Competing on Analytics and the Future of Ag Input Commercialization

Over the last week, I revisited the book Competing on Analytics: The New Science of Winning by Thomas Davenport and Jeanne Harris, while also listening to Randy Barker, CEO of INTENT, discuss commercialization in agriculture.

Both the conversation and the book point to similar considerations: in competitive markets, analytics aren’t optional. Analytical capability determines who gains market share, protects margins, and delivers the best customer experience.

In agriculture, especially in commercializing new inputs (eg: biostimulants) and navigating an ever growing competitive market (eg: generics), the difference between winning and losing will frequently come down to who acquires and utilizes data and analytics to improve their product positioning, customer and region targeting and understanding in the market.

Competing on Analytics

The book Competing on Analytics outlines how companies that lead in their sectors don’t just use data for reporting, they embed analytics into decision-making at every level.

These “analytical competitors” do three things exceptionally well according to the book:

1. Collect the right data — not just more data.

2. Analyze it with sophistication — uncovering patterns, drivers, and opportunities.

3. Embed insights into operations — where they actively guide daily decisions.

Netflix is an example that is prominent in the book.

Netflix gathers granular behavioral data, applies advanced algorithms to recommend and acquire content, and integrates those insights into what shows it makes (capital allocation), what shows it recommends (customer experience), pricing (value maximization), and marketing decisions (customer acquisition). Its advantage is inseparable from its analytics capability.

I believe this is true in all competitive markets: analytics are not a nice to have. They are the capability required to outsmart the competition and effectively deliver distinct experiences and outcomes to customers.

Agriculture’s Commercialization Gap

Gut feel has been too much of a driving factor of decisions in agriculture— whether in agronomic decisions, or even in the commercialization and launching of new products, such as fungicides or herbicides for example.

In fact, when it comes to product management, sales strategy, and marketing, the commercialization process still looks eerily similar to the 1990s! To be fair, there has been improved survey data, market share data and more used to inform product launches and empower sales teams, but there is ample opportunity to improve the precision with which products are sold.

I remember my first conversation with Randy Barker in 2020 — we discussed the gap in understanding the farmers entire experience with a product before launch from beginning to end:

Subscribe to Upstream Ag Professional to read the rest.