John Benson-Smith: Discussing the Past, Present & Future of Hospitality
John Benson-Smith is a well-recognised figure in the hospitality industry.
A consultant chef, food strategist, and former BBC MasterChef judge, John has 40-plus years’ experience in the industry, which is regularly called on by dozens of football stadium kitchens. These include the Etihad Stadium, (Manchester City), Tottenham Hotspur Stadium, and Santiago Bernabeu (Real Madrid).
With projects spanning Europe, the USA, and Middle East, John is able to offer unique insights on intercultural differences to cooking and foodservice, which he combines with his distinctive sense of humour.
In this exclusive interview, John Benson-Smith sits down with Alex Blair, Head of Content and Research at Klipspringer. Together, the pair discuss:
- John’s background
- The history of hospitality
- John’s current ventures
- Food safety in the NHS
- Common issues in stadium kitchens
- Cultural differences in food equipment and service
- Hospitality staff shortages
- Future trends in hospitality
- Equipment standards in hospitality
- John’s future
Browse the above menu to navigate straight to whichever topic interests you most – or click here to watch the full, uninterrupted interview.
Introducing John Benson-Smith
“I wanted to be a popstar, professional footballer, or motorcycle world champion. So I decided to become a chef.”
Alex kicks things off by overviewing the day’s topics of discussion and introducing John, who comically details how he got his first job as an apprentice chef in Beverley, East Yorkshire.
A Chef's History of the Hospitality Industry
“It’s like having two lumps of pastry mixed together for me. I can see the good, the bad, and the evil of all of it.”
Films like Boiling Point have cast a spotlight on the intense working culture in top kitchens. John paints a light-hearted picture of this culture, but says that those days are largely gone for good.
From parmentier potatoes to steak au pouivre, John also highlights the French influence on British cuisine and cooking in the 1970s – and the difficulties this posed to a “dyslexic lad from Yorkshire”. With the French word “chef” translating as “boss”, John traces the dictatorial dynamic of kitchens in that era.
John then mentions the rise of American and English chefs in the 1980s, naming Robert Carrier and John Tovey, and parallels their lineage with that of various cooking techniques, such as demi-glazing!
When Alex asks who inspired John’s passion for food and cooking, John pays tribute to Nico Ladeniz – who trained Gordon Ramsey – and Michael Quinn, the first ever English Head Chef of the Ritz, and “another successful Yorkshireman”.
John's Current Projects
“Hospitality catering and retail are very similar – but very different. Each has played in the other’s playground, and it hasn’t always worked.”
Next, John delves into some of the ventures he is currently involved in. Firstly, he describes an ambitious vending concept using interactive smartphone technology that takes preferences, intolerances, and allergies into account.
When Alex questions how this contradicts the romanticised version of cooking as art and expression discussed before, John emphasises the need for romance alongside something prosperous, sustainable, and commercial.
Regarding his other projects, John summarises his work with Morrison’s Market Kitchen, and hints at projects overseas and “a return to stadia”.
Working with the NHS
“It’s about money. If you want great hospital food – and the same in schools – and better facilities, it needs investment.”
Alex then transitions the conversation to John’s work in the public sector, specifically working on NHS foodservice.
Tailing back to his time on BBC MasterChef, John describes how involvement with John Prescott and Lloyd Grossman led to the NHS project, during which he visited 48 hospitals over two-and-a-half years.
John also outlines the logistical difficulties of serving 1 million meals each day, contrasting various methods including contract catering, in-house preparation, and centralised production. Funding and investment are also raised as the foundations of the problem.
Common Issues in Stadium Kitchens
“It’s the organisation. If the club is genuinely interested in and committed to good food, that will show. I’m not necessarily talking about the quality of the product, but also the floors, the walls, the extractors, the ventilation, the light, the food safety.”
According to John, logistics and speed are raised as two of the primary issues across stadium kitchens.
John details how 60-70% of revenue in UK stadiums is taken at half-time, a window of 15-20 minutes within which – based on an average crowd of 40,000 people – kitchens have to cater for around 15,000 people using predominantly casual or agency workers.
Understanding Hospitality in Different Cultures
“You learn that it’s their country, they’re great people, and you become part of their team. What you don’t do is dictate to them that you’re from a ‘better country’ and you’re cleverer. Become one of them. You work shoulder to shoulder, you clean the floor, you shred, you chop.”
Drawing on experiences unique to him, John outlines the difficulties and lessons learned through his work in Middle Eastern countries including Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. He denounces the superior attitudes of some chefs who embark on projects abroad, and reiterates the importance of humility and open-mindedness.
Hospitality Staff Shortages
“If you begin to inspire and show interest in the kids, with a curriculum of understanding what Earth is about, the elements, agriculture – that’s the solution. Unfortunately we spend more on Sky TV than our own health each month.”
The pair then discuss the pressing topic of hospitality staff shortages. John claims that “there has always been a shortage” – at least proportionate to the massive increase in food-serving venues from 1980 to 2023 without investment in workforce training.
Continuing on the theme of cultural differences, John also attributes the “ethos of foodservice doesn’t come naturally to the Brits like it does to the French and Italians” as a contributing factor.
When asked about agency staff, John says that leadership, influence, and development matter more. Alex then asks about his involvement in launching a hospitality scholarship for students in Scotland. Could education be the solution?
Future Trends in Hospitality
“I’d rather the chef concentrate on searing that wonderful piece of sea bass perfectly because potatoes came in already pre-prepared.”
Penultimately, John and Alex evaluate various hospitality trends that might unfold across the next decade.
Using the example of a local cake producer in Kuwait, John demonstrates the potential value of centralised food production – a system where food is produced in one central location, then distributed to multiple external foodservice points.
The pair also weigh up the pros and cons of automatised, machine-led processes for food preparation: “I used to chop parmentier potatoes into squares for four hours a day – I’d go to bed not counting sheep but diced potatoes”.
John acknowledges the potential threat to jobs posed by robotics, but asserts his interest in such technological trends amid the climate of staff shortages and continual innovation. He paints a vivid picture to explain exactly how far behind UK-based hospitality businesses are compared to the Middle East, and makes a strong call for change.
Equipment Standards in Hospitality
“‘If you get the right stuff, you’re going to perform better.’”
Alex and John discuss the use of equipment in the hospitality industry and the need for collaboration and innovation from manufacturers to meet customer standards. John then goes on to discuss the importance of quality equipment and the impact it has on his day-to-day operations.
What's Next?
“I want to be happy and enjoy my life.”
Lastly, John concludes the conversation with several humorous yet touching remarks on finding happiness and satisfaction in an at-times unsympathetic industry.
Klipspringer work with leading hospitality brands inculding McDonald’s, Five Guys and Whitbread to remove the guesswork from commercial kitchens.
This involves areas such as food oil management, thermometers & probes, and digital checklists.
Get in touch below if you are looking for support with your own kitchens and we will be more than happy to advise.
Foodex 2023: Klipspringer’s Team Take on the UK’s Largest Food Manufacturing Event
This year’s Foodex Manufacturing Solutions (FMS) was the most highly anticipated food manufacturing event in years.
Not only did FMS23 pack the National Exhibition Centre to the rafters with innovative technologies, unique insights, and industry-leading exhibitors – but it was also the first event since 2018 due pandemic-enforced postponements.
On Monday 24 April, FMS returned with a bang. More than 25,000 visitors and 1,500 exhibitors flocked to the Birmingham-based centre across the three-day exhibition, including some of Klipspringer’s finest.
At the forefront of our team’s mind was going the extra mile to connect with a wide range of professionals across the food manufacturing sector – while answering a whole host of questions around food safety and compliance, from the costs of shadow boards to the implications of BRCGS9.
But we also took the time to educate ourselves on FMS23’s key agenda: the Fourth Industrial Revolution, which is centred around technology, sustainability, and automation.
This focus was reflected in the product ranges and speaker line-up on show at FMS23.
Of particular interest were sessions delivered by:
- Keith Thornhill (Head of Food & Beverage Automation at Siemens)
- Dan Crossley (Executive Director of the Food Ethics Council)
- Andrew Dalziel (VP of Industry Solutions & Strategy at Infor)
Andrew Dalziel’s Monday afternoon session revolved around the hot topic of Artificial Intelligence. In the context of AI’s disruptive impact on industries including finance, healthcare, logistics, cybersecurity, and manufacturing, Dalziel evaluated the importance of machine learning through examples of its implementation in food businesses.
For now, AI-driven technologies are one to keep an eye on – but our development team at Klipspringer have been rolling out various other exciting innovations.
One our solutions which received the most attention was the LazaPort series.
By verifying the accuracy of probe thermometers in a matter of seconds, LazaPorts offer proof of competence, saving kitchen teams countless hours.
This product range is led by the LazaPort Mono, which won Gold at Commercial Kitchen’s Innovation Challenge in 2021, with judges describing it as: “…a great concept, ideal for consistency and great connectivity. A solution to an age-old issue.”
All in all, our team came away from FMS23 delighted with how the exhibition went.
Of course, it allowed us to promote and praise our product range – a range we are immensely proud of. Wouldn’t you be worried if we weren’t?!
But, more than that, FMS23 meant three days of exciting innovations, future-oriented insights, and great connections.
Our team thrive in environments like this, and we hope everyone who visited our stand felt the same way.
Speaking of our stand – in collaboration with Quadrant2Design, our team put weeks of hard work into designing, assembling, and finalising the Klipspringer stand for FMS23. Take a look at their handiwork below!
If you spoke to one of our team at Foodex and want to recontact them – or if you have any questions – give us a call at 01473 461800.
Alternatively, you can reach our individual team members on LinkedIn.
No Food Left Behind (Part 3): How UK Consumers Can Solve the Food Waste Crisis
Figures reveal that wasted food would provide three meals per day for every hungry person in Britain.
This is the third and final article in the ‘No Food Left Behind’ series. Written by our research expert Alex Blair, previous articles analysed what retailers and manufacturers can do to tackle the food waste crisis in the UK. Finally, we shift to the impact of consumers’ choices in reshaping a fairer, greener, and waste-free food system.
Each year, the UK throws away 15 billion meals’ worth of edible food.
At the same time, 14 million people struggle to get enough to eat each day.
In other words, the food thrown away would provide three meals a day, year-round, for every hungry person in Britain.
This gross injustice has resulted in much finger-pointing as to who is the main culprit in the food waste crisis.
As some of the most financially powerful and influential companies in the UK, large supermarkets and manufacturers often bear the brunt of the blame.
After all, leading retailers set the course for the rest of the food industry to follow, top-down, through their redistribution policies, store practices, and partnerships with farmers, manufacturers, and consumers.
Our previous article in this series also demonstrated how major manufacturers are able to implement changes that alter the entire supply chain, from eco-friendly landfill alternatives to a circular economic system.
However, the food waste crisis is not a straightforward narrative of greedy corporations exploiting the goodwill of innocent customers. Ultimately, consumers are responsible for the majority of the food wasted in the UK – and it is consumers who can play a major role in tackling the crisis.
Consumers Top Waste Figure Charts
That’s right – households actually cause 70% of the UK’s food waste, throwing away 6.6 million tonnes of food each year (4.5 million tonnes of edible food).
Amid sky-rocketing inflation of food prices, UK consumers have a chance to be greener while saving money. According to research by WRAP, the average household could save £730 per year by only buying the food they actually eat. This figure estimates that a typical family with children bins 244kg of food each year – the equivalent of 580 meals.
Environmentally, it isn’t just the potatoes or ham that goes to waste. It is all of the resources that have gone into their production, packaging, transportation, and storage – which explains why roughly 1/3 of the UK’s greenhouse gas emissions are related to food and drink.
If households knew these facts, attitudes towards food waste and its costs – both financial and environmental – would shift dramatically. As Brits desperately caste around for ways to save money on bills, it is imperative that all groups with influence over the food industry contribute to sharing this information, from retailers and manufacturers to media and government.
It is also crucial that UK consumers educate themselves on the impact of food waste. Corporations have a responsibility to propel sustainable, wasteless practices into the mainstream, but consumer behaviour drives commercial decision-making.
Consumers represent the final stage of the food supply chain. As seen below, there are several choices that can be made to cut food waste in the home – and also prove to large food businesses that waste-cutting, sustainable practices are non-negotiable.
Six Ways for Consumers to Reduce Waste
1) Buy wonky fruit and vegetables
With supermarkets and consumers looking to reduce food waste and keep costs down, rejecting produce for cosmetic reasons makes little sense. Retailers including Morrisons, Lidl, Sainsbury’s, Tesco, and Aldi have launched ‘imperfect’ ranges to address this.
Although wonky produce is just as tasty and nutritious – and usually costs less – take-up among consumers has been mixed. This is due to an underlying stigma towards fruit and vegetables that are unconventional in size or surface. In fact, UK consumers between 18 and 24 are 23% less likely to eat misshapen produce than older generations, research shows.
An alternative is fruit and vegetable boxes. Delivered directly to consumers’ doors, these boxes are full of wonky or surplus produce that would otherwise be thrown away by retailers. Companies offering imperfect fruit and vegetable boxes include Oddbox and WonkyVegBoxes.
2) Plan shopping and portions
A little preparation goes a long way when it comes to buying and cooking the right amount of food.
Consumers who take inventory of their cupboards before heading to the supermarket or local food store are less likely to buy more than needed, or accidentally double up on perishable produce.
Even better than a mental stock-take is a physical shopping list – whether that’s on paper, phone notes, or a shopping list app. WRAP’s ‘Love Food, Hate Waste’ initiative have several useful suggestions on shopping list writing, such as organising the list around the shop’s layout.
Having bought the right amount of food – at least within a reasonable margin of error – consumers can next think about cooking the correct quantities. For example, a single portion of spaghetti can be measured using a 1p or £1 coin, and a mug usually holds the right amount of (uncooked) rice for four adults.
3) Adjust and manage fridge storage
In the UK, the average fridge temperature is almost 7°C, but should be between 0 and 5°C according to the FSA. Adjustment to the correct temperature will keep food fresh and edible for longer.
Keeping fruit and vegetables in the fridge also ensures longer life. Exceptions to this are potatoes, onions, bananas, and pineapple. For salad bags and spinach, put a piece of kitchen towel inside the bag once open – this stops the leaves from going slimy.
4) Understand what food labels really mean
As outlined in the first article in the ‘No Food Left Behind’ series, leading supermarkets’ store practices are a key driver of wasteful consumer behaviours. Among these are ambiguous product labels, which have resulted in several prevalent misconceptions around food expiration dates.
Campaigns for food labels to be plainer and prevent unnecessary waste are ongoing, but consumers should also be informed that only ‘use-by’ dates are about food safety. Food should not be consumed or served after its use-by date, even if it looks and smells fine.
‘Best-before’ dates, on the other hand, solely relate to quality. Produce a few days past its best-before date is generally safe to eat. The same goes for ‘sell-by’ dates, which are intended for supermarket management, not consumers.
5) ‘Make and freeze’ cooking
Cooking multiple portions of ‘make and freeze’ recipes is recommended by BBC Good Food. Essentially, this involves preparing several days’ worth of meals at once, refrigerating the next day’s meals, then freezing the rest.
This advice can be extended to all food, cooked or not, which is fine to freeze right up to the use-by date. Almost all foods can be frozen, including bread (slice it first), cheese, and even eggs – once they’ve been cracked and beaten.
6) Creative recipes
Sometimes, spoilt food is unavoidable. But this does not always mean the food has to be binned.
Overripe bananas? Turn them into a tasty, nutritious load of banana bread. Bruised pears? Make a sticky toffee pear cake.
With a little thought and creativity, food bits that would otherwise go to waste can be reimagined and reused for tasty dinners and desserts.
Alone, individual consumer choices cannot stifle the food waste crisis, but they can influence retail and manufacturing policies.
UK consumers must first take ownership for the millions of tonnes of edible food binned each year – then take pride in overturning this waste through eco-friendly, oftentimes cheaper, food decisions.
In a world where nearly 800 million people suffer from malnutrition, the moral precedent to eradicate food waste is urgent and undeniable.
Access to food is a fundamental human right, and hunger is one of the most pressing problems facing our world today, closely linked with global conflict and climate change.
Only through coordinated action between all food industry participants can the food waste crisis be averted and, eventually, reversed so that no food is thrown away while people remain hungry.
Did you miss the rest of the ‘No Food Left Behind’ series?
Click below to read the first two articles, addressing the food waste crisis from the perspective of retailers and manufacturers.
How To Keep Production Lines Running During Washdowns
As outlined in our previous article on how to simplify colour-coding policy, segregation is a vital tool to eliminate any possibility of cross-contamination, a common non-conformance.
Segregation, however, is not limited to colour-coding.
Physical segregation is also a crucial consideration for food manufacturers, not just for health and safety reasons, but also for production efficiency. Machinery downtime is lost time – and money.
In an exclusive interview, Alex Carlyon – a Klipspringer Director with over eighteen years of experience in the food safety industry – explained the importance of segregating production lines responsible for allergenic products.
Typical factories have anywhere between two and five production lines under one roof. If an allergenic product is being manufactured on one line, the traditional approach to washdowns is to leave the production line between the allergen product and the other products empty, creating a barrier of space.
Instead, assembling a physical barrier during washdowns prevents any cross-contamination between these allergenic and non-allergenic production lines – without forcing one of these lines into idleness.
In Alex’s words, “If the two production lines are segregated effectively, a factory can be running a product on Line A while their hygiene team are cleaning down Line B”.
Efficiency is boosted, non-conformances are avoided, and there is a third benefit – staff safety.
Much emphasis is placed on the compliant production of allergenic food from a customer-facing point of view, sometimes at the cost of employee health during washdowns.
When hygiene teams are cleaning a production line with jet-foaming chemicals, physical segregation barriers eliminate any possibility of a worker crossing segregated lines and receiving a face full of chemicals. Assembling a simple screen can significantly lower the probability of such an accident occurring.
At Klipspringer, we have collaborated with food manufacturers and suppliers for several decades to help teams continue production during washdowns.
With regard to segregation, we provide several innovative solutions – the most popular being our SegriScreen.
Depicted above, the SegriScreen forms a continuous, connected barrier to clearly isolate a production line or piece of machinery during washdowns.
Most importantly, the SegriScreen enhances food safety and reduces downtime. Its hygienically designed, robust material also improves sustainability – eliminating flimsy single-use plastic.
When asked about the SegriScreen, a Site Hygiene Manager at Bakkavor said that:
“Features such as the ability to move as one continuous barrier, the flexibility around production lines and the ease of connecting were all really important to us. The visual impact of the SegriScreens also made it clear to all employees that this is a no entry area. There isn’t anything I’ve come across which does as comprehensive job or ticks as many boxes as SegriScreen does!”
Also used and praised by manufacturers including Kerry, Two Sisters and Cranswick, the SegriScreen is an innovative, long-term solution to the problem of washdown downtime.
Click here for more information, or browse the SegriScreen’s features below.
No Food Left Behind (Part 2): How UK Manufacturers Can Solve the Food Waste Crisis
The UK has one of the worst food wastage rates in Europe, throwing away 6.4 million tonnes of edible food each year – this equates to more than 15 billion meals.
Our research expert Alex Blair has written this second article in the ‘No Food Left Behind’ series to explore ways in which food manufacturers can alleviate the food waste crisis. If you’ve not read the first article on leading UK retailers, click here.
Food is the largest sector of the UK’s manufacturing industry.
Annually, it contributes £30 billion to the UK market – nearly 1/6 of the UK’s manufacturing output – and employs more than 468,000 people.
As a pillar of the British economy, the food manufacturing industry has the power, capital, and influence to act against the 1.5 million tonnes of food it currently wastes each year.
The implementation of a sustainable, waste-limiting supply system would see manufacturers reduce their greenhouse gas emissions, replenish valuable resources, and feed more people with less land – a crucial balance to strike amid growing populations and rising living costs.
Landfill Waste
Of all stages along the UK food chain, manufacturing is one of the most significant contributors to landfill food waste.
While some waste is classed as ‘unavoidable’ (such as inedible produce such as meat bones or eggshells), a sizeable portion of the discarded food could have been used to fill empty stomachs. Instead, this food waste takes up valuable land for years, or even decades, as it slowly decomposes.
Various greenhouse gases are released during the process of decomposition. Particularly damaging is methane – a greenhouse gas that is between 28 and 34 times more potent than carbon dioxide.
In the UK, landfills are responsible for approximately 25% of all methane emissions. Gases emitted from landfill sites have also been linked to negative health effects among communities living nearby.
It is a common misconception that manufacturing companies continue to use landfills because they are the cheapest disposal option.
Since the government raised the landfill tax to £98.60 per tonne in 2022, cheapness is no longer a valid justification. Landfills remain the most commonly used disposal option due to convenience and the status quo.
Regardless, convenience and cost should be no issue for leading manufacturing companies including Mars, Unilever, Diageo, and Associated British Foods, who turn over billions in revenue each year.
For many UK citizens, the recycling of paper, glass, and metals is now second nature. This enthusiasm, however, has not extended to food waste. Almost 6 million tonnes of food still end up in landfill sites each year.
When considering the wide range of solutions available to capture food waste and put it to better use, this is a considerable waste of resources.
So, what are some of these solutions to reduce food waste?
Conversion into a Food Resource
While the solutions outlined below focus on cutting food waste before it occurs, conversion targets the repurposing of food waste at the end of the cycle.
There are two main ways to recycle food waste: composting and anaerobic digestion.
Composting is widely recognised for soil fertilising and helping plant growth in gardens and farms. It is proven to reduce methane, carbon dioxide and the need for chemical fertilisers – as well as improving soil quality and moisture levels (resulting in lower water usage).
For UK manufacturers, commercial composting is a viable, simple alternative to the mass disposal of food waste into landfills. There are benefits in terms of supply shortages and costs, as composting results in a higher crop yield for farmers.
Amid a climate of supply chain uncertainty and environmental degradation, commercial composting is an exciting possibility for the future of food manufacturing.
