
































Microsoft Word - 87-Manuscript-979-1-11-20210216.docx


Benge and Beattie  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
  Volume 2, Issue 1, 2021 
  agdevresearch.org 

1. Matt Benge, Extension Assistant Professor, University of Florida/ Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, PO Box 

112060, Gainesville, FL, 32610, mattbenge@ufl.edu,  https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5358-3233     
2. Peyton N. Beattie,  Doctoral Candidate, University of Florida, PO Box 110540 Gainesville, FL 32611, pbeattie@ufl.edu,    

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0677-4600  
42 

 

Challenges of Early Career Extension Agents in Florida 
M. Benge1, P. Beattie2 

 
 

  

Abstract 

Extension agents serve a critical role in the land-grant mission as they disseminate research to local 
clientele in the form of educational programs. However, Extension agents face a myriad of 
challenges, such as the changing scope of clientele and programming, nature of the job, and 
burnout. Much research focuses specifically on new agent challenges within the first year, however, 
few studies have focused on early career Extension agents after the initial onboarding process is 
complete. We used a phenomenological approach to explore the challenges of early career Extension 
agents, which yielded eleven major themes, such as a lack of understanding Extension, the nature of 
the job and understanding their role, and personal pressure. Another major theme was the lack of 
Extension knowledge of early career Extension agents which could stem from the lack of formalized 
Extension education programs and professional development programs targeted to early career 
agents. Social capital theory could be used to better understand the social networks of early career 
Extension agents, how these networks form over time, and what type of impact social networks have 
on new Extension agents.  
 

Keywords 

onboarding, professional development, burnout 



Benge and Beattie  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v2i1.87  43 
 

Introduction and Problem Statement 
 
Cooperative Extension is an agency of change, providing non-formal education programs 
targeted toward community citizens. Since its inception in 1914, Extension has served both 
rural and urban dwellers alike, helping to transform communities through education and 
empowering citizens to make behavior changes that positively affect themselves, their families, 
communities, agriculture, and the environment (United States Department of Agriculture, 
2019). Florida Extension has 367 Extension agents who take the research conducted at a land-
grant university and create educational programs in focus areas such as 4-H youth 
development, agriculture, horticulture, natural resources, families, and communities (UF/IFAS 
Extension, n.d.).  
 
Extension agents serve a critical role within their local communities, but are faced with many 
challenges such as burnout, stress, and many weeknight and weekend activities (Kutilek, 2000), 
which often lead to employee turnover (Martin, 2011). Extension agent turnover leads to gaps 
in educational programming, community relationships, volunteers, knowledge, and experience 
(Arnold, 2008; Bradley et al., 2012; Ensle, 2005; Strong & Harder, 2009), which presents greater 
challenges at the state level due these programmatic and monetary losses (Borr & Young, 2010; 
Ensle, 2005; Kutilek, 2000). Martin (2011) suggested the first two to three years on the job is 
the most critical time for Extension agents to be onboarded and where the organization can 
decrease employee intent to leave the organization. Though there is much literature focused 
on Extension agents within their first year, and Extension agents overall, the literature does not 
focus on challenges of early career Extension agents (ECAs) beyond the first year and is 
essential to providing quality support to help curb employee retention. 
 

Theoretical and Conceptual Framework 
 
The challenges Extension agents face have changed over time due to a myriad of reasons. In its 
prime, Cooperative Extension’s outreach focused largely on agriculture and home economics 
(Gonzalez, 1982; Rasmussen; 1989). Beginning in the late 1940s and to this day, changes in 
technology, reduced farm size and rural populations, and Extension’s clientele base all 
contribute to an ever-changing landscape of Extension agent challenges and the need for 
evolving professional development beyond on-board training (Warner & Christenson, 1984). 
With declining budgets and inadequate networks and partnerships (Borich, 2001), as well as a 
shift to serve increasing urban and suburban audiences (Harder et al., 2019; Henning et al., 
2014), both Extension agents and the Extension system are feeling pressure to continuously 
adapt to meet changing needs, programming, and methodology. 
 
