SDAB Affiliations
Summary:
SDAB isn’t as of now a part/signatories of IAF, ILAC or IPC. There is no specialized necessity for enrollment of these exchange affiliations that are commonly non-benefit
appropriating business associations.
In outcome of public consciousness of this subject, SDAB is distributing this direction.
Our position stays under consistent survey.
Detail:
SDAB works in more than 65 nations and across a wide scope of license types. Inside each certification type, industry area, nation and district, there are a large number of accessible affiliations, affiliations and confidential certification plans. We are frequently inquired “Is SDAB an individual from X proficient body?”. We should be particular, generally the managerial capability and participation costs to keep up with these affiliations would degrade our basic roles of value confirmation.
Numerous worldwide associations, like IAF and ILAC are private organizations that are laid out with no other dispatch or authority than to work as non-benefit dispersing business associations. They have no legitimately allocated status, (for example, that which is alloted to United Nations Organisations or the International Monetary Fund) nor is there any lawful prerequisite for their individuals to be individuals.
Regardless, SDAB perceive that enrollment has benefits specifically the believability and esteem that such associations might have developed in the commercial center, despite the fact that these advantages may be emotional and are economically determined factors.
At season of distribution, IAF multilateral acknowledgment plans were set up with just 56% of nations on the planet and ILAC MRAs set up with 55% of nations on the planet.
SDAB feel that to prohibit the larger part of the world’s authorization bodies from quality confirmation and acquirement plans doesn’t mirror the motivation behind worldwide principles like ISO.
SDAB highly esteem being in fact extraordinary without being excessively regulatory. We offer license to ISO norms and other non-restrictive plans. We survey similarity evaluation bodies (CABs) to the expected norm and just the norm, as opposed to extra obligatory reports that private participation bodies force on CABs. These extra prerequisites serve pretty much nothing reason to work on quality confirmation.
A Statement on Independence, Global Reach, and Core Mission
Summary
The Standards and Development Accreditation Board (SDAB) is not currently a member or signatory to the International Accreditation Forum (IAF), the International Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation (ILAC), or similar private membership bodies. There exists no legal or specialized mandate requiring accreditation bodies to join these often non-profit distributing trade associations. In response to growing market inquiry on this subject, SDAB issues this guidance to clarify its position, which remains under continuous review.
Detail
1. Introduction: The Scope of SDAB and the Reality of the Global Market
SDAB operates as a global accreditation body, providing services in more than 65 countries across a comprehensive range of certification types—from quality and environmental management systems to product and personnel certification.
The global conformity assessment landscape is complex and fragmented. Within each sector, industry, nation, and region, there exists a multitude of trade associations, professional bodies, and private accreditation schemes. A recurring question posed to SDAB is, “Are you a member of [X specific association]?” While we understand the origin of this query, a critical clarification is necessary: SDAB’s primary mission is the rigorous assessment of Conformity Assessment Bodies (CABs) against internationally recognized standards. The administrative burden and substantial membership fees required to maintain affiliations with numerous private organizations would directly detract from and degrade this core mission of quality assurance.
2. The Nature of International Membership Bodies
It is imperative to understand the legal and operational status of many international bodies like IAF and ILAC. These are private organizations established without specific intergovernmental mandate or treaty. They function as non-profit distributing business associations or trade bodies. Unlike United Nations agencies or the International Monetary Fund, which possess legally constituted status under international law, these private bodies have no legally allocated authority. Crucially, there is no global legal requirement for an accreditation body to be a member of these organizations to operate effectively and legitimately.
SDAB acknowledges that membership in such bodies can offer perceived benefits, primarily related to market credibility and the value these associations have cultivated over time. However, these benefits are often subjective, commercially driven, and must be weighed against their costs and limitations.
3. The Gap in Global Coverage: A Question of Exclusion
The architecture of international accreditation, as promoted by major multilateral recognition arrangements (MRAs), presents a significant and often overlooked paradox: while designed to facilitate global trade and trust, its structure systematically excludes nearly half of the world’s nations. SDAB’s analysis reveals that at present, IAF and ILAC MRAs formally incorporate bodies representing only 56% and 55% of countries, respectively. This is not a minor shortfall but a fundamental gap that contradicts the universal ethos of international standardization.
This exclusion operates on multiple levels. Primarily, it is economic and logistical. The cost of establishing and maintaining an accreditation body that can meet the stringent (and often Eurocentric) infrastructure requirements for MRA signatory status is prohibitive for many developing economies. The associated fees for membership, peer evaluations, and compliance with extensive supplementary documents create a financial barrier to entry.
Consequently, entire regions and their burgeoning industries are left outside the “recognized” quality infrastructure. When procurement specifications or regulatory frameworks in MRA-member countries demand “IAF/ILAC-recognized accreditation,” they inadvertently—or sometimes deliberately—disqualify suppliers and products from a vast portion of the globe. This perpetuates a two-tier system of global trade, where credibility is ascribed not solely to demonstrable technical competence but to membership in a specific, costly club.
