Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo

Severity vs Likelihood Table for SQF Code Quality Threat Analysis

Share this

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

FurFarmandFork

    Food Safety Consultant, Production Supervisor

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 1,264 posts
  • 590 thanks
206
Excellent

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oregon, USA

Posted 21 February 2018 - 10:43 PM

Hi All,

 

Finalizing my new Food Quality plan for my 8.0 audit and rebuilt by likelihood vs. severity table for my "quality threat analysis" to follow a HACCP style review. Figured I'd share this since I found it helpful to get in the mindset of such an analysis and it was great to clarify the difference between the two (hazard vs quality threats) in my plan(s).

 

Enjoy!

 

Attached Files


Austin Bouck
Owner/Consultant at Fur, Farm, and Fork.
Consulting for companies needing effective, lean food safety systems and solutions.

Subscribe to the blog at furfarmandfork.com for food safety research, insights, and analysis.

nwilson

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 105 posts
  • 46 thanks
42
Excellent

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bay Area, CA

Posted 22 February 2018 - 12:03 AM

Thanks for sharing I am working on the SQF Quality Code currently as this is useful information.  


:coffee:


Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 20,542 posts
  • 5662 thanks
1,544
Excellent

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

Posted 22 February 2018 - 07:58 AM

Hi 3F,

 

Did you not like SQF's earlier (more generic) suggestion ?

 

Attached File  sqf 5x5 quality risk matrix.png   42.06KB   101 downloads


Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


Thanked by 1 Member:

FurFarmandFork

    Food Safety Consultant, Production Supervisor

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 1,264 posts
  • 590 thanks
206
Excellent

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oregon, USA

Posted 22 February 2018 - 03:46 PM

Nope. Though I must admit I didn't know it existed until you posted it.

 

I don't like including "recall" for quality concerns, that's a regulated term in US and it doesn't belong in my "quality" plan.

 

I'm not sure how "recall" is above "rejected shipment" anyway, if all lower risk issues were rejected, what would we be recalling? At what point the issue is found is not related to the seriousness of the issue.

 

Also hate the matrices that don't multiply X*Y, it hurts my brain, but that's a personal issue.

 

My first draft included CPMU benchmarks for liklihood (based on historical complaint rate), but ultimately they needed to be flexible as we eliminated issues and I want the chart to be consistent year over year. Mine reflects the actual conversations with management we have regarding risk and customer service.


Austin Bouck
Owner/Consultant at Fur, Farm, and Fork.
Consulting for companies needing effective, lean food safety systems and solutions.

Subscribe to the blog at furfarmandfork.com for food safety research, insights, and analysis.

adamperry2235

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 52 posts
  • 18 thanks
6
Neutral

  • United States
    United States

Posted 06 March 2018 - 06:16 PM

Thanks for the table. Its similar to what I have. I had an inspector ask why I didn't use the SQF recommended one and my answer was simply that I liked mine better. It was more logical to me. He insisted I should use the SQF one. I love fact vs opinion audits.



Thanked by 1 Member:

aebanno

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 5 posts
  • 1 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Canada
    Canada

Posted 31 August 2018 - 07:38 PM

Hi 3F,

 

Did you not like SQF's earlier (more generic) suggestion ?

 

attachicon.gif sqf 5x5 quality risk matrix.png

Hi Charles. I like the matrix. How do you compute the Risk Level for the SQF Risk analysis Matrix for Quality Issues? In my Hazard risk assessment, the formula is Severity x Probability = Risk. Thank you (email: xxx)


Edited by Charles.C, 01 September 2018 - 02:01 AM.
sorry deletion but emails are spam magnets


Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 20,542 posts
  • 5662 thanks
1,544
Excellent

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

Posted 01 September 2018 - 02:00 AM

Hi Charles. I like the matrix. How do you compute the Risk Level for the SQF Risk analysis Matrix for Quality Issues? In my Hazard risk assessment, the formula is Severity x Probability = Risk. Thank you (email: xxx)

 

Hi aebanno,

 

It will depend on "Quality" Risk Assessment for the Product / Your Process.

 

Personally i rather agree with 3F/Post 4 but SQF apparently have their own opinions.


Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


jcieslowski

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 196 posts
  • 61 thanks
32
Excellent

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male

Posted 04 September 2018 - 08:00 PM

My only gripe (not that it affects me in any way) is that 9 should not be a CQP.  Not only is it a visual outlier, but saying '10 or above' seems so much more... 'balanced'.