Anaerobic digestion is the second main way to recycle food waste.
Once collected from a separate recycling bin, this food waste is transferred into an oxygen-less tank and broken down by micro-organisms.
During this decomposition, the waste produces a biogas which is used to generate electricity. In the UK, around 1.3 million tonnes of food waste are broken down using anaerobic digestion each year – powering 200,000 homes. This is worth more than £220 million to the economy.
Instead of sending food waste to landfills, research shows that recycling it:
- reduces greenhouse gas emissions
- preserves environmental biodiversity
- uses less energy than producing new materials
- limits the need for landfill
- replenishes valuable resources
Circular Economy
Circular economies keep resources ‘in the loop’ (aka in use) for as long as possible. Rather than taking resources from the earth, using them once, then discarding them in landfill, circular economies repurpose and reutilise resources in other areas of an industry.
The ideal outcome is to extract maximum benefit from the resource, while reducing the abovementioned environmental damage of landfill sites. Circularity also has the potential to provide new jobs, encourage healthier lifestyles, and accelerate eco-friendly growth.
Crucially, circular food systems feed more people with less land. Not only does this redistribute surplus food, but circularity also encourages manufacturers to use food by-products to create bio-based fertilisers and other useful products.
By cutting out disposal, circular economic measures would retain the resource value of food within the closed loop.
Food production and manufacturing businesses have realised the potential of this. Recent deals include £50 million funding granted to Eider VF by Slate Asset Management, and the £100 million investment in GrowUp Farms by Generate Capital. Eider VF is a vertical farming company targeting wastewater, nutrient usage, and biohazard risk; GrowUp Farms uses science and technology to grow food they claim tastes better and has the lowest environmental impact.
This leads on to the methods chosen by manufacturers themselves – a key part of cutting food waste before it departs the factory or production line.
Manufacturing Practices
While many UK factories streamline their processes to boost efficiency, there are still several commonplace practices that drive food waste.
These include:
1) Under or Overweight Products
In the UK, 3.5% of products are rejected for poor production. These under or overweight products that fail to meet manufacturers’ standards are discarded without a second glance.
While strict safety standards are essential, a more flexible approach to product weight could result in significant savings for food businesses. Certain manufacturers and retailers have already implemented a pay-by-weight initiative, particularly common among meat products.
2) Trimmings
From bread crusts to tomato ends, one of the most common causes of food wastage is excess trimmings. These are especially common in meat processing, where production equipment that offers the highest yields and precision of cut is non-negotiable.
3) Technical Errors
In a similar vein, technical errors caused by contamination or malfunctioning machinery is an entirely avoidable driver of food waste. According to WRAP, 9% of waste in the ready meals and chilled products sector is caused by machine mishandling.
Higher-quality equipment usually comes with a more significant upfront cost. However, when calculated over the space of several years, reduced maintenance, downtime, and replacement costs, justify the larger initial sum.
4) Inconsistent Processes
Product integrity and quality are determined by one overarching factor: consistency of manufacturing process. Hitches and hiccups in this process result in inconsistent products – whether that be regarding size, ingredients, or any number of factors.
The key problem here is that inconsistent products are binned, rather than redistributed. (Or, even better, prevented in the first place). Manufacturers might be more inclined to limit such inconsistencies, but, when they do occur, admit their existence and put the food to better use than a landfill site.
5) Food Recalls
Two words that signal disaster to every hygiene and technical manager in the UK. Food recalls are primarily caused by foreign body contamination – when an object or substance enters a food item by mistake.
There have been several recent controversies surrounding food recalls. A prominent example is a recall in March 2023 which accounted for 148,000 pounds (67,131 kilograms) of chicken.
Typically, portion sizes state that 1kg of chicken feeds between five and six people. If this is accurate, the amount of chicken discarded could have provided meals for each of the 240,000 homeless people in the UK – nearly twice over.
These staggering figures are only based on a single recall. Imagine if recent recalls of cereal and snack packages or beef products had also been prevented and the food wasted given to those in need.
From the manufacturers’ perspective, recalls are also costly in fees and reputational damage. Combined with needless food waste, these are three massive reasons for creating an airtight foreign body prevention plan for food factories. Check out our guide here.
Ferndale Foods
Some food manufacturers have already taken it upon themselves to implement waste-cutting practices.
Vision 2020 is a ReFood initiative launched to ban all food from landfills and recycled instead. In line with Vision 2020, supermarket ready meal manufacturer Ferndale Foods identified food waste as a key step in its drive to improve recycling operations, cut costs, and manage its carbon footprint.
In 2012, Ferndale Foods generated more than 400MWh of renewable energy by diverting its food through PDM Group’s biomass combustion process. This decision allowed Ferndale Foods to produce a nutrient-rich fertiliser from the ash, and to displace more than 250 tonnes of greenhouse gases.
Examples like this reinforce the economic and environmental precedent to eliminate manufacturing food waste. Companies that implement waste-cutting measures now can stay head of the curve, marrying productive efficiency with CSR pledges.
Click below to read the final article in the ‘No Food Left Behind’ series, focusing on how consumers can do their bit to cut food waste.
Temperature Monitoring Explained
What is temperature monitoring?
In straightforward terms, temperature monitoring is the real-time, automated tracking of air temperatures within a sensitive environment.
Fridges or storage areas are typical examples. In these environments, hygiene teams conduct a risk assessment to determine the necessary limits or parameters.
Following this, an alarm system is put in place to alert the team should one of these parameters be exerted beyond a pre-determined length of time. This is implemented through temperature sensors placed in appropriate locations of the storage facility.
Once the temperature monitoring process is complete, the temperature monitoring data is recorded, either physically (often in piles of paper) or digitally (using a computerised management system).
NOTE – temperature monitoring is also commonly referred to as wireless monitoring.
Why is temperature monitoring important?
Recording this information guarantees full traceability. In other words, you can provide tangible proof to auditors that sensitive products are being maintained at safe temperatures.
In doing so, temperature monitoring prevents stored food from falling into the so-called ‘Danger Zone’ – the temperature range within which food becomes unsafe for consumption.
This process allows time to reposition Time Temperature-Sensitive Pharmaceutical Products (TTSPPs) in the event of a temperature excursion. As defined by the WHO, temperature excursion is an “event in which a TTSPP is exposed to temperatures outside the range(s) prescribed for storage and/or transport”.
All in all, the overarching importance of temperature monitoring lies in its potential to save companies or individuals significant costs on lost, damaged, or ruined products.
By placing all relevant temperature data in one location, senior management can more easily make crucial decisions around food storage and product quality control.
The benefits of wireless temperature monitoring are well-known. Innovative monitoring systems are proven to provide highly accurate, real-time temperature data, support food safety compliance, and cut costs of loading refrigerated food transportation. BRCGS standards also require the implementation and control of process monitoring to ensure that products are manufactured according to industry specifications.
When is temperature monitoring used?
Temperature monitoring is used across a wide range of applications.
The most typical application is the temperature-sensitive goods in storage or transit for more than four hours. In particular, this involves the monitoring of food and pharmaceutical products in frozen, chilled, and even ambient environments (i.e. it is critical to monitor chocolate storage).
Temperature monitoring is also used in applications such as server rooms, incubators, hatcheries, hospitals, patient rooms, ovens, and calibration laboratories.
Unsure of what type of temperature monitoring system best suits your applications?
Click here to use our free logging configurator which figures it out for you in less than two minutes.
What is the process behind temperature monitoring?
The first step is often to carry out a temperature mapping exercise to determine the hot and cold spots in the storage area.
Secondly, temperature recording loggers will be strategically placed in these locations. This allows teams to monitor the most critical areas of the storage area.
After that, loggers are collected, and their data is downloaded. With more advanced temperature monitoring systems, this data is downloadable in real-time with live dashboards or automated alarming.
Which factors should I consider when choosing a temperature monitoring system?
Below is a checklist of nine core factors to consider when selecting a temperature monitoring system. These are based on a webinar our Klipspringer experts hosted in collaboration with Quorn Foods.
Factor #1 – Parameters
Factor #2 – Hardware
Factor #3 – Data Access
Factor #4 – Sensor Connection
Factor #5 – Installation
Factor #6 – Alarm Type
Factor #7 – Calibration
Factor #8 – Cost
Factor #9 – Ongoing Support
Finally, in the below clip Kenny Edwards (Quality Manager at Quorn Foods) outlines the value a wireless temperature monitoring system provided for his team.
What are the costs of temperature monitoring systems?
As touched on in the above clip, the cost of temperature monitoring depends on various factors.
For instance, prices typically increase as the number of wireless loggers increases. The number of monitoring points is usually dependent on the value of the stock or product being monitored, and the size of the area monitored.
Another factor influencing cost is which system you choose. For instance, a system that has recording loggers with manual download will always be cheaper than a system with real-time, wireless loggers.
Example 1:
4 x fridges using a manual download logger = around £400
Example 2:
Full coverage of a large food factory with 25+ rooms/chillers/freezers using automated real-time monitoring = around £15,000
What temperature monitoring options are available?
At Klipspringer, we are naturally biased in favour of our own products. Wouldn’t you be worried if we weren’t?
Nonetheless, we understand that sometimes another provider’s system might be better suited to your applications. Below is a list of several well-rated temperature monitoring systems.
Manual Download Loggers
A steady, cost-saving option opted for by many kitchen teams.
Bluetooth Loggers
Used for storage or in-transit use, Bluetooth-connected loggers like the Verigo offer excellent value for money.
Real-Time Automated Systems
Offering versatile, instantaneous monitoring, alarm notifications, and full data encryption, wireless systems like the WatchmanOne are the leading industry options.
Read more about real-time automated monitoring systems here.
If you’re still unsure which type of system suits your applications, click here to access the free temperature monitoring configurator.
A Complete Guide to Food Industry Scales
Precision, robustness, and reliability are the building blocks of safe food production. From monitoring fridge temperature to gauging ATP, AMP, and ADP levels, these three qualities should determine any factory team’s choice in equipment.
Scales are no different. Correctly choosing a set of high-quality scales will assist your team in a wide range of applications (e.g. weighing ingredients, washdowns) – while the wrong choice will lead to malfunctions, mismeasurements, and non-conformances.
Before you read this article, we want to be completely open and say that, at Klipspringer, we’ve been a supplier of industry-leading scales and balances for several years. Yes, we are biased towards our own range. But we’ve written this article to better inform food production teams about choosing high-quality scales – even if that means not choosing Klipspringer scales.
Read on for a complete guide to food industry scales, based on the questions our customers most commonly ask us.
What are waterproof weighing scales used for?
What are the different types of scales?
What is a washdown scale?
A washdown scale is a weighing scale that can be used for applications where it is likely to get wet, or require washing down. Washdown scales are usually IP-rated, with IP67 and IP68 the most popular levels of ingress protection for washdown scales.
Hygiene teams benefit massively from this. During daily washdowns or deep cleans, a large amount of expensive, non-expendable equipment is at risk. Ingress-protected scales means that hygiene teams have one less thing to worry about.
What are waterproof weighing scales used for?
These scales are used for weighing tasks that may also lead to the apparatus getting wet.
Typical applications for waterproof scales are food production and catering. A common cause is weighing products that are moist or wet, such as raw meat or recently washed vegetables.
As with washdown scales, weighing scales need to be washed down regularly to keep them hygienic. Waterproof scales are IP-rated for ingress protection, the most common being IP68.
It is important to clarify that IP65 is not waterproof, only water resistant. The infographic to the right illustrates the protection offered by each level of IP rating against both solid objects and moisture.
What are the different types of scales?
Waterproof scales
Water ingress is an exceedingly common cause of equipment malfunction – particularly scales, balances, and probe thermometers – in food production environments.
Triggered by rapid cooling processes, steam from machinery, and hygiene washdowns, water ingress is near-impossible to completely eradicate. Fortunately, IP-rated waterproof scales offer greater protection against water ingress than bog-standard scales.
In other words, IP-rated waterproof scales should last much longer than a standard weighing scale when used in environments exposed to high levels of moisture.
The reliability and longevity of waterproof scales increases their value for money (compared to standard scales) by reducing replacement frequency, and therefore increasing cost effectiveness in most scenarios.
Washdown scales
IP65 and IP67-rated scales are usually referred to as washdown scales. Logically, IP65 and IP67 certification offer a lower level of ingress protection in washdown environments than IP68.
However, this should be reflected in the price – IP65 and IP67 washdown scales cater to hygiene teams with thinly stretched budgets, while IP68 scales are for those looking to make a longer-term investment in a more expensive piece of equipment.
Food scales
Food scales is the generic term used to encompass the majority of scales used in the food industry. In essence, food scales are weighing scales used for weighing food.
Applications of food scales include weighing ingredients, produce, or foodstuffs prior to despatch. Needless to say, precision and robustness are non-negotiable requirements for a food scale.
An additional feature certain models of food scale may have is an IP-rating against water and dirt ingress.
Catering scales
Similar to food scales, catering scales are used to weigh ingredients – but in kitchens, rather than on factory floors or despatch areas.
The quality and price of catering scales varies widely, with dozens of suppliers on the market. However, catering scales are generally cheaper due to the less demanding nature of a kitchen compared with a production or factory environment.
For enhanced reliability and a longer working life, we always recommend IP-rated catering scales for weighing in kitchens.
Trade-approved scales
Trade-approved scales are EC-approved weighing scales used to determine price based on weight.
EC Type Approval can be granted to all electronic scales and most mechanical non-automatic weighing instruments. The instrument has to meet the essential requirements contained in the EC Directive 2014/31/EU, which is in force under UK law.
Identifiable by an ‘M’ logo on their label, either on the side or bottom of the scale, trade-approved scales undergo rigorous testing to ensure that their design is up to the required standard.
Unsure whether or not you require trade-approved scales?
Where weight determines price, trade-approved scales must, by law, be used in the UK. This applies if you are buying or selling any form of goods based on weight.
UK law states that trade-approved scales must be used for this purpose, and that using non-approved scales could result in fines of at least £1000.
Stainless-steel scales
Two features characterise stainless-steel scales.
Either the scales are made with a stainless-steel casing and weighing pan, or with a stainless-steel indicator, pan, and column. Examples include the Gladiator Model (left).
These scales are used in environments where they are likely to get wet or dirty, as stainless steel is easy to clean. Stainless-steel scales are usually IP-rated, meaning greater protection in washdown environments, and stainless steel itself is far less likely to corrode than mild steel.
ABS plastic vs 304 food grade stainless-steel scales
Casing material is a key factor in choosing your scales, in particular deciding between a plastic casing or stainless steel.
ABS plastic is a strong, durable material useful for instruments used in industrial applications. It remains rigid and tough even at low temperatures – offering a balance of heat, chemical, impact and abrasion resistance.
304 food grade is the most common form of stainless-steel used around the world.
Generally favoured by the food production and catering industry, 304 stainless-steel has superb corrosion resistance against most oxidising acids.
Such durability makes 304 stainless-steel easy to sanitise, and essential for scales used in washdown areas. Compared to ABS plastic scales, stainless-steel scales also have a more professional appearance.
What are the benefits of calibrated scales?
Put simply, these food scales have been calibrated or re-calibrated by a supplier with an in-house lab and team of expert calibrators. This is especially important if the scales measurements are used in an application where incorrect readings could risk food safety.
If you have any questions about food scales, from IP ratings to EC Type Approval, our knowledgeable team are more than happy to help: 01473 461800.
In a recent interview, our Laboratory Manager Radek Tameczka explained the ins and outs of the calibration process, which applies to equipment as crucial as data loggers, pH meters, and – of course – scales.
Read our complete guide to equipment calibration below.
No Food Left Behind (Part 1): How UK Retailers Can Solve the Food Waste Crisis
Research from the UN shows that reducing and redistributing food waste by 25% would be enough to feed all the malnourished people worldwide.
At Klipspringer, our primary remit is food safety and compliance. But the related issue of food waste is so urgent that our research expert Alex Blair has written this article to discuss ways in which food retailers can do their bit. It is the first in the three-part ‘No Food Left Behind’ series, which examines solutions to food waste from the perspective of retailers, manufacturers and consumers.
Every year, more than 900 million tonnes of food is thrown away around the world.
According to a UN report, if this amount were reduced by just 25%, there would be enough food to feed the 795 million people suffering from malnutrition globally.
The capacity to solve the needless food waste crisis lies in our own hands. Unsustainable practices, monopolisation, and a lack of awareness have so far prevented any meaningful change – but UK retailers are beginning to mobilise against the danger and inequality of food waste.
This mobilisation is long overdue. With one of the worst food wastage rates in Europe, the UK throws away 9.5 million tonnes each year (6.4 million tonnes of which are edible). In other words, we discard more than 15 billion meals which could have been distributed to the deprived and deserving.
While this waste is the responsibility of all participants in the supply chain, from farm to fork, food retailers play an instrumental role in decisions made around supply chain systems, public communications, and surplus food.
Read on to learn how UK retailers can have a positive impact towards solving the food waste crisis.
Rising Prices, Rising Hunger
Events across the past few years have intensified the repercussions of food waste. From the COVID-19 pandemic to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, international disruptions to supply chains have seen food prices soar.
These price increases have affected items as varied as grains, oil, pasta, meats, and coffee. Extreme weather events have ruined crops, while pandemic-related labour shortages have made it difficult to get products onto the market.
It has never been more important to put all edible food to use. Much debate has focused on how to increase overall food production to match the growing population. But investment and effort put into such ventures could be better spent on ensuring that current food production is spread more equitably.
Why?
Globally, food production systems cultivate more than 1 ½ times enough food to feed everyone on the Planet. Every year, all the food produced but never eaten would be sufficient to feed two billion people: more than twice the number of undernourished people worldwide.
For the past twenty years, the rate of global food production has increased faster than the rate of population growth. Unequal distribution remains the problem – and the UK is a prime example.
The UK Food Retail Landscape
Nearly 14 million people in the UK struggle to get enough to eat. This equates to 1 in 5 of the UK’s population.
Large food retailers hold a unique position to address the food waste crisis and help this demographic. Through their direct links with farmers, processors, and consumers, these companies have considerable influence over every stage in the supply chain.
In the UK, the seven leading food retailers (Co-Operative Food, M&S, Asda, Morrisons, Sainsbury’s, Tesco, and Waitrose) make up 87% of the UK grocery market. And yet, these household names throw out, on average, 280,000 tonnes of unsold food a year.
The tide is beginning to turn. For retailers, limiting food waste is more sustainable, socially responsible – and also more profitable.
Tesco, Unilever, Waitrose, and M&S are among several companies that have pledged to halve food waste in the UK by 2030, following heightened pressure from the government and public to limit food waste among retailers. But this has been insufficient in light of the sheer volume of hunger and waste.
Based on our twenty years’ experience working with organisations across the complete food sector, our team at Klipspringer have published this article to suggest several solutions that UK retailers can act on to lead the fight against the food waste crisis.
Wasteful Store Practices
Traditionally, the majority of UK food retailers have high aesthetic standards for in-store produce. Fruits and vegetables are often discarded for being the ‘wrong’ size or having uneven surfaces.
Retailers are known to impose strict cosmetic specifications on farmers, which means they only buy fresh produce that fits the exacting shape, size, and colour requirements. All too often, insufficiently red apples or unacceptably wonky carrots are unharvested or binned – regardless of nutritional levels and taste.
While this is partly due to consumer choices, supermarkets can initiate the transition towards reaccepting imperfect fruits and vegetables. Some brands have launched food waste initiatives, including Sainsbury’s ‘Imperfectly Tasty’ range, Morrisons’ ‘Wonky’ range, and Tesco’s ‘Imperfectly Perfect’ range, which has saved more than 50 million packs of fruit and vegetables since its launch.
Product labelling is another cause of wasteful store practice. Supermarkets could modify ‘best before’ dates to reflect the actual timelines within which food can be consumed to prevent food from being prematurely discarded.
Of course, retailers must err on the side of caution when it comes to food safety. Selling spoilt products can lead to food poisoning or exposure to harmful bacteria – but in most cases, the food thrown out is still safe to eat.
Measures like those introduced by Waitrose and M&S are finally moving against the UK’s outdated product labelling norms. Last year, both retailers announced that they would remove the “best before” dates from the packaging of their food and plant products to cut food waste.
Another trend is switching “use-by” labels to “best before”, which signify a period of time in which products are still safe to consume, even if they’re not quite as fresh.
This was swiftly implemented by The Co-op to help combat the £100 million-a-year of yoghurt thrown out by UK homes when it is still perfectly edible.
Eliminating all wasteful store practices is an important first step, but it does not directly address the need to share surplus food throughout the country.
Sustainable in-store processes regarding aesthetic requirements and product labelling must be paired with partnerships between retailers and non-profit organisations.
Redistribution
As calculated above, the UK and wider world produces enough food for everyone. The crux of the issue lies in equally distributing this food to ensure no individual has too little.
Organisations like FareShare have made a name for themselves by redistributing surplus food to charities and community groups that, in turn, use it to provide meals. Through these partnerships, FareShare have redistributed 130 million meals’ worth of food to vulnerable people.
Since 2020, FareShare have worked closely with England international footballer Marcus Rashford, whose own family relied on breakfast clubs, free school meals, and food banks throughout his childhood.
Aside from donations and fundraising, Rashford has driven the issue of child hunger to the forefront of the news agenda. His #MakeTheUTurn campaign saw the voucher scheme (a vital replacement for free school meals during lockdown) extended throughout summer.
However, FareShare’s output represents only 1% of the 2.25 million tonnes of good-to-eat surplus food wasted in the UK each year. This is no fault of their own – private sector businesses must expand their CSR beyond predictable mission statements and initiate tangible action alongside not-for-profit mediators.
By forging partnerships with charities like FareShare, the UK’s largest retailers could slash their surplus inventory while tackling one of the world’s most pressing issues – which falls directly under their sphere of influence.
