Ron Pelger, a former director of produce operations in retail grocery, recently wrote an article in The Produce News titled In the Trenches: Are you overlooking invisible shrink? I’ve commented on this issue of identifying where shrink or waste occurs in the cold chain before but Ron, as a former “trench worker” brings a fresh perspective on the subject.
He writes: Whenever a produce manager was questioned about his or her shrink, the response usually was, “I don’t know where our shrink is occurring. I have a good staff and we faithfully follow all the company shrink programs. The numbers have to be wrong.
Well, the numbers probably aren’t wrong and there may be great shrink control programs in place. The problem lies in that too many people think that shrink begins at the store.
Ron raises some key points:
- The produce industry is muddled in its means of arriving at where exactly shrink originates.
- Retail companies are still measuring produce shrink in the same store-level manner.
- Retailers focus on produce managers for shrink in the store while it also develops in other exterior areas. (And ones that are completely outside the control of the produce manager!)
He suggests that we considered another reason which he terms “invisible shrink” that results from a myriad of variations in cut-to-cool and pre-cooling that impact produce shelf life and that retail produce managers shouldn’t be held to blame for in-store waste.
Mike Nicometo, cool-chain expert and president of EmpowerTech Inc. says that we shouldn’t discipline the produce manager for problems that they didn’t cause. Mike says that advanced shelf life loss is simply not visible until much later in the supply chain and that, in order to manage shrink and quality, we need to realize that putting product into the cool chain logistics process without knowing how much shelf life it has to start out. He likens this to sending a fleet of planes to random destinations without knowing how much fuel they have at take-off.
What a great analogy!
Mike explains: When comparing the temperature of each pallet on a load versus the commonly monitored ambient air of the trailer for thousands of pallets during three to five day trucking from Mexico to the U.S., I found over 30 percent of individual pallets were running very warm, causing high levels of advanced shelf life loss. Typically, the advanced shelf life loss was invisible at receiving QR inspections, resulting in product being considered equal. In reality, many pallets were over four days older in terms of shelf life than were the others.
The article goes on to discuss how new software and temperature monitoring technologies can be employed at the pallet-level to help gauge the actual relative remaining shelf life, making the “invisible” data visible and enabling better decision making that can reduce shrink and improve quality.
We’d better start checking that fuel gauge!
Senior Director of Marketing