8 replies to this topic

[The Food Nerd]

Hello Everyone, 

 

New here, but not new to Food and Nutrition Science. 

I am in need of moral support and some guidance. 

 

I am assuming I am not the only professional who has experienced this so hoping someone can answer this question. How do you navigate getting a company who has being doing business in their own "special" way, to do it in a way that actually complies with food regulation?

Do you start from the top?

Do you jump in wherever and tr to untangle he web from there?

 

Ex.We were pushed to get NSF certification. I say pushed because its not something that management truly wants, and unfortunately, I dont think it is something they truly understand. That is okay, I expect that. So they have written SOPs now. Not great SOPs, some not even helpful. But they are not really being applied. They are also very scattered, for example, an SOP should tell me who it applies to, these dont always. And it seems each department kinda does their own thing, for example, calibration. QC lab calibrates their own stuff. But not productions equipment Then yearly, they get a service provider to calibrate everything. The problem with that is.... document control. Who keeps the certification of calibration? Is it per department? We do have a "document control SOP" but I said, its not  very strong SOP. and its the same pattern for everything. 

 

Where do you start? Do you go hard on them? Do you go straight to the owner? Do i pick one thing and go from there? The main issue I believe is poor management, which is hard to address.  What is the bigger picture here? What worked for you?

[Scampi]

My advice, find a new job

 

You will feel so dejected so quickly that you'll wish you had done it sooner

 

But if you must give it a go, start with a scheduled meeting at the very top, lay it on the line, see how that person responds.  Make it crystal clear, that to be successful, leadership has to show everyone that you're position is valued and important, if you get any pushback, as the comic said, here's your sign (to leave)

 

best of luck

[kingstudruler1]

Scampi might be right.   Many times its not worth the effort and no matter how hard you try you may get no where.   Some have to learn the hard way.  

 

If you give it a try some things that are helpful.   It probably going to take a lot of mentoring.  Make sure that you continually discuss the "why" things are done.   Make sure you understand the "Why" of how things are done the way they are.    Look for ways to make it more beneficial to them to do the right thing.   I guess i don't think that 'going hard"  items that they are not going to see as  an immediate risk to food safety is going to be beneficial to you.   But im a work with others / find a compromise  that works reach the goal type of person.   Others are more of a i tell you what to do and you do it type of person.   You may need to be a little of both.  

 

The example you gave may not have been a good one.    If the calibrations are getting done, what is your concern or the risk?    Rewrite the SOP to what is actually happening (responsibilities, documentation / cert locations, etc)  Or, offer to take over the entire program (QC / food safety does all calibrations and maintenance of records).    

 

With that said, I have seen companies that were great places for people to work - except for food safety personnel.   90% resistant to anything that resembles following a standard.   

[The Food Nerd]

The example you gave may not have been a good one. If the calibrations are getting done, what is your concern or the risk? Rewrite the SOP to what is actually happening (responsibilities, documentation / cert locations, etc) Or, offer to take over the entire program (QC / food safety does all calibrations and maintenance of records).

With that said, I have seen companies that were great places for people to work - except for food safety personnel. 90% resistant to anything that resembles following a standard.

Hi kingstuduler1 and Scampi! And thank you so much for your feedback. I am in agreement.

I agree I didn’t give the best example because really, I don’t want to scare you all (LOL @ the trauma I’m getting from this.) In truth, the document control is just one of the issues. Really document control came up because I am scheduling trainings but then I see they have “conducted” training in which each manager titled the training “GMP training” But really, the training was just a review of a poorly written SOP… and the document control issue comes in the form that each manager actually documented their training on their very own “training form”, in spite of having an SOP that says all records should have the same heading etc etc… but again the SOP lacked an official training documentation form to go with it to document the training which is why… document control fails in particular in the area of training, but then also in general with each department doing their own “thing” like only calibrating their instruments and not others when they’re all the same type of instrument. So now I have documentation of QC instruments being held in QC department, which is great… but no documentation for production instruments until just recently when I reviewed records and saw only records for QC instruments. However, when I review the SOP for calibration, its pretty good, covers instruments in general, but doesn’t specify it’s only for the QC lab, so I was under the impression that QC calibrates all instruments in all departments until I reviewed further.

It’s a mess. And I did not want to give all that detail because as you can see, it’s a lot to write and I can’t even explain it all without sounding intense.
Now the issue with the yearly calibration records is that we have someone titled “production document control management”. But she said she doesn’t know who keeps the records….. so I was thinking I could start with rewriting document control? I honestly don’t know which way to turn.

It’s wild here. The good news is I’m pretty good at this. And I’m confident in my skills. I do agree that long term this won’t be a good fit, but I think someone like me should be here at this point to push for even small changes, since “needing” that NSF certification is kinda the only way I see change can be pushed? Sooooo, Who would like to be my mentor?

[kingstudruler1]

The example you gave may not have been a good one. If the calibrations are getting done, what is your concern or the risk? Rewrite the SOP to what is actually happening (responsibilities, documentation / cert locations, etc) Or, offer to take over the entire program (QC / food safety does all calibrations and maintenance of records).

