IATF 16949:2016 — Quality Management System for Automotive ProductionvsNIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 — Assessing CUI Security Requirements
See exactly how IATF 16949:2016 — Quality Management System for Automotive Production controls map to NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 — Assessing CUI Security Requirements. 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 NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 — Assessing CUI Security Requirements with 28% coverage across 7 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 25 IATF 16949:2016 — Quality Management System for Automotive Production controls identifies 18 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in Clause 7 - Support.
Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 25 controls analysed | 693 frameworks | 819K+ cross-framework mappings
Control Mappings
Showing 13 of 13 mapped controls across 5 domains. Sign up to explore all 819K+ mappings across 693 frameworks.
Clause 10 - Improvement(4 mappings)
Clause 4 - Context of the Organization(1 mappings)
Clause 6 - Planning(1 mappings)
Clause 8 - Operation(4 mappings)
Clause 9 - Performance Evaluation(3 mappings)
Related Comparisons
Other IATF 16949:2016 — Quality Management System for Automotive Production comparisons
Other NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 — Assessing CUI Security Requirements comparisons
Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets
AI-powered compliance intelligence across 693 frameworks — at a fraction of consulting costs.
Free
- ✓ 693 framework browser
- ✓ Cross-framework mappings (819K+)
- ✓ 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 NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 — Assessing CUI Security Requirements?
IATF 16949:2016 — Quality Management System for Automotive Production has 25 controls across its framework, while NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 — Assessing CUI Security Requirements covers 35 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 7 overlapping controls (28% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Clause 7 - Support, where 4 IATF 16949:2016 — Quality Management System for Automotive Production controls have no direct NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 — Assessing CUI Security Requirements equivalent.
How many controls map between IATF 16949:2016 — Quality Management System for Automotive Production and NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 — Assessing CUI Security Requirements?
Of 25 total IATF 16949:2016 — Quality Management System for Automotive Production controls, 7 map directly to NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 — Assessing CUI Security Requirements controls — representing 28% coverage. The remaining 18 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 NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 — Assessing CUI Security Requirements?
18 IATF 16949:2016 — Quality Management System for Automotive Production controls have no direct equivalent in NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 — Assessing CUI Security Requirements. The highest concentration of gaps is in Clause 7 - Support with 4 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 NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 — Assessing CUI Security Requirements?
The domain with the highest gap count is Clause 7 - Support (4 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.