25 replies to this topic

[GMO]

Hi All,

 

I'm not familiar with using AIB but would love to know more about it.  I have heard it's more hygiene and pest focused than other standards and very much a factory rather than a systems audits.

 

Do you use it?  Do you like it?  What benefits has it brought to your site?  Is the standard freely available?

Thanks in advance.

[jcieslowski]

At my last job we used AIB for many years and were pleased with the service.  I'd say they (along with everyone really) have stepped it up over the past few years to provide a standard that isn't terribly far off from a GFSI level standard and is a good 'stepping stone' to a GFSI program.  I think you can download the standard from their website if you submit your email address - of course they'll call / follow up with their sales department.  

[FurFarmandFork]

AIB has been stepping it up in the last few years ever since they got super defensive over being criticized for high scores at peanut corporation of america.

 

Even still, I never considered it any better than an FDA audit, I'd just as soon see your local state inspection report as an AIB one. They're only helpful if you aren't inspected by the state/feds anyway. They are a CB though, so they can audit any number of standards, I speak purely to their sanitation/GMP audits.

 

The training and other resources they provide are excellent though, they have great industry knowledge and resources.

[GMO]

AIB has been stepping it up in the last few years ever since they got super defensive over being criticized for high scores at peanut corporation of america.

 

Even still, I never considered it any better than an FDA audit, I'd just as soon see your local state inspection report as an AIB one. They're only helpful if you aren't inspected by the state/feds anyway. They are a CB though, so they can audit any number of standards, I speak purely to their sanitation/GMP audits.

 

The training and other resources they provide are excellent though, they have great industry knowledge and resources.

 

Thanks for the info; I did hear that about PCA but interesting you see it as no better than an FDA.  I'm sure it depends on the auditor but the one FDA I had was so basic I was shocked.

[jcieslowski]

I think that the AIB audit is much more intensive than the FDA audit, at least what I have.  FDA was ONLY concerned with my HACCP plan for my seafood product when they were here.  They didn't look at any of my non-HACCP specific records or programs, calibrations, preventative maintenance, etc.

[jcieslowski]

Also worth noting that a customer is not going to 'care' about an FDA audit.  Saying you are inspected by the FDA is good and fine, but my customers want to know that I've received a 3rd party audit or, better yet, am certified against a GFSI recognized scheme.  An FDA audit isn't going to provide any of that for your customers. 

[SQFconsultant]

Years back I worked as a 3rd party auditor (prior to becoming an SQF Auditor) for an auditing company that had gotten one of those gigantic supermarket auditing contracts and I found myself auditing a different food or packaging company on a daily basis all over the country.

 

Our audit format was developed in conjunction with the chain and the auditors as well as the auditing company - it was I still feel to this day the best all around audit format to follow, rather stringent but at the same time it allowed good auditors to not have to get into grey areas and the auditors could remain firm in application by at the same time fair.

 

I'm saying all of this because we found the closest format for an audit to be the one done by AIB.

 

However, this is where is faltered - I don't know if it was AIB or the the training of their Auditors - but, we were almost routinely coming up with grades/scores on facilities that were in many cases substantially lower than what AIB Auditors had.

 

All of us got the point where we'd actually cringe when walking in a facility that proudly displayed their SUPERIOR AIB certificates on the wall, because we knew that if we did the job we were there to do, that at the end of the day it could be a rough outbriefing due to those inflated AIB audit certificates.

 

I think their watershed moment was when they had the Auditor that basically looked the other way and top rated Peanut Corporation of America.

 

Since those years, I'm not sure what AIB has improved on their so called standard.

 

All I know is that today I rarely see companies that tout AIB audits.

[FurFarmandFork]

 

All I know is that today I rarely see companies that tout AIB audits.

 

 

I'd agree with Glen there, the reputation is still pretty bad, and I see AIB audits from many "not so great" suppliers, whereas others do an NSF, MXNS, or trade organization audit for "prereq programs".