For retailers more interested in the financial returns than the social, ethical, or environmental considerations, there are several organisations which pay for surplus produce. An example is The Company Shop Group, which has returned £200m to the industry in the last ten years.
Regardless, for the leading food retailers that generate up to £50bn in sales each year, the profitability of redistributing surplus food should not be a major concern. A recent report by Unite, the UK’s largest private sector trade union, includes supermarkets among hundreds of major firms which have improved profits with price increases amid the cost of living crisis.
Partnerships with Farmers
Food waste begins at the production level – in other words, on farms across the UK. Large amounts of produce are left unharvested in fields every year due to some supermarkets’ short-sighted insistence that farmers plant more crops than are needed.
Retailers cite adverse weather, disease, and fluctuating demand as justifications for this. But if more retailers (and their intermediaries) start working directly with farmers, food waste could be significantly reduced.
How?
For a start, retailers could be more open and systematic in sharing forecast data for specific food items. This would help farmers to plan production more carefully, while preventing the overplanting of popular crops that leads to mass unharvested waste.
Additionally, UK supermarkets could share knowledge and techniques that enhance productivity with farmers. Toeing the line between helpfulness and intrusiveness will be essential here, evidenced by recent debates between traditional and technological methods for the future of farming.
A successful example is Sainsbury’s collaboration with 822 sheep farmers in 2016. During a season of poor springtime weather that delayed lamb maturation, Sainsbury’s followed farmers’ advice and allowed the lamb to reach their full weight before stunning and slaughtering. This prevented any potential farm losses, extending the lamb season by five weeks and boosting the availability of UK-grown lamb for customers.
Collaborative approaches tend to be fruitful for all parties involved. Instead of viewing farmers as contractors, retailers should treat them as partners. Together, suppliers and vendors could invest in the long-term sustainability of the supply chain, instead of maximising immediate returns from food products.
Short-term thinking like this will ruin the agricultural sector – responsible for 13.4% of employment in Britain. But, if enough of the UK’s household food names coordinate a shift towards partnership-led supply systems, farmers can share tips based on years of experience to extend the longevity, efficiency, and equality of food production nationwide.
Communication with Consumers
Finally, leading retailers have a responsibility to change the national discourse when it comes to food wastage.
Retailers’ unique position in the supply chain also gives them access to consumers, only 3% of whom believe there is any stigma attached to throwing food away. Supermarkets should use their collective presence across social media, websites, newsletters, and in-store messaging to raise greater awareness for food waste.
Free magazines from supermarkets such as The Co-op could feature waste reduction tips and the best recipes for leftovers. Creative PR could also see supermarkets sponsor and collaborate with chefs to demonstrate how best to utilise leftover ingredients.
According to a report by Sainsbury’s, 37% of the population admit to not using leftovers, but those who do save, on average, £260 per year. Other money-saving habits not related to food waste have become far more normalised, such as turning off the light when leaving a room – despite this saving just £15 per year.
If consumers were better educated on cost-reducing, food-waste-cutting tricks – from list writing to meal planning – they would likely put them into practice. Changing habits and attitudes is a long-term process, in which leading retailers can play an important, educational role.
Advantages For All Parties
As the highest earners and most influential decision-makers in the supply chain, UK retailers have the most responsibility to eliminate food waste. Household names like Tesco, Asda, and M&S stand to gain much by designing a circular strategy to reduce food waste across the supply chain.
These returns are social, environmental, and financial. Selling or donating surplus stock allows charities and redistribution platforms to stretch family budgets further and support those in, or on the cusp of, food poverty.
Environmentally, reducing waste decreases carbon footprints – and customers are increasingly less tolerant of businesses that let good products go to waste. Retailers can also reap the financial returns of getting paid for produce that would otherwise have generated no profit, rotting away wastefully on supermarket shelves.
Even so, retailers cannot do it alone. Collaboration with farmers, food processors, non-profit organisations, and agri-tech and social ventures will help supermarkets achieve their food waste goals, and strengthen trading relationships across the agricultural sector.
Interested in how other sectors of the UK food industry can contribute towards solving food waste?
Click below for the second article in the ‘No Food Left Behind’ series, which examines the crisis from the perspective of manufacturers.
Five Little-Known Solutions to Lighten the Load of Hygiene Managers
Hygiene managers have one of the most demanding roles in the food industry.
Overseeing washdowns and general hygiene standards; recruiting staff; training new recruits; liaising with chemical companies; auditing for third party and customer audits – these are some of the most common responsibilities assigned to hygiene managers.
They are also faced with the pressure to balance thorough cleaning with speed and efficiency, so that food production can resume as quickly as possible.
For hygiene managers, catering to these ever-shortening hygiene windows is made more difficult by challenges like equipment malfunction and staff shortages.
This is based on some of the common responsibilities, challenges, and frustrations we see in our daily interactions with hygiene managers in food production sites across the UK.
In response, we compiled this article outlining lesser-known solutions to help hygiene managers achieve breakthroughs within their daily challenges.
Paired with the five most typical responsibilities of hygiene managers, these solutions are proven to save hours of time, drive compliance standards, and tangibly improve audit results.
Responsibility #1 – First-Rate Hygiene Standards
Responsibility #2 – Sustainable Practice
Responsibility #3 – Minimised Hygiene Windows
Responsibility #4 – Tightly-Stretched Budgets
Responsibility #5 – Recruitment & Training
Read on to find out more.
Responsibility #1 – First-Rate Hygiene Standards
The clue is in the name. Hygiene managers are, first and foremost, responsible for the cleanliness, upkeep, and hygienic standards of food production sites.
During a typical shift, this may include stripping down machines, foaming equipment, and a deep clean. Hygiene managers may also oversee routine tidying and cleaning during production shifts, sometimes known as ‘Clean as you go’.
Most hygiene managers are skilled at maintaining compliant standards in their factory. But these standards can always be raised through innovative, fresh approaches.
An example is the use of a shadow board system to provide a dedicated home for cleaning equipment, small utensils, and mobile tools.
Why is this a solution for ensuring hygiene standards?
Having the correct cleaning tools to hand is fundamental to achieving adequate hygiene performance. In addition, tools should be stored in a compliant manner depending on their use, which often means colour segregation.
What’s more, according to a leading audit body, 60% of non-conformance issues relate to poor housekeeping of small manufacturing and production utensils. Misplaced equipment slows down production, with factory workers unable to find and use the necessary tools in time.
A disordered work environment signifies a lack of professionalism to both auditors and customers. It also leaves hygiene managers prone to costly non-conformances.
Tracking, storing, and keeping hundreds of utensils visible is no mean feat – but utilising shadow boards can facilitate logical organisation.
A particularly nifty feature to look out for is magnetic mounting. This type of shadow board takes up minimal space on factory walls, can be easily relocated during washdowns, and does not have the built-in crevices and cracks which provide hotspots for harmful microbiological organisms.
In the last decade, shadow boards have become increasingly popular, used by household names including Arla, Hovis, Coca Cola, Cranswick, and Morrisons. To learn more, read this useful guide to shadow boards written by our team.
Responsibility #2 – Sustainable Practice
Food production has a significant impact on the environment. Not only does agriculture require large amounts of fresh water and land use, but it is an industry responsible for 26% of global greenhouse gas emissions.
Pressure to limit this environmental damage has become another challenge for hygiene managers to contend with during washdowns. Sustainable cleaning practice is no longer optional – food sector businesses are pivoting towards Environmental, Social & Governance (ESG) requirements to meet growing public activism and government regulation.
Given the current importance of this topic, our team decided to assemble a panel of experts in the third webinar of our three-part ‘Culture in Hygiene’ series. This webinar provided tangible advice on topics such as transportation, robotics, and circular economies.
Advice on sustainable cleaning practice includes:
- Identify wasted labour utilisation that can be reduced/eliminated/redirected
- Decrease energy and water wastage by targeting inefficiencies
- Conduct regular waste audits
- Limit single-use plastics (e.g. replace standard plastic equipment covers and segregation screens with longer-lasting, non-plastic alternatives)
- Choose suppliers who share the same sustainability values
- Prioritise ergonomic design and longevity in equipment choice
- Assist operatives with automated procedures where relevant (e.g. repetitive, low-skilled, or dangerous tasks)
It is also important for hygiene managers to recognise that, while prioritising sustainability is important for ESG, it also comes with cost savings on energy and materials. These savings can significantly add up over time.
For a full breakdown of that sustainable cleaning practice webinar, click below.
Responsibility #3 – Minimised Hygiene Windows
Of the many responsibilities lumped on hygiene managers, shortened windows to carry out factory washdowns is perhaps the most imperative – and the most pressurised.
With rising food costs, manufacturers are under increased pressure to produce food in even shorter timeframes. Consequently, production teams are known to rush their colleagues in the hygiene team to complete washdowns in as little time as possible so that production can resume.
Thoroughness of cleaning should never be compromised for any reason. However, there are several ways to boost cleaning efficiency.
Identifying inefficiencies is a pivotal first step.
One of the most common inefficiencies is missing equipment – unsurprising, given that 60% of non-conformance issues relate to poor housekeeping of small production utensils.
Other barriers to cleaning efficiency include poor scheduling of hygiene and production windows, hard-to-clean machinery, and a lack of effective segregation.
For an in-depth discussion of these barriers, and various other ways to operate within minimised hygiene windows, feel free to check out the second webinar in our ‘Culture in Hygiene’ series below.
Responsibility #4 – Tightly-Stretched Budgets
Budgets assigned to hygiene managers are often notoriously tight. Nonetheless, they are expected to stretch across a wide range of purchases, from chemicals to PPE.
To meet this challenge, hygiene managers must make smart, informed choices when it comes to product choices. Equipment failure causes a stop in production, yes, but more importantly it puts operatives at risk of accidents and injuries.
Studies have found that equipment failure regularly accounts for more than 35% of such incidents in the manufacturing industry. Making a tight budget stretch cannot come at the expense of worker safety – but, fortunately, there is an approach which addresses both challenges.
Longevity.
Yes, the upfront costs of long-term equipment choices tend to be marginally more expensive. After all, these equipment types are higher quality. But their overall value for money lies in a reduced need for replacement.
Regularly repurchasing lower-grade or low-cost equipment adds up in direct cost, and also in unplanned downtime. If spending slightly more results in an additional two, three, or even four years of usage, then the long-term savings more than justify the upfront cost.
To take one of our own partners as an example, Queensland Bakery recognised the opportunity to invest in better equipment during their move to a new production site in 2022.
Implementing bespoke shadow boards ensured all equipment was stored cleanly and correctly. It also helped to reinforce and simplify Queensland Bakery’s colour-coding policy, driving compliance.
We understand that the reality of balancing longevity and cost-cutting is that hygiene managers simply cannot always buy higher-quality equipment. Sometimes settling for a cheaper option is necessary – but our advice is to never let it become your main approach.
Responsibility #5 – Recruitment and Training
One of hygiene manager’s most time-consuming responsibilities is recruiting and training a complete team.
Due to staff shortages across the food industry, from manufacturers to hospitality, many food businesses are having to recruit through agencies. This can be a lengthy, unreliable, and costly process – some recruitment agencies take 10-30% of the employee’s base salary.
In an environment which requires as much attention to detail as food production hygiene, attracting and retaining the highest calibre of staff is essential.
Another of our expert-led webinars breaks this down into five steps. This ranges from protecting your team and equipment choice (mentioned above), to continual process refinement through a culture which encourages workers to challenge the status quo.
Offering ongoing training is also a compelling way to entice the best operatives, who tend to be interested in the prospect of self-development. Visual management is another key driver of employee engagement, as it makes daily tasks easier by avoiding confusion and miscommunication.
The full webinar breakdown is available below.
Successfully running a hygiene team comes down to the hard work, determination, and adaptive thinking of its manager. To assist with this complicated task, this article has outlined five of the main responsibilities and challenges hygiene managers face on a daily basis, and offered tangible, lesser-known solutions.
If you have any further questions, our team are happy to help: 01473 461800.
You can also view our abovementioned webinars in the ‘Culture in Hygiene’ series here.
A Foolproof Foreign Body Prevention Plan For Food Factories
Calculations show that the recent flurry of food contamination recalls could have provided meals for every homeless person in the UK.
From 2021 to 2022, the number of food items recalled increased by 700%, according to data from the FDA.
For USDA-regulated foods (meat, poultry, and egg products), the primary reason for recalls was foreign body contamination. It was also the top reason for recalls by unit count, with one recall accounting for 148,000 pounds of chicken, or 67,131 kilograms.
Typically, portion sizes state that 1kg of chicken feeds between five and six people. If this is accurate, the amount of chicken discarded could have provided meals for each of the 240,000 homeless people in the UK – nearly twice over.
These staggering figures are only based on a single recall. Imagine if recent recalls of cereal and snack packages or beef products had also been prevented and the food wasted given to those in need.
Aside from recalls, foreign body contamination is also a common cause of non-conformances, reputational damage, and consumer harm.
Read on for ten steps outlining how, by implementing an effective hazard audit, your factory can eliminate any possibility of needless food waste.
Step 1: Risk-assess your delivery and storage areas, production lines, and site perimeter
The first step relates to a thorough risk assessment of your production site.
That begins with your delivery and food storage areas. Forensically examine these zones for all potential foreign body hazards. No risk is too small or inconsequential – better to be safe than sorry.
Ingredients and packaging are two areas in delivery and storage areas with hazards aplenty.
Your freshly packed ingredients are susceptible to contamination by any number of foreign bodies, from stones to cockroaches. This is why it is critical to conduct intake quality checks after unloading ingredients.
If not handled correctly, packaging can also become a foreign body risk. A common example is bits from a plastic bag getting caught, then ending up in the production mix.
We recommend listing all of these potential hazards for future reference.
The next area to risk assess is your production lines.
Look out for hazards on, above, or adjacent to the production line.
Potential risks include diffusers, mastic in the ceiling or wall panels, overhead leads, nuts, bolts and screws in equipment, plastic or glass dials and plastic covers.
Assess each line one at a time, ensuring thoroughness. It may also be advisable to work with the engineering team on this.
Wherever there’s food, insects, rodents, and other creatures are not far behind. The Internet is awash with stories of small animals making their way into consumer food, from ants in sweets right up to mice in loaves of bread and tins of baked beans.
Check that the perimeter walls of your site are properly secure and consider areas where pest control measures may be necessary.
Step 2: Consider the use of mobile items
In each area of your production site you assess, consider the use and storage of mobile items such as knives, aprons, and cooking utensils.
These items also pose a risk when it comes to foreign body contamination. A pen made from non-detectable materials, for example, could easily fall into a vat and go unnoticed.
You can create a tagging system for each individual item, or provide a dedicated home for all equipment using a solution such as shadow boards. Read more about shadow boards here.
Step 3: Assess likelihood and severity of risk
At this point, you should have a reasonably extensive list of potential contamination hazards, relating to your delivery and storage areas, production lines, and perimeter.
The next step is to assign each hazard a rating based on likelihood of hazard. To do this, first consider the likelihood of each risk happening. The higher the likelihood, the higher the rating, from 1 (low likelihood) to 10 (high likelihood).
After this, go back through your list and allocate a rating based on severity of hazard. For instance, some foreign bodies may be a choke hazard or contaminate a large amount of product. These are high severity hazards. Others may be easy to detect post-production and affect only a small batch. These are lower severity hazards. Again, score items from 1 (not very severe) to 10 (very severe).
Having assigned likelihood and severity ratings, add these scores together. The total sum represents the hierarchy of risk posed by each hazard on your list.
Step 4: Assign frequency of integrity checks
Now that the likelihood and severity of each hazard has been identified, precautionary measures can be taken.
Committing to a consistent frequency to check each risk is essential to this. For example, your team could conduct integrity checks once per month for items scored between one and two. These checks could increase to weekly for items scored between three and five, and daily for items scored between six and eight, and twice daily for items scored nine or ten.
Step 5: Implement Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs)
Next, it is important to define – in writing – exactly how each integrity check should be performed, and what actions should be taken if an integrity check is failed.
These guidelines are called standard operating procedures (SOPs) and there should be one in place for each of your integrity checks.
Incidentally, SOPs are also useful for proving due diligence in the event of an investigation or audit in future. Given the overlap in many of your hazards, it is likely the some of your integrity checks will be identical for different areas of your site – meaning you could have one SOP for multiple integrity checks.
Step 6: Determine how integrity checks will be sorted and archived
A simple step, but an important one nonetheless. Whether digital or physical, you need to keep records of your integrity checks.
These records should include:
- when they were executed
- who performed them
- whether they were passed or failed
- details of any corrective action taken
We recommend using a checklist auditing system to reduce paper usage and system search time – but an ordered physical record system may be suitable for some environments.
Step 7: Allocate responsibility for completing integrity checks
Production speed is inseparably linked to profits. While integrity checks are crucial and should be thorough, it is also important that they are completed as speedily as possible.
For this reason, it is a good idea to distribute the responsibility for integrity checks across your workforce.
Spread the load to make sure checks are performed quickly as well as thoroughly – and that no one member of staff is unfairly bogged down with an extra responsibility. Staff who carry out integrity checks should be trained thoroughly in the respective SOPs.
Step 8: Audit
Conduct regular (at least yearly) audits to make sure your integrity checks are being made and recorded accurately and in accordance with SOPs.
Audits are particularly important when your site undergoes significant change. Examples of this might include the implementation of new equipment, the construction of a new area, or a shift in the location of certain machinery.
Hopefully, your processes are watertight, and you pass this self-audit with ease. However, even with the most seemingly foolproof risk assessment and integrity checks in the industry, there is still a chance that a contamination incident could occur.
In this case, follow Steps 9 and 10…
Step 9: Take action
Your SOPs will provide a framework in how to respond to a failed integrity check. Action might include stopping the production line, or identifying and quarantining any contaminated products.
Make sure your team have a written record of what happened – as well as the corrective action taken.
Step 10: Complete a root cause analysis
Once the incident has been remedied, it is essential that you carry out a root cause analysis.
Retrace the steps that preceded the incident and ask what caused the problems that led to the failed check.
Again, this forms part of your due diligence – so store this document safely. Depending on the outcome of your root cause analysis, you may wish to revise your SOP to prevent the same issue happening again in the future.
As a food manufacturer or producer, one of your key responsibilities is to keep your customers safe. That aside, contamination scares hurt your reputation, delay production, and can lead to costly product recalls.
Following the ten steps outlined above will help to prevent that. To learn more about foreign body contamination, read this article on why detection should be the last resort.
What Are the Most Common Causes of Probe Thermometer Damage – and How Do I Avoid Them?
Every day, our technicians assess a wide range of thermometer models sent in for repair. Several months ago, they began drawing up a list of the most common causes of damage to these probe thermometers they were inspecting.
Now, our technical team love to repair probe thermometers – and, with external accreditation from UKAS, ISO 9001, and BRCGS, it’s clear that they are rather good at it.
Even so, our technicians insisted that we compiled and published this concise article. Drawing on their combined experience, it outlines the three most common causes of probe thermometer damage and offers tangible ways to avoid them.
Read on for more.
Cause #1 - Water Ingress
Moisture is inescapable in food factories. Even if the production area is not technically a wet environment, excess moisture can be caused by a number of factors, including:
- Build-up of condensation from cooking processes
- Steam from machinery
- Hygiene washdowns
- Rapid cooling processes (e.g. blast chillers/freezers)
Moisture poses a serious threat to instrumentation, thermometers above all. Within each unit, electronic wiring (primarily the PCB, or Printed Circuit Board) is crucial to the thermometer working correctly.
When water gets into your probe thermometers, it corrodes the PCB, which causes accuracy to drift. Initially, this drift may be very subtle, but it will soon worsen until the thermometer’s readings are wrong.
Given the importance of probe thermometers to ensure food is cooked to the compliant temperature, this could have serious ramifications for your business in the form of a non-conformance or harmed customer.
You might be thinking that this is true, but surely your IP67-rated thermometer is protected from water ingress?
IP or Ingress Protection ratings give customers a clear indication of an item’s resistance to various types of unwanted intrusion. Typically, it encompasses three key metrics:
- Resistance to ingress, accidental or otherwise, by the user
- Resistance to ingress from foreign bodies (e.g. dust, dirt)
- Resistance to water ingress
Many thermometer specifications state IP67 rating. But you also need to check that both the thermometer unit and probe connector are IP67 rated. Without this, supposedly waterproof thermometer units still offer an access point for moisture to creep in.
In some cases, damage done to thermometers via water ingress is unrepairable. Questioning if your thermometers are exposed to moisture and if they are adequately protected can save your team a lot of time, effort, and money in the long run.
Cause #2 - Probe Cable Damage
Probe cables are considered a necessary part of a probe thermometer. Thermometers without cables are available (such as stem thermometers) but are rarely practical in production areas.
There are several forms of damage to probe cables that are not visible to the untrained eye. The most frequent are:
a) Fiddling
Fiddling with thermometers while not in use is probably the most common cause of damage. Inadvertently, many operatives play with the probe cable by twisting it or swinging it around. This stretches the electronic wire to snapping point, severing the electrical connection.
b) Snagging
Snagging most commonly occurs when the user puts the thermometer down and drops the probe, or when the user accidentally drops the thermometer and catches the probe as it falls. This puts excessive tension on the electronic wires inside the cable. If repeated too many times, the electronic wire inside the probe cable will snap.
c) Using as a prop
Fundamentally, probe thermometers are not designed for jamming doors, hatches, or windows open! Like snagging, this causes the electronic wires inside the cable to sever over time. The probe becomes unusable and must be replaced.
Unfortunately, all three types of probe cable damage are either unrepairable or not cost effective to repair. However, they can be avoided thorough team training and designating a purpose-built home to keep your thermometers out of harm’s way, as depicted above. Shadow boards which store instrumentation utensils are one of the most popular solutions in the food industry – read more about shadow boards here.
