Tracking and tracing: a structure for development and ...

Introduction

Tracking and tracing: a structure for development and contemporary practices

Many people have some example that they can refer to when asked about tracking and tracing. Usually they come up with an example about a food product being recalled. Tracking and tracing is often associated with quality defects of products. Indeed, a number of products have been recalled on the grounds of sharing a particular defect such as a bad material or foreign body. However, this is not all there is to say about tracking and tracing. Tracking and tracing is a more complex topic with extended application possibilities. This article explores these extended possibilities by organising several concepts of tracking and tracing in a development structure. In this respect, the structure displays the concepts systematically and coherently. The article is partitioned in four main sections: definitions; business scope; development structure; and conclusions.

Kees-Jan van Dorp

The author Kees-Jan van Dorp is based at the Wageningen Agricultural University, Wageningen, The Netherlands. Keywords Tracking, Identification, Logistics, Supply chain Abstract

Definitions

Although government and business interest in tracking and tracing has grown enormously over the last decade, a clear and coherent overview of the topic is still lacking and is not found in (logistics) literature. This article presents a structure for development and contemporary practices of tracking and tracing. The development structure is conceptualised by three supply-chain layers: item coding (the physical layer), information architecture (the information layer); and planning and control (the control layer). On behalf of tracking and tracing, the layers represent different levels of supply-chain integration. The conceptualisation is derived from similar ideas found in literature on supply-chain management. From a scientific point of view, the structure provides a coherent and systematic organisation of tracking and tracing concepts. From the viewpoint of business administration, the structure facilitates the determination of the scope of tracking and tracing application(s), which is of management value.

In the introduction a structure for developing tracking and tracing applications was mentioned. A development structure can be defined as a construct depicting specific concepts including the way these concepts are positioned in relation to each other. Tracking and tracing of food products, however, is more difficult to define, as the literature reveals no uniform understanding on this subject. Hence, in the following sections different tracking and tracing definitions are reviewed in detail, the significance of food material characteristics to tracking and tracing is assessed and a unified view on tracking and tracing is formulated. Literature overview The overview of Table I indicates that there is no uniform understanding of tracking and tracing. The definitions differ along the dimensions of the type of activities that are included and the organisational context in which they are performed.

Electronic access The research register for this journal is available at http://www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregisters

Food material characteristics In general, many yields in food industry are subject to qualitative variation. Therefore, the quality of lots supplied to a manufacturer may not be constant. Lots may contain active materials (e.g. proteins), of which the purity can vary. The quality of lots may even deviate from aimed specification to such an extent

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at http://www.emeraldinsight.com/0957-6053.htm

Logistics Information Management Volume 15 . Number 1 . 2002 . pp. 24±33 # MCB UP Limited . ISSN 0957-6053 DOI 10.1108/09576050210412648

24

Tracking and tracing

Logistics Information Management Volume 15 . Number 1 . 2002 . 24±33

Kees-Jan van Dorp

Table I Authors and definitions Author(s)

Definitions

APICS Dictionary (1992)

