Categories
Great Women in Compliance

Leaving a Lasting Impression with Wendy Wysong

Welcome to the Great Women in Compliance Podcast, co-hosted by Lisa Fine and Mary Shirley.

In 2011, Mary attended a conference in Singapore and listened to a learned lawyer speak about the FCPA.  Her name is Wendy Wysong and though they did not speak, Mary remembered Wendy’s name and many years later, connected with her on LinkedIn and ten years later asked Wendy to be on the Great Women in Compliance podcast.  Such was the lasting impression Wendy left from her talk that day.  Wendy is an American based in Hong Kong and shares some of her experiences of what work and life has been like during the pandemic.

 The two GWIC discuss the lessened guidance coming from US regulators in 2021 vs 2020, making adaptions to investigations during the pandemic with less ability to travel and how data privacy requirements have changed the way Wendy thinks about doing business.  This episode is snappy and right to the point with astute observations from Wendy packed into a relatively short timeframe – it’s perfect for filling a spare 20 minutes of your time or to keep you company while decluttering your drawers or vacuuming (iPods an essential for listening in while doing housework!).

The Great Women in Compliance Podcast is on the Compliance Podcast Network with a selection of other Compliance related offerings to listen in to.  If you are enjoying this episode, please rate it on your preferred podcast player to help other likeminded Ethics and Compliance professionals find it.  You can also find the GWIC podcast on Corporate Compliance Insights where Lisa and Mary have a landing page with additional information about them and the story of the podcast.  Corporate Compliance Insights is a much appreciated sponsor and supporter of GWIC, including affiliate organization CCI Press publishing the related book; “Sending the Elevator Back Down, What We’ve Learned from Great Women in Compliance” (CCI Press, 2020).

You can subscribe to the Great Women in Compliance podcast on any podcast player by searching for it and we welcome new subscribers to our podcast.

Join the Great Women in Compliance community on LinkedIn here.

