24 replies to this topic

[Jean]

Dear All,

I am looking out for the definition of quality ( as per your understanding) and how is qality measured with respect to your own department / work place , with respect to a final product or how quality is defined by a customer (external or internal).

Regards,

J

[Charles.C]

Dear Jean,

Ahh! Quality.

Almost infinite number of possible answers to this one.

Some generalised aspects are in this thread -

http://www.ifsqn.com...wtopic=9167&hl=

Rgds / Charles.C

[Jean]

Dear Charles,



Thank you for the thread link and have obtained some info. I have been assigned a small task to develop quality definitions with respect to for various processes like food preparation, handling, storage & service from the viewpoint of both internal and external customer, so that we can improve to meet the set definitions.

The few what I have jotted are:-



- To ensure the food safety standards are met and provide customer satisfaction

- To ensure timely and excellent service are provided to meet customer expectations.

- To ensure food prepared are free from any hazard and is fit for consumption.



Thanks and regards,



Jean

[Simon]

Hi Jean (hygiene ),

This won’t help you but we have a saying in English “Beauty is in the eye of the Beholder” To help with translation it basically means that ‘Quality’ is whatever your customer perceives. The problem is we usually have many customers each with there own perception of Beauty (Quality). Yes we can take an educated guess and would no doubt find most of the main requirements for our customers, but each customer may place more or less emphasis on the different criteria. And they will also have their own little bugbears besides.

I think it’s about knowing your customers intimately and providing everything they desire including (especially their bugbears). And don’t forget to smile – that costs nothing.

Regards,
Simon

[Enya81]

Not sure if my translation is the right one, but some people here would describe it as "to comply with the expectations of the customers"

[Jean]

Dear Simon,

Thanks for getting to know my professional name by which I am known in my work place, thats relates to my work too.

I agree with what you have commented, each customer indeed have their know view and criteria for defining quality and yes which includes their bugbears and all the regular customer requirements are noted by us and we ensure we meet their expectation each time they stay with us.

Dear Enya,

Yes you are right, Quality should meet customer expectations. Thanks for your suggestion.

Regards,

J

[GMO]

My personal view of quality is of course as Simon said, what the customer wants but we don't actually have specifications for what the consumer wants. Personal experience in the UK is the retailer will pass on quality complaints from consumers which I think are unreasonable; e.g. "even after following the cooking instructions, the meal was still frozen in the middle" - but the meal clearly stated on pack "do not freeze" and they'd obviously done it anyway.

For me, quality is not food safety because if I refer to something as a 'quality issue' I mean it ain't going to kill anyone. Quality is by it's nature a grey area. One person will accept something another person won't. I am the worst consumer in the world and complain about anything I don't see as matching my standards. I suppose the important thing is to regularly review against your complaints whether your standards are high enough.

I measure quality with taste panels and complaint levels which are both easy and quantitative.

[Simon]

Good points GMO.
When you say:

I suppose the important thing is to regularly review against your complaints whether your standards are high enough.

To extend your idea I suppose if (higher quality = higher cost) we should also make sure our standards are not too high? Is that possible, to have too high a level of quality?

Simon

[Charles.C]

Dear GMO,

My personal view of quality is of course as Simon said, what the customer wants

I think it is reasonable to assume that all customers expect to retain good health after consumption unless perhaps insurance claims are involved.

Rgds / Charles.C

[Charles.C]

Dear All,

After looking into this topic a bit more, I realised it was even more subjective and wider than I had first appreciated. I enclose some extracts for your consideration –

1. The term “food quality” has a variety of meanings to professionals in the food industry. To nutritionists it is synonymous with the nutritional value of food, to microbiologists it refers to the foods safety, while to chemists it may equate the item’s stability. Although each of these interpretations of “food quality” has merit, consumers, through their purchase and/or nonpurchase of the product must cetainly be considered the arbiters of food quality.
The notion that food quality must ultimately be defined by consumer perception is embodied in the frequently cited definition of food quality as “ the combination of attributes or characteristics of a product that have significance in determining the degree of acceptability of the product to a user”. Another definition of food quality that places even greater emphasis on the perceptual aspects of food quality is “the acceptance of the perceived characteristics of a product by consumers who are the regular users of the product category or those who comprise the market segment." In this definition, the phrase “perceived characteristics” refers to the perception of all characteristics of the food, not simply its sensory attributes. Thus it also includes the perception of the food’s safety, convenience, cost, value etc.

