by Terence Hart
The Government’s decision, taken in 1987, that the Agricultural Development and Advisory Service (ADAS) should charge for some of its services had a mixed reception both within and outside the service. Some ADAS staff, who had joined the service because they recognised that ADAS occupied the high ground of those able to advise the agricultural industry, were dismayed that their reputations for objectivity and professional integrity might be put in jeopardy. They need not have worried.
In the industry at large there were those who responded to the decision in much the same way as Dr Johnson reacted to women preachers: “A woman’s preaching,” the doctor said, “is like a dog’s walking on his hinder legs. It is not done well; but you are surprised to find it done at all.” Such critics have been confounded on two counts. Not only has ADAS been able to sell services for which formerly there was no charge; they have been able to sell those services very effectively. So effectively, indeed, that the new cry of the critics is “Unfair! Unfair!”. What they mean is that being in the government service gives ADAS an unfair advantage over other consultancy services. This reaction is the very antithesis of the original response — that a government organisation was bound to fail in a competitive environment.
Perhaps it would not have been surprising if ADAS staff had risen to the challenge of “going commercial” like the proverbial lead balloon. Most ADAS advisers joined the organisation because of a deep concern for good farming practice, and because they wanted to see agriculture prosper. They knew that their advisory services were free to any agriculturist or horticulturist wishing to avail themselves of those services. They knew that their services were supported by a vast range of research and development services, also free, which endorsed the ADAS claims to objectivity and integrity. There were also statutory duties which certain ADAS specialists had to perform, and these added the element of “authority” to the advisers’ role.
In the event, the majority of ADAS advisers have responded enthusiastically to the requirement to sell some services. They have been helped in this by a vigorous and continuous training programme whose objectives are to acquaint all advisers with communications techniques, and some with commercial and negotiating skills. All new entrants are given an induction course which makes them aware of the range of skills and experiences that the service has to offer, and which emphasises the primacy of the customer in ADAS working practice.
During the first year of commercial operation the director-general of ADAS, Professor Ronald Bell, has taken several opportunities to testify to ADAS’ successful trading record. On March 25 1988 ADAS published a new brochure, The Challenge of Change, and at the launch press conference the professor was able to say that those who were in that room 12 months ago would remember that he had described the new ADAS as “raring to go”. Faced with an enormous challenge, Professor Bell said that his staff had responded magnificently. Some of them had been apprehensive about how they would face up to being a commercial service, but with a very few exceptions this had been converted into confidence in themselves — and the industry had responded by showing its confidence in ADAS. The evidence that the industry wanted ADAS services and valued them was shown by the fact that by the end of February there were over 38,000 paying customers on the books. Professor Bell claimed that at the present rate of increase of more than 3,500 a month ADAS should soon reach the 40,000 mark. All the indications were that the service would reach the financial targets that were announced in 1985 and 1986, and would have sold £7m worth of advice and £2.5m of R&D.
Four months later, at the Royal Show, Professor Bell reviewed the current conditions in agriculture and announced the results of some market research. Conducted with a 400-farmer-and-grower sample, the research revealed that ADAS had retained its position as a key provider of advice, and that levels of satisfaction with the service had improved. Customers were particularly satisfied with specialist advisers and then, in descending order, with divisional bulletins, laboratory services and local advisers. The percentage of farmers and growers not purchasing advice from any source, the research showed, had fallen by 26% over the period 1986-87 to 1987-88; and that just over £20m was being spent on advice and information. ADAS entry into the consultancy market-place, Professor Bell asserted, had been beneficial to other providers, and he predicted that the demand for advice, particularly in respect of technical matters, diversification and farm business management, would grow: revenue was also expected to grow by about 20%.
Later in the year, at the ADAS Midlands and Western Open Day in Wolverhampton on September 23, Professor Bell was able to announce that in this region alone ADAS had 9,500 customers and that this total was growing at the rate of 300 new customers each month. Thus, by the end of the year, 25% of the agricultural business in the region would be with ADAS. Nationwide, ADAS had generated more than £8m of revenue and had recorded 50,000 customers.
ADAS owes its success to the comprehensive nature of the advice which it can offer, supported by a wide range of R&D facilities, and by expertise which can draw on 40 years of experience. “Opportunity Farm”, the service’s exhibit at the Royal Show in July, epitomised the ADAS approach to its customers: it is eager to emphasise the farm as a business, where the farmer needs to be aware of all the available opportunities and must obtain sound information and advice before taking any action. The brochure, The Challenge of Change, sets out in simple terms the precise nature of the specialist services and associated schemes which are available to help farmers maximise the business opportunities which they and their resources represent. It points out with justifiable pride that not many consultancies can muster 3,500 professional staff including 2,000 specialist and scientific experts in every branch of agriculture.
