Jeffrey Kaplan, a partner in the Princeton, New Jersey office of Kaplan & Walker LLP, has practiced law in the compliance and ethics field since the early 1990’s.
Mr. Kaplan is also former adjunct professor of business ethics at NYU’s Stern School of Business, co-editor (with Joseph Murphy) of Compliance Programs and the Corporate Sentencing Guidelines (West Thomson), former counsel to the Ethics and Compliance Officer Association and co-author of a study by the Conference Board on the use of compliance and ethics program criteria in government enforcement decisions.
Codes of conduct almost always have a discussion (typically in the introduction) of the compliance-and-ethics (C&E) duties of all employees and a discussion of the additional duties that managers have under the code. But not all companies fully leverage this discussion throughout other parts of their...Read more →
At the PLI Advanced Compliance & Ethics Workshop in NYC in October, Scott Killingsworth of the Bryan Cave law firm noted that each risk assessment should be unique. I agree, and I believe that the case for uniqueness is even more powerful for the combined program and risk assessments companies...Read more →
Risk assessment is, of course, the foundation of effective compliance measures. This has always been true as a matter of common sense. And, since the revised Federal Sentencing Guidelines for Organizations went into effect 10 years ago this November, this has been true as a matter of legal expectation. Risk...Read more →
There are a great many things one can do with a risk assessment, some of which are discussed in the complementary e-book CCI has recently published of my four years of risk assessment columns: Compliance & Ethics Risk Assessments: Concepts, Methods and New Directions. But for quite a few companies...Read more →
As the C&E program field matures, various forms of “checking” become increasingly important to ensuring program efficacy. The “three lines of defense” is a commonly used construct for identifying who does such checking (although the construct is not limited to C&E). The first line...Read more →
Since the 2004 amendments to the Federal Sentencing Guidelines for Organizations moved risk assessments and program assessments from the realm of best practice to what can be seen as the territory of de facto requirements, there has been a fair bit of confusion regarding the distinctions between these...Read more →
“It’s not complicated – more is better,” concludes a wonderful AT&T commercial. But for many C&E officers, it’s not that simple. In the wake of Enron/S-Ox/the Sentencing Guidelines revisions a great many companies seemingly had bottomless appetites for implementing compliance...Read more →
Does your organization apply a Sentencing Guidelines “seven-steps” approach to mitigating all significant areas of C&E risk? Many programs are built on the theory that they will do this, but far fewer actually do it to a meaningful degree. A useful organizing tool for making an approach of this...Read more →
The emerging field of “behavioral ethics” examines the effects of various social, cognitive and emotional factors on ethical decision making, and, in numerous experiments, has demonstrated the limited role that traditional notions of rationality play when we are faced with ethics-related choices....Read more →
By now, many companies have conducted foundational C&E risk assessments in response to the 2004 revisions to the Federal Sentencing Guidelines for Organizations that established risk assessment as an overarching requirement of an effective C&E program. But risks obviously change over the course...Read more →