M A N A G E M E N T I N F O R M A T I O N SYSTEMS FOR THE

I N D I V I D U A L F A R M FIRM

MALCOLM J. BLACKIE

Lincoln College, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand

INTRODUCTION

A business cannot operate rationally without knowledge, both of its current state
and also of the environment in which it operates; information on these topics must
be transmitted to the manager of the business by means of some information system.
In its simplest form, an information system may operate entirely independently of
the manager, and it may simply have arisen as a consequence of the haphazard
accumulation of knowledge over time (Kennedy, 1971).
However, where businesses operate under unfamiliar or rapidly changing
conditions, managers require a fast and accurate feedback of data from the business
in order to judge the effectiveness of any decisions taken. The competitive and inter-
active environment of many modern businesses ensures a growing demand for
specific and up-to-date information and, by inference, for specialised information
systems. Purpose-built information systems, therefore, are becoming a major
growth point of operations research (Wedekind, 1973).
The concept of an integrated management information system is a natural
development from the application of systems thinking to management science.
Where the workings of an organisation are studied from a systems aspect, such
notions as goal-seeking and goal-setting behaviour, and control and feedback
mechanisms are concepts of major relevance since management not only generates
the plans for the business, but, in addition, has the responsibility of overseeing the
implementation of these plans. These tasks can only adequately be performed if
management is continually in touch with the progress of its plans; not merely to
ensure that the plans are carried out correctly, but also to evaluate and, if necessary,
change them (Churchman, 1968). This control function of management has been
compared by Weiner (1948) to that of a steersman (hence the term 'cybernetics'
(from the Greek for 'steersman') to describe systems providing information feed-
23
Agricultural Systems (1) (1976)--© Applied Science Publishers Ltd, England, 1976
Printed in Great Britain
24 MALCOLM J. BLACKIE

back). Like the steersman, the manager requires a constant flow of information
about the effects of his actions, but, clearly, the data included in the flow and the
rate of flow will depend on the business being monitored. An important function
of the management scientist, therefore, is to analyse the organisation and its
requirements for control and to devise appropriate means of transmitting the
necessary control information to management--or, more simply, to set up an
effective information system.

INFORMATION SYSTEMS AND THE FARM BUSINESS

The farm business, in common with enterprises in other sectors, has a requirement
for information on both its past performance and on the likely outcome of current
or possible management strategies. Attention has been drawn, by the present and
other authors, to the conceptual gap between record analysis and forward planning
in agriculture, which forms a significant obstacle to effective farm management
advice (Finley & Pearse, 1966; Schmidt, 1966; Barnard & Nix, 1973; Blackie &
Dent, 1973; Eisgruber, 1973). Although sophisticated techniques have been devised
for planning and analysis of the farm business, the real requirements of the farm
manager for business information have not been satisfied. The main cause of this
shortcoming has been a consistent failure of individual techniques to complete the
'cybernetic' or information feedback loop which enables the manager to react to
changes in his business environment. Barnard & Nix (1973) and Blackie & Dent
(1973) have spoken of the need to establish an integrated information system where-
by the farm manager can receive rapid and frequent analyses on the state of his
business [see also Finley (1966) and Mauldon (1973)]. Information systems with
this objective have been developed for industrial firms, government departments
and the military (Churchman, 1968). At first sight, therefore, it appears strange, in
view of the considerable research into farm management, that little apparent
development has taken place on integrated management systems for the farm firm.
However, the farm business has particular features which clearly differentiate it
from other forms of enterprise. Briefly, the most common type of farm business is
family operated (Mauldon, 1973), with the manager not only controlling the
finances and farm policy, but also being involved in the 'shop-floor' activities of
work scheduling, maintenance and manual work. The time available for strictly
management tasks is often curtailed by this need to perform tasks in other sectors
of the business. The strong influence of biological elements and the long delay
between action and result further complicate the administration of the farm firm
(Dent & Pearse, 1973). An information system for the farm firm must operate not
only at a level of monetary cost acceptable to a small business, but also with a
minimum input of management time. Further, it must be such that, as the stochastic
and biological elements of the business exert their influence, it can accommodate
 MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS FOR THE INDIVIDUAL FARM FIRM 25

the changes imposed by these factors. Finally, there is no typical 'farm business'.
Farms operate various combinations of enterprises, and even farms with similar
enterprises may administer them in different ways. Consequently, the detailed
requirements of each farm firm for business information will differ.

