Tag: incentives

Categories
Blog

Key Compliance Speeches from 2023-Kenneth Polite on Incentives and Consequence Management

Assistant Attorney General Kenneth A. Polite, Jr. began his speech with an interesting aside. It is about the clear tie between poverty and corruption. This is why it is important to prosecute corrupt government officials because their actions keep the people of in such dire economic straits. He stated, “Just as crime recognizes no borders, our efforts to combat it must be equally boundless. We need our partners – both domestic and international – to solve community problems. That is where the Criminal Division thrives.” In the Diaz case there was international cooperation at various levels. Think about that for a moment, the US and Venezuelan governments cooperating on anything, yet they apparently did cooperate on this matter. Polite added that several recent FCPA corporate enforcement matters, “Glencore, ABB, Danske, and Stericycle, among many others, underscore the successes that we’ve shared with our colleagues abroad.”

To be truly effective community problem-solvers, prosecutors must broaden our sense of community by literally ‘spanning the globe’ to fight crime, including bribery and corruption. Polite stated, “Crime does not limit itself by country or region. Corruption’s corrosive effects are global, with the world’s poor often bearing the brunt. Bribery threatens our collective security by undermining the rule of law and providing a breeding ground for other crime and authoritarian rule.”

Clawbacks

The clawback policy was developed to promote “innovative approaches to compensation” which would “shift the burden of corporate malfeasance away from uninvolved shareholders onto those more directly responsible.” She believes “Companies should ensure that executives and employees are personally invested in promoting compliance” as “nothing grabs attention or demands personal investment like having skin in the game, through direct and tangible financial incentives.” This led the Criminal Division to “develop guidance, guidance on how to reward corporations with compliance-promoting compensation programs.”

The clawback Initiative has two parts. “First, every corporate resolution involving the Criminal Division will now include a requirement that the resolving company develop compliance-promoting criteria within its compensation and bonus system. Second is the creation of a 3-year pilot program under which the “Criminal Division will provide fine reductions to companies who seek to claw back compensation from corporate wrongdoers.”

Finally, the DOJ has added some real benefits for companies which follow these prescripts. First is that any company which resolves a FCPA violation will “pay the applicable fine, minus a reserved credit equaling the amount of compensation the company is attempting to claw back from culpable executives and employees.” Additionally, “If the company succeeds and recoups compensation from a responsible employee, the company gets to keep that clawback money — and also doesn’t have to pay the amount it recovered.” Finally, if the company’s efforts at clawbacks are not successful or completed during the pendency of the investigation up to the settlement “the pilot program will also ensure that those who pursue clawbacks in good faith but are unsuccessful are still eligible to receive a fine reduction.” All of these efforts are designed to “shift the burden of corporate wrongdoing away from shareholders, who frequently play no role in the misconduct, onto those directly responsible.” This new emphasis is clearly designed to encourage companies who do not already factor compliance into compensation to retool their programs and get ahead of the curve.

Polite provided more detail on the new clawback initiative. He said, “As to clawbacks: for companies that fully cooperate with our investigation and timely and appropriately remediate the misconduct, they may receive an additional fine reduction if the company has implemented a program to recoup compensation and uses that program. We expect companies that use these programs to address not only employees who engaged in wrongdoing in connection with the conduct under investigation, but also those who had supervisory authority over the employees or business area engaged in the misconduct, and knew of, or were willfully blind to, the misconduct.” (emphasis mine)

Expanding on the benefits for an organization, he stated, “If the company meets these factors and – in good faith – has initiated the process to recover such compensation at the time of resolution, our prosecutors will accord an additional fine reduction equal to the amount of any compensation that is recouped within the resolution term.” Finally, “if a company’s good faith effort is unsuccessful by the time the resolution term ends, our prosecutors will have discretion to accord a fine reduction of up to 25% of the amount of compensation that has been sought.”

Polite did leave room for companies to weigh a variety of factors in bringing a clawback claim. He noted, “We are not trying to incentivize waste. To the contrary, companies should make an assessment about the potential cost to shareholders and prospect of success of clawback litigation, given any applicable laws, and weigh it against the value of recoupment – and proceed in accordance with their stated corporate policies on executive compensation. This Pilot Program will be in effect for three years, allowing us to gather data and assess its effectiveness and also aid other components and offices in considering this important issue.”

