Emily Newton, Revolutionized Magazine

Utilizing Technology To Eliminate Food Processing Bottlenecks

By Emily Newton
No Comments
Emily Newton, Revolutionized Magazine

Food processing bottlenecks are a persistent problem in the industry. Whether due to labor shortages, shifts in consumer demand leading to product or formulation changes, or inefficient facility design, new technologies are coming to market that can help companies identify and overcome these challenges.

Overcoming Labor Shortages

A 2023 survey from Food Processing found that 40% of respondents plan to add new employees to their workforces this year. The survey highlighted the challenges companies continue to face due to labor shortages, including the inability to find enough workers and difficulty in retaining skilled employees. These problems collectively can cause food processing bottlenecks, particularly as companies seek to scale output to meet growing demand and enhance training to build employees’ skills.

Taiwan’s Taipei Medical University is using virtual reality (VR) at its food safety training center, and the technology shows promise as a faster and more engaging training tool. A professor familiar with the implementation of the technology noted that it can reduce safety-related errors and improve knowledge retention, as workers appreciate engaging in the more immersive learning style of VR compared to watching videos and reading textbook chapters.

That means it could also encourage workers to acquire new skills. That’s vital since the Food Processing survey noted that 55% of respondents have ramped up their in-house technical training in response worker shortages.

Incorporating new technologies, such as VR, may improve onboarding while also helping companies attract younger employees seeking companies that keep pace with modern times.

Digital Twins Increase Visibility

Digital twins are highly realistic models that allow companies to run various scenarios in a controlled environment before trying them in real life. They can help managers identify potential bottlenecks prior to implementing a new product or process, and can help solve existing bottlenecks by showing why an assembly line at a particular plant is less efficient than one at a nearby facility operated by the same company.

Digital twins can also help companies reduce waste. In one example, Accenture and Mars collaborated on a digital twin that enabled real-time monitoring of a filling process. That approach prevented too much product from going into a package.

When it comes to food safety, digital twins can identify insufficient food safety measures, highlighting where and how to make improvements.

One company even developed a digital twin for flavor formulations and customer response predictions. Nearly 90% of new food products remain on the market for only one year. The digital twin developed by Foodpairing was designed to predict “winning” formulations to increase the likelihood of success before introducing new food products.

Robots Supplement Human Efforts

There are limits to how fast humans can work safely and maintain stringent quality control. That’s why many food processing businesses have begun using robots to increase efficiency.

In one case, a food processor used cobots to decrease the six-hour time frame required to transition an assembly line to a different product. These robots also allowed the company to move to 24/7 production, which aligned with customer demand.

FlexCRAFT, a Dutch research program centered on using dual-arm robots for greenhouse management, food processing and packaging, has built machines with grippers that can handle various product shapes and packages.

The food processing application centers on deploying robots to separate, remove or cut various chicken parts. The team is currently developing machines to handle variations in size or type to ensure the robots can work with wings as well as thighs. Future initiatives include incorporating active learning and task planning to further improve the technology.

Food processing bottlenecks can keep companies from meeting goals and remaining competitive in a demanding marketplace. However, technology increasingly provides feasible solutions to help overcome these obstacles.

Leaders tasked with approving technological implementations should assess the most significant issues in their companies. From there, they can investigate which technologies have the most appropriate capabilities to reduce or solve those problems.

Matthew Taylor

Mitigating the Risks of Food Fraud in an Inflationary Environment

By Matthew Taylor
No Comments
Matthew Taylor

Inflation can create a challenging environment for the food industry, making it more difficult to maintain product quality, safety, and transparency. In August 2022, U.S. food inflation hit a 40-year high of 11.4% and has since remained persistently high, at 10.1% in January 2023. Manufacturers and suppliers must stay vigilant and take proactive steps to mitigate the risks posed by stubbornly high food inflation and increasingly complex supply chains.

Inflation can be a catalyst for risk in food supply chains for several reasons. Rising prices could encourage bad actors or tempt manufacturers and suppliers to cut corners or compromise quality to maintain profit margins. This can lead to an increased risk of food fraud, where lower-quality or counterfeit ingredients are substituted for genuine ones or where mislabeled products are sold to unsuspecting consumers. Supply chain disruptions could increasingly affect manufacturers as suppliers struggle to manage the increased costs of raw materials, transportation, and labor, as seen this winter in Europe, with the UK experiencing shortages of tomatoes and eggs. This can result in delays, shortages, and other logistical challenges that can make it difficult to maintain product quality and safety.

Inflation can also increase food allergy and sensitivity incidents. Mislabeling or allergen contamination due to substituted alternative ingredients could put allergen or intolerance sufferers at greater risk, as well as your brand. With the threat of food fraud lurking in increasingly complex and volatile supply chains, what steps can food manufacturers take to protect themselves and their customers?

Tackling Food Fraud and Allergen Incidents

Despite legislative and industry process improvements, food fraud continues to be a significant risk in the food industry, costing businesses an estimated $30 to $40 billion annually. Food fraud refers to any act of deception, intentional or otherwise, that is intended to result in the sale of a food product that is not what it purports to be. This can take many forms, from adulterating ingredients to misbranding and counterfeiting.

The consequences of food fraud can be severe and include economic losses, harm to human health, damage to the reputation of food companies and loss of consumer confidence in the food supply. Food fraud can also cause environmental consequences, including the illegal use of pesticides, or overfishing, which can have long-term effects on the environment, wildlife, and ecosystems.

Subscribe to the Food Safety Tech weekly newsletter to stay up to date on the latest news and information on food safety and quality.

In recent years, several high-profile cases of food fraud have occurred, including the widespread contamination of infant formula with melamine in China and the horse meat scandal in Europe. These incidents have highlighted the need for better measures to prevent food fraud and to ensure the safety of the food supply.

To protect the integrity and bolster consumer and producer confidence in organic food, which has long been a target of food fraud, the USDA published one of the largest-ever reforms to their organic program in January 2023. However, many risks remain as legislation tries to catch and close loopholes.

One of the challenges of preventing food fraud is that the supply chain is often complex and global, making it difficult to track the origin of ingredients and monitor their quality. In addition, many food frauds are not detected until they reach the end-consumer, making it difficult to recall contaminated products. In order to mitigate the risk of food fraud, it is essential to plan ahead and implement strong supply chain management practices, including the use of technology such as traceability systems and predictive analytics.

A good starting point to mitigate your risk of food fraud is to conduct a deep dive into your highest-risk raw materials and suppliers instead of trying to tackle everything at once, particularly if you have a large number of raw materials to assess. For instance, you may want to prioritize raw materials that have been linked to recent fraud incidents, such as infant formula, honey, and olive oil.

