Skip to main content
Advantive

How Much Can a Mismanaged Recall Cost Your Business?

By Grace Barton Updated

When it comes to recalls, manufacturers stand to lose a lot more than just money.

If it seems like recalls are getting more common nowadays, that’s probably because they are. On average, we experience 10% more recalls today than a a few years ago in 2013. This may seem alarming, but it doesn’t reflect sloppier processors or more danger at the grocery, but rather the opposite. As regulations get stricter and testing methods get more advanced, we’re able to catch more problems, quicker, and hold our manufacturers to a higher standard. While this is great news for the average person, meeting these ever-increasing standards can be a big challenge for those in the food processing space. The unpredictability of manufacturing means that most food processors will deal with a recall at some point, and the costs of such an event cannot always be measured in dollars and cents.

On average, a food recall causes direct costs to the manufacturer upwards of $10 million. This is a huge number for any business, but it can be devastating to mid-sized or smaller companies that can struggle to survive through that much lost revenue. Along with having current product pulled from shelves at a loss, depending on how deep the recall issue runs into the supply chain, the processor may also face having to dispose of any possibly defective product or raw materials in storage.

There are many things that can be lost in a recall that are just as devastating, and often, harder to replace than money. Take for example consumer trust: over half of consumers report that they cease purchasing a product completely after it has been recalled, and studies have shown that a brand’s stock price will typically drop as much as 22% following a recall. Trust is one of the hardest things to rebuild, and in many cases, once it’s gone, it’s gone, impacting sales far into the future. On top of this, many of the largest retailers have very strict standards for their suppliers, and if a recall happens and the producer can’t react in time, they risk having their contract terminated. Once the effects of these losses begin piling up, that initial $10 million can seem like a drop in the bucket.

What can processors do to minimize these risks? The most crucial step is to ensure that you have a robust and reliable lot tracing system in place. Digitizing these processes is essential, as tracking on paper is not only slow and inefficient, but also introduces numerous chances for error into the process. Processors who can identify and react to problems quickly, with accurate data, suffer far fewer losses than those who cannot.

Ready to automate your lot tracing and recall management? ParityFactory can help! Reach out to us today and we’ll show you how our system can help take the fear out of recalls.

Grace Barton

Marketing Specialist

About the Author Latest Posts

Grace Barton is a digital marketing and competitive intelligence professional who crafts strategic narratives by bridging marketing insights with analytical expertise. At Advantive, she creates engaging, data-driven content tailored to the distribution, manufacturing, packaging, and quality industries. Her goal is to deliver impactful messaging that drives engagement and growth based on specific gap closure needs, whether responding to sales organization requirements, pinpointing gaps in content, or meeting immediate market trends.
She thrives on transforming competitive intelligence into actionable insights for the sales organization. Grace manages Advantive’s competitive intelligence platform, Klue, to equip the sales team with the battlecards and market data they need to stay ahead of competitors. Since launch, she’s built 28+ battlecards across four lines of business, ensuring the GTM strategy stays sharp.
Grace has a passion for leveraging market insights with storytelling to guide strategic decision-making, empower sales organizations, and nurture organizational growth.

Areas of Expertise: Digital Marketing, Competitive Intelligence, Strategic Narratives, Marketing Insights, Analytical Expertise

LinkedIn

Editorial standards

Fact-checking & editorial guidelines

Every article on advantive.com is written and reviewed against an internal accuracy standard before publication. Here's what that means in practice.

  • Product claims are verified by the brand team that owns the platform.

    When an article references InfinityQS, WinSPC, PQ Systems, Pinpoint, ParityFactory, ProPlanner, KiwiPlan, DDI System, VeraCore, or any of Advantive's other specialty platforms, the relevant product team checks technical statements about features, deployment, and current capability before the article goes live.

  • External statistics cite their source inline.

    When an article references industry survey results, regulatory benchmarks, or third-party research, the source is linked at the point of citation. Statements without an inline source link are first-party observations drawn from Advantive's product teams or customer base.

  • Publication and revision dates stay visible.

    The original publication date and the most recent revision date are both shown on every article. Topics that change quickly — AI capabilities, regulatory rules, product roadmaps — are revisited on a tighter cadence than evergreen reference content.

  • Corrections are issued openly.

    If a factual error is reported, the article is updated, the revision date advances, and material corrections are noted at the bottom of the article so readers can see what changed and when.

Found something wrong, or have a citation to add? Get in touch with the editorial team and we'll review it.

Subject-matter review

Reviewed by subject-matter experts

Advantive is a portfolio of 14+ specialty software platforms — each one built and maintained by a product team that has spent years inside a specific manufacturing or distribution discipline. Articles in technical channels are reviewed by the relevant team before publication.

  • Quality & SPC content

    Reviewed by the InfinityQS, WinSPC, and PQ Systems product teams — the platforms behind statistical process control, capability analysis, and gage management deployments across food, automotive, pharma, and CPG manufacturers.

  • Manufacturing operations & MES content

    Reviewed by the PINpoint, ProPlanner, ParityFactory, and VIA Information Tools teams, whose platforms run production scheduling, traceability, and shop-floor execution for discrete, automotive, and food-and-beverage manufacturers.

  • Packaging & converter content

    Reviewed by the KiwiPlan, Abaca, and AdvantZware teams, who build software specifically for corrugated, folding-carton, and packaging-converter operations.

  • Distribution, ERP & B2B commerce content

    Reviewed by the DDI System (inFORM ERP), Distribution One, VeraCore, Pepperi, and Commerce Vision teams, whose platforms run wholesale ERP, fulfillment, field sales, and B2B portals for specialty distributors and 3PLs.

Are you a practitioner with domain expertise to contribute? Get in touch — we accept guest contributions from operators in the industries we serve.