(Food Storage Stability / Taub and Singh)

2. An EC Approach

Food quality in all its aspects
For some years now, European consumers' choices have tended to favour healthier and more flavoursome food of higher nutritional value, produced by more environmentally friendly methods. The guiding principle behind this development is quality: in this complex concept, vital issues are at stake.
A question of definition
But what does 'quality' mean in this context? Food safety is, of course, the prime condition for food quality and an absolute, non-negotiable must. This is also true of compliance with legally established standards for the environment and animal welfare since they relate to the protection of natural resources and requirements of an ethical nature, in addition to the characteristics of the products. Although food's nutritional value is subject to rules on labelling, this is more relative, being linked to eating habits. Other aspects of quality are optional because they have a subjective component and depend on consumer preferences; there are, for instance, flavour, smell and appearance. Some products also have an added value because they are produced in a particular region or by a traditional method (quality labels) or because their production methods pay special attention to the environment and animal welfare (e.g. organic farming).

http://ec.europa.eu/...al/quali_en.htm

3. Wiki Viewpoint

Food quality is the quality characteristics of food that is acceptable to consumers. This includes external factors as appearance (size, shape, colour, gloss, and consistency), texture, and flavour; factors such as federal grade standards (e.g. of eggs) and internal (chemical, physical, microbial).
Food quality is an important food manufacturing requirement, because food consumers are susceptible to any form of contamination that may occur during the manufacturing process. Many consumers also rely on manufacturing and processing standards, particularly to know what ingredients are present, due to dietary, nutritional requirements (kosher, halal, vegetarian), or medical conditions (e.g., diabetes, or allergies).
Besides ingredient quality, there are also sanitation requirements. It is important to ensure that the food processing environment is as clean as possible in order to produce the safest possible food for the consumer. A recent example of poor sanitation recently has been the 2006 North American E. coli outbreak involving spinach, an outbreak that is still under investigation.
Food quality also deals with product traceability, e.g. of ingredient and packaging suppliers, should a recall of the product be required. It also deals with labeling issues to ensure there is correct ingredient and nutritional information.

http://en.wikipedia....ki/Food_quality

4. A Separated Interpretation

Food Safety & Quality

Americans expect many things from their food supply. They want variety and quality; and they want nutritious, safe foods at a reasonable cost. The definition of good quality can be varied depending upon the type of food and the individual's food preference. Some of the important characteristics of quality include wholesomeness, freshness, nutritional value, texture, color, aroma and flavor. To many consumers, safe food means that there will be no danger from pathogenic microorganisms, naturally occurring toxins and other potentially harmful chemicals which may be deliberately added to foods.

http://msucares.com/...fety/index.html

Take your pick.

Rgds / Charles.C

[Jean]

Dear Charles,



Thanks a lot of the various extracts on quality. My pick was:-

The notion that food quality must ultimately be defined by consumer perception is embodied in the frequently cited definition of food quality as “ the combination of attributes or characteristics of a product that have significance in determining the degree of acceptability of the product to a user”. Another definition of food quality that places even greater emphasis on the perceptual aspects of food quality is “the acceptance of the perceived characteristics of a product by consumers who are the regular users of the product category or those who comprise the market segment." In this definition, the phrase “perceived characteristics” refers to the perception of all characteristics of the food, not simply its sensory attributes. Thus it also includes the perception of the food’s safety, convenience, cost, value etc.

