"In the end, I believe it is a fundamental right for the customers to know what they are buying, but lack of standardisation is adding a huge burden."
As part of The Data Advantage, we spoke with Karacasu Tekstil, a privately owned Turkish textile company established in 1996. Headquartered in Turkey, Karacasu Tekstil employs approximately 480 people and specializes in producing yarns from both natural and synthetic fibres, serving sectors including textile weaving and knitting, socks, denim, home textiles, and technical textiles. The company’s clientele features renowned global brands such as Nike and H&M.
Inside Tier 3 data Collection
Based in Kahramanmaraş, Karacasu Tekstil is a leading innovator in spinning technology, producing some of the first core spun yarns in Turkey, then expanding to open-end yarn production. Despite value added yarn production, impressive sustainability credentials, and partnerships with market-leading fibre producers, business is challenging.
Tough market conditions have forced a reduction in their workforce from 550 to 480, and diverging and increasing compliance requirements are increasing the physical and financial burden.
“The data collection and reporting workload has increased significantly over the last 10 years. In a typical month we are spending around 150 hours on data collection and reporting…”
“Currently we have 3 people working on the paperwork and data tracing, and this excludes the amount of time spent by the people inside the factory.”
LACK OF Data Standardisation IS COSTLY
While the volume of work is one challenge, the breadth of requirements is another:
“I believe it is beneficial for the industry to have traceability, but there is no standardization - every brand, entity or Tier 1 supplier is asking for something different.”
“Another disadvantage of the lack of standardization is that [all of] these requirements are key for doing business now, but the cost is getting difficult to bear with.”
The majority of the data burden is gathering documentation and some is tracked daily (such as BCI and GOTS) while others require occasional data entry into traceability platforms. The wide variation in material certifications is a particular challenge:
"For Oekotex, BCI, GOTS, OCS, GRS, FSC, RWS, European Flax, GOTS IVN best, Regenagri and some others, there are additional and varying requirements related to CMIA [Cotton Made in Africa]...”
“The [certifications] all serve the same purpose, but have different methods and it is too much work. We pay roughly 48.000 USD [per year] for certifications and it does not look like they are going to end [anytime] soon."
Data collection and preparation is generally done in spreadsheets, then uploaded to the various platforms as required by clients, via portals. Arifioglu highlights one less requirement for his spinning mill, compared to the other suppliers interviewed who operate laundry and dyeing facilities:
“We have not [used] High FEM [yet as] it is mostly for dye houses, but we will in the future with our [dyeing] innovation.”
Despite the burden, Arifioglu believes in transparency: "In the end I believe it is a fundamental right for the customers to know what they are buying, but lack of standardization is adding a huge burden."
With much of the data reported to Tier 1 suppliers rather than directly to brands, understanding the reasons why data is requested often isn’t possible:
"We believe they require it because they want to make sure we are really sourcing the materials from geographies that we say. I think one other aspect is they want customers to know what they are buying."
Where spinners do have direct interactions with brands is on audits, conducted via third parties:
"There is generally an inspector coming to our company at random intervals to make sure we are doing our practices in a rightful manner."
Here is what Arifioglu has to say on data streamlining and sharing: "I think there should be one standard for all [data requirements]. And then if this approach is really working on a mass scale in terms of customers having the opportunity to know what they are buying, then it is ok; but I don’t see much education from the brands towards the customers."
In closing
While current data demands handed up to Tier 3 suppliers lean heavily on materials documentation and certificates (obtained from Tier 4), the recently approved EU Product Environmental Footprint methodology thrusts Tier 4 impacts into the spotlight.
If today’s ambition is certifications as a proxy for ‘preferred’ or ‘low impact’ fibres, tomorrow’s is surely verified fibre impact data to calculate PEFCR scores that win in an increasingly competitive (and eco-incentivized) market. It’s probable that any additional data burden would fall on Tier 3 suppliers – a concern given existing expanse and cost of certifications.
This is an excerpt from The Data Advantage Playbook by TrusTrace. Get all the case studies from brands and suppliers, as well as The Compliance Canvas in The Data Advantage Playbook.
