4 replies to this topic

[fgjuadi]

FYI - found this little reference file on the interwebz today - it lists all of the standards against codex by topic & section number -

 

Quite outdated (from 2009) , but illustrates that all of these audits are almost covering the same material (BRC is covering SQF, or AIB, etc) -

it'd be nice to see a 2014 version if only for reference.   

 

A lot of the time I will find myself advocating for this standard or that standard, and someone will say "Yes, but does that work for SQF? Or "Yes, but it's okay with ISO, too, right?", or, worst of all :"You can pass SQF/BRC/ISO without that", so it's nice to have something to help me easily list where criteria is found in our HACCP plan and in each standard.

[Snookie]

Very nice find....but your right it definitely needs to be updated.  It was funny to see the old numbering system in SQF and most likely that the structure changed with the latest versions might make it hard to follow but only skimmed it and will look at it later when I have a bit more time. 

[Charles.C]

FYI - found this little reference file on the interwebz today - it lists all of the standards against codex by topic & section number -

 

Quite outdated (from 2009) , but illustrates that all of these audits are almost covering the same material (BRC is covering SQF, or AIB, etc) -

it'd be nice to see a 2014 version if only for reference.   

 

A lot of the time I will find myself advocating for this standard or that standard, and someone will say "Yes, but does that work for SQF? Or "Yes, but it's okay with ISO, too, right?", or, worst of all :"You can pass SQF/BRC/ISO without that", so it's nice to have something to help me easily list where criteria is found in our HACCP plan and in each standard.

 

Dear magenta_m,

 

Similar text is one thing. Auditorial interpretation can be something else altogether. This forum is a good proof.

 

Rgds / Charles.C

[michaelgaspard]

Hi all, 

many thanks for your help,

it's exactly what i was thinking to do, to compare, so already done, 

thanks,

Kind regards,

Michael G

[john.kukoly]

I have seen that checklist used in the past.

 

Beyond the dated part, you have to keep in mind how it is presented. It's looking to see of the basic elements are there, and does not look at all into anything beyond codex HACCP.  Sort of like having a checklist comparing cars - 4 wheels, steering wheel, seat, seatbelt, engine. All cars have the same basic elements therefore all cars are the same. I way oversimplified, but that was te approach of that checklist.  So yes, from a basic food safety element comparison, most programs contain the same elements. It does not provide any mechanism to look beyond this level, specifically into accreditation aspects, well beyond the checklist.

 

You can have gross comparisons - things like is there an unannounced option, is quality included, is fraud protection included, do non-conformities need to be closed or can they be left as ongoing risks, how competent auditors are, quality of integrity programs, and on and on. The challenge would be to have someone who is unbiased create the comparison. The other ones I have seen are typically done by someone with a vested interest in promoting one program over the others.

 

John