Life after serviced agronomy.

[MarkD]

It’s certainly true that agronomists will need to demonstrate a real contribution to our customers’ bottom line if we’re to continue to justify our position in the supply chain. Especially as the chemical input to crop production simplifies and reduces through alternatives, resistance and legislation/active ingredient loss. There’s no doubt that a lot of experience in crop production exists in the agronomy sector, but we need to find good business structures to harness that resource more effectively as we reduce our reliance on crop protection products.
The situation on a lot of diversified farm businesses is that they have been out-sourcing crop management to agronomists for a long time. That role, where filled by distributor agronomists would be difficult to replace by the independent sector in the short term - there is a succession challenge in the independent sector to meet before that will be possible.

 

[betweenthelines]

Never been involved in cereal farming so this may be a daft question, but does an advisor, agronomist or whatever they call themselves justify their advice financially?

As in "Your wheat has disease x which if untreated may reduce yield by .2 tonnes/hectare, treatment with product y will reduce this loss to .1 t/hectare at a cost of £z/hectare.

Or is it just a case of treating all visible pests and diseases?

 

[MarkD]

Never been involved in cereal farming so this may be a daft question, but does an advisor, agronomist or whatever they call themselves justify their advice financially?

As in "Your wheat has disease x which if untreated may reduce yield by .2 tonnes/hectare, treatment with product y will reduce this loss to .1 t/hectare at a cost of £z/hectare.

Or is it just a case of treating all visible pests and diseases?

Not daft at all. Most decisions involve the cost benefit discussion , although some are based on long term considerations where weeds might not be a financial problem in year one but the seed return could build an economically damaging problem for the future. Environmental considerations and customer attitudes/thresholds should also be part of the decision making process

 

[Brisel]

Or actually the AHDB levy could pay NIAB. They have a big r and d budget and we can all enjoy some cost savings. As Im sure there is an element of doubling up in some areas

Combinable crop agronomy doesn't change that much from year to year really.

AHDB do pay NIAB TAG to host their trials. It's just a business transaction but there's some data sharing.

 

[puppet]

Simply because I like to post an alternative view & I'm an awkward bugger, I'll defend serviced agronomy for once

Why do we still use accountants to submit accounts? Because they have the specialist knowledge of taxation and other legislation that frequently changes in order to provide you with good service.Some farmers don't want to spend a not inconsiderable amount of their time keeping up to date with all of this & choose to outsource that specialist subject to a professional.

Some farmers just aren't interested in agronomy. Farmers with several enterprises can't be geeks in all of them all of the time. They are happy to have someone walk the fields, write the tickets for the sprayer driver and order the chemicals too.
Can a mixed farmer with 300 acres of crops get an independent to walk their crops & have they then got the time to ring around for prices & orders?

Serviced agronomy packages have a place. The fact that it is still a big % of the market suggests that not all growers think they are being shafted sideways.

In most other professions the expert and the sales are becoming separated. Financial services dis it years ago to make it transparent. My accountant gives expertise to calculate and minimise my tax but he makes nothing extra by doing that.
Your doctor makes no extra income by suggesting one drug over another. Your vet could write a prescription but you could get it elsewhere.
I struggle to understand how someone does not have the time or interest to walk through their crops, phone for some quotes or learn about common diseases or weeds in their crops.
Without that background knowledge you have no idea if you are being sold a good service or if there are cheaper equivalent products which the OP has identified as saving £2000.

 

[Steevo]

Glad to hear you've made a good saving here Phil! Should all help pay for that TFF summer party you're hosting.....

 

[Gong Farmer]

AHDB do pay NIAB TAG to host their trials. It's just a business transaction but there's some data sharing.

Only variety (RL) trials, not members' agronomy trials

 

[Phil P]

Glad to hear you've made a good saving here Phil! Should all help pay for that TFF summer party you're hosting.....

Is that a virtual thing over zoom? If it is I’ll get some beer in ?