Any litigation is always fraught with unknowns, both known and unknown. Given the imbroglio involving the DOJ and Cognizant Technologies Solutions over the DOJ prosecution of former executives, the road to any successful clawback will be fraught with peril. Additionally, it is not clear how far companies or the DOJ will push for clawbacks from “those who had supervisory authority over the employees or business area engaged in the misconduct.” If scope creep comes in it could be a wide group.

Categories
31 Days to More Effective Compliance Programs

31 Days to a More Effective Compliance Program: Day 2 – 2023 Evaluation of Compliance Programs: Incentives and Consequences

The 2023 ECCP had significant changes regarding compliance-based incentives, both financial and non-financial; consequence management; messaging apps; and ancillary matters.

I.    Incentives

This section begins with a new introduction that makes clear the seriousness in which the DOJ views incentives, both financial and other types of incentives. The ECCP states, “The design and implementation of compensation schemes play an important role in fostering a compliance culture.”

The ECCP also added a new section on financial incentives, which directs prosecutors to specifically evaluate how a company designs and applies financial incentives. These four questions basically breakdown into the following continuum: (1) Assessment, (2) Analysis, (3) Implementation; and (4) Monitoring.

II.   Consequence Management

The DOJ has been talking about clawbacks for some time now. However, the revised language of the ECCP puts more rigor into what the DOJ is now mandating.

 a.   Clawbacks

The DOJ has made it clear that companies need to seek to recover amounts paid out to executives that were illegally received as corporate compensation. This could include both salary, stock options, similar payments, or discretionary bonuses. All of this means every compliance program will need to analyze each of these components as set out.

b.    Consequence Management

The DOJ also mandated that compliance programs take a deeper dive into their entire financial incentive program—both incentives and disincentives. While there is some overlap with the clawback language, there is quite a bit of newness in these areas. The DOJ’s hotline and speak-up reports directly relate to a company’s culture of compliance.

Three key takeaways:

1. The 2023 ECCP brought significant changes to both financial incentives and negative consequences as well.

2. The new financial incentive analysis is: (1) Assessment; (2) Analysis, (3) Implementation; and (4) Monitoring.

3. Clawbacks and Consequence Management are related but separate parts of a best practices compliance program.

Categories
Blog

Compliance Lessons from Venice: Incentives, Consequences and Compliance

This week I am running a three-part blog post series and three-part podcast series on compliance lessons from one of the most beautiful cities on earth, Venice. We will consider how construction in Venice can inform your compliance program, how the Venice ship building and repair business located in the Arsenale inform both corporate culture and your compliance program and how Venice created the first modern day hotline reporting system. In this second blog post and accompanying podcast we look at the Venetian ship building and ship repair industry centered in the Arsenale District and how they created a culture of compliance with the workers and implemented strategies which informed modern day compliance programs.

The Arsenale district in Venice serves as a historical example of the implementation of a corporate culture and implementation of a compliance program. This district was a significant maritime hub from the mid-1200s to the mid-1400s, known for its innovative shipbuilding techniques, which were considered state secrets. To protect this valuable intellectual property, the Venetian Fathers established a series of incentives and punishments that can inform best practices in compliance programs today.

One of the key takeaways from the Arsenale district is the importance of balancing incentives and discipline in a compliance program. This concept is emphasized by the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Companies can learn from this historical example by implementing clear procedures and consequences for violations, publicizing disciplinary actions as a deterrent, and offering positive incentives to encourage adherence to ethical business practices.

On the consequence side, the Venetian Fathers forbade skilled workers from leaving the city to work in neighboring or rival cities, establishing the first non-compete agreement. Additionally, those caught sharing state secrets faced summary execution after excruciating torture. While these specific punishment techniques may not be applicable in modern corporate America, they highlight the need for severe consequences for violations.

