Carol Cone believes that having a profound purpose that employees buy into is integral for businesses to fulfill their full potential. She discusses her work as the CEO of Carol Cone On Purpose, where she helps build partnerships between companies, brands and social issues for deep business and societal impact.

 Tom:                                   I’m Tom Martin, and joining us for this latest conversation in our purpose-driven business series is Carol Cone, founder of the firm Carol Cone On Purpose.

                                    She is regarded the mother of social purpose, working for 25 years to build partnerships between companies, brands and social issues for deep business and societal impact.

                                    Welcome, Carol.

Carol Cone:              Thank you for having me to the show, and I’m thrilled to be talking about my favorite topic.

Tom:                          Well, let me ask you about that. What is a purpose-driven business? Isn’t the purpose to serve the bottom line, the shareholder? Is there something beyond that?

Carol Cone:              Oh, actually, I’m so glad that you asked that, because it was Milton Friedman, in the late ‘70s, who said, “The purpose of the corporation is just to serve the shareholders.” But that — in a world where we have total transparency, and we have so much choice, and we also recognize that we have climate challenges and social challenges and, you know, economic challenges, that — companies today who are going to win in the marketplace, whether they are B-to-C or B-to-B, they stand for something beyond the bottom line that’s based in humanity.

                                    And simply put, the companies today are recognizing, “What’s our core competency, and how can we take that competency and apply it either (to) society or the environment?” And when they do that, they have a profound purpose, a reason for being, that lights up their employees, their customer relationships, their community relationships, their consumer relationships. It really allows them to fulfill their full potential.

Tom:                          The Unilever CEO, Paul Polman, has said that what people think, say and do should be aligned. And that might be obvious, but is this the essence of a business that has worked to develop and express its purpose?

Carol Cone:              Well, let me first say that I had the joyous opportunity to work with Unilever. I got to meet Paul Polman a number of times. And he actually — in all the thousands of encounters he’s had with people, he sent people my way, so he does recognize that I do have this expertise in purpose.

                                    And (with) this alignment of what the company stands for, you can’t just say, “We stand for it.” You have to act. And so, when he said that people should think, say and do and have this alignment, and when you have a purpose that is beyond making a profit, that’s where you truly, again, ignite your stakeholders — not just shareholders, your stakeholders — to truly perform to, you know, the wildest levels beyond their wildest dreams.

Tom:                          Carol, I wonder: How many of us know whether our company stands for something?

Carol Cone:              It’s a great question. And I believe that — you know, I’m a third-generation entrepreneur. And you know, I always — when I started my company — and you were very kind; you mentioned 25 years. I started my company in 1980. (But) it’s still young, and I didn’t know what I stood for, but about three years into it, I recognized that I wanted — I love branding, I love marketing and I love the social challenges of the day.

                                    I grew up in the ‘60s and the ‘70s, and we had the Vietnam War in our face, and we had the Civil Rights movement, and I just felt that companies could take their assets and make them work harder for society. And so, my purpose, (which) I found when I was very young, was to help elevate the purpose of companies and brands, as well as professionals, students and such.

                                    So, a company must understand what it, you know — (you must) stand for something, because you talk about it as that North Star. Like, “Why are we doing what we’re doing?”

Tom:                          Mm-hmm.

Carol Cone:              And, when you do that, and then you add dimensionality to it, it just becomes this ignition for just performance and possibility.

Tom:                          Well, let’s say that we want to build a purpose-driven organization from the ground up. What building blocks, what kinds of tools do we need to make that happen?

Carol Cone:              Well, it’s important — and usually, if you’re going to build up from the ground up, you’re probably a small company or you found the company — I’ll tell you a great story. It’s a very — it’s fascinating. It’s about a company called Charlotte Pipe.

                                    And Charlotte Pipe makes pipes. They make clay pipes and metal pipes for water and for, you know, basically, mostly water municipalities and for people who have farms and things like that. And you know, you think, “How can a company that makes pipes have a purpose?” But, you know, it was about — it was a family-owned firm (that) decided one day to say, “You know what? We’re going to make the best pipes ever in the world. And not only are we going to make them so that they are just the top-quality and all the parts and bits, you know, they integrate with each other and they perform; we’re going to give great warranties, and we’re also going to have great, great policies for our employees. So, our employees not only get a fair wage, and they get, you know, health benefits and such, but they know, at the end of the day, that they can stand behind (us) no matter where they are in the process of making these pipes, because we’re going to make the best pipes in the world.”

And so, sometimes, your purpose can be something as simple as just terrific quality, and then, making sure that your employees — because employees are the number-one stakeholder to support and to build companies that truly over-perform.

So they just did that, and they had these great values, and they live the values, they live their integrity daily, and it was an amazing company, and they made pipes. You know, that’s a lot different than when we think about Unilever, Unilever and Dove.

You know, Dove was basically soap. It was a white bar of soap. It really didn’t have many attributes that differentiated it. But one day, some of the marketers at Dove, they made a major piece of research around the globe. And, they have like, oh, I don’t know, hundreds and hundreds of pages from this research, and they were asking about women and beauty and how they (use) soap, about themselves, (and there) was this one little, little, teeny, tiny fact, and the fact was that it was something like only 4% of women worldwide feel beautiful. And so, some really, really smart person at Unilever said, “You know what? We’re going to take that fact — because we’re selling to women, right? And we want women to feel good.” And they started the campaign for Real Beauty, and it’s been around now for over, oh, like, 15 or 18 years now. And they supported all sorts of ways, in a realistic way, to help women feel confident and good about their selves, and that beauty was on the inside; it wasn’t just on the outside.

And that became one of the first purpose-driven brands at Unilever. And now, Unilever is certainly the gold-standard company that anybody will study to truly understand (purpose-driven businesses). They have brands that have super-human powers, and they have brands that have — that take on qualities that might be one step remote, but their purpose is to make sustainable living commonplace. And they touch 2.5 billion — with a “b” — people a day with their products, whether it’s Knorr soups or whether it’s Dirt Is Good laundry detergent or whether it’s Ben & Jerry’s ice cream or whether it’s Lifebuoy soap.

And each one of those brands — they have about 30 brands that are now purposeful, (and) those brands grow about 70% faster than their non-purpose brands, and they return over 75% of the profit to the company, because they stand for something more than just features and benefits.

Tom:                          I’m guessing that it takes a lot of thought, discussion and debate to work through this process, and there may be some impatience involved in the meantime.

Carol Cone:              Absolutely. Yeah.

Tom:                          How much time, reasonably, should we give ourselves to allow for the development of a clear statement of purpose?

Carol Cone:              Well, first of all, I love that you said “debate,” because a purpose is only as good if it’s authentic to the organization, its values and the people within that organization.

                                    So, we’ve had — we’ve worked with companies to develop their purpose, and we’ve also helped companies evolve their purpose, so we can study them. And it takes anywhere from — to do it well — six months to years. It could be couple of years.            

                                    And what’s really important — because you asked about, like, “What building blocks and tools do you need?” You need to ask some really good questions, and it needs to be not just the C-suite — not just the CEO, the CMO, the chief human resources person, the CFO, etc. It also needs the guy and the gal on the factory floor. And it’s harder to get them, because they may not have computers. 

                                    But, you know, we have worked with a company that has 47,000 people around the globe; they have over 100 different locations. And we did everything, from — we did phone interviews with their entire leadership team around the globe (for) an hour each, and that was 200 (people). So, that was a lot (of) time. But I will tell you, I had set — that company was so authentic, and it had such ethos and soul. I only had — out of a few hundred, because I did most of those calls, I only had five (dodge), five that were really boring.

                                    Now, in addition to that, we went around the globe, and we travelled to eight different locations, from China to Malaysia to Costa Rica and Brazil and the United States and Ireland and such, and we did workshops and focus groups. And so, we have, like, the, you know, the leadership interviews; we had the focus groups. And the focus groups have people from the factory floor.

So, we got conversations going about, you know, “What do we stand for? What’s our core expertise? What’s it like when, on a daily basis, when we’re at our best? What are some of the challenges that (manifest) when we don’t do well? Who do we admire, maybe in our industry or outside of our industry, who truly knows what they stand for and has fabulous cultures and really accelerated sales but who, also, is helping the local community, or who’s got great environmental programs?”

So, there’s more questions than that, but those are some of the core questions you ask. And then you need to debate, and then you need to say, you know, “How, let’s say, boldly, (do) we want to take on the world with our purpose?” Then, we want to take on something that’s more conservative. That’s another part of the tools that we utilize.

We have a process that I developed probably about 25 years ago that, you know, it’s no longer guessing; there’s truly a way that you can be a guide. And so, anybody who’s listening, there are ways to follow so that you’re not just guessing, because you don’t want to guess at this. It’s too important.

Tom:                          I visited your blog, Carol, and I saw that you’ve written that authentic purpose equals thoughtful, real and sustained actions that impact the business internally and externally, while also having that positive impact on society that you talked about earlier. Does this boil down to nurturing a culture of transparency, accountability, honesty and integrity, those kinds of things?

Carol Cone:              Well, when we talk authentic purpose — we did a piece of research. I’ve done about 30 pieces of research over the last 30 years, because I, when I started doing this work, I made the joke that I could have had a conversation about purpose at a table for four or six. And American Express was doing this work early on where they had a promotion where, if you use the American Express card, they would donate a penny or two to the restoration of the Statue of Liberty. And that was kind of the first big “cause program.”

So, in the early days, no one was talking about this. Today, because of the internet, because anybody can check off the reputation of the company — you know, what are the customers saying? What are people, you know — why are they getting three stars or zero stars? Do they, you know, like, do they stand behind their products and services?

                                    So, I — this last summer, I got really, really angry, because there was a lot of, can I say, “purpose washing,” “green washing,” “pink washing.” And part of that also came from this research that we did called the B-to-B Purpose Paradox, and it’s on our website, (at) Carol Cone On Purpose. And we asked businesses in the B-to-B realm — they were financial services, manufacturing, healthcare, technology, etc. — and we said, “Do you have a purpose?” And 86% said, “Yes. We have a purpose. We know what we stand for.”

                                    I was like, “What? There’s no way, because B-to-B world trails B-to-C world.” But when we asked deeper questions and peeled back the onion and we asked, “Do you activate — do you have an authentic purpose that you bring into your employees and your innovation and your operations?” Only 24% truly had activated it.

                                    So, getting back to this essay that I wrote last year about authentic purpose, it does boil down to walking the talk, living your values, integrating why you exist. Like, if you’re going to be Unilever and make sustainable living commonplace, what are your sustainability practices internally? What are your sustainability practices with your supply chain? How do you treat the farmers in Madagascar who are harvesting vanilla beans? You know, do you — is there a fair wage, etc.?

                                    So, you need to walk the talk, and yes, you need a culture that is transparent, that has high integrity, and that there’s honesty. And you know what? You’re not going to be perfect. That’s the other thing I really want to share with anybody listening who’s on a purpose journey. It is a journey. You know, Unilever had — they had a wonderful Dove campaign for Real Beauty, but they also had some missteps with Dove, some big, bad missteps. And — but you know what? Most of the time, their integrity is there, so a consumer or even an employee gives them the benefit of the doubt.

Tom:                          I’m going to dig further into that in just a few minutes. But I want to ask you, first: Has this coronavirus pandemic served to underscore the value and even, maybe, the necessity of engaging in those thoughtful, real and sustained actions that you were talking about?

Carol Cone:              Well, first of all, companies — the first thing that companies had to do during COVID is that they had to address the safety of their employees. And thank God that most companies did. Even if they didn’t have the world’s deepest purpose or greatest community relationships, they recognized that they had to, if they let people work from home — and you saw companies with 50,000, 100,000 employees pivot, almost, on a dime to let people work from home. The greater challenges were companies that had to keep people in their plants, and they had to manufacture and, you know, could they get PPE, and could they socially distance and such.

                                    So, COVID accelerated companies that were values-driven. And, I would say it also accelerated decision-making, which was really, really, really interesting because, you know, companies, per se, the larger they get, the slower they get in decision-making; they get more people involved, (and) they get very conservative. And COVID really pushed companies forward quickly.

                                    So, for example, you had AB InBev that, you know, all of a sudden, they took their manufacturing from beer, and they were making hand sanitizer. Same thing with P&G. They had over 200 different NGOs around the globe they are working with, and they immediately pivoted to help them not only survive but then make, again, PPE, hand sanitizer, things like that.

                                    So, COVID has really brought to the fore (the question), “Why does a business exist?” And companies that truly, truly rose to the occasion and helped their employees and then helped the community and then started helping small businesses survive and really, you know, helped all of us, you know, with mental health problems, or donating a lot of food — I mean, you know, there are so many families going hungry, and then (there were) tons and tons and tons of food drops and such.

COVID did, I believe, show the humanity of companies. And I don’t think that companies can go backwards once they’ve done that, and I think the smartest companies will build on that.

Tom:                          Yeah. We thought we knew what a game-changer was before COVID, didn’t we?

Carol Cone:              Right.

Tom:                          So, Carol, in those discussions and the debate that we talked about earlier, is it ever asked, “How do we address the needs of our customers, quality-wise and price-wise, while also remaining nimble enough,” in this ever-changing world that you just talked about, “to sustain our relevance?”

Carol Cone:              I use the word “innovation” because for a company’s customers to be at the top of their game, to have quality — and if you think about Alltech in the ingredients, what — Alltech is research-based, and it’s constantly looking at what are the elements in its products that will help to create natural, appropriate, faster growth of, whether it’s poultry or whether it’s beef or such, in a way that is nutrient-dense that, again, is natural.

And so, that company must focus on innovation. And you’re seeing, today, that purpose-led companies have incubators, that they’re funding innovation incubators. And again, you can go to — I know the Mars company has one. I know that AB InBev, I know that Unilever, P&G, the big — General Mills — the big companies have these incubators on the side, because they’re really looking for that next new idea to keep them relevant and to benefit their customers.

Tom:                          You referenced, earlier, the C-suite and bringing folks from the factory floor into the conversation. And so, I’m wondering: In terms of employee engagement, why is purpose important to everybody, from top to bottom?

Carol Cone:              You know, I would like to say (that it’s) what gets you up in the morning to go to work. Do you get up in the morning (because) “I’m going to make money for XYZ CEO”? Or, you know, do you get up in the morning because you’re going to make the best darn leather boots that anybody’s ever made, and those leather boots are going to be, you know — they’re made of all-natural ingredients, per se, and they give you tremendous support, and they allow you — they don’t have a thread that marks the path, so you’re going to leave no thread behind?

Now, of course, I’m making this up, per se. But the point is (that) having this greater reason for being just allows an individual at any level to — and it’s really funny, when you talk to CFOs, and I’ve seen CFOs that love the purpose of their company. They are just lit, and it’s really, really funny, in addition to the person on the factory floor. And so, it just gives you that energy and that North Star. You’re looking up to the stars to say, “I’m doing something to better my neighborhood, my community, my city, my country or the world.”

And so, to be inside of a purpose driven company — I’ll give you, I’ll give you another great example that’s one of my proudest moments, that, early on, I worked with the company called the Rockport Shoe Company. And their CEO, he came to me and he said, “I really want to build my company on something different.” He didn’t have a lot of money, but he had these really, really unique shoes, and they (had) Nike inners. So, they have, like, these athletic inners, but they had street shoe outers. And nobody has ever done that before. And so, they were ahead of their time; they’re a little bulky-looking, but, you know, for a year — it took me a year to find some gem, some reasons that these shoes were just more than shoes. And the CEO gave me a little clue.

                                    We would go to the trade shows and would have these beautiful pictures of people walking in his shoes, walking in a field, walking down the city street, walking in the neighborhood. And he didn’t, say, want to become the walking shoe company, but he did have these pictures. And so, one day, I realized — I did some research, and I realized (that) there’s no walking shoes for fitness and for health.

And so, long story short, we had a fellow who walked around the country. He talked to kids. He said, “Eat properly, don’t smoke, and walk.” He walked 11,208 miles in every state. We then flew him back to Massachusetts, to the University of Massachusetts. They had a health and fitness facility to study his health, because he was going to be the world’s first (and) longest walking experiment. And when he finished, not only was he wicked healthier, but we had a book, we had a movie, and we had a lot of data that said walking for health and fitness was really good for you.

