Inside the farmer’s skepticism shield

Hey y’all! Here’s today at a glance

The dive — Inside the farmer's skepticism shield

Framework — The psychological adoption framework

Don’t do this — The “revolutionary” marketing trap

Actionable takeaway — 3 tactics to beat the BS filter

First time reading? You can subscribe here

Picture this: A startup pitches their "revolutionary soil monitoring system" to a room full of corn farmers. The presentation is polished, the technology looks impressive, and the ROI calculations seem bulletproof.

Not a single farmer signs up.

During the coffee break, one farmer tells another: "Here we go again with another miracle cure. Remember that variable rate system that was supposed to 'transform' our yields? Still sitting in my shed."

This scenario plays out constantly in agriculture.

Only 39% of farmers surveyed globally are currently using or planning to use at least one agtech product in the next two years, and a 2023 survey revealed that 56% of emerging-market farmers cited high upfront costs as the primary reason for not adopting new technologies. But cost isn't the real problem, trust is.

Today, I'm going to show you why farmers have developed such strong BS filters, what psychological triggers you may be accidentally activating, and how to position innovation in a way that actually builds trust instead of skepticism.

Let's dig into the farmer's mind.

Farmers aren't born skeptical. They're trained to be by decades of overpromised and underdelivered solutions.

Research findings revealed that trust, effort, attitudinal, and normative barriers are big psychological issues to innovation adoption, and many farmers are understandably skeptical about new technology. This fear often stems from previous experiences with innovations that failed to deliver promised results.

But here's what most ag companies don't understand: when farmers have a bad experience with overhyped technology, it doesn't just hurt that company, it makes them more resistant to ALL future innovations.

Even when farmers are aware of all the details of the technology, they will assess it through multiple psychological filters:

Filter #1: Risk assessment
Farmers operate on thin margins where a single bad decision can threaten their livelihood. They have two competing thoughts: "This could be useful" vs. "But what if it goes wrong?" and the fear often wins.

Filter #2: Social proof
Farming communities are tight-knit. Farmers trust other farmers more than they trust companies. When your neighbor tries something and it fails, that story spreads faster than any marketing campaign.

Filter #3: Practical integration assessment
Some farmers have concerns about the complexity of using tech in agriculture, especially when it involves changing long-established farming practices. They're not just buying a new product, they're potentially disrupting generations of proven methods.

About 56 percent of row crop growers use digital agronomy for yield monitoring, compared with 40 percent of specialty crop farmers. Notice what this tells us: adoption varies dramatically by operation type and specific application.

The farmers who ARE adopting technology aren't responding to revolutionary claims. They're responding to specific, measurable benefits that align with their existing workflows.

The companies winning in agtech aren't the ones shouting loudest about disruption. They're the ones quietly proving value in ways that make sense to farmers.

Here's a typical marketing message:

"Revolutionary AI-powered crop monitoring system delivers 300% ROI and transforms your entire farming operation overnight. Be the first in your area to experience the agricultural revolution!"

This message hits every psychological alarm bell:

Here's how that same technology should be positioned:

"Corn farmers in three Illinois counties increased yields by an average of 12 bushels per acre using satellite monitoring to identify nitrogen deficiencies 14 days earlier than traditional scouting methods. See the field trials and talk to participating farmers."

When you lead with revolutionary claims, you're asking farmers to:

There is great importance to engage small farmers in technology adoption, but you can't engage them by triggering their skepticism shields.

Revolutionary positioning works in consumer tech where the downside of trying a new app is minimal. In agriculture, where a bad decision can cost someone their farm, it's a recipe for market failure.

Instead of: "Revolutionary precision agriculture system"
Use: "The same variable rate system John Peterson uses on his 2,400 acres"

Implementation: Lead every case study with a local farmer's name (with permission) and specific operation details. Make it about the farmer, not the technology.

Instead of: "Transform your entire operation"
Use: "Start with one field and measure the difference"

Implementation: Always offer pilot programs or limited trials. About 56 percent of row crop growers use digital agronomy for yield monitoring. They got there through gradual adoption, not wholesale transformation.

Instead of: "Maximize yields and boost profits"
Use: "Reduce nitrogen costs by $23 per acre while maintaining 180 bu/acre corn yields"

Implementation: Replace vague benefits with specific, measurable outcomes. Include the constraints and conditions where these outcomes were achieved. Farmers appreciate honesty about limitations.

The connection back: These tactics work because they address the core psychological barriers we discussed. They build trust through peer validation, reduce risk through incremental adoption, and provide concrete evidence instead of promises.

Remember: In agriculture, evolution beats revolution every time. Your technology might be groundbreaking, but your messaging should be ground-tested.

If you're a precision ag company looking for someone to ghostwrite your weekly newsletter or create a 5-day educational email course that helps you capture more leads and build trust, reply with a 👻 + your company name. Let's talk.

◾ Know someone who’d love this? Forward it their way.

◾ Was this email forwarded to you? Subscribe here

◾ Want to give me feedback or just say hi? Hit reply, I’d love to hear from you.