Identifying important educational competencies in Montana's value-added industry
by Carole Lynne Skeeters
A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in
Agricultural Education
Montana State University
© Copyright by Carole Lynne Skeeters (1998)
Abstract:
This survey was a descriptive study to identify the importance and need of select competencies in
Montana’s value-added industry. The population of the survey consisted of those individuals receiving
the Value-Added Montana Newsletter, those individuals who attended the Montana Value-Added
Forum, excluding Montana State University students who were required to attend the forum for class
credit and the president/directors of Montana’s major agricultural associations.
A mailed survey based on the cross-sectional survey design by Borg and Gall (1983) was used to
collect data. Eighty-seven competencies in six competency areas; production and processing,
marketing, entrepreneurship, promotion, basic economic principles and business principles were
identified.
Based on a needs assessment model by Borich (1980) respondents were asked to identify the
educational importance and their level of knowledge of each competency. In addition respondents were
asked to choose one of four value-added definitions derived from the researcher’s review of literature
that best fit their understanding of the concept as it relates to Montana agriculture. In order to assure
that the survey was clear and free of grammatical, typing and formatting errors a pilot study was used.
Following the initial mailing of 271 surveys, a follow-up post card and second mailing of the survey
were provided to non-respondents to insure the researcher obtained the needed sample size.
The survey data was entered into a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet. Using a statistical package, Cronbach
alphas were computed on each of the competency area’s level of knowledge and educational
importance scores to assure reliability of the survey. The computed alpha showed that the survey had
sufficient reliability for the study.
Frequency scores were calculated for value-added definitions. Means, standard deviations and weighed
discrepancy scores for each calculated for each competency. The WD scores were tested with an alpha
.05 using Analysis of variance and t-test to determine if there were any differences due to demographic
data. WD scores were used to determine the educational need of each competency. A positive WD
score indicated an educational need.
The data from the survey showed that all but one competency should be included in a community based
value-added curriculum. Based on t-test and ANOVA scores, demographic data showed to have no
significant effect on the educational needs of the respondents.
Value-added training seminars need to be created using the highest positive WD scored competencies.
Marketing competencies showed the highest level of educational need, while respondents had the
lowest educational need for business principle competencies. Due to the fact that there was not an
overwhelming consensus on a definition of value-added, a Delphi panel should be created to establish a
working definition of value-added as it relates to Montana agriculture. IDENTIFYING IMPORTANT EDUCATIONAL
COMPETENCIES IN MONTANA’S VALUE-ADDED INDUSTRY
.
'
A
by
Carole Lynne Skeeters
A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree
of
Master of Science
in
Agricultural Education
/ Montana State University - Bozeman
Bozeman, Montana
August 1998
h/yns
ii
APPROVAL
of a thesis submitted by
Carole Lynne Skeeters
This thesis has been read by each member of the thesis committee and has been found to be
satisfactory regarding content, English usage, format, citations, bibliographic style, and
consistency, and is ready for submission to the College of Graduate Studies.
7/L/^y
Committee Chair
Date Z
Approved for the College of Agriculture
/Department Head f
Date
Approved for the College of Graduate Studies
iduafe De;
Date
Ill
STATEMENT OF PERMISSION TO USE
In presenting this thesis in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a master's degree
at Montana State University-Bozeman, I agree that the Library shall make it available to
borrowers under the rules of the Library.
. If I have indicated my intention to copyright this thesis by including a copyright
notice page, copying is allowable only for scholarly purposes, consistent with “fair use” as
prescribed in the U.S. Copyright Law. Requests for permission for extended quotation from
or reproduction of this thesis is whole or in parts may be granted only by the copyright
holder.
CcLh(T)LfVI
Date
/
iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The researcher would like to make the following acknowledgements to those
individuals who helped make this project possible. A special thanks to the researcher’s
graduate advisor; and committee chair Dr. Van Shelhamer for his guidance and support,,
and the members of her graduate committee, Drs. Martin Frick and Clayton Marlow for
their valuable input. The researcher wishes to express a sincere thanks to Barb Planalp
for her personal and professional assistance in completing this project.
Finally the researcher wishes to thank her family for their constant support
through the good and bad times of her graduate endeavors. The educational values and
work ethic that her family promoted encouraged the researcher to pursue her educational
and professional desires. Without their influence and understanding, this project would
not have been possible.
V
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1. THE PROBLEM.............................................................................. ....... I
Introduction........................................ .............................................. I
Statement of Permission to Use.........................................................3 '
Need For Study............... ..................................................................3
Objectives.......... .............■........ .........................................................7
Assumptions..................... ........................ ........................................7
Limitations............................................. i............... ................... ...... 8
Definition of Terms................. .......................................................... 9
2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE .................................................................10
. Value-Added Definitions.................................................................. .10
Value-Added Programs in
Others States and Canadian Provinces..................................i.......... 12
Identifying Educational Competencies.............................................. 1.8
Curriculum Development........... .......................................................21
Value-Added In Montana.............................................
22
3. METHODOLOGY............. ..................................... :........................:.... 25
Population Description.................
25
Response Rate..............................
26
Instrument Design.........................
27
Data Collection................ ...:.............................................................29
Analysis of Data..................................
31
Summary.............................
32
4. RESULTS OF THE STUDY.........................
34
Demographic D ata.............................................................................34
Definition of Value-Added...................
37
Perceived Level of Educational Importance.................
38
Perceived Level of Knowledge........ ....................................'............ 48
Educational Needs as Assessed By Borich’s Model..........................58
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS /ContirmeL
Page
5. CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS AND RECCOMENDATIONS....69
Conclusions....................................................................................... 70
Implications.......................................................................;.............. 71
Recommendations.................................................. i......................... 71
Summary....................................
73
BIBLIOGRAPHY............................
74
APPENDICES.........................................................................
77
Appendix A- Value-Added Educational Competencies Survey................... 78
Appendix B- Cover Letter.............................................................................86
Appendix C- Reminder Postcard..........................
88
Appendix D- Second Mailing Cover Letter.................................................. 90'
Appendix E- Comments:...................................
92
Vii
LIST OF TABLES
Table
-
Page
1. Return Rate by Date of Return................................................................. 27
2. Distribution of Degrees Held by Respondents.........................................35
3. Distribution of the Areas of Agriculture in Which
Respondents are Involved In..................................... ........;.........................35
4. Distribution of Area in Which Value-Added
Educational Information Was Received By Respondents.............................36
5. Distribution of Value-Added Definitions
Indicated By Respondents.............................................................................37
•6. Rank Order of Competency Areas By Mean
Educational Importance.............................................................................
39
7. Rank Order of Production and Processing Competencies
by Mean Educational Importance................................................................. 40
8. Rank Order of Marketing Competencies by Mean
Educational Importance........................'.......................................................41
9. Ranlc Order of Entrepreneurship Competencies by Mean
Educational Importance................................................................................ 43
10. Rank Order of Promotion Competencies by Mean
Educational Importance............................................................................... :44
11. Rank Order of Basic Economic Principles Competencies
by Mean Educational Importance............:................................................... 45
12. Rank Order of Business Principles Competencies
by Mean Educational Importance...........................
47
13. Rank Order of Competency Areas by Mean
Level of Knowledge...................................................................................... 49
14. Rank Order of Production and Processing Competencies
By Mean Level of Knowledge...................................................................... 50
viii
LIST OF TABLES-Continued
Table
Page
15. Rank Order of Marketing Competencies By Mean
Level of Knowledge...................................................................... ............... 51
16. Rank Order of Entrepreneurship Competencies By
Mean Level of Knowledge........................ ;.................... ;............................ 52
17. Rank Order of Promotion Competencies By Mean
.Level of Knowledge....................................... ........................................ ..... 54
18. Rank Order of Basic Economic Principles Competencies
By Mean Level of Knowledge........................... .......................................... 55
19. Rank Order of Business Principles Competencies
By Mean Level of Knowledge..................................................................... 57
20. Rank Order of Competency Areas by Mean
Weighted Discrepancy (WD).............. :.....;....................... ......... ................ 59
21. Rank Order of Production and Processing Competencies
By Mean Weighted Discrepancy (WD)..............;........................................ 60
22. Rank Order of Marketing Competencies By Mean
Weighted Discrepancy (WD)........................................................................ 62
23. Rank Order of Entrepreneurship Competencies By
Mean Weighted Discrepancy (WD.............................................................. .63
24. Rank Order of Promotion Competencies By Mean
Weighted Discrepancy (WD)..................
25. Rank Order of Basic Economic Principles Competencies
By Mean Weighted Discrepancy (WD).....................................................
64
65
26. Rank Order of Business Principles Competencies By
Mean Weighted Discrepancy (WD).............................................................. 66
27. Competency Area Weighed Discrepancy Means By
Respondents Level of Education.................................................................. 68
ix
ABSTRACT
This survey was a descriptive study to identify the importance and need of select
competencies in Montana’s value-added industry. The population of the survey consisted
of those individuals receiving the Value-Added Montana Newsletter, those individuals
who attended the Montana Value-Added Forum, excluding Montana State University
students who were required to attend the forum for class credit and the president/directors
of Montana’s major agricultural associations.
A mailed survey based on the cross-sectional survey design by Borg and Gall
(1983) was used to collect data. Eighty-seven competencies in six competency areas;
production and processing, marketing, entrepreneurship, promotion, basic economic
principles and business principles were identified.
Based on a needs assessment model by Borich (1980) respondents were asked to (
identify the educational importance and their level of knowledge of each competency. In
addition respondents were asked to choose one of four value-added definitions derived
from the researcher’s review of literature that best fit their understanding of the concept
as it relates to Montana agriculture. In order to assure that the survey was clear and'free
of grammatical, typing and formatting errors a pilot study was used. Following the initial
mailing of 271 surveys, a follow-up post card and second mailing of the survey Were
provided to non-respondents to insure the researcher obtained the needed sample size.
The survey data was entered into a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet. Using a
statistical package, Cronbach alphas were computed on each of the competency area’s
level of knowledge and educational importance scores to assure reliability of the survey.
The computed alpha showed that the survey had sufficient reliability for the study.
Frequency scores were calculated for value-added definitions. Means, standard
deviations and weighed discrepancy scores for each calculated for each competency. The
WD scores were tested with an alpha .05 using Analysis of variance and t-test to
determine if there were any differences due to demographic data. WD scores were used
to determine the educational need of each competency. A positive WD score indicated
an educational need.
The data from the survey showed that all but one competency should be included
in a community based value-added curriculum. Based on t-test and ANOVA scores,
demographic, data showed to have no significant effect on the educational needs of the ■
respondents.
,
Value-added training seminars need to be created using the highest positive WD
scored competencies. Marketing competencies showed the highest level of educational
need, while respondents had the lowest educational need for business principle
competencies. Due to the fact that there was not an overwhelming consensus on a
definition of value-added, a Delphi panel should be created to establish a working
definition of value-added as it relates to Montana agriculture.
I
CHAPTER I
THE PROBLEM
Introduction
Montana’s farmers and ranchers have little.control over their products once they
leave the farm gate. A significant amount of the value being added to these products is
happening after the farmers and ranchers are no longer able to benefit. Through
marketing, processing, and other various forms of alteration, Montana’s traditional crops
are now becoming Montana’s “value-added” products. Organic production, high-tech
marketing programs, and new products formed from traditional crops are changing the
face of Montana agriculture. In response to the changing needs of the consumers a new
trend has emerged: Value-added Agriculture.
According to Montana Agricultural Statistics (1996), Montana has 59.7 million
acres of land in farms and ranches, ranking second in the nation behind Texas in farmland
acreage. As stated in the Montana Department of Agriculture’s 1997 release ’’Montana
Ag Information and Statistics,” farmer’s share in the’food dollar is less than 50 percent of
Montana’s major crop producing areas. If the consumer pays $.75/lb of bread the farmer
receives $.05/lb, if $2.83/lb is paid for choice beef the farmer receives $.70/lb. The
agricultural cash income for selected Montana industries shows a seven percent decrease
2
in the agricultural income, according to the Montana Agricultural Statistics (1996). Cash
incomes, including government payments, decreased eight percent in 1995 from 1994,
and 5 percent from 1993. This shows a decrease of nearly 170 million dollars.
The decreasing process of adding value to products significantly influences farm
income. Montana farmers and ranchers are unable to take advantage of value-added
agriculture because they are lacking the knowledge and resources to do so. The
Department o f Agriculture and the Montana State County Extension offices do not have
the value-added education resources to offer Montanans. Value-added as it relates to
Montana and the value-added educational needs of Montanans have not been clarified.
The concept of value-added is broad; it can span from processing and alteration of raw
materials, to marketing and promotion of products. However value-added is defined, it is
indisputable that “value-added" agriculture is the answer to decreasing cash incomes for ■
the Montana’s farmers.
The actual “value-added” contribution from farmers for each dollar spent on foodhas declined from 16.2 cents in 1950 to only 3.5 cents in 1990 (University of Arizona
Cooperative Extension Service, 1997). In Oregon State University Hot Topics, (1996),
Jim Cornelius, an Oregon State University agricultural economist, noted that nationwide,
that processing, a form of value-added, can add up to 70 percent of the farm-gate value to
crops (Duncan, p.l). With a 70 percent increase to Montana’s agricultural income,
Montana’s agricultural community has the opportunity to greatly increase the economic
3
impact they have on the state. In order to do so Montana’s farmers and ranchers,
educators, and extension agents need to be educated about value-added as it related to
Montana’s agriculture.
Statement of Purpose
The purpose of this study will be to identify the importance and educational need
for selected competencies by individuals involved in the Montana value-added industry.
Competencies will relate to production and processing, entrepreneurship, marketing,
promotion, and basic economic and business principles.
Need for Study
It is difficult to meet the educational needs of the consumer without first knowing
how to do so. It is, therefore, necessary to develop educational resources and materials
for those individuals interested in entering or expanding their knowledge of the valuel
added industry. According to Montana Agricultural Statistics (1996), U.S. agricultural
exports for the first six months of the fiscal year 1996 totaled nearly $32 billion. “This
strong export performance is due to the increased value of U.S. bulk commodities and the
continued demand for U.S. high-value products” (Montana Agricultural Statistics, 1996,
P 96).
4
Without adequate resources Montana’s farmers and ranchers will remain
uneducated about value-added agricultural strategies that can significantly increase their
cash incomes. Montana Governor Marc Racicot stated “Montana’s agricultural market is
no longer regional or even national, it is global. Farmers, rancher, and agri-business
people must have concise, reliable information to compete” (Montana Agricultural
Statistics, 1996, p. 3). Constructing competencies needed in the industry is the first step
in informing the public about value-added agriculture. Montana agricultural educators
need value-added competencies; without these competencies Montana’s value-added
industry cannot prosper and Montanans will lack the information need to be competitive
regionally, nationally, and internationally. Continuing to inform Montanans about the
value-added industry without these competencies will require Montana’s educators to rely
on information from other state’s value-added programs. These programs, tailored to fit
the needs of individuals residing within the given state, will not provide information
specific to Montana agriculture. Competencies directly evaluated by individuals involved
in Montana’s value-added industry will provide accurate information that can be directly
applied to Montana agriculture.
Educating Montanans about competencies needed in Montana’s value-added
industry will result in a greater competitiveness of Montana’s agricultural products.
Enhancing Montana’s value-added industry would allow Montana to gain greater
economic values from its products through the conversion of traditional products into
higher valued products for the use in domestic and international exports.
5
Research in the area of value-added will benefit all areas of the state by providing
new jobs that allow youth the opportunity to remain in the state, increase farmer’s and
rancher’s incomes and help with rural development. According to the USDA (1997)
research in the area of value-added is needed to enhance the competitive value of
agricultural products. There is an opportunity to obtain a greater economic value from
agricultural materials through: the conversion to high-value products; the development of
new products from conventional and new plant and animal sources; making existing
products more valuable; increasing process efficiency; making greater use of co-products
and waste materials; and through the integration of forest and agricultural products.
By determining the competencies presently used in Montana’s value-added
industry, it is possible to provide a resource base for those individuals currently involved
and those interested in becoming involved in the value-added industry. Montana is
presently lacking the information needed to become a competitor in the value-added
industry. States such as North Dakota, Idaho, Wyoming, and Oregon have recently
implemented value-added programs for their states' agriculture industry, providing
essential resources to their farmers and ranchers.
Value-added will diversify the agricultural market in Montana as it has done for
its neighboring states. Roger Johnson in North Dakota’s Biennium 1997-99 Agricultural
Marketing Plan (1997) believed that producers and processors need to have value-added
resource available to them on an individual basis. "Several states' agricultural concerns
have the product but lack marketing skills and information" stated Johnson (p. 4).
6
Information.is the foundation in forming an effective value-added industry. It is
necessary, to first identify what information is important in Montana’s value-added
industry. Today, as Montana’s agricultural cash incomes decrease, the demand for.U.S.
high-value products continue to increase. Value-added is becoming an increasingly
important agricultural sector. With ample resources, Montana's agriculturists can build
upon the value-added foundation that has already been established within the state;
however educational attention needs to be paid to the importance skills, knowledge and
attitudes needed to be competitive. In the December 17, 1997 Issue of Montana Grain
News, Gary Broyles, Montana Grain Growers Association President said, “I am
convinced that Montana farmers can make the change, but we need to focus our" energy
on those areas where we can make a real difference” (p. I). Broyles believed that one of
these areas is value-added agriculture. This study will provide Montana’s farmers and
ranchers with the information they need to become competitive in the national and
international value-added market. This study will both identify and determine the most
important areas that need to be included in a value-added curriculum.
