7 replies to this topic

[gcse-fhp]

This is a challenge recently posed to me: Food safety and quality system management is becoming too bugged down with ever-increasing need for information and data recording – “paperwork” (on paper or on computer). What is the answer to this besides the usual “just do it”?

Edited by gcse-fhp, 28 January 2012 - 02:03 PM.

[GMO]

Shop floor paperwork. Do a 'brown paper exercise". Work through your process and be honest about what you need, e.g. traceability, CCP recording, oPRP recording, PRP recording where necessary, quality attribute recording, H&S recording. Does anything fall out of that remit? Is there any duplication? Could you automate some of the recording so it's not done by people? Is any of it done too frequently?

As for FSQMS, mine just keeps growing and growing. The one which 'felt' the smallest though was the one I started from scratch and wrote myself. My quality manual was only 6-7 pages long. In it I referenced all the procedures which will make moving to version 6 BRC a piece of cake because you can move around where the procedures are referenced really easily. Now I'm stuck with an unwealdy document all now out of order, probably duplicating itself. After our BRC audit, I'm tempted to start again from scratch!

[George @ Safefood 360°]

The paper-work burden experienced by food businesses maintaining food safety systems has long been that big (and getting bigger) elephant in the room.

Food safety and quality management systems are like any other management system found in an organisation. Management define what it is they want to do or achieve, put systems in place to achieve it, record compliance and then review and improve. In this respect, they are no different except in one obvious and somewhat perplexing way.

Let's take financial management systems. There was once a time when manual book keeping was the way we all kept on top of this. Now we would be had pushed to find a food business who does not use some form of financial account software system to manage this routine and repetitive process. Indeed more and more of us use such a solution to maintain our personal finances backed up with online banking and convenient smart phone apps.

Other processes such as payroll, HRD and stock control now benefit from technologies designed to improve efficiency and reduce paperwork. Yet, food safety remains the poor relation in the food business management family when it come to the application of technology to make life easier.

I visited a food business in London this week to speak about their food safety system and had the opportunity to view their paper-based system which occupied two walls, floor to ceiling, with manuals and lever-arch folders. This is scene I have seen more times than I can recall.

In my opinion the answer gcse is the application of information technologies (IT) which are built specifically for the challenge of maintaining food safety management. IT has already proven itself for other management process and food safety deserves the same benefits.

George

[GMO]

Absolutely George. There are already the IT systems out there too but IME, people are a bit reluctant to use them because they're nervous about auditor and customer responses and also I've experienced the situation where the IT doesn't move fast enough. We are all facing change on an at least monthly basis to our forms, quality systems etc to improve, meet standards, in response to incidents and from audit findings but I've found some IT systems are not able to meet the requirements of, say, BRC and are inflexible to change.

Personally my start point is always to reduce what you have before you bring in IT. Quite often extra paperwork is brought in as a knee-jerk reaction to an incident when in reality it might have been overkill or there might have been a simpler way of doing things.

I also think people perceive IT based systems as "less work" for the shop floor. Not necessarily true. They have to be designed very well to ensure they aren't at least as laborious as paperwork; often they're more so. Another concern is capturing the person doing the tests. Trust me, passwords just will not do. They're not secure!

As an interim measure, have you ever thought of scanning paperwork in? Some companies will do this for you and then at least it resolves what to do with paperwork from 2 years ago you're not allowed to throw out yet...

[George @ Safefood 360°]

You are correct GMO, IT is not a solution unless it is well designed and does what it says on the tin.

But I think the solution has to be designed for the specific needs of food safety and the standards that must be met.

Scanning of documents into a document management system is one part of the equation but does not really address the problem. I was in one large food business a number of months ago who purchased a document management system to try and reduce the paperwork burden. However in order to use it they needed to take on an additional person to scan in all the documents and records. So this solution resulted in additional human resources and cost... hardly a solution in my opinion. But the manager involved who made the decision to get the system for the right reasons could not be seen to have created an additional layer of work in the organisation and therefore had to stand by this sub optimal solution.

