In “Three Nails in the Coffin of ‘Compliance 1.0,’ ” this page, Donna Boehme describes as “ fatally flawed” a relationship in which the compliance officer reports, for hierarchy purposes, to the general counsel. She presents this model (Compliance 1.0) as antithetical to effective compliance programs, the byproduct of the self-interested, and suggests that organizations that continue to apply such a model are “ridiculous.” She argues, in essence, that the only acceptable model is one in which “compliance is freed from the legal department” (e.g., Compliance 2.0).
I don’t agree. There’s another perspective — one less extreme in its approach; one less corrosive to the compliance officer-general counsel relationship; one that accurately represents the totality of recent developments. Simply, the answer is just not as black and white as Boehme contends, and I think it is misleading to suggest otherwise.
This content has been archived.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
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
