How to avoid the most common data collection mistakes

If you're a packaging producer, accurate packaging data isn’t optional - it’s essential. But why does data quality matter, and how can you steer clear of the risks that come with inaccurate data?

Accurate data gives you clearer insight, more stable forecasts, and peace of mind. So naturally, every company must be prioritising high-quality packaging data, right? Not always.

We spoke with Stuart Woodham, our experienced compliance Auditor, about the common mistakes he’s seen producers make when collecting packaging data – and his advice on how to avoid them.

Q: Why is quality packaging data essential?

A: The quality of your raw data directly impacts the reliability of your Packaging Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) costs (including Packaging Recovery Notes and waste management fees). Get the data right and you can better ensure long term budget consistency. Trust me, your budget holders will thank you.

But accuracy isn’t just a best practice - it’s also a legal requirement. Under EPR regulation 45, producers must provide raw data to their compliance scheme that’s as accurate as reasonably possible. It’s a high standard that regulators like the Environment Agency expect you to meet in an audit.

Good quality data also supports better sustainability reporting, helps you track progress on plastic reduction targets, and informs project planning.

Q: What are the top data collection mistakes that you’ve encountered?

A: The most common mistakes I see can be broken down into three areas:

Number one: Taking a piecemeal approach to gathering data

EPR is complex. When layered with intricate supply chains and complex business structures, gathering accurate data becomes a major challenge for producers. As a result, it isn’t uncommon for producers to resort to approaching data collection in a fragmented or ad hoc manner; reacting as deficiencies are unearthed by chance.

This approach often leads to inconsistencies, duplication, and gaps in data. Packaging may even be misclassified into unnecessarily costly EPR reporting categories - needlessly driving costs up.

Understandably, a piecemeal approach to compliance will feel easier to manage in the immediacy. However, systematically considering each compliance obligation will drive a consistent method of data collection, which should improve its completeness and accuracy, leading to more reliable EPR budget forecasts.

Number two: Not knowing where your data comes from

If your packaging doesn’t change much between EPR submissions, it’s tempting to keep reporting the same numbers year after year. But ask yourself: Is that data up to date? Where did it come from?

We often see producers relying on legacy data for their submissions. Not checking for updates to data provided by suppliers may result in you missing the potential cost saving benefits of a ‘lightweighting’ project, or changes made to packaging materials. Supplier improvements could markedly reduce your EPR costs, so make sure you’re capturing this in the data you submit to your compliance scheme.

If the data came from your own team, question that too. When was it recorded? How was it measured? Is it still valid? Blind trust in old numbers markedly increases your risk of non-compliance.

Number three: Not doing real-world checks

One of the simplest ways to improve data accuracy: weigh your packaging! It sounds obvious, but many producers skip this crucial step.

Completing real world checks of your own packaging (and that of a supplier), is one of the simplest things you can do to improve the accuracy of your data and ensure you’re remaining compliant with EPR regulations.

Real-world checks, (weighing packaging, confirming materials, verifying branding) help ensure you’re reporting accurately and only reporting what you’re truly obligated for.

We’ve seen many instances where real world checks can reveal a co-brand that's the true single point of compliance (the obligated party) under EPR, saving the producer from paying unnecessary fees.

The bottom line is: don’t make assumptions. Double-check.

Q: So, how would you recommend improving data quality?

You might now be thinking: “we’ve probably made a few of these mistakes… but how do we improve?”

We get it. For most producers, especially those dealing with complex operations or high packaging volumes, improving data quality doesn’t happen overnight. You need a deep understanding of your internal processes and of EPR regulations to get it right.

That’s where we come in....

Our compliance review service is a systematic deep-dive into your company structure, operations, packaging flows through your business, compliance obligations, data collection points, packaging categorisation, and data completeness.

The process begins with considerable prior research into your company structure and products, followed by a full day at your site. We will conduct real-world first-hand observation of your operations, and comparison of your EPR data against a sample of your packaging.

Using this approach enables us to inform you of problems there may be with your data collection methodology, and most importantly what you need to do about it – all in a candid and transparent way to leave you with clear, actionable insights to improve your packaging data and validate your points of good practice.

Whether you’re ready for a full-scale data overhaul and assurance on what you’re doing right, or you just want to address your most pressing issues, we have options to suit different goals and budgets, designed to save you the time and effort.

Stop repeating the same data mistakes. Collect data in a way that you can rely on and ensure you’re paying the correct EPR fees.

If you’re interested in how we help you stay compliant and build confidence in your packaging data, contact us today.