Podcasts about ceco

Post-Mortem avec Victoria Charlton - Saison 1 Roxanne Luce

Play Episode Listen Later Apr 12, 2023 26:06

Les membres au cœur du clan Dubois se sont éloignés de Montréal et sont devenus très discrets au point que les journalistes qui ont suivi leurs parcours ont des avis différents sur ce qu'ils sont devenus. Une chose semble pourtant certaine : les activités du clan ont rapporté beaucoup d'argent à plusieurs membres importants de l'organisation et on a ensuite très peu entendu parler des frères, dont plusieurs sont décédés au fil des ans. Certains membres du gang, comme le tueur à gages Donald Lavoie se sont retirés du milieu criminel, ce dernier concluant lui-même que les crimes auxquels il a été mêlé étaient des morts inutiles… Avec le temps, le Clan Dubois est un peu devenu un mythe sur lequel sont racontées toutes sortes d'histoires et dont le parcours reste unique dans l'univers criminel québécois. Production exécutive : Go-script médias pour QUB radioProducteur au contenu : Stéphane BerthometRecherche : Jessica LouiséScénarisation : Roger CantinScript de la narration et animation : Isabelle Marjorie TremblayRéalisation : Victor GalarretaMixage : Philippe Séguin Musique originale : ‘'S'cuse'' Graphisme : Hugo Jeanson Archives visuelles : Allo Police / Archives Madame KarineBibliothèque sonore : BAM musiqueArchives audio : TVA et Alain StankéPour de l'information concernant l'utilisation de vos données personnelles - https://omnystudio.com/policies/listener/fr

montreal mafia dubois certains tva paye tueur meurtres criminel ceco

Le Clan Dubois - Bande-annonce

Play Episode Listen Later Apr 5, 2023 2:27

Issu du quartier pauvre de St-Henri, le Clan Dubois a été l'une des organisations criminelles les plus violentes et meurtrières du Québec, au point que même la mafia et la famille Cotroni les respectaient. Des années 50 jusqu'après les années 80, ce groupe s'est livré à toutes sortes de trafics et d'activités criminelles, allant du prêt usuraire au meurtre en passant par le trafic de drogue, le vol et le racket.Au plus fort de ses activités, le Clan Dubois était composé de plus de 200 membres dont sept tueurs à gages, incluant le célèbre Donald Lavoie. De l'alliance avec la famille Cotroni et le gang irlandais de la famille Ryan, jusqu'à la célèbre guerre de l'ouest qui les a opposé aux frères McSween, le Clan Dubois a marqué à jamais l'histoire criminelle québécoise. Des trahisons et une commission d'enquête sur le crime organisé (CECO) mettront finalement un coup d'arrêt à une grande partie des activités du gang. Plusieurs envoyant plusieurs de ses membres derrière les barreaux. Jamais racontée en balado, cette véritable saga familiale et criminelle est animée par la journaliste Isabelle-Marjorie Tremblay. La musique spécialement composée pour ce balado par le groupe «S'cuse» et les archives, dont le rare témoignage du tueur Donald Lavoie, viennent enrichir ce récit riche en évènements et en rebondissements. Pour de l'information concernant l'utilisation de vos données personnelles - https://omnystudio.com/policies/listener/fr

jamais dubois clan plusieurs bande annonce issu ceco

Trahison et délation | 5

Play Episode Listen Later Apr 5, 2023 28:12

La police crée des groupes d'enquêteurs spécialisés dans la lutte au crime organisé et la pression sur le clan pousse Claude Dubois à commettre une très grosse erreur en voulant faire assassiner son meilleur tueur à gage, Donald Lavoie.Lavoie échappe de peu à cet assassinat et décide de faire la guerre aux Dubois, mais il se fera arrêter avant. Il va finalement devenir délateur et entrainer avec lui une vague de témoignages contre les membres du clan.Ces délateurs, les premiers de l'histoire du crime au Québec, vont mettre à jour les secrets du Clan et vont conduire plusieurs des frères et beaucoup de leurs complices derrière les barreaux. L'offensive policière des années 80 décime en grande partie le clan Dubois.Mais l'histoire criminelle du Clan Dubois est-elle pour autant terminée ?Qu'en est-il de l'immense fortune amassée durant des années par cette organisation qui a dominé l'univers du racket, du prêt sur gage et de la drogue durant des décennies? Production exécutive : Go-script médias pour QUB radioProducteur au contenu : Stéphane BerthometRecherche : Jessica LouiséScénarisation : Roger CantinScript de la narration et animation : Isabelle Marjorie TremblayRéalisation : Victor GalarretaMixage : Philippe Séguin Musique originale : ‘'S'cuse'' Graphisme : Hugo Jeanson Archives visuelles : Allo Police / Archives Madame KarineBibliothèque sonore : BAM musiqueArchives audio : TVA et Alain StankéPour de l'information concernant l'utilisation de vos données personnelles - https://omnystudio.com/policies/listener/fr

police ces mafia dubois clan tva lavoie meurtre trahison ceco

La prise de l'hôtel Iroquois | 4

Play Episode Listen Later Mar 29, 2023 30:12

Le milieu des années 70 marque la montée en puissance de nouvelles drogues comme la cocaïne et de nouveaux marchés vers des clients aisés se sont créés dans les clubs à la mode. Le Clan Dubois prend rapidement le contrôle du Plexi, la boîte de nuit qui se trouvait au sein de l'hôtel Iroquois, puis de l'hôtel au complet. Mais ils ignorent que des policiers qui travaillent pour la commission d'enquête sur le crime organisé (la CECO) les surveillent de près et documentent tous leurs faits et gestes. Dans le même temps, Jean-Guy Dubois et un complice parviennent à faire avorter un procès pour meurtre par un stratagème qui témoigne une fois de plus de leur ingéniosité et leur détermination. La CECO poursuit cependant ses enquêtes et devient très populaire en dévoilant un scandale de vente de viande avariée sous le contrôle du crime organisé. Bien qu'ils ne soient pas reliés à cette histoire, lorsque les membres du clan Dubois font enfin face à la commission, le vent a tourné et plusieurs témoins se décident à parler ce qui va placer le clan dans une situation très difficile. Mais le pire reste à venir, car un criminel repenti va se présenter à la barre de la CECO… Et il connaît très bien les méthodes du clan, dont il a été l'un des tueurs à gages. C'est Donald Lavoie. Production exécutive : Go-script médias pour QUB radioProducteur au contenu : Stéphane BerthometRecherche : Jessica LouiséScénarisation : Roger CantinScript de la narration et animation : Isabelle Marjorie TremblayRéalisation : Victor GalarretaMixage : Philippe Séguin Musique originale : ‘'S'cuse'' Graphisme : Hugo Jeanson Archives visuelles : Allo Police / Archives Madame KarineBibliothèque sonore : BAM musiqueArchives audio : TVA et Alain StankéPour de l'information concernant l'utilisation de vos données personnelles - https://omnystudio.com/policies/listener/fr

production dans mafia dubois tva iroquois la prise ceco plexi

La guerre de l'ouest | 3

production massacre dubois guerre la guerre tva saint valentin clans iroquois st valentin ceco andr c jean pierre charbonneau

Play Episode Listen Later Mar 22, 2023 26:31

Le meurtre d'un prêteur sur gage, Réal Lépine déclenche une véritable guerre entre les hommes du Clan Dubois et ceux de la famille irlandaise des McSween. Les meurtres violents et les attaques brutales se succèdent durant des mois. Les journalistes André Cédilot et Jean-Pierre Charbonneau racontent combien la période des années 70 est violente et l'expert en criminologie Jean Claude Bernheim dresse le portrait d'une époque brutale autant du côté des voyous que des policiers. Cette guerre entre les deux clans rivaux va s'étirer pendant près de 4 ans, faisant des dizaines de morts et va culminer avec une véritable tuerie que la presse ne tardera pas à nommer «le massacre de la Saint-Valentin». Cette attaque sanglante, à laquelle a participé le tueur à gage Donald Lavoie, marque la victoire du clan Dubois sur la famille McSween qui est en partie décimée. Les Dubois pensent alors pouvoir continuer leur expansion dans Montréal…Mais pendant que les criminels étaient occupés à s'entretuer, le gouvernement a mis en place une commission d'enquête sur le crime organisé, la CECO. Cette commission ne va pas tarder à s'intéresser aux activités du clan Dubois qui eux, ne se doutent de rien, et s'attaquent à un lieu mythique du vieux Montréal, l'hôtel Iroquois. Production exécutive : Go-script médias pour QUB radioProducteur au contenu : Stéphane BerthometRecherche : Jessica LouiséScénarisation : Roger CantinScript de la narration et animation : Isabelle Marjorie TremblayRéalisation : Victor GalarretaMixage : Philippe Séguin Musique originale : ‘'S'cuse'' Graphisme : Hugo Jeanson Archives visuelles : Allo Police / Archives Madame KarineBibliothèque sonore : BAM musiqueArchives audio : TVA et Alain StankéPour de l'information concernant l'utilisation de vos données personnelles - https://omnystudio.com/policies/listener/fr

