The Global Standard Winter 2009

The GS1 Ireland Magazine | Winter 2009

LD R O W A FIRST

NCHCD, St James's Hospital Dublin is the first healthcare recipient of the GS1 Global The Glob al Traceability Conformance Seal of Approval

Standar d Also: Reports on the Meat Traceability and ISQUA Conferences

CEO’s Comment

Index CEO’s Comment

2

GS1 News

3

GS1 Global Traceability Standard 4-6 GS1 Global Traceability Standard 4-5 NCHCD receives Global Traceability Conformance award 6 Healthcare ISQUA Conference report EFPIA Pilot Coding Project

7-11 7-9 10-11

Meat Traceability Conference report

12-15

2010 GS1 Training Courses

15

UK Data Crunch report

18-20

Tetra Pak Case Study

22-23

New Members

Editor Ross Carew 087 223 5867

Contributors Jim Bracken Ross Carew Barry Spellman Adreena Cullen Brendan Kernan Ian Campbell

24

Circulation Manager Adreena Cullen (01) 208 0671

Designer Mila Print & Design 087 927 2973

GS1 Ireland, The Nutley Building, Merrion Road, Dublin 4 Tel: (01) 208 0660 Fax (01) 208 0670 Email: info@gs1ie.org

www.gs1ie.org 2

This edition contains many examples of GS1 Standards in action. We also cover the Meat Traceability Conference, a joint event run by the FSAI and GS1. The conference focussed on lessons to be learned from last year’s dioxin crisis which threatened the reputation of the Irish Pork Industry.

Thanks to the timely decision to carry out a total recall the impact was minimised, albeit at considerable cost of the order of €180 million.

Meat Traceability Professor O’Reilly, CEO of the FSAI, predicted that food recalls are likely to happen again and stressed that it was now necessary to go further than ‘one-up, one-down’ traceability. The conference concluded that adopting a standards based approach would help the industry to improve its traceability systems and its ability to efficiently manage any future product recalls. Given the vital role that our food industry plays in terms of export earnings, it is imperative that we take all necessary steps to protect Brand Ireland. GS1 Ireland is working with the industry and the other stakeholders to assist in implementing our standards.

Healthcare In the healthcare sector the EFPIA pilot project is a clear demonstration of the benefits of using GS1 standards to protect patients from the growing threat of counterfeit pharmaceuticals. It is interesting that the data set contained in the 2D GS1 data matrix bar code on each patient pack is exactly the same as that specified by Dr. Barry White when he envisioned the NCHCD Track & Trace Solution for the treatment of haemophilia in 2004. Not only has the solution become internationally recognised as best practice but it has also recently been awarded the first ever seal of approval from the GS1 Global Traceability Conformance Programme. Dr. White, who has since become the HSE Director of Clinical Care, was a speaker at the ISQUA Annual Conference, along with HIQA’s Professor Jane Grimson. Details of their presentations are covered in our conference special, along with keynote presentations on the Electronic Health Record which, as we heard, is a key enabler of transformation in the healthcare sector.

Data Pool In recent years we have had lots of anecdotal evidence of the benefits of implementing a Data Pool service. In October this year our UK office produced the Data Crunch report, a most comprehensive analysis and convincing business case for rolling out a data pool service. As the report illustrates, the current product data alignment processes function only because both suppliers and retailers engage in workarounds to compensate for data quality issues. The annual cost of poor quality data in the supply chain is conservatively estimated to be in the region of £200 million per annum. As a result, the UK has decided to proceed with the rollout of a solution which will address this key issue and ensure that the grocery sector will be able to cope with the exponential growth expected in the number of attributes required over the next five years.

Improving Competitiveness in Ireland’s Economy GS1 Ireland in its Pre-Budget Submission stated that, given the current economic situation, Ireland needs to accelerate the use of eCommerce technologies in order to achieve efficiencies in the Public and Private Sectors. The following is a summary of our recommendations:

of service delivery. This would support the implementation of the Madden Report on Patient Safety adopted by Cabinet earlier this year.

6. To ensure that the implementation of the proposed Carbon Tax does not add to the administrative burden.

1. That Government issues a Statement of Intent with regard to the implementation of Electronic Invoicing in the immediate future.

2. That Government sets out dates and strategies by which all State entities will be mandated to receive all invoices for goods and services in electronic format. This would enable Ireland to comply with the 2010 European Commission targets for eProcurement.

3. That a pilot e-Invoicing project be established to demonstrate the potential benefits and ease of adoption of this already proven technology in use by the Irish retail grocery and DIY/Hardware sectors for more than 19 years.

4. That Government establishes an appropriate governance structure in all Departments in order to ensure the implementation of Electronic Invoicing.

5. That Government issues a Statement of Intent with regard to the implementation of GS1 standards across the Health Service in order to reduce costs, improve patient safety as well as the efficiency and effectiveness

Jim Bracken Chief Executive Officer

GS1 News

GS1 Ireland would like to wish all of its Members & Associates a

Very Peaceful Christmas and Prosperous New Year We would particularly like to thank those Members who have given of their valuable time to participate in and contribute to our Board & Committees.

The Board and management of GS1 are pleased to announce the appointment of Elaine Attridge of Unilever to the Supervisory Board.

Elaine Attridge After graduating from UCC with a BA in Economics and Computers and a HDip in Accounting Information Systems Elaine worked for 3 years in France with the IT Team for Andersen Consulting/Arthur Andersen.

From there she moved to Dublin to take up a Business Analyst role with Avid Technology.

Amongst other things, she completed her first SAP project during this time. She then joined the Professional Services team of Marrakech, a B2B start-up company, to gain some customer facing experience involving pre and post sales support management for the customers of their B2B technology.

In 2001 Elaine joined Unilever Ireland and has worked for them in the following areas: - IT elements of the re-organisation of icecream distribution in Ireland and a Telesales Implementation; test lead in SAP implementation project; established and managed a central Data Management team; project managed a Financial Shared Services outsourcing project with IBM; managed the Ireland IT Team & established a Lead User community; agreed and implemented two organisational re-organisations within IT. She has recently moved to a new role in Unilever as IT Service Delivery Manager for the UK & Ireland.

Staff Appointment Brendan Kernan It gives me great pleasure to welcome Brendan to the staff of GS1 Ireland. Brendan has a very comprehensive understanding of the GS1 System of Standards and is

recognised for his particular expertise in eCommerce messaging. A keen gardener and artist, Brendan is married to Emer and has two lovely daughters – Aoife and Niamh.

3

GS1 Global Traceability Standard Industry and users of the GS1 System around the world increasingly require assurance that products and services they purchase conform to traceability standards.

The question arises as to which traceability standard is most appropriate across an entire supply chain.

Many companies when implementing their programmes for traceability adopt standards such as: HACCP (HAZARD ANALYSIS AND CRITICAL CONTROL POINTS), ISO 22000:2005. “Food safety management systems – Requirements for any organisation in the food chain” BRC GLOBAL STANDARD – FOOD, Issue 4, British Retail Consortium. “Developed in order to assist retailers in complying with the legal obligations of consumer protection, providing a common basis for the auditing of organisations that supply retailers with qualified food products”.

IFS FOOD, Version 5, International Food Standard. This is a standard created by large French and German distributors that regulates quality management systems in organisations within the food sector, with the aim of achieving maximum safety in the processes of fabrication and/or manipulation of food products.

