Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorNurjanah, Siti
dc.contributor.advisorRahayu, Winiati Pudji
dc.contributor.authorWahyuni, Heni Dwi
dc.date.accessioned2021-05-25T00:39:17Z
dc.date.available2021-05-25T00:39:17Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.identifier.urihttp://repository.ipb.ac.id/handle/123456789/106834
dc.description.abstractPenerbitan standar ISO 22000:2018 menggantikan ISO 22000:2005 pada tanggal 18 Juni 2018 oleh organisasi dunia International Organization for Standarization (ISO) dan dikeluarkannya aturan masa transisi perubahan sertifikasi pada klien Lembaga Sertifikasi Sistem Manajemen Keamanan Pangan (LSSMKP) selama 3 tahun sampai 18 Juni 2021 oleh Komite Akreditasi Nasional (KAN) menjadi perhatian seluruh LSSMKP yang terakreditasi KAN untuk menyesuaikan kebijakan dan implementasi proses sertifikasi ke standar yang baru tersebut. Gap analysis diperlukan untuk mengukur kesiapan LSSMKP pada proses sertifikasi ISO 22000:2018 di industri pangan. Gap analysis yang dilakukan dengan metode yang terukur, diharapkan hasilnya akurat. Hasil tersebut menjadi dasar LSSMKP untuk mengembangkan kebijakan dan implementasinya sesuai persyaratan, sehingga proses akreditasi dan sertifikasi di industri pangan dapat dilakukan sesuai aturan yang berlaku. Sertifikasi dari LSSMKP yang terakreditasi dapat memberikan kepercayaan terhadap jaminan keamanan pangan produk industri pangan. Metode scoring merupakan pendekatan kuantitatif pada proses gap analysis untuk menghasilkan laporan audit yang terukur serta mengurangi subjektivitas pada penilaian pemenuhan persyaratan. Perbedaan persepsi auditor sering terjadi pada praktik audit sistem manajemen mutu termasuk auditor dari LSSMKP. Auditor sebagai penilai dapat mempengaruhi hasil audit. Penerapan persyaratan ISO/IEC 17021-1:2015 yang tidak konsisten di LSSMKP dapat memberikan peluang kegiatan audit (termasuk gap analysis) yang dilakukan tidak diterima karena tidak sesuai dengan persyaratan. Selain itu penggunaan metode kualitatif pada audit internal di LSSMKP menghasilkan laporan audit yang tidak terukur. Checklist kualitatif sebagai tool audit dapat memberikan peluang adanya subjektivitas pada penilaian auditor. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk melakukan perbaikan pada tool audit existing di LSSMKP yaitu checklist audit dengan sistem kualitatif yang digunakan pada kegiatan gap analysis, audit internal dan audit sertifikasi. Tujuan khusus dari penelitian ini adalah: 1) menghasilkan form checklist audit internal yang dilengkapi dengan scoring system, 2) mendapatkan keragaman hasil gap analysis yang dilakukan oleh auditor terkait pemenuhan persyaratan proses LSSMKP sesuai ISO/IEC 17021-1:2015 serta 3) mendapatkan informasi sumber keragaman hasil gap analysis yang dilakukan auditor dan cara mengatasinya. Ruang lingkup penelitian adalah klausul 9 ISO/IEC 17021-1:2015 yaitu persyaratan proses. Metode penelitian meliputi 3 tahap yaitu: 1) studi literatur persyaratan proses LSSMKP, verifikasi auditor serta mengembangkan checklist, 2) analisis data hasil gap analysis di PT XYZ dan 3) analisis sumber keragaman hasil gap analysis. Analisis data gap analysis dilakukan dengan pengujian kategorisasi skor penilaian auditor serta pengujian perbedaan skor auditor (ANOVA satu arah). Analisis sumber penyebab keragamanan hasil gap analysis dilakukan dengan tool Cause Effect Diagram (CED). PT XYZ merupakan LSSMKP yang terakreditasi KAN dan akan melakukan upgrade akreditasi untuk jasa sertifikasi ISO 22000:2018. Berdasarkan studi literatur persyaratan LSSMKP diperoleh informasi bahwa ISO/IEC 17021-1:2015 masih berlaku dan digunakan sebagai persyaratan akreditasi LSSMKP. Hasil verifikasi auditor menunjukkan seluruh auditor memenuhi persyaratan auditor internal PT XYZ. Auditor memiliki latar belakang pendidikan dan pengalaman kerja yang berbeda. Sebanyak 3 auditor memiliki pengalaman audit internal LSSMKP. Hasil pengembangan checklist dari checklist existing PT XYZ didapatkan checklist kuantitatif dengan scoring system 1-5 dan jumlah pertanyaan seluruhnya adalah 53. Hasil penentuan kategorisasi skor auditor menunjukkan total skor penilaian auditor terhadap pemenuhan persyaratan proses ISO/IEC 17021-1: 2015 di PT XYZ seluruhnya masuk dalam kelompok kategori skor tinggi (X ≥ 73.2%). Pengujian skor auditor menggunakan ANOVA satu arah dengan signifikasi 0.05 memberikan hasil tidak ada perbedaan nyata pada rata-rata skor auditor. Selisih total skor auditor internal dengan auditor eksternal relatif kecil yaitu 0.00% (auditor a), 1.51% (auditor b), 1.88% (auditor c) dan 2.26% (auditor d dan e). Hasil pengujian tersebut menunjukkan adanya konsistensi penilaian auditor menggunakan checklist dengan scoring system