There are many common challenges Extension agents and administrators are faced with, such 
as understanding agent roles and responsibilities (Ensle, 2005; Myers, 2011), reaching low-
income audiences (Benavente et al., 2009), and reaching parity and working across different 
cultures (Moncloa et al., 2019). Other challenges faced by Extension professionals include, time 
management, balancing work, and family, working with volunteers, insufficient staff, lack of 



Benge and Beattie  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v2i1.87  44 
 

training, and program evaluation and reporting (Diaz et al., 2019; Ensle, 2005; Myers, 2011). 
Harder et al. (2015) identified transactional factors increase the burnout of agents more than 
transformational factors. Challenges such as these affect the turnover rate of Extension 
professionals, which is approximately 7-9% annually (Benge & Harder, 2017; Kutilek, 2000), 
making it difficult for state Extension systems and program and staff development professionals 
to keep up with the demand of hiring and training new employees.  
 
Among land-grant universities across the nation, a total of only 18 universities offers an 
undergraduate or graduate academic program for Extension agents (Harder et al., 2018). This 
lack of formal Extension education programs provided by land-grant universities contributes 
pressure to state Extension systems to train and develop new hires as they are not competent-
ready when first hired. Harder et al. (2010) identified nineteen competencies entry-level 
Extension professionals should possess. However, many Extension agents lack the entry-level 
competencies deemed necessary by Harder et al. (2010). Thus, Cooperative Extension is hiring 
new educators without the complete skillset required to be successful. 
 
The Motivation-Hygiene Theory (Herzberg, 1968) provides a lens for identifying challenges that 
can influence an employee’s feelings of job satisfaction and job dissatisfaction, which can 
ultimately affect their willingness to leave the organization. Herzberg (1987) theorized that job 
satisfaction and dissatisfaction are distinct from each other, and that certain internal factors 
would lead to an increase in motivation and job satisfaction, whereas external factors would 
lead to negative feelings and job dissatisfaction. Herzberg (1987) stated, ‘‘The opposite of job 
satisfaction is not job dissatisfaction but, rather, no job satisfaction; and similarly, the opposite 
of job dissatisfaction is not job satisfaction, but no job dissatisfaction’’ (p. 4). Motivation factors 
relate to job satisfaction and include achievement, recognition, work itself, responsibility, 
advancement, and growth (Smerek & Peterson, 2007). Conversely, maintenance factors, also 
known as hygiene factors, relate to an employee’s job dissatisfaction and include company 
policy and administration, supervision, relationship with supervisor, work conditions, salary, 
relationships with peers, personal life, relationships with subordinates, status, and security 
(Smerek & Peterson, 2007). 

 
Purpose 

 
The purpose of this study was to explore challenges of ECAs in Florida, and it was part of a 
larger investigation of the Florida Extension new agent onboarding process. The research 
question guiding the study was: What are the challenges of ECAs in Florida?  
 

Methods 
 
We used a qualitative methodology design through a phenomenological lens, where challenges 
of Florida ECAs were the phenomenon being addressed. Phenomenology was the appropriate 
approach for this study as we sought to capture the “meaning for several individuals of their 
lived experiences of a concept of phenomenon” (Creswell, 2007, p. 56). We acknowledged our 



Benge and Beattie  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v2i1.87  45 
 

bias (Merriam, 1988) by searching for a convergence of information among multiple data 
sources to form themes (Golafshani, 2003). We obtained Institutional Review Board (IRB) 
approval from the University of Florida IRB Office prior to contacting potential participants.  
 
At the time the data was collected for this study, the total population of Florida Extension 
faculty was 367, of which 62 were County Extension Directors (CEDs), according to the Florida 
Extension Business Services office (T. Obreza, personal communication, March 15, 2019). The 
target population for the study consisted of: (a) 89 Extension agents who have been on the job 
for 1-3 years and (b) 48 CEDs who currently have an Extension agent in their office with 1-3 
years of experience. A sample of 15 participants (eight CEDs and seven ECAs) were purposively 
selected to participate in the study based on their district, program areas, and county type (i.e., 
rural, urban, mixed). 
 
We created two semi-structured interview guides, one for ECA participants and another for CED 
participants. A six-member expert panel reviewed both interview guides for face and content 
validity. The expert panel consisted of one Extension agent, one County Extension Director, two 
program and staff development professionals, and two state Extension faculty. Five of the six-
member panel either currently work or have worked for Extension as an Extension agent or 
CED. Both interview guides consisted of 20 questions, with the difference being that we asked 
ECA participants about their own experience and we asked CED participants about their 
perceptions of their ECA(s) experiences in their office. This study pertains to the following three 
questions from the 20-question interview guide: (a) describe your experience so far as being an 
Extension agent; (b) describe any challenges you have encountered while working in Extension; 
and (c) what has been most difficult?  
 
