“Give us the tools, and we will finish the job” - Winston Churchill

Well Winston, in the agricultural data world, there’s no dearth of tools, but the work is not done, so what’s missing?

I’ve been thinking a lot about the difference between a tool and a product. A product creates value for the user and the user is willing to give something up of value in exchange for that value. A tool, on the other hand, is there to help a user achieve some goal. It seems simple, but in the realm of agriculture, it's anything but. A complicated system of subsidy, agricultural extension, and public funding has created a unique paradigm. In this sector of endless grant funded web-tools and venture-capital backed products that are priced under the cost of production for the sake of “scale”, we see very few real products that are delivering enough value where a producer would be willing to pay for software what it costs to make it.

The result: hundreds of subsidized tools that exist to “support ranch/farm decision making”.

Now this is where I need to add a disclaimer. I’m part of the problem. I’ve built decision support web tools (for example: this carrying capacity app) that add to noise. While I hope that these tools have hopefully helped a few people along the way, I realize that they likely could end up another row on the endless list of tools/resources out there. These tools and resources are not inherently a bad thing. There is a great wealth of technological innovation, cutting edge data systems, and practical user interfaces that have been built to serve the agricultural community as a result of the grants, venture capital, and initiatives to support farmers/ranchers.

So where do we go from here? The U.S. Federal government is pushing record amounts of funding through programs like the Climate Smart Commodities Program, the NRCS, the EPA, and other Farm Bill programs. There is funding at every corner for producers to “improve their management practices” and the creation of tools to help producers and land managers “improve their decision making”. These tools and programs are often creating the same systems and architectures over and over again, without much thought into the broader ecosystems. This means there’s 5 or 6 different conservation programs vying to deploy funds here in South Dakota, 8 different free grazing management tools, and lots of ag-tech products vying for the same few early adopter producers to try their new invention.

Building products that last, and add real value to producers, is really hard. It also takes a long time. Typical venture capital funders typically don't want to wait long enough for products to evolve to a mature place before launching. The iteration cycle in an ecological system is slow, typically following the rotation of the earth around the sun, rather than the download of a new app or view of a new page. Because of this, the industry needs patient capital, long-term product strategies, and thoughtful go-to-market strategies in order to create meaningful products.

We believe that the next wave of innovation in the agricultural technology space has to focus on technology consolidation, system integration, improved content/information filtering, and thoughtful business practices.

At Celium group, we are working with customers across the agricultural industry to build and invest in great products. We aim to help our partners understand the complete landscape of what’s available and what products make sense for their needs, and when a custom solution is required. We help our clients think through how to build products that are driving value creation for the end user, not just another “cool tool” that ends up in a report somewhere.