SQF 2000 CODE, Issue November 2005, SQF Institute. “A HACCP Supplier Assurance Code for the Food Industry”.

This is a food safety standard developed by the Food Marketing Institute of the USA. It specifies the requirements needed in a quality management system to identify the safety and quality risks as well as validating and confirming the operation of the control measures.

To support these standards, manual and automated systems are implemented within the organisations to

Information flow

Physical flow 4

Traceability Partner

comply with Food Safety Requirements. These systems generate a large amount of data that has to be stored and, if the need arises, rapidly retrieved to manage an incident.

However, traceability is not just about the internal data silo, it is about how effectively and efficiently information can flow right across a supply chain.

The ability to capture and share information between trading (traceability) partners is the key to the damage limitation required when there is an incident. The information contained within organisations in the data silo can be easily accessed; it is however in the data that is shared between organisations where the cracks occur.

To fill these cracks companies embark on elaborate audit programmes, where auditors descend like seagulls to tear the management process apart to seek assurance that each step in the supply chain is not a weal link.

GS1 Standards based on globally unique identification, data carriers and electronic messaging are recognised as a world-class solution to global traceability management. Many companies implement them as part of their applications to ensure that the traceability data can be captured and shared automatically with their trading partners.

However, how do you know that you have implemented the GS1 Standards with sufficient robustness to deliver the desired world-class solution?

GS1 has developed a Global Traceability Conformance Programme based on the Global Traceability Standard and focuses the application of the GS1 Standards to satisfy the general standards detailed above and the technical delivery of the GS1 based solutions. The

programme contains a set of rigid control points and scoring mechanisms that set the benchmark for an award of the GS1 Global Traceability Standard Seal.

Has anybody in Ireland been awarded the GTS Seal?

Yes, the National Centre for Hereditary Coagulation Disorders (NCHCD) at St James’s Hospital was the first Irish organisation to attain this worldwide award and this is detailed on page 6.

How Does the Programme Work?

The audit process is illustrated below

Organisation

Audit Body

GS1 GTC MO

Start Designates Audit Team

Sends request for Initial / Renewal Audit

I Perform Initial / Renewal Audit

GS1 GTC Program Regulation

GS1 GTC Checklist

No

Any Nonconformity ?

Less than 3 months from Ini./Ren Audit?

Yes

Correct Nonconformities Requests a Nonconformity Audit

No

Yes

Achieving this Seal of Approval is a challenging task, however the value proposition is the global recognition afforded by successfully attaining the award.

II Decides to give the GS1 GTC Seal GS1 GTC Seal

II Perform the Nonconformity Audit GS1 GTC Checklist Any Nonconformity Yes ?

No

End

Request GS1 GTC Seal

What’s different between this and ISO 9000 and HACCP Audit?

The focus of the Global Traceability Standard and Conformance Programme is on the implementation of the GS1 Standards as a technical solution. The scope of the audit is intentionally broader than the ISO 9000 and HACCP audits and deals as much with your trading relationships as the internal structures.

The auditor who performs the audit will have been accredited by the GS1 Global Office.

By focusing on the trading relationships the audit tests how information is exchanged up and down the supply chain.

If you are interested in more details please contact Barry Spellman, GS1 Ireland at 01 2080676 or barry.spellman@gs1ie.org

Next Steps

5

NCHCD is first healthcare recipient in the world of the GS1 Global Traceability Conformance award Ireland’s national treatment solution for patients with haemophilia achieved another distinction when it became the first to be audited under the GS1 Global Healthcare Traceability Standard. The audit process involved a complete and thorough examination of the entire process and, not surprisingly, it passed with flying colours.

From a GS1 Ireland perspective this has been a great project from concept to implementation and passing the audit with 100% compliance is a reflection of the commitment of NCHCD, TCP and Clintech and their respective staff.

The audit of the entire process demonstrated the quality and effectiveness of the Track & Trace solution that has been implemented.

It also provides clear evidence of the value of deploying GS1 standards in healthcare settings in terms of improving patient safety as well as the efficiency and effectiveness of clinical processes.

6

At the presentation of the Global Traceability Conformance Seal of Approval to the National Centre for Hereditary Coagulation Disorders in St. James’s Hospital (l-r): Brendan Kernan, GS1 Ireland; Bill Moran, Advent Processing Solutions Ltd; Michael Flahive, Clintech; Fergal McGroarty, St James's Hospital; Derek McCormack, TCP Ltd.

Jim Bracken, CEO GS1 Ireland presenting the Global Traceability Conformance Seal of Approval to Fergal McGroarty, National Haemophilia System Project Manager, St. James's Hospital Dublin

Major International Health Care conference held in Dublin

At the 2009 International Society for Quality in Health Care (ISQUA) conference, held in Dublin in October, a number of speakers from different countries talked about their journey towards a modern health service using electronic records and e-health tools.

At different stages of development, they offered detailed insights into challenges along the way and collectively demonstrated that the quest for continuous improvement in patient care is a journey that never ends. A summary of the presentations of the main speakers follows.

“If you can’t see what is happening, you can’t change outcomes” Dr Barry White

Dr Barry White was until recently the Director of the National Centre for Hereditary Coagulation Disorders (NCHCD). He was recently appointed Director of Clinical Care in the Health Service Executive (HSE).

Haemophilia Trackand-Trace Solution is a world leader Ireland’s haemophiliac care service responded to a catastrophic failure by harnessing the latest technologies including GS1 standards to set new benchmarks in treatment.

Back in the 1980’s, the contamination of the blood transfusion system was one of the most catastrophic medical complications in the history of Irish healthcare. Around 200 haemophiliacs were infected with hepatitis C and HIV. Over 70 people died in a scandal that contributed to the downfall of a government.

These were the events that prompted Ireland to invest in a world leading track-and-trace system that was envisioned by Dr Barry White, the then Director of the NCHCD. The solution is based on a combination of electronic patient records and a complete track-and-trace supply chain system designed to eliminate any risk of a repeat disaster. In 2001, the NCHCD was set up to create a more effective supply chain that was simple to manage and measurable.

Making people responsible for each step in the supply chain reduced risk and is a cornerstone of the new service. Technology was identified as a crucial enabler. It was important to step away from paper-based processes that make it hard to collect information accurately.

Recognising that performance measurements in other industries were technology enabled and in real time, Dr. White felt that health care had to be the same. “If you can’t see what is happening, you can’t change outcomes.”

Applying these principles to haemophiliac treatment was made more difficult because over 60% of all medication is carried out in the patient’s home and the pharmaceutical companies that supply the drugs don’t use barcodes.

Using bar code scanning To measure and monitor the entire supply chain the NCHCD turned to bar code scanning technology, guided by GS1 Ireland. At present, each patient pack is over-labelled with a GS1 128 bar code containing a serialised GTIN, as well as batch and expiry data. This data set has

since become the ‘standard’ for medication track & trace solutions, for example the recent BRIDGE and EFPIA pilots, but is now being replaced with a GS1 data matrix code applied by the manufacturers. Using a unique identifier and bar codes to tag and label the coagulant factor concentrates (CFCs), the NCHCD rolled out a complete stock management and supply system that operates down to vial level. “We use GS1’s unique identifiers (GSRNs) to track the patients and the clinicians, as well as GLNs for each location, including the patient’s home, so we can trace who is treating what patient and where,” explained Dr White. This data is integrated with an Electronic Patient Record that has comprehensive information on primary diagnosis, bleeding history and other key information. The final link in the supply chain is a cold chain delivery service which uses AIDC (automatic identification and data capture) to scan products and their location, including deliveries to the patient’s fridge.

