Grabbing the life sciences ring: it's tough to do with 50 hands out.

• Author: Brooks, Mike
• Position: VIEWPOINT

READING THROUGH A recent report ranking Indiana high among the states in bioscience successes, it was tempting to relax a moment and enjoy the attention. After all, "Growing the Nation's Bioscience Sector: State Bioscience Initiatives 2006," ranked us in the top four life-sciences states, having significant assets in three of the four areas measured. It was compiled by Battelle, in cooperation with the Biotechnology Industry Organization, a trade organization in which the Indiana Health Industry Forum is the Indiana affiliate.

Spending time basking, though, would only give the other 49 states more time to develop and implement their life-sciences plans. And planning, in my experience as a former economic development official, is the key to determining the right mix of assets and incentives a community and a state need in order to keep and win good jobs. That's what it comes down to, good companies with good jobs.

Several states, such as North Carolina, Massachusetts, Kansas, Kentucky and California, already have strategic plans specific to life sciences. North Carolina's, for instance, has a goal of 48,000 biotechnology-related jobs by 2013. Interestingly, Massachusetts, a state we consider to be ahead of the pack in several areas, expresses its concern over tougher competition from other states in its MassBiotech 2010 report from the Massachusetts Biotechnology Council.

Our challenge in competing well in the life-sciences game is not just with other states, however. The life-sciences area is only one of the priorities within Indiana's own economic-development strategy "Accelerating Growth"--as it should be. It also identifies the other active industry clusters, advanced manufacturing, chemicals, advanced materials and advanced logistics.

It's time for Indiana to start development of a strategic plan for life sciences. The...