We use a questionnaire that contains 41 questions organised into five pillars:
The questionnaire covers five pillars:
- Leadership, governance, and organisation;
- Risk assessment;
- Company codes and policies;
- Personnel and helplines.
This index assess 163 defence companies on the ethics and anti-corruption programmes they have in place to prevent corruption.
TI-UK wrote to the Chief Executives of all companies in November 2013 informing them of the index, inviting them to appoint a point of contact (100 did so) and to indicate whether they wished to submit internal information. Sixty-three provided internal information.
TI-UK completed all desk research on publicly available information between April and December 2014. Sources included company websites and relevant links and documents directly accessible through them. Where possible, local language documents were assessed in addition to information available in English. Research was conducted independently of evidence provided for the 2012 index.
Companies were given the opportunity to comment on the draft analysis and to guide TI-UK towards additional publicly available information. Each company received a copy of the finalised assessment and an opportunity to submit further statements. Those companies that did not respond were contacted multiple times, by letter, email and telephone.
For companies providing internal information, TI-UK reviewed and discussed the documents bilaterally, and each company then received a second assessment based on the additional information provided. To be included in the internal information assessment, TI-UK had to be able to review original documentation or excerpts of original documentation.
The completed assessments underwent consistency checks and peer review within TI-UK. An external peer review group of four experts additionally reviewed a sample of assessments and draft analyses.
We have made two substantive updates to the 2014 Index methodology since the 2012 Index:
a) The inclusion of a ‘1’ score for 14 questions that were previously scored either ‘0’ or ‘2’. This was to allow for a more nuanced understanding of company ethics and anti-corruption programmes.
b) The addition of eight questions, mainly relating to offsets and whistleblowing. If a company does not engage in offset contracting, the offset questions were excluded from the scoring.
In addition, there have been minor clarifications to the wording of some of the questions and model answers based on feedback received from companies and stakeholders.
Defence companies have been selected according to the following three criteria:
- They were included in the CI 2012, so their inclusion in the CI 2015 enables comparison over time; and/or
- They were included in the Defense News 2012 top 100 defence companies and/or SIPRI 2011 top 100 defence companies ; and/or
- They are a significant defence company (by revenue and exports) from a country that would otherwise be unrepresented in the CI 2015, but that country has arms exports
- in excess of $1m 2010-2012, (SIPRI Trend Indicator Values expressed in USDm. at constant 1990 prices ).
We also include two trading houses from Japan—Itochu and Sumitomo Corporation—with significant net income relating to defence. Generally, company subsidiaries have been excluded from the analysis. In addition, three companies from the CI 2012 are not included – Goodrich Corporation because it is now defunct, Tognum because it has been acquired by Rolls-Royce, and ARINC because it has been acquired by Rockwell Collins. The number of companies from the CI 2012 assessed in the CI 2015 is 127 because, in 2013, Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) became Leidos and spun off its government services and information technology business under the name SAIC. Both Leidos and SAIC are included in the CI 2015. ATK merged with Orbital Sciences Corp. to form Orbital ATK Inc in 2015. ATK is included in this index as the merger was completed after the research period.
Companies from the following countries were added in 2015: Argentina, Austria, Belarus, Belgium, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Denmark, Indonesia, Iran, Jordan, Moldova, New Zealand, Romania, Saudi Arabia, Serbia and Taiwan.
The companies are scored on 41 questions, and then placed into one of six bands, from A to F, based on their scores.
A 83.3 – 100% Extensive evidence
B 66.7 – 83.2% Good evidence
C 50.0 – 66.6% Moderate evidence
D 33.3 – 49.9% Limited evidence
E 16.7 – 33.2% Very limited evidence
F 0 – 16.6 Almost no evidence