Fortune 100 Best Companies to Work For
Fortune released its 100 Best Companies to Work For a couple of weeks ago. It remains one of our preferred measures of external validation for corporate culture and employee sentiment for three reasons: (1) it has been published consistently since 1984, (2) it is not “pay-to-play” like many other rankings, and (3) there is extensive academic research linking inclusion to stronger financial performance.
Synchrony Financial ranked #1 this year and has now appeared on the list for nine consecutive years. Nineteen public companies have made the list every year for the past decade:
- Hilton
- Cisco
- American Express
- Nvidia
- Marriott
- Accenture
- Cadence Design Systems
- Pinnacle Financial Partners
- Camden Property Trust
- Rocket Companies
- Cheesecake Factory
- Salesforce
- Capital One
- Hyatt Hotels
- Intuit
- Adobe
- Stryker
- CarMax
- First American Financial
On the flip side, several large companies that were included in 2025 did not make this year’s list, including Walmart, Visa, and HP.
Get PeopleReturn insights in your inbox
EEO-1 Data Explosion
The timing—and even existence—of this year’s EEO-1 filing window remains unclear. As with last year, there are growing indications the administration may not collect employer data at all.
In the meantime, disclosure trends are moving in both directions.
Several large companies continue to publish EEO-1 reports voluntarily. Boston Properties (BXP) released its report for the first time, while Akamai Technologies, Allstate, and Conagra Brands posted 2024 data in recent weeks.
At the same time, others are stepping back. Large tech companies including Nvidia, Alphabet, Microsoft, and Meta Platforms have indicated they will no longer publicly disclose their EEO-1 data. Only 56% of S&P 500 companies published a 2024 report compared to 74% the prior yea
What has changed meaningfully is overall data availability.
Public disclosure only became widespread in 2020–2021, leaving historical company-level coverage relatively thin. That changed following a court order tied to a long-running FOIA case, which resulted in the release of 2016–2020 EEO-1 reports for thousands of federal contractors.
The result is a step-change in coverage. Our dataset has expanded by nearly 30% and now includes over 13,000 reports across more than 2,000 companies—covering 94% of the S&P 500 and 79% of the Russell 1000.
IBM’s ‘Illegal DEI’
The DOJ announced last week that IBM will pay $17 million to settle allegations related to what it characterized as “illegal DEI practices.”
This may be the first of many such cases, but IBM is a somewhat surprising early target given how common the underlying practices have been.
Based on available details, the issues centered on linking executive compensation to diversity-related goals and requiring diverse candidate slates in hiring processes—both of which were widely adopted across large public companies in recent years.
In an analysis we conducted of the S&P 100 in mid-2024, roughly half of companies had set explicit numerical targets for representation and/or hiring of specific demographic groups (which IBM had not). Tying executive compensation to DEI metrics was also a common feature of compensation programs at the time.
For example, Starbucks disclosed goals including:
- At least 30% women in all manufacturing roles (director, manager, individual contributor)
- At least 40% of all manufacturing roles to be held by BIPOC partners (director, manager, individual contributor)
- At least 50% women for all corporate roles
- At least 30% of all corporate roles to be held by BIPOC partners
- At least 55% women in all retail roles
- At least 40% BIPOC representation in all retail roles
- 100% gender equity in pay globally for company-operated markets
- 100% racial pay equity in U.S.
- Hire 5,000 Veterans and military spouses
The company also tied 10% of annual incentive compensation to inclusion and diversity goals.
What happens next is an open question. It will be worth watching whether companies choose to challenge these cases or, like IBM, opt to settle quickly—often for amounts that are immaterial relative to their size.
Proxy Season Update
We are now roughly two-thirds of the way through proxy season. A few trends are clearly emerging.
Our overall transparency score—which measures the share of demographic characteristics companies disclose about their boards—has declined slightly year-over-year and is now roughly in line with 2021 levels.
Across the board, the pattern is consistent: larger companies remain significantly more transparent than smaller peers. In 2026, 72% of S&P 500 companies have disclosed at least one quantitative measure of board diversity, compared to just 55% of the Russell 3000.