Every single step is now recorded, explains Dr White, from the point of prescription, to picking the product off the shelf, putting it in a van and delivering it to the patient’s home.

This helps makes product recall possible within minutes at every stage in the supply chain, something that was sadly lacking in the contamination crisis. With objective measurements in place throughout an optimised supply chain, Dr White was able to demonstrate how the NCHCD had significantly improved performance as well as patient safety. “Just by measurement alone and simple corrections we were able to reduce waiting times for appointments from months to an average of two weeks,” he said, “and without any additional staff we have been able to increase the number of patients going through the system by 40%. Staff own the process and by changing behaviour and through measurement they have reduced waiting times in the clinics from 60 minutes to 5 minutes.”

Summing up, Dr White said that the purpose of the improved end-to-end process was to decrease medication error and allow for rapid recall, but additional benefits had been an increase in productivity and a much-improved service.

The biggest benefit, however, is a significant improvement in patient care and patient safety. An added bonus is that the investments in technology have seen a healthy return, highlighting how IT and cutting-edge solutions can make a real contribution to healthcare in difficult economic times.

7

Professor Jane Grimson is Director of Health Information in HIQA (Health Information and Quality Authority).

Unique identifier is a vital first step Making the case for e-health and driving legislative change is a crucial part of transforming healthcare in Ireland The value of having Electronic Health Records (EHR) has long been recognised in Ireland but legislative changes are required to realise the benefits. This will happen in the first quarter of 2010, according to Professor Grimson, when the Health Information Act will pave the way for the assignment of a Unique Health Identifier (UHI). A single number allocated to every citizen in the country, the UHI is a vital stepping stone towards the implementation of an EHR. The complex piece of legislation will cover consent and information governance pertaining to issues around freedom of information and data protection.

The Professor made the case for better information sharing by painting a picture of a health service that was reliant on fragmented data. Information flows reasonably well up and down the vertical pillars of the individual care sectors but a lack of integration made it hard for patients to navigate between the different entities. Part of the problem is “a very strange healthcare system”, according to the Professor, a mixture of public and private, where the public system has been subject to much restructuring, with eleven health boards consolidated down to four.

Currenlty, with no UHI and different systems operating in silos around the country, patients can only by tracked on an episode-by-episode basis. “With a couple of exceptions, such as the National Cancer Registry, information does not accompany the patient as they move through the system,” she said.

Another exception is the NCHCD and its use of electronic bar coding technology, recommended by GS1. This was a crucial building block for a complete track-and-trace system that includes Ireland’s first single patient record.

As far as Professor Grimson is concerned, establishing sets of health records is a big part of the HIQA remit. “The possibilities are there for detailed research and improved outcomes,” she said, describing a virtuous circle which would be enabled by information sharing across the sector. Adhering to classic principles of “collect once, use many times”, the heavy costs associated with gathering health information could be alleviated, although she acknowledged that the pursuit of an EHR was never going to be cheap. “If you think of it as an IT system exclusively you will probably miss the point,” she warned. “With most health information systems, 25% of the cost is hardware and software, 75% is the cost around the systems, the changes in process which are potentially very significant.” She said it would cost many millions but HIQA

8

studies showed other countries had recouped their capital costs within a few years. These findings were part of a report submitted to the Irish Minister of Health that recommends the best approach for implementing a UHI, highlighting the importance of developing standards and making sure it is universally adopted.

Technology challenge A potential obstacle to the proposed plan is a particularly low level of IT investment in Irish healthcare. One of the reasons is the aftermath of an aborted attempt to roll out a centralised system to handle Personnel, Payroll and Related Systems (PPARS) for healthcare workers. There was a collective gasp from delegates when Professor Grimson said that the project was budgeted at around €10m and ended up costing €150m.

“You can imagine there was a lack of confidence about the health system’s ability to deliver appropriate ICT solutions,” she said. On a positive note, she said that the experience had at least highlighted the importance of trying to set standards and had given HIQA the breathing space to do the groundwork for a UHI. “We are doing this in the right order so we will have governance arrangements in place before the roll out,” she added.

A big part of the preparatory work has been looking at the characteristics of the UHI, and the appropriateness of using the existing social security number – the PPS in Ireland. The HIQA report concluded that it was not ideal for a number of reasons and even argued against an enhanced or modified PPS in favour of a brand new number. Nothing is agreed yet and there is still discussion to be had on precisely what data sets the number should cover. Privacy concerns over a national ID number were not an issue if the UHI was properly governed, argued Professor Grimson, and it could in fact strengthen security and confidentiality around personal health information.

By looking at international best practise, HIQA has built up a compelling case for the best way to implement a UHI and the benefits that will be realised through an EHR. Streamlining records management to relieve the administrative burden, a reduction of repetitive and unnecessary tasks, and the ability to monitor the population and aid medical research were just some of the wins that were mentioned, along with the potential to dramatically reduce costs. HIQA had also carried out a survey of public attitudes and received a very positive response - 96% of interviewees favoured some sort of number across all health settings and 86% thought all medical information should be linked up. “Attitudes were a lot more positive than we thought which gave us a lot of encouragement,” said Professor Grimson.

Richard Alvarez is President and Chief Executive Officer of Canada Health Infoway, an organisation funded by the federal government and charged with accelerating the development and adoption of EHR systems across the vast North American country

Rolling out Electronic Health Records Canada is in the middle of a massive e-health implementation that gives a fascinating insight into the challenges and a first taste of the benefits.

For Richard Alvarez, Electronic Health Records (EHR) are a ‘live’ project, a massive implementation that offers an insight into a journey that every healthcare organisation either wants to take or has taken already. The size of his task becomes clear when you consider the scale of the Canadian healthcare system. The deployment covers 10 provinces, 100 health regions and 700 hospitals, and involves almost half a million practitioners.

While the scale of the challenge is daunting, Alvarez is in no doubt that Canada’s healthcare system is unsustainable in its current form. It faces an aging population and stretched resources on one side, and growing patient expectations on the other. The good news is that 88% of Canadians support the idea of electronic health records, no doubt encouraged by a catalogue of statistics that make a compelling case for EHR adoption. For every 1,000: -

hospital admissions, 75 people will suffer an adverse drug event

-

patients with an ambulatory encounter, 20 will suffer a serious drug event

-

laboratory tests performed, up to 150 will be unnecessary

-

emergency room visits, 320 patients will have an information gap, resulting in an average increased stay of 1.2 hours

“Paper kills,” was Mr Alvarez’s chilling assessment of existing processes. He said the principal challenge was about redesigning processes and getting information to the right place using ubiquitous EHR systems. Basic wins would be improved quality in patient care, improved productivity through reducing duplication of data and wait time for diagnostics. The capital cost for EHR will be $10-$12 billion, but the estimated benefits are $6-$7 billion annually. By 2010 he hopes that 50% of Canadians will be have an EHR, which will rise to 100% by 2012. Cutting to the quick of the implementation challenge, he talked about the importance of stakeholder involvement, from the ministry down to regional hospitals. He said they were all expected to put “skin in the game” and contribute to the funding of the projects. Health Infoway was able to play its part and make investments more palatable and less risky by leveraging existing investments.