La piccola fortezza di terezin 1940-1945 - Parte prima

Immanuel Ka...st: Lezioni di Filosofia e Storia in mobilità

Play Episode Listen Later Mar 13, 2023 18:09

Guida alla Piccola fortezza di Terezin, autori: Vojtech Blodig, Csc., Mirolaslava Langhamerova e Jan Vajskebr. Traduzione di Paolo Pezzella.Parte prima: La cecoslovacchia nel periodo dell'occupazione nazista, L'occupazione della Cecoslovacchia, La lotta del popolo Ceco contro l'occupante

prima guida shoah csc nazismo piccola traduzione fortezza terezin ceco

Le Clan Dubois - Bande-annonce

leadership developing ethics compliance bio execution ensuring c suite robust csl neurotech ceco chief ethics

Play Episode Listen Later Mar 13, 2023 2:33

Dès le 15 mars - Issu du quartier pauvre de St-Henri, le Clan Dubois a été l'une des organisations criminelles les plus violentes et meurtrières du Québec, au point que même la mafia et la famille Cotroni les respectaient. Des années 50 jusqu'après les années 80, ce groupe s'est livré à toutes sortes de trafics et d'activités criminelles, allant du prêt usuraire au meurtre en passant par le trafic de drogue, le vol et le racket.Au plus fort de ses activités, le Clan Dubois était composé de plus de 200 membres dont sept tueurs à gages, incluant le célèbre Donald Lavoie. De l'alliance avec la famille Cotroni et le gang irlandais de la famille Ryan, jusqu'à la célèbre guerre de l'ouest qui les a opposé aux frères McSween, le Clan Dubois a marqué à jamais l'histoire criminelle québécoise. Des trahisons et une commission d'enquête sur le crime organisé (CECO) mettront finalement un coup d'arrêt à une grande partie des activités du gang. Plusieurs envoyant plusieurs de ses membres derrière les barreaux. Jamais racontée en balado, cette véritable saga familiale et criminelle est animée par la journaliste Isabelle-Marjorie Tremblay. La musique spécialement composée pour ce balado par le groupe «S'cuse» et les archives, dont le rare témoignage du tueur Donald Lavoie, viennent enrichir ce récit riche en évènements et en rebondissements. Pour de l'information concernant l'utilisation de vos données personnelles - https://omnystudio.com/policies/listener/fr

jamais dubois clan plusieurs bande annonce issu ceco

135 - Bella Rafael Hovhannisyan CECO: Neurotech Series - CSL, Ethics, Compliance and Tech

Heads Talk

Play Episode Listen Later Feb 12, 2023 31:10

Follow me to see #HeadsTalk Podcast Audiograms every Monday on LinkedIn. Episode Title:-

