14 replies to this topic

[Simon]

Sounds interesting. Why are you doing this research and who is it for? Is it for commercial benefit or a college project? Please tell us more information about who you are and why you are doing this.

Regards,
Simon

[Simon]

No doubt it's a good discussion subject and one our members will have strong views on. I'm not sure I like the anonymity though; we like to keep things open here. So for a start are you Rob from SAI?

[Simon]

Simon (or should I call you Sherlock!!)

I am indeed Rob from SAI Global.

I was hoping to keep things anonymous in order to ensure I didn't prejudice or influence people.

I am not at any point going to be trying to sell, so didn't want to steer people to our website etc, but am purely gathering feedback and information in order to help us continually improve our service offerings and customer services.

I am sure as you say there will be lots of feedback, particualrly when people discover a cert body is listening to what they have to say for a change!

It's actually against the Forum Terms and Conditions to have multiple identities. Which one do you want me to delete?

[cazyncymru]

Hi Simon

Thanks for the questions.

It is from a business perspective rather than a college project, to allow us to provide a better service and give us an opportunity to listen to what customers and industry experts feel they want and need.

Having frequently heard that CB's do what they want, how they want etc I am aiming to address that by listening to what others have to say.

As mentioned it is an opprotunity for people to voice their thoughts and opinions hopefully to the benefit of the many.

I am sure the nature of the industry being what it is that no one would complain if an organisation wanted to improve their service, performance and offerings, particularly a CB!!

All questions will be general, and no commercial information, competitor details will be requested.

It is purely designed as a market review exercise to enable us to offer a better service so I would if possible like to keep things fairly generic not mentioning names, either ours or competitors etc. I hope you understand.

Regards
Rob

Hi Rob

I find it very uncomfortable that one CB is asking people to comment / complain/ pass judgements on another CB's performance.

I'm sure it must be unethical for one CB to collate such information on other CB's, and i'd be interested to know what the BRC's take on this kind of " Market Research" is.

I'm sure that you would justify your research as continuous improvement!

Caz

[Simon]

Rob,

When you say your posts have caused offence; no not really. Not offence but from the beginning I have kept a close eye on your posts. Over the years we have had new members come along with the sole motivation of garnering some business or traffic to their website. Some members come to give, some to give and take and some just to take. We can accept the first two no problem, and the third we can accept from those looking for solutions, but not the third when the member is commercially motivated. And after 6 years online we can tell a mile off.

When you say you have provided assistance on several occasions, as Robbie you have made 6 posts; here are a couple (I think your first two). And let’s not go into the PM’s.

http://www.ifsqn.com...showtopic=11508

http://www.ifsqn.com...showtopic=11006

How then should we judge you as a member?

The bottom line is we welcome all members and we also have many CB personnel as members and they contribute to the discussions. Of course we know a lot of members have commercial motivations, we all do, but they play the game. They post and help out genuinely without brazenly advertising themselves and maybe they have their contact details in their signature. No problem. It’s win-win.

I would like you to continue as a member Rob, but it’s up to you. I also think your topic could have legs if we can get over this. Having multiple identities on a forum is a big no no. You were unaware, which is no problem. All we have to do is delete one of your accounts and everything will be ok. No harm done.

It’s up to you, let me know.

Regards,
Simon

[cazyncymru]

Hi Simon

Thanks for the feedback, it doesn't come across very well does it.

I think I will take it on face value from Caz, if one member is uncomfortable providing information to a CB, whatever that information may be, then there will be others with the same thoughts. If members start getting suspicious of who is posting what, and why, and whether to reply or not it becomes counter productive to the purpose of the forum.

So I think it best if I leave everyone to continue with beneficial and open discussion and stick with the original decision to cancel both profiles.

I am sure there will be others who can provide the information I can, so no one will lose out.

Regards

Rob

Rob

I am uncomfortable with this for a number of reasons.

In a previous role, I used to work as the food safety auditor for a large company. This entailed auditing suppliers of both ingredients and packaging, so I am pretty au fait with both the BRC standard and the BRC / IOP standard.

During these audits it is pretty normal to look at the BRC reports. More often or not these corresponded to my findings, but now and then you'd find an auditor or CB and you'd wonder if they'd seen the same factory as you. What that did was alert me that the auditor or CB wasn't exactly thorough. I identified one auditor, that freelanced for more than one CB who never once identified a non-conformance. On my auditing I would find huge discepencies against the standard.

For me to "name & shame" that auditor here, or the CB's that he freelanced for would be completely unprofessional. If I have issues with that auditor, I would go to the CB's or to BRC themselves, armed with my evidence.

Secondly, imagine you were a member here and you read that a certain auditor or CB was referred to as being useless. I'd be horrified to think that my accreditation was carried out by this person. It is difficult enough to attain the standards without your efforts being belittled because an auditor wasn't up to the job.

Thirdly, if there were issues with an auditor, it would be prudent to raise that with the CB. It is their responsibility, as you well know, to ensure that it has in place processes to monitor and maintain the competence of the auditor to the level required by the standard. If I were a CB, and I had an auditor coming back with a high level of no non-conformances, I'd be questioning his competence. On saying that, it is my duty to ensure that the auditor offered to me is competent to carry out that audit...how many of us actually check?

I can understand where you are coming from, but I think that it would have been more honest if you had been upfront about who you were and what your intentions were. Also, are you doing this on behalf of SAI or for your own means? Yes, we do have stories about our CB's, I'm lucky in that in the past few years I have worked with more that one, and both have been excellent, however I know that is not always the case.

Try reading Section III paragraph 15 of BRC Food Safety issue 5. It may clarify a few things.

Caz

[Simon]

So I think it best if I leave everyone to continue with beneficial and open discussion and stick with the original decision to cancel both profiles.

Well I am very sorry to hear that Rob, but ok I'll take care of it.

Regards,
Simon

[poppysnoss]

Can I ask a really stooopid question here please - What is a CB???

[cazyncymru]

Can I ask a really stooopid question here please - What is a CB???

It's not a stooopid question!

CB = Certification Body....some one like SAI, Efsis, Micron 2, PAI to name a few

[poppysnoss]

Sheesh! I really should have known that!!! *Blush*

Thanks, Caz!