In terms of incentives, the Arsenale district focused on job security. Layoffs were unheard of, and if someone lost their job due to injury or mishap, they received enough compensation to sustain themselves in the city. Furthermore, the company provided funeral expenses and assistance to the family of a deceased worker, ensuring their well-being.

The dual focus on keeping shipbuilding secrets within the city and incentivizing loyalty among workers aligns with the DOJ and SEC’s emphasis on incorporating both incentives and discipline into compliance programs. According to the guidance provided by these regulatory bodies, companies should have clearly defined procedures that are applied reliably and promptly, with punishments commensurate with the violation. Publicizing disciplinary actions internally, where appropriate, can serve as a deterrent and demonstrate the consequences of unethical actions.

However, the guidance also highlights the importance of positive incentives. The DOJ and SEC recognize that rewards for following a company’s internal code of conduct and conducting business ethically can drive compliant behavior. These incentives can take various forms, such as personal evaluations, promotions, rewards for improving compliance programs, and recognition for ethical behavior.

Companies can integrate incentives into their DNA through the hiring and promotion process. Senior management hires and promotions should include a compliance component, ensuring that individuals who prioritize compliance are recognized and rewarded. By making compliance evaluations a part of every employee’s overall evaluation, companies can further incentivize compliance.

The Arsenale district serves as a valuable historical example of the tradeoffs involved in balancing incentives and discipline in a compliance program. While severe punishments were imposed to protect state secrets, the district also prioritized job security and support for workers and their families. This approach highlights the importance of considering the impact on employees when making decisions about compliance program implementation.

In conclusion, the Arsenale district in Venice provides valuable insights into the implementation of a compliance program. By balancing incentives and discipline, companies can establish clear procedures and punishments for violations, publicize disciplinary actions as a deterrent, and offer positive incentives to drive compliant behavior. The historical example of the arsenal district emphasizes the importance of considering the impact on employees when making decisions about compliance program implementation.

Categories
Daily Compliance News

Daily Compliance News: August 28, 2023 – The Spanish Kiss Edition

Welcome to the Daily Compliance News. Each day, Tom Fox, the Voice of Compliance brings to you compliance-related stories to start your day. Sit back, enjoy a cup of morning coffee, and listen in to the Daily Compliance News. All, from the Compliance Podcast Network. Each day we consider four stories from the business world, compliance, ethics, risk management, leadership, or general interest for the compliance professional.

  • 3M settles FCPA action? (WSJ)
  • Imprisoned Kazakh tycoon may be released. (RFE/RL)
  • Do you really need incentives to operate safely? (Reuters)
  • FIFA suspends head of Spanish football. (FT)
Categories
31 Days to More Effective Compliance Programs

One Month to a More Effective Compliance Program: Day 10 – Sales Incentives and Compliance

In the DOJ’s 2023 ECCP, Incentives and Disciplinary Measures it stated:
Incentive System – Has the company considered the implications of its incentives and rewards on compliance? How does the company incentivize compliance and ethical behavior? Have there been specific examples of actions taken (e.g., promotions or awards denied) as a result of compliance and ethics considerations? Who determines the compensation, including bonuses, as well as discipline and promotion of compliance personnel?
When considering how a company could use incentives to further a compliance program and the role of HR in this process, we should also consider how incentives might lead to the converse, as they did in the now-infamous Wells Fargo fraudulent-accounts scandal. When you misalign these two concepts with a faulty sales strategy it can lead to a catastrophic failure, literally costing the company millions of dollars in fines, loss of business and depreciation of shareholder value. Whatever your incentive structure, there will be employees who try to game the system. Some will do it with the tacit or explicit approval of management. You, as the CCO, may be required to act.

Three key takeaways:

  1. Even a benign sales incentive program came become skewed.
  2. A sales incentive program can become high risk or illegal if not properly monitored.
  3. If there is alignment between the strategy, purpose and structure of an incentive system, it often makes the difference between a good and a bad one.

For more information, check out The Compliance Handbook, 4th edition here.