A measure of ADAS’ success might be deduced from the volume and the variety of voices who now claim that the service has an unfair trading advantage because of its proximity to Government. Mae West used to say, “If you’ve got it honey, flaunt it”, and certainly there is no way that ADAS could or would wish to “forget” 40 years of association with the Ministry of Agriculture, or to compromise the reputation for objectivity and straight dealing which it has established in that time.
Nor can the service refuse to fulfil its statutory duties, or fail to provide the free advice which the ministry requires it to provide. On the other hand the measures which exist to separate the commercial aspects of ADAS from those who are engaged in statutory duties are rigidly laid down by Legal Branch and rigorously enforced. ADAS national mineral specialist Peter Samuel recently presented a paper on an aspect of this very topic, setting out the role of ADAS in respect of advice which it provides to clients on pre-working site appraisals, restoration design, and in achieving high standards of site reinstatement and aftercare management.
The work which is done for clients as part of ADAS statutory duties here is performed by different staff from those who may be involved with the same clients to carry out commercial advisory work. The Stock Exchange has coined the phrase “Chinese Wall” to describe the invisible but effective barrier which separates the statutory from the entrepreneurial. In some ADAS regional and divisional offices a similar Chinese Wall has been built. As a manager who is responsible for clients who are seeking planning permission for alternative land use put it: “I enforce a very strict division. I have identified members of staff for statutory work, and I have identified staff for commercial work. Each group is separately managed. Where a task does not take up 100% of an adviser’s time, his residual time is occupied by non-conflicting activities.”
In all fairness, it should be pointed out that, while some potential commercial clients may welcome ADAS’ association with the ministry and with Government, there must be many who do not. On this count ADAS wins some and loses some. Nobody could reasonably expect ADAS to abandon 40 years of government service overnight, and some statutory duties seem destined to continue. ADAS is involved also with a huge amount of free consultancy work, whereas no commercial consultants do anything for nothing — a fact which is often forgotten by detractors of the Service. The terms of reference which guide the activities of MAFF are enshrined in section 17 of the Agriculture Act of 1986.
These terms require the ministry to:
- Promote and maintain a stable and efficient agricultural industry.
- Promote the economic and social interests of rural areas.
- Conserve and enhance the natural beauty of the countryside.
- Promote the enjoyment of the countryside by the public.
Given the present Government’s avowed interest in conservation and preservation, it is unlikely that ADAS will be able to give less time than it does at present to free advisory work in support of the ministry’s objectives and in connection with conservation and the environment. No other commercial consultancy is bound by the same obligations.
ADAS’ entry into commercial consultancy has enlarged the size of the market for all consultants. Market research carried out by ADAS shows this, and these findings have been reinforced by research carried out by Farmers Weekly and by Bayer. In 1986-87 the market was worth £14m. In 1987-88 it was worth £20m, which represents an increase of £6m or just under 50%. Far from knocking ADAS’ arrival as a commercial consultancy, rival consultants should applaud it for identifying new needs and handsomely increasing the number of potential customers who are looking for advice.
Now that ADAS is exhibiting at a bigger variety of shows than in the past, envious consultants have been heard to challenge the expertise of ADAS staff. “What are your qualifications?” ask other querulous voices. The two questions are not the same. ADAS advisers frequently show expertise in areas in which they have no formal qualification. “Learning by doing” is no bad way to acquire expertise and ADAS staff have, since NAAS days, had the opportunity to learn under the critical eye of men who have grown old and wise in the service of agriculture.
ADAS as an organisation is also committed to training, though it must not be thought that the staff are short on qualifications. Take forestry and farm woodland advice, for instance — a relatively new advisory area for ADAS. When ADAS exhibited at the Seventh National Forest Machinery Demonstration at Cannock Chase (September 28-30), their staff included several members of the Institute of Chartered Foresters, while some had higher degrees or were members of the RICS who had specialised in woodland advisory work. One of their number had made a major contribution to the most recent Forestry Commission publications on woodland planning and practice. Similar levels of qualifications would be revealed if any other aspect of ADAS advisory work were to be examined.
ADAS has responded remarkably well in 1987-88 to the challenge of change both within the Service and in the agricultural industry it is committed to serve. Both ADAS and the agricultural industry face opportunities for growth and development provided that they can adapt quickly to demand at home, in Europe and in world markets. All the evidence is that Professor Bell was not being over-optimistic in March, when he concluded his survey of progress: “It seems to me that all this augurs very well for the future, and I think we can be confident of an ever-increasing success.”