                                    And we continue to create a walking institute and walking tests and all sorts of walking information. Rockport renamed itself “the walking shoe company.” Walking became the nation’s newest fitness activity. It became a billion-dollar category at retail, and Rockport grew eight times (its size) in four years. They were wildly successful, and then Reebok bought them.

                                    But it was giving — and I’ll tell you, they had this thing about (their company) feeling really different. One day, I was out in the loading dock area, and I happen to, like, listen in to a guy that was taking boxes off of a UPS truck. And the UPS truck (driver) asked this employee — this was, like, a guy that was like, you know, 24 years old — “What’s this company, Rockport? What do you do here?” And this young man, he stopped, he just kind puffed off, and he said, “I work for Rockport. We’re the walking shoe company.”

                                    And, you know, the company not only made walking shoes, but they gave their employees a free pair of shoes; they gave them a walking book, (and) they gave them time to walk during the day. And it just gave that young man and, then, the entire company a reason for being, far beyond just selling a shoe. And it just made me — and that was, that was kicking off my purpose career.

And then, we did Reebok and human rights and Avon and breast cancer and PNC Financial Services and early childhood education, and we reinvented the Aflac duck. You know, the big Aflac duck that says, “Aflac!”

Well, (they) donated $125 million to pediatric cancer and — but the two did not meet. But we knew the kids who went through pediatric cancer had a thousand days of treatments. They were lonely, and they were sick, and they were scared. And so, we invented a social robot that helped those children. It was a companion for children that they could interact with, and they could put emoji cards on it, and the duck would quack with their feelings. So, those kids wouldn’t be alone. And Aflac was reborn in terms of its purpose and its engagement with society. And it helped also grow their sales tens of millions of dollars, because they created something called My Special Aflac Duck, a social work that help kids going through a really hard time with cancer.

So, purpose. And when you find that purpose — and it’s just an extraordinary accelerant to alignment between all your stakeholders and, then, growth.

Tom:                          Let’s stay in the C-suite for just a moment, and if you would, describe for us the traits of that successful leadership team that’s authentic and credible in the way that it models purpose in an organization and creates what you were just talking about: employee buy-in.

Carol Cone:              And you know, I’m going to say that — how do they model it? Because a company that has a purpose must walk the talk.

                                    So, people. If you’re going to sell to a diverse consumer base, you need to have diversity of people working to get better ideas, to get better energy. So, it’s walking the talk, so that when you talk about your value of being innovative or listening to everyone’s ideas, you need to activate them, and you need to model the behaviors, day in and day out. And it’s coaching. It’s mentoring. It’s innovating. And it’s also taking what you stand for down to your supply chain.

So, it could be such as what Alltech does. You know, they have this amazing commitment to Haiti, to the poorest of the poor in Haiti, where they’re sourcing coffee. Because they want to help, you know, individuals, farmers, the coffee farmers, have a better life. And then, they go sell that at retail, and they put the money back into it. It’s cause-related marketing and such.

                                    But they’re these virtuous circles that companies are recognizing that they have to be. And today, especially with the millennials and Gen Z, (they know) that there’s a choice about where you work, and people don’t want to park their values at the door. They want to work for a values-based company that’s not only going to help with their training but also, at the end of the day, when you leave the office or you go home to your family or to, like, you know, the local fact or game or something, you talk about — like, I remember, again, going back to Rockport, (and people would be proud to say), “I work at Rockport. I work at the walking shoe company.” And in it, there’s a pride. You can’t put a dollar amount on that pride.

And companies today, it is now becoming — it used to be just the early adopters, the Ben & Jerry’s and the Body Shops and such, (but) it is now the mainstream that companies recognize that they want to attract the best and brightest.

And the best — I’ll give you another example: Tata Consultancy Services. They’re the world’s largest information technology company. They have more than 50,000 employees. They’re based in India, but they’re all over the world. They are larger than Accenture and IBM. And when they bring in employees, they spend three months going through training and learning about the culture. And then, their first customer — it’s a not-for-profit, and so, they allow their new employees to really feel their integrity and their values and action. It’s extraordinary. And their turning rate is barely anything. Their retention is 87–89%.

Tom:                          Wow!

Carol Cone:              (That’s) unheard of in companies. It’s because they live their values from the very (start), from recruiting to retention, from the highest senior level to the factory. Well, they don’t really have factories, because they are software.

Tom:                          Well, Carol, I made a mental note to return to something that you brought up earlier in our conversation and, also, going back to your blog.

                                    You note there that there’s recent research that finds that 65% of consumers want businesses to take a stand on issues that are important to them, and that rate goes up to 74% among 18-to-39-year-olds. How does a policy of purpose inform how an organization responds to these forces, what it stands for, and does this include making clear what it opposes?

Carol Cone:              This is a — okay, so activism and advocacy is very hard for companies today. It’s really hard, because no matter what side you’re going to pick, you’re always going to have your detractors. So, what — the first thing we say to any of our clients is, “Don’t just jump in” — that you need to look at, “What do you stand for at the core?” And then, you need to decide whether you’re going to be bold and you’re going to stick your neck out, as Nike did with Colin Kaepernick.

                                    But, you know, I knew, when Nike did that — Nike is a “bad boy” company. Now, there are also about one of these days too. But, you know, that, doing what they did with Colin Kaepernick — you know, everybody said, “Oh, they’re losing all this money and their stock price,” etc., etc. Yeah, their stock price took a hit, but then it went, then it went right back up, through the roof, because they walk their talk; they live on their values. And, you know, they’re not perfect; (they’ve) had a lot of issues with women, and now, they’re trying to be much more equitable with women.

                                    But a company has got to look at its core, and it is, it’s a tough decision to make. It truly is, in terms (of) standing out. And I think DE&I — diversity, equity and inclusion — that’s where, you know, companies today, they know they have to act, but they also have to understand. They have to start with their policies internally. And do they have equitable pay? Do they have equitable advancement, you know? And they have to start there, and a lot of companies just are looking at, you know, the terms or the words they use and the way that they advance people, (but) they’ve got to start, really, at home.

                                    So, corporate activism, regarding (that), you know, you’ve got to be really, really careful, and there’s no one roadmap to follow. You know, you also want to look at: do you want to be left behind? So, again, there’s no easy answer to this, but you certainly need to look at your history and how you’ve acted and what your internal policies are before you take a stand at all.

Tom:                          But is any success in recruiting the best new generation of talent going to depend on a company’s willingness to respond to these social, political and environmental dynamics?

Carol Cone:              Well, I think we have to — you don’t have to respond to them all, because if you respond to all things, you will stand for nothing. That’s the first thing.

                                    Climate and the environment, I think it’s fairly indisputable that you’ve got companies today, and their ESG — their environmental, their social and their governance approaches — that, environmentally, they have to cut their carbon footprint. They have to be more environmentally, you know, sensitive. And there’s lots of innovation that comes out of that, which is great.

                                    And we are turning to an electric economy, which is exciting. And, you know, I’m going to give a shout-out to Mary Barra assigned with this podcast, this interview. But Mary Barra, the CEO of General Motors, they are going to stop making combustion engines by 2035. They’re not going to make them anymore for regular cars and light-duty vehicles — like, oh, my God, they are going to go all-electric. That’s so exciting.

                                    So, you know, I think that companies, they have (questions about) DE&I, (and) you’re going to have to respond. But how will you respond? And the level and the goals that, the goals that you set and how you measure and report back, you know, that’s (just) as important. You don’t have to go from zero to 60 instantly, but you need to make steady progress. The level of your boldness depends on, again, your culture.

                                    I also think that there’s going to be — a lot of my colleagues who are in the C-suite, and they say that there’s going to be this next generation of leadership, the next gen, the Mary Barras, who’s very (much) on the cutting edge. You know, she started out as an engineer at General Motors, you know, (and now she’s) a woman running a car company. How — my God! And she’s fabulous, and she’s really, really great. And Indra Nooyi, who ran Pepsi-Co, and she really helped them. You know, she had a philosophy (of) performance with purpose, and that, you know, (she) decided to make better-for-you drinks and (add) less sugar and salt in the snacks and things like that. And they’re on a wonderful journey too.

                                    So, there’s going to be a new generation of leadership that recognizes that you cannot be successful in a society that’s unhealthy. And so, you will see dramatic changes happening again and again and again.

Tom:                          The Unilever chief, Paul Polman, has said that leaders need to have the courage to show that they’re vulnerable, that they’re willing to ask for help, which would seem to counter the historical notion of leadership, where just the opposite has been expected.

                                    Has the world become more receptive to a more down-to-earth, more accessible servant-leadership style?

Carol Cone:              I love that you talk about servant leadership, because in the earliest days when I started doing this work, there was a guy named Jack Stack. And if anybody knows (or) reads his book, it was about (being an) open book with management and leadership. And it was pretty much about servant leadership.

                                    And there’s a company that I have (on) one of my podcasts called Lineage Logistics. And nobody knows them; they’re about a $3-billion B-to-B. They are cold-storage refrigeration warehouses. And they handle, from field to store, about one-third of the food in the United States and about one-tenth of the food around the globe.

                                    And their leader knew that, you know, “I’ve got people in heavy coats in cold-storage facilities that are wearing boots, and this is not glamorous.” But he recognized that he needed to have a purpose, and their purpose is, basically — the shorthand is to feed the world. It’s also to stop food waste, but to feed the world. And he’s applying — it’s really interesting, when you talk to him, because he is applying, he wants to be the greatest technological cold-storage facility, you know, around the globe. And they have all sorts of innovations, but he treats his employees — he’s got a great CHRL.

                                    And I interviewed him on my show and talked about servant leadership and talked about — if you think about your traditional pyramid, you’ve got the C-suite at the top, and you’ve got all the, you know, the worker bees at the bottom. Servant leadership flips that. It has the workers at the top and it has the C-suite at the bottom. And that’s what Lineage does. They are there to serve their employees, to give them great benefits, to give them opportunities to grow, to give them an understanding that they are helping to feed the world. And, actually, during COVID, what they did — they did this wonderful thing about collaborating with all of their customers. And they created this goal to feed a hundred million meals to people during COVID through Feeding America.

Tom:                          Wow!

Carol Cone:              And, you know — and again, they’re cold storage of food that, you know — they’ve got all these, you know, like, forklifts that are driving around. It is not glamorous, but their people feel (like), “My God, I get up in the morning because I am, I am helping with food waste, and I’m feeding the world.” And, Greg Lehmkuhl, who’s the CEO, he gets that, that their purpose is at their core, (that) it’s the soul of their company, and that he is there to serve him employees.

                                    So, you are spot-on. And I love that Paul Polman, you know, he’s gone on from Unilever, and he’s doing wonderful, really collaborative work with big industry groups. Like, I think that’s he’s got, like, I don’t know, 25 companies in apparel, and they’re trying to totally reinvent the apparel industry — dyes and things like that.

                                    And courage is really important. You’ve got to have courage to do this. But, when you do it, this is how you reinvent: it’s called stakeholder-based capitalism. And it’s truly, you know, taking Milton Friedman and turning him on his head — (it’s) saying it’s not about “when you do all these other things right to your stakeholders, then you make the profits, and then you serve your shareholders,” but you serve all your other constituents.

Tom:                          It sounds like it’s a matter of being comfortable in your own skin and developing a really powerful sense of confidence.

Carol Cone:              It is a powerful sense of confidence. And then, you also need to — the other thing (is) that you can’t go for the short term. So, one of the things that Paul Polman did is that he said, you know, he’s not going to report quarterly earnings, which was shocking. And he basically said, “If you don’t like my — if you don’t like the way I’m reporting, then don’t buy my stock.”

                                    And it’s hard for companies who are public who, you know, you have to give guidance, you have to report quarterly. But this is a game, a purpose game, and the stakeholder-based capitalist approach and strategy — it’s not a “game” game, but I’m using that as, you know, a euphemism — is that you got to have a long view, because innovations — you’ve got to bring the, you know, how you’re going to serve the climate and society. You’ve got to take a longer view. You just can’t — you know, (with) purpose, you can’t flip a switch on purpose. You can’t turn it on and off.

Tom:                          Going back to something else that you raised earlier in our conversation, Carol — and apologies for this cliché — but they say a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. Do you think it’s possible for a purpose-driven organization to influence the cultures and the behaviors and achieve alignment among the companies within its supply chain?

Carol Cone:              Well, you know who did that incredibly well? Oh boy, you know, take a page from the book of Walmart.

I mean, Walmart decided — and I was at one of these meetings, at, I think, it was business with social responsibility. And they said — and Walmart is doing this in a number of ways. They are saying that you have to report on your environmental footprint, per se, and you’re going to get, you know — there are all there reports you have to do, and based on how you come out, you will get, uh, your position on the shelf. And everybody wants that, you know — “I’d love a position,” etc., etc., etc.

                                    That was a game-changer. That was a game-changer. And so, you’ve got these, we call them, market makers. You’ve got these big organizations who say — like General Motors — “We’re not” — you know, it’s their own product, but “we are not going to sell combustion engines.” Well, think how the downstream is on that. Think about, “Oh, God, we’re going to have to have all these charging stations. We’re going to have to have all these new battery companies.” That’s cool, but think about the other stuff that’s going to be antiquated.

But there’s amazing things that are happening, where companies are really utilizing their — you know, Starbucks. And Starbucks changed the entire coffee farmer industry by, you know, determining that they were going to pay them a fair wage. And then, they communicated the heck out it. Starbucks is my favorite company (in terms of their) views of their employees. Their employees are their number-one stakeholder — one, two, three, four and five. (They’re) just brilliant, brilliant things they do.

Tom:                          When it starts at the top of the chain, at Walmart or Amazon or wherever, does it — do you see it rippling through the supply chain and influencing the policies of those companies that are within the chain?

Carol Cone:              Well, I don’t know about the policy. I think, certainly, it influences the products. And if — indeed, companies that wanted to sell at Walmart, they had to report on their carbon footprint. So, of course, it changed the policies, or they couldn’t sell there, or they got bad position on the shelf.

Tom:                          Back to the pandemic. This has been an overwhelming thing in our lives for more than a year now, and we’re really not out of the woods yet. And some are now saying — in fact, the New York Times has proclaimed on its front page — that remote work is here to stay. So, I’m just wondering: What kinds of challenges does this present to purpose-driven organizations?

Carol Cone:              I think it’s a tremendous opportunity, because (it’s about) standing for something besides just making widgets or being on a Zoom call all day.

For example, there’s virtual volunteering. And a major piece of research just came out of CECP, which (is the) Chief Executive for Corporate Purpose, called Value Volunteering. It’s going to be one of my podcasts; it’s going to air in about a month. And basically, volunteering is helping individuals stay connected to the company, even if it’s just, you know, on a Zoom screen, or we’ll eventually be able to do volunteering in our communities with, you know, with masks and then, ultimately, you know, without masks, in micro volunteering and large volunteering.

                                    So, purpose is going to be that golden thread that ties people to the company, I think, (and it) is more important than ever.

Tom:                          Carol, final question for you: What sort of world exists in the future in which purpose-driven businesses become the norm?

Carol Cone:              Hopefully, it’s not nirvana. Hopefully, it’s not a dream. Because companies will have their — they will be more efficient; they will more human; they will be more environmentally sensitive. They will make wicked-cool innovations that are going to be, you know, responding to social issues and environmental issues. And we will have greater solutions to the problems that confront us on a daily basis. And work will be more joyous. That is for sure.

Tom:                          So, do you think there’s a good chance we could be happier people?

Carol Cone:              I think we will be more fulfilled. I don’t think we’re going to be happy all the time, but I think that being satisfied and having greater fulfillment, I think that that’s going to be a great result from having a lot more purpose in all of our companies, both big and small, B-to-B, B-to-C, local, national and global.

Tom:                          I’ll take it. Carol Cone, founder of the consultancy, Carol Cone ON PURPOSE. Thank you so much, Carol. We appreciate your time.

Carol Cone:              I, it was joyful, it was great. And thank you so much.

Tom:                          I’m Tom Martin, and thank you for listening.