(yes, my gripe is an aesthetic one)



aebanno

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 5 posts
  • 1 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Canada
    Canada

Posted 05 September 2018 - 03:16 PM

Hi All,

 

Finalizing my new Food Quality plan for my 8.0 audit and rebuilt by likelihood vs. severity table for my "quality threat analysis" to follow a HACCP style review. Figured I'd share this since I found it helpful to get in the mindset of such an analysis and it was great to clarify the difference between the two (hazard vs quality threats) in my plan(s).

 

Enjoy!

Hi FFF. This is great. With this we can start to do the Quality Threat Analysis. Anything in red is Significant Threat? Using your Matrix,  Q1: Based on the likelihood of occurrence (before applying the control measure) and the severity  (Customer Impression of the Quality Defect), is this quality threat  (needs to be controlled)? YES: This is a significant quality  threat. Go to Q2. NO: This is not a significant quality threat.     

 

How will you proceed with Q2 to Q5 for the Significant threats? Do you have an example? Thanks.


Edited by aebanno, 05 September 2018 - 03:19 PM.


Brendan Triplett

    Grade - PIFSQN

  • IFSQN Principal
  • 511 posts
  • 131 thanks
106
Excellent

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Rugby, Military History, Reading

Posted 10 September 2018 - 01:57 PM

Hey all.  I worked with NSF pretty closely with this program and this is similar but is a bit more printer friendly and makes the section pretty cut and dry.

 

Attached File  Food Safety Risk Analysis Matrix.docx   12.47KB   311 downloads


Vice President and SQF Practitioner in Pennsylvania
Brendan Triplett


FurFarmandFork

    Food Safety Consultant, Production Supervisor

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 1,264 posts
  • 590 thanks
206
Excellent

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oregon, USA

Posted 10 September 2018 - 02:54 PM

Hey all.  I worked with NSF pretty closely with this program and this is similar but is a bit more printer friendly and makes the section pretty cut and dry.

 

attachicon.gif Food Safety Risk Analysis Matrix.docx

Hi Brendan,

 

Note that this thread is specifically discussing the food quality code, the matrix you uploaded is for the food safety code. Your food quality plan should never be looking at safety issues.

 

 

Hi FFF. This is great. With this we can start to do the Quality Threat Analysis. Anything in red is Significant Threat? Using your Matrix,  Q1: Based on the likelihood of occurrence (before applying the control measure) and the severity  (Customer Impression of the Quality Defect), is this quality threat  (needs to be controlled)? YES: This is a significant quality  threat. Go to Q2. NO: This is not a significant quality threat.     

 

How will you proceed with Q2 to Q5 for the Significant threats? Do you have an example? Thanks.

Hi aebanno,

 

It really depends on the quality threat you need to control. I don't really like the decision tree/5 questions in practice, I think it adds confusion as it feels like it was intended to help you figure out whether something you're already doing is actually a CCP/CQP, rather than actually analyzing a hazard/threat and determining if/where/when it needs to be controlled in the entire process flow.

 

I suppose here's an example:

 

Quality threat: >40% of potato chips are broken per bag.

 

Significant? Sure, it's happened before and people hate it, if we didn't take steps to mitigate this would happen often.

 

Are there steps in my process where I have control over this issue? Depends on root cause, but could be material handling, storage, stacking, bag seals, bag inflation, etc.

 

Some of those will be CQP's, others may not depending on risk and other downstream controls (sorting etc.).


Austin Bouck
Owner/Consultant at Fur, Farm, and Fork.
Consulting for companies needing effective, lean food safety systems and solutions.

Subscribe to the blog at furfarmandfork.com for food safety research, insights, and analysis.

Thanked by 1 Member:

Brendan Triplett

    Grade - PIFSQN

  • IFSQN Principal
  • 511 posts
  • 131 thanks
106
Excellent

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Rugby, Military History, Reading

Posted 10 September 2018 - 03:03 PM

Hey FFF,

 

Good catch.  Quality of course looking at a totally different set of concerns, I believe that verbiage could be adjusted for a good template to work in.  Design is sound, information is for something different altogether.  Thanks for the catch!


Vice President and SQF Practitioner in Pennsylvania
Brendan Triplett


PRomero

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 1 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Mexico
    Mexico

Posted 14 September 2020 - 10:19 PM

thank you so much for sharing!





Share this


Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: sqf quality code, level 3, level III, Critical Quality Point, CQP, quality threat analysis, hazard analysis, complaints

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users