Legal obligation lies at the heart of governance, risk, and compliance (GRC). The law compels action, and, in many cases, specifies the terms and conditions under which compliance is achieved. Whether compliance will be achieved is rarely in question, given the fines and penalties that can be issued by the court and regulatory bodies as consequences, but how compliance is achieved is always in question.
John “The Fraud Guy” Hanson answers three reader-submitted questions, providing his perspective as an independent corporate monitor.
Steve Priest reviews the lessons from the NFL referee fiasco and how it relates to the tragic flaw underlying most of our corporations, the relentless drive to improve profitability. This can be good, but sometimes, usually when arrogance overcomes prudence, people and companies do stupid things in the name of profitability.
Cravath, Swaine & Moore’s David Stuart focuses on issues that have come up with increasing frequency in recent years – the challenges associated with conducting cross-border investigations.
GRC tools have the ability to handle multiple missions in one integrated platform. PricewaterhouseCoopers’ Joe DeVita discusses getting the most out of your GRC tool. And that means thinking broader, more strategically, and holistically.
Corporate governance is very much on the minds of legislators, regulators and corporate senior management in Europe and beyond.
Regulators increasingly see governance as a key protector of financial stability and value. It can also be seen as a component of trustworthiness and reputation for nations competing in ever changing and unstable situations.
But what exactly is the so-called corporate governance problem?
Do we genuinely wish to learn from our previous mistakes?
Continuous controls monitoring (CCM) and continuous transaction monitoring (CTM) are increasingly becoming an integral part of the journey to achieve an effective and efficient GRC program. PwC’s Michael Baccala and Robert Clark talk about a practical way to take action on making full use of your enterprise risk planning investment in meeting your governance, risk and compliance obligations and doing it in a way that is well planned, effective, and as efficient as possible.
8 Questions Directors and Senior Management Should Ask About Their Company’s Anticorruption Compliance Efforts
In the wake of continuing press reports about the role of bribery in international commerce, many corporate directors and senior executives are asking for a fresh look at their company’s exposure to the risks of violating the U.S. FCPA, the U.K. Bribery Act, and similar laws around the world. A team of K&L Gates attorneys have identified eight key questions that should guide the thinking of corporate directors and senior managers in evaluating their company’s anticorruption compliance measures.
In the face of ever more aggressive enforcement of anti-corruption and wider anti-financial crime legislation, the management teams of even the most well-prepared multinational companies are asking themselves not “if,” but “when” they will have to take their organization through a regulatory investigation.
Banks, financial institutions and trading companies are being called to task for these deep systemic issues that have led to a corruption of ethics. If bankers want to stop banker-bashing, they need to change their ethics themselves before someone else does it for them. It is clear that these institutions face a choice but only time will tell which road they take: Will it mirror the road France took when it enacted an enlightened Republic or the road it took when the Terror reigned?