3 replies to this topic

[nekam2k7]

My name is Ajomiwe Imelda Nneka,I am presently working with PT INDOFOOD - Nigeria makers Indomie instant noodles as their Quality Control Chemical Analyst with over six year working experience in Quality Assurance/Control . I have also worked as a Microbiologist as well as a Technician all under Quality Assurance/Control Department.

 

I had like to know is I can do a FSSC certification programme instead of FSMS,since from what I understand it is a level ahead of FSMS? And FSMS is what is in vogue in my Nigeria,so running a programme would put me at an advantage.

 

Please I need immediate replies to this question.

[Simon]

Hi, how are you doing? 

 

FSMS = Food Safety Management System

 

FSSC is standard that specifies the requirements for a FSMS and it is GFSI benchmarked.

 

You cannot go wrong with any of the GFSI standards such as BRC, IFS, SQF and FSSC.

 

Are your customers asking for any particular standard? Maybe a good idea to discuss your plans with some of your big customers and see if they have any preference.

 

Regards,

Simon

[CLEMENT GRIFFITHS]

A warm Canadian welcome Ajomiwe, this is a nice forum you will like it. I agree with all that has been said so far; historically in my experience managers tended to select the program based what we call " wiggle room" . For some reason they felt that scheme A was a bit easier to pass than scheme B.

 

The program is called a Food Safety Quality Management system or FSMS for short , if you were running under ISO9001 they call it a QMS or Quality Management System.

 

Two quick observations first ISO 9001 is rapidly looking more like FSMS as we see more of HACCP coming in , for example we see a lot of wineries certified to ISO9001 and not FSSC. Second , when I first started auditing in 2012 the bias was that ISO22000 now FSSC  "on  steroids" ( just kidding) was the best. However after auditing to SQF and now working as  a BRC coordinator I can tell you the gap or difference between GFSI standards  meaning ( BRC, SQF, IFS and FSSC) is negligible.

 

In fact I am improving my BRC allergen program right now and my source or guidance is coming from SQF!

 

One thing that you should look at however is the reporting format. Choose a format that works well for your management team. I love the FSSC format but that choice is  CB ( certification body) driven meaning if you have a choice of 3 CB's the report formats may vary for the same standard. In short try to get a look at a report from each prospective CB for the standard you are interested in.

 

Finally 2 quick points . First  resist the pressure to rush to certification, get the FSMS working for at least 6 months before applying for certification, this gives time to iron out the bugs. Second work hard not just to know the standard ( knowing clauses) but understanding at a shop floor level what effective implementation requires or should  look like. For example if you have to do corrective action in your plant  what should the program look like if it is going to be effective.

 

Again good luck.

[Charles.C]

A warm Canadian welcome Ajomiwe, this is a nice forum you will like it. I agree with all that has been said so far; historically in my experience managers tended to select the program based what we call " wiggle room" . For some reason they felt that scheme A was a bit easier to pass than scheme B.

 

The program is called a Food Safety Quality Management system or FSMS for short , if you were running under ISO9001 they call it a QMS or Quality Management System.

 

Two quick observations first ISO 9001 is rapidly looking more like FSMS as we see more of HACCP coming in , for example we see a lot of wineries certified to ISO9001 and not FSSC. Second , when I first started auditing in 2012 the bias was that ISO22000 now FSSC  "on  steroids" ( just kidding) was the best. However after auditing to SQF and now working as  a BRC coordinator I can tell you the gap or difference between GFSI standards  meaning ( BRC, SQF, IFS and FSSC) is negligible.

 

In fact I am improving my BRC allergen program right now and my source or guidance is coming from SQF!

 

One thing that you should look at however is the reporting format. Choose a format that works well for your management team. I love the FSSC format but that choice is  CB ( certification body) driven meaning if you have a choice of 3 CB's the report formats may vary for the same standard. In short try to get a look at a report from each prospective CB for the standard you are interested in.

 

Finally 2 quick points . First  resist the pressure to rush to certification, get the FSMS working for at least 6 months before applying for certification, this gives time to iron out the bugs. Second work hard not just to know the standard ( knowing clauses) but understanding at a shop floor level what effective implementation requires or should  look like. For example if you have to do corrective action in your plant  what should the program look like if it is going to be effective.

 

Again good luck.

 

Hi Clement,

 

With respect to the "red" text,  i respectfully disagree.

Although the standards mentioned are nominally benchmarked to GFSI, some have fundamentally different operational objectives. Whether this aspect is obscured from an audit POV i would not know. Various other Standard-specific differentiations have been discussed in earlier threads here, for example the crypticality of  text and interactions of BRC clauses, the consistent  variations within SQF auditors regarding their interpretation of certain items. The iso22000-haccp philosophy is, IMO, basically different to all the others. And, IMO, thanks to OPRP, not in a good way.

It would be interesting to attempt to rank the ease of certification within the group mentioned.

 

With respect to the "blue" text, can you clarify how "food safety/haccp" is now being certified within the  context of the iso9001 standard. I was not aware of this trend/opportunity. If the result is a disappearance of OPRP it would be an example of "continuous improvement" IMO.