BRC Manual
Thanks,
Elliot
It is time consuming but I like spreadsheets for this sort of thing and it will also work as a gap analysis to make sure you cover it all and is further adaptable to make into an index and audit template too.
I would not advise referring to specific clauses by number as the next time the standard is updated it will likely throw them all out of sequence and you will have to revise everything...
Firstly hi to everyone on the forum, it's good to be back after a long hiatus. Can anyone offer guidance on the structure of a BRC manual, do you write it as per the clause numbering in the standard or some other way. It seems clause by clause is easiest for all involved including when under audit. Just looking for different approaches from members.
Thanks,
Elliot
Dear Elliot,
Assuming you mean a Quality Manual, the simplest construction method is to "reverse engineer" the Standards specific clause requirements. This procedure does tend to automatically generate a close match for numbering style of course as per previous post.
Other people just like to be creative. IMEX some auditors are not enamoured by such textual dexterity and start looking for specific omissions to hit on.
Rgds / Charles.C
I would suggest considering not doing a "BRC Manual" but rather "your company" quality management system manual, which should be tailored to the way things are done in your company, the quality culture, key success factors, etc., and would probably include some more things than just the requisites of BRC (even though this is an excellent standard). For example cost, yield or efficiency issues. Unless somebody thinks this should be separated from the quality manual? Also environmental and employee safety issues.
I mean the content and not the form or structure of the manual.
What happened to us is that that there is a tendency to distort the purpose of the QMS on just trying to comply with the certification audit, and the documents or systems are not used along the year to have a better business and customer results, among other things.
Just a comment, thanks for your feedback.
Francis
Hi,
I would suggest considering not doing a "BRC Manual" but rather "your company" quality management system manual, which should be tailored to the way things are done in your company, the quality culture, key success factors, etc., and would probably include some more things than just the requisites of BRC (even though this is an excellent standard). For example cost, yield or efficiency issues. Unless somebody thinks this should be separated from the quality manual? Also environmental and employee safety issues.
I mean the content and not the form or structure of the manual.
What happened to us is that that there is a tendency to distort the purpose of the QMS on just trying to comply with the certification audit, and the documents or systems are not used along the year to have a better business and customer results, among other things.
Just a comment, thanks for your feedback.
Francis
Huh, if we did that the manual would e very thin!!!
Yes, I know what you mean!
Huh, if we did that the manual would e very thin!!!
But maybe you could clarify more please?
Thanks
If you want to keep strict adherence to the clause numbering, I guess it will require some editing when a new version comes out. I'd rather do that every three years if it meant that the "flow" of the audit were linear.
Marshall
I have laid the manual out as per the standard, but also include the other things which are necessary for the efficient running of the business, the idea is that we communicate to everyone that Quality is everybody's responsibility. I have decided that this year it will no longer be referred to as the 'BRC Manual' but as the Quality and Food Safety Manual, so that it is not perceived as a 'project' each year, but that it is subsumed into the day to day running of the production process.
Progress is slow, which will always be the case with culture shifts. The Company are undergoing restructuring and it is a great opportunity for applying the principles of the standard to actual operations. I think that making the relevant managers/ supervisors etc aware of the minimum requirements ( BRC requirements per se), helps with this.
I'll let you know how things go, as we have scheduled our audit 4 months early to get it to a time of year when it is not such a pain in the aspidistra
Ultimately the layout of the manual is up to you, so long as you can provide an auditor evidence of compliance in a timely manner, I have noticed that if there is a lot of time spent looking for stuff get's them irritated, the confidence with which you present evidence makes a difference to your outcomes ( this is just my personal opinion, based on the last audit).
I am going to the corner now to write my lines.....
I will not make smart remarks
I will not make smart remarks
I will not make smart remarks....
