Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo
- - - - -

Tangible Benefits: ISO 22000 FSMS


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
4 replies to this topic

dsherring

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 2 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

Posted 18 August 2006 - 01:33 PM

First can I say that this discussion forum is an excellent source of inspiration. I find the contributors views and perceptions of ISO 22000 both intriguing and fascinating.

A client of mine has been operating an ISO 22000 based FSMS for over a year now. The management team there are very impressed with the food safety improvements experienced as a direct result of adopting ISO 22000. These are:

1. A significant reduction in metal contamination incidents/events, achieved as a result of enhancing their HACCP process and using the conclusions from the HACCP study to convince the senior management team to spend large sums of money in upgrading screens, sieves and metal detection equipment.

2. A greater and more widespread understanding of food safety issues across the company, through enhanced internal communication arrangements.

3. A widely understood and very well implemented corrective action process which actually prevents recurrence of food safety issues. (e.g. 5 Why technique is extensively used).

4. A more effective change management system, that is preventive in nature and which interfaces very well with the HACCP process. The HACCP system does not have to play "catch up" following changes to processes, products, materials etc.!

5. Enhanced focus on the "real" CCP's, enabling better control measure management. There is a clear distinction between CCP's and OPRP's, backed up by a robust risk assessment and decision-making approach.

6. A more integrated approach to conducting management reviews and managing improvement programmes, which combines food safety matters and other issues.

7. Clearer, more visible and widely understood reporting relationships, document control mechanisms, records control mechanisms and staff development processes.

8. A control measure validation approach which gives confidence in the food safety controls implemented.

The decision to adopt the ISO 22000 standard was made by the senior management team in order to enhance food safety systems, standards and culture throughout the business. This has been realised.

ISO 22000 works! :clap:



Simon

    IFSQN...it's My Life

  • IFSQN Admin
  • 12,529 posts
  • 1318 thanks
721
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Manchester
  • Interests:Married to Michelle, Father of three boys (Oliver, Jacob and Louis). I enjoy cycling, walking and travelling, watching sport, especially football and Manchester United. Oh and I love food and beer and wine.

Posted 18 August 2006 - 01:44 PM

Thank you for sharing your experience; I'm sure you will be inundated with questions from regulars who are active with 22k.

Great first post.

:welcome:

Regards,
Simon


hand-pointing-down.gif
 
Get FREE bitesize education with IFSQN webinar recordings.
 
Download this handy excel for desktop access to over 140 Food Safety Friday's webinar recordings.
https://www.ifsqn.com/fsf/Free%20Food%20Safety%20Videos.xlsx

 
Check out IFSQN’s extensive library of FREE food safety videos
https://www.ifsqn.com/food_safety_videos.html

 

recommend-us-on-facebook.png


Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 18,882 posts
  • 5256 thanks
1,232
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:SF
    TV
    Movies

Posted 19 August 2006 - 04:53 AM

Dear dsherring,
Very interesting post. I assume that the ISO22k plan has been sucessfully audited ? You didn't mention if the company already had ISO9k2k? I guessed not. I half suspect that the 'TOP MANAGEMENT' were simply in awe of the magic 3 letters whereas HACCP was something demanded by customers and getting the health authorities off their back all the time and therefore to be carried out at a minimum investment in staff and QA facilities. This is not unusual.

My first reaction after reading the list was that something was seriously wrong regarding the HACCP System which pre-existed becoming involved with ISO22000. I can't see how points 1-5, 8 would not have been covered by a properly installed HACCP System.
You don't mention the area of activity so speculation is difficult however I presume the original HACCP plan was successfully audited. This should have included a detailed assessment of the validation of any CCPs. I think you are suggesting that ISO22k has now shown the audited HACCP plan was unsatisfactory. By the same auditor ? You refer to the newly determined 'real' CCPs. Is it possible for you to clarify/example this comment ?

It is certainly true that involvement with any ISO scheme immediately calls for a renovation of documentation related processes and an appropriately increased staffing ratio. Company refusal to provide for the latter can be quite effective in diminishing the presence of Quality Assurance on the production floor in my experience. This relates to your points 6,7 of course where this company seem to have a remarkably benevolent T.M. or excellent QA subversion techniques. Congratulations to QA either way !
Please give some further feedback to this enterprising first post. I realise my post is a bit thin regarding specific ISO22k questions but other people will no doubt correct this balance.

Rgd / Charles.C


Edited by Charles.C, 19 August 2006 - 05:00 AM.

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


dsherring

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 2 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

Posted 21 August 2006 - 05:14 PM

Dear Charles

Thank you for your comments. Here are mine!

Dear dsherring,
Very interesting post. I assume that the ISO22k plan has been successfully audited?

Yes it has, but this was a secondary matter - the "icing on the cake". The main requirement among the senior management team was to realise food safety improvements and to generate a cohesive management system based on a recognised framework (improved food safety focus, efficiencies, communications etc.). Top management commitment!

You didn't mention if the company already had ISO9k2k? I guessed not. I half suspect that the "TOP MANAGEMENT" were simply in awe of the magic 3 letters whereas HACCP was something demanded by customers and getting the health authorities off their back all the time and therefore to be carried out at a minimum investment in staff and QA facilities. This is not unusual.

No, you guessed correctly Charles, they did not have a 9001 based system in operation.