sebagai tool pada gap analysis yang dilakukan. Keragaman skor dan ketidaksesuaian dari penilaian auditor terdapat pada 4 sub klausul (9.1, 9.2, 9.5 dan 9.9) sedangkan pada 5 sub klausul lainnya didapatkan hasil yang sama (9.3, 9.4, 9.6, 9.7 dan 9.8). Total skor dari auditor internal adalah: 259 (a), 263 (b), 264 (c) dan 265 (d,e) sedangkan total skor dari auditor eksternal (f) adalah 259. Nilai rata-rata total skor dari auditor internal dalah 263.2. Sebanyak empat auditor (b, c, d, e) mendapatkan lebih sedikit gap dan atau tidak mendapatkan gap pada implementasi di PT XYZ. Nilai standar deviasi relatif kecil yaitu: pada skor sub klausul 9.1 adalah 1.0, pada sub klausul 9.2 adalah 0.4, pada sub klausul 9.5 adalah 1.0 serta pada sub klausul 9.9 adalah 0.9, sedangkan pada total skor adalah 2.8. Hal tersebut menunjukkan hanya sedikit perbedaan penilaian auditor. Keragaman total skor auditor berasal dari keragaman skor pada pertanyaan dalam 4 sub klausul tersebut yaitu pada pertanyaan no 7, 12, 32, 51 dan 53. Selisih rata-rata skor auditor internal dengan auditor eksternal yaitu: pada pertanyaan no. 7 adalah 1.6, pertanyaan no. 12 adalah -0.2, pertanyaan no. 32 adalah 1.6, pertanyaan no. 51 adalah -0.6 serta pada pertanyaan no. 53 adalah 0.8. Pada penelitian ini yang menjadi sumber keragaman penilaian auditor di PT XYZ adalah personel dan alat. Personel dalam hal ini auditor yaitu terkait kompetensi yang bersumber pada perbedaan latar belakang pendidikan dan lama pengalaman auditor. Alat dalam hal ini checklist yaitu terkait dengan banyak poin pertanyaan yang menyebabkan terjadinya bias penilaian auditor. Keragaman penilaian auditor pada LSSMKP dapat mempengaruhi jaminan sertifikasi keamanan pangan yang diberikan di industri pangan. Sumber keragaman penilaian auditor di PT XYZ terkait personel dapat dikurangi dengan peningkatan pengalaman audit bagi auditor internal dan terkait alat dapat dikurangi dengan perubahan cara penilaian banyak poin pertanyaan dalam checklist audit serta penggunaan kata tanya aktif lainnya selain kata “apakah” misalnya dengan kata “bagaimana”.id
dc.description.abstractThe issuance of the ISO 22000: 2018 standard in replacing ISO 22000: 2005 on 18 June 2018 by the world International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and a transition period for certification changes to its clients for 3 years until 18 June 2021 by Komite Akreditasi Nasional/ National Accreditation Committee (KAN) become a concern for all Food Safety Management System Certification Body (FSMS CB) accredited by KAN to adjust the policies and implementation of the certification process to the new standard. Gap analysis is needed to measure the readiness of FSMS CB for the ISO 22000: 2018 certification process in food industries. By measuring methods, the results of the gap analysis are expected to be accurate. The results become the basis of FSMS CB to improve its policies and implementation according to the requirements, and in addition to the accreditation and certification processes in the food industries could be carried out comply to the requirements. So that, an accredited FSMS CB can provide a credible certification process in the assurance of food safety in food industry products. A scoring system is a quantitative approach in auditing to eliminate subjectivity and impartiality in the auditor’s assessment. Differences between auditor perceptions often occur in the audit process of the management system, even auditors from the FSMS CB. The auditor as an assessor is able to influence the audit report. Inconsistencies of requirements implementation may result in an opportunity for audit activities (including gap analysis) to be conducted not in accordance with the requirements. In addition, the use of the qualitative method in internal audits at FSMS CB produces not measurable audit reports. A qualitative checklist as an audit tool can provide opportunities for subjectivity to the auditor's assessment. The purpose of this study was to make an improvement to the existing audit checklist in FSMS CB, it was the qualitative audit checklist used in the gap analysis, internal audit, and certification audit activities. The specific purpose of this study was: 1) producing an internal audit checklist form equipped with a scoring system, 2) obtaining the diversity of the gap analysis results conducted by auditors which were related to compliance with the process requirements according to ISO / IEC 17021-1: 2015 and 3) obtaining information on the sources of diversity on the gap analysis results in FSMS CB (PT XYZ). The study scope was ISO/IEC 17021-1:2015 process requirements. The study consisted of 3 steps, they were: 1) a literature study of process requirements in FSMS