By relying on the input from individuals that are presently involved in the
industry, it is possible to provide information that is specific to Montana’s agricultural
industry. By incorporating individuals' current level of knowledge, information that is
important to the value-added industry presently available to Montanans can be
eliminated. Therefore, information that will be included in a value-added curriculum will
not duplicate programs and resources that are already available, but will provide new
innovative information to those individuals who are involved, or wish to be involved in
7
Montana’s value-added industry. With access to value-added educational resources, the
agricultural community can respond to the needs and desires of consumers in the state
and around the world.
Objectives
To meet the purpose of this study the following objectives were purposed:
(1)
To identify perceptions of what value-added means in Montana agriculture by
those individuals involved in the value-added industry.
(2)
To determine the level of knowledge of selected value-added competencies of
those individuals involved in Montana’s value-added industry.
(3)
To determine the educational importance of selected value-added competencies.
(4)
To determine the sources of information in which value-added knowledge was
obtained by those individuals involved in the value-added industry.
(5)
To determine the competencies needed in a community-based value-added
curriculum.
Assumptions
The researcher realized the following assumptions in this study:
8
(1) It was assumed that there is a set of competencies that are needed by individuals in
the value-added industry.
(2) It was assumed that those individuals involved in the value-added industry are aware
that their business is considered value-added.
(3) It was assumed that those individuals involved in Montana’s value-added industry
are knowledgeable about the educational competencies needed to be successful
within the industry.
Limitations
The research recognized the following limitations to the study:
(1)
The population of this study was limited to those individuals receiving the ValueAdded Montana Newsletter, those individuals who attended the November 15,
1996 Montana Value-Added Forum, excluding Montana State University
students, who were required to attend the Forum for a class and the
presidents/directors of Montana’s major agricultural associations.
(2)
The population consisted of only those individuals residing in Montana.
(3)
The time frame of this study was from January 1998 to July 1998.
(4)
Competencies of the study related to production and processing, entrepreneurship,
marketing, promotion and basic economic and business principles.
9
Definition of Terms
Competencies- Behavioral characteristics of knowledge, skills and attitude which enable
a person to perform efficiently and effectively given a function or task.
Value-added industry—Those businesses and individuals involved in increasing the value
of their initial commodity through marketing, processing, production, development of
new uses and products from traditional crops or animal byproducts, and manufacturing in
Montana.
10
CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
The review of literature covered five areas; (I) Value-added definitions, (2)
Value-added programs in other states and Canadian provinces, (3) Identifying educational
competencies, (4) Curriculum Development, and (5) Value-added in Montana.
Value-Added Definitions
There is currently no known definition of value-added as it relates to Montana
agriculture. Therefore, educators are unable to provide Montana’s agricultural community
with adequate educational resources on the topic. In order to identify those competencies
that are important in the value-added industry, we must first look at how value-added has
been defined.
Value-added is a term that can mean different things to different people. Dr.
Roger A. McCain (1997), Professor of Economics at Drexel University stated, "Valueadded is defined as the revenue of the firm minus the amounts paid to other firms (for raw
and semi-finished materials and services). Equivalently, the value-added is the sum of all
payments from the firm to households "including wages, rent, interest, and profit" (p. I).
While this definition described economically what value is being added to a firm, it does
11
little to form a definition about what is a value-added product. According to this
definition, a value-added product is anything that brings revenue to a firm.
The concept of value-added agriculture spans far beyond the fences that
traditional definitions impose. Iowa Senator Tom Harkin (1997) believed that the
concept of value-added included the variety of crops that are fed to livestock, the
processing of crops and livestock into products that are more marketable to a consumer,
as well as developing new uses and products from existing traditional crops and animal
byproducts. According to Harkin, value-added means more jobs, higher incomes, and
greater opportunities for families and communities. Value-added allows farmers and
ranchers in rural communities to gain control over what happens to their products once
they leave the farm gate. Harkin (1997) added, "Farmers who share in the ownership and
profits of value-added enterprises will be less vulnerable because they will not just be
price takers selling basic commodities" (p. 2). Harkin stated however, that in order, for
value-added agriculture to have an impact research needs to be developed. Public sources
of research need to be available to farmers and ranchers who are interested in promoting
value-added products. It is not the large established manufacturers who need this
information, but rather the small family farmers who want to gain more control over their
livelihood.
TC. Purcell, B.R. Eddleman and TI. Kunz (1982) reported, that “Value-added is
a concept generally applied to manufacturing. It is simply the value of the final product
adjusted for the value of raw materials consumed or modified in the manufacturing
12
process” (p. 4). The authors pointed out that through the modification of products, value
is being acquired. The difference in the value of the initial product and the value of the
product after it has gone through the modification process constitutes value-added.
Value-Added Programs in Other States and Canadian Provinces
Value-added agriculture not only has the potential to increase individual
economies, but will also add benefits to state and regional economies as well.
Saskatchewan, Canada created a multi-million dollar program to support value-added
agriculture within the province. The Canada-Saskatchewan Agri-Food Innovation
Agreement (1997) is "an industry-driven strategic initiative to support new and emerging
commodities and value-added activities in Saskatchewan" (p. 7). Shifting attitudes
within the province from government dependence to an environment of industry and
market-driven initiatives have encouraged change within the agricultural sectors of
Saskatchewan.
Agricultural diversification and value-added activities have combined and resulted
in new policies and programs for Saskatchewan agriculture. According to the CanadaSaskatchewan Agri-Food Innovation Agreement, "Value-added refers to the practice of
processing a primary commodity in some way so that value is added to the initial
commodity" (1997, p. I). The new programs and policies that have been developed
encourage the value-added processing to take place within Saskatchewan, rather than
13
exporting raw materials out of the province or the country to processing plants who gain
the value being added to the product. The programs and policies also ensure the viability
of rural communities by creating an environment where the producers of the raw
materials can become involved in the outcome of their product, allowing the value to be
returned to the grower, rather than to the processor. By focusing on eight distinct areas of
agriculture; biotechnology, food processing, horticulture, information technology, non­
food processing, special crops, specialized livestock, and sustainable, agriculture,
Saskatchewan has identified areas of value-added agriculture that will receive assistance
for research, development, and infrastructure needs.
In addition to providing an outlined plan for value-added agriculture to its
residents, Saskatchewan has also focused on the educational needs of the agricultural
community. The government realized that without a solid outline, farmers and ranchers
will not know how to engage in value-added activities. Therefore, for each of the valueadded sectors that Saskatchewan has identified, they have also outlined "Priority Areas."
These priority areas defined the important plans and strategies that needed to be
implemented in order for the various sectors to be successful. All areas of sustainable
agriculture and value-added activities were assigned a strategic area committee to oversee
the priority areas and assure each area’s needs are addressed. Each was given individual
attention in order for the individuals involved in the sectors to be adequately educated on
the topic.
Identifying the areas of agriculture in which value-added applies is vital to having
14
a productive statewide value-added program. North Dakota has been successful in
implementing a value-added program by identifying those areas,that value-added applies
to. Much of the attention focused around value-added in North Dakota has been food
processing. While processing has been the main focus. North Dakota State University
(1995) also pointed out that value-added has also centered around byproducts from
processing, industrial use of farm products, new crops and products, as well as the
individuals who are involved in the process (p.l). Like Montana, most of North
Dakota’s economy is derived from agriculture; however, the majority of the economic
activity has taken place after the product leaves the farm gate.
North Dakota has focused on three main areas to increase their value-added
campaign. First, the state has focused on the local changes that are taking place. Since
the 1970’s, the state has relied on agriculture to carry the brunt of economic development
within the state. With the increased numbers of processing cooperatives and a recent .
trend in new alternative crops and livestock, North Dakota is reassessing the traditional
mold agriculture has been accustom to. According to, NDSU (1995), one of the main
motivators behind North Dakota’s shift towards value-added is. an opportunity to replace
jobs lost in consolidating farm operations of the 1970’s and 1980’s. The increase in jobs
associated with value-added agriculture is a primary reason North Dakotans have seen an
increase in value-added products.
The second reason North Dakota has focused on value-added is that it is
impossible for them to ignore the changes that have taken place in the agricultural
15
industry. North Dakota State University pointed out in Building North Dakota’s
Foundation (1995) that "farmers are getting a decreased share of the food dollar 21 cents
overall in 1994, compared to 32 cents in 1970” (p.2). In order for farmers to improve
their income, they must move toward processing, concentrating on what the consumer
wants in order to make a profit. Environmental trends, the popularity of industrial
products made from farm commodities, and a demand for increased efficiency along with
other strong national trends, have been a basis upon which North Dakota has expanded its
value-added market.
The final reason North Dakota has moved toward value-added is that they have
the capability to do so. Technology has now allowed farmers to produce specialty crops
in addition to the traditional crops they produce. Improved communications, packaging
and shipping techniques, and farming efficiency has opened a new door for many of
North Dakota’s farmers. In addition to the concern about adding dollars to the farm,
North Dakota has also pointed out the additional benefits of value-added. Some of these,
benefits are: restoring areas that are in danger of being lost with the declining need for
farm labor; developing jobs that will keep the youth in the state; and retaining the culture
of the state by developing an economic base upon which the state can build.
The success of North Dakota’s value-added program is dependent upon their
international and national promotion plans. Included in the Marketing Plan 1997-99
Biennium, from the North Dakota Department of Agriculture (1997), promotional plans
were: market development; development of logos and program to educate the consumer
16
on value-added; exhibiting trade shows; and primarily educational programs for the
farmers and ranchers of North Dakota.
North Dakota’s educational efforts concentrated on marketing, an important area
of value-added. The educational division of the ND Department of Agriculture has been
aimed at helping the state’s agriculturists enhance their marketing conditions. According
to the Marketing Plan (1997) the division's educational efforts included:
focusing on knowledge enhancement activities including sponsorship of
marketing meetings; inviting agricultural marketing experts into the state
■ to consult with North Dakota companies and serving as a referral point to
both research and finance programs (p. 5).
In order to meet the educational needs of its members, the "Pride of Dakota,” North
Dakota’s leading value-added program, and the Marketing Division of the Department of
Agriculture, which is in charge of the value-added program, surveyed its members to find
out what services the members wanted to gain from the value-added program. In
response, the members overwhelmingly requested more seminars. As a result a four-part
series of seminars covered topics from "the principles of marketing to designing working
marketing plans" (p. 5) was created. As a result of these marketing seminars and the
availability of resources, North Dakota’s value-added agriculturists have established
themselves in the agricultural marketing sector of the state’s economy. By providing its
17
members with vital information on marketing and promotion, the "Pride of Dakota" has
built a rapport with its members and created a role for itself as a source for facts, trends,
and both basic and applied research.
In the fall of 1985 University of Wyoming’s College of Agriculture conducted the
“Value-Added Study.” According to Torok, Hambley and Ahleschwede (1988), the
Joint Agricultural Committee of the Wyoming legislature requested that UW College of
Agriculture provide the state with a “futuristic perspective related to Wyoming’s
agricultural industry” (p.l). The results of this study were enacted into law in February
of 1988. The study focused primarily on the processing of nine major Wyoming
agricultural commodities; alfalfa, barley, beef, com, dry beans, oats, sugar beets, sheep;
and wheat.
The Idaho State Department of Agriculture (1997) hoped to stimulate economic
diversification in Idaho agriculture through several marketing programs. According to an
Idaho State Department of Agriculture publication “Idaho, Marketing Food and
Agriculture,” “agricultural diversification included value-added processing, alternative
markets, new uses for agricultural products or resources, alternative production methods '
and specialty crops or livestock.” Because of this goal, the Department has developed
expertise for several value-added programs including; specialty food processing, farmers’
markets, organic production, farm and ranch recreation, and specialty crops and livestock.
According to the Idaho State Department of Agriculture’s International
Marketing Program, through consumer education, agricultural loans, produce market
18
news, exporter education, trade shows arid missions, promotions, and trade office, Idaho
hoped to promote their food and agriculture around the world.
Montana needs to align itself with the research that is being done in other states.
As a growing industry, it is important to identify the important educational competencies
needed in Montana’s value-added industry to a) create new jobs in'Montana thereby
keeping more Montanans from leaving the state to find employment, b) create a new and
innovative agricultural market opportunites, c) increase economic impact to the state, and
d) gain legislative and private support for value-added products in Montana.
Identifying Educational Competencies
When developing a value-added educational program that will benefit the farmers
and ranchers within Montana’s economy, it is first essential that the criteria for the
program be established. This can be done by identifying and confirming the essential
competencies needed for successful involvement in Montana’s value-added industry.
From 1976-1978, Instructional Consulting and Research Associates Inc. under the
direction of David McClay conducted the National Ag Occupations Competency Study.
McClay (1978) stated,
The purpose of the study was to identify the essential agricultural
competencies needed for entry employment and advancement in the major
agriculture and agribusiness occupations and to validate the importance of
the competencies identified for each occupation by workers employed in
the occupation (p. iii).
19
The report looked at 57 major production agriculture and 139 agribusiness occupations.
Teacher educators in agricultural education from 40 colleges and universities identified
these occupations across the nation.
The study compiled a list of occupations and classified the occupations as skilled,
technical and/or managerial, or professional. Following the identification of the
occupations, the study prepared job descriptions for each of the occupations eliminating
duplicate occupations and identifying those occupations which employed the most
workers regionally and nationally. Using a job and task analysis, the important
competencies for each occupation were identified. The competencies were then reviewed
by an Employer/Employee Review Group (E.E.R.G.) and the survey instrument was also
pilot tested on this group. The survey instrument was then revised eliminating those
competencies identified as unimportant. A national E.E.R.G. obtained a minimum of 30
completed questionnaires and classified the competencies according to importance. The.
responses of the E.E.R.G: were then summarized and a report of the findings was
prepared.
Following the summarization of the competencies several areas of the agricultural
industry were able to identify those competencies that needed to be focused on.
According to McClay (1978), competency was defined as a "behavioral characteristic of
knowledge, skills, attitudes, and judgment generally required for the successful
performance of a task(s) or the sum total of attitudes, knowledge, and skills which enable
a person to perform efficiently and effectively a given function" (p.7). The results of this
20
study were used to increase and improve vocational-agriculture educational programs.
McClay (1978) believed that the information allowed agricultural educators to identify
the important competencies needed as described by individuals presently involved in the
agricultural workforce. As a result, secondary school vocational-technical programs had
the opportunity to: update and evaluate courses of studies offered within agriculture and
agri-business programs; offer updated co-op training programs for occupational
preparation; determine additional equipment and supplies needed for optimal instruction;
establish additional areas of instruction for areas of importance that were identified by the
surveys; and, re-train instructors in competency areas in which instructors were deemed
deficient. In addition to the secondary educators uses of the survey, state administrators,
teacher education departments, colleges and universities, agriculture and agribusiness
industries, and student’s career development also were intended as beneficiaries of the
study.
Using a competency based approach for the survey will allow curriculum
development to focus on the needs and desires of those individuals involved in Montana’s
value-added industry. A University of Wisconsin Cooperative Extension Bulletin (1998)
stated that “competency-based approaches have a potential to offer a clear and integrated
set of dimensions against which present and future performance can be measured” (p. 3).
While this survey identified important competencies needed in the agricultural industry, it
also identified the fact that several new agricultural occupations
were arising. By targeting the new agricultural occupations and identifying the
competencies needed in Montana’s value-added industry, programs and educational
institutions in Montana can benefit from the information.
Curriculum Development
In their book Curriculum Development in Vocational and Technical Education:
Planning. Content and Implementation (1984), Curtis R. Finch and John R. Crunkilton
offered detailed guidelines to creating a vocational education curriculum. Following the
goals of the Vocational Education Act of 1963, which "set forth the philosophy that
instructional programs should be developed and evaluated on the basis of manpower
needs’’ Finch and Crunkilton based their curriculum development on a data collection
philosophy (McClay, 1978, p. I). Finch and Crunkilton (1984) stated that "the
contemporary vocational and technical curriculum cannot function properly unless it is
data based" (p. 17). This data, they believed, needs to be based on a cooperative data
collection effort between schools and communities. Finch and Crunkilfon's curriculum
development focused on eight areas of perceived outcome. Finch and Crunkilton (1984)
believed:
. . .Curriculum developers must give consideration to the basic character of
the curriculum and build in those factors that contribute to its quality . . . a
vocational and technical curriculum that is data based, dynamic, explicit in
its outcomes, fully.articulated, realistic, student oriented, evaluation
conscious, and future oriented (p. 16-17).
22
Value-added is an emerging area of agriculture that needs to be looked at in a
futuristic manner. By collecting current data about Montana’s value-added industry, a
curriculum based on the current and future needs of farmers can be created. Finch and
Crunkilton stated that "any curriculum that hopes to be relevant tomorrow must be
responsive to tomorrow’s as well as today’s needs" (p. 20).
Value-Added In Montana
Value-added resources that are available to members of Montana’s value-added
industry are scarce. The Montana Department of Agriculture published “Value-Added
Montana Newsletter.” As stated in the Spring 1996 edition of “Value-Added Montana
Newsletter,” the publication strives to “fill the gap between producers and exporters,
providing information on the production and promotion of value-added products in the
national and international markets” (p i). The newsletter has been distributed biannually
to food producers throughout Montana.
The Made in Montana program is another example of Montana value-added.
“The Made in Montana program has worked to evaluate the status of Montana made
products in the market place and then educate Montanans about the diversity of products
manufactured in their state” (Value-Added MT, Spring 1996, pi). According to the
23
Montana Department of Agriculture, in order for a farmer or rancher’s product to be •
considered Made in Montana. 50% of the value-added to the product must take place
within the state.
