Eni ranked best in transparency of corporate reporting

Eni was ranked first in the world for transparency of corporate reporting according to an assessment by Transparency International which examined the 124 largest listed companies in the world and analyzing their corporate reporting against three main metrics: anti-corruption programs, organization (e.g. relationship with subsidiaries and affiliates) and the disclosure of key financial information on a country-by-country basis.

Eni topped the list (which also includes several companies in the Oil & Gas field), gaining 7.3 points out of the 10 available.

It achieved an excellent score, particularly with respect to transparency and anti-corruption programs and was ranked as “best performer‘ for organizational reporting.

Other companies in the oil and gas field that also appeared in the report include:  Statoil 6.6, BHP Biliton 6.1, BG Group 5.3, BP 5.1, Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. (ONGC) 4.8, Petrobas 4.6, Rosneft 4.2, Total 3.9 among others.

The Transparency in Corporate Reporting report looks at exactly what you can find in answer to those questions if you visit the websites of the world’s 124 largest publicly traded companies.

The report assesses the disclosure practices of companies with respect to their anti-corruption programmes, company holdings and the disclosure of key financial information on a country-by-country basis. It follows on from a 2012 report which focused on the world’s 105 largest publicly traded companies.

All but three of the 124 companies in the report commit to complying with anti-corruption laws. The vast majority of companies have codes of conduct and a policy of zero tolerance for corruption.

However, 68 don’t disclose political contributions and only 56 say they forbid facilitation payments – small bribes paid to grease the wheels of commerce.

The report shows the impact of strong legislation, with UK companies scoring 90 per cent on average, compared to 20 per cent in China. All US companies enable staff to report corruption, in line with strong updated 2011 whistleblowing legislation.

All evaluated German companies disclosed the full lists of their subsidiaries, associates and joint-ventures, without applying any materiality criterion (a threshold set by regulators which defines the significance of a subsidiary). Meanwhile, 11 out of 44 US companies disclosed the full lists of their subsidiaries despite regulator.