Santa Brigida, la mistica che ha segnato la storia dell'Europa

BASTA BUGIE - Santi e beati

Play Episode Listen Later Dec 7, 2022 23:34

TESTO DELL'ARTICOLO ➜ www.bastabugie.it/it/articoli.php?id=7227SANTA BRIGIDA, LA MISTICA CHE HA SEGNATO LA STORIA DELL'EUROPA di Liana MarabiniSuor Cosima è indaffarata intorno al grande forno a legna, nel quale ha appena infilato quattro grandi teglie di ferro piene di biscotti. Si avvicina il Natale e le suore si sono accordate col "panaio" Ceco di dargli dei biscotti da vendere sul suo banco al mercato prefestivo. Guarda la brace soddisfatta, poi si gira verso il grande tavolo dove sta impastando le ostie: serviranno a don Maso, il confessore del monastero, per la Messa. Ma inavvertitamente la sua mano tocca una ciotola di zucchero che serviva per decorare i biscotti, che si ribalta e lo zucchero cade nell'impasto delle ostie. Perplessa, suor Cosima rimane un attimo pensierosa: buttare l'impasto non se ne parla, con quello che costa lo zucchero. Allora che fare? Si guarda in giro, indecisa. In un cesto ci sono delle uova, le ha raccolte lei stessa di mattina nel recinto delle galline. Ne prende tre, le spacca e le mette nell'impasto. Mescola il tutto, poi ha un'illuminazione. Va nella dispensa e torna con una bottiglia di liquore di anice. Ne versa un po' nell'impasto e amalgama bene tutto. Ora è contenta, ne farà dei biscotti belli profumati, ma li cuocerà sulle piastre delle ostie invece che nel forno, visto che l'impasto di base era destinato alle ostie.È il 1398 e siamo a Pistoia, nel monastero dell'Ordine del SS. Salvatore di Santa Brigida di Svezia. Suor Cosima, inventrice per errore di uno dei dolci più apprezzati in Toscana (i brigidini), fa parte delle suore che hanno costruito questo monastero, intitolato alla loro fondatrice. Le suore di questo ordine hanno la vocazione di accogliere i viandanti con grazia e carità, di pregare in contemplazione e adorazione eucaristica, di fare attività apostolica.Ma chi era santa Brigida? Di nobile famiglia, Birgitta Bengtsdotter nacque nel castello di Finsta nel 1303. Fu battezzata con il nome di Brigida in onore di santa Brigida di Kildare († 525), monaca e compatrona d'Irlanda, alla quale i genitori erano devoti.Rimase orfana della madre e, intorno a 12 anni, fu mandata presso la zia Caterina Bengtsdotter a completare la propria formazione; ancora fanciulla, Brigida ebbe le prime esperienze mistiche. Dopo aver ascoltato una predica sulla Passione di Gesù, ebbe con Lui un profondo colloquio. Alla domanda: "O mio caro Signore, chi ti ha ridotto così?", si sentì rispondere: "Tutti coloro che mi dimenticano e disprezzano il mio amore!".Verso i 13 anni, secondo le consuetudini dell'epoca, il padre la diede in sposa al giovane nobile Ulf Gudmarsson. Brigida, in realtà, avrebbe voluto consacrarsi a Dio, ma accettò umilmente la disposizione paterna, vedendo in essa la volontà divina. Le nozze furono celebrate nel 1316. Andò quindi ad abitare nel castello di Ulfasa, presso le sponde del lago Boren. Il giovane sposo, a dispetto del suo nome (Ulf significa "lupo" in svedese), era un uomo mite, animato dalla volontà di vivere secondo il Vangelo. Brigida diede al marito ben otto figli, quattro maschi e quattro femmine. Ma dopo la nascita dell'ultimo figlio, i due vissero come fratello e sorella.CHIAMATA DAL RE PER ISTRUIRE LA REGINAPer vent'anni Brigida, che aveva il titolo di principessa di Närke, visse nella città di Ulfasa, che diventò il suo universo. Un mondo che cercò di migliorare con le sue opere di bene. Malgrado la ricchezza e i titoli, Brigida conduceva una vita semplice, dirigendo personalmente i suoi servitori e svolgendo insieme a loro le incombenze domestiche, in un clima di famiglia. Brigida conobbe il maestro Matthias, uomo esperto in Sacra Scrittura, di vasta cultura e zelante sacerdote; ben presto divenne il suo confessore e si fece tradurre da lui in svedese buona parte della Bibbia per poterla leggere e meditare meglio. Don Matthias, che aveva studiato a Parigi ed era un uomo di grande erudizione, fece scoprire a Brigida le correnti di pensiero di tutta l'Europa e tutto ciò si rivelerà utile per la conoscenza delle problematiche del tempo, preparandola alla sua futura missione.Brigida venne talmente apprezzata per la sua cultura da essere chiamata dal re di Svezia Magnus IV Eriksson (1316-1374) per istruire la giovanissima regina di origine francese Bianca di Namur. Correva l'anno 1335 e Brigida, che era lontana cugina del sovrano, fu invitata a stabilirsi a corte. L'invito non si poteva rifiutare e quindi Brigida affidò i figli a due monasteri cisterciensi e lasciò temporaneamente la sua casa di Ulfasa. Si trasferì a Stoccolma, portando con sé il figlio più piccolo, bisognoso ancora delle cure materne. A corte ebbe grande influenza sui giovani sovrani e, finché fu ascoltata, la Svezia ebbe buone leggi e furono abolite ingiuste e inumane consuetudini, come il diritto regio di rapina sui beni dei naufraghi. Inoltre, furono mitigate le tasse che opprimevano il popolo.Man mano che la regina cresceva, manifestando un'eccessiva frivolezza (favorita dal marito), la vita di corte andò diventando molto mondana. Brigida si trovò messa da parte e a questo punto, senza rompere i rapporti con i sovrani, approfittando di momenti propizi e del lutto che l'aveva colpita con la morte nel 1338 del figlio Gudmar, lasciò la corte e se ne ritornò a casa sua, ritrovando nel castello di Ulfasa i figli, il marito e la gioia della famiglia.Nel 1341 i due coniugi festeggiarono le nozze d'argento: Brigida e Ulf decisero di recarsi in pellegrinaggio a Santiago di Compostela. Fu l'evento che segnò una svolta decisiva nella vita dei due, che già da tempo vivevano vita fraterna e casta. Nel viaggio di ritorno, Ulf scampò alla morte grazie ad un prodigio e così i due coniugi decisero concordemente di abbracciare la vita religiosa. Ulf fu accolto nel monastero cisterciense di Alvastra, mentre Brigida si trasferì in un edificio annesso allo stesso monastero, dove restò quasi tre anni, fino al 1346, curando i malati e aiutando la povera gente; provvide anche a dare un onesto lavoro alle giovani povere che sarebbero altrimenti cadute nel giro della prostituzione. Ulf morì il 12 febbraio 1344, assistito dalla moglie.LE VISIONI DI CRISTODopo la morte del marito, Brigida visse momenti di grande solitudine ed introspezione ad Alvastra, un castello regalatole dal re, con terre e donazioni comprese. Stava ore in adorazione nella piccola cappella del castello e ripresero a manifestarsi le visioni in cui Cristo la spingeva ad operare per il bene del Paese, ma anche dell'Europa e della Chiesa.Pian piano prese forma nella sua mente l'idea di dare alla Chiesa un nuovo ordine religioso - che sarà detto del Santo Salvatore - composto da monasteri "doppi", cioè di religiosi e suore, rigorosamente divisi e il cui unico punto d'incontro era in chiesa per la preghiera in comune; ma tutti sotto la guida di un'unica badessa, rappresentante la Santa Vergine e con un confessore generale.L'Ordine del Ss. Salvatore si ispirava alla Chiesa primitiva, raccolta nel Cenacolo attorno a Maria; la parte femminile era formata da 60 religiose e quella maschile da 25 religiosi, di cui 13 sacerdoti a ricordo dei 12 Apostoli con san Paolo, 2 diaconi e 2 suddiaconi rappresentanti i primi 4 Padri della Chiesa, e 8 frati. Riassumendo, ogni comunità doppia era composta da 85 membri, dei quali 60 suore che con i 12 monaci non sacerdoti rappresentavano i 72 discepoli, più i 13 sacerdoti come sopra detto. Il gioco di numeri rientrava nel gusto del tempo per il simbolismo. Rappresentare gli apostoli e i discepoli era un richiamo concreto a vivere come loro erano vissuti; senza dimenticare che in quell'epoca non esisteva crisi di vocazioni e ciò permetteva di raggiungere senza difficoltà il numero di monache e religiosi prescritto per ogni doppio monastero.Brigida non tardò a mettere in pratica questa idea ed iniziò i lavori di ristrutturazione di Alvastra, che durarono molti anni, anche perché papa Clemente VI non concesse la richiesta autorizzazione per il nuovo ordine, in ottemperanza al decreto del Concilio Ecumenico Lateranense del 1215, che proibiva il sorgere di nuovi ordini religiosi. Decisa a convincerlo della bontà del suo progetto, nell'autunno del 1349, Brigida si recò a Roma, accompagnata dalla figlia Caterina, con un doppio scopo: voleva vivere lì l'Anno Santo del 1350, ma anche - e soprattutto - intendeva sollecitare il Papa, quando sarebbe ritornato a Roma, a concedere l'approvazione per la creazione del nuovo ordine (purtroppo, questa fu concessa solo nel 1370 da papa Urbano V).IL PRIMO MONASTEROBrigida era giunta a Roma accompagnata non solo dalla figlia, ma anche da altre tre persone molto importanti per lei: il suo confessore, il segretario Pietro Magnus e il sacerdote Gudmaro di Federico, Alloggiò brevemente nell'ospizio dei pellegrini presso Castel Sant'Angelo, e poi nel palazzo del cardinale Ugo Roger di Beaufort, fratello del papa, che vivendo ad Avignone, aveva deciso di metterlo a disposizione di Brigida, la cui fama era giunta anche alla Curia avignonese. Roma fece una brutta impressione a Brigida, cosa che risulta dai suoi scritti, in cui parla di «una città popolata di rospi e vipere, le strade piene di fango ed erbacce, il clero avido, immorale e trascurato». Brigida aggiunge che «si avverte fortemente la lontananza da tanto tempo del Papa»: così, cominciò a scrivere al Pontefice, descrivendo nelle sue lettere la situazione a dir poco decadente della città e spronandolo a ritornare nella sua sede. Ma le sue parole cadevano nel vuoto. Il sogno di Brigida era vedere l'Europa unita e in pace, governata dall'imperatore e guidata spiritualmente dal Papa.

Robert Brooks: CECO Environmental $CECE Deep Dive

Value Hive Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Nov 18, 2022 63:17

Today's episode we had a conversation with Robert Brooks, Founder of Brick by Brick Capital. We covered everything that an investor needs to know about Ceco Environmental ($CECO), whether it is Ceco's history, what is their business, Ceco's Competitive advantages, its unit economic, value and why they still have future margin expansion and revenue growth. Plus, Robert shares his investment journey and what could possible go wrong with his Ceco Investment. Check out the time stamp below: [0:00] Who is Robert Brooks? [5:30] Brick by Brick Investing Strategy [10:40] Ceco Environmental ($CECO) [14:00] Ceco's Old Management [17:00] Ceco's Customer Base [25:00] Ceco's Unit Economics [30:20] Ceco's New Management [37:00] What could go wrong? [41:00] Ceco's Tailwinds [52:00] Ceco's Price Target [55:00] Closing Questions and More from Robert If you enjoyed the podcast, make sure to follow Rob on Twitter at @BrickByBrickCap. Finally, a big thanks to the following sponsors for making the podcast a reality. Mitimco This episode is brought to you by MIT Investment Management Company, also known as MITIMCo, the investment office of MIT. Each year, MITIMCo invests in a handful of new emerging managers who it believes can earn exceptional long-term returns in support of MIT's mission. To help the emerging manager community more broadly, they created emergingmanagers.org, a website for emerging manager stockpickers. For those looking to start a stock-picking fund or just looking to learn about how others have done it, I highly recommend the site. You'll find essays and interviews by successful emerging managers, service providers used by MIT's own managers, essays MITIMCo has written for emerging managers and more! Tegus Tegus has the world's largest collection of instantly available interviews on all the public and private companies you care about. Tegus actually makes primary research fun and effortless, too. Instead of weeks and months, you can learn a new industry or company in hours, and all from those that know it best. I spend nearly all my time reading Tegus calls on existing holdings and new ideas. And I know you will too. So if you're interested, head on over to tegus.co/valuehive for a free trial to see for yourself. TIKR TIKR is THE BEST resource for all stock market data, I use TIKR every day in my process, and I know you will too. Make sure to check them out at TIKR.com/hive. --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/valuehive/support

founders mit deep dive environmental competitive brick cece tailwinds customer base robert brooks price target tegus ceco mitimco

S8E8 | Compliance benchmarking: Benefits, limitations, and best practices

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 28, 2022 31:13

What you'll learn in this podcast episode Guidance from the US Department of Justice, particularly the recent 2020 memorandum, stresses that a company's compliance program must reflect and evolve with its risks—and should not be a snapshot or on cruise control. But in assessing those risks, it's helpful to see what other companies in the same area or circumstances have done to meet them. Collective action and coordination can be very useful in dealing with common risks. So, when is benchmarking and a collective approach to risk helpful? And when can it backfire? In this episode of the Principled Podcast, LRN Director of Advisory Services Emily Miner continues the conversation from Episode 6 about benchmarking with her colleague Susan Divers. Listen in as the two discuss the benefits and limitations of benchmarking, and how organizations can ensure they benchmark their E&C programs effectively. Featured guest: Susan Divers Susan Divers is the director of thought leadership and best practices with LRN Corporation. She brings 30+ years' accomplishments and experience in the ethics and compliance arena to LRN clients and colleagues. This expertise includes building state-of-the-art compliance programs infused with values, designing user-friendly means of engaging and informing employees, fostering an embedded culture of compliance, and sharing substantial subject matter expertise in anti-corruption, export controls, sanctions, and other key areas of compliance. Prior to joining LRN, Mrs. Divers served as AECOM's Assistant General for Global Ethics & Compliance and Chief Ethics & Compliance Officer. Under her leadership, AECOM's ethics and compliance program garnered six external awards in recognition of its effectiveness and Mrs. Divers' thought leadership in the ethics field. In 2011, Mrs. Divers received the AECOM CEO Award of Excellence, which recognized her work in advancing the company's ethics and compliance program. Before joining AECOM, she worked at SAIC and Lockheed Martin in the international compliance area. Prior to that, she was a partner with the DC office of Sonnenschein, Nath & Rosenthal. She also spent four years in London and is qualified as a Solicitor to the High Court of England and Wales, practicing in the international arena with the law firms of Theodore Goddard & Co. and Herbert Smith & Co. She also served as an attorney in the Office of the Legal Advisor at the Department of State and was a member of the U.S. delegation to the UN working on the first anti-corruption multilateral treaty initiative. Mrs. Divers is a member of the DC Bar and a graduate of Trinity College, Washington D.C. and of the National Law Center of George Washington University. In 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014 Ethisphere Magazine listed her as one the “Attorneys Who Matter” in the ethics & compliance area. She is a member of the Advisory Boards of the Rutgers University Center for Ethical Behavior and served as a member of the Board of Directors for the Institute for Practical Training from 2005-2008. She resides in Northern Virginia and is a frequent speaker, writer and commentator on ethics and compliance topics. Featured Host: Emily Miner Emily Miner is a director of LRN's Ethics & Compliance Advisory services. She counsels executive leadership teams on how to actively shape and manage their ethical culture through deep quantitative and qualitative understanding and engagement. A skilled facilitator, Emily emphasizes co-creative, bottom-up, and data-driven approaches to foster ethical behavior and inform program strategy. Emily has led engagements with organizations in the healthcare, technology, manufacturing, energy, professional services, and education industries. Emily co-leads LRN's ongoing flagship research on E&C program effectiveness and is a thought leader in the areas of organizational culture, leadership, and E&C program impact. Prior to joining LRN, Emily applied her behavioral science expertise in the environmental sustainability sector, working with non-profits and several New England municipalities; facilitated earth science research in academia; and contributed to drafting and advancing international climate policy goals. Emily has a Master of Public Administration in Environmental Science and Policy from Columbia University and graduated summa cum laude from the University of Florida with a degree in Anthropology. Principled Podcast Transcript Intro: Welcome to the Principled Podcast, brought to you by LRN. The Principled Podcast brings together the collective wisdom on ethics, business and compliance, transformative stories of leadership and inspiring workplace culture. Listen in to discover valuable strategies from our community of business leaders and workplace change makers. Emily Miner: Guidance from the US Department of Justice, particularly the recent 2020 memorandum, stresses that a company's compliance program must reflect and evolve with its risks and should not be a snapshot or on cruise control. But in assessing those risks, it's helpful to see what other companies in the same area or circumstances have done to meet them. Collective action and coordination can be very useful in dealing with common risks. So when is benchmarking and a collective approach to risk helpful, and when can it backfire? Hello, and welcome to another episode of LRN's Principled podcast. I'm your host, Emily Miner, director of Advisory Services at LRN. Today I'm continuing my conversation from episode six about benchmarking with my colleague Susan Divers, our director of Thought Leadership and Best practices. We're going to be talking about the benefits and the limitations of benchmarking and how organizations can ensure they benchmark their E&C programs effectively. Susan brings more than 30 years experience in both the legal and E&C spaces to this topic area with subject matter expertise in anti-corruption, export controls, sanctions, and other key areas of compliance. Susan, thanks for coming on the Principled podcast. Susan Divers: Oh, Emily, it's always nice to talk with you. Emily Miner: So Susan, before we get started, let's kind of define benchmarking and summarize the conversation that I had in our last podcast with our colleague Derek. So benchmarking means comparing what you do as an organization in this case to a usually large number of comparable organizations or individuals. And most often, this is done in a quantitative way, although there are also opportunities to benchmark qualitatively. And at LRN, we've been using benchmarks for a number of years now through our research reports. We've conducted major panel research on the role of ethical culture in an organization and in organization's risk of misconduct. So looking at how that varies across countries, across industries. We conduct every year research into ethics and compliance program effectiveness research that you lead and that you and I collaborate on. And we've been doing that for, oh gosh, coming up on, I don't know, maybe eight years now. That's been given us a insightful look into Ethics & Compliance Program best practices, and how they've evolved over time. We've also conducted research on codes of conduct, analyzing nearly 150 publicly listed codes of conduct from the top listed companies around the world and looking at similarities and differences and best practices in that space. But we have a brand new product at LRN that we're launching later this month that I know we're all really excited about called Catalyst Reveal, which is a platform that will, as it's name suggests, reveal insights to our clients about their ethics and compliance program, things like course level data training, data, employee sentiment, ethical culture. It will also give our clients the ability to see how their results along these metrics compare with other organizations in the LRN client universe. So looking at by industry, by company size, and a few other comparable filters. So with that exciting launch as our backdrop, I wanted to talk to you as an expert and a thought leader in this space about benchmarking compliance programs, when to do it, when not to do it, et cetera. So let me turn it over to you, Susan, and let's start with the benefits. What are the benefits of benchmarking in ethics and compliance program? Susan Divers: Sure, Emily, I'd be happy to talk about that. In thinking about this topic, there are really three really good functions that benchmarking is appropriate for. And then there are some where it's not so appropriate and we can talk about all of that. But starting with what it's very appropriate for, the first is if you're setting up a program, you need to figure out kind of what are the basics that you need to do at the outset. And it can be very helpful particularly if it's a new program, and it usually is if it's setting it up to be able to say your management, "We have to have a code. We have to have policies. We have to have audit. And we have to have training" and those are kind of the four basic pillars and being able to make that case. That's very basic, but it can be very helpful in terms of people who are struggling to get started in what we all know is a really complicated area. So that's kind of the first setting where benchmarking I think can be very helpful. And then the second is you've got your program and you're up and going. Now, no two companies are alike, no two industries are alike, and I can get into that a little bit later, but it's helpful to know if you're mainstream or not. Like for example, our Ethical Pulse Culture check lets you sort of get an idea from a short questionnaire embedded in our platform in Reveal whether your culture is really out of whack or pretty much along the same lines as mainstream. And again, that's really helpful because it can show you an area where you're maybe excelling and it's good to take credit for that and scale it, or it can show you an area where you're deficient and it's good to know about that too. And then the last is, and this is where for example Ethisphere has done a lot of really good