Article

How do you keep improving so EcoVadis is not a one-off?

In brief

Expert insight — François Dequenne: building a strong EcoVadis submission is not a one-off task but an ongoing journey that evolves with your organisation. Scores become more competitive every year, as medals are reserved for companies in the top performance percentiles — making what counted as good practice yesterday average tomorrow.

"EcoVadis isn't a box to tick, but a journey of continuous improvement."

To keep pace, think in terms of two complementary pathways: strengthening your sustainability management system, and executing each assessment with precision. Over time they blend into a cycle of continuous improvement rather than a rush before the deadline.

Why does EcoVadis matter for your business?

A strong rating helps you: develop or strengthen a management system in which policies, action plans and metrics form a coherent whole; benchmark performance over time instead of one-off reporting; ease access to finance by demonstrating that ESG risks are identified, managed and monitored; manage supply chain risk through visibility on supplier practices; and align with global best practice, since the methodology draws on widely recognised international standards. The benefits amplify when the assessment is part of a broader strategy rather than just a customer-driven requirement.

Why is EcoVadis a journey and not a checkbox?

The journey mindset changes each cycle: every submission becomes an opportunity to refine strategy, documentation and data. It matters because the methodology evolves — criteria become more rigorous, expectations for evidence quality increase, leading practices shift as more companies mature. A submission that once secured Gold might not be enough in future years if the organisation stands still. If the long-term goal is Platinum-level performance, incremental improvements must be woven into business planning, budgeting and governance — not left until the platform opens.

Pathway 1: how do you strengthen the system before submitting?

Understand where you stand today. The "gap-first" approach maps existing policies, procedures, KPIs and certifications against the EcoVadis themes; identifies which practices are formalised and which remain informal or undocumented; and clarifies roles and responsibilities to expose ownership gaps. The diagnosis shows both strengths to highlight and areas needing structure before the next assessment.

Use your results as a planning tool. Beyond the overall score, break results down: which themes underperform and why; where evidence was missing or too weak; which criteria offer the best near-term opportunities. Then design an improvement roadmap over several cycles rather than fixing everything at once — it guides how resources go to policies, actions, training and data systems.

Turn insights into a phased roadmap. Distinguish urgent actions, important ones needing preparation, and longer-term initiatives serving strategic ambitions. The aim: moving from isolated efforts to a coherent, resilient management system that underpins a steadily improving score.

Pathway 2: how do you execute the current assessment precisely?

Treat the assessment as a project. Define a clear timeline from platform opening to submission; assign roles across departments; plan reviews and approvals so nothing happens at the last minute. Phases: scoping, data and document collection, drafting, internal review, final approval — a discipline especially useful under tight customer deadlines.

Collect and qualify evidence. Replace "send me anything related to sustainability" with targeted requests: a list of required documents linked to specific questions and criteria; a clarified entity scope (sites, business units, geographies) per piece of evidence; documents checked as current, approved and aligned with the relevant period. A well-curated evidence library also improves internal information management and pays off over multiple cycles.

Craft clear, consistent responses. Use the Policies-Actions-Results framework to tell the story: state what each document demonstrates (policy, action or result); describe scope, boundaries and timeframe in plain language; keep terminology and data consistent so policies connect to actions and actions to results. Structured presentation helps reviewers award points confidently — and helps internal stakeholders see how their work contributes.

How do you combine both pathways over time?

In the first years, most organisations lean on execution to answer customer requests quickly; with familiarity, they tackle deeper structural gaps strategically. The most effective run a continuous loop: each cycle delivers a well-evidenced score and clear feedback → feedback drives a structured review of policies, processes and data → improvements show up in the next assessment, raising both performance and confidence. Whether the immediate priority is a first rating or long-term transformation, the journey mindset ensures progress doesn't stop when the questionnaire is submitted.

Where does ESGIM come in?

For organisations strengthening their system first: a structured gap analysis of processes and evidence against EcoVadis expectations — quick wins and structural opportunities — then a practical, prioritised roadmap aligned with business strategy. For organisations prioritising this year's assessment: an execution-focused solution — project management, targeted evidence collection, document quality checks, and clear, consistent responses — maximising the score at current maturity while improving internal processes for future cycles. With ESGIM's journey-based approach, each assessment becomes a checkpoint in a broader sustainability journey, built on more than 100 EcoVadis projects delivered.

Key takeaways

• Medals are percentile-based and the methodology evolves: standing still means falling behind.
• Pathway 1 — diagnose gaps, use results as a baseline, build a phased multi-cycle roadmap.
• Pathway 2 — run the assessment as a project, qualify every piece of evidence, structure responses in P-A-R.
• The two pathways converge into a loop: submission → feedback → structural review → better next submission.