8 replies to this topic

[jcieslowski]

This is a silly question but I implemented our SQF system some 12 years ago and, since then, the system has seen significant bloat.  (maybe I just feel this way because it happened while I was not at the company)

 

Our document numbers have got a little silly.   QM - 2.5.2.8 for example.   Not to mention that they're no longer in good order with the code as things change from time to time.

 

I'm looking to streamline and simplify - the program documents as well as the document numbering scheme.  

 

What are you doing that you either like or don't like in terms of document management?

 

Thanks,

 

John

[jfrey123]

I've seen companies write their programs directly numbered to SQF code.  I don't like that because as codes revisions change program numbers, you have significant rewrites of your program.

 

The system I prefer in my plants uses a 4 decimal system like you're talking about.  I love it because it's infinitely expandable and allows you to add documents between two existing ones when needed.  If you're ending up with too many documents using the 4th digit, you can consider whether some need to be revised and combined onto another program.  When I do the annual audit of my program to the SQF checklist, because we are required to provide qualitative evidence, you can list your program document number there under the related code as a guide where to point your auditor to during the audit.

 

For forms, we use a dept-form number-revision number scheme (QAC-100-1.2) where the decimals denote a minor revision and the whole number is a major form revision.  I tie the form revisions to a management of change document detailing the change so I don't have to put a revision history directly on fillable forms.

[nwilson]

For SQF I have always used the code as the reference number.  This makes it easier to audit and review internally and externally.  I was at a larger plant operation earlier this year and we did have some of the same issues with the numbering as it was getting convoluted at times.  There is the mention of having to essentially rewrite the system when code edition changes come out, however I see this as part of the annual review and needed at times to reduce the amount and numbering of documents in the FSMS.  Numbering to the code has always worked for me and my sites as its very easy to show an auditor how you are meeting a code element and not have to use another reference document or your memory.  The document control system used looks like:

 

1. SQF Clause-Document Type-Sequential Number, then version number
   1. Example 2.2.2-P-1 V1 = 2.2.2 SQF Code Clause, P-1 Program #1 referencing the SQF Code and version #1 of the documents. 
   2. Where Document Types are:
      1. F: Form
      2. PL: Policy
      3. PR: Procedure
      4. SOP: Standard Operating Procedure
      5. SSOP: Sanitation Standard Operating Procedure
      6. P: Program
      7. R: Register
      8. H: HACCP/Food Safety Plan

[SQFconsultant]

We've always set up the docs in an SQF Code sequence for our clients so that the auditors could easily review and now as I embark on our own company the consultant is doing the same.

 

We use paper based system with an electronic set for ease of updating. 

 

It's worked out well for over 22 years now.

[Tony-C]

We set up the documents in the IFSQN SQF Food Safety Management System Implementation Packages to match the clauses of the SQF Food Safety Code.

 

This makes it easier for the customer to cross-reference the documents with the SQF Food Safety Code requirements when implementing the package but also when a site has a certification audit the auditor can see quite clearly that the site has documentation that covers the full contents of the SQF Code.

 

On established sites with certification some people may decide that is not the way to go anymore and choose not to match the numbering, there is no problem with that as long the relevant site personnel know their way around the system.

 

Kind regards,

 

Tony

[MOHAMMED ZAMEERUDDIN]

We assigned document number mentioning four things: name of the department, type of document, document number and revision status

[jfrey123]

For those of you following the SQF numbering format:  how do you address adding a program/procedure to your documents that doesn't directly pertain to SQF code?

[Scotty_SQF]

We started at 01 for SOPs and each new SOP gets the next available number.  Quality/Food Safety related SOPs start with a 'Q' then dash the number.  Works great for us.  For SQF audits I have supporting documents spreadsheet that lists the code and what SOP number we use to for this aspect of the code.  

[Hoosiersmoker]

We moved away from numbering for the very reason that they can add or remove elements at new version implementation and went to naming them the same as the current SQF code. For instance: Instead of 2.3.4 Approved Supplier Program we eliminate the 2.3.4. They are ordered in our system the same as the code and I always verify the document titles during reviews. All peripheral procedures and instructions a simply named for what they refer to. We have a procedure for our offset press called Offset Print Pressmen. Our Glass and Brittle Plastic Procedure is called Glass and Brittle Plastic Procedure. it makes it easier when someone wants to view a document. They go to the SQF folder and under SOPs they can do a simple keyword search or scan the list for Offset or Flexo or Finishing and find the document quickly and easily. I have never had an auditor question our naming of documents.