Because Montana is located close to the Pacific Northwest region, it has the
capability to dramatically increase value-added trade with Pacific Rim Countries.
According to an article in the Winter 1997 issue o f Oregon’s Agricultural Progress,
entitled Pulp Fixings, T. Gentle stated “the countries located around the Pacific Rim are
considered to have the most immediate potential for value-added products” (p.3).
Markets for Northwest agricultural products are developing in Japan, Korea, China,
Taiwan, Singapore and Russia.
Montana’s Vision 2005 task force set goals for Montana value-added products.
As stated in the Montana Farmer Stockman (1998), the task force hoped to provide
recommendations, ideas and strategies that can double agriculture’s economic value by
the end of 2005. The task force will work throughout 1998 on a variety of agricultural
issues including value-added agriculture. The task force was formed as a result of the
1998 Governors’ Conference on Agriculture in which the. subject of value-added
agriculture was raised.
Montana lacks the educational resources to make its value-added industry
successful. Many states have developed a working definition of value-added as well as a
program to promote their value-added products. Montana cannot rely on other state’s
value-added resources. In order to compete with these states Montana must establish
24
value-added standards and provide the information that individuals in Montana’s valueadded industry need. This information includes a community based value-added
curriculum. In order to do this competencies need to be identified for educational
importance and need. Value-added agriculture will provide jobs for Montana’s, increase
the agricultural impact to the state, and allow the benefits of small business to remain in
Montana.
25
CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
This study was designed to identify the importance and educational need for
selected competencies by individuals involved in the Montana value-added industry.
Value-added competencies that were included in the study related to entrepreneurship,
marketing, processing, production and promotion. This chapter will explain the methods
and procedures used to conduct the research and is organized as follows; (I) population
description, (2) survey instrument design, (3) data collection and rate o f response, (4)
data analysis, and (5) summary.
The study was classified as a descriptive study. The survey design was based on
the descriptive study design described by Isaac and Michael (1971). As described by
Isaac and Michael (1971), the design performed a needs assessment for a communitybased vocational education program in addition to answering the objectives of the study.
Population Description
The population of this study consisted of those individuals receiving the ValueAdded Montana Newsletter, those individuals who attended the Montana Value-Added
Forum, (Montana State University students who were required to attend the Forum for
class credit were excluded) and the presidents/directors of Montana's major agricultural
associations. The Montana Department of Agriculture’s Marketing Division supplied the
26
names and addresses of the newsletter recipients and the forum attendants to the
researcher. The names of the presidents/directors of Montana’s major agricultural
associations were supplied by Dr. Van Shelhamer, for use in an Agricultural Education
course, AGED 251 Leadership Development in Agriculture and Industry. Permission
was granted to researcher by Dr. Shelhamer to use the information.
The population initially consisted of 287 individuals involved in Montana’s valueadded industry. However, after reviewing the list of individuals, it was found that several
of the names on the list were vacation homes, wrongly identified as being involved in
Montana’s value-added industry, or no longer associated with the company, association,
or department asked to respond to the survey. After eliminating these names from the
population, 271 individuals were surveyed.
Response Rate
A total of 271 individuals involved in Montana’s value-added industry received
The Montana Value-Added Educational Competencies Survey (Appendix A). The first
■J
mailing of 271 surveys generated a return rate of 19.9(54). After the follow-up postcard
was mailed, 38 (17.5%) more surveys were returned. The second mailing generated the
highest rate, of return. Of the 179-second mailings, 47(26.3%) were returned. All
mailings generated a return rate of 51.3%, 139 of the 271 individuals surveyed. The data
in Table I show the response rate of individuals involved in Montana’s value-added
industry by date. The percentages shown represent the rate of return percentage for the
individual mailings, therefore, the returned percentages exceed the 51.3% return rate due
to the varying number of surveys sent per mailing.
T ab le I.
Return R ate b y D ate o f Return. (N = 2 7 1 )
D ate R eturned
N um ber
Sent
First M a ilin g
271
54
19.9%
R em inder P ostcard
217
38
17.5% ■
S eco n d M a ilin g
179
47
26.3%
139
51.3%
T otal
• N u m b er
R eturned
Percent
Returned
I
Instrument Design
The design of the survey paralleled the cross-sectional survey described by Borg
and Gall (1983). The survey was divided into three sections; Section I asked the
respondents to circle the number that corresponds to the definition of value-added that
best represents their understanding of the concept as related to Montana agriculture. The
respondent was given four definitions of value-added. These definitions were derived
from the researcher’s review of literature. Definition one focused on value-added as
manufacturing, definition two related to the practice of processing a primary commodity,
definition three focused on moving up the food chain, and definition four related to
processing, marketing, and distribution an agricultural product.
Section II consisted of 87 competencies divided into six sub-categories;
production and processing, marketing, entrepreneurship, promotion, basic economic
principles and business principles. The areas and competencies were chosen on the basis
28
of information gained during the review of literature as well as personal knowledge of the
researcher and the graduate advisor. The competencies were further developed and
clarified following the pilot test. Of the 87 competencies, 15 were related to production
and processing, 14 to marketing, 15 to entrepreneurship, 11 to promotion, 15 to basic
economic principles, and 17 to business principles.
The respondents were asked to rank their level of knowledge and educational
importance of the competencies using a Likert-type scale. The five point Likert-type
scales were weighed so that the numbers represented the following; for educational
importance, I - not important, 2 - less important, 3= somewhat important, 4= more
important, and 5=very important. Level of knowledge ranking were; 1= no knowledge,
2= less knowledgeable, 3= somewhat knowledgeable, 4= more knowledgeable, and 5=
very knowledgeable.
The survey was designed to meet the criteria of Bbrich (1980) needs assessment
model. Borich’s model allows the researcher to obtain a weighted discrepancy (WD)
score. The WD score is obtained by taking the respondent’s educational importance
ratings minus their level of knowledge for each of the 87 competencies. This score is
then multiplied by the mean level of importance of each competency, resulting in a WD
score for each competency. Borich’s model and the WD scores allow the researcher to
identify those competencies that need more educational attention when developing a
curriculum. As reported in Kowasaki’s (1994) study, WD score that is above zero
indicates that the competency should be included in a curriculum. The higher the score in
the positive direction, the more educational attention the competency should receive.
Using the WD score allows the researcher to accurately identify the competencies that
29
need to be included in a community based value-added educational curriculum. In
addition to the information provided by the mean education importance of each
competency, a WD score allows a competency with a low level of education importance
and a high WD score to rank higher than a competency with a high level of educational
importance and a low WD. Therefore, the respondent’s level of knowledge was also
taken into, account.
Section III of the survey was comprised of the demographic information. The
question related to the areas of agriculture in which the respondent was involved, home
location and size of town closest to home, size of farm or ranch, years involved in
Montana agriculture, educational experience, and the area in which value-added
educational experience was received. These questions allowed the researcher to obtain a
profile of the respondents.
. Data Collection
;
' The instrument was pilot tested on 45 students enrolled in two Montana State
University courses; Marketing 345, Professional Selling and Animal,.Range and Natural
Resources 432, Sheep Management. Based on the course descriptions in the Montana
State University 1996-1998 Graduate and Undergraduate Bulletin, the researcher felt that
the students involved in these courses would provide an advanced level of knowledge in
the areas which the survey was intending to evaluate. The Animal, Range and Natural
Resources course focused on many of the production and processing, marketing, and
entrepreneurship competencies included in the survey. The Marketing course focused not
30
only on the marketing aspects of the survey but the promotion, basic economic and
business principles included in the survey as wel-L
The researcher attended the Animal, Range and Natural Resource 432 course on
March 2, 1998 and the Marketing 345 course on March 4,1998 and administered the ■
survey to the pilot respondents. Pilot respondents were asked to complete the survey and
return it to the researcher when finished. Respondents were asked to evaluate the survey
for clarity, grammatical and typing errors, and format changes. No major changes were
suggested. The pilot respondents were given 15-20 minutes to complete the survey.
Each respondent completed this survey in its entirety during the given time.
On March 13, 1998, a cover letter (Appendix B) and the survey were sent to
respondents on Department of Education, Agricultural and Technology Education
letterhead. The cover letter bore the signatures of Dr. Van Shelhamer, Graduate advisor,
and the researcher. The respondents were asked to return the survey directly to the
researcher, postage paid, by March 27, 1998.
Three weeks following the initial mailing of the survey, April 3, 1998, a postcard
reminder (Appendix C) was sent to all non-respondents. The follow-up postcards
allowed the researcher to eliminate unnecessary second mailings to respondents, as well
as generate prompt responses from the respondents.
April 17, 1998, two weeks after the mailing of the follow-up postcards, a second
cover letter (Appendix D) and survey were sent to all non-respondents. The second cover
letter encouraged the value-added individual to respond and emphasized the importance
of their input to the success of the survey. The non-respondents were asked to return the
survey no later than May 15,1998 in order for their input to be included in the study.
31
Analysis of Data
Responses from the surveys were entered into a Microsoft Office 95 Excel
spreadsheet. Scores for educational importance and level of knowledge were entered
individually. Demographic Data was also coded and entered. Means and standard
deviations were run for each competency.
Using SPSS, (Statistical Package for Social Sciences) reliability coefficients were
run using the educational importance and level of knowledge; data sets for each of six
competency areas. Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was used to indicate the reliability of the
survey. For the educational importance of production and processing, marketing,
entrepreneurship, promotion, basic economic principles and business principles, alphas of
.8794, .9440, .9402, .9441, .9492, and .9712 were computed. For level of knowledge of
production and processing, marketing, entrepreneurship, promotion, basic economic and
business principles alphas of .9236, .9663, .9557, .9487, .9574, and .9595 were
respectively computed. All alphas showed a high level of correlation, and were therefore
sufficiently reliable for the study.
Data analysis was conducted on each of the 87 competencies. Means, and
standard deviations were calculated for educational importance and level of knowledge.
A formula in the Excel spreadsheet was created to calculate the weighed discrepancy
scores (WD). WD scores were calculated by subtracting the level of knowledge score
from the educational importance score and then multiplying the difference by the
educational importance score.
32
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) or t-tests were run for each WD score against
different demographics, a significant level of .05 was used. Demographics used were
level of education and years involved in Montana agriculture. These showed no
statistical significance.
Summary
This survey was a descriptive study to identify the importance and need of select
competencies in Montana’s value-added industry. The population of the survey consisted
of those individuals receiving the Value-Added Montana Newsletter, those individuals
who attended the Montana Value-Added Forum, excluding Montana State University
students who were required to attend the forum for class credit and the president/directors
of Montana’s major agricultural associations.
A mailed survey based on the cross-sectional survey design by Borg and Gall
(1983), was used to collect data. Eighty-seven competencies in six competency areas;
production and processing, marketing, entrepreneurship, promotion, basic economic .
principles and business principles were identified. Based on a needs assessment model
by Borich (1980), respondents were asked to identify the educational importance and
their level of knowledge of each competency. In order to assure that the survey was clear
and free o f grammatical, typing and formatting errors, a pilot study was used, Following
the initial mailing of 271 surveys, a follow-up post card and second mailing of the survey
were provided to non-respondents to insure the researcher obtained the needed sample
size.
The survey data was entered into a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet. Using a
statistical package (SPSS 7.5), Cronbach alphas were computed on each of the
competency area’s level of knowledge and educational importance scores to assure
instrument reliability. The computed alpha showed that the survey had sufficient
reliability for the study. The researcher calculated means, standard deviations and
weighed discrepancy scores for each competency. The WD scores were tested with an
alpha .05 using Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and t-test to determine if there were any
differences due to demographic data. The WD scores were also used to determine the
educational need of each competency.
34
CHAPTER 4
RESULTS OF THE STUDY
The purpose of this study was to identify the importance and educational need for
selected competencies by individuals involved in the Montana value-added industry.
Competencies related to entrepreneurship, marketing, processing, production, promotion,
and basic economic and business principles were included. For the researcher to answer
the objectives of this study, data were collected using a survey mailed to those
individuals involved in Montana’s value-added industry. Data are presented in five
sections; (I) Demographic data, (2) Value-Added definition, (3) Perceived level of
educational importance, (4) Perceived level of knowledge, and (5) Weighted
Discrepancy.
Demographic Data
The data in Table 2 represents the return rates by type of degree held by the
respondents. Most respondents, 73 (52.5%) held Bachelors of Science degrees, The
respondents with High School degrees was the second highest group, 32 (22.3%).
Twenty-four respondents (17.3%) had Masters of Science degrees. It is interesting to
note that 73.4% (112 of 139) of the respondents continued their education past the high
school level.
35
T ab le 2.
D istribu tion o f D eg ree H eld b y R esp ond en ts. (N = 1 3 9 )
D eg ree H eld
n
H ig h S ch o o l
31
B achelors
73
52.5
M asters
24
17.3
D octorate
05
3 .6
Other
02
1.4
M issin g
04
2 .9
%
■
2 2 .3
The data in Table 3 indicated that of the 139 respondents surveyed, 78 (57.8%)
were involved in the production area of agriculture. The second largest area of
agriculture that respondents were involved in is marketing, 74 (54.8. Sixty-six (48.9%)
respondents were involved in sales, while 52 (38.5%) were involved in distribution and
43 (31.9%) in processing. It is interesting to note that many of the respondents were
involved in several areas of agriculture, hence the percentage is greater than 100.
T able 3.. D istribution o f the A reas o f A griculture in W h ich R esp ond en ts are In volved In. (N = 1 3 5 )
A reas o f A griculture
n
%*
Production
78
57.8
M arketing
74
54.8
S ales
66
4 8 .9
D istribution
52
38.5
P rocessin g
43
3 1 .9
^P ercentages w ill ex c e e d 100 b ecau se respondents co u ld se le c t m ore than one category.
The data in Table 4 represents the distribution of the areas in which the
respondents received their value-added educational information. The majority of
respondents, 81 (60%) received their information by attending seminars. Sixty-nine
36
(51.1 %) of the respondents had previous educational experience that provided them with
their value-added information. The Montana Department on Agriculture provided 59
(43.7%) of the respondents with their information. Twenty-six (19.2%) of the
respondents received their information from County Extension Agents. On the job
experiences accounted for 23 (17%) of the respondents value-added information. Sixteen
respondents (11.9%) received their information from trade magazines, 14 (10.4%) from
being a member of an agricultural organization, while 12 (8.99%) received their
information from a local library. Thirty-three (24.4%) respondents received their
information from other sources including trade shows, friends, and personal research..
T ab le 4. D istrib u tion o f A reas in W h ich V alu e-A d ded E ducational Inform ation W a s R e c e iv e d B y
R esp on d en ts. (N = 1 3 5 ).
V a lu erA d d ed Inform ational R esou rce
n
%
Sem inars
81
60.0
P reviou s E d ucation al E xperience
69
51.1
M on tana D epartm ent o f A griculture
59.
4 3 .7
Other
33
24.4
C oun ty A g en t
26
19.2
O n the Job E xp erien ce
23
17.0
Trade M a g a zin es
16
11.9
M em b er o f an O rganization
14
10.4
L o ca l Library
12
8.9
^ P ercentages w ill e x c e e d 100 b ecau se respondents cou ld se lec t m ore than o n e ca teg o ry .
37
Definition of Value-Added
In Section I of the survey, respondents were asked to identify the definition of
value-added that best represented their understanding of the concept as it related to
Montana agriculture. Table 5 data reveals the distribution of respondents’ understanding
of value-added. Of the 89 respondents, .4. (4.5%) selected - “Value-added is a concept,
generally applied to manufacturing. It is simply the value of the finished product
adjusted for the value of the raw materials consumed or modified in the manufacturing
process.” The definition most frequently related, 42 (47.2%) was —“Value-added refers
to the practice of processing a primary commodity in some way so that value is added to
the initial commodity.” Four respondents (4.5%) selected the definition of “value-added
t
is ‘moving up the food chain’—byproducts from.processing, industrial use of farm
products, new crops and livestock, and the people involved in it all.” Thirty-nine (43.8%)
respondents felt that—“The concept of value-added, as applied to the agricultural
industry, typically refers to the increased value assumed by the raw agricultural
commodities as they move through the nation's food and fiber, processing, marketing and
distribution system.
T able 5. D istribution o f V a lu e-A d d e d D efin itio n s Indicated B y R espondents.
(N = 8 9 )
D efin itio n s
n
%
( I ) V alu e-add ed is a co n cep t g en era lly ap plied to m anufacturing.
It is sim p ly the valu e o f the fin ish e d product adjusted for the
valu e o f the raw m aterials co n su m ed or m o d ified in the
m anufacturing process.
4
4.5
(2 ) V alu e-ad d ed refers to the p ractice o f p rocessin g a prim ary
co m m o d ity in so m e w a y so that v a lu e is added to the
initial com m od ity.
42
4 7 .2
38
T able 5. (C o n tin u ed ) D istribution o f V alu e-A d ded D efin itio n s Indicated B y R esp ond en ts.
(N = 8 9 )
D efin itio n s
n
%
(3 ) V a lu e-a d d ed is ‘m o v in g up the food ch ain ’— byproducts
from p ro ce ssin g , industrial u se o f farm products, n ew crops
and liv e sto ck , and the p eo p le in v o lv ed in it all.
4
4 .5
(4 ) T he c o n c e p t o f value-added, as applied to the agricultural
industry, ty p ic a lly refers to the increased valu e assum ed
b y raw agricultural com m od ities as they m o v e through the
n a tio n ’s f o o d and fib er processin g, m arketing, and .
distribution sy stem .