Categories
Blog

Compliance and a Human Rights Strategy: Part 2

Yesterday, I began a series considering how a Chief Compliance Officer (CCO) and corporate compliance function can help lead a company’s human rights initiatives against such scourges as human trafficking and modern slavery based upon a recent MIT Sloan Management Review article, entitled “Does Your Business Need a Human Rights Strategy?,by authors N. Craig Smith, Markus Scholz and Jane Williams. In this piece, they took a solid look at both the risk side of this equation as well developing a corporate strategy to deal with the issue. Yesterday we looked at a framework to assess the human rights issues your organization may face in doing business across the globe. Today, we consider how to use that assessment in crafting a human rights strategy.
Three Key Decisions
The authors believe there are three key decisions an organization must make to determine a strategy and then begin to execute on that strategy.
Decision 1: Exit, Voice, or Silence?
At the most basic level the initial decision a company must make is whether to get involved. The authors believe, “business leaders must decide whether the issue requires further attention and, possibly, action. Is it serious enough to warrant divesting operations and/or possibly leaving the country? If not, what other options are available?” The caution that this calculus is “not always straightforward, nor is flight always the most appropriate action: Pulling out of a country can not only seriously impact a business’s bottom line but also harm the communities in which it operates, such as by eliminating local jobs or ending prosocial initiatives the company has taken.” However, in the event that an organization “makes the choice to continue operating and to work to address systemic human rights abuses within its environment, it needs to develop a nuanced strategy and be very deliberate about how and with whom it interacts.”
Decision 2: A Collective or Individual Approach?
The authors believe that if a company “chooses to stay and take action, it must decide whether the issue is best addressed by the company individually or should be undertaken collectively with other organizations or stakeholders.” At times such an individual approach can be effective if the company is large enough to have influence and can act with expedience. Conversely, smaller organizations may team up with other companies or even other stakeholders.
For this latter situation, the authors pointed to “the reaction of companies in the garment sector after the 2012 Rana Plaza tragedy in Bangladesh offers an example of collective action… Companies in the sector worked together to introduce the Accord on Fire and Building Safety in Bangladesh, an independent, legally binding agreement formed among global brands, retailers, and trade unions. Since the accord’s creation, engineers have inspected more than 2,000 garment factories, addressed more than 150,000 safety hazards, and helped set up safety training programs that have educated more than 1.4 million workers in proper workplace safety practices.”
Decision 3: Which Actions and Tactics Should Be Chosen?
Next is the move into execution. Should an organization “take direct action to stop human rights violations or whether more can be done by indirectly influencing the institutional settings in which they operate.” In the Rani Plaza response, the indirect strategy proved effective but “if ready-made garment brands had become aware that a particular factory presented an extreme and urgent threat to life — they may have instead chosen to take direct action, such as putting pressure on politicians or legal enforcement agencies to close or force repairs to the building.”
Tactics
The next set of decisions is around tactics. Should they be direct or indirect? In the direct tactics camp, the authors provide three examples. (1) Companies can provide information about human rights abuses. (2) Organizations can decide whom to provide financial aid to in the fight for human rights. (3) Businesses can engage in certain activities or decline to participate in commercial events. Under indirect tactics the authors also list three examples, including: (a) Companies can work to strengthen and otherwise support NGO or other similar organizations fighting human rights abuses. (b) Businesses can sign up for international initiatives such the UN Compact on climate change or NGO efforts to fight human trafficking and modern slavery, such as put forward by the Global Fund to End Modern Slavery. (c) Organizations can work to develop, solely or in conjunction with others “new standards that supplement hard law. By acting collectively or alongside other multistakeholder initiatives, organizations can individually create rules of the game that define guardrails for corporate behavior.”
However sometimes, even with the most robust risk analysis and a defined strategy, a company makes the decision it must leave. As the authors noted, “There may be times when, in balancing the tension between the moral and business imperative, leaders feel that the best — or only — choice is for a company to leave, be it a problematic supply chain, a market where its products are implicated in human rights abuses, or even an entire country. The decision then will be whether to take the high road and exit with fanfare to publicly signal.” This happened with many energy companies and Venezuela in the last decade. Just last week, NPR reported, “Total Energies and Chevron, two of the world’s largest energy companies, said Friday they were stopping all operations in Myanmar, citing rampant human rights abuses and deteriorating rule of law since the country’s military overthrew the elected government in February.”
The bottom line is that doing nothing is no longer an option. As human trafficking and modern slavery become more publicized, international companies must work to assess their risks and manage those risks through a human rights strategy. The authors end by stating, “Companies are increasingly expected to assume political responsibilities. Doing nothing when there is an arsenal of options available might easily be interpreted as — at minimum — silent complicity with human rights violations.” Once again compliance needs to lead the way for every business on this issue.

Categories
The Compliance Life

Valerie Charles – CCOs and the Compliance Profession Down the Road


The Compliance Life details the journey to and in the role of a Chief Compliance Officer. How does one come to sit in the CCO chair? What are some of the skills a CCO needs to success navigate the compliance waters in any company? What are some of the top challenges CCOs have faced and how did they meet them? These questions and many others will be explored in this new podcast series. Over four episodes each month on The Compliance Life, I visit with one current or former CCO to explore their journey to the CCO chair. This month, my guest is Valerie Charles, partner at StoneTurn. We discuss Valerie’s journey to the CCO chair, then to a ComTech start up, to her current role at StoneTurn and look down the road at where ComTech and compliance will be in 2025 and beyond.
In this concluding episode, Valerie looks down the road at the compliance function. She believes there will be increased use of ComTech by compliance functions. Moreover, CCOs and compliance professionals will need learn how to use data and become more comfortable in leveraging data for insights to help prevent, detect and remediate corporate conduct. The corporate compliance function will become even more important in the corporate setting as it will bring together various corporate functions such as legal, HR and IT into collaborative actions.
Resources
Valerie Charles LinkedIn Profile
Valerie Charles at StoneTurn

