4 replies to this topic

[CBH]

We are considering a multi site certification (ISO9001) instead of individual certifications for each site. Would you like to share the pros and cons?

[jfrey123]

Multi-site is nice from the paperwork standpoint, but I'd point out that ISO9001 is not GFSI recognized and could prove to be a waste of money if your customers require GFSI.  I know SQF allows for multi-site certifications, our auditors have been pushing my company to go down that rabbit hole for our sites.

[SQFconsultant]

I always liked multi-sites both as a consultant and as an SQF Auditor but will one reservation - it works well when each facility is VERY similar, it does not work well when they are all different in all the ways they can be.

[TimG]

I always liked multi-sites both as a consultant and as an SQF Auditor but will one reservation - it works well when each facility is VERY similar, it does not work well when they are all different in all the ways they can be.

 

Can failure of one site cause all sites to lose or delay certification? If so, I can see that as being a con.

[jfrey123]

Can failure of one site cause all sites to lose or delay certification? If so, I can see that as being a con.

 

My understanding (and I'm happy to be corrected) is that a multi-site cert typically calls for a corporatized or master FSQMS documentation that all sites follow, allowing for one major audit of the SOP's the sites operate under.  This allows for shorter on-site audits as the on-site audits turn into GMP monitoring with some limited record review.  

 

That said, a major finding in the top level audit could affect all plants recertified under the scheme.  But a localized finding at an individual facility won't affect other facilities unless it leads to a major finding related to the SOP itself.