The implication is fairly straightforward. Many small- and mid-cap companies appear to have been disclosing board composition primarily in response to external pressure. As that pressure has eased—particularly from asset managers and proxy advisors—disclosure has pulled back, especially outside of large caps.
The most pronounced shift is in LGBTQ+ board disclosure. This metric was encouraged (though not required) under the Nasdaq Board Diversity Rule, which was struck down ahead of last proxy season. Since then, disclosure has dropped off sharply and consistently across indices.
If you’re looking for more granular detail on board disclosures or broader governance signals during proxy season, we’re happy to share additional cuts of the data.
What we’re reading:
- Rising AI Adoption Spurs Workforce Changes For the first time in Gallup’s measurement, half of employed American adults say they use AI in their role at least a few times a year, up from 46% last quarter. Frequent AI use is also increasing, with 13% of employees now saying they use AI daily and 28% reporting they use it a few times a week or more. (Gallup)
- White House Study Says DEI Hurts Productivity Much of Corporate America in the past decade embraced the theory that diversity, equity and inclusion policies were good for productivity and profits.A new White House study concludes the opposite: DEI policies that encourage hiring managers on the basis of race undercut the industries that adopted them, and the broader economy. (Wall Street Journal)
- The Proof Is in the Proxy: Connecting Governance to Returns Investors have long suspected that companies with poor corporate governance may be more prone to mismanagement and weak returns. Our research suggests they’re right. Specifically, our proxy voting study shows a connection between governance and return. We think proxy voting is one of the best tools investors can use to express a view on the quality of a firm’s governance, providing it’s based on careful analysis and accountability, not a rubber stamp. (AllianceBernstein)
- US pension funds defend human capital disclosures to SEC A series of US pension investors have defended the utility of human capital management disclosures to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) as the regulator seeks to revise its corporate disclosure requirements. The SEC’s call for public comments on potential reforms to Regulation S-K, which governs corporate disclosures in the country, closed on Monday with 58 responses from market participants and observers. (Responsible Investor)
- Is DEI dead in U.S. workplaces? IBM’s settlement raises new questions for HR Diversity, Culture & Belonging? Talent, Inclusion & Opportunity? Fair Opportunity? Across the U.S., companies are experimenting with creative alternatives to the now‑loaded “Diversity, Equity and Inclusion” or “DEI” label. The rebranding isn’t superficial, either. It’s happening against the backdrop of the federal government’s campaign against what it calls “illegal DEI,” most recently highlighted by IBM’s roughly US$17 million settlement over alleged violations tied to its federal contracts. (HRD)
- Opinion: Corporate America needs to come clean about AI’s impact on jobs Artificial intelligence is rapidly reshaping how companies operate, compete and profit. From software development to logistics to customer service, AI promises major gains in productivity. It is increasingly driving hiring decisions, workforce size and layoffs. Yet companies consistently fail to give investors clear, comparable information on how their AI strategies are affecting employees and long-term business growth. They’re eager to highlight productivity gains, but rarely provide transparency on AI’s consequences. That’s why, as trustee of the New York State Common Retirement Fund, I’m calling on corporations in our portfolio to increase transparency around AI’s impacts on their operations, especially when innovation has significant implications for a company’s workforce. (City & State)
- Corporate Value(s) In this Article, we set out to align those who highlight the importance of values with those who maintain that a corporation’s proper role is to focus on value. We argue that managers should select the corporate values that maximize long-term economic value. To do so, however, managers need to understand the economic significance of corporate values. Understanding the values of corporate stakeholders is a key input in that assessment. (SSRN)
- Consulting Used to Be a Dream First Job. AI Changed That The big consulting firms harvest thousands of fresh graduates each year—estimates range from 10,000 to 45,000 entry-level hires, depending on the role—offering pay, prestige and connections that can pave the way for partnerships or C-suite roles down the line. But the industry is still course-correcting from a post-pandemic hiring binge that led to delayed start dates, layoffs and sluggish salary growth, making applicants wary. On top of all of that, artificial intelligence is now able to handle much of the grunt work previously done by junior consultants. While that hasn’t led to the wholesale hiring reductions many young job seekers fear, it’s forced firms to reassess entry-level roles and how they recruit for them. (Bloomberg)