Specification management for food manufacturers: the complete guide

Key facts

• BRCGS Food Safety Issue 9. requires a specification review at least every 3 years, and sooner when a supplier or a regulation changes.
• Undeclared allergens. caused 34% of US recalls tracked by Food Safety Net Services (FSNS) in 2024, more than any other cause.
• Specification storage. Specright's "State of Specification Management" report found 45% of companies keep specifications on shared drives and 43% in Excel. Only 20% use a product lifecycle management (PLM) system.
• Dependency. Every finished product specification depends on the raw material and packaging specifications beneath it. An error in one of those flows up into the finished product.

What a specification is

A specification is a signed agreement about what a material or product must be, written against limits someone can measure. Specification management is the process and the system a manufacturer uses to create those agreements. It also covers approval and version control, along with how the agreements reach the people who need them. While the approved recipe tells production what to mix, the specification sets the measurable requirements for the result and is the document a customer or an auditor checks you against.

Food manufacturers work with three kinds of specification, and they depend on one another. Raw material specifications describe what you buy, while packaging specifications describe what holds the product. The finished product specification sits on top of both, so a mistake in a supplier's allergen data or a film's food contact status ends up in the finished record without anyone retyping it. That dependency is why a specification can't be managed as a standalone document.

For customer-branded products, BRCGS Issue 9 clause 3.6.3 asks you to get formal agreement on the finished product specification from the customer, or to show you've tried. Your own brands carry no such external signature, so the internal approval chain does all the work. The guide "What is a product specification? A definition for manufacturers" goes through the definition in more depth.

First, check where the master copy of each specification lives. If the answer is "it depends on the plant" or "the latest email", you're managing files. You haven't started managing specifications yet.

What a product specification contains

A product specification contains everything someone needs to produce and sell the product consistently, with requirements for checks and labelling. It covers identity and composition, with allergen information. It also sets measurable limits and shelf life, alongside the label text. The exact field list changes with the category and the customer, but the groups below show up in almost every food specification. Retailer templates add their own fields on top.

Raw material specifications

A raw material specification records what a supplier has agreed to deliver for one ingredient or processing aid, and the limits you'll accept it against. It names the supplier and the manufacturing site and states the country of origin. It sets out composition and allergen status, with the applicable limits for microbiological hazards and contaminants. It also records certifications such as organic or halal, and any genetically modified status.

These records carry more risk than their length suggests, because you didn't write them. The supplier holds the facts and you depend on what they send. BRCGS Issue 9 makes raw material risk assessment a fundamental clause (3.5.1.1), reviewed when a supplier or material changes. A spec sheet that's three years old tells you what the supplier did three years ago. And the quality of the risk assessment depends on the quality of that sheet.

A spice blend from a broker needs detailed information on origin down to the farm region and on adulteration controls. A bulk sugar supply from a certified refinery needs far less. Set the depth of each record by risk. Don't copy one maximal template onto every material, because suppliers stop filling in forms that ask for things that don't apply to them.

Check the supplier's last confirmation date on each raw material record and whether its allergen fields cover cross-contact on the supplier's site. Also check that the record links to the finished products that use it. That last link tells you which products are affected when a supplier changes a process. The guide "Raw material specifications: the supplier data problem" covers each of these in detail.

Packaging specifications

A packaging specification defines each pack component closely enough that a converter could make it and your line could run it. It records material and structure, with dimensions and their tolerances. It also specifies weights and colour standards. It also links to the artwork version and to food contact compliance. Primary packaging touches the food, so its specification carries the most regulatory weight.

For plastics, Regulation (EU) No 10/2011 requires a declaration of compliance at every stage of the supply chain except retail. That declaration states which substances were used and confirms the migration limits are met. It has to be renewed when the composition or production changes. A packaging specification that doesn't point to the current declaration can't show the pack is compliant.