I had done the short session on quality defining with my staff and they too came up with the same thought that -Quality would be met if the customer’s perceptions, food characteristics and food safety are met. Few came up saying Quality is achieved if correct process or procedures are done in the right way and it conforms to the specification / regulation or requirements.



There are 2 forms of quality either Subjective or Objective.

1. OBJECTIVE quality is the degree of compliance of a process or its outcome with a predetermined set of criteria, which are presumed essential to the ultimate value it provides. Example: proper formulation of a medication.

2. SUBJECTIVE quality is the level of perceived value reported by the person who benefits from a process or its outcome. It may subsume various intermediate quality measures, both objective and subjective. Example: pain relief provided by a medication.

The following are different definitions which I had found:-

Quality is neither mind nor matter, but a third entity independent of the two, even though Quality cannot be defined, you know what it is. (Persig, 1974)

Quality is fitness for use. (Juran, 1974)

Quality means conformance to requirements. (Crosby, 1979)

[Quality is] a system of means to economically produce goods or services which satisfy customers' requirements. (Japanese Industrial Standards Committee, 1981)

Quality refers to the amounts of the unpriced attributes contained in each unit of the priced attribute. (Leffler, 1982)

Quality means best for certain conditions...(a) the actual use and (b) the selling price. (Feigenbaum, 1983)

[Quality] means that the organization's culture is defined by and supports the constant attainment of customer satisfaction through an integrated system of tools, techniques, and training. (Sashkin & Kiser, 1993)

Thanks & Best Regards,

Jean

[GMO]

Hi Charles C - of course I agree I don't want to kill anyone but in my view that's food safety!

We have had a number of issues in places where I have worked where the customer have asked for a change and the consumer doesn't like it. It's amazing how many times I've had stores call and ask "why does this look different?" or consumers not like the taste of something after we've halved the saturated fat. I don't think the customer is always the best judge either but the consumer is by the very fact of who they are the best judge of quality; having said that, they don't agree! One person will praise innovation for the next person to hate change!

[GMO]

Had an argument about this today with an ISO expert. They see quality as encompassing aspects of food safety. I wondered whether that was because of ISO9001; because it doesn't directly reference food safety (as it's a standard which can apply to any field), it feels to me like it needs to be shoe horned in through the back door. My quibble is, if that is sufficient; why have a specific food safety standard (ie ISO 22000)?

[YongYM]

Dear GMO:

Someone explained to me that if a food company is implementing ISO 9001, the scope of quality actually covering food safety as well because you are producing food to consumer like you and me. If you received a complaint (e.g. metal fragments in the product), are you considering it a quality issue??

Initially for ISO 9001, it does not really emphasize on food safety as this standards actually can be applied by most of the industries e.g. hotel, construction etc. However, due to the increased in the importance of food safety issues, a new ISO standard emphasizing and incorporating on food safety only has been released. I can see some of the ISO 9001 elements are still remained but with the incorporation of new clauses on food safety.

Please correct me if I am wrong. TQ

Yong

[Charles.C]

Dear GMO,

I agree with you. This is an extract from a paper by Surak -

The working group that developed ISO 22000 intended that ISO 22000 would not replace ISO 9001. Instead, they intended that a food processor use both standards: ISO 22000 to address a food safety management system (FSMS) and ISO 9001 to address a quality management system. Both standards are compatible and have similar structures.
ISO has a unique format when compared to both the U.S. definition of HACCP, developed by the National Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Criteria for Foods (NACMCF), or the CODEX definition of HACCP. NACMCF and CODEX wrote their standards as guidance standards. These standards describe how a food processor can implement HACCP. ISO 22000 is written in auditable form so it can be used as a tool to develop audit plans for either internal audits or third party audits.

Personally, I believe ISO 22000 was developed by people who considered that HACCP was becoming too well understood as a tool for achieving food safety.

Rgds / Charles.C

[GMO]

Love the response Charles C.

