How to publish
NPS properly

A short guide for companies who want to be believed — not just impressive.

You've read the Hall of Shame. You've winced in recognition or righteous indignation. Now the constructive bit: what does a credible Net Promoter Score (NPS) disclosure actually look like? Turns out, it's not complicated. It's just rarely done.

What the Hall of Shame does

✗Surveys 30 people at their happiest moment and calls it world-class
✗Publishes a score with no sample size, no methodology, no auditor
✗Announces NPS in a press release alongside a hire or a funding round
✗Measures volunteers, graduates, or award recipients and calls it customers
✗Discloses once, never again, no accountability

What credible disclosure looks like

✓Representative sample, measured across the full customer base, not cherry-picked moments
✓n= disclosed, methodology explained, third-party where possible
✓Published in financial reports or investor materials — contexts with accountability
✓Clearly defines who was asked: customers, not advocates or fans
✓Published consistently, with prior period comparisons

The credibility problem hiding in plain sight

NPS has a trust problem — not because the metric is broken, but because disclosure is unregulated. Any company can publish any number with any methodology (or none) and call it their Net Promoter Score. There is no GAAP for customer experience. No auditor insists on a minimum sample size. No regulator questions whether the respondents were actually customers.

This creates a market for lemons. Companies with genuinely excellent customer relationships — measured rigorously and reported honestly — sit in the same database as companies that surveyed their own LinkedIn followers after a product launch. The number looks the same. The credibility could not be more different.

The good news: doing it properly is not hard. It just requires three things most companies are reluctant to provide: transparency, consistency, and the courage to publish a number that might not be 95.

The six standards
of credible NPS

Disclose your sample size

Every published NPS should include n=. A score of 72 from 3,400 respondents is fundamentally different information than a score of 72 from 34 respondents. Without n=, the number has no statistical weight. If you're proud of your NPS, be proud of how many people contributed to it.

Good example: "Our 2025 NPS of 72 is based on 4,218 responses collected across our global customer base over a 12-month rolling period."

Define who you surveyed

Customer NPS, employee NPS, partner NPS, volunteer NPS, and graduate NPS are four completely different things. None is more valid than the others — but they are not interchangeable. Be explicit: who received the survey? What was their relationship with your organisation? Were they self-selected or representative?

Good example: "Measured across all active accounts with >90 days tenure, surveyed via email, response rate 34%."

Avoid peak-moment capture

Measuring NPS immediately after a positive outcome — a purchase, a graduation, a successful treatment — gives you sentiment data, not loyalty data. Relationship NPS, measured at neutral intervals throughout the customer lifecycle, is what predicts retention and growth. If your survey goes out the day someone achieves their goal with you, your score reflects their goal, not your relationship.

Good example: "Relationship NPS surveyed quarterly, at 90-day intervals post-onboarding, not tied to specific transactions."

Publish in accountable contexts — and your own website

NPS that appears only in press releases, award entries, or LinkedIn posts carries zero accountability. The same number that features on your "About Us" page on your website*, in an annual report, earnings call transcript, or sustainability filing carries a very different weight — because it is associated with a document that has legal and reputational consequences. Choose your disclosure context deliberately. Bonus points for your CEO talking about it on an earnings call.

*See our sister site TheCustomerTest.com for evidence and guidance on how to do this.

Good example: Fresenius Medical Care, disclosing NPS in their joint annual report and sustainability report, year-on-year, with prior period comparison.

Report consistently over time

A single NPS score is interesting. The same score measured the same way for three years is genuinely valuable. Consistency of methodology over time is what allows external observers — investors, customers, analysts — to make meaningful comparisons. Changing your methodology without disclosure is indistinguishable from managing the number.

Good example: Bigbank AS, disclosing NPS monthly as part of their standard financial reporting, with month-on-month comparisons, since 2023.

Have the courage to publish bad news

The single most credible thing a company can do with NPS is publish a score that went down — and explain why. Bonheur ASA disclosed that their Balmoral division dropped from 63 to 36 in a year. That disclosure, uncomfortable as it is, builds more trust than seven consecutive press releases claiming scores above 90. Declining scores, explained honestly, are credibility assets.

Good example: eXp World Holdings, reporting Q1 2026 agent NPS of 67 — down from a record 78 — and addressing it in their earnings call.