Cause #3 - Impact Damage
As fine-tuned electrical devices, thermometers require careful upkeep. Much like other electrical equipment, from home appliances to smartphones, thermometers are highly susceptible to impact damage.
For example, if a thermometer is dropped from waist height onto a hard, solid floor, it is likely to ‘shock’ the internal electronics. A subsequent effect is water ingress, as the thermometer’s outer layer is damaged and no longer resistant.
Our technicians observed that impact damage is actually likeliest to occur when the thermometer is not in use. Protective covers (e.g. the silicone boot) help to mitigate damage by cushioning the force of any impact. As with probe cable breakage, impact damage can also be circumvented by suitable thermometer storage.
Identifying these three causes of damage and implementing targeted methods to prevent them can significantly increase the accuracy, lifespan, and reliability of your thermometers. It also results in reduced costs, inconvenience, and time wasted for hectically busy hygiene teams.
Even with these methods in place, it is still important to make thermometer calibration a regular part of your equipment routine.
For more information, we’ve compiled a complete guide to equipment calibration based on an interview with Radek Tameczka, Klipspringer’s Laboratory Manager, who has more than 15 years’ experience in the industry. You can also view Klipspringer’s instrumentation range, including our widely praised thermometers.
The Four Most Frequent Problems with Shadow Boards
Shadow boards have divided opinion among hygiene managers since their creation.
Used by hundreds of food businesses across the UK – from bakeries to breweries, meat manufacturers to dairy producers – shadow boards provide a dedicated home for cleaning equipment, small utensils, and mobile tools, facilitate visual organisation of equipment and colour-coding segregation.
There are, however, certain problems which frequently resurface with shadow boards.
Before you read this article, we’re going to be upfront and openly say that we sell shadow boards at Klipspringer. In fact, we’ve been the leading supplier of shadow boards across the food industry since popularising them in 2011.
But this article has been written for one purpose only: to give you all the information to overcome shadow board issues and make the best decision for you and your organisation, even if that means not choosing us.
Read on for the four most common issues with shadow boards.
Problem #1 – Cleaning Behind Shadow Boards
Problem #1 - Cleaning Behind Shadow Boards
Cracks and crevices are a common cause of non-conformances.
Why?
Because they create ‘bug traps’, making them hard to reach and thoroughly clean. Bug traps provide a hotspot for microbiological organisms to reside and grow into a costly non-conformance.
Shadow boards are designed to enhance manufacturing cleanliness standards. But, if designed with crevices or constructed using poor materials which crack and create these bug traps, this flaw can lead to the opposite.
There are, however, various solutions which can ensure that shadow boards drive compliance and food safety as intended.
When dealing with the problem of how to clean behind shadow boards, our team recommend three options.
The first option is suitable in most scenarios: magnetic mounting.
As the most popular solution for wall-mounted shadow boards, magnetic mounting allows for rapid installation and easy removal for cleaning.
No more bug traps, no more non-conformances – but hygiene teams reap all the rewards of shadow boards, from traceability of equipment to colour-coded segregation to avoid cross-contamination.
Now, most factories have walls made of magnetic materials, otherwise known as ‘white walling’. But other factory walls, made of plastic or concrete based materials, are not magnetic, and therefore require a different solution.
In these scenarios, our team usually suggest a freestanding shadow board.
These are either static freestanding shadow boards, ideal for factories with limited wall space, or mobile freestanding shadow boards (depicted left), which can be moved around as required with brake castors.
A third option is a through-board hook, which overcome the need for rails on shadow boards – a major bug trap. By removing any crevices or small parts, through-board hooks ensure that shadow boards stay hygienic, easy to clean, and free of any foreign body risks.
These three shadow board options have been implemented by food business including Quorn, Bakkavor, Arla, Krispy Kreme and Morrisons as a solution to the problem of cleaning behind shadow boards.
This has resulted in shadow boards becoming an industry staple – but only when their various problems have been dealt with.
Read on to learn about unreturned equipment, a second problem which frequently arises with shadow boards.
Problem #2 - Unreturned Equipment
According to a leading audit body, 60% of non-conformance issues relate to poor housekeeping of small manufacturing and production utensils.
As a dedicated home for utensils, shadow boards offer a solution to that particular non-compliant problem – but only when utilised correctly.
Sometimes, hygiene teams say that shadow boards “don’t work” because, while they are appealing in principle, equipment can still be misplaced. The below picture shows a typical example observed by our team on site visits.
The effectiveness of shadow boards depends on the accountability teams apply to them – after all, the utensils won’t magically return themselves!
So, what is the solution to unreturned equipment and empty shadow boards?
The answer is culture, guided by team training.
While this solution is not as tangible as magnetic mounting or indelible marking, we would argue that it is the cornerstone of any successful hygiene plan.
Team culture is so important that we’d go as far as saying do not buy a shadow board – not until each member of your staff has been trained in the process of effectively using a shadow board to store, segregate, and protect your hygiene utensils.
Implementing an accountability system to ensure that all equipment is returned to its designated ‘shadow’ by the end of the washdown will guarantee your production spaces remain clean and clutter-free.
For example, every shift manager could be given the responsibility of ensuring that all utensils are accounted for before signing off or handing over to the next shift manager.
It is also relevant to underline the importance of a thoroughly planned initial design and placement of shadow boards. Hygiene teams are likelier to use the boards correctly if helped by strategic placement.
In other words, if a site requires storage for around 100 utensils, housing these across five huge boards is less efficient regarding accessibility, accountability, and space-saving. It would be smarter to design ten smaller shadow boards (each housing ten tools) and place each closer to their area of use.
Problem #3 - Upfront Cost
Most shadow boards come with a considerable upfront cost.
Depending on the customisation, durability, size, material, and mounting methods, this price can vary massively. The type of shadow board is also significant in determining price, as demonstrated below.
Tool Boards | Cleaning Stations (Wall Mounted or Magnetic) | Cleaning Stations (Mobile/Free Standing) | Visual Management |
Used to store a set of related tools and supplies | Used to group hygiene-related apparatus for ease of access and usage/colour segregation. Price includes cleaning utensils. | Used to group hygiene-related apparatus for ease of access and usage/colour segregation. Price includes cleaning utensils. | Used to communicate essential information (e.g. procedures, maps, objectives) |
£100-£200 | Small: £100-£200 Large: £200-£400 | £600-£800 | £100-£200 |
Upfront cost is an objection we frequently hear at Klipspringer, as our shadow boards are often at the higher end of the price scale when compared to other cheaper and lower-grade options on the market.
When hygiene teams tell us that shadow boards’ upfront costs stretch their budget, we often ask what the return on investment might be.
For instance, a relatively large, bespoke tool board might cost in the ballpark of £200. This is not insignificant. But appraising the ongoing costs of replacing lost or damaged equipment puts it into perspective.
If used by correctly-trained teams, shadow boards can see a return on investment within just a few months – and that’s just when looking at equipment damage.
Additional factors to consider are increased productivity in line with the 5S Principles (with employees wasting less time searching for tools) and improved audit scores during factory inspections.
Problem #4 - Insufficient Space
Fourthly and finally, insufficient space.
Some hygiene teams tell us that they would love to implement a shadow board system for cleaning stations, visual management, and equipment storage – but their factory lacks the necessary space.
At first glance, these scenarios appear tricky. After all, you can’t expand the size of your factories just to incorporate shadow boards.
There are however, two simple solutions.
The first solution is mobile shadow boards.
These boards can be wheeled in and out of food production areas when needed, allowing your team to reap the rewards of shadow boards without having to sacrifice a permanent space for them.
The second solution is to use more adequately sized – in other words, smaller – shadow boards. By implementing, for example, ten smaller boards each housing ten tools, rather than five boards each housing twenty tools, your production space can be maximised.
If not, wall shadow boards can also be a relevant solution. These are typically cheaper, and can involve either wall-mounted boards, or magnetically mounted boards. Neither mounting method takes up more space than a rail on the wall.
For the most flexibility, we’d recommend magnetically mounted shadow boards, which benefit from rapid installation and easy removal for cleaning.
In this article, our team have summarised four of the most common problems with shadow boards and offered various solutions to overcome each.
We understand that shadow boards still might not be the right choice for you under certain circumstances. But, if you are interested in learning more about the costs of shadow boards, this article explains more.
You can also contact our team with any questions at 01473 461800, or via the below contact form.
Klipspringer to Attend Foodex Manufacturing Solutions Exhibition at NEC in April 2023
For the first time since 2018, the Foodex Manufacturing Solutions Exhibition will take place this April in Birmingham.
As the most renowned UK trade event for the food processing, packaging, and logistics industries, Foodex Manufacturing Solutions has established itself as a must-visit for those seeking to innovate in the food industry.
Every other year, thousands of visitors flocked to the National Exhibition Centre – the largest events space in the UK – for the three-day event. But, due to Covid-19, Foodex have had no choice but to postpone the show since 2018.
This year, Foodex Manufacturing Solutions (FMS) returns in full force. And our team at Klipspringer are excited to announce that we will also be returning to FMS23.
Read on to learn more about FMS23’s key details, speakers, and how to register for this free event.
What is Foodex Manufacturing Solutions?
FMS23 will run between 24-26 April 2023, packed to the brim with focus sessions, keynote speakers, and opportunities to network with industry professionals.
This year’s show is particularly important. Not only is it Foodex’s triumphant return to food sector events, but it also comes amid ongoing debate around the ‘Fourth Industrial Revolution’.
In relation to agricultural production, this revolution will be centred on technology, automation, and sustainability. Analysts have forecasted several key trends for the future of food and farming across the next decade, from smart greenhouses to livestock healthcare.
Commencing on 24 April, more than 25,000 visitors and 1,500 exhibitors will gather in the National Exhibition Centre for FMS23. It will be the place to learn about the Fourth Industrial Revolution and meet the innovators – both speakers and exhibitors – making sense of it all.
FMS23 can help you connect with suppliers and make valuable contacts as the whole industry comes together under one roof, engage with issues shaping our industry, and source new and exciting products that boost efficiency and drive compliance in food manufacturing.
In the words of Alan Ellis, Engineering & Technology Director at Coca-Cola European Partners: “It’s absolutely fantastic to see what other people are doing, what is out there, and these events are fantastic for getting your name out there, getting customers like ourselves to see what’s available in the market”.
When and where is the Foodex Manufacturing Solutions Exhibition, and how much does it cost?
Date: April 24th, 25th & 26th (Monday, Tuesday & Wednesday)
Time: 10:00am-5:00pm (except Wednesday, which is 10:00am-4:00pm)
Location: National Exhibition Centre (NEC), Birmingham, West Midlands, B40 1NT
Price: Free
If you or your team are interested in FMS23, you can follow this link to learn more and register your attendance.
FMS23 Ones to Watch
There are numerous presentations and panel sessions at this year’s FSEC which look highly promising.
Below, we’ve outlined a few which caught our eye…
The Challenges & Opportunities of Innovative Foods (Mon 24th April, 12:30pm-1:15pm)
Located in the Education Hub, this session will be led by Robin May, Chief Scientific Adviser at the Food Standards Agency. On the agenda are insights around the challenges and opportunities posed by innovative foods, including alternative proteins, insects, probiotics, and more.
Food Allergies – A Threat or an Opportunity? (Tues 25th April, 10:30am-11:15am)
This session will be hosted by a panel of four food safety experts, including Iain Ferris (Lecturer in Food Safety, Standards & Law at the University of Birmingham) and Lilijia Polo-Richards (Director & Founder at Allergy Companions Ltd).
It will be located at Food Manufacture Live and will explore consumer trust around food businesses’ product labelling – particularly important to allergen management.
Will Factories Scrap People in Ten Years? (Weds 26th April, 11:15am-12:00pm)
A somewhat controversial topic, this session delves into the increased focus on automation amid the current skills crisis due to post-Brexit immigration rules. In the Food Manufacture Live, Mehdi Adjiri (Technical Controller for Nature Delivered Limited) and Christine Walsh (Education Council for FTC) will discuss the impact for food factories.
These are but a few of the engaging sessions at FMS23 – you can browse the full list here.
As mentioned above, you can register for the event free of charge by clicking this link. If you have any queries or questions ahead of Food Manufacturing Solutions 2023, feel free to contact our helpful team at 01473 461800, or by filling out the below form.
How to Simplify Your Colour-Coding Policy for Guaranteed Segregation
Colour-coding is the industry’s go-to method to ensure segregation and good manufacturing practice.
Whether it be relating to food contact type (food/non-food), factory area risk (high care/low risk), species (lamb/beef/pork etc), or allergen (eggs/milk/nuts etc), colour-coding clearly demarcates the purpose of each equipment type.
Allergenic segregation is particularly crucial. In the UK, it is estimated that 1-2% of adults and 5-8% of children have a food allergy – equating to 2 million people nationwide – while allergy is the most common chronic disease in Europe.
Blasé approaches to segregation not only put the future of your business in jeopardy, but seriously endanger the wellbeing of consumers.
However, implementing a watertight segregation plan saves money, keeps customers happy, and maintains a professional reputation with suppliers, buyers, and retailers.
So, what is the best way to implement a failproof segregation strategy?
In our 20 years’ experience driving safety and compliance across the food sector, our team at Klipspringer are asked this question on a near-daily basis.
Our advice depends on circumstance, but there are several major points which consistently crop up as cornerstones of best practice regarding segregation. Based on an interview between Alex Carlyon (our Sales Director) and Alex Blair (our Content Lead), this article reveals those points.
Drawing on his 18 years of first-hand industry experience, Alex explains the principles of colour-coded segregation, and provides tangible examples of how to simplify segregation policies for maximum effectiveness.
Read on for more.
What is colour-coding, and how do I implement it?
Amid increased public and private sector awareness of allergens in food production, colour-coding has become the industry standard for segregation. Coinciding with research that revealed allergy to be the most common chronic disease in Europe, the EU and FSA released their industry-recognised ‘14 Allergens’ in 2014.
These are legally required to be displayed in all food production environments. Correspondingly, regulations became stricter, particularly the BRCGS, who mandate the separation of these allergens by visual, unambiguous measures.
That’s how colour-coding became the preferred approach. As a concept, it is defined as designating a certain colour to manufacturing and production utensils used for a certain purpose, or within a certain zone of the factory. For instance, all utensils used for production of a certain type of meat, such as lamb, could be colour-coded as red throughout the factory.
In principle, colour-coding is self-explanatory. However, due to complex production methods or ambiguous designations, many food businesses complain that their colour-coding strategies cause them more hassle than clarity. As a result, “how can I simplify my colour-coding policy?” is an unignorably common query. Read on to find out the answer.
How can I simplify my colour-coding policy?
Overarchingly, Alex underlined the importance of centring the policy around risk: “Far too many colour-coding policies are overcomplicated by excessive compartmentalisation, rather than focusing on what poses the biggest danger to product integrity”.
Alex proceeded to give an example based on a recent project he’d coordinated with a major UK meat manufacturer. The below table represents this manufacturer’s previous colour-coding policy, based entirely around ‘area’ (e.g. yellow for the Chicken Slaughter Line). The manufacturer then implemented different handle colours based on purpose (e.g. blue handle for ‘dirty’ chicken).
Overly complex colour-coding plan:
Area | Colour | Purpose | Description |
Food Contact | Black | Food contact | Fork, shovel, scoop |
Chicken Slaughter Line | Yellow with blue handle (dirty sector) Yellow (clean sector) | Cleaning | Squeegee, brush, shovel, hand shovel, bucket |
Pre-Chillers Loading Bay Chillers | Brown | Cleaning | Squeegee, hand shovel |
Boning Hall | Green | Cleaning | Squeegee, shovel, brush, hand shovel, bucket |
Despatch Stores | Purple | Cleaning | Squeegee, shovel, brush, hand shovel, |
Beef Slaughter Line | Blue with yellow handle (dirty sector) Blue (clean sector) | Cleaning | Squeegee, shovel, brush, hand shovel, bucket |
Red Offal | Blue with red handle | Cleaning | Squeegee, shovel, brush, hand shovel, bucket |
Green Offal | Blue with green handle | Cleaning | Squeegee, shovel, brush, hand shovel, bucket |
Toilets | Red | Cleaning | Squeegee, brush, mop |
Taking a risk-oriented approach, Alex says: “We’ve got dirty and clean slaughter here. Does it really matter if it’s chicken or beef, especially as they are in completely different areas on the site? No – neither from a compliance nor production perspective. So, why not use one colour for clean slaughter, and another colour for dirty slaughter, simplifying a multi-colour (and handle multi-colour) policy down to two logical colours”.
This is just one example. Alex also recommended measures like grouping the ‘green’ of the boning hall with the abovementioned clean slaughter, as all involve meat. Another colour saved, another simplification in colour-coding policy. See below for the updated version of the manufacturer’s colour-coding strategy.
Simplified colour-coding policy:
Area | Colour | Purpose | Description |
Food Contact | Black | Food contact | Fork, shovel, scoop |
Chicken Slaughter Line - Dirty | Yellow | Cleaning | Squeegee, brush, shovel, hand shovel, bucket |
Pre-Chillers & Loading Bay Chillers | Brown | Cleaning | Squeegee, hand shovel |
Clean Slaughter & Boning Hall | Green | Cleaning | Squeegee, shovel, brush, hand shovel, bucket |
Despatch Stores | Purple | Cleaning | Squeegee, shovel, brush, hand shovel, |
Beef Slaughter Line - Dirty | Blue | Cleaning | Squeegee, shovel, brush, hand shovel, bucket |
Red Offal | Grey | Cleaning | Squeegee, shovel, brush, hand shovel, bucket |
Green Offal | Pink | Cleaning | Squeegee, shovel, brush, hand shovel, bucket |
Toilets | Red | Cleaning | Squeegee, brush, mop |
Could your own colour-coding policy be simplified in a similar way? Feel free to implement these suggestions to reduce ambiguity and drive compliance. For any queries, you can reach out to Alex via his LinkedIn.
What do I do if I run out of colours?
During his 18 years’ industry experience, Alex has developed a tried-and-tested line of questioning to figure out if food businesses need to expand beyond their current array of colours.
Firstly, is your colour-coding policy overcomplicated?
“There are very few factories UK which have legitimately run out of colours”, Alex says. Challenging the status quo by questioning if your current colour-coding policy is truly effective. Are there colours that can be combined because of a low or non-existent level of risk?
Secondly, if no further simplifications can be made, are there any additional distinctions?
Most UK food safety businesses offer between five and ten distinct colours for colour-coded equipment. At Klipspringer, we offer eleven. But even then, there are many scenarios when food businesses legitimately run out of colours for their segregation policies.
In those scenarios, Alex recommends Indelible Marking – the process of imprinting an image, logo, or text onto a utensil to ensure greater traceability and accountability.
How does Indelible Marking work? Specialist lasers change the molecular structure of the product surface to create a contrasting ‘impression’. This means that the mark cannot be removed, without compromising any hygiene or food safety requirements.
Full of real-life examples, Alex described a manufacturer who wanted to use a different colour for three allergens (egg, milk, and soya). However, this would have been excessively complicated – so Alex worked with their team to combine equipment from all three allergens into one colour code (yellow), while indelibly marking ‘egg’, ‘milk’, or ‘soya’ onto the side of each utensil. This allowed the factory team to differentiate between each allergen clearly and compliantly, while saving cost and avoiding any mix-ups.
You can read more information about simplifying allergen segregation by downloading this free white paper, compiled by Sheena Britton, Klipspringer’s Technical Compliance Manager, who was previously a BRCGS-qualified auditor.
For innovation solutions for allergenic segregation of equipment, click on the button below.
FoodClean Launches Brand-New Experience Centre
Klipspringer and FoodClean form an exciting partnership to collaborate on future hygiene forums
Klipspringer are pleased to announce their access to FoodClean’s brand-new Experience Centre. This forms part of a new partnership between Klipspringer and FoodClean – formerly known as QJS – through which both organisations intend to enhance their positive impact on the hygiene, cleanliness, and compliance of the food and beverage industry.
What is the FoodClean Experience Centre?
Located in Lincoln, the Experience Centre is a recently constructed site where FoodClean will showcase the finest, most exciting aspects of the food safety industry. FoodClean are planning to transform the Centre into a thriving hub of food manufacturing success which cultivates discussion, collaboration, and innovation. Above all, the Experience Centre will raise the bar for hygiene standards across the food industry.
Who is FoodClean?
As a family-run business specialising in food manufacturing cleaning systems, FoodClean believe that every food company can achieve ultimate levels of workplace cleanliness whilst reducing the amount of energy, water, chemicals, labour, downtime, and risk involved.
Previously known as QJS, they recently rebranded as FoodClean to reflect their passion for food hygiene, and their core values of trust and integrity, share expertise, develop fast, go the extra mile, and have fun.
In line with these values, FoodClean’s team of factory hygiene specialists provide impeccable customer service and leading technical experience, epitomised by their Experience Centre. This is part of FoodClean’s wider mission: the Clean Factory Revolution.
Read on to find out more.
The Clean Factory Revolution
Innovative solutions that cover all bases are essential for guaranteeing top food hygiene levels. The Clean Factory Revolution is FoodClean’s answer to the stagnant approaches to consistency, compliance, and confidence across much of the food manufacturing industry.
FoodClean have constructed the Clean Factory Revolution around four principal areas of cleanliness:
1) Chemistry
FoodClean Chemistry is a range of specially formulated chemicals designed to complete hygiene tasks with greater speed and efficiency.
2) Equipment
FoodClean Equipment significantly enhances workplace organisational policy, optimising the hygiene processes necessary for compliant food manufacturing.
3) Protect
FoodClean Protect presents a variety of waterproof and certified chemical-resistant clothing and safety equipment.
4) Academy
The FoodClean Academy is the jewel in the Clean Factory Revolution crown. After an in-depth team consultation, FoodClean identified that relevant training on the use of cleaning systems is often lacking, and decided to launch the FoodClean Academy.