The Alltech ONE Ideas Conference (ONE) will launch virtually on May 25–27, 2021, and will feature tracks that will uncover the challenges and opportunities in the aqua, beef, crop science, dairy, equine, health and wellness, pet, pig, and poultry sectors. Now in its 37th year, Alltech’s global agri-food conference continues to be an invaluable resource, uniting thought-leaders and changemakers in an exploration of the power of science, sustainability and storytelling. More than 40 topics* are slated for discussion at ONE, including:    

Aqua

• Can Sustainability Remain Aquaculture’s Unfair Advantage?
• Feeding Your Future: The Changing Face of Aqua Feed
• From Sea to Land: The Evolution of Aquaculture
• Pick Your Protein: How the Pandemic Shifted Shopping Habits
• The Great Global Fish and Shrimp Cook-Off

Beef

•  Better Beef, Healthier Planet
• High-Steaks Investments: Capitalizing on Beef
• The Meat You Eat: The Nutritional Realities of Beef

Crop Science

• Carbonomics: The Economy Beneath Our Feet
• Empowering Growers Through Pest Prevention
• Natural Solutions, Unparalleled Protection
• Selenium: Agriculture’s Secret Weapon
• Tiny Microbes, Big Impact

Dairy

• From Late Gestation to Early Lactation: Managing Transitional Periods
• Happy Cows, Happy Farmers: Animal Welfare and Sustainability
• Higher Milk Production, Lower Carbon Hoofprint
• Opportunities for the Global Milk Trade
• Overcoming the Impact of Activists

Equine

• Equine Trace Mineral Research: The Advantages of Going Organic
• Equine Welfare: Hope for Horses Without Humans
• Going Green: Sustainable Equine Management
• In the Running: The Trends Dominating Equestrian Sport
• Making Aging a Breeze: Strategies for Feeding Your Senior Horse
• Photo Finish: Marketing to Equine Consumers

Health and Wellness

• Gut Reaction: Feeding a Healthy Microbiome
• Why Smart People Make Bad Food Choices: The Invisible Influences That Guide Our Thinking

Pet

• Brain Power: Supporting Cognitive Function in Pets
• Dog Days Are Over: Beating the Post-Pandemic Pet Blues
• Minimizing the Environmental Pawprint of Your Brand
• What’s in Store for the Future of Brick-and-Mortar Retail?

Pig

• Better Nutrition, Safer Swine
• High-Rise Pigsties: The Future of Swine Production
• Litters With Longevity: Optimizing Piglet Nutrition
• Smarter Barns, Healthier Pigs
• Leaving a Legacy: Ensuring Lasting Success for the Family Business

Poultry

• A New Way to Sell Chicken
• Future of the Flock: Sustainability in the Poultry Business
• Planet of Plenty: Poultry Partner Spotlight
• The World of Poultry

*Topics are subject to change.

The ONE virtual platform will provide access to on-demand tracks, streaming keynote presentations and live Q&A chats with select speakers. New this year, it will also offer an interactive networking experience, allowing attendees to connect with their peers from around the world. 

Registration for the Alltech ONE Ideas Conference is now open at one.alltech.com. Join the conversation across social media with #ONEbigidea.

Jim Stengel, host of The CMO Podcast and former CMO of P&G, is passionate about helping businesses and individuals discover and activate the “why” behind their work. Join us as he discusses the importance of purpose for an organization, how this can lead to better financial results and how the food industry's mission became more clearly defined and transparent as a result of the challenges of the past year.

The following is an edited transcript of the Ag Future podcast episode with Jim Stengel hosted by Tom Martin. Click below to hear the full audio or listen to the episode on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

Tom:                          Welcome, Jim.

Jim:                             Tom, thank you. Great to be here on a beautiful day with you in the spring.

Tom:                          Let's just begin with this very simple but important question: What is the importance of purpose?

Jim:                             Well, Tom, I think the importance of purpose is to give people in an organization a North Star — something to bring them together, something that is helping people, impacting people's lives in a way beyond just turning a dollar. And so, for me, it is getting to the fundamental question of: Why are we in business beyond making money? What's our point here? What was the founder’s idea? What is that concept that brings people together, gives them a bit of lifting their step, and brings them to work with new ideas, energy (and) enthusiasm every day? (That’s) such a long-winded way of saying I think it's the “why” behind what businesses do for a living. And the more powerful the “why,” I think, the more powerful the business.

Tom:                          When that policy of purpose, of mission, is established and made clear, how does that help the company then grow?

Jim:                             Well, I think it helps them in a few ways. And by the way, Tom, there’s a lot of data. I’ve been a purpose seller since I was at Procter & Gamble. I’m going on probably a quarter of a century of advocating purpose, testing it, trying it, seeking data about it. And there's a growing database that (shows that) companies that are seen by people, consumers (and) employees as being purpose-driven far exceed their competition in terms of business results, financial results. So, it works. It helps the company grow. And the “why” behind why it works is it attracts better people. It encourages people to bring their best ideas. It kind of causes you to measure different things. It helps you be more customer-centric. It helps you to have more of a service and a generosity mindset. And overall, it just creates a great culture. You know, brands and businesses are grown by people, and great cultures attract great people, and great cultures grow brands. So, it works. Once you're in a purpose-driven organization, it’s tough to leave it, and it’s tough to go to one that is not wired that way.

Tom:                          Are passion and purpose mutually exclusive, or can they complement one another?

Jim:                             Oh, I think they go together. You know, if you’re working for a company that you really believe in and a leader you really believe in and a team you really believe in, you bring a tremendous sense of passion and energy and creativity to your work. And I think they go hand in hand in a purpose-driven company.

                                    You know, it’s tough for me to think about an organization that attracts passionate people but (for whom passion is) not a purpose of the center. And by this, Tom, I don’t mean cause marketing. I don’t mean philanthropy. I don't mean CSR. I mean a genuine passion and desire and interest to leverage the company's assets to make life better for the people they serve.

Tom:                          Is there a particular process? What goes into sorting out and clearly identifying a company's purpose?

Jim:                             Well, I think the answer is usually in the company itself. It’s usually with the people. And if we’re asked by a firm or a leader to help them with that — my firm does a bit of that work. You know, we always come in like anthropologists, and we come in curious. We come in like sociologists. What we want to do is we want to talk to a lot of people. We want to really understand where this company came from and what was the catalyst in starting the business whenever it started. What was the founder’s motivation? What happened in the company — when were its high times? Its low times? And so, we really study the history, and we also talk to a lot of people about why they're in this company — why they joined, what brings them to work, what are their hopes and dreams, when are they at their best, what’s the best day they've had at work. And when you go in and you ask those kinds of questions and you study the history of a company, it does come out.

                                    I mean, we're not wizards. We don't come into a company and send a lightning bolt and their purpose appears in the wall and everything's wonderful. We go in and we help the people in the company discover — or rediscover — what's always been there. And then the tricky part is the next stage, and that is bringing it to life in daily work.

Tom:                          I know that you've defined the key components of purpose, and you've actually created a framework around five areas: employee engagement, offerings, societal contributions, branding, and consumer engagement. And I'd like to look at each of these, beginning with employee engagement. After a year and counting of this life under the pandemic, what are leadership teams encountering in the way of employee engagement?

Jim:                             Well, Tom, I think that framework you just rattled off, which we do live by, we did not create that just by team meeting. We said, “These are the five things we’re going to study.” That came out of a very large database on what sort of activities drive purpose, as consumers see it as important. So, employee offerings and contributions that help society, branding, consumer engagement — those are based on a very large database. So, it's good, quantitative information. So, I guarantee, anyone who is listening, if you put your team together and you think about your status against those five areas, no doubt, you will have ideas to make your company better and stronger.

                                    On employee engagement, which is your pointed question, I am seeing, during the pandemic condition, a tremendous — and I’m talking about a lot of people, a lot of chief marketing officers and CEOs over the last 12 months, and there is no doubt that the way they work with their teams and approach their teams has changed significantly. So, the level of empathy, of listening, of understanding, of caring — I think those have always been there with great leaders, (but) they’re on hyperdrive over the last year. They have been on hyperdrive. And once that happens, you don't go back.

                                    So, the bond I am seeing with teams, among teams, are driven by the leader and how they work with their team over the last 12 months. That is stronger than I've seen in my career, and (that) sounds counterintuitive, because we have been able to touch and shake each other's hands and be around the same table (in the past), but counterintuitively, what's happened is, I think, leaders have gone above and beyond on caring about their people — their mental health, their physical health, their balance in their life. And I think that's one very positive outcome of these very, very difficult times.

Tom:                          And let's expand on that. What sort of actions have occurred as a result of those realizations?

Jim:                             Well, there's all sorts of rituals people have developed on their own, but I think the principle that underlies all of them (is that) they’ve given their teams the flexibility and the freedom to run their lives and to take care of what's most important and to be of service to their customers in all sorts of ways.

                                    You know, I just remember, in the first weeks of the pandemic, talking to the chief innovation officer and chief marketing officer of the beer company, AB InBev. And these were very early times; we were just all kind of figuring out how to get on Zoom together. And he just described how, you know, they just said to their people, “Listen, forget about our products and services right now. Let's just figure out everything we can do with our capabilities and our assets to help people.” So, if that's about making sanitizers in our factories or volunteering or opening up our spaces for whatever is needed in the health community, that's what they did. And at the same time, they started figuring out how they’re going to work together as teams. And the one principle I’ve seen, you know, obviously, (is) flexibility and listening and caring about people. Everyone's making decisions faster.

                                    You know, some rituals I see — teams are having morning quick check-ins, evening quick check-ins (where they ask), “What has to be done today? How did we do today? Do we make decisions fast enough?” So, (there’s) a lot more empowerment, a lot more agility, a lot more speed — and, through that, I'm hearing, a lot more creativity. We’re just finding ways to do things that we’ve never done before, and that feels good.

Tom:                          This pandemic certainly has changed things, hasn’t it?

Jim:                             Oh, yeah. Yeah. I mean, I think this is just maybe — I don’t know about your life, but in my life, I’m not sure there’s been anything that has been more powerful in terms of changing habits, behaviors, rituals (and) focus. I'm hearing so many people who are forcing some milestones in their lives, whether that's stopping a career, changing a career, figuring out what they really want to do with the precious time we all have left on this planet, changing companies because they want to work for a company that has a stronger sense of purpose. I'm hearing all of these things and discussions.

Tom:                          Yeah. It has really reoriented our priorities, I would say.

Jim:                             Yes. Absolutely. Absolutely.

Tom:                          What about new generations entering the workforce? Is there a struggle there, to connect meaningfully with these new generations?

Jim:                             Well, I think it's been very tough to start a job in the pandemic, and I know a lot of young people who have done that. And companies, God bless them, have done their best to bring people into a culture, but I think starting with a company without meeting anyone — I just talked to a woman whose company was acquired by a large financial institution, and they’re now well into integration, and she said, “I've never met these people. And it's extraordinary how well we all feel we trust each other and understand each other without ever having a physical meeting.”

                                    But I do think for someone who's 22, 23, 27, who is starting a new job, it has been a particular challenge. And obviously, work is much more than going someplace to get something done. You get a paycheck, (but) when you're at that age, it's about meeting people. It's about discovering new things, developing yourself. And I think that has been tough in the pandemic. And you know, they're getting by. They're managing. And companies are doing their best. But I think when we see people's confidence (increase) in coming back together again, the first people who will want to be together in some sort of social/office situation will be the people who are in their first 1 to 2 years in a row.

Tom:                          Another of these five key focus points that you’ve identified is “offerings.” What's this about?

Jim:                             Oh, that’s probably a fancy way of saying just the products and services that you offer people from your company. And I think the companies that are purpose-driven think very deeply about, you know, “Are we offering the right level of products and services that emanate from our purpose, that are inspired by our purpose, and that genuinely do help people in our area in a way that delights them, reduces friction, makes your life easier, makes your life more joyful, makes your life richer?” And so, then, there are a lot of companies who get stuck in the current products and services that they're offering, and they get a little bit functional.

                                    You know, I spent a lot of years at Procter & Gamble, and when we were caught on our back foot, it was because we didn't think broadly enough about the products and services we offered our consumers as their lives changed. And I think, when you have a purpose that transcends the category that you're operating in — that appeals to sort of a higher North Star — then your employees come up with interesting products or services that are beyond what you're offering today. And I think that's a sign of a very creative customer-centered, purpose-driven organization.

Tom:                          That takes us right into that next point: societal contributions. What sorts of responsible actions can businesses take to play a role in improving society and the planet beyond the bottom line, and how does that tie into consumer engagement?

Jim:                             Yeah. I think, Tom, if you had done — you know, we do a lot of consumer research. And there's no doubt that this idea that companies should take a proactive role in solving some of the most pressing problems in our society, in our planet — our consumers and, frankly, our employees are expecting that. I don't think you would have seen that nearly as strongly as you do today, you know, 5 or 6 years ago. So, this is one that has gotten a bigger spotlight, where the expectations are higher. And it's a tricky one, right? If your business is, I don't know, hygiene — like Clorox, like Unilever (or), to some extent, Procter and Gamble — what you do for the planet and society ought to somehow be connected to the business you are or the culture you are and the products and services that you offer. And I think you need to stay in a space where you can generally make a difference based on the capabilities in your company. And, of course, there are some areas that transcend that.

                                    I think if you're not seeking to attract a diverse group of employees and you're (not) working on an inclusive culture that welcomes everyone, that welcomes everyone to bring their best ideas to work, then I think you're going to be, you know, you're going to be stuck about attracting the best talent. But when you pick an area that you want to make a difference in and help society, it should be something that you can genuinely affect, or it's going to be seen as greenwashing, and it’s not going to be authentic, and it's not who you are.

                                    And you know, you can probably think about the brands that you feel are taking a stand in the right spaces. You know, Unilever is a company that I competed against for many years. They've been very proactive at saying, “We're going to help people live a more sustainable lifestyle. And since we have an enormous range of products that are in packages that are discarded, that's the space that we think is right for us to play in. And if we do it well, consumers will appreciate it, our business will get healthier and the planet will be better.” I mean, look at General Motors today. They're making statements like, you know, “We're going to electrify everything by 2035.” They had this rallying cry of zero emissions, zero congestion, zero crashes. So, they're saying, “Hey, we're in the transportation movement business, and autos and trucks have been our lifeline. And they will continue to be for some time, but we are going to set a vision to move to 100% electrification, because it's the right thing to do.” And so, that's a terrific societal contribution, which, I think, if they do well, will benefit their business. So, it’s a good example, I think, of being coherent and picking a place to stand that makes sense for your culture and your category.

Tom:                          The fifth key focus point among the five that we've been talking about is branding. And I'm wondering: Is branding an expression of the other four?

Jim:                             Yeah. I think it's where it all comes together, Tom. I mean, when you think about branding, it’s everything that you communicate, right? It's your advertising. It’s your packaging. It's your language. It's your rituals in the company. So, it's everything that sends a message about who you are and what you value. So, I think it all comes together there. But you know, again, if you don’t think about all five of these areas, you will not be sending out a coherent and consistent message to your employees, first, as well as to other stakeholders, which include your customers. So, this is an important one. And I think it's one that, sometimes, we can think about as an afterthought.

                                    One danger in the purpose journey is that everyone is not on the same page, and some companies see purpose as a marketing initiative or a corporate affairs initiative, and (in) that (case), it does not work. In fact, it backfires. When you're on the purpose journey, everyone's in the boat. Everyone has a role. It breaks down silos. Everyone comes together, and that includes everything you do in branding. So, these aren't functional or discipline ideas. These are ideas within our company.

Tom:                          That really underscores the critical nature of effective communication of those ideas, right?

Jim:                             Oh, absolutely. Yeah. And it’s so important, communication, and we all know the companies that do it well and do it creatively and do it with a high level of engagement, but we have to do that inside the company, too. I was working with a company in Canada on the purpose journey, and they revamped, in all ways, how they communicate. They became much better storytellers. They started almost every press release with a story about their purpose. They started company meetings with stories about their purpose. And it palpably changed the feeling in that company and the morale in that company, and it led to just better ideas coming forward, better innovation toward their purpose, which everyone made their own, because they told stories about it. They talked about it in their own words and in their own stories, whether they were in the legal group, the financial group, the operations group, the finance group, the marketing group. Everyone had their own stories, but it was held together by the purpose.