Four Steps to Protecting Your Business

Know your supply chain. Controlling and understanding your supply chain is essential for minimizing risk. It is important to audit your supply chain back to the field, if possible, or at least to the production and processing facility. For smaller businesses, forensic auditing may not be feasible. However, there are still steps they can take to protect themselves, such as seeking third-party certification programs that verify the sustainability, quality, and ethical sourcing of ingredients. Going back by more than one step in your supply chain is crucial, and conducting a vulnerability assessment of your raw materials and suppliers is an excellent starting point.

Shop around safely. Review the market for potential alternate suppliers or less ‘at risk’ ingredients, subject to the required quality checks and labeling requirements. It is crucial to thoroughly assess current and potential new suppliers and ensure they meet the minimum Global Food Safety Initiative (GFSI) certification standards, wherever possible. Scrutinize all raw material specifications, including the country of origin, as countries with less established food safety regulations may pose a higher risk. Establishing solid relationships with your suppliers and engaging in regular communication with them is also essential to maintain a high standard of quality, safety, and sustainability.

Be vigilant about ingredients. Markets are constantly evolving, and economic, social, and environmental changes can impact the substitution risk profile of any ingredient that you purchase. To manage this risk, it is essential to have an up-to-date awareness of the various market forces that affect ingredients and their availability.

It is important to note that product adulteration may not always be motivated by economic factors. As ingredients become in short supply, manufacturers may make local substitution decisions to keep the supply available. Remember, there is no substitute for a thorough risk-assessed approach to managing this challenge with a complete and detailed understanding of your supply chains.

Utilize training to build awareness and readiness. Training employees on how to identify, prevent and respond to incidents of potential food fraud or allergens is essential but often challenging for food manufacturers. Regular training should include the types of fraud, how to recognize suspicious behavior, and the importance of accurate record-keeping. Ensuring your teams are trained on what to do is there is a food fraud issue is also key, as is testing the teams through mock exercises to see how they would manage a food fraud event in the business.

Persistently high food inflation rates have created a challenging environment for the food industry, making it harder for manufacturers and suppliers to maintain product quality, safety, and transparency. Food businesses must exercise extra vigilance to face an increased risk of food fraud, supply chain disruptions, and an increase in food allergy and sensitivity incidents. Now is the time to proactively mitigate these risks by prioritizing transparency, gaining control and understanding of supply chains, and acting to prevent food fraud.

It is important to note that no system is foolproof. Food manufacturers should regularly assess and improve their supply chain management practices to ensure they are up to date with industry best practices and changing threats. Increasing your transparency in the ingredient supply chain requires a commitment to responsible sourcing and a willingness to invest in traceability, certification, and supplier relationships. While the risks to food quality and safety are well known, businesses need to ask themselves the right questions and take the necessary steps to protect themselves and their customers. By doing so, they can protect their brand reputation and consumer confidence in the food supply and the environment.

 

Craig Butt

Preparing for the Proposed EU Ban on PFAS

By Food Safety Tech Staff
No Comments
Craig Butt

In February, the European Union (EU) announced a proposed ban on the production, use, and sale of about 10,000 per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). We spoke with Craig Butt, Ph.D., Senior Staff Scientist for Food/Environmental Science at SCIEX to learn more about the proposal, how it may affect the food industry and how companies can begin preparing for more stringent regulations both in the EU and the U.S.

What do food companies need to know about the EU’s proposed ban on PFAS?

Butt: First, it is a proposal at this point and it is open to six-month commentary. About a year from now they will make an official decision. Whatever they decide will slowly be rolled out, but it is a huge and very comprehensive proposed ban that will impact people globally.

We live in an environment of global trade, so this will impact those that manufacture food packaging as well as any food products that might be coming across EU lines. What’s most interesting to me about this is the idea that, in the U.S. there’s a lot of attention on drinking water and drinking water regulations, but to propose banning PFAS in products, that takes the regulations further up the chain.

Is this a true ban on PFAS in the products or are they lowering the threshold from current levels?

Butt: There are two aspects to it. It would set lower limits, but they are also seeking more comprehensive monitoring. Typically, regulation and detection of PFAS has involved specific, targeted sets of compounds.

The problem with PFAS is, it is not like banning or reducing use of a single pesticide, you’re talking about potentially 5,000 different chemicals—depending on how you define them—and maybe even 12,000 different chemicals. So how do you address PFAS as a group? This proposal is trying to address that by looking at not only targeted compounds, but PFAS as a class and trying to understand the control of those compounds as a group.

There is still a lot of work to be done before we see where it falls out. The devil is always in the details, and I know there’s going to be pressure on multiple sides. You’re going to have pressure from one group saying this isn’t strict enough and the other side saying this is too strict and everyone’s going to go bankrupt.

But when you read it and you see the ban on products and certain thresholds in those products, I’m pretty sure that’s going to stay, particularly where they’re looking at total PFAS or total fluorine content. That tells us that we’re going to have to go beyond just looking for a targeted list of compounds and do a better job of characterizing all the fluorine compounds that are in there.

Does the proposal primarily focus on food contact packaging or the food products themselves?

Butt: There is still some clarity needed in terms of what the regulations will look like in the final document, but it seems to be focused more on the source, which would be the food packaging paper and products, rather than the food itself.

Where is the industry now in terms of detection and remediation of PFAS and where will it potentially need to go to meet these new regulations, if passed?

Butt: It is important to remember that there was a time before PFAS were widespread in food packaging, and I do know that companies are making efforts to look for alternatives. Back in the early 2000s when 3M banned Scotch Guard, it wasn’t too long until suitable alternatives were found. In the U.S., some manufacturers—working with the FDA—have agreed to change what’s in their food contact materials. In terms of what the industry has in the warehouse ready to go, it is unclear, but companies have seen the writing on the wall and are taking steps to find alternatives. Still, the move totally away from fluorochemicals will likely be a bit of a shock to those who make them.

The concerns will be whether the non-fluorinated chemicals are as effective as the PFAS, and if they are not will they still be satisfactory? We also need to be cautious as we investigate alternatives because we don’t want to replace these PFAS chemicals with newer chemicals that we don’t yet have knowledge about their toxicology or environmental impact on.

What should people looking at now in terms of investigating new products and understanding what they’re going to need to do in terms of detection?

Butt: Detection is the first step. Some folks may not be aware of what’s in the products they are buying in terms of raw materials. You want to know what’s in your own products and the products you are using. There is a huge risk in terms of public relations and reputation. The last thing a company wants to do is have a third party test their products and find out that there are PFAS in them and have that potential reputational damage, because there are a lot of third parties out there that do that, and they are not afraid to name names.

Are there effective tests available if you want to start checking your packaging?

Butt: Yes, we have gotten very good at measuring extremely low levels as well as reducing some of the impacts on data quality and detection in terms of confirmed detection. We can measure things at trace levels and accurately say that they are there. That’s from a targeted standpoint. But we’re also very good at doing non-targeted work to find some of those unknown PFAS that may not be on a standard monitoring list but can help improve the further characterization of what’s there.

A lot of attention has been on PFOS and PFOA, but if you are only looking at those compounds, then you are doing yourself a disservice because what we know and what we’ve seen through time is that those lists of dangerous compounds only continue to grow. As regulators become aware of their presence and their toxicology and as analytical chemists get better and publish findings of these new compounds in consumer products, then the list will continue to grow.

In terms of the regulatory climate here in the U.S., where do you think we’re headed?

Butt: Back in the late 2000s, the FDA scientists produced some really incredible work looking at PFAS in food packaging and their migration out of that packaging into foods, and we continue to work with them. They are great scientists and they published some groundbreaking research. However, these are not the same scientists who make the regulations.

There have been some voluntary agreements with some of the manufacturers to reduce the use of chemicals that are larger—the long chain compounds—which are more likely to accumulate in human blood. But these EU regulations will put a whole lot more pressure on companies to look at PFAS as a larger class of chemicals.

As companies look for alternatives that are a) effective and b) not dangerous, are leaching tests typically part of testing these new products?

Butt: The EU regulations do have a leaching component for some of the food packaging materials, particularly for plastic food packaging. You do need to assess the leaching from plasticizer compounds. I’m not sure if there’s a similar leeching test for PFAS, because PFAS are a little bit weird in the sense that, in the past, most of the chemicals that we were concerned about were those that were fat soluble. We know that fatty foods like yogurts are very good at pulling out the contaminants from the food packaging, but PFAS are a little bit odd because they like more neutral compounds, ones that have some emulsifying properties to them—not super fatty or super water soluble—so you have to be cautious that the right kind of migration tests are being used and are fully applicable for these compounds.

One of the things that makes PFAS so interesting is that they don’t behave like our traditional hydrophobic organic contaminants. They don’t build up in your fat. Years ago, when we were worried about DDT and PCBs and some of those other chlorinated pesticides it was because they build up in your fat. But PFAS build up in the blood, kidney and liver, which from a chemical standpoint is interesting but it also means that some of our tests have to be revised for them.

But the really big thing is, with all the PFAS that are out there, the onus now seems to be shifting on to the manufacturer to know what is in their products beyond just the big ones of PFOS and PFOA. I think that is where we’re going in terms of the testing market. It’s not just testing for individual compounds, but doing a total PFAS analysis at a screening level and then, if a product is above a certain threshold, we do a more targeted, specific analysis.

Paul Damaren and Francine Shaw

The Return to Hospitality: How To Enhance Employee Onboarding

By Francine L. Shaw, Paul Damaren
No Comments
Paul Damaren and Francine Shaw

After restaurants nationwide experienced several years of a stressful, disruptive labor shortage, the leisure and hospitality industry has recently added 128,000 jobs, leading all sectors.

Hiring new employees is exciting, especially after years of being seriously understaffed. As you welcome new employees to your team, do not underestimate the importance of onboarding, as 69% of employees are more likely to stay with a company for three years if they were onboarded properly. Additionally, organizations with an official onboarding process experience 50% greater new-hire productivity.

When new hires are trained properly, they feel more confident in their roles and the companies they work for can maximize safety, quality, and compliance. To accomplish this, restaurants and other food businesses should:

Adopt Integrated Digital Solutions

Tech solutions can improve all aspects of your operations, making everything from budgeting to scheduling, forecasting, purchasing, and inspecting more efficient, accurate, and streamlined. Tech tools offer many significant benefits, helping your brand save time and money, reduce waste, and optimize operations.

What’s more, an integrated tech stack can help you get a holistic view of your entire enterprise, whether you have one location or dozens. Easy-to-understand reports provide critical information, allowing operators to make more informed, data-driven decisions.

Digital tools do require an investment, but they offer a tremendous ROI. These solutions help improve safety, efficiency, transparency, accuracy, and consistency. These positive changes boost key performance indicators, including increased sales, profits, customer loyalty, and employee retention.

Prioritize Safety, Quality, and Compliance

Each year, 48 million (1 in 6) Americans get sick from contaminated food or beverages. Don’t let food safety breaches happen at your business!

Prioritize a food safety culture, where all employees work together to maximize safety and minimize risks. Put food safety protocols in place and be certain that all employees are following them. Provide the proper tools for employees to ensure food safety, such as Bluetooth sensors that can tell when walk-in temperatures rise above safe temperatures, and state-of-the-art food thermometers that ensure foods are cooked to proper temps.

It’s not enough just to follow proper food safety protocols yourself, you must be sure that all your suppliers adhere to the strictest food safety standards, as well. If you are following all the right protocols, but a supplier delivers compromised products, your customers (and your business) are at risk.

Food safety and quality assurance must be followed from each product’s point of origin until it’s prepared and served to the consumer. Audit all suppliers regularly and be sure that they have proper, up-to-date safety certifications. When you have multiple suppliers—as most food businesses do—it can be overwhelming to track and organize these important safety certifications manually. Tech tools make this ongoing process easier and more accurate.

Modernize Training Efforts

Some food brands, particularly smaller companies, think that they don’t need a formal training or onboarding process, or they rely on antiquated training programs that have been in place for many years. Swap out your outdated (and/or informal) training programs in favor of something more modern, relevant, and tech driven.

Add more interactive tech elements to your training program, such as microlearning platforms and gamification, to make the information more engaging and memorable. Supplement online training efforts with a live trainer, who can spotlight best practices, answer questions, and role play with your employees to make the lessons stick.

Don’t just tell employees what to do but explain why the rules are so important. Employees are more likely to comply when they understand why the rules are in place.

Keep in mind that training never officially ends. Provide ongoing training opportunities so employees on all shifts can keep important information top-of-mind. Digital tools not only provide key information during initial onboarding, but are essential for reinforcing lessons, delivering updates, and sending reminders throughout each employee’s tenure.

Work to Retain Employees

Did you know that the average restaurant employee changes jobs every 56 days, and that losing a front-line employee costs a restaurant an average of $5,864?

Digital solutions can help you retain employees, as these technologies make their jobs much easier. Tech tools can streamline tedious administrative tasks, such as inspections and inventory, so your employees can spend more time doing the things they enjoy, such as cooking delicious meals and interacting with guests.

Offer competitive pay, appealing benefits, growth opportunities, mentorship, and a supportive culture. And don’t discount the “seemingly small” gestures that can be a big deal to your team. Thank your employees often and sincerely. Praise them in staff meetings for going above and beyond. Write thank you notes. Give bonuses and small gifts. Promote from within.

Get Inspired by Innovative Brands

It may sound like something out of a science fiction novel, but White Castle has a robot working its fryer. Dominos has delivered its first pizza by drone. KFC is using facial recognition technology that recognizes repeat visitors and tailors their experiences based on their past orders and meal preferences. And Panera Bread uses geofencing to track each customer’s location so employees can promptly bring their order to their vehicle.

