Tag Archives: audits

Ryan Mead, Focus-Works
FST Soapbox

8 Reasons to Go Digital 2016

By Ryan Mead
No Comments
Ryan Mead, Focus-Works

This year, more food manufacturing companies than ever are actively seeking software solutions for food safety and quality management. The majority of food businesses still collect food safety records using pen and paper, which is a time-consuming process and is far from reliable. Fortunately, food safety software is drastically changing the way HACCP and other QA/QC data becomes collected and stored. The following are some reasons food safety software is a must-have in 2016.

1.     Overwhelming Amount of Paperwork

Many employees at food manufacturing facilities—whether meats, baked goods, or beverages—still rely on pen and paper forms, checklists, and log books to manage their food safety operations. This allows operator errors and omissions to happen far too easily. Even well managed systems that use paperwork can reach a tipping point. Quality managers already have a big enough workload, and piling on the job of verifying all paperwork only increases the chances of a failure.

2.     Constant Change in Food Safety Standards

FSMA, the most sweeping reform of food safety laws in more than 70 years, was signed into law in 2011. While most food manufacturers have only been mandated to register, the time of more strict enforcement is coming. Global standards for food safety such as, SQF and BRC, fall within this generation of compliance. The necessities of these programs are constantly changing, becoming stricter and introducing new categories of requirements. Food safety software offers an effective way to deal with the ever-shifting landscape by providing evolving solutions managed by a software provider.

3.     Consumer Confidence

Consumer expect a safe and healthy product, and as such, a company must instill a feeling of confidence. When a product is expected to provide nutrition, energy and enjoyment any incidence of foodborne illness will only prevent future confidence in the product. In addition, the consumer is likely to spread the news among peers about how he or she became sick. It is the duty of the food company to do everything in its power to process, store and prepare food in the safest way possible. That process starts with ensuring a higher level of reliability in a food safety program, which can be achieved by using food safety software.

4.     Economics

No food company wants to deal with the hassle of a lawsuit from an outbreak or recall. These events can cost thousands, if not millions, of dollars in damages and  cause serious loss to a company of any size. Although many companies carry insurance for these occurrences, there still is the loss of sale from consumer mistrust. Investing in software can help companies increase profits by improving efficiencies. For example, companies can measure these efficiencies not only from labor savings but also from significant savings in paper and toner (i.e., saving $2000–$5000 a year).

5.     Operator Error and Omission

In an age in which documentation is becoming digitalized, food safety requirements are becoming more tedious. Even the smallest employee error can have massive repercussions. The cost of added staff is one thing, but the reliability of the data and adherence to schedule is another. Relying on inaccurate data collection may result in a recall or damage to a company’s brand.

Pencil whipping (faking paperwork) occurs for a variety of reasons, from employees taking short cuts to avoidance of writing down out-of-spec data. Manual record keeping has proven over time to be prone to errors. Employees, bored with the distraction of measuring and writing down dough or batch temperatures, piece weights or metal detector tests, and fill out forms with moot numbers just to complete the form.

6.     Monitoring and Notification

Being aware of control points is another way in which companies can avoid disaster. Food safety software can give companies the ability to monitor oven and freezer temperatures, metal detectors, tests or any other control point in real time. This capability also alerts users when a control point is out of deviation (doing so at a glance), along with sending custom notifications, allowing a plant to quickly address problems while simultaneously properly documenting the issue.

7.     Audits: Go from Stressful to Easy

An upcoming audit can be stressful for any company, involving numerous people who are gathering an abundance of documentation. With food safety software there is no reason to scramble to get documentation together or waste precious time preparing it. Auditors can simply view a company’s software for any requested documentation. For example, a company can produce random temperature logs, metal detector times, SSOPs, customer complaints and a variety of other documentation in just a few clicks.

8.     The Technology Is Available

One of the reasons why so many companies continue to use paper and Excel-based systems today is because they are unaware of the abilities and functionality available to them. After completing the formidable task of attaining a new-found level of compliance, some companies may find it daunting to continue to go to the next step of converting to a computerized system. Finding user-friendly food safety software that has good customer support, as well as solutions that are customized to user needs, is not necessarily easy. The key is to find software and a supplier that can provide the right solution for your company and food safety program, whether it’s HACCP, BRC or SQF, and ensure that it fits within an acceptable budget. Consider not only the initial cost but also the cost of implementation. What resources will be required? How much can the supplier help with implementation? Having the right answers and the true costs will assist you in arriving at the correct solution.