Tom:                          The food industry has always been important to everybody, but it seems as though it's really catapulted to the forefront during COVID, because we're spending more time in our kitchens (and) more of us (are) embracing healthy diets. How has this influenced thinking and decision-making at the leadership level of the food industry?

Jim:                             Well, I think this has been really positive, and I'm not sure they've gotten all the credit they probably should have through these times. I have my own podcast, and I talked to several CMOs of companies over the last year. And one woman — she’s at Kellogg's — you know, she said to me that, through this pandemic experience we've all had, she said, “Our purpose became so much clearer, our focus became so much clearer, and it came to life, especially in the supply chain.” And the supply chain of finding the right ingredients (and) materials in difficult times, getting products to the shelves so people could shop quickly, carefully go home and enjoy meals with their families when we still, to some extent, are shut in.

                                    I talked to the General Mills CMO about these times. I talked to people at Alltech and many others. And I just feel like the food industry stepped up — and their stock prices are pretty good. So, I think it's been appreciated by Wall Street and the investors, but I think they just said, “We’ve always been important. We’re now more important than ever.” And while they're doing this, Tom, I think they were continuing to make their products more — they were more transparent about what's in their products. They’re seeking to make the ingredients better. They’re seeking to help people eat healthier. Kroger's in my hometown, here, in Cincinnati, (and) they've been on a journey, a purpose journey, for the last few years, where they're just trying to help people eat fresh foods more easily and affordably and creatively.

                                    So, I really feel like the food industry has had a — it’s kind of a year of, you know — it tested them, of course. The supply chains were tested with all of us, but I just think they rose up and they were there and they helped us all get through this. And I think they’re stronger companies because of that.

Tom:                          It’s clear that you're a proponent of this, but I'm wondering what exactly makes you optimistic about a purpose-driven world as we move forward.

Jim:                             Because it works, Tom. You know, the companies that are seen by people as being more purpose-driven are doing better than their competition, and they're delivering superior financial results, and that's because people care. And so, you know, I think purpose is the management philosophy of the century. I think it was seen as a little bit, maybe, “fluffy” as it was bandied about 15 to 20 years ago, but I think what's happening is people are now seeing the growing data that (proves that) purpose is what people want. They want you to be purpose-centered. They want to be customer-centric. They want you to attract really great people, and they want you to help them live their lives more sustainably and more happily. So, I think it's here to stay. It's going to get stronger and stronger. And the competitive battleground is going to be the companies that are more long-term focused, that are more committed to this, that execute better, that are more creative in how they execute. So, it's not going to be about, “Are you purpose-driven or not?” It will be about how well that you inculcate that in your culture and how well you execute that for your customers.

Tom:                          Jim Stengel, former global marketing officer of Procter & Gamble, now president and CEO of the Jim Stengel Company in Cincinnati. Thanks, Jim.

Jim:     Thank you, Tom. I enjoyed it.

For the past year, Dr. Mark Lyons, president and CEO of Alltech, has led his multinational company through a global pandemic while maintaining an optimistic focus on the future. Join us as he provides his unique insights from the helm, including the significance of sustainability, countering negative perceptions of agriculture with science and why collaboration is crucial to creating a Planet of Plenty.

Tom:              I'm Tom Martin, and I'm joined by Dr. Mark Lyons, president and CEO of Alltech. Greetings, Dr. Lyons.

Mark:              Great to be with you.

Tom:              Mark, if you would, first, share with us a little bit of your background and how those experiences that you've had in your career are informing how you lead a company in a culture that has such a global reach.

Mark:              Absolutely. I had the great privilege to not only, I think, have a very extraordinary, dynamic father but have the opportunity to work with him, and that really started from a very early age. He, for some reason, didn't believe very much in holidays or vacations, and so he really saw the opportunity, often, to bring me with him and for me to be able to go and visit places and travel and experience things that he was doing. So, I was able to grow up very much with a global view. Obviously, our family coming over to Ireland — that was the first stop, anyway, going over to see family. Then, typically, I'd be able to travel on to continental Europe with him and experience that.

                        That formed, I think, a lot of the interests I had. Obviously, I had an interest in science — science, of course being primary in what we do as a company, but also in his family. That was his first interest, but he didn't stop there. He moved on quickly, obviously, to the business side. For my part, I think, I became very interested in comparative politics and the way that different cultures work around the world. I was able to explore those in my education, along with the science. That part — up to, I think, coming into Alltech — was very much looking at the world from a global perspective and trying to understand it at that individual level, where you have that opportunity to travel, especially being able to meet people and understand how they view the world and the experience that they have.

                        As I came into Alltech, I initially started on the production side. The idea was to really get to know the business from the inside. I was able to complete my Ph.D. at the same time focused in, of course, what is the core of Alltech: fermentation. Then, I transitioned more into the management and the sales side, having worked in Latin America, then up in North America and then over to China, where I lived for six years before coming back here in 2018.

Tom:              You, and your father before you, have spoken often about sustainability and the relationship between agriculture and the environment and sustainability. That word, “sustainability,” is used an awful lot these days. How do you define it?

Mark:              I think people get very caught up and concerned with definitions. I think, in a lot of regards, when I talk to people, I say, “Define it for yourself. What is it that this means?” I think, even in these last 12 months, this word has really grown. Now, I've been thinking about it — and, I think, in a much broader sense. Of course, we always think about environmental sustainability. That's a core element of it. But I think, right now, especially through so many challenges of COVID, we have to think about the communities that are involved, the individuals, the economic aspects of sustainability. We've fallen in love with, to a certain degree, technology and technology companies that come in and talk about disruption and “isn't this exciting?” and fast growth. But at the same time, we also need to look at the wake behind them and what that ends up costing society overall.

                        So, when we speak about sustainability, we really say that we need to think about if this new technology coming out is going to, overall, benefit society. Is it going to sustainably improve our health? Are these things really better for society or not? I think that's what it's all about. I think the sustainability mission is that: It's a journey. It's not a destination. It's all about: How can we do things that provide for today and make sure that we do have enough for today, but we also know that we have enough for tomorrow? To me, it's not about eliminating; it's about creating, and it's about making sure that we are focused on innovation and new ideas.

Tom:              Is there a distinction between local and global sustainability, or do they intersect?

Mark:              I think they intersect, but I think they're distinct. I think we have to reflect on this. Of course, being Irish, I'll tell you a story, and I'll tell you a story about the home country, as it were.

Ireland is an extraordinary environment. You have this protected Ireland temperates; the temperature never really gets too warm, for sure, but it also doesn't get too cold. It'd be very rare in Ireland to see snow. It's a place that, of course, is full of greenery. It's full of different shades of green. It's a highly productive agricultural economy and highly productive agricultural land. But if you looked at Ireland today, and if you polled Irish consumers, they would say, “To be able to achieve our environmental sustainability goals, we need to reduce the amount of agricultural outputs we have.”

                        When you think about that from a global perspective, that's a crazy idea. This is a place that is highly efficient. You have pasture-based systems. You've got other types of systems, lots of different ways of thinking about things. They've got a lot of concern, I think — just as you find in most places in the world — the farmers and agriculturalists are always looking at ways to eliminate waste and improve productivity. Their asset is their land, but yet, in Ireland, that would be the big push, would be: How do we reduce? I think, if that's the approach we take, I think we run the risk of a disimproving the global perspective on sustainability, where we may end up producing the type of dairy products that Ireland is so productive in or beef in countries that are not as productive.

                        I think we find a little bit of the same here. We use a lot of lands and a lot of inputs — especially on the ruminant side, on dairy and beef — that really couldn't be used for something else, and yet, sometimes, we're thinking about things very much on values that we find, perhaps, on a Google search or in a set of tables. We're not thinking about the actual individual producer and what that is doing to them. It's important to keep those two aspects in mind. Local sustainability is also very important, but there's this huge amount of data and a huge amount of information we need to pull in to really make sure that we're making the best decision.

Tom:              It's been only in recent years that the world seems to have begun to fully grasp the reality of climate change and pressures on the world food supply. What are your main concerns about climate and food — where we are today, and where we may be going?

Mark:              It's a great question. What's interesting about it is I studied climate change. I studied environmental science in college, and the science at that stage was clear. Again, you would speak with a climate scientist or you speak to the broader scientific community, and there really wasn't any disagreement. It's really been something that it took the acceptance from society and then, of course, the acceptance politically to maybe say, “This is something — we really need to bring about a change.”

It's crazy. When you think about this country, the Clean Air Act was passed by a Republican president, George Bush, Sr., and that was something that you would not anticipate when you think of the world that we're in today. That gives you an idea, in such a short amount of time, of how things got a little bit off.

                        I think, now, we see a lot more of the outcomes, and I think there are a lot more concerns — whether it's permafrost thawing in Siberia and the potential methane emissions that could create and how that could be a process that we can't turn around, or people being concerned about erratic weather. If I speak to the lady, I stayed over with in Germany years and years ago as a kid — it used to snow in the winter, and it doesn't snow there anymore. So, I think, in Western Europe, there's a real realization, because they see it every winter. They see a change.

                        I think that acceptance has come about from a broader perspective. Also, I think the change in the role of companies has really brought about this change. I guess, as I look forward, I just think that this is a moment where, if we don't make the change that we need to make fast enough, it ends up being an out-of-control scenario. Having said that, I would be very optimistic. When I look at the improvements that our industry, in agriculture, has made over the last 30, 40, 50 years, it's extraordinary how we are producing far more with less. If you start to look at that trajectory and you realize that we have become much more sustainable over this period of time without necessarily putting a focus on that — the focus probably was on reducing costs, but the outcome was an improvement in sustainability — imagine what we're going to be able to achieve now, with so much more technology coming into the sector and a different way of thinking.

                        My concern, honestly, is not so much on the change within the agriculture sector. I think the impact of agriculture on climate change is over-emphasized. I think it's the industry that can change and adapt quickly. My bigger concern is our reliance on fossil fuels and how we will bring about that change, particularly standing here in Kentucky, doesn't disadvantage those who may be energy producers today. How do we make sure that innovation does rest in locations, perhaps, that are high energy producers today and create new jobs and create new opportunities?

Tom:              We've had some pretty powerful dynamics in play, especially in this recent year: COVID-19, the increasing drive toward sustainability and a rising sense of imperative behind climate change. I'm just wondering how all those things have, perhaps, changed your business.

Mark:              Yeah. I think, over the last three years, we're just, at this time of year, thinking about my father, who passed away three years ago. We went through a big cultural change within the company. We had been building and growing the company, and, of course, that was a big shock, losing him. I think, for our business, the story that started three years ago, in a certain regard, prepared us, in some odd way, for this challenge of the last 12 months.

COVID has obviously impacted all aspects of all businesses and supply chains. It's made everything so difficult. We're very much a relationship business. We're a business that likes to be in the office. We like to be together. We like to be with our customers. That's what drives us. "Make a friend" was the message my father was always sharing with us — that we were to go out and foster relationships. That has been a big challenge, but I think that the cultural closeness that was created over the last three years — as we reflected on the loss that we had and thought a lot about what we talk about a lot, the “founder's mentality,” the objective and the way that my father thought and how we could continue to replicate that and grow — that concept got us ready.

                        We've stayed very close. I could tell you — as I'm sure you would hear from many other executives — I think this time of the pandemic, it almost takes more energy. We travel less, but we're talking to people, probably, even more. I think the responsibility of senior management, but particularly the CEO, has changed. I believe — and I think this was the case before for our good CEOs — but the CEO should not be responsible for just the bottom line or top line or those types of results. You have the CFO. You have the COO. The CEO is there to make sure that you maximize the most important asset of any company, which is people, and making sure that those individuals, I think, in this period of time, not only are productive but also healthy, and that's making sure that we can protect them from COVID and put those policies in place and make sure that works but, also, their mental health when we are separated.

                        I think that aspect has been a big shift. We've adopted all the technology possible, but I would quickly say that I think it's a poor second to being in-person. We look forward to being together again. But really, I think that both of these thoughts — the COVID challenge and then the sustainability, which has really accelerated, I think, in terms of urgency over the last 12 months — is something that it's probably positioned the company instead of a lot of the things we talk about. We've been talking about this “Working Together for Planet of Plenty^TM” mission now for over two years. I think that has really moved from being “some idea that Mark has” to, really, something that is driving our business. In every single conversation we have, people are bringing it up in new ways. I think that goes together with that realization that sustainability is something that's here to stay.

Tom:              I know that part of the growth that you mentioned a moment ago includes the acquisition of the Environmental Services Company, E-CO₂, to provide advice, tools and services to help farmers measure and improve their environmental performance. With the rise of the European Green Deal and the United States' renewed commitment to climate action, over 70% of the global economy has now set or is intending to set targets to reach net zero emissions. Do you sense that E-CO₂'s moment has arrived?

Mark:              It's interesting. Before we called it the Alltech ONE Ideas Conference, it was the Symposium, and we had the symposium where one of the themes was “niche to mainstream.” I went and found the book the other day, and here it was, from the late '90s — here was my father saying that these ideas that Alltech had were becoming mainstream. Of course, we look, now, forward, and it was probably 20 years later when that was true.

I think E-CO₂ is actually that type of a story. This was something that was niche. It was something aspirational. I think it was these number of retailers in the U.K. who said, “We've got to put plans in place so that we can make sure that we know what the environmental impact of farming is and of our products on the shelf.” That was where the business began. It was actually founded by a farmer, which I think makes it highly relevant. It was always built from that perspective and then came into the Alltech fold about eight years ago. It was something that was focused there. We thought, “Maybe there's an opportunity to go global in the future, but it’s very much a British business.” Now, over the last 12 months, it has truly gone global.

So, as we build out our what we call now Planet of Plenty partnerships — so, working with customers, helping them with their sustainability journey — E-CO₂ plays a critical role in that. We can explain what the environmental foot-printing is, what the greenhouse gas emissions are. We could talk about ways to reduce those, then, as we bring in the Alltech colleagues and look at the nutrition and different technologies that can be utilized or different farming practices. It's a critical aspect, because if we don't measure it, it doesn't get done. So, we've got to make sure that we have that ability to measure the science in it and provide the data behind to track things.

                        When you're able to put a dashboard in front of somebody and say, "This is what we've done in terms of your environmental footprint" and, actually, you overlay on top of that the economics, you can quickly see that the two can go together very easily and that environmental sustainability or improvements around that can very much mean economic sustainability as well.

Tom:              I mentioned the EU Green Deal, which is driven by the aim of the European Union to become the world's first climate-neutral bloc by 2050. I'm wondering: What is your view of that initiative?

Mark:              Well, I think it's something that I'm very positive about. I think it is a good move. There are a lot of different initiatives there. There's a lot of thinking about cities and the way that cities are going to operate, especially — COVID, again, is challenging us on that. It really is top of mind. When you think about consumers in the U.S., I think there are some people who would reflect on those elements. In Europe, it's very much a situation that people are thinking about the environment in a much more serious way. They also see this as an opportunity for leadership for the European Union. This is an area, this is a topic, that Europe has always been leading on. To make that type of a goal, that this is something they can pull together and achieve — I think that aspect is very positive.

                        One concern I would have is they have a farm-to-fork program. This program, when you look at who is running it, it's very much led by some medical doctors, some human nutritionists, but it's not really looking at things from a pure or a full-chain approach. That's something that has been a little bit of a concern for us. Does agriculture or even the agri-food industry have a seat at the table?

                        I also think that there are a lot of very well-minded intended ideas. I think the question is going to be: How are they going to be implemented at the member-state level and then at that very local level? How do we make sure that we don't have unintended consequences? Which I think every government, when they go out and create these types of programs, has to look at and make sure that we are really achieving the best, exactly as you were describing earlier, asking earlier, this global-local question. If the EU puts so many constraints on the producers within the market, how does that then respond to imports? How are you going to hold imported products to the same levels, and how is that all going to be balanced out?

