Brian’s Beef - Let’s NOT Be Proactive About Foreign Objects, Let’s Wait Until We Have a Huge Recall!
By Brian McFarlane
As many of you know, I’m an avid supporter of new, innovative, and cutting-edge technologies, especially those that set new standards or raise expectations, and I particularly seek out those groundbreaking “techy” things that have the potential to revolutionize industries.
Here’s what blows my mind, companies that refuse to proactively invest in the latest and most advanced technologies to enhance their systems and ensure food safety. I thought this was known as continuous improvement, or perhaps in some cases, companies will classify these investments as R&D. If you're reading this, you're probably not a lot different from me and see foreign object recalls in the news that catch your attention and you ask; how did this happen with the technologies available today?
It simply astounds me when companies prioritize short-term gains over long-term benefits and fail to allocate sufficient funds to proactively purchase technologies that can significantly improve food safety and, in some cases, even enhance their operational efficiencies.
I’m not referring to companies that implemented new technologies in the last couple years and are now hesitant to invest in further improvements that only give marginal improvement, nor am I talking about companies that allocate millions of dollars to R&D!
I understand the complexities involved in justifying investments, calculating ROI, or determining which investment will yield the highest financial return. After all, nothing is free, and I’m not one to overlook the value of free resources!
However, I’m compelled to question what truly hinders some companies from making the necessary investments to prevent recalls, protect their brand reputation, and retain customer loyalty. Could a significant upgrade, for instance, prevent a broken tooth by identifying smaller bone chips, stop reoccurring customer complaints, or maybe prevent a customer from leaving and going to a new supplier? There are countless examples where proactively investing in new and better technology could have made a substantial difference.
I’ve encountered instances where companies have neglected to address critical areas or have opted for the cheapest and most basic technology. It seems as though they simply felt compelled to have "something” in place that meets a minimum requirement that offered a better “price tag", rather than investing in the best available option.
FO detection technologies have advanced significantly. While these newer technologies may come with a higher cost, it’s crucial to consider the value of the incremental improvements and enhanced detection capabilities they offer.
Additionally, every company that utilizes a co-packer or has outsourced ingredients in its products should mandate that its co-packers and suppliers utilize the most advanced technology available. Is your brand and company name worth jeopardizing? Do these 3rd parties have a direct impact on your products' quality and reputation? Are they creating unforeseen risks for your business or your customers? Have you personally inspected their plants and systems to ensure their functionality and reliability? I am pretty certain that there is a company that recently faced a massive recall that wished their products had passed through the latest cutting-edge technology!
As an example, a company has the option to invest less than $100,000 in a pretty good modern X-ray system or spend over $200,000 on the latest technology that offers detection capabilities to something as low as .2 millimeters. Is the incremental detection provided by the latter technology worth the additional investment? Have these new technologies maybe even set new standards?
It’s a straightforward decision in my mind that a company should prioritize becoming an industry leader rather than merely surviving in the industry to make a profit. However, each company must carefully evaluate the cost-risk ratio to determine the most suitable investment for its specific application and product, but recognize, those decisions also have both short- and long-term implications to their product quality and their reputations in the industry.
Sincerely,
Brian McFarlane – Director of Technical Services, Eurofins Rapid Microbiology Laboratories
