10 replies to this topic

[karina.j]

Hi 

I work for company that has BRC accreditation and is currently looking at IFS as per customer request.

 

I am currently doing my MSc in food technology and have the assessment to do.

Assessment is to review SQF2000 and critique its application in my workplace, outline advantages and disadvantages of undertaking certification.

 

Can someone please tell me what was the reason in your companies to choose SQF standard?

 

As far as I know undertaking BRC was dictated by our customers. Most of the standards are focusing on the same requirements with small differences so everything depend on recognition by customers.

 

to be honest I am not entirely sure what to write in this review

 

thank you in advance for your help

[Charles.C]

Hi karina,

 

SQF2000 was terminated ca. 2012 ?

I assume yr scope is limited to Food.

 

Assessment is to review SQF2000 and critique its application in my workplace, outline advantages and disadvantages of undertaking certification.

 

 

Not sure if you meant regarding  "certification" per se or specifically to SQF itself. I assumed the latter since the former is easier to (textbook) answer. (the former option would require yr defining "certification to "what"/"whom" ? eg GFSI, non-GFSI ?)

 

There are differences in concept/approach/implementation between all the GFSI-FS - recognised Standards, notably BRC,SQF,IFS,FSSC22000. The differences have been frequently discussed at various places in this Forum over last 10 years or so.

 

Reviews/Comparisons of these Standards have been published in the general FS Literature.

 

Can someone please tell me what was the reason in your companies to choose SQF standard?

 

There is probably a "related" poll here on this already. If not, you might devise one.

 

I think you are correct that the choice of many users of these GFSI standards has been dictated by the requirements of their own customers. This often results in Geoographical demarcations.

However I suspect that other reasons may influence in certain areas. For example, i opine that iso22000/fssc22000 is more popular in Asia with both producers and receivers due to its flexibility and market differences.

 

Personally i suggest you initially do a general Literature search and compare the opinions with the various posts in this Forum and yr own experience. You might also usefully study the comparitive  structures of  the Standards themselves as shown in the various cross-matrices posted on this Forum, there are obvious differences.

 

Just for example, a few differences between BRC/SQF are listed below. The comparisons with other Standards will vary.

 

(1) BRC usage is probably heavily concentrated toward UK. SQF probably towards USA. Statistics are available.

(2) BRC contains substantial non-FS material due to its own parallel objectives of due diligence. SQF focuses solely on FS-related topics in Lvl2. non-FS added in Lvl3.

(3) BRC IMO is more prescriptive but both Standards have some segments whose actual meaning/intent is "mysterious".

(4) BRC has one Standard for all types of Food. SQF is modular. The differences have their own consequences.

(5) BRC is heavily oriented to requiring risk-based procedures/documentation. SQF much less so.

(6) BRC (IMO) is more forthright regarding it's expected scope of response to the Clauses in its Standard. But often only at a Price.

(7) BRC offers little free Guideline material. SQF offers a large amount but the content is sometimes of debatable agreement  with respect to user's auditorial findings

(8) BRC maintains the textual content of it's Standard more in line with current trends in Global FS. Some of the SQF Standard contains (IMO) errors which have been retained for at least 10 years. Some of it's long-term website content is quantitatively in disagreement with its Guideline materials.

(9) The BRC/SQF audit procedures are clearly different from implementation / evaluation POVs. Whether one is better than the other is a matter of opinion.

 

Just my personal opinions and some Food for your thoughts.

[karina.j]

Hi Charles

 

Hi karina,

 

SQF2000 was terminated ca. 2012 ?

 

 

Not sure if you meant regarding  "certification" per se or specifically to SQF itself. I assumed the latter since the former is easier to (textbook) answer. (the former option would require yr defining "certification to "what"/"whom" ? eg GFSI, non-GFSI ?)

 

 

this is my first contact with this standard

I have found SQF Code edition 7 here http://www.sqfi.com/...code/downloads/

is this most up to date version?

 

the question for the assessment is:

''Review the SQF2000 standard and critique its application in your own workplace. Outline the advantages and disadvantages of undertaking certification against this standard.''

 

now I know the question itself hasn't been updated if  SQF2000 was terminated

as its very general I do not know what approach to take and what is actually required

 

thank you for your thoughts and great list of things to consider

 

karina 

[bedaniels]

No, SQF edition 7 is not the most current. Sqf edition 8 was recently released.

[karina.j]

No, SQF edition 7 is not the most current. Sqf edition 8 was recently released.

 

any chance someone can share it with me?

as cant find anywhere to download it from

[bedaniels]

www.sqfi.com

[karina.j]

www.sqfi.com

there is only edition 7.2 available on this website

• SQF Code, Ed. 7.2 (English) Released: March, 2014, Implementation Date: July 3, 2014

[bedaniels]

[karina.j]

hehe sorry

found it

I'm a blond

 

 

there is only edition 7.2 available on this website

• SQF Code, Ed. 7.2 (English) Released: March, 2014, Implementation Date: July 3, 2014

 

[Charles.C]

Hi Charles

 

this is my first contact with this standard

I have found SQF Code edition 7 here http://www.sqfi.com/...code/downloads/

is this most up to date version?

 

the question for the assessment is:

''Review the SQF2000 standard and critique its application in your own workplace. Outline the advantages and disadvantages of undertaking certification against this standard.''

 

now I know the question itself hasn't been updated if  SQF2000 was terminated

as its very general I do not know what approach to take and what is actually required

 

thank you for your thoughts and great list of things to consider

 

karina 

 

Hi karina,

 

I guess you can score some points by updating the title.

 

Good Luck with the M.Sc

[karina.j]

Hi karina,

 

I guess you can score some points by updating the title.

 

Good Luck with the M.Sc

 

Its just amazing how program is run with out of date information

I will do my best :)

thank you for all the help