From intent to implementation
How close is the intent of ISO 22000:2005 and its implementation by users ? An expert who took part in its design and development has reviewed feedback from early users and gives some pointers to tackling the issues they raise.
by Didier Blanc
Author Didier Blanc is founder and directorof ProCert, a provider of training and certiﬁcation in ISO 9001, ISO 14001 and ISO 22000 management system standards. He is a veterinary surgeon specialized in food hygiene, and a member of Working Groups WG 8 and WG 11 of ISO Technical Committee ISO/TC 34, Food products, responsible for developing ISO 22000:2005, Food safety management systems – Requirements for any organization in the foodchain, and ISO/TS 22003, Food safety management systems – Requirements for bodies providing audit and certiﬁcation of food safety management systems. Dr. Didier Blanc, Director, ProCert, CH-1015 Lausanne 15, Switzerland. Tel. + 41 79 337 51 39. Fax + 41 21 693 87 20. E-mail email@example.com Web www.procert.ch
ISO 22000:2005, Food safety management systems – Requirements for any organization in thefood chain is the first management system standard on food safety to go beyond the recommendations put forward in 1993 by the Codex Alimentarius Commission. Inevitably, the arrival of this brand new standard with its updated approach is accompanied by issues of interpretation and how to meet its requirements.
in any of the quality or food safety management systems standards used so far bycompanies in the food chain (e.g. ISO 9001, BRC, IFS, DS 3027 or others). Table 1 (overleaf) lists and interprets the key new elements.
These innovations mainly relate to the interpretation, consistency and thoroughness of the HACCP method of controlling food safety hazards. Indeed, ISO 22000 is the first standard that not only endorses the Codex Alimentarius recommendations, but also attempts to fillthe gaps and inconsistencies brought to light by 13 years of accumulated experience with HACCP.
ISO 22000 goes beyond the food safety recommendations put forward in 1993 by the Codex Alimentarius Commission
The main interpretation and implementation challenges revolve around requirements that did not appear in the 12 Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP system) applicationsteps described in the Codex Alimentarius, nor
ISO Management Systems – May-June 2006 7
© ISO Management Systems, www.iso.org/ims
Figure 1 illustrates the links between ISO 22000 and the 12 HACCP steps and highlights the stages that have been added (broken outline), or significantly altered and consolidated (yellow background). These innovations apply as muchupstream – the requirement for the selection and implementation of appropriate prerequisite programmes (PRP’s) 1), before proceeding to hazard analysis – as to the core of the HACCP system itself : hazard analysis, selection, validation and monitoring of adequate control measures. A generic requirements-based standard designed for certification purposes cannot provide examples or recommendations,so I will provide some here. In addition, the systems approach of ISO 22000 states requirements in terms of results rather than means. Although this approach, successfully applied in ISO 9001 and ISO 14001, has been widely supported by representatives of the food industry, it can prompt questions such as the following: • What do I have to do ? • What are the baselines ? • Can I have examples ? •How will I validate my choices ? • How can I be sure not to go too far, or not far enough ?
Clause in the standard 5.5 Food safety team leader 5.6 Communication
Investing in skills
In a nutshell, while the requirements for means often involve investment in infrastructure, the obligation to achieve results leads rather to investing in manpower, in the skills of the HACCP team...