A twofold view on traceability is put forward: traceability is (1) the attribute that allows the ongoing location of a shipment to be determined, and traceability is (2) the registering and tracking of parts, processes and materials used in production, by lot or serial number Beulens et al. (1999) Traceability is the ability to document the history of delivered goods and services and to prove conformance to specifications. Moreover, with respect to tracking and tracing it is indicated that long after closing a particular business transaction, the customer and supplier still are subject to a relationship ISO (1994) Traceability is the ability to trace the history, application or location of an entity by means of recorded identification. ISO relates traceability to the origin of materials and parts, the product processing history and the distribution and location of the product after delivery. According to ISO, traceability includes the set of interrelated resources and activities which transform inputs into outputs Jansen (1998) A distinction exists between product tracking and product tracing. Product tracking originates from product value or risk, whereby one wishes to locate the products. Product tracing originates from exception handling, whereby one wishes to establish the source of (bad) quality Kim et al. (1995) Traceability is referred to as clear knowledge of ancestry whereby the entities to trace (in this reference, ISO 9000 products and activities); depend on unique identification; traceability relations are commented on by a graphical notation of ancestry MESA (1997) Traceability comes down to product tracking and genealogy, it provides the visibility to where work is at all times and its disposition. Status information can include who is working on it, components, materials, batch, supplier, lot, serial number, current production conditions, any alarms, rework or exceptions related to products. Besides visibility, an on-line tracking function creates a historic record, allowing the traceability of components and usage of each end product Moe (1998) Traceability is viewed as an ability by which one may track a product batch and its history through the whole, or part, of a production chain from harvest through transport, storage, processing, distribution and sales (read: ``chain traceability''), or internally in one of the steps in the chain, for example the production step (read: ``internal traceablity'') Rijn et al. (1993) Traceability relates to WIP (work in progress), defining it as the identification of a lot or batch of material, the tracking information (location and quality), and the tracing information (where from and where used) of material van Twillert (1999) Tracking and tracing may be subdivided into a tracking part and a forward and backward traceability part. The tracking part consists of the determination of the ongoing location of items during their way through the supply chain. The forward traceability part refers to the determination of the location of items in the supply chain which were produced together using, for example, a contamination of the history of a certain item. Backward tracing is used to determine the source of the problem of a defective item Weigand (1997) Tracking and tracing is considered a modern tool that gives insight into the origin of products to all links of the supply chain, insight which is used to optimise the processes in the separate links and to enhance the total supply chain Wilson and Clarke Food traceability can be defined as the kind of information necessary to describe the (1998) production history of a food crop and any subsequent transformations or processes that the crop might be subject to on its journey from the grower to the consumer plate

that lots must be classified differently, worst case: ``off-spec'' (i.e. not according to specification). Hence, a manufacturer will usually not ground his production calculations on material quantity alone. In short, the quantities needed for a particular production order will depend on the properties of the lots. In order to anticipate

possible quality variation of lots, production can gather detailed information on these properties. A production model in which this is practice is lot-based production. The model manages the tactical co-ordination of lots in the supply chain. A production model that specifically manages the operational co-ordination of lots is called recipe 25

Tracking and tracing

Logistics Information Management Volume 15 . Number 1 . 2002 . 24±33

Kees-Jan van Dorp

Business scope

optimisation. Recipes are process control instructions and include work instructions, equipment instructions, operator instructions, machine instructions and scheduling instructions (MESA, 1995). An actual recipe will depend on the quality of submitted lots. Based on the lot properties and the number of production items required, recipe optimisation results in the allocation of particular lots to production. The examples of lot-based production and recipe optimisation clearly demonstrate that lot data are not restricted to applications of forward and backward traceability. In light of optimisation, data on lot properties are of inconceivable value to tactical and operational management of production.

Organisations often do not operate solo, they are part of a larger network of interrelated organisations which are linked by markets of supply and demand. Organisations maintain relations with sister companies, suppliers, (industrial) customers, consumers and external environment stakeholders. One may study tracking and tracing with respect to all these different relations. Different relations may sprout different tracking and tracing requirements and may have a different impact on the organisation (van Dorp, 1999). The business scope of tracking and tracing can be depicted with the four generic perspectives shown in Figure 1 (van Twillert, 1999) and described in further detail in the following sub-sections.

A unified view Taking into consideration the quality variation on tactical and operational production levels (along with the desire to control this variation) and the review of tracking and tracing (as presented by the definitions survey), two tracking and tracing definitions can be derived: tracking and tracing in a restricted sense; and tracking and tracing in an extensive sense. Tracking and tracing in the restricted sense provides the visibility to where work is at all times and its disposition. In this respect, a particular on-line tracking function creates a historical record by means of recorded identification that allows for the traceability of components and the usage of each end product. Tracking and tracing in this sense provides for product tracking and forward and backward traceability. Tracking and tracing in the extensive sense, however, goes well beyond tracking and tracing in the restricted sense. Tracking and tracing in the extensive sense encompasses tracking and tracing in the restricted sense. On-line information is not only used for cradle-to-grave tracking and tracing but is also used in the management and control of lots in successive stages of production. In this respect, information on lot properties provides for the possibility of dynamic lot allocation in order to obviate quality variation during production. Tracking and tracing in such extensive sense refers to the optimisation and control of processes in and between separate links of the supply chain, for which the on-line tracking of lots and storage of data on lot properties is indispensable.