We conducted interviews over two months, ranging from 28 to 63 minutes in length, with the 
average interview length being 40 minutes. We audio recorded and transcribed interviews 
verbatim, and we utilized NVivo 12 qualitative software to organize, code, and analyze the data 
collected. Data was reduced using the phenomenological reduction method by Stevick-Colaizzi-
Keen as modified by Moustakas (1994). We used five strategies to maintain credibility of study, 
as Eisner (1991) stated that establishing credibility within qualitative research “allows us to feel 
confident about our observations, interpretations, and conclusions” (p. 110). These strategies 
include investigator triangulation, peer debriefing, member checking, thick and rich 
descriptions, and clarifying researcher bias.  
 

Findings 
 
The interviews yielded 11 themes of challenges: (a) building relationships; (b) official mentor; 
(c) lack of knowledge and understanding of Extension; (d) the nature of the job and 
understanding their role; (e) CED turnover; (f) leadership and supervision; (g) personal pressure; 
(h) plans of work and reporting; (i) competence; (j) volunteer management; and (k) following 
the previous agent. 
 



Benge and Beattie  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v2i1.87  46 
 

Building Relationships 
An ECA shared challenges she experienced with navigating political relationships during her first 
three years on the job (Abigail). Abigail expressed her experience with feeling misplaced among 
colleagues given her job title: “I got a sense from some of my colleagues that they thought I 
didn’t really belong where I was. And there was this sense that is inaccurate, but it still exists, 
that RSAs are somehow better or higher or above county agents.” Carl, a CED, urged his early 
career agent to build relationships with a few people in the county because of their visibility of 
being an opinion leader within the county:  

I don’t know these 10 people very well, but I get the feeling that they have a huge 
influence on this group’. You need to get to know those people and decide if that’s true 
or not. If it’s not, we need to find out who does and figure out how to build those 
relationships. Build their trust, and overall, you’ll have a bigger impact with that group. 

 
Official Mentors 
Both the ECAs and the CEDs explained there were inconsistencies regarding assigned peer 
mentors, such as not having an assigned mentor, having a mentor who doesn’t keep consistent 
contact, and number of mentors (both official and unofficial). Early career agent Anna 
expressed, “it’s been, kind of, very short-lipped” when sharing experiences with her assigned 
mentor. Additionally, Abigail indicated, “I actually have two [mentors], because they weren’t 
sure who to assign me, based on me being an RSA and [program].” The CEDs wished their 
agents’ assigned mentors would have been more present or provided more guidance during the 
agents’ first years on the job, and they have witnessed a variation in mentor and mentee 
relationships in terms of time invested and experiences. Camile, a CED, expressed, “I feel like 
[agent] has these other kind of more informal networks that he uses more than maybe 
[mentor].”  
 
Lack of Knowledge and Understanding of Extension 
The ECAs did not discuss their lack of knowledge of Extension as much as the CEDs discussed 
the Extensions agents’ lack of knowledge of Extension being a difficulty. There was only one 
ECA, Abigail, who expressed her lack of knowledge of Extension and stated: “I didn’t really 
know what Extension was…I was in UF/IFAS for 6 years doing my graduate work, and I didn’t 
really know about land grants.” The CEDs expressed having to invest more time with agents 
who lack knowledge of Extension when coming into the job as compared to agents with 
previous knowledge of Extension when starting the job. Carol explained, “[Agent]… came in as 
an agent but did not have an Extension background. So, she has been undoubtedly the agent 
that I’ve done the most handholding with, ever, in my CED time.” Caleb explained that a lack of 
Extension knowledge coming into the job causes agents to “have a hard time figuring about 
what they’re supposed to do regarding programming.” 
 
