Abstract

The Social Systems Research Unit of AgResearch, a New Zealand Crown Research Institute, does R&D adoption, knowledge and learning R&D while Dexcel, a New Zealand dairy industry good company focuses on dairy sector research, extension and education. Knowledge optimisation, adoption processes, and adult learning principles underpin extension delivery leading to an opportunity for the two groups to work together. However, there is a historical divide between extension theory and practice in the New Zealand dairy sector, and this brings several challenges to working together. This paper is a case study where a team of AgResearch social researchers collaborated with a Dexcel Consulting Officer (extension officer) to develop an extension delivery program. What is unique is that we combined social research methods and theories with dairy farm systems analysis and practical experience to inform and develop an extension delivery project on dairy farm bull management. Limited biophysical scientific information is available on this topic. The social research parts of the project included analyses of current practice and producer decision-making regarding dairy farm bull management. It also included an analysis of the learning contexts and information needs of producers, and the application of adoption, communication and adult learning theory. The delivery part of the extension program will be focussed on providing dairy producers with up-to-date information and strategies that will help them offset problems and challenges with bull management. The paper describes our experiences in using social research methods and theories in extension planning and delivery. It reports on work-in-progress and consequently does not cover extension delivery.

Introduction

Agricultural extension in New Zealand had gone through some drastic changes during the 1980’s. The change in government in New Zealand in 1984 brought a change in policy towards liberalising and opening up the economy. Subsequent governments continued these policies and all sectors of the economy were affected by reforms and deregulation that were carried out. For the agricultural sector, the reforms included a removal of all subsidies, a removal of concessional finance to producer boards and to farmers, the restructuring of agricultural research and development and the commercialisation of agricultural extension (Everton, 1995).

Commercialisation of Extension: Up until the mid 1980s the Advisory Services Division of MAF was a provider of extension and advice to the rural sector on a non-chargeable basis (Journeaux and Stevens, 1997). In 1985, the new government directed Advisory Services Division to become fully user pays within five years. This required a major change in culture for the organisation, as commercial success would demand significantly more business focus and discipline. Since 1985 extension went through two more changes under the names MAF Technology and then Management Consultancy Service. The latter had the intention of corporatising and then privatising the organisation over the following two to three years (Journeaux and Stevens, 1997). On 1 February 1995 full privatisation occurred when the business (Agriculture New Zealand), was purchased by Wrightson Limited, New Zealand’s largest stock and station firm. At the time of the purchase, only 80 consultants remained. Their number increased to 100 during 1995, which made Agriculture New Zealand Limited the country’s largest national agricultural consultancy business. During 1995 it operated as a fully commercial but separate limited liability company, fully owned by Wrightson Limited (Ritchie 1995).

Crown Research Institutes (CRIs): In 1992, the infrastructure of government departments and ministries that had supported agricultural research and development, and technology transfer, was dismantled. In its place was established nine Crown Research Institutes; independent, government-owned, limited liability companies engaged in scientific research. AgResearch is the largest of these Crown Research Institutes, currently with almost 1,000 permanent staff and focusing on grassland agricultural production. Each CRI is based around a productive sector of the economy or a grouping of natural resources. This allows each of the nine institutes to have a clearly defined purpose and customer base.

The AgResearch Social Systems Research Unit (SSRU): Soon after 1992 AgResearch identified the need for a social science capability to obtain, through social science R&D, a better understanding of the interaction between human factors and technological advances as they relate to the adoption and placement of innovations by and into agricultural value chains. Since then the group has grown to 11 full time permanent staff, focusing on five areas pertinent to the interface between humans and technology, i.e. adoption behaviour, compliance behaviour, bio-ethics, knowledge and learning, and value chain analysis. The group is now known as the Social Systems Research Unit (SSRU).

Dexcel: Dexcel is the research and extension arm of New Zealand's dairy industry, incorporating the former Dairying Research Corporation and the Consulting Officer Service of Livestock Improvement. Initially set up by the New Zealand Dairy Board (NZDB), Dexcel is now 100% owned and funded by all New Zealand Dairy Farmers. Dexcel is working towards providing a focused voice for farm productivity, and will enable the New Zealand dairy industry to pull together and co-ordinate all of the activities related to on-farm research and development.

Current approach of Dexcel to extension: In September 2001, Dexcel held a series of farmer meetings throughout New Zealand to find out what were the key issues facing them, and how Dexcel could address those issues. In response to those issues, Dexcel has established five target areas for research and extension: helping farmers plan their future, increasing the value of milk, healthy well fed cows, improving labour productivity, and maintaining high environmental and animal welfare standards. For extension, these issues are currently attended to through four work programmes, respectively called Plan4Success, Feed4Profit, People4Dairying, and Farm4Tomorrow.

