Quality Assurance - The case for substance over style

My ego wants nothing more than to venerate the picture of the lone figure crafting innovative libations like some maverick radical of mixological creativity. But it probably isn’t something that interests a real brewer or distiller in the slightest, those who’ve truly cut their teeth know that running a production process like a metronome day-in day-out is far more difficult than the exercise of concocting a recipe. I believe that this over romanticised image of what mastery looks like does a disservice to the drinks industry in particular and fundamentally allows new entrants to the market to have a skewed perception of what really matters when they start making a product people are going to spend their hard earned money on and most importantly eat or drink too.

After safety, nothing is more vital to achieving a successfully operating manufacturing process than creating a consistent product with the management systems to back it up. Poor quality assurance is not just a litigation risk: it is a silent killer of brand reputation, waiting all but forgotten until something goes badly wrong and that’s when a lack of due diligence can fell a company. I have known this level of naivety go beyond being a basic ignorance and reach incompetence bordering on fraud. Such as a sales exec submitting the example page from a “HACCP for Dummies” guide in their tenders (unbelievably this was approved by a major supermarket ) to a manager passing off a co-packer’s quality management documentation as suitably covering the entire supply chain of their own company’s manufacturing process. The problem with the above examples is something that is inherently present in any setting where expertise meets hubris. A lack of understanding can often be great enough that the extent of these issues and their potential ramifications are not fully recognised owing to the Dunning-Kruger effect. Yet most management level employees, even those with actual responsibly not just an over inflated job title, don’t understand the rudimentary difference between quality assurance and quality control.

Quality control is a tactical set of activities that will be carried out to assess production. Quality assurance is the strategic principles that govern what processes should be implemented to manage quality. As a minimum all food and beverage producers should have the following QA/QC related documentation in place: Food safety policy, Hazard and Critical Control Point (HACCP) analysis, Standard Operating Procedures, training schedules and matrices, product conformity standards, documented and tested batch traceability protocol, defined product recall strategy, raw materials purchasing policy, complaints reporting and investigation procedure, quality assurance guidelines, and hygiene inspection methodology and records. They also need somebody to be responsible for all this, ideally in the form of an in house expert.

A quality manager for a brewery doesn’t just sit in a booth tasting beer all day, not anymore anyway! They are responsible for running a department that guarantees every aspect of the production standards and crucially design, document, implement and constantly adapt a strategy for how this will be done. A quality manager needs to write policies and procedures, measure every aspect of quality, assess suppliers and any third-party co-manufacturers, and ensure that production complies with various food safety regimens. Proper quality assurance makes sure that what the customer receives is what they are expecting every time, and if in the unlikely event they don’t, because every box has been ticked before the product leaves the door, we have a documented plan for how to deal with that also. Admittedly all this paperwork is a dreadful bore to produce, especially when starting up from scratch, however it is integral for not only prudent risk management and avoiding litigation but also as a basis for continuous improvement in manufacturing which ultimately drives revenue growth and safeguards jobs.

Once we have this solid platform of quality assurance we can start to build a total quality management system that is able to deliver continuous improvement. TQM should be constant and incremental, and can be achieved using a number of different formal approaches such as 6 sigma and Kaisen. Though there is potential for such methodologies to become a bit "inhuman" and undermine operational continuity and possibly even culture over time. The best systems tend to utilise a cyclical approach that necessitates the inclusion of every business function in addition to production (e.g. logistics, sales, marketing, finance etc.), this ensures that change is holistic, adds value and is fundamentally fit for purpose. Therefore I would proffer that particularly in a nascent business it is best to avoid a cumbersome formal approach and focus on a simple guiding policy that most importantly ties in with the defined company values, which everybody should be bought into.

No single person in a brewery or distillery should be making judgement calls based purely on their opinions, ever! The way to guard against poor choices and give decisions credibility is by proper scrutiny and ensuring all team members share accountability for measurable performance. This is never more true than in production, where not only does science underpin most aspects of modern techniques but the very field of biochemistry was pioneered in the 19th century by our industry. Analytical techniques and instruments from simple gravity hydrometers and pH meters to advanced spectrophotometers and high performance liquid chromatography allow us to assess product quality throughout the brewing and distilling process. Statistics plays a vital role too, whether it's a simple chi-squared in a tringle tasting or more complex analysis of conformity using a t-test or variance analysis. Without these kinds of methods and commitment to adhere to any experimental conclusions we cannot have data driven decision making and instead may be lead astray by the follies of old wives' tales or any number of cognitive biases.

If we can't measure something then I believe it can't ever be fully understood and if you don't want to measure something in business I would ask why you are wasting resources on it then? Quality management often falls to the bottom of the priority list particularly in a rapidly growing business with so many "spinning plates", however every leadership team needs to recognise the vital role it plays not just in innovation but in the day-to-day also. Most sizeable customers will now require a form of self-audit process to be conducted at the very least for new suppliers. Therefore without a QA system in place it simply isn't possible to tap into these businesses' sales channels as routes to market, whilst accreditation such as SALSA gives greater confidence to customers that a producer is manufacturing food products in a safe and legal manner. Not only does quality management reduce risk far better than styling it out when things go wrong but when done right it forms the basis for the exciting things to happen whether that is new product development, winning new business or launching into new markets.