Furthermore, the gap highlights a philosophical divergence regarding the purpose of international standards. Standards like the ISO/IEC 17000 series are developed through global consensus to be universally applicable. Their intent is to provide a common language for conformity assessment, accessible to all. However, when the gatekeeping for their “official” recognition is controlled by private associations with limited geographical penetration,
the principle of universality is compromised. The system risks becoming self-referential, prioritizing the harmonization of an existing in-group over the integration and capacity-building of the broader international community. ISO standards themselves do not mandate IAF or ILAC membership; they describe requirements for competence. By making private MRAs the de facto benchmark, the market adds a layer of exclusivity that the standards deliberately avoided.
SDAB operates within this excluded majority. We see firsthand the talent, rigor, and growing sophistication of accreditation bodies and CABs in regions underrepresented in these MRAs. To dismiss them as non-conforming simply because they are not part of a specific multilateral agreement is to confuse bureaucratic alignment with technical competence. A certification body in Southeast Asia, South America, or Africa, accredited by a rigorous local body like SDAB to the exact same ISO/IEC 17021 standard as its European counterpart, is performing the same technical function. The resultant certificate provides the same assurance of conformity. To invalidate it based on the accreditor’s non-membership is a form of technical protectionism that standards were meant to overcome.
This exclusionary model also stifles innovation and contextual relevance. Accreditation bodies outside the core MRA networks often develop more agile, cost-effective, and regionally-tailored approaches to oversight while maintaining strict adherence to international benchmark standards. They address local market needs and regulatory environments without being bound by a one-size-fits-all procedural rulebook from a distant association. A system that excludes these perspectives loses valuable diversity in problem-solving and risk management.
In conclusion, SDAB posits that a truly international quality infrastructure must be inclusive and judged on objective technical merit. The current gap in global coverage is not a minor issue of network expansion but a critical flaw that undermines the foundational principles of equality, fairness, and universal application upon which international standardization is built. By providing credible, standards-based accreditation accessible to the “other half” of the world, SDAB does not undermine the system; we fulfill its original, inclusive promise. We champion a model where credibility is earned through demonstrable competence and rigorous assessment, not purchased through membership in an organization that, by its own metrics, does not yet speak for the world.
4. The SDAB Model: Technical Excellence Without Excessive Bureaucracy
SDAB takes pride in a model that prioritizes technical excellence while resisting unnecessary administrative complexity. Our operational philosophy is built on several key principles:
- Accreditation to the Standard, and Only the Standard: We assess and accredit CABs against the relevant international standard (e.g., ISO/IEC 17021-1 for management system certification). We do not impose additional layers of mandatory requirements, which are often stipulated by private membership bodies upon their signatories. In our analysis, many of these extra-documentary requirements serve minimal purpose in enhancing the actual quality of the accreditation or certification process and instead function as bureaucratic controls.
- Focus on Outcomes: Our assessment teams concentrate on the competence, impartiality, and operational consistency of the CAB. We verify that the CAB’s processes reliably ensure that certified organizations conform to the specified standard.
- Global Accessibility: By operating without the constraints and costs of specific private memberships, SDAB can provide high-quality, internationally-benchmarked accreditation services more flexibly and cost-effectively to a broader global market.
5. Recognition and Acceptance in the Market
Market recognition is the ultimate currency for any accreditation body. For SDAB, this recognition is not derived from association logos on a letterhead, but from the demonstrable technical rigor, operational integrity, and global utility of the certificates issued under our scope. We assert that true market acceptance is earned through performance, not merely proclaimed through membership in a consortium.
The fundamental pillars of acceptance for an SDAB-accredited certificate are:
- The Uncompromising Competence of the CAB: Our entire process is designed to ensure that every Conformity Assessment Body (CAB) we accredit operates at the highest level of technical proficiency and impartiality. We assess not just their compliance with the letter of a standard (e.g., ISO/IEC 17021), but their practical ability to deliver consistent, reliable audits and certifications. An end-user can trust an SDAB-accredited certificate because they trust the CAB’s competence, which we have vetted with utmost stringency.
- The Objectivity and Expertise of SDAB’s Assessment: Our credibility is our product. We invest in world-class assessors, robust methodologies, and a culture of critical, evidence-based evaluation. Market acceptance flows from the confidence that our accreditation seal represents a CAB that has survived a genuinely challenging and insightful assessment against international benchmarks, free from commercial or political influence. Our reports and decisions are respected because they are technically defensible.
