This is fascinating. Any chance you could publish some more of the raw data in table form, e.g. net inflow/outflow, but also raw numbers in growth/decline. e.g. Madison is experiencing a 75% increase, but is it starting from such a small base that it is unlikely to be a real player in the next few years?
Alex - Do you know if this data is updated regularly and published by Linkedin? Took a look but couldn't find it. Be great to see 2021 trends year to date.
I think you should consider updating your article. Your conclusions would be more meaningful if you also stated the number of workers per annum associated with inflow or outflow. Percentages and ratios don’t tell the full story on their own.
I’d like to know what defines a tech worker and how LinkedIn can accurately track “tech worker” movements. For instance does the data take into consideration workers who moved to suburbs of Austin? How about workers who don’t update their LinkedIn status immediately...or ever? I do agree it’s not all pandemic related- rather it’s political and policy related.
If Austin's reduced flow is still higher than Madison's increased flow, this story is a little misleading. A table showing the top cities would round out this story.
These are meaningless statistics. If two tech workers arrive and 1 leaves, they have a ratio of 2. Does that mean they are a magnate for tech. I don’t think so. Put a link to the data set so others can provide real insight.
Would expect a little later from the data folks at LinkedIn. Not a great take given how prevalent remote work is within tech and how much of the migration is just temporary.
Whistling past the graveyard. Companies are moving out of CA and the northeast because of costs of living and business unfriendly environments. When HP, arguably the founding member of the silicon valley club, moves, it speaks volumes. The moves will continue until the voters elect leaders who understand where the money they spend comes from and choose to represent the working class.
This is an interesting read, though I would be cautious with drawing these conclusions from LinkedIn's data. I think there are two types of people who left SF this year: people who committed, moved permanently and changed their location on LI, and people who took advantage of remote work but either will be coming back when remote work ends, or are yet unsure and have not changed their location on LI.
I think the Austin/Miami buzz is about the latter category, and I think there are some reasons these cities did not make the LI's list.
So far at my company, the policy was that only senior people can apply for remote work permanently. They would typically have families and aging parents, so it makes sense Midwestern cities make up most of the list, and also Sacramento made it (you can commute from Sac once a week to the office in Silicon Valley but it's also way safer, cheaper and nicer than SF or San Jose while still having great weather). Meanwhile that other type of tech worker - younger and single or DINK - still wants to live in a sexy, warm city but just wants this city to be cheaper than SF is. They so far could not apply for remote work, but they will be able to starting next year, and I think this is when many of these people will change their LinkedIn location (because they will be there permanently, not temporarily until offices reopen in SV).
For a post titled “Where tech workers are moving” this seems incomplete without volumes.
Sure, some unlikely cities saw relative surges, but without the volumes as context how are we supposed to have any idea if those gains are significant?
I'm not sure quantity is the big story here.
This is fascinating. Any chance you could publish some more of the raw data in table form, e.g. net inflow/outflow, but also raw numbers in growth/decline. e.g. Madison is experiencing a 75% increase, but is it starting from such a small base that it is unlikely to be a real player in the next few years?
For Seattle, does this include Redmond and Bellevue?
Alex - Do you know if this data is updated regularly and published by Linkedin? Took a look but couldn't find it. Be great to see 2021 trends year to date.
I think you should consider updating your article. Your conclusions would be more meaningful if you also stated the number of workers per annum associated with inflow or outflow. Percentages and ratios don’t tell the full story on their own.
I’d like to know what defines a tech worker and how LinkedIn can accurately track “tech worker” movements. For instance does the data take into consideration workers who moved to suburbs of Austin? How about workers who don’t update their LinkedIn status immediately...or ever? I do agree it’s not all pandemic related- rather it’s political and policy related.
If Austin's reduced flow is still higher than Madison's increased flow, this story is a little misleading. A table showing the top cities would round out this story.
These are meaningless statistics. If two tech workers arrive and 1 leaves, they have a ratio of 2. Does that mean they are a magnate for tech. I don’t think so. Put a link to the data set so others can provide real insight.
Surprising! Great report. I had assumed Austin was the big winner here. Also interesting to see that LA doesn't have a top-5 outflow of talent.
Would expect a little later from the data folks at LinkedIn. Not a great take given how prevalent remote work is within tech and how much of the migration is just temporary.
Whistling past the graveyard. Companies are moving out of CA and the northeast because of costs of living and business unfriendly environments. When HP, arguably the founding member of the silicon valley club, moves, it speaks volumes. The moves will continue until the voters elect leaders who understand where the money they spend comes from and choose to represent the working class.
This is great. Is there a way to get a full list of the rankings?
This is an interesting read, though I would be cautious with drawing these conclusions from LinkedIn's data. I think there are two types of people who left SF this year: people who committed, moved permanently and changed their location on LI, and people who took advantage of remote work but either will be coming back when remote work ends, or are yet unsure and have not changed their location on LI.
I think the Austin/Miami buzz is about the latter category, and I think there are some reasons these cities did not make the LI's list.
So far at my company, the policy was that only senior people can apply for remote work permanently. They would typically have families and aging parents, so it makes sense Midwestern cities make up most of the list, and also Sacramento made it (you can commute from Sac once a week to the office in Silicon Valley but it's also way safer, cheaper and nicer than SF or San Jose while still having great weather). Meanwhile that other type of tech worker - younger and single or DINK - still wants to live in a sexy, warm city but just wants this city to be cheaper than SF is. They so far could not apply for remote work, but they will be able to starting next year, and I think this is when many of these people will change their LinkedIn location (because they will be there permanently, not temporarily until offices reopen in SV).
For a post titled “Where tech workers are moving” this seems incomplete without volumes.
Sure, some unlikely cities saw relative surges, but without the volumes as context how are we supposed to have any idea if those gains are significant?