10 replies to this topic

[Frank88maurice]

How hard or difficult is it to transition from BRC to SQF?

Thanks in advance

[Simon]

Hi Frank, I know this place is about good advice but here's a complete guess for you.
If you have a compliant BRC FSMS in place you will breeze through SQF provided you have a trained SQF Practitioner on site.

The only difficulty is having your manual aligned to the numbering of the SQF standard as it is likely aligned to the BRC clauses. That doesn't get you an NC or lose you certification it just makes the auditor earn their fee.

Now I'm going to hide whilst those in possession of 'the facts' shoot me down.



Regards,
Simon

[psunjka]

I would like to put a different twist to Frank's question: How hard or difficult is it to transition from SQF to BRC? Any opinions?

[bacon]

I would like to put a different twist to Frank's question: How hard or difficult is it to transition from SQF to BRC? Any opinions?

Well, I have recently popped over from BRC to SQF (at a different location and a totally different product type), it is rather easy for SQF Level 2, and should not be a problem for Level 3 (as BRC does not differentiate the 2). Hence it being a GFSI benchmark; apart from the wee little quirks like the "SQF Practitioner" that causes some confusion, but nothing that a $50USD and a 60 question on-line exam wont fix (vs. having an "original" £95.00 BRC Global Standard book on hand). I prefer the later.

Really, IMO, It all comes down to the CB on a GFSI benchmark. Some are crap (easy) and some are quite legitimately thorough. I have well passed 3rd Party audits that we should not have, as well as having a dam good system and got a poor score. The Standards are one level, and GFSI is another.

Conclution: do not worry about your GFSI standard, worry about your CB and their record: was it not Silliker that passed Sunland (voluntary recall that I remember quite vividly (sickened a total of 35 people in 19 states) rippled throughout the supply chain last year... is it not NSF that brags about giving the most NC's compared to other CBs? Personally, I'd go for NFS, more intense (and legitimate) scrutiny never hurt in getting Senior Management Commitment in line... you QA Managers know what I'm talking about. Have ya ever had an Aussi auditor? check the hoops they have to jump through in that country...

Who is with me for hanging a legitimate "Supplier Approval" program?!!!
This (above w/ Sunland) makes the "validation" rather difficult, eh.
How does one really know if these GFSI benchmarks will do the trick in protecting your brand reputation from being undercut by a slack supplier...

Note: This observation is from the lower 48 states (USA) 2013, other parts of the world may have a different story (Good, bad and ugly)... and it is wisdom to know the difference to protect lives and the bottom line.

Hope that gives you any insight Frank88maurice, any feedback is appreciated.

-Baron

Had to add this from Simon:

Now I'm going to hide whilst those in possession of 'the facts' shoot me down.

Cheers,
-B

Edited by baron, 03 May 2013 - 04:03 AM.

[ajbuilta]

Is there a spreadsheet that compares one code to another? 

[Scampi]

if you google it, you'll find lots of comparisons

 

Even though this is an 8 year old thread, the same is still true-------each has it's own nuances good and bad 

[SQFconsultant]

Easy, SQF Progrqm not as complcated.

[SQFconsultant]

Easy, SQF Program not as complcated.

[Charles.C]

Is there a spreadsheet that compares one code to another? 

Hi ajbuilta,

 

If you mean compares "content" such as individual clauses, the quest may be difficult. I had a look but all I could find were old/obsolete comparison charts.

 

You may find the analyses (and particularly the appended discussions) of these 3 interesting (2020) multi-GFSI-Standard articles of some value although sort of oriented to UK.. I was rather amazed at the relatively dominant usage of  BRC over SQF  both worldwide and even more so in UK.. Together with the (perhaps predictable) negligible number of SQF/CBs in UK. But not, afaik, in USA.

 

https://techni-k.co....hemes-to-brcgs/

https://techni-k.co....pared-to-brcgs/

https://techni-k.co....-your-business/

 

Although not containing full clause-by-clause comparisons..these recent articles (bar last one) did contain info. of some interest IMO.

 topics covered by major FS schemes.png   104.85KB   0 downloads

 Applicability major FS schemes across food supply chain.PNG   59.47KB   0 downloads

(extracted from -
 FS measures for horticultural produce,2020.pdf   1.19MB   3 downloads

 

 GFSI schemes SQF,BRC,FSSC22000 comparison,Eurofins Guide.pdf   318.23KB   12 downloads

 Making Sense of Third Party Food Safety Certification.pdf   1.4MB   4 downloads

 Comparison (condensed) for brc5 - sqf6(2011).pdf   376.27KB   8 downloads

[Sam D]

In my experience, it not a whole different.  After working with BRC certified company for lot a years, I moved into a company that wanted to get SQF certified. On writing their policy from scratch, all I could see was the similarity. There may be few things different here and there but I don't feel it's any thing concerning difficult.

If you have handled a successful BRC program, you can easily handle SQF.

 

-Sam

[Charles.C]

In my experience, it not a whole different.  After working with BRC certified company for lot a years, I moved into a company that wanted to get SQF certified. On writing their policy from scratch, all I could see was the similarity. There may be few things different here and there but I don't feel it's any thing concerning difficult.

If you have handled a successful BRC program, you can easily handle SQF.

 

-Sam

Hi Sam,

 

Thanks for directly answering the OP.

 

IMHO, the 2 standards are more like Apples and Oranges. Both IMO have major, but often different, user Skeletons in the Closet.

 

The numerous Posts appearing in this Forum suggest to me that Ease of Comprehension is one Skeleton shared by both Standards.

 

For me, with some exceptions, implementing SQF's interpretation of FS requires a distinct re-think as compared to BRC. Maybe something like Simon's comment in Post 2.

 

PS - the transition might perhaps have been a little easier in 2013 when this thread originated and FS Standards tended, IIRC, to be a little less cluttered with FS "newbies" such as food fraud, FSMA etc.