BRCGS Global Standard for Food Safety Issue 9vsCOSO Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) Framework (2017)
See exactly how BRCGS Global Standard for Food Safety Issue 9 controls map to COSO Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) Framework (2017). Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.
According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:
BRCGS Global Standard for Food Safety Issue 9 maps to COSO Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) Framework (2017) with 6% coverage across 3 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 52 BRCGS Global Standard for Food Safety Issue 9 controls identifies 49 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in Personnel.
Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 52 controls analysed | 769 frameworks | 815K+ cross-framework mappings
Control Mappings
Showing 6 of 6 mapped controls across 2 domains. Sign up to explore all 815K+ mappings across 769 frameworks.
Senior Management Commitment(4 mappings)
Food Safety and Quality Management System(2 mappings)
Related Comparisons
Other BRCGS Global Standard for Food Safety Issue 9 comparisons
Other COSO Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) Framework (2017) comparisons
Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets
AI-powered compliance intelligence across 769 frameworks — at a fraction of consulting costs.
Free
- ✓ 769 framework browser
- ✓ Cross-framework mappings (815K+)
- ✓ 824 compliance assessments
- ✓ 3 AI queries & searches per day
Professional
- ✓ Unlimited AI Compliance Advisory
- ✓ Unlimited full-text search
- ✓ Framework self-assessment
- ✓ PDF, Excel & CSV exports
What are the key differences between BRCGS Global Standard for Food Safety Issue 9 and COSO Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) Framework (2017)?
BRCGS Global Standard for Food Safety Issue 9 has 52 controls across its framework, while COSO Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) Framework (2017) covers 40 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 3 overlapping controls (6% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Personnel, where 6 BRCGS Global Standard for Food Safety Issue 9 controls have no direct COSO Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) Framework (2017) equivalent.
How many controls map between BRCGS Global Standard for Food Safety Issue 9 and COSO Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) Framework (2017)?
Of 52 total BRCGS Global Standard for Food Safety Issue 9 controls, 3 map directly to COSO Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) Framework (2017) controls — representing 6% coverage. The remaining 49 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.
What are the compliance gaps when mapping BRCGS Global Standard for Food Safety Issue 9 to COSO Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) Framework (2017)?
49 BRCGS Global Standard for Food Safety Issue 9 controls have no direct equivalent in COSO Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) Framework (2017). The highest concentration of gaps is in Personnel with 6 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 BRCGS Global Standard for Food Safety Issue 9 and COSO Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) Framework (2017)?
The domain with the highest gap count is Personnel (6 gaps). Export the full domain-by-domain gap breakdown via the Professional tier to generate a prioritised remediation roadmap.
Related Resources
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.