ICE Chips

Q. We do self-inspections every month and keep a list of issues we find that need corrected. Lately, it seems that the issues listed are just a repeat of the previous month, and nothing is getting done. It has become more difficult to get people to do the inspections because they do not think it is worth the time spent anymore. How do we get our self-inspection working so that it is effective again?

A. Before I go any further, who are you inspecting for? Are you performing inspections just to have a document on file for an auditor to review as proof of your inspection program, or are they done to find issues and solutions to make your facility better? There are very big differences.

When people get into a routine of performing inspections to satisfy some audit criteria, it rapidly becomes boring and unproductive. At some point you even decide how much or how little information you need to capture to squeak by the audit requirements. The lack of return on the time invested drives most people to discontinue participating because they find better things to do with their limited time. As a result, the inspection process deteriorates to one or two people assigned to produce a document. The few remaining inspectors have the right idea, but due to the lack of support they become frustrated.

Facilities with successful self-inspection programs have a goal of looking for and finding issues that are causing problems that are holding them back. Their interest is on making things better and continually challenging their normal routine. Plant leadership plays an important role in the success of these efforts. The inspection team is given clear objectives by management: find out what is causing problems; come up with a solution; and convince us that it needs to be a priority.

This approach encourages the inspection team to do more than just walk around looking at things superficially. They have to look for trends, using their experiences and knowledge to investigate and gather factual information. They have to determine the priority by which the items will be addressed. Then, using the facts, research, and basic economics, present the case to management for a decision on what needs action first.

In order to be successful, you have to prove your point. Supporting your case with facts is far better than just saying an issue needs to be fixed. When you can rationally demonstrate that the cost for correction is far less than the cost of allowing the issue to remain, you will have better success in making changes. The results often stimulate the interest, and the challenges sustain involvement in the program.

When self-inspections are done for the benefit of the company, not for audit documentation, everyone can see the advantage. Before long, the positive results prompt employees to willingly provide information for improvements that benefit everyone.



Do you have a question for Al St. Cyr? If so, e-mail him at astcyr@aibonline.org.
The author is Head of Food Safety Education, AIB International.