CB, auditor verification, and the development of a checklist, 2) data analysis of the gap analysis results in PT XYZ and 3) a cause-effect analysis of the diversity in the gap analysis results. Data analysis of the gap analysis results in PT XYZ was performed by testing the categorization of the auditor's assessment score and testing the difference in the auditor's score (one-way ANOVA test). A cause-effect analysis of the diversity in the gap analysis results was carried out using the Cause-Effect Diagram (CED). PT XYZ was a FSMS CB accredited by KAN and would upgrade its accreditation for ISO 22000: 2018 certification services. Based on information in the KAN and IAF websites and other conducted literature studies, information was obtained that ISO/ IEC 17021-1: 2015 is still valid and is used as a requirement for FSMS CB accreditation. Verification of the auditor's track record stated that all auditors met the requirements of PT XYZ's internal auditors. All auditors had different educational backgrounds and periods of working experience. Three auditors had experience in the internal audit of FSMS CB. The result of developing PT XYZ's internal audit checklist was a checklist that has been completed with a score of 1-5 and the total of all questions was 53. The results of determining the categorization of the auditor's score showed that the total score of the auditor's assessment was all included in the good score category (X ≥ 73.2%). The auditors’ score test using the one-way ANOVA also gave results that were not significantly different at the 0.05 significance level. The difference in the scores of internal auditors compared to external auditors was relatively not significant, which was 0.00 % (a), 1.51% (b), 1.88% (c), and 2.26% (d, e) so that it did not provide a statistically significant difference. The results of data analysis indicated the consistency of the auditor's assessment using a checklist form with a scoring system as a tool for gap analysis at PT XYZ. The diversity in the auditors’ assessment was found in 4 sub-clauses (9.1, 9.2, 9.5, and 9.9), while the other 5 sub-clauses obtained the same results (9.3, 9.4, 9.6, 9.7, and 9.8). The total score of the internal auditors was: 259 (a), 263 (b), 264 (c), and 265 (d, e) while the total score of external auditor (f) was 259. The average score of internal auditors was 263.2. Four auditors (b, c, d, e) got fewer gaps and/or did not get gaps in the implementation of PT XYZ. The results also showed a low standard deviation value both on the score for each sub-clause and in the total score. The standard deviation value in sub-clause 9.1 was 1.0, in sub-clause 9.2 was 0.4, in sub-clause 9.5 was 1.0, and in sub-clause 9.9 was 0.9 while the total score was 2.8. These scores indicated a slight variation in scores and total scores among auditors. The difference in the total score of auditors came from the diversity of scores on the questions in the 4 sub-clauses, they were in questions no. 7, 12, 32, 51, and 53. The difference between the average of internal auditors' score and external auditor's score was: at question no.7 was 1.6, question no.12 was -0.2, question no. 32 was 1.6, question no. 51 was -0.6 and question no.53 was 0.8. In this study, the sources in the diversity of the PT XYZ internal auditor's assessment were personnel and tool. Personnel, in this case, auditors, were related to the competence that comes from differences in educational background and length of experience of auditors. The tool in this case a checklist was related to many question points that cause bias in the auditor's assessment. The diversity in the auditor’s assessment in FSMS CB could affect the assurance of food safety certification provided in the food industry. The source of the diversity of the auditor's assessment in PT XYZ related personnel could be reduced by improving the audit experience of PT XYZ internal auditors and related tools can be reduced by changing in assessment method of many question points and using other active question words in addition to the question word "what", for example changing with the question word "how".id
dc.language.isoidid
dc.publisherIPB Universityid
dc.titleSumber Keragaman Penilaian Auditor Lembaga Sertifikasi Sistem Manajemen Keamanan Panganid
dc.title.alternativeSource of Diversity in The Food Safety Management System Certification Body Auditors Assessmentid
dc.typeThesisid
dc.subject.keywordauditorid
dc.subject.keywordgap analysisid
dc.subject.keywordLSSMKPid
dc.subject.keywordmetode scoringid
dc.subject.keywordsumber keragamanid
dc.subject.keywordFSMS CBid
dc.subject.keywordscoring systemid
dc.subject.keywordsource of diversityid


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record