# data[].attributes.body
GRC tools - forrester

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Qu'est-ce qu'un administrateur référent ?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Référence question N° 701 - Qu'est-ce qu'un administrateur référent ?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
EXTRA-TERRITORIALITE DU DROIT AMERICAIN : L'INDISPENSABLE ETUDE D'HERVE JUVIN1 par Richard Labévière - COMITE VALMY

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
EXTRA-TERRITORIALITE DU DROIT AMERICAIN : L'INDISPENSABLE ETUDE D'HERVE JUVIN1 Dernièrement, un patron de PME française - qui rentre tout juste de (...)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Lexis® Diligence from LexisNexis. Lexis® Diligence helps compliance professionals develop a rigorous anti-corruption/anti-bribery compliance program, protect your company's reputation and avoid FCPA fines. Within the compliance field, you often need to: * Protect your organization's reputation and manage risk with a comprehensive third party due diligence program.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Anticipate and navigate global regulatory compliance confidently with Thomson Reuters Regulatory Intelligence, providing a focused view of the global regulatory environment and empowering compliance professionals to make well-informed decisions to manage regulatory risk with confidence.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
World-Check, trusted and accurate source of risk intelligence made available to help you meet your regulatory obligations, make informed decisions, and help prevent your business from inadvertently being used to launder the proceeds of crime or association with corrupt business practices.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Regulatory Compliance Software Solutions - MetricStream

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
MetricStream provides Regulatory Compliance software solutions to enable efficient compliance management. It provides a common framework and an integrated approach to meet cross-industry mandates and regulations.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
IBM Watson Regulatory Compliance - Overview - United States

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A cognitive cloud solution, powered by Watson, that streamlines the process of managing regulatory compliance

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Dataviz sur le règlement européen sur la protection des données

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
La dataviz permet de comprentre les liens entre les différents articles du règlement

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
How to increase the effectiveness of compliance management programs, while also reducing the time and effort compliance places on employees. Make compliance monitoring more effective at your organization.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
CEB Compliance and Ethics Leadership Council is a membership for innovative compliance leaders who want to optimize the performance of their compliance and ethics function and business.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Toute l'info sur http://wizdeo.com/s/grandlilletv . La CNIL a épinglé acadomia pour des commentaires excessifs voire injurieux sur les élèves, parents et professeurs. (DROITS RESERVES . Pour toute exploitation sur TV, web, mobile, aller sur http://wizdeo.com/s/banqueimages )

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Global Compliance Software & Training | NAVEX Global

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
NAVEX Global provides a suite of world-class ethics and compliance software, services, and training to protect your organisation, people, and bottom line.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
ISO 19600:2014(fr), Systèmes de management de la compliance ? Lignes directrices

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
La présente Norme internationale ne spécifie pas d'exigences, mais fournit des lignes directrices concernant les systèmes de management de la compliance et des pratiques recommandées.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Label ISR | Pour choisir des placements responsables et durables

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Pour choisir des placements responsables et durables

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
USA Mutuals Vice Fund Investor Class Shares (VICEX) Fund Performance and Returns

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Get fund performance data on USA Mutuals Vice Fund Investor Class Shares (VICEX) including growth, trailing returns, and quarterly and monthly returns.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Recherchez un fonds ISR (Investissement Socialement Responsable) en sélectionnant au préalable leur approche ISR, un fonds thématique ou non, leur exclusions normatives ou sectorielles, ou encore leur association ISR-solidaire.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Prix Pinocchio : le grand gagnant est Yara, le leader mondial des engrais chimiques

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Glossaire OCDE normes pénales internationales

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
La compliance, une fonction en pleine évolution - ANALYSE FINANCIÈRE

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Le Cercle de la Compliance - De la Compliance

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Le secret de la réussite de la compliance

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Retranscription Conférence Cercle De la Compliance 26012012

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Punytive Damages? World's Biggest Corporate Fines - Information is Beautiful

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Distilling the world's data, information & knowledge into beautiful infographics & visualizations

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Visualiser La Corruption : Le Média N°1 Anti Corruption

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Visualiser La Corruption : Le Média N°1 Anti Corruption

