"The adoption of agricultural brands in the 21st century"; as farms grow larger and producers evolve into more sophisticated, demanding buyers ... how can ag suppliers start and protect customer relationships? (Special Report).I. Trends Affecting Sales To Larger Producers Due To Farm Consolidation And More Businesslike Buyers, Creating And Maintaining Customer Relationships Has Grown More Difficult Almost Three-Quarters Of The Producers Have Undergone Significant Operational Changes (2) ... Making Them More Elusive Sales And Marketing Targets Size of operation changed 45% Merged with another operation 2% Acquired additional farms/ranches 23% Acquired by another operation 5% Expanded by purchasing or renting more acreage 35% Formed strategic alliances/partnerships with other operations 7% Started new farm/ranch 6% Closed operations 17% No such changes 30% Merging or Acquiring Farms/Ranches 28% Involved in Operational Changes 70% A Clear Trend Toward FEWER But LARGER Operations (2) * 56% Of Producers Now See FEWER Operations Similar To Their Own * 54% Now See LARGER Operations Similar To Their Own
Compared To The Previous Generation, Today's Farmers And Ranchers
View Themselves As More Sophisticated And Open To Change
Less/Much More/Much
Less About More
Advanced The Same Advanced
* Level of education 4% 20% 76%
* Knowledge of ag technology 6% 9% 85%
(genetics, computerization, etc.)
* Understanding of ag's critical 5% 30% 65%
issues (consumerism, trade, etc.)
* Business skills required for 6% 27% 67%
success (finance, marketing, etc.)
* Willingness to try new approaches, 6% 27% 67%
technologies or relationships
(1) Average annual gross receipts of survey respondents = $272,400 in
sales from crops and/or livestock
(2) Compared with the mid-1990s
Note: Table made from bar graph.
Today's Producers Are More Demanding Of Suppliers ... Seeking Greater
Accountability And Returns On Investments (1)
Now have a more businesslike relationship 55%
with suppliers (rely less on personal
attributes)
Now make more objective decisions about 55%
products/brands (performance, ROI, etc.)
Now require reps to stay involved after 49%
the sale (training, consulting,
implementing, etc.)
Now require reps to develop more custom 43%
solutions to our problems/situations
Feel Their Relationships With Suppliers 91%
Are Changing
Note: Table made from bar graph.
Many Producers Are Now Less Loyal To Suppliers ... They're Searching
For Solutions Beyond Those Offered By Current Vendors (2)
Less Open 6%
About The Same 47%
More Open 48%
* Willingness To Evaluate New Suppliers
Note: Table made from bar graph.
Suppliers Must Now Work Harder To Demonstrate Their Company's
Stability (2)
Less Concerned 4%
Much More Concerned 17%
More Concerned 42%
About The Same 37%
* Producers' Concern About Vendor Stability
(1) Compared with previous generations of producers
(2) Compared with the mid-1990s
Note: Table made from pie graph.
II. The Ability Of Reps And Dealers To Make Contact Sales Reps And Dealers Need Substantial Support In Branding Products And Building New Customer Relationships Almost Half The Producers Now Have Less Time To See Sales Reps (1) * Avg. No. Contacts With All Of Reps (in person & via phone): 0.6 per week More Time 12% Much Less Time 12% Less Time 33% About The Same 43% Note: Table made from pie graph. * 80% Of Producers Don't Regulary See COMPANY/MFR. Reps At Their Farm/Ranch * 41% Don't Regulary See DEALER Reps At Their Farm/Ranch In Responding To Suppliers' Ads ... Buyers Often Sidestep Reps By Going To A Vendor's Web Site For More Information (2) Respond By Going Online (2) To Avoid Reps 83% Frequently/Very Frequently 44% Rarely/Never 17% Sometimes 39% Frequently 28% Very Frequently 16% Note: Table made from bar graph. Before Visiting Ag Dealers For New Products Or Equipment, Buyers Usually Have One Or Two Brands Already In Mind (those they've seen, read or heard about) Very Freq. Have Brands in Mind 16% Frequently Have Brands in Mind 48% Sometimes Have Brands in Mind 29% Rarely/Never 7% Freq. Very Freq. 64% Freq. Very Freq. Sometimes 93% Note: Table made from bar graph. Producers Feel Dealers Usually Don't Have The Time To Discuss A Category's Multiple Brands, In-Depth Sometimes/Rarely/Never 81% Never 10% Rarely 28% Sometimes 43% Frequently Very Frequently 19% (1) Compared with the mid-1990s (2) Based on producers now online; 46% online as of 3/02 + 13% plan to do so (within avg. of 9 mos.) = 59% Note: Table made from bar graph. III. The Role Of Communications Programs Customer Relationships Are Initialed By Communications Media ... Primarily Via Ag Magazines And Newspapers Two-Thirds Of Producers First Learn About A Supplier's Capabilities And Products Through The Vendor's Communications Programs
First learn of them through communications 68%
programs (magazine/newspaper/TV/radio ads,
Internet promotion, publicity, etc.