Entire applications are proven and then rolled out, one territory at a time. Not only does this mean a consistency of service and common standards, it can save significant money on procurement. Three provinces bought their diagnostic imaging systems together and saved around $70m.

Change challenge The change management component of the project is not to be underestimated, warned Mr Alvarez. “It’s not a technology game; it’s a transformation and change management game with clinicans. If you don’t engage with them from the get-go, you have no chance of these systems succeeding.” He acknowledged that big IT projects had a terrible reputation and were intrinsically high risk, exposing all sorts of organisations to expensive project overruns. Health Infoway addresses this by withholding payments to health bodies until the results are delivered. “We pay for results. No deliverables, no money,” he said. Underpinning Canada’s EHR is serviceoriented architecture, a standards based technology platform that enables the complex sharing of multiples databases and the integration of disparate systems. “We are trying to bring coherence to the systems,” explained Mr Alvarez. It enables information to be seamlessly shifted between different locations, linking hospitals and doctor systems on a common network. New vendor solutions are only added if they fit with the system.

The work of Health Infoway has triggered a flurry of activity.

Five years ago there were around 50 IT projects underway, now there are close to 300. Some are already delivering benefits such as the roll out of diagnostic imaging which replaces traditional X-rays. Digitals images can be transmitted over networks and are much better suited for a country like Canada where a huge landmass and remote regions make travel difficult and slow down diagnosis times. Currently, around 76% of imaging is film-free and digitised. Radiologist productivity has seen productivity improvement of between 25 and 30%, which is equivalent to taking on 500 additional specialists. Mr Alvarez said Canada could expect to see a billion dollar return on a process that has “got rid of filing cabinets” and that is not even taking into account the improved patient care. Anxious not to underplay the challenges in the wider EHR project, he reminded delegates again that stakeholder buy-in was vital.

“We are a still a long way from where we want to be because it’s so complex. Some jurisdictions are pulling their weight; others are falling behind.” To better measure progress, Health Infoway built an evaluation framework with 23 indicators, partly because it was surprisingly hard to attain any quantitative data from countries that have already rolled out an EHR. Summing up, Mr Alvarez conceded that the project was “a real slog”. He reeled off other challenges - vendors who claim their technology is interoperable when it isn’t; skill shortages in healthcare that forced them to poach technical expertise from other sectors – but believed the public appetite for change would drive it through. “Canadians are sick and tired of having to repeat their medical histories over and over again,” he said.

“And they don’t even know about the quality improvements that these systems can deliver, the improved access for rural communities, the reduction in waste and waiting times.”

9

New medicine coding system to help address the growing risk of counterfeit medicines EFPIA Pilot Coding Project EFPIA (The European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations), the voice of the research-based pharmaceutical industry in Europe, recently unveiled its pilot project to verify medicines and so help reduce the risk of counterfeit medicines being dispensed to patients.

The coding pilot project, launched in September, involves testing a pharmacybased verification system using a small data matrix on each medicine pack dispensed. This will run for approximately four months in 25 pharmacies, and will assess more than 100,000 packs. The project uses a twodimensional barcode, similar to those found on airline boarding passes. This contains a unique product identifier, allowing pharmacists to verify the status of every pack in the pilot at the time of dispensing.

Scanning the data matrix code with a simple barcode reader will also allow the pharmacists to automatically detect the product expiry date and the batch number.

This will increase confidence that the product being dispensed is safe.

Background to the EFPIA Pilot The project is a response to the European Commission’s Draft Directive on counterfeiting, aimed at reducing the risks of counterfeit medicines entering the legitimate supply chain. The proposals set out a legal basis for ensuring that safety features are obligatory on packs, allowing them to be authenticated and traced.

The logic of the Commission’s proposal is indisputable.

Europe’s citizens need to be protected from the infiltration of counterfeit medicines, for their own safety as well as to maintain confidence in the legitimate supply chain. Improved identification of medicine packs entering the pharmacy and being dispensed to patients will make a valuable contribution to tackling this threat.

However, this cannot wholly eradicate the problem; other measures are also required. To eliminate 10

counterfeits and protect public health means having a comprehensive series of measures. These include harmonised product serialisation, the universal use of safety features and a ban on repackaging.

Ensuring Product Integrity The use of safety features on the packaging, to show the pack has not been opened or tampered with, along with verification at the point of dispensing will ensure pack integrity. Where existing safety features have been removed it becomes easier for counterfeits to enter the supply chain undetected. The simplest method of avoiding this would be a ban on repackaging, as this would help guarantee that the integrity of the original packaging has been preserved throughout the entire distribution chain and the product has not been tampered with. However, to date the Commission does not wish to see such measures. EFPIA strongly believes that, should repackaging be allowed to continue, robust inspection and audits by regulatory authorities are required to ensure that this activity is strictly controlled and scrutinised.

An Optimum Approach to Product Verification Of the measures proposed, a product verification system at the point of dispense (i.e. Pharmacy or Hospital) offers good scope for improving both supply chain security and patient safety. The Commission has not set out how they envisage traceability working, but there are clear criteria required to ensure success. Paramount is that the system is harmonised and interoperable across Europe. If the free movement of medicines across borders is to be safe, a coordinated approach to identification and verification is essential. This needs all national coding systems to be interoperable and based on common standards such as those defined by GS1.

This way, any pharmacist in any country can verify whether a pack with the same serial number has been dispensed before, irrespective of its country of origin.

Accredited full-line wholesalers would also be able to have the option to access the database to check the status of the product at any time if in doubt,

Pharma Manufacturer

Wholesaler

Wholesaler

Pharmacist/ Hospital

Patient

Product Flow

Unique Serialization

✓ ✘ Dispensing Verification

Verification

2D Data Matrix on 2o pack

Data Transfer

Product Serialization Database

either before sending a product to the pharmacists or upon return of the product by the pharmacists. Without standardisation and interoperability, there is a risk that the national identification and verification systems will be fragmented. This will limit verification of a product’s provenance to national product codes and create the problem of identifying counterfeit products crossing borders. With parallel trade accounting for around 10% of all pharmaceutical sales in Europe, the ability to verify products that have moved cross-border is essential.

Furthermore, the solution needs to garner the support of all stakeholders by addressing their needs effectively.

Imposing high-end or expensive solutions throughout the supply chain is likely to generate resistance. The proposed EFPIA solution is realistic, proportionate and cost-effective. This pilot project encompasses both wholesalers and retail pharmacies in the trial process, and will generate learnings from all actors.

Finally, the solution needs to be timely. The Commission proposals mean that Member States will have to embrace mass serialisation, but without setting timelines or guidelines on the appropriate technology.

This could create a situation where the numbers of counterfeit medicines in the supply chain continues to increase, while Member States initiate potentially incompatible solutions at different speeds, without addressing the needs for interoperability and standardisation.

The EFPIA project will provide proof of concept; a system using proven technology that can be deployed rapidly. It will also address the key requirements of interoperability and standardisation in a proportionate and affordable manner. This is a practical solution to the challenge of

implementing unique pack verification that all actors can embrace.

It will not offer the total protection that a ban on repackaging would provide, but offers a practical, pragmatic and achievable approach that provides citizens with additional protection from this threat.

