FDA 21 CFR Part 11
FDA regulation for trustworthy electronic records and signatures
TOGAF
Global framework for enterprise architecture development
Quick Verdict
FDA 21 CFR Part 11 mandates electronic record trustworthiness for life sciences compliance, while TOGAF provides voluntary EA methodology for enterprise-wide IT alignment. Regulated firms adopt Part 11 to avoid enforcement; enterprises use TOGAF for strategic agility and governance.
FDA 21 CFR Part 11
21 CFR Part 11: Electronic Records; Electronic Signatures
Key Features
- Establishes equivalency criteria for electronic records to paper
- Mandates secure, time-stamped audit trails for integrity
- Requires unique, multi-component electronic signatures non-repudiation
- Defines distinct controls for closed and open systems
- Enforces risk-based validation with enforcement discretion
TOGAF
TOGAF Standard, 10th Edition
Key Features
- Iterative Architecture Development Method (ADM)
- Content Framework and Metamodel for artifacts
- Enterprise Continuum for asset classification and reuse
- Reference models including TRM and III-RM
- Architecture Capability Framework for governance
Detailed Analysis
A comprehensive look at the specific requirements, scope, and impact of each standard.
FDA 21 CFR Part 11 Details
What It Is
FDA 21 CFR Part 11 is a U.S. regulation defining criteria under which electronic records and signatures are trustworthy, reliable, and equivalent to paper records and handwritten signatures. It governs FDA-regulated industries using electronic systems for predicate rule records like batch records and submissions. Adopts a risk-based approach with narrow scope and enforcement discretion per 2003 guidance.
Key Components
- **SubpartsGeneral provisions, electronic records (closed/open systems), electronic signatures.
- Controls include validation, audit trails, access limits, operational/authority/device checks, training, documentation, signature linking/manifestation.
- Integrates with predicate rules (e.g., CGMP); emphasizes inspection readiness over certification.
Why Organizations Use It
- Ensures data integrity and compliance, avoiding warnings/recalls.
- Enables paperless efficiency, faster audits, robust CAPA.
- Builds stakeholder trust, supports digital transformation in pharma/devices.
Implementation Overview
- **Risk-based CSVScoping, IQ/OQ/PQ, SOPs, vendor governance.
- Phased: gap analysis, validation, training, monitoring.
- Targets life sciences under FDA; demonstrated via inspections.
TOGAF Details
What It Is
TOGAF® Standard (The Open Group Architecture Framework) is a vendor-neutral enterprise architecture framework. Its primary purpose is to design, plan, implement, and govern enterprise-wide change across business and IT. The key methodology is the iterative Architecture Development Method (ADM), supporting tailoring for organizational context.
Key Components
- Core pillars: ADM (10 phases including Preliminary, Vision, Business/Data/Application/Technology Architectures, Migration, Governance, Change Management), Content Framework (deliverables, artifacts, building blocks), Enterprise Continuum, reference models (TRM, SIB, III-RM), and Architecture Capability Framework.
- Content Metamodel formalizes entities like actors, services, data.
- No fixed controls; focuses on governance, certification via Open Group paths.
Why Organizations Use It
- Aligns strategy with IT for efficiency, reuse, ROI.
- Reduces duplication, risk; enables agility in transformations.
- Builds stakeholder trust through consistent standards.
- Voluntary but strategic for large enterprises in regulated sectors.
Implementation Overview
- Phased: maturity assessment, pilot ADM cycles, scale governance.
- Involves tailoring, repository setup, training; suits large organizations across industries.
- Certification optional; emphasizes capability building over audits. (178 words)
Key Differences
| Aspect | FDA 21 CFR Part 11 | TOGAF |
|---|---|---|
| Scope | Electronic records/signatures trustworthiness in regulated systems | Enterprise architecture design, planning, governance across domains |
| Industry | Life sciences, pharma, medical devices (US-focused) | All industries, global enterprise IT operations |
| Nature | Mandatory US FDA regulation with enforcement discretion | Voluntary vendor-neutral EA methodology/framework |
| Testing | Risk-based system validation, audit trails, FDA inspections | Iterative ADM phases, maturity assessments, compliance reviews |
| Penalties | Warning letters, product holds, regulatory actions | No legal penalties, internal governance failures |
Scope
Industry
Nature
Testing
Penalties
Frequently Asked Questions
Common questions about FDA 21 CFR Part 11 and TOGAF
FDA 21 CFR Part 11 FAQ
TOGAF FAQ
You Might also be Interested in These Articles...

CMMC Level 3 Implementation Guide: Integrating NIST SP 800-172 Enhanced Controls for APT Defense
Step-by-step CMMC Level 3 guide for DIB contractors. Implement 24 NIST SP 800-172 controls on Level 2. Prep for DIBCAC, C3PAO scoping & 180-day POA&Ms. Boost cy

NIST CSF 2.0 Implementation Tiers Roadmap: Step-by-Step Guide from Partial to Adaptive Cybersecurity Maturity
Master NIST CSF 2.0 Implementation Tiers with a step-by-step roadmap. Assess your tier, build gap analyses, and advance from Partial (Tier 1) to Adaptive (Tier

Top 5 Audit Survival Secrets for Your First SOC 2 Type 2: What Auditors Really Check (and How to Pass)
Master your first SOC 2 Type 2 audit with proven strategies: 40-sample testing, vendor gaps, CPA walkthroughs. Get checklists, scripts & tips from SignWell to s
Run Maturity Assessments with GRADUM
Transform your compliance journey with our AI-powered assessment platform
Assess your organization's maturity across multiple standards and regulations including ISO 27001, DORA, NIS2, NIST, GDPR, and hundreds more. Get actionable insights and track your progress with collaborative, AI-powered evaluations.
Check out these other Gradum.io Standards Comparison Pages
HIPAA vs PIPEDA
Compare HIPAA vs PIPEDA: US healthcare privacy/security rules vs Canada's 10 fair principles. Uncover scope, breaches, consents & enforcement diffs. Ensure cross-border compliance!
ISO 27701 vs U.S. SEC Cybersecurity Rules
Unlock ISO 27701 privacy controls vs U.S. SEC cybersecurity rules. Compare governance, risk management & compliance strategies for integrated protection. Align now for audit-ready resilience.
EN 1090 vs ISO 19600
EN 1090 vs ISO 19600: Compare steel/aluminium CE marking via execution classes & FPC with ISO 19600's CMS guidelines. Ensure compliance, cut risks. Master it now!