This message was posted by a user wishing to remain anonymous
Hi Cheryl: We use the internet for adverse media but try to stick to the facts such as news releases, BBB complaints (not reviews) and the BBB rating, CFPB complaints (we're a financial institution), Federal Trade Commission, pending litigation (which might also be found in SEC filings for public companies), etc.
We don't completely discount employee reviews but if we see a news story about lay-offs, then it makes sense that we might see a lot of negative employee reviews. The most helpful employee reviews we found were in one case where several former employees commented on "technology debt" (where systems were quickly patched haphazardly with the intent of going back later to fix it properly) - we asked the vendor about it and it was true. They shared their remediation plan with us, and then we were able to track their progress.
Our thinking on reviews is that generally people that don't have something nice to say have more energy to say it publicly. We also consider whether or not the complaint is for a line of business we have under contract.
To tie these thoughts together - just today I saw a lot of complaints about customer service for one of our vendors, and employee reviews that complained about the lack of training. (Are these related?) The complaints were about a direct-to-consumer line of business, but we have a back-office product under contract and our IT folks are very happy with it. On the surface, it looked terrible, but when all of the available information was considered together, the picture seemed a bit different.
There are regulations for financial institutions that prohibit performing transactions for certain people, businesses, and/or countries. While not a true background check, we run all of our vendors against a federal database on a regular basis to ensure we are in compliance with federal regulations.
Great topic!