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What is antitrust? | Legal insights by World Finance

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In order to protect the above aims, the antitrust laws are worded in an open-ended language so as to be able to respond if required to the actions of any predatory business. The antitrust laws effectively are the antitrust statutes which form the bare-boned frameworks behind the courts dressing for justice.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
@ REA Tous droits réservés

160,6 millions d'euros : c'est le montant des amendes infligées aux entreprises l'an dernier par l'Autorité de la concurrence en France, selon le rapport annuel de l'institution, publié ce jeudi. Une dégringolade de 70,3% par rapport à 2012, lorsqu'elles avaient atteint 540,7 millions, et de 78,7% comparée au record enregistré en 2005 (754,4 millions). Cette chute est toutefois à relativiser puisque sur 3 ans glissants, le montant moyen des sanctions reste relativement stable, aux alentours de 300 millions d'euros par an.

Parmi les sanctions prononcées l'an dernier, seule celle de 79 millions d'euros infligée à un cartel de distributeurs de produits chimiques se hisse parmi les 10 plus importantes depuis 2000, que nous vous proposons de découvrir.
1. Les opérateurs mobiles s'entendent sur leurs parts de marché (2005) : 534 millions d'euros
Entre 1997 et 2003, les 3 opérateurs mobiles (Orange, Bouygues Télécom et SFR) ont échangé mensuellement des chiffres précis sur le nombre de nouveaux abonnements et de résiliation. Ils se sont aussi entendus, entre 2000 et 2002, sur une stabilisation de leur part de marché. Verdict : 256 millions d'euros d'amende pour Orange, 220 millions pour SFR et 58 millions pour Bouygues Telecom.
2. Les banques facturent des commissions injustifiées sur les chèques (2010) : 384,9 millions d'euros
L'Autorité a reproché aux banques de ponctionner des commissions interbancaires, liées à la dématérialisation de l'échange des chèques, ce qui augmentait artificiellement leurs coûts et se répercutait sur les tarifs (remise de chèque...). Au total, 11 établissements ont été sanctionnés : la Banque de France, BPCE, la Banque postale, BNP Paribas, la Confédération Nationale du Crédit Mutuel, Crédit Agricole, Crédit du Nord, CIC, LCL, HSBC et Société Générale.
3. Les géants de la lessive fixent entre eux les prix de vente (2011) : 367,9 millions d'euros
En France, le marché de la lessive est contrôlé par 4 grands fabricants : Unilever, Procter & Gamble, Henkel et Colgate Palmolive. Et ces derniers ont mené, de 1997 à 2004, des réunions secrètes, afin de se mettre d'accord sur les prix et les promotions qu'ils allaient proposer. Ce, pour toutes les gammes des grandes marques vendues dans l'Hexagone (Ariel, Le Chat, Skip, Dash, Omo...). Procter & Gamble a écopé à lui seul de 240,2 millions d'euros d'amende. Unilever, de son côté, a été exempté, pour avoir dénoncé l'affaire à l'autorité en 2008.
4. Les meuniers français et allemands signent un pacte de non agression (2012) : 242,4 millions d'euros
"Chacun reste chez soi" : c'est ainsi que peut se résumer l'entente entre meuniers français et allemands, qui visait à limiter les importations entre les deux pays. L'Autorité a aussi sanctionné, dans le cadre de cette même décision, une entente entre meuniers tricolores, qui leur permettait de manipuler les prix, la production ainsi que l'allocation des clients.
5. Orange et SFR commercialisent des offres anticoncurrentielles (2012) : 183,1 millions d'euros
Nouvelle affaire concernant les opérateurs mobiles. Cette fois, ce sont uniquement Orange et SFR qui sont inquiétés, suite à une plainte de Bouygues portant sur des offres incluant les appels illimités uniquement vers les personnes abonnées au même réseau. Une pratique qui incite les consommateurs à rejoindre le même opérateur que leurs proches, et biaise donc la concurrence. Orange a été condamné à 117,4 millions d'euros d'amende, SFR à 65,7 millions.
6. Les banques s'interdisent de démarcher les clients souhaitant renégocier leur crédit immobilier (2000) : 174,5 millions d'euros
L'affaire remonte à 1993-1994. A l'époque, les taux des crédits immobiliers viennent de connaître une très forte baisse (ils sont tombés entre 7,5 et 9%, contre 12% fin 1992 et 20% au début des années 80). De quoi inciter les emprunteurs à bénéficier de meilleures conditions en allant voir la concurrence. Sauf que les banques, voyant venir le danger, s'accordent pour ne pas faire de propositions aux clients d'autres établissements souhaitant renégocier leur emprunt. La sanction la plus lourde est infligée au Crédit agricole (450 millions de francs, l'équivalent de 69 millions d'euros). Il s'agit de la première affaire de pratiques anticoncurrentielles dans le secteur bancaire.
7. Les champions de l'intérim coordonnent leur politique commerciale (2009) : 94,4 millions d'euros
Adecco, Manpower et VediorBis, qui couvrent 70 % du marché français de l'intérim, se sont concertés à plusieurs reprises entre 2003 et 2004 sur leur politique commerciale et tarifaire vis-à-vis de leurs clients les plus importants (du type Eiffage, La Poste, Alstom, EDF, ou encore les Galeries Lafayette), afin de préserver leurs marges. Adecco a écopé de 34,2 millions d'euros d'amende, Manpower de 42 millions et VediorBis de 18,2 millions.
8. France Télécom verrouille de marché de l'internet ADSL (2005) : 80 millions d'euros
Jusqu'en 2002, France Télécom (désormais Orange) a refusé à ses concurrents l'accès au marché de gros de l'internet à haut débit (ADSL). Un abus de position dominante, a jugé l'Autorité de la concurrence, qui avait été saisi par Neuf Télécom (depuis avalé par SFR).
9. Un cartel dans le secteur de la distribution de produits chimiques (2013) : 79 millions d'euros
Les quatre principaux distributeurs de produits chimiques en France (Renntag, Caldic Est, Univar et Solvadis), qui détiennent plus de 80% de ce marché, ont été condamnés pour une entente consistant à se répartir les clients et à se coordonner sur les prix. L'affaire avait été révélée par l'un de ces quatre acteurs, Solvadis, qui a de ce fait échappé à une sanction (la société aurait normalement dû écoper de 13 millions d'euros d'amende).
10. Les rois du négoce de produits sidérurgiques s'entendent sur les prix (2008) : 74 millions d'euros
Alertée par des clients ayant repéré des similitudes suspectes dans des offres concurrentes, l'autorité a mis au jour une entente entre 11 sociétés de négoce de produits sidérurgiques, portant sur les conditions commerciales accordées aux clients (prix, taux de remise...). La sanction, qui avait atteint la somme record de 575,4 millions d'euros au départ, a finalement été réduite à 74 millions par la Cour d'appel de Paris.
Thomas Le Bars

