Rated Ranking: 25 World’s Best Multinational Workplaces 2013

25 World’s Best Multinational Workplaces 2013

25_best_multinational_workplaces_final

Summary
Great Place to Work Institute (GPtW) selected the 25 best 2013 from responses of a representative sample of employees from more than 6,200 companies in more than 45 countries on six continents. A company must apply to – and be accepted on – a national Best Workplaces list. GPtW assesses the results of two studies: the Trust Index Employee Survey and the Culture Audit Management Questionnaire. Two-thirds of a company´s workplace culture assessment is based on the employee survey; one-third is based on the company´s policies and practices, as measured in the so-called culture Audit.

Detailed results and benchmark reports for individual companies must be purchased. To be considered, companies must apply, participate – and pay a fee – in at least 5 national lists, which entails that the majority of companies to not participate. Despite these flaws, the ranking is a useful tool for managers of large corporations to find out how they are perceived by their employees in terms of employer attractiveness.

Relevance / Impact
– 13 points –
Added Value / Insights
– 9 points –

Trustworthiness / Intention
– 11 points –
Methodology
– 11 points –

Aggregated points
– 44 (out of 60) –
51–60
points
Highly valuable ranking

41–50
points
Useful ranking with some flaws

30–40
points
Partially useful ranking with considerable flaws

< 30
points
Useless ranking

Reach of publication:

  • Global, e.g. North America, Europe and Asia (5 points)
  • Regional, e.g. Europe or North America (3 points)
  • Large national market: e.g. US, China, Japan, Germany, France, UK, Italy, Brazil (2 points)
  • Mid-sized or small market, e.g. Switzerland, Netherlands, Argentina, Singapore (1 point)

Ranking will be recognized by key stakeholders:

  • Opinion Leaders (Politicians, Professors; NGO’s) (2 points)
  • Business Advisory Board, C-Level Executives (CEO, CCO, CFO, CMO) (2 points)
  • High Potentials & Top Talents (employer market, students) (2 points)
  • Financial Market (2 points)
  • General Public (2 points)

Aggregated points: 13 (of max. 15)

Is the owner providing the ranking a credible and trustworthy organization?

  • Ranking owner has limited credibility and reputation. (1 point)
  • Ranking owner has fair credibility and reputation. (3 points)
  • Ranking owner has excellent credibility and reputation. (5 points)

What is the ranking owner’s intention to produce and disseminate the ranking?

  • Ranking is predominantly a tool to raise awareness for the owner with the possible intention to sell consultancy services. (1 point)
  • Ranking is partly a tool to raise awareness for the owner with the possible intention to sell consultancy services. (3 points)
  • Ranking is predominantly a tool to surface and share important insights on the subject surveyed. (5 points)

Comment: Great Place to Work Institute invests a lot of efforts and money in producing the ranking, but at the same time clearly intends to sell their consultancy services via the ranking.

Is/Are the media outlet(s) where the ranking is published of high credibility and reputation?

  • Media outlet(s) has/have limited credibility and reputation. (1 point)
  • Media outlet(s) has/have fair credibility and reputation. (3 points)
  • Media outlet(s) has/have excellent credibility and reputation. (5 points)

Aggregated points: 11 (of max. 15)

Do the ranking results provide overall orientation where companies stand?

  • limited orientation only (1 point)
  • fair orientation provided (3 points)
  • very good orientation (5 points)

Is the Ranking published in the same format on a regular basis, e.g. annually, which allows to track developments and comparisons over time?

  • ranking is published for the first time (1 point)
  • ranking is published for the second time in the same format (3 points)
  • ranking is published for more than 3 times on a regular basis in the same format (5 points)

Do the ranking results provide added value and further insights on how companies are evaluated in in their industry, e.g. detailed ratings in various sub-dimensions of the overall result?

  • limited added value only (1 point)
  • fair amount of added value (3 points)
  • high amount of added value (5 points)

Aggregated points: 9 (of max. 15)

Is the ranking based on a representative survey among key stakeholders or on a jury only?

  • Ranking is based on a jury’s opinion only. (1 point)
  • Ranking is based on a small survey or only on a limited group of stakeholders. (3 points)
  • Ranking is based on a robust and representative survey. (5 points)

Comment: The 2013 ranking is based on responses of more than 6,200 companies in more than 45 countries on six continents. To be considered, companies must apply – and pay a fee – in at least 5 national lists.

Is the ranking methodology easy to understand and reasonable – even for non-statisticians?

  • Methodology not easy to understand and not reasonable. (1 point)
  • Methodology fairly good to understand and reasonable. (3 points)
  • Methodology very easy to understand and reasonable. (5 points)

Is the ranking methodology easy to access and transparent?

  • Methodology not easy to find and not sufficiently transparent. (1 point)
  • Methodology fairly good to find and of medium transparency. (3 points)
  • Methodology very easy to find and of high transparency. (5 points)

Aggregated points: 11 (of max. 15)

Ranking category

  • Product / Service Brands
  • Company Brands
  • Corporate Reputation and Company Esteem
  • Social Responsibility, CSR & Sustainability, Ethical Business Practices
  • Innovation & Technology
  • Employer Attractiveness & Diversity
  • Leadership
  • Nations & Destinations
  • University & Other Institutions
  • Sports
  • Lifestyle
  • Social Media
  • Personal Branding & CEOs

Ranking statistics

  • Name of Ranking: 25 World’s Best Multinational Workplaces
  • Ranking managed/produced by institute/organization: Great Place to Work-Institute
  • Ranking published by media outlet: Fortune/CNN Money
  • Date of recent publication: October 22, 2013
  • Date of previous publication: November 13, 2012

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *