No. An accredited certification is not mandatory. There is no ISO requirement that mandates accreditation. Even in procurement law – for example, in Section 49 of the German Procurement Regulation (VgV) – it is stipulated that contracting authorities must also accept other evidence if a company cannot provide a specific certificate for justifiable reasons, provided that such evidence demonstrates equivalent quality assurance or a comparable management system.

The assumption that an ISO certification must be accredited is one of the most common misconceptions in the market. In fact, ISO itself does not specify whether a certification body must be accredited. ISO defines requirements for management systems (e.g., ISO 9001, ISO 14001, or ISO 27001), but not how the certification should be organized. An accredited certification is an option – but not a fundamental requirement.

In the certification of management systems, accreditation is merely an additional quality signal: A national accreditation body (in Germany, for example, the German Accreditation Body (DAkkS)) confirms that a certification body operates according to specific rules. However, such a quality signal can also be provided in other ways.

In terms of content, there is no difference, as both certifications assess the same ISO standards. The difference lies in the effort: Accredited certifications are significantly more bureaucratic, time-intensive, and cost-intensive, as certification bodies must meet additional formal requirements from accreditation bodies.

The central point is often overlooked: The requirements of the ISO standards remain identical – regardless of whether a certification is accredited or not. The difference does not arise in the management system itself, but in the way the certification body operates and which additional requirements it must fulfill. Accreditation bodies audit and monitor certifiers according to strict formal criteria. This leads to more documentation obligations, longer processes, and higher costs – without changing the actual content of the ISO standard.

Non-accredited certification

Accredited Certification

As a manager – especially in a small company – you should carefully consider whether the additional effort and higher costs of an accredited certification are actually justified by a corresponding added value. Furthermore, in practice, there is usually room for negotiation with both public clients and corporations: Non-accredited certifications are very often accepted, especially when they are transparently documented by a detailed certification report – which can save you several thousand euros in costs and several months of work.

There are numerous decisions confirming that accreditation is not a mandatory prerequisite for the legal validity of an ISO certification.

For example, the Higher Regional Court of Cologne (judgment of September 30, 2015 – 26 U 9/15) clarifies that both forms of certification have the same legal validity: “The legal validity of a certificate does not – so far – depend on whether the certification was carried out by a body with or without accreditation.”

The following overview shows other key decisions that confirm and specify this legal position:

This reveals a clear line of case law: Accreditation is not a mandatory characteristic for the validity or “authenticity” of an ISO certificate. Rather, case law clearly shows that accreditation is primarily a voluntary quality assurance mechanism – not a legal prerequisite for a valid certification.

Only to a very limited extent. In public procurement law, certificates are frequently referenced. This is regulated by Section 49 of the German Procurement Regulation (VgV). At the same time, the legislator makes it clear that companies must not be disadvantaged if they cannot provide a specific certificate. What matters is proof of substantive equivalence. Public contracting authorities must accept alternative evidence if it demonstrates that a company meets comparable standards.

Many tenders include the phrase “or a comparable management system“. This phrase typically means that a non-accredited certificate is also recognized. Practical tip: Contact the tendering authority and ask in which cases a non-accredited certification is also accepted. Use the following template, for example:

Subject: Inquiry regarding equivalent evidence in your tender

Dear Sir or Madam,
As [Company Name], we are planning to participate in your tender [Title/Reference of Tender].

We are currently implementing a certification according to [ISO standard, e.g., ISO 9001 / ISO 14001 / ISO 27001] and expect to complete it by [enter date before the tender deadline].

In this context, we would like to inquire which equivalent evidence you accept in accordance with Section 49 of the Procurement Regulation (VgV), which requires that alternative evidence must also be considered, instead of an accredited certification.

For example, evidence could consist of a free certification by a reputable organization with proven references, whose equivalence is demonstrated through certification guidelines, auditor competence evidence, and a standard-compliant certification report.

We would be grateful if you could briefly inform us which evidence is recognized as equivalent in your specific procurement procedure.

Thank you in advance for your response.

Sincerely,
[Name]
[Position]
[Company]

A single email can save a company several thousand euros and months of additional work.

Recognizing a non-accredited certification can bring significant advantages for clients – particularly greater flexibility, a wider selection of suitable suppliers, and a stronger focus on practically relevant audit content while maintaining legal certainty.

For clients, whether private or public, recognizing alternative evidence opens up additional options. What matters is not formal accreditation, but whether a company demonstrably operates an effective management system. The following table shows key criteria to support your assessment: