ISO/IEC 23894:2023vsResponsible Minerals Initiative (RMI) - Responsible Minerals Assurance Process
See exactly how ISO/IEC 23894:2023 controls map to Responsible Minerals Initiative (RMI) - Responsible Minerals Assurance Process. 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/IEC 23894:2023 maps to Responsible Minerals Initiative (RMI) - Responsible Minerals Assurance Process with 6% coverage across 5 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 85 ISO/IEC 23894:2023 controls identifies 80 compliance gaps, primarily concentrated in Risk management process – ISO/IEC 23894:2023.
Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 85 controls analysed | 686 frameworks | 310K+ cross-framework mappings
Control Mappings
Showing 13 of 13 mapped controls across 3 domains. Sign up to explore all 310K+ mappings across 686 frameworks.
Process (Clause 6)(9 mappings)
AI-Specific Risk Sources (Annex A)(3 mappings)
Risk management process – ISO/IEC 23894:2023(1 mappings)
A ISO/IEC 23894:2023 to Responsible Minerals Initiative (RMI) - Responsible Minerals Assurance Process crosswalk, built to order
The table above lists candidate mappings. A crosswalk answers the narrower question you are probably here for: which Responsible Minerals Initiative (RMI) - Responsible Minerals Assurance Process controls your existing ISO/IEC 23894:2023 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 6% in the header counts how many ISO/IEC 23894:2023 controls carry at least one candidate mapping in the graph, before any review. The crosswalk percentage counts something stricter: how many Responsible Minerals Initiative (RMI) - Responsible Minerals Assurance Process 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/IEC 23894:2023 comparisons
Other Responsible Minerals Initiative (RMI) - Responsible Minerals Assurance Process comparisons
Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets
AI-powered compliance intelligence across 686 frameworks, at a fraction of consulting costs.
Free
- ✓ 686 framework browser
- ✓ Cross-framework mappings (310K+)
- ✓ 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/IEC 23894:2023 and Responsible Minerals Initiative (RMI) - Responsible Minerals Assurance Process?
ISO/IEC 23894:2023 has 85 controls across its framework, while Responsible Minerals Initiative (RMI) - Responsible Minerals Assurance Process covers 18 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 5 overlapping controls (6% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Risk management process – ISO/IEC 23894:2023, where 16 ISO/IEC 23894:2023 controls have no direct Responsible Minerals Initiative (RMI) - Responsible Minerals Assurance Process equivalent.
How many controls map between ISO/IEC 23894:2023 and Responsible Minerals Initiative (RMI) - Responsible Minerals Assurance Process?
Of 85 total ISO/IEC 23894:2023 controls, 5 map directly to Responsible Minerals Initiative (RMI) - Responsible Minerals Assurance Process controls, representing 6% coverage. The remaining 80 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.
What are the compliance gaps when mapping ISO/IEC 23894:2023 to Responsible Minerals Initiative (RMI) - Responsible Minerals Assurance Process?
80 ISO/IEC 23894:2023 controls have no direct equivalent in Responsible Minerals Initiative (RMI) - Responsible Minerals Assurance Process. The highest concentration of gaps is in Risk management process – ISO/IEC 23894:2023 with 16 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/IEC 23894:2023 and Responsible Minerals Initiative (RMI) - Responsible Minerals Assurance Process?
The domain with the highest gap count is Risk management process – ISO/IEC 23894:2023 (16 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.