CHEM Blog

By JEFF REINKE, Editorial Director

As we do our planning for the content of each print issue of Chem.Info, as well as the overall strategy for www.chem.info  and the Chem.Insider Daily e-newsletter, we’re faced with three primary marching orders:

1. Keep it interesting.
2. Keep in pertinent.
3. Address readers' critical issues.

It seems the multi-tasking never stops, but as any information provider can tell you, all three share the top spot in terms of content focus. As a reader, I hope you agree that we do a respectable job in hitting all three targets.

Some times it is easier than others. Talking about product recalls and explosions, and doing more on-site plant tours than anyone else easily keeps us three for three. However, when we address critical issues like training, safety and operational efficiencies, we can almost hear the eyes of our readership glazing over. It seems these topics definitely register in terms of relevance and importance, but interesting?

Even the most die-hard plant managers would be challenged to say they get excited over the prospects of additional information on topics that they are seemingly barraged with on a daily, or some times hourly, basis. It’s not to say anyone is questioning the critical importance of such topics, but in reality, how long could anyone go before they start tuning out another Top 10 list of safety protocols, more information on lean manufacturing or additional listings of training resources?
We know from talking to plant managers around the country, in plants of varying sizes and specialties, that these topics are crucial to your success. We also know from looking at traffic relative to this information on our websites that it’s not sparking tremendous interest — all the time.

What we do know is that once an event or incident that negatively impacts output does take place, it’s the basics that receive the most scrutiny. The Imperial Sugar disaster of a couple years ago was one of the most significant stories in the processing industry, and it all came down to simple safety measures.

U.S. manufacturing as a whole continues to lose its competitive grip in a global economy, much of which can be attributed to operational factors that drive up costs. Granted, little can be done to combat cheaper foreign labor rates, but the benefits of a workforce that functions more smoothly and is better trained can certainly help offset some of these balance sheet-inspired strategies.

Hopefully it doesn’t take such drastic occurrences at your facility for these monotonous elements of processing to once again capture your attention and interest.

My constant references to what I call the “blocking and tackling” of our work as editors has become almost a punch line to those around the office. However, as our company grows and expands, I want to ensure we’re still focused on all those less exciting factors that play such a huge role in our success.

Similarly, I’d hope that regardless of all the exposure and the sheer number of resources available in addressing several of the more common factors impacting your plant’s operations, they’ll remain not only prominent in your approach, but that you maintain a dedicated effort to constantly learning more about them — even if they are boring.

What do you think? Let me know by e-mailing me jeff.reinke@advantagemedia.com.

By JEFF REINKE, Editorial Director

It should be rather straightforward.

Eating better = living healthier. Greater overall health = reduced nation-wide health care costs and less taxpayer burden. Again, this seems like a clear connection to make. The unfortunate truth is that clarity has never been a strength of bureaucratic organizations, and the political pessimist in me says our governments are no different.

I was taken down this road by some of the recent legislation, both proposed and enacted in states like New York, that call for special taxes on food that has been deemed responsible for our society’s collectively poor health status. The latest one to catch my eye was based on a study that postulated how adding a special tax on soda and pizza could produce a collective five-pound weight loss per person.

Good idea, because if we look at other health issues based on poor consumption choices, such as alcohol and tobacco for example, less frequent use obviously starts with the higher taxes on cigarettes and spirits. Sorry, but in my humble opinion, those who choose to abuse their bodies with an influx of poor eating decisions would not be hindered by higher costs for Mountain Dew and Pizza Hut.

Rather, the ones who would feel the pinch are the companies in the production and service industries that provide these products to those who like the occasional soft drink, slice of pizza for lunch or combination of the two. If the government is really serious about focusing its efforts on healthier lifestyles, instead of punishing the collective, how about offering individual rewards and incentives?

Consider the following, for example:

• Flex-spending accounts for fresh fruits and vegetables.
• Income tax deductions for health club memberships and exercise equipment.
• Insurance company subsidies that can be passed along to customers based on the use of both of these programs.

The problem is that these approaches would mask the true intentions of the proposed tax, which is nothing more than a revenue stream that would extract funds in a manner difficult for any political opponent to combat. If there really is a focus on improving overall health care, the onus would come back to individual programs, not broad strokes that would fail to impact those for whom they are primarily intended.

Those who have always slammed a six-pack of soda and eaten pizza 10 times a week will continue to do so. In case you need proof, just ask those congregating in the smoking area how much recent cigarette price increases have weighed on their purchasing decisions.