Your organization may not yet be able to afford robotics in your kitchen or drone deliveries, and that’s OK. But, as tech solutions become more affordable, accessible, and user-friendly for food businesses of all sizes and budgets, it’s clear that technology is improving many aspects of our industry. Digital solutions are no longer “nice to have” luxury items. They’re necessities for brands that prioritize consistently excellent and safe experiences.

By investigating and integrating new technologies, you can provide better service, safer food, and a more convenient dining experience. All of which will help you better meet (and exceed) customer expectations.

Olivia Pitts

How to Successfully Implement an Integrated Management System

By Olivia Pitts
No Comments
Olivia Pitts

Implementing an integrated management system that encompasses food safety and quality standards is a complex process that requires careful planning, team buy-in and good communication. If an organization fails to plan properly, these large-scale projects can fall by the wayside.

The planning process will help to identify risks and potential roadblocks. Keep expectations realistic by considering the stakeholders’ needs and expectations. Reach out to those impacted for feedback before the project launches. The information gathered can be helpful in identifying stakeholders’ concerns, unforeseen issues, and resource constraints that may impact the project.

It’s also important to understand the certification process when working through the planning phase, as processes may vary slightly between certification bodies. Factors such as the need for single site vs. multi-site certification, number of standards included, the organization size, geographic location, and auditor availability can all impact the timeline. Meeting with your certification body to walk through these details will aid in setting a realistic project timeline.

Develop a Communication Plan

Communicating project details is critical to project success. This can be done in a variety of ways; often the development of a communication plan will help to set things into motion. These plans describe the who, what, when, and how of the project. Larger companies may need a more in-depth plan while smaller companies can take a more informal approach.

Subscribe to the Food Safety Tech weekly newsletter to stay up to date on the latest news and information on food safety and quality.

Work with your management team to develop messaging for the larger organization around the project that fits into the overall strategic vision of the organization. The message should communicate the plan for fulfilling the goals and objectives of the project as well as the strategic connection to the overall vision or mission of the company. Remember, there is no one size fits all for communication plans. Feel free to get creative and do what works best for your organization.

Once the plan has been outlined, engage top management to build a strong foundation for success. Get their buy in on the timeline and agenda. Look to them to provide overall support of the project and act as advocates for implementing the change. Seek out their advice when issues arise or when delays are encountered. They are often the key to helping move the project forward.

Planning an official project kickoff as well as milestone events is a great way to give the project momentum. Encourage top management to attend the kickoff, and keep everyone engaged by providing frequent status updates. Highlight success stories and small wins throughout the life of the project.

Encourage implementation team members to communicate regularly with their internal groups. Utilizing communication boards and site wide meetings to keep everyone apprised of progress is helpful. Implementation projects often take several months, so it’s wise to continuously share information to keep motivation up.

Intentionally Select Team Members

Identifying the right people for the implementation team is a critical step in the project development process. Integrated systems often require collaboration between a variety of groups. When building your implementation team consider current activities and identify processes that are within the scope of the standards being implemented. The individuals who manage these processes are the ideal candidates for the implementation team. Pulling from a pool of subject matter experts will help to streamline the process, as the team will be able to spend their time aligning current business practices rather than mastering the subject. Utilize your team’s expertise and influence to drive change. An understanding of the standards requirements will help identify the specific expertise needed.

Review the standards within the scope of the project and identify differences and commonalities. This should be relatively simple due to fact that ISO standards are all based upon a High-Level Structure (HLS) format, which harmonizes the standard format and requirements. The standard creators adopted this approach with the understanding that many organizations intend to integrate management systems. Similarities often lie within management system activities such as context, leadership, document control, management review, internal audit, and corrective action.

Team meeting
Your team should include subject matter experts related to the standards requirements.

In each of the standards there are sections that will be unique depending on the specific focus. For example, ISO 9001 has extensive requirements around customer focus and operations, while ISO 22000 is tailored towards food safety with specific requirements around HACCP and PRPs. Identify who within the organization has the skillsets needed for the project and create an outline for the roles and responsibilities of each team member.

When establishing roles and responsibilities seek input from the team members and take into consideration their workloads outside of the project. Implementation projects require an extensive amount of time, so you want to ensure you don’t overload them.

Consider allowing team members to establish their own deadlines to provide them with a sense of ownership of their identified areas. Use small, focused teams to help break the project down into segments to make it easier to manage. Team members will be able to focus on their individual tasks and not be overwhelmed with the overall scope. If workload is a concern, consider splitting responsibilities between team members or reaching out to those in your organization who maybe underutilized.

Building the project around current processes and process owners will save time and reduce the need to sell the idea of implementing an integrated system. Many times, organizations are unknowingly meeting partial requirements and only minor modifications will be needed to close the gap. By utilizing internal subject matter experts, gaps can be identified and corrective actions established with minimal effort.

Utilize Auditing Throughout Implementation

Gap assessments and internal audits are an excellent way to ensure the implementation efforts are going as intended. Conducting a gap assessment of the management system provides an overview of the full system and highlights where gaps may lie. This is a great tool to use for project planning and timeline development. The quantity and complexity of the gaps will help guide the team to the areas that need heightened focus.

Develop a team action log to track status of specific actions and identify responsible parties. Keep it simple with clearly identified project milestones. Consider incorporating these milestones into communication plans for awareness across the organization.

Once the team has begun to close the gaps identified, the next step is to verify that the changes are effective. Internal audits can be used to confirm that changes are being rolled out as intended.

Establish an audit program early in the implementation process to help clarify the requirements across the organization. The format of the audit schedule will be unique to each company. Consider aligning with the current processes or departments for a streamlined approach.

As integration activities are rolled out, conduct focused audits a few weeks after launch to verify proper adoption. Work with the team to build a checklist tailored to the process or department being audited. This customized approach will provide a detailed look at current activities.

Take time to accurately document the requirements and any nonconformities. Document the findings in a formal report and set aside time to discuss the results with the auditee. Be sure to include any positive findings that are encountered. Lastly, come to an agreement on the timeline for corrective actions and set a date for any follow-up audits.

When working through corrective actions be sure to work with your stakeholders to help them understand the ISO requirements and how the organization can adapt to meet them. Encourage them to ask for operator input on corrections. Their firsthand knowledge of day-to-day operations provides great insight on current processes.

Utilize team huddles or site wide meetings to spread awareness of the audit results and status of the implementation project. Be sure to allow time for questions and provide follow up as needed. With proper planning, leadership buy-in and consistent communication throughout the process, implementing an integrated management system can become a more manageable and positive process for the entire team.

 

 

 

 

Wendy White

Understanding the True Purpose of Environmental Monitoring Programs

By Wendy Wade White
No Comments
Wendy White

 Salmonella and Listeria are among the most prevalent foodborne pathogens, causing untold illnesses and a significant number of recalls each year. Experts have determined that the source of this contamination often comes from the manufacturing facility. Five years ago, the FDA published, Draft Guidance for Industry: Control of Listeria Monocytogenes in Ready-To-Eat Foods (we’ve also been promised a similar guidance document for Salmonella). The Food Safety Modernization Act’s Preventive Controls for Human Foods also contains provisions for evaluation of environmental pathogens in a ready-to-eat hazard analysis.

