ShopTalk, Geo Info Systems, volume 7, number 9, September 1997. Pages 46 - 48.

Column Editor Grant Ian Thrall is president of Spatial Decisions & Analysis (SD&A, Gainesville, Florida), a professor of geography at the University of Florida (Gainesville), and a member of Geo Info Systems' Editorial Advisory Board.

If you have issues you would like to have covered in this column, write to Grant Ian Thrall, Spatial Decisions & Analysis, 5200 NW 43rd Street, Suite 102138, Gainesville, FL 32606-4482, e-mail thrall@afn.org, http://www.afn.org/~thrall/.

So many professional organizations are competing for the attentions of GIS practitioners, I think it could be argued that some organizations should consider merging with others. Yet, those engaging in business GIS were not - until recently - represented by a professional organization catering specifically to their needs. The business geography market is growing so quickly that it will soon even eclipse that long established bastion of GIS, the government market. In fact, the growth is so great that established professional organizations with no background or knowledge base in business-related topics - even those organizations whose knowledge base is entirely in the physical and natural resources - are scrambling to add business geography venues to their national meetings.

Recognizing that the business geography market was not being served by a dedicated professional organization, the Geo Business Association (GBA, Fort Collins, Colorado) was founded in 1996. According to the GBA, its purpose is to promote, communicate, and advance the understanding, implementation, and applications of geographic information technology and methodology for business applications. In June, the GBA sponsored a national meeting in Atlanta, Georgia.

I had the opportunity to represent Geo Info Systems at that meeting, and to participate in both a paper session on marketing geography and a panel discussion about the future of business geography education. I believe that the issues affecting business geography education, and thus the GBA, are the same issues affecting GIS and geography education in general, and thus those organizations serving the GIS and geographic science communities.

The focus of the panel discussion concemed how to meet the needs that business has for appropriately trained business geography students. I presented a position statement along with my fellow panelists, who were:

Among those points about which the panelists agreed was that higher education is aware of business geography. Students are demanding an education in business geography, likely driven by the demand in the business world to employ students trained in the discipline.

Mild disagreement existed on the panel about whether business geography education should be housed within the department of geography, which is commonly located under the college of liberal arts and sciences, or within a college of business. If business geography is taught within a business college, should the college create a dedicated department or make business geography a seamless part of the existing curriculum? I raised these issues in last month's Geo Info Systems Showcase issue (Thrall, 1997).

Panelists clearly avoided what is, in my opinion, a fundamental topic: from where will the resources come to create this new educational curriculum? Contrary to common beliefs (that seem to be the basis for public policy), quality education is not a free good. You do get what you pay for. Return is proportional to investment. If no one provides dedicated resources for business geography education, then the return will be a multiple of the investment: nothing.

ESRI's Jack Dangermond prompted a passionate discussion when he stated that GIS software could and should be made more user-friendly - for if GIS software were truly user-friendly, then the question of business geography education becomes moot. He expressed that the new generation of Microsoft (Redmond, Washington) Windows-based GIS software requires about an hour of self-training, following along the interactive training guides that accompany the software. That's still too much time for Jack Dangermond; he envisions GIS software that requires less than 10 minutes to learn. Jack Dangermond's concern is with software use, which is natural and expected; after all, he presides over one of the GIS industry's most prominent software firms.

Table 1: In Which College Should Business Geography Be Taught?
In a traditional geography department housed in a college of liberal arts and sciences Positive: The vast majority of faculty who truly know geography reside there; A traditional and established support network for geography exists; Geography departments have a standard of conducting meaningful research and offering comprehensive training; Business geography can be integrated into a larger geography academic culture, strengthening the discipline (as in economics); and Traditional geography graduate education is very labor-intensive and is geared toward intensive personal involvement and the establishment of one-to-one relationships between the graduate student and the faculty advisor.	In a conventional college of business Positive: Business colleges are responsive to market needs in terms of training and producing large numbers of graduates; and Generally, more resources are available for both faculty and students - as compared to colleges of liberal arts and sciences and geography departments in particular.
Negative: Only a small percentage of geography faculty with expertise, interest, training, or experience in business geography exists; A traditional lack of resources exists - including educational infrastructure and competitive wages for faculty; As traditional geography departments are typically located within a college of liberal arts and sciences, geography students would not be required to complete a curriculum which would school them in business; Unlike economics, geography suffers from a tarnished reputation among the general population; Those teaching the classic geography discipline have traditionally turned their backs on applied geography, issues of relevance, and methods high in demand by business; and The labor-intensive tradition of geography graduate education is commendable in terms of quality but unlikely because of its low-volume-of-output to meet the market output requirement that business expects today.	Negative: Only snippets of geographic technology and literature would be discussed during traditional lectures about, for example, real estate or marketing; Business colleges would not create separate business geography departments if there were only one, two, or three faculty members; and If combined with other departments, geography would lose its focus and identity, and therefore its effectiveness (as real estate did when it was combined with finance and insurance).
So what will get the job done? Each university that wants to offer a quality business geography education should establish three to four endowed chairs. With the resources and independence that endowed chairs provide, the business geography department could be located in either college. Business geography faculty should be able to interact with both colleges. Business geography faculty should work closely with the business community as consultants, while at the same time maintaining a respected research and education program.

