The methodology itself requires governance.
A rating system cannot credibly evaluate governance if its own decision process is opaque or unstable. Methodology governance establishes how criteria change, how reviewers are calibrated, how conflicts are managed, how evidence is protected and how decisions can be challenged.
Version control
Every rating identifies the methodology version applied to its evidence set and decision record.
Change control
Material changes have rationale, effective dates and transition rules.
Calibration
Reviewer decisions are tested for consistency across comparable evidence states.
Conflicts
Commercial and remediation functions are separated from final rating approval where required.
Records
Evidence, challenge, exceptions and approvals are retained to support reconstruction and review.
Appeal
Rated organizations have a documented process to contest factual error, omitted evidence or methodology misapplication.
Controlled information
Public methodology should be sufficient to explain what the rating means and how decisions are governed. Proprietary weights, thresholds, calibration parameters and anti-gaming logic can remain controlled where disclosure would undermine methodology integrity.