39
' 4 3 .8
T otal
89
100.0
Perceived Level of Educational Importance
The following represents data generated from the respondents' rating of
educational importance. The ratihgs ranged from I—Not Important to 5—Very
Import anti The higher the mean scores the more important that competency. Mean
scores have been broken into the following convections in order to estimate the
educational importance of each competency; 1.00 tol.50 not important, 1.51 to 2.49 less
important, 2.50 to 3.49 somewhat important, 3.50 to 4.49 more important, 4.50 to 5.00
very important. The data were summarized for the mean and standard deviation (SD) Ibr
each competency. Means and standard deviations were rounded at two decimal points.
The competencies were sorted in descending order by mean level of importance. The
competencies were separated into the individual competency areas of production and
processing, marketing, entrepreneurship, promotion, basic economic principles, and
business principles. The total number of responses for each competency varied due to the
fact that some of the respondent’s surveys were not properly completed.
39
The data in Table 6 represents ,the rank order of competency areas by overall
educational importance means and SD. Respondents indicated that the most important
competency area was entrepreneurship with an overall mean educational importance
score of 4.10. The lowest overall ranked competency area was business principles, with a
mean educational importance of 3.56, Three competency areas scored within .06 of the
highest ranked competency area. These areas were basic economic principles, production
and processing, arid marketing. The promotion competency area had a mean score of
3.96. SD scores ranged from 0.90 to 1.04.
T able 6. R ank Order o f C om p eten cy A reas B y M e a n E ducational Importance.
C om p eten cy A rea
M ean*
SD
Entrepreneurship
4 .1 0
0 .9 0
B asic E co n o m ic P rinciples
4 .0 9
0 .9 0
Production and P rocessin g
4 .0 7
0.91
M arketing
4 .0 4
0 .9 2
P rom otion
3 .9 6
0 .9 5
B u sin ess P rinciples
3 .5 6
1.04
*B ased on a S cale o f I to 5. 1= N o t Important, 2 = L ess Im portant, 3 = Som ew h at Important, 4 = M ore
Important, 5 = Very.Im portant.
The data in Table 7 indicates that production and processing competencies range
from 4.44 to 3.67. The competencies in the production and processing area fall iri the
more important educational needs convection. The highest-ranking competency was
understand food safety regulations, the lowest ranking competency was understand how
to use chemical preservatives. Standard deviations ranged from .77 to 1.16. It is
interesting to note that the competencies dealing with regulation range from 4.44 to 3.78.
40
The regulation competencies were: understandfood safety regulations (4.44;; identify
regulations required to produce a safe food product (4.40); identify the agencies-tUat
determine food safety regulations (3.98); identify tariffs and shipping regulations that
apply to the value-added industry (3.92); and identify what constitutes and organicfood
and how they are regulated (3.78).
T ab le 7. R ank Order o f Production and Processing C o m p eten cies b y M ean E d ucational Importance.
C om p eten cies
N*
M ean **
SD
U nderstand fo o d sa fety regulations.
136
4 .4 4
0.79
Id en tify regulations required to produce a safe food product.
135
4 .4 0
• 0.77
U nderstand the valu e o f p ackaging in marketing a product.
.1 3 7
U nderstand the environm ental effects o f agri-chem icals.
138
E stim ate quality o f product
.
4 .3 3 ■
0.81
4 .2 8
0.93
135
4 .2 8
0.84
U nderstand step s in p rocessin g a product from
producer to consum er.
134
4 .1 3
0 .8 4
U nderstand h o w fo o d p rocessin g enhances
p roduct quality.
136
4.11
0 .9 0
Iden tify the w a y s that fo o d products can be preserved.
137
4 .0 6
0.87
Id en tify the correct p ack aging products to use.
135
3 .9 9
0.97.
Id en tify the ag en cies that determ ine food
sa fety regulations.
139
3 .9 8
0.95
Id en tify tariffs and shipp in g regulations that
ap ply to valu e-add ed industry.
135
3 .9 2
0.97
Id en tify various form s o f p rocessing.
135
3 .8 0
0.91
Id en tify w hat constitutes an organic food
and h o w th ey are regulated.
138
3 .7 8
1.01
Id en tify the reason w h y products are processed.
133
3 .7 8
0.99
U nderstand h o w to u se ch em ical preservatives.
136
3 .6 7
1.16
.
* N V aries D u e to the N um ber o f R espondents W ho A n sw e re d th e Q uestions.
** B a sed o n a S cale o f I to 5. 1= N o t Important, 2 = L ess Im portant, 3 = S o m ew h a t Important, 4 = M ore
Im portant, 5 = V ery Important.
41
The data in Table 8 indicate that the mean educational importance for marketing
ranged from 4.44 to 3.78. The highest competency was determine how to market a
product (4.44) while the lowest competency was determine how product prices are
affected by.Federal price supports and marketing orders (3.78/ The means for
marketing educational importance indicate that those competencies are more important.
The standard deviations ranged from 1.07 to 0.82. Determining how and when to market
and what method of marketing to use received high educational importance ranking from
the respondents. Determine how to market a product (4.44), determine when to market a
product (4.24/ identify and contrast major methods o f marketing, understand marketing
procedures (4.08/ arid determine marketing timing (4.08) all ranked within the more
important convection of educational importance. Competencies that dealt with selling a
product ranked lower than other competencies in the marketing area. Giving a sales
presentation and identifying suggestive selling techniques scored within the important
range, receiving 3.99 and 3.83 means.
T ab le 8. R ank Order o f M arketing C om p eten cies B y M ean Educational Im portance.
C om p eten cies
N*
M ean**
SD
' 135
4 .4 4
0 .8 2
D eterm ine w h en to m arket a product.
133
4 .2 4
0 .8 9
Identify, com pare and contrast m ajor m ethods
o f m arketing.
137
4 .1 6
0 .8 7
E valuate current m arket trends and prices.
138
4 .1 6
0 .8 2
U nderstand m arketing p rocedures.
136
4 .0 8
0.85
D eterm ine h o w to m arket a product.
'
*N V aries D u e to the N u m b er o f R esp ond en ts W h o A n sw ered the Q uestions.
* *B ased on a I to 5 S ca le. 1= N o t Important, 2 - L ess Important, 3 = Som ew h at Important, 4 = M ore
Important, 5 = V ery Important.
42
Table 8. (Continued) Rank Order of Marketing Competencies By Mean Educational Importance.
C o m p eten cies
N*
M ean **
SD
U nd erstand and apply the b asic principles o f eco n o m ics
to distribution and m arketing o f product.
135.
4 .0 4
0.90
C o lle ct and interpret m arket inform ation.
136
4 .0 0
0.94
D eterm in e m arketing practices.
138
4 .0 0
0.92
G iv e a sa le s presentation.
139
3 .9 9
1.07
Id en tify international markets.
138
3 .8 9
0.99
A n a ly ze trends in m arket dem and as
affected b y the lo ca l market.
137
3 .8 4
0.95
Id en tify su g g estiv e sellin g techniques.
137
3 .8 3
0.98
D eterm in e h o w product prices are affected by
F ederal p rice supports and m arketing orders.
139
3 .7 8
1.00
* N V aries D u e to the N um ber o f R esp ond en ts W h o A n sw e re d the Q uestions.
** B a sed o n a I to 5 S cale. 1= N o t Important, 2 = L ess Im portant, 3 = S om ew h at Important, 4 = M ore
Im portant, 5 - V ery Important.
The data in Table 9 displays the rank order of entrepreneurship competencies by
mean educational importance and SD. The data reveal that respondents ranked the .
competencies from 4.40 to 3.80. The highest competency was keep, use and analyze
records (4.40), whereas the lowest competency was identify specific applications of
microcomputers in agriculture and sources o f software for these applications (3.80). The
variance in mean scores of .60 (4.40-3.80) was the lowest variance of any competency
area. The SD ranged from 0.99 to 0.83, also the least variance of any area; the SD varied
by 0.16. Determining the type of product that will succeed in Montana’s value-added
industry was reflected in several of the entrepreneurship competencies. These
competencies were ranked as more important by the respondent and ranged from 4.30 to
4.10. The competencies included; determine type o f product desired by consumer (4.30),
43
determine niche markets (4.16; determine market base (4.12/ and perform a product
feasibility assessment (4.1Oy).
T ab le 9. R ank Order o f Enfrepreneurship C om p eten cies B y M ean E ducational Im portance. (N = 139)
C o m p eten cies
N*
M ea n * *
SD
K eep , u se and an alyze records.
136
4 .4 0
0.83
D eterm in e lo n g and short term b u sin ess goals.
135
4 .3 4 ■
0.87
D eterm in e typ e o f product desired b y consum er.
137
4 .3 0
0.87
D eterm in e w h ich law s apply to b usin ess. '
138
4 .1 9
0.91
D eterm in e n ich e markets.
136
4 .1 6
. 0.86
D eterm in e m arket base.
135
4 .1 2
0.83
P erform a product fea sib ility a ssessm en t
134
4 .1 0
0.99
A n a ly ze p erson al k n o w led g e o f potential product.
139
4 .1 0
0.91
A n a ly ze personal ab ility to enter entrepreneurship.
134
4 .1 0
0.92
D eterm in e w h e n to u se p rofession al services.
134
• 4 :07
0:94
R e c o g n iz e trends in product production for local,
state and national m arkets.
134
4 .0 4
0.86
Id en tify the advantaged and disadvantages o f
entrepreneurship.
136
3 .9 7
0.93
. 135
3 .9 5
0.99
Id en tify valu e-ad d ed occupational opportunities
w ith in M ontana.
134
3 .9 3
0.90
Id en tify sp e c ific applications o f m icrocom puters in
agriculture and sources o f softw are for these applications.
133
3 .8 0
0.94
R e c o g n iz e the p o sitiv e and n egative aspects o f the
V a lu e-a d d ed industry.
* N V aried D u e to the N um ber o f R espondents W h o A n sw e re d the Q uestions.
* * B a sed on a I to 5 S cale. I - N o t Important, 2—L ess Im portant, 3 = S om ew h at Im portant, 4 = M ore
Im portant, 5 = V ery Important.
44
The data in Table 10 shows promotion competency means range from 4.16 to
3.43. Respondents indicated that- the promotion competency with the highest mean was
develop production goals (4.16), whereas the lowest competency was design an
agribusiness display (3.43;. SD scores ranged from a high of 1.08,to a low of 0.81, a
variance o f .27. The promotion competencies that dealt with product advertisement
ranged from 4.03 to 3.43. These competencies were develop an advertising plan (4.03;,
prepare product advertisement (3.88), and design an agribusiness display (3.43). These
competencies ranged from somewhat important to more important.
T able 10. R an k Order o f P rom otion C om p eten cies B y M ean Educational Im portance. (N = IS P )
C om p eten cies
N*
M ean**
SD
D ev e lo p p rod u ction g o a ls.
137
4 .1 6
0 .8 8
K n o w h o w to e ffe c tiv e ly u se sales to o ls.
137
4 .1 6
0 .8 4
■ 139
4 .0 9
0.93
R ec o g n iz e p o ten tia l cu stom ers id en tified
from m arket stud ies.
135
4 .0 7
0.88
D e v e lo p an ad vertisin g plan.
134
4 .0 3
1.01
Id entify a v a ila b le sa le s to o ls.
134
4 .0 1
0.81
- 135
4 .0 1
0.81
3 .8 8
1.08
V
K n o w the v a lu e o f p u b licity.
D e sig n a sa les program .
Prepare p rod u ct advertisem ent.
134
D ev e lo p a p u b lic relation s program .
137
3 .8 5
0.99
D em onstrate the u se o f different ty p es o f sales techniques.
137.
3 .8 1
0 .9 9
D e sig n an agrib u sin ess display.
135
3 .4 3 .
1.03
■
* N V aries D u e to N u m b er o f R esp ond en ts W ho A n sw ered the Q uestions.
* * B a sed o n a I to 5 S ca le . 1= N o t Important, 2 = L ess Important, 3 = S om ew hat Im portant, 4 = M ore
Important, 5 = V er y Important.
The data in Table 11 represents the mean arid SD scores of Basic Economic
Principles. The mean scores varied by 0.77, ranging from 4.42 to 3.65, whereas the SD
45
varied 0.28 and ranged from 1.07 to 0.79. The highest ranking competency understand
fixed costs (4.42) had the lowest SD, while the lowest ranking competency use the
futures market (3.65) had the highest SD.
T able 11. R ank Order o f B a sic E co n o m ic P rinciples C om p eten cies B y M ean E d ucational Importance
(N = 1 3 9 )
C om p eten cies
N*
U nderstand fix ed and variable costs.
134
4 .4 2
D e v e lo p a cash flo w p rojection.
138
4 .3 7
B u d get resources in order to determ ine
least co st and m axim u m return.
134
4 .3 7
0.81 .
U nderstand the co n ce p t o f su p p ly and dem and.
134
4 .2 6
0 .8 3
U nderstand the roles o f p rices in a market.
134
4 .2 6
0 .8 5
D eterm ine n et w orth
132
4 .1 9
0 .9 2
U nderstand h o w to d iv id e p rofits and lo sses.
137
4 .1 7
0 .9 0
D eterm ine n et agri-b u sin ess and/or farm in com e.
134
4 .1 3
0 .9 7
N eg o tia te purchase or sa le w ith in a g iv e n p rice structure.
138
4 .0 5
0 .8 6
U nderstand ela sticity o f dem and.
134
3 .9 8
0 .9 2
E stim ate opportunity costs.
135
3 .9 6
1.02
E stim ate the ec o n o m ic v a lu e o f alternatives.
138
3 .9 3
0 .8 9
U nderstand ch an ges in the g lo b a l econ om y.
134
3 .9 0
0 .9 5
U nderstand the co n ce p t o f product substitution.
135
3 .7 5
0.93
U se the futures m arket as a tool.
138
3 .6 5
1.07
•' M ean**
’
SD
0 .8 3
:
0 .7 9
* N V aries D u e to th e N u m b er o f R espondents w h o A n sw ered the Q uestions.
** B a sed o n a I to 5 S ca le. 1= N o t Important, 2 = L ess Important, 3 = Som ew h at Important, 4 = M ore
Important, 5 = V ery Important.
Table 12 data indicated that competencies that dealt with business structures were
the highest ranked business principle competencies. The competencies’ means ranged
from 3.87 to 3.82, with a variance of only 0.05 points. The competencies were; identify
the advantages and disadvantages o f a general partnershipif .87), identify the advantages
and disadvantages o f proprietorship{f>.%5), identify the advantages and disadvantages of
an ordinary business corporation^.^5), and identify the advantages and disadvantaged
o f a cooperative business(f>.%2). The rank order of business principles means ranged
from 3.87 to 3.18. The highest-ranking competency was identify the advantages and.
disadvantages o f a general partnership {3.%1), the lowest ranking competency was
describe perfect and imperfect business (3.18). The standard deviations ranged from 1.23
to .92, a range of ,31. Cooperative competency means ranged from 3.82 to 3.28 and had
an overall mean of 3.37. The overall mean was calculated by taking the sum of the
business principle competencies, 57.27, divided by the number of competencies, 17,
gives .you an overall average of 3.37 Cooperative competencies included; identify the
advantages and disadvantages o f a cooperative business (3.82), understand the
importance o f cooperative in Montana’s value-added industry (3.78), understand the
concept o f p‘ ooling’ as related to cooperatives (3.62), distinguish between open and
closed cooperatives (3.39), define hedging as related to cooperatives (336), distinguish
between stock and nonstock cooperatives (3.33), and distinguish between centralized
andfederalized cooperatives (3.28). The overall mean for these cooperative
competencies indicates that the respondents felt these competencies were somewhat
important; therefore consideration should be given to cooperative, principles in a valueadded educational curriculum.
47
Table 12. Rank Order of Business Principles Competencies By Mean Educational Importance. (N=139)
C o m p eten cies
N*
M ea n * *
SD
Iden tify the ad vantages and d isadvan tages o f
a general partnership.
133
3 .8 7
0.95
Identify the ad vantages and d isadvan tages o f
a proprietorship.
139
3 .8 5
1.02
Id en tify the ad vantages and disadvan tages o f
an ordinary b u sin ess corporation.
134
3 .8 5
0 .9 9
Iden tify the ad vantages and d isadvan tages o f
a coop erative b u sin ess.
134
3 .8 2
0.93
U nderstand th e im portan ce o f coop eratives
in M on tan a’s v alu e-a d d ed industry.
135
3 .7 8
0.92
Iden tify b y cla ssific a tio n coop erative functions
(m arketing, b argain in g, p urchasing, and service).
134
3 .7 7
0 .9 2
U nderstand m ark etin g alliances.
138
3 .7 4
0.95
138.
3 .6 5
1.06
U nderstand th e co n ce p t o f ‘p o o lin g ’ as related
to coop eratives.
132
3 .6 2
0 .9 9
D escrib e the free m arket system .
128
3 .5 7
1.08
D istin g u ish b e tw e e n o p en and c lo se d cooperatives.
134
3 .3 9
1.11
D e fin e h ed g in g as related to coop eratives.
132
3 .3 6
0 .9 9
D istin g u ish b e tw e e n sto ck and n o n -sto ck cooperatives.
133
3 .3 3
1.08
D istin g u ish b e tw e e n centralized and
fed eralized coop era tiv es.
133
3 .2 8
1.10
D efin e m o n o p o ly .
132
3 .2 8
1.20
D efin e o lig o p o ly .
131
3 .2 1
1.23
3 .1 8
1.12
D istin g u ish the d ifferen ces am on g the various
types o f b u sin ess organ ization structures.
' D escrib e p erfect and im p erfect b u sin ess.
