Field Trials Cost More than you Think – here’s the real math

Discover what you actually spend, and why usable data is the metric that matters

Let’s face it: field trials aren’t cheap, and they’re not easy. But in agriculture, they’re the backbone of making smart decisions about your products. For some companies, the DIY approach feels like the right move—after all, how hard can it be? The truth? Harder (and more expensive) than you might think.

DIY trials don’t usually fail all at once. They erode value slowly: sites drop off, data comes back incomplete, internal teams spend weeks stitching information together. It’s not just about what you spend. It’s about what you actually get back.

And when return rates are low, the true cost climbs quickly.

The Real Price Tag of DIY Trials

Running trials in-house can look manageable on a spreadsheet. But once you account for the full scope of work — field visits, coordination, recruiting, data cleanup, and reporting — the real cost adds up quickly.

Consider a typical 10-site program:

  • Product Costs: $5,000
  • 2 x Field Visits: $9,000
  • Gas, Mileage, and Incidentals: $1,200
  • Project Management for the Duration of the Season: $26,000
  • Farmer Recruiting: $3,000
  • Data Collection, Analysis and Marketing: $6,000

Total Investment? $51,200.

That’s the visible cost. Now consider the outcome.

If only 40% of your sites return data, and only half of that is actually usable, you’re left with just two usable sites out of ten.

Your effective cost per usable site becomes $25,600

That’s the number that really matters.

$$ are based on an average numbers of hours at $100/hour.

SAME PROGRAM, DIFFERENT RETURN

Now consider the same 10-site trial executed with standardized protocols, active coordination, and real-time oversight.

Instead of losing half the program to gaps and inconsistencies, assume a conservative 80% usable return rate:

  • 10 sites
  • 8 usable
  • Same overall investment range

Your effective cost per usable site drops to approximately: $6,400.

Same season.
Same number of sites.
Very different outcome.

The difference isn’t in what you spend — it’s in what you get back.

With stronger coordination, consistent execution, and centralized data management, fewer sites fall through the cracks. Fewer internal hours are wasted chasing missing information. And more of your trial budget actually turns into usable results that inform real decisions.

That’s what changes the economics.

The RISK ISN’T JUST FINANCIAL

Bad trials don’t just eat up your budget—they hold your business back. Here’s what’s really at stake:

  • Missed Growing Seasons: Bad data equals bad timing, and in agriculture, a missed season is a missed opportunity.
  • Poor Product Decisions: Incomplete data can lead to costly missteps, like betting on the wrong positioning or product feature.
  • Reputation Damage: If your product underperforms because you relied on shaky trial data, the fallout can be brutal.

The bottom line? You’re not just risking dollars—you’re risking your ability to compete.

That’s why cost per usable outcome is a more meaningful metric than cost per site.

EXECUTION IS THE LEVER

Running more trials doesn’t solve this problem. Running them better does.

When protocols are consistent, progress is visible in real time, and data is captured in a structured way from the start, fewer sites fall through the cracks. Less time is spent chasing missing information. More of the program turns into decision-ready results.

That’s what changes the math.

WANT TO PRESSURE-TEST YOUR OWN PROGRAM?

We’ve created a practical cost comparison guide that walks through:

  • Common trial cost categories
  • Return-rate scenarios
  • Cost per usable site calculations
  • A worksheet to model your own numbers

Download the full Cost Comparison Guide here.

Because the real measure of a trial program isn’t how many sites you run — it’s how many actually move your business forward.