First learn through sales reps and dealers 32%
Note: Table made from bar graph.
Communications Programs
Pave The Way
For A Rep's Sales Calls
No 9%
Yes 91%
* Whether Prior Knowledge
Of A Supplier Makes Granting
Appointments More Likely
Note: Table made from pie graph.
Producers Select Ag Publications
As Their Primary Medium
For Continuing Education
Usefulness in Staying
Medium Current With Change (1)
* Agricultural magazines/newspapers 82%
* Ag newsletters 69%
* Farm shows (exhibits/seminars) 68%
* Ag dealers/retailers 63%
* Ag supplier sales reps 51%
* Ag conferences (not part of trade shows) 50%
* Ag radio shows 48%
* Ag television programs 43%
* General daily newspapers 34%
* Web sites from ag magazines 30%
* Web sites for ag not affiliated
with ag magazines 30%
(1) Very useful + useful
Ag Publications Are The Principal Way
Producers First Learn About
New Products, Equipment And Suppliers
First Learn About
Medium New Products/Suppliers
Ranking As #1
* Ag publications (either ads or
news/articles) 59%
* Ag supplier/dealer sales reps 19%
* Farm show exhibits 11%
* Direct mail announcements/brochures
from suppliers 4%
* Ag reference publications (directories,
buyer's guides) 2%
* Ag television programs 1%
* Ag radio shows 1%
* Radio programs (not ag specific) 1%
* Web sites from ag publs. (with product
nows/databases) 1%
* Web sites for agriculture not affiliated
with publications 1%
* Ag supplier/dealer Web sites 0%
* Broadbased search engines (Yahoo, etc.) 0%
IV. Trends In Producer Involvement With Ag Publications To Meet An Array Of Challenges, Producers Now Rely Even More Heavily On Ag Magazines And Newspapers
Across Producers Of All Ages,
Ag Publications Will Be Even More Important In The Future
Less/Much Less Important 8%
More/Much More Important 58%
The Same Important 34%
* The Importance Of Ag Publications In The Next 3-4 Years
Note: Table made from pie graph.
By Age
("Just As"/"More Important")
20-29 99%
30-39 96%
40-49 91%
50-59 89%
60+ 95%
Note: Table made from bar graph.
Producers Recognize
That The Magazine
Format Offers
Distinct Advantages
Convenience; can reach for/get into them quickly 68%
Portability; can read at work, at home, etc. 67%
Constructive; they contain useful information 60%
They're credible source of ag information 58%
Very visual, bringing info to life with photos, charts, etc. 54%
"Tangible"; enjoy thumbing through them 44%
Offer "random access" to any article 40%
"Personal"; relevant to my areas of interest 37%
They do the research for me 37%
Easy to remove articles/ads 33%
Note: Table made from bar graph.
Into The Future ...
Larger Producers Expect To Continue Investing
Significant Time With Ag Publications
By Age
(time spent reading per week)
% Who Will Spend
Time Now The Same Or More
Age Spent Reading Time (Next 3-4 Yrs.)