'
123
.
■
* N V aries D u e to the N u m b er o f R esp ond en ts W ho A n sw ered Q uestions.
** B a sed o n a I to 5 S ca le. 1= N o t Important, 2 = L ess Important, 3 = S om ew hat Im portant, 4 = M ore
Important, 5 = V er y Important.
48
Perceived Level of Knowledge
Data in the following tables represents the respondent’s perceived level of
knowledge of select value-added competencies. The ratings ranged from 1—No
Knowledge to 5—Very Knowledgeable. Mean scores have been broken into the
following convections in order to estimate the level of knowledge of each competency;
1.00 tol.50 no knowledgeable, 1.51 to 2.49 less knowledgeable, 2.50 to 3.49 somewhat
knowledgeable, 3.50 to 4.49 more knowledgeable, 4.50 to 5.00 very knowledgeable. The
higher the mean, the higher perceived level of knowledge the respondent has about the
competency. The data was summarized for mean level of knowledge and standard
deviation (SD). Means and SD were rounded to two decimal places. Like the rankings
on educational importance, the value-added competencies were separated into six
competency areas; production and processing, marketing, promotion, entrepreneurship,
basic economic principles and business principles.
The data in Table 13 shows the rank order of competency, areas by mean level of
knowledge. Overall mean level of knowledge scores ranged from 3.46 to 3.06.
Respondents indicated that they were most knowledgeable of basic economic principles
and least knowledgeable of business principles competencies. It is interesting to note that
while respondents were most knowledgeable of basic economic principles they also felt
that the competency area had the most educational importance as reported earlier. The
mean level of knowledge scores varied by 0.36 points, whereas the SD scores varied .05
with a high of 1.13 and a low of 1.07. The production and processing competency area
49
had a mean score of 3.26, marketing 3.21, promotion 3.19, and the area of
entrepreneurship had a mean score of 3.10.
T able 13. R ank O rder o f C om p eten cy A reas b y M ean L e v el o f K n ow led ge.
C om p eten cy A rea
M ea n *
SD
B asic E co n o m ic P rin cip les
3 .4 6
1.08
P roduction and P ro c essin g
3 .2 6
1.10
M arketing
3 .2 1
1.08
P rom otion
3 .1 9
1.10
Entrepreneurship
3 .1 0
1.07
B u sin ess P rinciples
3 .0 6
1.13
*B ased on a S ca le o f I to 5. l= n o k n o w led g e, 2 = le ss k now led geab le, 3 = so m ew h a t k n o w led g ea b le, 4 =
m ore k n o w led g ea b le , 5 = v ery k n o w led geab le.
The data in Table 14 show the perceived level of knowledge of production and
processing competencies by mean level of knowledge and SD. The means ranged from
3.59 to 2.48, whereas the SD ranged from 1.24 to 0.93. The highest ranking competency
was understand the value o f packaging in marketing a product (3.59), and the lowest
ranking competency was understand how to use chemical preservative (2 AS). It is
important to note that the competencies with the lowest level of knowledge are those that
deal with regulations. Respondents indicated that they were only somewhat
knowledgeable (mean=2.85) of tariffs and shipping regulations that apply to the valueadded industry. They also were somewhat knowledgeable (means of 3.01 to 3.50) of
understanding food safety regulations, regulations that are required to produce a safe food
product, and what constitutes an organic food and how they are regulated.
50
Tablel4. Rank Order of Production and Processing Competencies By Mean Level of Knowledge. (N=139)
C om p eten cies
N*
M ean **
SD
U nderstand the valu e o f p ack agin g in m arketing
a product.
139
3 .5 9
1.19
Estim ate quality o f product
136
3 .5 9
1.10
U nderstand h o w fo o d p rocessin g en h an ces
product quality.
■139
3 .5 4
1.05
U nderstand steps in p rocessin g a p rod uct from
producer to consum er.
138
.3.53
1.08
Iden tify the reason w h y products are p ro cessed .
138
3 .4 7
0.93
Id entify the a g en cies that determ ine fo o d
safety regulations.
136
3 .3 9
1.04
U nderstand the environm ental effe c ts o f agri-ch em icals.
135
3 .3 6
1.24
U nderstand fo o d safety regulations.
136
3 .3 5
1.16
Identify various form s o f p rocessin g.
136
3 .2 7
0.95
Identify regulations required to p rod uce a
safe fo o d product.
136
3 .2 4
1,15
139
3 .1 7
1.09
Iden tify the correct packaging products to u se.
139
3 .1 0
1.13
Identify w hat constitutes an organ ic fo o d and
h o w th ey are regulated.
136
3 .0 2
1.18
Iden tify tariffs and shipping regu lation s that
apply to valu e-add ed industry.
135
2 .8 5
1.11
U nderstand h o w to u se ch em ical p reservatives.
138
2 .4 8
1.14
Iden tify the w a y s that fo o d products ca n b e preserved.
.
*N V aries D u e to the N um ber o f R esp o n d en ts W h o A n sw ered the Q uestion.
**B ased on a I to 5 S cale. l= n o k n o w le d g e , 2 = le ss k n o w led g ea b le, 3= som ew h at k n o w led geab le, 4 - m ore
k now led geab le, 5 = very k n o w led g ea b le
The data in Table 15 represented the mean and SD of the respondent’s level of
knowledge of marketing competencies. The competencies ranged from the highestranking competency determine how to market a product with a mean score of 3.43 to the
lowest ranking competency with a mean score of 2.80, identify international markets.
51
Standard deviations ranged from 1.22 to 0.99. Although the respondents felt they were
most knowledgeable of how to market a product, they did not feel as knowledgeable
about competencies that dealt with when they should market their product. Determine
when to market a product (3.29) and determine market timing (3.23) ranked lower then
competencies that that dealt with methods of marketing and how to market a product:
T ab le 15. R ank Order o f M arketing C om p eten cies B y M ean L e v el of-K n ow led ge. (N = 1 3 9 )
C om p eten cies
N*
M ean**
SD
D eterm in e h o w to m arket a product.
135
3 .4 3
1.07
G iv e a sa les presentation .
133
3 .3 6
1.22
A n a ly ze trends in m arket d em and as affected b y
the lo c a l m arket.
134
3 .3 5
1.02
U nderstand and ap ply the b a sic principles o f
e c o n o m ic s to distribution and m arketing o f product.
135
3 .3 2
1.10
Iden tify, com pare and contrast m ajor
m eth od s o f m arketing.
133
3 .3 0
1.04
D eterm in e w h e n to m arket a product.
134
3 .2 9
1.01
U nd erstand m arketing p rocedures.
136
3 .2 9
0 .9 9
D eterm in e m arket tim ing.
135
3 .2 3
1.09
D eterm in e m arketing p ractices.
134
3 .2 2 '
1.03
E valuate current m arket trends and prices.
135
3 .2 1
1.08
C o lle ct and interpret m arket inform ation.
133
3 .1 9
1.04
Id en tify su g g e stiv e se llin g techniques.
132
3 .1 4
1.18
D eterm in e h o w p rod uct p rices are affected ■
b y F ederal p rice supports and m arketing orders.
134
2 .8 8
1.08
Id en tify international m arkets.
133
2 .8 0
1.12
I
■**N varies d ue to the num ber o f respondents w h o answ ered the question. .
* B a s e d o n a I to 5 sc a le. l= n o k n ow led ge, 2 = less k n ow led geab le, 3= som ew h at k n o w le d g e a b le , 4 = m ore
k n o w led g ea b le, 5 = v ery k n o w led g ea b le
52
The data in Table 16 represented the rank order of entrepreneurship competencies
by mean level of knowledge and SD. The highest ranking competency, keep, use and
analyze records received a mean score of 3.79, where as the lowest ranking competency,
the competency respondents were least knowledgeable of was, identify specific
applications o f microcomputers in agriculture and source of software for these
applications, which received a mean score of 2.81. Standard deviation scores ranged
from, keep, use and analyze records with the lowest SD of 0.94 to perform a product
feasibility assessment with the highest SD of 1.17. It is interesting to note that in the area
of entrepreneurship, respondents were most knowledgeable of the ability to keep, use and ■
analyze records (3.79), however, they were least knowledgeable of the ability to identify
specific applications o f microcomputers in agriculture and sources o f software for these
applications (2.81). It could be assumed that individuals involved in Montana’s valueadded industry do not use microcpmputers to keep, use and analyze their records.
T able 16. R ank Order o f Entrepreneurship C o m p eten cies b y M ean L ev el o f K n ow led ge. (N = 1 3 9 )
C om p eten cies
M ean**
SD
• 139
3 .7 9
0 .9 4
D eterm ine w h e n to u se p ro fessio n a l services.
139
3 .5 7
1.02
D eterm ine lo n g and short term b u sin ess g o a ls.
139'
3 .5 4
1.10
A n a ly ze p erson al ab ility to enter entrepreneurship.
136
3.53
1.05
Identify the advantaged and d isadvantages
o f entrepreneurship.
136
3.51
1.06
A n a ly ze personal k n o w le d g e o f p oten tial product.
135
3.51
1.11
D eterm ine w h ich la w s apply to b u sin ess.
139
3 .3 4
1.05
K eep , u se and an aly ze records.
N*
.
* N V aries D u e to the N um ber o f R esp ond en ts W h o A n sw ered the Q uestion.
* *B ased o n a S ca le o f I to 5. I=Tio k n o w led g e, 2 = le ss k n o w led g ea b le, 3= som ew h at k n ow led geab le, 4 =
m ore k n o w led g ea b le , 5 = very k n o w led g ea b le
53
T able 16 (co n tin u ed ). R ank Order o f Entrepreneurship C om p eten cies b y M ean L e v e l o f K n ow led ge.
(N = 1 3 9 )________________________________________
C o m p eten cies
. .
■ N*
M ea n * *
SD ■
D eterm in e n ic h e m a rk ets.'
137
3 .3 0
1.11
D eterm in e ty p e o f p roduct d esired by co n su m e r..
138
3 .2 4
1.08
•
R ec o g n iz e th e p o sitiv e and n eg a tiv e aspects
o f the v a lu e-a d d ed industry.
138
3 .1 7
1.06
Id en tify v a lu e-a d d ed occu p ational opportunities
w ithin M on tana.
136
3 .1 4
1.00
D eterm in e m arket b ase.
139
3 .0 5
R ec o g n iz e trends in product production for local,
state and n a tio n a l m arkets.
138
3 .0 2
1.06
P erform a p rod u ct fea sib ility a ssessm en t
139
2 .8 1
1.17
Id en tify sp e c ific ap p lication s o f m icrocom puters
in agriculture and so u rces o f softw are for
these ap p lication s.
137
2 .8 1
1.12
/
1.14
* N V aries D u e to the N u m b er o f R espondents W ho A n sw ered the Q uestion.
** B a sed o n a S ca le o f I to 5. l= n o k n ow led ge, 2 = less k n o w led g ea b le, 3 = so m ew h a t k n ow led geab le, 4 =
m ore k n o w le d g e a b le , 5 = v ery k n ow led geab le
1
The data in Table 17 indicated that the mean level of knowledge of promotion
competencies ranged from 3.66 to 2.91. The highest-ranking competency was
understand the value o f publicity (3.66), whereas the lowest ranking competency was
design an agribusiness display (2.91). The SD of the competencies ranged from 1.20 to
1.02, a variance of .18. Respondents indicated that they were more knowledgeable of
identifying available sales tools than they were of knowledgeable of how to effectively
use them. This is also true for advertising. Respondents felt they were more
knowledgeable of developing an advertising plan than they were of preparing a product
advertisement. Therefore, although they had the knowledge of a skill, when asked to
implement the skill or understanding of the concept the respondents were less
knowledgeable.
54Table 17. Rank Order of Promotion Competencies By Mean Level of Knowledge. (N=139)
C om p eten cies
N*
M ean **
SD
U nderstand the valu e o f p u b licity.
136
3 .6 6
1.12
D ev e lo p production g o a ls.
134
3 .4 6
1.02
D ev e lo p a public relation s program .
136
3 .2 9
1.06
Identify available sales to o ls.
133
3 .2 2
1.06
D ev elo p an advertising plan.
136
3 .2 0
. 1.10
R eco g n ize potential cu stom ers id en tified
from m arket studies.
133
3 .1 5
1.03
K n o w h o w to e ffe c tiv e ly u se sa les to o ls.
136
3 .1 5
Prepare product advertisem ent.
136
3 .0 8
1.16
D esig n a sales program .
134
3.01
1.15
D em onstrate the u se o f d ifferen t types
o f sales techniques.
135
2 .9 9
1.10
D e sig n an agribusiness display.
135
2.91
1.20
.
1.09
* N V aries D u e to the N u m b er .o f R esp on d en ts W h o A n sw ered the Q uestion.
* *B ased on a S cale o f I to 5. l= n o k n o w le d g e , 2 = le ss k n ow led geab le, 3 = so m ew h a t k now led geab le, 4 =
m ore k n ow ledgeable, 5 = v ery k n o w led g ea b le
As revealed by the data in Table 18, mean level of knowledge of basic economic
principles range from 3.92 to 2.66. Respondents were most knowledgeable of the
competency understand the concept o f supply and demand (3.92), while they were least
knowledgeable of u se the futures market as a tool(2.66). Standard deviations ranged
from 1.14 to 0.98. The competency with the highest level of knowledge had the lowest
SD, 0.98, and the competency with the lowest level of knowledge had the highest SD of
1.14. Respondents were knowledgeable of the basic economic competencies that dealt
with current income and/or profits; determine net worth (3.88), understand fixed and
variable costs (3.88) and determine net agri-business and/orfarm income (3.67).
55'
Competencies that dealt with current income and/or profits had an overall mean of
3.73Competencies that deal with futuristic incomes and/or profits; estimate the economic
value o f alternatives (3.15), understand changes in the global economy (3t.08),
understand the concept o f substitution (3.02), and use the futures market as a tool (2.66)
only had an overall mean of 2.98, showing that the respondents were only somewhat
knowledgeable of these competencies.
T ab le 18. R ank Order o f B a sic E co n o m ic P rinciple C om p eten cies b y M ean L e v e l o f K n o w led g e. (N = 1 3 9 )
C o m p eten cies
N*
M ea n * *
SD
U nderstand the co n ce p t o f supply and demand.
139
3 .9 2
0.98
D eterm in e n et w orth
139
3 .8 8
1.02
U nderstand fix e d and variable costs.
139
3 .8 8
1.04
D e v e lo p a cash flo w projection.
138
3 .7 4
• 1.12
D eterm in e n et agri-b u sin ess and/or farm in com e.
138
3 .6 7
1.14
U nderstand h o w to d iv id e p rofits and losses.
136
3 .6 6
1.11
U nderstand the roles o f p rices in a market.
137
3 .5 5
1.05
B u d g et resou rces in order to .determ ine least cost
and m axim u m return.
136
3 .5 3
1.09
138
3 .4 9
1.09
U nderstand ela sticity o f dem and.
•
* N V aries D u e to the N u m b er o f R espondents W ho A n sw ered the Q uestion.
** B a sed o n a S ca le o f I to 5. l= n o k n ow led ge, 2 = le ss k n ow led geab le, 3 = so m ew h a t k n ow led geab le, 4 =
m ore k n o w led g ea b le , 5 = v ery k n ow led geab le
56 ■
T able 18 (continued ). R ank Order o f B a sic E co n o m ic P rinciple C om petencies b y M ea n L e v e l o f
K n o w led g e. (N = 13 9 )
C om p eten cies
N*
M ea n * *
SD
E stim ate opportunity costs.
138
3 .3 2
1.11
N egotiate purchase or sa le w ith in a
g iv e n price structure.
137
3 .3 0
1.09
E stim ate the ec o n o m ic v a lu e o f alternatives.
136
3 .1 5
1.08
U nderstand ch an ges in the g lo b a l e c o n o m y ..
137
' 3 .0 8
1.05
U nderstand the co n ce p t o f p roduct substitution.
137
3 .0 2
1.10
U se the futures m arket as a tool.
136
2 .6 6
1.14
'
•
* N V aries D u e to the N u m b er o f R esp on d en ts W h o A n sw ered the Q uestion.
** B a sed on a S cale o f I to 5. l= n o k h o w le d g e , 2 = less k now led geab le, 3= so m ew h a t k n ow led geab le, 4 =
m ore k n ow led geab le, ‘5 = v ery k n o w led g ea b le
The data in Table 19 contains the rank order of business principle competencies
based upon mean level of knowledge and SD as indicated by respondents. Mean scores
ranged from 3.56 to 2.47, the highest mean score competency was identify the advantages
and disadvantages o f a proprietorship, whereas the competency with the least amount of
knowledge was define hedging as related to cooperatives. Standard deviations ranged
from 1.03 to 1.29 and varied 0.26. Respondents were least knowledgeable of
competencies related to cooperatives. These competencies and their means were;
understand the concept o f ‘p ooling’ as related to cooperatives, (2.84), distinguish
between stock and. nonstock cooperatives, (2.84), distinguish between open and closed
cooperatives, (2.71), distinguish between centralized andfederalized cooperatives (2.54),
and define hedging as related to cooperatives, (2.47). The respondents were either
somewhat knowledgeable or less knowledgeable of the competencies.
57
T ab le 19. R ank Order o f B u sin ess P rinciple C om p eten cies B y M ean L e v e l o f K n o w led g e. (N = 139)
C o m p eten cies
N*
M ean** ■
SD
Id en tify th e advantages and disadvantages o f a
proprietorship.
136
3 .5 6
1.10
D e fin e m o n o p o ly .
