Content area
Competent authorities must implement quality control to guarantee the quality and safety of fisheries products. This is achieved by developing and applying testing method requirements or standards in reference/testing laboratories, adhering to Government Regulation 57 of 2015 concerning the Quality Assurance System and Safety of Fishery Products, and enhancing the added value of these products. The presence of accredited testing laboratories is crucial as a core competency in assuring the quality required by exporting countries. The Minister of Marine Affairs and Fisheries Regulation Number 8 of 2024, concerning the control of the implementation of quality assurance systems and the safety of marine and fishery products, reinforces the role of reference/testing laboratories. These laboratories are essential in supporting the control of the Quality and Safety Assurance System for Marine and Fishery Products, demonstrating competence in testing the quality of these products. Fisheries laboratory management is necessary to analyze the effectiveness of quality standard implementation at the Fish Quarantine and Fishery Product Quality and Safety Standard Testing Center (FQI-STL) laboratory. This analysis is based on SNI ISO/IEC 17025:2017. Furthermore, strategic fisheries laboratory management steps are needed to improve laboratory quality standards to support the Quality and Safety Assurance System for Marine and Fishery Products at FQI-STL, using the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) method. The research methodology employed a descriptive approach, combining qualitative and quantitative methods. Data collection involved observation, surveys, interviews, and questionnaires. Statistical data analysis was performed using MicrosoftExcel and Expert Choice 11 software. AHP respondents consisted of five experts in fisheries and management, representing the government, practitioners from the National Accreditation Body of Indonesia (KAN), and academia. Research findings from internal audit data between 2021 and 2023 revealed findings in clause 6.4 (equipment) at 7.89%, and clause 7.2 (selection, verification and validation of methods) at 25%. These two clauses had the highest number of findings and tended to recur annually, although a decrease in the number of findings was observed each year. Non-conformity data from the 2023 surveillance indicated minor and observation categories, suggesting that implementing laboratory management system requirements at FQI-STL according to SNI ISO/IEC 17025:2017 remains effective. The AHP results prioritized the following laboratory management strategies for improving FQISTL laboratory quality standards: excellent service (24.8%), sustained advancement and modernization of laboratory technology (24.1%), regulation amendment (18.5%), compliance with fishery product export regulations (16.6%), and implementation of key performance indicators (16.0%).
Abstract. Competent authorities must implement quality control to guarantee the quality and safety of fisheries products. This is achieved by developing and applying testing method requirements or standards in reference/testing laboratories, adhering to Government Regulation 57 of 2015 concerning the Quality Assurance System and Safety of Fishery Products, and enhancing the added value of these products. The presence of accredited testing laboratories is crucial as a core competency in assuring the quality required by exporting countries. The Minister of Marine Affairs and Fisheries Regulation Number 8 of 2024, concerning the control of the implementation of quality assurance systems and the safety of marine and fishery products, reinforces the role of reference/testing laboratories. These laboratories are essential in supporting the control of the Quality and Safety Assurance System for Marine and Fishery Products, demonstrating competence in testing the quality of these products. Fisheries laboratory management is necessary to analyze the effectiveness of quality standard implementation at the Fish Quarantine and Fishery Product Quality and Safety Standard Testing Center (FQI-STL) laboratory. This analysis is based on SNI ISO/IEC 17025:2017. Furthermore, strategic fisheries laboratory management steps are needed to improve laboratory quality standards to support the Quality and Safety Assurance System for Marine and Fishery Products at FQI-STL, using the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) method. The research methodology employed a descriptive approach, combining qualitative and quantitative methods. Data collection involved observation, surveys, interviews, and questionnaires. Statistical data analysis was performed using MicrosoftExcel and Expert Choice 11 software. AHP respondents consisted of five experts in fisheries and management, representing the government, practitioners from the National Accreditation Body of Indonesia (KAN), and academia. Research findings from internal audit data between 2021 and 2023 revealed findings in clause 6.4 (equipment) at 7.89%, and clause 7.2 (selection, verification and validation of methods) at 25%. These two clauses had the highest number of findings and tended to recur annually, although a decrease in the number of findings was observed each year. Non-conformity data from the 2023 surveillance indicated minor and observation categories, suggesting that implementing laboratory management system requirements at FQI-STL according to SNI ISO/IEC 17025:2017 remains effective. The AHP results prioritized the following laboratory management strategies for improving FQISTL laboratory quality standards: excellent service (24.8%), sustained advancement and modernization of laboratory technology (24.1%), regulation amendment (18.5%), compliance with fishery product export regulations (16.6%), and implementation of key performance indicators (16.0%).
Key Words: accreditation, AHP, effectiveness, fisheries laboratory, ISO/IEC 17025.
Introduction. The food industry is required to implement quality assurance and food safety systems consistently. This preventative and control measure, applied from preproduction to distribution, aims to produce high-quality, standardized, and safe food products for human consumption. The seafood and fisheries industry is a strategically important sector within the national economy of Indonesia, a major global supplier of fresh, frozen, and processed seafood products. The Indonesian Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries reported that the value of Indonesian fisheries exports in 2023 reached US$5.6 billion, still below the previous year's target of US$6.2 billion (https://statistik.kkp.go.id/) (Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries 2024b). Standards in seafood handling processes must be met to ensure that fishery products are high quality, have premium value, and are internationally competitive. Applying standards to products is necessary to bridge the interests of consumers and businesses or producers (Resnia et al 2015).
The continued non-compliant standard implementation in various industries across countries remains a primary issue in the trade of food products, including fisheries products. This is a significant cause of rejection for Indonesian fishery exports (Irawati et al 2019). Research by Irawati et al (2019) and Pradianti et al (2019) indicated that between 2008 and 2017, the main reason for the European Union's rejection of Indonesian fishery product exports was heavy metal contamination, particularly mercury. Nurkhasanah et al (2022) noted 2,318 cases in the American market and 79 cases in Europe that led to the rejection of Indonesian fishery export products between 2010 and 2020. Approximately 80% of rejections in the American market were due to filth and Salmonella contamination. In the European market, rejection reasons included inadequate temperature control, along with contamination with Salmonella, mercury, histamine, and cadmium. To guarantee the safety and quality of fishery products, every handling and/or processing step must implement controls against potential food safety hazards in seafood, such as physical contaminants (Hariyadi 2015); bacterial and pathogenic microbial contamination (Hasanah et al 2022); antibiotic residue contamination (Supartono & Rakhmadhani 2015); and heavy metal and histamine contamination (Irawati et al 2019). Food products traded internationally must adhere to quality, safety, environmental, and health requirements, meeting the standards set by the importing country (Resnia et al 2015). Accurate measurement is crucial in food safety to detect chemical contaminants like pesticide residues and heavy metals or biological contaminants like mycotoxins (National Standardization Agency of Indonesia 2023b).
Fishery products intended for human consumption must meet food quality and safety standards, a fundamental aspect of domestic and international trade. The government must ensure and reassure consumers about healthy, safe, and quality food. This necessitates quality and safety control of fishery products in the processing industry, from upstream to downstream, through the Quality Assurance System and Safety of Fishery Products (Santoso et al 2020). Government Regulation Number 57 of 2015 concerning the Quality Assurance System and Safety of Fishery Products and the Enhancement of Added Value of Fishery Products mandates that Competent Authorities must develop and implement testing method requirements or standards (Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries 2015). Accurate measurement is essential in fulfilling these standards. This highlights the role of metrology in supporting the global food system and national food security by maintaining the quantity and quality of food commodities (National Standardization Agency of Indonesia 2023a). Laboratories play a vital role across various sectors, including industry, health, and the environment. In industry, testing and calibration results determine product quality and production processes, directly impacting a business's reputation and success. In healthcare, accurate laboratory results are critical for detecting contamination or disease. In the environmental sector, laboratory data monitors and controls pollution, affecting public health and ecosystems.
According to Herniwanti (2019), the international standard ISO/IEC 17025:2017 aims to assist in developing laboratory quality management systems, both technically and administratively. This reinforces laboratory competence to service users, government policymakers, and the public. Accredited laboratories must consistently implement monitoring procedures to meet ISO/IEC 17025:2017 requirements by conducting internal quality control by analysts. This ensures the reliability and validity of laboratory test results. The validity of test results is crucial and commonly used by Competent Authorities in making strategic policies impacting the economic, environmental, health, and safety sectors. The presence of accredited testing laboratories is essential as a core competency in assuring the quality required by exporting countries (Dananjaya & Wahyujati 2012), ensuring competent laboratory operations align with established standards, guaranteeing the validity of test results, ensuring high-quality standards, enhancing customer confidence, meeting regulatory compliance, and improving personnel competence (National Standardization Agency of Indonesia 2023a).
The Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries is maximizing efforts to ensure fishery products and commodities meet international standards by implementing quality and safety assurance systems from upstream to downstream, aligning with developed nations. The regulation of the Minister of Marine Affairs and Fisheries Regulation Number 8 of 2024 strengthens the role of reference/testing laboratories in supporting the implementation of the Quality and Safety Assurance System for Marine and Fishery Products. These competent laboratories are crucial for testing the quality of marine and fishery products according to required test parameters and accreditation by the National Accreditation Body of Indonesia (Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries 2024a). Laboratories are instruments that measure and control product quality and safety based on prevailing regulations or standards (Elfriede et al 2018). The Fish Quarantine and Fishery Product Quality and Safety Standard Testing Center (FQI-STL), as a Technical Implementation Unit of the Fish Quarantine and Fishery Product Quality Control Agency (MFQAA), serves as a reference and testing laboratory. FQI-STL supports MFQAA's role within the Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries in the Quality Assurance System for Marine and Fisheries Products. The quality standard implementation by this laboratory also affects public satisfaction.
FQI-STL must consistently implement basic requirements, particularly technical parameter requirements, according to SNI ISO/IEC 17025:2017 (National Standardization Agency of Indonesia 2018) on fishery products. Meeting these requirements guarantees all personnel's commitment to recognizing customer needs and compliance with national and international regulations. Therefore, this research is necessary to analyze the effectiveness of FQI-STL laboratory quality standard implementation in supporting the Seafood Quality and Safety Assurance System. This analysis is an anticipatory measure against the rejection of Indonesian fishery products from a laboratory perspective and a strategic step for fisheries laboratory management to improve laboratory quality standards. The aim is to bolster the Quality and Safety Assurance System for Marine and Fishery Products, employing the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) approach.