This Academy, and more generally the Clean Factory Revolution, will bring the following benefits to businesses across the food industry, including:
- Labour efficiencies
- Reduced costs
- Chemical savings
- Water savings
- Energy savings
- Minimal downtime
- Better hygiene results
- Sustainability
Klipspringer and the FoodClean Experience Centre
The professional relationship between Klipspringer and FoodClean dates back more than a decade. That’s why, when our associates over at FoodClean contacted us about the Experience Centre, we immediately recognised the opportunity to be involved something significant. Something exciting, with a long-lasting impact, which tangibly demonstrates our partnership in the industry.
At Klipspringer, our very blueprint is built around optimising organisation and maximising efficiencies. As a BRC partner, we’ve worked with the likes of Whitbread, McDonalds, Hovis, Kerry, Greggs, Compass Group, Cranswick, Müller, and Coca Cola to provide compliance with confidence.
Using the Experience Centre, we will be offering expert-led training on food safety standards and solutions, placing ourselves at the forefront of the industry. We’ll showcase exciting new products, host collaborative forums, and resolve any of your industry-related queries, drawing on our 20-plus years of wide-ranging experience.
Interested in meeting us at the Experience Centre?
Reach out to Alex Carlyon, one of our directors, at: alex.carlyon@klipspringer.com, or contact our team at: 01473 461 800.
HRC23: Klipspringer Announce Attendance at Leading UK Hospitality Show
As part of an ongoing commitment to provide leading insights and innovation across the food sector, Klipspringer continue to attend and support a wide range of industry events.
Following on from the success of last week’s BRCGS Food Safety Europe Conference, sponsored by Klipspringer, we are pleased to announce our attendance at this year’s Hotel, Restaurant & Catering Show, or HRC23.
What is HRC23?
HRC23 welcomes thousands of visitors each year to discover the latest developments in food service, professional kitchens, and hospitality technology. More than 1,500 suppliers gather to reveal the most exciting innovations and solutions. Industry pioneers offer expert advice and give insights on the latest trends.
At this year’s show, a whole host of exciting guest speakers will be attending, including HRC Chef Ambassador Monica Galletti – presenter and judge on MasterChef.
Read on for more information.
When and where is HRC23, and how much does it cost?
Date: March 20th, 21st & 22nd (Monday, Tuesday & Wednesday)
Time: 10:00am-5:00pm (except Wednesday, which is 10:00am-4:00pm)
Location: ExCel Centre, London, E16 1XL
Price: Free
If you or your team are interested in HRC23, you can check out the full seminar programme, or follow this link to learn more and register your attendance.
A Word From Wes
With leading economists, entrepreneurs, and chef directors all scheduled to speak across HRC’s five dedicated show sections, our team at Klipspringer are eager to learn themselves. We are also enthused at the possibility of meeting visitors and fellow exhibitors and discussing a range of food-related topics.
As put by Wes Carlyon, Head of Hospitality at Klipspringer: “There has never been a more important time than right now to collaborate and share ideas in the hospitality industry. That’s why, at this year’s HRC, we’re eager to showcase more than ever before. I’m particularly excited to meet with industry friends to discuss all things food safety, compliance, and hygiene – from removing the guesswork from basic kitchen functions, to helping brands become simpler and smarter back of house! See you on March 20th!”
Ahead of HRC23, feel free to reach out to one of our hospitality experts over the phone with any queries or questions: 01473 461 800.
At the event itself, look out for us at Stand H2551, where our friendly team will be keen for a chat!
Free tickets for HRC23 are available here.
A Complete Guide to Equipment Calibration
Klipspringer’s Laboratory Manager Explains Lead Times, The Calibration Process, and More…
When it comes to equipment calibration, striking the balance between speed, thoroughness, and efficiency is crucially important.
Every year without fail, food businesses lose thousands in revenue when equipment is returned for calibration. Downtime forces production to slow, resulting in wasted labour, a depleted inventory, and a bottleneck in work.
At the other end of the scale, uncalibrated equipment is an even riskier alternative. It leaves food businesses at risk of low-quality products, non-compliant manufacturing or service processes, and unsatisfied customers.
With an in-house UKAS laboratory that oversees more than 10,000 calibrations annually, we are regularly asked a range of questions about equipment calibration, from the process of recalibrating equipment to the factors impacting lead times.
Based on an interview between Radek Tameczka (our Laboratory Manager) and Alex Blair (our Content Lead), this article answers the following FAQs:
What is calibration and why is it important?
How often should I calibrate my equipment?
How do I return my equipment for calibration?
What is calibration and why is it important?
Drawing on his 15 years’ experience in the industry, Radek pointed out a key misconception surrounding calibration. “Calibration is often mistaken to mean adjustment. That’s not always the case. In many instances, calibration means verification of what the instrument reads at a very specific point.”
For example, a thermometer calibration involves a verified analysis of its temperature accuracies. Most laboratories verify the thermometer’s accuracy at three different temperature points, such as -18°C, 0°C, and 100°C.
If the instrument is adjustable, then the calibration process can involve modifications. If it is not adjustable, equipment is returned with a calibration certificate stating any divergence, such as -18.2°C, 0.3°C, and 100.5°C.
The importance of this cannot be overstated. Yes, certification proves that your instruments are traceable to a UKAS-accredited standard – in Klipspringer’s case, international standard ISO/IEC17025. Calibration certificates also enhance company adherence to food safety standards and are one of the most common requests made by assessors during audits.
But, most crucially, certificates also explicitly demonstrate the exact accuracy of an instrument. Neither subjectivity nor error are tolerable when it comes to food compliance. Customer safety is at risk – particularly with temperature, where the difference between safe and unsafe food could be as little as one degree.
How often should I calibrate my equipment?
In conversation with Radek, he outlined four specific factors that determine the necessary frequency of calibration. These are:
1) Equipment type
In general, most equipment requires consistent calibration, although, logically, certain types of instruments require recalibration on a more regular basis than others. Humidity meters, refractometers, and callipers are all examples of instruments that should be frequently recalibrated.
2) Usage
A general rule of thumb here: as a piece of equipment receives more use, the frequency of its calibrations must increase proportionately. For example, thermometers are usually expected to be calibrated at least once a year – but Radek says some food businesses send their units in for calibration every 4-6 months because their usage is so high.
3) Likelihood of readings changing without recalibration
For equipment which sees regular shifts in readings, more frequent calibration is required. These might include data or process loggers. Conversely, it is not as essential to repeatedly recalibrate instruments which maintain the accuracy of readings for longer.
4) Capacity to calibrate the equipment on-site
Some food businesses are able to calibrate their equipment on-site. For instruments like pH and conductivity meters – which are expected to be calibrated daily – it makes sense to keep the majority of these verifications in-house, with occasional external confirmations.
Radek underlined the importance of an external validation procedure to confirm that units are still working within their specification. Cross-checking confirms in-house calibrations and drives compliance.
In a recent conversation with Ben Foster, an Equipment Engineer at Pharma, Radek was told that they calibrate their pH meters in-house every day. However, for traceability and good practice, Pharma also sends all pH meters to a third-party at least once a year to confirm these readings and ensure the highest safety standards.
While it is impossible to provide an exact calibration timeline for all scenarios, a quick appraisal of your equipment based on those four factors should give you an approximate idea of how often you should calibrate your instruments. If you want a more personalised idea, feel free to contact our Calibration Team: 01473 461800.
How do I return my equipment for calibration?
The below outline is based on our internal calibration process at Klipspringer, overseen by Radek as Laboratory Manager.
Calibrations that fall within the UKAS-specified -30°C to 150°C range are always carried out internally, according to the following procedure:
1) The customer communicates with the lab team and raises a quotation
2) The customer sends their equipment to the laboratory
3) This equipment is booked in; the customer is sent an email confirmation, specifying exactly what the lab team is going to do with the equipment
4) If the equipment is booked in for UKAS calibration, the customer will receive an email with confirmation of temperature point the unit will be calibrated at
5) A lab technician is designated to the task – they either begin the calibration immediately, or carry out any necessary technical repair beforehand
6) Equipment sent in for UKAS calibration will need to be stabilised at an ambient temperature of 20°C ±4 for up to 24 hours before performing the calibration
7) Once repaired and/or calibrated, a certificate is issued to the customer and uploaded to the Audit Portal
8) The lab job is passed onto the Service Team, who send an email quotation to the customer to confirm any final details
9) Following customer approval, equipment is returned to the customer, usually on the same day, or at least within three working days
How long should the calibration process take?
Defined as the time elapsed between the start and end of the calibration process, calibration lead time is a crucial metric in the food industry used to calculate how quickly and efficiently your equipment can be calibrated, returned, and operating once more.
By making enquiries among our customers, we ascertained that, on average, most companies in the industry operate with calibration lead times of 4-7 days. Sometimes these turnaround times are as lengthy as 2-3 weeks!
According to Radek, there is no hard-and-fast rule for lead times. But there are two factors that markedly influence lead times: the number of calibration orders at any one time, and the resources available to manage them.
It is also true that some companies simply prioritise calibrations more than others. When asked why Klipspringer are able to guarantee that all in-house calibrations are fully completed within three working days, Radek replied:
“We have several skilled lab workers constantly on the calibrations, completing each with meticulous attention. It comes down to efficiency and experience.”
Which equipment types need calibrating?
In short, the stringent compliance regulations of the food service and production industries necessitate regular verification of the majority of equipment used in kitchens, warehouses, and production lines. This is particularly true since the BRCGS announced Issue 9 of the Global Standards in Food Safety, auditable from 1 February 2023.
Below is a comprehensive list of various instrumentation types that Radek stipulated as requiring consistent calibration.
Temperature
- Data Loggers
- Process Loggers
- Liquid ‘In-Glass’ Thermometers
- In-House Thermometer Verifiers (also known as Temperature Simulators)
Meters
- pH and Conductivity Meters
- Reflectometers (measure the reflectivity of objects)
- Anemometers (measure the speed of wind or gas currents)
- Refractometers (measure the index of refraction)
Humidity
- Handheld Units
- Loggers
- Dry-Block Calibrators
Other
- Callipers (measure the dimensions of an object)
- Scales and Weights
- Oil Quality Measurement
- Hygiene Monitors
- Light Meters
- Gas Analysers
Radek emphasised that, while this list encompasses most of the instrumentation most frequently calibrated at Klipspringer’s in-house lab, it is not exhaustive – other types of equipment will also need calibration.
If you’re unsure about anything calibration-related, please contact our customer service team at: 01473 461800. A member of our team will consult one of our Calibration Experts about your specific requirements, before giving you all the relevant information.
Alternatively, you can read another research-led article we wrote detailing how to understand your UKAS calibration certificate.
Seven Key Trends for the Future of Food and Farming
Research indicates that, among other technological innovations, smart greenhouses with vertical farming will be pivotal in driving the ‘Fourth Agricultural Revolution’.
At Klipspringer, we’ve been helping food businesses ensure safety, compliance, and efficiency for over twenty years. As part of our ongoing commitment to insightful, industry-leading content, Klipspringer’s research expert Alex Blair has written this article to notify readers about developments unfolding at the forefront of food production.
On 15 November 2022, the world population reached 8 billion people. Together with climate change, geopolitical tensions, disparities in food security, the pandemic, and ethical dietary considerations, population growth is one of the key factors instigating change throughout international food systems.
Labelled as ‘pressures’ in a UK Government report, these factors create an urgent need to produce more food on less land. How to approach this task most effectively is the subject of heated debate between advocates of traditional or technological methods.
Nonetheless, advancements in machinery and plant breeding will become increasingly utilised in food production, according to a report from Global Data investigating technological trends across several sectors.
Navigate the below menu to skip straight to the trend of most interest to you:
Trend #1 – An Expansion in Drone Usage and Automatisation
Trend #2 – A Rise in Blockchain Technology Supply Systems
Trend #3 – A Surge in Smart Greenhouses and Vertical Farming
Trend #4 – A Transition from GMOs to CRISPR Techniques for Food Cultivation
Trend #5 – A Steady Growth in Alternative Proteins
Trend #6 – A Heightened Focus on Livestock Healthtech to Fight Zoonotic Diseases
Trend #7 – An Increase in Use of Digital Twins to Predict and Optimise Farm Operations
Read on to learn more about these seven key trends identified across current research.
Trend #1 – An Expansion in Drone Usage and Automatisation
Agricultural drones are unmanned vehicles used for yield optimisation and monitoring crop growth. By 2030, it is predicted that they will also be able to carry out crop spraying and terrain monitoring.
As seen below, the demand for agri-drones is rising rapidly. This is partly due to the labour crisis and skills shortage, and partly due to agri-drones capacity to conduct diagnostics impossible for ground checks, such as soil pH level, irrigation, and temperature.
Challenges facing the future development of agri-drones include poor rural connectivity, regulatory hurdles (particularly minimising chemical drift during crop spraying), and weather dependency. In spite of this, some estimate that 80-90% of drone market growth in the next decade will come from agriculture.
Trend #2 – A Rise in Blockchain Technology Supply Systems
In the past three years, supply chain failures have plagued the food industry.
Rising prices and supply breakdowns of cooking oil were particularly noticeable. Various issues including manufacturing backlogs, a lack of qualified workers, and a shortage of raw materials have severely impacted the international food supply chain. Not to mention wars and global pandemics.
As a digital system for recording trade transactions among multiple parties, blockchain technology allows for a vast and unlimited number of trading partners to access data and supplies privately, anonymously, and securely. Blockchains offer equal access for each partner in the network at all times – enhancing traceability, deterring fraud, and improving responses to contamination and foodborne illnesses.
Major food companies such as Nestlé, Dole Food Co., and Unilever have already integrated blockchain technology into their supply systems. An increasing number of organisations are researching the potential benefits of blockchain – particularly since the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) emphasised the need for ‘tech-enabled traceability’ as part of their New Era of Smarter Food Safety Blueprint in 2020.
Trend #3 – A Surge in Smart Greenhouses and Vertical Farming
As a combination of traditional agricultural systems and modernised automation, smart greenhouses allow farmers to construct a self-regulated microclimate, boosting productivity.
Within these greenhouses, vertical farming – a stacked growing system for indoor crops – received over $1 billion in funding in 2021, exceeding its combined funding generated in 2018 and 2019. This included Fischer Farm’s announcement of a £25m vertical farm in Norfolk – unveiled earlier this month. The plant will supply 6.5 tonnes of leafy salad, herbs, and other fresh produce to UK supermarkets each day
Smart greenhouse job advertisements have also increased fivefold in just under two years, as demonstrated below.
Population growth is projected to reach 8.5 billion by 2030, with approximately 5 billion people converging in cities. Therefore, growing nutritionally dense food closer to urban areas is the most significant benefit of this trend.
The enormity of this challenge is likely to outweigh reservations regarding the high upfront costs of smart greenhouses. Even so, alternative solutions will be required for the ‘smart’ cultivation of cereals and fruits, which vertical farming is largely ineffective at.
Investors will also have to weigh up the land-saving benefits against the high electricity consumption of smart greenhouses.
Trend #4 – A Transition from GMOs to CRISPR Techniques for Food Cultivation
Controversy has surrounded Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) for over a decade.
Critics point out their threat to small-scale farmers, strengthening of corporate control over global food supply, and damage to biodiversity due to intensive monoculture systems. Public attitudes remain sceptical and strong regulation around safety and labelling is unwavering.
However, research into the biological, nutritional, and socioeconomic implications of CRISPR technology is starting to gain traction.
Put simply, CRISPR is a genetic engineering technique by which the genomes of living organisms are modified through deleting, adding, or altering sections of DNA. Advocates for CRISPR techniques claim that the use of this novel DNA leads to:
- Improved food safety (by knocking out antibiotic resistance to provide immunity against pathogens like salmonella)
- Lengthened shelf life of perishable foods
- Development of new products that taste better and have other desirable traits for consumers
One example of these ‘desirable traits’ is celiac-safe wheat, beneficial for those suffering from celiac disease (an extreme allergy to gluten). Another is improving the crop benefits and taste of decaffeinated coffee.
Despite these potential opportunities, widespread gene editing for food production purposes will be slowed by public misgivings and regulatory hurdles. This trend is forecasted not to develop significantly until the latter part of this decade.
Trend #5 – A Steady Growth in Alternative Proteins
Analysts predict that the alternative meat and dairy markets will continue to expand steadily – but not as much as some have touted
Primarily driven by concerns for animal welfare, health, and the environment, daily meat consumption in the UK has reduced by 17% in the last decade, according to a study published in Lancet Planetary Health.
Meat alternatives are expected to hit double digits in value growth from 2020 to 2025, with a Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of 12.7%. Meanwhile, the alternative dairy market has a similar projected CAGR (12.5%), but over the space of eight years, from 2022 to 2030.
The below table illustrates the pros, cons, and key markets associated with various types of alternative proteins.
Alternative Protein Type | Pros | Cons | Key Markets |
Insect Protein | -High protein levels -Lower carbon footprint, land and resource use compared to animal proteins | -Widespread aversion to eating insects (especially in Western countries) | -Asia Pacific Region -Latin America -Africa |
Cultured Meat* | -Lower carbon footprint than animal protein -Predicted to be cheaper than beef by 2030 -Improved animal welfare | -Still regulatorily prohibited in the USA, UK & EU -Worsened taste | -Israel -Asia Pacific Region |
Plant-Based Proteins | -Lower carbon footprint, land and resource use -Can replace both meat and dairy products -Currently attracting the most investment of all alternative proteins | -Vitamin B12 deficiency -No cheaper as an alternative than traditional proteins | -North America -Europe -Latin America -Asia Pacific Region |
Microbial Proteins** | -Sidesteps animal cruelty -Can be carried out using organic waste -Lower carbon footprint, land and resource use | -Further research needed on allergic reactions and gastrointestinal symptoms | -North America -Asia Pacific Region |
Pros, cons, and key markets of alternative protein types. Sources: Klipspringer and Global Data.
*Cultured meat is produced from animal cells rather than actual meat.
**Microbial proteins are single-celled proteins typically made up of fungi, bacteria, or algae.
Overall, the growth of alternative proteins is significant, but not enough to seriously disrupt the monopoly that traditional proteins have on the food market. By 2026, traditional meat or dairy products are still expected to account for 51% of global food sales, compared with just 1.4% for alternative proteins.
Trend #6 – A Heightened Focus on Livestock Healthtech to Fight Zoonotic Diseases
Meat and dairy industries are entirely dependent on livestock numbers. As any disease or infection that is naturally transmissible from vertebrate animals to humans, zoonotic diseases – or zoonoses – can devastate livestock numbers, and, therefore, food markets.
The spread of African swine fever (ASF) in pigs across Southeast Asia is a prominent example of a market-devastating disease. Following an outbreak in China in August 2018, ASF led to the deaths or culling of millions of pigs dying Southeast Asia. With pork meat accounting for over 35% of global meat consumption, global prices soared.
As analysed in the previous trend, traditional proteins look set to retain their stranglehold on global markets, at least for the time being. In light of this, food and farming organisations are anticipated to focus on protecting livestock numbers through animal health monitoring and vaccine development.
Trend #7 – An Increase in Use of Digital Twins to Predict and Optimise Farm Operations
A digital twin is a representation of a physical system that can help to understand, predict, and optimise performance. Data is collected from the physical asset, including information that cannot be observed, such as soil health. The digital twin analyses previous patterns to simulate future behaviour, allowing farmers to act quickly if a deviation occurs.
Digital twins are underpinned by remote operation, which is a hotly contested aspect to this so-called ‘new phase of smart farming’. Supporters cite the capacity to conduct planning and control away from the site, and to carry out predictive analysis and real-time response, while critics highlight jobs lost due to automatisation.
While automatised developments like digital twins are promising with regard to efficiency, cost-saving, and sustainability, if implemented improperly they could have serious ramifications for rural livelihoods. A most prominent example of this dispute between cause and consequence is the population divergence into urban areas, which is predicted to cause a global decrease in rural populations and farms.
Extreme care must be taken to ensure that trends of this sort are only used in response to our shifting population demographics, intensifying climate, and unequally distributed global food supply, rather than driving these changes in the first place.
Businesses seeking to innovate by implementing the developments and trends outlined above must also commit to genuine corporate responsibility regarding their ethical and environmental consequences. Dedicating time to educate and fully inform your team is essential to this responsibility.
For more insightful content, click below to see a breakdown of the first webinar in our ‘Culture in Hygiene’ series, hosted by Klipspringer alongside two expert panellists.
How Can the 5S Lean Principles Boost Business Efficiency?
Seiri, seiton, seiso, seiketsu, and shitsuke.
These words may be alien to you now, but in the few minutes it’ll take to read this article, you’ll be singing their praises. You’ll also possess an invaluable tool for cultivating a more efficient, compliant, and organised workplace.
Where does 5S come from?
Although it originally developed in Japan, 5S’s roots are frequently debated.
Some claim that the concepts underpinning 5S come from 16th century Japanese shipbuilders, whose streamlined assembly process allowed ships to be built in a matter of hours, rather than days or weeks.
Others argue that it was officially introduced by Toyota in the 1970s, when their analysts were sent to dissect the assembly line of rivals Ford Motor Company. Based on these findings, Toyota formulated a methodology to surpass their competitors.
So, what exactly is 5S?
Put simply, 5S is a framework for operational efficiency. At first, that might sound like typically vague self-development drivel – but 5S differs from other improvement systems in its applicability.
Translated from Japanese, the five words – Seiri, Seiton, Seiso, Seiketsu, and Shitsuke – mean Sort, Set In Order, Shine, Standardise, and Sustain. When used as a lean manufacturing tool, these 5Ss eliminate waste, uphold health and safety standards, and cultivate an environment of unrivalled productivity.
What can it help your business with?
Often associated with similar concepts like Six Sigma or Kaizen, 5S is starting to gain traction in the food industry. Research has proven its effectiveness across a variety of workplaces, with benefits including:
- Happier staff – your team will appreciate your efforts to make their job easier through a more pleasant and manageable working environment.
