In addition to understanding the sector composition of Ohio’s industrial base, examining the state’s technology workforce provides insights into a critical resource for supporting technology industry development and offers a valuable perspective on the extent of technology deployment in the state.
Indeed, the level of an industry’s technology workforce is a key criterion used by the U.S. Department of Labor in identifying industries as high-technology-related on a national basis. But, not all technology industries are alike from state to state. In some states, the technology industries are more “technology worker intensive,” suggesting a greater degree of technology development and deployment. On the other hand, not all technology workers are employed by technology-related industries. Traditional industries may, in fact, be deploying technology skills to a greater degree in a particular state than nationwide—so recognizing the importance of technology skills across a state’s total industry base is important.
In examining Ohio’s technology workforce, the following were considered:
• The overall concentration of technology workers across Ohio’s total industry base
• The extent of the technology workforce contained within nationally identified technology- related industries—with a particular focus on the use of lower skilled technicians versus more research-oriented scientists and engineers
• The state’s generation of graduates in technology fields and how that matches with the demands for new technology workers in Ohio.
A state’s technology workforce is broadly defined in this section to include all occupations primarily involved in scientific, computer, or engineering work. This encompasses a wide range, from technician occupations requiring vocational and community college education and training, to scientific and engineering occupations requiring advanced degrees.
Presence of Technology Workforce in Ohio
A starting point in analyzing Ohio’s technology workforce is to examine how extensively technology skills are deployed in Ohio’s economy. For instance:
• Four percent of Ohio’s workforce is employed across the broad range of scientific, computer, or engineering occupations. In total, 221,680 workers are employed in technology occupations in Ohio.
• By far, the largest number of technology workers in Ohio is found in computer-related occupations, with 92,270 workers composing 42 percent of the state’s technology
workforce. This reflects the importance of information technology skills across the broad economic landscape.
• Engineers are the second-largest technology occupation group with 59,550 workers or 27 percent of the technology workforce. The full distribution of Ohio’s technology workforce is presented in Figure 5.
Ohio’s Higher Concentration than the Nation in Specific Technology Occupations
• Industrial Engineers—78% • Materials Engineers—60% • Mechanical Drafters—54%
• Industrial Engineering Technicians—35% • Environmental Science Technicians—34% • Mechanical Engineers—28%
• Environmental Engineering Technicians—21% • Environmental Engineers—21%
• Database Administrators—12% Figure 5: Composition of High-Technology Workforce in Ohio, FY 2000
To fully consider the prevalence of technology occupations in Ohio, the share that technology workers compose of Ohio’s total workforce was compared with the same ratio for the nation (Figure 6). In essence, this comparison revealed how “concentrated” technology occupations are in Ohio. The analysis indicated that
• Across all technology occupations, Ohio has a lower overall concentration of technology workers employed across its workforce. Nationally, 4.5 percent of the workforce is found in these technology occupations—and so, Ohio, with 4.0 percent of its workforce in tech- nology occupations, is at roughly 95 percent of
the national level.
• Despite the large share of Ohio’s technology workers in computer-related occupations, Ohio is well below the national concentra- tion in this occupational area, standing 19 per- cent lower in the concentration of computer occupations.
• Nevertheless, consistent with Ohio’s emphasis on advanced manufacturing and advanced material industries, Ohio stands out in its concentration of engineers and technicians. Ohio has a 13 percent higher concentration of
engineering workers, a 37 percent higher concentration of engineering technicians, and a 66 percent higher concentration of scientific technicians, compared with the nation. Of particular note is the high concentration in Ohio of industrial engineers, material engineers,
Engineering Technicians 12% 26,040 Engineers 27% 59,550 Computer Scientists 42% 92,270 Technology Managers 10% 21,300 Scientific Technicians 5% 11,510 Scientists 5% 11,010
Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wages, www.bls.gov/oes/oesdl.htm.
Figure 6: Ohio’s High-Technology Occupation Share of Total Workforce Relative to U.S. Average, FY 2000
and mechanical drafters, each exceeding the national average in the workforce by more than 50 percent.
• A particular area of weakness in Ohio is its lower concentration of scientific workers. Ohio stands 35 percent below the national concentration of scientific workers. This suggests that Ohio’s overall industry base is less research intensive than the nation.
Technology Workforce Presence Within Technology Industry Sectors
While the presence of technology workers throughout Ohio’s private-sector economy provides a backdrop to the deployment of technology skills in Ohio, it is also important to consider the “technology intensiveness” of Ohio’s technology-related industries. In fact, the deployment of technology occupations varies significantly across the specific technology industry groupings in Ohio (Figure 7).6 Most notably:
• Advanced material industries employ a greater share of technology workers in Ohio than nationally.
• Of even more interest, advanced materials appear to be more research intensive in Ohio than nationally. Ohio accounts for 4.31 percent of the total advanced material workers in the United States, but employs 5.8 percent of the national industry’s scientists.
