Modern theories of the nature of quality control and quality assurance are accepted by many large brewing companies; it is suggested that more attention should ...
•J. Inst. Brew., May-June, 1986, Vol. 92, pp. 229-231
229
CENTENARY REVIEW BREWERY QUALITY CONTROL By M. Moll
(Centre de Recherche TEPRAL 2, rue Gabriel Bour F54250 Champigneulles, France) Received 19 February 1985
■
The brewing literature is relatively rich in quality control papers but only the more recent articles mention approaches such as Good Manufacturing Practice, Total Quality Control, Quality Circles. The
repliesfrom48 Companies who have been questioned ontheir methods of quality control aresummarised. Modern theories of the nature of quality control and quality assurance are accepted by many large
brewing companies; it is suggested that more attention should be given to details of the difference between the quality assurance function and quality control tasks, and to the evaluation in money terms of matters dealt with by quality control, so that ideas can be formulated on the proper budgeting of these activities. About 12,000 people are involved in brewing quality control world-wide.
Key words: Quality control, beer, microbiology, quality
circle.
Introduction
Quality control (Q.C.) was considered for many years, by people concerned mainly with production, as a repressive function. Breweries have learned from other industries that the quality control department helps the Company to avoid mistakes in production and in distribution of final products. Several concepts have been introduced into the industry:
1. Objectives of Q.C. in Your Brewery? The majority of companies are in general agreement with the definitions proposed by official bodies as set out in EBC
Monograph X.5 There is still some confusion between
quality assurance, which is a function (see figure 1, 2 in
reference14) and quality control, which is an operation. The replies suggest
that the following definitions,
slightly
modifying those of EBC Monograph X,5 represent the majority of practice today:
Good Manufacturing Practice,12-5-11 Total Quality Control6-10 but it is not known how widely they are applied
QUALITY: the totality of features and characteristics of a product, process or service that bear on its ability to satisfy stated or implied needs. QUALITY CONTROL: the operational techniques and activities that are used to satisfy quality requirements.
industry;1-3-5-'4-16-19-24 in reference14 are listed 84
QUALITY ASSURANCE: all those planned or system
in the brewing industry. Many articles and reviews have been published on quality control and quality assurance in the brewing
papers. Recently MONOGRAPH X concerning the EBCSymposium on quality assurance, Zoeterwoude, November
I9845 became available. It represents a practical contri
bution in this field, by describing the state of the art in the brewing industry. In order to follow up the lines of thought opened up by this Symposium, fifty-three breweries all over the world were contacted and asked the following 10 questions: 1. What are the objectives of Q.C. in your company? 2. Connections and interactions of Q.C. department with other departments: production, marketing, general management, R & D, etc...? 3. Dependence of Q.C. (hierarchy) in the company and/or in the brewery. Could you give me an organigram? 4. Connections with external structures? 5. Qualifications of Q.C. manager for a brewery of 2 million, 1M, 0-5M, 0-2M, 0-1M hi per year? 6. Q.C. in production: number of persons/hl/year? 7. Q.C. in packaging (kegs, bottles, cans): number of persons/hl/year? 8. Significance in Q.C. of: physical/chemical studies— microbiology—number of persons per speciality in the brewery? 9. Is your brewery involved in defensive research (assurance of safety of product and protection against consumer associations' attack)? Could you give me practical examples? 10. Do you use quality circles? Forty-eight companies (90-6% of those approached) from 20 countries representing 330 million hi (1/3 of the world beer production) responded. The replies may there fore be considered to give a representation of the situation of quality control in breweries today. Detailed examination of the answers allows the following summary to be made.
atic actions necessary to provide adequate confidence that a product, process or service will continue to satisfy given quality requirements. These definitions are those of ISO/DIS 8402-1985. 2. Connections and Interactions of Q.C. Department WITH OTHER DEPARTMENTS- PRODUCTION, MARKETING, General Management, R & D, etc
In the majority of the companies, the Q.C. department maintains structured connections with the departments mentioned. The links are specially adapted when a large company has line and staff functions. No specific remarks were made on this subject. 3. Dependence of Q.C. (Hierarchy) in the Company and/or in the Brewery?
