Makers of Our National Pastime: Lessons for Cities from Louisville — the birthplace of the Slugger

By Jeremy Goldberg

Jeremy M. Goldberg is a national leader in municipal civic innovation and public-private partnerships. He is the Director of Civic Innovation, at Civic Consulting USA where he oversees a collaboration with the White House Stronger Cities Stronger Communities (SC2) National Resource Network to create local resource networks in multiple U.S. cities.

Mar 11, 2015 | Smart Cities | 0 comments

We are all “makers.” We dream. We tinker. We design. We develop. We trouble-shoot and we deploy. Across industry — public, private or government – we’re all making something; we’re all part of the maker movement.

I participated in a recent panel at Governing’s Performance and Innovation Summit in Louisville with leaders from Living Cities, Philadelphia’s Office of New Urban Mechanics and the Louisville Mayor’s Office. It struck me that there are also civic makers, who are tinkering with our neighborhoods, our communities, and the things that make our cities exciting.

Throughout the panel, we returned to more and more examples of technology and tools that further democratize civic engagement. And it’s not just San Francisco, Chicago and New York. We found examples everywhere of makers energizing the social and economic fabric of our cities. And the question we grappled with as a panel was how partners and those from within the maker movement can lead to lasting social impact.

Big-BatLouisville, the wonderful host of the conference and the birthplace of The Slugger, is a veritable glimpse of the maker movement’s history. The legendary baseball bat began humbly when Bud Hellerich saw a player break his bat during a game over one hundred years ago. After the game, Bud took the player to his father’s woodworking shop where they designed a new bat together.

Bud was enthusiastic, his father was impressed and he stepped aside to encourage his son’s ‘making’. Word quickly traveled: Players came by the dozens to the family’s wood shop. The likes of Honus Wagner, Babe Ruth, and the World Series Champion SF Giants have all used Louisville Sluggers. Today, the factory produces nearly two million bats annually. A walk through the factory is a walkthrough the history of innovation of our great nation – the company’s traditional bat-making methods now enhanced by a one-of-a-kind computer that produced consistency from every order. The new technology emerged from an iterative process which tested, tried, and developed each successive produce – that’s the maker process.

Louisville also offers great examples of the civic maker movement today. When Mayor Greg Fisher hosted a conference a few years back on the maker movement, his idea was that government should be supportive of innovation and encourage entrepreneurs. At the same time the government, understandably, will not lead the innovation. Ted Smith, Louisville’s Chief Innovation Officer, shared a little insight with me as to how Louisville added the “civic” into the makers’ movement.

It started when GE opened its doors to makers and entrepreneurs in 2013. As a result, community members and government staff came to the table too. This was an unprecedented moment signaling new ways for corporate and community to work together to spur new products, grow the local talent pool and encourage more public-private cooperation. With cross-sector partners at the table – government, corporate, academe, and community – the effort set in motion a wave of activity which according to Smith “culminated in a GE joint venture with Local motors – called FirstBuild” – located at the University of Louisville-Belknap Campus.

In addition to the efforts the city leadership supported, the nonprofit WaterStep organized Hack2O, a Water Solutions hackathon to innovate clean water solutions in global communities.

So what can cities learn from Louisville?

One, leaders need to create a safe place for people to test and try new ideas, sometimes fail. Bud needed his father’s permission to craft, develop and test out different baseball bats. FirstBuild came from Mayor Fisher, GE, and other leaders letting the makers see where their innovations took them as they worked across sectors in new ways.

Secondly, the big, game-changing things we are pursuing take partnerships. Without the baseball player in the workshop with him, Bud wouldn’t have gotten the Slugger right. Similarly, GE needed to bring community members in before the idea for FirstBuild came out.

Near the end of my tour of Slugger on historic West Main, my tourguide shared a story about Ted Williams, the hall of famer and last MLB player to hit .400. Apparently, Williams was particularly particular about his bats. He ordered the same bat over and over. But one bat Williams sent it back because “it didn’t grip right.”   They checked the order, and it was made just like the previous ones, but when they measured it, sure enough, it didn’t match. There’s nothing like the hands of the batter to tell if the bat’s right and there’s lots of work to do. Imagine if our cities had that similar ability to listen, to tinker, to trouble shoot, and to deploy. Our making continues…

Discussion

Leave your comment below, or reply to others.

Please note that this comment section is for thoughtful, on-topic discussions. Admin approval is required for all comments. Your comment may be edited if it contains grammatical errors. Low effort, self-promotional, or impolite comments will be deleted.

0 Comments

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Read more from MeetingoftheMinds.org

Spotlighting innovations in urban sustainability and connected technology

Optimization Tools to Help Transit Agencies Recover

Optimization Tools to Help Transit Agencies Recover

I spoke last week with Krishna Desai from Cubic Transportation, and we discussed three big problems facing transportation, and the ways that Cubic is approaching these challenges:

1) If (or when) more workers return to traditional on-location jobs, but feel a lingering distrust of crowded spaces, people who can afford it may opt for private cars instead of using public transit for their commute. This will create a massive influx of cars on roads that were already crowded, and more financial woes for transit agencies already dealing with budget shortfalls. Krishna told me about a suite of optimization tools Cubic is deploying in places like Mexico and San Francisco to make public transit more efficient, more transparent, and, overall, more attractive to riders.

2) For the time being, though, we’re dealing with the opposite problem. How can transit agencies find ways to influence user behavior in a way that complies with social distancing and capacity requirements? How can you incentivize riders to wait for the next bus? (In a way that doesn’t alienate them forever – see #1). Cubic has deployed a loyalty/advertising program in Miami-Dade County that was originally intended to increase ridership, but is now being used to help control crowding and social distancing on transit.

3) Transportation infrastructure, in generally, was not built to accomodate 6-feet of separation between riders – or between workers. Little things like, for example, opening gates, requires workers to be closer than 6-feet to riders, and there are examples like that throughout every transit hub. Technology can help, but creating and implementing software/hardware solutions quickly and efficiently requires experience with innovation, deployment, maintenance and more. Cubic has a program called Project Rebound that shows the possibilities.

Need to Improve Your Transportation Plans? Try Inverting the Order of Planning

Need to Improve Your Transportation Plans? Try Inverting the Order of Planning

Advanced Urban Visioning offers a powerful tool for regions that are serious about achieving a major transformation in their sustainability and resilience. By clarifying what optimal transportation networks look like for a region, it can give planners and the public a better idea of what is possible. It inverts the traditional order of planning, ensuring that each mode can make the greatest possible contribution toward achieving future goals.

Advanced Urban Visioning doesn’t conflict with government-required planning processes; it precedes them. For example, the AUV process may identify the need for specialized infrastructure in a corridor, while the Alternatives Analysis process can now be used to determine the time-frame where such infrastructure becomes necessary given its role in a network.

Life is a Highway: Embracing Intelligent Transportation Systems

Life is a Highway: Embracing Intelligent Transportation Systems

The introduction of intelligent transportation systems, which includes a broad network of smart roads, smart cars, smart streetlights and electrification are pushing roadways to new heights. Roadways are no longer simply considered stretches of pavement; they’ve become platforms for innovation. The ability to empower roadways with intelligence and sensing capabilities will unlock extraordinary levels of safety and mobility by enabling smarter, more connected transportation systems that benefit the public and the environment.

The Future of Cities

Mayors, planners, futurists, technologists, executives and advocates — hundreds of urban thought leaders publish on Meeting of the Minds. Sign up below to follow the future of cities.

You have Successfully Subscribed!

Share This