Nature of the Job and Understanding their Role 
Many of the ECAs shared their high level of uncertainty of what they were supposed to be 
accomplishing when they started their job (Anna, Alexis, Adam, Alyssa, Amy). Anna stated, 
“there have been parts of it that have been frustrating, not knowing the exact direction to 
take.” Amy explained the amount of time to learn the job was a challenge, and she 



Benge and Beattie  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v2i1.87  47 
 

communicated, “the thing that you kind of hear a lot is ‘oh, it takes you 6 or more years to 
really understand your job,’ … It shouldn’t take me 6 years to understand my job!” Adam also 
discussed: 

[Finding] your role within the county and how you fit… a lot of times they [the county] 
are already doing a lot of the same programs, so they have departments doing some of 
the programs, and you have to find a place to fit that makes sense. This is a challenge to 
make everyone happy and creating the right programs that people want. 

 
The discussion with the CEDs was very similar to the discussion with the ECAs regarding agents 
being uncertain what exactly they should be accomplishing in the first years on the job (Camile, 
Cade, Caleb, Cameron, and Carol). Carol shared, “I think that she [agent] really had trouble 
understanding what she was supposed to be doing, for almost the first year, and it took her 
months just to start teaching.” Cameron discussed, “as an agent, you have to come up with 
your own programming, what you think is important, and being a new agent… that can be a 
challenge, you know? What do I do, when do I do it, what’s enough, what’s not enough?” Caleb 
stated, “Knowing what to do. Having a clear job description: ‘this is what I need to do’. Too 
many times [new agents] are left in the office and we say ‘okay, go out into the world and 
figure it out’. They need a clearer direction.”  
 
Turnover of County Extension Directors 
Two ECAs from two different counties shared their experiences with having multiple CEDs in 
their first three years on the job (Adam and Amy). The multiple turnovers in leadership left the 
agents confused, as each CED came with different expectations. Adam shared, “we’ve had 
multiple CEDs, three in three years. They’ve all had a different way of doing things, which can 
be tough trying to navigate.” Adam expanded his experience:  

You didn’t know what was expected. With our CED now, we know what to expect which 
is definitely different than before. She seems to have more of a balanced plan. I feel 
now more micromanaged now than I did before, which is something I have to get used 
to. 

 
Amy shared, “she’s been our interim CED, I want to say for about six months now, so I’m still 
trying to learn her… leadership style.” Amy further explained:  

Each person has their own unique leadership style, and so trying to conform or 
understand those different leadership styles can… not that it was hard, but it is a little, 
you know, it can be a little challenging, especially when, you know some of them are 
interim. 

 
CED Leadership and Supervision 
ECAs expressed frustrations relating to the level of guidance they received from their CEDs 
(Abigail, Anna, Adam, Alyssa, and Amy). Anna indicated a lack of coaching received from her 
CED by stating: 

I’m not sure I’ve had what I would call ‘coaching’. I mean, I’ve had reviews of my 
packet… But I don’t think I’ve had… I’m not sure what you would call ‘coaching’ But as 



Benge and Beattie  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v2i1.87  48 
 

far as coaching specific things, I mean, I don’t think that has, you know, that hasn’t really 
happened. 

 
Alyssa shared her lack of confidence in her CED to coach her and stated, “some of the things 
that I’m working on, I know that she may not be able to necessarily give me good direction on, 
so that’s why I’ve kind of moved to other parts of our Extension community to find some of 
those answers.” Abigail discussed frustrations with CEDs from other counties:  

They just assumed that I needed any guidance they had to give me, and without trying 
to meet me at my level, you know? I’m sure that CED would have had plenty of great 
things to tell me as someone who’s only been in Extension 3 years, but I don’t really 
need someone to tell me how to network at this point. 

 
ECAs expressed their enjoyment with CEDs who have experience in their program area or have 
experience being an agent prior to becoming a CED (Adam and Anna). Adam stated, “I always 
like the CEDs that are veteran agents. Those CEDs with that longer experience that worked their 
way through the system, they tend to have a really good perspective.” Anna, a RSA, struggled 
with CEDs from different program areas, stating “with the counties that their CED is an 
[agriculture] agent, again, it’s kind of easy because they know what I’m doing, and they know 
what I’m involved in and what’s going on.”  
 