Preliminary results The pilot project will not be completed until the end of the year but early results have been very encouraging: •

No operational problems reported by pharmacies

•

New scanners are well accepted by pharmacists

•

More than 1000 packs verified and dispensed during work days

•

Pharmacy log file entries show that the majority of pharmacies do not have any significant issues;

•

Ca. 9900 packs sold (as of 5 Oct) which is ca. 9 % of packs coded

•

Excellent system response times, 99 % of transactions completed in < 1.0 sec.

11

Filling gaps in ‘farm to fork’ traceability A report on the Meat Traceability Conference recently held in Dublin.

Organised by the Food Safety Authority of Ireland (FSAI), in association with GS1 Ireland, the conference entitled “Meat Traceability – everyone’s business” highlighted the need for standards, best practice and a willingness to share information as crucial steps forward.

The 2008 pork dioxin crisis that led to a total recall of Irish pork products was the first and final topic to be discussed at the conference. The FSAI Chief Executive Officer, Professor Alan Reilly, kicked off proceedings with a candid overview of the incident and said it was important to learn lessons because something similar would almost certainly happen again. While there is country of origin labelling and other mechanisms to facilitate ‘farm to fork’ visibility, the supply chain

complexity that goes into food production challenges the concept of complete traceability, according to Professor Reilly. The ingredients of a single pork sausage, for example, could come from 25 different animals, 15 different farms and six different countries.

Professor Reilly was the first of a number of speakers to refer to EU food law178/2002, the ‘one-up, one down’ legal requirement whereby a food production facility must know who supplied them and where or to whom their product has gone. “In the dioxin crisis everybody had complied with this. So now it’s time to go a step further,” he said. It took three weeks to recall all pork products using the EU Rapid Alert System, a timeline that he suggested could be improved if information was able to flow more freely through the supply chain. “We knew it was a crisis but because we were just seeing pieces of a jig-saw we did not see the extent of it at first,” he said.

Speakers at the Conference(L-R): Dr Wayne Anderson - Director of Food Science and Standards, Food Safety Authority of Ireland; Mr Jimmy O’Connor - Technical Manager, Rosderra Irish Meats Group, Ltd; Mr John Keogh - Senior Vice President, Traceability & EPCglobal, GS1 Canada; Mr Niels Peter Baadsgaard - Senior Project Leader, Veterinary Research and Development, Danish Pig Production; Mr Jim Bracken - Chief Executive Officer, GS1 Ireland; Prof. Alan Reilly - Chief Executive, Food Safety Authority of Ireland; Mr Denis O’Brien Information Technology Consultant; Mr Justin Carton - Director, Carton Group; Mr Garry Hartley - GS1 New Zealand’s Manager for Strategic Initiatives.

12

Numbers game When it came to a practical approach to traceability, numbers are the name of the game. Justin Carton, Managing Director of the Carton Group, Ireland’s largest poultry processing company, said his firm had gone beyond the basic requirements and instigated a sophisticated numbering system that covered everything from the chicken feed to the different cuts of meat that are delivered to supermarkets. With reliable identification of every item, it was possible to build a system with complete traceability. Initially designed as a way to deal more effectively with customer complaints, it is part of the company’s strategy to make customer service a differentiator.

Following examples from the technology world, and Dell in particular, every supplier is classified and coded to give the company end-to-end control. Carton even built its own feed mill and keeps an archive of feed samples, which means it can identify what every bird ate. The company is a big user of IT and has adopted a ‘gather data once’ approach that has made the business more efficient and competitive in a crowded marketplace. “It’s not a traceability system per se, but it’s an integrated system with one set of data that covers everything from raw materials to finished goods,” said Carton.

Another example of a company that has gone beyond the basic legal requirement is the Rosderra Irish Meats Group, a pork processing company that had its systems

put to test with the dioxin crisis. Technical Manager Jimmy O’Connor outlined how its slaughterhouse trackand-trace system worked, using an elaborate numbering system to facilitate the processing of 26,000 pigs every week. The process starts with the ‘slap mark’, the ID tag that records the species, farm and county of each pig and is part of a national tracking system. More data is captured in the slaughterhouse as each part of the carcass is classified and the information entered into the company’s business management software.

Comprehensive information about each product is then embedded on a 10-digit barcode as well as on the product label.

On the day of the dioxin crisis the phones started ringing from customers across Europe. One French customer had €500,000 worth of pork that it wanted to know if it could be released to market. By analysing its traceability data, Rosderra had a comprehensive view of how the contamination could have affected its products by the next morning. It was able to tell the French customer that he was good to go. O’Connor said there was certainly room for improvement in the way the recall was carried out, an issue that was later addressed in some detail by representatives of GS1.

John Keogh, Senior Vice President of GS1 Canada, spoke about developing a food safety recall network where participants would publish product information on a web site. It would become a single trusted source of data, where items are identified and visible throughout the supply chain. The challenge is

Jim Bracken - CEO, GS1 Ireland & Prof. Alan Reilly - Chief Executive, Food Safety Authority of Ireland 13

(L-R): Mr Jimmy O’Connor - Technical Manager, Rosderra Irish Meats Group, Ltd; Prof. Alan Reilly - Chief Executive, Food Safety Authority of Ireland; Mr Justin Carton - Director, Carton Group

persuading companies that their commercially sensitive information would be secure in the system. The benefit would be a database that could be accessed in a crisis and used to instigate a comprehensive and timely product recall.

“We’re not telling people how to do their product recall, we’re doing the piece in the middle,” explained Keogh.

He left no doubt of the need for improved procedures.

In the US, 67% of companies had experienced recalls that had cost on average $20 million. Further research showed that a recall typically takes 42 days and only 43% of products are traced. “It’s shocking,” said Keogh, “ and we need to see improvements by using information that translates just as easily for someone running a store in the mid-west of America as to a multinational chain.”

Boosting brand value The drivers for organisations to improve traceability are twofold, according to Keogh. There is federal regulatory pressure and there is brand value. He argued that the risk of negative brand impact should be the best reason, encouraging organisations to improve traceability and use it as a way to differentiate and create competitive advantage. He also identified simple market realities as a great way of moving companies along. Canadian firms looking to trade with China, for example, must have strong traceability processes in place.

14

GS1 is also working with IT consultant Dennis O’Brien to develop an application for sharing information. The database could be interrogated like Google, with an index search service for pulling up data by batch number and other criteria, for a complete picture of the supply chain. Reminding delegates that delays in the dioxin recall were caused by missing information, O’Brien emphasised that such a track-and-trace system would only be as good as the data it contained. He also talked about the evolution of the barcode, pointing out that the new generation of GS1 data matrix and GS1 databar carry much more information and could play a vital role in a recall. Even if a product had slipped through and made it to the shelves, O’Brien explained that it could still be caught at the point of sale, as the scan would be alerted by a number that was on the recall list.

There was tangible evidence at the event that the bar coding technologies and infrastructure are there; it’s just a matter of standardising the data set. This was the key message from Jim Bracken, CEO of GS1 Ireland, who explained that GS1 has over 30 years experience implementing best practice in supply chains and had previously worked with the Irish Beef industry in developing a best practice traceability solution based on GS1 standards.

Jim highlighted the importance of standardising barcodes and the need to create a shared data pool for a more timely and effective access to data, “the current labelling system in the industry is non standard but the technology is there and a GS1 standard label format could be quickly and easily implemented”. He also discussed the role of scanning solutions and the rise of RFID tagging, which was explored further by two international speakers.

