The Index of Online Excellence: Who’s top for construction, message and contact provisions?

Scott Payton looks deeper into our annual ranking of the world’s best companies for digital corporate communications to highlight the best online estates for navigation, visual impact and other areas. 

Earlier this month, we looked at the world’s best companies at serving investors, journalists, jobseekers and other key audience groups via their online channels. All this was drawn from our 2019 Index of Online Excellence, which was published in June.
 
Here are the companies that were the top performers in some of the other key areas that we evaluate in the Index:
 

Best for navigation and user orientation

 
Top-scoring company: Bayer (27 points out of a maximum of 32)
 
Screenshot-2019-07-18-at-15-46-28-(1).png
 
The Bayer web estate has undergone a refresh recently – and, unusually among redesigned corporate sites, has managed to retain highly effective usability with the updated look and feel. The keys to this are a well-implemented drop-down menu, left menus within sections, a common utility menu across its wide federation of separate sites, and vigorous use of right links to connect the estate.
 
Runners up: Unilever, GSK, Eni, BAT, NXP (26/32)
 

Best for online estate integration

 
Top-scoring company: GSK (15 points out of a maximum of 16)
 
Screenshot-2019-07-19-at-13-57-05-(1).png
 
GSK's compact, multi-level country-sites menu works well as a hub for the company's country-based web estate. Social media signposts are conventionally handled, and the company has made some useful improvements in relation to country-based social signposts. 
 
Runners up: Unilever, Nestlé, Sanofi (14/16)
 
 

Strongest home page and visual design

 
Top-scoring company: AXA (22 points out of a maximum of 24)
 
Screenshot-2019-07-19-at-14-00-42.png
 
The new AXA group website is an exceptionally good example of corporate website design. The copious use of dramatic, documentary-style imagery is particularly well done. But subtler effects are also impactful, lending a polished sheen to the total visual experience.
 
Runners up: Nestlé, Unilever, Verizon, (21/24)
 
 

Best for company information and internationalism

 
Top-scoring company: Nestlé (22 points out of a maximum of 24)
 
Screenshot-2019-07-19-at-14-03-26.png
 
Nestlé offers a great deal of good information on nestle.com about the company - what it does, how it is managed, its purpose and so on. History is very well covered (including several innovative features, such as a customisable timeline, ‘Your life in food’), and the main history timeline is now more engaging after a redesign. Nestlé also acts convincingly like a company with an international mindset, interested in engaging with a genuinely global stakeholder base. The main corporate site is in English only, but with much key information translated into relevant other languages. There is clear evidence of communication between the corporate centre and country site editors; indeed, content sharing between these sites appears to be stronger than ever after the estate-wide redesign.
 
Runners up: BP, Roche (21 points out of a maximum of 24)
 
 

Best for contact provisions

 
Top-scoring companies: GSK and Eni (11 points out of a maximum of 12)
 
Screenshot-2019-07-19-at-14-05-19.png
 
GSK's global ‘Contact us’ page is a model approach. It features clear language and comprehensive signposts, including simple but significant links to Facebook and Twitter. 
 
Screenshot-2019-07-19-at-14-09-21.png
Eni's contact page is welcoming and transparent, with clearly signposted direct contact options for a variety of stakeholders.
 
Runners up: Nestlé, ING, HSBC, Novo Nordisk, AXA, Vinci, Merck, Pfizer, Proctor & Gamble, General Electric (10/12)
 
Visit the Global Index 2019 page to see the full results, and download free Index publication.
 
The Bowen Craggs Database is the engine that drives the Index of Online Excellence, with detailed scoring and analysis for more than 100 global companies and best practice from the top performers.
 
First published 19 July, 2019
< Back to Commentaries