3 Steps Towards Building a Better Compliance Culture Reply

A corporation’s compliance culture: that intangible force that permeates a company’s entire way of doing business.  Like an invisible hand of ethical expectations, it guides employees to do the right thing in difficult situations.  But how well are companies cultivating their compliance culture?

In a recent 2012 survey conducted by Ernst & Young, a stunning 15% of respondents said that they were prepared to make cash bribes to win or retain business.  That means that 15% of respondents were willing to break the law – putting themselves and their companies at risk of criminal penalties – in order to win a business opportunity.  The survey was comprised of 1,700 interviews of chief financial officers and heads of legal, compliance and internal audit in 43 different countries.  The survey is a cold reminder that for a sizable minority of companies the message remains plain: win at any cost.

A healthy compliance culture, on the other hand, not only helps a company stay out of trouble, but it also builds a company’s reputation as trustworthy and can often lead to gaining new business opportunities.  How, then, to change the message?  Below are three steps that compliance officers are taking in the uphill battle towards building a better compliance culture at their companies:

1)  Change The Incentive Structure – Studies have found that people act dishonestly less out of a desire for personal gain and more out of anxiety for what will happen to them if they don’t cheat.  In a recent article in Scientific America Mind entitled “Why We Cheat”, it was revealed that “many instances of dishonesty in the real world result when people find themselves in a situation in which they face losing money, reputation or their career.”  That goes double in a bad economy.  “There is little question that the current economic situation has exerted negative pressure on employees,” writes Ernst & Young in their report.  “One of the most troubling findings of the survey is the widespread acceptance of unethical business practices.”

Companies need to be aware of these pressures and create incentive structures and reward systems that counteract the impulses to act unethically.  This entails giving employees a sense of security that they will be rewarded, not punished, by doing the right thing.

Walmart associates from around globe gather during the 2011 Walmart Shareholders' Meeting. (photo by Wesley Hitt, Hitt Photography)

Walmart associates from around the globe gather during the 2011 Walmart Shareholders’ Meeting. (photo by Wesley Hitt, Hitt Photography)

That’s what Walmart’s trying to do right now.  Last year, Walmart made front-page headlines when it was alleged that their employees had been paying bribes in various countries around the world.  Since then, the company has spent millions of dollars to reform its compliance program, and, more importantly, change its compliance culture.  Part of that shift has been changing its executive compensation plan so that pay is not only based on financial measures, like sales, operating income, and return on investment, but also based on whether they’ve successfully overhauled their compliance operations.  By changing the incentive structure, such as Walmart is trying to do, companies send a message to their employees that compliance is more than just some hollow promise.

2)  Nip Bad Behavior in the Bud – Strict enforcement against infractions – even minor ones – can help prevent bigger problems down the road.  It’s what Dan Ariely, a behavioral economist at Duke University, describes as the “what the hell effect” – an attitude that develops after a person has already broken a rule once, leading them to cheat more frequently.  “Just as an untreated minor infection may progress to a more serious condition, minor acts of dishonesty that pass without consequences may be followed by more egregious misconduct,” writes Scientific MindMore…

TRACE Profile: Stories from the Front Lines of Due Diligence Reply

Over the last decade, TRACE’s team of due diligence associates has performed over 300,000 due diligence reviews in over 135 countries.  Headquartered in Annapolis, Maryland, we never outsource our due diligence to independent contractors. We conduct all reviews using in-house research capabilities and the  twenty different languages we have represented here.  With all of that background expertise, we like to showcase our due diligence analysts on TRACE Blog and allow them to share their personal stories from the front lines of anti-bribery due diligence.

Today we interview Patricia “Patty” Orndorff, a TRACE due diligence associate with over four years of experience conducting due diligence of third party intermediaries.   Patty is usually the one asking the questions,  but we caught up with her and turned the tables for this interview.

———————–

Patty

Patricia “Patty” Orndorff

TRACE Blog [TB]Patty, I know you started out in education.  Can you explain for our readers how you began working at TRACE?

Patricia Orndorff [PO]: Right, well prior to joining TRACE, I worked in the education sector for 31 years in Anne Arundel County, Maryland.  I started out as a high school French teacher and then later worked in various resource positions—first as a resource person for strategic planning and school development for the entire county school system, then as the coordinator of a team of nearly 60 teachers who taught English to the county’s English Language Learners and finally I became the Director of Curriculum.