Categories
Blog

Compliance and a Human Rights Strategy: Part 1

The compliance intersection with Environmental, Social, and Corporate Governance (ESG) continues to drive many initiatives in both the ESG realm as well as compliance. One of the key areas is in found in corporate Supply Chain, particularly around human rights, human trafficking and modern slavery. The Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act puts additional pressure on companies who do business with China to be able to affirmatively show no goods or services were produced through forced labor involving the Chinese Uyghur population, much to the consternation of the Chinese government. Most compliance professionals depend on language in supplier contracts which certify that no products are the result of slave labor. A New York Times (NYT) piece, entitled U.S. Effort to Combat Forced Labor Targets Corporate China Ties, reported, “One of the biggest hurdles for U.S. businesses is determining whether their products touched Xinjiang at any point in the supply chain. Many companies complain that beyond their direct suppliers, they lack the leverage to demand information from the Chinese firms that manufacture raw materials and parts.” However, that most basic approach is no longer adequate.
In a recent Sloan Management Review article, entitled “Does Your Business Need a Human Rights Strategy?,authors N. Craig Smith, Markus Scholz and Jane Williams took a solid look at both the risk side of this equation as well developing a corporate strategy to deal with the issue. Over the next couple of blog posts, I will be exploring the article in the context of the compliance professional and a corporate ESG strategy.
While the Chinese response may be painful, it will frankly pale next to the response from the US government and the buying public. With so much increased attention to human rights, the authors believe “businesses that turn a blind eye to violations that occur in their sphere of operations face the risk of being exposed as morally complicit as well as vulnerable to legal action and reputational harm. That’s why it’s critical for companies to have a human rights strategy and proactively consider when and how to take the action needed to fulfill their moral obligations; meet shareholder, customer, and employee expectations; and keep other stakeholders satisfied.”
Three Categories of Human Rights Violations
The authors believe there are three broad categories of human rights issues. They are:

  1. Abuse in the way a company’s products or services are made or delivered. This includes abuse by suppliers or contractors or within a company’s own operations. Although most western companies believe this is not a problem for them, a UK investigation found a slave labor operation within the country itself, which was supplying food products to such UK retailors as Tesco, Sainsbury’s and others.
  2. Abuse in the way a company’s products or services are used. This includes companies that find themselves complicit when customers employ their products or services to do so — if not legally complicit, then at least guilty in the court of public opinion. The obvious example here are the digital surveillance systems sold to Chinese security agencies and used to implement a mass surveillance program against minority groups while creating an overall surveillance state within the country.
  3. Abuse by regimes where the company operates. This may be one of the trickiest to navigate. Obviously working with governments is an important business component but even working with the US government can be trick as McKinsey found out when it contracted with Customs and Borders and “Media reports suggested that the consultancy had been redirected to assist in former President Donald Trump’s clampdown on illegal immigration and was responsible for money-saving recommendations that included cuts in funding for food, medical care, and the supervision of detainees.”

Obligations to Address Human Rights
 Both compliance and ESG have driven the discussion on the role of the corporation in dealing with this issue. The Business Roundtable’s Statement on the Purpose of a Corporation also pointed in this direction. Companies are now being called to engage as responsible corporate citizens in a wide variety of areas, including human rights. The authors see four reasons why a company should consider human rights a priority. (1) Moral reasons. The fight against human trafficking and slavery are moral duties that require not simply a call for action but real action. Inaction is no longer acceptable. (2) Legal considerations. Together with the US, multiple  countries have enacted laws that require organizations to act in ways that protect and promote human rights. (3) Soft laws. Standards may come into play, such as the United Nations’ Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, and are becoming more important. (4) Reputation. With social media, amplifying human trafficking and other human rights issues which may have been more inconspicuous in the past, it is making businesses increasingly vulnerable to being accused of complicity.
Corporate Exposure