The enterprise perspective The first perspective, the enterprise perspective views tracking and tracing within a manufacturing company. In this respect, the horizontal dimension of tracking and tracing is usually considered since tracking and tracing is often referred to as a ``horizontal topic'', indicating that tracking and tracing not only deals with the manufacturing domain (of a producer in an industry), but further extends to include other functional domains. In this respect, all functional domains may be important, as tracking and tracing data are generated everywhere, for instance in a purchase department, in an existing warehouse, etc. According to Cheng and Simmons (1994), however, an approach for tracking and tracing in the enterprise context should be much broader than this kind of historical record keeping. One should not only address information horizontally, at tracing functions from different points in the history of events, but also address information at different management levels of a manufacturing system: ``vertically''. In this respect one may differentiate between strategic, tactic and operational planning and control levels of the manufacturing system. As the objectives of these levels are not the same, different sets of tracking and tracing data are required at different times. Nowadays, large parts of these levels may be vertically integrated with so-called manufacturing execution systems (MES). 26

Tracking and tracing

Logistics Information Management Volume 15 . Number 1 . 2002 . 24±33

Kees-Jan van Dorp

Figure 1 Four perspectives

tracing requires all necessary information of the supply chain to be managed efficiently and effectively. Due to the cross-company nature, different parties of the supply chain need to work together in determining the requirements for tracking and tracing. Jansen (1998) divides the supply-chain parties into two groups: suppliers and industrial customers; and endcustomers. With respect to tracking and tracing, suppliers and industrial customers impose requirements on the supply chain: one may refer to them as ``business-to-business'' requirements. End-customers impose requirements on the supply chain: one may call them ``business-to-consumer'' requirements.

The multi-site perspective The second perspective views the multi-site aspects of tracking and tracing. A lot of manufacturers, particularly in semi-process industries, have more than one plant in which they manufacture their products. Sometimes these plants are also located at different sites, even in different countries, depending on their location/allocation strategy. It is possible that separate plants deliver their semi-finished products to related sister plants for further processing. Consequently there are multiple flows of materials and related tracking and tracing information within this complex network of related sister plants. The material and information flow through the network requires full attention during the development phase of tracking and tracing. The different processing requirements of sister plants in the network may result in the exchange of different sets of tracking and tracing data.

The external environment perspective Tracking and tracing requirements may also stem from authorities, governing bodies or branch organisations: external stakeholders affecting the activities of the supply chain. These requirements can also be called ``business-to-administration'' requirements. Although ``external'' entities are often classified as ``others'', they are part of the environment in which the supply chain operates. The requirements are usually embedded in legislation. Some important European Economic Community (EEC) directives in this respect are: . Packaging and packaging waste (94/62/ EEC). This directive concerns the management of packaging and packaging waste to prevent any impact thereof on the environment or to reduce such

The supply-chain perspective Tracking and tracing is not merely restricted to the enterprise the entire supply chain is of importance. According to Jansen (1998), a supply chain can be regarded as a network, consisting of two or more enterprises, which are, each for itself, not a constituent of one of the other enterprises or which are separated by market forces. From viewpoint of tracking and tracing, supply chains can be regarded as the integrative approach for dealing with planning and control of materials from suppliers to endusers. In this respect, proper tracking and 27

Tracking and tracing

Logistics Information Management Volume 15 . Number 1 . 2002 . 24±33

Kees-Jan van Dorp

.

.

