IATF 16949:2016 - Quality Management System for Automotive ProductionvsISO/IEC 27003:2017
See exactly how IATF 16949:2016 - Quality Management System for Automotive Production controls map to ISO/IEC 27003:2017. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.
According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:
IATF 16949:2016 - Quality Management System for Automotive Production maps to ISO/IEC 27003:2017 with 50% coverage across 5 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 10 IATF 16949:2016 - Quality Management System for Automotive Production controls identifies 5 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in IATF 16949 Clause 9 - Performance Evaluation.
Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 10 controls analysed | 718 frameworks | 332K+ cross-framework mappings
Control Mappings
Showing 12 of 12 mapped controls across 5 domains. Sign up to explore all 332K+ mappings across 718 frameworks.
IATF 16949 Clause 10 - Improvement(1 mappings)
IATF 16949 Clause 4 - Context of Organization(4 mappings)
IATF 16949 Clause 5 - Leadership(3 mappings)
IATF 16949 Clause 6 - Planning(3 mappings)
IATF 16949 Clause 8 - Supplier(1 mappings)
Related Comparisons
Other IATF 16949:2016 - Quality Management System for Automotive Production comparisons
Other ISO/IEC 27003:2017 comparisons
Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets
AI-powered compliance intelligence across 718 frameworks — at a fraction of consulting costs.
Free
- ✓ 718 framework browser
- ✓ Cross-framework mappings (332K+)
- ✓ 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 IATF 16949:2016 - Quality Management System for Automotive Production and ISO/IEC 27003:2017?
IATF 16949:2016 - Quality Management System for Automotive Production has 10 controls across its framework, while ISO/IEC 27003:2017 covers 72 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 5 overlapping controls (50% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in IATF 16949 Clause 9 - Performance Evaluation, where 1 IATF 16949:2016 - Quality Management System for Automotive Production controls have no direct ISO/IEC 27003:2017 equivalent.
How many controls map between IATF 16949:2016 - Quality Management System for Automotive Production and ISO/IEC 27003:2017?
Of 10 total IATF 16949:2016 - Quality Management System for Automotive Production controls, 5 map directly to ISO/IEC 27003:2017 controls — representing 50% coverage. The remaining 5 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.
What are the compliance gaps when mapping IATF 16949:2016 - Quality Management System for Automotive Production to ISO/IEC 27003:2017?
5 IATF 16949:2016 - Quality Management System for Automotive Production controls have no direct equivalent in ISO/IEC 27003:2017. The highest concentration of gaps is in IATF 16949 Clause 9 - Performance Evaluation with 1 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 IATF 16949:2016 - Quality Management System for Automotive Production and ISO/IEC 27003:2017?
The domain with the highest gap count is IATF 16949 Clause 9 - Performance Evaluation (1 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.