Marketing to farmers – 7 mistakes that limit campaign effectiveness

A campaign may have a precisely defined media mix, polished creative, appropriate reach, and good media KPIs, yet still fail to generate the expected business outcome. In agricultural marketing, the source of the problem often lies not in campaign execution, but in strategic assumptions. These may include: improper segmentation, misreading purchase intent, a mismatch between communication and the customer journey stage, or overlooking the actual decision-making process.

Today's farmer's purchasing path is multichannel and increasingly complex. The manufacturer, distributor, dealer, advisor, search engine, trade media, social media, user reviews, and AI tools create an ecosystem of touchpoints that can influence the final decision.

That is why reach, impressions, or CTR should not be treated as standalone metrics of the effectiveness of a campaign targeted at farmers. What is crucial is whether the communication reaches the right segment, addresses their current need, and effectively moves the recipient through the subsequent stages of the decision-making process.

So where do mistakes in agricultural marketing, which reduce the effectiveness of campaigns targeting farmers, most often occur? I answer this and other questions in this article. 

1. Segmentation that is too broad – treating farmers as a single target group

One of the fundamental errors appears already at the level of market definition and segmentation model.

Farmers are not a homogeneous target group. They represent a very wide range of farms with different economic potential, production profile, technology level, investment intensity, and purchasing decision-making process.

A 20-hectare farm and an 800-hectare farm can be classified into the same group, but from a marketing perspective, they are completely different business entities. They differ, among other things, in scale of operations, cost structure, machinery park, level of automation, access to specialist consulting, method of financing investments, and technology and purchasing maturity.

Audience segmentation in agricultural marketing should go beyond basic demographics and primarily take into account behavioral, production, and economic criteria, such as:

• direction and specialization of production,
• farm area and agrarian structure,
• location and regional conditions,
• production intensity level,
• the degree of mechanization and use of technology,
• nature and stage of the investment,
• history of interactions with the brand,
• strength of the relationship with the dealer, distributor, or advisor,
• purchasing potential in a specific product category,
• current need or problem generating demand.

The more precisely defined the segment, the greater the opportunity matching the value proposition, message, communication channel, and sales arguments to the recipient's real context.

Broad targeting can of course build reach, but at the same time it increases risk low communication relevance, message dilution, and inefficient budget allocation.

Therefore, before we start wondering, „where to file a complaint?”, it is worth first answering a more important question: what kind of farms do we want to reach, what is their purchasing potential, and at what stage of the purchasing decision are their owners or the people responsible for purchases? 

2. Starting a campaign by choosing a channel

„Let's run a Facebook campaign.
„We need Google Ads.”.
„We need to be on YouTube.

This is one of the most common mistakes in communication planning. The channel is adopted as a strategic assumption before the business goal, the audience, and the mechanism intended to lead them to the desired reaction are defined.

After all, a campaign can have completely different objectives: build brand awareness, introduce a product to the market, generate demand, capture existing demand, support the sales process, generate inquiries, or direct potential customers to the dealer network.

Therefore, the campaign design logic should be reversed. This is shown in the table below.

Table 1. Strategic bases for the selection of communication channels 

Only on this basis can one design touchpoint architecture and assign a specific function to individual channels in the process of building awareness, consideration of the solution, and the purchase decision.

In practice, this means moving from thinking „Where to advertise?” to the question „how to design a customer journey so that communication supports the achievement of a business goal?”

A channel is an element of a communication strategy, not its starting point.

The media plan, on the other hand, should be a consequence of the adopted strategy, audience model, and business goal—never their replacement.

3. Market size and the actual potential of the target group

There are over 1.2 million farms operating in Poland. This number shows the scale of the entire market, but in itself it says little about the sales potential of a specific product category. In a campaign targeted at farmers, what matters is not the number of all farms, but the group meeting specific purchasing criteria.

According to the Statistics Poland publication „Characteristics of agricultural holdings in 2023”, there were 1,232.5 thousand of them in June 2023. Already a basic segmentation by agricultural land area shows how quickly the number of the potential target group decreases when the farm size criterion is applied.

Table 2. Structure of the agricultural market by farm size. CSO data – „Characteristics of agricultural holdings in 2023”

Absolute values for aggregated groups are approximations calculated based on the total number of households and percentage shares provided by the Central Statistical Office (GUS).

The area criterion alone reduces the potential group from over 1.2 million to about 336,000 entities. In practice, therefore, segmentation should also take into account production profile, scale of operations, purchasing potential, and needs related to the given product category. Only such a profile makes it possible to determine which part of the market the campaign should actually reach. 

