As competition for foreign investment intensifies, the availability of skilled workers is becoming an increasingly important determinant of where companies choose to invest. But workforce competitiveness is no longer simply a question of how many engineers, technicians or graduates a location can produce.
It is also about whether those people can be attracted — and persuaded to stay.
This distinction matters. Governments and economic development organisations have traditionally treated investment attraction, workforce development and place promotion as related but largely separate activities. Yet companies considering an international investment increasingly need confidence not only that a location has the skills they require today, but that they will be able to recruit and retain people as their operations grow.
That puts housing, transport, education, connectivity, quality of life and opportunities for career progression much closer to the centre of the investment proposition.
In an era in which many skilled workers have greater choice over where they build their careers, places are competing for human capital alongside corporate capital. Successful investment attraction therefore increasingly depends upon the ability to do both.
People choose places as well as jobs
A compelling job opportunity may encourage someone to consider relocating, but employment is rarely the only factor determining whether they do so.
Housing affordability, commuting times, schools, a partner’s employment prospects, professional networks and the wider quality of life can all influence the decision. A location may have a strong corporate proposition, but if the people required to support those companies are reluctant to live there, that ultimately becomes an investment constraint.
Tulsa in the US offers an interesting example of what can happen when talent attraction is treated as part of a broader economic development strategy. Since its launch in 2018, Tulsa Remote has attracted approximately 4,000 remote workers to the city. Its 2025 economic impact report found that participants had generated $878 million in direct employment income, while 80% of those surveyed remained in Tulsa two years after joining the programme.
The significance extends beyond the success of a particular relocation programme. It demonstrates the potential economic value of attracting people who establish longer-term connections with a location rather than simply filling immediate vacancies.
Place is part of the value proposition
Locations have become increasingly sophisticated at constructing propositions for investors. They identify sector strengths, infrastructure, market access, costs, incentives, supply chains and other factors that influence corporate location decisions.
Talent requires similarly rigorous thinking.
Different groups of workers have different priorities. Younger technology professionals may place greater weight on career mobility, connectivity and lifestyle, while experienced executives may focus more heavily on housing, schools and professional networks. International workers may also consider immigration processes and the ease with which they and their families can integrate into a new country or city.
The implication is that there can be no generic talent proposition. Just as investment strategies increasingly target particular sectors and types of company, talent strategies need to identify the people required to support those investments.
For a location seeking advanced manufacturing investment, for example, attracting the company is only part of the equation. It must also understand whether it can supply — or attract — the engineers, technicians, operators and managers that the investment will require.
This requires more than workforce statistics. It demands an assessment of the wider environment in which those people will live and work, including an honest understanding of weaknesses that may put the location at a disadvantage against competitors.
Talent and investment strategies need to converge
This is where the issue becomes particularly important for foreign direct investment.
When companies assess potential locations, labour availability is increasingly considered alongside energy, infrastructure, market access, taxation and operating costs. A location able to demonstrate both a strong existing workforce and the capacity to attract additional talent as an investment expands has a more resilient proposition.
That means talent attraction cannot sit on the margins of economic development strategy. Workforce development, inward investment, infrastructure and place-making increasingly need to reinforce one another.
It also means that marketing alone cannot solve the problem.
If housing is prohibitively expensive, transport connections are inadequate or childcare and education provision do not meet the needs of the people a location hopes to attract, a stronger communications campaign will have limited effect. The gap between the proposition being marketed and the lived reality will eventually become apparent.
The more difficult task is therefore to identify and address the factors that weaken a location’s competitiveness.
Build the place before selling the story
There is no universal model for doing this. Labour-market requirements and quality-of-life priorities differ substantially between sectors, occupations and locations.
But a more integrated approach starts with three questions: what investment is a location seeking to attract; what skills will those investments require; and what would persuade people with those skills to build their careers and lives there?
From there, policymakers and economic development organisations can assess gaps in housing, transport, childcare, education and amenities; connect priority industries with the occupations needed to support them; and build a place proposition around the factors that genuinely matter to those groups.
Only then does communications come into play.
The strongest talent proposition is ultimately one that reflects reality. Places that can offer both career opportunity and a compelling environment in which to live are better positioned to attract skilled people, while companies gain greater confidence that the workforce underpinning an investment will be sustainable over the longer term.
The competition for investment and the competition for talent are therefore becoming two sides of the same equation. The locations that recognise that connection, and build their economic strategies accordingly, will be better placed to compete for both.