work, best practices. People are constantly innovating. I'm always amazed at how ethics and compliance programs are changing and getting better. And we can talk about that a little bit, and Reveal's going to be very helpful there. But benchmarking can give you ideas that can be very valuable for enhancing your program. So those are sort of the three big areas where I think benchmarking can be extremely helpful. Emily Miner: Yeah, thanks Susan. And on that last point that you shared, that's really resonating because if nothing else, benchmarking or surveying what other companies are doing out there with respect to ethics and compliance and different facets of that, it gives you as an ethics and compliance professional just an idea of what's possible. Maybe there's a new approach to communicating with your employees that you haven't thought of that might work for your organization. I'm at the SCCE's Compliance & Ethics Institute right now, and there was a session yesterday about one particular organization's sort of their evolution of their compliance program following some significant trust that was lost in the organization to senior leader misconduct. One of the things that they talked about was having employees around the globe put on skits that they turned into videos that dealt with ethics moments and how the actors, which were the employees of the organizations, would kind of get famous around the world for their skits. It was a very lighthearted way of communicating very serious topics that resonated for this particular organization. But a lot of people in the room were asking questions, "Oh, well, how could I put together a skit like that? Did you write the script or did the employees come up with it and this and that?" Just that it's a way of sharing ideas and fostering innovation across the industry that can be really exciting and powerful. Susan Divers: Yeah, that's a great example, but maybe it's time to talk a little bit about the limits of benchmarking too because that's a good illustration of the point that benchmarking's good for the three things we just talked about. Setting up, making sure that you're in the mainstream and not at either end, or maybe you want to be excelling and then getting ideas and best practices. What it's not good for is saying, "Hey, we met the criteria." And the reason is there isn't a criteria. In fact, there was a quote two days ago or so from the CEO of Advanced Micro Devices, and she said, I quote, "It's like running a different company every two years." So the point I'm trying to make here is that your program has to be based on your risks, and those risks can change dramatically, I mean, certainly in the semiconductor area, and that's what she was talking about. The risks have changed, they basically changed radically with all the changes with China and the export sanctions and the war in the Ukraine. So it's not enough to say, "Hey, I'm doing what everybody else is doing in that area." And secondly, the other big problem is comparing apples to apples. I picked three consumer companies to sort of illustrate this. One is Walmart, which obviously is a big consumer company. Another is PepsiCo, another is Mondelez. And if you look at all three, they all have really different risk profiles. They may be in the same area generally, but Walmart's much bigger than the other two. Walmart had a major scandal a number of years ago where they wound up paying, I think it was 137 million in 2019 because in order to get permits for their stores in Latin America, particularly Mexico, their lawyers were actually paying bribes. When you think about it, that should have been something that they were sensitive to on their risk profile and both training and auditing the local lawyers. Also, there was some lawyers on their teams internally. That was a risk and they failed to mitigate it. PepsiCo is bottling, and so do Mondelez has plants, but it's not quite the same level of regulatory intensity as setting up a store, hiring people, environmental health. So I use that example because I'm trying to pick an industry and say, "Well, if you compared yourself to one, you might miss some of the particular risks that you have." One of the also things to bear in mind, and you alluded to it when we started, is that DOJ has never recommended benchmarking in all of the guidance. In fact, they've said things that kind of contradict benchmarking if you were using it to say, "Hey, we met the norm." They've said, "You don't want to be on cruise control," and that's because things change. And they've also said, "You don't want to just take a snapshot of your program at a given time." And that's kind of what the CEO of Advanced Micro Devices was saying too. And that's because any time you're looking backwards rather than forwards, you could miss the iceberg that's looming up ahead and going to sink the Titanic. So at any rate, I think benchmarking can be very useful, but you have to use it for the right purposes and you have to bear in mind the limitations. Emily Miner: Right. Absolutely. It's never the be all end all. It's one data point that we should be collecting and looking at in some situations and not others. And in those situations, it's one of many that we should be considering when we're thinking about program effectiveness. Susan Divers: Yeah, it's an element. Yep, absolutely. Emily Miner: So let's kind of tease this out a little bit more. Where do you see benchmarking being helpful? I know that you gave those three scenarios, but maybe if you could pick out a concrete example to share against any of those three scenarios to illustrate how it can be helpful or when it can backfire. Susan Divers: Sure. Well, let's pick another consumer company, Anheuser-Busch. This is a great example because it illustrates how benchmarking can be used very effectively to drive a best practice. Anheuser-Busch had a very prominent CECO who has very recently left to go to the Department of Justice in the last couple of months. When he was there, he set up an internal data analytics program that was able to pull data from their own systems, payments, SAP of course, onboarding and pick out red flags without, if you will, human intervention. In other words, he was able to take a number of data streams from various parts of the company and meld them together. And because he was very good CECO, he was able to figure out what some of the risk signs were or the red flags. What it did is it enabled Anheuser to manage its third parties, which if you think about it, beer distribute, beer companies have a lot of third parties. And then they could focus in on those companies, those third parties where there were red flags. They didn't have to audit everybody to the same degree of intensity. And that approach of internal data analytics was a best practice that was gathering steam, sorry. But once Matt really took it to the next level and showed how it could be done, then it really became mainstream in the E&C area. And Matt's now at DOJ. So if you're going to go in and have tense talks with regulators, being able to talk about what you're doing in benchmarking is important. And it takes us back to Reveal where Reveal is a really powerful tool that we've developed that will enable you to see red flags or predictive factors. And again, remember looking backwards doesn't really help you because it doesn't tell you if there's a big iceberg about to sink the Titanic. But looking forward and saying, gosh, the data that's coming in from Asia on attempts to pass courses or on our Ethical Pulse Culture check or other features is worrying. It's nothing specific that we know about at this point, but it indicates that, I'm just picking on Asia randomly, it indicates that we need to spend some time in Asia figuring out what's going on. So that's really an excellent use of benchmarking and that's a good story as to how understanding what best practices are emerging and adapting them then for you, because nobody could simply take Matt's system of third party analytics and plug it into their company and come up with the same results. It has to be tailored and it has to be specific. But that's a really good example of what DOJ is talking about in this area where they say you have to tailor it to your risks. So does that make sense? Emily Miner: Yeah, absolutely. It's a great example with Anheuser-Busch and the system that they set up. I want to kind of talk about specific types of data that we collect in ethics and compliance or can collect, because I feel like the kind of two most common ones that organizations want to benchmark are training completion rates, that's a metric that is easy to collect and is often one that is shared, and hotline. "Oh, my hotline reports. How does this compare?" And the hotline providers will publish annual benchmarking reports on hotline. So we've got course completions, we've got hotline data, but we also collect other data points, or there are other places where we could to think about program effectiveness. I'd love to hear from you, as you think about the universe of ethics and compliance data, where do you think kind of benchmarking holds water and where does it not? Susan Divers: That's a great question, Emily, and I'm glad you asked it. Let's start with the hotline because that's a really good example in a lot of ways of two of the pitfalls. One of the major pitfalls that we touched on is are you comparing apples to apples or apples to potatoes? A company, let's take Starbucks for example, they have 300,000, relatively young, many of them first job employees. And are they going to call the hotline if they see something or worried about something? The odds are probably no even though they've got a big kind of young and engaged workforce because they're inexperienced. Most of their employees, I was talking to their CECO last week, and most of their employees really haven't worked extensively in the workplace. So Starbucks might have really low hotline numbers. Another company that's largely unionized, on the other hand, because unionized workers generally know about the hotline and they know about formal complaint processes, they'll have high hotline usage compared to other companies. Let's just pick a