Data Sources

We apply set criteria for our selection of data sources. Firstly, we aim to ensure as much comparable data as possible across organizations to allow for fair scoring. Secondly, we draw evidence from credible sources (direct company disclosures or respected third party sources). We do not assess data without a credible source (a time-dated web page or a respected media source). Below is a set of criteria that applies to our interrogation of data sources, aimed at providing an objective and consistent method for all organizations.

  1. If a particular query does not apply to a data source (e.g. transparency queries do not apply to external data sources), or if data is unavailable for a particular corporation (e.g. lack of disclosure to CDP or in legislative consultations), we mark the weighting cell with NA (not applicable), and the weighting is set to zero. The data cell’s original weighting is redistributed evenly through other data points for this query.

  2. If no evidence is available (after conducting research) for a particular cell, it is marked NS (not scored), with the same impact on the matrix as NA . Therefore, each organization has its own specific weighting matrix that depends on data availability and relevance for that specific organization. This means that a company will not be impacted by its lack of involvement in policies that do not affect it activities, but it will be more accurately assessed for relevant policies.

  3. Our interrogation of each data source is conducted in a consistent manner for every organization (e.g. using the same terms to search through a set list of data sources, spending a similar amount of time on each organization).

  4. We look at data originating from the last two years, prioritizing more recent evidence. However, older evidence is referred to if it appears that a position has been taken (e.g. a stance on climate science) which remains consistent and unchanged over longer time period. It may also be used to build a chronological sequence of pieces of evidence to demonstrate InfluenceMap’s conclusion on a specific topic.

  5. The English version of an organization’s corporate website is searched using consistent search terms (e.g. "carbon tax"). In the case where an English language data source is unavailable, we make best use of our team’s linguistic ability in translating the data source. Otherwise, we mark the relevant data cells as NS (not scored) if our team is unable to interpret the data source.

The following table summarizes our data sources.

Our Data Sources


Data source



Organization's promotional information


Organization's websites


Main organization website, affiliated websites and major publications (sustainability report, annual report, etc.)

Other direct messaging


Media and other websites controlled (or funded) by the organization, social media (Twitter), direct advertising campaigns, press releases, and initiatives to which the organization has signed up

Voluntary disclosures via third parties

CDP responses


Assessment and scoring of CDP political influence questions (Q2.3)

Disclosure to governments


Legislative consultations


Legislative Consultation documents from government sources such as US government, the European Commission and governments of other key regions e.g. Australia and Japan

Financial disclosures


We search 10-K and 20-F SEC filings where available (and non-US equivalents), earnings comments via Edgar Online and Fair Disclosure Wire

EU Transparency Register


Information provided to the voluntary EU Transparency Register

External data (press, creditable websites, etc.)


External reporting on the organization


Web searches (the organization's name AND relevant query search terms) in reputable news sources, supported by targeted searches in proprietary databases (LexisNexis)

External reports on CEO messaging


Web searches (CEO's name AND relevant query search terms) in reputable news sources, supported by targeted searches in proprietary databases (LexisNexis)