Working together: Over time Dexcel has identified the need to obtain more knowledge and skills about extension delivery to better service their clients through its extension system. Moreover, the SSRU has had the need to further develop and strengthen their networks into the NZ farming community for their research endeavours. This led to a co-operative venture where both institutions and end-users would gain through linking social science research methods and theories with planning extension and implementing extension delivery. In this venture a Dexcel Consulting Officer was seconded to SSRU for a day per week. The arrangement was reviewed after six months and a year, found meaningful and is continuing.

Social science research methods and theories in extension practice

The collaboration started during 2002 and focused on a new area about which little scientific information is available and about which very little extension has been done – bull management for dairying. A team was put together to start the project and not using the same terminology soon proved to be a considerable constraint. Over time it became clear that Dexcel Consulting Officers intuitively use social science research methods during different phases of their extension process (Figure 1), but would use different terms. Getting a common understanding of the terms helped participants in two ways. Firstly it helped to break down the perception that the one group is ‘theoretical’ and the other ‘applied’. Secondly it made it clear that in doing extension, Dexcel actually uses very similar steps and procedures to the social researchers, which further strengthened the project. It further became clear that the SSRU had a good understanding and application capability of the social science methods and theories which Dexcel extension used and applied.

Applying social research methods in extension practice
Social science methods and theories	Dexcel extension practice steps
Research scoping, identifying and describing delimitations Background data assimilation/gathering using: Key informant interviewing Literature reviews	Project scoping Get information by: Talking to people Reading relevant material
Research design and planning	Design of extension project management plan
Complimentary data gathering: Farmer interviews Mind mapping Questionnaire design Needs analysis Learning preference identification / analysis Learning context analysis Problem perception definition and description	Market research by: Talking to farmers Drawing pictures of how they see things Asking questions using a questionnaire Finding out what they need Finding out how they want to learn Finding out where and why they should learn What they see as problems
Data analysis and interpretation	Analyse and interpret the data
Triangulation / data verification	Testing information
Theories of: adult learning, group dynamics, leadership, group facilitation, communication, adoption, knowledge management. Field delivery would probably be called implementation even though it is out of order with the above	Product development
	Pre-delivery training
	Field delivery
Evaluation	Evaluation

Figure 1. Comparison of social science research methods and theories used in the SSRU and Dexcel extension practice.

At the same time, but at another level the lack of planning for extension delivery became evident. Using a research project planning and management approach in the project brought structure and focus to project activities. This is described below.

Bull management extension project activities

Project initiation

The desired outcome of this project was the need to reduce empty rates and lower the number of inductions used in New Zealand dairy herds. One of the areas identified to achieve this was improving the bull performance during the natural mating stage of the mating programme. Farmer behaviour needs to change for this to happen and extension would therefore aspire to achieve this outcome.

One of the Dexcel extension areas is focussed on cow reproduction and is called ROMP (Reproductive Management Plan). ROMP is a research programme that consists of a portfolio of research and information delivery projects. One of those projects set about contracting SSRU to develop the basis for an extension project based around bull management. At that time it was acknowledged that bull management has not been focused on in research or extension, because there has been some survey work and the occasional research paper on the topic.

There are a number of important steps to carry out before, during and after this extension project process for it to be successful. The aim is to outline the process and at the same time demonstrate the link with social science research and methodology. At each stage there would be synergies between Dexcel and SSRU.

Step One: Project Scoping

The first step was to assess the outcomes, purpose and objectives and scope the project. A project team meeting was therefore held to begin clarify what was required and the timeframes involved, given the resources available. A subsequent literature review helped to provide more information on the topic and added to the understanding of what would be needed to do the project. Moreover this information was very helpful in drafting an achievable project management plan.

Step Two: Project Management Plan

The next phase was to detail the project management plan. This outlined the project purpose and background, key objectives, key delivery milestones and dates, and delivery methodology. Along with time frames, project team responsibilities were also assigned, which resulted in the project plan being laid out in a logical manner. This helped to manage appropriate and timely communication between all project stakeholders. The need for more information was identified in phase one and a specific step to gather that information was written into the management plan.