slightly ridiculous example, but a big manufacturer of clothing like the Gap or something. You'll have unionized workers in the plants, but Booz Allen is a consulting company. Are you going to compare hotlines between Booz Allen and the Gap? That really is an apples to potatoes comparison. So I think hotline benchmarking, and I know most of my colleagues in the E&C area would agree is very, very difficult because you'd have to really know what the workforces are to try to get an idea. And then secondly, it can be driven by other factors such as when I was at AECOM, we deployed a lot of people in the Middle East and the conditions were harsh. So our hotline complaints would go up when people were under stress, but another company might not have that circumstance. Emily Miner: Yeah, that's such a great point about when you're using benchmarking and you're considering using benchmarking, you have to be really thoughtful about what that benchmark pool is made up of. The union example is such a great one because even within the same industry, you compared the Gap to Booz Allen, but even within the manufacturing industry, for example, not all manufacturing company has a unionized workforce. So you can think, "Oh, well it's manufacturing, so it's comparable," but it might not be depending on the workforce dynamics. That level of insight isn't always available when we're benchmark data sources. Susan Divers: We forgot one thing that both of us know, which is I think the last stat I saw was more than 90% of meaningful issues are not raised through the hotline, they're raised in conversations with managers. So I've never been a fan of hotline benchmarking. Emily Miner: Yes, absolutely. Susan Divers: But to turn to training completions, that's an interesting one too. Again, it really depends. If you're using an old fashioned training provider whose library consists of 45 minute or even longer lectures, sort of Soviet style on the evils of sexual harassment, first, it's probably not very effective. And secondly, a lot of people won't complete a 45 minute course just because it's long. If the training is repetitive and hectoring, they'll drop out. Whereas the kinds of courses that we have and that we emphasize are very engaging, they tend to be shorter, they tend to be more microburst learning. So again, what are you comparing? Do you have a lot of employees on the shop floor? Well, it's hard for them. They can't really just take a break, sit down at their laptop and open up a course on antitrust. So again, I think training completions can be tricky. It doesn't mean it isn't interesting to see that data, but figuring out, again, whether you're making an apples to apples or an apples to potato comparison, I think is really important. And then secondly, remember, it's retrospective looking. It's not telling you anything about what's coming around the corner. Emily Miner: Mm-hmm. One thing that we've focused on in this discussion is comparing ourselves to other organizations. I mean, that was how I even defined benchmarking at the outset, but there's also internal benchmarking, comparing your own performance year over year or whatever the period of time is. When you were just talking about training completion, it made me think about that internal comparison, less so with training completion because I think it tends to be high, a lot of companies mandate it so there can be penalties for not completing training. So if it's high for that reason alone whether or not it's good or relevant to employees or they liked it or whatever. But thinking about metrics like pass/fail rates or number of attempts or test outs or some of those more nuanced training related data points and comparing against yourself year over year and seeing what has changed and what might be the result of that. I mean, maybe you noticed in year one that it was taking the majority of your employees or a significant minority of your employees more attempts than you wanted to answer certain questions correctly related to a certain risk topic. And so then as a result, you rolled out some focused communication and maybe you targeted specific groups of people where you noticed were particularly struggling for additional manager led conversations or whatever. And then in year two, does that pass rate or attempt rate improve? That's a helpful metric because you're comparing apples to apples, you're comparing yourself and you're able to connect it back directly to specific interventions that you may have need to make improvements in that area. So I just wanted to point out that benchmarking can be done internally as well. It's not always an external exercise even though that does tend to be how we talk about it. Susan Divers: Well, and you're exactly right, and that's where it gets really valuable because first you can make sure that you're comparing apples to apples. For example, if you've just done a merger and suddenly your population of employees has doubled, well obviously then you know that you've got a much different comparison year over year, but you can break that down and you can make those comparisons by manipulating the data. Secondly, your Ethical Culture pulse survey is a really good tool year over year adjusted for employee population size. And if we've got new people coming in the company, a merger for example. And it can be proactive. It can, again, spot trends as you were just saying that indicate that you may need to spend more time with people. But the beauty of internal benchmarking, particularly the way Reveal has set that up for our clients and made it easy is that you can get genuine insights looking at what happened last year, what happened this year and you know some of the reasons why there may have been a change. Whereas if you're comparing yourself to, I don't know, Ernst & Young, you don't. You don't have visibility in terms of their numbers. So internal benchmarking, I think you're right to stress that. And it's a very, very valuable tool. Emily Miner: I've done, as you know, a lot of work with organizations evaluating and assessing their ethical culture. The trend that I've noticed with those clients that we've done this type of work year over year over year is that the benchmark, the external benchmark just grows. It's important kind of in year one and maybe year two, but after that it ceases to be relevant and the companies don't really care what it is anymore because it's also they're not shooting for the benchmark. The benchmark is often the average and they want to be above average. And so it's more about competing with yourselves and how did we improve against our own performance last year? And so that's just been interesting to observe. I think as companies get more robust in their use of data and their tools and how it informs their strategy in some areas like ethical culture for example, that external comparison just becomes less relevant over time. Susan Divers: That's a really good point too. And that gets back to the Department of Justice saying, "Don't put your program on cruise control." And I do remember, I think it was 15 years ago when benchmarking was much more trendy and before people really thought through the limitations, someone was bragging that they had benchmarked their program against Boeing. Boeing then subsequently had major meltdowns left, right, and center most specifically and tragically the 737 MAX where people died. And so running around saying, "Hey, my program benchmarks well against Boeing" may not have been really a compliment to the program in the end. But it also misses the point which you're making, which is you have to look at your program and what's gaining traction with your people and where the proactive red flags are emerging because that's what enables you not to be Boeing, not to pick on Boeing, but it's a good example. Emily Miner: So Susan, let's wrap up by offering some recommendations to organizations that are thinking about program effectiveness, how they measure that. They want to have those benchmarks. Maybe they fall into those three scenarios that you outlined at the beginning. What recommendations or best practices would you offer to those organizations, to your peers? Susan Divers: Well, the first one is be really smart about it and avoid comparing apples to potatoes. And to do that, you have to really think it through. What are we comparing to whom and how similar are they? I really, again, think that's most useful for kind of like, "Are we in the mainstream? Or is there something maybe we forgot?" If it turns out that everybody in your industry has suddenly amended their training curriculum to train about trade controls in the wake of the Ukraine war and you haven't, well, that's a helpful benchmark. But I think the main ones that are valuable are what we were talking about with best practices and data analytics and the creative use of data analytics that are tailored to that particular company is a great example of that. And then the second one as you pointed out which I think is equally valuable and really essential too, is internal benchmarking up to a point where you're able to see what direction things are going in. And again, it's more in the nature of red flags rather than a way of saying, "Hey, we met the requirement, we're good." It's, "How are people doing this year compared to last? What does that tell me about where I need to focus my resources?" Emily Miner: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Yeah, Susan, thank you so much. And thank you for joining me on this episode. We are out of time for today. So to everyone out there listening, thank you for listening to the Principled Podcast by LRN. It was a pleasure to talk with you, Susan. Susan Divers: Oh, it's always a pleasure to talk to you, Emily. Outro: We hope you enjoyed this episode. The Principled Podcast is brought to you by LRN. At LRN, our mission is to inspire principled performance in global organizations by helping them foster winning ethical cultures rooted in sustainable values. Please visit us at lrn.com to learn more. And if you enjoyed this episode, subscribe to our podcast on Apple Podcasts, Stitcher, Google Podcasts, or wherever you listen and don't forget to leave us a review.

