6 replies to this topic

[courtstar]

My audit is 2 days long and auditor should arrive at 9am and leave at 5pm on both days.  Should spend about 40% of time in the plant and 60% on documents.

The last audit I had he arrived at 8:40am and left at 5:20pm spent maybe 45 minutes in the plant

Day 2 arrived at 8:40am and left at 5:30pm spent 45 minutes in the plant.

How is the OK?  I am so annoyed with the agency body that I will not use them again!!

Oh and he did not follow the audit schedule!

[beautiophile]

My audit is 2 days long and auditor should arrive at 9am and leave at 5pm on both days.  Should spend about 40% of time in the plant and 60% on documents.

There are no such requirements of those timing proportions anywhere.

 

 

The last audit I had he arrived at 8:40am and left at 5:20pm spent maybe 45 minutes in the plant

Day 2 arrived at 8:40am and left at 5:30pm spent 45 minutes in the plant.

How is the OK?  I am so annoyed with the agency body that I will not use them again!!

Oh and he did not follow the audit schedule!

IMEX, auditors always try their best to finish the on-site jobs within audit days. A bit expansion of time is understandable and forgivable because nobody can 100% guarantee their works could go as planned. Auditors have never got full knowledge of assessed sites. They might discover unexpected findings and need time to treat them. Moreover, slow responses from auditees also make the process longer. 

It's rather about the culture of cooperation. In East Asia, we very appreciate this kind of working attitude of auditors.

[zoelawton]

I would double check this. Our audit used to be 2 days, it's not being extended to 3 days. 

 

They will spend as much or as little time in the plant as they like - the less time they spend in the plant the better i say! (unpredictable with general production errors and staff etc.)

[zanorias]

There is a small section at the start of the BRC standard book that gives some vague detail on what to expect. But it can only be vague without considering the specifics of each site, operation and number of staff as those factors will of course determine the time and focus spent during the audit, as will to some extent the organisation of the host. I've never had a BRC audit that finished bang on 5pm or a pre-set time and I make sure not to make any evening plans for those two day where possible. With unannounced audits though I imagine there will sometimes be cases of some staff having to leave at a certain time i.e. child care obligations.

[pHruit]

How large is your plant?
The system/factory time split is potentially variable, although the auditor will generally need to justify in their report why they have spent less time in the plant than the audit calculator says they should.

 

My experience is exactly the same as the others on timings - well into double figures of BRC audits and never had a single one that was 9-5!

 

When you say they "did not follow the audit schedule", do you mean that they didn't work through the standard in order? If so then again I don't think this is at all unusual; sometimes it makes sense to group things differently depending on the flow of the audit, and indeed I'd say that almost every BRC (and customer) audit I've been present at has largely gone straight into HACCP after the opening meeting, as that then sets a good background to progress into the factory. Indeed I'll usually do the same with a supplier audit, as it's often a good way to get a feel for the competence of the people/systems too.

[SQFconsultant]

Having been an SQF Auditor I remember when the requirement came in for spending a set percentage of time in the facility.

We looked at each other in the office, laughed and someone said... what, are we to twiddle our thumbs for half of that time or stare at the ceiling.

In thery its fine to set up these expectations but in realty they are most difficult for an Auditor to follow.

There are lots of factors that come into play the include cooperation of facility personnel, documentation flow, was the facility prepared or was there lots of teeth pulling in order to get what should have been in the same room

I had audits that tooks excessive time due to many factors.

Have walked thru plamts that were spotless and ones that were filthy.

Unlike an SQF Consultant that already has a boatload of information and video to review prior to the visit (if any) an Auditor walks in with minimal details.

[john.kukoly]

Assuming here, BRCGS food 8 audit took place. If you turn to the Standard itself, in the back section Part III Audit Protocol, section 2.2 the on site audit, auditors are expected to spend approximately 50% percent of their time "on the floor". Note BRCGS uses a different number, and definition of "on the floor" that some other programs, notabley SQF, so they can't easily be compared. The standard requirements themselves, are color coded to give guidance on which clauses are expected to be assessed "on the floor".

 

There is the usual debate about reviewing records and documents, but generally reviewing procedures and historical documents in a production area office, is not generally considered "on the floor". Interviewing staff, supervisors and managers in their production area offices generally is, and reviewing active records being produced on the floor generally is as well.

 

That time split is obviously not always possible, and there is opportunity for the auditor to explain and justify variations.

 

In the end, audits are a service. They are bound by a number of oversight systems, from accreditation bodies, certification bodies and program owners, most things are not negotiable with the auditor. if you feel your auditor did not follow protocol, you should be bringing this to the attention of the service provider (the certification body) to get the right explanation. You have a copy of the standard you are being certified to, within it, or the CPO website, you can usually find the actual requirements for pretty much everything.  If you don;t get satisfaction that way, all CPO's have direct contact to elevate your concern to.

 

Taking action to protect the industry is the right thing to do, where you feel anyone is not in compliance.