Compliance and Ethics: Ideas & Answers. Edition 48

Dear friends,

Welcome back to another edition of Compliance and Ethics: Ideas & Answers.

In edition 48, we have an excellent piece by Dr. Camille Howard, CCEP, CCEP-I, CIPP-US on Harmony in Compliance: The Transformative Power of Active Listening in Ethics and Compliance. In Adam Balfour 's piece, we look at the evolving role of Ethics Helplines.

And finally, in our regular feature, Compliance Lite we consider 'Should Compliance officers be Optimistic'. As well as revealing the answers to last week's Sentencing Guidelines Trivia Quiz.

And as always, there's more content on our website so please do visit us there to read our other articles.

Thank you, Joe.

Harmony in Compliance: The Transformative Power of Active Listening in Ethics and Compliance

by Dr. Camille Howard, CCEP, CCEP-I, CIPP

In the ever-evolving landscape of ethics and compliance, the ability to listen actively stands out as a critical driver for professional success and effective leadership.?Active listening goes beyond merely hearing words; it is an engagement in understanding, a commitment to empathizing with the speaker, and a strategic skill in navigating the complex landscape of ethical dilemmas and regulatory nuances. This article delves into the transformative impact of active listening, not just as a functioning tool in compliance but as a catalyst for personal growth, improved decision-making, and fostering a culture of ethical integrity. ?

Active listening transcends the mere act of hearing; it embodies the art of deliberate, empathetic engagement with the speaker's words and emotions. In ethics and compliance, where ethical dilemmas, regulatory intricacies, and multifaceted decisions are part of daily life, active listening emerges not as a luxury but as an absolute necessity.?

The Personal Advantages of Mastering Active Listening in Compliance Challenges?

In the intricate and often challenging domain of ethics and compliance, active listening is a critical factor for professional excellence. This field, characterized by its dense web of regulations and emotionally charged scenarios, demands more than surface-level understanding. Especially during sensitive investigations, the capacity to fully comprehend every nuance of communication is crucial. Active listening is more than a mere skill – it becomes an essential instrument that dramatically boosts your proficiency as a compliance expert.

Continue reading on our website...

Evolving Helplines, From Channels To Report Wrongdoing, To Also Raising Opportunities To Learn

by Adam Balfour

Many ethics helplines are currently used (and promoted as such) to report actual or suspected wrongdoing that has already occurred. While helplines need to support that type of reporting, they also have an opportunity to help encourage people to report learning opportunities that could either allow small mistakes to be reported and learnt from, or even prevent actual or potential wrongdoing at a later stage if early intervention and learning occurs.

Organizations that genuinely seek to drive a growth mindset in their culture and employees would no doubt benefit from encouraging people to speak up if they see opportunities for the organization to learn that help avoid costly mistakes in the future. On a human level, I think a lot of people would find it easier to raise smaller issues that could lead to learning (for themselves or others) than having to speak up about bigger issues that may lead to others getting in trouble. There are likely missed opportunities when the helpline is only marketed as an intake for once wrongdoing has occurred - the opportunity to learn will come after, rather than instead of, the wrongdoing (and usually following an internal investigation that can be time-consuming, a drain on resources and an uncomfortable experience for those involved).

Would an approach like this possibly change the number of reports your organization receives through the helpline and drive up your substantiation rates and other metrics? I would guess the answer for many organizations would be yes - and I think that would be a great thing if opportunities are highlighted, learning occurs and issues are addressed early or avoided altogether.

Learning before wrongdoing is always better and less costly than learning after wrongdoing.

Answers to Last Week's Trivia Quiz

1. What event was called the Woodstock of Compliance? A: The US Sentencing Commission’s Sept. 1995 Symposium, “Corporate Crime in America: Strengthening the ‘Good Citizen’ Corporation.”
2. Who headed up the Sentencing Commission staff group that developed the original 1991 compliance program standards?A: Win Swenson, then Deputy General Counsel of the Commission
3. Which of the 7 steps in the Sentencing Guidelines includes “internal controls”?A: Item 1. The notes define “procedures” as “internal controls that are reasonably capable of reducing the likelihood of criminal conduct.
4. When was the reference to “incentives” included in the Sentencing Guidelines standards?A: 2004. It has been a compliance program minimum requirement for 2 decades.

Well done to Tim C. Mazur for correctly answering Question 1, in the comments of my post last week.

Should Compliance Officers be Optimists?

by Jeff Kaplan

Optimism generally correlates with success in the world of work. ?As noted in Canadian Lawyer Magazine , “Martin Seligman of the University of Pennsylvania - who studies positive psychology - found that most optimists do better in life than merited by their talents alone.”

This finding apparently applies across a wide range of professions. ?But with lawyers, it was not the case.

“Seligman’s survey of law students found that pessimists got better grades, were more likely to make law review and got better job offers.” ‘In law,’ he said, ‘pessimism is considered prudent.’”

This would, in my view, likely not be a surprise to many people. But can something similar about pessimism be said for the Compliance & Ethics (“C&E”) field? ?Does pessimism in the C&E field correlate with prudence (or any other virtue, for that matter)? ?

I am not aware of any study like Seligman’s regarding pessimism and the C&E perspective.? However, I believe that having a pessimistic perspective can be important to achieving and maintaining C&E program efficacy.?

This is particularly true with C&E risk assessment.? Among other things, having an appropriately pessimistic view can be helpful in identifying risks that might be missed by a more positive-thinking C&E professional. Indeed, C&E risk assessment involves identifying the various ways misconduct can occur and the reasons behind them, making a pessimistic perspective – at least for this exercise – essential.

The benefit of a pessimistic view is also, I believe, important with respect to C&E board/senior management oversight, communications, monitoring, audits and investigations, among other areas. ?With each of these, having a suitably dark view of risk can help make those involved in C&E work be more effective than they might otherwise be.

But optimism does have its place in the compliance realm as well.? That is, so much of C&E is relatively new and untested, and an optimistic view may be necessary to secure buy-in to go forward with necessary but difficult measures.

Finally, my own perspective is that generally one needs some of both views.

And, in that connection, I have tried to live by the timeless guidance: one should be cynical but endlessly optimistic.