.

the injured person, within a reasonable time, of the identity of the producer or the person who supplied him with the product. In this respect, tracking and tracing systems may pass on ``the bug''.

impact, providing a high level of environmental protection. The total quantity of packaging material used should decrease, while the percentage of recycled packaging material should increase. Return, and/or collection systems and reuse and/or recovery systems must guarantee a maximum return of packaging and packaging waste. Tracking and tracing monitors the quantity and the type (recycled or nonrecycled) of packaging material in the supply chain, in order to reduce environmental impact as much as possible. The official control of foodstuffs (89/397/ EEC). This directive verifies compliance with foodstuff legislation and rules on composition and quality. The focus is on the inspection of foodstuffs, food additives, vitamins, mineral salts, trace elements (and other additives intended to be sold as such) and materials and articles intended to come in contact with foodstuffs (e.g. packaging material). The inspections are carried out (without warning) regularly or when violation or non-compliance is suspected. The inspections are carried out using means proportionate to the end to be observed. Competent authorities perform the inspections and protect the consumers' interests. The functional labelling of products (79/112 EEC). Functional labelling is to ensure that consumers are provided with the essential information with regard to the composition of the product, its manufacturer and the methods of storage and preparation which are necessary to ensure consumer safety. In this respect, labelling of minimum durability and any special conditions of storage or use, will enhance (quality) traceability. Labelling information must not mislead the consumer. Liability for defect products (85/374/EEC). Product liability is concerned with the liability of the producer for damages caused by the defectiveness of his products. In this respect, the consumer is protected against damage to his health or property caused by a defective product. When a producer cannot be identified, each supplier of the product shall be treated as its producer unless he informs

Development structure The sophistication of an application for the supply chain is related to the level of supplychain integration that is required for the application. In general, supply-chain integration is divided (amongst others) into the integration of the physical layer, the integration of the information layer and the integration of the control layer (Boorsma and Noord, 1992; Goor et al., 1996). The integration of each layer will require the deployment of a number of concepts. In this respect, systematic development of applications is facilitated. Supply-chain management (SCM) and efficient consumer response (ECR) are applications that have been conceptualised and developed in this manner (Ellram and Cooper, 1993; Kurt Salmon Associates, 1993). This article seeks similar facilitated development for tracking and tracing. Layers, similar to those mentioned above, are used to attend to concepts that are specific for tracking and tracing (Figure 2). With minor particularisation of terminology, the layers used for tracking and tracing application development are: item coding (the physical layer); information architecture (the information layer); and planning and control (the control layer). Depending on the desired sophistication of the tracking and tracing application, particular layers of the supply chain will receive attention and will become integrated by deploying dedicated concepts. The upcoming sections will elaborate further on the development of tracking and tracing and the dedicated concepts within layers that must receive attention in the process (Table II). Item coding Item coding can be subdivided into product identification and product coding. Both are important concepts in tracking and tracing the physical product flow through the supply chain. Their function is to reference associated product information of a product. The objective of item coding is to facilitate the 28

Tracking and tracing

Logistics Information Management Volume 15 . Number 1 . 2002 . 24±33

Kees-Jan van Dorp

Figure 2 Tracking and tracing layers

Table II Tracking and tracing development concept Supply-chain layers

Item coding

Information architecture Planning and control

Development concepts

Product identification Product coding

Information de-coupling Certification

Lot-based production Recipe optimisation

Batches and lots are often regarded as the smallest traceable units. They are identified with identification numbers called batch or lot numbers. Rijn et al. (1993) define a batch or a lot as a quantity produced together and sharing the same production costs and resultant specifications. In general, a typical traceable unit is comprised of products whose associated properties were jointly set during production. In many industries the assignment of identification to products or batches is a function of the different steps of production. Generally, batches can be pooled (forming one batch) or segregated (forming multiple batches). In case of batch pooling, batches must be given new identification when mixing activities change particular properties. In case of batch segregation (splitting), individual batches should receive new identification only if downstream activities or conditions occur that are not identical and will result in change of properties. In semi-process industries batches may be involved in many splitting or mixing activities. These different activities and their effect on batch composition may be tracked by means of a ``bill of batches''. APICS (1992) refers to the ``bill of batches'' as: ``a method of tracking the specific multilevel batch composition of a manufactured item. The bill of batches provides the necessary where-used and where-from relationships required for lot traceability''.