AGRICULTURAL INFORMATION SYSTEMS

Ansoff & Hayes (1973) have drawn attention to the confusion that clearly exists
among management scientists as to the function of an information system. Any
such system does not fulfil its primary role until it is adopted as an integral part of
management practice (Tobin & Butfield, 1973). A management information
system is more than a model of some part of the business--it is rather an integrated
feedback mechanism which can be used by managers to analyse both the results of
past actions and the potential consequences of future plans. An information system
may merely present data suitable for further analysis by other means or it may
actually analyse past performance and make projections of real-system behaviour.
In either case, the essential feature is the existence of a continual exchange of
information between the business and the information system.
This definition of a management information system enables the range of
potential candidates for admission as agricultural information systems to be
significantly reduced. Excluded are such projects as the MASCOT linear pro-
gramming scheme which is used largely as an educational exercise to indicate the
potential for business improvement within a profit-maximising environment
(Bond et al., 1970; Blackie & Dent, 1974). Excluded also are those farm recording
schemes which fail to provide sufficiently rapid analyses of the recorded data for use
in current management decisions. Farm management services, however, have
evolved to the stage where there are several information systems currently available
to, and used by, farm managers although few fulfil the ideal of an integrated
management system incorporating a complete cybernetic loop. This is not intended
to suggest that such systems are of little value to the managerathe review below
clearly indicates the usefulness of the information provided by many existing
systems. Nevertheless, certain farm enterprises--particularly intensive dairy,
poultry or pig enterprises where small variations in the cost or quantity used of a
major input or output have a large effect on eventual profitability--have a require-
ment for the more complete range of management information supplied by an
integrated information system.

'MAIL-IN' RECORDING SCHEMES

Possibly the earliest organised agricultural information systems are the 'mail-in'
farm record-keeping services. These originated in the land grant colleges of the
26 MALCOLM J. BLACKIE

United States mainly under the guidance of specialists from the Co-operative
Federal State Extension Service. Rowe (1971) lists seven operational systems based
on the State Universities of Michigan, Purdue, Wisconsin, Virginia, Vermont,
Arizona and Missouri. Most of these systems are speeded up versions of existing
manual schemes and, as such, represent an attempt to return recorded data to the
farmer in time for use in current decisions. The most advanced of these systems--
called Management Accounting Program (MAP) and operated by the University of
Arizona--uses a comprehensive double-entry accounting system to produce a wide
range of taxation and financial accounts (Rowe, 1971). These are produced monthly
and include internal accuracy checks by means of monthly trial balances for each
account. Canada, with the ELFARM system--based on the University of Guelph--
and Australia, with systems based on the Universities of New England and Western
Australia, also have mail-in systems of varying degrees of sophistication.
Early mail-in systems were plagued by difficulties in data collection and pro-
cessing. To a large extent, problems could be attributed to the unfamiliarity of
researchers, extension workers and farm managers with computer technology and a
failure to use a systems approach in development (Rowe, 1971). Computerised
information systems frequently have effects beyond the straightforward reduction
in data processing time; the system will also influence such related areas as data
collection, retrieval and storage, and output presentation and contents (Tobin &
Butfield, 1973). With the exception of the Arizona scheme (which used self-
checking double-entry procedures) most of the early American systems placed the
major burden of checking data for accuracy and consistency on the farmer.
Experience has shown the necessity for a comprehensive means of editing farm data
to ensure that coding is correct and that important regular entries are not over-
looked. The physical preparation of data for the computer--typically by punching
and verifying cards--is a major operation but one that was frequently overlooked
in early systems. Consequently, there were unnecessarily large fluctuations in the
work load of data preparation staff and delay and inefficiency in the overall pro-
cessing operation. Finally, output design was often poor and the contents in-
adequately screened for relevance to management (Finley & Pearse, 1966). How-
ever, many of these initial difficulties have been overcome and the mail-in concept
has become sufficiently valuable to farm managers to attract successful com-
mercial, as well as university-based, schemes (for example, Farm and Estate
Management Accounting Services in Great Britain).
Nevertheless, these information systems are, by nature, entirely retrospective.
While the analyses provide a valuable picture of the immediate past and historical
state of the business, projections of future business performance must be obtained
by other means. As such, the 'mail-in' record schemes can only be included as
information systems in a rudimentary sense.
 MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS FOR THE INDIVIDUAL FARM FIRM 27