Personal Pressure 
A challenge many ECAs discussed was personal pressure they, often times, put on themselves 
(Abigail, Alexis, Adam, Amelia, Alyssa, and Amy). One of these pressures was time 
management, often related to not being able to say no or overcommitting to too many tasks 
(Abigail, Alexis, Adam, and Amelia). Abigail shared, “the obvious challenge of time management 
and figuring out your limits… you have enough freedom to get yourself in trouble with your 
time.” Abigail continued to share her experience with personal pressure, stating: 

I don’t really like the term ‘time management’ because it’s more overcommitting, 
because I’m extremely efficient. I don’t waste time at work – I just work a lot. So, I find it 
really hard to say ‘no’ because I think in my head, something’s not going to take me that 
long because I do work efficiently, but of course, there’s always things that you don’t 
plan for. So just learning my limits, I guess, has been the most difficult. And sticking to 
those [limits]. 

 
Much like the ECAs reported, the CEDs noticed the ECAs’ lack of ability to manage their time 
causing stress for the agents and their lack of ability to say ‘no’ (Candice, Cade, and Carol). Cade 
shared an experience with an agent, stating:  

[Agent] also gets dragged into things too. He got a call asking to help pull weeds at a 
community garden. I said, ‘[Agent], you’re not a weed puller. You’re a horticultural 
agent and you’re responsible for programming. You can’t use valuable time and 
resources to drive across town and help someone pull weeds. That is not going to work.’ 
Helping them, sometimes, as these things can be difficult because they are afraid to say 
no. Help them figure out how to draw that line and say ‘no, I can’t do that’. That can be 
difficult for all new agents, even seasoned agents sometimes. 



Benge and Beattie  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v2i1.87  49 
 

Plans of Work and Reporting 
Reporting and developing records of accomplishment (ROAs) and plans of work (POWs) have 
shown to be a challenge for ECAs (Anna, Adam, Amelia, and Amy). Anna explained that because 
of the nature of her programs, she struggled with how to report impact, stating “I can’t say 
because of this program, 10 less cattle were lame on this farm, because there’s a million things 
that go into that, and there’s no way to measure the instance, the direct impact of that.” 
Amelia shared her challenges with ROAs by explaining, “I have to admit, the one area I struggle 
with is figuring out the percentages in the ROA, how much behavior change you are making.” 
 
The CEDs shared that understanding plans of work and annual reporting is time consuming and 
especially difficult for early career agents who are not familiar with the system (Cade, Caleb, 
Cameron, and Carly). For example, Cameron shared:  

As an agent, I think it’s always good to have a lot of guidance for putting together your 
[annual report]. It’s a very stressful thing because you never know if enough is enough. 
You never know if you’ve got enough programs, or trainings, or what have you, and 
there’s no formula to tell you that there’s enough, which I’ve always found very difficult 
to swallow. 

 
The CEDs also recognized the importance of their role in helping ECAs understand the reporting 
processes and what is expected of them (Caleb, Cameron, and Carly). Carly explained: 

I didn’t do the greatest service to her in the very beginning about reporting. And 
reporting can make or break an agent. I know it’s just a little bit in the onboarding 
sessions, and it kind of depends on when they start, whether it’s spring or fall, but I just 
think we are doing them a disservice if we don’t do more in that arena. Learn how to 
write that success story. Learn how to write that objective. Maybe it’s a workshop so 
they can develop their first set of objectives. 

 
Competence 
ECAs expressed they received a number of professional development trainings but do not feel 
as competent in all areas they should be. The ECAs reported desire to receive more in-depth 
training related to social science research (Abigail), evaluation and evaluation methods (Abigail 
and Alyssa), development of logic models (Alyssa), and strategies for marketing (Amy). Abigail 
shared her challenging experiences with evaluation: 

I definitely played a lot of catch-up in terms of my reporting and getting a good start on 
evaluation… a lot of people just sort of jump in head-first and focus on developing 
presentation materials, and the evaluation is sort of an afterthought, and that was 
mostly because I didn’t really understand the sort of short, medium, long-term impacts. 

 
The CEDs and the ECAs only indicated one competence area in common as a common challenge 
among ECAs: evaluation. Additionally, CEDs expressed different competence areas the ECAs 
could use supplemental professional development, such as social media (Camile), 
communication and dealing with conflict (Camile and Carol), program development and 
teaching (Caleb, Carly, and Carol), and developing relationships with clientele (Carol and Carl).  
 



