Worcester Business Journal

www.wbjournal.com September 14, 2015 • Worcester Business Journal 33 Since taking over the corner office in January, Gov. Charlie Baker has established a goal of reining in state spending amid a fiscal year 2015 budget deficit his administration estimated at close to $750 million. The Massachusetts Life Sciences Center (MLSC), which is carrying out the Patrick initiative, is scheduled to receive up to $95 million this fiscal year for its investment fund, capital budget and tax incentives, but that's less than the $100 million-plus it was allocated in each of the last two fiscal cycles, according to the agency. The MLSC has been without a permanent director since Susan Windham-Bannister, who led it since its inception in 2008, stepped down in June. Earlier this month, following months of little progress, the Baker administration agreed to release information about the search for her replacement in a process that has been reported as secretive. "We have seen the life sciences really become front and center," Sen. Eileen Donoghue, a Lowell Democrat and Senate chairwoman of the Joint Committee on Economic Development and Emerging Technologies, told State House News Service. She cited the MLSC's success since its inception and said new leadership could "tweak" its goals, adding that it would continue to be a "critical component" of the state's economic development strategy. We agree. The center has made noteworthy investments around the state, particularly in Central Massachusetts, with $90 million allocated for the Albert Sherman Center at the University of Massachusetts Medical School, $5 million for MassBiologics, also at UMass Medical, and $5.15 million for Gateway Park. The recent relocation of GE Healthcare Life Sciences' headquarters to Marlborough, which came with the addition of more than 200 jobs, has helped further elevate the region's profile as a life sciences destination. However Baker chooses to structure the MLSC — whether to fold it into another economic development agency or keep it as a standalone entity — we hope Central Massachusetts will continue to receive its just due in the form of attention and financial resources to help the life sciences industry grow here. In its annual report for 2014, the MLSC boasted that for every dollar of taxpayer money, it attracted more than $3 in additional, outside investment, creating about $2.3 billion in public-private investments in the life sciences industry and generating more than 3,700 jobs. That's what public funding should do: make enough of a commitment that the private sector will follow suit and strengthen that investment. We've seen it happen in renewable energy. It should continue to happen for life sciences. n Life sciences deserves continued state commitment E D I T O R I A L The Worcester Business Journal welcomes letters to the editor and commentary submissions. Please send submissions to Rick Saia, editor, at rsaia@wbjournal.com. Letters can also be faxed to 508-755-8860. N obody should have to choose between raising a family and pursuing a career. Yet that decision still looms large today, and women most often feel the pressure to choose one over the other. Striking life-work balance, or life-work integration, as I like to call it, is one of the most significant challenges professionals encounter as they seek to advance their careers. Career growth for women usually intensifies between the ages of 30 and 40, the same time when many are helping raise young children, purchase a home, or begin a marriage. It makes sense, then, that as of the end of 2010, women in the U.S. worked an average of 37 hours per week compared to nearly 42 hours for men, according to the Census Bureau. That gap of about 12 percent becomes even more significant in fields that demand higher cyclical output from their professionals. In fact, I know of women in accounting who are pressured to work the same as everyone else in their firms. It's almost like a "one size fits all" approach to the profession. Professional service firms must uphold a strong client service culture. Therefore, the schedules can be rigorous. Finding a way to balance family and work commitments can be challenging. As a managing partner and a devoted mother, I have lived the struggle of achieving this integration. I know the importance of being there for doctor visits, gymnastics events and school concerts, as well as all the little moments that allow us to enjoy that special bond with our children. Companies should create opportunities for women to consider the dilemma they share, lean on one another, and not be afraid to ask the popular question, "How can the company I work for help me achieve my career and family goals at the same time?" At AAFCPAs, this mindset led us to create our Women's Opportunity Network, through which we enthusiastically promote this kind of dialogue. We encourage everyone at the firm to talk openly, understand the importance of an integrated culture and create a more joyful work experience. When women have a forum to address issues and feel supported by the company, they feel confident in suggesting solutions that will ultimately increase employee retention and morale. It has paid off with a 300-percent increase in the number of female managers since 2011. As a female leader, I applaud other companies that develop safe and balanced work environments, and hope more will follow suit. It's a powerful way to demonstrate a commitment to advancing women employees. In the end, when women can thrive at both work and home, a healthy and motivated work environment will usually follow. Employers that have adopted flexible workplace practices cite many economic benefits such as reduced absenteeism and better employee retention. Meanwhile, women can approach their careers with more confidence and take significant steps on their leadership paths while enjoying the rewards of motherhood. n Carla McCall is co-managing partner at AAFCPAs in Westborough, where she has worked since 1995. Businesses aren't done in helping women balance work, life BY CARLA McCALL Special to the Worcester Business Journal V I E W P O I N T Carla McCall W hen it comes to layoffs, there's only one thing worse than reading about them: becoming a layoff casualty. That outcome is even more likely to be happening at times of great change in an industry, and health care certainly qualifies as an industry undergoing a high degree of change. So, when Reliant Medical Group announced the layoffs of 78 employees last week, or about 3 percent of its payroll — it came as no surprise. Reliant's action highlights the far-reaching impact of health care reform on those who provide care. Many layoffs have already taken place in hospital systems, where the federal government, through the agency that oversees Medicare, has begun imposing financial penalties on readmissions. Those penalties have squeezed many institutions. A statement from Reliant said that the largest independent, ambulatory integrated health system in Central Massachusetts was facing similar pressures, in the form of reduced utilization of services due to higher insurance deductibles and declining reimbursements. While some organizations in the health care delivery system are tightening their belts, others are growing, and the long-term demographic trends of this region — a growing population of older adults — mean that there ought to be long- term growth ahead. While further consolidation may be inevitable, institutions that change with the times are more likely to emerge as stronger, long-term players than those that resist those changes. n Another sign of the times in health care T he growth of the life sciences industry in Massachusetts is unmistakable, and serves as an affirmation of the Bay State's stature as a center for innovation. The 10-year, $1 billion public funding commitment made by former governor Deval Patrick in 2008 set the bar high and created a sustained focus on this key industry sector.

• Cover