ADVANCED WHOLE FARM 'MAIL-IN' SYSTEMS

The CANFARM information system, currently being developed by the Canadian

Department of Agriculture, is an important extension of the 'mail-in' approach.
This computer-based system is designed to allow for the diverse requirements for
information exhibited by different farm managers. A manager using the
CANFARM scheme elects to use one of three options, each providing whole farm
management information at a different level of sophistication. This system is
designed so that a farmer can move easily between options to select the level of
information feedback necessary for his business (Keeler, 1970). The system
provides monthly, periodic and annual reports on historical data and ultimately
there will be various planning packages including least-cost ration formulation and
simulation models of beef, poultry and dairy enterprises (Lee & Nicholson, 1973).
The Farm Management Service Laboratory at the University of Western
Australia has developed the 'mail-in' approach to include the concept of budgetary
control (Mauldon et al., 1969). This system compares actual historical data on cash
flows within the business with budgeted figures. Statements are provided on the
sources and uses of funds, changes in equity and liquidity, asset transactions and
farm profit, among other financial items. The cost of using the system is low and
recording is simple and straightforward. Flows of funds statements appear monthly,
physical enterprise performance reports are published quarterly and several annual
statements are available.
These two systems represent attempts to cover the management cycle of planning,
action, control and adaptation (Blackie & Dent, 1974), and, from a whole farm
aspect, constitute the most advanced management systems available to farm
managers. They differ from conventional farm record services and--of course,
traditional income tax accounting--in that they are carefully designed to conform
to the particular characteristics of the farm business. The concept of planning is
incorporated within the design of the systems (especially the Western Australia
system) so that, for the first time, an 'integrated' information system has made an
appearance on the agricultural scene.

ENTERPRISE INFORMATION SYSTEMS

Management systems for intensive livestock enterprises have formed an important

focus for attention by farm management scientists in recent years (Nelson, 1971;
Wood, 1973). Whole farm information systems face difficulties--mainly of size and
cost--in providing the business detail necessary for the management of intensive
livestock production (Blackie & Dent, 1973). The Western Australia system, for
example, is particularly designed for Australian conditions and enterprise per-
formance analyses are only produced quarterly (although they could be produced
28 MALCOLM J. BLACKIE

more frequently if the enterprise warranted it). Intensive livestock systems, how-
ever, require a more detailed and rapid control mechanism that is justified for most
other farm enterprises and, in consequence, a number of information systems have
been developed specifically for individual intensive livestock enterprises.

