ISO 26000:2010vsOECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises on Responsible Business Conduct (2023 Update)
See exactly how ISO 26000:2010 controls map to OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises on Responsible Business Conduct (2023 Update). Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.
Need this as a report you can hand to an assessor? A coverage crosswalk for this pair can be built to order.
According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:
ISO 26000:2010 maps to OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises on Responsible Business Conduct (2023 Update) with 12% coverage across 7 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 60 ISO 26000:2010 controls identifies 53 compliance gaps, primarily concentrated in Clause 4: Principles of Social Responsibility.
Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 60 controls analysed | 694 frameworks | 306K+ cross-framework mappings
Control Mappings
Showing 9 of 9 mapped controls across 3 domains. Sign up to explore all 306K+ mappings across 694 frameworks.
Clause 6: Core Subject - Human Rights (6.3)(3 mappings)
Clause 6: Core Subject - The Environment (6.5)(5 mappings)
Clause 6: Core Subjects - Fair Operating Practices, Consumer Issues, Community Involvement (6.6-6.8)(1 mappings)
A ISO 26000:2010 to OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises on Responsible Business Conduct (2023 Update) crosswalk, built to order
The table above lists candidate mappings. A crosswalk answers the narrower question you are probably here for: which OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises on Responsible Business Conduct (2023 Update) controls your existing ISO 26000:2010 work already satisfies, which are real gaps, and the reasoning behind every claim so you can check it. One pair, $299, one time.
This direction has not been through crosswalk review and sign off, so no coverage figure is published for it. Reporting an unreviewed number would be worse than reporting none. It can be built to order at the same price as a pair that is already on the shelf.
If the two frameworks turn out to have too little in common for a crosswalk to help you, we say so and refund it rather than send a number worth nothing.
This direction has not been through crosswalk review and sign off, so no coverage figure is published for it. Reporting an unreviewed number would be worse than reporting none. It can be built to order at the same price as a pair that is already on the shelf.
If the two frameworks turn out to have too little in common for a crosswalk to help you, we say so and refund it rather than send a number worth nothing.
- Every evidenced control, with the reasoning behind it
- Every gap, with what it requires
- Its level of review stated plainly, not a bare number
Why this page shows two different percentages. The 12% in the header counts how many ISO 26000:2010 controls carry at least one candidate mapping in the graph, before any review. The crosswalk percentage counts something stricter: how many OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises on Responsible Business Conduct (2023 Update) controls are actually evidenced, after a pass that argued against each mapping and kept only what survived. They answer different questions and they are not meant to agree.
A crosswalk narrows the work. It does not replace an audit, and your assessor may take a different view on individual controls. Mappings between frameworks are judgements, not text printed in either standard, which is why every claim in the report shows its reasoning. Questions go to support@theartofservice.com.
Related Comparisons
Other ISO 26000:2010 comparisons
Other OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises on Responsible Business Conduct (2023 Update) comparisons
Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets
AI-powered compliance intelligence across 694 frameworks, at a fraction of consulting costs.
Free
- ✓ 694 framework browser
- ✓ Cross-framework mappings (306K+)
- ✓ 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 ISO 26000:2010 and OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises on Responsible Business Conduct (2023 Update)?
ISO 26000:2010 has 60 controls across its framework, while OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises on Responsible Business Conduct (2023 Update) covers 8 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 7 overlapping controls (12% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Clause 4: Principles of Social Responsibility, where 8 ISO 26000:2010 controls have no direct OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises on Responsible Business Conduct (2023 Update) equivalent.
How many controls map between ISO 26000:2010 and OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises on Responsible Business Conduct (2023 Update)?
Of 60 total ISO 26000:2010 controls, 7 map directly to OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises on Responsible Business Conduct (2023 Update) controls, representing 12% coverage. The remaining 53 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.
What are the compliance gaps when mapping ISO 26000:2010 to OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises on Responsible Business Conduct (2023 Update)?
53 ISO 26000:2010 controls have no direct equivalent in OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises on Responsible Business Conduct (2023 Update). The highest concentration of gaps is in Clause 4: Principles of Social Responsibility with 8 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 ISO 26000:2010 and OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises on Responsible Business Conduct (2023 Update)?
The domain with the highest gap count is Clause 4: Principles of Social Responsibility (8 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.