 

[Brisel]

Only variety (RL) trials, not members' agronomy trials

I should have elaborated better. Sorry

 

[Steevo]

Simply because I like to post an alternative view & I'm an awkward bugger, I'll defend serviced agronomy for once

Why do we still use accountants to submit accounts? Because they have the specialist knowledge of taxation and other legislation that frequently changes in order to provide you with good service whilst doing a job most don't find scintillating even though it is critical to the survival of their business. To many, agronomy is similar. Specialist knowledge of products, what is being revoked, growth stage cut off and what's new. Which is the most cost effective product for that variety/weed/pest in that season? (I know I'm skating on thin ice with that one!). Some farmers don't want to spend a not inconsiderable amount of their time keeping up to date with all of this & choose to outsource that specialist subject to a professional.

Some farmers just aren't interested in agronomy. Farmers with several enterprises can't be geeks in all of them all of the time. They are happy to have someone walk the fields, write the tickets for the sprayer driver and order the chemicals too. Any unused products are taken back & they are first in the queue when products run short. How simple is that?

Can a mixed farmer with 300 acres of crops get an independent to walk their crops & have they then got the time to ring around for prices & orders?

Serviced agronomy packages have a place. The fact that it is still a big % of the market suggests that not all growers think they are being shafted sideways. Some may be ignorant about the alternatives but some may be happy that their crops look better than their neighbours and the service is good. TFF is a forum for people who seek knowledge or just have a rant with like minded people. I don't see serviced agronomy getting glowing reviews in TFF - you wouldn't extol the virtues of animal rearing in a vegan forum without getting some hassle in return...!

Ask your independent agronomist how they got started - many will have been trained & had their early careers in the service trade.

Me? I'm a dedicated manager of a large arable and conservation farm where the seed, fertiliser and sprays bill is approx. half our total costs and runs in to 6 figures every year. We have the scale to justify my BASIS and FACTS training, and to hire an independent agronomist to walk fields and provide a medium for the exchange of ideas and strategies. He also walks many other farms so sees issues in advance and afterwards so can learn from those experiences. I pay his firm a fee per acre walked and organise my own deliveries via a buying group who seek to get the best deals and cut out middlemen yet save me even more time ringing around suppliers for quotes. I don't regret that choice, enjoy agronomy and chasing the best strategies for my employers.

Good comments.

I would suggest accountants are more trustworthy than serviced agronomists - less pressure selling required, no specific power imbalance. In fact I would go as far as to say they are more professional.

Serviced agronomy does have a place and could do an excellent job at providing a service for many farmers....there are quite a few bad eggs that spoil it for the others.

 

[Steevo]

Or actually the AHDB levy could pay NIAB. They have a big r and d budget and we can all enjoy some cost savings. As Im sure there is an element of doubling up in some areas

Combinable crop agronomy doesn't change that much from year to year really.

It would make sense. Whether NIAB would like that though I'm unsure. A bit like the air ambulances that are happy not being govt funded and thus under govt control.

There's also the risk that a static budget could allow them to become complacent and bloated.

 

[SilliamWhale]

It would make sense. Whether NIAB would like that though I'm unsure. A bit like the air ambulances that are happy not being govt funded and thus under govt control.

There's also the risk that a static budget could allow them to become complacent and bloated.

I hear you. However we fund AHDB not govt dont we?

 

[ollie989898]

Biggest issue going forward is going to be a lack of products to even use. Take the subsidy out of the equation and there will be land that doesn't wash it's face- doesn't take much imagination to think of land locally that you would never plough and expect to grow wheat/OSR reliably and profitably in every year.

I don't see why the industry needs government money for research, either. Fudge quangos and carry ons, just get on with the job.

 

[Steevo]

In most other professions the expert and the sales are becoming separated. Financial services dis it years ago to make it transparent. My accountant gives expertise to calculate and minimise my tax but he makes nothing extra by doing that.
Your doctor makes no extra income by suggesting one drug over another. Your vet could write a prescription but you could get it elsewhere.
I struggle to understand how someone does not have the time or interest to walk through their crops, phone for some quotes or learn about common diseases or weeds in their crops.
Without that background knowledge you have no idea if you are being sold a good service or if there are cheaper equivalent products which the OP has identified as saving £2000.

I agree with all of this.....bar the last couple of sentences.

I have an independent agronomist. I walk every field with him every visit and we discuss everything.

I can't spot weeds as well or as quick as him - he sees things without even looking for them. He spends his days doing is hour after hour and it's second nature. I wish I was as skilled, but I'm happy to pay him for this. It's not as easy as you might think.