Employee in cheese plant
A product’s risk level varies based on the amount of pre-packaging exposure to the environment and direct handling by employees.

The challenge with these pathogens is that they are often found in the surrounding environment, and once they enter a facility and become entrenched, these residential pathogens can cause sporadic contamination that is very hard to pinpoint. The best way to prevent this type of contamination is to design and implement a robust Environmental Monitoring Program (EMP), and many manufacturers have added these surveillance programs to their food safety systems.

Unfortunately, many do not understand that the true purpose of EMPs is to seek and destroy residential microorganisms of concern that are living inside facilities before they have a chance to proliferate and contaminate products. This key control involves swabbing surfaces around the facility in the hopes of finding any of these residential pathogens or spoilage organisms. Having a robust, written EMP that includes clear action levels for unsatisfactory results and corresponding corrective actions will help manage pathogen positives and mitigate disaster.

Defining the EMP Scope and Balancing Resources

When designing an EMP, it’s easy to understand how expensive they can become. The question is, “How extensive does your EMP really need to be?” It’s best to start with a risk assessment to understand the program size and then estimate a realistic budget.

These programs are more necessary for ready-to-eat facilities, especially ones in which the post-processed product is exposed to the environment before being safely packaged. Risk is determined by how much pre-packaging exposure the product receives, the amount of direct handling by employees, and the condition of the equipment and surrounding facility. Use this risk analysis to determine how much sampling must be done to properly survey the facility. The scope of the program (and therefore the budget) must be balanced with the risk (severity and likelihood) of contamination.

It is then important to understand the microorganism(s) of concern for your products, facility, and processes. For example, should you stick to true pathogen testing or indicator organisms, such as Aerobic Plate Count (APC or TPC), Enterobacter, or Total Coliform tests? If you do test for pathogens, Listeria is more appropriate for wet processing environments and Salmonella better for dry processing; you might need to test for both. Sometimes its beneficial to evaluate spoilage organisms, such as yeast and mold testing, depending on the risk. For example, a ketchup facility may be less worried about residential pathogens than osmophilic yeast.

Subscribe to the Food Safety Tech weekly newsletter to stay up to date on the latest news and information on food safety and quality.

Next, one must determine the frequency and number of swabs that should be taken. Most facilities are large and contain thousands of potential hiding spots for microorganisms. For this reason, understanding your facility’s risk and available resources, and prioritizing the swabbing site selection can help maximize efforts. Will a dozen swabs every quarter be sufficient? What is your level of confidence that the sampling program is sufficient to find any hidden biological hazards? Being logical about the target microorganisms and swab frequency/number can help control the budget and allow for better use of resources to accomplish the true EMP goal, minimizing risk to your product.

Creating an Acceptable Site List

Just as important as defining the microbe of concern and the frequency/number of swabs is creating a good site list. An EMP expert once advised to, “think like Salmonella.” Where is our target pathogen/microbe of concern most likely to be hiding? Factors to consider are potential ingress points (roof leaks, employee shoes), opportunities for travel (water/air flow points like drains, foot or wheeled traffic routes), and likely niches (cracks and crevasses). Also important are areas that are often missed by the sanitation crew due to inaccessibility.

Organizing surfaces into zones is a good means of prioritizing swabbing. Zone 1 (food-contact surfaces) and Zone 2 (surfaces adjacent to food-contact surfaces) are cleaned often and not as likely to harbor hidden caches of microbes. It’s important to conduct routine verification testing of these equipment surfaces to evaluate the performance of sanitation, but this is somewhat different than the true purpose of EMP, which is to seek and destroy residential biological hazards. Zone 3 surfaces (those inside production areas but not immediately near food-contact surfaces) are the best focus for an EMP site list, and most of the surface swabbing should be concentrated in these areas.

Consider areas within the facility that could harbor microorganisms and allow biofilms to develop. Cracks, areas regularly exposed to water, and places that are very hard to reach/clean are all likely candidates. These include underneath equipment frames, inside motor casings and pumps, deep inside drains, underneath ramps and stairs and inside air vents/AC units. Cast a wide net, ensuring that all areas are rotated through the swabbing list, while prioritizing the high-risk locations.

The main stumbling block that managers face when designing EMP is challenging themselves to find problems, because once you find an issue, you must deal with the consequences.

Having a Game Plan for Unsatisfactory Results

The best way to mitigate the fear of success (finding a residential pathogen or microbial issue) is to be prepared with an action plan. This starts by defining what constitutes an unacceptable result. Pathogen results are easy (the presence of a pathogen is always unsatisfactory) but the quantitative results from indicator organisms can be tricky. How high do your Enterobacter or yeast/mold results need to be before they trigger action? What is that action?

Family in grocery store
Environmental monitoring programs are most needed in facilities that process and package ready to eat foods.

It’s all too common for unsatisfactory swabs to reemerge a few weeks after initial corrective actions because the true source of the contamination wasn’t found. Requirements for EMP corrective actions are often limited to 1) Reclean 2) Reswab and 3) Retrain. This is extremely limited and doesn’t really address the root cause. Vector swabbing is a great tool to identify root cause, as well as conduct an evaluation of variables that could spread contamination. For example, Listeria found in a drain might have originated by an unsealed wall/floor junction, a perfect microbial niche. When the crack is flooded, the biofilm periodically releases fresh contamination to spread across the floor and into the original identified drain.

Different results should trigger different responses. Certainly, reclean/retest/retrain is a smart approach, but finding the true source of the contamination and taking steps to eliminate it is vital. This might involve special cleaning, such as fogging or hiring a consultant. It might require a redesign of equipment or replace and repair of damaged or vulnerable areas. Ensure that all unsatisfactory results involve an investigation, graph results to identify trends, and communication of findings to all appropriate stakeholders.

EMP Review and Reevaluation

EMP doesn’t have to be a static program, and there’s no “one-size fits all” approach. It’s recommended to design your program based on risk and the above-mentioned variables, implement, and monitor the results. If you never find unsatisfactory results, you might need to increase your frequency/number of swabs or reevaluate your site list. Are you properly challenging yourself? Are you REALLY trying to find problems or just going through the motions to satisfy some requirement? You know your products, facility, and employees and should be able to make these determinations. Don’t be afraid to revise your EMP as a result of historical data and changing variables inside the facility. This might involve increasing your frequency/number of swabs, but the reverse might also be appropriate. Sometimes EMP can be scaled back, and those resources better used elsewhere.

The best approach to a well-written EMP is to understand the scope by considering the risk and applicable variables, employing thoughtful and risk-based logic to the design, and planning for potential unsatisfactory results with thorough corrective actions. Be mindful the true purpose of Environmental Monitoring Programs, which is to seek and destroy harmful microorganisms of concern inside your facility. A robust EMP, coupled with proper training, implementation, monitoring/trending, and communication, will go a long way towards peace of mind that your facility isn’t harboring a potential, biological hazard threat.

