Whatever the ‘Doubting Thomases' are saying about the likely outcome of the Red Meat Sector Strategy, there's no doubt that the recently formed Strategy Coordination Group (SCG) is trying a different approach to help it along.

The strategy itself didn't go for a massive ‘fix' involving huge amalgamations and single desk selling. Instead, it recommended ‘informed, aligned behaviour change' by all involved in growing, processing and selling red meat.

It looked for changes to ‘coordinated in-market behaviour', ‘efficient and aligned procurement' and ‘sector best practice' as routes to what could be $6 billion of revenue growth.

So instead of baying at the moon or praying for miracles, the SCG started with a stocktake of what was actually happening and already they have found good things going on.

Market research and sales channels are already getting a degree of in-market collaboration. Procurement models are being made more aligned and transparent and, in some areas, the thorny problems of efficiency in production, processing and logistics are being tackled.

The computer whizzes at B+LNZ have been busy jazzing up the website so farmers are able to benchmark data and systems to see where their good and weak spots are. They are also trying to catch up with DairyNZ in supplying far more information online.

The new regional committees are working on face-to-face opportunities, including selecting demonstration farms to work on individually-chosen projects, which aim for an increase of $100,000 in annual income.

The sad lack of skills of a large proportion of farmers in financial planning/budgets/cashflows, which was revealed in the strategy report, is being remedied by projects to help farmers increase these skills.

To make sure farmers are all up with the play, the SCG will report quarterly on progress in each area.

It is hard to believe that, at least in recent years, the meat sector has not had a collective approach to keep government officials dealing with trade informed on its strategic market access agenda and priorities. No wonder processors are all out there undercutting each other in significant markets.

The strategy was also somewhat critical of how qualified and clued up farm advisors actually are and advisors themselves have been heard to say that commercial organisations don't necessarily keep them up to date with developments.

If farmers are getting their advice third hand, then no wonder it varies. One of the projects will be working on some form of accreditation for advisors, so farmers know what they are paying for.

There are also moves to create a voluntary code of practice which will define ‘the attributes of a high performing stock agent' as recommended in the strategy.

Even meat research projects are getting a new emphasis on ‘togetherness', building on existing projects such as the Ovine Automation Consortium, plus new work on tenderness, shelf life and meat colour. The regulatory regime is getting a hard look at maximising its value and minimising compliance costs.

'Look how dairy does it” is being examined, potentially in regard to an online trading platform, coordinated transport and shipping etcetera. Procurement as a case study may give the whole process more transparency and lo and behold, they are looking at ‘who knows what' in the multitude of those working for such as B+LNZ Economic Service, MAF and elsewhere, to see if all that knowledge can be pooled for the greater good.

Obviously it won't all happen overnight, but the efforts being made certainly sound more promising than what's come previously.