Material and Method. This research was conducted over two months (July-August 2024) at the FQI-STL in East Jakarta, DKI Jakarta. Data were obtained from internal audit results spanning 2021-2023 and non-conformity findings from laboratory assessments by the accreditation body in 2023. These data were used to evaluate the effectiveness of laboratory quality standard implementation. Direct interviews and AHP questionnaires were administered to academics and practitioners with experience in ISO 17025 and assessors from the National Accreditation Body of Indonesia. These experts provided in-depth information regarding the effectiveness of quality standard implementation in the laboratory and strategic laboratory management. This study employed a mixed-methods approach, combining descriptive qualitative and quantitative methods, using a case study design focused on FQI-STL. This approach was chosen to obtain a precise, factual, accurate, and systematic description of the research object's conditions (Rusandi & Rusli 2021). Mixed methods allow for more comprehensive, valid, reliable, and objective data collection (Pane et al 2021). It effectively addresses research questions requiring both quantitative and qualitative approaches within a single study (Yam 2022). Following Hora (2009), three to five experts are sufficient for AHP studies. The AHP questionnaire was used to gather data for constructing a hierarchy to analyze fisheries laboratory management strategies aimed at improving laboratory quality standards. The AHP method was implemented in six steps: 1. identifying the problem and the type of information needed; 2. developing a decision hierarchy; 3. constructing matrices to establish pairwise comparisons; 4. determining the relative weights of items at each level; 5. verifying and balancing judgments; and 6. documenting the decisions (Russo & Camanho 2015). Expert judgments were processed and analyzed using Expert Choice 11 software, generating priority strategy scores and graphs. Figure 1 depicts the AHP hierarchy diagram used in this study.
Result and Discussion. Laboratories must conduct periodic internal audits and be subject to routine assessments by accreditation bodies to ensure adherence to ISO/IEC 17025 requirements. As mandated by ISO/IEC 17025 standards, laboratories must also continuously improve the effectiveness of their quality management systems (QMS) (Grochau & Schwengber ten Caten). The effectiveness analysis of quality standard implementation at FQI-STL laboratory, as a reference and testing laboratory based on SNI ISO/IEC 17025:2017, is divided into two discussions. The first concerns internal quality control, specifically internal audits (2021-2023), presented in Table 1. The second involves external quality control (Figure 2), focusing on the 2023 laboratory assessment by the FQISTL accreditation body. According to Murugan et al (2020), a laboratory requires a QMS to meet internationally accepted quality standards. This system gives service users assurance regarding performance, competence, and the quality of test results. Strategic steps, including internal and external audits, are necessary to evaluate QMS implementation.
Research findings from internal audit data between 2021 and 2023 revealed findings in clause 6.4 (Equipment) at 7.89%, and clause 7.2 (Selection, verification and validation of methods) at 25%. Analysis of recurring findings from 2021 to 2023 internal audits, particularly in clause 6.4, indicates that these issues stem from personnel's insufficient understanding of equipment temperature monitoring. Additionally, personnel lacked commitment to routine equipment sterilization monitoring, and budget refocusing hindered new equipment procurement. According to Panhwar et al (2020), a laboratory management system should include quality assurance activities, such as maintaining measurement traceability records, preventing errors, and implementing corrective actions. Hadi (2018) stated that accurate temperature and humidity data are essential for testing laboratories, as they significantly affect test results by determining the performance of instruments and equipment. Laboratory equipment requires periodic monitoring and calibration to ensure valid instrument measurements. Maintaining instrument performance necessitates documented maintenance according to existing instructions. Therefore, an instrument history list is created to identify no longer usable instruments, and a budget plan is developed to allocate funds for new instrument purchases. Risks are associated with decreased confidence in equipment calibration status due to planned calibration programs within the laboratory. Consequently, monitoring calibration intervals for each instrument periodically is crucial. This can be achieved through inter-instrument checks to ascertain the validity of calibration or testing results related to instrument calibration status (Krismastuti & Habibie 2022).
Analysis of issues from clause 7.2 findings reveals inconsistencies in the following testing stages based on selected references. Method validation has not been updated, scope expansion has not been performed on validated testing methods, and interlaboratory comparisons required for accredited parameter scope expansion have not been conducted. This is due to the lack of laboratories capable of performing the tests or the absence of proficiency testing providers for the proposed accreditation parameters. Method selection and updating are crucial to meet regulatory requirements. In addition to calibrated equipment, testing quality control is implemented. Selecting appropriate testing methods and consistently updating these methods are equally important for laboratories. Based on ISO 17025, method validation and verification are mandatory requirements for laboratories before implementing a testing or calibration method. Panagiotidou et al (2025) stated that method verification and measurement traceability are critical success factors for validated ISO/IEC 17025 implementation. This involves selecting appropriate test procedures and verifying test methods to ensure they meet the required performance standards. It also includes determining precision, evaluating measurement uncertainty, and establishing metrological traceability through documented and continuous calibration series.
The Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CEDAR) of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) outlines four components necessary for generating quality test data: appropriate equipment qualification/performance, method validation, system suitability testing, and quality control (Faridah et al 2018). Each laboratory can independently determine the testing methods to be used, adjusted to the laboratory's conditions and capabilities (Faridah et al 2018). Based on FQI-STL laboratory internal audit results from 2021 to 2023, gaps persist in fulfilling equipment requirements and meeting requirements for method selection, verification, and validation. These two clauses repeatedly emerge and constitute a significant portion of overall findings, even though the laboratory can perform testing according to applicable technical regulations regarding methods, equipment, and personnel competence.
External quality control measures the effectiveness of FQI-STL laboratory quality standard implementation based on SNI ISO/IEC 17025:2017 by reviewing laboratory surveillance test results by the National Accreditation Body of Indonesia (KAN) in 2023. These results are categorized according to SNI ISO 17025:2017 requirement categories. Non-conformity data from surveillance results are grouped based on SNI ISO 17025:2017 requirement categories, as shown in Figure 2.