Benge and Beattie  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v2i1.87  50 
 

Volunteer Management 
Both ECAs and CEDs expressed challenges with volunteer management, though CEDs perceived 
volunteer management as a bigger challenge than the ECAs did. Alexis explained, “I really 
hadn’t put a lot of emphasis on the volunteer recruitment and retention. And I feel like that’s 
the hardest, most challenging thing – is something to do with, you know, some kind of training 
on volunteers.” Most of the experiences shared by the CEDs were with agents who had 
responsibilities with the Master Gardeners (MGs) and 4-H programs (Cade, Caleb, Cameron, 
and Carol). The challenges witnessed by the CEDs regarding the agents’ volunteer management 
had to do with volunteer conflicts. Carol explained her ECA dealt with backlash from volunteers 
through the enforcement of rules. Additionally, Cade expressed that running a volunteer 
program can be challenge for an early career agent:  

It’s a big challenge, especially here because we have a lot of them, over 100 MGs, that 
come on a regular basis. One of the key things with those volunteers is they come from 
a job where they were director, they were in charge, and now they are part of a 
program where they are asked to pull weeds or do something that they might not 
necessarily want to do. 

 
Following the Previous Agent 
CEDs discussed following the previous agent as a challenge for ECAs. Candice discussed how the 
previous agent’s lack of following policies and procedures caused hardship for the current agent 
in their beginning years on the job:  

Some of the challenges she’s been having, and it’s getting all these MGs that have 
existed with all these loosy-goosy rules back in the fold into the new rules. For them to 
understand she is doing it for a reason. There was quite a bit of folks, the MGs that have 
been here for a long time really like her, they love her teaching style, they don’t like the 
rules so much, but they are getting to understand why. 

 
Different than the previous example, Caleb witnessed his ECA having to follow an agent who 
was well-respected. Caleb mentioned the ECA was adjusting to the job, but following a well-
respected agent is difficult, stating “I don’t care what Master Gardener agent comes in, it’s 
always hard following someone who did well. So you have a year for the agent to get used to 
the volunteers and vice versa.” 
 

Conclusions, Discussion, and Recommendations 
 
ECAs indicated a myriad of challenges, though the majority of those challenges are 
maintenance factors in which Herzberg (1968) suggested an organization must focus its 
attention in order to decrease employee turnover. Nine of the 11 challenges identified in this 
study fall under the ‘maintenance factor umbrella’, which include: (a) building relationships; (b) 
official mentor; (c) the nature of the job and understanding their role; (d) CED turnover; (e) 
leadership and supervision; (f) personal pressure; (g) plans of work and reporting; (h) volunteer 
management; and (i) following the previous agent.  
 



Benge and Beattie  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v2i1.87  51 
 

Both ECAs and CEDs alluded to difficulties having strong relationships regarding clientele, 
volunteers, mentors, and their CEDs. Some ECAs who had been on the job for three years did 
not yet have a mentor, and other ECAs noted very poor relationships with their respective CEDs 
due to leadership styles or CED turnover. Many of the challenges the ECAs and the CEDs 
identified have existed for at least a decade or more as Diaz et al. (2019), Ensle (2005), and 
Myers (2011) all indicated similar conclusions. It is an interesting finding that many ECAs 
struggle to develop relationships because Extension is a relational organization that utilizes its 
social capital to onboard and train employees (Seevers & Graham, 2012). In addition, the 
amount of CED turnover for ECAs is a major cause for concern as CEDs play an integral part in 
the onboarding and development of Extension agents (citation omitted). We recommend 
UF/IFAS Extension conduct an in-depth assessment to understand why CEDs are turning over, 
as well as the impact of CED turnover on ECAs in those counties. 
 
The Extension agents and CEDs in this study attested that defining the roles and responsibilities 
of the Extension agent were difficult. Ensle (2005) and Myers (2011) reached similar 
conclusions in their respective studies. The Extension job and understanding their role is a not a 
new challenge for Extension agents and is rooted within the changing Extension landscape and 
the lack of formalized academic Extension education programs (Harder et al., 2018; Henning et 
al., 2014). However, what is concerning is that agents in their third year are still challenged with 
understanding their job. ECAs should understand what Extension is when hired, and UF/IFAS 
should evaluate and/or revamp their new agent training program.  
 