 

As to the FDA audit being useless, again not saying it's anything special. But the FDA audit reports typically have just as many "findings" as any AIB one. And I can request them from the state for suppliers that are slow to respond.

[ncwingnut]

We had used AIB for years, before becoming SQF Certified.  We still use them as our certification body, but that is completely a seperate realm from their GMP inspection auditors.

 

We always had a good experience with them, but once we went on to GFSI, found that it was rather redundant to have both.  We still have many warehouse/brokers that use them and haven't had any complaints.

[GMO]

Thanks everyone.  I'm now two years into AIB audits and I can safely say they have been the most daft audits I've ever had.  I generally don't come out of it disagreeing with the score, but how they comprise it?  Bonkers.  Genuine food safety risks over a line, given a minor.  No food safety risk away from a line, requires improvement.  Also those bonkers "well I'm going to raise a non conformity against your systems and training because you've had some non conformances".  That's just stupid.  Actually raise something against systems and training if you find something there, don't double count.  Also had the most unprofessional auditor I've ever encountered audit me.  He complained about other AIB auditors (even naming names), lauded himself as the font of all knowledge (he'd had 2 years in industry and 1 in auditing) and generally got everybody's backs up.

 

If I can convince my company to move away from them I will.  There's nothing wrong with a tough audit but where it's an audit which isn't pragmatic in relation to risk, I have to question the value.

[QAGB]

Thanks everyone.  I'm now two years into AIB audits and I can safely say they have been the most daft audits I've ever had.  I generally don't come out of it disagreeing with the score, but how they comprise it?  Bonkers.  Genuine food safety risks over a line, given a minor.  No food safety risk away from a line, requires improvement.  Also those bonkers "well I'm going to raise a non conformity against your systems and training because you've had some non conformances".  That's just stupid.  Actually raise something against systems and training if you find something there, don't double count.  Also had the most unprofessional auditor I've ever encountered audit me.  He complained about other AIB auditors (even naming names), lauded himself as the font of all knowledge (he'd had 2 years in industry and 1 in auditing) and generally got everybody's backs up.

 

If I can convince my company to move away from them I will.  There's nothing wrong with a tough audit but where it's an audit which isn't pragmatic in relation to risk, I have to question the value.

 

I've heard that AIB was pretty notorious for double counting non-conformances. Luckily, I never had to deal with that as we were moving towards GFSI when I joined the food industry. 

 

Your auditor sounds like he could use some more training and an ego check as well. I hope you can convince your company to move away from AIB!

Edited by QAGB, 21 October 2019 - 02:18 PM.

[GMO]

I've heard that AIB was pretty notorious for double counting non-conformances. Luckily, I never had to deal with that as we were moving towards GFSI when I joined the food industry. 

 

Your auditor sounds like he could use some more training and an ego check as well. I hope you can convince your company to move away from AIB!

 

To be fair had he given us a lower score I would have pushed really hard.

[ClassicMatt]

Thanks everyone.  I'm now two years into AIB audits and I can safely say they have been the most daft audits I've ever had.  I generally don't come out of it disagreeing with the score, but how they comprise it?  Bonkers.  Genuine food safety risks over a line, given a minor.  No food safety risk away from a line, requires improvement.  Also those bonkers "well I'm going to raise a non conformity against your systems and training because you've had some non conformances".  That's just stupid.  Actually raise something against systems and training if you find something there, don't double count.  Also had the most unprofessional auditor I've ever encountered audit me.  He complained about other AIB auditors (even naming names), lauded himself as the font of all knowledge (he'd had 2 years in industry and 1 in auditing) and generally got everybody's backs up.

 

If I can convince my company to move away from them I will.  There's nothing wrong with a tough audit but where it's an audit which isn't pragmatic in relation to risk, I have to question the value.

That has been my biggest frustration so far: the entire thing is at the discretion of the auditor at the time and their interpretation of protocols vastly differ.

[mgourley]

It's been years since I have been audited to an AIB Standard. "Back in the day" (late 90's early 2000's) they were a great resource because they have always been more oriented to what's going on out on the production floor. 