The answers received are greatly influenced by the size, location, and mono/poly-product orientation of the com- ,
pany. In Table 1 is summarised the affiliation of the Q.C. department in the company or brewery. Table 1 shows that 11 companies (22-9%) consider that the Q.C. department must have access to the highest level of the hierarchy. 31 Companies (64-6%), the majority, still think that the Q.C. department may report to the General
TABLE 1.
Hierarchical dependency of Q.C. department
in the
company
Number of companies
Q.C. department reports to
II 31 6
President/General Manager General Manager, operations Production/Head brewer
230
[J. Inst. Brew.
moll: brewery quality control
Manager of operations. Only 6 Companies (125%) arc con vinced that the Q.C. department can be linked directly to production; this represents a judge and jury situation which is now in most cases considered to be unsatisfactory. 4. Connections with External Structures
chemical side and others, less often, to microbiology as summarised in Table 3. TABLE III. Proportion of physical/chemical and microbiological specialists in 43 breweries
The majority of companies have connections with:
Physical/chemical
mean 65-6%
SD 15-2%
range 31-90%
—national institutions such as: —brewing industry representation —food industry representation —health department —customs and excise —standardisation bodies —consultants, universities etc... —international institutions such as:
Microbiological
mean 34-4%
SD 15-2%
range 10-69%
SD = Standard Deviation
In three companies the proportion of microbiologists exceeds 50%.
—ASBC, EBC, IOB, MBAA etc... 5. Qualification of Quality Control Manager for a Brewery of 1M, 0-5M, 0-2M and 01M hl Per Year The concensus of opinion is that a quality control manager should have a university degree in chemistry, bio chemistry, microbiology, engineering, or brewing at BSc, Master or PhD level. The majority of companies indicated that practical brewing experience is of highest importance in the appointment of a quality control manager. The number of years of practical industrial experience varies from 2 to 20 years; in all cases practical experience in the brewing industry is required. 6/7. Quality Control in Production and in Packaging (Kegs, Bottles, Cans) Number of Persons/hl/Year This important question has been answered by all partici pants with several practical examples. A statistical treat ment has been carried out but no correlations were found between the size of the brewery and the number of persons involved in quality control. Table 2 summarises the results obtained.
9. Is Your Brewery Involved in Defensive Research (Assurance of Safety of Product and Protection Against Consumer Associations' Attacks)? Could You Give Me Practical Examples?
The majority of the companies are involved in defensive research. Collaboration with government, university, and official laboratories is often mentioned. The main practical example cited is nitrosodimethylamine followed by toxins, pesticides, fungicides in raw materials, SO2 in final beer, composition of caramel and asbestos in final beer. 10. Do You Use Quality Circles? The number of companies involved in quality circles is low, as shown in Table 4. TABLE IV. Use of quality circles in breweries Number of answers Number of breweries using quality circles
48 5
Number of breweries having quality circles under investigation
12
Negative answers
31
TABLE II. Mean and standard deviation of number of persons per million hi and number of persons specifically invovled in production and packaging in the brewery 52
Number of answers (total persons) Number of persons involved in Q.C. per million of hi produced
mean 12-6; SD 6-1 range 4 to 31
Number of answers (production and packaging)
31
Number of persons involved in production Q.C./I M hi/year
mean 8-5; SD 4-9 range 2 to 22
Number ofpersons involved in packaging Q.C./I M hi/year
mean 5-7; SD 31 range 1 to 15
SD = Standard Deviation
These figures give an approximate indication of the total number of people involved in the Q.C. department. The number of persons in the Q.C. in production/packaging is very dependent on the proportion of kegs/bottles/cans, location and seasonal factors. 8. Importance of Quality Control of: —PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL ANALYSIS —MICROBIOLOGY NUMBER OF PERSONS PER SPECIALITY IN THE BREWERY?