Gary Hartley, GS1 New Zealand, and Niels Peter Baadsgaard, project leader in Danish Pig Production, were both working on pilot projects using ultra high frequency (UHF) RFID for tagging livestock. They claimed that low frequency tags and readers could be superceded by technology that would allow details of livestock to be captured more quickly and efficiently. Their trials had shown high success rates with prototype equipment over distances of up to five or six metres and both were looking to extend the life and reach of their pilot programmes.

The projects had other things in common. Both were using technology to protect international trading interests by improving traceability on key national exports. And both elicited an angry response from other players in their industries, who, for various reasons, had settled on the existing solution and were reluctant to pursue another, even though the benefits were tangible.

The political dimension of trying to improve on old ways of doing things was touched on in the roundtable discussion that concluded the event.

While all the speakers had reinforced the idea that standards and common practices are pivotal in a heavily regulated sector like the food industry, there was recognition that everyone needed to change and work more closely together to minimise the fallout from future incidents.

Acknowledging that nothing had happened in the last year to prevent a similar crisis from occurring, Cormac Healy of IBEC assured delegates that things were starting to change. “The industry is working with the Department of Agriculture and we are close to standardising a format for information that would make things easier in the future,” he said.

GS1 Ireland and the Irish meat industry are in discussion on the application of a standards label application to help improve traceability requirements and ensure the repercussions of a mass product recall are minimised in the future.

2010 Courses Training

GS1 Training is designed to get you up to speed on the GS1 Standards as quickly as possible, saving you time, money and energy.

Our courses are conducted in an informal classroom-style setting, delivered by experts in their field. Each course breaks down the Standards into easy to manage steps, ensuring you can put them into action immediately upon your return to the office.

GS1 Ireland Training dates for 2010 February Barcode training

Feb 2nd

Dublin

EDI training

Feb 10th & 11th

Dublin

March 4th

Galway

April 15th

Dublin

EDI

May 11th & 12th

Dublin

Barcode training

May 27th

Cork

Barcode training

July 13th

Dublin

EDI training

July 21st & 22nd

Dublin

September 14th

Limerick

EDI training

October 5th & 6th

Dublin

Barcode training

October 14th

Dublin

November 18th

Dublin

March Barcode training

April Barcode training

May

July

September Barcode training

October

November Barcode training

For registration, please log onto www.gs1ie.og

15

ADVERTORIAL

Codico solved

How for Lakeland

Dairies

The Problem:Lakeland Dairies, a longstanding customer of Codico won an order to produce fresh milk pots for a catering contract from a UK Dairy company.

In order to produce the product to the required standard, Lakeland had to develop all new packaging and coding to meet existing customers standards in the UK. One area of concern for Lakeland was the application of a label that contained variable information such as GS1-128 bar codes on the case that contained 100 pots, as they had

previous poor experience with this type of technology in a fast production area.

Lakeland had existing Domino outer-case inkjet coders employed to place the production and expiry dates on similar boxes but they now wanted a high resolution inkjet coding solution that could guarantee them all bar codes were up to standard.

Tom Brady, Production Manager for Lakeland Daries in Killeshandra then contacted Codico for a possible solution.

The Testing:Codico carried out sample testing using the Domino C6000+ high resolution inkjet printer system on the exact case type that Lakeland had selected for this product.

Lakeland then presented the inkjet cases printed with the Domino C6000+ system and succeeded in getting approval for this type of bar coding but each printed box had to be verified online.

Examples of three types of existing case labelling

GS1-128 bar code issue example of an installation.

The Solution:Codico then installed our Domino C6000+ case coding solution on a prepared line in Lakeland

example of typical coding on a production line.

This system is capable of printing variable data on each consecutive case such as time of production, case number and all GS1 bar codes, such as the GS1-128 bar code.

GS1-128 bar code was utilised as the end customer needed the expiry date to be included in the bar code for stock rotation purposes.

Codico also installed a verification system on-line that checked the quality of each GS1-128 bar code and has the ability to stop the line, repurge the Domino C6000+ printer and release the line into production again.

example of how verifier scans bar code on production line.

The Result:Codico installed a Domino C6000+ high resolution bar code printing system to print the human readable data plus the GS1-128 bar code standard that included the expiry date on each case. The in-line verification system that was connected to the printer and the production line ensured that the cases were of the required standard for the customer.

Lakeland duplicated this same system on a further production line to keep up with increased orders for product. Example of Domino C6000+ print quality below and GS1128 bar code.

Please contact Codico Distributors Ltd for further information on 051 379933 or visit us at www.codico-distributors.com.

Data Crunch GS1 UK’s study provides invaluable data on the business case for implementing a Data Pool Service.

The UK retail industry is behind the curve in addressing the challenge of poor product supply chain data. The size of the quality problem is far worse than expected, with data shown to be inconsistent in over 80% of instances. It is estimated that this will cost the industry at least £700m over the next 5 years, and a further £300m in lost revenues.

80%

The average level of industry product data inconsistency

Furthermore, given the increasing demands of consumers for better product information and labelling for nutrition, health and lifestyle and pending European legislation related to packaging and the environment, manual work arounds and pragmatic fixes employed currently by retailers are no longer sustainable. The time has arrived for the UK grocery industry to address the data quality issue head on, and reap the considerable benefits.

Accurate product data – the bedrock of efficient supply chains UK retailing is a highly competitive, fast-moving and rapidly changing industry. The major supermarket chains have developed supply chains that service a diverse range of outlets with an impressive and growing selection of products and merchandise.

Margins and profits are under pressure as consumer spending is curtailed in the economic downturn. The supermarket groups are in a fiercely competitive environment.

The retail sector is under constant pressure to innovate – introducing new ways for consumers to buy (e.g. from the web and mobile devices), providing extended product ranges and addressing increasing demands from consumers and legislators.

18

In this context, the flow of information is even more critical.

Anecdotal evidence has suggested that product data in the supply chain is of poor quality. To prove (or disprove) the ‘bad data’ argument, GS1 UK compared the data on grocery products held by four of the largest supermarket retailers and matched this against product data from four major suppliers.

The study has revealed that retailers are working with data that is inconsistent in well over 80% of instances. Given the current overall health of the grocery retailing industry, it was surprising to discover such a high level of poor quality product data currently being held by retailers.

Bad data has a severe cost impact on the industry in three main areas: • • •

the cost of manual workarounds to source missing data and correct errors administrative shrinkage costs in areas such as ordering and invoicing lost consumer sales through shelf stock- outs.

The estimated financial impact on retailers and suppliers of £1 billion over the next 5 years is believed to be conservative. This arises from a combination of process inefficiencies, duplications and workarounds across the retailer and supplier’s supply chains, together with administrative shrinkage and shelf stockouts that inaccurate data causes.

Manual workarounds untenable with data requirements set to grow The consumer and regulatory information demands multiply the volume of data that grocery retailers will need to hold for the products they sell – from an average of 66 product attributes today to an estimated 250 attributes in future years. This will make the management of product data by suppliers and retailers even more challenging.

Without efficient processes to obtain, store, update and deliver accurate product information, retailers will continue to incur rapidly increasing internal costs to patch up deficiencies in product data, and potentially suffer sanctions from legislators, pressure groups and consumers.