The authors have developed an approach which identifies key factors driving ““corporate human rights strategies and used them to create an exposure” scale. This tool captures both the moral intensity and the potential influence of a company in a specific situation.” Understanding where your organization lies on such a scale can assist a Chief Compliance Officer (CCO) or compliance professional to not only lead a discussion but more importantly help to formulate a corporate response. The twin axis are moral intensity and influence. Moral intensity “captures the degree to which people see a situation as unethical and demanding of action.” Some of the questions you need to consider include what is the magnitude of consequences? The extent of the harm likely to result? What is the social consensus, the extent to which people agree on the moral rights and wrongs of an issue? What is the probability of effect and how likely is harm to happen? What is the “Temporal immediacy. How urgent is the issue? Is fast action required to prevent harm?” How near is your organization to the issue and what part of your stakeholder communities will be affected by the issue?
 
The authors believe that determining influence is even trickier. They believe a nuanced approach should be used when assessing an organization’s influence. Their approach includes reviewing institutional factors, then understand “What are the formal and informal rules and values that shape the environment, including willingness — or pressure — to conform?” Next look at some industry specifics to help understand  “How is influence affected by factors such as the complexity of supply chains, the geographic location of where vital products are sourced, or the degree of concentration or fragmentation of the industry?” From there review your resources to help understand “What can the organization bring to bear to influence the issue?” Such a review would look at both “tangible resources, such as funds, inventory, land, and buildings;” as well as “intangible ones, such as networks, skills, and knowledge.” Finally, consider embeddedness, which is “How closely and on how many levels is the company entangled with the perpetrators of abuse?”
Tomorrow we will look at how you can create a corporate human rights strategy for your corporate compliance regime or ESG program based upon the authors’ model.

Categories
FCPA Compliance Report

Andrew Neblett and Brian Beeghly Join Ethisphere

In this episode of the FCPA Compliance Report, I am joined by Andrew Neblett and Brian Beeghly, co-founders of Informed360 who recently joined forces with Ethisphere. Highlights of this podcast include:

  1. Tells us about Informed360 platform
  2. Why did you decide to join Ethisphere?
  3. How will the Informed360 solution be integrated into the Ethisphere offering(s)?
  4. As a combined company how will this improve compliance offerings?
  5. How will you be able to take data and provide insights for enhancement of compliance programs?
  6. Their roles at Ethisphere moving forward.

Resources

Check out the upcoming webinar Turning Ethics and Compliance Insights into Action. Register at Ethisphere.com/events

Categories
Daily Compliance News

January 24, 2022 the Burnout in Compliance Edition


In today’s edition of Daily Compliance News:

  • Trouble at Peleton. (WaPo)
  • Bank compliance professionals facing burnout. (WSJ)
  • Family trouble in the Magic Kingdom. (NYT)
  • Congress to probe role of BODs in energy cos misinformation campaigns. (Retuers)
Categories
This Week in FCPA

Episode 287 – the Activision Blizzard Sold edition


As both of their teams are unceremoniously knocked out of the playoffs, Tom and Jay are back looking at some of the week’s top compliance and ethics stories this week in the Activision Blizzard Sold edition.
Stories

  1. Activision Blizzard was sold to Microsoft. Check out articles on how the NYT happened, the parameters of the deal in the  WSJ, the compliance mess in Bloomberg, and legal issues in  Reuters.
  2. Did the pandemic undo corruption risk models? Dick Cassin explores in the FCPA Blog.
  3. KPMG spanked yet again in the UK. Jaclyn Jaeger in Compliance Week (sub req’d).
  4. Person of the Year in Compliance? ESG. Mike Volkov in Corruption Crime and Compliance.   
  5. Is Abby Normal next? Banks using behavioral science. Vera Cherepanova in FCPA Blog.
  6. Businesses and Strategy on Countering Corruption. Sara Paul, Andrea Gordon, and Dane Sowers in the CCI.  
  7. Climate change compliance. Jeff Kaplan in Conflicts of Interest Blog.
  8. Trust has its moment. Stewart Levine in Forbes.com
  9. Institutional investors on ESG voting. Lawrence Heim in PracticalESG.
  10. The virtual Board Room. Jeffrey Karpf and Fernando Martinez in Compliance and Enforcement

