5S in a HACCP SYSTEM

When a company's level of human / technical support is not there to drive towards HACCP yet, IMO the option to persue implementation of 5S as a foundation base is a good idea. I am saying this from the experiences that we have had.

I find Org. who go for ISO 9K and HACCP simultaneously somewhat "tiring" as the team members are basically the same group of ppl.

5S is less demanding but serves the all important purpose of building a "solid foundation" for an effective HACCP implementation. Does anyone has this experience to share with us?

Charles Chew

I like it Charles, I like it a lot. 5S's is a great foundation for any improvement programme, but I hadn't thought of 5S's as a precursor to implementing a HACCP system.

5S's - Seiri, Seiton, Seiso, Seiketsu, Shitsuke

Seiri = sort, structurise, sort out
Seiton = straighten, systematise, systematic arrangement
Seiso = scrub, sanitise, spic and span
Seiketsu = systematise, standardise
Shitsuke = standardise, self-discipline

5S's HACCP certainly sounds like a match made in heaven, it makes perfect sense. Remember where you heard it first. Its OK Charles you got the copyright.

There's a really great 5S's article on our web site written by David Straker:
The Five S's Uncovered

Regards,
Simon

5S is surely the tool you can use if you are going for a safe work environment including producing a product that is safe to use.
I am always surprised that what is called 5S is already widely used in aviation and offshore business and is called common sense there.
Needless to say that these safety driven business are far ahead in organising safety.
It is my experience that the simplicity of 5S makes it difficult to implement.
Foodsafety/HACCP is a necessity from a legal standpoint, market demands and customer expectations and you have to do it.
As a strong supporter of 5S I think 5S can enter trough the backdoor of HACCP and help us to implement simple and cheap solutions for all kind of problems that are otherwise "difficult" to tackle.

No worries, Okido

You are quite right Okido the 5S's methodology is pure common sense. Also neatness, cleanliness etc. are natural human traits that some people do and some people don't possess.

Quality Manager
'Hello John, I want to start a project with production to de-clutter the factory and then implement some systems and disciplines to keep everything clean, neat, tidy and in its rightful place.'

Production Manager
'Uh…no time.'

Quality Manager
'What?'

Production Manager
'You know we ain't got time for all that crap Mary, we've got schedules to keep, we're down to the bare bones on capacity and I've got sales screaming in my ear about late shipments.'

Quality Manager
'I understand that John, but if we take a little time out to get ourselves better organised we might actually squeeze a little extra capacity out.'

Production Manager
'What the hell are you talking about while my men are shuffling bits of paper and taking brooms for walks, who's gonna be running my machines?'

Quality Manager
'How long does it take to do a tool change?'

Production Manager
'What's that got to do with it?'

Quality Manager
'Everything, how long does it take to do a tool change?'

Production Manager
'About 6 hours or so.'

Quality Manager
'Have you ever analysed a tool change to see what activities make up the 6 hours.'

Production Manager
'Mary I worked on the shop floor for 14 years, I must have done a zillion tool changes.'

Quality Manager
'I know you can do them in your sleep, but have you ever analysed a tool change to see how much time it takes to do each step - we may be able to reduce it.'

Production Manager
'Oh I get it ‘time and motion' my men are gonna love that. Look Mary we're doing that BS 5750 thing for you and its probably filling all those silly little forms in that takes up most of our time.'

Quality Manager
'How many tool changes do you do a month?'

Production Manager
'About 500.'

Quality Manager
'OK - 500 changes at 6 hours that's 3,000 hours a month. What if I said I could reduce it by a 1,000 to 2,000 hours a month? No extra equipment, no extra staff and nobody will have to work any harder.'

Production Manager
'So who do you think you are now David Blaine?'

Quality Manager
'I'm serious let me look at some tool changes and I'll show you what takes up the 6 hours.'

Production Manager
'The fellas ain't gonna like it.'

Quality Manager
'It's important we do this, I'll talk to them and win them over.'

Production Manager
'1,000 hours?'

Quality Manager
'At least!'

Production Manager
'OK Mary'

And so the 5S's programme begins…

Regards,
Simon

Looking at the general demand of implementing 5S and as both of you had mentioned that it is predominantly a common sense system (isn't eveything else?) - most of these demands are found or would be introduced as part of the HACCP System anyway.

Implementing 5S ahead merely makes it easier for ppl to grasp the general idea of having a systematic approach to doing things and get attuned to a culture based on combined efforts of all involved. Seriously, 5S does that very well.

Therefore, 5S as a precursor to HACCP IMO is a better approach and does make more sense. However, any way taken it will still have positive impact

Charles Chew

Hi everybody!

I have just become a member...
I had the same experience... First I'd started with 5S, then GMP and finally we're on HACCP. I think it's a good way to initiate quality programs and save time in the future. But there're some problems to continuous with 5S.
When you go ahead with quality programs you usually "forget", or include the main ideas in the next one... And how to audit all the programs?! I don't know about yours experiences, but here we don't have a special department to audit... I had trainned some persons (not only who belongs to quality department) from the company.
What I took as solution is to audit only the last program (including the main topics of others): GMP and HACCP.
Is there anyone with the same problem?
What should we do in order to not left it behind?

