Implementation of ISO-22000 in Spain: obstacles and key benefits

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to analyze the status of the implementation of ISO 22000 in the food industry in Spain. The study identifies the main difficulties faced by firms during the adoption process, the benefits obtained, and the most influential benefits on firms overall satisfaction with ISO 22000. Design/methodology/approach – A questionnaire was developed to identify the difficulties and benefits for ISO 22000 implementation. Data were collected among 189 Spanish certified firms. Factor analysis and multiple linear regression were used. Findings – ISO 22000 is used by firms operating in all links of the food chain (FC). Size of the firm is not a factor that determines its implementation. Exporter firms are more attracted to ISO 22000 certification. All sample firms experienced difficulties throughout the implementation process, being those related with time and money the most relevant. The benefits which most contributed to the firms’ satisfaction were internal in nature, in particular, those related to improved efficiency and food safety. Practical implications – Despite the many difficulties, both material and organizational, that sample firms experienced in implementing ISO 22000, and the complexity of the standard, the overall satisfaction is high. Originality/value – The sample analyzed comprised certified firms, including representatives of all links in the FC from farm to table. Prior research specifically aimed at analyzing ISO 22000 implementation and its benefits is very scarce.

Implementation of ISO 22000 in Romanian Companies: Motivations, Difficulties and Key Benefits

“…The key benefits obtained by our sample companies were food safety improvement, reduction of illness and other risks arising from food, improvement of consumers' confidence, improvement of customers and stakeholders' satisfaction, followed by improvement of sales volumes. Similar findings were also obtained by Escanciano and Santos-Vijande (2014b) who mentioned better control of food hazards, continuous improvement of food safety and increased customer confidence among the benefits of ISO 22000 certification that most contribute to the fulfilment of the companies'objectives. The ISO 22000 benefits made further the subject of an exploratory factor analysis, to collect new evidence.…”

“…A wide number of food borne hazards pose risks and threats to health and raise barriers to global trade in foods (Soman and Raman, 2016). The global public health challenges as well as the more stringent government regulations and the increasing demands from the customers concerning the food safety take more and more food companies to seek better and safer production systems or service delivery.Beyond complying with basic food regulations and following acceptable workplace practices, more organisations are deciding to develop a comprehensive food safety management system, which is critical to the success of the business, either it operates in food production, storage, packaging or preparation (Mensah and Julien, 2011;Escanciano and Santos-Vijande, 2014b). An efficient food safety management system helps the company to protect its competitive market place, customers and the community, guaranteeing continuous prevention of food borne illnesses, and the promotion of safe to eat foods.…”

Drivers for the implementation of market‐based food safety management systems: Evidence from Lebanon

“…Based on a review of recent studies on potential incentives and barriers for the implementation of FSMSs (Escanciano & Leticia Santos‐Vijande, ; Karaman et al, ; Macheka et al, ), 29 items (reported in Table ) were identified and included in the questionnaire. The food safety/quality managers were asked to indicate their level of (dis)agreement on each of the 29 items (on a 7‐point Likert scale), ranging from 1 (“strongly disagree”) to 7 (“strongly agree”).…”

“…Cronbach's alpha was used to measure the internal consistency reliability of the measurement scale, and all the three constructs exceeded the 0.70 threshold. All the multi-item scales were based on extensive reviews of prior studies on FSMSs adoption (Escanciano & Leticia Santos-Vijande, 2014;Karaman et al, 2012;Macheka et al, 2013). Thus, the scale items have content validity.…”

“…Based on a review of recent studies on potential incentives and barriers for the implementation of FSMSs (Escanciano & Leticia Santos-Vijande, 2014;Karaman et al, 2012;Macheka et al, 2013), 29 items (reported in Table 3) the FSMSs) or perception (if the company did not implement any FSMSs at all) ( Table 3).…”