Ranking and comparative insight policy.
Rules for consent, context, demonstration data and responsible publication of any comparative output.
1. Purpose
Comparative insight should support learning and improvement. It must not create misleading precision, reputational harm, or incentives to manage a number rather than the underlying practice.
2. Consent
i5Benchmark will not publish an organisation’s identifiable result, position or response detail without explicit, informed and documented consent covering the intended publication.
3. Basis of assessment
An assessment is made against declared requirements for a declared subject, scope, evidence period, implementation profile and framework version. A result must not be described as a percentile, market rank or population position unless a disclosed and methodologically appropriate comparison dataset exists.
4. Demonstration data
Demonstration data must be clearly labelled as fictional at the point of display, and must not use names likely to be mistaken for real participating organisations, sectors, cities, regions or countries.
5. Conditions for any future comparative output
- A disclosed cohort definition, scope, evidence period and inclusion rules.
- A sufficient sample size, a minimum cohort threshold, and disclosure of material limitations.
- Compatible subject type, implementation profile and framework version across the cohort.
- Context for sector, scale, geography and evidence quality.
- Quality checks and a documented correction and appeal pathway.
- Consent appropriate to identifiable publication.
6. Preferred reporting
Where possible, use bands, distributions, anonymised aggregates and change over time rather than simplistic league tables. Cohorts too small to protect confidentiality must not be ranked.
7. Changes and corrections
Any published comparative output must state its framework version and date. Material errors must be corrected transparently, with affected participants notified where appropriate.
8. Prohibited presentation
Comparisons must not imply certification, accredited status, legal compliance, endorsement by the European Union or any authority, official standard status, or superiority beyond what the disclosed method and evidence support.