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.

Continue Reading

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“).

Continue Reading

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.”

According to TI, the “data sources are collected by a variety of reputable institutions, including the World Bank and the World Economic Forum” and the “sources and surveys which make up the CPI are based on carefully designed and calibrated questionnaires, answered by experts and businesspeople.”

According to TI, this year’s CPI “reveals that corruption levels remain at a standstill worldwide” and “131 countries have made no significant progress against corruption over the last decade, and this year 27 countries are at a historic low in their CPI score.”

The CPI generates a lot of media coverage and is 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.

Continue Reading

In an annual non-event, last week Transparency International (TI) released its so-called Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) (see here). The CPI scores 180 countries and territories by their perceived levels of public sector corruption, according to experts and business people. 100 is very clean and 0 is highly corrupt.

According to TI, the CPI 2019 “reveals a staggering number of countries are showing little to no improvement in tackling corruption.”

The CPI generates a lot of media coverage and is 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.

Continue Reading