The value of an IT solution comes from eliminating paperwork from the outset. Data needs to be collected automatically or directly into a form via computer, tablet or smart phone, securely stored and accessible and without major IT support. This means the use of Web based or 'cloud' technologies. Generic compliance solutions don't provide a solution since they do not account for the specific food safety requirements and users then need to maintain paperwork to show compliance.

So what is needed is specific food safety solutions, aligned to food safety standards which can be updated quickly as standards change. This means web or cloud (software as a service) solutions are the way forward IMO.

[GMO]

For scanning, I meant some companies will do this for you as in you can pay them to take away your paperwork, scan it and store it for you. It can work out to be cheaper than the storage costs for paperwork and you would not need an extra member of staff.

There are web based systems and you can put anything into a cloud. The problem is making it flexible enough to be able to predict what changes Tesco, BRC, M&S etc will ask for next week. You can't guarantee it. If you leave it completely open and flexible, where is the pay off for the software developers?

[gcse-fhp]

GMO and George,

Thanks you for joining this conversation and for your suggestions. There may not be a one-stroke panacea but there are points in your suggestions that will work if properly combined in real life applications. It is a common understanding that if you cannot avoid it (whatever “it” is), you must find ways to deal with it. In this case “it” is “information and data recording”. This includes ensuring the validity, usefulness, effectiveness, consistency, completeness, and the integrity of documented or recorded information.

At the planning stage, aside from the general reluctance to bother with planning, there is the observed practice of managers who simply take bundles (of say pre-requisite programs) from elsewhere and paste their companies’ names on them. The worst of these managers do not even check to see if some of the generic content applies in their operation.

I have heard food facility owners and managers say: “It is too much trouble and a waste of time for them to plan before doing what they have already been doing for years”. Hence, to these individuals, the documentation of procedures and maintenance of records are done only to please the inspectors and auditors.

There is also the issue of the reluctant operators on the plant floor. Some operators work the information and data from memory onto paper at the end of the day’s work. This is even considered to be comparatively prudent.There are operators who would wait up to a week or more to record data after-the-fact. This poses a challenge to the integrity of what is recorded.There are also operators who record what is expected instead of what is actually measured or observed because it is “too much of a border” to go through the actual measurement or observation exercises.

The cost of IT solutions, the timidity about using them, distrust of such solutions et cetera, are some hurdles with regards to these solutions. Nevertheless, they do make sense.

It is my growing belief that a technocratic approach to the management of “paperwork” is the answer. This means that the suggestions from you (GMO and George), and other contributors should be seen as gold mines by the technocrat. It is possible to piece an excellent system together from these suggestions.

Edited by gcse-fhp, 28 January 2012 - 03:18 PM.

[George @ Safefood 360°]

I take your point GMO and also gcse. There is no one solution to fit all. Nonetheless, the essential problem is one of a management process that generates mountains of paperwork. And this is not a new problem. It has been around as long as man has cut down trees to make paper and decided to install systems in organisations.

The 'cloud' in and of itself is not a solution. It is how we use this new technology that provides us with opportunities to overcome this old problem. Much of this opportunity comes from SaaS or Software as a Service. Using the web as a platform to provide solutions that meet compliance demands but flexible enough to account for the local variations in how this compliance need is met is the real opportunity.

The service providers can for example provide a platform to set up, record and generate reports on all of the main and well defined PRP's, Management and HACCP processes. With SaaS these tools can be accessible anywhere and capture the data at source either through existing data logging systems or manually entered into a web enabled device - the result is no paperwork generated that needs to be stored, scanned etc. And then the real benefits begin. IT can check the data against specification, report, alert and schedule tasks. These service providers can also track changes in standards and regulations and in a timely way update the service. This was something we were able do with the new BRC Issue 6, for example. Conduct a gap analysis, identify new requirements and work flows and update the solution quickly. There are many other benefits to do with live streaming of alerts, recalls etc which is old rope now for these technologies.

It is a brave new world for our profession, i feel. Great discussion...