Increasingly, the science that has the greatest potential to make a difference in agriculture is psychology.
In recent years, we have come to appreciate the role of psychology in commodity markets, and in land markets too. We also think we have learned a lot about the psychology of succession planning, and even the psychology of technology adoption.
In reality, however, what we have learned to date is mere child’s play compared to what is being learned now, and compared to the science that farmers in the next few years will be putting to use to drive their own profitability and growth.
Read Also
Editor’s Note: No pressure
What is your playbook going into this year’s crop? Not an easy question to answer right now, given the global…
So let me start the year with an over-statement (this is the press, after all!). If I were going to rate someone as a potential farm successor, and if I was looking to predict their chances of success in farming over a full career, a good question to ask would be whether they read psychologist Pierrette Desrosier’s column in Country Guide magazine.
I confess that, in my case at least, it took a bit of commitment to become an avid HR reader. Psychology can just seem too far from the dirt and grease of “real” farming to actually matter.
But do what I did. Read a column and absorb what you can. Then read next month’s, plus the one after that too. Soon you will find that you come to the column knowing more about the kinds of value that you can get out of its science. That’s when the amount of benefit you get out of it will also rapidly climb, as will the amount of interest you place in it.
Based on the feedback I get, I’m not the only one to reach this conclusion. The column’s readership is steadily climbing, particularly it seems among mid-career, growth-oriented farmers.
So start with this month’s column, “Why are true leaders rare?” it asks. And then it asks an even more basic question; Is it better for a leader to be results focused, or task oriented?
It’s the kind of question we could debate endlessly. But now, fortunately, it is also a question that science has an answer for. And I guarantee you that the answer will surprise you.
Who knew that you could farm better because you know that there is such a thing as a neural see-saw that affects brain performance?
I also guarantee that if you read this month’s and next month’s columns, you will emerge thinking there is something akin to grease and dirt in them after all. It’s as if their psychology can test you in the same way you would test some new varieties in the field, with equal scientific rigour, and with equal real-world utility.
Very soon, the psychology of leadership will be recognized as an agricultural science, joining genetics and agronomy, and the odds will favour farmers who are early adopters. Are we getting it right? Let me know at [email protected].