Based on the non-conformity data from the FQI-STL laboratory surveillance audit by the National Accreditation Body of Indonesia in 2023, the identified non-conformity categories were minor. This indicates that implementing the FQI-STL laboratory management system requirements, according to SNI ISO/IEC 17025:2017, remains effective despite persistent gaps in fulfilling equipment requirements and selection, verification and validation of methods requirements. It also confirms the validity of the results. The absence of major-category findings suggests no critical failures in implementing one or more accreditation requirements that would doubt the credibility of conformity assessment results issued by the body. To prevent the recurrence of these nonconformities, the organization must allocate resources, both personnel and budget/ funding. This will ensure that implementation as a reference and testing laboratory based on SNI ISO/IEC 17025:2017 is improved and can be executed according to schedule, effectively supporting the Quality Assurance System and Safety of Marine and Fishery Products. The findings have been carefully examined to ensure continuous improvement. The conformity assessment results issued by the body remain unquestionable because no significant category findings were identified. No accreditation requirements were disregarded, even though surveillance results still indicate non-conformities. According to ISO/IEC 17025, laboratory accreditation guarantees the reliability of testing laboratories in implementing laboratory management systems according to international standards. This assures exporters and other businesses by delivering high-quality testing results (Okezue et al 2020).
Analytical hierarchy process (AHP). Saaty (2008) elucidates that nearly every major decision aligns with AHP, a measurement theory employing pairwise comparisons to derive priority scales from expert opinions. In this study, the AHP questionnaire was completed by 5 (five) respondents, which is consistent with Hora's (2009) recommendation that three to five experts are sufficient. The AHP questionnaire aimed to gather data to construct a hierarchy and analyze fisheries' laboratory management strategies to improve laboratory quality standards. Based on the AHP process in this research, seven criteria for laboratory management strategies to enhance FQI-STL laboratory quality standards were identified: (1) organization; (2) management system; (3) human resource; (4) management review; (5) test method; (6) quality assurance of test result; and (7) community satisfaction. Criteria were determined based on SNI ISO/IEC 17025:2017 clauses relevant to assessing implementation effectiveness in testing laboratories. Sari & Nurcahyo (2018) noted that these criteria are key to laboratory effectiveness in implementing SNI ISO/IEC 17025:2017. The authors of the present study incorporated the criterion of public satisfaction as a key performance indicator in the implementation of SNI ISO 17025:2017, recognizing its significance in assessing laboratory performance. This perspective is consistent with Hadi (2018), who emphasized the critical role of public satisfaction in evaluating laboratory quality. AHP assigns relative attractiveness scores to each factor. Figure 1 illustrates the hierarchy for determining the strength of sustainable fisheries laboratory management strategies to support the Quality and Safety Assurance System for Marine and Fishery Products, derived from the analytical hierarchy process using Expert Choice 11 software.
Strategies with the highest total relative attractiveness scores indicate priority strategies. Following analysis and calculation of the Intermediate Total Score values, a matrix of fisheries laboratory management strategies for improving laboratory quality standards to support the Quality and Safety Assurance System for Marine and Fishery Products was obtained. Based on all considered criteria, the priority weighting diagram of fisheries laboratory management strategies is presented in Figure 3.
Based on the AHP analysis (Figure 3) using Expert Choice 11, the quality assurance of test results criterion emerged as the primary consideration in laboratory management strategy, with a weight of 0.208. This highlights that laboratories must effectively ensure the quality of test result outputs in ISO/IEC 17025 implementation. This clause encompasses quality control procedures to monitor the validity of conducted testing and calibration (Nurcahyo et al 2018). Such monitoring should be planned and reviewed with the routine use of certified reference materials or internal quality control using secondary reference materials, participation in benchmarking/proficiency testing, re-testing using the same methods, and correlation of results. Meeting these requirements will yield high-quality laboratory test results, assuring clients that quality assurance is structured, planned, and implemented within the laboratory quality management system (Afifah et al 2022). The inconsistency ratio value of 0.02 (< 0.1 maximum limit) indicates that the analysis results are acceptable. Masripah et al (2022a) emphasized that the implementation of result validity requirements, as stipulated in clause 7.7 of SNI ISO/IEC 17025:2017, is crucial for determining the quality of test result outputs.
The second most important criterion is human resource, with a weight of 0.177. Experts deemed this critical because system effectiveness relies on personnel understanding the quality standards implemented by the laboratory. Human resource competence significantly impacts laboratory operational effectiveness, necessitating technical training/development to cultivate qualified human resources (Sari & Nurcahyo 2018). Panagiotidou et al (2025) consider human resource involvement, reflecting employee commitment, awareness, and active participation in the quality system, alongside training and development, as essential components. These elements underscore the significant impact of human competence on overall laboratory performance.
The third criterion is testing methods, with a weight of 0.166. Testing methods are a vital criterion because the chosen methods must undergo verification and validation processes to ensure valid and reliable test data. Public satisfaction ranks fourth, with a weight of 0.132. This criterion is important in laboratory management strategy, as customer satisfaction is paramount for a reputable testing laboratory. This prioritization provides an alternative strategy development for analytical service industries to address future challenges in becoming reference laboratories capable of meeting testing demands following regulations and developments concerning safe products (Putri et al 2020).
Management review is the fifth criterion, with a weight of 0.121. Long-term laboratory management must conduct periodic and consistent management reviews, applied to all quality documents, both managerial and technical. It is crucial for laboratories to monitor SNI ISO/IEC 17025 implementation regularly to ensure continuous suitability and effectiveness (Sari & Nurcahyo 2018). Al Gharibi & Abdullah (2017) stated that management review is a core requirement and an essential element of the system, ensuring its ongoing suitability and effectiveness across many quality management systems.
The management system criterion is the sixth important criterion, weighing 0.104. Management must be integrated into a laboratory management system to optimize the effectiveness of the SNI ISO/IEC 17025 implementation. A good management system is designed as simply and effectively as possible without compromising essential requirements, facilitating easier implementation and achievement of laboratory objectives (Sari & Nurcahyo 2018). Achieving laboratory management system implementation, based on ISO/IEC-17025, is contingent upon the availability of adequate resources and commitment from top management in both government and private sectors (Panhwar et al 2020).
