The commutability of calibrators and accuracy control materials affects the traceable link between patient sample results and standards. We sought to identify the repercussions of commutability on various aspects of laboratory practice (calibration, control of bias and accuracy assessment) and to discover the solutions that can reduce the problems produced by non-commutability with presently available resources. Ten serum constituents, ten comparison procedures and 37 analytical procedures were studied. The information concerning accuracy and bias provided from materials found to be commutable in previous works was challenged with native serum results for each routine and reference method compared, using Passing-Bablok regression and decision limits derived from biological variation. We found that: (1) Use of commutable control materials did not assure reliable information on the bias (systematic component of analytical error) of analytical procedures, and (2) Results from native serum and commutable controls were very highly concordant, indicating that these materials provide a good indication of the inaccuracy (total analytical error) of results. We suggest that the performance of individual laboratories would be better evaluated by occasional use of native sera with values assigned by reference methods in EQAS schemes. Moreover, our findings support the idea that manufacturers should assign values to calibrators using reference methods and native sera to reduce matrix effects and promote traceability.