My personal take on their auditing scheme is that it is now irrelevant. It's not GFSI approved, and while I guess "useful" for people that are not ready to certificate to a GFSI scheme, it does not seem helpful because they do double count findings.

Also, all the really good auditors that they had years ago have moved on.

 

Marshall

[bpummer]

 

 

If I can convince my company to move away from them I will.  There's nothing wrong with a tough audit but where it's an audit which isn't pragmatic in relation to risk, I have to question the value.

I have one SQF and 2 AIB audited facilities.  I know auditors are all different, I've had easy AIB auditors and very hard ones.  That being said look at the standard and ask what you feel safe with and what protects your company better.  It is easy to be stuck on AIB for the lacking of GFSI benchmarked standards because it is less the Quality/Company team has to do but if you want to protect the company and customers why not add that extra protection. 

 

Glenn is on point, you don't tout AIB audits. 

[kfromNE]

I worked at a company with AIB but were in the process of becoming SQF certified. The problem, it's a GMP audit and not GFSI audit. We could get by showing we had a AIB audit certificate for our customers but I knew it wasn't going to cut it for very much longer.

 

You need to do what your customer demands and in the USA at least, that's usually a GFSI audit.

[GMO]

I worked at a company with AIB but were in the process of becoming SQF certified. The problem, it's a GMP audit and not GFSI audit. We could get by showing we had a AIB audit certificate for our customers but I knew it wasn't going to cut it for very much longer.

 

You need to do what your customer demands and in the USA at least, that's usually a GFSI audit.

 

We have AIB and BRC so are also doing GFSI.

 

Since we had Mr Knobnoodle (not his actual name) last year, we've had a lovely auditor twice who has been really good and pragmatic.  Unfortunately Mr K is likely to return and reaudit for another site later.  Not looking forward to it.  Unprofessional wasn't the word. 

[will.merrill]

AIB Is another source for standards & certification. We have used them for years, but have seen a slide in their performance recently, both administrative and in auditing.

 

They have taken some heat over the PCA debacle, which is justified, but PCA apparently had skills in hiding things from auditors (as the court cases, penalties and prison sentences have shown). That may be the reason for the new logo and name change...

 

I believe that SQF is a more robust standard, and has more responsive admin and auditing... and the prices are about the same. Plus, SQF appears to be favored by our customers (many emerging customers have never heard of AIB International or their namesake American Institute for Baking).

[Charles.C]

AIB was the subject of this thread.

 

afaik AIB focuses on inspection of  GMP (ie PRPs) + HACCP Programs in a highly prescriptive, stripped-down, fashion.

 

I don't think it purports to emulate a GFSI-type undertaking such as the likes of BRC, SQF etc.

 

Perhaps a better Operational comparison would be to some of the "HACCP" only Standards ?

 

Perhaps its (only?) benefit is where there is no interest on either side in a GFSI-recognised System or "equivalent".

[kfromNE]

Actually AIB was the subject of this thread.

 

afaik AIB focuses on inspection of  GMP (ie PRPs) + HACCP Programs in a highly prescriptive, stripped-down, fashion.

 

I don't think it purports to emulate a GFSI-type undertaking such as the likes of BRC, SQF etc.

 

Perhaps a better Operational comparison would be to some of the "HACCP" only Standards ?

 

Perhaps its (only?) benefit is where there is no interest on either side in a GFSI-recognised System or "equivalent".

They are a GMP audit and not GFSI audit. They'll tell you that as well. AIB recommends to do both (GMP and GFSI) which they can do - obviously so they can get more money. 

 

My previous job had a AIB GMP audit only. The reasoning - it was easier to implement than SQF or another GFSI audit.  While I was working there - when a supplier asked for an audit, suppliers were accepting it as proof. When I left almost a year ago - they/I was working on becoming SQF certified because suppliers were wanting more than a GMP audit. When they became SQF Certified, they were going to drop the gmp audit.

Edited by kfromNE, 09 March 2020 - 08:46 PM.