unambiguous information exchange between partners of the supply chain. Item coding should therefore receive proper attention during the development of tracking and tracing. Codes should be designed in such a way that they safeguard extensions for future applications. Product identification and product coding are elaborated next. Product identification Products that differ in form, fit or function are tagged with a different product code (Rijn et al., 1993). For example, a natural steak and a peppered steak will receive a different code. The difference in code indicates that the products' associated properties are different. The flaw of general product coding, however, is that one cannot differentiate between similar products. For example, natural steaks stemming from one particular producer may be assigned an identical product code, although they may have experienced slightly different processing conditions as they stem from different production batches. In this respect it is unfortunate that many industries are able to differentiate products in a commercial sense, but lack the ability to differentiate products in a processing sense. However, in semi-process industries this is less the case. Unique identification is assigned to batches that have experienced different processing conditions. Moreover, in this industry benefits are obtained by differentiating on associated batch properties. One is able to assess more effectively the applicability of batches in further processing steps.

Product coding Once the identification of materials and products is under control it can be embedded in product coding, for product coding and 29

Tracking and tracing

Logistics Information Management Volume 15 . Number 1 . 2002 . 24±33

Kees-Jan van Dorp

(Jansen, 1998; Beulens et al., 1999). The problem, however, is that extended information integration may cause downstream information overflow. A paradox emerges: extended information integration contra lean information management. Information de-coupling may resolve this issue (next section). The information de-coupling point is a generic architectural concept for tracking and tracing and is (best) deployed in conjunction with certification.

automated materials handling increase the efficiency of tracking and tracing the physical goods flow through the supply chain. Product coding has many features, of which only a few will be discussed here. Some features are: efficient storage and retrieval of items, sorting of goods or items, internal goods tracking, tracking of WIP (work in process), tracking and management of transportation, and tracking and recovering of pallets and containers. Technology available for sutomatic identification and data capture is referred to as AIDC by AIM[1]. AIM states three benefits of AIDC: (1) streamlined data entry, automated and inexpensive; (2) rapidly available information, providing a more current and flexible view of business; and (3) AIDC provides more accurate information than economically feasible with manual data entry.

Information de-coupling Information de-coupling describes the generic way of information integration of the extended enterprise with respect to tracking and tracing applications (Beulens et al., 1999). An information de-coupling point is a point in the supply chain where a set of specific product properties is aggregated and replaced by a particular label downstream. The label displays aggregated properties of a product batch, for example the quality class. On exception, traceability can be performed with unique identification that is embedded in the code of the label. The processing properties of the batch can be traced as the underlying set of specific properties is functionally dependent on the unique identification. Consequently, an information de-coupling point operates like an interface, providing access to upstream specific properties. As specific product properties need not be communicated downstream, lean information management in the supply chain is facilitated. In this respect, a broad application spectrum applies for information de-coupling, examples hereof are: materials handling, product certification, animal friendliness, product responsibility, logistics control, reverse logistics (recycling), human health care and/or customer information. Industries where subsequent processing is complex of nature and where the associated quality requirements are high (such as in pharmaceutical manufacturing), may require multiple de-coupling points to be managed. Depending on the production route, products may pass multiple de-coupling points. In order to track the de-coupling points passed, a ``bill of de-coupling'' could accompany these products. The ``bill of de-coupling'' then lists the de-coupling points and includes references to the specific properties detected on passage. In the event of an exception, the specific properties may be retrieved in order to

Associated technologies include: barcode, radio frequency identification, magnetic stripe, voice and vision systems, optical character recognition and biometrics. With respect to barcode, EAN/UCC-128[2], an exponent of barcode symbols, is rapidly becoming the food industry standard, identifying any specified food product or shipping container, unambiguously anywhere in the world. It includes application identifiers (AI), adding versatility to inter-enterprise information exchange. Next to product code, AI allows other code(s) to be exchanged, such as perishable dating, lot or batch identification, units-of-use measure, location codes, and other product-associated information attributes. Clearly, for tracking and tracing to be successful, product identification must be embedded in product coding. Information architecture An important aspect of tracking and tracing is the information architecture of the application. Design methods for (logistic) information systems have long emphasised (reference) models for single organisations (Scheer, 1998; Bertrand et al., 1990; van Es and Post, 1996; Curran and Keller, 1998; van Dorp et al., 1998). But as previous sections already indicated, the scope of tracking and tracing is much broader than a single organisation. Indeed, tracking and tracing applies the notion of the extended enterprise 30