FSMA

Are You Ready for the Produce Rule? You Just Might Be

By Marsha Madrigal
No Comments
FSMA

At last the new Produce Rule is out, issued on November 13, 2015.  For the first time in FDA history, the rule establishes a science-based minimum standard for growing, harvesting, packing and holding of fruits and vegetables grown for human consumption.  The rule can be found in Part 112 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). It applies to both domestic and imported produce.

The new rule provides assurance that produce on the market is not adulterated under the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.  It will accomplish this by establishing procedures, processes and practices that are known to minimize the risks of serious adverse health consequences or death to humans, and to prevent the introduction of known biological hazards into and or on produce.

The definition for a farm, covered under the rule, includes two kinds of farming operations, primary production farm and secondary activities farm. The primary production farm operates under one management, and the secondary activities farm is an operation. Where as the primary production farm owns, or jointly owns, a majority of interest in the secondary activities farm.

Food Safety Consortium
During the FDA Town Hall, an audience member asks about the Produce Rule and the work being done with Mexico. Watch the video

For the most part, the new mandated FDA Produce Rules, mirror what farmers, packers and others in the farm business have been doing all along.  For years now, produce buyers have required some kind of written guarantee from their suppliers such as a third-party audit certificate showing that the supplying farm or packing shed is complying with the farm food safety standards. Most farms and packing sheds have already undergone, if not one, but perhaps two or more third-party audits such as a Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) or, one of the Harmonized GAP audits, or a Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP) audit, or one of the Global Food Safety Initiative (GFSI) audits such as GlobalGAP, Safe Quality Foods (SQF) or BRC Global Standards (BRC).

This means that those covered under the Produce Rule for growing, harvesting, packing and holding of fruits and vegetables grown for human consumption and have received a third-party audit should have no trouble achieving compliance with the new Produce Rule.

The above-mentioned third-party standards cover most aspects of the key requirements of the Produce Rule regarding agricultural water, biological soil amendments, domesticated and wild animals, worker training, health and hygiene, and equipment, tools, and buildings.

However, some key requirements of the new rule not noted in existing third-party standards include:

  • Water testing of untreated water, sample collection and survey creation for agricultural water.
  • Microbial standard limits for detectable amounts of microorganisms to include Listeria monocytogenes, Salmonella species, and E. coli 0157:H7 for the treatment process of soil amendments, including manure.
  • The final Produce Rule includes requirements to help prevent the contamination of sprouts. For example, requires testing of spent sprout irrigation water for pathogens and requires environmental monitoring for Listeria. Documentation or letters from seed and/or bean supplier for the prior treatment of seed and beans are acceptable.
  • The requirements of Domesticated and Wild Animals relies more on monitoring and assessing conditions during growing season. If you find evidence of potential contamination like animal excreta, you must take action and evaluate whether produce can be harvested or if there is a likelihood of contamination. The produce must not be harvested.

This rule does not apply to:

  • Farms that have an average annual value of produce sold during the previous three year period of $25,000/yea
  • Produce for personal or on-the farm consumption
  • If the produce is on the list of “rarely consumed raw commodities” such as sweet potatoes and
  • A food grain such as wheat or oats

The rule provides also for exemptions:

  • Produce that will receive commercial processing (kill-step) to reduce microorganisms of public health concerns.
  • Provides a qualified exemption and modification requirement for farms that meet certain requirements based on monetary value and direct sales to qualified end users such as consumers or restaurants. The farm must also meet associated modified requirements like establishing and maintaining certain documentation.

Under certain conditions the FDA may withdraw a farm’s qualified exemption.

The rule focuses on sources of produce contamination found in the past: Agricultural water, biological soil amendments, domesticated and wild animals, worker training, health and hygiene, and equipment, tools and buildings.

This rule and others under FSMA such as Preventive Controls for Human Food, Preventive Controls for Animal Food, and the Foreign Supplier Verification Program are a long overdue yet great achievement for FDA. The agency now shifts its gear into focusing on preventing food safety problems instead of reacting to food safety outbreaks.

FDA estimates that about 348,000 illnesses per year will be prevented by the implementation of this rule.

The compliance dates for the new rule are staggered and based on business size.