Finally, the seventh criterion is organization, with a weight of 0.092. Organizations committed to supporting the overall effectiveness of the laboratory management system can streamline business processes, minimizing obstacles in sustainable laboratory management (Sari & Nurcahyo 2018). This is achieved through established legal legitimacy, organizational structure, managerially and technically responsible personnel, and realized management commitment to achieving a robust quality management system (Nurcahyo et al 2018). Zgirskas et al (2021) suggested that organizations implementing quality management systems based on external and internal motives ultimately benefit from the implemented standards. If the motive for implementing a quality management system is customer or market requirements, the organization can eventually enter new markets. If the motive is internal (improving company and management activities and operational efficiency), organizational management will ultimately become easier with enhanced employee culture, awareness, and procedural thinking, further developing the organization.
Priority weight calculations for the sub-criteria of the organizational aspect (Figure 4) indicate that ethics and integrity yielded the highest value, at 0.424, based on expert questionnaire results. Within the organizational aspect, consistent integrity and impartiality of laboratory personnel in performing their duties and functions are crucial (Faridah et al 2018). This ensures the independence and professionalism of the laboratory are maintained (Hadi 2018). Subsequently, the sub-criterion of budget allocation, with a priority weight of 0.303, is also significant. Finance and funding are direct resources supporting laboratory management effectiveness and efficiency. Laboratories must commit to allocating budgets for all needs related to ISO/IEC 17025:2017 standard implementation (Suratno et al 2020). Budget allocation in laboratory management includes operational and capital budgets for laboratory facility development. The inconsistency ratio value is 0.04 < 0.1 (maximum limit), indicating that the analysis results are acceptable. Budget allocation or financial support is a critical factor in the successful implementation of ISO 17025, supporting laboratory quality development (Al-mijrab et al 2019).
Figure 5 demonstrates that the sub-criteria for the management system aspect in this study were consistently assessed, as the inconsistency ratio value is 0.00094 < 0.1 (maximum limit), which means the analysis results are acceptable. Based on expert questionnaire results, sub-criteria priority weights show that risk management yielded the highest value, at 0.470. Risk management is essential for determining appropriate controls and making decisions when risks need monitoring, evaluation, and further analysis (Masripah et al 2022b). Effective risk management is beneficial for achieving efficient and effective performance, forming the basis for strategic plan development to enhance customer satisfaction (Tohom 2014). In quality standard implementation, Stojković et al (2021) suggested that for a laboratory management system to function correctly and avoid undesirable consequences, the laboratory must first establish a framework for managing risks and opportunities. The laboratory must address every potential hazard or possibility.
The sub-criteria for the human resource aspect have an inconsistency ratio value of 0.00087 < 0.1 (maximum limit), indicating that the analysis results are acceptable (Figure 6). Based on expert assessment, competency has the highest value at 0.473. All personnel at every level of the laboratory organization must plan competency improvement programs that impact the quality of test data results (Hadi 2018). The operational effectiveness of these laboratories depends on their competence in performing tests and calibrations consistently (Belezia & de Almeida 2021). Furthermore, technical guidance, with a weight of 0.299, is a significant criterion in laboratory management. Technical guidance is a key element in developing laboratory personnel competence. With effective guidance, laboratories can ensure that every team member is skilled and knowledgeable in performing their duties optimally (Arizona 2024). Similarly, personnel training, with a weight of 0.228, is important because it can improve personnel's skills, knowledge, and abilities in performing their duties. This will lead to more effective and efficient work, impacting organizational performance and productivity.
From the management review perspective, document review holds the highest priority at 0.414 (Figure 7). Management review activities serve as a barometer for measuring the ongoing suitability, adequacy, and effectiveness of the management system implementation within the laboratory. These reviews should be conducted periodically to ensure continuity, suitability, and adequacy, including policies and objectives for fulfilling and effectively implementing SNI ISO/IEC 17025:2017.
The second priority, with a weight of 0.386, is the consistency of review schedule. This demonstrates the laboratory management's commitment to consistent and periodic socialization and evaluation through scheduled meetings with all laboratory personnel (Faridah et al 2018). The third important aspect of management review is document review, with a weight of 0.200. This criterion is important because the stages in the quality management system implementation process must be continuously updated, relevant, and adequate to quality requirements (The National Agency of Drug and Food Control 2023). Sub-criteria for the management review aspect have an inconsistency ratio value of 0.06 < 0.1 (maximum limit), indicating that the analysis results are acceptable.
Figure 8 shows that the sub-criteria for the test method aspect have an inconsistency ratio value of 0 (absolute consistency), meaning the analysis results are acceptable. Priority weights indicate that testing method aligned with current national and international regulations yields the highest value, at 0.636, based on expert questionnaire results. Discrepancies between Indonesian standards and regulations and those of exporting countries impact the rejection of Indonesian fishery products in those countries (Irawati et al 2019). Therefore, laboratories must continuously update their testing methods to align with the latest regulations required by exporting countries.
Figure 9 shows that the sub-criteria for the quality assurance of test results aspect have an inconsistency ratio value of 0.09 < 0.1 (maximum limit), indicating acceptable analysis results. Priority weights show that the calibration program yields the highest value, at 0.402, based on expert questionnaire results. Laboratories must maintain calibration program consistency for all equipment with intermediate checks to maintain confidence in equipment calibration status. This can influence the quality of the test result data (Elfriede et al 2018). Uneven levels of accuracy and sensitivity in test results imply that calibration is key to ensuring equipment is always traceable to international references and conforms to specifications needed for targeted measurement requirements (Faridah et al 2018).
