Progress … Or Not?

The start of a new year is a good time to look back. In my case, I find it astonishing that I now have been at this business of food safety and product quality management for 30 years. There have been numerous changes and improvements during that time, and Americans still have the world’s safest food supply, with many other countries looking to the U.S. as a leader in this arena.

Yet, there are still product recalls each and every year. There also are new test methods every year that are faster, easier, or able to detect ever smaller amounts—allergens is a great example. The market for organic foods has expanded and continues to grow—whether you believe it provides benefits to your health, the environment, both, or neither.

But when it comes to advances in quality management, we continue to try to figure out how to make a process foolproof; how to make it easier to do the right thing at the right time, instead of the wrong thing. There are excellent examples of this as well. The use of electronic records and automated documentation at quality and food safety checkpoints are great aids to quality and operations staffs to help automate and expedite the gathering and saving of records. We can now find records faster and trace product faster and more accurately. When an auditor or regulator asks for documentation, the electronic records are extremely accessible and valuable.

Artificial Intelligence. This “artificial intelligence” for tracing cannot be beat. With the software programs that are now available, there is a long list of benefits, making them quite advantageous and cost effective. We can schedule important activities and track the results that are generated when the action is taken. We can analyze data much quicker when it is all tracked in the computer than if we have to transfer data from hard-copy records to a spreadsheet. We can assure that HACCP critical control point (CCP) checks are planned; that there is a reminder to appropriate staff to complete the check; that there is a place to record the test result in the electronic records. We can also assure that if “out-of-range” data is entered, the operator knows that the results are not acceptable. This can be as simple as highlighting the results in a colored font or as intricate as having the out-of-range result flash in red highlights. All to ensure that the operator knows there is something amiss.

Some of these software programs are even capable of making an automated call to the director of quality, so that he or she is made aware of the issue and can direct corrective action. I have received information and seen demonstrations of several of these programs, and they are quite sophisticated. I think it’s great that we can take the actions that we used to do on a day-to-day basis and set forth a plan to assure that they happen. The process mapping that takes place must take months to complete and is certainly different for every operation. I remember the efforts that had to be put out in the past by entire plant teams to decide what they do, how they do it, and how best to capture all that information just to install a laboratory information management system (LIMS). There is so much “tribal knowledge” in every facility’s operation, that capturing it into a standard operating procedure (SOP) from start to finish was a true accomplishment. I offer my congratulations to the first team to map the process for making a product from scratch! That must have been a true labor of love.

Is it Progress? But … here is where is I have trouble with all this good news. Remember earlier when I said that some of these software programs are even capable of making an automated call to the director of quality, so that he or she is made aware of the issue and can direct corrective action? Up to that point, I believe it was progress. Now I worry that progress is being short-changed.

I believe progress is a better-trained workforce, with better knowledge of procedures and an improved ability to know the right thing to do and when. When the artificial intelligence recognizes an out-of-range entry, I don’t want the director of quality to get a message (by email or phone), because it will lead to what I’ve seen in too many companies—one person has to know it all and make all the decisions. There are good people in the world, don’t get me wrong; I just don’t like the idea of one person being indispensible. This one person becomes so relied upon, that a sick day or vacation is out of the question. When this person decides to move on or retire, there is no chance of capturing all that knowledge.

On the other hand, who in their right mind really wants to have to have all that knowledge: Which customer will accept a wider spec range? Which customer requires testing for that pathogen? When did we change the spec for pH to be this? And why? Who has room in their head for all that scoop, so that they can make an intelligent decision when half awake at 3 a.m. on New Year’s Day?

Real Progress. If we want a better-trained workforce, we need to put the information in front of them. When the HACCP CCP check is out of range, we should not notify the director of quality, we should put information in front of operators to enable them to make the right decision. When the load of incoming materials is not chilled enough, we should have the artificial intelligence notify the operator and provide appropriate directions on what to do.

As a quality practitioner for three decades, this is the value I see in these software programs. The operator is prompted to complete a task and enter the test result. If the results are out of range, the operators have the information at their fingertips to make the right decision in a timely manner. When the director of quality arrives for work the next day, he or she can quickly review the exceptions and see that the operators have completed the correct next steps in a timely manner.

Such progress means that the director now can focus less on details and day-to-day items and more on the big picture required for a person in such a position.

If progress is defined as a better-trained workforce, with better knowledge of procedures and an improved ability to know the right thing to do, and when to do it … Is it progress or regress when we use this artificial intelligence?

You decide.