Categories
31 Days to More Effective Compliance Programs

One Month to a More Effective Compliance Program: Day 8-Executives and Compliance Compensation Incentives

The lack of personal consequences for senior executives responsible for corporate malfeasance is explored in this podcast episode. Executives are incentivized to take excessive risks, knowing they won’t have to pay any fines, while shareholders bear the brunt of penalties. Proposed solutions include the concept of “skin in the game,” where executives contribute a portion of their compensation to a pool of money that can be used to pay penalties. Another suggestion involves forfeiting the performance bond of senior management in the case of large fines. A third approach suggests creating a contract that would enforce a reduction in pay for failures of corporate governance. These proposals aim to hold senior executives personally accountable for compliance failures and align executive compensation with compliance objectives. HR professionals play a crucial role in designing and implementing positive incentives to foster a culture of compliance and ethical conduct within organizations.

When it comes to compliance failures, the penalties are usually paid by shareholders, leaving senior executives largely untouched. This lack of personal accountability creates a disconnect between executive actions and the consequences of those actions. It’s high time we bridge this gap and ensure that senior executives are held personally responsible for compliance failures. What are some proposed solutions:

1. “Skin in the Game”. One proposed solution, advocated by William Dudley, former president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, suggests that senior management and material risk takers should forfeit their performance bond in the case of large fines. This approach would discipline individual behavior and decision-making, incentivizing individuals to flag issues when problems arise.

2. Automatic Pay Reductions. Another approach, proposed in an article titled “Ties That Bind Codes of Conduct,” suggests automatic reduction of pay for officers, directors, and advisors for failures of corporate governance. Executives would agree to pay back a portion of their gross compensation for a specified period before the beginning of any improprieties, regardless of their knowledge of misdeeds within the company.

Benefits of Accountability for Senior Executives:

1. Aligning Incentives. Corporate leaders cannot afford to turn a blind eye to compliance failures anymore. Holding senior executives accountable ensures that their compensation is directly tied to compliance objectives, aligning incentives and promoting ethical business practices.

2. Addressing Perverse Incentives. Perverse incentives in corporate pay, such as additional compensation based on company performance, can lead to unethical behavior and non-compliance. By implementing accountability measures, we can address these perverse incentives and create a culture of ethical behavior within organizations.

3. Driving Positive Change. Creating positive incentives within organizations is crucial to driving ethical behavior and compliance. HR professionals play a pivotal role in designing and implementing these incentives, ensuring that they are effective in promoting a culture of compliance.

Three key takeaways:

1. Perverse incentives are named that for a reason; they really are bad.

2. How can you create positive incentives in your organization?

3. There is a business response to this legal issue. Employ it.

For more information, check out The Compliance Handbook, 4th edition, available on LexisNexis.com.

Categories
31 Days to More Effective Compliance Programs

One Month to a More Effective Compliance Program: Day 6-Six Core Principles for Compliance Incentives

In these podcast episodes, Tom Fox discusses the importance of incorporating incentives and support systems into a company’s compliance program. He presents six core principles for effective compliance incentives, emphasizing the need for simplicity, visibility, and institutional mechanisms to ensure their longevity. Fox also highlights the role of human resources in implementing compliance programs and the positive impact it can have on organizations. By understanding and implementing these principles, companies can create a culture of compliance, reduce the risk of unethical behavior, and enhance their credibility.

I have developed six core principles for incentives, adapted from a MIT Sloan Management Review article, entitled “Combining Purpose with Profits”, and formulated them for the compliance function in an anti-corruption compliance program.

1.     Compliance incentives don’t have to be elaborate or novel.

2.     Compliance incentives need supporting systems if they are to stick.

3.     Support systems are needed to reinforce compliance incentives.

4.     Compliance incentives need a “counterweight” to endure.

5.     Compliance incentive alignment works in an oblique, not linear, way.

6.     Compliance incentive initiatives can be implemented at all levels.

Obviously, this list is not exhaustive. Yet it is now more important than ever that you demonstrate tangible incentives for your employees to gain benefits, both financial and hierarchical, through doing business ethically, in compliance with your own Code of Conduct and most certainly in compliance with relevant anti-bribery laws. It is also a requirement that such actions be documented so they can be demonstrated to the regulators, if they come knocking.