- Amplified productivity – logical workspace organisation decreases downtime and time-consuming misunderstandings (not to mention that if your staff are happier, they’ll be more productive).
- Tidier and safer workspace – both Sorting (Seiri) and Shining (Seiso) make your workspace tidier, which contributes to eliminating health and safety risks.
- Better quality and lower prices – increased efficiency makes your products more consistent and of better quality, resulting in increased profits, as well as the option to reduce prices for your loyal customer base.
How can you implement 5S?
1) Sort (Seiri)
There is a growing body of studies addressing direct methods of implementing the 5S Framework. Of course, these applications are dependent on the type of workplace they are intended for. However, overarching recommendations can be made regarding implementation at each of the five stages:
2) Set In Order (Seiton)
Consider the layout of your current workstations. Do your workers have to excessively relocate to get to the places they need to be? Do they waste precious time searching for the tools that they need?
Setting in order ensures that staff don’t waste time searching for tools and utensils that aren’t in the right place. This could involve drawing up a 5S Map of your workplace, or using the ever-popular Shadow Boards and Tool Stations.
3) Shine (Seiso)
This is an easy one – simply keeping your factory floor or food production space clean and tidy. We suggest regular hygiene practices, including scheduled clean-downs and ‘clean as you go’ policies, in addition to black bag audits and consistent inspections to ensure that everywhere is kept pristine. This will ensure that people can work in a mess- and risk-free environment (important for productivity and morale). It also ensures that machinery is properly cared for – extending work life and saving replacement costs.
4) Standardise (Seiketsu)
By writing down what is being done, where, and by whom, you can officially incorporate new practices into normal work procedure. This paves the way for long-term change.
Before writing any Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs), observe employees to see where problems arise, and which methods work most consistently. Consult employees to double-check each stage, and ensure the process feels natural.
Common tools for this process include:
5S Checklists – listing the individual steps of a process makes it easy for workers to follow that process completely. It also provides a simple visual management tool to check progress later on.
Job Cycle Charts – identify each task to be performed in a work area, and decide on a schedule or frequency for each of those tasks. Then, assign responsibility to a particular worker (or job duty). The resulting chart can be posted visibly to resolve questions and encourage accountability.
Procedure Labels and Signs – provide operating instructions, cleaning steps, and preventative maintenance procedures exactly where that information is needed.
5) Sustain (Shitsuke)
Implementing a 5S approach is not a one-off event. The fifth step, Sustain – or Shitsuke, which translates literally as ‘discipline’ – follows the idea of continual commitment. As a framework, 5S is most effective when habitualised and re-applied over and over.
Depending on the workplace, steps might include:
- Management Support
- Department Tours
- Updated Training Procedures
- In-House Progress Audits
- Performance Evaluations
Whatever programme or methods you deem most suitable for your organisation, getting the basics of the first four steps right makes ongoing success easier to sustain.
Feel ready to implement the 5S Framework in your workplace?
Check out our gallery of Shadow Boards, used by the likes of Lidl, Tesco Maintenance, McDonalds, Aston Martin, and Bakkavor, or chat with one of our consultants: 01473 461 800.
Klipspringer to Sponsor BRCGS Food Safety Europe Conference 2023
What is the Food Safety Europe Conference?
We are delighted to announce that, as a BRCGS partner organisation, Klipspringer will be returning to sponsor this year’s Food Safety Europe Conference (FSEC).
Curated to enhance European food safety management across retail, food service, and manufacturing environments, the FSEC is an exemplar industry event. It provides a platform for leading figures to pool their knowledge, resulting in invaluable insights and feedback for attendees.
The one-day conference will also feature keynote presentations from influential companies including Amazon, Nestle, and Just Eat, alongside decisive regulators such as the Food Standards Agency and, of course, the BRCGS itself. Their newly revised Global Standards for Food Safety Issue 9 will be a topic of hot discussion at the FSEC.
When and where is FSEC23, and how much does it cost?
Date: Wednesday 1st February
Time: 8:00am–5:00pm
Location: Etc Venues, 133 Houndsditch, Liverpool Street, London, EC3A 7BX
Price: £330-£1,170 (depending on ticket type) – use the code KLIP20 for a 20% discount on your ticket registration price here.
FSEC23 – Ones to watch
There are numerous presentations and panel sessions at this year’s FSEC which look highly promising. Below, we’ve outlined a few which caught our eye…
08:45–9:10am: Outlining Amazon’s Approach to Food Safety
Delivered by John Michael Piggott, EU Head of Food Safety, this keynote speech will undoubtedly be a strong start to the conference. It is likely to contain important information regarding the food safety assurances required by the world’s largest online retailer, who are now branching into food delivery.
09:35–10:15am: Horizon Scanning to Determine and Plan for Potential Food Safety Challenges
Following a year plagued by supply chain issues caused by war, fuel costs, and climate change-driven weather, experts from Waitrose, Barilla, and the Food Standards Agency will discuss lessons from 2022 and forecast challenges for 2023 in what looks set to be an engaging panel debate.
10:50–11:15am: BRCGS Presentation: What is New in Issue 9?
On 1 August 2022, the BRCGS released their latest version of the Global Standards for Food Safety, a global benchmark against which leading companies set their requirements for compliance. This presentation is relevant for those seeking more information on the widely read article our expert team at Klipspringer researched and compiled on the key changes from Issue 8 to Issue 9.
14:50–15:15pm: Microbiology Under the Microscope: New Trends, Tools, and Challenges
Led by John Donaghy, Head of Food Safety, Corporate Operations and Quality Management at Nestle, this afternoon session might perhaps go under some attendees’ radars. However, for those interested in future trends in food production (especially plant-based proteins) it is certainly worth a listen.
These talks are merely the tip of the iceberg. Feel free to browse the full conference agenda here.
For any questions about the Food Safety Europe Conference, our team are more than happy to help, if you contact us at: 01473 461 800.
Interested in attending? Click here to register – and don’t forget that KLIP20 discount code for 20% off!
TRAKKD: Boosting Compliance, Traceability, and Sustainability Across the Hospitality Industry
Providing global visibility to local data on a digital, paperless system that reduces waste, saves time, and minimises system costs
In the current hospitality landscape, pioneering companies are looking to reassess their methods, practices, and procedures, setting a new course of action for the post-pandemic era of hospitality.
High-quality digital management is crucial to their key objective of pivoting towards a future that is digital, transparent, traceable, and adaptable. Newer, more innovative systems are finally replacing the endless mounds of compliance paperwork.
In the interest of supporting our customers as they navigate this brave new world, we decided to answer some of the most common questions surrounding digital management and more specifically: the digital management system TRAKKD. You can read through all the key points or skip to your most burning question using the links below:
What are Digital Quality Management Systems?
How does TRAKKD work, and how much money can it save me?
Can TRAKKD connect with other equipment?
What are the main benefits of TRAKKD?
What are Digital Quality Management Systems?
Digital quality management systems are software solutions that help organisations manage and improve their quality management processes. This software connects and harmonises data between its digitised host and key processes in food prodution and service.
TRAKKD is a digital quality management system. As an entirely digital host of cloud-accessed data, it ensures that hospitality teams are never lacking the most important information. TRAKKD simplifies data analysis and strengthens food compliance, seen in its successful implementation by well-established brands such as McDonalds, KraftHeinz, and Albron, among others.
How does TRAKKD work, and how much can it save?
Put simply, TRAKKD has two core parts: the digital checklist, and the real-time wireless monitoring.
Moving away from manual paperwork towards a digital checklist system modernises information storage processes. As an entirely paperless app, it limits the amount of paper discarded in landfill sites, while making detailed calculations for regular food waste savings – integral to sustainability pledges. TRAKKD keeps all food safety data in one secure location, rather than in overwhelming piles of time-consuming paperwork.
See a specific cost savings breakdown below based on TRAKKD’s implementation at Albron, a leading food service and catering company with over 700 venues throughout Europe.
KPI | Cost of Current Method | Cost of Digital Method (TRAKKD) |
Price per manual per year per location (paper, printing, sending, etc) -Complete manual /registration provided as a book -Per location £307 (per year) | £307 | £105 |
Labour hours (filling in checklists) per location -Average 1.25 hours per week using current method -Average 1 hour per week using digital method -Fewer temperatures have to be taken using real-time temperature monitoring, saving 0.5 hours per week on average -Hourly pay rate: £12.50 | £713 | £570 |
Checklist management per year (maintenance, archiving, approval etc of checklists) -Quality support at HQ and regional managers involved in the process -Estimated savings of 2 FTE | £87,650 | £0 |
Reduction of inspections (from two per year to one or ideally zero) -Inspections cost £132 per visit | £264 | £132 or £0 |
Reduction of travel to separate locations (fuel, car maintenance, CO2 reduction, time saved) -Due to TRAKKD’s HQ/regional dashboarding and reporting, teams travel less frequently to single locations, management spends less time creating reports etc) | Hard to quantify, but one of the most significant costs in this table |
As seen above, TRAKKD offers savings totalling more than £88,000 per year. And that’s not including waste savings due to equipment failure, especially of fridges and freezers.
This is because TRAKKD’s features allow users to make informed decisions about performance based on accurate data analysis, filtered by any parameter including user, site, region, country, etcetera – invaluable information for eliminating food safety hazards.
In the past, such information was only available on paper at the location itself, whereas TRAKKD’s global cloud access makes its data reachable wherever, 24/7. This traceability also pinpoints the root cause of any mishap, preventing any costly re-occurrences in future.
As put by Ruud Homan, Operations Manager at Albron: “TRAKKD gives us the opportunity to adjust immediately. In addition, it offers the possibility to make trend analyses at various levels. This gives us fast and actionable insights into which areas are performing better and which need improvement. We can then quickly adjust, operationally, according to these findings.”
Can TRAKKD connect with other equipment?
The second part of TRAKKD is real-time wireless monitoring with Bluetooth connectivity.
Using sensors compatible with its state-of-the-art software, TRAKKD combines the routine reporting and digital management system outlined above with wireless monitoring across a variety of parameters.
Of these parameters, the all-in-one temperature monitoring system has been highly praised by TRAKKD’s early adopter companies, above all its automatic synchronisation of information, which eliminates costly human error. As the first provider to offer this fully integrated hardware, we are immensely proud of the positive impact TRAKKD has had in better preparing food businesses for upcoming audits, while also saving vast amounts of money.
What are the main benefits of TRAKKD?
There are three overarching benefits to the implementation of a digital quality management system like TRAKKD.
1) Reduced Waste
Having to discard stock due to faults or coldspots in food storage areas is a massive drain on funds. TRAKKD prevents this, identifying potential breaches of compliance before they occur.
There is also a sustainability benefit to this. On average, 1/3 of our individual carbon footprint is made up of what we eat and drink. A primary consideration for many food businesses is how to cut this footprint. Choosing producers and suppliers who calculate the CO2 impact per product is one method. Operating with a system that – through rigorous, accurate tracking – significantly reduces food waste is another method.
2) Time Saved
By managing all data, checklists, and warnings in one place, on one app, TRAKKD significantly cuts the amount of time employees waste on manual paperwork checks and temperature monitoring checks. This ensures employees have sufficient time to focus on what they’re there to do – preparing and serving food!
Unlike other systems, TRAKKD is designed to be user-friendly to the extent that, once employees receive our training in how to professionally operate the system, this can be done independently, without any devious add-ons in price.
3) Minimised System Costs
Costs are lower than other digital management systems thanks to TRAKKD’s pay-per-kitchen model – a pricing structure which actually suits hospitality businesses, rather than the conventional pay-per-user system. In turn, this allows food businesses to offer greater affordability in prices for their loyal customer base, without compromising on compliance or quality.
Designed for kitchen teams, clients, contract teams, compliance managers, front-of-house teams (or really just any food team member, anywhere), TRAKKD offers an innovative digitised solution to post-pandemic food safety in the hospitality sector.
If you’re ready to take the first step, reach out to our team of experts to arrange an initial consultation: 01473 461 800. We also offer a completely free of charge 30-day trial for those wanting to test out TRAKKD first.
If you want to learn more about our most popular digital quality management system, click the button below. You can also download our TRAKKD Starter Guide.
If you would like further guidance relating to your quality management system, the Klipspringer team would be happy to help. Share your details below to arrange a free consultation.
What is the Best Way to Check Oil Quality?
Resolving the TPM vs FFA Debate
At Klipspringer, we’ve been helping manufacturing and hospitality businesses to ensure food compliance for over 20 years. By removing all guesswork from food oil management, we’ve modernised food safety for the likes of McDonalds, Whitbread, Chopstix, Wasabi, and Five Guys.
One of the most frequent questions we receive from our customers is: which method of checking oil quality is most accurate, compliant, and objective? This article aims to answer that question, addressing a much-contested area of food oil management: the TPM (Total Polar Materials) vs FFA (Free Fatty Acids) debate.
Read on to find out more.
Why does frying oil need testing?
Frying produces exceptionally flavoursome food. It is an inexpensive, rapid, and popular way of cooking, which delivers the ultimate food sensory trifecta of “golden, brown, and delicious”, or “GBD”.
However, this trifecta is only guaranteed if the food in question is fried in safe, high-quality oil. Past a certain level – where the oil is not brand new, but rather from B-C on the below graph – this quality is jeopardised by the repeated use of oil, which causes it to degrade. When oil is used continually, an increasing number of chemical reactions occur, leading to alterations in its composition.
As cooking oil degrades, so does the taste, texture, and overall flavour of the food. For manufacturers and hospitality businesses that prioritise product consistency, this can be a pressing issue.
Product integrity is another area compromised by flawed oil management processes. In the worst-case scenario, it can expose customers to the build-up of acrylamide – a cancer-causing chemical.
On the other side of the coin is oil wastage. Research has shown that, surprisingly, most businesses prematurely discard usable oil due to basic or outdated testing methods. Amid astronomical rises in oil prices, a growing number of restaurant operators are arriving at the same conclusion: monitoring oil quality ensures compliance, prioritises sustainability, and significantly cuts costs. The only question remaining is how best to do it.
What are the most common oil testing methods?
Currently, there are three predominant oil testing methods used in the industry. The first is simple, but amateurish. The second is relatively accurate, but subjective. The third is eco-friendly, cost-saving, and entirely objective.
Read on to learn about the core differences, pros, and cons of each method.
Method #1 – Visual Inspection
Unfortunately, many restaurants still change their oil based on a quick visual check. While some chefs with vast amounts of experience can make informed guesses about when to change their oil, their decision is still subjective. It stems from the “we’ve always done it that way” rationale which has come to harm many businesses over the years, whether it be through unnecessary expenditures, unsustainable practices, or audit non-conformances.
In this day and age, taking a quick glance at a batch of cooking oil and deciding if it’s safe simply doesn’t cut it. This is twofold: the rate of darkening differs from oil to oil, and is also dependent on filtering practices and product types. Overall, visual inspection is better than no method of oil monitoring, but there are more accurate options available.
Method #2 – FFA Measurement (Test Strips)
High levels of FFA, or Free Fatty Acids, directly correlate to off-colours, off-odours, and off-flavours in fried food products. FFA is typically measured using test strips. After being dipped into the oil, a range of colours appear on the strip. This is then compared to a colour reference chart to determine FFA levels. Standard test strips measure free fatty acid levels from 2% up to 7%, with 5.5% to 7% as the discard range.
So, just how effective are FFA Test Strips?
With an overall accuracy of roughly 80%, these strips offer greater compliance than any visual inspection, but don’t provide the same assurance nor peace of mind as other methods. This is primarily because the comparison of the strips’ colouring with the colour chart is still subjective to inadequate or distorted lighting, and strips can also easily be contaminated by improper storage.
Studies have found that monitoring methods based on dielectric constant provide more “objective and valuable results” than those based on colorimetric reactions. In other words, methods that go beyond surface-level colouring – outlined below – are more reliable.
Dielectric constant-based methods are also less likely to be single-use, unlike test strips, which result in an ongoing cost of around £300 per year.
Overall, FFA Measurement is still a reasonable solution for food oil monitoring, but isn’t particularly ground-breaking given modern technological advances. As explained above, there is nothing inherently wrong or non-compliant about it. But, for businesses seeking to go the extra mile, other more innovative options are out there.
Method #3 – TPM Measurement (Food Oil Monitors)
Devices which determine cooking oil quality by TPM, or Total Polar Materials, remove the subjectivity found with previously summarised methods. By basing data on changes in the dielectric constant, handheld TPM devices – usually a Food Oil Monitor – are greater in accuracy than FFA-based methods.
TPM Measurements is the most current method utilised in commercial kitchens. Legislatively encouraged across Europe, the go-to critical parameter for TPM limits falls between 24% to 27%. A TPM reading of higher than 25% is considered the discard point in many European countries.
Best used at the end of each trading day, when the oil is still hot, Food Oil Monitors are efficient and fast to operate. Kitchen staff simply have to place the sensor stem into the vat of oil, and then use a gentle stirring motion until the light at the top of the instrument begins to flash. If the Monitor flashes green, the oil is safe to use again. If it flashes amber, the oil needs changing soon. If it flashes red, the oil requires immediate changing.
For smaller establishments, a potential drawback of Food Oil Monitors is the upfront cost – usually in the region of £400. However, once purchased and implemented, the Monitors typically show a return on investment within six months, and should last for three or more years. What’s more, these Monitors can be specifically calibrated to various oil types, and are able to verify temperature, as well as oil quality.
Method | Summary | Pros | Cons |
Visual Inspection | Simple eye test based on oil colour |
|
|
FFA Measurement | Uses test strips and a colour chart to measure Free Fatty Acids |
|
|
TPM Measurement | Uses a Food Oil Monitor to measure Total Polar Materials |
| 1. Upfront cost of around £400 |
Hopefully this summary has given you a structured insight into the best ways to check oil quality, and has provided some clarity in settling the age-old debate between FFA and TPM.
Want to quickly outline each oil monitoring method’s pros and cons with your team? Refer to the above table for a concise overview.
For a concrete example of how Food Oil Monitors have helped companies increase compliance and cut oil usage, read about how Whitbread made savings of up to 52%.
Culture in Hygiene: Sustainable Cleaning Practice (Webinar 3)
Sustainable Cleaning Practice
Food production is responsible for 1/4 of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions. Amid growing calls for food businesses to prioritise more sustainable practices, eco-friendly cleaning approaches are a frequently forgotten part of the equation.
No longer – at Klipspringer, we decided to assemble a panel of experts to discuss how your business can implement sustainable cleaning practices. Based on the third webinar in the three-part ‘Culture in Hygiene’ series, this information-packed article provides tangible advice on topics including robotics, transport, and a circular economy.
This webinar is hosted by Alex Carlyon, a Director at Klipspringer with over 18 years of industry experience. Alex is joined by Phil Kulkowski, Hygiene Consultant at Hygiene Improvement Solutions, and Dan Turner, Director at FoodClean.
If you’re interested in a specific part of this webinar, browse the below menu to skip ahead to the section most relevant to your food safety needs:
Click below if you’d prefer to watch the full webinar and download the corresponding slides.
1) Efficient Hygiene Practice
After some introductory points by Alex around sustainability and economic models (see the full webinar above), Dan delves into various factors that commonly cause inefficiencies for manufacturing businesses. Of particular interest is how to reduce energy and water wastage – while Phil provides valuable insights on minimising downtime.
2) Transport & Packaging
18% of the greenhouse gases emitted during the food production cycle come from the supply chain. Therefore, it is crucial to implement sustainable practices during the transport and packaging of foodstuff.
This is where Alex’s expertise comes in. In detail, he provides tips on how to transport chemicals and water off site, and how to conduct a waste audit. All of this allows supply chains to be built on ESG policies.
3) Equipment Choice
Alex then transitions into a shorter segment on equipment choice. Again, sustainability of the supply chain structure is examined, as is the specific design of equipment, factoring in ergonomics and longevity. Phil also weighs in with some insights around simplifying equipment use for newer operatives.
Watch below for more.
4) Robotics & Automation
Automation is an increasingly prominent topic amid debates over the future trends of food production. Dan covers off some key concepts in the area, particularly focusing on how to automatise repetitive, low-skilled, and dangerous jobs. He reaffirms the importance of using automatised procedures to assist operatives rather than replace them – reallocating their invaluable labour time for production or other hygiene tasks.
For more in-depth webinar content, take a look at the other episodes in our ‘Culture in Hygiene’ series.
Alternatively, if you have any questions or queries you can get in touch with one of our Hygiene Experts below, or by contacting us at: 01473 461 800.
Preventing Foreign Body Contamination - Why Detection Should Be the Last Resort
Even the most stringent of detectability-oriented food safety systems are not fail-safe. The below image – taken in Melbourne, Australia, by a customer of a prominent global food retailer – shows exactly why prevention is a more effective approach.
Upon discovering a sharp metal spring in her meal, the mother-of-two said she “felt something was right in my tooth”. After spitting out her food, she noticed the large spring, and, in her own words, “instantly felt sick”.
Worst of all, this customer was with her two children, both under the age of three. Afterwards, she told 7News Australia that: “I just keep thinking about what could’ve happened if it was either of my young children and how scary it could’ve turned out.”
Public exposure of this sort will taint any company’s reputation. Following this incident, a three-pronged investigation between the restaurant, customer, and council had to be undertaken. But it was entirely preventable.
A Common Non-Conformance
Due to the unavoidable need for pens and other utensils in and around production lines, poor foreign body contamination control is one of the most commonly identified BRCGS non-conformities. More importantly, it is also a violation of compliance – not to mention customer trust. In this era of instantaneous, 24/7 news and social media reviews, years of impeccable food safety standards can be ruined by one tiny lapse.
But there is a guaranteed way to ensure that the pens used by your team pose no risk of foreign body contamination.
Prevention before detection.
Read on to find out more.
The Solution
Pen coil springs are virtually undetectable, not only by the human eye, but also by automated machines. Leading companies are now opting to use metal detectors or x-rays to identify pen fragments in food items where necessary, in addition to implementing measures to prevent such hazards before they arise.