It was evident that the Extension agents included or discussed in this study require professional 
development programs focused on their evolving needs which is supported by the thoughts of 
Warner and Christenson (1984). Plans of work and reporting are common challenges among all 
Extension agents (Benge et al., 2020; Diaz et al., 2019; Lamm, 2011); Extension administrators 
and evaluation specialists need to increase the training and resources available to creating 
plans of work and evaluation capacity among its workforce. As Extension agent job 
responsibilities increase so does the demand for competence and skillsets to fulfill these 
responsibilities. Florida Extension agents may not be receiving enough professional 
development in these areas of need. 
 
Though this study results are not generalizable beyond Florida, other Extension systems should 
ensure their onboarding processes are producing the desired results and limiting the amount of 
job dissatisfaction (i.e., maintenance factors) that can lead to employee turnover. The costs 
associated with onboarding and developing a new employee can be high (Borr & Young, 2010); 
however, if an agent is not performing at a sufficient level two to three years on the job, 
Extension administrators might consider either creating professional improvement plans or 
parting ways with those employees, as the costs of employing an insufficient employee may be 
higher than hiring and training a new employee. Extension researchers could use social capital 
theory to better understand the social networks of early career Extension agents, how these 
networks form over time, and what type of impact social networks have on new Extension 
agents. 
 



Benge and Beattie  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v2i1.87  52 
 

References 
 
Arnold, S. K. (2008). Career decisions of Florida agricultural Extension agents (Publication No. 

3281495) [Doctoral dissertation, University of Florida]. Abstracts International. 
 
Becerra, T. A, Middendorf, G., Campbell, A., & Tomlinson, P. (2016). Climate change challenges 

for Extension educators: Technical capacity and cultural attitudes. Journal of Extension, 
54(6), Article v54-6a2. https://joe.org/joe/2016december/a2.php  

 
Benavente, L. M., Jayaratne, K. S. U., & Jones, L. (2009). Challenges, alternatives, and 

educational strategies in reaching limited income audiences. Journal of Extension, 47(6), 
Article v47-6rb2. https://www.joe.org/joe/2009december/rb2.php  

 
Benge, M., & Harder, A. (2017). The effects of leader-member exchanges on the relationships 

between Extension agents and county Extension directors in Florida. Journal of Human 
Sciences and Extension, 5(1), 35–49. 
https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/c8fe6e_abf482fce12b43e79bdc759ad61bce87.pdf   

 
Benge, M., Muscato, A. F., & Beattie, P. N. (2020). Professional development needs of early-

career Extension agents beyond the first year: Florida county Extension director 
perspectives. Journal of Extension, 58(6), Article v58-6rb1. 
https://www.joe.org/joe/2020december/rb1.php  

 
Borich, T. O. (2001). The department of housing and urban development and cooperative 

Extension: A case for urban collaboration. Journal of Extension, 39(6), Article 6FEA2. 
https://www.joe.org/joe/2001december/a2.php  

 
Borr, M. L., & Young, R. B. (2010). Retirement and attrition trends of Extension professionals in 

North Dakota. Journal of Extension, 48(1), Article v48-1rb4. 
https://joe.org/joe/2010february/rb4.php  

 
Bradley, L., Driscoll, E., & Bardon, R. (2012). Removing the tension from Extension. Journal of 

Extension, 50(2), Article v50-2t1. https://www.joe.org/joe/2012april/tt1.php  
 
Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches 

(2nd ed.). Sage Publications.   
 
Diaz, J., Chaudhary, A. K., Jayaratne, K. S. U., & Warner, L. A. (2019). Program evaluation 

challenges and obstacles faced by new Extension agents: Implications for capacity 
building. Journal of Extension, 57(4), Article v57-4a1. 
https://www.joe.org/joe/2019august/a1.php  

 



Benge and Beattie  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v2i1.87  53 
 

Eisner, E. W. (1991). The enlightened eye. Qualitative inquiry and the enhancement of 
educational practice. Macmillan. 

 
Ensle, K. M. (2005). Burnout: How does Extension balance job and family? Journal of Extension, 

43(3), Article 3FEA5. https://www.joe.org/joe/2005june/a5.php  
 
Franz, N. K., & McCann, M. (2007). Reporting program impacts: Slaying the dragon of 

resistance. Journal of Extension, 45(6), Article 6OT1. 
https://joe.org/joe/2007december/tt1.php  

 
Golafshani, N. (2003). Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative research. The 

Qualitative Report, 8(4), 597 – 606. http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR8-
4/golafshani.pdf   

 
Gonzalez, I. M. (1982). The professional competencies needed by Extension agents in the 

Pennsylvania Cooperative Extension Service. The Pennsylvania State University.
 