I was having a heated discussion with someone yesterday about ISO9001 and how it does relate to food safety because quality means "fit for purpose" and should encompass legislative requirements (ie including HACCP.) I thought 'well why have ISO22000 then?'

I'm increasingly thinking trying to shoehorn one standard into all industries is kind of daft.

[rita]

Excuse me for my ignorance, but what is the basic difference between ISO9001 and ISO22000.

[GMO]

I'm no ISO expert but as far as I can tell (please correct me if I'm wrong):

ISO9001 = quality standard which can apply to any industry
ISO22000 = food safety standard, therefore far more concerned with HACCP etc and obviously only applies to food

[Charles.C]

Dear GMO,

ISO22000 = food safety standard, therefore far more concerned with HACCP etc and obviously only applies to food

Perhaps it should be added that "food" is interpreted in an amazingly wide fashion, eg occupations supporting the production of food can be included also, eg cleaning agents, equipment, etc. Mobile phones I'm not so sure.

In a similar way, I think BRC considers cigarettes as food.

Rgds / Charles.C

[Charles Chew]

Someone explained to me that if a food company is implementing ISO 9001, the scope of quality actually covering food safety as well because you are producing food to consumer like you and me. If you received a complaint (e.g. metal fragments in the product), are you considering it a quality issue??

Clearly, the elements of quality and food safety are the requirement of ISO 22000 however the food safety elements ranks paramount. In other word, a food processor with ISO 9001 but w/o the elements of ISO 15161 cannot really effectively achieve ISO 9001 Certification as the system is flawed. And, ISO 9001 + ISO 15161 / HACCP is NOT equals to ISO 22000.

By the way, regulatory requirement compliant is mandatory under ISO 22000 and if a product was sold underweighted, this would be a trade offence as well as a quality issue.

ISO 9001 Quality Statement - Food that looks good, tastes good and smells good...eat it, you may end up in a hospital.

ISO 22000 Quality Statement - Food that looks good, taste good, smells good and SAFE to EAT.

[GMO]

I was having this argument with an ISO9001 auditor and he was adament that safety forms part of quality. Personally I agree with you Charles.

[rita]

Great to see a good feedback and I’m a bit anxious and curious to know the differences between ISO 15161, ISO9001:2000. I believe HACCP is there in both and in ISO22000 as it is related to Food. Again, excuse me for my lack of knowledge and would love to learn from the ISO experts.

[Simon]

Clearly, the elements of quality and food safety are the requirement of ISO 22000 however the food safety elements ranks paramount. In other word, a food processor with ISO 9001 but w/o the elements of ISO 15161 cannot really effectively achieve ISO 9001 Certification as the system is flawed. And, ISO 9001 + ISO 15161 / HACCP is NOT equals to ISO 22000.

By the way, regulatory requirement compliant is mandatory under ISO 22000 and if a product was sold underweighted, this would be a trade offence as well as a quality issue.

ISO 9001 Quality Statement - Food that looks good, tastes good and smells good...eat it, you may end up in a hospital.

ISO 22000 Quality Statement - Food that looks good, taste good, smells good and SAFE to EAT.

I think Charles has pretty much explained above. Can you tell us a bit about your background Rita and why you need / are trying to learn about food safety.

Great to see a good feedback and I’m a bit anxious and curious to know the differences between ISO 15161, ISO9001:2000. I believe HACCP is there in both and in ISO22000 as it is related to Food. Again, excuse me for my lack of knowledge and would love to learn from the ISO experts.

[rita]

Hi!


I am a Hygiene Assistant working for a water processing unit.
So far have not undergone any training in ISO. Have knowlege in HACCP which was part of my project in college. I have just started my career.

[GMO]

I would say then keep it simple.

Food Safety is all about:

'will it kill or hurt someone or make them ill?'

Food Quality (may or may not include food safety) but also includes:

'has the product been made in the way it should? Does it fulfill my customers expectations? Will the consumer be happy to eat it?'

So obviously your first concern should always be food safety. You will have no customers if you kill them!