Manual Methods Dominate Training Documentation (Image Credits: Unsplash)
The food industry continues to grapple with training practices that blend tradition and emerging needs. Responses from over 3,000 sites worldwide in the ninth annual Global Food Safety Training Survey painted a detailed picture of current approaches.[1][2] Organized by Campden BRI with partners including BRCGS, IFS, Kiwa, NSF, Registrar Corp., SGS, SQF, TSI, and Culture Strategies Group, the effort benchmarked budgets, methods, challenges, and impacts across sectors like manufacturing, packaging, and retail.
Manual Methods Dominate Training Documentation
Over half of participants reported using paper-based records to document and manage employee training. Just over one-quarter relied on Excel spreadsheets for these tasks. Less than one-quarter employed Learning Management Systems or other IT solutions.[1]
This persistence in analog approaches stood out amid broader industry pushes toward digital efficiency. One-quarter of respondents lacked a competency framework or remained unsure about its presence. Similarly, just under one-quarter either did not include cross-functional members in their learning management teams or were uncertain.[1]
These findings suggested untapped potential in structured systems to enhance accountability and tracking. The survey covered a wide array of company sizes, with most responses from operations employing 26 to 250 full-time staff.
Top Challenges in Training Delivery
Scheduling time for training emerged as the foremost obstacle for food safety professionals. Respondents identified several persistent hurdles that limited program effectiveness.
- Scheduling time for training.
- Making training engaging.
- Assessing training effectiveness.
- Resources and staff to manage delivery and documentation.
- Providing job-specific training.
Just under half of sites lacked continuous analytical data to evaluate training outcomes. Professional development programs for supervisors were absent or unclear for nearly half of participants. These issues highlighted the need for streamlined processes and dedicated resources.
Differences in Training Across Roles
Instructor-led classroom training topped delivery methods at 51.5 percent overall, followed by virtual instructor-led at 27 percent and eLearning at 17.3 percent. On-the-job coaching accounted for 4.2 percent.[2]
New hire orientation varied significantly by role. For temporary and seasonal workers, 60.7 percent received less than eight hours. Frontline staff averaged more, with 34 percent under eight hours and 14 percent exceeding 32 hours. Supervisors and managers saw higher allocations, often surpassing 32 hours for one in five and one in four, respectively.
| Role | <8 Hours (%) | 8-16 Hours (%) | >32 Hours (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Temporary/Seasonal (New Hire) | 60.7 | 20.1 | 5.5 |
| Frontline (New Hire) | 34.0 | 26.3 | 14.0 |
| Supervisors (New Hire) | 27.2 | 23.2 | 20.8 |
| Managers (New Hire) | 28.5 | 18.3 | 26.1 |
Annual additional training followed similar patterns, with temporary staff receiving the least – 62.8 percent under eight hours. Frontline operators got more balanced hours, while leadership roles emphasized ongoing development.
Technology Uptake and Culture Insights
Advanced tools remained niche: one-tenth of sites used virtual or augmented reality, and one-eighth incorporated artificial intelligence. Assessments relied heavily on on-the-job observation (over 60 percent) and KPI-based performance (over 40 percent).[1]
Nearly 95 percent of respondents agreed their organizations understood building a strong food safety culture. Around three-fifths rated their overall programs as sufficient, though one-sixth deemed them poor – especially for temporary staff. Impacts on retention and productivity showed mixed results: one-third saw no retention benefit, and only two-thirds noted productivity gains.
“Although the results are better than 2024, the takeaway for the industry is that there is still room for improvement, including making time for training, following best practice to improve training effectiveness and drive positive behaviours/motivation, and leveraging technology,” survey organizers noted.[1]
Key Takeaways
- Paper records prevail, but digital shifts could streamline management.
- Time constraints top challenges; competency frameworks offer solutions.
- Strong culture awareness provides a foundation for enhanced programs.
The survey underscored opportunities to elevate training through technology and best practices. Progress since 2024 offered encouragement, yet deliberate action remains essential for safer operations. What steps is your organization taking to modernize food safety training? Share your thoughts in the comments.