ENTERPRISE SYSTEMS USING HISTORICAL ANALYSIS

BOCM/Silcock in Great Britain have a computer-based Poultry Costing Service

which provides an analysis of costs and performance standards for all main aspects
of poultry production. The frequency and content of the reports depend on the
type of poultry production being analysed and include graphical analysis of para-
meters such as egg production and grading, and estimates on return to capital.
With regard to the pig enterprise, the Meat and Livestock Commission (MLC) in
Great Britain operates a Pig Feed Recording Service which provides monthly,
quarterly and semi-annual reports on herd performance, together with a trading
account and comparisons with other herds of a similar type. ICI--who operate
'Beefman'--and MLC provide computerised information systems for beef pro-
ducers. 'Beefman' analyses historical data for any beef production system and the
manager can select between options which provide different levels of information
feedback. The MLC scheme provides two basic services (MLC also operates a
similar system for sheep)--one for pedigree breeders and the other for com-
mercial producers. Information from this scheme is largely confined to historical
analyses of liveweight gain, feed use and final gross margin at slaughter (Wood,
1973). All the above systems are retrospective in concept.

ENTERPRISE SYSTEMS USING FORECASTING MECHANISMS

For dairy cattle, BOCM/Silcock operate Project 360 which, while requiring little
recording by the farmer, provides an analysis of performance of individual cows
within the herd. Feeding recommendations for each cow are produced and physical
production targets are generated for comparison with actual values. The system is
designed to measure target/actual deviations and to print out possible remedies
when actual values show an abnormal deviation from target. Service recommenda-
tions are made for individual cows, but no financial information appears in the
monthly report. An associated Dairy Enterprise Plan is available which produces an
annual forecast of herd performance (based on historical production and feeding
data), including financial parameters and a monthly performance analysis of both
physical and financial inputs and outputs. The performance analysis--or Monthly
Costing Service--can also be used independently of the Dairy Enterprise Plan
(Nelson, 1971).
 MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS FOR THE INDIVIDUAL FARM FIRM 29

A similar scheme to Project 360--called Computerised Milk Production (CMP)--

is available from a number of British feed manufacturers (Wood, 1973). 'Dairy-
maid'--operated by ICI--is comparable with BOCM/Silcock's Dairy Enterprise
Plan but recording is simpler. In addition, comparative information from other
participating herds is printed out. Other dairy forecasting schemes in Great
Britain are also operated by the Milk Marketing Board and the Agricultural
Development and Advisory Service (Nelson, 1971). A development on the lines of
Project 360 has been the University of Melbourne Dairy Herd Health and Produc-
tivity Reporting Service (Cohen, 1972). This Service produces monthly reports on
the current fertility pattern of both individual cows and complete herds. An annual
report also summarises the information produced monthly and calculates annual
performance indices.

AN ASSESSMENT OF EXISTING AGRICULTURAL INFORMATION SYSTEMS

There has been a significant shift in emphasis in management science. The trend is
to a re-ordering of priorities to include problems of planning and system design and
a retreat from optimising normative models to 'decision-support' or 'if-then'
models (Ansoff & Hayes, 1973). The agricultural information systems reviewed
above reflect this movement and represent the growing involvement of farm
management scientists with the real problems of farm managers (Eisgruber, 1973).
A large gap still remains between the service provided by any of these systems and
the ideal of an information system which may be used to assist in the development
of a management strategy, to monitor the progress of that strategy and to revise the
original strategy should this prove necessary. Control--which is most effective
where there is a rapid flow of monitoring data from the business--infers the
existence of adapative behaviour which, in turn, necessitates planning. It is essential,
therefore, that a comprehensive information system is designed so that the effects of
adapative behaviour can be rapidly reflected in future analyses of performance.
Planning is thus removed from its pedestal as a special and infrequent function of
management and is regarded in its true role as a continuing series of short-run
tactical decisions influencing long-run strategy. In this light, the need for planning
for a stable, as well as a changing, situation is apparent (Blackie & Anderson,
1974). Many existing agricultural information systems, by contrast, invoke planning
as an exceptional, rather than a routine, part of management and, consequently, the
link between recording, control and adaption hehaviour is defective.