6 For SIC definitions of industry subsectors, please see Appendix A.
-35% Scientists -19% Computer Scientists -11% Technology Managers Engineers 13% Engineering Technicans 37% Scientific Technicians 66% ALL HIGH-TECH OCCUPATIONS -5% Occupational Category U.S. Average
Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wages, www.bls.gov/oes/oesdl.htm.
Figure 7: Science and Engineering Occupations by Industry Subsector, FY 2000
• Advanced manufacturing industries in Ohio also employ a greater share of technology workers than nationally, but this is driven primarily by technicians. Ohio employs
19.5 percent of the technicians working in advanced manufacturing industries nationally. • The most surprising result is that digital service industries employ a substantially greater
share of technology workers in Ohio than in the nation. The primary difference is the greater emphasis on engineers working in Ohio’s digital service industries—perhaps a reflection of the state’s digital service industries serving the extensive advanced manufacturing base in Ohio.
• Research and testing industries also maintain a greater share of technology workers in Ohio than nationally—due to larger employment concentrations of engineers, engineering
technicians, and scientific technicians.
Ohio’s Technology Graduates and Demands for New Technology Workers
Across the nation, strong concerns exist regarding the ability of higher education to keep pace with the demand for technology workers. Ohio is fortunate to have a strong base of educational institutions graduating students in a variety of technology fields. Examining programs that graduate at least 50 students annually revealed that Ohio has
• 13 institutions with programs in engineering
• 14 institutions with advanced degree (primarily master and Ph.D.) programs in the sciences • 32 institutions with programs in computer science
• 14 institutions with associate degree programs in engineering technicians
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%
High-Tech Share of Total Industry Employment
Bioscience Advanced Manufacturing Digital Infrastructure Advanced Materials Aerospace Research and Testing Digital Services ALL TECHNOLOGY-BASED INDUSTRIES
Industry Subsector
Ohio United States
Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wages,
www.bls.gov/oes/oesdl.htm; and Ohio Department of Job and Family Services, Bureau of Labor Market Information.
• 71 institutions with associate degree programs in scientific technicians, including those in nursing and medical technician fields.
Table 3 provides a comparison of degrees awarded to projected annual job openings within the broad areas of engineers, scientists, and computer scientists. While no direct way exists to link degrees to job openings, those qualified for new jobs in technology fields are approximated by considering those earning bachelor’s and higher degrees in engineering, associate’s and higher degrees in computer science, and master’s and higher degrees for scientists.
Table 3: Comparison of New Degrees Awarded in Technology Fields and Projected Annual Job Openings in Ohio
Engineers Scientists Computer Scientists
Total Degrees Awarded in 2000 4,177 3,478 5,948
Annual Openings Projected 1,800 540 6,500
Surplus/(Gap) 2,377 2,938 (552)
Source: National Center for Educational Statistics for degrees awarded; Ohio Department of Job and Family Services (Department of Labor) for projected annual job openings.
The strength of Ohio’s institutions of higher education in generating graduates in technology fields appears to be outpacing the growth of technology jobs in broad categories of technology occupations. Even in the fast-growth computer science fields—an area experiencing significant shortages across the nation—there is only a small difference between new graduates and
projected annual openings forecasted by the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services. This finding that graduates exceed demand in technology fields is supported by a recent study entitled “The Problem of Brain Drain in Ohio and Northeastern Ohio” by the Center for Regional Economic Issues at Case Western Reserve University. This study analyzes the National Science Foundation’s survey of practicing scientists and engineers to identify migration patterns compar- ing where scientists and engineers were educated to their current employment locations. A key finding from this Brain Drain study was as follows:
In the 1990s Ohio continued to be a net exporter of scientists and engineers from out of its universities. Since there is nothing particularly wrong with the level of Ohio’s degree production, it follows that Ohio’s top priority should be to increase the level of high-tech job demand.
Assessing future technology job demand for the State of Ohio can begin by returning to the sectoral definitions created earlier in this analysis to examine national industry growth predic- tions. Although Ohio growth patterns may differ from those of the nation in coming years, prevailing trends can at least shed some light on overall directions and the net effect of influences external to the state.
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the rapid growth experienced at the national level in most industry groups between 1995 and 2001 is expected to moderate during the 2000 to 2010 period.7,8 Table 4 presents employment projections published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, displaying only those industries comprising Ohio’s technology strengths. It is immediately apparent that, despite this overall reduction in growth rate, the technology-intensive services are predicted to undergo much more rapid employment expansion during the coming decade than the manufacturing portion of the technology sector. Computer programming and services, in particular, will continue to add large numbers of employees each year, at a pace that would achieve a doubling of total employment in only 11 years.