My position statement presented as part of my panel presentation is summarized in Table 1. The main points deal with the positives and negatives of business geography education being housed in a traditional department of geography versus a college of business.

I contended that knowing how to use GIS software is not equivalent to knowing how to apply geography to business. GIS software is a wonderful vehicle for easier manipulation and display of geographic data. Easier to use software is a desirable objective - but it is not a replacement for geographic reasoning. Larry Brown agreed; he was a certified professional accountant and accomplished in business before he became a geography academic. (In fact, I had been one of Larry Brown's teaching assistants while a graduate student at Ohio State University.)

I believe that the application and adoption of GIS in real estate analysis is illustrative of the adoption of geographic technology in other business disciplines. Real estate analysts are rapidly adopting GIS technology and geographic reasoning at such a rapid pace that Wofford and Thrall (in press) have regarded the adoption as a paradigm shift in real estate analysis. The rapid pace of adoption can also lead to greater misuse of geographic technology and misinterpretation of geographic information. The software does not come bundled with a sophisticated expert system that automates geographic reasoning, though software vendors may subtly imply to the buyers of the software that necessary geographic reasoning has been automated by the software program. Analysts from academia and practice are eager to perform sophisticated spatial data manipulation (Marks and Thrall, 1993) and sophisticated geographic analysis. This eagerness is reasonable because central to real estate analysis is location, and GIS is the appropriate vehicle for the analyst to evaluate location. However, without geographic training there is the potential for efforts. Geography has not been automated by a GIS software program any more than finance has been automated by a spreadsheet software program (for a comprehensive overview of geography as an academic discipline see Harris, 1985; Gail and Willmott, 1989). The software just makes it easier to make a mistake, and the feeling of greater productivity may coincide with more mistakes being made. Software and computers together can allow for an increase in productivity, and can allow for greater precision of measurement. However, the technology has not replaced the knowledge of which type of analysis to perform, and the technology has not changed how the outcomes of appropriately performed analysis are to be interpreted.

So, I consider those who see geography only as a recent software release as being misguided. GIS software hasn't replaced geography and spatial analysis any more than spreadsheet software has fully automated the finance or economics disciplines. Moreover, many who claim that GIS software has a long and difficult learning curve are actually discovering that geography and spatial analysis have not been automated by a software product, and that geographic reasoning is as rigorous as any other professional curriculum. Those who complain that GIS software is too difficult are more likely complaining about the vastly underestimated complexities of geographic analysis. I can virtually guarantee that little of value will come from any GIS software program if users don't know geographic analysis or spatial reasoning (Thrall, in press).

After the panel presentations, position statements, and general discussions concluded, those roughly 40 persons in attendance separated into roundtable discussions. Jack Thompson maintained that the appropriate geographic body of knowledge should be included seamlessly within existing business education curriculums. He wants to employ students who are trained in traditional business subjects, and at the same time he wants them to know how geography affects business decisions. Just as well-trained business students are, expected to know spreadsheets, the well-trained businessperson should also be knowledgeable about geographic technology.

I agree with Jack Thompson's opinion of incorporating geographic teachings into traditional business curriculums. Attaining that goal within the university institutional context is another matter. Institutional barriers exist. Resource barriers exist. And even limits exist to the present body of knowledge. Business consumes knowledge; yet business pays too little attention to the creation of that body of knowledge. Businesses may ask a professor, or a consultant, or they employ someone with the appropriate training. Where does their information come from?

Research universities have the dual purpose of creating a body of knowledge and then disseminating that knowledge. It takes more than time to create a body of knowledge, such as an understanding of how geography can be used to improve management decisions. For geography to be adopted in business curriculums, the business discipline must proceed through a paradigm shift, adopt a new form of reasoning - namely geographic - and then apply that geographic reasoning to grow its body of knowledge. Larry Wofford and I examined this position with respect to the real estate industry (Wofford and Thrall, in press). The creation, diffusion, and adoption process takes time. The more resources at hand, the faster the pace of adoption.

Common ground was found, issues were aired, but the debate has only begun on how to provide an education in business geography. The business community wants results - that is, a supply of appropriately trained potential employees in possession of a valuable body of knowledge. Business demand is high because key management today recognizes that without employees trained in geographic reasoning and geographic technology, the business is at a disadvantage. Businesses believe that the returns can be high with the appropriately trained employees. But the business community isn't interested in departmental and college-level turf battles. Business is not sympathetic to the institutional, financial, and related resource issues of the university. Business just wants results.

Gail, G., and C. Willmott. 1989. Geography in America. Columbus, Ohio: Merrill Publishing Company.

Harris, C., editor. 1985. Geographical Bibliography for American Libraries. Washington, D.C.: Association of American Geographers; Washington, D.C.: National Geographic Society.

Marks, A., and G. Thrall. 1993. Functional Requirements of a Geographic Information System for Performing Real Estate Research and Analysis. Journal of Real Estate Literature I(]): 49-61.

Thrall, G. 1997. "Finally, Business GIS and ... Oh, Yeah! Education!" in "Services" essays. Geo Info Systems Showcase 4(8): 34.

Thrall, G. 1998 In press. Common Geographic Errors of Real Estate Analysts. Journal of Real Estate Literature 6(l).

Wofford, L., and G. Tbrall. 1987 In press. Real Estate Problem Solving and Geographic Information Systems: A Stage Model of Reasoning. Journal of Real Estate Literature 5(2).