How?
These organisations – which include Heinz, Bakkavor, Cargill, PepsiCo, Two Sisters, Moy Park, and XPO Logistics – are mandating the use of writing utensils which physically cannot fragment. In other words, they have made it company policy that their pens…
1) …are made of the strongest, most durable materials
2) …are completely shatterproof
3) …do not contain coil springs
Tried and tested across the complete food sector, Retreeva Global have designed an innovative range of near-unbreakable pens. It is a known fact that higher metal content makes factory pens more brittle, increasing the risk of the pen shattering under pressure, and, subsequently, product contamination.
As part of the Klipspringer Group, Retreeva’s choice of materials means that, unlike other options, these pens cannot shatter into unnoticeable, far-flung fragments.
By eliminating the risk of foreign body contamination on assembly lines, consistent product integrity is ensured. And yes, these pens are still produced to a very high standard of detectability. But, by choosing a robust, shatterproof, and spring-free pen which first prevents foreign body contamination, detection becomes a last resort.
In the unlikely occurrence of a mishap, this ensures that stray pens still have a very high chance of being rejected in finished product.
What Does BRCGS Food Safety Issue 9 Say?
It also offers compliance with the BRCGS’s increasingly strict food safety requirements, which state that:
“Portable handheld equipment, e.g. stationery items (pens, pencils etc.), mobile phones, tablets and similar portable items used in open product areas shall be controlled to minimise risk of physical contamination. The site may consider, for example:
excluding non-approved items restricting the use to site-issued equipment ensuring stationery items such as pens are designed without small external parts and are detectable by foreign body detection equipment, or are used in designated areas where contamination is prevented" (BRCGS9 Ref. 4.9.6.2.)
If you’d like to learn more about the specific features of Retreeva’s much-acclaimed detectable pen range, read this comprehensive summary.
Alternatively, you can watch the below video explaining which type of detectable pen best suits your applications.
Culture in Hygiene: Maximising the Hygiene Window (Webinar 2)
Maximising the Hygiene Window
All food businesses recognise the vital importance of the Hygiene Window to ensure cleanliness and drive compliance. But little guidance is ever offered on how to actually put this into action.
Based on the second webinar in the three-part ‘Culture in Hygiene’ series, this article addresses this issue. Following on from the previous webinar, in which three industry experts discussed hygiene team engagement and retention, this information-packed panel provides tangible advice on how to maximise the Hygiene Window.
This webinar is hosted by Alex Carlyon, a Director at Klipspringer with over 18 years of industry experience. Alex is joined by Nick Turner, a Director at FoodClean, and Andy Fletcher, a Technical Consultant with over 30 years’ experience in the food industry.
If you’re interested in a specific part of this webinar, browse the below menu to skip ahead to the section most relevant to your food safety needs:
Click below if you’d prefer to watch the full webinar and download the corresponding slides.
1) Cleaning Efficiency
In this section of the webinar, Nick and Andy delve into some of the biggest barriers to cleaning efficiency during the Hygiene Window. These vary from missing equipment to a lack of segregation. Nick and Andy then outline several solutions around cleaning equipment, storing tools, and protecting machinery, all of which saves costs, time, and non-conformances.
2) Labour Efficiency
Calculated in cost per minute, downtime is an expensive part of the Hygiene Window which teams must be made aware of. Nick and Andy strongly encourage bringing the hygiene team in on the journey to foster greater understanding and communication – as well as the value of ready-to-use equipment to reduce operator frustration and improve labour efficiency.
3) Zone Segregation
Thirdly, Alex draws on his extensive experience to discuss the role of zone segregation. His advice on mitigating the risks of in-process cleaning includes effective production scheduling, low pressure cleaning equipment, and mobile screening – which he provides visual examples of from a recent visit to an A.G. Barr Factory.
Watch below for more.
For more in-depth webinar content on related topics, take a look at the third episode in our ‘Culture in Hygiene’ series.
Alternatively, you can get in touch with one of our Hygiene Experts below, or by contacting us at: 01473 461 800.
How Much Do Shadow Boards Really Cost?
Breaking Down the Pricing of the Most Popular Organisational Tool in the Food Industry
Since Klipspringer popularised shadow boards in 2011, they’ve steadily grown into an industry staple.
Huge companies such as Two Sisters, Morrisons, Dominoes, Cranswick, Hovis, Domino’s, and Coca Cola have recognised the utility of shadow boards for improving hygiene standards, health and safety, and efficiency.
Few refute these benefits. However, the price of shadow boards varies so much that our customers often ask us:
“How much does a shadow board actually cost?”
When addressing the cost of a product, most articles usually put something like ‘it depends’, entirely avoiding any sort of specific price point. And of course, the price of a shadow board is dependent on various factors, from size, to material, to fixing and mounting methods.
However, this doesn’t mean we can’t provide you with a ballpark price of a shadow board by type. The three most common types of shadow board are tool boards, cleaning stations, and visual management boards.
Below is a breakdown of each, with an approximate price range:
Tool Boards | Cleaning Stations (Wall Mounted or Magnetic) | Cleaning Stations (Mobile/Free Standing) | Visual Management |
Used to store a set of related tools and supplies | Used to group hygiene-related apparatus for ease of access and usage/colour segregation. Price includes cleaning utensils. | Used to group hygiene-related apparatus for ease of access and usage/colour segregation. Price includes cleaning utensils. | Used to communicate essential information (e.g. procedures, maps, objectives) |
£100-£200 | Small: £100-£200 Large: £200-£400 | £600-£800 | £100-£200 |
For specific examples and prices, click here to view our range of ‘Buy It Now’ cleaning stations.
Three key considerations when breaking down the price of a shadow board are durability, customisation, and return on investment.
Is the board made from high-quality, long-lasting material? Can you embellish your true company branding, moving beyond the basic name and logo? Will the board offer a strong ROI, for instance through improved audit scores, or boosted productivity in line with the 5S Principles?
Klipspringer’s shadow boards meet all three criteria. Of course, we’re favourably biased towards our own products (wouldn’t you be worried if we weren’t?), but it is justified by our state-of-the-art print and production facilities, clarity of visual communication, and magnetic mounting options.
But ours aren’t the only shadow boards on the market. We get that. Not only do we acknowledge that there are plenty of other capable manufacturers out there, but we’re open in admitting that, at Klipspringer, our shadow boards are more expensive than the industry bog-standard.
Read on to find out why that is.
Why Klipspringer?
Most shadow boards are effective at storing tools, circumventing non-compliances, and maintaining hygiene standards.
That said, not all shadow boards are created equal.
These benefits depend on the quality of craftsmanship, reliability of mounting method, and efficacy of visual communication, all of which is determined by the Shadow Board Process.
At Klipspringer, this process entails six separate steps.
Firstly, the specification. We find out the customer’s precise requirements, including colour, equipment, and printed content.
Secondly, the quotation. Within one working day of the initial enquiry, we send a personalised quotation summarising the customer’s needs.
Thirdly, the order. The customer accepts the quotation and/or provides us with any necessary amendments.
Fourthly, the proofing. Our design team complete the artwork proofs (see below), before sending them to the customer for final confirmation.
Penultimately, the print. Using our cutting-edge print and production facilities, our in-house production team strive to complete the order promptly.
Lastly, the delivery. Once printed, machined, and sealed, boards are despatched to the customer within 5-7 days (one of the quickest turnaround times in the industry), or even sooner if deadlines require.
This carefully refined six-step process has resulted in Klipspringer’s firm establishment as the industry leader in bespoke shadow boards. But don’t just take our word for it – our boards have also been advocated by the likes of Tesco Maintenance, Bradley’s Metal Finishers, and Fulfil Food Solutions.
Other key factors distinguishing our shadow boards from the crowd include…
1) Five High-Quality Fixing Methods
From sturdy direct mounts and stand offs, to free-standing frames and wheeled frames, to our much-admired magnetic shadow boards, we have an option to suit each circumstance.
2) Long-Lasting, Lightweight Material
While some continue to favour unsustainable foam-set options, our shadow boards are made of 6mm composite aluminium. A robust neoprene core is incorporated within the aluminium sheets, resulting in strong, water-resistant material that is safe to use in food environments, as well as being cost effective.
3) Unmatched Equipment Colour Variety
With 11 distinct colours, Klipspringer leads the industry in range of colour-coding utensils. Avoid cross-contamination and non-conformances with explicitly colour-coded equipment and corresponding shadow boards.
4) Anti-Scuff Laminate
To increase durability, we exclusively use heat-sealed, anti-scuff laminate, maximising adhesion (preventing any peeling) and ensuring your boards look good as new for years to come.
5) Through-Board Hook System
Last but certainly not least, we offer a through-board hook system. This entirely unique feature of Klipspringer shadow boards means that there are no hidden crevices or small parts. It ensures that your board is hygienic, easy to clean, and free of any foreign body risks.
Where To Get Started
Having overviewed the ballpark costs of various types of shadow boards, revealing Klipspringer’s six-step production process and unique features, this article has given a comprehensive breakdown of shadow board prices.
If you want more information, take a look at our shadow board overview page, or contact our experienced shadow board team: 01473 461 800.
If you already know which shadow board option you require, check out our ‘Buy It Now’ range, or fill out our Shadow Board Enquiry Form for a free quotation.
Klipspringer Launch Brand-New Range of Production Knives
Knives are an integral part of any food production workplace. Used in a wide range of contexts – from preparing fruit and vegetables to filleting, jointing, and deboning meat and fish – production knives must be grippy, rigid, and, above all, long-lastingly sharp. However, with knife-related injuries sending more than 1 million workers to hospital every year, ensuring that cutting utensils are safe and of the highest quality is extremely important. Enter Klipspringer’s latest launch: a brand-new range of production knives, designed to cater for all applications in food manufacturing environments.
This exciting new range is divided into three main categories:
1) Ergo Series Knives
Manufactured from high-quality stainless steel, either Molibdenum or Vanadium, the Ergo Series blades are corrosion-resistant, and offer their user exceptional cutting power. These knives are structurally robust, with their hard inner plastic component and long-lasting edge making them able to withstand intensive use.
What’s more, the Ergo Series utilises a Bi-injection handle manufacturing method. This differentiated colour handle system allows each knives to be categorised by its specific purpose, eliminating any possibility of cross-contamination between foods, while offering a grippy, cushioned handle design for maximum comfort and ease of use.
Current models available in the Ergo Series include Breaking Knives, Butchers Knives, Boning Knives, Cimeter Knives, Stick Knives, Fillet Knives and Bead/Pastry Knives.
2) Performance Series Knives
Next, there’s the Performance Series – a range of long-lasting blades ideal for butchery, fish filleting, vegetable prep, and a vast array of other applications. These knives are manufactured from SANDVIK12C27 Steel, and have an ergonomic design carefully tailored to give comfort and control for extended use. This is supplemented by a comfortable handle, the material of which provides extra grip, even when wet.
But what truly sets the Performance Series apart from other industry knives as a true ally of professionals in the food processing industry? Antimicrobiality – contained in the handle material are cutting-edge antibacterial properties that prevent the growth and propagation of bacteria and microorganisms.
Current models available in the Performance Series include Butcher Knives, Boning Knives, Skinning Knives, Cimeter Knives and breaking knives.
3) Essential Series Knives & Accessories
Designed for more general, multi-purpose contexts, the Essential Series knives are similarly strong, sharp, and have excellent corrosion resistance to prevent rusting. The soft rubber material on the handle’s surface allows for a smooth, tight grip, and, again, a colour-coded handle system prevents cross-contamination.
The Essential Series is also unique in offering first-rate knife accessories. In particular, it showcases a Knife Sharpening Steel (pictured below) made from carbon steel, with a protective layer of hard chrome plating, and a Polyethene handle – a hygienic surface material recommended for the food industry.
Current models available in the Essential Series include Paring Knives, Serrated Knives and Knife Sharpening Steel.
For more information about these latest additions to the Klipspringer range, feel free to contact our team: 01473 461 800.
Culture in Hygiene: Hygiene Team Retention & Engagement (Webinar 1)
Hygiene Team Engagement and Retention
Culture in food safety is one of the most crucial aspects to guaranteeing unwavering compliance. In fact, a lacklustre food safety culture plan was identified as one of the eight most common non-conformities by the BRCGS in their recently updated issue of the Global Standards of Food Safety.
For that reason, our team at Klipspringer decided it was time to address Culture in Hygiene across a three-part webinar series.
Hosted by Alex Carlyon, a Director at Klipspringer with over 18 years of industry experience, the first part of this series focuses on how to engage with and retain an efficient, high-functioning hygiene team. Today, Alex is joined by Phil May, Technical Support & Hygiene Manager at leading manufacturers Greencore, and Lars Turner, Food Industry Specialist at cleaning solution providers FoodClean.
Interested in a specific part of this webinar?
Browse the below menu to skip ahead to the section most relevant to your food safety needs:
Click below if you’d prefer to watch the full webinar.
1) Protecting Your Team
Amid staff shortages and a smaller pool of skilled workers, ensuring that team members are safe at work is an absolute MINIMUM requirement for maintaining an effective and loyal team.
In this section of the webinar, Lars and Phil provide several tangible examples to demonstrate the value of an operator-first approach. They discuss how labour retention is always higher among a well-protected and engaged team – and the positive economic and environmental impact this can have for food businesses.
2) Equipment Choice
Each year, hundreds of thousands of workers suffer from equipment-inflicted injuries. Equipment construction and maintenance was the third most common category of non-conformance identified by the BRCGS in their abovementioned Issue 9.
As explained by Phil and Lars, reduction in injury is just one facet to improving culture in hygiene. Watch below as they dissect the higher motivation and increased lifespan of equipment resulting from an ‘operator-owned’ model of workplace production.
3) Induction and Training
Thirdly, Alex and Phil delve into the importance of the initial onboarding process in developing an outstanding hygiene culture.
Alex addresses the issue of high staff turnover – a common problem with many workers currently coming through recruitment agencies. Recognising that training is an ongoing process and making Critical Control Points (CCPs) highly visual is also suggested.
4) Sustaining Good Practice
Creating and implementing these processes is all well and good, but their long-term impact will be limited if they are not sustained. Drawing on several visual examples, Alex illustrates how to prolong and consolidate hygiene processes through adaptability.
5) Ongoing Process Refinement
Lastly, Lars and Phil return to offer valuable insights about ongoing process refinement.
Contrary to popular belief, they recommend a culture which encourages workers to challenge the status quo, as the most powerful improvements often come from unexpected sources. Root Cause Analysis, cross-functional teams, and the 5-Whys are also mentioned.
For more in-depth webinar content on this topic, take a look at the second episode in our ‘Culture in Hygiene’ series.
Alternatively, you can get in touch with one of our Hygiene Experts below, or contact us at: 01473 461 800.
UK Hospitality Staff Shortages Hit Record High
Four Solutions to Help Food Businesses Overcome the Recruitment Crisis
Recent figures reveal that one in four hospitality businesses have been forced to close their doors due to an ‘endemic’ of staff shortages.
Exacerbated by Brexit and Covid, the hospitality recruitment crisis had been building for years. Now, the problem has spiralled horribly out of control, culminating in a record high 174,000 hospitality vacancies according to trade body UKHospitality.
During the height of summer, when hospitality businesses generate around three-quarters of their annual turnover (especially coastal businesses), staff-enforced closures can be the difference between survival and insolvency.
While the recruitment crisis is undoubtedly predicated on the current economic climate, there are several approaches that hospitality businesses can take to alleviate its burden.
Based on conversations with our partners and customers at Klipspringer – and our twenty years’ experience as the leading compliance provider across the complete food industry – we’ve compiled a few solutions for overcoming staff shortages.
Read on to find out what these are.
Solution #1 - Opening Hours
Amid the current crisis, many venues are radically altering their approach to service, placing greater emphasis on improving the treatment of their staff teams, and convenience for their customers.
Crucially, this involves reducing opening hours. While some may be aghast at the prospect of fewer hours, evidence suggests that businesses which optimise their opening hours are less likely to face bankruptcy.
This is because these venues waste less time and resources remaining open during times in which it is not profitable to do so. Pinpointing exactly when these times are is unique to each business, but a good place to start is with an appraisal of peak and non-peak hours, based on a typical day.
When setting opening hours, it is also worth considering the competition, holidays, special events, and – above all – customers. The best way is simply to ask them; release a simple poll or micro-survey enquiring which operating hours would be most convenient for them, via social media, email, or even face-to-face.
Solution #2 - Menus
While menu change is a gamble, it is undeniably necessary in the current climate. As hospitality businesses recognise the need to offer more lucrative staff wages, conditions, and perks, many reach the inevitable conclusion that they must do similar numbers over fewer hours with fewer staff.
For hospitality venues, simplifying the number of menu options available is often easier to manage. During Covid-19, even the largest chains decreased menu offerings to satisfy investors and remain profitable – often without any negative customer feedback.
The benefits of a smaller menu include:
- Easier to train new employees
- Faster cook times
- Higher-quality meals
- Reduced waste
- Less inventory to manage
- Decreased restaurant costs
While removing menu options that have long been cornerstones to a business is hard, it may be a necessary step in staying afloat and profitable. To do so, we recommend five logical steps:
- Cost Evaluate the Menu
- Categorise Menu Items According to Profit and Popularity
- Design a New Menu
- Test the New Menu
- Implement the Successful Aspects of the New Menu
Solution #3 - Streamlined Systems
With an increasing scarcity of staff, food businesses must ensure that their workplace systems are airtight – whether that be relating to production or service. Re-evaluating and, if necessary, reorganising the efficiency of current systems through the implementation of effective products and services is a crucial step in freeing up employee time for more pressing tasks.
Examples include digital quality management systems, shadow boards, or thermometer probe verification devices. For a specific idea of how product or service implementation can revolutionise large-scale food service, read this case study about how Five Guys improved their standards, efficiency, and compliance using a Food Oil Monitor.
Solution #4 - Culture
When making enquiries amongst the food sector – from hospitality workers and managers to factory production personnel – one factor continues to resurface: culture.
As raised above, the recruitment crisis was festering long before Brexit or Covid. These factors massively catalysed the problem, but were pre-existed by a widespread culture of poor employee treatment.
For years, workers tolerated a culture of extremely long working-hours and undervalued pay due to job scarcity. Zero-hour contracts gave employers the right to fire staff at any moment, a phenomenon seen repeatedly following the initial Covid-19 lockdown.
The ball is now in the other court. Knowing that businesses desperately need qualified, experienced workers, employees simply will not stand for subpar working conditions. Companies which have prioritised employee welfare for years have, unsurprisingly, been least affected by the staff shortages – but many companies are now re-evaluating their priorities. Better late than never.
This article has summarised the factors fuelling the current UK recruitment crisis, and provided some concrete solutions for food industry businesses to implement.
Should you have any enquiries or questions, our knowledgeable team are more than happy to help. Feel free to reach us by phone: 01473 461 800.
Nine Factors to Consider When Choosing a Wireless Monitoring System
Across the food and beverage industry, the benefits of wireless temperature monitoring are well-known. Innovative monitoring systems are proven to provide highly accurate, real-time temperature data, support food safety compliance, and cut costs of loading refrigerated food transportation. BRCGS standards also require the implementation and control of process monitoring to ensure that products are manufactured according to industry specifications.
These benefits have been applied across a wide range of industries, including:
- Food and beverage production
- Pharmaceutical and medical
- Hospitals and care
- Food service and hospitality
- Storage and logistics
- Laboratories and pharmacies
- Industry and manufacturing
- Food retail
However, there is much uncertainty around the best form of wireless monitoring system. At Klipspringer, our partner and customers frequently ask us for advice on which system to choose. Instead of simplistically recommending one of our systems, regardless of their specific temperature monitoring applications, we decided that providing all of the relevant information best enables them to make the right choice.
That’s why we wrote this article. Drawing on our two decades’ experience as industry leaders in modernised data logging, it is based on clips from a webinar we recently hosted in collaboration with Quorn Foods.
The topic is nine key factors to consider before choosing a wireless monitoring system. Navigate the below menu to skip straight to the section most relevant to your needs…
Skip straight to the section most relevant to your needs…
Factor 3 – Data Storage Access
You can also watch the full webinar below:
1) Parameters
It’s difficult to order each factor by importance, but the parameter – or parameters – measured by the system you opt for is one of the most fundamental aspects.
As you begin your hunt for the perfect wireless monitoring system, one of the first questions you should ask yourself is: what exactly do I want to monitor?
If your answer is temperature only, most basic monitoring systems will cover your needs, even simple Wi-Fi loggers found on sites like Amazon. However, if your answer is more complex than just temperature, other options may be more suitable.
Do you, for example, want to measure both temperature and humidity (rH)? What about energy, concentration (ppm), or even door contact? As the number of measurables increases, so does the complexity of system required.
Here is a list of the most common measurable parameters:
- Temperature
- Humidity
- CO2
- Energy
- Pressure
- Concentration
- Door contact
- Data from advanced plant/engineering sensors
While there are countless systems that are custom-built for specific measurables, with advanced, high-end systems it is possible to measure and set up alarms for virtually any parameter.
2) Hardware
Having established your required parameters, the next three factors all relate to the component setup of your system. Component setup is an essential early step in the monitoring system decision-making process, but it often gets overlooked.
Hardware is the first of these factors.
The biggest delineation in deciding your hardware is whether you require a physical base station, complete with display and sounds, or a non-physical system which operates entirely digitally.
Careful consideration of the working conditions your hardware will have to withstand will also be essential. For example, will your system’s sensors need to be waterproof? Does your system need to be equipped with heat-resistant casing? Or require particularly long-lasting battery life, as it needs to be placed in an inaccessible area?
Finally, appraising your probe options is another essential step. Will you need to measure air temperature or product temperature? If so, choose a probe that corresponds with those applications.