Industry best practice from around the world tells us that product data should be input once, and in most cases, this should be by the supplier. The good news is that sample checks of product dimension data carried out during the project have indicated that in 4 out of 5 instances the supplier data is more accurate than the retailer data.

The solution – Global Data Synchronisation (GDS) The conclusion of the Data Crunch Project is that retailers and their suppliers should consider adopting GDS techniques already in use in other countries such as the USA, Australia and mainland Europe. Albert Heijn, the leading Dutch supermarket operator, automated the management of its product data as a precursor to full GDS. The results were greater data accuracy, improved supply chain processes and greater collaboration with trading partners.

warehousing, distribution, merchandising and stores) and across retailers, distributors and suppliers. Although the data may relate to the same products, it is rarely managed in a cohesive and consistent manner within individual retailers, let alone across the wider industry.

The systems and processes in place to handle product data are basically the same as those designed when the grocery market was much smaller, slower and less dynamic. After a new product is launched, there are inadequate processes to check the accuracy of data. If manufacturing processes, product content or packaging attributes change, there are no mechanisms to update the many usage points within each of a supplier’s many hundred trade retail customers. In the majority of cases, no-one in the supplier or the retailer organisation is charged with ensuring the ongoing quality of data, or for removing obsolete information from master data files.

The supply chain continues to function because each retailer, lacking trust in the suppliers’ data, has allowed its many stores, warehouses and trade buyers to develop a multitude of spreadsheets and small databases, each containing local product data created and tailored for particular departmental needs.

This keeps the supply chain operating. However, as our survey reveals, it has contributed to enormous data inaccuracies and inconsistencies which are having an impact on retailer and supplier profits and downgrading on-shelf availability. Apart from the problems caused by inaccurate product data, the cost of building and operating these local silos of product information imposes a large and unnecessary operational cost penalty on the supply chain.

Wegmans Food Markets pioneered GDS in the USA. It made quantum improvements in the accuracy of product data and cut several days out of the administration processes needed to bring new products into stores.Similar techniques can deliver benefits in the UK. However, for GDS to become the de facto way of working in the UK industry, major retail groups will need to move away from tactical solutions and embrace a new industry standard for managing product data where one single, accurate, master source is used by all parties.

Product data describes the characteristics of every item, case and pack bought and sold. It exists and is stored, duplicated and manipulated across departments for different purposes across business functions (e.g. buying, 19

Summary The supply chain continues to function and satisfy the needs of consumers but at a high financial cost in manual workarounds, a high incidence of lost sales and significant product â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;shrinkageâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;.

In the past, rapid market growth and the expansion of the large supermarket chains have compensated for the hidden costs in keeping the supply chain functioning.

However, growth cannot continue at current rates indefinitely, and supermarket chains will need to place more attention on raising efficiency levels and streamlining activities. Improving the quality of product data and reducing the time and effort it takes to obtain, manage and distribute consistent and accurate information across the business will play an important part in delivering these benefits.

As the grocery industry becomes more complex, product life cycles reduce and consumer outlets become more varied, the demand for faster delivery of more diverse and

accurate data will increase. Additional pressures are being imposed by consumers, governments, regulators and pressure groups placing increasing demands for greater information on nutritional, environmental, packaging and other product attributes.

To keep pace with these demands, and manage product information efficiently and economically, retailers and suppliers will need to collaborate in automating and centralising the sourcing, maintenance and distribution of accurate product data.

Proven solutions exist in the form of GDS and implementations of this technology are delivering value in many countries. To date, grocery retailers in the UK have resisted adopting GDS. Although the attractions and benefits are self-evident, the major UK grocery supermarket chains have viewed implementation as too challenging, diverting focus away from expansion and winning share within a highly competitive and growing market.

As market growth slows and it becomes more challenging to increase market share and profit, itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s time for the major UK supermarket chains to take action and start to enjoy the benefits of GDS that are already proven in the grocery industries of other advanced countries.

20

Atlas Fusion An Internet connection is now all you need to maximise the significant business benefits of electronic trading thanks to Atlas Fusion.

For more than 15 years Atlas Products International has established an enviable reputation for developing some of the most innovative EDI software solutions on the market.

Atlas Fusion has been operating successfully in Ireland for the past four years and has now been brought to the UK by Atlas.

Now, whether you are a buyer or a supplier, Atlas Fusion provides a view of any document your company handles, be it paper or electronically originated, that is available, anytime, from anywhere in the world, using any Internet Explorer or other browser.

Everyone agrees that the paperless office is a goal we all strive for but are unlikely to attain. Atlas Fusion takes us closer to that goal than any other system, whilst at the same time reducing your carbon footprint and helping to achieve your sustainability objectives and policies.

Aimed at organisations which want to improve or introduce efficiency with electronic trading - but still send or receive forests of paper, Atlas Fusion is the ideal tool to allow outbound documents to be 100% electronic, thereby slashing the costs of handling the daily inbound paper avalanche.

Rich in functionality, Atlas Fusion has been developed in a modular fashion with a core product supplemented by a wide range of additional features to enable users to build the ideal bespoke system for their own unique electronic trading requirements.

It can be integrated to your back office accounts or ERP systems and work seamlessly with your current EDI system or with your existing Atlas EDI system.

From just tens up to tens of thousands of documents daily, Atlas Fusion’s Scanning and OCR (Optical Character Recognition) system is completely scalable and can grow with your company’s needs.

Also available as a stand-alone product, the OCR used by Atlas Fusion has the ability to convert whole rooms full of arch files, filing cabinets and archived paper trails into electronic format, reducing up to 320,000 pages of A4 onto a single DVD.

The Atlas Fusion modules include:

EDI • •

•

Back office Integration Electronic documents includes but not restricted to Statements, Payments, Orders, Invoices, Credit Notes, ASN's, Delivery Notes etc Suppliers can type in manually, upload CSV or XL Spreadsheet

Price Matching Engine • • • • • •

Will stop and / or warn of incorrectly priced invoices.

Will stop and / or warn of incorrect invoice Quantities Buyers can decide prices Buyers can add / delete / amend suppliers Suppliers can add / delete / amend staff details Suppliers can request price changes, deletions,

• •

additions, description changes, pack-size changes etc Suppliers can match against Retailer’s master price & product list Fully secure – Suppliers can only see their own prices.

Dispute Resolution Centre • •

Allows users to exchange comments and resolve disputes in a common user forum Disputes can be started anytime by supplier or buyer, attached to an invoice, credit, delivery note, scanned POD or EDI GRN. Full tracking and resolution system. Option for buyers to create Debit notes allowing disputed invoices to be paid up to a lesser value until the dispute is resolved.

Statistics •

Complete buyers and supplier’s a summary of all transactions over any given time frame categorised by product code, product group/type, value etc.

Document Search Engine, E-Mail, News letter and promotions and many more.

GS1 Standards Atlas Fusion uses GS1 standard EDI messages to ensure the same EDI message format is used throughout the supply chain. For example, if a supplier uses Fusion to send invoices to a retailer, the retailer will receive the

ADVERTORIAL

same EDI invoice message as though the invoice had come through from a traditional EDI message. Fusion translates the invoice into the standard EDI message as used by the retailer.

Fusion also uses the standard GS1 numbering system – GTINs that uniquely identify products and GLNs that uniquely identify trading partners within the EDI world.

Who uses Fusion?

Atlas Fusion has been rolled out to some of Ireland’s top retailers in the FMCG and Hardware / DIY sectors.