Three key takeaways:

  1. Compliance incentives do not have to be elaborate or novel.
  2. You must create support systems for your compliance incentives.
  3. Compliance incentives should be implemented at all levels.
Categories
Sunday Book Review

Sunday Book Review: April 30, 2023 – The New Mind Edition

In the Sunday Book Review, I consider books that interest the compliance professional, the business executive, or anyone curious. It could be books about business, compliance, history, leadership, current events, or anything else that might interest me. In today’s edition of the Sunday Book Review, I return to look at some new books which caught my eye in the New Mind edition.

Today, new books from the Yale University Press:

·      Roe by Mary Ziegler

·      Mixed Signals by Uri Gneezy

·      Life by Paul Ehrlich

·      Tragic Mind by Robert Kaplan

Categories
Everything Compliance

Episode 114, The Monaco, Polite & ECCP Edition

Welcome to the only roundtable podcast in compliance as we celebrate our second century of shows. Everything Compliance has been honored by W3 as the top talk show in podcasting. In this episode, we have the quartet of Tom Fox, Jonathan Marks, Matt Kelly and special guest Scott Garland from Affiliated Monitors, who discuss at the recent speeches by DAG Lisa Monaco and Kenneth Polite, announcing changes in the DOJ’s Evaluation of Corporate Compliance Programs. We conclude with our fan fav Shout Outs and Rants section.

  1. Matt Kelly looks at the changes around clawbacks. He shouts out to the PCAOB for reminding folks that cryptocurrency ‘reserve reports’ are not worth the paper they are printed on.
  2. Jonathan Marks considers what the two speeches and changes in the ECCP mean for corporate governance. He shouts out to US House of Representatives for overwhelmingly voting to investigate the origins of Covid-19.
  3. Tom Fox looks at the changes to incentives, both financial and non-financial in the 2023 ECCP. He rants about the Tennessee legislature attempt to ban Shakespeare, movies such as Tootie and Some Like It Hot, politicians such as George Santos; all in the guise of banning drag shows.
  1. Special Guest Scott Garland looks at the changes in the monitor selection process and what that means for the line attorney prosecuting a FCPA violation. He shouts out to the Department of Justice for their continued evolution in their thinking about compliance and compliance programs.

The members of the Everything Compliance are:

  • Jay Rosen– Jay is Vice President, Business Development Corporate Monitoring at Affiliated Monitors. Rosen can be reached at JRosen@affiliatedmonitors.com
  • Karen Woody – One of the top academic experts on the SEC. Woody can be reached at kwoody@wlu.edu
  • Matt Kelly – Founder and CEO of Radical Compliance. Kelly can be reached at mkelly@radicalcompliance.com
  • Jonathan Armstrong –is our UK colleague, who is an experienced data privacy/data protection lawyer with Cordery in London. Armstrong can be reached at armstrong@corderycompliance.com
  • Jonathan Marks is Partner, Firm Practice Leader – Global Forensic, Compliance & Integrity Services at Baker Tilly. Marks can be reached at marks@bakertilly.com

The host and producer, ranter (and sometime panelist) of Everything Compliance is Tom Fox the Voice of Compliance. He can be reached at tfox@tfoxlaw.com. Everything Compliance is a part of the Compliance Podcast Network.

Categories
Blog

The Week That Was in Compliance – The ECCP: Part 1 – Incentives

In addition to the speeches presented at the ABA’s 38th Annual National Institute on White Collar Crime, by Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco (2023 Monaco Speech) and Assistant Attorney General Kenneth A. Polite (Polite Speech); there was the release of the 2023 U.S. Department of Justice Criminal Division Evaluation of Corporate Compliance Programs (ECCP). Today we will begin a multi-part review of this document by considering financial incentives.

This section begins with a new introduction which makes clear the seriousness in which the Department of Justice (DOJ) views incentives, both financial and other types of incentives. The ECCP states, “The design and implementation of compensation schemes play an important role in fostering a compliance culture. Prosecutors may consider whether a company has incentivized compliance by designing compensation systems that defer or escrow certain compensation tied to conduct consistent with company values and policies. Some companies have also enforced contract provisions that permit the company to recoup previously awarded compensation if the recipient of such compensation is found to have engaged in or to be otherwise responsible for corporate wrongdoing. Finally, prosecutors may consider whether provisions for recoupment or reduction of compensation due to compliance violations or misconduct are maintained and enforced in accordance with company policy and applicable laws. Compensation structures that clearly and effectively impose financial penalties for misconduct can deter risky behavior and foster a culture of compliance.”

