When performing its accreditation activities, NAISM follows a set of Values and Principles that are described here below:


In the field of accreditation, the impartiality rule requires that the accreditation body has to be impartial in making decisions on accreditation. This means that NAISM shall not have any conflict of interest with the body applying for accreditation and that NAISM shall not be subject to any kind of pressure that might be of political, commercial, financial, etc. nature in order not to prejudice its impartiality.

As consequence, NAISM accreditation body has been created as an non-profit institution in order to avoid any competition with accredited conformity assessment bodies.


When granting accreditation, the independence of every member of the assessment team is checked and evaluated, in order to guarantee the interests of all parties involved, not allowing any external factors to influence the conformity assessment process.


NAISM is making all the efforts in order to follow the growing and diversified market needs in which its clients daily operate. Therefore, the NAISM accreditation body is paying attention in studying and preparing new assessments schemes and guidelines in order to let the clients compete worldwide.


NAISM takes in great consideration the importance of good business communication through a clear decision-making structure and well defined tasks and responsibilities, establishing rules set by working groups in which all interested subjects may participate.


NAISM’s technical experts and assessors are able to guarantee at all times a high level of performance through a continuum and adequate professional training and education. NAISM continually monitors and evaluates the competence levels of its assessors and technical experts during assessments, and, in case of need, arranges appropriate training measures.


All audit activities are performed following the principles of ethics and professional duties, using procedures aimed to reduce as much as possible the risk of unclear interpretations of the requirements of standards.