It allows all suppliers to trade electronically with their retailers regardless of their size.

For example, Suppliers now have 3 methods of getting their invoices to their retailers – 1.

“Traditional” EDI 2.

Manually enter invoices via Fusion 3.

Upload CSV of invoices via Fusion Using Fusion, the length of time involved in getting suppliers trading electronically with their retailers is a fraction of the amount of time using traditional EDI. On one Fusion project with a major retailer, 220 suppliers went live in less than 3 months.

For more details about Atlas and our range of products visit our website at www.atlasproducts.com or call our Dublin sales team on 01 511 1264. Alternatively, if you would like to speak to our UK office, please call us on +44(0)87005011033.

Atlas Products Ireland, Digital Depot, Roe Lane, The Digital Hub, Thomas Street, Dublin 8.

Electronic trading that is 100% paperless, 100% EDI, 100% price-matched, 100% quantitymatched, 100% accurate and 100% visible

Tetra Pak adopts GS1 Global Standards Tetra Pak has harmonised the design of pallet labels across all its facilities worldwide. This saves a great deal of time and money for Tetra Pak's customers. The next step will be the introduction of RFID tags as information carriers on pallets.

Tetra Pak is the world's leading supplier of packaging solutions for foodstuffs. These products, one-time packaging for milk, juice and other liquid foodstuffs, are used every day by millions of people across the globe.

Tetra Pak has more than 21,000 employees and operations in more than 150 countries. The company's largest customers are giants such as Unilever, Coca-Cola and Nestlé.

For many years Tetra Pak used different types of pallet labels at its facilities in different countries. There has previously been no great need for harmonisation since the factories have traditionally focused on their local markets. Tetra Pak's exports from the individual countries were normally very low.

That picture has changed. Many of the company's factories have customers in several countries. Individual customers often have, in turn, Tetra Pak facilities in different countries as packaging suppliers. In Germany, for example, there are customers who take deliveries from facilities not only in Germany but also France and Spain. Customers like these found it difficult to understand why they got pallets from Tetra Pak with two or three different types of labels, requiring additional technical equipment and creating unnecessarily complex routines.

To address these problems, Tetra Pak has harmonised the design of pallet labels across all its facilities worldwide.

"A single pallet label designed to a global standard gives enormous advantages in the supply chain. The aim of harmonisation is above all to give our customers what they want. They save a great deal of time and money thanks to common labels. Customer reactions have also been very positive", says Ernesto Schroeder, global logistics manager at Tetra Pak. Work began with a study to work out what could be done to improve the system.

22

"We collected labels from all our facilities in every country", says Ernesto Schroeder. "We studied them here in Sweden. It needed a lot of observation and research to understand why we had different labels."

The study resulted in a decision to design a single pallet label at the global level which would satisfy the demands of both Tetra Pak and its customers. The company got in touch with GS1 Sweden, and a joint project was started.

"Several of our large customers participate in the GS1 system. We discussed with these customers and with GS1 what information should be on the label and where.

Our cooperation with GS1 has gone smoothly throughout and has not been expensive."

At the end of 2008, GS1 Sweden presented its proposal.

The label was based on GS1’s global standard.

"Customers were pleased with the proposal as well as our own warehouses and factories. The information is easy to understand and it is simple to scan the barcodes."

It took roughly one year from the problem being stated to the pallet label being ready for rollout.

"The project plan was included in each factory’s IT resources and IT investments. We have invested in special equipment to print the labels. We have also invested in the software recommended by GS1."

The project was rolled out to 30 factories worldwide which together account for 99% of Tetra Pak’s total production. These are in Europe, North America, South America, Africa and China. Tetra Pak has a total of 33 factories globally. The remaining three were not included in the project since they produce a totally different type of product.

"In only five months, from March to July this year, we succeeded in rolling the system out to factories around the globe," continues Ernesto Schroeder. "Customers can now receive goods from any factory regardless of which country it is in."

The pallet label’s design is identical for the whole world with the exception of China. For the four facilities there, the label is printed in both English and Chinese. In the rest of the world the label is only printed in English.

"We got an immediate positive reaction from customers in Germany, Switzerland, France and Italy who were the first recipients of the rollout. They have been able to simplify their routines considerably. We have now received similar positive responses from customers in the US, Mexico and Spain.

"How much our customers are saving through harmonisation we don't know. It's possible that an individual customer can save several hundred thousand Euros per year. Sooner or later, we will probably get some feedback in the form of numbers."

The most important lessons from the harmonisation project so far are, according to Ernesto Schroeder, the following: •

A simple pallet label gives very big gains in the supply chain if it follows a global standard.

•

Never start a project without listening to customers’ wishes and opinions. The project must give them sufficiently large gains, otherwise it will be irrelevant.

•

It is possible to carry out big projects with wideranging and positive effects without costing a fortune.

•

Completing the project so quickly and smoothly was due to a great extent to excellent cooperation with GS1.

The next few years will see further development of information carriers on pallets within Tetra Pak.

"We will be starting a project to put all pallet information on RFID/EPC tags. All pallets going into or out of our warehouses will be scanned automatically. Our customers will soon be able to save even more time by not having to stand pallet labels. We expect to be using RFID/EPC pallets throughout the group by 2012 at the latest," says Ernesto Schroeder.

Facts about Tetra Pak •

Tetra Pak is the world's leading company within process and packaging solutions for foodstuffs.

•

The company has more than 20,000 employees and operations in over 150 countries.

•

Their products satisfy the needs of millions of people across the globe.

•

There are manufacturing facilities on five continents.

•

The largest factories are in Lund, Sweden, Spain, Germany, Mexico, Brazil, Japan and the US.

23

GS1 Ireland would like to welcome the following as New Members of the organisation A & N Fuels Ltd Alusi Europa Ltd Andrew Ace Exports Banaghan & Co (Stationery) Ltd Beauty Results Ltd Born to Bake Button & Co Goldsmiths Ltd C.O.H Suppliers Ltd Cafe Sol Ltd Caffreys Natural Stone Capella Medical Devices Ltd Catherines Kitchen Charem Ltd Clever Box Club Dingle Farmhouse Products Doreen's Bakery Limited Doreens Bakery Ltd Eco Friend Ireland Eco Ink Ecopal Farbro Distribution Ltd Giles Bros Glanbia Agribusiness Goatsbridge Trout Farm Ltd GTO Marketing Ltd Hannoplastics Hartys Hickey Brothers Hi-Volt Ireland Ltd Innovative Wine Solutions Ltd Irish Bacon Slicers Ltd Irish Tackle & Leisure Ltd Jasons Cottage home bakery Jim Casey Breadcrumb Kandyco Ltd Killarney Plastics Ltd La Charcuterie Irlandaise Ltd Langans Cafe & Restaurants Ltd

Leo Dunne Ltd Lett Frozen Foods Live4Less M & B Sweets Ltd MD Product Innovations Ltd MEAS Natural Art ltd Neutrog Fertilisers R & S Fine Food Ltd RedRock Trading Co Ltd Royal County Products Ltd

Sean O'Brien Shicon Ltd Simplicity SleepySportz Stafford Fine Wines The Forge Restaurant The Gluten Free Bakery Thornton EcoFuels Ltd Trona Products Vincent Ryan Cooked Meats Ltd Yunan Natural Tea Company