Figure 10 indicates that the sub-criteria for the community satisfaction aspect have an inconsistency ratio value of 0.04 < 0.1 (maximum limit), which means the analysis results are acceptable. Priority weight analysis shows that response speed yielded the highest value, at 0.301, based on expert questionnaire results. Response speed is a crucial element in enhancing service quality to the public. Positive responsiveness supports public service (Hariyanto & Susilo 2021).
Figure 11 illustrates the priority ranking of strategic alternatives for fisheries laboratory management for improving laboratory quality standards to support the Quality and Safety Assurance System for Marine and Fishery Products. The top alternatives are: excellent service (24.8%), sustained advancement and modernization of laboratory technology (24.1%), regulation amendment (18.5%), compliance with fishery product export regulations (16.6%), and implementation of key performance indicators (16.0%). Excellent service is the top-priority alternative in laboratory management strategy for improving laboratory quality standards. This is because a service-oriented organization's constructive actions will focus on customer satisfaction by providing excellent service. This, in turn, builds customer loyalty and enhances the testing laboratory's image and reputation. Nurlia (2018) stated that excellent service is key to service that meets quality standards according to customer expectations and satisfaction. In this context, two important and interconnected elements are service and quality. Community satisfaction is a primary concern for organizations or companies. It is considered important for organizations to improve service quality, products, and customer loyalty to survive in a competitive market. Community satisfaction measurement provides information on how companies manage their relationships with their customer base and will influence the organization's success in the global market (Davis & Gomez 2021).
The second strategic alternative is sustained advancement and modernization of laboratory technology. This involves providing facilities with sustainable technology, from energyefficient laboratory instruments and environmentally friendly alternative materials to solutions that generate less waste. By prioritizing sustainability, laboratories can contribute to climate change mitigation and foster a healthier and more productive working environment for laboratory staff(Rai et al 2024).
The third alternative is regulatory improvements that strengthen the position of reference laboratories and/or testing laboratories in addressing global challenges. Utomo et al (2024) stated that countries often protect their national interests through regulations and policies in international trade. The Indonesian government needs to take concrete steps to increase investment in the fisheries sector, such as policy reforms in regulation making and enforcement, simplifying import processes, and investing in infrastructure.
The fourth alternative is compliance with fishery product export regulations. Economic progress, environmental protection, and broad benefits for Indonesian society can be achieved if the government enacts laws that reflect national interests. Quality requirement gaps appear between local and foreign goods, as seen in the frequent rejection of export goods. Therefore, it is important to harmonize Indonesian National Standards (SNI) with relevant international standards, destination country standards, and country of origin standards (Resnia et al 2015). The final alternative is the implementation of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs), which function as performance monitoring and control tools established by organizations for laboratories. With global demands, the competitive value of marine and fishery products must be optimized and meet standards and requirements set by exporting countries to guarantee quality and protect consumers. Therefore, laboratory management strategies are needed to maintain the safety and comfort of service users and laboratory managers, minimize risks, maximize the use of equipment and materials, facilitate supervision, improve laboratory quality, and ensure laboratory management systems meet requirements. The findings of this study differ from those of Nurcahyo et al (2018) who stated that a quality management system in ISO/IEC 17025- based laboratories will operate effectively if several key factors in the effectiveness clause are well-implemented, including organization, management system, management review, personnel, testing methods, and quality assurance of test results. Batepola et al (2021) suggested that the ISO/IEC 17025 guidelines contain laboratory product benchmarks for testing services. This will convince testing laboratories to consistently and reliably perform testing services. Implementing and improving system quality management is the goal of many companies. Having a quality management system is part of a business development strategy.
Conclusions. Based on the research findings, it can be concluded that the Fish Quarantine and Fishery Product Quality and Safety Standard Testing Center (FQI-STL) Laboratory, as a reference and testing laboratory based on SNI ISO/IEC 17025:2017 within the Fish and Marine Product Quality Control and Supervision Agency under the Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries, has effectively implemented quality standards. This implementation is evidenced by internal quality control measures, namely internal audits and external quality control through laboratory assessments by accreditation bodies. Non-conformities identified were categorized as minor and observation levels, indicating that FQI-STL laboratory effectively demonstrates the implementation of management system requirements according to SNI ISO/IEC 17025:2017. The Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) results identified the priority ranking of laboratory management strategy criteria for improving FQI-STL laboratory quality standards as: excellent service (24.8%), sustained advancement and modernization of laboratory technology (24.1%), regulation amendment (18.5%), compliance with fishery product export regulations (16.6%), and implementation of Key Performance Indicators (16.0%).
Acknowledgements. The researchers expresses their gratitude to the Fish Quarantine and Fishery Product Quality and Safety Standard Testing Center for the opportunity to conduct this research.
Conflict of interest. The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.
References
Afifah D. A., Muslihudin M., Cendekia D., 2022 [Implementation of quality control for accuracy and precision of protein analysis results]. Jurnal Analis Farmasi 7(1):69-80. [in Indonesian]
Al-mijrab A., Elgharib M., Al-Griw M. A., 2019 Critical success factors of ISO/IEC 17025 implementation within Arabic countries: a case study of Libyan Research Centres and Laboratories (LRCL). TQ e-Learning Practices in Industries 6(6):1-11.
Al Gharibi I., Abdullah M., 2017 The relationship between ISO/IEC 17025 adoption and operational performance of testing and calibration laboratories. Selangor Business Review 2(1):73-83.