3) Data Storage Access
Storage access is one of the most crucial, yet most misunderstood, factors to consider when choosing a wireless monitoring system. It is frequently conflated with sensor connection type – addressed below – but data storage access is its own independent category.
This category can be split into two options: network-based storage, and cloud-based storage. Many see network-based storage as more secure because it doesn’t rely on external servers. There are also no ongoing cloud licensing fees.
On the other hand, cloud-based storage offers access to data from any location, at any time. This makes it the ideal solution for those looking to implement wireless monitoring systems at multiple site locations, while accessing the data from one central location.
4) Sensor Connection Type
Equally crucial is the type of sensor connector. The majority of wireless monitoring systems use one of three main types:
a) Wi-Fi
Wi-Fi-based sensor connectors are excellent, if your site has strong coverage throughout. However, in large chillers or freezers it is difficult and expensive to guarantee such Wi-Fi coverage. Because a password is required to gain access, it can result in a loss of sensor connection if this password is changed by IT. Higher battery consumption is also an issue with Wi-Fi-based systems.
b) Bluetooth
Bluetooth options require a reading device to be nearby at all times. This often constitutes a mobile phone with a downloaded data tracking app – a simple but reliable system, although battery life does drain significantly.
c) Radio Frequency
Radio frequency, or RF, is the strongest form of wireless data transfer. In most scenarios, radio systems use a frequency of 433mHz, which is used for longer-distance transmissions across large open spaces, or 868mHz, which is better suited for shorter distances with more obstructions, such as walls. When asked by customers, we are likeliest to recommend radio-based systems because of their stronger signal, lower battery consumption, and more reliable overall connectivity.
5) Installation
As with any installation, the most pressing consideration is whether or not your site/s require professional support, or if you want to install the system yourself.
At Klipspringer, we pride ourselves on offering one of the fastest delivery turnaround times in the industry – the entire monitoring system is typically delivered within 2-3 days. For those requiring professional installation services, leading companies will send expert technicians on site. This process usually lasts between 3-4 weeks.
6) Alarm Type
When looking out for the best monitoring solutions, here’s a tip: look out for the systems that issue alarms by the widest range of mediums.
Why? In the event of an alarm, speedy and decisive action is immediately required. This cannot happen if you are not instantly notified about the situation – hence the urgent need for alarms to be sent by phone call, SMS, email, and a variety of other methods, rather than riskily depending on just one.
7) Calibration
There are three questions regarding calibration you should ask yourself before purchasing any wireless monitoring system.
Firstly, do you require UKAS calibration for audit requirements? If so, only UKAS accredited organisations are able to supply this service, which narrows your options to those upper-tier companies.
Secondly, will your system require periodic onsite recalibration? If so, take note of the costs involved in this process, how frequently your system will require recalibration, and whether your potential monitoring system supplier offers this service.
Thirdly, what is the location of the sensors? For example, if the sensors have to be mounted on the ceiling, this makes it altogether more difficult to access them for recalibration and servicing.
8) Cost
Consult the below table for an outline of the potential costs of wireless monitoring systems, based on two generalised scenarios:
Factors | Scenario 1 | Scenario 2 |
Size of facility | Small | Large |
No. of monitoring points | <5 | >25 |
Parameters | Temperature only (-20 to 25°C) | Multiple parameters; mainly high temperature, some humidity (rH) |
Accessibility to sensor position | Easy access | Easy access |
Onsite installation and annual service/calibration | Not required | Professional installation and ongoing technical support |
UKAS calibration | Not required | Yes |
Alarming | Basic | Advanced |
Pricing guide | £500 | £8,000-£10,000 |
As seen above, differences in these factors can cause massive range in the price of a system. Read on to learn about the final factor to consider when choosing a wireless monitoring systems…
9) Ongoing Support
Last but far from least is ongoing support. In their haste to acquire the first system that crosses their path, people often overlook the vital importance of continual expert advice, long after any purchase of a wireless monitoring system has been made.
While sites like Amazon offer a wide range of logging systems, there is no on-site support available regarding calibration, software updates, or troubleshooting.
The current market is flooded with wireless monitoring systems. While many of these are perfectly acceptable, most are designed to cover multiple industries. At Klipspringer, we’ve spent years refining wireless monitoring systems to meet site requirements that are specifically focused on the food industry.
Listen below as Kenny Edwards, Quality Manager at Quorn Foods, outlines how wireless site monitoring provided tremendous value for him and his team.
Our knowledgeable, friendly team offer unequalled customer support, and our systems – such as the much-acclaimed WatchmanOne – excel at real-time monitoring across a range of parameters.
For any wireless monitoring system-related enquiries, feel free to contact our support team at: 01473 461 800.
Klipspringer Announce Attendance at Commercial Kitchen Show 2022
What is the Commercial Kitchen Show?
We are delighted to announce that Klipspringer will be returning to this year’s Commercial Kitchen Show. As the go-to industry event for decision-makers involved in equipping and running efficient commercial kitchens, CKS is an unmissable opportunity for suppliers and buyers alike.
CKS22 has the makings of the best show yet, with a star-studded line-up of suppliers, hundreds of innovative new products, dozens of informative seminars, and thousands of commercial kitchen decision-makers seeking an edge over their competition.
When and where is CKS22, and how much does it cost?
Date:
Wednesday 14th and Thursday 15th September
Time:
10:00am–5:00pm (last entry at 4:00pm)
Location:
ExCel London (One Western Gateway Royal Victoria Dock, London E16 1FR)
Price:
The event is free to visitors who register in advance, or £20 entry for those who haven’t pre-registered.
Looking Back at CKS21
Since 2019, we’ve been an ever-present feature at the CKS, solving customer questions with detailed industry expertise, exhibiting new, ground-breaking products, and even winning a prestigious award for originality at last year’s show.
The accolade in question – Commercial Kitchen’s Innovation Challenge Gold Winner – was awarded to our LazaPort Mono thermometer calibrator, with judges labelling it as “a solution to an age-old issue”. Our team of enthusiastic experts are eager to share more details on the Mono with commercial kitchen decision-makers at this year’s show, following its successful implementation at the Tottenham Hotspur Stadium by Compass Group.
Looking Forward to CKS22
This year, we want to surpass our previous CKS appearances, building on our status as the leading provider of food safety compliance. We’re anticipating that most queries will relate to our specialisms, which include:
- removing the guesswork from food oil management
- providing UKAS-accredited temperature calibration services
- eliminating foreign body risk with durable, metal-detectable equipment
- increasing the efficiency and accuracy of thermometer checks
- offering a market-leading range of colour-coded food grade products
- developing innovative digital quality management systems
- maximising workplace organisation with visual aids
- minimising risks, costs, and audit non-conformances
- sourcing eco-friendly cleaning utensils from ocean plastic
Of these, we are particularly excited to announce EVERSEA® – a brand-new range of sustainable cleaning utensils. Sourced from plastic waste in the Mediterranean, EVERSEA® is a circular economy project which alleviates the astronomical amount (14 million tonnes!) of plastic dumped into our oceans each year.
Projects of this sort are gathering momentum and support across the food and hospitality industry, to the extent that the CKS Team published this press release solely dedicated to the EVERSEA® launch.
Ahead of CKS22 this September, you can also read about how our much-acclaimed Food Oil Monitor used by the likes of McDonalds and Whitbread helps to cut oil usage by up to 52%.
Interested in attending Commercial Kitchen Show 2022?
Click here to learn more.
Already got your free ticket?
Visit Stand CK436 to chat with our friendly, knowledgeable team about your kitchen requirements.
Unpacking the BRCGS Standard for Food Safety Issue 9
What the Latest Global Standard Food Safety Issue Means for Food Businesses
On August 1st, BRCGS released the latest issue of the Global Standard in Food Safety. This publication – known simply as BRCGS Issue 9 – stipulates the newly revised requirements for food manufacturers to achieve BRCGS certification. From equipment hygiene to process control, this article summarises and explains the key points of BRCGS Issue 9 as relevant to food businesses.
NOTE – this article uses descriptions and images of some Klipspringer products to provide tangible examples in advising how best to comply with BRCGS Issue 9. We are immensely proud of our work and its impact. However, we want to clarify that this article is primarily about helping food businesses to adjust to the new safety standards in the food and beverage industry, not self-promotion.
Adopted by 30,000 certified food manufacturers and suppliers in over 130 countries around the world, the BRCGS aims to standardise quality, safety, and operational criteria to ensure that manufacturers fulfil their legal obligations and provide protection for the end consumer. It was first published in 1998, as British retailers sought to raise the bar of industry hygiene and compliance standards. While it is not a legal requirement in the UK, most large food retail brands and foodservice companies demand that their suppliers are BRCGS-certified.
BRCGS Issue 9 was released four years on from its predecessor, BRCGS Issue 8, which was published on August 1st, 2018. The key changes between these two issues are informed by the most frequently occurring non-conformities throughout 2021.
The below table lists eight non-conformities in order of commonality:
Clause | Non-Conformity Details |
4.11.1 | Premises & equipment hygiene |
4.4.8 | Doors - both internal & external |
4.6.1 | Equipment construction & maintenance |
4.9.1.1 | Chemical control |
4.4.1 | Walls - condition & cleaning |
2.7.1 | Hazard identification |
4.15.1 | Risk assessment for safe storage of ingredients |
1.1.2 | Food safety culture plan |
Continue reading for guidance on how food businesses can implement strategies, policies, and procedures to get ahead of the food compliance curve before Issue 9 becomes fully auditable from February 1st, 2023.
Key Area #1 - Culture
BRCGS Issue 9 has placed a strong onus on the role of senior management in committing to continual improvement. As seen in Clause 1.1.2, BRCGS Issue 9 contains a far more tangible focus on the power of top-down company culture in perpetuating food safety standards.
Clause 1.1.2
Clause 1.1 (‘Senior Management Commitment and Continual Improvement’) is one of the BRCGS’s twelve ‘fundamental’ requirements to achieve certification against the new issue. Within this, Clause 1.1.2 provides a specific list of activity design features needed to enact this positive culture change.
These include activities such as open commnication on product safety, training, feedback from employees, required behaviours to sustain and improve product safety processes, a plan indicating how these activities will be carried out, and a review of their effectivness.
Of particular interest are the specification for employee feedback – an invaluable, if sometimes overlooked activity – as well as an action plan involving processes, measurements, and timelines. As Issue 8 made no reference to review, or frequency of review, requiring this plan to be reviewed and updated on a yearly basis is also new to BRCGS Issue 9.
Key Area #2 - Equipment
Given its position as the first and third most common type of non-conformity on the above list, equipment compliance is logically one of the predominant focal points of BRCGS Issue 9. This can be seen across the range of clauses explained below.
Clause 4.6.1
In Clause 4.6.1, there is far more detailed guidance on sites’ responsibilities regarding equipment management than in Issue 8. This includes a documented purchase specification, as well as any relevant legislation, food contact approved requirements, and details of intended use of the equipment.
To this end, it will be invaluable to have a reliable place to keep track of production and hygiene utensils used on site, equipment verification schedules, calibration due dates, and warranty lengths. An example is our Calibration, Audit and Product Certificate Portal, which allows users to…
- View and download compliance certificates
- Manage technical equipment
- Track calibration due dates
- Download calibration certificates
…therefore maintaining compliance with the final part of Clause 4.6.1, which states that ‘suppliers should provide evidence that the equipment meets these site requirements prior to supply’.
Clause 4.6.2
A common cause of audit non-conformances is contamination – whether it be microbiological, allergenic, or foreign body. Often, these various forms of contamination take hold in the hidden crevices and small parts of food manufacturing or cleaning equipment, hence BRCGS Issue 9’s requirement for ‘the use of correct seals, impervious surfaces, or smooth welds and joints’.
In light of this, it is strongly recommended that equipment is chosen based on risk minimisation. Shadow boards offer a fitting example. As an increasingly popular hygiene management and storage solution across the food industry, shadow boards can be constructed to minimise cross-contamination – but only when designed with food safety in mind.
Specifically, this means minimal welds, joints, or hidden crevices behind the board. One solution is a through-board hook system, which keeps shadow boards hygienic, easy to clean, and free of any foreign body risks. Another is a magnetic mounting option, which allows for convenient and regular cleaning behind the board.
Clause 4.9.6.2
This particular clause emphasises the pressing need for portable handheld equipment to be designed with a focus on prevention. At factory or production sites, pens are the most commonly found handheld utensil, and are consequently the cause of many foreign body contamination non-conformities due to their clips, springs, and other small, breakable parts.
Practices a site may consider reviewing include the exclusion of non-approved items and restriction of site-issued equipment. Furthermore, sites should ensure any such portable handheld equipment items are designed without small external parts, as well as being detectable by detection equipment (metal detectors, X-ray etc), or are only used in areas where contamination is specifically prevented.
Organisations with the highest priority on compliance mandate the use of pens which, first and foremost, prevent foreign body contamination (through shatterproof pens made of durable materials, with no metal springs), and – as a last resort – are detectable by x-rays and metal detectors.
Key Area #3 - Product Control
Ensuring a safe, consistent, and contaminant-free product is the backbone of any food business. While product control doesn’t tend to rank high on lists of most frequent non-conformances, when it does appear, it often has disastrous consequences, both to the safety of consumers, and the reputation of brands.
Clause 5.3.4
Clause 5.3 (‘Management of Allergens’) is another of the BRCGS’s twelve ‘fundamental’ requirements to achieve certification against the new issue. Within this, Clause 5.3.4 outlines various procedures for carrying out effective management of allergenic materials.
Broadly, this means minimising the risk of allergen contamination and cross-contact by having a system or process for managing allergenic materials, and which as a baseline meets legal labelling requirements.
To a greater extent, this clause suggests segregating allergen-containing materials during storage, processing, and packing, as well as having on-site a set of separated, identified utensils for dealing with these materials.
What is the best way of identifying these utensils by allergen?
A compelling solution is colour-coding. Whether it be production utensils or brushware; squeegees or storage containers, using sharp, vibrant colours to clearly delineate equipment by its purpose is a reliable way of preventing allergenic cross-contamination. With stronger colours, compliance failures can be easily spotted, which makes the management of allergen segregation easier.
See the below table for how colour-coded equipment might be implemented.
Allergen | Assigned Equipment Colour |
Nuts | Brown |
Eggs | Blue |
Shellfish | Red |
Soy | Green |
Milk | Purple |
Wheat | Orange |
Another popular method of managing allergens is physical segregation using screens, curtains, or covers. Hygienically designed for food industry environments, these segregators prevent cross-contamination, as well as reducing production downtime and eliminating unnecessary single-use plastics.
Clause 5.9.1
Animal primary conversion is an entirely new section included under BRCGS Issue 9. It states the importance of implementing specific controls to keep food safe, authentic, and legal during the conversion process – above all using risk assessment results to inform testing procedures and raw material acceptance. It states the company shall undertake a risk assessment for potential prohibited substances, including pharmaceuticals, veterinary medicines, heavy metals and pesticides.
Key Area #4 - Process Control
As another of the BRCGS’s new ‘fundamental’ requirements, process control is essential for ensuring full compliance with a HACCP (Hazard Analysis & Critical Control Points) or food safety plan. For maximum effectiveness, it usually involves documentation and systematisation of production procedures to optimise product quality, safety, and legality.
Clause 6.1.3
In Clause 6.1.3, the standard outlines the importance of process monitoring for ensuring products are manufactured within the required process specification. In relation to this, wireless monitoring systems are proven to provide highly accurate, real-time temperature data, support food safety compliance, and cut costs of loading refrigerated food transportation. Clause 6.1.3 includes temperature, time, pressure, and chemical properties as some examples of key parameters to measure. Leading wireless monitoring systems will typically have the capability to also measure:
- Humidity
- CO2
- Energy
- Concentration
- Door contact
- Data from advanced plant/engineering sensors
For more information, watch clips from a webinar we hosted recently on the factors to consider when choosing a wireless monitoring system. Drawing on decades of industry experience, our team dissect nine relevant factors – from the system’s hardware to its data storage access.
Clause 6.1.4
Clause 6.1.4 directly addresses another of these factors: the type of alarm used by monitoring systems. A good tip is to look out for the systems that issue alarms by the widest range of mediums, so you can adapt the system to best suit your site or team.
Why?
In the event of an alarm – whether it be a product quality issue or a malfunctioning chiller unit – speedy and decisive action is essential. This cannot happen without being instantly notified about the situation, which highlights the urgent need for alarms to be sent by a variety of methods (e.g. phone call, SMS, email) rather than riskily depending on just one. Clause 6.1.4 also includes a requirement to routinely check that the alarm and alert system is working correctly.
Clause 6.4.2
Instrumentation devices which measure a specific parameter – the most common being temperature-measuring probe thermometers – must in turn be checked for accuracy and recalibrated.
BRCGS Issue 9 strongly emphasises the need for this checking process to adhere to a recognised national or international standard. In the UK, the most credible recognised standard is a UKAS calibration certificate, which distinguishes the industry’s leading measuring devices from the satisfactory.
Consider re-evaluating outdated approaches to accuracy checks of measuring devices. This is particularly relevant to thermometers; many companies still use the traditional ice or boiling water check, without realising that there are far more innovative methods which remove all subjectivity from checks, and save quality assurance teams hours each month.
This article has deconstructed the BRCCG’s latest standard in food safety into four key areas and nine standout clauses, explaining their ramifications – and providing tangible solutions – for food businesses.
If you’d like to take a look at the BRCGS Food Safety Issue 9 in full, you can head to this webpage and select ‘Free PDF’ on the right-hand side for a free copy.
At Klipspringer, we’ve specialised in food safety and audit compliance for more than twenty years. As a BRCGS partner organisation, we work with the smallest artisan producers to the largest food producers and manufacturers, including the likes of Whitbread, McDonalds, Kerry, Hovis, and Greggs.
Whatever your situation, our knowledgeable team are on hand to help. Feel free to contact us by phone at 01473 461 800, or book an online meeting via the form below:
References
BRCGS (2022a) Global Standard Food Safety Issue 9. Available at: https://www.brcgs.com/our-standards/food-safety/issue-9-revision/.
BRCGS (2022b) Food Safety Issue 9 Interpretation Guideline. Available as purchase.
High Speed Training (2020) Our Guide to Understanding BRCGS. Available at: https://www.highspeedtraining.co.uk/hub/understanding-brcgs/.
Techni-K (2022) BRCGS Food Safety Issue 9. Available at: https://techni-k.co.uk/brcgs-food-safety/brcgs-food-safety-issue-9/.
Cooking Oil – Rising Prices, Needless Costs and Unsustainable Practices
In 2022, oil dominated global headlines: a constantly revolving door of rising oil prices, supply chain issues, and sustainability breaches.
Countries worldwide are admitting to massive shortages, with even oil-rich countries like Saudi Arabia revealing that their reserves are running out.
Lower-income households struggled to afford cooking oil – let alone fill up their petrol tanks – while protests called for windfall taxes on the soaring profits of energy giants like Shell and BP.
Rising Oil Prices
On June 8, the global oil price rose above £123 per barrel ($147), matching the all-time high price points of the 2008 recession.
Cooking oil prices have also increased astronomically, doubling to $1.90 (£1.60) per litre in the UK, and $2.72 (£2.29) per litre on international average.
The current rises in oil prices are unprecedented, and are being caused by factors such as:
- The COVID-19 pandemic
- Increased biodiesel demand in the EU
- Russia’s invasion of Ukraine
- Extreme weather in Western Canada and South America (prominent areas of global oil exportation)
These circumstances culminated in strong global demand for oil, but extraordinarily weak supply.
At Klipspringer, we watched in disbelief as oil prices reached near-unaffordable levels, but few companies implemented failsafe methods to cut waste, save on costs, and increase sustainability.
In commercial kitchens, the dangers of unsafe oil are well-known, particularly relating to acrylamide build-up.
Despite this, research has indicated that most companies actually discard their cooking oil more often than necessary.
Why is this?
Why Are Most Companies Changing Oil Unnecessarily?
In our experience, there are three key reasons why food cooking oil is being changed prematurely…
1) Status quo. “It’s always been done this way”. Nobody knows why, but the procedure hasn’t changed, and nobody wants to be the person who risks changing it. This line of thinking typically sees oil changed once or twice a week, or every Friday morning, or when fish and chips are on the menu.
2) Visual checks. “It looks like it needs changing.” This is always based on experience, and whilst there are many trained eyes in commercial kitchens, colour is subjective. What looks like a subtle difference in oil appearance can make a massive difference to its working life.
3) Colorimetric methods. The most common colorimetric method is test strips and a colour chart. This measures FFA, or Free Fatty Acids, which directly correlate to off-colours, off-odours, and off-flavours in fried food products. While compliant and reasonably accurate (usually around 80% accuracy), colorimetric methods are still subjective to human error, and can be contaminated by improper storage.
What Is the Best Way of Knowing When Oil Needs Changing?
At Klipspringer, based on our twenty-plus-years’ experience as the industry leaders in removing the guesswork from food oil management, we recommend the following steps to maximise your oil life, in-keeping with the below graph of oil degradation.
- Make it measurable. Oil quality should be measured as an arbitrary number, and a threshold set for changing the oil. Regular checks mean oil life is then extended to its maximum without compromising product quality.
- De-technicalise oil management. All unnecessary complexity should be removed from oil-checking and changing procedures. Any team member should be able to check the oil quality and then make an entirely objective decision as to whether it needs replacing. This is only possible once arbitrary, digital measurement has been implemented.
- Report. Every oil quality measurement should be recorded. As should the date and time when the oil was last changed. Management should review this on a regular basis to make sure oil is not being changed too regularly or too late. A fully documented ‘audit trail’ also supports effective kitchen management and circumvents non-conformances.
In terms of practically implementing these steps, we recommend a solution based on neither status quo, nor visual checks, nor colorimetric methods.
This solution has been used by the likes of Five Guys, McDonalds, and Whitbread to refine their frying process, conduct eco-friendly practices, and cut their oil usage by half.