Tracking and tracing

Logistics Information Management Volume 15 . Number 1 . 2002 . 24±33

Kees-Jan van Dorp

and purchasers and is referred to as independent certification. Reduction of costs caused by second-party certification and public demonstration of commitment are important aims of third-party certification. Driven by cost reduction on the part of all supply-chain entities, third-party certification is (also) to be favoured in information decoupling certification schemes.

compare them to the ``master'' quality specification of the individual de-coupling points. On particular non-conformance, products illegally passed a certain de-coupling point. From a designer's point of view, the ``bill of de-coupling'' is best compared with the ``bill of batches'', which was discussed previously with regard to product identification. Certification Certification is often associated with quality audits of products. Early (1995), and Dale and Oakland (1994) described some perspectives on product quality, which include: the customer's perception of product conformance, the applicability and/or fitness for purpose, the manufacturer's ability to produce according to specification and the product's characteristics of performance, reliability and maintainability. However, next to product quality, reliable information decoupling demands that certification schemes pay additional attention to information quality. Information quality considers the timeliness (response time), the integrity (accuracy), completeness (adequacy), precision (detail), and source (person or organisation) of information (Alter, 1999). The information systems and procedures responsible for information de-coupling should function in conformance with agreed standards or specification of information quality. Companies that are successfully audited in this respect are certified accordingly. For the act of certification, however, parties must agree on a certification strategy. One can distinguish first-party, second-party and third-party certification (Dale and Oakland, 1994). First-party certification is selfcertification and is sometimes known as the producer's declaration. The problem with self-certification is the supplier's opportunity to falsify compliance to standards or requirements. Second-party certification is certification in which a purchaser carries out the assessment of whether or not the supplier's systems are according to specification and meet the requirements; it is known as the purchaser audit. Second-party assessments have the disadvantage of being costly for both customer and supplier, as they make suppliers adapt internal procedures to reflect what the purchasers want to see. Multiple assessments result in a proliferation of procedures, systems and manuals. Thirdparty certification is independent of suppliers

Planning and control The exchange of information on lot properties between entities of the supply chain enables a proactive kind of tracking and tracing. Herein, entities seek the optimisation of their production processes and more specifically, the optimisation of their production formulae. Quality and quantity of production are continuously optimised as lots are allocated dynamically to subsequent processing steps. The optimisation reduces the quality variation of end-products and minimises quality costs. Well-known models of the above are lot-based production and recipe optimisation. They optimise quality on two levels of production: tactical and operational. Information architecture (the integration of tracking and tracing information) and item coding (the coded identification of materials and products) are two important pre-conditions for implementing these models. Lot-based production and recipe optimisation are described next. Lot-based production Manufacturers should take adequate notice of the lot quality that is supplied to them. Depending on what lots are used for, the quality of lots can have a great impact on downstream processing. Lots from successive production runs of suppliers can differ in quality and may affect downstream the outcome of the manufacturer's process. Hence, a manufacturer should not perceive the quality of lots submitted as trivial. In order to satisfy effectively the production formula of a manufacturer, the ability of suppliers to particularise the properties of lots supplied must be regarded important. Products of which, in the end, the quality grades are either too high or too low are not particularly beneficial for a manufacturer. Customers may reject lower-grade products, as they are not produced according to specification, while higher-grade products may have to be sold against the standard price 31

Tracking and tracing

Logistics Information Management Volume 15 . Number 1 . 2002 . 24±33

Kees-Jan van Dorp

The quality of materials is taken into account in determining the quantity of materials needed to produce a certain number of end products. Depending on the variance found in the quality of lots, appropriate adjustments to quantity usage of materials can be made while allocating lots to production. Recipe optimisation has many advantages, ranging from better anticipation of changes in lot quality and increased production responsiveness (supplying high quality products in the shortest possible time) to increased margins and higher revenues due to waste elimination, decreased inventory and optimised order fulfilment. While lot-based production and recipe optimisation are alike, recipe optimisation focuses on short-term events (day-to-day operations), whereas lot-based production focuses on mid-term events (weeks or months).