Priscila

What I took as solution is to audit only the last program (including the main topics of others): GMP and HACCP.

Hi Priscilla,

I take it that your problem is one of integrating procedures to control the different "systems" that you now have. Am I right? If this is so, you would need to manage / integrate them to run on parallel "mode" (like 3 similar procedures operating in 1 mode) - thus allowing you to audit common verification procedures on common audit platform against "integrated policies".

I hope this helps. But having said the above, we must remember that the primary objective is to effectively implement A HACCP SYSTEM and there is nothing in the Codex that says 5S cannot be part of your HACCP System...............think about this one! ..................if QMS ISO 9000 and HACCP can be combined to form ISO 22000 for a FSM Progam..........what is wrong with using 5S and HACCP? An opinion!

Charles Chew

Hello Priscila, welcome to the forums.

I think we all agree that 5S's can be a good foundation for HACCP and it's important you integrate the separate programs into one system where you can. When you say you have some problems maintaining the 5S disciplines can you be a little more specific?

Regards,
Simon

For us it is not a goal to audit programs, we audit the management system.
The management system is based on ISO 9001 : 2000 and ISO 14001, HACCP, Safety, GMP are widely integrated in this system.
Auditors are a cross section of the employees and they audit parts of the management system.
They focus on a processes and than verify if this process performs conform the targets and or standards that apply. Non conformance is used as a signal to improve.

Good day, Okido

Non conformance is used as a signal to improve. 

Non-Conformance (if a CCP) is a severe violation of set criteria. A breach could propel implications of adverse effects to public health. I am not sure if we could consider such a situation as a signal for improvements or a failure to ensure absolute or reasonable control of critical criterion remains.

Even if a non-conformance were to occur on a CP, it could if a root cause analysis exercise is taken may turn out to be an unwanted element that may promote hazardous implications afterall.

Charles Chew

Charles Chew:

Thank you for your comments!!! It will be easier to include, as part of HACCP, a topic named 5S than just include its topic and submit the name 5S.

About non-conformance, I think that Okido wants to say is that we can use it for Continuous Improvement (Am I correct?). Then, in my point of view, some non conformances can bring so many problems that we won't be able to use it for Continuous Improvement... mainly if it's on your product. Maybe if you find it on your system!

Simon:

The problems I had mentioned were about keeping the program 5S alive on workers mind. First I thought that keeping 5S as a separeted program would make a mess on workers mind. But I'd liked Charles' idea to keep it as a topic of HACCP program. At least workers will always remember about 5S, because they had learned it once and continuos in the next programm. That was my doubt, because if I submit the name 5S and just include on HACCP, after some time they won't remember 5S.

Have a nice day!

Priscila

The problems I had mentioned were about keeping the program 5S alive on workers mind.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It's the eternal problem Priscila, if you don't keep reinforcing and refreshing procedures by showing an interest with simple things like walking and talking to people, asking questions and auditing you find even long standing procedures that you thought were deeply ingrained suddenly stop. This is especially true when the activity is outside the normal scope of the operator's work e.g. cleaning.

Regards,
Simon

Good day Priscilla

You are right non conformance must be used for continuous improvement.
Maybe I made my point not so clear.
To keep programs alive you could indeed audit them and evaluate how they function and improve on it.
It is my experience that keeping programs alive is rather difficult. Besides that programs come and go.
For us the main stable factor is the management system, preferably based on a standard like ISO 9001:2000 or BRC IOP etc.
We audit the management system.
Auditors take a process as starting point and look if policies, goals and set criteria are met.
So rather than auditing the functioning of a program, we focus on the performance of a process.
Managers are bound only by the management system and have the freedom to use whatever program they like as long as they meet the policies, goals and set criteria laid down in the management system.
We do this now for several years and I see that a variety of elements out all kind of programs are successfully implemented.


Okido

So rather than auditing the functioning of a program, we focus on the performance of a process.  Managers are bound only by the management system and have the freedom to use whatever program they like as long as they meet the policies, goals and set criteria laid down in the management system.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Okido, I agree it's important to audit the performance of the process. It's also important to understand how the operation of a program contributes towards the effectiveness and efficiency of the process; in order that we may improve process performance. As such it's essential the 5S program and its intrinsic activities are audited. Doing a desk audit and looking at charts is an easy way to confirm how a process is doing against key performance measures, but it's the why of ‘the performance' that counts and the answers are usually found in the work place.

Regards,
Simon

hi charles
its good idea that we can apply HACCP through 5-S because base for HACCP is
G.M.P. and G.H.P. and i think 5-S is very helpfull to get G.M.P. and G.H.P.
i m working a company who will go for HACCP and they already working on 5-S
and personaly i think 5-S is very helpfull.

When a company's level of human / technical support is not there to drive towards HACCP yet, IMO the option to persue implementation of 5S as a foundation base is a good idea. I am saying this from the experiences that we have had.

I find Org. who go for ISO 9K and HACCP simultaneously somewhat "tiring" as the team members are basically the same group of ppl.

5S is less demanding but serves the all important purpose of building a "solid foundation" for an effective HACCP implementation. Does anyone has this experience to share with us?

Charles Chew

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>