Methodology
How entries are verified. Written so that an applicant, a journalist or a sceptic can read it once and know exactly what we do.
The principle
A register is only as good as the work that goes into checking it. The Sunday Times Rich List has been wrong, publicly, more than once. Forbes has been wrong more than that. Both are still useful, because both publish their method.
We do the same. Here is ours.
Stage one — the application
Every applicant fills in the same long form. It is deliberately not short.
We ask for company name, role, turnover band, headcount band, the year you started, what you actually built, the verifiable record of it (Companies House number, a website, an audited filing, a press reference), and an unedited paragraph in your own words about something you did that you are quietly proud of.
The paragraph matters more than the numbers. Numbers can be checked. Voice cannot be faked.
Stage two — the document check
Every UK applicant is checked against Companies House. We confirm the company exists, that you are or were a director, that the filings are current, and that the turnover band claimed is consistent with the most recent accounts where filed.
International applicants are checked against the equivalent national register. Where no public register exists, we ask for two of: a signed letter from the company's accountant, a bank statement redacted to the relevant line, or a reference call from a listed member.
This stage takes between twenty minutes and two hours per applicant. It is done by the Editor, not by software.
Stage three — the reference
Every applicant nominates at least one referee. We do not require the referee to be a listed member, but we strongly prefer it. The referee is asked three questions, in writing or by call:
- Would you do business with this person again?
- Have you seen them in a hard moment, and how did they behave?
- Is there anything you would want the room to know before they are listed?
Answers to question three are kept strictly confidential and may, in rare cases, cause an application to be declined or held over to a future edition. Most do not.
Stage four — the editorial check
Before any application is accepted, the Editor reviews the file as a whole and asks two final questions:
- Is the entry true?
- Is the entry useful?
True means the facts hold up. Useful means the listing improves the average quality of the room.
A small number of applications fail this stage despite being technically true. We tell those applicants why, in writing. They are welcome to re-apply.
Stage five — the listing
Accepted applicants are notified by email and offered fourteen days to review their entry as it will appear in print. You may correct factual errors. You may not rewrite the entry into marketing copy. The Editor has final say on tone and length.
Once printed, the entry is permanent for that edition. Corrections to the next edition can be requested at any time.
What we do not do
We do not pay for entries.
We do not accept payment for entries.
We do not run sponsored listings, paid features, or "partner spotlights" disguised as editorial.
We do not share applicant data with any third party. The application form is hosted on infrastructure we control. The referee answers are stored encrypted and visible only to the Editor.
We do not verify private wealth, residency, philanthropy or any other claim outside what is needed for the listing. The Index is a record of operating output, not of net worth.
Errors
If we get something wrong, we will say so in writing in the next edition and on this page. The errata section will not be hidden in the back of the book.
It is more important that the record be honest than that it be flattering.