that was agreed upon. Either way the manufacturer pays a price. Therefore, lot quality should be specified properly in order to allow subsequent lot allocation and production refinements to be planned. Lot-based production reduces the outcome of products with quality grades that are either too high or too low, as it enables extended control over production. Lot-based production is preferably implemented in close co-operation with supplying entities. The extended control becomes possible because ``as-built'' information displays the details of properties of lots supplied. The availability of these data to the manufacturer enables the optimisation of his downstream process (the production formula). Obviously, lot identification, which is embedded in code, plays an important role in this: the identification is the prime reference to the lot's associated properties. The advantage of lot-based production is the transparency or ``visibility'' of lot properties, which help determine (in an early stage) the congruence of lots with further processing requirements. Congruence may be enhanced even more if lot quality is expressed with a common quality classification scheme. Then, lot quality from various parties may be taken unambiguously into account in the allocation and quantification of lots to production.

Conclusions A state-of-the-art overview of tracking and tracing was presented in this article. A restricted and extensive definition of tracking and tracing has been given. However, tracking and tracing was not only researched from a definitions' point of view, an assessment of the organisational scope was also made. What has become apparent is that the organisational scope of tracking and tracing is much broader than initially thought. In this respect, the article illustrated that tracking and tracing transcends company borders and extends to include all entities of the supply chain, as well as external stakeholders of the environment. A structure was introduced with which to view tracking and tracing development. Typical levels of tracking and tracing sophistication in the supply chain were described: item coding, information architecture, and planning and control. The organisation of Item coding is held responsible for basic forward and backward traceability, the organisation of Information Architecture (additionally) is held responsible for the exchange of certified information on product or material lots and (in addition) the organisation of planning and control is held responsible for extended process control and optimisation. The intention is to continue on the research described in this article. Exemplary cases alongside the development structure may help to illustrate (even further) that tracking and tracing projects can be classified using the

Recipe optimisation Within manufacturing, quality depends on mixing, splitting and transformation activities and the extent of process control that manufacturers have over these activities. In this respect both common variations and uncontrolled variations must be dealt with (Early, 1995). Common variations emerge when products are made to a standard recipe using the same source of ingredients, which have been produced at different manufacturing sites (the cause of variation lies in differences of plant and manufacturing equipment). Uncontrolled variations emerge when process control is not standardised and when there exists non-coherence in process operations or usage of ingredients (the cause of this variation lies in the uncontrolled physical material properties). Generally, recipe optimisation can be applied to prevent the above-mentioned (nondesirable) variations. Recipes are optimised on the basis of pre-recorded quality characteristics of lots and the desired quality of end products. 32

Tracking and tracing

Logistics Information Management Volume 15 . Number 1 . 2002 . 24±33

Kees-Jan van Dorp

discussed layers and concepts. Using the development structure as a reference, future research will describe practical business cases in detail and assess the sophistication of the tracking and tracing applied. The article was written under careful consideration, as the author was not able to describe all subjects in length. The references at the end of this article can function as a guide for readers to study in more detail the topics of interest. Finally, the author welcomes any suggestions or comments on the article and/ or on tracking and tracing in general.

Web resources 1 Automatic Identification Manufacturers, Inc. (www.aimglobal.org). 2 EAN International/Uniform Code Council, Inc. (www.ean-ucc.org).

