SEPTEMBER 2017 SEEDWORLD.COM / 33 I’M SITTING IN a meeting to discuss high-level seed conditioning ideas with a major seed company, and the conversation zeros in on the amazing technology that’s available but not being fully used by seed processing equipment manufacturers, and hence their customers. I couldn’t help but be slightly offended. Look at all the amazing advancements that have come into adop- tion in a conditioning line: optical sorters, gravity separators controlled by a touch screen, seed treatment equipment capa- ble of transforming seed into Tic Tacs, and control systems that run the whole process from a central location. As I listened to the customer’s requests for advanced equipment, I realized that they hadn’t even begun to fully adopt what technology is already in the market. So, where is the disconnect? Consider possibility vs. feasibility. Possibility has no constraint on time or money, and feasibility is more realistic. Or you can call it technical feasibility vs. economic feasibility. Yes, it is technically feasible to detect germination issues in seed with laser optics, but there’s no return on investment. That’s why the newest technologies don’t get adopted. Technical feasibility can be determined with good engineering and technical equip- ment resources. Meanwhile, economic feasibility adds complexity and needs input from many other sources. Other considera- tions in determining the economic feasibility of new equipment might be: • ROI vs. Cost. Does your company consider all of the budgetary impacts of implementing technology? Are budgets adjusted for cost-cutting factors due to the new technology? Or are upfront costs the only factor, without considering the long-term view? Is consideration given to company viability and how to remain relevant to your customer? • Adoption. If it is technically possible, how soon is too soon to implement Technology vs. Feasibility: An Economic Balancing Act JON MORELAND EES COMPANIES SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT OF SALES JMoreland@EESCompanies.com • eescompanies.com new technology? Does it have longev- ity? Is it serviceable? For early adopters, there’s never the comfort of seeing the new technology in multiple installations. Instead, the reward is in getting ahead of the competitor. To be an early adopter, consider the source of the technology. Is the company credible? • Staffing. There are many great examples where technology has been implemented to address the loss of experienced opera- tors. But do you now need to hire a new skill set? Technology doesn’t typically replace the need for skills; it just changes what skills are necessary. The seed industry is not the pharma- ceutical industry, at least not yet. The end product created has some rational, finite price. The threshold is set by a customer buying a bag of seed — that’s true econom- ics driven by an array of choices. To operate in that market, we all have to continue to consider possibility vs. feasibility. EVERY JULY, SEED corn fields buzz with activity. The removal of off-types and hand removal of the last remaining tassels from female parent plants are all done the old- fashioned way: A person walks down every row of every seed field. It’s incredibly hard work that puts each laborer up close and per- sonal with the elements of summer. Years ago, companies depended on employing scores of rural high schoolers. This type of work was second nature, since many grew up on farms and were use to being in the elements. For rural baby boomers and Gen Xers, detasseling was a rite of passage that taught discipline, how to work hard and the value of a dollar. Today, that pool of rural, high school labor has all but dried up. Declining rural populations and other factors mean fewer farm kids, of which even fewer are used to manual, agricultural work. Without access to the so-called “kid crews” of the past, seed corn production companies, including Gro Alliance, rely on migrant farm laborers — typically first- generation Americans or individuals who’ve come to the U.S. on work visas or tempo- rary work permits. There’s a natural symbiosis, as both depend heavily on the other to meet their goals. Long days in the field are particularly valuable. For the worker, the money earned is critical. Since many are just starting out in the U.S., they are anxious to earn as much as possible by working as many hours as possible. For seed companies, the manual production steps are critical to seed purity, and it must still be done by hand. In a typical seed production season, a migrant laborer can earn enough money Their Hands, Your Seed JIM SCHWEIGERT GRO ALLIANCE PRESIDENT @jim_schweigert • jim.schweigert@groalliance.com • GroAlliance.com to support his or her immediate family, as well as additional relatives. For them, this job matters. In fact, at Gro Alliance, many of our field workers have more than a decade of detas- seling experience. This is a major benefit to seed purity as that experience and commit- ment ensures they’ll do the best job. In this way, migrant labor is an improve- ment over the kid crews of the past when two to three years experience was the most a company could expect. With this symbiotic relationship, it’s easy to see how interconnected and important these jobs are to both the seed company and the migrant laborer. I urge all reading this to support local and national policies that allow migrant laborers access to this work and allow your local seed companies access to these incredible workers.