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Les 10 plus grosses amendes infligées par l'Autorité de la concurrence

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
160,6 millions d'euros : c'est le montant des amendes infligées aux entreprises l'an dernier par l'Autorité de la concurrence en France, selon le rapport annuel de l'institution, publié ce jeudi. Une dégringolade de 70,3% par rapport à 2012, lorsqu'elles avaient atteint 540,7 millions, et de 78,7% comparée au record enregistré en 2005 (754,4 millions).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The 2016 Guidelines Manual, effective November 1, 2016, WILL REMAIN IN EFFECT ON NOVEMBER 1, 2017 as there were no new amendments promulgated by the Commission. The manual is available in HTML and PDF formats, which can be viewed, downloaded or printed via the website.
NEW! The Commission also offers a web-based app of the current Guidelines Manual and accompanying appendices. The app features additional tools to assist in understanding and applying the federal sentencing guidelines. For quick future access, don't forget to "Add to Home Screen" on your mobile device or save as a bookmark on your desktop or laptop computer. Access the app.
CHAPTER ONE - Introduction, Authority, and General Application Principles
Part A - Introduction and Authority
CHAPTER TWO - Offense Conduct

PARTS A-C
Part B - Basic Economic Offenses
Part D - Offenses Involving Drugs and Narco-Terrorism

