Rules of the Road: With a solid foundation in place, a durable culture of ethics and compliance will flourish
With a solid foundation in place, a durable culture of ethics and compliance will flourish.
August 31, 2009 at 08:00 PM
4 minute read
I continue to receive requests for further dialogue on strategies for avoiding ethical issues (as opposed to managing them once they are visited upon in-house counsel). I have offered one strategy. It involves making sure you work for a company exhibiting sound ethical values–one that will not place you in ethical predicaments in the first place.
When a lawyer is considering an in-house role, he should make it one of his primary objectives to gauge the potential employer's ethical culture. Traditionally, in job interviews it is the person doing the hiring who asks the tough questions.
This is especially so during difficult economic conditions. Still, given the scrutiny in-house counsel face in the post-Enron era, assessing the ethical culture of the organization is a must.
This begins during the job interview process. Give a hypothetical scenario centered on an ethical problem, and ask the interviewer how he would expect the in-house lawyer and the other corporate constituents to respond. The answer should provide a glimpse of the ethical culture of the organization, as well as how management would react if the situation actually happened.
Other readers have asked about proactive steps the in-house team may take to assure that a durable ethical culture flourishes within an organization. I suggest that in-house lawyers conduct a regular review of the compliance infrastructure, including the company's corporate code of conduct, policies and hotline reporting processes. These represent the foundation of an effective ethics program but are often neglected and thus ineffective.
Place yourself in the employee's shoes. Is your code of conduct written for employees' understanding? Are your company's policies updated? Can employees find the policies absent MacGyver-like resourcefulness? If you want a company's constituents–from the CEO to frontline staff–to conform to company standards, it is up to the legal and compliance department to proactively elucidate the “rules of the road.”
Codes of Conduct. Most corporate conduct codes read like the Federal Register and are easily understandable only to lawyers.
To ensure that employees understand the code, expose it to a focus group of a cross-section of employees, and make sure it includes people outside the U.S. You may also ask a third party to review your code. I recently asked an organization called the Red Flag Group (www.redflaggroup.com) to overhaul KLA-Tencor's code. The result was a technically sound yet still highly readable document that includes a useful question-and-answer section, as well as quotes summarizing key concepts and ideas. Let's face it: When it comes to reading these codes, employees have the attention span of a ferret. You need to employ the time-tested precept of knowing your audience when you deploy a code of conduct, particularly if you want employees to actually read it.
Corporate Policies. The problems with corporate policies are that they proliferate across corporate intranets and often are not easily located. Moreover, policies tend to be posted to some Web site and forgotten. Again with the help of the Red Flag Group, my company is attempting to tame the hydra-headed policy beast by creating a policy portal–a one-stop, organized and updated source for the company's policies. If the objective is for company personnel to know and abide by company standards, then ensuring the policies are updated, understandable and readily accessible makes sense.
The corporate and legal “rules of the road” need to be clear and available to all corporate constituents. Only with this solid foundation in place can a durable culture of ethics and compliance take hold and flourish. That is the type of organization with which you should entrust your career.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllGC Conference Takeaways: Picking AI Vendors 'a Bit of a Crap Shoot,' Beware of Internal Investigation 'Scope Creep'
8 minute readWhy ACLU's New Legal Director Says It's a 'Good Time to Take the Reins'
'Utterly Bewildering': GCs Struggle to Grasp Scattershot Nature of Law Firm Rate Hikes
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250