Arizona Y., 2024 [Enthusiasm of drug and NAPPZA laboratory technical guidance participants: investment for the future]. Available at: https://surabaya.pom.go.id/ berita/antusiasme-peserta-bimbingan-teknis-laboratorium-obat-dan-nappzainvestasi- untuk-masa-depan. Accessed: October, 2024. [in Indonesian]
Batepola G., Jemziya F., Rikasa A. M., Kanugala K. A. N. P., 2021 Gap analysis in implementation of ISO/IEC 17025:2017 accreditation programme in selected microbiological laboratory. 1st International Conference on Science and Technology on Technology - based research and innovation for empowerment and sustainability, July 2021, South Eastern University of Sri Lanka, Oluvil, Sri Lanka, pp. 130-138.
Belezia L. C., de Almeida M. F. L., 2021 Self-assessment model for testing and calibration laboratories based on ISO/IEC 17025:2017 requirements. Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1826:012026.
Dananjaya I., Wahyujati A., 2012 [Improving the competitiveness of local products in standardization efforts to enter the global market (quality standardization and quality of tiger shrimp)]. UG Journal 6(02):9-15. [in Indonesian]
Davis T. J., Gomez M. I., 2022 The COVID-19 pandemic, customer satisfaction and sales performance in wine tasting rooms in the Finger Lakes region of New York State. International Journal of Wine Business Research 34(2):173-189.
Elfriede D. P., Kusumaningrum H. D., Lioe H. N., 2018 [Review on technical requirements of testing laboratory in the dairy industry for infant formula products according to ISO 17025: 2017]. Jurnal Standardisasi 20(3):219-230. [in Indonesian]
Faridah D. N., Erawan D., Sutriah K., Hadi A., Budiantari F., 2018 [Implementation of SNI ISO/IEC 17025:2017 - general requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories]. Badan Standardisasi Nasional Indonesia, Jakarta, 216 pp. [in Indonesian]
Grochau I. H., Schwengber ten Caten C., 2012 A process approach to ISO/IEC 17025 in implementation of a quality management system in testing laboratories. Accreditation and Quality Assurance 17(5):519-527.
Hadi A., 2018 [General requirements for competence of testing laboratories and calibration laboratories ISO/IEC 17025: 2017]. Gramedia Pustaka Utama, 544 pp. [in Indonesian]
Hariyadi P., 2015 [Food safety: double challenge for Indonesia]. SNI Valuasi 9(2):7-9. [in Indonesian]
Hariyanto S., Susilo H. D., 2021 [Evaluation of community satisfaction with public services at the office of Tanggaran Village, Pule District, Trenggalek Regency]. Publiciana: Jurnal Ilmu Sosial dan Ilmu Politik 14(2):307-327. [in Indonesian]
Hasanah N., Sudaryatma P. E., Razaq I., Eriawati N. N., Nugraha W. A., Kumalasari H., Anggraeni N. P. A. S., Dewi I. A. M. M., 2022 [Early detection of Vibrio parahaemolyticus and Escherichia coli contamination in fisheries product using multiplex polymerase chain reaction]. Jurnal Sain Veteriner 40(2):171-182. [in Indonesian]
Herniwanti, 2019 [Mapping of testing laboratories in Indonesia accredited to ISO 17025 by the National Accreditation Body (KAN)]. Prosiding Seminar Nasional Pelestarian Lingkungan, Pekanbaru, November, pp. 292-298. [in Indonesian]
Hora S. C., 2009 Expert judgment in risk analysis. Non-published Research Reports, Paper 120, 10 pp.
Irawati H., Kusnandar F., Kusumaningrum H., 2019 [Rejection analysis of the Indonesian fishery products to European Union (2007-2017) using root cause analysis]. Jurnal Standardisasi 21(2):149-160. [in Indonesian]
ISO/IEC 17025, 2017 General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, 30 pp.
Krismastuti F. S. H., Habibie M. H., 2022 Complying with the resource requirements of ISO/IEC 17025:2017 in Indonesian calibration and testing laboratories: current challenges and future directions. Accreditation and Quality Assurance 27(6):359-367.
Masripah, Fadila M., Pramukti S. R., Oktari Z., 2022a [Effectiveness assessment of the implementation of requirements for ensuring the validity of test and calibration laboratory results according to SNI ISO/IEC 17025:2017]. Buletin Pengelolaan Reaktor Nuklir 19(2):26-33. [in Indonesian]
Masripah, Pramukti S. R., Oktari Z., Fadila M., 2022b [Risk management of quality control in testing and calibration laboratory PRTBBN according to SNI ISO/IEC 17025:2017 requirements]. Jurnal Standardisasi 24(1):33-44. [in Indonesian]
Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries, 2015 [Government Regulation of the Republic of Indonesia Number 57 of 2015 regarding the quality assurance system and safety of fishery products and increasing the added value of fishery product]. Kementerian Kelautan dan Perikanan, 24 pp. [in Indonesian]
Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries, 2024a [Regulation of the Minister of Marine Affairs and Fisheries No. 8 of 2024 concerning the control of the implementation of quality assurance and safety systems for marine and fishery products]. Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries, 21 pp. [in Indonesian]
Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries, 2024b [KKP Statistics. Fisheries Production]. Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries. Available at: https //statistik.kkp.go.id/. Accessed: December, 2024. [in Indonesian]
Murugan S., Anderson D., Gunawardana D., Gosai R., Kumarasinghe L., Kumwenda H., 2020 Experience in establishing a quality management system at a plant diagnostic laboratory in Fiji. Accreditation and Quality Assurance 25(3):179-183.
National Standardization Agency of Indonesia, 2018 [SNI ISO/IEC 17025:2017 General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories]. Badan Standardisasi Nasional, 66 pp. [in Indonesian]
National Standardization Agency of Indonesia, 2023a [Accreditation underpins global trade and improves national fishery product quality via competent laboratories]. SNI Valuasi 30:10. [in Indonesian]
National Standardization Agency of Indonesia, 2023b [Role of metrology in supporting food safety]. SNI Valuasi 30:11. [in Indonesian]
Nurcahyo R., Gabriel D. S., Ivan E., Habiburrahman M., Sari I. P., 2018 ISO/IEC 17025 implementation at testing laboratory in Indonesia. IEEE 5th International Conference on Engineering Technologies and Applied Sciences (ICETAS), November 2018, Bangkok, Thailand, pp. 1-6.