ceo director university china master england mexico state office benefits ukraine washington dc board dc institute middle east walmart policy excellence starbucks new england collective titanic stitcher reveal wales google podcasts columbia university latin america best practices compliance limitations boeing gap soviet anthropology doj mm sap us department george washington university divers pepsico northern virginia thought leadership public administration high court environmental science ec lockheed martin trinity college anheuser busch benchmarking sonnenschein ernst young solicitor principled advisory services mondelez advisory boards saic aecom booz allen legal advisor advanced micro devices lrn ethical culture ceco ethisphere anheuser national law center scce rutgers university center

S8E1 | How can boards assess corporate culture and improve oversight?

Compliance into the Weeds

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 9, 2022 25:41

What you'll learn in this podcast episode What is top of mind with board directors when they think about corporate culture, ethics, and compliance? How can leaders best assess culture in the companies they oversee? In the season 8 premiere of the Principled Podcast, LRN Director of Advisory Services Emily Miner is joined by Dr. Marsha Ershaghi Hames and Dr. Eric Baldwin at Tapestry Networks to discuss how board members can improve oversight. Listen in as the group shares insights from Tapestry Networks and LRN's joint report Assessing Corporate Culture: A Practical Guide to Improving Board Oversight, which draws from a working group of nearly 40 directors and executives representing over 60 public companies. Principled Podcast Show Notes [0:29] - Emily welcomes listeners to this episode with Marsha and Eric of Tapestry Networks. [1:46] - A discussion on the recently published report, “Assessing Corporate Culture: A Practical Guide to Improving Board Oversight.” [6:14] - Why the report offers a practical framework and what needs it seeks to address. [9:59] - The key findings or pillars of the report. [15:22] - How the report helps leaders answer “How?” questions. [20:30] - What is the potential broader impact of the report? Featured guest: Dr. Eric Baldwin Eric Baldwin is a principal at Tapestry Networks, working with teams in the firm's corporate governance and financial services practices. Prior to coming to Tapestry, he served for several years as a research associate at Harvard Business School (HBS), where he collaborated with faculty on a variety of research and writing projects covering topics ranging from organizational culture and change management to corporate strategy and healthcare policy. Prior to his time at HBS, Eric taught in the religious studies departments at Franklin & Marshall College and Boston University, while earlier in his career he served in engineering and operations roles at ON Technology Corporation, a software development firm based in greater Boston. Eric holds a PhD in religious studies from Boston University and a BA in history from the College of William and Mary. Featured guest: Dr. Marsha Ershaghi Hames Dr. Marsha Ershaghi Hames is a partner with Tapestry Networks and a leader of our corporate governance practice. She advises non-executive directors, C-suite executives, and in-house counsel on issues related to governance, culture transformation, board leadership, and stakeholder engagement. Prior to joining Tapestry, Marsha was a managing director of strategy and development at LRN, Inc. a global governance, risk and compliance firm. She specialized in the alignment of leaders and organizations for effective corporate governance and organizational culture transformation. Her view is that compliance is no longer merely a legal matter but a strategic and reputational priority. Marsha has been interviewed and cited by the media including CNBC, CNN, Ethisphere, HR Magazine, Compliance Week, The FCPA Report, Entrepreneur.com, Chief Learning Officer, ATD Talent & Development, Corporate Counsel Magazine, the Society of Corporate Compliance and Ethics and more. She hosted the Principled Podcast, profiling the stories of some of the top transformational leaders in business. Marsha serves as an expert fellow on USC's Neely Center for Ethical Leadership and Decision Making and on the advisory boards of LMH Strategies, Inc. an integrative supply chain advisory firm and Compliance.ai, a regulatory change management firm. Marsha holds an Ed.D. and MA from Pepperdine University. Her research was on the role of ethical leadership as an enabler of organizational culture change. Her BA is from the University of Southern California. She is a certified compliance and ethics professional. Featured Host: Emily Miner Emily Miner is the Director of Advisory Services at LRN's Ethics & Compliance Advisory practice. She counsels executive leadership teams on how to actively shape and manage their ethical culture through deep quantitative and qualitative understanding and engagement. A skilled facilitator, Emily emphasizes co-creative, bottom-up, and data-driven approaches to foster ethical behavior and inform program strategy. Emily has led engagements with organizations in the healthcare, technology, manufacturing, energy, professional services, and education industries. Emily co-leads LRN's ongoing flagship research on E&C program effectiveness and is a thought leader in the areas of organizational culture, leadership, and E&C program impact. Prior to joining LRN, Emily applied her behavioral science expertise in the environmental sustainability sector, working with non-profits and several New England municipalities; facilitated earth science research in academia; and contributed to drafting and advancing international climate policy goals. Emily has a Master of Public Administration in Environmental Science and Policy from Columbia University and graduated summa cum laude from the University of Florida with a degree in Anthropology. Principled Podcast Transcript Intro: Welcome to the Principled Podcast brought to you by LRN. The Principled Podcast brings together the collective wisdom on ethics, business and compliance, transformative stories of leadership and inspiring workplace culture. Listen in to discover valuable strategies from our community of business leaders and workplace change makers. Emily Miner: What is top of mind with board directors when they think about corporate culture, ethics and compliance? How can leaders best assess culture in the companies they oversee? Hi, and welcome to another episode of LRN's Principled Podcast. I'm your host, Emily Miner, director of advisory at LRN. And today I'm joined by Dr. Marsha Ershaghi Hames and Dr. Eric Baldwin partner and principal respectively at Tapestry Networks. We're going to be talking about corporate culture and how board members can improve oversight. Marsha and Eric have just collaborated with us at LRN on a report entitled, "Assessing Corporate Culture: A practical guide to improving board oversight." The report presents insights from a working group of nearly 40 directors and executives representing over 60 public companies, including some of the largest companies in the world: Cigna, Sony, McKesson, Lockheed Martin, CDW, Coca-Cola, Excel Energy and Palo Alto Networks included. Marsha, Eric, thanks for joining me on the Principled Podcast today. Marsha Ershaghi Hames: It's great to be here. Eric Baldwin: Thanks for having us, Emily. Emily Miner: Okay, so let's jump right in. This report, a guide really, assessing corporate culture is the result of working group sessions of the ethics, culture and compliance network. Marsha, let me start with you. What is the ECCN, who are its members, and how did it come to be? Marsha Ershaghi Hames: Sure. Great. We're happy to continue to share the Ethics Culture Compliance Network progress. This network was founded in the summer of 2020. I mean, it was during the thick of a pandemic. Companies were spiraling. It was just a lot of crisis management and companies were starting to take a real reflective step back. They were assessing where do we need to look? How do we need to assess our planning for longer term future? And the conversation emerged initially, Emily, as a forum. It was a safe space to convene. Public company directors and senior executives, namely chief ethics and compliance officers, to really start exploring values, corporate culture and the role of ethical decision making in business. Emily, if I can highlight just a few key aspects that the stakeholders of ECCN started to really prioritize over the last two years, number one, the need for boards and executive teams to align and articulate culture so that management feels supported. Number two, to address the challenge of getting ethics and culture on board agendas and to really promote directors going deeper with management, we're going to get to shortly. Number three, ECCN stakeholders have continued to really want a forum to share peer to peer examples, pragmatic examples of the need for better communication and greater transparency between the CECO, the broader management team and the board. Emily Miner: Thanks, Marsha. Having sat in on some of these sessions, I know that those specific examples that you just alluded to, those were among some of the most powerful conversation prompts. So I think that the members got a lot of value out of that. I certainly know I did. And so this report builds on a report that we, Tapestry Networks and LRN, collaborated on last year, activating culture and ethics from the boardroom, which was a really insightful temperature check on board's attitudes about culture. Eric, can you talk about that project and how it led to this latest one? Eric Baldwin: Sure. With the last year's activating culture report, we had set out to understand the realities facing boards and their oversight of ethics and culture. What were their key concerns, the challenges they face, current practices. So to get at that, we interviewed 40 directors who occupied about 80 seats on public company boards with the aim of getting a really broad view of board oversight of ethics and culture. What we found was a pretty diverse range of practices across boards, in terms of what kinds of information they were receiving, their engagement with their management teams, including how often they heard from their chief ethics and compliance officer, a range of assignments of committee responsibilities and really it's just a variability and how much attention the issues get from boards. We also found a real lack of comfort among directors. So directors recognize the importance of culture and the risks associated with ethical lapses or with unhealthy cultures, but recognize that their ability to oversee culture doesn't have the level of clarity and rigor that you find in other aspects of board oversight, like say financial reporting. So there's a real gap between the seriousness of the risk associated with culture and the importance of culture on the one hand and director's sense of their ability, or lack of ability, frankly, to effectively oversee that set of issues. So given that, it seemed crucial to start to develop some board-level tools and practices that could help directors make their oversight of ethics and culture more robust. Emily Miner: Thanks, Eric. I know that this latest report traces its roots back to those earlier insights that you were just describing and the need for a practical framework that board members could adopt. Tell us why this framework and the specific needs it seeks to address. Marsha Ershaghi Hames: Yeah. So maybe I'll take that one. So to Eric's point, we have conversations with 40 directors in 2021 and coming out of it, it was the spirit of action. How can we now take action? So the consensus was, we want a simple, practical framework to start to advance a conversation, just get the conversation started. Think of it like a simple roadmap. How can we take this into the boardroom? How can we start to connect with management with simple prompts, questions. Help us organize our thoughts about how to activate and get the conversation started. Then, another goal was the input was we want to have a peer-reviewed framework. We don't want a treatise. We don't want a commission study by a third party. We want to be a part of driving the frame for what we think will have the greatest impact, both within board rooms and for the boards to explore directly with management. Emily Miner: You've talked a little bit about the approach to developing the framework, talking to the 40 directors and the peer-to-peer nature of it. What else about the approach of how the framework was developed, do you think contributes to the power of what it ultimately offers to boards and management teams? Eric Baldwin: Yeah, I can jump in here. As Marsha noted, we really wanted this to be as useful and practical for boards as possible so we thought it was really important that it'd be grounded in the experience of directors. We knew that there was a lot of good practice already going on in boardrooms. So if we could tap into that collective knowledge and pull that together, it could be really valuable. So the way we went about that was to recruit and convene a working group of about 12 to 15 members, 10 of whom were sitting public company directors. Several of those directors are current or former chief ethics and compliance officers so they've got deep experience in that space that they bring into the boardroom. We also included a couple of sitting senior ethics and compliance executives who report into boards on these matters on a regular basis to bring their perspective, as well as our colleagues from LRN, who brought their expertise in culture measurement. So, we brought the group together several times for virtual discussions, for peer exchange, to really surface the challenges and gaps that they're experiencing, to share and vet