Inquiry about food safety culture elements
Dears,
Good day!
I have an inquiry about fod safety culture elements,
I went through GFSI white paper and found:
1. People,
2. Consistency,
3. Vision and mission,
4. Adaptability,
5. Hazard and risk awareness.
Then i went though BRCGS guidelines, i found the following parameters:
1. People,
2. Process,
3. Products,
4. Proactivity.
So which parameters shall be included? could anyone advise?
I would recommend to include the elements of the standard you are using and then propose to the company some more and collectively decide the extra ones.
I would suggest the two are not incompatible. The GFSI position paper as well includes some great questions and what good looks like. I'd also recommend using the PAS320 which is a brilliant resource. Personally I'm not a massive fan of how the BRCGS clause is written but these are some ways you could combine the two:
So if you look at the 5 areas in GFSI; this is how I think they overlap.
1. People - obvious really but also think about the processes of recruitment and training?
2. Consistency - I always say this is like the "drumbeat" of your site. So what processes do you have in place to discuss food safety? For example, what short interval control meetings do you have? How is food safety discussed in there? Which people attend? What documentation do you have in place to make sure products are produced correctly? How do you use leading metrics to proactively discuss food safety issues before an incident occurs in your site processes?
3. Vision and Mission - how do your site leaders (i.e. people) communicate this vision? Is there a process to make sure people understand the food safety expectations of them?
4. Adaptability - do you have processes, e.g. root cause analysis to learn from the past? Are people trained in these processes and enthusiastically adopt them? What processes are in place to look forward to potential change? For example, new product development?
5. Hazard and Risk awareness - do the people in your site know what risks and hazards are present in their zone, whether there are specific hazards with certain products and the consequences of not following processes to reduce risk? Do you have a near miss process to proactively raise issues before they become a risk?
I could be wrong but I think the intent of the BRCGS standard is just to make you think that culture is more than just people but it can be evidenced through your processes, through being proactive etc. BUT I also think there is widespread misunderstanding on what food safety culture is within Technical circles and honestly, I'm not sure the BRCGS definition helps. What I mean by that is a culture programme is not putting up some posters and doing a food safety week event in the canteen. (It's really not.) Yes that might be part of launching an activity but it's not a particularly effective one.
I would suggest the two are not incompatible. The GFSI position paper as well includes some great questions and what good looks like. I'd also recommend using the PAS320 which is a brilliant resource. Personally I'm not a massive fan of how the BRCGS clause is written but these are some ways you could combine the two:
So if you look at the 5 areas in GFSI; this is how I think they overlap.
1. People - obvious really but also think about the processes of recruitment and training?
2. Consistency - I always say this is like the "drumbeat" of your site. So what processes do you have in place to discuss food safety? For example, what short interval control meetings do you have? How is food safety discussed in there? Which people attend? What documentation do you have in place to make sure products are produced correctly? How do you use leading metrics to proactively discuss food safety issues before an incident occurs in your site processes?
3. Vision and Mission - how do your site leaders (i.e. people) communicate this vision? Is there a process to make sure people understand the food safety expectations of them?
4. Adaptability - do you have processes, e.g. root cause analysis to learn from the past? Are people trained in these processes and enthusiastically adopt them? What processes are in place to look forward to potential change? For example, new product development?
5. Hazard and Risk awareness - do the people in your site know what risks and hazards are present in their zone, whether there are specific hazards with certain products and the consequences of not following processes to reduce risk? Do you have a near miss process to proactively raise issues before they become a risk?
I could be wrong but I think the intent of the BRCGS standard is just to make you think that culture is more than just people but it can be evidenced through your processes, through being proactive etc. BUT I also think there is widespread misunderstanding on what food safety culture is within Technical circles and honestly, I'm not sure the BRCGS definition helps. What I mean by that is a culture programme is not putting up some posters and doing a food safety week event in the canteen. (It's really not.) Yes that might be part of launching an activity but it's not a particularly effective one.
Thanks dear for your reply,
actually i went through GFSI, BRCGS culture module and PAS 320 also, they all talking about the same thing however each one is focusing on specific parameter, for me it's all about the people and their behavior towards the product safety and how to deal when no one is seeing you, that's queit challenging, after reading i have a conclusion and i would like to share with you and it will be great to know your opinion.
To create a food safety culture you have to:
1. Measure and determien the gaps based on survey and you have to determine the elements,
2. Setting key matrix for the score to detrmine the maturity,
3. Doing action plan for the points that need improvement,
4. Setting controls and review it,
this will close th documentation part, for the practical part it's more about management commitment and their support.
1. Measure and determien the gaps based on survey and you have to determine the elements,
2. Setting key matrix for the score to detrmine the maturity,
3. Doing action plan for the points that need improvement,
4. Setting controls and review it,
this will close th documentation part, for the practical part it's more about management commitment and their support.
Yes, I agree. I think for point one, it can be based on a survey but doesn't have to be. Survey data is not great data because it is at a point in time. BUT it's also a great way of asking peoples beliefs which is important for this. You can also use focus groups / discussions for the same but again it's a point in time. I'd also use some input and output metrics on culture as well. So it's lagging but do include complaints, audit outcomes etc.
For 2 - it may be a translation thing but I think to determine the maturity you're looking at the results of your survey and metrics. Then what I'd do as a next step is identify areas where you're weak and need to be stronger and possibly some areas you want to protect and shore up. I wouldn't pick too many. Keep it simple.
Yes, 3 an action plan is needed. If you've identified what behaviours need to change choose some actions as a team which you think may influence those behaviours. Think about active and direct training for example but don't discount "nudges" which can change behaviour subconsciously.
For 4 that's where I'd choose what metrics I'd use to measure if you are on or off track. Ideally these should be a combination of leading and lagging indicators. So for example, if you chose in point 3 that you want to improve the presence and visibility of leaders on your production area talking about food safety and quality. A leading metric could be the level of training of your leaders to undertake this activity. A lagging metric could be improvement in GMP scores (as greater presence should lead to more challenge day to day etc) then an even more "laggy" metric would be external audit results.