Podcasts and More

  1. Tom and Matt Kelly conclude a 2-part podcast series on issues they are following in 2022. On Compliance into the Weeds, Part 1 and Part 2
  2. In January on The Compliance Life, I visited Valerie Charles, a partner at StoneTurn. Val has one of the most interesting journeys in compliance. In Part 1, she discussed her academic background and early professional career. In Part 2, she discusses her move to ComTech. In Part 3, Valerie moves into the consulting world. 
  3. What is the intersection of Joel Coen’s Macbeth and organizational issues in compliance? Tom explores in a 4-part blog series on the FCPA Compliance and Ethics Blog
  4. CCI releases a new e-book from Tom, “FCPA 2021 Year in Review”. Available free from CCI.
  5. Trial of the Century-the Enron Trial. On Monday, January 4, Tom premiers a 5-part podcast series on the Enron Trial with Loren Steffy, who covered the trial for the Houston Chronicle. You can check out the preview here. It will be available on the Compliance Podcast Network, Megaphone, iTunes, and other top podcast platforms. 
  6. Check out 31 Days to a More Effective Compliance Program returns, which runs from January 1 to January 31. Available on the Compliance Podcast NetworkMegaphoneiTunes, and other top podcast platforms. 

 Tom Fox is the Voice of Compliance and can be reached at tfox@tfoxlaw.com. Jay Rosen is Mr. Monitor and can be reached at jrosen@affiliatedmonitors.com.  

Categories
Blog

Macbeth and Culture Transformation

Over the past week, I have been considering Joel Coen’s The Tragedy of Macbeth currently appearing on Apple TV. I have been reviewing the film and exploring my love of all things Shakespeare. Today, to end this series I want to talk about the remarkable performance by Kathryn Hunter as not one but all three of the weird sisters (3 witches) of the play.
In a New Yorker article, entitled “Weird Sisters? Make that the Twisted Sisters”, Henry Alford interviewed the actor and explored her preparation for the role. First a word about her performance which was nothing short of mesmerizing. Hunter contorted her body in the very first sisters’ scene where she prophesizes that Macbeth will become the Thane of Cawdor. It was basically acting with her body in addition to the dialogue. As the camera closes in on her you see not only her contortions but her dramatic voice. Of this scene, Alford wrote, “Hunter’s first scene in the movie has her squatting in the sand (no panty hose), where she alternately squawks, clutches a sailor’s severed thumb in her gnarled toes, and twists her right arm all the way behind her head. Imagine a litigious raven who has done a lot of yoga.”
Equally impressive was Hunter’s preparation for the role, which only lasted a slim few minutes in the entire movie. Alford wrote, “For her “weird sisters” research, Hunter studied people with multiple-personality disorder, and also crows, which are symbols of divination. She also consulted a modern-day witch. “I asked her to give me a simple spell to keep the company safe,” Hunter said. “Denzel told me he believes in the power of prophecy and the power of blessings, so, before going on set, I would do a ritual to keep him and the company safe.””
Finally, in the film, “Hunter also plays the Old Man outside Macbeth’s castle, which suggests that the witches have shape-shifted into an old codger. It’s the Old Man who, referencing first the darkness of the sky and then Duncan’s murder, says, “ ’Tis unnatural / Even like the deed that’s done.” Hunter was quoted by Alford, “It’s amazing that Shakespeare was so concerned with nature. He’s saying, When man is out of kilter, as it were, it’s reflected in nature. How prescient is that?”
I thought about Hunter’s performance and her innovative use of her body to communicate so well in the movie for my final exploration of transforming your compliance program. In a MIT Sloan Review article, entitled “Use Networks to Drive Culture Change”, authors Peter Gray, Rob Cross and Michael Arena posit that culture is difficult to change, “in part because it reflects people’s values — their deeply held beliefs about what is good, desirable, and appropriate. Relationships can complicate matters further. When colleagues are embedded in informal networks with others who share and reinforce their values, they often become entrenched rather than open to new attitudes and behaviors. But it doesn’t have to be like that. Those same networks can also help leaders identify and overcome obstacles to cultural change and discover unexpected allies.” Their approach has some innovations which every Chief Compliance Officer (CCO) should study to help in the culture transformation of your organization.
Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco, in her October speech, renewed the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) emphasis on corporate culture stating, “Now, I recognize the resources and the effort it takes to manage a large organization and to put in place the right culture. The Department of Justice has over 115,000 employees across dozens of countries and an operating budget equivalent to that of a Fortune 100 company. So, I know what it means to manage and be accountable for what happens in a complex organization. But corporate culture matters. A corporate culture that fails to hold individuals accountable, or fails to invest in compliance — or worse, that thumbs its nose at compliance — leads to bad results.” Clearly, she is signally a more focused DOJ interest in culture. This means you need to be ready to not only transform your culture but also document the transformation.
There are five steps which I have adapted for the compliance professional.

