Credibl Sustainability Leadership award
This award recognises organisations that set clear priorities for managing climate risk and broader environmental, social and governance (ESG) matters; back those priorities with credible action; and actively evolve their business models to create enduring value.
Judging focuses on clarity of ambition, evidence of leadership, and evidence of progress, including measurable outcomes, disciplined execution, and the ability to navigate trade-offs in a shifting market and regulatory environment.
Sponsored by Credibl, the award reflects the growing importance of transparency, accountability, and trusted sustainability practices in creating long-term value.
What we assess
The criteria translate the award purpose into three weighted areas:
- Bold leadership and clear ambition (20%) – assesses leadership, governance, accountability and ambition at board and executive level.
- ESG strategy and integration (30%) – assesses whether sustainability is embedded into long-term strategy, capital allocation, and the operating model.
- Execution and measurable outcomes (50%) – assesses evidence of delivery, outcomes, sustained progress, and transparent decision-making.
Screening and evidence base
Prior to detailed scoring, companies are screened for sector exclusions, severe ESG-related harm, and the absence of a stakeholder-informed materiality assessment.
All assessment is based on publicly available information, with structured grading applied to support consistent, evidence-based comparison across companies.
Assessment process
The Top 200 Credibl Sustainability Leadership award applies a benchmarking process and is informed by publicly available material only. In other words, the shortlist is compiled through a review of publicly available information that has been published by the entity; the media; or by other credible third parties.
Criteria are scored on a tiered 1–5 rating scale, with scores determined by the robustness of evidence, transparency of reporting, and the degree of visible implementation and action. This approach ensures that the process is objective, fact-based, and evidence-based, and ensures that neither bias, nor subjectivity, may influence or determine the outcome.
Alignment with the World Business Council for Sustainable Development
To ensure alignment with internationally recognised reporting principles, Deloitte has aligned its scoring criteria with that of the WBCSD. As with prior years, Deloitte has enlisted the support of the Sustainable Business Council to provide a third-party review of the criteria to ensure alignment.
What leadership looks like
Leading organisations demonstrate that sustainability considerations are evident in enterprise risk management, board decisions, risk appetite, capital deployment, and strategic trade-offs. They articulate credible long-term ambition supported by executive-led planning, investment, performance tracking, innovation, and disciplined execution.
These entities demonstrate measurable progress over time, and they transparently acknowledge challenges and trade-offs, showing how momentum has been maintained in a changing market and regulatory environment.
Appendix: award description and alignment to criteria questions and WBCSD principles
|
Award description element |
How this is assessed in the criteria |
Alignment with WBCSD principles |
|---|---|---|
|
Clear priorities for managing climate risk |
Companies must identify and prioritise climate risks through materiality, long‑term outlook, and risk assessment, including financial impacts. |
Operating context, materiality, assurance, implementation and controls |
|
Clear priorities for broader ESG matters |
Broader environmental and social issues are explicitly tested through stakeholder engagement, ESG risk coverage beyond GHG, and materiality transparency. |
Stakeholder engagement, materiality, strategy, performance, implementation and controls |
|
Clarity of ambition |
Ambition is assessed through leadership intent, long‑term strategy, and credible transition pathways that reflect the organisation’s context. |
Sustainability governance, operating context, strategy, balance |
|
Backing priorities with action |
Action is tested through capital allocation, operational embedding, and demonstrated improvement over time, not intent alone. |
Implementation and controls, balance |
|
Evolving the business model |
The criteria explicitly test whether sustainability is reshaping the business model, operating model, or revenue model, rather than being incremental. |
Implementation and controls, balance |
|
Creation of enduring value |
Long‑term value creation is assessed through strategy, investment decisions, financial integration, and sustained performance over multiple years. |
Operating context, implementation and controls, assurance, materiality, balance |
|
Sustainability as competitive advantage and innovation |
Leadership and strategy criteria explicitly assess whether sustainability drives competitive positioning, differentiation, or innovation. |
Sustainability governance, operating context, implementation and controls |
|
Evidence of leadership |
Leadership is tested at board, executive, and management levels, including skills, accountability, and incentives. |
Sustainability governance, implementation and controls, commitments and targets |
|
Evidence of progress |
Progress must be measurable, evidenced over time, and sustained across material topics. |
Performance, balance |
|
Measurable outcomes |
Quantified targets, financial impacts, and performance data are required to demonstrate delivery. |
Commitments and targets, assurance, performance, balance |
|
Disciplined execution |
Execution discipline is assessed through governance, accountability, incentives, and operational integration. |
Implementation and controls, commitments and targets |
|
Ability to navigate trade‑offs |
Companies are assessed on whether they transparently acknowledge challenges and demonstrate how trade‑offs have been managed over time. |
Sustainability governance, operating context, balance |
|
Momentum in a shifting market and regulatory environment |
The framework assesses responsiveness to regulatory change, market dynamics, and long‑term transition planning. |
Operating context, assurance, balance |
- The matrix illustrates the award criteria's alignment with the award description and the criteria's alignment with WBCSD disclosure principles.
- Each question is crafted to ensure an evidence-based determination can be made against each criteria.
- Highest‑scoring companies are those that demonstrate consistency of process, ambition, investment, strategic decisions, and outcomes.
