The Most Common Mistakes in Preparing for an EcoVadis Assessment

In this article, we look at why companies unnecessarily lose points in the EcoVadis assessment, what typically causes low scores, and how these issues can be avoided.

Today, EcoVadis assessments are addressed by companies across sectors and sizes – often in response to customer requirements or as part of strengthening credibility in sustainability (see our article How to Meet Your Clients' ESG Expectations? EcoVadis Can Help).

In practice, we see that the biggest challenge is usually not a lack of activities, but rather an inconsistent approach and uncertainty about what to focus on and what is truly material for a given company. Especially before their first assessment, companies often lack a basic analysis of potential material topics, clearly defined sustainability priorities relevant to their business, or an understanding of how their activities will be evaluated by an external assessor.

In repeated assessments, a different issue typically emerges – documentation and processes created on an ad hoc basis gradually stop working, are not updated, or no longer make sense in the broader context of company management. From the assessors’ perspective, the approach then appears unsystematic or difficult to follow, even though genuine efforts and individual activities do exist within the company.

EcoVadis does not assess good intentions or marketing statements. Based on the submitted evidence, it evaluates the maturity of ESG management – whether the company has clearly defined rules, targets, responsibilities, and can substantiate its claims.

One important aspect that companies often underestimate is the underlying logic of the EcoVadis assessment itself.

To begin with, it is important to understand that EcoVadis does not use a universal questionnaire. Moreover, the EcoVadis methodology is continuously evolving, which directly affects both the questionnaire structure and the scoring of individual areas (explained in more detail in our article How EcoVadis Methodology Updates Affect Your ESG Reporting and Medals).

Based on information about the company, its sector, size, and geographic presence, the EcoVadis platform generates a tailor-made questionnaire. This questionnaire determines which topics are considered material from a corporate sustainability perspective.

This customised approach is often surprising for many companies. Topics appear that:

• have not been systematically addressed so far
• were not considered a priority
• or were perceived as marginal

In the environmental area, frequently overlooked topics include, for example:

• water management
• climate-related risks
• air pollution

Other areas that repeatedly show insufficient coverage include:

• employee training and development
• diversity, equity and inclusion
• career development and talent management
• employee training and awareness on key topics
• sustainability in the supply chain

Without a basic understanding of why these topics appear in the assessment, companies tend to react rather than act – attempting to add documents or answers that do not fit into an overall management system.

Below, we provide an overview of the most common mistakes we see when preparing for an EcoVadis assessment – both among smaller companies preparing for their first assessment and larger organisations aiming to improve their EcoVadis score – and show how to approach them more strategically.

In practice, the most common issue we encounter is outdated, poorly maintained, and non-functional documentation. Policies are often not regularly updated, do not reflect current processes, or are formulated in overly general terms. Frequently, they were created as a one-off exercise for the first assessment and were not further developed. From the assessor’s perspective, such documents appear as formal attachments with little connection to day-to-day operations.

We therefore help clients understand documentation as a living part of management, not an administrative obligation. Policies and procedures should have a clear owner, a defined review logic, and a clear link to practice – for example through training, internal communication, defined targets, or follow-up processes. EcoVadis places strong emphasis on whether documents make sense in the company context and whether they are supported by evidence of implementation. It is also important to keep in mind that EcoVadis only recognises documents that are less than eight years old, and for reported data and performance metrics, only data from the last two years.

One of the most common challenges, especially before a first EcoVadis assessment, is working with material topics. In practice, companies often enter the assessment without a clear understanding of which topics will be considered key from the EcoVadis perspective. This is not necessarily a mistake – EcoVadis defines material topics only after registration, based on company size, focus, and location.

As a result, many companies are surprised by the structure of the questionnaire and the areas that appear in it and have not yet been systematically addressed, such as water, climate risks, air pollution, or certain social or ethical aspects.

The right approach in this situation is not to try to “guess” the future questionnaire, but to prepare conceptually. Even before registration, it makes sense to work with at least a basic framework of potential impacts and risks arising from the company’s activities, sector, and value chain. This reflection helps companies orient themselves more quickly once the questionnaire is available and respond in a structured way instead of reactively filling individual gaps. Ideally, key material topics should already be mapped and embedded in core policies, measures, and reported data.

