What’s the number one dilemma for AgTech today?

It’s the lack of data standards to support interoperability of different brands of machinery, third-party devices and software solutions.

You see the great thing about standards is there are so many to choose from!

Farming is a complex business with many moving parts. Growers are some of the most resourceful people in business today. They must wear many different hats throughout the season. Mechanic, soil scientist, meteorologist, stock controller, marketer, accountant… the list goes on.

More recently one of the additional hats growers are now being expected to wear is that of data scientist. Somehow they are expected to make sense of all the big data that is pouring in from the equipment, sensors and online services connected to their farm.

Agronomic information, machine data, soil samples, drone data, yield maps, scouting results, weather — a considerable amount of this information is now streaming 24/7 from sensors continuously measuring and reporting results. To further compound the problem, this data comes from a variety of different manufacturers with no means of interoperability from one brand to another.

Data Standards

In 2001 I worked for BEELINE Technologies who were the first to market with GPS hands free steering for tractors.

This was a genuinely disruptive technology that transformed the industry by enabling tractors and other equipment to be precisely steered within inches of a desired location throughout the field. This led to considerable savings in fuel, crop inputs and labor along with improvements to farming practices that could not be achieved previously.

BEELINE signed a factory supply agreement with one of the world’s major tractor manufacturers in 2002. This meant that common standards were then required on how the steering system would communicate with the tractor. The international standards ISO11783 and SAE J1939 were selected and modified to support the new steering technology.

BEELINE and the manufacturer led the initiative of creating the standard that would later be adopted by farm equipment manufacturers and precision steering companies around the world.

The Problem with Standards

There is no doubt standards are necessary to provide a set of guidelines from which all manufactures and third parties can work from and ultimately develop solutions that are compatible from one brand to another.

The issue becomes the speed with which standards are developed and agreed upon. In the hardware sector longer lead-times to develop standards are accepted because the engineering and manufacturing cycles are considerable.

However, long lead times to develop standards are problematic in the software sector. Because software has the ability to be uploaded instantaneously to thousands of users around the world, standards simply cannot keep pace.

There is also the issue of which standard to choose?

Currently in the AgTech sector there are a number of evolving data standards including AgGateway, OADA and ISO. The major manufacturers are gravitating toward their preferred standard. But there is no guarantee these standards will be compatible with one another in the short term.

How ironic?

Becoming a Standard

Whilst each of the standards organisations develop their various approaches, the broader industry is moving ahead but in different directions. There are essentially three approaches playing out in the absence of a universally recognised data standard that all stakeholders can embrace.

1) The Architects — companies setting the standards

Like the BEELINE example outlined above, there are companies working closely with the various standards organisations to develop the next generation of data guidelines and protocols.

This is an absolute necessity because equipment and data interoperability is needed now. Companies with real-world knowledge of the customer use cases and manufacturer requirements must be involved in the developing standards to maximise their chance of success.

2) The Proxies — companies who want to be the standard

Another approach playing out within the industry is the attempt by various private and multi-national companies vying for their solutions to become a standard. Typically these companies have a large customer base, a framework for managing the data and an API for outside companies to connect with and leverage their data formats.

Whilst this is a noble approach, it is fundamentally flawed. The problem is that the proxy company typically has their own commercial product that they’re also selling in the market. This often results in channel conflict and direct competition with the companies they are trying to convince should adopt their proposed standard.

3) The Innovators — companies integrating data in the absence of standards

Then there are the independent AgTech companies such as AgDNA and others that are getting on with the business of implementing solutions that can be used now. These solutions are brand agnostic and capable of combining data sets from multiple sources and manufacturers. Typically the data innovators have the following attributes:

Speed — next generation technology available now and cannot wait for standards to be published.

Independence — they are not aligned to any one manufacturer or supplier and therefore have the freedom to operate across the industry supply chain.

Customer Focused — their motivation is to provide the best solution for their customers and therefore are focused on building solutions rather than standards.

The Answer

Ultimately the approach of architects (1) supporting the development of standards will rise to the top. Standards are inevitable and given enough time they will be published and adopted. If there is more than one standard then the market will determine which one will prevail.

In the meantime the innovators (2) will deliver real-world commercial solutions that can be used by growers today. These companies will embrace standards as they become available and continue to drive the next wave of disruption as those same standards no longer keep pace with the evolution of new technology.

It’s impossible to predict what technologies and data types will be available in the future. This is why a mix of architects developing standards and innovators commercialising solutions will continue to co-exist for the benefit of all growers.

As for the proxy (3) companies wanting to become the standard, they will need to rethink their approach — “are we a solution or standard? They can’t be both. Because competing in the market against companies who you want to embrace your standard is unlikely to succeed.