Last December Southwest Airlines was forced to cancel more than 15,000 flights during the peak holiday season. It wasn’t weather, mechanical issues, or even striking airline workers that caused the chaos. Instead, the real reason for the grounding was the weight of the company’s overall “technical debt” had become too much too bear. In short, the company’s antiquated systems and technology broke down at the worst possible time.
Could the same thing happen in agriculture? Absolutely. In fact, the agricultural industry as a whole, at both the macro and micro levels are ripe for such technical tsunamis. That’s not just Chicken Little talking, such warnings are echoed by a recent McKinsey Global Institute study that placed agriculture dead last in terms of the industry’s state of digitization.
Is too much “technical debt” putting your farm’s future at risk? To answer that question you must first understand what technical debt means and how it affects your overall business.
Technical debt — or tech debt — is the implied cost incurred when businesses do not fix problems that will affect them in the future. Accruing technical debt causes existing problems to get worse over time. The longer the debt builds up, the more costly it becomes to rectify.
Learn more about the risk of technical debt at the 2024 Top Producer Summit. Register online today!
Farmers have been on the agricultural treadmill for the better part of two centuries now. It was JFK’s Chief Agricultural Economist Willard Cochrane that coined the phrase “technology tread-mill” to describe the race to adopt new technologies in order to remain cost competitive. From the Industrial Revolution to the Green Revolution, to the Biotech Revolution, to now the Information Age, it feels like Cochrane’s treadmill has accelerated to warp speed.
Assessing your farm’s technical debt is not as simple as evaluating risks from financial debt. There is not a clear formula, like a debt ratio, that measures total debt to total assets. Addressing technical debt involves taking inventory of the technology on the farm today and evaluating the short-term and long-term risks to your overall operation if one or more of those technologies fail.
That’s just the first layer of the onion when it comes to knowing your true technical debt. The exercise should also involve answering various questions about your farm’s overall technical health. Questions like — What technology is missing that I need today, or even tomorrow? What equip-ment should immediately be put out to pasture or parked in the digital fencerow? Are my technology pieces compatible? In other other words, do they play nice together and talk to each other? And finally — are you really using the technology you already have and the data that comes with it?
In the real world those questions might sound something like this — Do I need to digitize and record more of my field activities, like anhydrous or crop protection product application, in order to increase my farm’s future carbon market value? Is my yield monitor so old that they don’t even make memory card readers to download the data? Will my John Deere tractor display talk to my new Kinze planter? Do I religiously use technology to implement actionable agronomy practices like variable-rate seeding and crop removal recommendations?
Just like financial debt, not all technical debt is bad. Just like regular debt, it must be managed and serviced on a regular basis. The most important way to turn technical debt into a positive is to simply have a technology plan. What do you want your technology to do for you and does it align with the other overall future goals for your farming operation?
Tech debt cannot be eliminated by geeking out and going on a technology buying spree. Investment in tech should not be considered just a fair weather proposition, nor should it be considered when you’re behind the eight-ball like in the case of Southwest. Since the dawn of precision farm-ing, the industry’s pervasive mentality has been that technology falls into more of a luxury category than treating it as the capital expense it should be.
The agricultural treadmill has always been unforgiving. The recent rise of technical debt has only ratcheted up the intensity. If you are not proactive, you will likely spend all your time putting out fires. That leaves little time or energy left for planning. And as Winston Churchill once said: “He who fails to plan is planning to fail.”