132
3 .5 3
1.15
Id en tify the advantages and disadvantages o f an ordinary
b u sin ess corporation.
136
3 .5 3
1.12
Id en tify the advantages and disadvantages
o f a gen eral partnership
136
3 .5 2
1.08
D esc rib e the free m arket system .
136
■3 .4 7
1.09
■Identify the ad vantages and disadvantages •
o f a co o p era tiv e b u sin ess.
136
3 .3 9
1.07
D istin g u ish the d ifferen ces am ong the various
typ es o f b u sin ess organization structures.
136
3 .2 7
1.18
Id en tify b y c la ssific a tio n cooperative functions
(m arketing, b argain in g, purchasing, and service).
136
3 .0 4
1.14
U nd erstand th e im portance o f coop eratives in M on tana’s
v a lu e-a d d ed industry.
136
2 .8 7
1.18
U nd erstand m arketing alliances.
135 .
2 .8 7
1.21
U nd erstand the co n cep t o f ‘p o o lin g ’ as related
to coop eratives.
135
2 .8 4
1.15
D istin g u ish b etw e en sto ck and n on -stock cooperatives.
136
2 .8 4
1.16
' 127
2 .8 0
1.29 ■
D escrib e p erfect and im perfect b usiness.
133
2 .7 4
1.09
D istin g u ish b e tw e e n op en and clo sed cooperatives.
136
2 .7 1
1.14
D istin g u ish b etw e en centralized and
fed era lized coop eratives.
136
2 .5 4
1.03
D e fin e h ed g in g as related to cooperatives.
133
2 .4 7
1.12
D e fin e o lig o p o ly .
* N V aries D u e to the N um ber o f R espondents W ho A n sw ered the Q uestion.
** B a sed o n a S ca le o f I to 5. I =no k n o w led g e, 2 = le ss k n o w led g ea b le, 3 -s o m e w h a t k now ledgeable, 4 =
m ore k n o w led g ea b le , 5 = very k n ow led geab le
58
Educational Needs as Assessed By Borich’s Model
The data in the following tables represents the educational needs of value-added
competencies using Borich’s model. For each competency a weighed discrepancy score
(WD) was calculated by subtracting the level of importance mean from the educational
importance mean, then multiplying the value by the educational importance mean. A
positive WD score indicates that there is a need for education for the competency. The
WD scores are shown in five tables based on competency areas; production and
processing, marketing, promotion, entrepreneurship, basic economic and business
principles. WD scores can range from a high of 20 to a low of -4. The higher the WD
score the more educational needed for that competency.
The data in Table 20 reveals that the overall WD scores ranged from 3.33 to 1.80.
The competency area that has the most educational need is marketing, whereas the area
with the least educational importance was business principles. All competency areas .
received a positive WD score, therefore, all areas are important. Production and
processing was the second highest scoring competency area with a mean WD of 3.27.
Entrepreneurship scored a mean WD of 3.17, whereas promotion had a mean WD of 2.83
and basic economic principles a mean WD of 2.58. WD scores varied 1.53 (3.33-1.80).
It is interesting to note that the production and processing and marketing competency
areas received the highest WD ranking and the majority of respondents indicated that
they were involved in the production (57.8%) or marketing (54.8) areas of the valueadded industry. The weighed discrepancy score was calculated using the overall mean
educational importance scores and overall mean level of knowledge scores. For example
production and processing had an overall educational knowledge score of 4.07 and an
59
overall mean level of knowledge score of 3.26. To calculate the WD score 3.26 is
subtracted from 4.07 and a difference of .61 is obtained. This score, .61 is multiplied by
the overall educational mean of 4^07 to obtain a WD score of 3.29. .This calculation
represents the importance of both the respondent’s level of knowledge and the
educational importance of the competency. Therefore, the WD score takes into account
respondents that rank competencies low in educational importance because they are not
knowledgeable of the skill, task or concept.
T ab le 2 0 . R ank Order o f C om p eten cy A reas b y M ean W eig h ted D iscrep a n cy (W D ).
C o m p eten cy A rea
M ean W D *
M arketing
3 .3 3
P roduction and P rocessin g
3 .2 9
Entrepreneurship
3 .1 7
P rom otion
2 .8 3
B a sic E c o n o m ic P rinciples
2 .5 8
B u sin ess P rin cip les
1 .8 0
* B a sed o n a S ca le o f I t o 5.
W D = (M ean E ducational Im portance - M ean L e v el o f K n o w led g e) x M ean E d u cation al Importance.
W D > 0 In dicates E ducational N eed.
I
The data in Table 21 represents the rank order of production and processing
competencies by WD. Identify regulations required to produce a safe food product
received the highest educational need score of 5.10. The lowest ranking competency
identify why products are processed, received a WD of 1.17. Four competencies had a
mean WD score of 4.0 or above. These competencies were; identify tariffs and shipping
regulations that apply to the value-added industry (4.19), understand how to use
chemical preservatives (4.37), understandfood safety regulations (4.84), and identify
60
regulations required to produce a safe food product^.10). It is interesting to note that of
the four top ranked competencies, three related to regulations. Those competencies that
were affiliated with the concept of processing, understand the steps in processing a
product from producer to consumer (2.48), understand howfood processing enhances
product quality (2.34), identify various forms o f processing (2.01), and identify the
reasons why products are processed (1.17), showed the lowest educational need in the
production and processing area
T ab le 2 1. R ank Order o f P roduction and P rocessin g C om p eten cies B y M ean W eig h ted D iscrep an cy (W D ).
C o m p eten cies
M eanW D
Iden tify regulations required to p roduce a safe
fo o d product.
5 .1 0
U nderstand fo o d sa fety regulations.
4 .8 4
U nderstand h o w to u se ch em ica l preservatives.
4 .3 7
Iden tify tariffs and sh ip p in g regulations that
ap ply to v alu e-ad d ed industry.
4 .1 9
U nderstand the en viron m en tal effects o f agri-chem icals.
3 .9 4
Id en tify the w a y s that fo o d products can b e preserved.
3.61
Id en tify the correct p a ck a g in g products to use.
3 .5 5
U nderstand the v a lu e o f p ack agin g in m arketing a product.
3 .2 0
E stim ate q uality o f product.
2 .9 5
* W D = (M ean E d ucation al Im portance - M ean L e v el o f K n ow led ge) x M ean E d u cation al Im portance.
W D > 0 Indicates E d u cation al N ee d .
61
T ab le 21 (con tin u ed ). R ank Order o f Production and P ro c essin g C om p eten cies B y M ean W eighted
D iscrep a n cy (W D ).
C o m p eten cies
Id en tify w h at constitutes an organic fo o d and
h o w th ey are regulated.
M ean W D
-
2 .8 9
U nderstand step s in p ro cessin g a product from
producer to consum er.
2.48
Id en tify the ag en cies that determ ine fo o d sa fety regulations.
2.35
U nderstand h o w fo o d processin g enhances product quality.
2 .3 4
Id en tify variou s form s o f processin g.
2.01
Iden tify the reason w h y products are processed..
1.17 *
* W D = (M ea n E ducational Im portance - M ean L e v el o f K n o w led g e) x M ean E ducational Importance.
W D > 0 In dicates E ducational N eed .
Data in Table-22 indicates that marketing WD scores range from 4.48 to 1.88. All
competencies in the marketing area should be included in a value-added educational
curriculum. The competency with the highest ranking. WD was determine how to market
a product (4.48), while the lowest ranking WD competency was analyze trend in market
demand as affected by the local market (1.88). Four competencies were calculated to
have a mean WD score of below 3.0. These competencies were; understand and apply
the basic principles o f economics to distribution and marketing ofproduct (2.91), identify
suggestive selling techniques (2.64), give a sales presentation (2.51), and analyze trends
in market demand as affected by the local market (1.88).
62
T able 2 2 . R ank Order o f M arketing C om p eten cies b y M ean W eig h ed D iscrep an cy (W D ).
C o m p eten cies
M ean W D *
D eterm ine h o w to m arket a product.
4 .4 8
Iden tify international m arkets.
4 .2 4
D eten n in e w h e n to m arket a product.
4 .0 3
E valuate current m ark et trends and prices.
3 .9 5
Identify, com p are and contrast m ajor m ethods o f m arketing.
3 .5 8
D eterm ine m arket tim ing.
■ 3 .4 7
D eterm ine h o w prod uct p rices are a ffected b y Federal
p rice supports and m arketing orders.
3 .4 0
C o llect and interpret m arket inform ation.
3 .2 4
U nderstand m arketing procedures.
3 .2 2
D eterm ine m ark etin g procedures.
3 .1 2
U nderstand and ap p ly the b a sic principles o f eco n o m ics
to distribution and m ark eting o f product.
• 2.91
Iden tify su g g e stiv e se llin g techniques.
2 .6 4
G ive a sa les p resentation .
2.51
A n a ly ze trends in m ark et dem and as
affected b y the lo c a l m arket.
1,88
•
* W D = (M ea n E d u ca tio n a l Im portance - M ean L e v e l o f K n o w led g e) x M ean E d u cation al Im portance.
W D > 0 In dicates E d u ca tio n a l N eed .
The data in Table 23 shows, the rank order of entrepreneurship competencies by
mean weighted discrepancy (WD). The competencies ranged from the highest
competency perform a product feasibility assessment with a WD score of 5.29 to the
lowest competency identify, the advantages and disadvantage o f an entrepreneurship,
with a mean WD of 1.83. It is interesting to note that the competencies that scored.the
highest; perform a product feasibility assessment (5.29), determine type ofproduct
desired by consumer (4.56), and determine market base(AA\), all dealt with identifying
63
what type of products would be successful in Montana’s value-added industry. The WD
score of 5.29 was the highest ranked WD of any of the 87 competencies included in the
survey.
T ab le 23. R ank Order o f Entrepreneurship C om p eten cies B y M ean W eig h ed D iscrep a n cy (W D ).
C om p eten cies
M ean W D *
P erform a product fea sib ility assessm ent.
5 .2 9
D eterm in e typ e o f product desired b y consum er.
4 .5 6
D eterm in e m arket base.
4.41
R ec o g n iz e trends in product production for local,
state and national markets.
4 .1 2
Id en tify sp ec ific application o f m icrocom puters in
agriculture and sou rces o f softw are for these applications.
.
•
3 .7 6
D eterm in e n ich e m arkets. .
3 .5 8
D eterm in e w h ich law s apply to b usiness.
3 .5 6
D eterm in e lo n g and short term b usin ess goals.
3 .4 7
Id en tify valu e-add ed occupational opportunities
w ith in M ontana.
3 .1 0
R ec o g n iz e the p o sitiv e and n egative aspects o f the
valu e-ad d ed industry.
3.08
A n a ly ze personal k n o w led g e o f potential product.
2 .4 2
A n a ly ze p ersonal ability to enter entrepreneurship.
2:34
D eterm in e w h en to u se p rofession al services.
2 .0 4
Id en tify the advantages and disadvantages o f
entrepreneurship.
1.83
* W D = (M ean E ducational Im portance - M ean L e v el o f K n o w led g e) x M ean E ducational Importance.
M D > 0 Indicates E ducational N eed .
Promotion competency weighed discrepancy scores are displayed in the data in
Table 24. The data revealed that WD scores ranged from 4.20 to 1.76. The competency
with the highest mean was how to effectively use sales tools (4.20), whereas the lowest
64
competency was understand the value o f publicity (1.76). Most of the scores (64%, 7 of
11) had a ranking above 3.0. Design an agribusiness display and know the value o f
publicity ranked below 2.0, indicating that they have the lowest educational need of the
promotion competencies that would be included in a value-added educational curriculum.
T ab le 2 4 . R ank O rder o f P rom otion C om petencies B y M ean W eig h ed D iscrep a n cy (W D ).
C om p eten cies
M ean W D *
K n o w h o w to e ffe c tiv e ly u se sales tools.
4 .2 0
D e s ig n a sa les program .
4.01
R ec o g n iz e p oten tial custom ers id en tified from market studies.
3 .7 4
D e v e lo p and ad vertisin g plan.
3 .3 4
Id en tify availab le sa le s to o ls.
3 .1 7
D em onstrate the u se o f d ifferen t types o f sales techniques.
3 .1 2
Prepare product advertisem ent.
3 .1 0
D e v e lo p p rod uction g o a ls.
2.91
D e v e lo p a p u b lic relation s program .
2 .1 6
D e sig n an agrib u sin ess display.
1.78
U nderstand the v a lu e o f pub licity.
1.76
-
■
* W D = (M ean E d u ca tio n a l Im portance - M ean L evel o f K n o w led g e) x M ean E d u cational Importance.
M D > 0 In dicated E d u cation al N eed .
The data in Table 25 shows that the WD scores for basic economic principles
range from a high of 3.67 to a low of 1.30. The basic economic competency that was
ranked highest was budget resources in order to determine least cost and maximum
return (3.67). The competency that ranks the lowest and has a lower educational need
was determine net worth (1.30). Understand elasticity o f demand, determine net
agribusiness and/or farm income; understand the concept o f supply and demand and
determine net worth, all ranked below 2.0, indicating a lower level of educational need.
65
T ab le 25. R ank Order o f B a sic E co n o m ic P rinciples C om p eten cies B y M ean W eig h ed D iscrepancy (W D ).
C om p eten cies
M ean W D *
B u d g et resources in order to determ ine least
c o st and m axim u m return.
3,67
U s e the futures m arket as a tool.
3.61
U nderstand changes in the glo b a l eco n o m y .
3 .2 0
E stim ate the eco n o m ic valu e o f alternatives.
3.07
N eg o tia te purchase or sa le w ithin a g iv e n p rice structure.
3.04
U nderstand the roles o f p rices in a market.
3.02
D e v e lo p a cash flo w production.
2.75
*
/
.
U nderstand the con cep t o f product substitution.
2 .7 4
E stim ate opportunity cost.
2.53
U nderstand fix ed and variable costs.
2 .3 7
U nderstand h o w to d ivid e profits and lo sses.
2.13
U nderstand elasticity o f dem and.
1.95
D eterm ine n et agribusiness and/or farm in com e.
1 .90
U nderstand the con cep t o f su pp ly and dem and.
D eterm in e n et worth.
.
1
.
4
5
1.30
* W D = (M ean E ducational Im portance - M ean L e v e l o f K n o w led g e) x M ean E ducational Importance.
M D > 0 Indicates E ducational N eed .
The rank order of business principle competencies by mean WD is displayed in
the data in Table 26. The data shows that the WD scores of the competencies varied by
4.26 (3.44—.82). The competency with the highest educational need and WD mean was
understand the importance o f cooperatives in Montana’s value-added industry, with a
mean WD of 3.44. The lowest ranking competency define monopoly received a WD o f 0.82. A WD .of below zero indicated that the respondents perceived no educational need
for the competency and it should; therefore, not be included in a value-added curriculum.
66
This was the only competency that received a subzero ranking. The business principle
competency area also had the overall lowest positively ranked competency of any area;
describe the free market system with a mean WD score of 0.36.
T ab le 2 6 . R an k Order o f B u sin ess P rinciple C o m p eten cies B y M ean W eig h ed D isc re p a n cy (W D ).
C o m p eten cies
M ean W D *
U nderstand th e im portance o f coop eratives in
M on tan a's v a lu e-a d d ed industry.
3 .4 4
U nderstand m ark etin g alliances.
3.25
D e fin e h ed g in g as related to cooperatives.
2 .9 9
U nderstand the co n ce p t o f ‘p o o lin g ’ as
related to coop erativ es.
2 .8 2
Id en tify b y cla ssific a tio n coop erative functions (m arketing.
B argain ing, p urch asin g and service).
2.75
D istin g u ish b e tw e e n o p en and clo sed cooperatives.
2.31
D istin g u ish b e tw e e n centralized and fed eralized coop erative.
2.43
Id en tify the ad vantages and disadvantages o f a
coo p erative b u sin ess.
1.64
D istin g u ish b e tw e e n sto ck and n on -stock cooperatives.
1.63
D escrib e p erfe ct and im perfect busin ess.
1.40
D istin g u ish th e d ifferen ces am ong the various types
o f b u sin ess organ iza tio n s structures.
1.39
Id en tify the ad vantages and disadvantages o f a
gen eral partnership.
1.35
D e fin e o lig o p o ly .
1.32
Iden tify the ad vantages and disadvantages o f an
ordinary b u sin ess corporation
1.23
Id en tify the ad vantages and disadvantages o f a proprietorship.
1.12
D escrib e th e free m arket system .
0 .3 6
D e fin e m o n o p o ly .
-0 .8 2
* W D = (M ea n E d ucation al Im portance - M ean L e v el o f K n o w led g e) x M ean E d u cation al Importance.
W D > 0 In d icates E d u cation al N eed .
Data in Table 27 shows the overall WD scores for production and processing,
marketing, entrepreneurship, promotion, basic economic and business principles based on
the respondent’s level of education. An analysis of variance was run on the data to
determine if level of education had a significant impact on the educational needs of the
respondents. Using a significance level of .05, the researcher found that there was not a
significant difference in the educational needs of the respondents with Doctorate or
Masters of Science, Bachelors of Science and High School Degrees. The data shows that
the highest overall WD score was in the competency area of marketing for respondents
with High School degrees (4.25). The lowest WD score was in the area of business
principles for respondents with Doctorate and Masters of Science degrees (2.04). The
overall WD scores for respondents with Doctorate or Masters of Science degrees ranged
from 3.46 to 2.04, with production and processing competencies showing the highest
educational need and business principles having the lowest educational need. For
respondents with Bachelors of Science degrees entrepreneurship competencies had the
highest educational need (4:04) and business principles had the lowest educational need
(2.27). WD scores for respondents with high school degrees ranged from marketing
competencies with a mean of 4.25 to business principles competencies 2.92.
