Management
and Use of Data in Large Commercial swine systems
Gene
Noem
Director of Marketing,
Murphy Farms Western Operations
Ames, Iowa
Large production systems have always existed they just haven’t
seen themselves as coordinated. Nor have they been measured or tried to perform
as a system. Concentration of ownership and the formation of coordinated
systems have automatically created new sets of data. Managers and leaders have
attempted to assimilate the data into information. Information should lead to
the knowledge useful for managing a business.
As mentioned earlier, there is no lack of data and
observations in the swine business today. One could easily make the assertion
that the data are expensive to collect, hard to assimilate in a form digestible
to the workforce, but does do a reasonable job describing what has happened.
However, information is rarely organized in a fashion which helps a manager
understand much about WHAT MIGHT HAPPEN!
At the end of the day, management is about influencing results. In a world laden with so many inputs and
elements impacting the process and results of a process, questions come to mind
such as, “What should I measure”, “How should I use it?” and “Which results
really mean something?”.
Most are aware of the presence of variation in results. For example, does it surprise us that in
week of 11.0 average born alive, there are ‘normally’ sows with born alive
numbers below 8 or above 13? I suspect
not. How about a series of weekly born
alive averages that ranges from10.4 to 11.1?
Not really. How about a sow that
only has two pigs? ‘Stuff
happens’.
The real challenge is knowing when to perform intervention
as a result of seeing something in the information. More clearly stated; “Which occurrences of variation can be
connected to an identifiable cause?” and “How should I teach people how to
separate normal variation from that variation that has a source that is in
their area of influence?”.
In this world of high variability farm staff are often
hungry for guidance which will help them understand the information they should
focus on. In Murphy Farms, we prefer to
take a systems approach. There are some variations in the approach, but in
their most basic sense, each of them consider how they will do the following;
1. Define objective
2. Identify
drivers/factors
3. Develop and implement
methods
4. Measure
5. Refine process
Control charts should be used for the measures (or at a
minimum simple run charts) so that individuals in the process can see how
normal variation exists. When working
to change a process (to try to cause better results) or when “unusual”
variation appears, a predictable problem solving process should be
undertaken. Any process that produces
results should have low variation in how it is performed. Root cause identification is no
exception. Helping staff understand the
impact inputs have on results, giving them tools to analyze the most important
of those inputs and showing them a process on how to measure the result of
their effort has organizational power like no other incentives available.
The power of computers has
encouraged us to think that understanding more and more about an individual
animal will lead the commercial industry to a greater understanding of how the
system can be improved. Computing
prowess may in fact just lead us to incorrect assumptions much quicker.
Seasonality has always existed in pig production. Simply
looking at April and October market hog prices demonstrates the point. Historically
we have thought this was driven by seasonal farrowing plans in facilities that
were not well enough fortified to protect young pigs from extreme winters.
Seasonal behavior still exists even in today’s large systems with carefully
managed sow and pig environments. The
impact of production seasonality in highly capitalized fixed grow finish space
might have an even greater industry impact than it historically has (in terms
of price/profitability).
Agriculture is a classic demonstration of chaotic
behavior. This is demonstrated even in
large, supposedly coordinated systems.
However, even in this chaotic atmosphere, dramatic improvements in performance
have been made over the past 35 years. Controlled environments, improved
nutrition, and medical intervention have changed the cost structure, but
hopefully also the predictability with which the industry can deliver
performance results. Percent lean in carcasses is a good example. The industry has reduced the variation (increased
predictability) through improvements in the inputs (methods, materials,
environment).
The next steps of improvement (or differentiation?) for the
swine industry may manifest in areas that many don’t even have on the radar
screen at the moment. The “quality” of the meat in the animal we produce is a
very important attribute. There is no
lack of attempt to produce objective measures for benchmarking. (pH, color,
WHC, cooking yield, etc). Theories abound
regarding the inputs that produce beneficial and detrimental impacts. How does a producer sort out what is needed
when the customer cannot define the benefits to his business anywhere but in a
lab setting?
The answer is the same as the 5 step process described
earlier. Define the Objective, identify drivers and get on the path so people
can measure their impact. With all the other opportunities, it becomes
difficult to evaluate these emerging factors against what we already know we
haven’t gotten done back at the farm.
How do we balance animal care intended to improve
productivity with social concerns? How do we measure social attitudes about our
industry as we make adjustments in rearing methods as a result of the apparent
pressures? Can we make those
adjustments AND make improvement in cost/predictability/profitability?
Computing power has provided the swine industry a very
powerful tool. While many recording
systems help us to better understand the individual animal (through use of sow
cards and treatment records as an example), few of them really help lead us to
understand the predictability of a large system and it’s normal seasonal
behavior. How we assimilate information can help people lead themselves.