                        I think the phasing of this process is going to be a critical element. We're really pushing our teams to get very engaged and help to really achieve that implementation of this type of initiative and make sure that we take all the stakeholders into account when we're making the decisions that we need to make.

Tom:              You mentioned the importance of being aware of anticipating unintended consequences. Here's one: reducing the use of farming inputs, fertilizer, pesticides. It's been going on for many years; machinery, mapping, measurement systems have all become more efficient. But are there risks that reducing the use of those inputs could potentially lead to a reduction in food output?

Mark:              Certainly. I think, again, when you think of that global-local element, we've got to think about that aspect. We don't want to become so focused on reducing the environmental impact that we're not looking at the total production. We're often pushing people to say, “What is the production we have per unit of milk, per unit of bushel of corn?” or whatever the metric is, because that's really what we need to be looking for. We are in a situation, as a global planet, as a global community, where we do have malnourishment. We do have a huge amount of countries that are going to be left in a position post-COVID that is even less food-secure than they were before. So how do we make sure that we keep that productivity and realize that that's a big part of what we need to be doing as well?

                        Having said that, I think that there are different technologies. The soil science area is fascinating. We think about the microbiome of the soil and what we're able to achieve there — maybe changing some of these inputs, fertilizers, pesticides, and moving towards a more holistic approach and regenerative agriculture. I think these are areas that we can keep that productivity and add the efficiency but also keep the outputs. Those are the types of areas that we're really trying to put a focus on and highlight on as we look at Planet of Plenty and as we look at our Alltech ONE Ideas Conference coming up. Those are the types of stories we're looking to focus on.

Tom:              I think we often talk about achieving the goal of net zero emissions in aspirational terms, as something off in the future, but I'm wondering if we don't now have the affordable technology to achieve net zero.

Mark:              Yeah. I think that, from a lot of what I've looked at, those initial steps — I think we can make some big reductions, but when getting to net zero, I think those last steps are going to be the most costly. We're going to need to look at the things that are simple and easier to do. There are a lot of technologies, particularly when it comes to energy, that are becoming more and more affordable that can help us to make those first steps, but I think that last piece is really where it will be a little bit more challenged.

                        For me, I suppose we've always been ones that have said — if we think of the Chinese context, “the journey of a thousand miles starts with the first step,” it's the type of thing that we have to make those first steps. And typically, once we create those frameworks and start to say, “These are the KPIs or the outcomes that we want to achieve,” I think that will lead people in the right places. So, we're really trying to push our colleagues and encourage our customers to be trying out new things, trying out technologies. That's where a lot of our interest comes in, on that ag-tech area, the aggregation of technology, so that we can start to see what works and what doesn't.

                        We have to try things differently in different places. It's one of the things I love about my job, is how diverse the agricultural sector is. I think it is going to be something that will take some time to get there, but if we don't get started, we'll simply be analyzing this to death and we'll never really get there. I think there is a lot there, and so many of the technologies, they do help us to lower costs. That's one of the great things about, I think, especially the American agriculture sector. So much is really created around the improvements and the productivity, and nobody's having something subsidized. They're really having to go out and sell their idea and implement it because it's giving that return on investment.

Tom:              Earlier, when we were talking about the EU and the Green Deal initiative, you expressed the hope that agriculture would have a seat at the table in those discussions. I'm wondering about one aspect: carbon capture and carbon sequestration. Is that a science that is agriculture's role, and should that be a part of that conversation?

Mark:              Yeah. There's a lot in terms of, I think, people thinking about carbon farming and these types of things. I think we have to look at it as, maybe, an element that could be incorporated in different agricultural systems. One of our Planet of Plenty videos is actually an example of silvopasture, which is a mixed-use system where you have the land, you've got crops, you've got trees growing and you have, in this case, beef cattle in the same environment.

                        I think that's a great example of, really, what this whole system is. We are in this biogenic cycle, especially in the ruminant side. There's a lot of focus on methane production and a lot of confusion about it and a lot of, I think, misinformation when you really look at the fact that the methane is staying with us for a short period of time: ten years. It is a potent greenhouse gas, but it also breaks down quickly. Also, everything that the animals are eating, the CO₂ that ends up going back into the crops, is what created the plants that they consume, so it is a cycle. I think it's something that, as we become more and more efficient, as we probably have smaller dairy herds and smaller beef herds — which is something that has been a longstanding trend already — you can actually see how the overall environmental impact is reduced, too.

                        I think that there are some of these technologies that can come in. I think it will become an element of agriculture. People are going to look at their farms, at their operations, and say, “Let's add this aspect in,” whether that's methane digesters and trying to create energy out of materials already produced or, indeed, pure carbon capture plays that are going to be involved, and looking at some of those ways that you can mix things up. I think it's an exciting area. Again, it creates another income stream, a new income stream, for producers.

Tom:              Let's stay with that theme of methane for just a moment. In an article on its online news page, the United Nations states that, and I'm quoting here, "Livestock produce significant levels of methane, a greenhouse gas, and these could be reduced drastically if we eat less meat and more plant-based foods." Here, again, the signs are promising, such as the rising popularity of plant-based meats now being sold in major international fast-food chains. Do you envision a large-scale consumer shift to plant-based meats? How should the beef and dairy industries be positioning around the prospect of an increasing market presence of these meat alternatives?

Mark:              I think it's interesting. We've noticed, over a number of years, that the UN does like to come out with these statements, and we're not really sure which part of the UN they come from, because you do have such, obviously, a broad array of individuals, but you also have them living in a certain demographic and a certain geography in the world, and they sit in a certain place in society. There's been a massive amount of money made with plant-based meats already, and a lot of them have been quite speculative, a lot on the banking side — those that launched the IPOs, et cetera. There are a lot of people looking at this area as a big moneymaker for the future.

                        I think, if you step back and you look at the science, both in terms of the environmental side, I think there are some questions in terms of the claims being made — claims that, I would say, in more established industries, will be difficult to make. Then, on the human health side, the science there is also a little bit dubious.

So, we think that it's definitely going to be a trend. It's an area that has gotten the attraction of people. It's an area that people are interested in. It's catchy, and there's been a ton of marketing money put into it. But actually, when you look at the numbers, the growth actually has been miniscule compared to the overall protein market. That has been quite interesting to note, particularly during COVID. When you look at the percentages of increase for plant-based protein, it seems dramatic and astounding. When you look at the growth, the small percentage growth that took place more in the animal proteins, that actually dwarfs the growth that took place, on a real-volume basis, of plant-based.

                        We are a world that needs more protein. At Alltech, we don't have an issue of that being insect protein or that being plant-based proteins. But to a large degree, we've had a lot of these types of products in the past that have been far less processed. Again, based on my time in Asia, there's a lot of plant-based proteins that are out there and traditional ways of producing food, and I think coming at this thinking that this is some amazing technology and not thinking, again, about sustainability in a broader way — of what takes place in communities that were producing these products, of what takes place in the environment if we remove animals. Animals are critical to the soil health of our planet. If we remove them from the system, we're going to see a lot more deleterious effects. A world without cows, a world without animals, it's not a world I want to be in, and it is a world that we need to have to be able to make sure that we achieve what we need to.

                        As an environmentalist, I think one of my biggest concerns with this area is that we may have a population, we may have consumers who think they're genuinely doing the right thing by changing their diet, but in reality, we're actually not solving the climate issue, which is really being driven by fossil fuel usage.

Tom:              That's really interesting. Can you expand on that a little bit? Why is it wrong to think that way?

Mark:              I think it's because we're not looking at the whole system. We're not looking at the fact that agriculture produces, yes, greenhouse gases, but it also, as a primary function, captures carbon. Our food production system is actually pretty efficient, and it's getting more and more efficient. If we all stopped eating meat, we do not save the planet, if you want to say it that way. We do not stop climate change. This is one area where I do think diets will change. Diets will change in a lot of different ways. I think we're learning more and more about how our individual diets need to change throughout our lives. There are certain times we probably need more protein and times we need less. Also, it depends on our individual behaviors and lifestyle.

                        I think that, to me, it simply comes down to the fact that if we do not remove ourselves from fossil fuel usage and we continue to put more new carbon into the environment, that is really what's driving the change. The carbon that is being put into the atmosphere by animals in agriculture is carbon that we sequester with the crops that we grow. I think looking at that in that regard and realizing — can we improve yet further? Absolutely, we will, but that's not the area that I think we should be focused on. Those are the areas that concern me when I see statements like that from the UN, where I think that they're taking their eye off the ball and perhaps being, sometimes, misled to lead us down a path that may not achieve what we need to.

Tom:              It's projected that, by 2050, ten billion people will inhabit this planet, and that means making room for feeding and sheltering another two billion people in less than 30 years. Can world population growth at that pace be sustained, even as we're also dealing with climate change?

Mark:              Yeah, I think it absolutely can. I think a lot of it does have to come back to the fact that we do need to make changes. This has to be based on continued improvements. I don't think that this is something where this is a done deal that we can achieve this, but I do think, if we continue to focus on innovations and new technologies, it does give us that sense that the next 30 years really are going to be the most critical.

This is a time where we've got to make sure that we, I think — particularly in a time where we're not necessarily our most connected globally — we need to realize that we do need to be thinking as one world. A lot of this growth is going to be taking place in Asia. It's going to be taking place in Africa. It's going to be taking place, therefore, in places that we need to make sure that we are partnering with. A lot of what we're trying to do — we're operating in markets around the world as we connect with entrepreneurs. We help them to grow their businesses and, in a large degree, bring them the technology and the ideas and, sometimes, just the inspiration that they need to move those businesses forward. Those are going to be the people who build and have got a nutritional base for that protein that's required, the food that's needed for that growing population and, at the same time, grow those economies.

                        I think the fact is, when you speak to people in that position, they clearly see climate change as part of the environment that they're in, and they realize that this is something that they have to be thinking about. But I think, when we look back over the history of humankind, we've had situations such as this before where it was stated that we couldn't sustain our populations, and we've always achieved that. We have a lot of changes, of course, too, in more developed countries where, obviously, the population growth is slower. So, when I look at it in terms of the speed of growth, I think we're in a position now that this can be managed, I think, to a large degree. I think we're going to need some of those new people coming in, young people with new ideas, and they're going to be a big part of us helping us to achieve what needs to be done.

Tom:              At the beginning of the year, we spoke to a few experts about their insights and expectations for agriculture and food in 2021 and beyond. Some talked about the impact COVID-19 has had on the food chain; others talked about new regulations, innovations, emerging technologies. What big themes and big trends currently capture your attention?

Mark:              I think we spoke about a number that, really, at the onset of COVID, we could already see were going to be challenged. One of those was this whole idea of supply chains. Suddenly, when you have a disruption like COVID, your supply chain is thrown into chaos. You've got to not just understand and trust your suppliers — you also need to understand and trust your customers and make sure that those systems can work and be fluid and adapt to shocks. That was a big theme that we saw.

                        Another big theme has been health. Everybody is, of course, far more concerned about their health than they were before. I think that is changing our diets, and that really should be one of the major drivers for our, of course, dietary decisions.

I think another element, of course, that we've seen over the last year has been very much around inclusion and, I think empathy — companies needing to make sure that they're thinking about all stakeholders and all elements and how they're having a positive impact there.

Those have been, I think, big elements. One that's come forward to us also that I think is a little bit new actually goes back to your question around the growing population. If you think about how much food is wasted in our world, that, in and of itself, could have an extraordinary impact on all of these elements: on feeding the planet, on the environmental impacts and, really, on just having a better environment that we're living in. If you consider all food waste, that would actually represent 8% of greenhouse gases that are produced in the world — it would be the third-largest country, if it was a country, in terms of greenhouse gas production. This is an area which, again, is almost a pre-competitive area. How do we, as an entire food system, reduce that? We know that a lot of it is happening, obviously, a little bit through food production at that farm level, through transportation, through spoilage, maybe, in the retail side or waste in restaurants, or it's happening in our own homes. So, what are the types of things that we can work together on and, again, very much on a local level to reduce that? I think that could have a huge impact on us feeding that global population.

That's a real trend. I think it's starting to move. I think this is going to be a big area of focus, and it's one that we within Alltech are talking about. We're going to be exploring some of that starting in May and then growing out over the next few years to think about how we can reduce that food waste.

Tom:              You mentioned supply chain disruptions, and that makes me curious. Has your company, Alltech, experienced problems due to supply chain disruptions?

Mark:              Well, I think there was certainly a heightened focus on this area. Again, it goes back to that element we always talk about: making a friend — and we normally are thinking about that being a customer, but it also goes with our suppliers. We have to make sure that we have good relationships with them. Thankfully, we really did.

I think that there have been disruptions for our industry. Alltech, I think we're in a very good position. We have over 100 production facilities around the world. That gives us a lot of flexibility. It gives us options. If one facility has an issue, we can supply from another facility. I think that optionality helped us.

                        We also immediately, at the start of COVID, stated that safety was the number-one focus, and we wanted to take care of the health of our colleagues, our customers and our communities. Those were our three Cs. I didn't realize it at the time, but that really set the tone and made sure that everybody understood our operational capabilities and our ability to keep our own people safe, our customers safe. It was the critical thing, and so we've been able to maintain operations all the way through COVID. We haven't had those disruptions. We also have been able to have that flexibility of supply, having different suppliers, having deep relationships with those suppliers that have really helped us.

Tom:              Back to looking at trends, I'm wondering: What trends are actually, in real time, transforming the future of food and feed?

Mark:              I think, with the trends, I do think that the sustainability one is probably the thing that's changing the fastest. We're seeing it in Europe very quickly, but we also see, now, a trend here where, if you go into a Panera, you can see a “cool eats” menu. You can see what might be better for the planet. You can see the same types of ideas being explored in Chipotle. Other companies are looking at that as well.

                        Those types of messages are kind of a new fad. I think that quickly behind the fad needs to come the data and the story backing it up. That's something that I think we all need to be aware of. I don't think our industry is yet quite as focused on that as maybe we need to be. We've been thinking about: how did that shift, maybe, take place, and how quickly will it occur?

                        The other elements, though, might come back to this health idea. I think there's a lot of focus on: How can we produce foods that are better for our health, that are more enriched, that are health-enhancing? We've been able to show that, through some of our programs, we're not only reducing the reliance on antibiotics and food production but that we're actually reversing antibiotic resistance in bacteria and systems in and around those farms. That isn't an impact just for the production of that food but may be, also, an impact for the health of the people who work on those facilities.

                        That's an element — health, overall, and a focus on health — that, through this time of so much loss and so much grief, maybe is a silver lining or a benefit, that we're going to be more focused on our health and also, maybe, start to look at nutrition and our diets as a way to improve our health as opposed to constantly thinking that it's going to be a medical intervention that overcomes that challenge. I think that might be a big trend. When we look back in ten years, we'll say, “Wow, that was a moment when that aspect of our society changed.”

Tom:              The idea of carbon counting is pretty new to a lot of people. Do you see the day coming when carbon counting will have a place right there on the menu alongside calorie counting?

Mark:              Yeah. As I mentioned with the Panera idea and, I think, Chipotle — I think Chipotle is taking it a little bit further. They're almost saying, “You're having this burrito. What's the impact on the environment that this burrito had?” I don't know if they've got it totally dialed in yet, but they're seeing that as a clever way to differentiate themselves vis-à-vis their competitors.

We've noted that one in five millennials would say that they would change their diet to improve the planet's health. That's a pretty staggering number. I think that you could see, certainly, the case that this is the next thing, the next fad that comes along: “I'm not just thinking about how many calories I had today. I'm thinking about, actually, ‘What was the impact I had on the environment?’”

                        I think, within the European context, it's even going further. People are already changing what they're doing in terms of how they're traveling, where they're willing to travel, what types of jobs they will take because of the distance they will travel. I think the dietary aspect of that is just going to be a part of it, and that's going to be something that I think we'll probably see play out in a number of different ways. Diets have already been shifting, probably, away from beef more to pork or maybe poultry products over a number of years. Aquaculture is growing, and maybe that's going to play a bigger role, as well, as people start to think about those things. That's where we have to make sure — and I think our customers need to make sure they're getting out and telling the story and are accurately able to demonstrate and provide the metrics of what the actual environmental impact is of their food.