68
T ab le 2 7 . C om p eten cy A rea W eig h ed D iscrepan cy M eans B y R esp ond en ts L e v e l o f E ducation (N = 1 3 3 )
C o m p eten cy A rea
W eig h e d D iscrep a n cy S cores (W D )*
P h D /M S
BS
HS
P roduction and P rocessin g
3 .4 6
3 .7 5
4 .0 0
M arketing
3 .3 6
3 .7 7
4.25
Entrepreneurship ■
.3 .3 0
4 .0 4
4.03
P rom otion
2 .9 8
3 .6 6
3.87
B a sic E c o n o m ic P rinciples
2 .9 2
3 .1 3
2 .7 4
B u sin ess P rinciples
2 .0 4 .
2 .2 7
2.92
* W D = (M ea n E ducational Im portance - M ean L e v el o f K n o w led g e) x M ean E d u cational Importance.
W D > 0 In dicates E ducational N eed .
Upon completion of the survey, the respondents were given an opportunity to
make comments. These comments are listed in Appendix E..
.
69
CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS
AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The purpose of this study was to identify the importance and educational need for
selected competencies by individuals involved in the Montana value-added industry. The
chapter includes four areas, I) Conclusions, 2) Implications, 3) Recommendations, and 4)
Summary.
To fulfill the objectives of this study, individuals in Montana’s value-added
industry were surveyed in order to:
(1)
Identify perceptions of what value-added means in Montana agriculture by those
individuals involved in the value-added industry.
(2)
Determine the level of knowledge of selected value-added competencies of those
individuals involved in Montana’s value-added industry.
(3)
Determine the educational importance of selected value-added competencies.
(4)
Determine the sources of information in which value-added knowledge was
obtained by those individuals involved in the value-added industry.
(5)
Determine the competencies needed in a community-based value-added
curriculum.
70
Conclusions
Based on the objectives of the study and data analysis, the following conclusions
were drawn:
(1) Based on WD scores, there is an educational need for value-added competencies in
the areas of production and processing, marketing, promotion, entrepreneurship,
basic economic, and business principles.
(2) Competencies with positive WD scores should be included in a community-based
value-added curriculum. The higher the positive WD of a competency, a higher
priority of training should be given to the competency.
(3) Based on significance of scores from an analysis of variance of WD and educational
level, the respondent’s level of education does not effect their educational needs.
(4) The majority of the respondents received their value-added educational information
by attending seminars, from previous educational experience or the Montana
Department of Agriculture.
(5) Based on a frequency score, value-added was defined as the practice of processing a
primary commodity in some way so that value is added to the initial commodity. The
area o f agriculture that the respondents were involved in did not effect the way that
they defined value-added.
(6) Respondents were most knowledgeable of basic economic principle competencies
and least knowledgeable of business principles..
(7) The majority of people surveyed were involved, in the production, or marketing area
of agriculture.
71
Implications
The data collected for this study allowed the researcher to determine the following
implications:
(1) It appears that Montana County Extension Agents do not provide sufficient valueadded information to those individuals involved in Montana’s value-added industry
.
*
or individuals involved in Montana’s value-added industry do not utilize their County
Extension Agent.
(2) Based on comments made by some respondents, in addition to educational
competencies, a value-added curriculum should include hands-on experience.
(3) An overall weighed discrepancy (WD) score of 2.83, for all the competencies
included in the survey showed that there is an educational need for a value-added
curriculum, however, based on Borich’s model the range in WD scores is +20 to -4,
it is therefore difficult to estimate the importance of the educational need WD score.
(4) The small amount of variance in the WD scores can be attributed to the researcher’s
self selected population.
Recommendations
The following recommendations are a result of the findings of this study. The follow-up
of these recommendations will improve and enhance Montana’s value-added industry.
(1) Based on the WD scores, a community based value-added curriculum should be
developed using the positive WD scored competencies.
(2) Based on comments made by respondents that relate to Section I of the survey asking
respondent to indicate \yhat definition of value-added best represents their
understanding of the concept, a Delphi panel should be created and a working
definition of the concept of value-added as it relates to Montana agriculture should be
created.
.
(3) Based on the fact that only 19.2% of the respondents received their value-added
information from County Agents, a study should be conducted to determine if County
Extension Agents do not have sufficient value-added educational resources and/or
those individuals involved in the value-added industry utilize their County Extension
Agents.
(4) Based on the fact that 60.0% of the respondents received their value-added
information from seminars, value-added seminars addressing information that relates .
to the highest ranked WD scores should be created and conducted. The areas that
should be addressed in value-added seminars are production and processing
competencies that dealt with regulations, marketing competencies that dealt with
market timing, recognizing potential customers and developing sales and advertising
programs as indicated in the promotion competency area, and competencies from the
entrepreneurship competency area that dealt with what type of products would be
successful in Montana’s value-added industry. Competencies dealing with basic
economic and business principles should have the lowest educational priority.
73
(5) A Montana Department of Agriculture and/or Montana State University Extension
value-added agriculture specialist should be hired to serve as a resource base and
liaison for individuals involved in Montana’s value-added industry.
(6) Value-added educational courses should be integrated into Montana State University
agricultural business, education, and economics courses. A course specifically
developed to educate students on value-added agriculture, or value-added •
information integrated into existing course would fulfill this recommendation.
(7) Based on WD scores of competencies that related to cooperative principles, a valueadded cooperative should be created to provide those individuals that are currently
involved of those individuals that wish to be involved in Montana’s value-added
industry with value-added and cooperative educational resources.
Summary
The findings of study indicate that there is an educational need for select
competencies in Montana’s value-added industry. The competencies with positive WD
scores should be included in a community based value-added curriculum. A lack of
resources provided by the Montana Department of Agriculture and County Agents
indicates that resources need to be made available to these agencies in addition to the
individuals involved in the industry. Following the recommendations put forth by the
researcher will enhance Montana’s value-added industry and increase the
competitiveness of Montana’s value-added products.
74
BIBLIOGRPAHY
AgriData (1986). Marketing and Financial Planning Workshop. Milwaukee: AgriData
Network Resources, Inc.
Borich, G.D. (1980). A Needs Assessment Model For Conducting Follow-Up Studies.
Journal of Teacher Education. 31 (3). 39-42.
Bahn, H., Guthner, J., Rust, C., and Scholtzko, R.T, eds. (1988). Marketing of
Agricultural Products: A Curriculum of Study. Western Extension Marketing
Committee, Montana State University.
Borg, W.R. and Gall, M. D. (1983). Educational Research. New York: Longman
Publishing.
Canada-Saskatchewan Agri-Food Innovation Agreement.
Fund Plans and Programs.
U 997V A gri-F ood Tnnnvatinn
Canada-Saskatchewan Agri-Food Innovation Agreement. (1997). New Attitudes.
Duncan, A. (1996, September). Private-public food and ag center to aid economy.
Oregon State University Hot Topics. Corvallis, OR.: Oregon State University
News and Communication Services.
Extension Service, Arizona. (1997,. September). New Gates Through Old Fences [OnIine]. Available: http://ag.arizona.edu/AREC/VAA.
Extension Service, University of Wisconsin. (1997). Professional Development.
Finch,.C.R. and Crunkilton, J.R. (1984). Curriculum Development in Vocational and
Technical Education. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc.
Gentle, T., (1997). Pulp Findings. Oregon’s Ag Progress Magazine. Spring 1997 P. 13.
Harkin5T. (1997). Adding value to agriculture. In Touch With Iowa. [On-line].
■ Available: http://ftp.senate.gov/member/ia/harkin/general/farm2.htm.
Humphrey, J. K., Birkenholz, R.J., Harris, C. R. (1991) Exploring Agriculture in America
vol. 23 (I). Columbia: Instructional Materials Laboratory.
Idaho State Department of Agriculture. (1997, August). MarUetingIdaho Agriculture
vol. 9, 2. Boise, ID; Division of Marketing and Support Services.
75
Idaho State Department of Agriculture. (1997). Idaho; Marketing Food and Agriculture.
Boise, ID; Division of Marketing and Support Services.
Issac, S. and Micheal, W.B. (1971). Handbook in Research in Evaluation. San Diego:
EdITS Publishing.
Johnson, R. (1996). North Dakota Department of Agriculture. North Dakota Department
of Agriculture Marketing Plan 1197-99 Biennium.
Kawasaki, J.L (1994). Information-related competencies for Montana extension service
professionals. Master’s theses. Agricultural and Technology Education, Montana
State University-B ozeman.
Knerr, V. L. (1996). A Needs Assessment of Integrated Management Education
Activites as seen by Cattle Producers. Master’s professional paper, Agricultural
and Technology Education, Montana State University-Bozeman.
Kourilsky, M., Allen, C., Bocage, A., Waters, G., and Clow, J. (1995). The New Youth
Entrepreneur. Camden: Education, Training and Enterprise Center, Inc.
McCain, RA., (1997). Essential Principles of Economics, a Hypermedia Text: The
Value-Added Method. Drexel University. [On-line], Available:
http ://www.drexel.edu/top/prin/txt.html.
McClay, D.R. (1978). National Ag Occupations Competency Study. Washington D.C.:
US. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Occupational and Adult
Education Branch.
Meyer, E.C. and Allen, K.R., (1994). Entrepreneurship and Small Business
Management. New York: Glencoe Publishing.
Montana Agricultural Statistics Service.. (1997, November). Montana Ag Information
Statistics.
Montana Agricultural Statistics Service. (1996). Montana Agricultural Statistics. 1996.
Montana Agricultural Statistics Service. (1997). Montana Agricultural Statistics. 1997.
Montana Department of Agriculture.. (1996). Value-AddedMontanaNewsletter. Spring
1997. Helena, MT; Agricultural Development Division.
Montana Department of Agriculture. (1996). Value-AddedMontanaNewsletter. Fall
1997. Helena, MT; Agricultural Development Division.
76
Montana Department of Agriculture. (1996). Value-Added Montana Newsletter.
Summer 1997. Helena, MT; Agricultural Development Division.
Montana Department of Agriculture. (1996). Value-AddedMontanaNewsletter. Spring
1996. Helena, MT; Agricultural Development Division.
Montana Department of Agriculture. (1996). Value-AddedMontanaNewsletter. Fall
1996. Helena, MT; Agricultural Development Division.
Montana Grain Growers Association. (1997, December). Boyles Elected President of
MT Grain Growers Association. Montana Grain News issue. 21.
North Dakota State University/ ND Agricultural Experiment Station/ NDSU Extension
Service. (1995). Building North Dakota’s Foundation—Food Farms and
Families.
Pucell, TC., Eddleman B.R., and Kunz, TT (1982). Value-Added in United States
Agriculture Relative to the Cropland Base. Work Force. Investment and Debt.
Interregional Cooperative Publication of the State Agricultural Experiment
Stations.
Torok, S., Hambley, D., and Ahleschwede, R. (1988). Value-Added Study: Industry
Agricultural Industry Opportunities. University of Wyoming College of
Agriculture and Cooperative Extension Service. B-898.15
Torok, S., Hambley, D., and Ahleschwede, R. (1988). Value-Added Study: Industry
Agricultural Industry Opportunities Resource Directory for Value-Added
Agriculture. University of Wyoming College of Agriculture and Cooperative
Extension Service. B-S.98.17
Torok, S., Hambley, D., and Ahleschwede, R. (1988). Value-Added Study: Industry
Agricultural Industry Opportunities Bibliography on Value-Added Agriculture.
University of Wyoming College of Agriculture and Cooperative Extension
Service. B-8.98.16
United States Department of Agriculture, NRICGP Program Description. (1997,
September). 71.0 Value-Added Product Research. [On-line].. Available:
http://www.reeusda.gdv/new/nri/progdesc/valadd.htm.
Vision 2005 task force. (1998) Montana Farmer Stockman. 18.
Wessel, K.L., (1993, February). Value-added adds to your profits. American Vegetable
Grower. 33-35.
I
APPENDICES
78
\
APPENDIX A
VALUE-ADDED EDUCATIONAL
COMPETENCIES SURVEY
%
Cf
OM
0CMr*
!I
1
5
Ln
VO
gc-
in
H
%
Pl
C
c - Lt
Montana Value-Added
Educational Competencies
Survey
Ic
E(V)
to ***
Fm
CO
M
u>
4>
O
<
Pl
CO
73
m
T3
r~
■<
Montana State University
Department of Agricultural Education
College of Agriculture
'dO N
I
Survey Purpose: Ilic purpose o f this study is to identify' the important
educational competencies needed in Montana’s value-added industry, in
order to create a community based value-added curriculum.
Section I
Please circle the number that corresponds to tire definition of
value-added that best represents your understanding o f the concept as
related to Montana agriculture.
Example:
I.
Value-added means the processes o f creating a new agriculutral
product.
f 2. J Value-added refers to the practices that take place after thc'pfoduct .
^ ^ leaves the farm-gate. .
Therefore definition IHbest represents my understanding of value-added as
related to Montana agriculture. •
S e c tio n I I
Please rank the following competencies based on your experiences.
Indicate the educational importance o f each competency in Montana’s
value-added industry, with I being not important and 5 being most
important. In addition indicate your current knowledge o f die competency,
with I representing no knowledge of the competency and 5 representing
that you have extensive knowledge of the competency.
EDUCATIONAL IMPORTANCE
T- Not Important
2- Less Important
3- Somewhat Important . 4- More Important
5- Very Important .
LEVEL OF KNOWLEDGE
1- No Knowledge
2- Less Knowledgeable
3- Somewhat Knowledgeable
4- More Knowledgeable
5- Very Knowledgeable
Competencies:
PRODUCTION AND PROCESSING"
Tlic Ability to:
Educational
■ Importance
Level of
Knowledge
• Value-added Dcfintions:
1.
2.
3.
4.
1. Identify various forms of processing.
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
Value-added is a concept generally applied to manufacturing. It i s "
simply Ilie value o f the finished product adjusted for the value of the
raw materials consumed or modified in the manufacturing process.
2. Identify the reason why products arc
processed.'
/
1 2 3 4 5
I 2 3 4 5
Value-added refers to the practice of processing a primary commodity
in some way so that value is added to the initial commodity.
3 .. Understand steps hi processing a
product from producer to consumer.
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
Value-added is ‘moving up the food chain’— byproducts from
processing, industrial use "of farm products, new crops and livestock,
and the people involved in it all.
4. Understand how food processing
enhances product.quality.
.1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
5. Identify the ways that food
products can be preserved.
1 2 3 4 5
I 2 .3 4 5
.1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
Tlic concept o f value-added, as applied to the agricultural Industry,
typically refers to"the increased value assumed by raw agricultural
conunoditics as they move through the nation’s food and fiber
processing, marketing, and distribution system.
6. Understand how to use
chemical preservatives. ■
PRODUCTION AND PROCESSING
CONTINUED
Tlic Ability To:
Educational
Importance
Level of
Knowledge
7. Identify the correct packaging
products to use.
12 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
.EDUCATIONAL IMPORTANCE
1- Not Important
2- Less Important
3- Somewhat Important
4- More Important
5- Very Important
LEVEL OE KNOWLEDGE
1- No Knowledge
2- Less Knowledgeable
' 3- Somewhat Knowledgeable
4- More Knowledgeable
5- Very Knowledgeable
MARKETING CONTINUED
8. Understand the value o f packaging ■
in marketing a product.
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
9. Identify regulations required to
produce a safe food product.
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
Tlic Ability To:
Educational
Importance
Level of
Knowledge
3. Determine when to market a product.
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
4. Determine how to market a product.
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
10. Understand food safety
regulations.
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5,
5. Understand marketing procedures.
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
11. Identify die agencies that
determine food safety regulations.
12 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
6. Understand and apply the basic
principles of economics to
distribution and. marketing of product.
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
7. Determine marketing practices.
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 45
8. Determine market tuning.
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 45
9. Evaluate current market
trends and prices.
1 2 3 4 5
I 2 3 .4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
12. Identify tariffs and shipping
regulations that apply to the
value-added industry.
13. Identify what constitutes an organic
food and how they arc regulated.
12 3 4 5
12 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
12 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
15. Estimate quality o f product
1 2 3 4 5
12 3 4 5
10. Analyze trends in market
demand as affected by the
local market. '
Educational
Importance'
Level of
Knowledge
11. Determine how product prices
arc affected by Federal price
supports and marketing orders. '
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
12. Identify international markets.
1 2 3 4 5
I 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
12 3 4 5
13. Identify suggestive selling techniques
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
14. Give a sales presentation.
12 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
I
14. Understand (lie environmental effects
•o f agri-chemicals.
The Ability To:
I. Identify, compare and contrast
major methods o f marketing.
2. Collect and interpret market '
information.
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
ENTREPRENEURSHIP
Tlic Ability To:
Educational
Importance
Level of
Knowledge
I. Identify the advantaged and
disadvantages of entrepreneurship.
1 2 3 4 5
12 3 4 5
2. Analyze personal ability to enter
entrepreneurship.
I 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
3. Analyze personal knowledge of
potential product.
1 2 3 4 5
LEVEL OE KNOWLEDGE
1- No Knowledge
2- Less Knowledgeable
3- Somewhat Knowledgeable
4- More Knowledgeable
5- Very Knowledgeable
.ENTREPRENEURSHIP
CONTINUED
The Ability To:
Educational
Importance
Level of
Knowledge
14, Determine which laws apply to
. business.
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
15. Identify specific applications of
microcomputers in agriculture and
sources of software for these
applications.