Harder, A., Gouldthorpe, J., & Goodwin, J. (2015). Exploring organizational factors related to 

Extension employee burnout. Journal of Extension, 53(2), Article v53-2a2. 
https://joe.org/joe/2015april/a2.php  

 
Harder, A., Narine, L. K., Benge, M., & Albert, B. (2018, May 15-18). Assessing the availability 

and academic offerings of Extension education in the United States [Conference 
session]. American Association of Agricultural Education Conference, Charleston, SC, 
United States.  

 
Harder, A., Narine, L. K., & Wells, O. (2019). Organizational priorities for advancing Cooperative 

Extension in selected urban counties in Florida. Journal of Agricultural Education, 60(1), 
96–108. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2019.01096   

 
Harder, A., Place, N. T., & Scheer, S. D. (2010). Towards a competency-based Extension 

education curriculum: A Delphi study. Journal of Agricultural Education, 51(3), 44 – 52. 
https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2010.03044  

 
Henning, J., Buchholz, D., Steele, D., & Ramaswamy, S. (2014). Milestones and the future for 

Cooperative Extension. Journal of Extension, 52(6), Article v52-6comm1. 
https://www.joe.org/joe/2014december/comm1.php  

 
Herzberg, F. (1968). Work and the nature of man. Crosby. 
 
Herzberg, F. (1987). One more time: How do you motivate employees? Harvard Business 

Review, 65(5), 109 – 120.  
 



Benge and Beattie  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v2i1.87  54 
 

Kutilek, L. M. (2000). Learning from those who leave. Journal of Extension, 38(3), Article  3IAW2. 
https://www.joe.org/joe/2000june/iw2.php  

 
Lamm, A. J. (2011). Effect of organizational context on Extension evaluation behaviors [Doctoral 

dissertation, University of Florida]. http://etd.fcla.edu/UF/UFE0042737/lamm_a.pdf   
 
Martin, M. J. (2011). Influence of human resource practices on employee intention to quit 

[Doctoral dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University]. 
https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/bitstream/handle/10919/28424/Martin_MJ_D_2011.pdf?
sequence=1  

 
Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study application in education. Jossey-Bass.  
 
Moncloa, F., Horrillo, S. J., Espinoza, D., & Hill, R. (2019). Embracing diversity and inclusion: An 

organizational change model to increase intercultural competence. Journal of Extension, 
57(6), Article v57-6a1. https://www.joe.org/joe/2019december/a1.php 

 
Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Sage. 
 
Myers, P. (2011). Can I breathe yet? Reflections on my first year in Extension. Journal of 

Extension, 49(1), Article v49-1tt1. https://www.joe.org/joe/2011february/tt1.php 
 
Rasmussen, W. D. (1989). Taking the university to the people: Seventy-five years of Cooperative 

Extension. Iowa State University Press. 
 
Seevers, B. S., Baca, J. S., & Van Leeuwen, D. (2005). Training methods and needs related to 

volunteer management competencies of Extension 4-H youth development agents. 
Journal of Extension, 43(6), Article 6RIB3. 
https://www.joe.org/joe/2005december/rb3.php  

 
Seevers, B., & Graham, D. (2012). Education through Cooperative Extension (3rd ed.). University 

of Arkansas.  
 
Smerek, R. E., & Peterson, M. (2007). Examining Herzberg’s theory: Improving job satisfaction 

among non-academic employees at a university. Research in Higher Education, 48(2), 
229 – 250. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-006-9042-3 

 
Strong, R., & Harder, A. (2009). Implications of maintenance and motivation factors on 

Extension agent turnover. Journal of Extension, 47(1), Article v47-1a2. 
http://www.joe.org/joe/2009february/a2.php  

 
United States Department of Agriculture. (2019). About us. https://nifa.usda.gov/extension  
 
 



Benge and Beattie  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v2i1.87  55 
 

Warner, P. D., & Christenson, J. A. (1984). The cooperative extension service: A national 
assessment. Westview Press. 

 
UF/IFAS Extension. (n.d.). About Extension. https://sfyl.ifas.ufl.edu/who-we-are/about-

extension/  
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

© 2021 by authors. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of 
the Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). 

 