 

Melody Ge
Women in Food Safety

Don’t Let the Challenges Distract You

By Food Safety Tech Staff
No Comments
Melody Ge

Compassion is at the core of food safety, and it is a trait that shines through for anyone who has had the opportunity to meet Melody Ge. As the Director of Food Safety & Quality Assurance (FSQA) at StarKist, which produces nearly 50% of canned food goods on the market, and founder of Women in Food Safety, Ge has devoted her career to helping others—both by protecting consumers and by nurturing young professionals.

We spoke with Ge to learn more about her background, her career and what drives her success as a food safety leader.

What led you to a career in food safety?

Ge: My mom worked for food safety labs, and I knew that she was doing something good that was helping society. After graduating from University of Maryland with a Food Science, Technology and Nutrition degree, I started my job with Beyond Meat in R&D and food safety & quality. During my time there, I was on a business trip with one of my grad school classmates who accidently had a serious shrimp allergic reaction at a restaurant where we ate together during the trip. Even though he emphasized that he is allergic to shrimp to the waiter. This was over 10 years ago, and it still gives me goose pumps. I am always a person willing to help, and to see him go through that was a traumatic experience.

At that moment, I understood firsthand the critical role that food safety plays in society. That experience combined with my own work experience made me want to focus on food safety, and I found my passion. I started to focus my career path on safety and quality by working for GFSI CPOs, EU retailers, manufacturers, and other stakeholders.

What are some of the biggest challenges you’ve faced working in food safety and quality assurance?

Ge: I always say that FSQA professionals are heroes because they take a lot of what they do to heart. They put a lot of responsibility on their own shoulders to protect consumers. Often, FSQA professionals are seen as the police of operations. So, communication is one of the challenges: how we can translate the technical knowledge and share the sense of urgency to other department stakeholders within the company so we can achieve FSQA together within the business?

The other challenge is on the technical side. We deal with an evolving environment. For example, what we knew about listeria 10 years ago is different than what we know today. The regulations are always changing. Hence, keep ourselves updated and keep learning are crucial.

Do you have any tips or strategies on how to do that in the midst of doing your day-to-day job?

Ge: My advice would be to use the pieces or fragments of time. You don’t have to devote two hours of your day to learn a new policy, for example, the new FDA traceability rules. Sometimes, while I’m sitting down having my coffee, I am scanning the news, and that’s learning. When I’m having lunch, I try to look at some webinar recordings, and that’s learning. When you have small pieces of time throughout the day, you actually can learn quite amount of new information. Subscribe to the industry publications like Food Safety Tech and Food Quality, and learn from everyone around you. I learn from my team and my coworkers. I also send them to webinars and then we learn from each other.

You mentioned that a lot of people view FSQA as the police of the company. How do you overcome that?

Ge: Being an influencer, proactive communicator and trusted member of the team are keys to success. I find a way to communicate all these important aspects to the team at Starkist. I do feel lucky that at Starkist I am working with people who are aware of food safety and quality constantly. And now with social media and the direct face to consumers it offers, people overall are more aware of food safety and quality. There is a fundamental basic knowledge out there.

I try to use the audience’s language, whether its senior management or production employees. I also stay connected with the line people. Every time I’m in the plant, I walk with them and talk with them. I make them aware that I’m not picking on them; it’s about the products that get produced and consumed. And I am still practicing this every day to be better.

You are also the founder of Women in Food Safety. When did that group start, and what led you to put that together?

Ge: The group started in January 2020 with the intention of helping the younger generations. The initial idea was to provide a resource and a platform for students and industry, and this evolved after I met my committee members. Now we have two missions:  First to pipeline the younger generation and second to help bridge the gap between academia and industry.

We have five focuses:

  • Diversity in Culture. We really focus on supporting people who are coming from different cultures to help them adapt within their companies.
  • Adventure Starts. This is for the students and early first and second year professionals in the industry
  • Leadership. Believe it or not, there were a lot of females stuck in at the manager level for over eight years, and then it’s very hard to move up. This focus is to help them climb that ladder to eventually become an executive in the industry.
  • Boots on the Ground. One of the challenges in food safety is how we work with the line people at the plants to communicate food safety and how to adapt our working style in the manufacturer environment.
  • Work and Life Balance. This is not just for women who are having children; it’s also about how to take your breaks in life, enjoy your downtime and your family, and still stay up to date and come back to the industry as a new leader or professional at any time you are ready again.

How can people get involved in Women in Food Safety?

Ge: We have a LinkedIn group. You do need to be approved to get in just to keep the group focused on the mission and the industry needs, and keep it from being diluted into a commercial group. The group now has around 900 members. With our two—almost three—years partnership with Food Safety Tech, we have more and more influence. We now hold in-person events at the Food Safety Consortium and also at IAFP with the students. We also have a website, and it’s free to subscribe.

If you could turn the clock back to when you were just starting in the industry, what would you tell your younger self and would you have made different decisions?

Ge: I would say, “You are on the right path! Don’t let the difficulties and challenges happening in your career distract you or change you. You know who you are and you know what you’re doing.”

I don’t regret any of my decisions because they all made me the Melody I am today. In some cases, I chose to leave a very good boss for a better career, which was very hard for me. Those decisions and challenges still make me sad till today but I don’t regret those moves.

When people ask me, “How did you get such a wide variety of experience?” It is because I stepped out of my comfort zone, even though it was scary. I made decisions for myself that long-term I knew were going to help my career.

What advice would you offer professionals who are just starting their careers in food safety?

Ge: Try different things and say yes. Just say yes! Every time I get the question, “Can you do this?” I say, “Yes!” and then I figure it out. Don’t hesitate when there are new opportunities, and learn from anything you do at the moment. When I first started, I worked for three years in customer service. I answered emails and phone calls from suppliers who had technical questions. Was it a really fun job? Maybe not. But it helped me so much even up to today when I’m implementing any GFSI CPOs, I remember the details of the clauses. So, enjoy what you do—that is the foundation of doing a job well. Be patient, and keep in mind that nothing you do will be wasted. It’s all part of your own puzzle, and those pieces will eventually all come together.

What’s your opinion on mentors and mentorship?

Ge: One thing about mentoring I do want to share is that it is not a matter of saying, “I need a mentor so I’m going to go out and find myself one!” Mentoring is a concept. It’s a chemistry that naturally happens between two people learning from each other. You know this person will help you; or maybe it’s their style that influences you, and you don’t feel awkward to be vulnerable in front of them. There are many professionals in the industry who are my mentors—sometimes they might not know it. I learn from them and translate what I learn in a way that I can maintain based on my personality, so it’s sustainable.

What’s the main driver that keeps you in food safety?

Ge: Every day is a different day. I am not a person who likes doing things according to a preset list, meaning when you walk into the office you know exactly what you’re going to do that day. I enjoy investigating and identifying problems and finding solutions. That’s what keeps me in FSQA.