Packaging records are the weakest file in the product record. The packaging team owns the dimensions, while the artwork sits with marketing or an agency. Food contact paperwork ends up in the quality team's inbox. Nobody holds the whole picture, so a change to a film supplier can go live without anyone updating the declaration. The guide "Packaging specifications: why they are the weakest record in the product file" looks at the causes. "Artwork management: where labels get delayed" deals with the artwork side.

Before you sign off a pack change, confirm that the declaration of compliance and the component specification refer to the same material. Check the artwork version against that material too. If one of them is out of step, the specification is wrong.

Who approves a specification

A product specification is approved by the people who answer for each part of it. Technical or quality answers for safety, while R&D answers for composition. Regulatory answers for the label. Packaging signs off the pack, and for own-label products the retail customer signs last. One named person, the technical manager, is accountable for the release as a whole. The others approve their own sections.

The split matters because approval only means something when the approver checked what they signed. A regulatory specialist's confirmation that the allergen declaration matches the composition leaves the validity of the shelf life study for someone else to confirm. When everyone signs the whole document, each signature covers less than it seems to, and audits expose that.

In a single-site company of 80 people, it's fine for one technical manager to approve almost everything as long as that responsibility is written down. In a group with 12 plants, approval rights split between central and site teams. Your process has to say which decisions the plant can make, such as a local raw material substitution, and which go to the centre.

Decide who approves before you configure any system. C+P Consulting agrees decision rights and approval order before it builds anything in its harmonisation work, because a system only enforces the rules you give it. The guide "Designing specification approval: who signs in what order" covers role mapping in full.

Review your current approvals by asking each signer to explain which fields they checked; a signature without that explanation is a formality.

In what order

Approve sections in the order in which their facts depend on one another, so each signature rests on confirmed data. A sequence that works for most food manufacturers looks like this:

Steps 3 and 4 can run in parallel when the composition is stable, which saves days on a busy launch; step 4 must follow step 2. A regulatory approval given before the composition is final is a guess. You'll have to redo it when R&D changes a percentage.

When teams approve the label first because the artwork deadline is closest, a later formula change leaves the approved label out of step with the product. A system that blocks downstream approval until the upstream section is signed prevents this. Check whether yours does, or whether the order only exists in a procedure document.

1. Raw material and packaging specifications are approved first, because the finished product inherits their data.
2. R&D signs off the composition and the process, which fixes the formula and the method.
3. Technical or quality approves allergen controls and microbiological limits, along with the product's shelf life.
4. Regulatory approves the ingredient and nutrition declarations calculated from the approved composition. It also approves any claims calculated from that composition.
5. Packaging and artwork approve the label against the regulatory text.
6. The customer approves, for customer-branded products.
7. The accountable owner releases the specification, and it becomes the version in force from a stated date.

Which version was in force

You prove which version was in force by keeping every approved version with its effective date and linking production batches to the version they were made against. When a customer complains about a batch from March, you need to retrieve the exact specification that applied that day in minutes. Rebuilding it from emails doesn't count.

Versioning needs rules about what counts as a change. Most manufacturers split changes into two kinds. The table below shows a common split, though your own thresholds depend on the category and on customer contracts.

BRCGS Issue 9 clause 3.6.4 asks for documented reviews at least every 3 years, so even a review that changes nothing needs a record for audits.

Versioning breaks when plants print a specification and keep working from the paper copy after a new version is released. And spreadsheets get saved as "final_v3_revised" with no effective date at all. The guide "Versioning specifications so everyone knows which one is current" covers the rules. To test your rules, choose one product and one past date. Then time how long it takes to find the version in force.

Templates across categories

A single template can serve every category if it has a common core of fields that every product shares and conditional fields that switch on by category. Bakery needs category-specific fields such as baking loss, while beverages need carbonation levels and dilution ratios. Both share identity and composition fields, with allergen information. They also share nutrition and shelf life fields, and these common fields carry most of the compliance risk.

The alternative is one template per category. It looks simpler at first and costs more every year after. Templates drift apart when someone adds a field to the dairy version that never reaches the snacks version. Reports across the portfolio stop working because the same fact sits in differently named fields. When a regulation changes, you update five templates and miss one.

