🇺🇸United States

Expanded scope and cost of recalls due to weak batch/lot traceability

2 verified sources

Definition

When lot coding and traceability documentation are incomplete or inaccurate, manufacturers cannot narrowly identify affected batches during a contamination or mislabeling event. Traceability guidelines stress that each traceable item must be uniquely identified by batch/lot, with one‑step‑up and one‑step‑down visibility, specifically to localize recalls and avoid pulling unaffected product.[2][7] Poor implementation forces broader, more expensive recalls.

Key Findings

  • Financial Impact: $50,000–$500,000 per recall event for a preserves manufacturer, including product destruction, reverse logistics, overtime, and lost inventory; this aligns with documented recall cost ranges in processed food sectors and is directly driven higher when traceability cannot limit scope (inferred from GS1/produce recall guidance tied to lot-level identification).[2][7]
  • Frequency: Occasional (but high‑impact when it occurs)
  • Root Cause: Missing or inconsistent batch/lot coding on cases and unit packs, inability to link finished jars to specific ingredient lots, and fragmented records across paper, spreadsheets, and disparate systems. Implementation guides warn that without reliable internal traceability linking raw materials to finished goods and logistics units (SSCC), traceback and trace‑forward become slow and imprecise, inflating the volume of product recalled.[2][7]

Why This Matters

This pain point represents a significant opportunity for B2B solutions targeting Fruit and Vegetable Preserves Manufacturing.

Affected Stakeholders

Food safety/QA managers, Regulatory affairs managers, Operations managers, Supply chain/logistics managers, Customer service and key account managers, Finance controllers

Deep Analysis (Premium)

Financial Impact

$100,000–$250,000 per audit/incident (product hold, compliance remediation, audit labor, potential delisting) • $100,000–$250,000 per incident (lost ingredient supply, production halt, customer credits, rework or destruction) • $100,000–$250,000 per incident (supplier relationship damage, re-audit costs, lost procurement credibility)

Unlock to reveal

Current Workarounds

Buyer manually compiles ingredient sourcing record and supplier certificate; provides to QA and Food Safety Coordinator via email for institutional reporting • Buyer manually cross-references ingredient supplier lot certificate with preserve production lot; compiles traceability evidence via email • Buyer manually retrieves supplier certificate and matches to preserve production record; provides proof via email to distributor and QA

Unlock to reveal

Get Solutions for This Problem

Full report with actionable solutions

$99$39
  • Solutions for this specific pain
  • Solutions for all 15 industry pains
  • Where to find first clients
  • Pricing & launch costs
Get Solutions Report

Methodology & Sources

Data collected via OSINT from regulatory filings, industry audits, and verified case studies.

Evidence Sources:

Related Business Risks

Excess manual labor and rework in lot coding and paper traceability records

$3,000–$10,000 per month in extra labor and rework for a mid‑size preserves plant (inferred from additional QA/clerical hours required to maintain and reconcile manual records across thousands of cases monthly).

Delayed export clearances and retailer onboarding from incomplete batch/lot documentation

$10,000–$50,000 per delayed shipment in demurrage, storage, rescheduling, and working capital tied up, for exporters regularly shipping containers of preserves (inferred from typical container delay costs and capital lock‑up, triggered specifically by missing or nonstandard traceability documentation).

Production and warehouse bottlenecks from slow lot identification and manual checks

$5,000–$20,000 per month in lost throughput and overtime for a mid‑size preserves facility, due to slower line speeds, extended changeovers, and dock congestion (inferred from time saved when moving from manual to automated scan-based traceability, as reported in fresh produce pilots).

Regulatory non‑compliance risk and penalties for inadequate lot traceability

$25,000–$250,000 per incident in regulatory penalties, destroyed product, and lost sales from import refusals or license suspensions (range inferred from typical food safety enforcement actions where traceability is deficient).

Opportunity for ingredient and finished‑goods diversion due to weak lot-level controls

$1,000–$5,000 per month in unaccounted inventory for a plant with poor lot-level reconciliation (inferred from typical shrinkage levels that become visible and reducible once traceability and asset tracking are implemented).

Retailer and distributor dissatisfaction over slow or incomplete traceability responses

$5,000–$30,000 per lost or downgraded account annually due to poor traceability responsiveness (inferred from margins on private‑label or branded preserves contracts and their dependence on compliance performance).

Request Deep Analysis

🇺🇸 Be first to access this market's intelligence