Resources

  1. Produce Rule: Standards for the Growing, Harvesting, Packing, and Holding of Produce for Human Consumption
  2. FSMA Webinar Series: Final Rules for Produce Safety, Foreign Supplier Verification Program (FSVP), and Third Party Auditors
Timothy Ahn, LRQA

Beyond the Fluff: Leadership Must Demonstrate Food Safety Culture Through Actions

By Maria Fontanazza
1 Comment
Timothy Ahn, LRQA

As the popular phrase goes, if you’re going to talk the talk, then you need to walk the walk. This expression really does ring true when discussing an effective food safety culture within an organization. Timothy Ahn, senior technical manager of food safety at LRQA sheds some light on the importance of management commitment as a foundation for success in implementing a food safety culture and how employee training fits into the picture.

Food Safety Tech: In your column on Food Safety Tech, “Tackling the ‘Why’ of Food Safety”, you touch on the point that food safety culture needs to start at the top. What are the issues in management today that prevents a food safety culture from flourishing within organizations?

Timothy Ahn: First, it’s important to define food safety culture. It can mean a lot of different things to people. The culture is the collective behavior from the organization around shared values and beliefs. From that perspective, it’s extremely important the leadership understands its beliefs and values. The collective behaviors of the leaders become really important, because we’re also talking about how the leadership sets management commitment and drives what’s important in the organization. The organization will follow whatever the leaders do and not necessarily what they say. That’s the issue—having the ability to get commitment from leadership that is demonstrated through their actions, which then transfers into rewards, objectives and consequences. What are the issues that are preventing the culture from embedding itself? Actions aren’t aligned with their words. You have a senior leadership group that will say one thing, but then their actions are different.

In addition, when cascading priorities are very different, food safety doesn’t get the right messages. It’s about growth, market share, profits—all of those financial measures are extremely important, because they have consequences and are also rewarded. Meanwhile, depending on the organization, the objectives around food safety culture may or may not be talked about, defined, or even rewarded. It’s really about making sure that the organization has cascading priorities.

FST: When taking a holistic approach to employee training, what are some of the challenges that companies can expect to encounter?

Ahn: I put food safety into three different buckets that build on top of each other.

  1. At the bottom is the foundation. It’s around good manufacturing practices and all the foundational activities that need to be in place for factory operations. How often you clean your equipment? What do you do around allergens? Can you trace your materials from one end to the other? Do you have a pest control program?
  2. Our food safety system: This includes things around HACCP: Do you have a HACCP plan in place? Do you understand what your hazards are? Have you defined your control measures?
  3. The last bucket is around the management system that drives food safety. Have you defined your objectives? Do you have a policy? Do you conduct a management review? Do you have an internal audit?

The issue with training is many operations only focus on the foundation. You need to have people who know how to clean equipment; you have to make sure that the pest control is done; you need to have good allergen management. Those are all pretty well done. Now you’re starting to get more traction in the second bucket, which is around HACCP, because with FSMA, HACCP is no longer an option; you need to be able to do it.

But the missing piece in many organizations is at the top—the management systems. This is important, because when you talk about culture, that’s where it gets embedded within an organization—through implementation of the management system.

If you look at this holistically, you need to train across all of those areas, not just in the foundation. You can differentiate yourself from organizations that have effective food safety management systems (not just food safety systems) because they’re training across all those buckets.

The other part of training is management systems. Who do you train? Besides targeting first line employees and operators, you also need to train senior managers because these managers, along with leadership, need to better define the objectives and policies. What does it mean to conduct an effective management review? What does it mean to do an internal audit? What’s a good corrective action process? The training often falls apart because organizations haven’t embedded that very well.

FST: Do you see differences between implementing these practices in small versus large organizations?

Ahn: There are differences, but it’s not necessarily a function of the size of the company. It’s more around how they’ve approached developing and organizing their management system and in particular, their food safety management system.

FST: In reality, how long does it take a typical company to create an effective food safety culture?

Ahn: There are two parts to that question.

My belief is that if you want to implement a food safety culture, you need to create a food safety management system, otherwise it is just all words and talk. It’s what you do, not what you say. The way to do that is to embed a food safety management system within your organization.

The two questions are: How do you get to initiate it? And, how long does it take to execute once you decide to initiate?

To address the first question: How do you initiate it?

There are a couple of ways that it can happen. There’s nothing like a crisis to get the fire under somebody’s feet, whether it’s a recall or an incident, it will draw attention to the fact that there’s a problem and something needs to happen. But, that’s reactive and detrimental.

The other way to initiate is that if you have enlightened leadership—an owner or group of owners who understand where they want to go, where they need to go, what needs to be avoided and understands the importance of the organization’s culture in getting to the right place, etc.

