Food crime risk profiling tool: Organisation

In order for a business to successfully implement strategies for critical business risks such as food crime, there must be a considered organisational structure that allows the effective cascade of strategic intentions through to implemented practices.

Any business strategy will be more successful if the desired outcomes are understood throughout the organisation at every level and across all functions. The means documenting specific responsibilities within roles, setting targets within objectives, and defining responsibilities across functions will give a business the best chance of success.

As well as cascading the intentions and objectives for critical risks such as food crime, there should also be the means to report, review, and communicate effectively through the structure, so individuals and teams are well connected to the real time performance of the management of such risks.

The effective and successful management of critical risks such as food crime require businesses to clearly identify responsibilities within roles and across functional areas.

Any role within a business that may have an impact on a business’s exposure to food crime risk will need to have performance objectives which ensure responsibility is captured and documented. Although the responsibility for defining food crime risk and control measures may sit within a function and be linked to food defence, food safety, or compliance, other functions through their activities may be highly likely to compromise food crime risk.

Functions such as procurement, new product development, marketing, and engineering for example, must be required to operate within parameters that consider their responsibility for ensuring control of critical risks such as food crime.

Functional credibility has a significant impact on a business's ability to successfully manage critical risks such as food crime. For this particular risk, likely to be managed through the function, team, or leader responsible for product quality, food safety, or food defence, the internal credibility of that function or team must be internally supported by the organisation.

A business leader or leadership team must look to encourage the credibility and grow the equity of such teams so they have an effective platform to implement the measures, secure the investment, and govern the resources necessary to keep safeguards robust.

To support the effective delivery of positive performance for critical risks such as food crime, a business must ensure that where responsibility is identified, it is matched with the authority to enable or disable processes.

When critical controls, which safeguard a business from the risk of food crime exposure,  have been identified, they must be implemented and managed with the necessary authority to ensure they remain effective.

There will be a significant risk of control measures being discredited and therefore ineffective if those with the responsibility for ensuring safeguards remain in place, find their authority undermined and critical decisions reversed.

Businesses must consider the risks presented by food crime and apply competent authority to ensure the right decisions are made, particularly where pressure or demand is applied or where change of any kind is being managed.

For a business to be able to cascade internal strategies for the management of critical risks such as food crime, there needs to be in place role-holders with competency appropriate to translate strategies into implementable measures.

Business intentions, whether they be global policies or simple business safeguards, can only be fully effective if those who are required to receive and understand them have the competency to translate the policies or safeguards into simple instructions or actions.

Businesses must therefore carefully consider what competencies they need to consider for roles with the capability to impact critical risks such as food crime.

For a business to be able to cascade internal strategies such as those for the management of critical risks such as food crime, there needs to be in place resources with necessary capacity to be able to implement measures effectively.

Business intentions, whether they be global policies or simple business safeguards, can only be fully effective if those who are required to receive and understand them have then the capacity to translate the policies or safeguards into simple instructions or actions.

Businesses must therefore carefully consider what level of resources are required to enable effective operation of measures to manage critical risks such as food crime.

For a business to be able to cascade internal strategies such as those for the management of critical risks such as food crime, there needs to be in place the necessary training and development for key role holders to enable the translation strategies into implementable measures.

Business intentions, whether they be global policies or simple business safeguards can only be fully effective if those who are required to receive and understand them have the training and development to be able translate the policies or safeguards into simple instructions or actions.

Businesses must therefore carefully consider what training and development plans and resources they need to consider for roles with the capability to impact critical risks such as food crime.

Businesses should give careful consideration to the assurance of supplied materials, bought in services, employed resources and secured supply chains within the structure of the organisation. The means, methods and resources necessary to risk assess, approve, accredit and secure safe management of critical risk such as food crime will help support the positive performance delivery of a business, reduce risk and vulnerability and make surprises less likely.

The world of food supply chains is a volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous (V.U.C.A.) environment requiring businesses, big and small, to be able to adapt to almost instant change. For food businesses to be able to maintain continuity without increasing risk, they need to consider the reality of change and have the agility to adapt when required.

This can involve simple measures such as identifying and risk assessing those most critical materials or resources needed and ensuring alternative supplies if needs arise.

The ability to adapt processes, recipes, packaging formats, and delivery supply routes may all be important in ensuring a business is not faced with decisions that compromise critical risks such as food crime, ensuring the threat and vulnerability to food crime are not increased by unforeseen circumstances.

Despite a business’s best efforts in establishing food crime risk, understanding threats and vulnerabilities, identifying control measures and implementation practices to manage risk, the food supply chain will still surprise us.

Businesses, whatever their size or complexity, should plan for continuity but always prepare for crisis. Businesses which allocate time and resources to having the means to respond through careful escalation, when unpredicted to unforeseen events impact, will be more resilient than businesses that don't.

The ability to react and respond to changing conditions or catastrophic events is not dependent on the size or resources available to a business, rather the consideration that business has given to recognising change.

Routing a crisis response within a carefully considered escalating process management system enables a business to identify when processes are starting to move off track, enabling early intervention.

Considering who and how to manage non-conforming situations of any kind, right through to a full catastrophic event, well in advance, will help businesses to prepare and be effective in dealing with changing conditions and major events.