Food crime risk profiling tool: Performance

There are many elements that need to be considered when managing business performance related to food crime risk. Once a risk is understood and a plan of action established, then we need to decide what we are going to measure, what data should be captured, and where the trends are.

The formation of a clear set of numbers that can either confirm we are on the right track, or tell us we are moving towards greater risk may be the difference between success and failure, or being unaffected or otherwise, by food crime.

All data related to the defence of supply chains and food is important, with key trends captured and recorded to ensure there is a real-time understanding of both internal performance and external factors effecting a business’s ability to manage its own risk.

Deciding what data and trends to report will depend on legal requirements, perhaps what retail customers or external accreditation bodies require. It is also critical that a business knows what it needs to report on based on how it has determined its risks.

Critical measures such as compliance to specifications for material deliveries, sampling and testing results, audit findings, product or manufacturing issues related to ingredient performance, all tell an underlying story of performance.

The identification of key indicator measurements can be invaluable in signposting the effectiveness of measures to control and manage risk. For critical risks such as food crime, the use of key Indicators to monitor compliance provides insight that would hopefully allow an uncontrolled or unexpected situation to be recognised and acted upon before it adversely impacts the business.

As an example, using a key Indicator such as vendor compliance, which would highlight a supplier's ongoing performance, to allow a business time to address performance and engage with a supplier before performance drives the business to have to make difficult decisions under pressure.

The ultimate purpose of information is to support decision making so that better informed, more accurate and successful decisions can be made.

The common and familiar route from data to information, to decision relies upon accurate data, interpreted by competent role holders or systems into useful information. This can come from internal references or measures defined by our business, our risk assessments and from data a business collects for itself. Information can also come from our networks which include suppliers, trade associations, research institutes, regulators, stakeholders, or even customers.

Businesses should also consider what information can be purchased from collating organisations that track and trend world data. The decisions made with respect to critical risks such as food crime will always be more successful, the wider the reference.

Performance measurement will invariably involve setting targets which are designed to track success. There are different ways of thinking about target setting, with the identification of either Lag or Lead considered targets. Lag targets are often set to reflect the "improvement of failure" so are looking to reduce such things as consumer complaints, accidents, non-compliances, audit failures, or other retrospective events which then look to set 'corrective plans’ for the reduction of recurrence. For the management of food crime risk, these may be targets set to reduce events such inbound materials rejections or supplier audit failures.

Lead measurements on the other hand, afford a means to set positive targets that drive positive behaviours. The creation of targets that look for increases rather than reductions have the benefit of encouraging improvements. For the example used in the management of food crime risk, to measure positive compliance to inbound materials checks or 'right first time' deliveries as an improving % often changes the energy of a supplier relationship, with the focus on driving positive improvement and collaboration.

All businesses should strive to have in place the means to continuously adapt and improve performance, reliability with predictability the key to a sustainable supply chain business. This ultimately requires the business or organisation to set objectives, both at a strategic level and the cascade through to routine daily operations.

Businesses will be far more successful in the delivery of objectives if they consider not just the outcome but the manner of the route to achieving them. Businesses should identify objectives that are specified against a performance to be improved (such as food crime resilience); measurable; realistically achievable with latitude to adapt as circumstances change; and anchored in a time frame. In order to encourage positive and active participation, chances of success are improved when objectives are positive, encouraging, and based around increasing measurements. It is better to set objectives based on measurements which improve and encourage positive engagement, rather than the reduction of failure.

For critical risks such as food crime, setting objectives based on improving compliance to specifications with material suppliers is far more positive than driving reductions in failed deliveries as it creates a more positive, engaging, and collaborative relationship within the supply chain.

Specifications and Service Level agreements are perhaps some of the most important contracts a business can have within its own operating environment and across its supply chain. These documented agreements are a committed, costed, and a relationship promise, so the more time and effort afforded to the careful consideration of what expectations are being set, the more understood and therefore predictable the outcomes.

When considering what to specify for a material or service from both internal and external partners, the consideration of critical risks such as food crime must be considered in order to create some thresholds of security and reassurance.

For material specifications, the capture of elements relating food safety, quality, functionality and authenticity, should also be accompanied by origin and even location. To specify 'milk powder' as a material has much less structure than to specify milk powder from cows milk, sourced from UK farms, delivered in 25kg lined paper bags. The greater the emphasis on the subject matter and detail of a material or service specification, the clearer the expectation and the better able a business is to test and confirm compliance and also the spirit of the sourcing relationship.

With well documented and established processes and practices, operations within a business or organisation then become routine. This then presents an opportunity to identify what a standard condition looks like, what we expect to see during the course of an activity, what to expect when receiving goods or materials into a location, the behaviour of materials within a process, or the performance of manufacturing or processing lines during production.

What can also become much clearer to notice are uncharacteristic anomalies within routines. Enabling individuals or teams to identify and alert the business when routines throw up uncharacteristic anomalies is a powerful safeguard in identifying variations before they become issues. It is far better to identify an issue upon receipt or delivery than to see the consequence in the final product or worse, become aware from a consumer or regulator. The more clearly a business or organisation can describe the correct circumstances, the less the vulnerability and greater the resilience.

Identifying critical performance or measurable parameters across materials, intermediates, processes, and even services can significantly strengthen the understanding of what meets requirements. The ability to analyse and confirm these parameters will underpin a business’s ability to detect anomalies and thus strengthen its resilience.

Within the framework of HACCP (Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point) we understand that the management of food safety hazards can be assured by the identification of Critical Control Points, those critical measures that confirm good control.

The same principle can be employed for other critical risks such as food crime, if a business considers those parameters that will enable it to confirm absence of adulteration, substitution, dilution, contamination and other such threats. Based on a threat assessment (TACCP) a business can then design a routine sampling and testing plan which is proportional, affordable, and based on genuine threats identified.

Working in isolation to manage critical risks such as food crime across a local or global supply chain, a business will need to consider greater internal resources to identify and manage its risks than if it engaged with other organisations.

Working collaboratively across networks such as material groups, trade associations, research institutes, or by subscribing to organisations which horizon scan would allow a business or organisation to gain valuable insight. The greater the amount of information available to a business, through sharing platforms, material groups, reports, trends, or just alerts to anomalies, the better equipped a business is to identify and manage threats as they present themselves. The wider the circle of data gathered the better advised a business will be and the better the quality of decision making.