Secondly, once you start this process, how long does it take to get this type of system running?

Based on my experience in implementing food safety management systems like FSSC 22000, it takes anywhere from 18 months to 2 years to get it established, and then probably another 18 months or so to actually fully implement. So it’s not something that happens in a couple of months. It takes some time to really get it implemented and embedded, because these are foundational elements you  must put into place. There’s a lot of momentum involved, and it has to move throughout the organization.

The term food safety culture has gotten a lot of attention—it’s a buzzword. But what does it really mean and how do you make it come to life? That’s really where people need to start looking. You make it come to life through implementation of structured food safety management systems—ones that are verified, and independently verified. Put substance and real work around your food safety culture instead of using a lot of fluffy words to describe it.

FDA

FDA Releases Voluntary Retail Program Standards

By Food Safety Tech Staff
No Comments
FDA

After receiving input from federal, state, and local regulatory officials, along with industry and trade associations, academia, and consumers, FDA issued its Voluntary National Retail Food Regulatory Program Standards last week. The standards address “what constitutes a highly effective and responsive retail food regulatory program,” according to the document.

The Retail Program Standards include:

  • Promoting the adoption of science-based guidelines from the FDA Food Code
  • Promoting improvement of training programs to ensure local, state, tribal, and territorial staff have the necessary skills, knowledge and abilities
  • Implementing risk-based inspection programs
  • Developing outbreak and food defense surveillance plans to enable systematic detection and response to foodborne illness or food contamination

The 2015 edition contains new worksheets that are intended to assist regulatory programs in looking at how their programs line up with the 2013 Food Code. This includes helping them assess the consistency and effectiveness of their enforcement activities, and a verification tool to help independent auditors with these self-assessments. Although jurisdictions can use the worksheets and other materials without enrolling in the Retail Program Standards, FDA encourages them to do so, as enrollment allows them to apply for FDA funding. The agency also lists the jurisdictions enrolled in the program here.

FSMA Final Rules Almost Here, Guide to GFSI

By Food Safety Tech Staff
No Comments

With a host of mandatory requirements under FSMA means, businesses may want to consider GFSI certification.

The first FSMA deadlines are now two months away, and manufacturers may wonder how and where GFSI certification ties into increased regulation. First, what are some of the main differences between GFSI and FSMA? GFSI is seen as more global, while FSMA is more US-focused. Of course, the final FSMA rules will require mandatory compliance, and GFSI is voluntary. However, GFSI certification is recognized among major domestic and international retailers, so compliance with a GFSI-recognized scheme is an important part of a company’s food safety program.

The Food Safety Consortium Conference features a GFSI Services & Compliance track. With increased regulatory demands under FSMA, speakers will discuss the role of food safety certification systems. A GFSI-certified facility is one step closer to compliance with FSMA and may be held in higher regard by FDA from an auditing and inspection standpoint versus a business that has not opted to obtain certification.

Obtaining GFSI certification provides several benefits to the food industry, according to a recent TraceGains blog about the GFSI journey, including:

  • Reducing duplication of audits
  • Creating a comparable audit approach and outcomes
  • Enabling continuous improvement and customer opportunity for GFSI-benchmarked companies
  • Enhancing trade opportunities
  • Gaining cost efficiencies throughout the supply chain
  • Increasing competitiveness in the global market

Several food safety management schemes are recognized by GFSI. Among them is FSSC 22000, which touts the certification of more than 10,000 businesses worldwide. This year’s Food Safety Consortium also includes the first FSSC 22000 North American Harmonization Day on Tuesday, November 18. The meeting will provide a technical update of FSSC 22000, along with current scheme and future plans for expanding scopes and preparing for GFSI benchmarking.

How Supplier Scorecards Affect You

By Food Safety Tech Staff
No Comments

A supplier scorecard allows companies to measure vendor performance as it relates to risk management, quality, and compliance. Having up-to-date and accurate documentation, particularly surrounding foreign supplier verification, is an important part of FSMA compliance. Suppliers must be able to provide immediate and accurate information, especially in the event of an audit. Marc Simony, vice president of marketing at TraceGains, explains why companies should build the scorecard over time, evaluating a supplier’s performance against specific business requirements.

