13 replies to this topic

[esperanza373]

Hello,

We are currently reviewing our Supplier questionnaire and I was wondering if you had any suggestions or comments when it comes to this.  

[kfromNE]

Can you provide what you currently have or the questions you ask

[esperanza373]

Yes, 

I just started working with this company and was asked to review this form.  Will you please give me your insight on it.  I deleted the company's information.  

[MOHAMMED ZAMEERUDDIN]

kindly share your existing questionnaire

[esperanza373]

I apologize, I thought I had attached the questionnaire in the last reply.  

Attached Files

•  Food safety Questionnaire.docx   41.42KB   83 downloads

Edited by esperanza373, 18 January 2024 - 01:21 AM.

[jfrey123]

It looks pretty okay to me.  I don't personally like the part where you let suppliers skip answering questions based solely on their GFSI standard, but as long as this checklist gets you the info you need per your program, it's defendable as doing its job.

[MOHAMMED ZAMEERUDDIN]

I apologize, I thought I had attached the questionnaire in the last reply.  

Questionnaire is OK.

[MlissaB]

It looks pretty okay to me.  I don't personally like the part where you let suppliers skip answering questions based solely on their GFSI standard, but as long as this checklist gets you the info you need per your program, it's defendable as doing its job.

 

jfrey123 -

As a supplier I have to say this is exactly how GFSI certification was sold to us. We were told once you are certified your customer questionnaires and audits will be reduced because the certification is the answer. There was another forum not too long ago that digressed into a rant session about how this is no longer the case.

 

The fact that we consistently receive A or higher ratings for our GFSI/BRC audits implies that we have all of those items in place, why do I need to now go through a list of questions to say it again?

[Bo16]

As an ingredient manufacturer, I really wish everyone would supply their audit as well as their certification, we ask, but are turned down, a lot.  Then I have to ask a whole bunch of questions that have already been answered in the GFSI certification report.  Our certifier is really easy to work with to remove proprietary information from the final report.  

 

We send out the certificate and the audit report, non-conformances and CAPAs included.  No hiding.

The best customer questionnaire is one that states if you are GFSI certified, please attach certification and report and skip sections 3-9 provide the required documents (Halal, Kosher, SDS, BE statement, allergen statements, Labels, Technical Data sheets, Regulatory Data Sheets, Vegan, OMRI, other non GFSI documents based on regulations where you are selling/manufacturing, FDA, EU, etc.) and sign the questionnaire!  But answering the same questions over and over again for each customer is not cost effective.  Every customer words them slightly different, and isn't that what the GFSI audit was created to stop?  

 

Imagine, a small company with (under 30 employees) with over 200 customers with 200 different customer questionnaires! How many people are needed for this insanity.  Our time would be much better spent ensuring the quality of our products.  

 

 

Of course, upon review of GFSI audit report we and our customers may ask for additional information.

[MDaleDDF]

jfrey123 -

As a supplier I have to say this is exactly how GFSI certification was sold to us. We were told once you are certified your customer questionnaires and audits will be reduced because the certification is the answer. There was another forum not too long ago that digressed into a rant session about how this is no longer the case.

 

The fact that we consistently receive A or higher ratings for our GFSI/BRC audits implies that we have all of those items in place, why do I need to now go through a list of questions to say it again?

EXACTLY this.  The whole idea is holding the certification is supposed to be sufficient.   Any of my vendors with a GFSI cert I don't bug at all.  

And I don't show my audit info, corrective actions, or any of that to anyone.   We are a private company, in all aspects.   If the fact I've been certified for almost 20 years isn't enough for you, move along... many customers don't like that answer, and that's ok.   Don't order then.

[MlissaB]

EXACTLY this.  The whole idea is holding the certification is supposed to be sufficient.   Any of my vendors with a GFSI cert I don't bug at all.  

And I don't show my audit info, corrective actions, or any of that to anyone.   We are a private company, in all aspects.   If the fact I've been certified for almost 20 years isn't enough for you, move along... many customers don't like that answer, and that's ok.   Don't order then.

 

We handle requests for the report on a case by case basis. I've actually have AUDITORS tell me we SHOULDN'T share it. If the cert isn't enough then the system has lost credibility and we should stop wasting our time.

 

As for sharing the report, with the amount of things I send customers and NEVER get push back I KNOW they aren't reading it so why should I share it. I actually like when a customer pushes back or asks a follow up question because at least then I know they are reading the info I send.

 

Far too often I send things out, they receive it, check a box, and file it never to be looked at again, then ask for it again the next year. Wash, rinse, repeat. It's tedious.