10 or 50 ha? Area as a filter for purchasing potential 

In marketing practice the number of farms is not the same as the size of the potential customer market. The mere fact of running a farm does not yet mean qualification for a specific brand's target group. The actual market potential is determined primarily by product category, production profile, scale of operations, investment potential, and likelihood of a purchasing need.

For plant protection products, one of the preliminary qualification criteria can be the farm size, e.g., starting from 10 ha. In such a model, the population of over 1.2 million farms is narrowed down to approximately 336k potential entities, even before applying additional criteria, such as crop structure, region, production technology, or current purchasing need.

When it comes to agricultural machinery, lead qualification threshold it is often set much higher, for example at the level of 50 ha, and in some categories even 100 ha. There are about farms with an area of 50 ha and more in Poland 44,000, or just 3.6% of the total household population.

However, this is still not a real market for the campaign.

After taking into account additional variables – production profile, location, level of technologization, available machinery park, investment potential, and point in the purchasing cycle the number of households meeting all criteria may be many times lower.

And that is precisely why the key question is not „how many farmers can we reach?”, but rather „how many farmers actually qualify as potential buyers of our solution?”.

That is the difference between between population reach and the size of the serviceable available market.

3.6% farms account for approximately 40% of cropland

The size of a segment does not determine its market significance. The concentration of production and purchasing potential is equally important.

According to Statistics Poland (GUS) data, the total sown area in Poland in 2023 was 11.1 million hectares. Data on the crop area structure by farm size groups show that approximately 4.5 million hectares belonged to farms with an area of 50 hectares and larger. This means that 3.6% farms accounted for approximately 40% of cropland.

The concentration of production potential is even more evident in individual crop segments. In the case of grain maize, farms with an area of 50 ha and larger accounted for about 9% of farms growing this crop, but were already responsible for about 47% of its surface.

From a marketing perspective, this is of significant importance. The given segment's share of the number of farms does not have to correspond to its market share of agricultural inputs. A small percentage of the population may concentrate a significant portion of land area, production, investment potential, and demand.

Therefore, when planning a campaign, it is worth analyzing not only the size of the segment, but also its share in the production area, market value, and purchasing potential.

A small area does not always mean low potential

Farm size should not be the sole qualification criterion for a potential customer. The group of smaller farms includes entities conducting intensive, specialized production, including vegetable, fruit, soft fruit, nursery production or production under cover. In such models, a few hectares can generate significantly higher production value and purchasing potential than the corresponding field crop area.

According to the Statistics Poland (GUS) typology, farms specializing in horticultural crops, including vegetables, strawberries, flowers, ornamental plants, mushrooms, and nurseries, accounted in 2023 for. 2.11 TP3T for all households. Next 4,5% specialized in the cultivation of fruit trees and bushes. In total, this gives 6.6 % of the household population.

This does not mean, of course, that all farms in these groups have an area of less than 10 ha. However, the data reveals an important point from the perspective of campaign planning: acreage alone is not sufficient to assess a farm's potential.

Proper target group qualification should combine area with production profile, farming intensity, production value, and purchasing potential in a specific product category.

In practice, this means that a small-scale farm can be for a specific brand a much more attractive recipient than a farm many times larger, but engaged in production of lower unit value.

Economic potential and the number of farms  

The data concerning the economic size of farms illustrate the difference between population size and its actual economic significance even more clearly. According to Statistics Poland, nearly 357,000 farms with a standard output of over 15,000 euros—which is less than 29% of all farms—accounted for 87% of the national economic size of agricultural holdings.

This means a very high concentration of the scale of economy in Polish agriculture. Therefore, the number of farms does not directly translate into their economic significance or the market potential for specific product categories.

Another important aspect of segmentation is the structure of income sources. In 2023, agricultural activity accounted for more than 50% of household income only in the case of 30.1% of households with an individual farm operator, or approximately 369,000 households. At the same time, 48.6% of these households derived income from wage labor in addition to income from agricultural activities.

This does not mean that the other farms are not engaged in production activities. It shows, however, that the formal category „farm” encompasses a wide variety of economic models – from large, specialized farms that invest heavily to farms where agricultural production is one of several sources of income.

From an action planning perspective, this means one thing: the number of households is the starting point for market analysis, not a measure of its value. When assessing the potential of a target group, one must take into account its economic strength, income structure, scale of operations, propensity to invest, and purchasing potential in a specific product category.

What does this mean for a campaign targeted at farmers?

In a media report, a reach of 500k or 1 million „farmers” may look impressive. From a business perspective, however, the mere number of contacts is not a measure of campaign effectiveness. It does not answer the question of what portion of this reach covers households meeting the target group criteria.

If the product is targeted at farms with an area of 50 ha and larger, of which there are about 44 thousand in Poland, generating several hundred thousand contacts does not automatically mean reaching the appropriate number of potential buyers.