The list of our documents is:
QAP000
3
Quality ManualNovember 2012
QAP000.1
7
Management Organisation ChartNovember 2012
QAP000.2
2
Management ResponsibilitiesSeptember 2012
QAP001
3
Product Safety & Quality PolicyAugust 2012
QAP002
2
Hygiene Policy & RegulationsNovember 2012
QAP003
1
Health & Safety PolicyOctober 2010
QAP004
1
Environmental PolicyOctober 2010
QAP005
1
Training PolicyOctober 2010
QAP006
1
Control PoliciesOctober 2010
QAP007
1
Customer Enquiry Process – to be updatedOctober 2010
QAP008
1
Sales Order ProcessOctober 2010
QAP009
2
Supplier Approval ProcessNovember 2012
QAP010
2
ToolingNovember 2012
QAP011
2
Purchasing ProcessNovember 2012
QAP012
1
Pre & Manufacture ProcessOctober 2010
QAP013
2
Maintenance ProcessNovember 2011
QAP014
1
Non-Conforming GoodsOctober 2010
QAP015
2
Housekeeping & CleaningNovember 2012
QAP016
2
Audit ProcessNovember 2012
QAP017
2
Personal HealthNovember 2012
QAP018
1
TraceabilityOctober 2010
QAP019
2
Incident & Product RecallNovember 2012
Just saw your question regards manual structure. Defiantly do not use the BRC structure! This has caused a lot of trouble when changes were made from Issue 4 to Issue 5 as the new chapter 1 Management Decision was included. You 'll never know what issue 7 will bring. A lot of companies had to re-write their manual. I have implemented many FSMS and always used the structure of the ISO 9001:2008. It is proven and works. You can than tweak it to BRC. One last thing. You may need to comply at some stage with other standards such as IFS or FSSC etc. Again we have other structures and numbering etc. Do you own thing e.g. ISO 9001 structure. Hope this helps. Ulrich
Firstly hi to everyone on the forum, it's good to be back after a long hiatus. Can anyone offer guidance on the structure of a BRC manual, do you write it as per the clause numbering in the standard or some other way. It seems clause by clause is easiest for all involved including when under audit. Just looking for different approaches from members.
Thanks,
Elliot
I may have a different perspective. We have gone fromPrimusGFS to SQF 2000 to the newly updated SQF 7. Each time we rearranged our documentation to follow the new standard. Not a minor undertaking.
Within a week after our SQF 7 audit, we had a surprise visitfrom another customer that had their own standard. Spent a good amount of timejumping back and forth trying to find the documents they were asking becausetheir standard was in a different order.
I will not want to go through that again. I am setting upour manual according to OUR standard. Followed by a thorough indexing and crossreference.
Hope that helps
Firstly hi to everyone on the forum, it's good to be back after a long hiatus. Can anyone offer guidance on the structure of a BRC manual, do you write it as per the clause numbering in the standard or some other way. It seems clause by clause is easiest for all involved including when under audit. Just looking for different approaches from members.
Thanks,
Elliot
Marshall
Sorry for being flippant, Charles has firmly slapped my wrists!
I have laid the manual out as per the standard, but also include the other things which are necessary for the efficient running of the business, the idea is that we communicate to everyone that Quality is everybody's responsibility. I have decided that this year it will no longer be referred to as the 'BRC Manual' but as the Quality and Food Safety Manual, so that it is not perceived as a 'project' each year, but that it is subsumed into the day to day running of the production process.
Progress is slow, which will always be the case with culture shifts. The Company are undergoing restructuring and it is a great opportunity for applying the principles of the standard to actual operations. I think that making the relevant managers/ supervisors etc aware of the minimum requirements ( BRC requirements per se), helps with this.
I'll let you know how things go, as we have scheduled our audit 4 months early to get it to a time of year when it is not such a pain in the aspidistra
Ultimately the layout of the manual is up to you, so long as you can provide an auditor evidence of compliance in a timely manner, I have noticed that if there is a lot of time spent looking for stuff get's them irritated, the confidence with which you present evidence makes a difference to your outcomes ( this is just my personal opinion, based on the last audit).
I am going to the corner now to write my lines.....
I will not make smart remarks
I will not make smart remarks
I will not make smart remarks....
Thanks trubertq! I appreciate your comments
Francis
I did divide my manual into sections that correspond to the standard to make it easier to correlate the procedural requirements to the standard but I can append new procedures to any section without upsetting existing pagination or numbering systems.