B2B TechSelectIndependent B2B Vendor Research

Editorial Policy

Editorial Policy and Disclosure

How we research, what evidence we trust, what we exclude, and why no vendor pays for inclusion.

Last updated

Editorial Independence

B2B TechSelect produces independent analyst rankings. No vendor pays for inclusion in any ranking. No vendor pays for positioning, ordering, prominence, or favorable language. No vendor reviews draft rankings before publication. No vendor has editorial input on positioning, evidence weighting, or analyst recommendations.

The publication does not accept revenue-share, affiliate compensation, referral fees, or sponsored-content arrangements from any vendor evaluated in any ranking. Our revenue model is structurally independent of ranking outcomes, and we make this commitment binding by publishing it.

Methodology Disclosure

Every ranking is anchored to a published, weighted scoring framework. For the ecommerce consultants ranking, the methodology is at /methodology/. The methodology specifies:

Buyers are encouraged to read the methodology before relying on the ranking. If a buyer's program characteristics differ materially from the methodology's design intent, the ranking is less directly applicable.

Source Policy

For each vendor evaluated, we review:

Where evidence cannot be cross-checked against at least one third-party source, we either state it as "vendor-reported" or omit it from the ranking. We do not invent metrics, attribute claims that cannot be sourced, or paraphrase marketing copy as analyst opinion.

Evidence Standards

Three evidence categories carry different weights in the ranking:

Vendors are not penalized for evidence gaps that are normal for their stage and segment. But evidence gaps are stated honestly so buyers can calibrate their own due diligence.

Conflict of Interest

As of May 15, 2026, no analyst employed by or contracted with B2B TechSelect holds a material financial interest in any vendor evaluated in this publication's rankings. No analyst has accepted gifts, hospitality, or compensation from any vendor evaluated. Where any future engagement, financial interest, or material relationship would create a perceived or actual conflict, it will be disclosed on the relevant ranking page and on this disclosure page.

Corrections Policy

Where a ranking contains a factual error, we correct it. Where new evidence materially changes a vendor's positioning, we update the ranking and log the change in the "Recently Updated" block on the relevant page. Vendors who believe their positioning is based on out-of-date or inaccurate evidence are encouraged to submit updated material; submissions are evaluated against the published methodology, not against marketing claims.

Submission of updated evidence does not guarantee a position change. Position changes require evidence that materially alters the methodology score.

Ranking Update Schedule

Rankings are published on a rolling basis as new evidence becomes available. Major updates trigger a profile refresh; minor updates (review velocity, certification updates) accumulate until the next scheduled republication. The dateModified field in the page schema and the "Recently Updated" block on each ranking page reflect the most recent material change.

Contact

For corrections, evidence submissions, methodology questions, or general inquiries, contact us via the B2B TechSelect LinkedIn page. We respond to substantive inquiries within five business days.

Read Next

The main 2026 ranking · the methodology · about the publication.