Analysis, forecasting, reporting…these are the things which seem like the most valuable aspects of agri advisory. This Kiwi adviser thinks differently.
Between farmers and their advisers, the relationship is built on a promise of better decisions. Better information, better forecasting, better conversations about what’s coming—as opposed to what’s already passed.
Most advisers who have made the shift from compliance towards advisory would say that’s the value they’re delivering.
Brett Wooffindin, director of Sidekick Rural, offers a different view. We spoke to him in a recent online panel discussion and asked him to name his top principles for building an effective advisory relationship. Quality of analysis is important, but didn’t top the list, nor forecasting tools, benchmarking or scenario modelling.
It was accountability.
"Creating accountability—this, to me, is the real value-add that we provide,” he said. “If we're not achieving anything out of these sessions, then what are we doing them for? It's really important that my clients understand what they're doing and why they're doing it—and that we hold each other to account by making sure we're doing what we say we're going to do."
The shift from compliance to advisory is often described as a shift in conversation from looking backwards to looking forwards. It moves the relationship from reporting what happened to planning for what might happen next.
In theory, this enables the farm team to get ahead of volatility, have more informed conversations about cashflow and planning, and improve the relationship with the bank.
Learn more: In Your Farm Team: Is the Bank a Gatekeeper, or Collaborator?
However, if a forward-looking conversation produces no committed actions, is it a forward-looking conversation or still simply a review of what has come before? It might inform. But it didn’t change anything.
Here, accountability is actually the most important part of the adviser-farmer relationship—not the insights alone.
Between Brett and his dairy client Neer Enterprises, a family business chaired by Rob Steele who also joined us in the discussion, accountability is at the core of their working relationship—in part because the family already ran structured meetings prior to Brett coming on board.
Part of what drives each party to hold the other accountable is taking actions, not minutes.
"Minutes are boring. But actions are not,” said Rob. “We're very specific about what that action is. We all agree the action, we choose a person who leads completion of that action point—so there is a “victim”—and we have a date when it has to be done by."
Meeting minutes record what was said, action lists record what was committed to. They drive what happens next. That means you can hold someone accountable to what was done, or not done.
What’s In An Action List:
Every meeting that follows opens with a review of the last meeting’s action items. Everyone either has their tasks completed or, in Rob’s words, has to think of “a very innovative excuse” as to why they haven’t.
“We’re not just doing it ad hoc as required,” said Brett, “but actually committing to sitting down and going through it monthly, quarterly, whatever, whenever we want to do it. But we've got it in the calendar. We've got an agenda. We've got mandatory actions afterwards to cover it all off."
Farming is an urgent business. Seasonal pressures, equipment breakdowns, livestock decisions, cashflow conversations…these things often demand immediate attention, and they get it.
The danger, though, is that it can take away attention from important tasks which aren’t urgent: succession planning, capital structure, risk frameworks, and longer-term planning.
To ensure their relationship also remains accountable to these tasks, the Neer Enterprises family and Brett utilise a monthly meeting rhythm with a structured annual agenda. This keeps all important agenda items rolling, not just the urgent ones.
"It's very easy to get into the urgent stuff,” Rob added. “But you also need to focus on the important stuff and the longer-term things. What we're trying to do with these monthly meetings is have that rhythm, and also hit some of the bigger points that mean in 12 months we've had 12 chances of actually moving some of these bigger issues on."
Learn more: What Farmers Want From Their Agri Adviser—But Don’t Ask For
So who owns accountability in the relationship?
Both parties.
Rob and the Neer family are accountable to Brett for implementing the advice presented, but Brett is also accountable to the family. This isn’t a service relationship where the adviser delivers and the client receives. Rob expects openness from Brett, and delivers it in return.
"If Brett is doing a great job—and he is, 95-98% of the time—tell him,” he said. “If there's an area we'd like him to look at differently, tell him that as well. If you don't tell people stuff and then expect them to somehow know, that's a really good way of having an exercise in frustration for everybody."
For advisers building this kind of relationship, this is a helpful way to think about accountability. It isn’t something you impose. Rather it’s a mutual commitment that both parties take responsibility for, and are answerable to.
It makes the relationship more durable, and significantly more valuable.
Rob and Brett recently sat down with us to talk about their partnership, where it came from, and the specific structures and steps that make it a success. Learn more about these by downloading our free guide, “Navigating the Road Ahead: A Guide to Building Proactive Advisory Teams in NZ Dairy.”
Or catch up on the full webinar here.