Adoption Insight

Retailers that sell precision services to growers always face the challenge of showing provable benefits to the potential customer. This is especially true when selling to growers who are new to precision technology. This winter, The PrecisionAg Institute, a precision technology advocacy association managed by the CropLife Media Group, sponsored an in-depth grower research project focused on the adoption of precision technology in the major row crops — corn, soybeans, wheat, and cotton.

Among the myriad findings from the research are insights into what drives adopters to use the technology, and what repels non-adopters. Louis Chavez of Institute research partner dmrkinetic conducted the focus group phase of the research, and he shared some thoughts on the growers’ precision agriculture mindset in a recent interview:

Q: In doing the research, what do you think were the key attitudinal differences between grower-adopters and non-adopters?
A: In my opinion, adopters seemed very excited and enthusiastic about using this technology. I remember one gentleman using the word “passionate” when describing how he felt about the technology. In my opinion, adopters are much like leaders who have a vision and can see beyond the present situation. They talked in terms of successes they currently have, but realize that they will see even greater benefits down the road. While only a few would describe themselves as first adopters, the feeling I got is that they are willing to make the large investment now, knowing that they will reap even greater rewards in the long run. I also sensed somewhat of a competitive attitude among this group.

In my opinion, non-adopters seemed much less optimistic about what technology could do for them. They seemed more deliberate and cautious in describing the benefits of precision agriculture technology. Maybe skepticism is a better word. I sensed that they do not trust technology or what technology can do for their operation. They would much rather rely on the methods (non-technological), which they have used over the years, rather than make a large investment for something they feel may not work for them.

Q: When talking to non-adopters, did you perceive any “openings” for retailers who offer precision agriculture services to discuss these services?
A: The fact that this group was willing to participate in open discussions about precision agriculture technology shows that they are open to the idea. They may need a little more hands-on training, but many of them left the door open for more information.

I believe that sales personnel who serve non-adopters need to be viewed as something other than salespeople trying to sell something. These individuals want someone to come alongside of them and show them how technology can help specifically with their operation. They have fear, anxiety, and are very skeptical. One gentleman expressed: “How can this help my operation?” I think that’s the key for sales people. It may even be helpful for sales personnel to partner with current users planting the same crop and work with non-users to help them better understand the technology.

Q: Cost is most often pointed to as a barrier, but is this really the main factor? What else is in play for non-adopters?
Cost is definitely a factor and concern for non-users so I believe it’s important that this barrier be addressed. While it may not be possible to lower costs, it is possible to offer incentives and other package-priced marketing. One adopter mentioned that grants may be available to growers, and he explained that he received one. Information such as this is important to help non-adopters overcome the price hurdle.

Additionally, profitable return on the initial investment is very important to non-adopters. Somehow, non-adopters must be convinced that this technology, under most circumstances, will pay for itself in the long run. The only way to do this is to educate them on how it can improve their operation. Showing non-adopters data using farms similar to their farms and possibly doing tests with the technology in their operation are important in educating them on the benefits. I believe that non-adopters’ lack of understanding on “how this technology works” and how it can save them money are two of the primary barriers that must be addressed in addition to cost. I believe that if non-adopters were shown how their initial investment would pay for itself in lower input costs and greater yields, they would be more willing to adopt this technology.

One other point that must be addressed is the longevity of the system. Several non-adopters expressed concern that what they purchase in the way of technology today would be obsolete one or two years later.
Q: What would be the best course of action for a retailer that is looking to improve service sales success to non-adopters of precision agriculture (segmenting by relevant factors, technical aptitude, etc.)?
I think your points are important and valid. I would add geographic location to that mix. Several non-adopters as well as adopters said that software and technology is often developed using the Midwest farm as the template. Those who do contour, dry-land, and terrace farming do not feel that this technology meets their needs.