Then, in 2007, I was offered a job as Curriculum Director for the City of Baltimore, MD, but due to the downturn in the economy, the position was not funded.  About this time, I was offered a teaching position in the Johns Hopkins Graduate School of Education, teaching curriculum courses and I did that for two years.  One day, I saw an ad in the newspaper for TRACE and read that they were seeking people with language capabilities, especially in French and Spanish.  I thought, “why not?”  The interview process began and a few weeks later I ended up joining TRACE.

TBHas your background in education helped your work at TRACE?

PO:  Well I really enjoyed working with teachers and I still consider myself a teacher at heart.  I once was reviewing a company and the whole process was moving really slowly.  I was sending reminder e-mails all the time.  At last, the point of contact told me, “You are really keeping me on track.  You are like my teacher when I was in high school.” I laughed and told him that there was a reason he felt that way!  I guess that in both jobs you end up having to chase people down.  And ultimately both are rewarding in the sense that I enjoy helping wonderful people most of the time.

TB: So does TRACE assign all third party intermediaries from French speaking nations to you then?

PO:  I don’t think I have all of the French speaking companies.  I know that there are a few other analysts who also speak French.  But I do have many small companies that don’t have any employees who speak English – mostly from West Africa and a few from France.

Once, I went to one of the employee training conferences in Paris with the TRACE team to help translate.  At the time I was just finishing the file of a company that was located outside of Paris.  I told the company that I was going to be in Paris and my point of contact ended up being a really nice gentleman and we met for coffee in a small café in Paris.  It was really nice to put a face to the contact. More…

Why We Ask For References: TRACE Vignettes Reply

TRACE LogoTRACE Vignettes, a recurring segment on our blog, is an opportunity to share with our readers interesting, real-life due diligence tales that come direct from our team of analysts.

A few weeks ago, while conducting a review of a small, seven-person South Korean distribution company, we were again reminded that checking out business and financial references is more than just checking a box.  Depending on the type of due diligence being conducted, TRACE will sometimes ask for business and financial references when vetting a third party to screen not only for effectiveness and reputation, but also for government relations and business ethics. In some cases, such as this one, the exercise can prove truly enlightening.

When the South Korean company provided TRACE with a reference, our due diligence analyst noticed that the name listed on the reference’s business card was the same name as a director of the company itself.  The analyst emailed the distributor back and asked if there had been an error or if the company had listed one of its own directors as a business reference.

The company’s response was to ignore the question and simply to provide a new financial reference.  But by then, alarm bells had begun to sound.  Again, TRACE pressed the issue and asked if the director was also an employee of the business reference.  The reply was a curt “no.”  Something seemed definitely amiss.  TRACE once again followed the trail: “Was that you that filled out the financial reference form?  How are you associated with [the financial reference]?”

After a few more back-and-forth communications, the mystery finally came to an end.  The distributor admitted that it had completely fabricated the reference’s business card and e-mail address and listed one of its own directors as a point of contact.  The director had even signed a questionnaire vouching that the candidate company had “excellent” business ethics and practices.  And yet what was perhaps most surprising of all is that the company still didn’t seem to think it had done anything wrong: couldn’t TRACE simply just ignore the whole matter and use the second business contact as a reference instead?

Suffice to say that TRACE denied the company certification. Forging documents and creating fake business cards and e-mail addresses does not, as one might imagine, instill the greatest confidence in business ethics. A good eye for detail combined with a bit of perseverance, on the other hand, can often uncover what lies just beneath the surface.

5 Ways to Fight Off Anti-bribery Compliance Fatigue Reply

Compliance Fatigue  

2012 Survey conducted by Ernst & Young this past summer indicates that a large portion of Chief Financial Officers are experiencing “a certain degree of fatigue about anti-corruption and compliance initiatives.”  This is not entirely surprising given the fact that companies are currently spending tens of millions of dollars on internal corruption investigations and anti-bribery compliance measures.

Compliance fatigue can, however, be avoided.  Just as one of the best ways to fight off the common flu is simply to practice every day good hygiene like remembering to wash your hands, so too can companies make life easier for themselves by practicing easy, every day compliance solutions.  The key is to streamline the compliance process and adopt cost-effective solutions.  We’ve listed below five ways compliance officers are doing just that and warding off compliance fatigue in their companies:

1.      Remember, perfection is neither possible nor necessary.  When devising a compliance plan, More…