Another thing is this is a very friendly industry. I really like the people who work in food safety and quality. We are open to each other. We share best practices and knowledge. We ask questions and we share knowledge. We are like friends and family.

What are some of your hobbies or interests outside of work?

Ge: I try to learn something new every year. Each January, I set a personal goal for myself for the year. For example, in the past, I have learned photography, flamenco, surfing and so on. Some I maintained, and some I don’t because I don’t like them after I tried. Last year, I started learning Korean. I am a scuba diver and a yoga instructor. I try to explore new things each year. I am not an expert on those different things, but they expose me to new ideas, which keeps me energized.

 

Cybersecurity

Maintaining Data Security in Plant Operations

By Matthew Taylor, Tony Giles
No Comments
Cybersecurity

When it comes to cybersecurity, the food industry is facing more threats and risks than ever before, which is creating increased vulnerability in plant operations and the rest of the supply chain. Cyberattacks are focusing more and more on critical infrastructure, putting the food industry squarely in the crosshairs of cybercriminals.

Studies have shown that cybercriminals can penetrate 93% of company networks. One of the most serious threats is food tampering, with malware turning food itself into a weapon of terror. Cybercriminals can hack into food processing, transportation, and storage systems to spoil food and cause food poisoning and food shortages.

Ramping up protection costs both time and money, but making a preemptive investment in information security can save significant costs, considering that the median cost of a cyberattack increased from $10,000 to $18,000 in 2022, costing 40% of attack victims $25,000 or more.

Employees: Your First Line of Defense

The first and most crucial step in cybersecurity is employee training. When it comes to information breaches, two segments of a company can be impacted: the business and the operations. Impacts on the business could include leaking confidential client information, formulations, and recipes, among other data, while operations could include sensitive employee information.

As a company’s first line of defense, employees need to understand how important and integral their role is in data security. Phishing and malware are among the most popular forms of cyberattacks. By preying on individual employees, successful hackers can shut down production lines, reroute deliveries, and delay shipments.

Person using a computer
Phishing tests can be used to gauge employee skills in “real-life” scenarios and encourage vigilance.

Tools such as phishing tests can help gauge employee skills in “real-life” scenarios and help companies identify weaknesses across the organization. Employees who consistently fail phishing tests can be provided with additional training. Tests can also be coordinated on a recurring, random basis to keep employees alert and vigilant.

Food companies, especially those with plant operations, should also focus on physical security. Hackers will sometimes try their hand at breaching physical locations by “tailgating,” following an employee into a secured building without a badge. This type of attack incurs risks to data stored within the location and the products being manufactured. Just as with phishing simulations, it is important to educate employees about the risks of physical breaches, with reminders on how to prevent tailgating, lock computers, and safely store sensitive information.

Creating a Cybersecurity Toolkit

Building a strong culture of information security starts from the top down. Senior management must prioritize cybersecurity for employees to care about and understand its importance. Security professionals can work with senior leaders to identify the organization’s security starting point. If management makes information security a priority, that mentality trickles down to the entire organization.

This mentality can be communicated in training, team meetings, emails, and office posters. Some companies incentivize employees by providing free lunch or a day off for passing cybersecurity training and simulated tests.

Businesses can ramp up data security by implementing controls across the organization. Passwords should require a combination of upper and lowercase letters, numbers, and special characters, as well as frequent updating. In combination with strong passwords, multi-factor authentication (MFA) can secure data even further. This extra layer of protection can stop a hacker who has breached the system from advancing to further applications.

Companies should also evaluate their software and hardware to determine if upgrades are needed. Legacy infrastructure can hamper an organization’s efforts to increase cybersecurity, as it often cannot be updated to meet current security needs. Patching assets is another area where companies can focus their efforts; unpatched assets are a popular way for hackers to breach systems.

When Incidents Do Occur

It is best practice to have a contingency plan in place for worst-case scenarios, such as a data breach or malware that shuts down operations. An incident response plan can be created with specific details included, such as whom to contact depending on the scenario, what systems must be shut down to reduce the reach of the incident, and what tools should be used to contact employees and stakeholders. By putting an incident response plan in place, operators can minimize the potential damage to systems and data. Employees should be trained on the plan. This help to increase response speed and minimize panic and confusion during real-life situations. Incident response plans should be updated at least annually.

Seek Third-Party Support

From providing security training to setting up off-site servers, there are numerous third parties that can help businesses to improve and strengthen their information security efforts. NSF-ISR’s basic security assessment and ISO 27001 certification provide a security framework to help businesses better manage their data and information. ISO 27001 is a globally recognized certification that defines requirements for creating and maintaining a cybersecurity management system and provides a comprehensive set of controls.

No matter what mode of action businesses take first to strengthen their information security, it is most important to simply get started. Operations are only going to become more digital, so when it comes to areas within the food industry where safety, the supply chain and confidential information can be impacted, cybersecurity is imperative.

Jeff Chilton

What Food Manufacturers Can Learn from the Baby Formula Recall

By Jeff Chilton
1 Comment
Jeff Chilton

Months after the most high-profile product recalls in U.S. history, grocery stores are replenishing their supplies of baby formula. While the news remains fresh in everyone’s memory, food manufacturers have an opportunity to reflect on the mistakes that brought about this tragic event.

Abbott Nutrition, which produces about one-fourth of the nation’s infant formula, will be associated with this year’s baby formula shortage for years because it failed on so many levels to keep products safe at its plant in Sturgis, Michigan.

Many of the factors behind this crisis could have been easily avoided or at least quickly corrected. Instead, it took a whistleblower to alert the FDA, citing falsified records, releasing of untested products, sanitation problems, information hidden from auditors, failure to take corrective actions, and traceability issues.

In addition to near irreparable damage to its brand, Abbott Nutrition and members of its executive team are facing regulatory actions, criminal prosecution, and lawsuits.

The formula recall offers an opportunity for food manufacturers to learn from Abbott’s mistakes and to prepare for intensified scrutiny from federal regulators. Let’s dive into some of the most important lessons learned from the Abbott baby formula recall.

Empower Employees
Your frontline employees are your best defense for maintaining food and workplace safety. Make sure they know they won’t face retaliation for reporting incidents. In Abbott’s case, the whistleblower talked about retaliation against employees for reporting food safety concerns. And some employees were afraid they might lose their jobs if they raised concerns.

Take Corrective Actions
A failure to take effective corrective action was a big issue across the board for Abbott and something that all companies find difficult to do. Unfortunately, in the food industry, it’s much more common to put a band-aid on a symptom than conduct a root cause analysis to identify a problem. Fix the root problem as soon as you discover it so you’re not fighting the same fire day after day.

Ensure Record-Keeping Integrity
This seems obvious, but many food manufacturers still don’t have a formalized process to maintain proper record-keeping practices. This process should be documented and shared when necessary with auditors, and there should always be a zero-tolerance policy to prevent falsified records.