Step 3: Market Research

To avoid making assumptions about what should be done and to ensure that value would be added to other ongoing extension projects, it was essential during this step to identify and describe gaps in information, knowledge and skills, and to identify and if available, summarise research and/or extension that had been done in bull management. This will help to avoid duplication of work already done. The target audience for the extension material was also identified and described by the project team by using their industry knowledge and talking to other experts. In this manner farmers, change agents, veterinarians and rural professionals were identified as potential receivers.

The market research also involved developing an interview process as part of the qualitative approach that was used during this step.

Ideas were sought from a range of people as to who should be interviewed and what interview questions needed to be asked. Sixteen farmers were eventually interviewed. Some had dairy cow reproduction systems that involved only natural (bull) mating, some used artificial insemination (AI) only and some used a combination of these methods. During the interview process the following were undertaken:

• The use of a semi-structured questionnaire to guide the interviews in identifying farmers’ needs, their learning preferences, where and why they would learn about the topic and what they considered to be challenges.
• Diagrams – Under the guidance of the project team the farmers developed a diagram of their views on dairy reproduction based on key words and arrows to link these.
• Transcripts – a summary of the interview was recorded then transcribed.

The primary contact with veterinarians was at a dairy vet conference. The focus was on gathering data on their views of bull management and which needs related to the topic farmers in their region had. Altogether 36 vets in 6 groups were involved. To better understand the wider context, the vet groups at the conference developed an outline of the impact of scale of farming operation and milk payout would have on reproduction and bull management.

Step 4: Data analysis and interpretation

Information and knowledge gained previously were analysed and interpreted in order to clearly define the target audience’s needs in terms of information, decision tools, mechanisms and information preferences. From this analysis four theme areas were identified and rated in terms of importance (see appendix). Reproduction researchers also assessed the information needs, to double check for information gaps in existing research. Finally the most appropriate tools to develop for each theme area were agreed upon.

Step 5: Testing the information

The clear theme areas with their defined focus were used to guide further information collation on each of the themes. At this stage no more social research were undertaken. Technical information that was gathered now was tested with vets and farmers who had been involved earlier. This helped to gain peer support from industry professionals and select farmers and will strengthen extension delivery later on.

Step 6: Product development

Dexcel has a product development team that develops products, i.e. relevant extension messages and tools for its consulting officers and other collaborating rural professionals and other delivery partners. Each product has its own particular features and should therefore involve dairy farmers in a specific way to assure maximum impact.

The project is now at this particular stage. It is envisaged that the final product will not only include technical information but also extension techniques and tools for use by consulting officers and other delivery partners. It is important to incorporate adult learning principles as part of the package development.

Moreover, the objective of extension delivery of this product need to be understood, i.e.: through learning build the capacity of learners so they can make decisions and take actions that will improve bull management to reduce empty rates and inductions.

At this stage it becomes clear that the social and biophysical research disciplines go together, that there are a series of learning stages that Dexcel and end-users go through before the final outcome is achieved.

Step 7: Pre field delivery training

This is the step during which the final delivery “package” will be developed as the delivery agents will be trained on both the technical aspects of the topic and the recommended extension techniques that will assist successful delivery to end users.

Step 8: Field delivery

Field delivery will be aligned with the adoption stage of end users (see Table 1).

Table 1: Alignment of Dexcel extension delivery with end user adoption stage

End user stage	Action required	Communication channels	Comment
Unaware	Create and raise awareness	Mass Media, Monitor farms, Field days, Geographic discussion groups. Articles, media releases, web site, FarmFacts and pamphlets.	There will be some initial intuition about the topic and so farmers will need to gain increased awareness of what the topic is about.
Interest / Consider	Increase knowledge and skills	Geographic type groups, Mass media, Workshops, Rural professionals. Use work sheets, questionnaires, before case studies.	At this stage some end users are or will become increasing observant and seek greater definition of the problem / issue; i.e. what will the cost / benefit be to them.
Testing	Inform decision	Small specialist groups / events, workshops for small groups, courses / training opportunities Use more detailed written material and presentations.	End users will seek solutions to address the issue. Define solutions. End users will be developing skills to implement required changes.
Adoption / rejection	Support decision and actions	Rural professionals (e.g. – consultants, vets), specialist and small discussion groups to confirm actions, mentoring.	During this stage end users would either adopt or reject the practice. They are empowered to make informed decisions and take action towards the desired outcome and have the skills to implement the idea and practice.
Confirmation	Confirm decision and actions	One-on-one contact, Rural professionals (e.g. – consultants, vets), specialist and small discussion groups to confirm actions. Networks, research companies e.g. AgResearch. Surveys at industry, subject and farmer level, Post Case studies.	During this stage end users would be reviewing improvements in productivity and confirming they have made the right decision. Dexcel will be measuring and evaluating the effectiveness of the extension programme and supporting the change process.