Therefore, the question:

„How many farmers did we reach?”

it is worth replacing with the question:

„How many households meeting the target group criteria did the campaign reach?”

That's it reach in the qualified group should be one of the key parameters for evaluating the effectiveness of activities.

Because a broad distribution of the message can generate a high number of contacts while at the same time low share of audiences with actual purchasing potential. In this case, reach metrics look good, but their translation into business value remains limited.

Therefore, campaign analysis should take into account not only the reach scale, but also the quality and structure of that reach: the share of recipients meeting the segment criteria, their purchasing potential, and the alignment of the communication with the stage of the decision-making process.

In campaigns targeting farmers, sheer audience size does not determine effectiveness. What matters more is what portion of the budget reaches individuals and farms that may actually be interested in purchasing a given product.

4. The assumption that the path from ad to purchase is simple

A farmer who sees an advertisement for a tractor, a crop protection product, a fertilizer, or a seed variety does not have to immediately visit the manufacturer's website and leave their contact information. They may return to the topic after a few days, talk to a sales representative, check the experiences of other farmers, search for information on Google, watch a product review, browse forum discussions, or use an AI system to compare available solutions.

For larger purchases, the decision-making path can involve multiple touchpoints with the brand and last for weeks or months. Each of these touchpoints can serve a different function: build category awareness, generate interest, provide information, facilitate offer comparison, or confirm information gathered previously.

Therefore Evaluating a campaign solely through the lens of direct conversions can distort the picture of its actual impact on the purchasing process.. Not every message is meant to generate sales. However, each one should have a specific role at a particular stage of the decision-making journey.

We describe this mechanism in more detail in our analysis of, how the farmer's decision-making process is changing.

5. Ignoring what the recipient will do after seeing the ad

Marketers pay a lot of attention to the question: how to reach the target audience They analyze much less frequently, what the recipient will do with the message after exposure to the advertisement.

In this industry, it matters a lot. A farmer may see a product advertisement, but before making a decision, they often cross-reference the information in it with other sources. They might look for:

• technical data,
• prices and operating costs,
• information on the application,
• user reviews,
• comparisons with other products,
• manufacturer's materials,
• experiences of other farms,
• advisor recommendations,
• information from the dealer.

Such a source can also be an AI tool. This does not mean that artificial intelligence is replacing traditional sources of information. There is currently no basis to make such an assumption with regard to Polish farmers. However, the information environment in which the recipient can search for, compare, and verify product information is changing.

Therefore It is worth analyzing the effectiveness of a campaign not only at the stage of emission and direct response to the advertisement, but also by taking into account the recipient's further information journey.

6. Information inconsistency between the brand, dealers, and other sources

The manufacturer can plan product communication very precisely. The problem arises when the recipient encounters different versions of information at successive touchpoints with the brand.

It may happen that:

• the manufacturer's website provides different information,
• the dealer communicates different parameters or benefits,
• the sales materials contain outdated data,
• The industry portal describes the product in a different context,
• users point out features or limitations that the brand does not include in its communication,
• individual sources use different data, arguments, or product descriptions.

As a result, the recipient must independently organize the information and assess which parts are current and reliable. With more complex products, such inconsistency can make it difficult to compare solutions and lengthen the decision-making process.

In the generative AI environment, the importance of a coherent information background may grow even further. AI systems can compile information from multiple publicly available sources, which is why discrepancies between a manufacturer's communication, sales materials, and external content may be more readily apparent to the recipient.

The brand does not control all information published about its products. However, it has an influence on the quality and relevance of its own sources. They should be:

• current,
• specific,
• coherent,
• verifiable,
• clear in terms of product parameters, application, and limitations.

The more complex the solution, the greater the importance of the quality of information available throughout the decision-making environment, rather than just within the advertisement itself.

7. Measuring activity instead of results

Suppose the campaign generated:

• 1.5 million views
• 600k reach
• 8K clicks
• 3k reactions

Was it effective?

Based on this data, such a conclusion cannot be drawn yet.

Media indicators describe the scale and method of message distribution in the advertising environment. They show how many times the ad was displayed, how many users it reached, and how often the audience performed a specific action. However, they do not determine whether the campaign achieved its intended business or communication objective.

The evaluation of effectiveness should stem from the function the campaign was intended to serve.

If the goal was building brand or product awareness, the quality and frequency of exposure as well as the share of the properly defined target group in the total reach will be crucial.

In the event that the campaign had support the consideration of the purchase, entries into product content, reviewing the offer, comparing solutions, or subsequent touchpoints with the brand may be of greater importance.

