Cuentos disléxicos

7.4.2.1Increasing the requirements of auditors

Four respondents in my survey among certification bodies indicated that increasing the requirements of auditors could improve the quality of an audit. Two certification bodies thought that it could undermine the audit quality. In practice, more competent

158

and experienced auditors can obtain higher quality of audit with the same audit cost. As mentioned in 7.4.3, different schemes have different requirements for their auditors. More training, work and audit experience may be required.

7.4.2.2Adopting the risk oriented auditing practice

Four respondents in my survey among certification bodies claimed that a certification body can improve the audit quality by adopting a risk oriented auditing practice

instead of carrying out the audit schematically. Two respondents did not believe that it had an impact on the audit quality. In contrast to schematic audit practices, the risk oriented approach takes specific characteristics of manufacturing enterprises (e.g. sub- sector, size, targeting markets) into consideration. Auditors can allocate more efforts to high risk fields to audit the client more efficiently and effectively.

7.5Conclusions

The quality of third-party food safety audits was identified by respondents as an important factor which could impinge on the effectiveness of non-regulatory FSMS. This chapter analyses the role of third-party food safety audits in the implementation of non-regulatory FSMS. Factors influencing audit quality are investigated, and ways to improve audit quality are analysed. The third-party food safety audit works as an independent and objective institution of enforcement to provide assurance of the implementation of non-regulatory FSMS. It offers information about the conformity of food manufacturing enterprises to stakeholders along the food supply chain. Through the involvement of third-party audits, the responsibility of ensuring food safety is shared among stakeholders along the food supply chain. When the third-party food safety audit is used properly as an improvement tool of food safety management, it is

159

very effective in facilitating continuous improvement in food safety management and could lift up the level of food safety management in food manufacturing businesses. Auditors should be able to provide guidance to senior management of food businesses on gaps and opportunities in their food safety management systems, and then food businesses could work proactively on these gaps and food safety risks to prevent food safety issues and losses.

There are similarities among certification processes of different non-regulatory FSMS. Food manufacturing enterprises have to implement relevant standards, be audited by certification bodies, take corrective actions to close any non-conformity and keep ongoing compliance to relevant requirements. During the period for which the certificate is valid, certification bodies should conduct surveillance activities to assess the ongoing conformity of the food manufacturing enterprises. However, some schemes have their special processes. For instance, Woolworths Limited, the scheme owner of WQA, is much more involved in the certification process. Food manufacturing enterprises can only be invited into the WQA programme by Woolworths Limited. Certification bodies are also nominated by Woolworths Limited. In addition, certification decisions are made by Woolworths Limited.

Factors, which can have impact on the quality of third-party food safety audits, includes accreditation, competition in the certification market, competency and integrity of auditors, audit scope, audit time, and surveillance activities of scheme owners. As indicated by certification bodies responding to my survey, accreditation is important to ensure the independence and objectivity of certification bodies, and is an important way to demonstrate that they are independent and objective. Increasing

160

competition among certification bodies could negatively affect the objectivity and neutrality of the audit process, and compromise the audit quality. If certification bodies have to be approved by scheme owners to perform respective audits or certification services (such as the situation of the BRC and WQA), the number of certification bodies could be controllable in certain regions or nations. Then the level of competition in those areas can be controlled. Technical knowledge and audit skills of auditors are vital to the audit quality. The standards of non-regulatory FSMS per se

have impacts on the audit quality, as they determine the audit scope. A relative balance between the formalization of the audit conduct and the auditor’s own discretion should be identified to ensure a desirable level of audit integrity and to empower auditors to make independent and objective judgements. All certification bodies responding to my survey indicated that reducing audit time could undermine the audit quality. Based on the guidance from the scheme owner and the specific situation of the auditee, certification bodies have to optimise the audit time. The scheme owners could conduct a series of activities to monitor the performance of approved certification bodies to ensure that these certification bodies meet key performance targets and other requirements of competency and capability.

Besides the existing controlling measures of non-regulatory FSMS, the quality of third- party food safety audits can be improved in four ways. The audit quality can be improved by extending the liability of certification bodies. Naming and shaming the failed certification bodies by the scheme owner could improve the audit quality. Increasing the requirements of auditors could positively affect the quality of an audit. Finally, a certification body can improve the audit quality by adopting a risk oriented auditing practice instead of carrying out the audit schematically.

161