Just like all of you, the thought of additional taxes frustrate me, but even more so in this context because they don’t deal with the individual problems plaguing our health care system. Yes, we as a society need to eat better. We need to lose weight. We need to be accountable for the problems we’ve created. But this starts with individual responsibility for one’s actions.

If you’re going to gorge on a Chicago-style with three cheeses and four meats, then maybe get on the treadmill once or twice a week. If you’re going to revel in the caffeinated benefits of soda like I do every morning, then recognize that water throughout the day is going to be needed to help offset the high sugar intake.

The key to healthier living and unregulated eating is basically moderation. I find little wrong in eating some of the “bad” stuff once in a while, but it’s the desire to go overboard or considering the consequences that gets all of us in trouble. Granted, these are personal choices that can have a far-reaching impact on our health care system, but the focus still needs to remain on encouraging better individual decisions, not force-feeding new penalties to the general public.

When you’re done munching on those Doritos, please feel free to weigh in with your opinion by e-mailing me at jeff.reinke@advantagemedia.com. (After all, you wouldn’t want to get all that nacho cheese all over your keyboard.)

 

By JEFF REINKE, Editorial Director

Aside from being a Cy Young Award winner (think MVP for baseball pitchers) and member of the 1960 Pittsburgh Pirates World Championship baseball team, Vernon Law is attributed with one of my favorite quotes of all time. Whether he was referencing his experience as a father or an athlete, I’m not sure, but by sharing with us that he felt, “Experience is a hard teacher because she gives the test first, the lesson afterward,” Law also could have been foreshadowing the current situation involving our market’s new trade show schedule.

The Pack and Process Expos used to be held at the same time at the same place. Now with PMMI and FPSA deciding to go their respective ways, these organizations' shows have their own separate places on the calendar.

Similarly, every two years one could see representative companies from the dairy, meat and bakery marketplaces collectively supporting the Worldwide Food Expo. That show, too, has seemingly gone the way of the Dodo, with the International Dairy Foods Association (IDFA) deciding to host its show separately. Throw in the IBIE show for all you bakers out there, as well as a couple of other more regional or niche events, and the schedule fills up pretty quickly for suppliers who strive to service all these sectors of the food processing universe.

My colleagues and I here both at Chem.Info and Food Manufacturing have been fortunate enough to meet and work with representatives from the organizations involved with these shows and responsible for their management. We can appreciate their perspective and are dedicated to working with all of them in helping to best serve the food production marketplace of which we’re all a part. However, I can’t help but think back to Mr. Law’s quote about experience and how it might reflect on this division of shows and the difficult lessons it could teach as suppliers and processors alike look to allocate limited travel funds.

The overused yet accurate verbiage I’ve heard at shows when speaking to exhibitors for the last 18 to 24 months is that attendance has been more about quality than quantity. So while there have been fewer handshakes at the booth, the purchasing power, technological savvy and prestige of the representative companies on the other end have made the trip worthwhile. Hopefully that will continue to be the case.

Hopefully the experiences of all who attend each of these shows will simply reflect a new dynamic where all of these events meet a specific demand for both the supplier and plant personnel in keeping everyone involved operating profitably and effectively. Hopefully, experience in this case allows each of these shows to pass that initial test — and only need to learn how to improve afterwards, instead of just survive.

What's your take? Let me know by e-mailing jeff.reinke@advantagemedia.com.

By JEFF REINKE, Editorial Director

Yeah, I have to admit that I can be a real sucker for an interesting headline. Maybe it’s some form of subliminal, professional courtesy or just the simple fact that I gravitate towards unique points of view — especially if they differ from my own. That might be the only reason I read a recent article about the environmental benefits of … wait for it … mining.

The article, which you can find at www.siteselection.com/theEnergyReport/2010/jan/article3.htm offers perspective on the need for mining operations in order to recover several precious metals and other elements that are vital in progressing new or alternative energy platforms. So while I doubt these thoughts will drive Greenpeace to embed a pick and shovel into their logo, I can appreciate the fresh perspective on an industry that is often more synonymous with stripping away from the earth’s composition than working to restore it.

I have to admit that my knowledge of mining operations is quite limited. It’s relegated primarily to pictures of big holes in the ground made by enormous machines that require monstrous amounts of oil-based fuel sources and lubricants in order to function — not exactly the backdrop for talks about new hybrid vehicles. Although it would be difficult to obtain the lithium used in the battery composition of such vehicles without these holes in the ground caused by fossil-fuel guzzling vehicles the size of an office building.

