Ethics and Compliance About More Than Just Rules, Survey Says
New data from LRN Corp. indicates that basing an E&C program on values, rather than rules, may be the way to go.
March 27, 2018 at 11:05 AM
2 minute read
Shutterstock.com
When it comes to making investments in ethics and compliance programs, it's best for companies to keep their efforts focused on a values-based approach, according to a new report.
The 2018 Ethics and Compliance Effectiveness Report, released by consulting firm LRN Corp., found that values-based ethics and compliance programs are more effective at encouraging ethical behavior than those focused on processes and rules.
Some 78 percent of respondents whose E&C programs rated as high performers on LRN's Program Effectiveness Index said in the past five years their programs have increasingly focused on values, not just rules.
The report points out the countless number of organizations in the past year that have been upended by sexual harassment scandals. “Many of these organizations have invested in ethics and compliance programs … but such measures didn't prevent the unethical behavior itself,” the report said.
The report continued, “These scandals graphically illustrate the gap between talking the talk and walking the walk when it comes to maintaining an ethical workplace.”
Last February, the Fraud Section of the U.S. Department of Justice released a memorandum on how corporate compliance programs should be evaluated. And per the criteria, LRN asked respondents if their organizations perform a root-cause analysis when misconduct arises to determine the underlying causes.
According to the report, the vast majority of companies do. Eighty-nine percent of high-performing companies said they do such an analysis, and only 11 percent do not.
Most organizations reported that the human resources function is tasked with conducting the root-cause analysis.
Additionally, 77 percent of respondents with high-performing E&C programs on the PEI scale said their organizations' consideration of ethics and compliance risks or factors led to the substantial modification or to the abandonment of a business initiative. From that group, about 23 percent said this occurs “sometimes,” and 54 percent said it happens “regularly.”
This content has been archived.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 All
Contract Software Unicorn Ironclad Hires Former Pinterest Lawyer as GC
2 minute read
How Amy Harris Leverages Diversity to Give UMB Financial a Competitive Edge
5 minute read
Auditor Finds 'Significant Deficiency' in FTC Accounting to Tune of $7M
4 minute read
Dog Gone It, Target: Provider of Retailer's Mascot Dog Sues Over Contract Cancellation
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
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