References Alter, S. (1999), Information Systems, A Management Perspective, 3rd ed., Addison-Wesley Educational Publishers Inc., Reading, MA. APICS Dictionary (1992), 7th ed., American Production and Inventory Control Society, Inc., Falls Church, VA. Bertrand, J.W.M., Wortmann, J.C. and Wijngaard, J. (1990), Production Control: A Structural and Design Oriented Approach, Eindhoven University of Technology, Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam. Beulens, A.J.M., Jansen, M.H. and Wortmann, J.C. (1999), ``The information de-coupling point'', Global Production Management, IFIP WG5.7, International Conference on Advances in Production Management Systems, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston/Dordrecht/London, pp. 51-8. Boorsma, M. and Noord, J. (1992), ``Ketenintegratie'', (Dutch title), Tijdschrift voor Inkoop en Logistiek (I&L), Vol. 8 No. 6, pp. 40-7. Cheng, M.J. and Simmons, J.E.L. (1994), ``Traceability in manufacturing systems'', International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 14 No. 10, pp. 4-16. Curran, T. and Keller, G. (1998), SAP R/3 Business Blueprint, Understanding the Business Process Reference Model, Prentice-Hall Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Dale, B.G. and Oakland, J.S. (1994), Quality Improvement Through Standards, 2nd ed., UMIST and University of Bradford Management Centre, Stanley Thornes (Publishers) Ltd, Cheltenham. Early, R. (1995), Guide to Quality Management Systems for the Food Industry, Seale-Hayne Department of Agriculture and Food Studies, University of Plymouth, Blackie Academic and Professional, Glasgow. Ellram, L.M. and Cooper, M.C. (1993), ``The relationship between Supply Chain Management and Keiretsu'',

33

International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 1-12. ISO (1994), ISO 8402: 1994. Quality Management and Quality Assurance ± Vocabulary. Jansen, M.H. (1998), ``The environment as a resource; developing environmental information systems based on enterprise resource planning software'', Ph.D. thesis, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven. Kim, H.M., Fox, M.S. and Gruninger, M. (1995), ``An ontology of quality for enterprise modelling'', Proceedings of WET-ICE, IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, pp. 105-16. Kurt Salmon Associates (1993), Efficient Consumer Response; Enhancing Consumer Value in the Grocery Industry, Food Marketing Institute, Washington, DC. MESA (1995), Controls Definition and MES to Controls data Flow Possibilities, White Paper Number 3, Manufacturing Execution Systems Association (MESA), Pittsburgh, PA, 8/95. MESA (1997), MES Functionalities and MRP to MES Data Flow Possibilities, White Paper Number 2, Manufacturing Execution Systems Association (MESA), Pittsburgh, PA, Revised and Reissued 4/97. Moe, T. (1998), ``Perspectives on traceability in food manufacture'', Trends in Food Science and Technology, No. 9, pp. 211-14. Rijn, Th.M.J. van and Schyns, B.V.P. et al. (1993), MRP in Process; the Applicability of MRP-II in the SemiProcess Industry, Van Gorcum, Assen. Scheer, A.W. (1998), Business Process Engineering: Reference Models for Industrial Enterprises, Springer-Verlag Berlin, Heidelberg. van Dorp, C.A. (1999), ``Requirements for ICT in supply chains ± tracking and tracing'', Perspectives of Modern Information and Communication Systems in Agriculture, Food Production and Environmental Control, Volume B, EFITA-Bonn, pp. 633-62. van Dorp, C.A., Beulens, A.J.M. and Beers, G. (1998), ``Chain reference information models: surveying the scope'', Third International Conference on Chain Management In Agribusiness and the Food Industry, Management Studies Group, Wageningen Agricultural University (WAU), Wageningen, pp. 321-31. van Es, R.M. and Post, H.A. (1996), Dynamic Enterprise Modelling, A Paradigm Shift in Software Implementation, Baan Business B.V., Barneveld. van Goor, A.R., Ploos van Amstel, M.J. and Ploos van Amstel, W. (1996), Physical Distribution: Thinking in Added Value (Dutch title), Stenfert Kroese, Leiden. van Twillert, J. (1999), Tracking and Tracing in Semiprocess Industries, Development of a Generalised Concept for the Baan Series, Wageningen Agricultural University (WAU), Wageningen. Weigand, A. (1997), Tracking and Tracing in Agri and Food (Dutch title), Kluwer BedrijfsInformatie, Deventer. Wilson, T.P. and Clarke, W.R. (1998), ``Food safety and traceability in the agricultural supply chain; using the Internet to deliver traceability'', Supply Chain Management, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 127-33.