PARTS E - K

PARTS L - X
Part R - Antitrust Offenses Part T - Offenses Involving Taxation Part A - Victim-Related Adjustments Part A - Criminal History Part A - Sentencing Table Part D - Supervised Release Part F - Sentencing Options Part J - Relief From Disability Part A - Sentencing Procedures Part D - Organizational Probation
(EFFECTIVE November 1, 2016)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The 2016 Guidelines Manual, effective November 1, 2016, WILL REMAIN IN EFFECT ON NOVEMBER 1, 2017 as there were no new amendments promulgated by the Commission. The manual is available in HTML and PDF formats, which can be viewed, downloaded or printed via the website.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Effective compliance program as per US FED guidelines

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
GAN Integrity: Online Compliance Software | Management | Reporting - All-In-One

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
GAN online compliance software gives global compliance teams a single place to manage compliance - policies, training, third parties, investigations, and more.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Compliance Guides | Business Anti-Corruption Portal

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Compliance Guides are brief business overviews of compliance demands for select countries. Select a country where your company does business.

# data[].attributes.headline
Programme de conformité autorité de la concurrence

# data[].attributes.subject
Programme de conformité autorité de la concurrence

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Norton Rose Fulbright - The Institute - Norton Rose Fulbright Publisher

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Welcome to The Institute, our premium client knowledge site, providing valuable insight on a range of legal topics and trends.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
It has been reported that approximately two-thirds of companies in the U.S. are affected by fraud, losing an estimated 1.2% of revenue each year to such activity. [1] Indirect costs associated with fraud, such as reputational damage and costs associated with investigation and remediation of the fraudulent acts, may also be substantial. When and where implemented, an internal whistleblower hotline is a critical component of a company's anti-fraud program, as tips are consistently the most common method of detecting fraud. [2] Consequently, it is essential that companies consider implementing, if they have not already done so, effective whistleblower hotlines. [3] To the extent hotlines are currently in place, companies need to evaluate them to ensure that the hotlines are operating as intended and are effective in preventing and identifying unethical or potentially unlawful activity, including corporate fraud, securities violations and employment discrimination or harassment. This evaluation should be a key element of every company's assessment of its compliance and ethics program.

Benchmarking hotline data to that of its peers and industry should also be part of a company's compliance and ethics program evaluation and may provide valuable insight into the effectiveness of a company's whistleblower hotline. For example, a high volume of calls to a company's hotline (as compared to peers and its industry) may indicate that the company is experiencing significant compliance issues and potentially has an ineffective compliance and ethics program. Conversely, a high volume of hotline calls may suggest that the hotline is working as planned, that the company's compliance and ethics employee training program is effective, that there is greater awareness of the hotline and increased trust in the company's compliance department, and that the board of directors and management are setting the proper tone in reinforcing internal reporting mechanisms, including the hotline, and ethical culture. On the other hand, silence or a low volume of calls (as compared to a company's peers and its industry) may not necessarily imply that all is well at the company and unethical or unlawful conduct is not occurring but, to the contrary, may be indicative of an inadequate hotline and overall ineffective corporate compliance and ethics program.

It is more crucial than ever that companies have effective whistleblower hotlines as part of their corporate compliance programs so that employees (and other company stakeholders, such as vendors) are motivated to report suspected unethical or unlawful conduct internally and not incentivized to first turn to regulators. The Whistleblower Program established by the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC") pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 ("Dodd-Frank"), for example, like certain other federal government whistleblower programs, provides monetary incentives for individuals, including employees, to come forward and report possible violations of the federal securities laws to the SEC (the "SEC Whistleblower Program"). [4] Further, it is essential that companies implement an effective whistleblower hotline and incentivize employees to use such hotline, as the reporting of suspected wrongdoing internally first may provide a company with the opportunity to address and remedy the conduct or activity before it becomes unlawful or the company is required to report it to regulators. There is often a fine line between unethical and unlawful conduct in the current regulatory environment and the reporting of suspected wrongdoing by an employee (or the company) to regulators may trigger a government investigation or shareholder suit (either of which may require lengthy, costly and resource-intensive actions by the company to defend).

