Employee Food Safety Training: New Research
This blog is always looking at ways to improve the effectiveness of employee food safety training. Many research studies report a significant improvement in the employee’s food safety knowledge but this does not translate into better food safety behaviors.
What is the best way to produce effective food safety behaviors? Articles in this blog emphasize the important first step of understanding required behaviors. However, while the employee may attend the training and listen to the lecture or video, they might not be intent or motivated to act.
The article from the Journal of Food Science suggests that
…results show that although an employee increased their knowledge in food safety, it did not mean that this translated into proper food safety behavior. In most studies, knowledge was seen to have a significant increase after training, but no significant changes in behavior were observed after training was given.
This suggests that using a video, lecture or web based lesson will only be a first step. While it is important to provide direct food knowledge about the desired behavior, it is also critical to model the behavior and allow employees time to practice. Corporate trainers estimate that employees need to practice behaviors eight to ten times under supervision if they are to reproduce the behavior independently. Behavior based training is the important final step.
One critical violation often associated with food borne illness is improper hand washing. In one study, employees were given both knowledge-based (a video based on ServSafe) and behavior-based training (a soap dispenser demonstration and a ten minute weekly meeting about handwashing).
Measurements were made of the success of each step, before and after. In the knowledge segment, employees were quizzed about the video. In the behavioral component, the use of the soap dispenser was linked to music for eighteen seconds. In the associated meeting, performance feedback, monetary rewards and goal setting were presented. Observations of employee behavior were observed over two weeks.
The results showed significant improvement in handwashing behavior for each step. When knowledge was the only factor used, handwashing frequency increased by 22% from 55.85 to 71 times per shift. This improvement was statistically significant (p<0.05). When behavior was added to the program, frequency increased to 102.7 times per shift for an increased statistical significance of p<0.001. Handwashing duration and handwashing behavior (detailed wetting and washing) also increased significantly after behavior-based training was added (p<0.001). The authors conclude that ‘behavior-based training can improve employee behavior…with lasting effect… there was a significant difference (P < 0.05) after behavior-based training (42.7 times). Even more, handwashing frequency was still significantly higher (30.8 times) than baseline data even after withdrawing the motivational soap dispenser and safety meetings. (Note about statistics and their importance: the ‘p’ value indicates the likelihood that the results could not occur by chance. A value of p<.05 indicates that the same results might occur by chance in five of 100 times.) The authors go on to discuss barriers to compliance imposed by rush service periods. While knowledge-based training might improve performance during low-demand service times, ‘when peak service time came, the knowledge-based training was not enough to trigger proper handwashing techniques; thus knowledge-based training is not enough (ed. by itself) to decrease risks of foodborne illnesses associated with hand washing’. Conclusions? Knowledge-based training has many advantages. It is cheap, convenient, and not time-consuming. Employees can watch a video, and the employee training component has been met. Managers do not have to develop a program, nor do they have to attend or present a program. They can purchase a ready-to-use product. In low rush hour settings, this component might be useful. It is not nearly as effective by itself, however, especially during rush hours or when managers are not available to monitor activities. Further, the effectiveness of knowledge not applied to behaviors decays rapidly; retraining is important. Adding a behavioral component appears to send employees a message that managers are actively involved in training and that the behavior is more significant. Adding that component improves the program results, even over extended times. Patricia McFarland, Aleksandra Checinska Sielaff, Barbara Rasco, Stephanie Smith. Efficacy of Food Safety Training in Commercial Food Service ’ Journal of Food Science V. 84 (6), May 2019. Published in https://ift.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1750-3841.14628