Gap analysis between SQF 2000 and ISO 22000

Great topic for sure. Has anyone looked at the differences between ISO 22000 and SQF 2000? We are SQF 2000 right now and concidering going ISO 22000. Perhaps a way you may want to go instead of downgrading to just HACCP. If anyone has any input to comparing the 2 standards, please share...

Thanx,

Matt

Does anyone have a gap analysis between SQF and ISO 22000 to share with Matt?

Regards,
Simon

Great topic for sure. Has anyone looked at the differences between ISO 22000 and SQF 2000? We are SQF 2000 right now and concidering going ISO 22000. Perhaps a way you may want to go instead of downgrading to just HACCP. If anyone has any input to comparing the 2 standards, please share...

Thanx,

Matt

Hi Matt

Not used SQF 2000 much. I might look at doing a full comparison if there's some interest.

Looking at the two standards SQF is much more prescriptive particularly with site prerequisite standards. It also has a lot of useful guidance notes.

ISO 22000 distinguishes between Prerequisite Programmes and Operational Prerequisite programmes and has different requirements for validation of these. ISO 22000 has more requirements for preliminary information required prior to the hazard analysis e.g product description, material characteristic, food safety team, intended use and flow diagrams.
ISO 22000 has more specific communication requirements especailly within the food chain.

Regards,

Tony

Dear lakelobster / matt,

This document (though slightly old for iso 22000 [2006]) contains some relevant info. Esp see the tables in annex 4 and preceding discussion.

food_certification_standards_compared.pdf   799.72KB   339 downloads

Rgds / Charles.C

added -

this up-to-date article is also quite informative on a more macro level -

http://www.foodsafet...20090607/?pg=42

Matt,

I was recently comparing ISO 22000 (we were registered in May 2009) to SQF and found that they are similar but SQF also includes elements of ISO 9000.

FSSC 22000 (which combines ISO 22000 and PAS 220) would have more similarities and was accepted by GFSI this year as an equal to SQF, BRC, IFS, Dutch HACCP.

I would say it is mostly a preference thing. Some like the systematic approach that ISO uses and some don't. In the end either are capable of giving you good results.

The important thing for the industry right now seems to be meeting GFSI guidelines.

TS

Dear tsmith,

Hmmm. I remember reviewing the sqf 2000 standard here some time ago and pointing out some, IMO, very dubious haccp-related definitions in the standard. It seems that GFSI did not agree with me.

I have no particular objection to GFSI creating an empire but I wonder if BRC actually care about the GFSI philosophy.

I am also somewhat sceptical about laying out a list of prerequisites as appears to be the objective on PASxxx (haven't read it yet so perhaps there is a "minimum" included somewhere?). I presume the team of ISO 22000 felt the same although they probably went far too far the other way.

Rgds / Charles.C

Ah, yes Charles, it is sort of like deja vu all over again. We had this discussion in June. And yes, ISO seems to have a history of going from one end of the spectrum to the other in huge leaps.

Whats the difference...

In fact, Matt, for your reference, there are several threads in the Misc. Food Safety Standards that may provide some additional insight to your question.

Dear lakelobster / matt,

This document (though slightly old for iso 22000 [2006]) contains some relevant info. Esp see the tables in annex 4 and preceding discussion.

food_certification_standards_compared.pdf   799.72KB   339 downloads

Rgds / Charles.C

added -

this up-to-date article is also quite informative on a more macro level -

http://www.foodsafet...20090607/?pg=42

Thanks for the links Charles.

A few interesting bits from the 2nd one:

BRC has 326 Requirements.
IFS has 250 Requirements.
SQF 2000 has 418 doument requirements and 429 on site checks.
It doesn't quote the number for 22000. This is probably due to ISO 22000 being less presciptive and " dependent on activity, size of organisation, nature of the business etc."

It also comes up with a figure that 88% of Product Recalls are due to GMP failure.

Regards,

Tony