Table 4: National Employment Projections for Ohio Technology Strengths
In contrast, national employment is projected to increase only slightly or not at all in several of the technology-intensive manufacturing industry groups that are most significant in Ohio, including motor vehicles; general industrial machinery; laboratory apparatus; and soaps, detergents, and cleansers. Within technology-intensive manufacturing, the Ohio specializations or industry strengths judged by the Bureau of Labor Statistics to have the greatest employment growth potential at the national level are construction and mining machinery (fueled by con- tinued strong demand for residential and commercial construction) and medical and dental 7 Berman, J. 2001. Industry output and employment projections to 2010. Monthly Labor Review, United States
Bureau of Labor Statistics, November, 39-56. The biennial Bureau of Labor Statistics industry projections are the most widely cited forecasts of output and employment growth for the United States.
8 It should be noted that these projections do not take into account the economic effects of the events of September 11, 2001.
Data sources: Berman, J. 2001. Industry output and employment projections to 2010. Monthly
Labor Review, United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, November, 39-56; Battelle calculations
from Dun & Bradstreet MarketPlace survey.
Annual % Annual % Projected Empl. Ch. Empl. Ch. Empl. Annual % Ch.
Sector SIC 2001 1995-2001 1995-2001 Empl. 2000-2010
Plastics and synthetic materials 282 9,288 7.2 1.8 (1.7)
Soaps, detergents, and cleansers 284 55,801 7.0 1.4 0.6
Paints and varnishes 285 4,607 (3.7) (1.2) 0.7
Miscellaneous chemical products 289 16,802 4.7 0.6 0.2
Construction and mining machinery 353 18,180 3.2 2.8 1.7
Special industry machinery 355 14,950 (5.1) 0.6 (0.8)
General industrial machinery 356 34,625 3.0 1.2 0.3
Electrical industrial apparatus 362 16,639 0.6 1.0 (1.7)
Motor vehicles 371 122,082 2.4 2.1 0.8
Laboratory apparatus 382 22,110 4.8 2.5 (0.1)
Medical and dental instruments 384 18,695 5.4 2.6 1.6
Computer programming and services 737 88,852 14.2 13.0 6.4
Engineering and architectural services 871 42,767 1.7 3.7 2.7
Research and testing services 873 44,509 5.9 3.4 3.3
Management services 874 229,036 21.4 12.1 3.6
United States Ohio
instruments (buoyed along with the rest of the extended healthcare sector by the aging of U.S. and world populations). The latter industry group includes such Ohio firms as Ethicon, Invacare, Marconi Medical Systems, and Steris.
Thus, the indications are that Ohio’s institutions of education are producing and will continue to produce large numbers of qualified technology graduates; yet, the growth of Ohio’s technology industries is not sufficient to provide employment for all of them. Indeed, if current trends continue, the disparity between technology education and technology employment opportunities in Ohio is likely to become even greater as the state’s traditional technology industry strengths support constant or declining numbers of new technology job openings. This analysis suggests that policymakers should focus strongly on supporting those technology industries that will yield substantial and escalating numbers of job opportunities in Ohio in the future. Moreover, Ohio’s educational institutions, while continuing to sustain and encourage technology education in general, should emphasize programs to educate and train students to fill jobs in these particular high-growth technology industries.
C
ONCLUSIONThe technology sector forms a vital and expanding part of the Ohio economy. Manufacturing has a long history in Ohio and continues to form the largest segment and primary strength of the state technology establishment. Motor vehicles, industrial machinery, and electrical apparatus are among the advanced manufacturing industries concentrated in the state. While Ohio is relatively weak in digital infrastructure and aerospace industries, plastics and chemicals constitute an important technology-intensive manufacturing strength.
Mirroring national trends, most of the expansion in the Ohio technology sector in recent years has been centered in service industries. The biosciences, while still small in Ohio, are growing rapidly; computer programming and services is blossoming into a vibrant and vital component of the Ohio technology economy. Vigorous employment expansion in technology research, testing, and consulting may create a base for generating future technology strengths. Yet, a lack of youthful firms coupled with a concentration of technology-intensive manufacturing employment within branch sites does not bode well for the potential of establishing a dynamic and state and regionally responsive technology-driven economy in Ohio.
In addition, Ohio has a significant workforce resource being generated through its higher education institutions. The state’s goal must be to generate high-paying, technologically advanced positions to maximize the development potential represented by new graduates from these higher education institutions.
Endowed with considerable strengths as well as substantial deficiencies, Ohio is approaching a definitive moment between two possible futures. The state may fail to develop beyond its current strengths, thereby potentially becoming even more predominantly a supplier of intermediate materials and goods to out-of-state technology firms, with its best students and workers migrating to more promising states and regions. Alternatively, Ohio may continue to progress toward an exciting and dynamic technology-based economy, empha- sizing advanced manufacturing and other technical strengths and becoming a national center for education, innovation, and technology application. The policies enacted and actions taken in the coming years will help determine which of these paths the State of Ohio will follow in the future.