Step 9: Evaluation

Before, during and after the project there will be continuous evaluation of the effectiveness of the project process and delivery against the desired outcomes.

The value of research and extension working together

Although this collaborative project is still underway, it has shown significant value in bringing social science research together with extension planning, product development and delivery. The focus of Dexcel extension and SSRU are different, with Dexcel extension working on product development for extension delivery and SSRU focusing on research. However, this project has shown extensive common ground in terms of the use and application of social research methods by extension. Throughout the process of working together, a wide variety of social science research methods were utilised in extension planning. The project enabled the Dexcel participants to experience the value of the use of social science during extension planning and product development. This understanding promises to increase the effectiveness of Dexcel’s extension planning procedures and processes.

For SSRU the advantages of working together are getting access to new research and rural networks and forging working relationships with the dairy industry. The latter is important for up to this stage SSRU have not had much contact and working experience in this industry.

Furthermore, as a result of this project there is a greater understanding by both parties not only of each other’s day-to-day activities, but also of strategy. The project enabled all participants to combine their skills, knowledge and networks together to add value to a product that holds potential to contribute to enhanced industry outcomes.

The collaboration will continue and new opportunities to gain value are emerging. SSRU will continue to provide access to skills that are necessary to better design and deliver specific Dexcel extension projects.

Moreover SSRU will continue to bring a deeper understanding of human behaviour in the context of intervention through extension planning and delivery, while Dexcel will increasingly provide access to their rural and industry networks. SSRU will be able to capture more value by agreeing with Dexcel on how to access Dexcel farmer networks, while Dexcel will have to put in place formal mechanisms to achieve internal transfer of what has been learnt.

New and better ways of working together will also be explored. Additional time would have to be designated to this collaboration to enable multiple project involvement for increased effectiveness. Also, to further increase the value of the collaboration, opportunities for information transfer between SSRU and Dexcel should be explored. Staff changes influenced the progress of the project so far and in future new appointees to key roles in Dexcel need to be brought up to date with the arrangement. Furthermore the role should be formalised to gain maximum value. A system should also be developed to capture the potential for SSRU and Dexcel staff to work together on short term projects. Prospects to further develop future partnerships between AgResearch and Dexcel in a number of areas should also be explored.

References

Everton, A. (1995). Government Intervention in the New Zealand Economy 1914-1918: Its aims and effectiveness. MA Thesis, Department of History, Victoria University, N.Z.

Journeaux, P and Stevens J (1997).  The development of agriculture advisory services in New Zealand. MAF Technical report.

Ritchie, I (1995). From the Public to the Private Sector — The Agriculture New Zealand Story. Aust and NZIAS, Volume 8, Number 4, 29-31.

Walker, A B (1995), Some NZ Observations on the 2-way Street of Public and Private Extension, Paper presented to the Dairy Horizons Conference, Melbourne, Australia, November 1995.

APPENDIX 1 – Analysis of dairy “natural mating” information needs identified

Farmers Main Information need “themes”	Theme Complexity Simple Medium Complex	Information Availability Readily Mixed Unknown	Extension Difficulty Low Med High	Seasonality Seasonal Non-Seasonal	Collation Easy Moderate Difficult	Return on effort	Ranking of sub-topics to focus on	Approach	Conclusion
Day to Day Management	Simple	Readily	Medium	Seasonal	Easy	High Return	Human Risk Lameness Intro / Exit to herd Rotation	Group Planner/Chart Vet Newsletter Web	Develop one tool chart
Bull Ratio	Medium	Mixed	Low	Seasonal	Moderate	High Return	Risk of few bulls Ratio description Heifers vs Cows	Groups Rural media Fact Sheet	Collate and Test
Bull Selection	Medium	Mixed	Low	Non-seasonal	Moderate	Medium return	Bull for heifers Bulls for cows Stocktake of Bull tests	Group Fact Sheet Newsletter/ Magazine Web	Collate and Test
Lease, Buy or Breed	Complex	Mixed	Medium	Non-seasonal	Difficult	Low Return	N/A	Case Study Group, 1 on 1 Conference Paper	Define then recommend a review is done on this

Other criteria we developed in association with this analysis was to:

• List where we could obtain information on each of the focus areas.
• Decide on project team members responsibilities and schedule.
• Define what the initial output would be?

By defining the theme needs, we were able to decide how complex each theme was and so decide what we should work on given the time and resources available. From this we set priorities.