Framework overlap

Does ASIS SPC.1-2009 cover ISO 37001:2016?

You hold ASIS SPC.1-2009 and have been told to do ISO 37001:2016. Here is how much overlaps, control by control.

33% of ISO 37001:2016 you already have

ASIS SPC.1-2009 already covers about 33% of ISO 37001:2016, leaving 26 of 39 controls as genuinely new work.

Already covered 5 Likely covered 8 New work 26

What is genuinely new work

Nothing in ASIS SPC.1-2009 reaches these. This is the list to scope.

4.2
Understanding the needs and expectations of stakeholders
4.3
Determining the scope of the anti-bribery management system
4.4
Anti-bribery management system
4.5
Bribery risk assessment
5.1.1
Governing body
5.1.2
Top management
5.2
Anti-bribery policy
5.3
Organizational roles, responsibilities and authorities
5.3.2
Anti-bribery compliance function
6.2
Anti-bribery objectives andISO planning
7.2.2
Employment process
7.3
Awareness and training
7.5
Documented information
7.5.2
Creating and updating
8.1
Operational planning and control
8.10
Investigating and dealing with bribery
8.3
Financial controls
8.4
Non-financial controls
8.5
Implementation of anti-bribery controls by controlled organizations and by
8.6
Anti-bribery commitments
8.7
Gifts, hospitality, donations and similar benefits
8.8
Managing inadequacy of anti-bribery controls
8.9
Raising concerns
9.1
Monitoring, measurement, analysis and evaluation
9.3.1
Top management review
9.4
Review by anti-bribery compliance function
Show the 13 you already have
10.1
Nonconformity and corrective action
10.2
Continual improvement
7.4
Communication
9.2
Internal audit
9.3
Management review
4.1
Understanding the organization and its context
5.1
Leadership and commitment
5.3.1
Roles and responsibilities
6.1
Actions to address risks and opportunities
7.2
Competence
7.5.3
Control of documented information
8.2
Due diligence
9.3.2
Governing body review

How this is calculated

Already covered means a mapping runs from a control in ASIS SPC.1-2009 to that control. Likely covered means no direct mapping exists but both frameworks map to the same control in a third standard. New work means neither. We keep those separate rather than adding them into one friendlier number, because blending them would present a two-hop inference as a verified fact.

Coverage is not symmetric. Run it the other way and you will get a different number; both are correct.

From 332,959 cross-framework control mappings across 723 frameworks, 531 of them verified against their source documents. It does not tell you that you are compliant: a mapped control means the two standards ask for the same thing, not that you have done it.

Try another pair ยท Today's edition