'SKELETON' MODELLING

In attempting to solve the information problems of the farm business, past

researchers have taken one of three paths:
30 MALCOLM J. BLACKIE

a. Largely to ignore the feedback problem and to develop a sophisticated

technique for planning or analysis in its own right.
b. To develop an information system specifically for a particular farm. This
has only proved suitable in cost-benefit terms for very large units and,
therefore, is not suitable for the majority of farm businesses. In any case,
applied on a large scale, this approach would involve wasteful duplication
of effort.
c. To construct a normative planning model of a farm or enterprise for use in
co-ordination with some form of record analysis.
This paper suggests a different approach: to develop a skeleton model of a farm
or enterprise for incorporation into an integrated planning and recording system.
A skeleton model has been defined as a model which includes within its structure
only the formal logic and basic parameters of the real system (Blackie & Dent,
1974). If this framework has been satisfactorily modelled, data from a real system
can be 'coupled' with the skeleton model to provide a functional model which, in
its 'coupled' state, is unique to that system. The significance of this approach is that
it creates an independent information system for each user. The computer model is
constructed so that only the fundamental structure of the 'skeleton' of the business
is fixed. On to this skeleton, each manager can 'couple' the features of his particular
business so that the 'coupled' or complete model is capable of mimicking the future
behaviour of his unit.
Model projections of future business behaviour may be used as guidelines or
targets against which the performance of the business may be measured over time.
As such targets are estimates based on the manager's stated intentions and expecta-
tions (provided by the data input), it is vital, if the targets are to be effective yard-
sticks, that an assessment be made of expected reliability. Blackie & Dent (1974)
have described the validation of a skeleton model together with considerations of
accuracy of target predictions.
The concept of an information system co-ordinates well with that of a skeleton
model but the mere setting up of targets is not sufficient to ensure a cybernetic or
data feedback loop. There must, in addition, be the means of comparing actual
results with targeted performance and a method of modifying targets or expecta-
tions or plans as they become invalidated by time or by management changes.
Therefore, to use a skeleton model effectively, it must be integrated into a system of
recording and storing information on the business. It is this facility to form part of
a general information system, while retaining the ability to mimic the individual
farm firm, that distinguishes the skeleton model as a distinct model type.

THE PIG HERD 'SKELETON' MODEL

The pig enterprise is a particularly suitable subject for skeleton modelling, for
three main reasons. First, enterprise modelling is more likely to prove a viable
 MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS FOR THE INDIVIDUAL FARM FIRM 31

concept in practical terms than whole farm modelling since the variability within
enterprise types is less than that between whole farm businesses (Blackie & Dent,
1973). Secondly, intensive livestock enterprises have a particular need for compre-
hensive control techniques. Intensive enterprises typically operate under conditions
which cause rapid flows of inputs and outputs. Small variations in these rates of
flow can significantly affect the final profit from the enterprise, and, therefore, there
is a need for rapid feedback of information to the manager on these rates of flow.
Finally, the controlled environment in which intensive pig systems operate enables
consideration of the pig unit virtually as a closed system.
A skeleton model of an intensive pig enterprise has been developed and in-
corporated into a complete information system designed to facilitate information
feedback (Blackie & Anderson, 1974; Blackie & Dent, 1974). The system consists
of five major elements and is presented diagramatically in Fig. 1. These elements are
used to check data submitted from an individual unit, update the farm data file (if
the particular unit has previously submitted data to the system), couple the data
with the pig herd model, perform the herd simulation and print out forecast and
performance analysis reports.
Data for 'coupling' with the model are collected on the farm, punched on to
computer cards and submitted to a checking routine (for a small operation (__+200
farms) checking can be done manually). The purpose of this routine is to check for
punching errors or data inconsistencies so that erroneous data do not corrupt the
farm data file. If the data are rejected, they are returned to the farm manager for
amendment without further processing. To simplify recording, two types of data are
collected for use with the model. First, the set-up data which are comprehensive in
nature and which describe the features of a particular herd in terms of policy,
performance and status. Set-up data need only be collected when the manager
first starts to use the model and are stored on a computer data file. This file is kept
up-to-date by successive submissions of the second data type--termed period
input--which represent first, a record of events occurring within the herd (sales,
births, etc.) during the past recording period (four weeks) and secondly, amend-
ments to the set-up data when this is necessary. At any time amendments to set-up
data to reflect changes in policy or performance may be made via the period input
(Blackie & Anderson, 1974).
Data which pass the checking routine pass into a coupling routine which links the
data to the skeleton model. In the case of an initial or set-up run, these data (set-up
data) are first written on to a computer data file for storage for use in future runs
and then pass directly to the coupling routine. Subsequent runs require an up-
dating routine which reads and revises the stored set-up data (by means of the
period input) before they are sent to the coupling routine. The coupling routine
links the data to the simulation routine which is the pig herd skeleton model and the
'core' of the management system. When the data are coupled with the programmed
logic of the simulation routine, the result is a coupled model of the system specified
32 MALCOLMJ. BLACKIE

