Julia Stewart:
Hello, this is PMA PR Director Julia Stewart, and welcome back to PMA’s audio blog, “Ask Dr. Bob.” PMA’s Chief Science and Technology Officer Dr. Bob Whitaker and Lorna Christie, PMA’s Executive Vice President and COO, are with us today to share news on some exciting food safety events coming up later this year. The next Food Safety Symposium will be held in May in Ellensburg, Washington, and others are planned for later in the year.

Bob, Lorna, what is the CEO Food Safety Symposium and why is it different from other events?

Bob:
Thank you, Julia.  We’re looking forward to our first Food Safety Symposium of 2010.

This special CEO series that we started just last year, is geared toward the high-level decision-makers in each company because, as I’ve said previously, in order to really have effective food safety programs you have to change your business culture. The persons ultimately responsible for a business’ culture – food safety or otherwise – are the top decision-makers, the CEOs or presidents. They also have the best view of the risk if there isn’t a good food safety program — consequences like the loss of brand equity or even loss of the entire company. This symposium is geared toward this C-level position, rather than the food safety scientists. It focuses on the business aspect of food safety.

Lorna: 
That’s right, Bob. This symposium is different from other food safety conferences because it changes the dialogue around food safety. It takes it out of the quality assurance department and makes it the responsibility of  everyone in the company — from the CEO to the guy who packs product on the trucks at the other end of the building. This symposium is unique because it doesn’t focus on the science or technical aspects of food safety; instead it focuses on how to change your business model.

Bob: 
I think that is an important point, Lorna!  We don’t talk about the science at all.  And, the symposium format includes some very interactive, real-world breakout sessions where the participants can discuss some of the points we make during our presentations, and explore how some of these ideas might be incorporated into their own businesses.

We start off with a status check, having an honest conversation with attendees about their food safety programs, the types of elements such programs should have, and how basic business functions relate to food safety. Then we hear from a lawyer whose firm specializes in prosecuting food safety cases. He lays out the stark realities of food safety, pointing out that if you don’t have a thorough food safety program, he’s going to sue you – and win! He really drives home the consequences of not having a comprehensive program.

Lorna:
Then we have one of my favorite parts which we like to call the “oh shit moment”. In breakout sessions, attendees discuss what they heard that really gave them pause, and how it could relate to their company. This illustrates the unique difference in the format of this symposium from other events out there. It looks at the impact of failure that goes beyond business losses.

We also incorporate applied knowledge — we present a scenario and discuss what they would do. People get to think outside their traditional box and look at applying what we’ve talked about in a very different way. We’ve had great feedback from all our symposiums.

Bob:
Attendees at last summer’s  Monterey event really appreciated the legal perspective – for example, they thought the insight we offered into how post-outbreak investigations and lawsuits expose weaknesses in food safety programs was particularly beneficial. They also recognized the benefit of having fellow colleagues in the room, networking, and sharing ideas with produce and food safety executives… and understanding some of the similarities of this issue throughout the produce industry.

Lorna:
And, attendees at our Austin symposium last year especially regarded the outlook on what to do if you have a food safety event and the news media come knocking on your door. In Rochester last fall, attendees noted the value of getting a better understanding of how to prepare for a food safety issue, beyond just your protocol for recalling product. In all cases, participants touted the benefit of looking at real world situations and examples of how to handle them in our business

Julia:
Thank you, Bob and Lorna. We look forward to this unique event and to hearing back from our listeners who attend it.

For more information about the Symposium or to register, go to www.pmafoodsafety.com. Thanks for joining us, everyone…Until next time

Julia Stewart:
Hello, this is PMA PR Director Julia Stewart, and welcome back to PMA’s audio blog, “Ask Dr. Bob” with PMA’s Chief Science and Technology Officer Dr. Bob Whitaker. Bob, in early February you attended a Global Food Safety Conference hosted by the Consumer Goods Forum that was held Washington, D.C. The Consumer Goods Forum sponsors something called the Global Food Safety Initiative. Would you explain to our listeners what GFSI is, and what they’re doing?

Bob:
Thanks, Julia. The Global Food Safety Initiative or GFSI was formed nearly 10 years ago by a group of retailers in Europe, to try to bring some cohesiveness to the proliferation of food safety audits. GFSI is a global benchmarking organization that benchmarks different food safety standards or schemes, against GFSI defined set of standards. The goal is to try to bring some equivalency to all the different food safety schemes and audits out there, on a global basis. In effect, GFSI believes that by using a benchmarking approach, the various food safety standards can be equilibrated and brought to a common level.

Here’s how it works: Their technical group goes through and analyzes each scheme, then reports back on its strengths and weaknesses. If the scheme meets the requirements of their benchmarking guidance, GFSI can then approve or “recognize” the scheme. Alternatively, if they find the scheme to be deficient, or they need further clarification, they can ask the owner of the standard to go back and revise it and re-submit it for future evaluation. The GFSI credo is ‘Once Audited, Accepted Everywhere.’

Julia:
Bob, you keep using this word ‘scheme’. What does that mean in this particular context?

