TOGAF
Vendor-neutral enterprise architecture framework for IT alignment
BRC
Global standard for food safety in manufacturing
Quick Verdict
TOGAF provides enterprise architecture methodology for aligning business and IT globally, while BRC is a food safety certification standard for manufacturers ensuring product safety and retailer compliance through rigorous audits.
TOGAF
TOGAF Standard, 10th Edition
Key Features
- Iterative ADM lifecycle for architecture development
- Content Framework with metamodel for artifacts
- Enterprise Continuum enabling asset reuse governance
- Reference Models including TRM and III-RM
- Architecture Capability Framework with governance board
BRC
BRCGS Global Standard for Food Safety
Key Features
- Codex HACCP-based food safety plan
- Senior management commitment and culture
- Fundamental certification-critical requirements
- Site standards and risk zoning
- GFSI-benchmarked graded audits
Detailed Analysis
A comprehensive look at the specific requirements, scope, and impact of each standard.
TOGAF Details
What It Is
TOGAF® Standard (The Open Group Architecture Framework) is a vendor-neutral enterprise architecture framework. Its primary purpose is designing, planning, implementing, and governing enterprise-wide change across business and IT. Core approach is the iterative Architecture Development Method (ADM), a cyclical lifecycle from preliminary preparation to change management.
Key Components
- **ADM phasesPreliminary, Vision, Business/Information Systems/Technology Architectures, Opportunities/Solutions, Migration, Governance, Change Management.
- **Content FrameworkDeliverables, artifacts (catalogs/matrices/diagrams), building blocks.
- Enterprise Continuum, Repository, Reference Models (TRM, SIB, III-RM).
- **Capability FrameworkGovernance, skills, maturity models. No fixed controls; certification for practitioners.
Why Organizations Use It
Aligns strategy with execution, reduces duplication, accelerates delivery via reuse, improves governance/risk management. Voluntary adoption for efficiency, ROI, avoiding vendor lock-in. Builds stakeholder trust through traceability.
Implementation Overview
Phased tailoring of ADM: assess maturity, pilot domains, scale governance. Applies to large enterprises across industries; requires repository/tools/training. No formal audits; self-governed via Architecture Board.
BRC Details
What It Is
BRCGS Global Standard for Food Safety (Issue 9) is a third-party certification framework for food manufacturers, processors, and packers. It ensures product safety, legality, authenticity, and quality through a structured management system combining senior management commitment, Codex HACCP-based plans, and prerequisite programs (GMP/GHP).
Key Components
- Nine core clauses: senior management, HACCP plan, FSQMS, site standards, product/process controls, personnel, risk zones, traded products.
- Fundamental requirements (e.g., traceability, allergens, internal audits) critical for certification.
- Built on risk-based hazard analysis including fraud and defense; GFSI-benchmarked with graded audits (AA/A/B/C/D).
Why Organizations Use It
- Mandated by retailers for market access and supply chain trust.
- Reduces recalls via environmental monitoring, labeling controls.
- Demonstrates due diligence, operational resilience; enhances reputation.
Implementation Overview
- Phased: gap analysis, documentation, training, mock audits.
- 6-12 months typical; suits food manufacturers globally.
- Requires annual announced/unannounced audits by certification bodies.
Key Differences
| Aspect | TOGAF | BRC |
|---|---|---|
| Scope | Enterprise architecture across business/IT domains | Food safety manufacturing/processing/packing controls |
| Industry | All industries, global, any organization size | Food manufacturing, packaging, global retailers/suppliers |
| Nature | Voluntary methodology/framework, no enforcement | Voluntary GFSI-benchmarked certification standard |
| Testing | Internal governance reviews, no formal certification | Annual third-party site audits, announced/unannounced |
| Penalties | No penalties, loss of architecture benefits | Certification withdrawal, lost market access |
Scope
Industry
Nature
Testing
Penalties
Frequently Asked Questions
Common questions about TOGAF and BRC
TOGAF FAQ
BRC FAQ
You Might also be Interested in These Articles...
SEC Cybersecurity Rules Materiality Determination Framework: Step-by-Step Guide with Checklists and Real-World Examples
Master SEC Form 8-K Item 1.05 materiality determinations with our step-by-step framework, checklists, case law factors, and real-world examples. Avoid enforceme
What if the EU would not have made GDPR mandatory...
Explore a world without mandatory GDPR: How would organizations manage data? What data privacy regs would emerge? Uncover impacts on businesses and privacy laws
The DORA 'Hot Seat' Blueprint: Preparing Leadership and the Management Body for Regulatory Interviews
Prepare your Board & Management Body for DORA audits. Master the human element: demonstrate active oversight & accountability in regulatory interviews. Get the
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
LGPD vs CSA
LGPD vs CSA: Compare Brazil's GDPR-inspired data law & Canada's safety standards. Key diffs in scope, fines (2% revenue), rights & enforcement. Master compliance now!
PMBOK vs MAS TRM
Explore PMBOK vs MAS TRM: Compare PMI's project management standard with Singapore's tech risk guidelines for finance pros. Master compliance, strategy & implementation now!
FERPA vs PIPEDA
Discover FERPA vs PIPEDA: US student privacy law meets Canada's data rules. Compare rights, disclosures, exceptions & compliance for educators. Master global edtech privacy now.