Some additional segments could include: type of crop grown, years of farm experience, and attitude toward technology in general. I realize that it may be cost prohibitive to create educational seminars for all of these different segments, but it would make growers feel that retailers are truly trying to meet their individual needs

Leave a Reply

Latest News
HerbicidesBREAKING: EPA Pulls Registration On Dow’s Enlist …
November 25, 2015
EPA on Wednesday withdrew approval of a controversial new weed killer to be used on genetically modified corn and soybeans, Read More
FertilizerYara Tampa Ammonia Terminal Garners ResponsibleAg Honor…
November 25, 2015
Yara has received its first ResponsibleAg Certification for its Tampa, FL, Ammonia terminal location. This achievement demonstrates Yara’s commitment to Read More
ManagementReviewing The Top Ag Stories For 2015
November 24, 2015
Editors Eric Sfiligoj and Paul Schrimpf discuss the most noteworthy events from this past year in agriculture. Read More
EmployeesAgriculture Jobs May Be Plentiful, But New Grads Are Sc…
November 24, 2015
Close to 60,000 jobs are set to open up in agriculture each year for the next five years, but there's not enough grads to fill them. Read More
Radish cover crop
StewardshipCover Crops Guide Helps Growers Improve Water Quality
November 23, 2015
A publication that teaches growers the advantages of using cover crops to improve soil health and crop yields has won Read More
Crop InputsThe Andersons’ Products Receive California Organi…
November 23, 2015
The Plant Nutrient Group of The Andersons, Inc. announced today that its Humic DG and Black Gypsum DG products are Read More
Eric SfiligojNew European Study Seems To Support Glyphosate Safety
November 23, 2015
Looking at any international news over the past few years, it might seem as if the European Union (EU) is Read More
Toggle Biostimulant corn roots
Crop InputsTwo New Biostimulants Added To United Suppliers’ …
November 20, 2015
Winfield US announces the launch of two new products in the United Suppliers portfolio for the 2016 crop season, Optify Read More
StewardshipNRDC Report: Cover Crops Contain Vast Benefits
November 19, 2015
As harvest season ends and farmers in the United States ready themselves for winter, one small change could make a Read More
Fall Harvest
Seed/BiotechArysta Launches New Seed Protectant
November 19, 2015
As spring wheat growers begin planning for a strong start to their season, Arysta LifeScience North America announces RANCONA V Read More
Crop InputsInocucor Receives U.S. Patent For Microbials
November 19, 2015
Inocucor Technologies Inc., the Montreal-based agriculture biotech company, was issued patent No. 9,175,258 by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to protect Read More
ManagementSyngenta Rumors and ARA 2015 Preview
November 19, 2015
CropLife Editor Eric Sfiligoj looks at the latest rumors involving Syngenta selling its crop protection business and talks about events Read More
EquipmentAGCO Announces Finalists For Operator Of The Year Honor
November 19, 2015
AGCO Corp. has announced the four top operators chosen as finalists for AGCO’s 10th Annual Operator of the Year program, Read More
High Plains Aquifer
StewardshipStudy: High Plains Aquifer Overall Usage In Decline
November 18, 2015
A new Kansas State University study finds that the over-tapping of the High Plains Aquifer’s groundwater beyond the aquifer’s recharge Read More
Golden Harvest Corn healthy leaves
FungicidesArysta Launches New Corn And Soybean Fungicide
November 17, 2015
Arysta LifeScience North America has recently launched ZOLERA FX Fungicide. The highly systemic, powerful fungicide delivers broad-spectrum disease control with Read More
Young corn plants in soil
Crop InputsBioAg Alliance: Microbials Targeted For 250-500 million…
November 17, 2015
Monsanto and Novozymes have announced a new 2025 acreage target that will guide the companies’ microbials business for the next Read More
Syngenta Sign
Crop InputsSyngenta Still Being Eyed For China Takeover
November 16, 2015
China National Chemical Corp. approached sovereign wealth funds including China Investment Corp. to help pay for a potential acquisition of Read More
Cedar Country Cooperative
Eric SfiligojCooperative Consolidation Continues
November 16, 2015
As I put this enewsletter column together, we’ve just put the finishing touches on our magazine’s annual CropLife 100 report. Read More