Whether his advice is right every time is another matter - weather plays a big part in that. It's all a risk vs. cost calculation. We work it out together, both of us having our strengths to contribute.

I rarely do exactly what he says every time....and often he finds that as interesting as me. Sometimes his advice is too cautious, or too extreme - but I'm pleased to have that perspective. 4wks back he suggested I sprayed off several wheat fields which til then I thought looked good and would be profitable. I did some but not all as a trial - looking at the bits I left, there's more blackgrass appearing than I'd like which will cause a headache for future years. Juggling what's best for today and what's best for the future is never easy.

 

[yellow belly]

To add to the debate
Is serviced agronomy similar to having manufacturers serviced machinery
independent agronomist and independent machinery or vehicle repairs and servicing

 

[Brisel]

In most other professions the expert and the sales are becoming separated. Financial services dis it years ago to make it transparent. My accountant gives expertise to calculate and minimise my tax but he makes nothing extra by doing that.
Your doctor makes no extra income by suggesting one drug over another. Your vet could write a prescription but you could get it elsewhere.
I struggle to understand how someone does not have the time or interest to walk through their crops, phone for some quotes or learn about common diseases or weeds in their crops.
Without that background knowledge you have no idea if you are being sold a good service or if there are cheaper equivalent products which the OP has identified as saving £2000.

Serviced agronomy is funded by agrochemical sales. Nothing to stop anyone having a distributor agronomist walking your fields, making your recommendations and being paid a fee per acre with you getting the products where you like. There is a lot of this happening successfully. An agronomist should be making you money in excess of their fees.

NHS Doctors were under pressure to prescribe cheaper drugs. Remember Herceptin for cancer?

I agree with your last point but growers let this happen. They chose serviced agronomy, not had it forced on them.

 

[T Hectares]

Simply because I like to post an alternative view & I'm an awkward bugger, I'll defend serviced agronomy for once

Why do we still use accountants to submit accounts? Because they have the specialist knowledge of taxation and other legislation that frequently changes in order to provide you with good service whilst doing a job most don't find scintillating even though it is critical to the survival of their business. To many, agronomy is similar. Specialist knowledge of products, what is being revoked, growth stage cut off and what's new. Which is the most cost effective product for that variety/weed/pest in that season? (I know I'm skating on thin ice with that one!). Some farmers don't want to spend a not inconsiderable amount of their time keeping up to date with all of this & choose to outsource that specialist subject to a professional.

Some farmers just aren't interested in agronomy. Farmers with several enterprises can't be geeks in all of them all of the time. They are happy to have someone walk the fields, write the tickets for the sprayer driver and order the chemicals too. Any unused products are taken back & they are first in the queue when products run short. How simple is that?

Can a mixed farmer with 300 acres of crops get an independent to walk their crops & have they then got the time to ring around for prices & orders?

Serviced agronomy packages have a place. The fact that it is still a big % of the market suggests that not all growers think they are being shafted sideways. Some may be ignorant about the alternatives but some may be happy that their crops look better than their neighbours and the service is good. TFF is a forum for people who seek knowledge or just have a rant with like minded people. I don't see serviced agronomy getting glowing reviews in TFF - you wouldn't extol the virtues of animal rearing in a vegan forum without getting some hassle in return...!

Ask your independent agronomist how they got started - many will have been trained & had their early careers in the service trade.

Me? I'm a dedicated manager of a large arable and conservation farm where the seed, fertiliser and sprays bill is approx. half our total costs and runs in to 6 figures every year. We have the scale to justify my BASIS and FACTS training, and to hire an independent agronomist to walk fields and provide a medium for the exchange of ideas and strategies. He also walks many other farms so sees issues in advance and afterwards so can learn from those experiences. I pay his firm a fee per acre walked and organise my own deliveries via a buying group who seek to get the best deals and cut out middlemen yet save me even more time ringing around suppliers for quotes. I don't regret that choice, enjoy agronomy and chasing the best strategies for my employers.

My thoughts fwiw ( not much, I know )

There is for sure a need for full service agronomists for business' where arable farming is not their core business or interest and the farm doesn't have the skills in hand, but an independent combined with a buying group can give the same service as the distributor, the only downside will be several invoices to pay instead of one and the ability to send chem back.