Ron Harrison, Ph.D., Director of Technical Services, Orkin, LLC
Bug Bytes

Make Employee Training a Team Effort in Your Pest Management Program

By Ron Harrison, Ph.D.
1 Comment
Ron Harrison, Ph.D., Director of Technical Services, Orkin, LLC

Pest management plays a key role in food safety and product integrity, and ensuring such is a critical, facility-wide undertaking. The success of a pest management program can be the difference between acing a third-party audit and facing a plant shutdown. An effective program is not just a one-person job; it requires an ongoing team effort from a company’s pest management provider and all employees. As such, beyond selecting an effective pest management provider, it’s equally important to recruit employees to help enhance your efforts. After all, they are the eyes and ears of your facility, as they spend a lot more time there than your pest management provider.

Arming your employees with the right tools and pest control knowledge will set up your pest management program for success. The following steps outline how you can get your entire team involved in your company’s program.

Teach the what, where and how

Your employees can be the first responders to any pest problems, but only if they know what they should be looking for and where they should be looking. For that reason, it’s essential that they complete training on the specific pest pressures your property faces and the red flags that alert them to pest activity.

Many pest control providers offer complimentary employee training, so ask your pest management professional to conduct an on-site training session for your team. These training sessions should include not only information about the specific pest pressures on your property, but also the conducive conditions and pest hot spots that your employees can help control. Pest hot spots are the key areas inside and outside your building that pests target as entry or harborage points. These areas are in constant danger of being penetrated by pests and are areas that currently or have previously had pest issues. Areas with standing water, excessive condensation or improper drainage are just a few examples.

Your pest management professional can also teach your employees the key components of integrated pest management (IPM). Rather than reacting to pest issues, IPM takes a proactive approach through a combination of non-chemical solutions, relying on chemical treatments only as a last resort. Proper sanitation practices, ongoing property maintenance to exclude pests, and regular monitoring are paramount to a pest-free facility.

Training sessions are also a great way for your employees and provider to build a strong relationship so your team is more likely to proactively report any pest issues.

Keep the lines of communication open

An open, ongoing line of communication between management, employees and your pest management provider is also an important component of successful pest management programs. Regular communication helps ensure that your employees are kept in the loop on important pest control information and initiatives. Furthermore, an open line of communication will keep you thinking proactively about pest management, which can help reduce decisions that lead to reactive chemical treatments.

This open dialogue will also help build rapport with your employees so they are more comfortable talking about sensitive issues, including the potential for bringing pests into the facility from home. 

Know your role

Your pest management program will work best when everyone involved knows his or her role. Consider assigning each team member a specific pest management task based on his or her daily duties. For instance, employees involved in facility maintenance can monitor for small holes or gaps in the building façade and seal them immediately to help prevent pest entry. 

 

In case of a pest sighting

Sometimes no matter how effective your IPM program is, resilient pests can still find their way inside your facility. Further, pest activity may not only originate locally, but from other parts of the country throughout the supply chain, making it somewhat difficult to immediately pinpoint the pest issue. This means there is a chance for both live and dead pests to make their way into your product, which can pose a nationwide health and safety threats to consumers.

With this in mind, it’s important to have a plan in place should a pest be spotted. Establish a pest sighting protocol that identifies the steps to report a pest incident, including who should be notified. The following are a few examples of steps that should be included in a pest sighting protocol:

  • If possible, catch and show the pest to your pest management professional.
  • Record the pest activity in a pest sighting report, making note of when, where and how many pests were seen.
  • Work with your pest management professional to determine what is causing the issue and how to resolve it.

Continue the education

Your employees need continued education to help keep your property on the cutting edge of pest control. Many pest management providers offer educational resources that facilities can use as ongoing education, including tip sheets, sanitation and maintenance checklists, and seasonal pest management tips. Ask your pest management provider if they have resources you can share with your team. You may also consider having your pest management professional provide further training sessions on specific pest problems.

Pest control is most successful when a team effort is involved. Work with your pest management provider to get your employees up to speed on the pest management efforts at your facility and ensure they have the basic knowledge needed to play a role in keeping pests out.

What Matters When Considering a Food Safety Audit?

No Comments

Food companies need to get audited and their personnel need to get trained frequently, and this is a growing trend in the evolving regulatory landscape and a highly competitive and global supply chain. However, what matters the most to food companies when getting audited? How significant is auditor competence as an attribute? How about the time that the audit takes, and the time to get the report? Or for training, what role does technology play?

To understand this, Eurofins conducted a blind survey of industry participants – nearly 600 respondents answered questions related to Certification and food safety Training.

