Compliance Professionals Should Take The Corruption Perceptions Index With A Grain Of Salt
In an annual non-event, Transparency International (TI) released its so-called Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) (see here). The CPI “draws on 13 independent data sources” and “ranks 182 countries and territories worldwide by their perceived levels of public sector corruption. The results are given on a scale of 0 (highly corrupt) to 100 (very clean).”
As stated by TI: “While 31 countries have significantly reduced their corruption levels since 2012, the rest are failing to tackle the problem – they have stayed stagnant or got worse during the same period. The global average has fallen to a new low of 42, while more than two-thirds of countries score below 50.”
According to the TI: “The U.S. government’s decision to temporarily freeze and then degrade enforcement of its Foreign Corrupt Practices Act … sends a dangerous signal that bribery and other corrupt practices are acceptable.” TI does not explain what “degrade” means nor does it mention that in 2025 there was more corporate FCPA enforcement by the DOJ compared to 2021 or 2015 nor does it mention that the past nine months – including the present – has been the most active period of FCPA trials of individuals in the FCPA’s nearly 50 years.
The CPI generates a lot of media coverage and is aggressively marketed by TI and is perhaps a popular tool for business organizations in ranking risk (and thus prioritizing compliance).
However, for the reasons highlighted in this post compliance professionals should take the CPI with a grain of salt.
Compliance Professionals Should Take The Corruption Perceptions Index With A Grain Of Salt
In an annual non-event, Transparency International (TI) released its so-called Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) (see here). The CPI attempts to “measure how corrupt each country’s public sector is perceived to be according to experts and businesspeople.”
According to TI, “each country’s score is a combination of at least 3 data sources drawn from 13 different corruption surveys and assessments.” A country’s score is the perceived level of public sector corruption on a scale of 0-100, where 0 means highly corrupt and 100 means very clean.
As stated by TI: “As corruption grows in scale and complexity, over two-thirds of countries now score below the mid-point on TI’s CPI.”
The CPI generates a lot of media coverage and is aggressively marketed by TI and is perhaps a popular tool for business organizations in ranking risk (and thus prioritizing compliance).
However, for the reasons highlighted in this post compliance professionals should take the CPI with a grain of salt.
Compliance Professionals Should Take The Corruption Perceptions Index With A Grain Of Salt
In an annual non-event, Transparency International (TI) released its so-called Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) (see here). The CPI “ranks 180 countries and territories by their perceived levels of public sector corruption, and considers factors such as bribery, diversion of public funds, prosecution of corrupt officials, and the use of public office for private gain. The scale runs from 0 (highly corrupt) to 100 (very clean).”
The CPI’s methodology is shown at the end of this post.
According to TI, the CPI “shows that corruption is thriving across the world.”
Compliance Professionals Should Take The Corruption Perceptions Index With A Grain Of Salt
In an annual non-event, Transparency International (TI) released its so-called Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) (see here). The CPI “ranks 180 countries and territories by their perceived levels of public sector corruption according to experts and business people. It relies on 13 independent data sources and uses a scale of zero to 100, where zero is highly corrupt and 100 is very clean.”
The CPI’s methodology is shown at the end of this post.
According to TI, “the global average remains unchanged for over a decade at just 43 out of 100. More than two-thirds of countries score below 50, while 26 countries have fallen to their lowest scores yet. Despite concerted efforts and hard-won gains by some, 155 countries have made no significant progress against corruption or have declined since 2012.”
The CPI generates a lot of media coverage and is aggressively marketed by TI and is perhaps a popular tool for business organizations in ranking risk (and thus prioritizing compliance).
However, for the reasons highlighted in this post compliance professionals should take the CPI with a grain of salt.
TI’s Shaming Of Countries Accomplishes Little – Plus Comparing Enforcement Across Countries Is An Apples To Oranges Comparison
I have no doubt that the individuals associated with Transparency International have a genuine interest in reducing bribery and corruption in the global marketplace.
Nevertheless, I have long had good-faith concerns (see prior posts here, here, here, here, here and here) about how TI goes about this task.
The latest example is TI’s recent “shaming report” (that is my term, TI technically calls its report “Exporting Corruption 2022 – Assessing Enforcement of the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention“).