Cross-Framework Mapping

AS9100D:2016 — Quality Management Systems for Aviation, Space, and DefencevsISO/IEC 17025:2017 — General Requirements for Testing and Calibration Laboratories

See exactly how AS9100D:2016 — Quality Management Systems for Aviation, Space, and Defence controls map to ISO/IEC 17025:2017 — General Requirements for Testing and Calibration Laboratories. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

26
Controls Mapped
12
Gaps Found
26%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

AS9100D:2016 — Quality Management Systems for Aviation, Space, and Defence maps to ISO/IEC 17025:2017 — General Requirements for Testing and Calibration Laboratories with 26% coverage across 10 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 38 AS9100D:2016 — Quality Management Systems for Aviation, Space, and Defence controls identifies 28 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in Operation (Clause 8).

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 38 controls analysed | 693 frameworks | 819K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 20 of 26 mapped controls across 5 domains. Sign up to explore all 819K+ mappings across 693 frameworks.

Performance Evaluation and Improvement (Clauses 9–10)(6 mappings)

10.2Nonconformity and Corrective Action3 targets
ISO-15189-8.1General requirements
ISO-17025-8.1Options
ISO-17025-8.7Corrective actions
9.2Network Domain Security3 targets
ISO-15189-6.7Service agreements
ISO-17025-5.1Legal entity
ISO-17025-5.4Personnel for the management system

Context of the Organisation (Clause 4)(6 mappings)

4.1External Standards3 targets
ISO-15189-6.3Facilities and environmental conditions
ISO-15189-6.5Equipment calibration and metrological traceability
ISO-17025-6.5Metrological traceability
4.2Building Fabric and Facilities3 targets
ISO-15189-6.3Facilities and environmental conditions
ISO-15189-6.5Equipment calibration and metrological traceability
ISO-17025-6.5Metrological traceability

Leadership (Clause 5)(3 mappings)

5.3Management of Allergens3 targets
ISO-15189-6.3Facilities and environmental conditions
ISO-15189-6.5Equipment calibration and metrological traceability
ISO-17025-6.5Metrological traceability

Planning and Support (Clauses 6–7)(3 mappings)

7.1Training and Competence3 targets
ISO-15189-6.3Facilities and environmental conditions
ISO-15189-6.5Equipment calibration and metrological traceability
ISO-17025-6.5Metrological traceability

Operation (Clause 8)(2 mappings)

8.5Production and Service Provision2 targets
ISO-15189-6.3Facilities and environmental conditions
ISO-15189-6.5Equipment calibration and metrological traceability

+6 more mappings

Plus AI-powered gap analysis, compliance advisory, PDF exports, and cross-mapping for all 693 frameworks.

Create Free Account →

Free forever — no credit card required

Related Comparisons

Other AS9100D:2016 — Quality Management Systems for Aviation, Space, and Defence comparisons

Other ISO/IEC 17025:2017 — General Requirements for Testing and Calibration Laboratories comparisons

Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets

AI-powered compliance intelligence across 693 frameworks — at a fraction of consulting costs.

$0/forever

Free

  • 693 framework browser
  • Cross-framework mappings (819K+)
  • 824 compliance assessments
  • 3 AI queries & searches per day
Get Started Free
Recommended
$49/month

Professional

  • Unlimited AI Compliance Advisory
  • Unlimited full-text search
  • Framework self-assessment
  • PDF, Excel & CSV exports
Start 7-Day Free Trial →

What are the key differences between AS9100D:2016 — Quality Management Systems for Aviation, Space, and Defence and ISO/IEC 17025:2017 — General Requirements for Testing and Calibration Laboratories?

AS9100D:2016 — Quality Management Systems for Aviation, Space, and Defence has 38 controls across its framework, while ISO/IEC 17025:2017 — General Requirements for Testing and Calibration Laboratories covers 65 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 10 overlapping controls (26% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Operation (Clause 8), where 10 AS9100D:2016 — Quality Management Systems for Aviation, Space, and Defence controls have no direct ISO/IEC 17025:2017 — General Requirements for Testing and Calibration Laboratories equivalent.

How many controls map between AS9100D:2016 — Quality Management Systems for Aviation, Space, and Defence and ISO/IEC 17025:2017 — General Requirements for Testing and Calibration Laboratories?

Of 38 total AS9100D:2016 — Quality Management Systems for Aviation, Space, and Defence controls, 10 map directly to ISO/IEC 17025:2017 — General Requirements for Testing and Calibration Laboratories controls — representing 26% coverage. The remaining 28 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping AS9100D:2016 — Quality Management Systems for Aviation, Space, and Defence to ISO/IEC 17025:2017 — General Requirements for Testing and Calibration Laboratories?

28 AS9100D:2016 — Quality Management Systems for Aviation, Space, and Defence controls have no direct equivalent in ISO/IEC 17025:2017 — General Requirements for Testing and Calibration Laboratories. The highest concentration of gaps is in Operation (Clause 8) with 10 unmapped controls. These gaps represent areas where additional controls, policies, or documentation must be created to achieve compliance with both frameworks.

Which control domains have the most gaps between AS9100D:2016 — Quality Management Systems for Aviation, Space, and Defence and ISO/IEC 17025:2017 — General Requirements for Testing and Calibration Laboratories?

The domain with the highest gap count is Operation (Clause 8) (10 gaps). Export the full domain-by-domain gap breakdown via the Professional tier to generate a prioritised remediation roadmap.

This platform provides educational compliance tools, not legal, regulatory, or professional compliance advice. Cross-framework mappings are AI-assisted interpretations and do not reproduce or replace official standards. Framework names and trademarks belong to their respective owners. Consult qualified professionals for your specific compliance requirements. See our Terms of Service.