My first reaction after reading the list was that something was seriously wrong regarding the HACCP System which pre-existed becoming involved with ISO22000. I can't see how points 1-5, 8 would not have been covered by a properly installed HACCP System.

1. A significant reduction in metal contamination incidents/events, achieved as a result of enhancing their HACCP process and using the conclusions from the HACCP study to convince the senior management team to spend large sums of money in upgrading screens, sieves and metal detection equipment.

But their HACCP system had been based on Codex principles and had been approved by many regulatory (not certification) bodies. It suffered from the same flaws as many other HACCP systems currently in place. It was not based on management system principles, it was owned by the food safety team only, it was not process based etc. .....

2. A greater and more widespread understanding of food safety issues across the company, through enhanced internal communication arrangements.

Internal communication is an area often not considered during audits and absent in many HACCP "standards".

3. A widely understood and very well implemented corrective action process which actually prevents recurrence of food safety issues. (e.g. 5 Why technique is extensively used).

HACCP systems often prompt correction, not corrective action. Cause identification and elimination is often lacking from traditional HACCP systems (and many Quality Management Systems). ISO 22000 distinguishes between correction and corrective action.

4. A more effective change management system, that is preventive in nature and which interfaces very well with the HACCP process.

The HACCP system does not have to play "catch up" following changes to processes, products, materials etc.! This is now managed as one process that is part of a management system comprising many processes. It is not an activity-based event that the food safety team has to coordinate once they are made aware of the change, which is often some time after the change has taken place! Management controls are implemented that provide a prompt response (risk assessment) and review of existing control measures. Change management is often regarded as a weakness within HACCP systems.

5. Enhanced focus on the "real" CCP's, enabling better control measure management. There is a clear distinction between CCP's and OPRP's, backed up by a robust risk assessment and decision-making approach.

Previously too much reliance was placed on the Codex decision tree to generate CCP's. This meant that a common sense and fact-based approach to decision-making was absent.

8. A control measure validation approach which gives confidence in the food safety controls implemented.

Too many assumptions had previously been made that existing control measures were effective, despite many process, plant and material changes over the years. The approach did not stand up to scrutiny. A disciplined approach towards validation has been introduced that gives the management team confidence and which has led to point 1 above. Again validation is widely reported as being a typical weakness within traditional HACCP systems.

You don't mention the area of activity so speculation is difficult however I presume the original HACCP plan was successfully audited.

Only by regulators and not CB's. The organisation manufactures (microbiologically) low risk food products and the brand is globally well-known.

This should have included a detailed assessment of the validation of any CCPs.

Yes I agree, but historically there were no issues highlighted by regulatory authorities.

I think you are suggesting that ISO22k has now shown the audited HACCP plan was unsatisfactory.

Yes.

By the same auditor ?

No, by many auditors who, from what I gather, had no/little "management systems" understanding.

You refer to the newly determined "real" CCPs. Is it possible for you to clarify/example this comment ?

Yes - previously each metal detector was treated as a CCP regardless of where it was located in the process. In addition each detector had different sensitivities - i.e. they became more sensitive further "downstream". The last metal detector was ultimately regarded as the 1 CCP. Also, goods inwards checking had not been regarded as a CCP, i.e. to "control" chemical contaminants in raw materials that other "downstream" steps could not deal with.

It is certainly true that involvement with any ISO scheme immediately calls for a renovation of documentation related processes and an appropriately increased staffing ratio. Company refusal to provide for the latter can be quite effective in diminishing the presence of Quality Assurance on the production floor in my experience. This relates to your points 6,7 of course where this company seem to have a remarkably benevolent T.M. or excellent QA subversion techniques.

There was no increase in staffing and no paper mountain generated! The organisation wanted to learn from management systems best practice. "Food Safety Management" as distinct from "Food Safety Assurance" (akin to the difference between QM and QA).

Congratulations to QA either way!

Rather the Food Safety Team!

Please give some further feedback to this enterprising first post. I realise my post is a bit thin regarding specific ISO22k questions but other people will no doubt correct this balance.

Rgd / Charles.C



Simon

    IFSQN...it's My Life

  • IFSQN Admin
  • 12,529 posts
  • 1318 thanks
721
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Manchester
  • Interests:Married to Michelle, Father of three boys (Oliver, Jacob and Louis). I enjoy cycling, walking and travelling, watching sport, especially football and Manchester United. Oh and I love food and beer and wine.

Posted 21 August 2006 - 07:23 PM

dsherring you quoted Charles several times in your post in order to answer his questions, I went through your post and added 'quote tags' to make it easier to read. You were not to know. See the image below on how to use quote tags. Also there is a help topic here that explains a bit more about 'quote' and other button functions:

Attached File  quote.gif   3.53KB   61 downloads

http://www.saferpak....?showtopic=4602

Regards,
Simon


hand-pointing-down.gif
 
Get FREE bitesize education with IFSQN webinar recordings.
 
Download this handy excel for desktop access to over 140 Food Safety Friday's webinar recordings.
https://www.ifsqn.com/fsf/Free%20Food%20Safety%20Videos.xlsx

 
Check out IFSQN’s extensive library of FREE food safety videos
https://www.ifsqn.com/food_safety_videos.html

 

recommend-us-on-facebook.png





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users