* 20-29 Yrs. 5.3 hrs. 99%
* 30-39 Yrs. 3.4 hrs. 87%
* 40-49 Yrs. 3.0 hrs. 85%
* 50-59 Yrs. 3.7 hrs. 87%
* 60+ Yrs. 3.0 hrs. 85%
Total 3.3 hrs. 86%
V. Advertising In Ag Magazines And Newspapers Publication Advertising Continues To Be A Primary, Powerful Medium For Starting And Protecting Customer Relationships Across All Media--Your Sales Messages Will Be Exposed Most Frequently In Ag Publications % Ranking As The #1 Medium For Frequent Exposure To Advertising (% Ranking in Top 3) Ads in farm publications 69% (94%) Ads on farm radio programs 9% (34%) Direct mail adv. from ag suppliers 9% (56%) Ads on farm directories (print) 5% (64%) Ads on farm TV programs 5% (28%) Ads on indp't. Internet sites 1% (9%) Ads on ag supplier Web sites 1% (8%) Ads on Internet search engine sites (Yahoo, etc.) 1% (6%) Ads on online service provider sites (AOL, etc) 0% (2%) Note: Table made from bar graph. 85% (1) Have Positive Perceptions Of Ag Suppliers Who Communicate Regularly Via Publication Advertising Likely to be a more well-established company 53% Likely to be one of the more stable companies 44% Likely to be one of the more successful companies 41% Likely to be a more reliable supplier 37% Likely to offer more innovative/state-of-the-art products 36% Likely to have more significant resources 35% Likely to be more customer-oriented 33% (1) Unduplicated Note: Table made from bar graph. Response To Ag Publication Advertising Continues To Remain Strong ... Especially Via Direct Methods Of Response (Phone, Web Sites, etc.) Less Often 14% More Often 30% Same Level 56% * 86% Of Producers Are Seeking Out/Requesting Information More Often Or At The Same Level (Vs. 3-4 Yrs. Ago) Note: Table made from pie graph. Return reader service cards 55% DIRECT METHODS OF RESPONSE (Unduplicated) 96% Telephone manufacturers/dealers 84% Discuss products with manufacturers'/dealer' reps 80% Visit suppliers' show exhibits 75% Send back a specific suppliers' reply card 50% Visit manufacturers' Web sites 37% Visit dealers' Web sites 31% Go to distributors' Web Sites 15% E-mail 14% Write/Fax 19% Save ads for reference 64% Suggest products be used 61% Discuss advertised products with staff 52% Pass on ads to others for action 40% (unduplicated) Electronic Methods 41% (unduplicated) Are Using Direct Methods Of Contact 96% * Based on using each method very frequently, frequently or sometimes Note: Table made from bar graph. VI. Conclusions * Today's ag market continues trending toward fewer but larger producers ... operations managed by ever-more astute, businesslike buyers who have less brand loyalty. These shifts require ongoing contact and branding efforts ... but reps and dealers need considerable support in starting and protecting customer relationships. * Clearly, it's a supplier's communications program that initiates these bonds. And by a wide margin, ag publications remain the #1 communications medium. Not only are they the producer's primary source of continuing education, but they're the principal way buyers learn about suppliers' products. * From establishing initial contact to generating awareness, positive perceptions and creating a willingness to meet with reps ... publications will remain an essential medium for building customer relationships in the ag product adoption process.
STEPS IN BUILDING CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIPS EFFECTIVE ROLES
1. Establish Initial Contact
2. Create Company/Product Awareness Ag Communications
3. Develop Positive Perceptions Media (especially ag
4. Develop Preference For The Company/Product magazines/
5. Create A Willingness To Meet With Reps newspapers)
6. Stimulate Direct And Indirect Sales Leads
7. Position The Company/Product Vs. Competitors
8. Customize The Product To Client's Needs
9. Create And Present Custom Proposals Personal Selling
10. Negotiate (Reps & Dealers)
11. Follow Up
12. Close The Sale
13. Keep Customer Sold: Generate The Next Scale Ag Communications
Media
VI. Methodology * Date Conducted/Medium: March, 2002; mail survey. * Universe Studied: 7,000 unduplicated names were selected at random from the crop and livestock databases of 11 ABM/Agri Council member organizations. * Types Of Producers Surveyed: To generate results from larger producers, each publication's list reflected minimum crop or livestock sizes (e.g., 250+ acres of corn, soy or cotton, 100+ head of beef, etc.). Titles surveyed: owners/operators/managers/supervisors. * Incentive: $1.00 Effective Mailing: 308 undeliverable, unusable or late returns. Effective mailing = 6,560. * Response Rate: 2,418 usable returns = 36.9%. Maximum overall sampling tolerance (95% confidence level) = margin of error of +/- 2.0%. * Weighting: The results in this report (reflecting all segments combined) have been weighted to reflect the agricultural universe. See complete report for details. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY * Market trends affecting suppliers * Producer attitudes about suppliers * Making contact through reps/dealers * The role of communications media * The role of ag publications * Advertising response trends |
|
||||||||||||||||||||

Printer friendly
Cite/link
Email
Feedback
Reader Opinion