Framework overlap

Does ISO 15189:2022 cover ISO/IEC 17025:2017?

You hold ISO 15189:2022 and have been told to do ISO/IEC 17025:2017. Here is how much overlaps, control by control.

63% of ISO/IEC 17025:2017 you already have

ISO 15189:2022 already covers about 63% of ISO/IEC 17025:2017, leaving 14 of 38 controls as genuinely new work.

Already covered 22 Likely covered 2 New work 14

What is genuinely new work

Nothing in ISO 15189:2022 reaches these. This is the list to scope.

4.1
Impartiality
7.2.2
Validation of methods
7.3
Sampling
7.8.2
Common requirements for reports (test, calibration or sampling)
7.8.3
Specific requirements for test reports
7.8.4
Specific requirements for calibration certificates
7.8.5
Reporting sampling – specific requirements
7.8.6
Reporting statements of conformity
7.8.7
Reporting opinions and interpretations
7.8.8
Amendments to reports
7.9
Complaints
8.1
Options
8.1.2
Option A
8.1.3
Option B
Show the 24 you already have
4.2
Confidentiality
6.3
Facilities and environmental conditions
6.5
Metrological traceability
6.6
Externally provided products and services
7.1
Review of requests, tenders and contracts
7.10
Nonconforming work
7.11
Control of data and information management
7.2
Selection, verification and validation of methods
7.2.1
Selection and verification of methods
7.4
Handling of test or calibration items
7.5
Technical records
7.6
Evaluation of measurement uncertainty
7.7
Ensuring the validity of results
7.8
Reporting of results
8.2
Management system documentation (Option A)
8.3
Control of management system documents (Option A)
8.4
Control of records (Option A)
8.5
Actions to address risks and opportunities (Option A)
8.6
Improvement (Option A)
8.7
Corrective actions (Option A)
8.8
Internal audits (Option A)
8.9
Management reviews (Option A)
6.2
Personnel
6.4
Equipment

How this is calculated

Already covered means a mapping runs from a control in ISO 15189:2022 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 · Today's edition