This was not our first SQF Audit. First time with THIS auditor, but our third overall.
Or perhaps I misunderstood.
S.
Dear Setanta,
it's equally likely that i misunderstood.
Of course, the auditor may have had no idea regarding your "fix".
Perhaps i should elaborate.
I predict yr comment regarding reluctance / refusal by the auditor to make suggestions is one of the most frequent complaints from auditees.
I guess the reason for refusal is one or more of the following -
(a) Standard Rules laid down for auditors which dictate their handling of an audit, possibly with the threat of dire consequences if detected.
(b) Simple lack of knowledge regarding alternatives for correcting a "discovered" technical defect. consequently hiding such ignorance behind the "no consulting allowed" tag. (= my previous posted comment)
© Fear of having a (subsequently proven) wrong suggestion being quoted back to them. Maybe a corollary of (a).
I tried some googling around (a, c) but failed to find any relevant black and white instructions at all. Perhaps some poster can point a link to anything specific ?
(b) I have tended to be disappointed with auditors' knowledge regarding technical details of food science, processing and equipment. However the day-to-day scope of an auditor's work probably makes it inevitable. Or perhaps auditees simply underestimate the specialist knowledge which they have accumulated.
For example, one lead auditor I met early in my career claimed to be unaware that "a maximum product temperature around 4degC is an accepted target for preventing bacterial growth of many common pathogens". Validation was requested. At the time i suspected extreme trickiness but the reality was just a limited exposure to auditing refrigerated goods. Hence the auditor's being accompanied by a particularly inquisitive colleague (spy?) who clearly
was a specialist in the product area. After showing the auditor an Internet page, we moved on. Maybe some people here would have responded more aggressively ?
So, regarding an auditor's refusal to "consult" due to "rules", this time i would much like to see some actual validation.
I have occasionally tried the "Have you seen other people do it like this?" approach and got some feedback but only 50/50 at the best, even after a superlative lunch.
I noticed these 2 documents in passing which seemed quite informative -
dealing with auditors.pdf 136.29KB
20 downloads(general application)(overlong, meandering and confrontational but does make some points)
auditor competency assessment australian - nfsac_final_report.pdf 878.24KB
24 downloadsFood safety oriented. Attempts to compile / evaluate / satisfy the expectancies placed on auditors. The "consulting" opportunity is naturally one of the discussed features.
(rather heavy-going to read but contains an impressive collection of opinions and some innovative, risk based, grading methods)(for example see pgs 29-section 2,2,2; pgs149-50, section A2; pg 32 et seq,).
Presumably SQFI courses may have some relevant content as to the audit-permitted dialog scope.
Rgds / Charles.C