C+P Consulting's harmonisation work uses one common-core specification structure with conditional fields to accommodate differences between categories or plants. The hard part is agreeing what belongs in the core. Make that call field by field. Ask whether the field is needed for safety or the label in every category. If yes, it's core.

An attribute such as "country of origin" under three different names across your category templates will cost you at data migration time. The "Product data management" pillar covers why.

Templates across plants

Use the same template structure across plants, with local fields only where a plant does something the others don't. Keep one specification with plant-specific sections for a product made in two plants so its requirements stay aligned. Without that, a customer gets different answers depending on which site they ask.

Plants diverge because they were acquired with their own systems or built spreadsheets when the central template didn't fit. Their auditors also accepted local formats for years. Fixing this starts with knowing what exists. C+P Consulting's harmonisation method begins with an audit of every place that holds specifications, including templates and spreadsheets as well as systems. The audit records each one's fields and approvers. Design comes after that audit, and it's the order I'd recommend to anyone, whoever does the work.

A global confectionery manufacturer needed one source of truth for specifications and formulations across its plants and had no earlier system to build on. C+P ran a standard-first implementation with a structured fit-gap and early conference-room pilots, so business users validated the design before configuration. The result was a single source of truth for specifications, live on time against plan.

Give migration order as much attention as design by moving active products first, after their data has been cleansed against the agreed structure and with checks to prove it arrived intact. Leave discontinued products until later or keep them archived. The guides "Standardising specification templates across plants" and "Your specifications live in too many places" go further into both steps. Before you start, count how many places hold a specification today. That number is your baseline.

Getting specification data from suppliers

To get reliable specification data from suppliers, request it in a fixed structure and check it against your own requirements when it arrives. Require the supplier to confirm it on a schedule. Free-form PDFs make each of these harder. The steps below work whether you use a supplier portal or a structured spreadsheet:

A 2006 US study of 91,000 new and changed products found that more than 60 percent of data entries needed correction, as reported by Learn About Logistics. That study covered general product data. Specification data from food suppliers has the same weaknesses, plus allergen fields that carry legal risk.

Under BRCGS Issue 9 clause 3.5.1.6, approval of a supplier by questionnaire requires traceability verification on first approval and then at least every 3 years. So a questionnaire is a scheduled obligation. You can't send it once and forget it.

A large manufacturer has the leverage to require suppliers to use its portal; a small manufacturer that must accept and transcribe the supplier's own format depends more on the checks in step 3. The guide "Specification management software: what to look for" compares portal features. Whichever tool you use, check how many active raw materials have data older than their reconfirmation date. That number shows how exposed you are.

1. Define the fields you need for each material risk class before you contact anyone, so you only ask for what you'll use.
2. Send a structured questionnaire or portal form. Supplier sheets vary in format and skip fields they don't think matter.
3. Check each return against your requirements for allergens, including cross-contact, and origin. Also check contaminant limits and certificates with expiry dates.
4. Reject or query incomplete returns at once. Record each query with its date.
5. Link the approved data to every finished product that uses the material.
6. Set a reconfirmation date and require suppliers to tell you about significant changes before them.

The guides behind this page

This page covers the subject end to end. Each sub-topic has its own guide that goes deeper, and the table shows where to go for each question. Outside specification management, the Regulatory compliance pillar covers labelling law, while Product data management covers data governance. PLM implementation covers system delivery.

Where to start

Start with the audit. List every place a food product specification lives today, with its fields and approvers. That list informs the common template and approval order, as well as the migration sequence. Teams that skip it design a structure for the specifications they think they have, then discover the rest during migration, when changes cost the most. Put approval rights on paper during the audit, while the people who hold them are still easy to find.

C+P Consulting helps food manufacturers put specifications into one governed structure that covers approval order and supplier data. To talk through your situation, book a 30-minute conversation.

FAQ

More articles