With that said, I have seen companies that were great places for people to work - except for food safety personnel. 90% resistant to anything that resembles following a standard.

Hi kingstuduler1 and Scampi! And thank you so much for your feedback. I am in agreement.

I agree I didn’t give the best example because really, I don’t want to scare you all (LOL @ the trauma I’m getting from this.) In truth, the document control is just one of the issues. Really document control came up because I am scheduling trainings but then I see they have “conducted” training in which each manager titled the training “GMP training” But really, the training was just a review of a poorly written SOP… and the document control issue comes in the form that each manager actually documented their training on their very own “training form”, in spite of having an SOP that says all records should have the same heading etc etc… but again the SOP lacked an official training documentation form to go with it to document the training which is why… document control fails in particular in the area of training, but then also in general with each department doing their own “thing” like only calibrating their instruments and not others when they’re all the same type of instrument. So now I have documentation of QC instruments being held in QC department, which is great… but no documentation for production instruments until just recently when I reviewed records and saw only records for QC instruments. However, when I review the SOP for calibration, its pretty good, covers instruments in general, but doesn’t specify it’s only for the QC lab, so I was under the impression that QC calibrates all instruments in all departments until I reviewed further.

It’s a mess. And I did not want to give all that detail because as you can see, it’s a lot to write and I can’t even explain it all without sounding intense.
Now the issue with the yearly calibration records is that we have someone titled “production document control management”. But she said she doesn’t know who keeps the records….. so I was thinking I could start with rewriting document control? I honestly don’t know which way to turn.

It’s wild here. The good news is I’m pretty good at this. And I’m confident in my skills. I do agree that long term this won’t be a good fit, but I think someone like me should be here at this point to push for even small changes, since “needing” that NSF certification is kinda the only way I see change can be pushed? Sooooo, Who would like to be my mentor?

 

Yes, I think i get it and don't get me wrong, I've left a company because it was such a disaster and didn't think I could change it.  Some times we take jobs that seem like a great opportunity that turn into a nightmare.   

 

Yes, if you haven't achieved the NSF certification (is that a basic HACCP type audit or GFSI?), that gives you a lot more persuasion.  We are all here to help.  You can reach out to me any time.   

[The Food Nerd]

Thank you so much kongstudruler1.
I will definitely reach out.
It helps to know others in my field of expertise understand the real issue. It feels like if I was to explain that big spider web of details to management they really wouldn’t understand why the inconsistency through the system puts us at risk of failing the audit. Nsf is a gmp certification. Very similar to SQF.

[G M]

Some of the issue sounds like "growing pains" as the company increases its size, scope or diversifies the customer base it is entering a phase where more comprehensive and standardized recordkeeping needs to happen.  The amount of information being gathered is growing beyond the ability of one person "wearing many hats" to keep track of it all, so the documentation needs to be maintained in a way that allows someone to look up pertinent information when a problem or request arises.

 

The idea that the business is growing is positive, but that also usually means new requirements or responsibilities need to be met to maintain that growth.  You can present the message to management that bigger and more diverse sets of customers require these standards to be met for them to be allowed to purchase from you.  

[The Food Nerd]

hi G M,

Yes you are correct. Not the new customers, but the idea that the company grew bigger than a few people can handle. I think one of the things I would really want to recommend is handing off some items n fu to their pertaining departments. For example, purchasing cleaning agents, should all be the responsibility of the purchasing team and myself. Tricky part is getting them to let go of that false sense of control they have to start implementing new ideas. That’s where I am having the issues. How do you approach management when it is obvious the issue starts with them?
I feel like this is commonly seen anywhere, and it’s not my first time seeing the amount of work it takes to get a company to a level of certification, but apt of the issue is stemming from management wanting to keep control over something they’ve lost control of a long time ago. Not sure where to move there.
Hope this isn’t coming off as snobby in anyway. I enjoy the work I do and I’m not scared to step on a few toes. Just trying to see what others recommend.

[G M]

Generally with push back from management, operations or maintenance you need to be able to tie compliance to the ability to produce saleable product. 

 

If your customers require you to have XYZ certification to meet their purchasing specification, the risk of not complying is loss of the customer/sales.  Similar for regulatory compliance, if you don't meet those compliance standards you may not legally be able to sell it.  Put a number on it, X% of sales or $XM a year lost.  Additionally, if you can save them time or money, people will usually be very receptive.

 

If this is a voluntary or speculative program where someone decided it needed to be done because it just seemed like a good idea then you have a much harder road without top management being the ones driving compliance.  This kind of goal can be futile if the culture in the company is resistant.

 

I have been fortunate that the team I work with is usually very willing to support food safety and quality initiatives (so long as the time/effort burden is justified), but there are other members who have definitely been confronted with the kind of compliance problems you're dealing with, or worse.

Edited by G M, 02 January 2024 - 10:18 PM.