  1. Unearth the Subcultures. It turns out that culture is created not holistically but by corporate subgroups, which have their own cultures and cultural leaders. CCOs often think about the culture of their area of the organization and take action at that level, which across an organization culture is only partially influenced by holistic structures; it is also shaped and reinforced by subnetworks of employees who may spread across many different units. CCOs need to “see the diversity of values that exist in different cultural subnetworks can take much more precise action to support or change these subcultures.”
  2. Find Your Real Cultural Leaders. Here the key for compliance is that “Informal influencers deep inside the organization are critical — but often hidden — enablers of change. Enlisting their help is far more efficient than taking a top-down approach.” As the CCO you need to identify these real subunit leaders, get their buy in and then enlist them to lead your cultural transformation.
  3. Shine a Light on Hidden Tensions. There are always disagreements throughout an organization which can kill cultural changes, usually through the proverbial death by a thousand cuts. Analyzing network and cultural data can bring these tensions to light so leaders can manage them. A key one can be what the authors called, “toxic misalignments, where cultural influencers with very different values interacted in negative and dysfunctional ways”. Here the role of the CCO is to be a facilitator, to “appeal to a higher shared value can resolve a deadlock, but only after uncovering value misalignment and discovering who sits on which side.”
  4. Evoke Positive Emotions. I hope that you as a CCO have a positive outlook. Most CCOs I know are eternal optimists, even those who come from the General Counsel’s office. While a standard tactic to lead cultural change is rationality; i.e., explain and educate using “compelling logic, in hopes of persuading them to commit to new ways of working” the authors found their “research shows that culture spreads most effectively through network connections that have an emotional aspect.” As a CCO you should bring an energy and excitement level and then start “training first-level supervisors to become more skilled as “energizers.” They learned how to engage people in realistic possibilities that captured their imaginations and hearts, for example, and how to help others see how their efforts contributed to an ambitious plan. Nine months later, new data revealed far greater adoption of the new cultural values among individual contributors.”
  5. Give Adoption the Time It Needs. The authors found that the time to change culture can vary and “leaders may see slow or uneven adoption as new cultural ideas’ failure to spread, when in fact it may be a function of how tacit or complex the values are. And while networks play an important role in speed of adoption, faster isn’t always better.” The bottom line for the CCO is to give it time. But use the tools you have available to assess, monitor and improve your culture transformation program. Mid-course corrections are allowed. The authors concluded, “Combining network analysis with assessments of organizational culture provides leaders with a rich understanding of how new values take root.” This can provide to a CCO a more focused even “local” view of culture, where desired behaviors are communicated, modeled, observed, and adopted on the ground, not broadcast from on high. This in turn allows a CCO to drive cultural transformation in more targeted ways.