However, the DOJ reiterated that “providing positive incentives, such as promotions, rewards, and bonuses for improving and developing a compliance program or demonstrating ethical leadership, can drive compliance. Prosecutors should examine whether a company has made working on compliance a means of career advancement, offered opportunities for managers and employees to serve as a compliance “champion”, or made compliance a significant metric for management bonuses. In evaluating whether the compensation and consequence management schemes are indicative of a positive compliance culture.”

Neither of these concepts for incentives are new. Financial incentives were a part of the original 10 Hallmarks of an Effective Compliance Program, as delineated in the 2012 edition of the FCPA Resource Guide. It was brought forward in the 2020 2nd edition. Promotions, rewards and bonuses were also discussed in both of those documents as well as other DOJ pronouncements and formulations over the years. However, this is the first time the DOJ has specifically spelled out the role of the ‘compliance champion’ as both an indicia of a best practices compliance program as well as a mechanism to demonstrate a ‘positive compliance culture.’

The ECCP also added a new section on financial incentives which directs prosecutors to specifically evaluate how a company designs and applies financial incentives. It states:

Incentive System – Has the company considered the implications of its incentives and rewards on compliance? How does the company incentivize compliance and ethical behavior? Have there been specific examples of actions taken (e.g., promotions or awards denied) as a result of compliance and ethicsconsiderations? Who determines the compensation, including bonuses, as well as discipline and promotion of compliance personnel?

Rephrasing these questions, a compliance professional might consider them in the following manner:

  1. How does the company incentivize compliance and ethical behavior?
  2. Has the company considered the implications of its incentives and rewards on compliance?
  3. Who determines the compensation, including bonuses, as well as discipline and promotion of compliance personnel?
  4. Have there been specific examples of actions taken (g., promotions or awards denied) as a result ofcompliance and ethics considerations?

These four questions basically breakdown into the following continuum: (1) Assessment, (2) Analysis, (3) Implementation; and (4) Monitoring.

Incentive program assessment. Here you need to review your corporate incentive program for all employees, most particularly the discretionary bonus program but also your non-financial incentives such as promotion. Is your bonus program only related to individual sales, division sales or other similar metric or overall company performance? You can begin with some questions suggested by the ECCP: What role does the compliance function have in designing and awarding financial incentives at senior levels of the organization? Has the company evaluated whether commercial targets are achievable if the business operates within a compliant and ethical manner?

If you do not have any component for doing business ethically and in compliance, your entire compliance program is probably falling short at this point. You should also see if this is a query for promotion and not simply does an employee.

Incentive program analysis. Here you need to see what perverse incentives may exist in your organization. Obviously if meeting your target numbers is the sole criteria, your program is once again falling short. On the promotion front, you need to analyze patterns of promotion to (1) see if any employees with ethical or compliance program violations have been promoted; and (2) also determine if employees are promoted simply for NOT have any ethical violations. This would lead to a review of whether or not promoted employees have been actively participated in improving or maintaining a culture of compliance. How does the company incentivize compliance and ethical behavior? What percentage of executive compensation is structured to encourage enduring ethical business objectives?

Incentive program implementation. After implementation of the incentive program, it must be monitored. The ECCP suggests an inquiry into the following area: Has the company considered the impact of its financial rewards and other incentives on compliance? Additionally, what role, if any, did the corporate compliance function have in advising on the bonus program or participating in setting the bonus and promotion structures?

Incentive program monitoring. Here there needs to be ongoing monitoring of the incentive program, including has the company ensured effective management of the incentive program? The ECCP suggests a review of how much compensation has in fact been impacted (either positively or negatively) on account of compliance-related activities?

Join me tomorrow where I take a deep dive into discipline or the new formulation, “consequence management.”