[Scotty_SQF]

EXACTLY this.  The whole idea is holding the certification is supposed to be sufficient.   Any of my vendors with a GFSI cert I don't bug at all.  

And I don't show my audit info, corrective actions, or any of that to anyone.   We are a private company, in all aspects.   If the fact I've been certified for almost 20 years isn't enough for you, move along... many customers don't like that answer, and that's ok.   Don't order then.

 

Agreed on both accounts.  When asked for the full audit report I say the certificate is enough.  I am sometimes willing to show the findings report with approved Corrective Actions (blanking out any information I feel is confidential), but the full audit report is confidential in my opinion and not needed.

[jfrey123]

We handle requests for the report on a case by case basis. I've actually have AUDITORS tell me we SHOULDN'T share it. If the cert isn't enough then the system has lost credibility and we should stop wasting our time.

 

As for sharing the report, with the amount of things I send customers and NEVER get push back I KNOW they aren't reading it so why should I share it. I actually like when a customer pushes back or asks a follow up question because at least then I know they are reading the info I send.

 

Far too often I send things out, they receive it, check a box, and file it never to be looked at again, then ask for it again the next year. Wash, rinse, repeat. It's tedious.

 

I echo your sentiment in your post above this one:  If I'm buying from a GFSI certified supplier, it should all be good in this ideal world of GFSI.  I also drank the Kool-Aid early on that all of us being GFSI would make things faster and swifter.  "The end of the need for customer audits!" is something we can all look back at and laugh.  The problem is GFSI forced us to strengthen the supplier approval criteria to justify our own programs, and often by most of the schemes' own code, merely listing a supplier as GFSI certified is insufficient to justify all the risks we're force to analyze.

 

To the quoted point, I'll say this:  My company is one of those that asks for audits and certs, and we're happy when we receive both but settle for the certification when they complete the rest of our supplier docs.  GFSI cert goes a long way that I can trust a company to do the right thing, and we won't push for copies of Allergen and Food Safety programs.  But review of actual audits showed us one of our GFSI suppliers was hit for allergen related findings in 3 consecutive years, so we stopped buying from them.  Not all of us ask for the audits just to check a box and ignore it, we read them.

 

And as much as we'd like to say GFSI is all good, the Malichita Farms recall proves it's not an end-all be-all.  Malichita is PrimusGFS certified, a GFSI recognized program, and they still managed to sicken 400+ people and kill 6 across the country in 2023's cantaloupe recall.  Reasons like that are why I accept when my vendors ask us to fill out some extra documentation.

Edited by jfrey123, 25 January 2024 - 06:08 PM.

[MlissaB]

I echo your sentiment in your post above this one:  If I'm buying from a GFSI certified supplier, it should all be good in this ideal world of GFSI.  I also drank the Kool-Aid early on that all of us being GFSI would make things faster and swifter.  "The end of the need for customer audits!" is something we can all look back at and laugh.  The problem is GFSI forced us to strengthen the supplier approval criteria to justify our own programs, and often by most of the schemes' own code, merely listing a supplier as GFSI certified is insufficient to justify all the risks we're force to analyze.

 

To the quoted point, I'll say this:  My company is one of those that asks for audits and certs, and we're happy when we receive both but settle for the certification when they complete the rest of our supplier docs.  GFSI cert goes a long way that I can trust a company to do the right thing, and we won't push for copies of Allergen and Food Safety programs.  But review of actual audits showed us one of our GFSI suppliers was hit for allergen related findings in 3 consecutive years, so we stopped buying from them.  Not all of us ask for the audits just to check a box and ignore it, we read them.

 

And as much as we'd like to say GFSI is all good, the Malichita Farms recall proves it's not an end-all be-all.  Malichita is PrimusGFS certified, a GFSI recognized program, and they still managed to sicken 400+ people and kill 6 across the country in 2023's cantaloupe recall.  Reasons like that are why I accept when my vendors ask us to fill out some extra documentation.

 

I totally get it. My issue is my company produces mainly secondary and tertiary packaging and displays. We are not an ingredient supplier and with only two exceptions our product isn't even intended to come in contact with food. Many of our customers send us the exact same requests as if we were sending them eggs or cheese and don't seem to understand when I explain what we are supplying. There are times I spend as much time typing N/A with an explanation as I do actually answering questions. And the number of people who don't understand why we aren't registered with the FDA or we don't need to comply with all of the FSMA requirements makes me question how much they truly understand those requirements.