START )
~,/ card I ."~o:.: I _i ,a,a I
input ---I routine I - ~--~'J
i

END )

i ~~,u~,~n.y I r°ut'n"

I ~1I c°u~"n°
routine

~ ~ YE,~
simulation
routine
(model)
/

~ ,,,t NO

~ -~ J

_r
v~
output
routine

END )
I I ~orecast I
I _ I and
I-'1 per'°rmaT.~
I

Fig. 1. Flow chart of the Pig Herd Business Information System.

 MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS FOR THE INDIVIDUAL FARM FIRM 33

in the data input. The routine generates a forecast of herd behaviour in both
physical and financial terms for the next thirteen four-weekly periods. At the com-
pletion of this exercise, or whenever appropriate, new performance targets may be
set, based on the model predictions of herd behaviour (currently targets are set
once every six months or whenever a change occurs which invalidates the existing
targets). Finally, the output routine is called. The forecast and analysis of per-
formance report are printed out in easily comprehensible tabular format and the
performance data recorded are stored on the farm data file. The analysis of per-
formance includes target/actual data comparisons for the data recorded during the
past four weeks and also, where necessary, cumulative historical comparisons over
the time since the targets were last set. This output is then sent direct to the farm
manager.
Routinely, the pig herd information system can be used for providing the neces-
sary feedback information for control of the business. The system can also be used
in an investigative mode to determine the most suitable method of production for a
particular manager's circumstances, and provides the means whereby the manager
can continually, if necessary, reassess his business in the light of new production
methods or simply with regard to his own recorded performance. When the system
is used in this manner, the data deck submitted to the system contains information
(set-up data) on the production system to be investigated and a control card to
prevent permanent amendment to farm data already stored on file. The output
produced in this case contains only a forecast of likely results from using the
experimental strategy. Where an entirely new system is to be investigated, a com-
plete set of set-up data would be necessary to obtain the experimental forecast.
However, should the proposed new system be a variant of the existing system, data
on which are already stored on the farm data file, only those items of set-up data
which differ between the two systems need be submitted. Clearly it is a simple
procedure to carry out a series of runs of the same basic strategy but with one or
more parameters (for example, feed conversion or relative prices) varied to obtain
simple response information over the range of interest to the manager. However
many runs are performed, the farm data file is never permanently amended until,
as the result of experimentation, the manager decides to alter his existing strategy
and requests an amendment to his farm file. At this point, necessary changes are
made to the farm data file, and new targets, if necessary, produced for the altered
strategy.
A key feature of this system is that its operation is essentially the same whether it
is being used for control or for experimentation. Therefore any user who is familiar
with the control functions of the system can also operate the planning functions
with ease. This enables the planning and control functions of the system to be
closely integrated (Dent, 1974). Further, the regularly updated information may
include not only historical data but also additional amendments to the current
farm file which result from either experimentation with the model or the monitoring
 34 MALCOLM J. BLACKIE