                        When you look at a steak in a restaurant, it's not exactly going to be totally clear what the environmental impact is of that. Every single producer has a different way of producing. I think that's where we've got to get to what we're really explaining: “As a producer, this is what I'm doing, and this is what makes me different to, maybe, somebody else.” I think those elements are going to be really speeding up in major trends that are going to impact our producers over the next five years.

Tom:              Earlier, you mentioned the mantra that your father carried with him throughout his life and career and, now, you are carrying with you. It's simple: it's “make friends.” How does collaboration fall into elevating the agri-food sector, the whole sector?

Mark:              You know, it is an industry, and he used to like to say this: He had a colleague early on who said to him, "Pearse, isn't this great? We travel around, we talk to great people, and they pay us for it." It always stuck with me, where I genuinely would say agriculture is one of those sectors that is made up of great people. I think anytime you're involved with animals, it somehow makes you a better human being. I think that they're very much people who care about each other, who care about their communities, who are there doing the right things, maybe, because they work outside, because they work on the soil, because they work with animals. For us, I think, when you have that type of mindset, I think that's the mindset that helps you realize you depend on your neighbor. You depend on that person coming down the farm drive and, maybe, giving you some insights or ideas or providing you with a technology. Collaboration is somewhat second nature within our industry.

                        I think, within our company, when you start out as a small startup, in a way, and grow, and you've got to go and do things a little bit differently — and I remember my father saying this to me: "Mark, I had to go and do it myself because I didn't have anybody else. But you, you'll have the opportunity to work with lots of people because of what has been built, because of what we've achieved” — and because of where, I think, the world is.

I think that the world is in a position for collaboration. It's been something that we've really all seen as a major growth driver for the future. It sits in a very important place. When we talk about Planet of Plenty, I would say the words in front of that that are even more important: "Working together." Working together is a clear signal. We are open to work with people. We're open to discuss ideas. I think that was always his way. He loved to have people come and visit, to sit around and talk about ideas. Many times, there was nothing related to business at all. It was simply, "How can I help you? How can my people help you? How does this have that impact?" And that positive impact makes that difference that we want to make in the world.

                        As I mentioned before, I think, three years ago, we really reflected deeply on that, and we said, “That is our mission. That's our purpose as a company.” It suddenly went from being a Pearse Lyons idea that he encouraged his colleagues to take on to, suddenly, everybody's idea. I think that's been, really, one of the most exciting things over the past few years. I guess that's what they always say: Great leaders make more leaders, and I think that's what he achieved.

Tom:              Alltech's work in Haiti comes immediately to mind — the Haitian coffee product. What new business models might be created following that Planet of Plenty mission statement?

Mark:              I think one of the elements that we've been talking about that goes back to that trend of trust. There are transactional relationships, and those are critical to businesses and very important. That's a lot of what our businesses operate, but partnership is something different. Partnerships, I think, really are going to be the future. We are now moving into a phase where we've had a few dozen companies that we are working with, different markets that have been success stories focused on this Planet of Plenty collaboration. I think that's a new business model. That's a way of saying, “What are the aspects that you're working on? What's the big goal you have as a company? How can we help you to achieve that?” And equally, in many regards, those customers also may be companies that are helping Alltech with our own objectives.

                        So, the mutually aligned goals, the idea that this isn't just about one sales order; it's about a much longer-term relationship. Companies that are saying to us, "Can we work with you on multi-year projects and deals?" That's a new business model that's pretty exciting that I think has come out of this message, because a lot of people are saying, "We love the Planet of Plenty idea. We want to be a part of it. How do we do that?" So we've created that framework.

                        It's interesting because some of the framework and some of the ideas of this actually came from something that might seem not so aligned and something that took place now ten and a half years ago, which was the Alltech FEI World Equestrian Games. Within that, we created feed partners, and those feed partners were customers of Alltech, and we help them with their marketing. We help them with their IT. We help them with whatever they needed, and I think we're able to replicate that now — maybe in an even more meaningful way in terms of some of these big issues that we're all going to be dealing with globally in the Planet of Plenty partnerships.

                        That's a concept I'm very excited about. What's been great is, as I said before, it's gone from being an idea to really something that our local markets are embracing. I was on a call today with Asia, Latin America, North America. In each of those calls, people were talking about a company that they had a connection with, an idea they had about creating a Planet of Plenty partnership. So, it's really taken root within the organization, and it's moving very quickly.

Tom:              You have a very big event coming up. In the years before this pandemic forced you to go virtual for 2020, the Alltech ONE Ideas Conference has gathered in one place. You mentioned the Symposium, which is what it was before it was called ONE, and that was here in Lexington, Kentucky. It gave a platform to agri-food expertise, from insights into animal feed and nutrition to developments in CRISPR research from all over the world. In fact, we interviewed many of the people who spoke at those conferences. And I have to tell you, Mark, my head was about to explode at the end of one of those days. The information is incredible.

So, the dates of the virtual conference have been set for this year: May 25–27. This will be the second year that the Alltech ONE Ideas Conference has gone virtual. What are the themes for this year's conference?

Mark:              Well, we've taken this and focused back on that Planet of Plenty message. If you look at the logo we have for Planet of Plenty, we have these three leaves. One stands for science, one stands for sustainability and one stands for storytelling. We're going to use those three as the themes of the conference. We've been thinking about this in terms of how these elements are interconnected. There's so much that's taking place, but we have to also be led by that science. At the same time, we can only really communicate, and communicate effectively, if we have that storytelling ability and that ability to connect with people. Those are going to be, on a broader scale, some of the themes.

                        Some new things that we're doing — we did decide, almost this time last year, to move the conference to a virtual format. We had to make that decision. Our team worked very, very quickly and established a very successful program. We took the conference from an in-person, 3,500-person event to almost 25,000 people on the platform. This year, what we want to do is make sure that we're engaging in a deeper way with that audience and also continuing to grow. We decided to invest in our own platform. We didn't want to work purely with third parties. We now have our own trade show area. We've got our own place that really looks like, almost, the Central Bank Convention Center, and so it's really exciting to see how we're going to be able to utilize that.

                        The conference will be those three days. If people come through, they'll be able to see some of the different tracks they normally would see by species, perhaps something on general business, on human health, crop science, all those different things that they would see — but they're also going to be able to look at different talks and see, “This one is focused on health and wellness. This one is focused on sustainability. This one is focused on regenerative agriculture, and I want to follow those throughout.” So now, different to a physical conference, it's very easy to be able to listen to a talk, then pop into another section — plus all the information that's on demand so people could come back. I think that might give us all a little bit of a better chance to not get a headache, as you did, and be able to absorb some of the information.

Those are going to be exciting ways that the conference is changing. The other element here is that we're going to open the conference, the trade show area, a little bit early so people will get a chance to go in. They'll be able to experience that and use the environment. I think that'll create the opportunity for more interaction. This platform gives us the chance to have one-on-one meetings but also workshops on certain topics where smaller groups can have a voice. I think, through so much of the past year, when you're looking at the screen and hearing somebody give a talk, that's one thing, but that opportunity for interaction is the key. That's, of course, what makes our conference unique, I think, and really exciting — when we're all able to be in the same place and have those conversations, that makes that impact. That's what we want to make sure that we replicate and what our teams are working on now.

Tom:              Well, I must say that it's a delightful headache to have. I'm wondering: Do you hear from people? Do you get feedback about the connections made, ideas hatched, collaborations formed after a conference has occurred?

Mark:              Absolutely. It's something that there isn't, certainly, a year that goes by that there aren't many of those collaborations created. We have a lot of people who end up creating businesses together or establishing working relationships at the conference. They can hearken back to that and say, "Well, I met that person at the ONE; I met that person in the President's Club," or whatever the case may be. That's a critical aspect.

                        I think the networking element is really important. What we want to make sure is that we provide that networking opportunity in this format, and I'll tell you why that's important. Say we have 3,500 people at the physical conference. We probably have three-fold that, so maybe roughly 10,000-plus people who have never been to the conference. But if we're up to 25,000 people, that means there are people for whom this is the conference — the majority of people have experienced it in a virtual format than ever in a physical format. So, this really means that we can connect with anyone at any time. We can engage with those people, as I mentioned — perhaps they are entrepreneurs who are running a business who don't have time to travel or have never had the ability to gain access to this type of information. Also, we now are able to provide them with an opportunity to network with others. I think that's a really exciting thing.

                        It really goes back to the purpose of the conference. Is it to explore new ideas? Absolutely, but it's also about the relationships that we build along the way and how we can continue, beyond the conference, to have that positive impact. It was something we wanted to do, for a number of years, as a virtual element — and of course, in 2020 we were forced to. It's going to be something that will be with us from here on out. That's the challenge for 2022, is running a physical and a virtual conference as one.

Tom:              That's going to be interesting. Is registration already underway? Is it available on the Alltech website?

Mark:              Yes. Everything's up there on the website at one.alltech.com. The registration is open. We're looking forward to welcoming so many people back in. We have, of course, continued coverage throughout the year, and that has been another element that we've added with our Alltech ONE Virtual Experience, but we really shifted back into that Alltech ONE Ideas Conference message and the look and feel of that.

I'm really, really excited for this year's program. As I mentioned already, we already have a team, a separate team, working on 2022 — when I think it's going to be even bigger — who are really pushing to think about things in new ways. I mentioned that waste aspect before. That's going to be something that is a big focus. Just one shocking statistic that I learned on food waste is that the average American wastes the same amount of money on food as we are receiving in our stimulus checks — $2,000 of wasted food per American in a country which actually has some of the cheapest food in the world. The volume of that food is also very significant. That's an idea, I think, that we need to focus on and will be an element of this year's program and a much bigger element of next year's.

Tom:              Well, something to ponder. Thank you for leaving us with that. That's incredible. Dr. Mark Lyons, president and CEO of Alltech, thank you so much for this almost hour-long conversation. I really appreciate it.

Mark:              Yes, thank you for the opportunity. I really enjoyed it as well.

Tom:              I'm Tom Martin, and thank you for listening

People interpret sustainability in different ways. Hence the uncertainty and divisiveness the topic can create in discussions. In contrast with other industries, the agri-food sector has the unique position of being a solution provider when it comes to mitigating emissions and supporting biodiversity in our local environments. Animal feed is integral to profitable and efficient dairy and beef farming. Therefore, feed production has a crucial role in how we lower the environmental impact associated with the food system.

Strengthening the links in our chain

COVID-19 has emphasized the need for such resilient food systems. Feed production capacity is directly correlated to the amount of food available for human consumption and, indeed, general food security. Alltech’s experience across 128 countries finds that sustainable and efficient feed supply chains are relevant to small-scale livestock production all the way up to some of the world’s largest integrators. A growing challenge for the feed industry is competition with humans for similar feed sources. This challenges the feed additive inclusion to improve rumen efficiency and exploration of bespoke feed ingredients that only ruminants can utilize. Sustainable animal feeding has and is being practiced. Through Alltech’s unique network of eight Alltech IFM™ (in vitro fermentation model) labs around the world, we can verify in greater detail diet efficiency and where scope exists to lower emissions and improve producer profitability. 

Can you verify that?

It is no longer sufficient to simply claim a low carbon footprint for your livestock production system or animal feed. This needs to be supported by repeatable, measurable and verifiable evidence. Alltech E-CO₂ has developed the Feeds EA™ model to help feed manufacturers and producers globally measure and lower the carbon footprint of their feed. Feeds EA measures the environmental impact of feed production at the feed mill level by assessing the effects of existing compounds or blends. This is determined by calculating greenhouse gas emissions from production, cultivation, processing, energy utilization and transportation in feed manufacturing. Feeds EA™ can calculate emissions from a database of more than 300 ingredients, including raw materials, soya products, byproducts and additives.  

In reducing food waste through circular agriculture-type initiatives, we can be confident about the resilience of our food production systems to embrace more efficient resource utilization. This is exemplified in initiatives such as supplementation of byproducts to ruminants and closing nutrient loops. By lowering food loss and waste in our livestock production systems in a verifiable way, we can continue to make a strong case for the sustainable solutions our industry offers in slowing the pace of climate change.

Mitigating waste

Precision agriculture and the application to animal nutrition has been proven in recent Alltech meta-analyses on dairy (Salami et al., 2021) and beef research (Salami et al., 2020) to lower environmental impact through improved nitrogen utilization in ruminant systems. Optigen® supplementation through dairy diets was shown to:

• Improve nitrogen utilization efficiency in dairy cattle by 4%, thanks to better nitrogen capture in the rumen.
• Reduce manure nitrogen excretion by 12–13 g of nitrogen/cow/day.

This data suggests, for example, that the use of Optigen could reduce the annual manure nitrogen excretion from the U.S. dairy sector by an average of 51,509 metric tons of nitrogen based on the annual milk output.

Simply put, this approach is trying to provide ‘the right amount of nitrogen, at the right time, in the right place’ to help in reducing waste on farms. Results from the meta-analysis also showed that the use of Optigen in dairy diets resulted in a carbon saving of around 54 g of CO₂e per kg of milk. When extrapolated to the annual milk output of the German dairy sector, for example, this would be equivalent to a carbon emission reduction of 1.8 million metric tons of CO₂e. Such a carbon saving represents 16% of the entire reduction target for German agriculture by 2030.

A simulation analysis based on the results of the meta-analysis indicated that feeding Optigen to 1,000 dairy cows would:

• Increase income over feed costs by $18,000.
• Reduce the carbon footprint of the herd by 647 metric tons of CO2e. That carbon reduction is the same as taking 424 cars off the road or 436 houses’ use of electricity.

The meta-analysis on beef research highlighted how the partial replacement of vegetable protein with Optigen exhibited a consistent improvement in the liveweight gain and feed efficiency of beef cattle. The many positive effects included an average higher liveweight gain (by 8%) and better feed efficiency (by 8%), with the inclusion of corn silage enhancing the effects of Optigen.

A simulation analysis based on these benefits indicated that feeding Optigen to gain 440 lbs. in 1,000 cattle would:

• Reduce the time to slaughter by 9 days.
• Reduce feed costs by $18,000.
• Support a reduction in the carbon footprint of the beef unit by 111 tons of CO₂e. That carbon saving is the same as taking 73 cars off the road or 75 houses’ use of electricity.

Sustainability does not have to come at a cost

Lowering the environmental impact from animal feed does not imply lowering revenues for food system stakeholders. From large dairy farms in the U.S. to the 300 million dairy cows predominantly spread across small farms in India, Alltech has firsthand experience of how sustainable solutions have become the non-negotiable in animal nutrition. Profitable farming understandably leads this agenda. With animal feed typically representing the most significant variable cost in producing animal products, there is a business responsibility to ensure we minimize food loss and waste.

Animal feed production has humbly underpinned the food system that has enabled global population growth over the last 150 years. It is now time to recognize this unique contribution and how it also serves in discovering and implementing technologies that lower the environmental impact of animal products and support the circular economy.

Considering sustainability efforts need to make both environmental and economic sense, don’t miss our related blog 6 tips to stretch protein supplies and lower your feed costs.

I want to learn more about ruminant production.

The pathology of cattle consuming endophyte-infected tall fescue varies greatly based on the weather and the alkaloid concentration. The most readily apparent signs of fescue toxicosis include reduced feed intake, weight gain, milk production and reproductive efficiency, as well as tissue necrosis and a rough hair coat. Decreases in productivity caused by fescue toxicosis are estimated to cost U.S. beef producers more than $2 billion annually (Kallenbach, 2015).

Absorption of alkaloids

Calculating the animal’s retention of ergot alkaloids is difficult due to biotransformation. Generally, it is estimated that 76–92% of consumed ergot alkaloids are absorbed, with the other 8–24% excreted in the feces. The math on alkaloid absorption and excretion doesn’t always add up, as alkaloids are broken down and/or biotransformed into numerous metabolites. Most alkaloids are ultimately excreted in the urine as lysergic acid.