Provide Audit Transparency
During the Abbott investigation and audits, there was a lack of transparency and a willingness to withhold information. This can be a fine line to walk. When your workers’ and customers’ health and safety are on the line, it’s critical to be as forthcoming as possible. When preparing for audits, there is the temptation to answer questions only when asked and to avoid volunteering additional information. However, this mentality can mask problems that will eventually come to light.

Establish Proper Sanitation Practices
Many food manufacturers fail to maintain, validate, and consistently implement proper sanitation procedures. Sanitation jobs can be challenging. They involve cold and wet processing environments and are usually worked during third shifts. Most companies struggle with an excessively high employee turnover in these positions. And with few workers on hand, they strive to prepare for the next shift in just a few hours. Maintaining sanitation procedures is a big challenge for many companies, but critical to delivering safe food products.

Validate Environmental Monitoring
Food manufacturers should have environmental monitoring programs in place where they test equipment and the processing environment for various pathogens. From food contact surfaces to areas inside the processing room—including floors, walls, and drains—to outside processing areas like break rooms and common hallways, it is imperative to identify the correct sites to sample, ensure adequate sampling frequency, and act when necessary based on the results.

Establish Traceability

Food manufacturers need to be able to trace all raw materials, packaging materials, processing aids, and anything else that goes into their finished product, as well as their shipping processes and destinations. Most companies have a good idea of where products are shipped, but they’re not as adept at tracing the raw materials and processing aids that come into their manufacturing facilities. That was one of the issues cited with Abbott Nutrition, and it’s a problem in the food industry.

Ensure Redundancy and Sustainability in the Supply Chain

Our country relies too much on just a few manufacturers to supply critical food supplies in too many areas. In the case of Abbott Nutrition, one major factory shutdown sent shockwaves through the industry and panicked consumers. Food manufacturers must have backup plans and processes in place in case of recalls, fires, tornados, floods, sabotage, or any other issue that might bring their operations to a halt.

These are some of the most prominent lessons we can all learn from Abbott’s missteps around their baby formula recall. The food industry must do as much as possible to ensure a safe and sustainable food supply. This means evaluating food safety and quality assurance systems to identify potential risks and reassessing programs to create a stronger food safety quality assurance system.

It’s also critical to develop a robust food safety culture across the entire company from the top down. Every manufacturer needs to be proactive in maintaining food safety. No company should rely on inspectors or auditors to discover their issues. They must anticipate questions and problems that can occur during audits through robust internal review processes. This not only allows them to pass their audits but also gives them the ability to proactively identify and address issues before they become major violations or national recalls that make headlines.

Emily Newton, Revolutionized Magazine

Five Technologies Impacting the Beverage Industry

By Emily Newton
No Comments
Emily Newton, Revolutionized Magazine

The beverage industry is undergoing a period of technological transformation. As consumer demand and supply chain pressures reveal the shortcomings of older systems and processes, beverage manufacturers are embracing new technologies at an unprecedented pace. While many of these trends are promising, some are more impactful than others. With that in mind, here are the five technologies making the biggest impact in the beverage industry.

Automation

While automation isn’t necessarily new, it is reaching new heights. Automation is becoming an essential part of the beverage sector as robotic systems become more accessible and versatile, and talent becomes harder to acquire.

The food and beverage industry currently has more than 4 million open positions and could add another 370,000 by 2031. With fewer young workers entering manufacturing, beverage facilities are turning to robotics to sustain productivity. The more automated a facility is, the more it can accomplish despite having fewer employees, offsetting the labor shortage.

Automation applies to more than just physical workflows, too. Robotic process automation is seeing increased adoption in back offices, where it can be used to boost productivity and reduce errors.

Artificial Intelligence

Another impactful technology in the beverage sector is artificial intelligence (AI). As beverage workflows become increasingly digitized, they generate more data. AI algorithms can analyze that data to turn it into actionable insights, helping beverage manufacturers predict and adapt to incoming changes and optimize their operations.

Common industry thinking holds that companies can only optimize two of three key variables—time, cost and quality—simultaneously. However, it’s often difficult for humans to determine which is the most valuable area for improvement in their businesses. AI can analyze workflow data to reveal weak points and highlight changes that would have the most significant impact, helping leaders make these decisions.

AI can also help predict future changes, including shifting consumer demand. With this insight, beverage producers can adjust to minimize losses and capitalize early on new trends. Those that don’t embrace AI analytics may quickly fall behind the competition as this technology becomes increasingly common.

The Internet of Things

As AI adoption grows, the Internet of Things (IoT) can help beverage companies make the most of these algorithms. IoT devices give previously unconnected machines wireless connectivity, providing more data points for AI models to analyze, improving their accuracy. This connectivity and data collection can also improve transparency.

One of the most impactful use cases for IoT sensors is in the supply chain. Connected tracking devices can provide real-time updates on shipment locations, temperature, vibrations and other factors. If anything falls out of acceptable parameters or schedules, they can alert relevant stakeholders so they can adapt to ensure safe, timely shipments.

IoT devices can also improve machine health by alerting workers to needed repairs. This data-driven, need-based approach prevents costly breakdowns while minimizing downtime from unnecessary maintenance.

Biotechnology

While many of the most impactful technologies in the beverage industry appear within manufacturing facilities, some focus on earlier workflows. Biotechnology, such as gene editing, can optimize the farming operations that produce the ingredients beverage companies need.

Some bioengineered crops require less water to grow or are pest-resistant, minimizing the need for pesticides. These upgrades reduce farms’ ongoing expenses, making beverage ingredients cheaper for production facilities. Other bioengineering processes can make certain ingredients healthier or less environmentally impactful, both of which appeal to consumers.

Emerging biotechnology solutions let beverage companies use specially designed enzymes to gauge milk contamination and spoilage better. With these biological markers, businesses can ensure they don’t send poor-quality products to market and can trace contamination issues, leading to long-term improvements.

Renewable Energy

Another increasingly impactful technology for beverage companies today is renewable energy. As climate issues become more prominent, consumer preferences lean towards sustainable companies and products, even if that means paying more for products. Switching to renewable power helps energy-hungry beverage factories adapt to this demand and protect the environment.

Because renewables such as solar and wind are technologies, not fuel sources, they will only become cheaper and more efficient over time. Consequently, switching to these technologies is becoming an increasingly viable option for companies. They can also reduce energy costs long-term, as facilities begin to generate their own power instead of buying it from the grid.

Additionally, growing climate urgency may lead to increased regulations around industrial energy sources. Shifting to renewable power now can ensure beverage companies minimize disruption from any changing legislation.

Virtually every industry today is undergoing a tech-driven transformation. Capitalizing on this movement means being able to separate the buzzwords from the technologies that hold the most promise. These five technologies are among the most impactful for beverage companies today. As their adoption grows, they could dramatically alter the face of the industry.