TheArtOfService
Cross-Framework Mapping

ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work (Core Conventions)vsNATO AQAP 2110 - Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production

See exactly how ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work (Core Conventions) controls map to NATO AQAP 2110 - Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

2
Controls Mapped
6
Gaps Found
12%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work (Core Conventions) maps to NATO AQAP 2110 - Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production with 12% coverage across 1 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 8 ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work (Core Conventions) controls identifies 7 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in ILO FPRW Supply Chain + Reporting + Coord.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 8 controls analysed | 718 frameworks | 332K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 2 of 2 mapped controls across 1 domains. Sign up to explore all 332K+ mappings across 718 frameworks.

ILO FPRW Category 5 - OSH(2 mappings)

ILO-FPRW-Cat5-OSH-SafeHealthyEnvironment-C155-C187-2022AmendmentILO Fundamental Category 5 - Safe and Healthy Working Environment (C155 + C187) + 2022 Amendment Adding OSH as Fundamental Right2 targets
→AQAP2110-7Production, Special Processes, Inspection, Testing, and Records
→AQAP2110-8Internal Audit, Management Review, Corrective Action, CofC, and Continual Improvement

Related Comparisons

Other ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work (Core Conventions) comparisons

ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work (Core Conventions) vs Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights (VPs)3 mappingsILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work (Core Conventions) vs German Supply Chain Due Diligence Act (LkSG)3 mappingsILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work (Core Conventions) vs Fair Labor Association (FLA) Workplace Code of Conduct3 mappingsILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work (Core Conventions) vs DAMA-DMBOK2 - Data Management Body of Knowledge (2nd Edition)2 mappingsILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work (Core Conventions) vs NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 - Assessing CUI Security Requirements2 mappingsILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work (Core Conventions) vs UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs)2 mappingsILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work (Core Conventions) vs OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises on Responsible Business Conduct (2023 Update)2 mappingsILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work (Core Conventions) vs SWIFT CSCF1 mappings

Other NATO AQAP 2110 - Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production comparisons

ICH Q10 - Pharmaceutical Quality System vs NATO AQAP 2110 - Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production6 mappingsICAO Annex 17 - Aviation Security (AVSEC) vs NATO AQAP 2110 - Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production5 mappingsIATF 16949:2016 - Quality Management System for Automotive Production vs NATO AQAP 2110 - Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production5 mappingsGLOBALG.A.P. Integrated Farm Assurance (IFA) Standard v6 vs NATO AQAP 2110 - Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production5 mappingsGerman Supply Chain Due Diligence Act (LkSG) vs NATO AQAP 2110 - Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production5 mappingsFDA Quality Management System Regulation (QMSR) vs NATO AQAP 2110 - Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production5 mappingsBRCGS Global Standard for Food Safety Issue 9 vs NATO AQAP 2110 - Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production5 mappingsNIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 - Assessing CUI Security Requirements vs NATO AQAP 2110 - Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production5 mappings

Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets

AI-powered compliance intelligence across 718 frameworks — at a fraction of consulting costs.

$0/forever

Free

  • ✓ 718 framework browser
  • ✓ Cross-framework mappings (332K+)
  • ✓ 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 →

Popular framework comparisons

NIST CSF vs NIST 800-53ISO 27001 vs NIST CSFCMMC vs NIST 800-53FedRAMP vs NIST 800-53NIST CSF vs SOC 2HIPAA vs NIST 800-53ISO 27001 vs SOC 2ISO 27001 vs ISO 27701

What are the key differences between ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work (Core Conventions) and NATO AQAP 2110 - Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production?

ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work (Core Conventions) has 8 controls across its framework, while NATO AQAP 2110 - Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production covers 8 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 1 overlapping controls (12% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in ILO FPRW Supply Chain + Reporting + Coord, where 1 ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work (Core Conventions) controls have no direct NATO AQAP 2110 - Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production equivalent.

How many controls map between ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work (Core Conventions) and NATO AQAP 2110 - Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production?

Of 8 total ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work (Core Conventions) controls, 1 map directly to NATO AQAP 2110 - Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production controls — representing 12% coverage. The remaining 7 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work (Core Conventions) to NATO AQAP 2110 - Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production?

7 ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work (Core Conventions) controls have no direct equivalent in NATO AQAP 2110 - Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production. The highest concentration of gaps is in ILO FPRW Supply Chain + Reporting + Coord 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 ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work (Core Conventions) and NATO AQAP 2110 - Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production?

The domain with the highest gap count is ILO FPRW Supply Chain + Reporting + Coord (1 gaps). Export the full domain-by-domain gap breakdown via the Professional tier to generate a prioritised remediation roadmap.

Related Resources

How to Map Controls Across Frameworks|Multi-Framework Compliance Guide|Compliance Glossary

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.