Nurkhasanah A. A., Suadi S., Puspita I. D., 2022 The root causes analysis of Indonesia's fishery products rejection in the United States of America and European countries during 2010 - 2020. Industria: Jurnal Teknologi dan Manajemen Agroindustri 11(2): 165-176.
Nurlia, 2018 [Service strategy with service excellence concept]. Meraja Journal 1(2):17- 30. [in Indonesian]
Okezue M. A., Adeyeye M. C., Byrn S. J., Abiola V. O., Clase K. L., 2020 Impact of ISO/IEC 17025 laboratory accreditation in sub-Saharan Africa: a case study. BMC Health Services Research 20(1):1065.
Panagiotidou E., Chountalas P. T., Magoutas A. I., Georgakellos D. A., Lagodimos A. G., 2025 Systematic identification and validation of critical success factors for ISO/IEC 17025 implementation. Administrative Sciences 15(2):60.
Pane I., Hadju V. A., Maghfuroh L., Akbar H., Simamora R. S., Lestari Z. W., Galih A. P., Wijayanto P. W., Waluyo W., Uslan U., Aulia U., 2021 [Research design mixed method]. Publisher Foundation Muhammad Zaini, 180 pp. [in Indonesian]
Panhwar A., Naeem M. A., Ul Haq A., Zainulibad S., Ahmed M., Ul Haq S., 2020 Laboratory management system and competency of accredited laboratories. International Review of Basic and Applied Sciences 8(2):9-13.
Pradianti O. S., Rahayu W. P., Dewanti-Hariyadi R., 2019 [Compliance assessment of chemical contamination standard (heavy metals and PAH) for fishery products in Indonesia with those of other countries and codex]. Jurnal Pascapanen dan Bioteknologi Kelautan dan Perikanan 14(1):45-62. [in Indonesian]
Putri A. E. R., Harianto W., Aziz A., 2020 [Customer satisfaction assessment on service quality X with servqual method and analytical hierarchy process (AHP)]. RAINSTEK: Jurnal Terapan Sains dan Teknologi 2(3):202-208. [in Indonesian]
Rai S., Sriram N., Alva P., Ashraf A. A., Kumar S., Nayak S., 2024 Advancing green laboratory practices : a review of sustainability in healthcare. International Journal of Medical Biochemistry 7(3):201-207.
Resnia R., Wicaksena B., Salim Z., 2015 [Compatibilty of Indonesian National Standards (SNI) to international standards and trading countries standards on fisheries export products tuna and skipjack]. Jurnal Standardisasi 17(2):87-98. [in Indonesian]
Rusandi, Rusli M., 2021 [Guidance on designing basic/descriptive qualitative research and case studies]. Al-Ubudiyah - Jurnal Pendidikan dan Studi Islam 2(1):48-60. [in Indonesian]
Russo R. D. F. S. M., Camanho R., 2015 Criteria in AHP: a systematic review of literature. Procedia Computer Science 55:1123-1132.
Saaty T. L., 2008 Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Services Sciences 1(1):83-98.
Santoso A., Palupi N. S., Kusumaningrum H. D., 2020 [Histamine control in the process chain for export frozen tuna products]. Jurnal Standardisasi 22(2):131-142. [in Indonesian]
Sari I. P., Nurcahyo R., 2018 Analysis implementation effectiveness of ISO/IEC 17025 on testing laboratory. Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management, Bandung, Indonesia, 6-8 March, pp. 1752-1761.
Stojković A., Igić N., Krstić N., Ðorðević D., Krstić I., 2021 Improving the quality of environmental testing through the implementation of ISO 17025 standards. Facta Universitatis Series: Working and Living Environmental Protection 18(3):169-175.
Supartono W., Rakhmadhani P., 2015 [Analysis of rejection of Indonesian export products of blue swimming crab (Portunus pelagicus) and crab (Scylla serrata) in the United States for 2002-2013]. Proceedings of the Agroindustry Seminar and National Workshop FKPT-TPI, 2-3 Sept, pp. 28-32. [in Indonesian]
Suratno, Swadesi B., Asmorowati D., 2020 [Laboratory management]. Fakultas Teknologi Mineral, Universitas Pembangunan Nasional "Veteran" Yogyakarta, 96 pp. [in Indonesian]
The National Agency of Drug and Food Control, 2023 [Review of QMS ISO 9001:2015 documents integrated with ISO 17025:2017]. Available at: https://qms.pom.go.id/ berita-aktual-qms/kaji-ulang-dokumen-qms-iso-90012015-terintegrasi-iso- 170252017#. Accessed: October, 2024. [in Indonesian]
Tohom A., 2014 [Governance, risk management, and internal control]. Pusat Pendidikan dan Pelatihan Pengawasan, Badan Pengawasan Keuangan dan Pembangunan, 92 pp. [in Indonesian]
Utomo P. B., Nadapdap B., Widiarty W. S., 2024 [Analysis of the impact of fishery product import regulations (2017-2023) from an investment law perspective]. Journal Syntax Idea 6(3):138-150. [in Indonesian]
Yam J. H., 2022 [Reflection on mixed methods research]. Jurnal Empire 2(2):126-134. [in Indonesian]
Zgirskas A., Ruževičius J., Ruželė D., 2021 Benefits of quality management standards in organizations. Standards 1(2):154-166.
Copyright Bioflux SRL 2025