Life involves three types of decisions: must do, could do and should do. Among these, the “must” decisions are the easiest because external forces often make them for us. These are actions that must be completed due to obligations or rules. For example, paying taxes in the United States is a “must” decision. Regardless of personal feelings, people comply to avoid penalties or jail time. It’s straightforward because the consequences of inaction are clear and immediate. Once completed, most individuals move on with their year, repeating the process annually without much thought.
In contrast, “could” decisions are far more complex and overwhelming. These represent the plethora of options available to us, offering opportunities to choose any path forward. While the abundance of options is a privilege, it can also be paralyzing. This is illustrated by a metaphor of customers in an ice cream shop, faced with endless flavor combinations. Excitement quickly turns to overwhelm as they struggle to choose, often defaulting to the simplest or first option. This behavior demonstrates how, when faced with too many possibilities, people often settle for what feels easiest rather than what might be the best choice.
The same dynamic applies to decision-making in other areas of life, including food safety. Many professionals in the field fall back on the simplest programs or policies they encounter early in their careers. Over time, these established practices persist, not because they are optimal, but because they are functional and easy to maintain. Whether someone is new to food safety or has years of expertise, the challenge lies in navigating a vast array of choices without the certainty of a “right” answer. Food safety, like medicine, is a practice developed through experience, mentorship and learning from past events.
Next are “should” decisions, which are the most complex and nuanced. These decisions sit in a gray area between “must” and “could,” requiring a balance of personal ethics, professional responsibility, and context. Unlike “must” decisions with clear rules, or “could” decisions driven by open-ended possibilities, “should” decisions often involve ambiguity. For food safety professionals, these decisions dominate their work. They constantly navigate scenarios where the right answer isn’t clear until after the fact, such as deciding whether a missing plastic knob likely fell into a production vat or assessing the safety of products after a refrigeration failure.
The difficulty of “should” decisions lies in their reliance on judgment rather than rules. While it’s the food safety professional’s role to ensure food is safe for consumption, they must also ensure products are still viable to sell. Overly strict decisions might eliminate all risks but could leave no product to distribute. Conversely, leniency might preserve inventory but increase potential dangers to public health. This constant balancing act highlights the complexity of the “should” category, requiring professionals to weigh risks, outcomes and ethical considerations in real-time.
In the end, life’s decisions are rarely black and white. The “must” decisions are the simplest because they are dictated by external forces. The “could” decisions represent boundless possibilities but often lead to overwhelm. And the “should” decisions, which merge elements of the first two, are where most of life—and especially professional roles like food safety—exists. These decisions require the courage to operate in uncertainty, relying on experience, mentorship, and a commitment to doing what seems best in a world full of gray areas.
Western Growers Science team recognizes that the challenge for the Produce food safety professional is difficult and increasing with research leading to enhanced understanding of our environments and potential risks. Navigating the “should” decisions in day-to-day food safety decision-making can be overwhelming, especially within fresh produce where the complexity of the supply chain and production environment is high, and the direct ability to manage all variables is low. Western Growers is here to help, and we are building a library of tools and information to make “should” decision-making easier. Through our programs, we are supporting the industry by building resources to optimize learnings on risk management, increasing produce food safety expertise through mentorship, collaboration and educational materials and designing transformational systems like GreenLink® for enhanced food safety data utilization.
Interested in cultivating the future of produce food safety? Join us.