Another frequent mistake is working with data only when the questionnaire needs to be completed. Companies then search for information retrospectively, are unsure about its completeness or consistency, and often cannot place the data into a time context. This applies in particular to environmental and social indicators, where comprehensive data or clearly defined metrics are often missing.

From a long-term preparedness perspective, it makes sense to establish at least a basic system for collecting and evaluating ESG data. This does not require complex reporting tools – what matters is clarity on which data are tracked, who is responsible for them, and how often they are reviewed. Continuous work with data makes it easier to explain trends, identify weaknesses, and strengthen the credibility of responses within the assessment.

In many companies, EcoVadis preparation is assigned to a single employee, often without a clear mandate and without systematic involvement of other departments. This approach leads to certain areas being overlooked, incomplete answers, or inconsistencies between responses. This is particularly problematic in environmental and supply-chain topics, where information is typically spread across the organisation.

We recommend that clients establish an internal “mini ESG team” with at least a basic division of roles and responsibilities. Even in smaller companies, it makes sense to involve multiple functions – such as HR, quality, procurement, or operations – and clearly define who is responsible for the overall process. Management awareness is also crucial; leadership should understand the importance of EcoVadis for the company and its broader implications.

Some companies approach the assessment primarily as a scoring exercise, with the goal of achieving a specific EcoVadis medal as quickly as possible. This often leads to short-term measures that are not integrated into overall ESG management. The result can be fluctuating scores between assessments, loss of a previously achieved medal, and frustration when expected improvements do not materialise in subsequent assessments.

A functional long-term approach is to view EcoVadis as a tool that reflects the maturity of sustainability management over time. An important and often underestimated phase is the evaluation of the received score and work with the Corrective Action Plan. The medal is then the outcome of this approach, not the objective in itself. Long-term stable results are built on systematic work with topics, data, and processes that evolve alongside the company and market requirements.

The supply chain is among the areas that frequently represent a weak point in the assessment, especially for manufacturing and trading companies of size S and above (more than 25 employees). Clear expectations towards suppliers are often missing, ethical or environmental requirements are not formally anchored, and sustainability criteria are not part of procurement processes. As a result, companies have little evidence to provide, even though they may already be aware of certain supply-chain risks.

The right approach does not mean immediately implementing robust supplier management systems. Even basic steps – such as a Supplier Code of Conduct, a simple definition of ethical and environmental criteria in procurement, or a supplier questionnaire – can have a significant impact on the assessment. What matters is that it is clear the company actively considers its supply chain and understands what it can substantiate in this area.

The final common mistake is inconsistency between what the company states in its answers and what is supported by the uploaded evidence. This may involve differing wording, incorrectly assigned or unassigned documents, unclear timeframes, or documents that do not support the claims made in the questionnaire. Such inconsistencies significantly reduce the credibility of the entire assessment, even when the underlying activities genuinely exist.

When completing the EcoVadis questionnaire, careful consistency checks between answers and documentation and a realistic description of the company’s current state are essential. EcoVadis does not require perfection, but it does expect a clear and coherent picture. Acknowledging weaker areas combined with a clearly described approach to addressing them is always better than attempting to present a situation that cannot be convincingly substantiated.

The EcoVadis assessment can be seen as a test of ESG management maturity. It is not about one-off compliance or formal “point collection.” In practice, it reveals whether sustainability is genuinely managed within the company – with clear priorities, responsibilities, data, and links to daily operations.

Companies that approach the assessment systematically achieve more stable results over time, respond more effectively to growing customer requirements, and are able to use EcoVadis as a tool for ESG management rather than an administrative burden. The key is to understand the assessment logic, work with material topics, and continuously develop processes and documentation – not just “fill in gaps” before the questionnaire deadline.

Do you need support with your first assessment, or are you aiming to improve your score in the next one?

👉 Schedule an online consultation with our expert team.