Some of the highlights included:

EurofinsSurveyMarch2015_1EurofinsSurveyMarch2015_2EurofinsSurveyMarch2015_3 Ultimately, the following factors influenced food companies’ decision to go through food safety certification:

  1. Customer Requirements/Requests Relationships;
  2. Industry Standard; and
  3. Value Proposition. 

When it came to training, the top three influencers to go through Food Safety Training were identified as:

  • Developing Competence (Gaining, Improving, Growing)
  • Relevance and Subject of Training Cost and Time

EurofinsSurveyMarch2015_4

Top 5 Reasons Organizations Fail Audits and How to Not Be One of Them

By Chelsey Davis
No Comments

When it comes to audits, there are plenty of reasons for failing, especially in the food and beverage industry. To help shed light on some of the reasons companies fail audits and to help prevent future failure, here’s our top 5 reasons to why organizations fail.

When it comes to audits, there are plenty of reasons for failing, especially in the food and beverage industry. Whether it’s an audit for GFSI, FDA or an audit required by any of your customers, the consequences of failing can be very costly. And while the whole team receives praise when an audit is successfully completed, there are a select few that bear the burden of audit failure (QA professionals). To help shed light on some of the reasons companies fail audits and to help prevent future failure, we’ve listed our top 5 reasons to why organizations fail.

1. Human Error

It doesn’t matter what industry you’re in, human error is bound to occur. The key here is to be able to minimize the chances of human error as much as possible. As a quality assurance manager, it’s important to make sure all employees are well-trained and fully understand the reasoning for performing certain functions of the job in a particular way. When employees understand the why regarding processes, it will be easier to remember going forward. Additionally, you should have systems and internal audits in place to ensure that what is supposed to happen is happening.

2. Compliance vs. Business as Usual

During audit time, there is often a conflict of interest when it comes to quality assurance managers and making sure the business is still operating as usual. As part of the process to prepping for an audit, management needs to ensure everything is up to standards, and this can possibly include stopping production lines, which interferes with the operation manger’s strict schedules. The important thing to convey here is the fact that compliance should come before anything else. The consequences of failing to meet compliance requirements will surely cost more than a delay in product delivery.

3. HACCP Failure

Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP) is a management system that helps prevent foodborne diseases and essentially operates to protect consumer safety. When it comes to audits, HACCP documentation is incredibly important, which is why it’s crucial to have it complete and comprehensive. Not doing so can be enough to cause your organization to fail. (Download this HACCP checklist as a guide to help you get started).

4. Lack of Supplier Control

All the guidelines and processes in the world you use to keep your organization compliant wouldn’t help much if your suppliers weren’t in sync. And with today’s global food supply chain, it is becoming increasingly difficult to manage risks of food fraud and contamination. One way to help tackle this issue is supplier scorecarding. Automated scorecarding helps both parties examine data and results based on the same information, fostering closer collaboration, information exchange, review of standard and best practices, as well as the occasional review of ingredient specifications, so that all stakeholders involved can work toward the same goals.

5. Lack of Documentation and Organization

“The best part about prepping for an audit is gathering all the required documents,” said no one ever. Not being organized can definitely hinder your chances of successfully completing an audit. And with multiple suppliers providing multiple different documents, staying organized can be a challenge. A filing cabinet just won’t cut it anymore. As a quality assurance manager, you were not hired to be a paper clerk, but agile document management is critical to the success of your business. This is where automation comes into the picture. Are you getting the data and information out of your documents that you need to improve your business? Can you satisfy an auditor with just a few mouse clicks? Automating this process not only helps your organization overall, but also helps you—the quality assurance hero—save time and energy.

Check out our chat with John Paul Williams, Director, Enterprise Solutions and Market Development, Americas, at Polycom, to learn more about why automation is so important for evolving businesses.

What’s Frustrating for Food Manufacturers?

By Food Safety Tech Staff
No Comments

Gary Nowacki, CEO of TraceGains, highlights the concerns that came out of an Ask the Expert discussion about Supplier Qualifications and Management at the 2014 Food Safety Consortium.

“A common takeaway–whether it was small, mid-size or large companies–was the frustration of having to do more audits, and the growing demand for more paperwork. A question that was often asked was that ‘my customer is asking me to subscribe to a different audit, and that defeats the promise of GFSI, that it would lead to fewer audits.’ My advice to them is to not just blindly agree, but ask the customer politely what exactly they are looking for, and see if they can address that. Another frustration related to the increase in paperwork and the time and resources consumed in filling these plethora of forms. So there was a discussion about how we can standardize these. And people are looking to get automated solutions as they are not getting more headcount.”