To provide context as to the successes and potential monetary incentives of certain government whistleblower programs, this post first discusses the current state of the SEC Whistleblower Program. This post then (1) examines why employees may choose to avoid internal whistleblower hotlines in favor of reporting to regulators, such as the SEC, and (2) identifies certain practices that boards of directors and company management may consider to help facilitate whistleblower reporting internally and help implement an effective whistleblower hotline and reporting program.
Current State of the SEC Whistleblower Program
Under the SEC Whistleblower Program, eligible whistleblowers can potentially recover a reward equal to 10%-30% of the amount of any monetary sanctions collected that exceed $1 million in actions brought by the SEC and related actions brought by other regulatory and law enforcement authorities. The SEC Whistleblower Program also prohibits retaliation by employers against employees who provide the SEC with information about possible securities violations, including accounting fraud, market manipulation, insider trading, misleading statements in public filings and misrepresentations in the sale of securities. Notably, the SEC Whistleblower Program does not require that employee whistleblowers report violations internally in order to qualify for an award. SEC rules do, however, add certain incentives intended to encourage employees to utilize their company's internal compliance and reporting programs when appropriate to do so. [5]

The SEC has received a high volume of hotline calls since the SEC Whistleblower Program became effective in 2011, with 3,238 calls received in fiscal 2013 (up from 3,001 in fiscal 2012). The most common complaint categories reported by whistleblowers in those calls involved fraud in corporate disclosures and financials, offering fraud and stock price manipulation. [6] The SEC has also exercised its authority under Dodd-Frank and brought a number of actions based upon those whistleblower tips. In fiscal 2013, the SEC issued 118 enforcement judgments and orders, which generated award payments of nearly $15 million to whistleblowers. [7] More recently, in 2014, the SEC has awarded the following:

in June, $875,000 to two individuals for "tips and assistance" relating to fraud in the securities market (which represented 30% of the nearly $3 million in sanctions the SEC collected in the enforcement action);

in July, $400,000 to a whistleblower who reported fraud to the SEC after the employee's company failed to address internally certain securities law violations;

in August, $300,000 to a company employee who performed audit and compliance functions and reported wrongdoing to the SEC after the company failed to take action when the employee reported it internally first; and

in September, more than $30 million (the SEC's largest whistleblower award to date) to an employee living in a foreign country who provided information about "an ongoing fraud that would have been very difficult to detect" and which led to a successful SEC enforcement action. [8]

Based upon the volume and increasing number of whistleblower tips to the SEC and the sizeable awards granted under the SEC Whistleblower Program to certain of the individuals providing those tips, companies should evaluate and determine the effectiveness of their internal compliance program, with a particular focus on their whistleblower hotline, to ensure that employees are encouraged and motivated to report suspected unethical or unlawful conduct by way of the company's hotline.
Reasons Why Employees May Choose to Avoid Internal Whistleblower Hotlines
Assessing the effectiveness of an internal whistleblower hotline (should such hotline exist) and addressing reasons why employees choose to avoid reporting tips by way of that hotline in favor of reporting to regulators should be an integral component of evaluating a company's compliance and ethics program. There are a number of reasons employees may avoid hotlines, such as the fear of retaliation (including dismissal, constructive discharge and loss of career advancement opportunities) or being labeled a "snitch" or "rat" and the fact that some company hotlines may only provide for the ability to actually blow the whistle and do not serve any additional function. [9] Further, employees may perceive that they do not have shared values with the company or that the "tone at the top" among the board of directors and management is not one that promotes or rewards ethical behavior. Moreover, employees simply may not be aware of the hotline, how it works, the procedures involved, the ramifications of calling and making a report, or the various hotline-related protections provided to them, including the confidentiality of calls.
Considerations to Help Facilitate Whistleblower Reporting Internally and Implement an Effective Whistleblower Hotline and Reporting Program
To address reasons employees may be reluctant to use an internal whistleblower hotline and to help facilitate an effective whistleblower hotline and reporting program, boards of directors and management should consider the following:

Hotline as an integral part of company's corporate compliance and ethics program. A whistleblower hotline is often a key component of an effective corporate compliance and ethics program. Research reveals that internal employee hotlines facilitate the detection of unethical or unlawful conduct, as tips are the most common detection method for suspected wrongdoing in companies with or without hotlines. In companies with an internal hotline, tips account for over half of all fraud detection versus only one-third of detections in companies with no internal hotline. Notably, the rate of discovering fraud "by accident" more than doubles when a company fails to offer a hotline. [10] Therefore, companies should review their internal compliance and for prompt identification and redress of suspected unethical or unlawful acts and provides management with the necessary tools to resolve such acts internally.

