Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo
- - - - -

Suggested Preventive Control HA Form - Please comment


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
4 replies to this topic

#1 Jason Young

Jason Young

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 25 posts
  • 111 thanks
4
Neutral

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Stillwater, OK

Posted 05 September 2016 - 04:28 PM

Preventive Controls Hazard Analysis form

 

Please critique and provide feedback. My thinking is to add a 3rd level of risk assessment.

 

1. greater or equal to 9: Most critical level = traditional CCP(process control)

 

2. greater or equal to 5: Regulatory Preventive Controls to control "Significant Hazards"

 

3. Less than or equal to 4: PRP's/GMP's control potential hazardsAttached File  Preventive Control Hazard Analysis 8 22 16.rtf   152.79KB   54 downloads

 

 

Jason


  • 0

#2 syju28380

syju28380

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 45 posts
  • 9 thanks
0
Neutral

  • India
    India

Posted 06 September 2016 - 03:53 AM

Hi Jason,

 

I am a beginner in Food safety and my comment may be silly; so apologies in advance. 

 

In the risk assessment, I believe multiplying "likelihood" and "consequence" to assess the" risk" (risk matrix) is more appropriate than adding them. 

As per this system, likelihood and consequence has to be 5 and 4 (or vice versa) to treat it as a CCP which I believe is not appropriate. 

 

Regards,

Syju


  • 0

#3 Jason Young

Jason Young

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 25 posts
  • 111 thanks
4
Neutral

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Stillwater, OK

Posted 08 September 2016 - 04:29 PM

Syju,

 

Yes, I agree, using multiplication vs. addition may create a better risk assessment.  Multiplication should make the values /assessment more sensitive to the extent of likelihood or consequence.

 

I like the addition approach because it is simpler.  I am attaching the risk matrix that I use.  You can find many similar risk matrix online.  Some add and others multiply.

 

 

Attached Files


  • 0

Thanked by 1 Member:

#4 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 12,590 posts
  • 3278 thanks
350
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:SF
    TV
    Movies

Posted 09 September 2016 - 09:09 AM

Hi syju,

 

As per previous post, both additive/multiplicative/hybrid methods for estimating risk  are in substantial use for both non-matrix and matrix purposes.

 

Yr question is a relevant one but afaik a consensus of preference does not exist.  I daresay this is because a very large range of different types of applications/probability distributions (eg discrete/continuous)  are involved. Plus a reluctance to complicate what has been considered an effective methodology.

 

In fact, over last 10-20 years,  a number of specific criticisms regarding matrix use have arisen in the literature. However these have mostly been ignored by the user communities since the risk matrix has provided an unusually convenient, pictorial, readily explainable tool for a  non-simple subject like risk assessment/risk ranking.

 

One potentially significant factor in the choice of  (x or +) calculation of risk is the nature of the (x,y) scales used for the risk matrix, eg linear vs logarithmic, the two options favoring multiplicative/additive respectively (most textbooks avoid such scale nuances). This is discussed in detail in this recent review -

Attached File  Recommendations_on_the_use_and_design_of_risk_matrices.pdf   612.44KB   28 downloads

 

A practical example of a (claimed) justified preference (multiplication) is here –

Attached File  Risk matrix methodology.pdf   1.24MB   27 downloads

(Pgs C37-C39)

 

Other publications seem relatively unconcerned, eg –

semi-quantitative (multi-criteria) analysis: scores for each scenario to be evaluated are combined with the appropriate weights and are combined to produce a final risk estimate using simple additive or multiplicative models.

Attached File  Risk assessment for control.pdf   1.25MB   28 downloads

(pg 30)

 

Personally, I would guesstimate that the majority of FS literature uses multiplication although exceptions certainly exist.

 

PS - One more useful discussion on risk matrix, particularly scales. Similar content to first above but maybe little more easily readable/explained.

Attached File  Risk assessment,challenges and recommendations.pdf   619.83KB   17 downloads


  • 0

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#5 Jason Young

Jason Young

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 25 posts
  • 111 thanks
4
Neutral

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Stillwater, OK

Posted 09 September 2016 - 04:19 PM

Charles,

Thanks - excellent information and support for the use of the risk matrix methodology.  I have had processors and auditors request support for the risk matrix, this will be very useful.

 

Thanks!

 

Jason


  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users