And I think we’ve all seen the dark and murky images of coal mines with equipment and personnel covered in dust and soot. In reinforcing the consequences of our continued use and reliance on fossil fuels, many like to present these snapshots as living arguments that reinforce the individual health problems and polluting ways these mines represent. Of course without the coal obtained from these hotbeds of environmental carnage I’m not sure how much juice would be available when plugging in those electric vehicles or to help supplement solar panels on cloudy days or wind turbines when the breeze fails to blow.

So we’re caught in that viscous circle that is alternative energy development. In order to get to the promise of tomorrow we seemingly need to continue our reliance on the methodologies of today that so many loath. What this article showed me is that while a vocal minority wants to scream for the implementation of new, greener technologies without any delay, they fail to see the full picture in understanding the benefits of a more moderate transition.

As an example, coal is abundant and works extremely well in generating energy. It’s not the sexiest option out there and certainly has its negative qualities, but until alternative options can match its performance, let’s not dismiss its place in our energy grid. Similarly, mining, although vitally necessary, is definitely not the most environmentally friendly operation. However, right now it simply doesn’t make sense to vilify either. And more importantly, completely turning our backs on coal or the mining operations that retrieve it would actually work to the detriment of developing a replacement.

I’m not arguing for the continued use of fossil fuels or against the implementation of new energy sources, but I think greater attention should be given to the benefits of our current approaches. In doing so, we’ll have found the fuel we need for better efforts down the road.

What’s your opinion? Let me hear it by e-mailing me at jeff.reinke@advantagemedia.com.

JEFF REINKE, Editorial Director

Yesterday we ran a video in which author and “food activist” Michael Pollan offered some thoughts behind his book Food Rules. First, I’m going to admit that I haven’t read the book, so I’m solely going off of his remarks in the interview referenced above.

Overall, I thought he made some very interesting points, and I’d agree with many of them in terms of further examining one’s diet, making a greater effort to really think about what we’re eating and even the points he touched upon relating to getting more animals back on the farms from where so much of our food supply stems. However, he also touched a nerve when alluding to “edible food-like substances,” referring to many of the processed foods Americans consume every day.

I’m not here to debate the prominence of organic food products. I think they have their place, but as Mr. Pollan stated, they are more expensive and simply demand more effort in finding and selecting than just going to the store and grabbing from shelves. I get that and respect those who prefer to go this route. There is definitely a place for all things organic.

Just as important, however, are those more heavily processed products that are less expensive, easier to procure, quicker to prepare, and in my opinion, tasted pretty good while watching the Badgers basketball game last night. And I’m not going to blame my consumption of a couple breaded chicken sandwiches, some mozzarella sticks and a can of soda as some sort of cosmic equalizer for a last-second, heartbreaking loss.

Similarly, when I chow down on some freshly made guacamole made from avocados and tomatoes purchased from the farmer’s market down the street during the Super Bowl, I’m not going to feel more at peace with the world as I cheer on the Saints.

Sports references aside, my point is that while I can appreciate the competitive sparring between the organic vs. mass-produced food communities, the bottom line is that our society wants and demands both. My deep-fried, calorie-oozing options last night are not a normal occurrence but once in a while, it feels good to have a dinner I enjoy and is ready with no effort in less than 15 minutes.

Also, in addition to the higher prices I pay for fresh vegetables in Wisconsin markets right now, it’s nice to reap the benefits of the discounted $10 for 10 processed items I devoured last night.

The key is balance and personal responsibility, not attempting to propagate an elitist attitude towards food consumption that many — not all — but many organic champions do. Most nights I would prefer some baked chicken and veggies, but some times that’s just not going to happen. I also know there’s no part of the chicken called the nugget, but as long as my daughters finish their potatoes or rice and fresh vegetables, I can live with their appreciation of the meal choice.

Just like so many things that make our country better than most, food choices need to be a prevalent part of our market. That’s where our focus in food production needs to lie — creating an environment in which both are given a viable chance to survive and thrive. So, in addition to supporting my local farmer, I’m also going to support my local canner, frozen food distributor and processor.

What are your thoughts? Let me know by e-mailing me at jeff.reinke@advantagemedia.com.

By JEFF REINKE, Editorial Director, Chem.Info

First, for those familiar with the work of Stephen King, the IT I mention here is not the terrifying Pennywise the clown, who haunted my dreams for about a week after seeing the movie IT that was based on the famous horror author’s novel. Rather, I’m talking about that equally wonderful and frustrating art of information technology — and the only time its impact ever seems to be really appreciated.

