The 2018 RDR Corporate Accountability Index was RDR’s third Index, published in April 2018. The 2018 RDR Index evaluated the same 22 companies as the 2017 RDR Index and applied the same methodology.
RDR Index research is conducted following a rigorous process of cross-checking, peer review, company feedback, and quality control. The process for the 2018 RDR Index, conducted by RDR and a team of international researchers, included the following steps:
- Step 1: Data Collection. The primary research team collected data for each company and provided a preliminary assessment of company performance across all indicators. Researchers also evaluated if company policies changed or remained the same in comparison to the previous year (2017).
- Step 2: Secondary Review. A second team of researchers conducted a fact-check of assessments provided by primary researchers in Step 1.
- Step 3: Review and Reconciliation. The RDR team examined the results from Steps 1 and 2, and resolved any differences that arose.
- Step 4: First Horizontal Review. The RDR team cross-checked the indicators to ensure they had been evaluated consistently for each company.
- Step 5: Company Feedback. Initial results were sent to companies for comment and feedback.
- Step 6: Second Horizontal Review. The RDR team conducted a second horizontal review, drawing on company feedback collected in Step 5, and cross-checking the indicators for consistency and quality control.
- Step 7: Final Scoring. The RDR team calculated final scores. Results included an assessment of how companies performed in 2017 in comparison to 2018.
Note on national contexts affecting company performance: In most countries, certain laws, regulations, or political factors will either enhance or limit a company’s ability to perform well on certain indicators. Our methodology does not compensate for these factors: in other words, the RDR Index evaluates companies on what they do or don’t do, regardless of the reason. However, narrative profiles for each company include an analysis of how the company’s home jurisdiction’s legal, regulatory, and political environment may have affected its score. In some cases the reason for a company’s strong or weak performance on a given indicator will be due to the legal, regulatory, or political environment of that company’s home country. In situations where laws and regulations cause companies to perform poorly, we encourage companies to advocate for laws that enable them to fully respect users’ rights to freedom of expression and privacy by disclosing strong commitments, policies, and practices.
