Fiona Coffey explains exactly what the function of the Ethics and Compliance practitioner is, and the tools they require to fill the role

Repeated corporate scandals in recent years have raised questions as to the ability of businesses to improve ethical behaviour from the inside. But relatively little is understood about the way specialist practitioners inside organisations approach this task. The Ethics and Compliance function is still relatively new, and there remains some ambiguity and confusion surrounding its purpose.

At first glance it may seem that E&C functions operate in similar ways – they implement relatively standardised E&C programmes consisting of Codes of Ethics, policies, education and training programmes employee hotlines and investigations. But research suggests that Ethics and Compliance practitioners approach the role differently. They enjoy different relationships with executives inside their organisation, and have different ways of adding value.

This research into the Role and Effectiveness of Ethics and Compliance Practitioners, published by the Institute of Business Ethics is based on interviews with eighteen senior E&C practitioners in a range of industries working in global organisations. These practitioners spoke in depth about how they approached their role. Their accounts pointed towards three principal ‘domains of activity’ associated with the E&C role – custodianship, advocacy and innovation.

Those focused on ‘custodianship’ saw their role as safeguarding and embedding corporate values and standards and providing a visible and human face to the compliance programme. Their purpose was to represent and embed norms and standards of conduct through traditional activities including advice giving, education and training, dealing with whistle-blowing hotline cases and investigations of potential misconduct.

Those engaged in ‘advocacy’ were operating at a strategic level, and actively making it their business to challenge corporate values and standards in practice. They saw their roles as surfacing and debating difficult issues, asking awkward questions, challenging business decisions that may carry an ethical or reputational risk and helping leaders to become more reflective around ethical issues at work. Finally, those tasked with ‘innovation’ were primarily involved in highlighting and changing business processes – such as supplier management systems – that presented an unacceptable risk of legal or ethical failure. The E&C role here was about designing and structuring programmes of work to deliver change in partnership with the business.

The research does not imply that E&C practitioners only see their role in one of three ways or undertake only one of three kinds of activity. It does suggest though that practitioners will have a predominant focus at any given time, around which other activities may constellate. This is partly because these roles add value in different ways and demand different skills and qualities on the part of the E&C practitioner.

Custodians add value by being the eyes and ears of the organisation and helping others to navigate tricky situations at work. They often come to the E&C role after long periods of service in the organisation and deeply understand its culture and ways of working. Advocates add value by shaking things up, promoting challenge and debate around issues that might otherwise get overlooked. Three out of four advocates in this study were lawyers, suggesting that they were well positioned to speak authoritatively on areas of legal and reputational risk. Innovators add value by finding ways to connect ethical challenges with live business concerns. They talk the language of risk, and structure tangible programmes of work to deiiver in partnership with the business. In this study, in contrast to custodians, innovators had built their careers in different organisations, and therefore brought experience of change in different contexts.

So how should we decide which kind of E&C role is likely to be most effective? In organisations that have already got it right in terms of standards of ethical conduct, the custodian role is best positioned to ensure that these standards are embedded in everyday practice. But in organisations where change is required, E&C roles need to move beyond custodianship in order to challenge corporate values in practice and implement changes to the business model where necessary. These roles are inherently more challenging to ‘business as usual’ and require a high level of skill on the part of practitioners in order to influence change inside the organisation. Equally, leaders must be comfortable with challenge and change if they are to support E&C practitioners in this task. Not all E&C practitioners enjoy this level of scope and permission.

This research provides a route map for E&C practitioners in thinking about their current role and how to develop their careers. It also provides the basis for a more informed discussion with boards and senior executives on the value that the E&C function can bring and the kind of support required for different kinds of E&C roles to be effective.

Fiona Coffey is author of The Role and Effectiveness of Ethics and Compliance Practitioners which is available from the Institute of Business Ethics. http://www.ibe.org.uk/list-of-publications/67/47#pub2160



Related Reads

comments powered by Disqus