It's become a real fashion in recent years for various kinds of publications to produce lists that rank the best or worst of whatever they happen to cover.
A handful of them have actually achieved some prominence -- lists such as Fortune's 100 Best Places to Work, Working Mother's Best Companies, J.D. Power recognitions, Dow Jones sustainability indexes, and the U.S. News & World Report "Bests."
One of the newest -- but by far the most important -- entrants in the field is Ethisphere magazine's annual list of the "World's Most Ethical Companies." Started in only 2007, it has catapulted to the top of its class within a very short period of time, making it an absolute "must read" for anybody in the business world.
And here is why: those who invest in public companies or work at them want to know that these are good organizations -- ones that try to do the right thing every single day. Who wouldn't want that?
But there's a fundamental problem: trying to figure out which corporations are really good is a difficult exercise. Random press articles about this or that don't really tell you about a company, and corporate securities disclosures certainly don't do the job.
That's why I think Ethisphere's list is so vitally important.
Now, some people might think that the words "Ethical Company" are an oxymoron similar to the term "Central Intelligence," but Ethisphere and the standards it applies to the hundreds of applicants who are vying to make that all-important annual list prove otherwise. And so do the companies themselves.
To be sure, every corporation has its bad actors or has done something that it's not especially proud of. Ethisphere, however, has devised an insightful set of criteria, weighs different -- and entirely transparent -- standards to rank the most ethical companies across 35 different industries, and allows outsider advisers to comment on the listings. The criteria include executive leadership, tone from the top, corporate citizenship as well as integrity, track record and reputation.
As a former journalist, I've always been more than suspicious about one particular aspect about all of those various rankings out there and it's this: is anyone on those lists paying to play? And, if they are, has that been fully revealed upfront in an open and transparent manner?
I can't remember any of the ranking publications ever disclosing whether there was any sort of economic relationship between them and those that they ranked. Call me cynical, but I've seen enough in my reporting life to cause me to wonder whether any monetary incentives were ever at play in these rankings.
This year, Ethisphere has set an entirely new standard that every other ranking publication would be foolish not to follow. It has just released its first annual "Media Responsibility Report," identifying the companies on its lists with which it has had material economic relationships. (There were very few.)
But can the same be said for Fortune, J.D. Power, Dow Jones, Working Mother, etc.? I don't know, but I think it's really important for their readers to find out.
The "Media Responsibility Report" does a whole lot more than just disclose economic relationships: it also identifies the methodology behind the rankings, the amount of weight given to each of its standards and the list of outside advisers who helped to create the ranking system itself.
That is what I call complete and absolute transparency. And it shows you exactly why Ethisphere -- and its list -- have had such a meteoric rise and become so well respected in such a short period of time.
Why can't the other list-makers do the same? And why shouldn't they? What on earth is wrong with full disclosure when they're basing their rankings on what they lead others to believe is an entirely objective set of criteria? Even the slightest lack of transparency will only hurt their credibility.
So, just when we're all forced to wonder about who is really guarding the hen house, it's nice to know that at least one outfit is reviewing hundreds of pages of submissions and trying to identify for us the hens that need the least guarding. Isn't that what we all want to know?
Not surprisingly, it was a media company dedicated to ethics that took the first leap. And the real question now becomes: will the others follow suit or just go their normal merry old way?