Forty-three responses were received and it can be seen that most breweries pay more attention to the physical/
This may be explained by the fact that the quality circle approach is not fully understood and certainly needs adaptation for countries outside Japan. Discussion
The concept that quality assurance is a necessary function relating to the highest level of management is obviously gaining ground and is now accepted by the majority of large brewery companies. The difference between quality control and quality assurance is not clearly understood. Although a question about financial costs and justifi cations of quality control and quality assurance was not asked directly, it was perhaps surprising that in no reply was this point taken up. Possibly it appears difficult to make such value analysis. How to make this type of analysis, from the very beginning with raw material intake, to the final glass of beer which is drunk, has been discussed by several
authors.4'15'21'23 In this analysis every department of the
whole brewery is carefully examined and all anomalies are reported and their effects calculated in money terms. As practical examples there may be mentioned: —slow mash filtration which does not allow fulfilment of the daily brewhouse programme, e.g. 8 brews/24 h. The losses due to extra pay and loss of yield, amortisation etc... can be calculated. —non-uniformity of the paper of bottle labels which slows down bottle line performance. The losses due to
Vol. 92,1986]
moll: brewery quality control
extra pay, loss of amortisation, risk of accident, con sumer impact or late final product deliveries and of bad or irregular bottle labelling, can also be calculated. It is suggested that brewery companies should examine
this aspect of value analysis in more depth.
The replies relating to the staffing level in quality control departments show that there is no general agreement about the number of people necessary to support a given output of
beer. It appears from the information given that the total number involved in quality control in breweries in the whole
world is approximately 12,000. It is interesting that there are very large differences between brewery companies in the emphasis given to microbiological work in their quality control efforts. There is certainly a greater need to-day for breweries to
carry out research and control work related
to such
questions as the possible presence of toxic substances. The
fact that nearly all those who replied to the questionnaire maintain close liaison with government laboratories and agencies shows that the industry is ready to deal with any new problems in this area as soon as they arise. References
1. Bauman. H. E.andTaubet.C; Food Technology. 1984,38(4), 101, 102. 2. Bianco. L. J., Food Technology. 1984,34 (4), 103.104. 3. Burditt, G. M.. Food Technology. 1984,38 (4), 115,116. 4. Chauvel, A.. Revue de /'association francaise pour le controle mdtairiel el la qualite (AFCIQ). 1984.20(3). 19-26.
231
5. E.B.C., Monograph-X, EBC-Symposium on quality assurance.
Zoeterwoude. Nov. 1984, Brauwelt Verlag, D-8500 Nurnberg. 1985. 6. Fcigcnbaum, A. V., Total quality control, third edition, McGrawHill Book Company, New York. 1983.
7. Golomski, W. A., Food Technology. 1985.39 (9), S3, 55.
8. Gromus. J.. Forum fur Brauerei, 1985,38,5,6,8-10. 9. Hyde. T. G, Denny, S. C. T. and Evans. H. A. V., Technical Quarterly, Mister Brewers Association of the Americas, in press. 10. Ishikawa, K., le T.Q.C. ou la qualite a lajaponaise. AFNOR Tour d'Europe, Ccdex 7,92080 Paris la Defense, 1980. 11. Juran, J. M., Quality Control Handbook, third edition, McGrawHill Book Company, New York. 1974. 12. Lyons. R. L.. Food Technology. 1984.38 (4), 108-110. 13. Marckwardl. H.. Chemical Engineering. 1984, 91 (13). 163. 164. 166. 14. Moll, M., European Brewery Convention. Proceedings of the 19th Congress. London. 1983,287-306. 15. Morgan Anderson, R., Food Technology. 1984.38 (4). 111-112. 16. Million, J. L., La qualite des produits alimentaires. politique. incilation. gestion el contrite. Technique el Documentation Lavoi sier, Paris, France, 1985. 17. Pfenninger, H.. Braucrei-Rundschau. 1979,90,121-125.
18. Pfenninger, H., Brauwelt. 1984,124,1745-1747. 19. Pfenninger, H., Brauerei-Rundschau. 1985,96,270-274.
20. Q.C. Circle KORYO—General Principle of the Q.C. Circle, edited by Q.C. Circle Headquarters. Union of Japanese Scientists and Engineers (JUSE). S-10-l1, Scndagaya, Shibuyaku, Tokyo, 1980. 21. Rouct, C, Cout de la non-qualite, paper presented at FUTURAL 1985, Nancy, 8.10.1985. 22. Sterling. R., Food Technology, 1985,39(9), 54,55. 23. Vandcville, P., Gestion el controle de la qualite. Eyrolles, 61. bd Saint Germain. 75240 Paris Cedcx 05. France, 1985.
24. Wintermantcl. J. F.. Food Technology. 1984.38 (4). 113. 114.
