Report: Most Ethical Companies Still Working to Improve Written Policies
What is considered to be some of the most ethical companies in the world such as Dell and Intel are still working to make employee policies and codes of conduct more comprehensive and digestible, according to a recent report from Ethisphere.
April 18, 2019 at 06:33 PM
4 minute read
The world's most ethical companies of 2019 are still working to make employee policies and codes of conduct more comprehensive and digestible, according to a report from Ethisphere published Wednesday.
The report is based on a survey of the 128 companies Ethisphere deemed the most ethical of 2019. Those companies include Dell, Intel Corp., Accenture, Hasbro Inc. and IBM.
Erica Salmon Byrne, executive vice president of Ethisphere, said that authoring policies employees can understand will often begin in the legal department.
“For a lot of companies who are not in highly regulated spaces, the ethics and compliance roles often end up in the legal department,” Byrne said. “One of the things we talked about is that there is a growing focus on company policies.”
Byrne said in the past companies have largely created the documents to have a basis to fire someone rather than train and lead employees toward ethical behavior. She said now policies and company guidelines are being made with the collaboration between ethics and legal teams.
“I've referred to a lot of policies as documents that only lawyers can love,” Byrne said. “One of the things that I've always challenged, for example, is that if you open up your antitrust policy and it refers to the Sherman Act, you need to rewrite your policy. The average sales manager isn't going to know what that is.”
Byrne said she has seen an effort of companies making their policies easier to read and that this year companies are putting in rollover definitions, FAQs and guidance documents so that employees have a better understanding of those policies.
Where companies still struggle, according to the report, is by putting learning aids and examples into codes of conduct. On a scale of one to five, companies averaged a score of 1.7 for learning aids and examples in their policies and codes of conduct.
David Huntley, senior executive vice president and chief compliance officer at AT&T, which was not honored this year, said in an email there may be a better way to teach employees rather than having them read a policy.
“At AT&T, we regularly share a report with employees that highlights cases of employees making poor ethical decisions,” Huntley said. “These cases serve as a reminder to our employees of the importance of just doing the right thing.”
This also appears to be a trend in the report which found that nearly 50 percent of the honorees provide employees with information about the number, types and outcomes of investigations. Eighty-four percent of honorees said they have a tracking tool or case management system that tracks reports and related investigations of how the report was originally made.
“We find these regular updates to be more effective than putting static examples in the code,” Huntley said.
A rising trend Byrne said Ethisphere has seen over the past three years is that boards of directors are beginning to travel to different locations for board meetings to better understand the business.
“Directors are looking to have a much better understanding of the business, so they are looking for these opportunities,” Byrne explained.
According to the report, 72 percent of those surveyed go to a different location at least once a year to have their board meeting. Byrne said this is important because directors get to see what is going on outside of the company's headquarters. Seventy-one percent of companies said they encourage non-director employees to visit a location other than the company's headquarters.
Huntley said directors should travel to these meetings on a case-by-case basis.
“That said, for certain types of businesses there would be advantages to meeting where the company actually conducts its business,” he said. “Doing so allows board members to dig in and really get to know the business they are entrusted to oversee.”
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 AllHow Dana Rao Built a 'Yes' Culture at Adobe and Why He Walked Away
FTC Sues Cash-Advance Fintech Dave, Says It Deceives the 'Financially Vulnerable'
Discover Hires Interim Legal Chief as $35B Sale to Capital One Faces New Hurdles
Trending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Trump's Return to the White House: The Legal Industry Reacts
- 3Election 2024: Nationwide Judicial Races and Ballot Measures to Watch
- 4Climate Disputes, International Arbitration, and State Court Limitations for Global Issues
- 5Judicial Face-Off: Navigating the Ethical and Efficient Use of AI in Legal Practice [CLE Pending]
- 6How Much Does the Frequency of Retirement Withdrawals Matter?
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