In a food safety management system, identifying a non-conformity and creating a ticket is an important first step toward operational excellence. But what happens next? Who follows up? How quickly is it resolved? And what if corrective actions are delayed? These are precisely the questions that the ticket escalation answers with clarity, structure, and automation.
Ticket escalation is a built-in mechanism that ensures critical non-conformities, whether discovered during audits or routine checks, do not go unresolved. It prevents stagnation by introducing a time and risk based escalation chain. The approach is preventive: it ensures that responsibility moves up the chain of command when progress stalls, so that no deviation is left unaddressed, especially in critical processes related to food safety or compliance in general.
Uncovering the Logic of Escalation
The foundation of escalation lies in the company-defined risk evaluation system, which is mapped directly into the Check Form. Each ticket is automatically assigned a risk category, a priority level, and a due date. If this deadline is exceeded without action or resolution, predefined escalation rules are triggered. These rules are based on various parameters such as risk class, responsibilities, and time progression. Depending on the escalation rule, specific parameters of the ticket are adjusted — such as increasing its priority, changing the risk level, or reassigning responsibility.Broader Impact
This process proves especially effective in complex environments such as multi-site retail chains, production facilities, or organisations with shared responsibilities across various roles. While escalation respects existing organisational hierarchies, it remains flexible and adaptable to the specific structure. A ticket originally assigned to a technician can be escalated to a team leader, and then further to a regional quality manager or plant director. At each escalation level, the system ensures that the responsible person has both visibility and the authority to act on the ticket.
Furthermore, escalations work hand in hand with ticket reminders. While reminders keep a deviation on the radar of the currently responsible person, escalation ensures that, in the absence of action, another responsible party is engaged. This combination guarantees that the path from detection to resolution of a non-conformity remains active, traceable, and transparent at all times.
Escalations can also be triggered manually. For example, a quality manager may determine that a recurring deviation — even if not yet formally overdue — requires the attention of senior management. In such cases, the ticket can be manually escalated, assigned a higher priority, and flagged for immediate action.
Some of the key features of the escalation process include:
- Automated filtering: Only tickets matching defined risk, age, and ownership criteria are escalated - avoiding unnecessary noise.
- Role-based escalation: Non-conformities move up through management tiers - from individuals to supervisors, to department or to top-level managers.
- Priority upgrades: Escalated tickets can automatically shift from "standard" to "urgent".
- Notification cycles: Emails can be repeated (e.g. daily, weekly) until the ticket is resolved.
- Current escalation status: Tickets clearly show whether they are in early, mid, or final escalation stage.
To support transparency, each ticket displays its current escalation status within the dashboard. Users can easily see whether a ticket is in early-stage escalation, mid-cycle escalation, or has reached top-level review. Managers benefit from escalation filters, which allows them to track open non-conformities not only by department or location, but by escalation tier.
Finally, the integrated escalation mechanism complements ticket processing - it fosters a culture of accountability. When staff understand that unresolved tasks don't disappear but rather rise in visibility and importance, they are more likely to act proactively. Over time, this reduces the overall number of escalated tickets, not by suppressing alerts, but by promoting a discipline of follow-through and prompt correction.