When the goal was lead generation, the sheer number of acquired leads doesn't say much. It is necessary to analyze their quality, compliance with the ideal customer profile, and how many of them were passed on to the further sales process and what results they brought.

In supportive campaigns dealer network or field sales some of the effects, in turn, may occur outside the digital environment and not be directly attributed to a click or a form.

Therefore KPIs should stem from the campaign's goal and the stage of the decision-making process it is intended to support., and not from which metrics are the easiest to read from the ad dashboard.

A high number of views is not yet a business result. It is merely information about the scale of emission.

Seven mistakes – one common problem

The seven described errors may look like separate problems, but in practice they have common source: reverse campaign design order.

Too often still, the process begins with the question:

channel → format → broadcast

Meanwhile, effective communication should be designed in reverse order:

target audience → need → stage of the decision-making process → communication objective → channel → performance metric

This is the very difference that determines whether a campaign is merely an efficiently executed ad delivery, or as a tool for achieving a specific business goal.

Table 3. Design logic of an effective campaign

Strategy should determine the way to reach [the audience], not the other way around. Only a proper understanding of the recipient, their needs, and the decision-making process allows for selecting channels, formats, and metrics that truly matter for the campaign's outcome.

Five questions before launching your next campaign

Before choosing channels, formats, and budget, it is worth going through five questions that organize strategy, communication architecture and method of measuring results.

1. Who exactly do we want to reach?
Not to the broadly understood „farmers”, but to a precisely defined segment of farms and individuals participating in the selection and purchasing process.

2. At what stage of the decision-making process is the recipient?
Is he just identifying the category and problem, looking for a solution, comparing available products, or is he already close to a purchasing decision?

3. What change is the message supposed to cause?
Is its task to increase brand awareness, build an understanding of the solution's advantage, encourage exploring the offer, contacting a dealer, or leaving contact details?

4. Where will the recipient verify the communicated promise?
On the manufacturer's website, at the dealer's, in search results, in industry media, among other users, with an advisor, and also using tools powered by artificial intelligence?

5. What result will actually mean success?
Will it be appropriate reach in the target group, viewing the material, visiting the website, a qualitative inquiry, contact with a dealer, a sales visit, or a sale?

Only the answers to these questions should lead to the decision on the choice of channels, formats, budget, and effectiveness metrics. Then the campaign ceases to be a set of media activities and becomes planned mechanism for achieving the business goal.

High reach can be a good result. But not always a good goal

It is not about contrasting sales reach or traditional media with new communication channels. Each of these tools serves a specific function. Reach builds the scale of impact, advertising supports the achievement of communication goals, and social media, search engines, industry portals, expert content, the dealer network, and direct customer relationships create further touchpoints in the decision-making process.

The problem arises when a tool or a single metric starts replacing the actual marketing goal.

High reach can be a very good result for an awareness-driven campaign. However, it will not be a sufficient metric for a campaign whose goal is to generate leads, support the dealer network, or drive sales.

Therefore, the effectiveness of the campaign should be evaluated through the prism of the quality of reach, the adequacy of the message, the stage of the decision-making process, and its translation into the intended business result.

This requires moving away from simple activity reporting toward evaluation real impact of communication on recipient behavior and business results.

A large reach can be a result. However, it should not automatically become the goal.

PLUSAGRI 2026 – from reach to business result 

One of the presentations during PLUSAGRI 2026 agricultural marketing conference – The Agricultural Marketing Communication Forum will be a case study „Why a large reach can be the biggest mistake of an agro campaign”

The starting point will not be questioning the value of reach as a metric, but rather the analysis of its real value in the context of the campaign goal, audience profile, and expected business outcome. High reach can support brand awareness, but it may also result from a wide distribution of the message outside the target audience.

The topic fits into a broader discussion about effectiveness of communication with a farmer, its decision-making process, and the growing number of information touchpoints. Today, farmers simultaneously use trade media, search engines, social media, dealers, advisors, and recommendations from other users. Another layer of this environment consists of tools utilizing artificial intelligence.

„In agricultural marketing, reach alone is not a measure of campaign effectiveness. Precise definition of the target group and its purchasing potential is key. During PLUSAGRI 2026, we will show how data, the FARM system, and AdAgri Core AI allow for a transition from mass reach to precise audience modeling and the design of communication that translates into a tangible business result.”

— Jacek Kwiatkowski, CEO of AdAgri Sp. z o.o.

During PLUSAGRI 2026, we will therefore take a closer look at, how to design communication that not only reaches a wide audience, but above all reaches the right recipients and supports the achievement of business goals.

• GUS: Characteristics of agricultural holdings in 2023.
• GUS: Agriculture in 2023.

We have been connecting agro brands with farmers for over 20 years.

Talk to us about your campaign and start reaching the right audience.