EMPTY STATE
COMPARISON TOOL

Samsung 54/100

(KRX:OO5930) 7 of 20 (2016)

Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. (Samsung) provides average disclosure of its policies and programs designed to address forced labor and human trafficking risks in its supply chain, ranking seventh on the benchmark overall. Notably, Samsung demonstrates among the highest levels of transparency with respect to supply chain workers' empowerment, its supplier monitoring programs, and its remedy programs. Samsung is encouraged to enhance and disclose its traceability and risk assessment programs aimed at identifying forced labor risks in its supply chain. Additionally, the company has an opportunity to improve its performance in the areas of purchasing practices and recruitment approach.

DOWNLOAD SCORECARD

54 /100

2016 Ranking: 7 of 20

HOW DO THEY COMPARE?

The comparison tool allows companies’ results to be easily compared. Up to three companies can be selected and compared against each other as shown below.

You have selected a maximum of 3 data points to compare. Remove one data point to add a new one.

loading...

54

Samsung was evaluated both in 2016, when it ranked seventh out of 20 companies, and in 2018, when it ranked sixth out of 40 companies. Despite a strengthened methodology which makes it harder to achieve the same score, it improved its score by eight points since 2016 to 62/100 by developing and disclosing migrant worker guidelines, and providing training on forced labor for internal staff such as procurement, HR, and senior management, as well as for suppliers, labor sourcing companies, and recruitment agencies. Further, the company disclosed analyzing suppliers' production capacity to manage working hours, and outcomes of grievances submitted by suppliers' workers on workplace aspects.

METHODOLOGY

62

The average score for the sector was 32/100, compared to 39/100 in 2016. The drop in score is due in part to the increase in number of small and mid cap companies from 20 to 40, as well as the changes made to the methodology that strengthened it. The 20 companies benchmarked in both 2016 and 2018 saw their average score improve from 39/100 to 40/100, which is notable given the changes to the methodology.

2018 BENCHMARK

2016

54

Samsung was evaluated both in 2016, when it ranked seventh out of 20 companies, and in 2018, when it ranked sixth out of 40 companies. Despite a strengthened methodology which makes it harder to achieve the same score, it improved its score by eight points since 2016 to 62/100 by developing and disclosing migrant worker guidelines, and providing training on forced labor for internal staff such as procurement, HR, and senior management, as well as for suppliers, labor sourcing companies, and recruitment agencies. Further, the company disclosed analyzing suppliers' production capacity to manage working hours, and outcomes of grievances submitted by suppliers' workers on workplace aspects.

METHODOLOGY

2018

62

The average score for the sector was 32/100, compared to 39/100 in 2016. The drop in score is due in part to the increase in number of small and mid cap companies from 20 to 40, as well as the changes made to the methodology that strengthened it. The 20 companies benchmarked in both 2016 and 2018 saw their average score improve from 39/100 to 40/100, which is notable given the changes to the methodology.

2018BENCHMARK

THEME AND INDICATOR SCORE

The benchmark methodology has seven themes, selected to capture the key areas where companies need to take action to eradicate forced labor from their supply chains. There are a total of 22 indicators across the seven themes. For each theme, a company can score a total of 100 points.

Commitment and Governance

The company's top-level commitments on forced labor, supply chain standards, management processes, training programs and stakeholder engagement

OVERALL 80
INDICATORS
Awareness and Commitment
100
Supply Chain Standards
100
Management and Accountability
100
Training
25
Stakeholder Engagement
75

Traceability and Risk Assessment

The extent to which the company traces its supply chain and conducts forced labor risk assessments, and discloses information about these processes.

OVERALL 25
Traceability and Risk Assessment
50
Transparency
0

Purchasing Practices

The company's awareness and action on purchasing practices that can exacerbate forced labor risks, and its process for selecting suppliers, integrating standards into contracts and cascading them down the supply chain.

OVERALL 63
Purchasing Practices
0
Supplier Selection
50
Integration into Supplier Contracts
100
Cascading Standards through the Supply Chain
100

Recruitment

The company's approach to reducing exploitation by recruitment agencies and eliminating workers' payment of fees for their jobs.

OVERALL 17
Recruitment Approach
0
Recruitment Fees
50
Recruitment Audits
0

Worker Voice

The extent to which the company proactively communicates with workers through the supply chain, enables freedom of association and ensures access to effective and trusted grievance mechanisms.

OVERALL 38
INDICATORS
Communication of Policies
50
Worker Voice
0
Worker Empowerment
0
Grievance Mechanism
100

Monitoring

The company's process for auditing (including whether it includes non-scheduled visits, document review, worker interviews) and disclosure about the audit process and findings.

OVERALL 80
Auditing Process
100
Audit Disclosure
60

Remedy

The extent to which the company has corrective action plans for non-compliant factories, as well as processes for remedying workers who are victims of forced labor, and reports on remedies provided.

OVERALL 75
Corrective Action Plans
100
Remedy Programs
50

Access Benchmark Data

Access the underlying data and non-scored information in a spreadsheet for ease of comparison or download all the scorecards.

DOWNLOAD