information returned from the system to the farm manager. These additional
amendments represent the adaptive intentions of the farm manager and are trans-
lated directly on to the farm data file to modify future projections and targets.
A continuous and rapid exchange of information exists between the business and
the management information system so that the information from the management
system remains relevant to, and useful for, real world decisions. Operation of the
system is such that it does not require special skills or a significant input of time and
it can be operated almost entirely independently by individual farm managers
(Blackie & Anderson, 1974). This last feature has two distinct benefits. First, if the
system can be effectively operated by the decision-makers without a large degree of
specialist assistance, they are more likely to comprehend the values and limitations
of the system and their use of it will demonstrate its positive value to the business,
Mauldon et al. (1969). Secondly, although consultants will be essential to the
success of the system, their role will be one of introducing managers to the system
and assisting in any extraordinary problems that arise. Their work, therefore, is
closely allied to normal extension duties so that the system could well be supervised
by existing field staff of a government or commercial advisory service. The cost to
each manager using the system should, therefore, be acceptably low as a large
portion of the operating costs of a farm advisory service has, historically, been
attributable to consultant expenses (Bond et al., 1970; Pearse & Street, 1972).

CONCLUSIONS

The pig herd information system is not offered as a panacea to the various ills
suffered by the pig production industry, nor yet as the ultimate in farm management
methodology. Rather it simply reflects the growing trend among scientists to
consider problems from a systems, rather than a mechanistic, aspect. The skeleton
model concept which forms the theme of this paper has much to offer the agricul-
tural industry. Similar models could be developed for other farm enterprises and
possibly, as experience in modelling develops and computer facilities improve, for
the whole farm business. Models for individual enterprises may be developed as
compatible modules so that they can be linked to form models of complete farming
systems instead of merely farm enterprises. Dent (1974) has indicated possible uses
of such models as a means whereby advanced technology--such as least cost ration
formulation---could be made available to the farm manager on a routine basis.
It is hoped that this paper has served not only as a review of current agricultural
information systems, but also as a vantage point for the applicability of a particular
type of model--the skeleton simulation model. The systems approach---about
which much has been said--is not a new concept; it depends essentially on the
application of commonsense and logic on a realistic basis (Ramo, 1970). What is
new is its use in the development of specialised tools to deal with complex and
 MANAGEMENT INFORMATIONSYSTEMSFOR THE INDIVIDUALFARM FIRM 35

interactive problems. The skeleton model and the pig herd information system
represent an application o f systems thinking to particular problems o f agriculture.
Like any systems project, the pig herd information system has resulted f r o m the
efforts o f specialists in m a n y scientific fields. Involved in the development work have
been extension workers, pig specialists o f m a n y varieties and farmers and systems
analysts, in addition to the present author. This team a p p r o a c h to problem-
solving, where specialised knowledge and an intellectual discipline can be yoked
together in the face o f a difficult project, offers a significant payoff as opposed to the
traditional r a n d o m piecemeal approach. Systems m e t h o d o l o g y has been used with
obvious success in such fields as missile and computer technology, and similar
benefit m a y be expected f r o m its use in other areas o f study, such as agriculture,
where efficiency in the use o f limited resources is becoming increasingly important.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The author is grateful to J. B. D e n t and the reviewers o f this journal for critical
comments on an earlier draft o f this paper.