I hope you have enjoyed this short series drawing inspiration from Macbeth to discuss transformation of your compliance function as much as I have enjoyed watching the movie, researching the topic and writing about it.

Categories
Blog

Macbeth and the ‘S’ Learning Curve for Compliance

Over the weekend I saw Joel Coen’s The Tragedy of Macbeth on Apple TV. To say it blew me away would be putting it mildly. I have been reviewing the film this week and exploring my love of all things Shakespeare in this week’s blog posts. Today, I want to consider Frances McDormand in her starring role as Lady Macbeth and how her experiences of life point to learning curves.
McDormand herself said that she was destined to play the role. Stephen Schaefer, writing in the Boston Herald, quoted her for the following, ““The first thing that got me hooked on being an actor the rest of my life was the sleepwalking scene from ‘The Tragedy,’” she said of Shakespeare’s guilt-ridden murderess Lady Macbeth, who can never wash the blood from her hands. “I did it when I was 14,” she said. “Then I’ve been pretty much practicing and rehearsing for it for 50 years. It had kind of a fated inevitability to it.””
While other versions of Macbeth, notably Roman Polanski’s 1972 version, used younger actors in the lead roles, here Director Coen focused on older versions of the Macbeths. Schaefer also focused on the experience of the actors, McDormand and Denzel Washington, playing the lead roles. Both actors understand about the drive to achieve the next success, which for Macbeth was to take over the Kingdom of Scotland. Schaefer also noted, “McDormand, 64, agreed. “You might think they don’t understand. But guess what? We understand because when we first talked about the film, Denzel and I (it was our own private conversation), both understood about each other: There’s always been a fight. We fought it as gracefully as possible. The fight’s never going to be over. “So we brought that to it. We still know how to fight. Maybe we were limping a little bit. Maybe it took us a little bit longer to get there, but the fight was still there.””
In a recent Harvard Business Review (HBR) article, entitled “Managing Your Organization as a Portfolio of Learning Curves”, author Whitney Johnson,  posited, “As people develop competence in a new domain of expertise, they move along an S Curve: Growth is slow and effortful at the outset, or launch point. It then progresses rapidly as people acquire new skills in a stretch known as the sweet spot. At the peak is mastery, when work becomes easier but the curve flattens. Understanding where your employees are on this S Curve of Learning will help you coach them appropriately, craft thoughtful succession plans, and build a team with diverse but complementary strengths.” I use the article as a starting point for the Chief Compliance Officer (CCO) to use it to aid in developing a strong compliance bench at your organization.
The ‘S’ learning curve has three components; (1) launch point, (2) sweet spot and (3) mastery. It was originally developed by Everett M. Rogers, “to show how new ideas and technologies spread.” However, Johnson also saw it as “the trajectory that people move along as they develop competence in a new domain of expertise.” She calls it the “S Curve of Learning;” where growth  is slow and effortful at the outset, which is the launch point. The initial phase is “followed by rapid upward progress as people acquire new skills and overcome setbacks: a stretch I think of as the sweet spot. At the peak is mastery—when work becomes easier, but the curve flattens because there is little left to learn. When that happens it’s time to jump to the bottom of a new S Curve, put in the effort, and experience the thrill of climbing again.”
Johnson applied this concept to three areas which are also important to the corporate compliance team; talent development, succession planning and building an “A Team’. Many have said that talent development, acquisition and retention will be one of the most critical corporate endeavors going into the 2020’s. This is even more true for the compliance function. Our discipline is at a cross-roads with many non-legal concepts becoming more important. Such skills as data analytics, behavioral psychology and others are replacing the need to be able to recite the text of the Foreign Corrupt Practices (FCPA). The S Curve in talent development gives CCOs and their compliance team members a “common language for discussions about personal growth and talent development—about people’s progress in their roles and their future with the organization. When one of your reports says, “I’m at the launch point,” you’ll know that person is struggling to gain traction. When someone says, “I’m in the sweet spot,” he or she has momentum and is feeling competent and confident. And when you hear an employee say, “I’m in mastery,” the message is clear—“I know I’m good at this, but I can’t keep doing it—I need a new challenge.””
Under succession planning, it is not enough to plan what is next for the organization or even your compliance team; you also need to consider what is next for the individual. Johnson wrote, “Doing this well involves anticipating which people might move on and when, identifying team members who might assume this role, and then thinking about those who could backfill that role.” In other words, you need think of it as a multi-dimensional chess game; not only thinking several moves ahead but also on X, Y and Z axes. Such an approach allows you to “see when the high-contribution sweet spot is about to yield to mastery, and shortly thereafter, boredom and stagnation. Keeping people who’ve reached the mastery stage in a role for too long carries risks. An employee can become complacent or a flight risk. And if, as an organization or team, most of your people are in the sweet spot, humming along, you may be courting the danger that your entire team could suddenly be in mastery, setting off a wave of departures. Counter these risks with succession planning for each individual.”
Now think about all of the above in building out your ‘A’ compliance team. Johnson advocates diversity in talent on the ‘S’ curve so that some team members are on the sweet spot and some in the others. She stated, “You want people who have a variety of aptitudes and ambitions, and you want a balanced portfolio of people at different stages of growth. People in mastery have deep experience, people at the launch point bring fresh perspectives, and those in the sweet spot have both the enthusiasm and competence to breathe life into a project. Although every team is different, many look like a bell curve, with most members in the sweet spot at any given time and a small percentage of people at the launch point and in mastery. When putting together a team, smart leaders make sure they have people on all major phases of the curve—what I call a matched team.”
Just as McDormand’s portrayal of Lady Macbeth is thought-provoking so is Johnson’s piece. If you are looking for a low-cost way to improve your compliance team, this approach gives you several ways to think through talent development, retention and advance.
Tomorrow, the sisters.

