2026 WDI Scoring Consultation

The Workforce Disclosure Initiative (WDI) is fundamentally redesigning its scoring methodology for 2026, and we would like you to join the conversation and contribute your insights to this important development.

Introduction

For over a decade, WDI has helped investors and companies build a shared language around workforce transparency. As investor stewardship becomes more sophisticated, the frameworks that underpin it must advance to keep pace. This year marks the most significant evolution in WDI’s scoring approach since inception as we are moving from a purely disclosure-based model to one that evaluates the quality, maturity, and effectiveness of workforce management practices.

This shift responds directly to what we’ve heard from both sides of the table: companies want scoring that recognises genuine progress, and not just volume of disclosure; while investors want sharper insight into how companies are managing workforce risk.

This consultation period (13–24 July 2026) is your opportunity to shape that framework before it is finalised.

Why are we changing the criteria?

Disclosure remains a critical foundation for transparency and accountability, but patterns of disclosure vary considerably across sectors and are often shaped by differing regulatory requirements, workforce models, and material risks. As a result, disclosure alone does not always provide a complete picture of how effectively workforce-related issues are being managed.

Investors are increasingly seeking insight into the systems, governance structures, and actions that sit behind reported commitments. Understanding how workforce considerations are embedded within business processes can provide a more meaningful indication of organisational maturity and preparedness than disclosure alone.

The 2026 methodology is built to make exactly that distinction across all 31 WDI topics.

The Guiding Principles

The redesign is anchored in one core idea: scores should reflect the substance and maturity of a company’s practices, not just the presence of disclosure.

Our ambition is therefore to:

• Provide a more meaningful benchmark by creating greater differentiation between levels of workforce management maturity, enabling investors to identify strengths, gaps, and emerging risks while giving companies richer and more actionable feedback.
• Generate deeper insights by translating narrative and qualitative disclosures into structured, comparable data that can support stewardship, engagement, risk assessment, and portfolio-level analysis.
• Reflect context and complexity through scenario-based evaluation that recognises differences in sectors, business models, workforce structures, risk exposure, and governance arrangements, helping ensure companies are assessed fairly within their operating environment.
• Strengthen the engagement process by integrating scoring earlier in the disclosure cycle, enabling companies to receive timely insights, identify potential gaps, and improve the quality of information provided before final assessment.
• Align with the evolving responsible business landscape by creating a framework that is interoperable with emerging standards and capable of supporting a more coherent and connected ecosystem of workforce and corporate responsibility metrics.

Importantly, the thematic focus of the survey remains largely unchanged. The enhancement lies in the assessment methodology, allowing for more nuanced and decision-useful insights without increasing the reporting burden on participating companies.

The Scoring Framework – 3A Architecture

The framework is organised around three dimensions: Awareness, Approach, and Action (3A):

• Awareness: Does the company know what its workforce risks are?
• Approach: Does the company have a framework to manage those risks?
• Action: Does the company effectively implement and demonstrate that framework in practice?

Not every topic is assessed across all three dimensions. Some topics are designed to evaluate a company’s understanding, governance arrangements, and implementation efforts, while others are more limited in scope. For example, where a question is simply a factual data point or a basic yes/no disclosure, only the relevant dimension(s) are assessed.

Each dimension is scored on an integer scale from 0 to 5. The scoring scale is tailored to the nature of the question, allowing for meaningful differentiation where appropriate. Simpler questions may use a limited set of scoring outcomes (for example, 0–1–5), while more complex topics that capture varying levels of maturity may use the full 0–5 scale.

Individual topic scores are then aggregated through three levels of the framework i.e.

Topic → Section → Company.

This produces four company-level scores on a 0–100 scale: an Overall Composite Score, alongside separate Awareness, Approach, and Action scores. Together, these scores provide both an overall view of performance and insight into the specific dimensions driving a company’s results.

Example:

To illustrate how this works in practice, consider three companies answering the same Human Rights Due Diligence questions:

More detailed examples and practical application scenarios are available here: Scoring Methodology 2026: Framework and Design Principles

The same survey responses can yield very different outcomes depending on whether a company demonstrates awareness of an issue, robust governance and management systems, or evidence of implementation in practice, thereby offering a more textured view of performance.

How to Get Involved?

We want this methodology to be shaped by the people who use it. There are two ways to contribute during the consultation window:

Join a Consultation Call:

We invite our investor signatories to have a conversation with our team to walk you through the framework, the 3A tagging approach, and discuss how the scores and underlying data could support your investment process. Let us know your availability during 13-24 July 2026.

or

Submit Written Feedback:

Prefer to respond in writing? We welcome detailed comments on the draft scoring criteria and scoring framework on this page. Due to capacity reasons, any interested companies can submit their feedback in writing.

We are particularly keen to hear your views on:

• The overall structure of the scoring framework
• Whether the 3A tagging and differentiation approach effectively distinguishes between varying levels of company performance
• Potential investor use-cases for the scores and underlying data

You can submit call requests or written comments to: wdi@thomsonreuters.com

Timeline: Feedback gathered during this consultation will directly inform the final framework, which we expect to publish in early August 2026. The public data scorecard will follow in batches through the disclosure window, with the self-disclosure scorecard available early next year.

The WDI 2026 Survey is available here, and you can find the 2026 Survey Guidance via this link.

Finally, the Topic-wise scoring criteria can be found via this link.