Good point Andy. My understanding is that ISO 45001 certification automatically meets Totika requirements and that's how it should be.

@Andy Bunyan
After reading the published outline and guidance information here my belief is you would be better currently maintaining ISO certification over Totika.
A standardised framework of core elements for assessment would be beneficial for for clients, suppliers and contractors. My opinion is that Totika does not deliver on the promises that it "creates a fair and equitable scheme . . . . and a common view for H&S pre-qualification".

I found the information disjointed, bulky and wordy, has multiple spelling and grammar errors, uses terminology not common in NZ, lacks a common topic layout, is strongly biased towards it's own auditors and overly detailed creating an inflexible framework.
Compare Totika with Ministry of Education requirements as both use SHE and Prequal.

In my experience, OHS prequalification is a method of short-listing potential suppliers or contractors for goods or services. It is a snapshot of their abilities, experience, processes and performance. A method of determining suitability before doing due diligence.
Unfortunately I think there is a considerable gap between what Totika currently provides and what industry requires.

Just my ramblings

Ahhhhhhhh, Prequal Schemes, one of the things I thank God daily for not having to waste my time with any more. Would it be fair to say that Construction Health and Safety New Zealand (CHASNZ), is a Site Safe on steroids with the aim of creating one prequal to rule them all?

We have covered some of this ground before

https://forum.safeguard.co.nz/discussion/563/is-totika-prequalification-being-adopted
https://forum.safeguard.co.nz/discussion/472/contractor-pre-qual
https://forum.safeguard.co.nz/discussion/478/prequal-yet-again
https://forum.safeguard.co.nz/discussion/417/contractor-management-the-thin-paper-wall

Would it be fair to say that Construction Health and Safety New Zealand (CHASNZ), is a Site Safe on steroids with the aim of creating one prequal to rule them all? — Steve H

I think both SiteSafe and CHASNZ have lost their way. I can see parts of SiteWise in Totika and parts of SiteSafe's SSSPs in Totika also. In the end, I think both CHASNZ's Totika and SiteSafe's SSSPs have similar characteristics - good ideas spoiled by senior management to justify bureaucratic creations.

Again my ramblings

Thanks both KeithH and Steve H for your views - appreciate it indeed.

Interesting in recently putting an Rfq response was that membership of a certain prequalifying agency was an immediate barrier to entry. Ok so we are indeed a member and therefore over the first fence but there was not even the scope to offer ISOs including 45001 as an alternative to that prequal ticket. As a consequence, the cost of doing business seems to have got cranked up just a little further.

That's correct Tony :-)

Hi Andy, You may choose to register with Tōtika for free. Once you have done that you can upload your ISO 45001 certificate and most recent audit report. We will then list you until you are due your next audit. After your next audit just repeat the process (an so on every year) - no cost to your business.

Tōtika is in a period of exponential growth with many of NZ's largest Supply Chain Leaders recognising the listed status. That means for businesses who are investing in ISO 45001 should not need to undertake prequalification assessments. If you find a Supply Chain Leader not recognising Tōtika, or not aware of the scheme, pass on their details and I'll give them a call. :-)

Hi Keith, I'm sorry to hear you feel that way about Tōtika. Your comments are appreciated and not representative of the feedback we are receiving from buyers and suppliers across multiple industries.

I'd be happy to have a personal chat if you like, in order to better understand your perspectives and see if there is anything we might do to improve. Here's my email if you are up for a discussion jonatchasnzdotorg.

Hi Steve, no it isn't that. Tōtika is not another pre-qualification scheme and has been developed with government funding (as a not-for-profit initiative) to cross-recognise efforts already being made. This is our best chance to sort this mess out. I'm always happy to hear constructive feedback and listen to ideas on how to do this better, so please reach out if you wish to discuus the issue - my email: jonatchasnzdotorg

thanks for the insight Jon - much appreciated.

You are very welcome. I've added comments in the other threads linked earlier that may be of broader interest :-)