Categories
Great Women in Compliance

Corporate Integrity Matters with Sonja Stirnimann

Welcome to the Great Women in Compliance Podcast, co-hosted by Lisa Fine and Mary Shirley.

Corporate Integrity is something that is a core component of a strong compliance program, and today’s guest is a leader in helping organizations globally understand and provide guidance on in this area, as well as hosting a wonderful podcast on this topic “The Human Factor: Why Corporate Integrity Matters.”  Sonja Stirnimann.is the Founder and Managing Director at Structuul AG, a consultancy based in Switzerland which focuses on preventing fraud and non-compliance, as well as hosting her podcast.

Lisa had the opportunity to discuss how Sonja defines corporate integrity, as well as why humans are the key to building a strong program (as well as indicators of one that needs improvement). She shares some of the challenges she has faced as a woman leader and entrepreneur, and also one where she had her own integrity challenges very early in her career.

We also have the chance to Sonja to share some of her favorite places to visit in Switzerland and allows Lisa to reminisce about that amazing place.

GWIC is excited about our winter season, and always happy to get suggestions on guests, recommendations or ideas to make our podcast and community even stronger.

As always, we are so grateful for all of your support and if you have any feedback or suggestions for our line up or would just like to reach out and say hello, we always welcome hearing from our listeners. If you are enjoying this episode, please rate it on your preferred podcast player to help other likeminded Ethics and Compliance professionals find it.  You can also find the GWIC podcast on Corporate Compliance Insights where Lisa and Mary have a landing page with additional information about them and the story of the podcast.

You can subscribe to the Great Women in Compliance podcast on any podcast player by searching for it and we welcome new subscribers to our podcast.

Join the Great Women in Compliance community on LinkedIn here.