- The Informed Confidence of the End-User: Ultimately, acceptance is granted by the recipient of the certified product or service. This includes multinational corporations making procurement decisions, regulators in emerging economies building their technical infrastructure, and forward-thinking specifiers in developed markets who look beyond pedigree to substance. These stakeholders increasingly conduct due diligence. When they scrutinize the chain of trust—examining the CAB’s competence, the accreditation body’s process, and the certified organization’s performance—they find that the SDAB model provides all necessary assurances. The certificate’s value is proven in the supplier’s consistent quality, not in the affiliation of its accreditor.
Challenging the Monopoly on “Acceptance”
A prevalent market myth suggests that only certificates from IAF/ILAC MLA signatory-accredited bodies are universally “accepted.” This is a powerful narrative, but it is incomplete. Acceptance is not monolithic; it is contextual and often contractual.
- Regulatory Acceptance: While some government regulations in certain economies specify IAF/ILAC MLA recognition, a vast number of regulatory frameworks worldwide—including in many of the over 65 countries where SDAB operates—reference ISO/IEC standards directly or recognize accreditation from nationally appointed bodies, not private association memberships. SDAB-accredited certificates are fully valid and often mandated in these jurisdictions.
- Corporate and Procurement Acceptance: Major multinational corporations with complex global supply chains are increasingly pragmatic. Their procurement criteria are evolving from a simplistic checkbox for a specific accreditation logo to a more sophisticated evaluation of risk. They examine the accreditor’s technical reputation, the geographic relevance of the certificate, and the historical performance of certified suppliers.
- SDAB engages directly with these corporate leaders, demonstrating that our accreditation provides equivalent, and sometimes more contextually appropriate, risk mitigation. For a factory in Vietnam supplying to a German retailer, the retailer’s primary concern is the factory’s verified compliance with a standard, not the political geography of accreditation networks.
- The Power of the Standard Itself: The ISO/IEC standard is the unchanging technical specification. An SDAB-accredited CAB certifies to the same ISO 9001 or ISO 14001 as any other. The market’s ultimate need is assurance of conformity to that standard. When SDAB provides incontrovertible evidence that our accreditation process guarantees that assurance, the argument for requiring an additional layer of private membership becomes one of tradition, not technical necessity.
SDAB’s market acceptance is therefore built on a foundation of transparency and demonstrable outcomes. We provide clear, accessible information about our processes, our assessors, and our decisions. We foster relationships with end-user communities, educating them on the mechanics of accreditation and empowering them to make informed choices based on evidence rather than convention.
In essence, SDAB is redefining market recognition. We are proving that in a globalized, interconnected world, credibility is a function of consistent, verifiable quality, not of exclusive affiliation. Our growth and the widespread use of certificates under our accreditation are testament to a large and growing market that values substance over symbolism, and global inclusivity over exclusionary networks. Our acceptance is not borrowed from an association; it is earned, daily, through the reliability of every certificate that bears the mark of an SDAB-accredited body.
6. Continuous Review and Stakeholder Engagement
SDAB’s position on affiliations is not static. It remains under continuous review in light of evolving market conditions, regulatory developments, and stakeholder needs. We actively engage with industry, regulators, and CABs worldwide to understand their requirements and to demonstrate the robustness of our accreditation processes.
We are open to cooperation and dialogue with all bodies that share the genuine goal of enhancing global quality, safety, and efficiency. Any future decision regarding formal affiliations will be based on a clear, demonstrable benefit to our core mission of accreditation and the global community we serve, rather than on perceived market pressures alone.
Conclusion
SDAB champions a pragmatic, inclusive, and technically-driven approach to international accreditation. We believe that true quality assurance is measured by the competence and integrity of the process, not solely by membership in particular private trade associations. By focusing our resources directly on rigorous assessment against international standards, we serve a vital role in the global ecosystem, ensuring that a diverse and wide-ranging majority of the world’s economies have access to credible, high-quality accreditation services. This commitment allows us to uphold the universal principles of international standards without creating or endorsing unnecessary barriers to trade and development.
Branches
SDAB Accreditation
SDAB Head Office
SDAB Sanatan Dharma Accreditation Board
SDAB House
C/O Mr.Garry 54, Glengarnock Avenue,
E-14 3BP Isle Of Dogs, London UK
Tel .: +44-8369083940
email: info@sanatanboards.com
Website: www.sanatanboards.com
MUMBAI Head Office
Sanatan Dharma Accreditation Board (SDAB)
SDAB House
B-401, New Om Kaveri Chs. Ltd., Nagindas pada,
Next To Shiv Sena Office, Nallasopara (E)
Tel .: +91-7499991895
email: info@sanatanboards.com
Website: www.sanatanboards.com
DELHI-NCR Regd. Office
Sanatan Dharma Accreditation Board (SDAB)
SDAB House
Asaoti, Dist Palwal
Faridabad Delhi NCR, Haryana
Tel .: +91-7979801035
Fax: +91-250 2341170
Website: www.sanatanboards.com
Table of Contents