I agree with @puppet in that it's a conflict of interest to combine sales and advice in one package

For larger arable businesses it's an odd one to be disconnected from agronomy, it's at the heart of everything we do and its something we can have control over and potentially save money on.

As for the @MarkD approach of paying based on GM I'm sceptical, I just remember ii articles/adverts in FW years back where they justified very high spending on increases in GM, whether it was sustainable or not, most professionals charge a fee and are rewarded by your continuation with them.

My own approach ??
I do the bulk myself, I'm on a smaller scale than you but have several other enterprises to run.
I employ an Indy on a reduced service, he visits as I need but maybe 4 times a year, what I get is a sounding board and phone advise which is very valuable, they also run several key Timing meetings where they present some potential strategies based on what they are seeing, these and the NIAB tag strategies form the basis for what I implement and keep me current, keep me from becoming too insular and keep my interest up.
Secondly the buying group is very good, steering us on product choice, availability and have been very good at fertiliser purchasing
It works for me, I'm aware it wouldn't for everyone and its also working for the farm.

Farming is changing and it will lead to similar knock-on effects in the advice and supply trades.

 

[ollie989898]

I can counter it all because I've heard the same conversations about both kinds. People nicknamed 'the invisible man' because you just don't see him and so on. I wasn't cheap cheap, but on the other hand I did do the extra mile (and a half) near running myself into the ground sometimes to nip down and look at this 10 acres or can you look at this land down the road X wants me to rent etc etc etc. You aren't going to get that level of service for £4 an acre from anyone. I also spent a lot of time soil sampling and helping with planning, which a lot of livestock farmers genuinely appreciated. I also acted as the 'fast bowler' for a couple of contractors. The service offered between agronomists is perhaps not comparable- I never saw myself as the sort of guy who was going to be riding a quadbike over 12,000 acres of wheat and OSR. I did the slower and more expensive end of the market. As I have maintained in the past, the big all-arable farmers should be perfectly able to do their own agronomy, it's in the job description really.

I'm not entirely clear on how the NHS would work, but people trained and authorised to prescribe can only choose from an approved list: it is not a free-for-all. I don't believe there is any incentive to favour any drug over another but there is a system in place where funding follows the patient and so the entire system is now aligned at getting bodies through doors as smoothly convenient as possible because procedures and appointments mean money.

 

[Steevo]

I hear you. However we fund AHDB not govt dont we?

Yes, it's levy funded. The government are linked in slightly though - DEFRA recently carried out a review on AHDB which showed whether farmers felt they were getting value for money.

This is taken from the AHDB framework document:

AHDB is led and directed by a Board about the Secretary of State is formally accountable to the UK Parliament for the activities, performance and expenditure of AHDB. AHDB are included within Defra's consolidated accounts and are regarded as part of the wider Defra group for these purposes.

As an Arm's Length Body, AHDB works closely with Defra, other sponsors and other bodies, thereby helping to ensure that its functions are carried out efficiently. It supports and contributes appropriately to the Government's aims and priorities taking into full account the needs of the industries that fund it and which it serves.

https://projectblue.blob.core.windows.net/media/Default/Footer/Funding%20and%20structure/08032018FrameworkDocumentMarch2018-AHDB.pdf

 

[ollie989898]

Yes, it's levy funded. The government are linked in slightly though - DEFRA recently carried out a review on AHDB which showed whether farmers felt they were getting value for money.

This is taken from the AHDB framework document:

AHDB is led and directed by a Board about the Secretary of State is formally accountable to the UK Parliament for the activities, performance and expenditure of AHDB. AHDB are included within Defra's consolidated accounts and are regarded as part of the wider Defra group for these purposes.

As an Arm's Length Body, AHDB works closely with Defra, other sponsors and other bodies, thereby helping to ensure that its functions are carried out efficiently. It supports and contributes appropriately to the Government's aims and priorities taking into full account the needs of the industries that fund it and which it serves.

https://projectblue.blob.core.windows.net/media/Default/Footer/Funding%20and%20structure/08032018FrameworkDocumentMarch2018-AHDB.pdf

The AHDB should not be funded by levy. I don't care if you think it is the best thing since sliced bread or an utter farce, it should be funded by voluntary subscription. Live or die in the harsh reality of commerce. Those times of the nanny state knowing best are long gone.