Firstsource Group USA - 1792 Exchange

Rating Overview

Firstsource Group USA is Medium Risk.

Firstsource Group USA is Medium Risk. The company often yields to political activism in shaping corporate governance, potentially alienating consumers, dividing employees, and harming shareholders. The company elevates merit, excellence, and integrity ahead of race and identity-based policies. Firstsource Group occasionally embraces corporate initiatives that redirect its central focus from business goals to partisan policies and divisive issues at times. This approach fails to safeguard free exercise, free speech, and free enterprise.

Rating Criteria

Corporate Weaponization Risk Levels
Criteria	Risk Level
Cancellations	Medium Risk
Discriminatory Philanthropy	Lower Risk
Employment Protection	High Risk

Corporate Weaponization ⓘ

Corporate Governance and Public Policy Risk Levels
Criteria	Risk Level
Advocacy Bias	Medium Risk
Funding	Medium Risk
Political Actions	Lower Risk

Corporate Governance and Public Policy ⓘ

Rating Criteria Detail

Criteria Risk Level Rationale

Corporate Weaponization

Criteria:

Has canceled customers, suppliers, or vendors due to their political views or religious beliefs OR corporately boycotts, divests, or sanctions regions, people groups, or industries.

Risk Level:

Medium

Rationale:

FirstSource received a score of 50 on the 2026 Corporate Equality Index (CEI) from the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), a political stakeholder group. The company recruits employees based on sexual identity issues. The company discriminates against vendors that do not promote divisive sex and gender policies, indicating it prioritizes sexual issues over merit (1)(2)(3). The company integrates ESG into its business practices. From its 2021-2022 ESG Report: “We integrated ESG risks – including employee safety and wellbeing, climate-related risks, inclusion and diversity (I&D), supplier management and customer expectations around ESG – into our enterprise risk management framework” (4). However, Firstsource has not publicly canceled customers, suppliers, or vendors based on political views or religious beliefs (5)(6)(7)(8).

Criteria:

Charitable giving (including employee matching programs) policies or practices discriminate against charitable organizations based on views or religious beliefs.

Risk Level:

Lower

Rationale:

Firstsource does not appear to discriminate against charitable organizations based on views or beliefs. However, it supports groups that work towards “empowerment and gender equality” (1)(2).

Criteria:

Employment policies fail to protect against viewpoint or other discrimination and/or are ideological in nature.

Risk Level:

High

Rationale:

Firstsource’s HRC 2026 CEI rating indicates the company forces employees to attend at least one, controversial training on gender identity, sexual orientation, transgender issues, and divisive racial ideology. The company provides gender transition guidelines for its employees (1)(2)(3). The company’s HRC 2025 CEI rating indicates the company forces employees to attend multiple, controversial trainings on gender identity, sexual orientation, transgender issues, and divisive racial ideology (4)(5). To commemorate International Pronouns Day, Firstsource launched an “Inclusive Language Guide”. The company also created Inclusion & Diversity Discussion Packs for its managers. The company engages in transgender-specific recruiting initiatives. From its 2023 ESG Report: “In a significant step towards inclusivity we recruited our first group of transgender employees in India setting an example for similar initiatives in other locations”. The company appears to prioritize diversity over merit in its supply chain. From its 2023 ESG Report: “Supplier diversity is a core aspect of our social responsibility program. We actively seek certified diverse suppliers aligned with our business strategy” (6). The company protects its employees against viewpoint discrimination. It “bases all employment decisions only on valid job requirements”. The company “takes affirmative action to ensure that minority group individuals, females, protected veterans, and qualified disabled persons are introduced into our workforce and considered for employment and advancement opportunities” (7).

Corporate Governance and Public Policy

Criteria:

Uses corporate reputation to support causes, organizations, or policies hostile to freedom of expression.

Risk Level:

Medium

Rationale:

Firstsource’s CEO, Vipul Khanna, signed the NASSCOM Inclusion & Diversity Pledge. Firstsoruce “promoted allyship with a Pride parade at work” (1). The company’s executives oversee the planning, implementation, and follow through of Inclusion and Diversity initiatives throughout the company. From its 2021-2022 ESG Report: “The Firstsource MD and CEO serves as the executive sponsor for the I&D (Inclusion and Diversity) initiatives. We have our I&D studio which consists of our enterprise leaders who ensure alignment of our I&D strategy with business objectives and drive accountability for results. Our I&D Advocate team of subject matter experts partner with the I&D Studio and responsible for building corporate-level frameworks and action plans” (2). Otherwise, there are no publicly known cases of Firstsource using its reputation to advance ideological causes or policies (3).

Criteria:

Uses corporate funds to advance ideological causes, organizations, or policies hostile to freedom of expression.

Risk Level:

Medium

Rationale:

Firstsource became a partner of Stonewall’s “Diversity Champions programme”, which advocates for the implementation of LGBTQ policies in the workplace (1). Otherwise, there are no publicly known cases of the company using corporate funds to advance ideological causes, organizations, or policies (2).

Criteria:

Uses corporate political actions and/or financial contributions for ideological, non-business purposes.

Risk Level:

Lower

Rationale:

Firstsource does not operate a PAC or engage in lobbying at this time (1)(2)(3). According to its 2021-2022 ESG Report, the company makes “No contribution to political parties” (4).