1 2 3 4 5
1-2 3 4 5
12 3 4 5
4. Identify value-added occupational
opportunities within Montana.
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
5. Determine niche markets.
12 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
6. Recognize the positive and negative
aspects o f the value-added industry.
12 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
7. Recognize trends in product production
for local, state and national markets.
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
8. Perform a product feasibility
assessment
EDUCATIONAL IMPORTANCE
1- Not Important
2- Less Important
3- Somewhat Important
4- More Important
5- Very Important
oo
K)
PROMOTION
1-2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
Tlic Ability To: ' .
Educational
Importance
Level of
Knowledge
I. Recognize potential customers
identified from market studies.
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
9. Determine type of product desired by
consumer.
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
2. Develop production goals.
1 2 3 4 5
I 2 3 .4 5
10. Dctcimhic .market base.
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
3. Identify available sales tools.
1 2 3 4 5
I 2 3 4 .5
11. Determine long and short term
business goals.
1 2 3 4 5-
1-2 3 4 5
4. Know how to effectively use sales
tools.
1 2 3 4 5
.1 2 3 4 5
12. Keep, use and analyze records.
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
5. .Demonstrate the use of different
types of sales techniques.
1 2 3 4 5
12345'
6. Know the value o f publicity.
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
7. Develop a public relations program.
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
13. Determine when to use professional
services.
1 2 3 4 5
12 3 4 5
PROMOTION CONTINUED
EDUCATIONAL IMPORTANCE
1- Not Important
2- Less Important
3- Somewhat Important
4- More Important
5- Very Important
Tlic Ability To:
Educational
Importance
Level of
Knowledge
8. Develop an advertising plan.
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
9. Prepare product advertisement.'
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4-5
10. Design a sales program.
1-2 3 4 5
12 3 4 5
BASIC ECONOMIC PRINCIPLES
CONTINUED
11. Design an agribusiness display.
12-345
I 2 3 4 5 .
Tlic Ability To:
BASIC ECONOMIC PRINCIPLES
LEVEL OP KNOWLEDGE
1No Knowledge
2- Less Knowledgeable
3- Somewhat Knowledgeable
4- More Knowledgeable
5- Very Knowledgeable
■Educational
Importance
Level o f
Knowledge
■ 11. Understand the roles of prices in
a market.
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
12. Use the futures market as a tool.
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
13. Budget resources iii order, to determine
least cost and maximum return.
1 2 3 4 5
• 1 2 3 4 5
14. Understand changes in die global
economy..
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
15. Negotiate purchase or sale within
a given price structure.
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
Educational
Importance
.Level of
■Knowledge
1. Understand the concept o f supply and ■
demand.
12345'
1 2 3 4 5
2. Understand elasticity o f demand.
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
3. Understand fixed and variable costs.
1 2 3 4 5
12 3 4 5
4. Determine net worth.
1 2 3 4 5
12 3 4 5
5. Determine net agri-business and/or
farm income.
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
6. Estimate opportunity costs.
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
Tlie Ability To:
Educational
Importance
Level of
Knowledge
7. Develop a cash flow projection.
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
I. Dcfmc monopoly.
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
8. Understand how to divide profits
and losses;
2. Define oligopoly.
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5-
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
3. Describe the free market system.
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
12 3 4 5
TlicAbiIity To:
9. Understand the concept o f product
substitution.
10. Estimate the economic value o f '
alternatives.
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5 ■
. BUSINESS PRINCIPLES '
4. Describe perfect and imperfect
. business.
BUSINESS PRINCIPLES
CONTINUED
EDUCATIONAL IMPORTANCE
1- Not Important ■
2- Less Important
3- Somewhat Important
4- More Important
5- Very Important
LEVEL OF KNOWLEDGE '
1- No Knowledge
2- Less Knowledgeable
3- Somewhat Knowledgeable
4- More Knowledgeable
5- Very Knowledgeable
Tlic Ability To:
Educational
Importance
Level of
Knowledge
5. Distinguish Ilic differences among
the various types o f business organization
structures.
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
BUSINESS PRINCIPLES
CONTINUED
6. Identify the advantages and
disadvantages o f a proprietorship.
1 2 3 4 5
I 2 3 4 5
Tlic Ability To:
Educational
Importance
Level of
Knowledge
7. Identify the advantages and
disadvantages of a general partnership.
1 2 3 4 5
I 2 3 4 5
16. Define hedging as related to
cooperatives.
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
17. Understand marketing alliances.
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
8. Identify the advantages and
disadvantages of an ordinary business
corporation.
1 2 3 4 5
I 2 3 4 5
ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS ARE WELCOME!
9. Identify the advantages and
disadvantages o f a cooperative business.
1 2 3 4 5
I 2 3 4 5
10. Identify by classification cooperative
functions (marketing, bargaining,
purchasing, and service).
1 2 3 4 5
.1.2 3 4 5
11. Distinguish between centralized and
federalized cooperatives.
1234.5
I 2 3 4 5'
12. Distinguish between open and
closed cooperatives.
1 23 4 5
13. Distinguish between stock and
non-stock cooperatives.'
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
14. Understand the importance .of
cooperatives in Montana’s value-added
industry.
1 2 3 4 5
I 2 3 4 5
.15. Understand the concept o f ‘pooling’
as related to cooperatives.
1 2 3 4 5
I 2 3 4 5
.
I 2 3. 4 5"
DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION
THANK. YOU FOR YOUR TIM E!!!
1. Please indicate the areas of agriculture in which you arc involved in:
_____ Production
__ _ Processing
____ Marketing
_____Manufacturing
_____Sales
_____ Distribution •
2.
a.
Where is your home located:
Farm
b. Rural Area
3.
If you live on a farm or ranch how many acres arc included in your'opcration?
a. Do not live on a farm or ranch
b. 10-50 acres
c. 50-500 acres
d. 500-1,000 acres
c. Over 100 acres
4.
What is the population o f the town closest to your home?
a. Under 2,500
b. 2,501- 10,000
c. 10,001-25,000
d. 25,001-100,00
c. Over 100,000
c. f own/City
5. I low many years have you been involved in Montana agriculture?
a. Less than 5 years
b. 5-10 years
c. More than 10 years
6.
7.
a.
b.
c.
d.
c.
Would you like a copy o f the survey results?
a. Yes
b. No
Wliat is'your highest level of education?
Less than High School .
High School Degree
Bachelor’s Degree
Master’s Degree
PhD.
8.
Where do you receive your value-added educational information?
____Previous Educational Experience.
___County Agent
____Local Library
____Montana Department O f Agriculture
____Seminars and/or Conferences
____Other_________________________
Y
"86
APPENDIX B
COVER LETTER
87
D epartm ent o f E ducation
Agria;!tursl end Technology Education
Cheever HoIl
MSU • Bozeman
Eozemon1MT 55717-0374
B O Z E M A N
Telephone (406) 554-3201
Fax
(406) 554-6656
FIELD(Company)
FIELD(Name)
FIELD(Address)
FIELD(City, State)
FIELD(Zip)
DearFIELD (Form alN am e),
Agriculture is the number one industry in Montana and Montanans pride themselves on the
state’s regional, national and international agricultural reputation. With the demand for high
value exports on the rise, now, more than ever, Montanans need to be informed o f the changes
that are taking p lace in their traditional agricultural infrastructure: To meet the demands for
value-added products, Montana must provide its citizens with the educational resources needed
to compete in the increasingly popular value-added industry.
As a graduate student working towards m y Master’s Degree in Agricultural Education at
Montana State U niversity I am conducting a survey to identify the important educational
competencies needed in Montana’s value-added industry. You are one o f the select individuals
■that has been chosen to complete this survey. A s a representative o f the industry your input is
important in order to gain a perception o f the skills and knowledge needed in Montana’s valueadded industry.
.
The survey should take about 15 minutes to complete. A ll information gained from the survey
will be kept confidential and w ill not be used for any purpose unrelated to this study. The code
number on the survey is used for follow up and recording purposes only. I encourage any
additional com m ents in the space provided.
I would like to thank you in advance for your, cooperation in aiding the advancement o f
agricultural education in our state. Your prompt, honest responses are important to the future o f
' Montana’s value-added industry. Your completed survey can be taped or stapled shut and
■dropped in your local mailbox, postage w ill be paid. Please return the survey by M arch 27,
1998.
Please feel free to contact me with any additional questions.or concerns you may have- (406)
994-3691. T h an k you again for your time and cooperation!
Sincerely
Carole Skeeters
Graduate Student
Van Shelhamer
Professor -
88
APPENDIX C
REMINDER POSTCARD
89
D epartm ent o f E d u cation
Agriculture! end Technology Educerion
Cheever Ho)!
MSU • Bozemon
Bozeman, MT S97]7-037-i
B O Z E M A N
Telephone (-106) 994-3201
Tax
(406) 994-6696
DATE
FIELD(Company Name)
FIELD(Name)
FIELD(Address)
FIELD(City)
FIELD(Zip)
Dear FIELD(Formal Name),
Approximately one month ago you received a survey entitled “Montana Value-Added
Educational Competencies Survey,’’ and to date I have not received your response. I understand
that this is a busy time o f year for most agriculturalists, however your response is crucial. The
■information that I receive from the survey is an essential part o f my graduate thesis. In order to
fulfi ll the requirements for my Master’s in Agricultural Education I must submit my completed
thesis this summer.
The survey asks you to identify the educational importance o f selected competencies in
Montana’s value-added industry, as well as indicating your current level o f knowledge o f the
competencies. In the chance that you have misplaced the survey I have enclosed an additional
copy. P lease take 15 minutes to complete the survey as soon as possible. The survey can be
taped or stapled shut and dropped in your local mailbox, no postage necessary!
In order for your input to be included in m y study I m ust receive your survey by M av
15 ,1998. Y ou are part o f a small sample o f individuals I have chosen to take part in this study,
therefore, your input is crucial to its completion and success. As a representative o f Montana’s
value-added industry I would appreciate your cooperation.
I f I can be o f any assistance to you, feel free to contact me at (406) 994-3691 with •
questions or concerns. Ifyou have already completed the survey, Thank You!) Please do your
part to help aid the advancement o f agricultural education in Montana.
Thank you again for your valuable time and cooperation!
Sincerely,
Carole Skeeters
Graduate Student Agriculutural Education
Dr. Van Shelhamer
Professor
Agricultural Education
-•
90
APPENDIX D
SECOND MAILING COVER LETTER
91
Carole Skeeters
Agricultural Education
126 Cheever Hall
PO B ox 173740
Bozeman, MT
59717-3740
HELD(Name)
FJELp(Address)
FIELD (City, State)
. FJEGb(Zip)I .
M arch 2 7 , 1 9 9 8
R e c e n tly I sen t y o u a survey entitled M ontana V alu e-A d ded
E ducational C o m p e te n c ie s S urvey. T o date-I liave not received your reply. I f
you have not a lread y fille d o u t the survey, cou ld y ou p le a se take -15 m inu tes to
do so? Y o u w e r e c h o se n a s a representative o f M ontana’s value-added industry
to fill out the su r v e y and y o u r input is important! I w ou ld greatly appreciate
you r prom pt and h o n est r e sp o n se . A ll inform ation w ill b e kept con fidential and
w ill not be u sed fo r any p u rp o se unrelated to this study.
I f y o u n e e d an ad d ition al copy o f the survey or h a v e any q uestions, .
p lease feel free to co n ta ct m e at (406) 9 9 4 -3 6 9 1 .
T h an k -you fo r h e lp in g to aid (lie advancem ent o f agricultural education
in Montana.'
Sincerely,
Carole S keelers
M ontana State U niversity
. Agricultural E d ucation
92
APPENDIX E
COMMENTS
93
Comments
-I. I- Research on laws that hamper business and agri business situation,
a. State level
2. With NAFTA-GATT fast track has to be attended to.
3. Also lots on consumer/customer
a. service
b. relationship building, personal and global
c. commitments
2. Change the.form, shape, and location ofa raw farm product.
3. We need more help for start up value-added industry in Montana. Department of Ag
is helpful but they have not enough money. Dept, of Commerce in one word
“stinks!” Gov. Rocicot needs another 8 years and we would be in good shape.
4. Fm going to the Dept, of Ag co-op meeting to leam.
5. Carole-1 hope you get some good results. When you look at my answers, please keep
in mind that I am in the meat business and not very experienced at that! IfI were
designing an Ag Education curriculum I would expose students to all area and then
provide opportunities and then allow for individual study one or two areas. There is
just too much information and that’s often changing for anyone to be knowledgeable
in all areas.
94
6. I feel that the success of any business operation is determined by the amount of time
and dedication a person is willing to put into it. This, of course, is dependent upon
adequate financial ability.
7. I like the idea o f cooperatives, !think. I need to know a lot more though, there is a
meeting in April that I cannot attend. I hope there will be more.
8. I am not a good candidate for your survey. Those that want to succeed in a business
will- the tools are already there. Force-feeding does not make winners! Some
calluses, losses and risk taking brings the cream to the top- in any business! Why
should agriculture be any different?
9. This business has been operating as is since -1922 as a candy store and soda fountain.
We are not really involved in agriculture. I have been here for 27 years.
10- #1—Financing =capital (much) are the primary needs of any value-added business.
#2—Resources = who knows what and how to get them to share.
#3—Networking = working with others to achieve goals.
#4—Money = Money
11. In my opinion, any increase in the product value is not “value-added” unless the
increase is solely realized by the “producer.”
12. As a graduate o f MSU in AgBus I am really deficient in skills needed for business
survival. I have has to work and research to get where I am. In my opinion, too
much emphasis was placed on economics and models. Far too little (if any) attention
was given to practicality and real world survival and advancement skills.
13. This is confusing. Obviously the more information you have in anything the better.
We Ieam when we have to solve problems. Now I do not have time for formal
95
education—So it is education by doing or association. IfI would have known what I
was going to do in high school I would have planned differently in education.
14. Carole-1 am sorry I have not returned the survey yet, but the postcard reminded me.
I have been trying to start my own business producing wheat flour, whole flour and
cookie and cake mixes, but I have run into several problem areas. Are you aware of
any departments there at MSU that do any nutrition tests for labeling? I would love
different info if you have any national or international contacts for value-added
products from Montana. I am open to any suggestions. My mom does wheat
weaving and we were also wondering about trying to get that are into the
marketplace. Thanks in Advance.
I would like info on packaging dry flour mixes if you have any.
■ Would love info on this for wheat products.
15. Sorry this is late. We were away.
Some questions: Obviously the more knowledge and information one has the better
the chances are on any issue. .
1. Is the competency referred to a theoretical competency.required by the
industry?
2. Is the current level of knowledge a reference to the respondent’s possession of
a particular skill, or knowledge of how much skill the industry has? (In other
words, am I rating myself or am I rating the industry?)
16. Education is key; there is always room to learn more.
17.1 am a one-man operation; most of what you are asking does not apply to my
situation.
96
18.1 do not understand how to answer these questions as they pertain to value-added. I
am the State Statistician for Montana Ag Services. I am not a farmer and don’t feel
that I should provide feedback on this survey. If you would like to talk about the
survey please call Thanks.
19. Received 3/26 in Portland, OR
20. My value-added educational info comes from my basic college education. I have
farm for a living and believe that the greatest opportunity for me is with the New
Barley Malting facility being built in Chotaeu, MT. Now Fll know that I am using
MT grains in my beer. The way that I answered the first column was by “rating how
much I consider education to be the factor in being able to 16. Define hedging as
related... I hope that is how you intended it.
21. There really isn t much in here that is not important or very important and also needs
to be very knowledge level to the producer and marketer. This is all about marketing
and profitability.
•
•
22. We are a small organic farm/processing company manufacturing herbal teas for a
healthy and specialty food market.
23. What person or group would be the target of such a curriculum? I have a hard time
answering these survey points because I am not sure whom it is that you would be
educating, children, adults, adults in the “value-added” industry. . . ?
24. It’s vertical integration.
25. Sorry for the lateness in doing this survey.
26. Please update your mailing list.
27. I .
Mr. Rubino no longer works for the FLCG.
97
.
2. I completed the form even though I felt completely lost—
3. Don’t believe this packing plant constitutes “value-added.” There is no change to
the basic cherry! A “value-added” industry in my opinion would be a cheny
jam/preserves or juice business. I believe your questions should all be addressed
in college level classes.
28. Not quite sure why you had the US EPA on your mailing list for this survey—We
enforce and regulate Environmental laws, some affecting agriculture, in Montana—
use our response as you choose.
29. We received your survey in April to be completed by us. We are an organization to
protect the rights of the Disabled and individuals with mental illness. After looking
through your survey, we do not think that it pertains to us, so we are returning it to
you.- We are sorry that we could not be helpful in you study. Your Truly.
30. This questionnaire is overwhelming and confusing in layout. Ijust received the
questionnaire at a new address. Prior to my present job I was more involved with
economics and community development—this has more application at this level.
3 1. Dear Carole Skeeters, Value-added industry and educational competencies, two
topics, 180 degrees from one another in land locked Montana. Being value-added
requires changing to customer service. Educating “The RedHead Stranger for Blue
Rock, Montana” on the basic aspects of customer service may be a larger than life
project for a student and her Masters. Reaching out regionally and globally will be a
tough task for lots OfMontana producers due to this high independence thing. Once
Montana knows the world is willing in consumer service, customer commitment and
customer relationship building most of value-added industry will work. The word
98
CUSTOMER is the only word above value-added in the office door. I your letter and
in your mind keep customers first and no task will fail. Remember listen to the
consumer wasn’t of how, what, when and where. Be a server. Be a provider. Be a
winner!