Fescue alkaloids and microbiome shifts

An emerging area of research is the interaction between fescue alkaloids and the microbiome. Decreases in the Erysipelotrichaceae family and increases of Ruminococcaceae, Lachnospiraceae and Clostridiaceae, as well as abundances of Planctomycetes, Chloroflexi and Proteobacteria phyla have been reported for cattle grazing infected fescue. Fescue seed extract, when added to in vitro fermentations, led to increased populations of tryptophan-utilizing bacteria. Considering the tryptophan base of ergot alkaloids, this increase likely indicates an up-regulation in detoxification capacity. The characterization and identification of the three isolates with the highest conversion abilities found that all three were gram-positive, spore-forming rods that produced ammonia from tryptophan, classified as Clostridium sporogenes.

Receptor-binding of fescue ergot alkaloids

Due to the structural similarity of ergot alkaloids and serotonin, dopamine, norepinephrine and epinephrine, several receptor types in numerous tissues are affected during fescue toxicosis in cattle. This results in a wide range of effects on physiology and metabolism. As more research examining the underlying mechanisms is completed, the connections between ergot alkaloid receptor-binding and animal performance grow more complex.

Individual animal sensitivity to infected fescue is affected by:

• Environmental conditions.
• The density of the receptors.
• The capacity for liver and ruminal degradation.
• Other genetic factors.

Fescue's effect on weight gains

Ergot alkaloid-induced vasoconstriction reduces heat dissipation, resulting in a variety of physiological fescue toxicosis symptoms in cattle, including an increased respiration rate and elevated core body temperature. Ultimately, this leads to lower weight gains — which is generally known as the summer slump, as animals spend less time grazing as a result of standing in the shade or water to cool off. In colder months, fescue-associated vasoconstriction combines with thermoregulatory vasoconstriction, resulting in tissue death in the extremities, which is commonly known as fescue foot.

Ergot alkaloid consumption also leads to:

• The thickening of the medial layer of blood vessels
• Endothelial cell damage
• Vascular stasis
• Thrombosis
• Ischemia
• Changes in blood pressure, among other cardiovascular effects

Fescue's effect on rumen fill

The frequency and amplitude of the ruminal contractions, as well as changes in eating patterns due to fescue toxicosis in cattle, combine to affect rumen fill, passage rates and intake.

• Vasoconstriction also reduces blood flow to the rumen, decreasing VFA absorption.
• Increased rumen fill provides a negative feedback loop, exacerbating reduced intakes.
• While the total tract digestibility of the feeds is generally unchanged, these alterations work in concert to reduce nutrient availability, contributing to the reduced growth rate frequently observed in cattle grazing fescue.
• Added to this are the effects of alkaloids on circulating serotonin levels, the hypothalamic center and tryptophan-related satiety.

Fescue's effect on energy metabolism

Ergot alkaloids affect energy metabolism primarily when alkaloid intakes are high and during heat stress. Growth differences in cattle during fescue toxicosis are most likely the result of reduced intake, as no differences in retained energy or energy partitioning were caused by alkaloid ingestion when feed intake was equal.

• When fed near maintenance, cattle had lower basal metabolic rates.
• At higher feeding rates, maintenance energy requirements increased.
• When combined with observed increases in fat loss and a higher capacity for gluconeogenesis in the liver, this indicates the prioritization of energy (when available) toward elevated respiration, thermoregulation and alkaloid detoxification.

Economic losses due to fescue toxicosis

As much as 75% of the economic losses attributed to infected tall fescue pastures are related to decreased calving rates.

For cows:

• Alkaloid consumption reduces the circulating levels of several hormones important for reproductive efficiency, including progesterone and estradiol.
• Changes in ovarian follicle development, oocyte quality and luteal function have been reported.
• When combined with vasoconstriction to the uterus and ovaries, it is no surprise that reductions in reproductive efficiency are seen in cows grazing infected fescue.
• There is speculation that vasoconstriction in the umbilical cord contributes to low birthweights and diminished fetal development.

On the bull side of the equation, research indicates that ergot alkaloids may:

• Affect sperm count.
• Increase the occurrence of abnormal sperm.
• Alter motility, especially during the summer months.

Fescue's effect on milk production and calving

The structural similarity of ergot alkaloids to dopamine results in reduced prolactin secretion from the anterior pituitary gland. Further, changes in gene expression in the mammary glands of cattle consuming fescue indicate alterations in their lipid metabolism and small molecule transport. Altogether, these changes translate to reduced mammary development and lower milk production. Similar changes in lipid metabolism can be seen in reduced levels of circulating cholesterol and the occurrence of fat necrosis (lipomatosis), and in some cases of long-term alkaloid exposure, these fatty masses can cause digestive issues and dystocia. 

Fescue's effect on hair coat and immune function

Reduced prolactin also leads to the rough hair coat that is often observed in cattle grazing infected fescue. Originally thought to be a retained winter hair coat, it is now known that low prolactin levels increase hair growth rates. As prolactin is a co-factor in humoral immune function, the long-term grazing of infected fescue can lead to depressed levels of immunoglobulins. However, as nutritional levels also affect immune function, more work needs to be done to determine whether altered immunocompetence is a direct result of ergot alkaloid consumption or a secondary effect of a diminished nutritional status. While there is no true fescue toxicosis treatment for cattle, there are ways to mitigate the challenges that fescue presents through management, nutrition and feed additives.

References and Additional Reading

Fribourg, H. A., D. B. Hannaway, and C. P. West (ed.) 2009. Tall Fescue for the Twenty-First Century. Agron. Monog. 53. ASA, CSSA, SSSA. Madison, WI. 540 pp. Also (http://forages.oregonstate.edu/tallfescuemonograph).

Kallenbach, R. L. (2015). BILL E. KUNKLE INTERDISCIPLINARY BEEF SYMPOSIUM: Coping with tall fescue toxicosis: Solutions and realities. Journal of Animal Science, 93(12), 5487-5495.

Mayberry, K. J. (2018). Evaluation of Genetic Resistance to Fescue Toxicosis in Purebred Angus Cattle Utilizing Phenotypic Variables, Calf Performance and Cytokine Response. Thesis, North Carolina State University.

Melchior, E. A., & Myer, P. R. (2018). Fescue toxicosis and its influence on the rumen microbiome: mitigation of production losses through clover isoflavones. Journal of Applied Animal Research, 46(1), 1280-1288.

Poole, R. K., & Poole, D. H. (2019). Impact of ergot alkaloids on female reproduction in domestic livestock species. Toxins, 11(6), 364.

Download a free poster!

For any cow-calf operation, a primary goal is to enhance the ratio of pounds of calf weaned per cow bred annually. A critical component of reaching this goal is keeping the herd as close to a 365-day calving cycle as possible. To this end, shortening the postpartum anestrus interval and increasing first-service conception rates to reduce the need for cattle rebreeding are key topics of discussion and research within the industry. Both nutrition and body condition affect anestrus and conception, dictating the cows’ ability to rebreed successfully.

Identifying and correcting problem cows between calving and breeding is not an easy proposition. As such, the best option is to set a cow up for success before calving by ensuring that her BCS is between 5.5 and 6 and that her nutritional needs are met.

Return to estrus

The length of the postpartum anestrus is fundamental to determining the calving interval. Given a typical 283-day cow gestation period, cows must have a postpartum interval of 82 days to produce one calf every 12 months. Cows cycle from anywhere between 30 to 100 days after calving, with nutrition and cow age contributing to the anestrus length. In beef cows, the uterus returns to its non-pregnant size by around 30 days post-calving. Before cows are ready to cycle normally, an additional 10 days is required to complete the uterine involution.

Beef cows that calve early in the season and cycle early have better chances of fully completing their uterine involution and returning to their normal cyclicity before the start of the breeding season. Cows that are cycling before starting the breeding season are most likely to conceive on first breeding — and within the first 21 days of the breeding season.

Research has also shown that the nutritional requirements for beef cattle in late gestation affect the cow’s health and return to normal cyclicity. The importance of body condition scores and nutrition in relation to conception and pregnancy rates has been thoroughly studied, with results indicating that:

• Cows need access to sufficient protein and energy to calve with a BCS between 5.5 and 6. Not only is being in the proper condition important for allowing the cow to produce high-quality colostrum, but this BCS must then be maintained throughout the breeding season.
• Underconditioned cows are slower to cycle, skewing the 365-day calving cycle, and cows that lose condition between calving and breeding are significantly less likely to conceive.
• Immediately following calving, the cow is using the nutrition she is provided with to recover from the stresses of the gestation period and calving, as well as to produce milk for her new calf. Only after those needs are met will the cow redirect her energy and nutrients toward preparing for the next breeding season.

A significant body of external work supports the use of fat supplementation to enhance reproduction, generally in relation to managing cattle BSC and/or avoiding a negative energy balance in transition animals. In these cases, oleic acid (C18:1) may be the preferred fat source, as it boosts energy being partitioned toward the cow’s body reserves. 

Alternatively, stearic acid (C18:0) is preferentially used as an energy source, and dietary supplementation may reduce the cow’s reliance on mobilizing her body reserves. All fat feeding should be carefully considered — especially the type of fat and the timing of the feeding, as there are instances in which supplemental fat has reduced reproductive efficiency by increasing anestrous, reducing intake and, in turn, the energy balance, or inhibiting prostaglandin synthesis.  

Conception success and embryo mortality

A lot of attention is given to conception rates in beef cattle. However, research from Ft. Keogh in Montana indicates that 90–100% of cows will conceive at first breeding and that it is actually early embryo mortality that gives rise to many open cows. 

• Approximately 25% of cows suffer embryonic loss before the 28th day of their gestation period, with a further 8% of pregnancies lost before day 42. 
• Unlike late-term pregnancy losses, early embryo mortality is often not noticed on the farm. These losses are often miscategorized as cows that didn’t catch on the first round of breeding.
• Embryo mortality is estimated to cost U.S. cattle producers $1.4 billion annually as a result of open cows, lost productive days and rebreeding costs. 
• Embryo survival is affected by a variety of factors, including maternal and fetal nutrition, genetics, maternal stress, parity and health. As a result, research examining this issue is limited, and often, no clear answer for reducing embryonic loss is determined.  

How nutrition affects reproductive success

Balancing energy and protein in cow diets is important, as lower conception rates are often observed in cows with very high dietary protein intakes. Excess protein can increase the urea concentration in uterine secretions, which results in elevated prostaglandin levels. As prostaglandin is a signal for the body to return to cyclicity, this mechanism may be partly responsible for early embryonic losses in some herds.

As with body condition maintenance, research indicates that fat supplementation may additionally have a direct impact on reproduction.

• Dietary fat has been reported to increase follicle formation in super-ovulated cows, possibly by increasing the serum insulin levels as a mediating step. 
• Luteinizing hormone (LH) secretion, which triggers ovulation and CL development, is controlled in part by an animal’s energy status; thus, fat supplementation that enhances the energy balance will also aid in LH regulation.
• Dietary fat supplementation has also been reported to increase serum progesterone. A poor-quality CL or insufficient progesterone can both be responsible for pregnancy losses before implantation, particularly in cows that are bred on their first cycle after calving. This once again highlights the importance of early calving to provide cows sufficient time to complete their anestrus and return to normal cyclicity before the start of the breeding season.

Beyond energy and protein, trace minerals — such as copper, zinc, manganese and selenium — play key roles in health, metabolism and the general nutritional requirements of beef cattle. Sub-clinical deficiencies in trace minerals can lead to reduced cyclicity and diminished reproductive health. Minerals impact colostrum quality and calf immunity, but their value for the cow should also not be forgotten. 

Optimizing trace minerals can aid in maintaining optimal uterine health by reducing the risk of:

• Metritis.
• Retained placentas.
• Other adverse events that lengthen the time needed for uterine involution and a return to normal cyclicity.

Nutrigenomics research has also shown that minerals affect several metabolic pathways related to the preparation of the endometrium for implantation.

Other factors affecting success

The period before the start of the calving season is a good time to go over your herd health plan. Connect with your veterinarian and other experts to ensure that your management and vaccination programs are in line with the best practices for your region.

This is also a good time to make sure that your recordkeeping is up to date. Diagnosing breeding and reproductive issues is often an exercise in looking back. Working from accurate records can make the difference in identifying the underlying causes and developing a plan to prevent them next year.

The bottom line

Beyond the importance of individual nutrients, timing the supplemental feeding of cows correctly is important. The last 50 to 60 days of the cow’s gestation period are well-known to be critical for colostrum quality, as well as calf health and growth — but preparation for calving and rebreeding go hand in hand. As it takes time for nutrients to be absorbed, metabolized and take effect in the animal, a feeding program to support reproductive soundness and breeding-related stresses should begin before calving and continue through the confirmation of pregnancy.

A few key indicators to monitor are the percentages of mature cows calving during the first 21 days of the calving season and of late-season-calving cows. If either of these metrics run above average, it is time to take a close look at your calving and breeding season program.

Simply put, cows need to be set up for successful rebreeding before calving. Waiting to think about the breeding season until after the calf hits the ground is too late to affect major change in your cow herd’s performance.

Download a free poster!

Proactive cattlemen are good cattlemen. They have the foresight to combat the inevitable stresses and other challenges their cattle will face. They know that weaning, transportation and other prolonged periods of stress can have a negative impact on immune function and, ultimately, the performance of their animals. So they act to mitigate that stress and, in turn, any health problems their beef cattle are facing. They know that prevention is cheaper than treatment, and they want to see their cattle thrive. Preventative health management practices are key for healthy cattle.

Vaccinations and nutrition have a symbiotic relationship in terms of maintaining healthy immune functions in cattle. While quality nutritional programs are the bedrock of healthy immune function, both nutritional and vaccination programs are important for successful preventative health management on a cattle operation. Preventative health management focuses on promoting an animal’s natural immunity and minimizing the negative growth responses associated with stress and other health challenges.

The role of vaccination

Vaccinating your cattle stimulates their immune systems to produce antibodies that specifically work to combat disease-causing viruses or bacteria. After vaccination, a healthy immune response should translate to a memory of those specific pathogens for the immune system. This memory ensures a rapid response if the animal is exposed to pathogens it has been vaccinated against and allows the animal to avoid infection. Disease challenges vary between different geographies, so it is important to work with your local veterinarian to develop vaccine protocols, as they can identify and walk through the specific needs of your operation.

Although your needs may vary based on your herd and geography, there are a few vaccines that we typically consider crucial for beef cattle, such as a scours vaccine and vaccinating for the bovine respiratory syncytial virus.

Implementing a beef vaccination schedule

While vaccination is generally important, establishing a well-constructed beef cattle vaccination schedule is crucial for vaccine success. One part of that plan — that is, the timing — can make the difference between failure and success. Vaccinations should be timed so that peak levels of antibodies are present when the animal is at the highest risk of infection. Keep in mind that peak levels of antibodies take several weeks to manifest following vaccination, so you’ll want to plan ahead.

The stage of the production cycle will determine the type and timing of the vaccine.

• Pre-calving: A scours vaccination should happen during late gestation so that the highest levels of antibodies are present in the colostrum. A new calf’s immune system is weak, leaving it susceptible to disease and reliant on colostrum to provide it with much-needed antibodies and protection.
• Pre-breeding: For added protection for replacement heifers and cows, it might make sense to implement a pre-breeding vaccination protocol. This should be done around 45 days before you are hoping to breed. 
• Bulls: Keeping your bulls protected may mean implementing an annual vaccination program. Similar to your cows and replacement heifers, these vaccinations may be most effective for bulls around 45 days before breeding.
• Weaned calves: Vaccinations should be given a couple of weeks before weaning so that peak antibody protection is achieved during feedlot arrival. With weaning, transportation, a new environment and mingling with a new group, this time in a calf’s life is the perfect storm for sickness. Vaccination provides calves with some protection as they start this new stage of their lives.

These programs and protocols are only as effective as they are managed. Poor animal health status at vaccination, improper vaccine handling and inadequate nutritional status can all lead to vaccine failure. A failed vaccine costs more than just the amount of product you had in the syringe; it can lead to loss of gain or even death throughout an entire group of calves. Likewise, it is important to understand that vaccines do not guarantee 100% protection and may only provide protection for a period. Even so, can we increase the effectiveness of the vaccine through proper nutrition?