[Charles.C]

They are a GMP audit and not GFSI audit. They'll tell you that as well. AIB recommends to do both (GMP and GFSI) which they can do - obviously so they can get more money. 

 

My previous job had a AIB GMP audit only. The reasoning - it was easier to implement than SQF or another GFSI audit.  While I was working there - when a supplier asked for an audit, suppliers were accepting it as proof. When I left almost a year ago - they/I was working on becoming SQF certified because suppliers were wanting more than a GMP audit. When they became SQF Certified, they were going to drop the gmp audit.

 

Hi kfromNE,

 

After doing a little googling, the sub-GFSI  auditing "scene" in USA seems to offer an amazingly inventive range of  Services named from one or more of terms like (1) Inspection, (2) GMP, (3) Prerequisite (4) HACCP, (5) audit, (6) Certification.

 

Similarly flexible as the so-called  BRC Global Standard of Food Safety  

[Penard]

hi all,

Reading all these comments gives an interesting value. to give you more elements, one of our customers has decided to conduct an AIB audit focused on the pest management on all his suppliers - in the bakery business. Having had looked their requirements on the pest perspective, it seems more requiring than the nestlé & cargill's standards i've used these past years.

perhaps the focus on the 'native' bakery AIB business has a better added value ?

[BrainzPoem]

hi all,

Reading all these comments gives an interesting value. to give you more elements, one of our customers has decided to conduct an AIB audit focused on the pest management on all his suppliers - in the bakery business. Having had looked their requirements on the pest perspective, it seems more requiring than the nestlé & cargill's standards i've used these past years.

perhaps the focus on the 'native' bakery AIB business has a better added value ?

We produce bakery and pass unannounced AIB twice per year. As I know AIB doesn't focus only on bakery anymore. It has spreaded through many industries and can't be easily stated that "native" bakery has better added value nowadays.

[mgourley]

I have not been audited against the AIB standard for years, simply because the world has moved on to things like BRCGS or SQF or other like GFSI benchmarked standards.

Back in the day (early to late 90's) AIB audits were (generally) the industry standard, in that they audited the general things that should be audited as a food processor. They were generally more inspection oriented and were light (somewhat) on documentation.

They took a big hit when the whole Peanut Corporation of America recall happened.

Is their Standard and inspection criteria good? I guess, but it's not GFSI approved. Which, today, is really what matters.
Are their auditors any good? Don't know. Again, back in the day the auditors I had were very good, auditing against "their" Standard.

 

Marshall

 

[patrick@flexsack]

Years back I worked as a 3rd party auditor (prior to becoming an SQF Auditor) for an auditing company that had gotten one of those gigantic supermarket auditing contracts and I found myself auditing a different food or packaging company on a daily basis all over the country.

 

Our audit format was developed in conjunction with the chain and the auditors as well as the auditing company - it was I still feel to this day the best all around audit format to follow, rather stringent but at the same time it allowed good auditors to not have to get into grey areas and the auditors could remain firm in application by at the same time fair.

 

I'm saying all of this because we found the closest format for an audit to be the one done by AIB.

 

However, this is where is faltered - I don't know if it was AIB or the the training of their Auditors - but, we were almost routinely coming up with grades/scores on facilities that were in many cases substantially lower than what AIB Auditors had.

 

All of us got the point where we'd actually cringe when walking in a facility that proudly displayed their SUPERIOR AIB certificates on the wall, because we knew that if we did the job we were there to do, that at the end of the day it could be a rough outbriefing due to those inflated AIB audit certificates.

 

I think their watershed moment was when they had the Auditor that basically looked the other way and top rated Peanut Corporation of America.

 

Since those years, I'm not sure what AIB has improved on their so called standard.

 

All I know is that today I rarely see companies that tout AIB audits.

Is this why BRC seemed to replace AIB about 5 or so years ago?

In the super sack industry, we always touted AIB certification and then seemingly overnight it switched to BRC.

I was never really aware of why that happened.