Bob:
Good point, Julia. In the world of global benchmarking, ‘scheme’ is used to denote an entire food safety program. That is, the technical pieces around risk assessment and management, foundation programs like standard operating procedures, sanitation, good manufacturing practices, training, traceability and also the auditing operations. By auditing, I mean the requirements for auditing the scheme; how the auditor will perform the audit, the requirements for auditing, auditor training, the dispute resolution process, and development of corrective actions.

SQF 1000 (or Safe Quality Food) and BRC (the British Retail Consortium) are two schemes that have already been recognized by GFSI and are operational in North America. Just last week, GFSI announced that Primuslabs has also successfully achieved recognition.

Julia:
So, what happened at this most recent meeting, and why is it significant?

Bob:
The most recent meeting in Washington is significant because in North America, we are now broadening our view of standards and what’s going on elsewhere in the world in food safety. GFSI coming to the U.S. for this meeting emphasizes this. The meeting had just shy of 700 participants from all sectors of the food industry — a clear indication of the growing importance of GFSI’s work.

Also, the discussion at this meeting indicates GFSI is working to address some of the challenges which have been brought up in the past about their approach. The biggest issue revolves around whether they can really reduce the cost of food safety auditing and be relevant to small growers – for example, benchmarked audits so far have been more expensive than other audits. GFSI is recognizing they need to have a system that is accessible to small suppliers as well as large ones. If the higher costs of benchmarked standards exclude smaller suppliers, it may prove to be a major stumbling block for retailers dealing with local growers and seasonal sources.

Another issue that was discussed at the Washington, DC meeting was that of auditor competency and consistency. No matter what your scheme is, it all comes down to the person who visits your facility and performs the audit. GFSI is committed to working with their approved scheme owners to achieve a higher level of consistency in their auditors’ performance. In the end, in order for buying groups to have confidence that an audit truly represents the food safety performance of their supplier, they must believe that the auditor is conducting audits in an efficient and comprehensive fashion.

Julia:
At this point, Bob, why should our listeners care about this?

Bob:
Having formal boundaries between scheme-holders, accreditation bodies and certification bodies is something that hasn’t always been the case in the U.S. produce industry. However, this global benchmarking concept is gaining momentum, and a number of companies across the food supply chain are already embracing the concept. Companies like Kroger, WalMart, US Foodservice, McDonald’s and a number of others have said they want their suppliers to adopt a globally benchmarked food safety scheme. Retailers recognize they’re sourcing product globally, and suppliers are increasingly facing a multitude of different audit schemes. Simplifying the audit process worldwide will be beneficial to them.

It’s also clear that the Food and Drug Administration is looking at, and is willing to work with, folks like GFSI to improve the performance and safety of the food industry. We need to learn about this and be involved with it, because it is a trend we see emerging for our industry.

Julia:Thank you, Bob, for that interesting introduction to global benchmarking. We’ll look forward to future updates on the topic. Thanks to our listeners, and please join us next time!

Julia Stewart:
Hello, this is PMA PR Director Julia Stewart, and welcome back to PMA’s audio blog, “Ask Dr. Bob.” PMA’s Chief Science Officer Dr. Bob Whitaker is with me today to continue discussing risk assessment and risk management.

Bob, in several of your posts on food safety you have talked about the need for continuous improvement. What exactly does that mean and how can companies incorporate it into their risk assessment and management process?

Bob Whitaker:
Julia, Risk assessment and management is never really finished. If you add a new ranch, change harvesters, re-organize your cooler, add a new process line, contract a new transportation company, change the traffic flow in the distribution center, or change display cases in your store, then you need to re-examine your risk management program — to take a fresh look and be sure it is still accurate. Continuous improvement should be a key attribute of that process, and of any good food safety program.

Absent true kill steps, food safety will always be a process of risk assessment and management – so food safety managers are challenged then to be innovative thinkers and search out new ideas and technologies to help manage those risks. There are exciting new technologies out there poised to have an impact on food safety performance. But first we have to test these new technologies, verify they work, and understand how they can impact food safety. We also have to look internally, to strategize, plan, train and implement, then do it again. These are concepts you use every day in your sales groups and production teams, why not food safety?

Continuous improvement means never being satisfied. If you stand still on food safety, you’ll most assuredly get run over. This is not a static issue. I always think of it as a “ripple effect”. A little drop of information obtained at a conference, off the internet, or at an agricultural extension service can be shaped, molded and implemented in your business, and have a tidal wave impact on the food safety performance of your company.

The information is not simply going to find you, you need to search it out. You can do that by getting involved with your trade associations, by visiting Web sites like PMA.com to get food safety updates, by obtaining links to other useful sites, and by supporting the research efforts of the Center for Produce Safety or a local university actively engaged in food safety research.

Always remember, as your business changes, so does your food safety risk profile; you are constantly in the mode of updating and re-evaluating. A continual process of risk assessment and risk management is a chance for your employees to learn, and a chance for your company to improve your food safety performance. This mind set of continuous improvement can and will also transfer to other aspects of your business activities, and have a positive impact on your business culture.

Julia:
Thank you, Bob. PMA is committed to continuously improving the food safety culture of our industry, and our members can take advantage of the wealth of information we have available on food safety.
Thanks very much to our listeners, please join us again next time!