REFERENCES

ANSOFF,H. I. & HAYES,R. L. (1973). Role of models in corporate decision making. In (M. Ross,
Ed.), Operational Research '72, Amsterdam, North Holland.
BARNARD,C. S. & NIX, J. S. (1973). Farm planning and control, Cambridge, University Press.
BLACKIE,M. J. & ANDERSON,F. M. (1974). A planning and control system for an intensive farm
enterprise: Pig production, OutL Agric., 8 (1), 42-6.
BLACKIE,M. J. 8¢ DENT, J. B. (1973). Budgetary control--Review and reconstruction, Fro. MAt.,
2 (5), 261-71.
BLACKIE, M. J. & DENT, J. B. (1974). The concept and application of skeleton models in farm
business analysis and planning, J. Ag. Econ., 25 (2), 165-73.
BOND, R., CARTER,P. G. & CROZIER,N. (1970). Computerised farm planning--MASCOT, Fro.
MAt., 9 (1), 17-23.
CHURCHMAN,C. W. (1968). Systems. In (S. L. Optner, 1973, Ed.), Systems analysis, Harmonds-
worth, Penguin.
COHEN,W. (1972). Data management in large dairy units. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of
Reading.
DENT, J. B. (1974). Application of systems concepts and simulation in agriculture. Lecture
delivered in the School of Agriculture, Aberdeen.
DENT, J. B. & PEARSE,R. A. (1973). Operations research, agricultural research and agricultural
practice. In (M. Ross, Ed.), Operational research '72, Amsterdam, North Holland.
EXSGRUBER,L. M. (1973). Managerial information and decision systems in the USA: Historical
developments, current status, and major issues, Am. J. Ag. Econ., 55 (5), 930-7.
FINLEY,R. M. (1966). An appraisal of EDP and its relationship to the decision making process in
farm management, University of Missouri ALP No. 1966-3, Columbia, Missouri: Depart-
ment of Agricultural Economics and Federal Extension Service.
FINLEY,R. M. & PEARSE,R. A. (1966). EDP and farm records A survey and appraisal, Univer-
sity of Missouri ALP No. 1966-2, Columbia, Missouri: Department of Agricultural Econ-
omics and Federal Extension Service.
KELLER, K. (1970). CANFARM--A management information service to Canadian farmers.
Paper presented at Data Processing Institute Conference, Ottawa.
36 MALCOLM J. BLACKIE

KENNEDY,J. O. S. (1971). The design of integrated planning and control systems for agricultural
enterprises with particular application to beef production. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Univer-
sity of London.
LEE, G. E. & NtCHOLSON, R. C. (1973). Managerial information (recording, data and decision)
systems in Canada, Am. J. Ag. Econ., 55 (5), 921-9.
MAULDON,R. G. (1973). Financial control within commercial family farms, Aust. J. Ag. Econ., 17
(1), 33-42.
MAULDON, R. G., SCHAPPER,H. G. & TRELOAR,D. W. G. (1969). Operational accounting for
farm management, Aust. J. Ag. Econ., 13 (1), 47-51.
NrLSON, J. K. (1971). The use of computers in dairy farm management, J. Soc. Dairy Technol., 24
(1), 35-7.
PEARSE,R. A. & STREEt, P. R. (1972). Report on a conference on business planning and control
techniques, J. Ag. Econ., 23 (3), 335-7.
RAMO,S. (1970). Systems approach to Man's future. In (S. L. Optner, 1973, Ed.), Systems analysis,
Harmondsworth, Penguin.
ROWE, A. (1971). Computerised systems of accounting and control. Paper presented at First
International Farm Management Congress, Warwick University.
SCnMIDT,J. R. (1966). Relationship of EDP, record analysis and forward planning, Proceedings of
a Symposium on Present Use and Potentials of Linear Programming and Other Operations
Research Techniques in Farm Management Extensions, Columbia, Missouri, Department of
Agricultural Economics and Federal Extension Service.
ToBIN, N. & BUTFIELD,T. (1973). The implementation of OR models in planning procedures. In
(M. Ross, Ed.), Operational research '72, Amsterdam, North Holland.
WEDEKIND,H. (1973). Informationsystems for decision and control. In (M. Ross, Ed.), Operational
research '72, Amsterdam, North Holland.
WEINER,N. (1948). Cybernetics, New York, Wiley.
WOOD, D. (1973). Let the computer do all the hard work, British Farmer and Stockbreeder, 3 (58),
49-51.