For those on the techie side of things, I’m sure you don’t care for this genre of data control and organization being classified as an art, but as I’ve learned as of late, it at least needs to be appreciated as one. You see, we’ve had an interesting couple of days here at Advantage Business Media in dealing with e-mail and phone systems that have been sporadically inoperative. My apologies if you’ve been a victim of not getting a prompt response from someone here.

What’s been interesting is how the viewpoint of these communication portals, which at least for me can at times foster uninspired remarks about an overloaded inbox or numerous voicemails in need of return, has been transformed from villain to hero. It seems that the mass quantity of information delivered through Microsoft Outlook is even more important than I realized — and not just as an outlet for receiving information — but in organizing, archiving and retrieving it as well. Cliché as it might be, you really don’t know what you’ve got until it’s gone.

Similar to a dysfunctional work cell in your plant, this inability to effectively send and receive information has caused some serious productivity issues, and reinforces how vital these things that we take for granted really are.

We’ve all been privy to the constant reinforcement of concepts and best practices that revolve around implementing preventive maintenance programs, reinvesting in equipment, integrating greater elements of automation and advanced manufacturing technologies, and a number of others relative to embracing the impact of new technological developments. And while few would debate the merit of these topics, it’s equally easy to understand how the redundancy of these messages could lead to a certain level of ambivalence.

That is, until something goes wrong, and those resources are no longer available.

I’m not looking to further inundate you with a message about the importance of those topics mentioned above — you already know how significant they are in keeping your plant running smoothly. Rather, it’s simply to reinforce an appreciation for these systems, and the individuals responsible for integrating and troubleshooting them. It’s easy to complain about downtime associated with scheduled overhauls and upgrades, but try to remember how life would be without them, and maybe take an extra moment to appreciate the tech installing and maintaining them.

Have you experienced a similar situation at your place of work? Did it make you appreciate your IT-based world, or despise the information overload even more? Let me know at jeff.reinke@advantagemedia.com.

A couple of weeks before we start production on a new issue of Chem.Info, our staff gets together to talk basically about three things — where we stand right now, where we want to go and how we intend to get there.

This scope of attention deals not only with the financial elements that any business endeavor must broach, but also the quality of our end products, in both print and on the web, as well as the process we take in getting there. The re-occurring challenge for us right now is the same that many of you might be encountering — how to fully embrace the need to continuously improve and, excuse the cliché, take that next step.

I think this can be challenging for three primary reasons:

1. Recent Improvements

Comparing our print and electronic offerings from two years ago would venture a nearly unanimous endorsement of significant improvement. The look is better. The content is better, and we’ve received buy-in from some major advertisers. So we’re very proud of the progress that has been made.

Similarly, I’m guessing if a tour was taken of your facility two years ago and then again today – the improvements would be evident. The stumbling block here, whether your business is publishing or processing, is that continuous improvement is the mantra of the day. It’s about what you’re going to continue to do, not patting yourself on the back for previous accomplishments.

2. It’s Time To Be Critical Of The Process

Sometimes getting where you want to be from a quality perspective means implementing inefficient short cuts in the production cycle. So now it’s time to go back and analyze not just the outcome, but how getting there can be improved. This can be a frustrating experience because some will not want to mess with a process that has produced the desired result — a result that was not easy to come by and produced excellent feedback. 

Therein lays the true challenge for today’s U.S. manufacturers and processors. We’ve never had quality issues, simply efficiency and profitability obstacles that came from an old-school approach to production. Analyzing the process is a necessary part of taking that next step towards success.

For us it meant re-evaluating our production schedules and working to get further ahead in terms of planning. For processors it could mean changing a number operational paradigms and implementing greater automation.

3. The Tough Stuff

The initial quality and process improvements are easier in many ways because the impact is simple to understand and faster to realize. The “next step” means digging beyond the problem/solution stage and actually finding issues to be resolved.

For us, this meant going beyond producing a daily newsletter and tracking it to ensure good metrics, and delving into how we can improve those already high marks. Do we need to re-design our templates so even more information appears in the preview pane? Do we need to generate content from even more sources, feeds and industry contacts? Should we deploy more video? More blogs?

None of these are problems, but we need to look at them like critical issues to be solved and improved upon in order to reach the next level of success. Similarly, how do you improve quality controls in that already low percentage of rejects? How can turnaround times be made even quicker than the industry best level that you currently provide?

Everyone wants to take the next step in improving their offerings, approach and results. We all want to be better. The tough part is that improvement doesn’t always stem from fixing things that are obviously broken, but from finding those things that aren’t broken yet.

What kind of improvements have been made at your plant? Were they obvious or subtle fixes? Let me know by e-mailing me at jeff.reinke@advantagemedia.com.