Knowledge Integrity & Recognition Rules
A practical set of rules used within IAF’s membership-based ecosystem to protect the integrity of training and research outputs, and to define how recognition may be granted after committee review under IAQC oversight.
Purpose and scope
These rules apply to members participating as trainers, researchers, and academics under the Professionals & Experts membership service. They describe expectations for accuracy, transparency, authorship, and evidence handling when producing or delivering knowledge artifacts such as course materials, technical notes, research summaries, presentations, and committee submissions.
IAF is a membership-based federation and does not act as a regulator. Any IAF recognition is voluntary and may be issued only after membership is confirmed and the relevant committee completes review, with oversight by the International Automotive Quality Council (IAQC).
Core rules used for integrity and recognition decisions
The items below summarize the minimum expectations typically checked during internal review of member-submitted training and research outputs. Additional requirements may be defined by the relevant technical committee for a specific topic area.
Evidence traceability and version control
Maintain a clear link between claims and sources (standards, peer-reviewed literature, validated test data, or documented field evidence). Use versioning for slides, papers, datasets, and assessment instruments, including dates and change notes.
Disclosure, conflicts, and funding transparency
Disclose sponsorship, commercial interests, employer relationships, and any incentives that could influence content. Where applicable, separate factual material from opinion, and note limitations, assumptions, and boundary conditions.
Originality, attribution, and permitted reuse
Use proper citations for third-party content, respect licensing terms, and avoid plagiarism or uncredited derivative work. For co-authored outputs, define contributions and obtain consent for publication or submission under the member’s name.
Review readiness and reproducibility
Provide enough methodological detail for a competent reviewer to understand how results were derived (data sources, sampling, test setup, analysis steps). When confidentiality applies, supply a reviewable summary and controlled-access evidence as permitted.
How recognition is handled within IAF membership
Recognition (for example, listing a member as an IAF-recognized contributor, acknowledging a training program alignment statement, or referencing a research contribution in committee outputs) is considered only after membership is active and the submission is reviewed against applicable criteria. Reviews focus on integrity controls, technical coherence, and clarity of scope rather than promotional positioning.
Outcomes may include: acceptance with conditions (e.g., required corrections or added citations), deferral pending additional evidence, or non-recognition where integrity requirements are not met. Where appropriate, committees may request updates to keep materials current as standards evolve or new evidence emerges.
Governance connection (committee review + IAQC oversight)
Knowledge integrity and recognition decisions are managed through IAF’s committee process: members submit materials or evidence packages, committees conduct structured review and document findings, and the International Automotive Quality Council (IAQC) provides oversight to ensure consistency, impartiality, and documented decision trails across membership services.
Continue Exploring
Use the links below to navigate related content in this section.