Anonymity and confidentiality. Employees should be able to make whistleblower tips anonymously or, at the very least, confidentially, as research indicates that employees are more comfortable reporting suspected wrongdoing when such options are available. In 2013, 60% of internal fraud tips were reported anonymously. [11] Anonymous and confidential reporting mechanisms help foster a climate whereby company employees are more likely to report or seek guidance regarding potential or actual wrongdoing without fear of retaliation.

No retaliation. Companies must emphasize when publicizing hotline reporting procedures that they will not and are prohibited by law from retaliating against employees who make whistleblower reports. The fear of retribution is generally strong among potential whistleblowers and such fear may adversely affect the effectiveness of the internal reporting process. Trust in a company's whistleblower processes, including making hotline reports without fear of retaliation, is essential to motivate employees to report suspected unethical or unlawful conduct internally. Further, in addition to the whistleblower anti-retaliation protections found in a number of federal statutes, most states also provide related protections that may apply.

Whistleblower incentives. Companies should offer financial as well as non-financial reporting incentives, such as cash rewards or extra vacation days, for whistleblower reports that lead the company to identify suspected unethical or unlawful activity. Although the percentage of companies offering rewards for internal whistleblowers is estimated to be approximately 10%, external incentives (such as the SEC Whistleblower Program's financial rewards) may motivate employees to first report outside the organization. [12] A company may minimize external incentives by offering its own reporting programs, including hotlines, as well as their internal investigation procedures, and consider initiatives (e.g., a training program that identifies the areas that pose the most risks to the company) that actively promote those programs (emphasizing confidentiality and non-retaliation), simplify reporting procedures and attempt to make related policies more accessible and easy to understand. A company's hotline policy should be a clear, well-communicated written policy that allows reward/compensation system to internal whistleblowers for tips that identify unethical conduct, fraud and waste and those that save the company resources, for example, through workplace safety and process improvements.

Positive "tone at the top." SEC Chair Mary Jo White recently commented that it is up to company directors, along with senior management under the purview of the board, to set the "all-important 'tone at the top' for the entire company." Setting the standard in the boardroom that good corporate governance and rigorous compliance are essential helps establish a strong corporate culture throughout a company. [13] Creating a culture in which internal reporting is valued and where tipsters are protected is essential to preventing and detecting suspected unethical or unlawful conduct. A positive tone from the top of a company may ease the stigma of utilizing a company hotline, making employees feel less intimidated when they decide whether to report to the internal hotline in the future. Also, a board's or management's effective and expeditious response to hotline calls will help facilitate communicating a proper message to employees so they do not lose faith in the board or management and feel as though their only option is to report suspected wrongdoing to regulators. Further, senior management should praise whistleblowers who first report suspected unethical or unlawful conduct internally (versus to regulators) to reinforce that such action is encouraged and supported.

Educate, publicize and make hotline available. Companies should ensure that their compliance and ethics program includes regularly educating employees on and publicizing the who-what-when-where-why-how of reporting suspected unethical or unlawful activity via the company's whistleblower hotline. A portion of the compliance department's budget should be dedicated to educating (e.g., on what types of activities or observations are appropriate for reporting and those that are not) and promoting the company's hotline. Certain compliance experts note that keeping a positive hotline message (for example, using words such as accountability, transparency, responsibility and citizenship as opposed to fraud, corruption, embezzlement, bribery and crime) may help alleviate psychological barriers that prevent or discourage tipsters from using the hotline. [14] Further, companies should make hotlines available 24 hours a day and 365 days a year. Employees may feel more comfortable reporting suspected wrongdoing outside of normal work hours to preserve anonymity.

Multiple uses for hotline, including a helpline. Companies should expand the reasons an employee may contemplate calling the hotline, such as having the hotline also serve as a helpline, as this may alter the perception or negativity associated with hotlines and facilitate reducing the fear of calling and the associated stigma. For example, a company can encourage employees to use the hotline/helpline to receive interpretative guidance on provisions of the company's code of ethics, make efficiency and process improvement suggestions (which could potentially save the company resources through innovative employee ideas) or report quality control or workplace safety concerns. Further, board and management actions that help change the perception of using the company hotline may reduce the barriers an employee feels before reporting his or her first tip and, after such tip, the employee may be more readily inclined to report future suspected wrongdoing. Research reveals that employees who are repeat tipsters to the company's internal hotline have a higher rate of legitimate claims than first-time reporters. [15]

Record and analyze statistics. Companies should use their hotlines as a tool for collecting and analyzing information on the company's overall internal compliance, reporting and ethics program. Data a company receives in connection with its whistleblower hotline should be reviewed by management with board oversight to monitor, among other metrics, the rate of employee hotline use, the company's record of following up on tips, whether claims are substantiated and the departments that are most frequently implicated in the reports.

Companies should benchmark their compliance programs to internal (e.g., location, business units and departments) and external (e.g., peers and industry) data sources. Company data is often available by way of its internal or third-party hotline database, while peer and industry hotline data may be purchased from third-party providers. Hotline data benchmarking provides companies with comparative information to determine reporting patterns that are higher than, lower than or in line with peers and their industry, which information may suggest mistrust or misuse of the whistleblower hotline or be indicative of more serious company-wide compliance and ethics issues.

Hotline managed by third-party provider. Whistleblower hotlines should be managed by independent third-party providers which, if so used by a company, should be well publicized to its employees. Employees tend to trust independently managed more than internally maintained hotlines. Further, third-party providers generally have more experience in managing whistleblower calls and may provide company boards and management with insightful hotline data, reports and analyses of the effectiveness of the hotline.

Allow multiple methods for submitting tips. Employees should be allowed to submit whistleblower tips in multiple forms such as via U.S. mail, a designated website and a dedicated phone line. Depending on a number of factors (e.g., location, educational background, age and level of employment), employees may differ on their preferred method of reporting compliance concerns.

Evaluate, test and audit. Hotlines, whether managed internally or outsourced to a third party, should be evaluated, tested and audited to ensure that the manner in which hotline calls are received, recorded and managed is consistent, confidential, accurate and timely, and that the hotline is operating as intended by the board and management.

Educate other stakeholders and grant access to Companies should expand trainings and dissemination of educational materials relating to their compliance and ethics program to include not only employees, but also other company stakeholders (such as vendors) and agents. Regularly educating other stakeholders and agents on the who-what-when-where- why-how of reporting suspected wrongdoing by way of the company's hotline may prove beneficial to the company through an increased number of substantiated hotline reports.

The quality of a company's internal compliance and reporting programs and how effectively they are communicated to employees may significantly impact whether a whistleblower first reports internally or approaches a regulator, such as the SEC. An effective whistleblower hotline is a good corporate governance practice, is essential to a company's successful corporate compliance program and in turn, the company's long- term success, and helps ensure that a silent hotline reflects the effectiveness of a company's compliance and ethics efforts and is not an indication of something more ominous.
Endnotes:
[5] Such incentives, for example, include (1) making a whistleblower eligible for an award if the whistleblower reports internally, the company informs the SEC about the violation and a successful SEC action ensues, (2) treating an employee as a whistleblower, under the SEC program, as of the date that employee reports the information internally, as long as the employee provides the same information to the SEC within 120 days and (3) providing that a whistleblower's voluntary participation in the company's internal compliance and reporting programs is a factor that can increase the amount of an award.
(go back)

[8] SEC Press Release 2014-113 (June 3, 2014) and Order Determining Whistleblower Award Claim, SEC Release No. 72301, File No. 2014-5 (June 3, 2014); SEC Press Release 2014-154 (July 31, 2014) and Order Determining Whistleblower Award Claim, SEC Release No. 72727, File No. 2014-8 (July 31, 2014); SEC Press Release 2014-180 (August 29, 2014) and Order Determining Whistleblower Award Claim, SEC Release No. 72947, File No. 2014-9 (August 29, 2014); SEC Press Release 2014-206 (September 22, 2014) and Order Determining Whistleblower Award Claim, SEC Release No. 73174, File No. 2014-10 (September 22, 2014).
(go back)

[9] Some whistleblower hotlines are established for the sole purpose of reporting suspected unlawful activity. As discussed further below under "Considerations to Help Facilitate Whistleblower Reporting Internally and Implement an Effective Whistleblower Hotline and Reporting Program," other hotlines also serve additional purposes, such as "helplines."
(go back)

[10] Report to the Nations on Occupational Fraud and Abuse, 2014 Global Fraud Study, supra note 2, at 22.
(go back)

[12] Report to the Nations on Occupational Fraud and Abuse, 2014 Global Fraud Study, supra note 2, at 31.
(go back)

[13] SEC Chair Mary Jo White (Speech), Stanford University Rock Center for Corporate Governance, Twentieth Annual Stanford Directors' College (June 23, 2014), discussed on the Forum here.
(go back)

[15] See The 2014 Ethics and Compliance Hotline Benchmark Report, supra note 11, at 10 (reporting that first-time tipsters have a 35% substantiation rate versus 40% for repeat tipsters).
(go back)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.authors[].name
Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance and Financial Regulation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Elements of an Effective Whistleblower Hotline

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It has been reported that approximately two-thirds of companies in the U.S. are affected by fraud, losing an estimated 1.2% of revenue each year to such activity. [1] Indirect costs associated with fraud, such as reputational damage and costs associated with investigation and remediation of the fraudulent acts, may also be substantial.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Submit a tip, learn about the program, or claim an award.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Headquartered in Bethesda, Maryland, Lockheed Martin is a global security and aerospace company that employs approximately 100,000 people worldwide and is principally engaged in the research, design, development, manufacture, integration and sustainment of advanced technology systems, products and services.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Ethics and Compliance Training course covers all of the most important legal, ethical and compliance principles that organizations face.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
are just one aspect of applying for certification. Please visit The Basic Compliance and Ethics Academy is a three-and-a-half-day intensive program focusing on subject areas at the heart of the compliance practice. The Academy addresses methods for implementing and managing compliance programs based on the Seven Element Approach. Courses are designed for participants who have a basic knowledge of compliance concepts and some professional experience in a compliance function. The Academy covers specific subject matter in depth and is a great preparation course for the optional or CCEP-I exam when attending one of our academies outside of the United States. (The course provides you with sufficient credits required to sit for the exam, but credits www.compliancecertification.org to download a copy of the Candidate Handbook for complete information.)

Course materials are provided and include SCCE's The Complete Compliance and Ethics Manual in digital/e-book format and SCCE's training video for board members, when attending an Academy within the US. When attending one of our International Academies (outside of the United States), you will receive a copy of International Compliance 101 instead of the training video for board members.

An integral feature of the SCCE Academy is the ability to meet industry peers. During the course of the Academy, SCCE will provide a networking event that will give participants the opportunity to meet with each other in an informal environment.

Academies typically sell out several weeks, if not months, in advance. Consequently, we encourage prospective attendees to enroll as early as possible.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
society of corporate compliance and ethics; compliance association; compliance and ethics professionals; compliance and ethics institute; annual institute; compliance conference

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
compliance and ethics quizzes; c&e quizzes; compliance library; compliance international; compliance and ethics; ccep; certified compliance and ethics professional; certified compliance; compliance certifications

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
SCCE Compliance & Ethics Academies| Professional Compliance Training

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
are just one aspect of applying for certification. Please visit The Basic Compliance and Ethics Academy is a three-and-a-half-day intensive program focusing on subject areas at the heart of the compliance practice. The Academy addresses methods for implementing and managing compliance programs based on the Seven Element Approach.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Lexis Diligence® - Trusted Due Diligence Solution

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Due diligence checks are essential to a robust compliance process. By choosing Lexis Diligence®, you can help your organization reduce reputational and regulatory risks.