The role of nutrition

Meeting an animal's nutritional requirements is essential for the proper development, maintenance and function of its immune system. Among the other health benefits good nutrition provides, it can also bolster the effectiveness of vaccines and provide longer-lasting protection for cattle. To achieve a nutritional status that supports immune responses, a cattle nutrition program must include energy, protein, trace minerals and vitamins.

• Energy: Immune responses require an abundance of energy. When cattle are exposed to a disease, their immune systems work hard. In terms of the energy hierarchy, an immune response comes before maintenance and production energy. However, shifting energy to the immune response will decrease the nutrients available for growth or maintenance and can cause a reduction in body condition in dams and reduce growth in feedlot animals.
• Protein: Proteins are used to produce antibodies. Since the goal of vaccination is to increase the production of antibodies, a protein deficiency can result in substandard antibody production. As with energy, shifting protein from growth to immune function can negatively impact animal performance.
• Trace minerals and vitamins: The amount of trace minerals and vitamins needed in the diet varies based on the age, role and geography of the cattle, but both vitamins and minerals play an essential role in immune function. Deficiencies in one or more of these nutrients can lead to reduced antibody production.

Nutritional needs at different life stages

Just like with vaccines, the nutritional needs of your cattle will vary based on your specific herd and geography. Factors that can contribute to the nutrition discussion on your operation include the type of facilities your cattle have access to, the feedstuffs used and whether your cattle have experienced health issues in the past. The most important factor, though, is the current life stage of your cattle, as this will dictate the most basic nutritional needs that should be met.

• Newborn calves: As mentioned above, calves are born with a high susceptibility to disease, requiring them to rely on colostrum to acquire those all-important antibodies. Calves should have a healthy gut from the very start so that they can better absorb the nutrients in colostrum and, as they transition to creep feed, maximize their potential for big gains.
• Weaned calves: Maintaining a healthy gut in your calves through weaning is crucial to supporting their gastrointestinal integrity, aiding in vaccine success during the receiving period and keeping them healthy in high-stress situations.
• Cows: The needs of the cows in your herd can vary based on their age and their current stage in the production cycle. Depending on the forage quality, cows may need mineral supplementation for optimum health, immune function and reproductive success.

Herd vaccination programs require an investment of both time and money, and quality nutrition is essential to safeguarding your investment. Talk with your veterinarian about putting together a solid vaccination and nutrition program for your operation. Remember: Proactive cattlemen are good cattlemen, and prevention is cheaper than treatment.

I want to learn more about nutrition for my beef cattle.

In January 2016, a massive fire burned down Kentucky’s largest individual cattle market, the Blue Grass Stockyards. The stockyard has since rebuilt its facilities, but like many in the agri-food industry, it has faced new challenges over the past year. We spoke with COO Jim Akers about the current state of the meatpacking industry, the challenges and opportunities for rebuilding the cattle market and more.

The following is an edited transcript of the Ag Future podcast episode with Jim Akers hosted by Tom Martin. Click below to hear the full audio or listen on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

Tom:                          In January 2016, a huge column of black smoke rose over Lexington, Kentucky. It could be seen as far away as Louisville, 70 miles to the west. A massive fire had broken out at Bluegrass Stockyards’ main Lexington facility, devastating the largest individual cattle market in Kentucky. To put it in perspective, Bluegrass Stockyards is to cattle what Keeneland is to Thoroughbreds. It’s been five years since the fire, and much has happened in that time. Joining us from Lexington is Bluegrass Stockyards CEO Jim Akers. Thanks for joining us, Jim.

Jim:                             Glad to be with you.

Tom:                          So, you all had a new 232,000-square-foot facility up and running on Iron Works Pike near the Kentucky Horse Park outside of Lexington just a year and a half after the fire. How did you manage to do business during the time before you could reopen?

Jim:                             Well, we were very fortunate in our structure in that we have two other facilities that are located within 35 miles of Lexington here, and we very quickly — in fact, by Monday morning after the fire that actually happened on Saturday, we had added sale dates at our Richmond and Mount Sterling locations and basically moved. We moved our Monday sale to Mount Sterling (and) our Tuesday sale to Richmond. We relocated some of our key employees, and customers listened to us, listened to our field people. And we picked right up and went on. Granted, customers had to travel a little farther, and (there were) certainly a little more logistical issues for us, but you know, it helped us maintain our business and our customer base.

Tom:                          Was the new location on Iron Works Pike already on your radar, or did you have to scramble in the aftermath of that fire to find a new spot?

Jim:                             Well, we actually already owned the property. Approximately 10 to 15 years prior to the fire, there was an effort to move the stockyard out of downtown Lexington, and this was one of the potential locations for that. So, we didn't have to acquire property, but there also were no real plans in place for the construction either.

Tom:                          I think we should emphasize for our listeners that it's been determined that the fire was an accident at the old facility, and that facility had been there for a lot of years and was wood. Correct?

Jim:                             Yes. Yes. Predominately, yes.

Tom:                          Right. So now, five years later, Bluegrass Stockyards is facing another challenge: the COVID-19 pandemic. Back in March, just as we were beginning to comprehend what a pandemic meant, the industry saw a rapid drop in the value of an animal — and at a critical time for local producers. Tell us what that period was like for the stockyard business.

Jim:                             Well, very complicated, Tom, from early April on up through, really, (the) middle part of the year, where you had multiple factors at play. Just the comfort level of people coming out to do business and, you know, coming into a facility — you know, that comfort level was pretty shaky. The market itself was extremely volatile. You know, we saw exorbitant prices at the grocery store, yet just a horrible market for the animals themselves on the farmer side. And so, it really caused a lot of people to hold cattle much, much longer than they would have. Our volume through the months of April, May and June (was) considerably below a normal year. We’re in a pretty significant liquidation phase in the cattle industry right now anyway. So, we were already hurting for numbers, compounded by the fact that people were hanging on to them, hoping that the market was going to get better. It was a pretty tough stretch.

Tom:                          You mentioned that people were kind of reluctant to gather, and now, it’s been many months since then. Has that kind of sorted itself out as people have become accustomed to masking and all that?

Jim:                             Yeah. Our level of compliance is far greater today than it was when we first started. We put a lot of measures in place literally right out of the gate because we were told by the Department of Agriculture and others that, you know, we have to continue to operate. We’re the only source of ready cash that a lot of these farmers have got. So, we had to try to keep running. And we started out by limiting the number of people that were allowed inside the sales arena. I actually had to post people at the doors to count heads in and heads out and try to keep that number down very low, and it was predominately just buyers at that point. We would let consignors in one or two at a time to watch their cattle sale. So, it was really a burden.

                                    As we've moved along and understand a little more about social distancing, masking and all those kinds of things, we provide masks at the door to all our customers if they need them. We've actually eliminated about 2/3 — well, more than 2/3; almost ¾ — of our seating in the arena by blocking off those seats, enforcing social distancing. You know, people are, for the most part, fairly compliant with that. It's gotten better as we've gone along, certainly.

Tom:                          Well, you literally had opportunity rise out of the ashes in that this was an opportunity, out on Iron Works Pike, to start from scratch, to build an entirely new facility. And I'm just wondering how it differs from the original site. It might seem obvious, but maybe you can tell us more.

Jim:                             Well, you know, (I’ll) talk about the stockyard operation first. You know, having an opportunity to start from scratch with a clean slate and design a facility just like you'd like to have it was something that was pretty special. And so, obviously, the stockyard facility itself is far more efficient. It takes fewer people to operate. The movement of the cattle is quicker, safer and easier than it was in the old facility. Our ability to address workplace safety issues (and) cattle safety issues has certainly been far, far better in the new facility than we could ever do in the old one.

                                    Relative to the rest of the operation out here, we've got what we call the Bluegrass regional marketplace; that's kind of the front end of the operation, the front building you come into on your way to the sales arena. That includes retail partners, a full-scale restaurant, a classroom with a certified teacher (and) museum content. And we've got about 15 to 20 other businesses that are located out here with us that are all agriculturally related (and) really create an interesting mix of goods and services that are all in one place.

Tom:                          So, who came up with that idea, to try to integrate retail — and events as well, correct?

Jim:                             Oh, you bet. You bet. Events are a big part of what we do. Meetings of all sizes, as well as several events that we put on ourselves throughout the year to educate the public, just create recreational opportunities and also drive business to these partners that we've got out here. You know, it was born out of a dream of the chairman of our board, Gene Barber. He talked for years and years and years about having kind of a one-stop shop for farmers where they could source their — buy their insurance, do their banking, all of those kinds of things, all in one location. As we got into this, the realities of the zoning and the type of building we could put up really didn’t allow us to exactly bring his dream to fruition, but out of that came this large building with multiple partners in many, many different aspects of the agricultural industry.

Tom:                          Well, Jim, some in the industry have been predicting that the influx of government money from pandemic-related programs — such as coronavirus (and) food assistance, the paycheck protection, the PPP and market facilitation programs like those — will have a lasting negative effect. Do you agree with that?

Jim:                             Well, you know, I don’t know about a lasting negative (impact). Farmers are farmers. You put dollars in their hands, they’re going to reinvest them, and they’ve done that with the CFAT money and the other monies that have been out there. We’ve seen — our market for high-quality replacement animals has certainly been really, really good here through the latter part of 2020 and the end of the early part of 2021. And I think that’s a reflection of that extra money that’s there in circulation.

                                    You know, the reality of it is (that) this has been an extremely depressed market for the last couple (or) three years, and that shot in the arm has probably kept some people in business that might well not have survived through this. And even with that said, we’ve dispersed a lot of cowherds during this period of time. A lot. And we’ve decreased this cowherd considerably here, in the state of Kentucky, and surrounding states as well, but I don’t think you’re going to see a lasting impact. You know, the culture of the cattle producer is not one of government dependence. And so, I think this one or two influxes of extra money are probably just going to help people improve their operations, improve their overall economic stability and, hopefully, keep them in business.

Tom:                          Let’s turn to meatpacking. There are just four major operations in the country, and I’m wondering if the meatpacking industry needs some diversification. What’s your opinion on that?

Jim:                             Huge topic in the industry right now. And yeah, there’s no question: we have both the transparency issue in our fat cattle markets and a competition issue in our fat cattle markets. You know, when you’ve got four major packers in the United States that control 80-some percent of the slaughter capacity — (and) two of those entities are foreign-owned, which further compounds the issue. And we certainly have some problems at the upper end of the production system in that meatpacking sector. And you know, more than 80% of the cattle that are going into packing plants today or are not being sourced through any system of open price discovery — they're under contract or, you know, other arrangements with feedlots, where those prices are set on those cattle outside of the open marketplace. Well, it trickles back down through the entire industry, because those packers are one of the few segments of any business that I know of that not only gets to set the price for their product going out the door, but they also get to set the price for their inputs coming in the door. It’s a pretty good spot to be in.

Tom:                          What about the rise in recent years of competitive and alternative proteins? What do you feel the beef business needs to do to stay competitive with that?

Jim:                             You know, one of the things that we saw during COVID, if you watched when the grocery store started emptying out: what emptied out first? You know, the meat cases were empty on the first day. (There were) a lot of pictures floating around of, you know, the meat case empty, and then the alternative products are never out of stock.

                                    We have a great product. We have a product that's in great demand, both domestically and in the export markets. I think we have to continue to improve our product and improve the perception of our production process in the eyes of our consumer. We can’t ever take our eye off that ball. We’ve got to continue to make steady progress moving forward of elevating not only the quality of the product itself but the perception of that product — nutritionally, animal husbandry, all of those factors come into play.

                                    You know, those alternative products are certainly a concern of a lot of people here in the meat industry. Personally, I think they’re somewhat of a niche market — maybe a large niche market for a growing population of people that don’t want to eat meat, for one reason or another. But at our current level of production, boy, it’s sure not been difficult to move this product. So, we certainly have demand. I think we just need to be cognizant of the fact that there is competition out there and continue to do the best we can to put a better product in front of our consumer.

Tom:                          Well, Jim, as somebody who’s been around the cattle business for a long time, what would you say has changed the most and why?

Jim:                             Because of what we’ve just talked about, you’re seeing more and more of the marketplace driven by data and information. It’s become more difficult for the smaller producers to participate in the marketplace. And subsequently, we’ve lost a lot of our smaller producers that were selling not necessarily a bad product but more of a commodity product into the system, (and) that was a big part of our business over the years in the livestock markets. And we’ve certainly had to adjust to make our sales relevant to those larger and larger producers that are more data-driven and more information-driven and provide value to them in our system. But you know, we typically are gravitating toward dealing with ever larger producers that are handling more and more cattle across the broader geographies and doing it with a lot more technology.

Tom:                          So, Jim, how long have you actually been in the cattle business?

Jim:                             I mean, I’m 56 years old, and I've basically been in the industry in one form or another all of my life.

Tom:                          Well, I’m just wondering: Any favorite memories from your time in the business? It's a lifelong thing, I know, but anything stand out there? The fire certainly isn’t one of them.

Jim:                             No. The fire is not. It is certainly a memory, but it's not a good memory.

Tom:                          Right. Right.

Jim:                             You know, as I look back over the years, you do have to love this business. If you didn't, you couldn't survive. Facing a lot of challenges along the way and surviving those challenges and going on to grow and be better, (and) the many, many just amazing people that are in this great industry — too oftentimes, we get hung up on a handful of bad guys out there, but the vast majority of the people that we deal with are just tremendous, salt-of-the-earth, honest people (who) are really dedicated to putting a good product in front of our consumers and doing good business. And I guess that’s probably the best memory for me, is just getting to know and dealing with all of those really fine folks.

Tom:                          All right. That’s Bluegrass Stockyard CEO Jim Akers. Jim, thanks so much for joining us.

Jim:                             You bet. Thank you.

Tom:                          And I'm Tom Martin, and thanks for listening to us.

Announcer:              Join us for the rest of this series as we reflect on how the agriculture industry adapted in 2020 and speak with experts on what's in store for agri-food in 2021. Thank you for joining us. Be sure to subscribe Ag Future wherever you listen to podcasts.

Have a question or comment?

As a global leader in animal nutrition and health, Alltech is pleased to announce the appointment of Dr. Saheed Salami, a research fellow at the company, to the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) as a member of its Technical Advisory Group (TAG) on methane for the FAO Livestock Environmental Assessment and Performance (LEAP) Partnership. As part of this working group, Dr. Salami and other industry experts will focus on revising methane assessment guidelines to enhance greenhouse gas (GHG) emission inventories and to improve carbon footprint assessments and strategies for low-carbon livestock and food security.

“I have dedicated my education and career to research in agriculture and sustainability and am looking forward to continuing my journey as part of the technical advisory group on methane,” said Dr. Salami. “This will serve as an excellent opportunity to work with global leaders across the industry to improve carbon footprint assessments and strategies for low-carbon livestock and food security.”

Dr. Salami has international experience in leading research and handling technical responsibilities in sustainable animal nutrition and food quality. He joined Alltech in 2019 as a research fellow based in Stamford, U.K., as part of the company’s Solutions Deployment Team. He utilizes his multidisciplinary expertise in animal nutrition and environmental science to develop customer-focused and data-driven solutions for improving the productivity and sustainability of animal protein systems.

Prior to joining Alltech, Dr. Salami obtained a double Ph.D. in agricultural, food and environmental science from the University of Catania in Italy and University College Cork, Ireland. He also has a double master’s degree in sustainable animal nutrition and feeding from Wageningen University and Research in the Netherlands and Ecole d'Ingénieurs de Purpan, France. 

“We are proud to have Dr. Salami represent Alltech as part of the UN FAO expert working group, where he can contribute scientific expertise and knowledge of the industry to crucial global discussions on climate change and the role of agriculture,” said Dr. Mark Lyons, president and CEO of Alltech. “This truly aligns with our Planet of Plenty™ vision of working together with other global partners to shape a sustainable future for agriculture and our planet.”  

The LEAP Partnership is a multi-stakeholder initiative that seeks to improve the environmental sustainability of the livestock sector through harmonized methods, metrics and data. LEAP leads a coordinated global initiative to accelerate the sustainable development of the livestock supply chain and to support coherent climate actions while contributing to the achievement of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Paris Agreement.

For more information on Alltech’s vision for a Planet of Plenty, visit Alltech.com.