existing practices and tools and identify some key insights and good practices that are already going on. So out of that, our team developed a draft framework, which we shared then with a larger group of about 40 directors and ethics and compliance executives to pressure test our recommendations and get additional feedback before publishing the piece this summer. So I think what really gives it its power is that it's grounded in the experience of the boardroom, it's peer developed and peer vetted and rooted in the efforts of directors and practitioners. Emily Miner: Yeah. Thank you, Eric. And just to underline something that both you and Marsha shared, I think something that's so compelling about it in terms of being grounded in that experience is, as you mentioned, many of those directors are current or former chief ethics and compliance officers. So being able to hear from people that have worn both of those hats or are wearing both of those hats, I think is so powerful. So let's keep on talking about the framework. What are the key findings or pillars? I know that there are five pillars of the framework and I'd love for you to expand upon those five pillars for us. Eric Baldwin: Yeah. I'm happy to try to do that. There's a lot of insights there, so I'll try to be brief. As you mentioned, there are five key themes here, and we see them not so much as a series of steps, but more as sets of interlocking practices or that can mutually reinforce each other. So briefly, the first is really just to make ethics and culture a priority. We've heard from directors that culture and ethics often don't get enough time and attention in the boardroom. They get pushed to the bottom of crowded board agendas. So a key step is simply just to ensure that they get priority on the agenda, that they get enough time and attention. It's really crucial. We heard that boards communicate to management that culture and ethics are priorities, which they can do by pushing for information, asking questions, following up, probing. Management needs to know that ethics and culture are board priorities. The second is for boards to take a look at their own culture. Boards have their own internal cultures and the culture of the board influences the culture of the organizations. They sort of set the tone from the top. But directors tell us that boards don't often examine their own cultures in a rigorous way. So it's really important for boards as one member put it, to take a hard look at their own culture. In this, it's especially important for boards to assess their openness and transparency and the level of trust, both among the directors and between the board and the management team, and especially their willingness to hear difficult news and how the board responds to bad news or to hard truths. A key element we heard of ethical culture is trust and transparency and to foster an environment where bad news travels fast. That starts with the board and the board's willingness to hear bad news. The third is the challenge of being able to articulate the elements of culture and really to describe and articulate the culture you're aiming at, what you want to see in your corporate culture. The challenge here is that culture can be a very fuzzy and abstract concept. It's implicit, it's unspoken rules and norms, and that makes it really hard to measure and assess. So anything boards and management teams can do to make discussions of culture more concrete and precise will really help. This can mean breaking down ethical culture into various components, things like trust, willingness to speak out, fairness, organizational justice, so that boards and management teams have a clear answer to the question, "When we talk about culture, what exactly are we talking about?" A key insight here was the importance for boards to be active partners with their management teams in defining and articulating the attributes of a desired ethical culture, rather than just sort of hearing them from management. Contributors told us that the process of defining what a good culture looks like by fostering a robust and structured discussion of culture is as important as the outcome. So boards need to be involved in those discussions early, rather than just the management team coming to them and saying, "Here's what we think our culture should look like." The fourth is really about the tools that they use to measure and monitor culture. This is all about information and data and how it comes to the board. There's a pretty common range of data and information sources that boards depend on and there's plenty of data. But the key is for boards to get that information presented to them in the right way so that it has enough context that it can really make sense to them. So one key issue for boards we found is to push their management teams to report to them in such a way that insights from a range of data sources are integrated into a coherent picture or narrative. So survey data or data from culture surveys is overlaid with safety data, turnover data, and cost of hotline for example. Boards are really looking for a more integrated view from their management teams. Anything that will help generate a narrative or surface patterns that help boards know where they need to follow up and probe and potentially allocate more resources is really helpful. Then finally is the issue of establishing clear communication lines. There's a lot of information relevant to culture that comes from a lot of different functional areas bearing on ethics and culture. So boards need to push their management teams to be able to develop a holistic view and really ask the question who, if anyone, in the management team owns culture and owns reporting on it and can give a really coherent and holistic view of culture. The same goes for the board. At the board level, different committees on the board, get reporting from different management teams and information can become siloed. So the key question is how can boards overcome that tendency and make sure that the entire board is getting a full picture of culture. Emily Miner: Thanks, Eric, you did a great job of covering a lot of detail, very succinctly so I appreciate that. You framed a lot of those pillars in the form of a question: so how can boards do this, how can boards and management team collect the right data and interpret it together and break down those silos, et cetera, so I want to go into those hows a little bit because we call it a practical guide. So how does that manifest? How can this guide, I'll call it a guide and not a report, how can this guide help boards in their oversight of culture? Marsha Ershaghi Hames: Yeah, so Emily, maybe I'll jump in on that one. So to Eric's point as he went through these five key pillars and big insights or meta themes that jumped out, each pillar is supported with countless examples, practical scenarios, and we've even lifted up some direct quotes that came from all of the contributors. So part of this is practically speaking, we want to help agitate that curiosity from the directors. We want to encourage them, look behind the numbers, start asking some of those uncomfortable questions. We wanted to give them, when you talk about sort of manifesting, how do we give directors a simple roadmap or framework to go into, to start within their own boardrooms, and then to look at opportunities to connect and communicate with management, to build that bridge, to forge an ongoing dialogue. So this is not an overnight put your hero cape on. This is to start to create essentially more of that accountability partnership, a dialogue between management and the board and framing it in these five buckets. So it's, step one, are we even prioritizing this? So that can be a series of conversations. Step two, have we aligned as a board and management team? Have we been engaged as a part of articulating and assessing and understanding what is that desired culture? Are we as a board reflecting? So as Eric was going through these, it's you need to have a roadmap essentially to start agitating some of that dialogue. We wanted these pillars to become levers to begin that process to engage with management. Emily Miner: I love the way that you are framing this as agitating the dialogue. There's such a great mental, descriptive image. So thank you for that, Marsha. I know that one of the features of the report or the guide to help agitate that dialogue is a series of questions that can serve as a starting point for this dialogue with management teams and within boards. Can you share some of those compelling prompts? Eric Baldwin: Yeah, I'd be happy to give some examples. I think questions for boards are really a key tool in their tool belt. One of the things that boards are expected to do is offer a credible challenge to management, and it's really through asking questions that they do that. So we did include a number of questions, I think they're probably more than two dozen appended to the end of the report. I will not read anything like all of them at this point, but I'll give you a couple of examples of some of the questions that we include in the report. Again, many of them line up with some of the key buckets that we identified above. One would be just to ask yourselves as boards, have we identified the cultural attributes and behaviors that align with our stated values and our purpose? How can we effectively articulate the culture we're trying to achieve? This in turn would guide management's efforts to measure culture. Another question for the board to reflect on is, does our culture, that is the board's culture, encourage management to share those difficult truths with us? How open to debate and disagreement is our board? Then we also include some questions that boards can ask their management teams. One is to simply ask, to what extent can you provide the board with an integrated view that incorporates information from a range of sources of data into a single picture for us? How can you give us an integrated view of culture? Then another question for management is, are you able to communicate directly to the board when necessary? Do you feel you have the necessary independence to bring issues and questions to the board? So those are just a few examples of a number of questions that we've included in this report. Emily Miner: Thank you. I think that's another feature of the practicality of this. I mean, boards can in some sense sort of lift these questions up and apply them in their own contexts. So recently LRN's Ty Francis, our chief advisory officer had a conversation with Tom Fox, who I think we all know as the voice of compliance and founder of the Compliance Podcast Network. Tom called this report prescient more than once and cited both recent statements of Lisa Monaco, deputy attorney general, and rulings of the Delaware Supreme Court about the need for boards to take a more active role in monitoring and measurement. So with those statements, that context, occurring around the same time as the release of this guide, what do you see is the potential broader impact of the guide, the framework with the five pillars, the practical examples and discussion prompts? What do you see as the potential impact of that? Marsha Ershaghi Hames: So maybe I'll take the lead here and, Eric, if you want to share any other thoughts ... But if we take a step back, this came up in ... so we had a summit, Emily, that you, of course participated in, where we brought together all of the Ethics Culture Compliance Network contributors, not only of the report, but other key stakeholders. It was interesting, a few people pointed to this and they said that if you look at the foundations of corporate scandals over the last few decades, there's a pattern that points to the failure to speak up and a correlating fear of retaliation. So it's that notion of someone always knows what's going on. Right? So when you look at the statements of Lisa Monaco and the Delaware Supreme Court about boards taking a more active role, you have to take a step back and look at what is the role that boards can play to encourage and drive a culture that is more transparent and more open. How can a board activate open dialogue? How can a board establish a more transparent tone. We know, there's enough research around this, that culture's fundamental to business and tone at the top matters. I could even say, and Emily, you and I have collaborated, full disclosure, over years in my consulting days. I saw this. I can just draw anecdotally that in 22 years of consulting, I would come across so many compliance executives who just felt like, "Hey, is my company going to make the investment in my team, and are they going to prioritize culture?" CECOs, they're under a lot of pressure to operate as a resource, enforce policy, developed policy. They're regarded as the primary architects of culture, but oftentimes we're also labeled as a cost center. So some of this stuff has been coming out as you know, Emily and Eric, and our conversations around like, "Are we leading on this or are we in a reactive mode?" So I would say in terms the broader impact of this framework, it's the notion of how can we be proactive? How can we put a framework and a roadmap in front of the board to agitate the curiosity, to ask for more data behind the numbers and to empower boards and management teams to get the conversation started. To Eric's point, it's like, is it a toolbox? Is it a tool set? Well, yes, it is. It's been pressure tested by peers. It was developed by peers. They're trying it in their own boardrooms. Some of these stakeholders are current or former chief ethics and compliance officers so there's an appreciative inquiry of the tensions on both sides of the table. So in my opinion, I really forecast that this is going to have a catalyzing impact on the industry. Eric, I don't know, thoughts on your end too. Eric Baldwin: No, I would just say, I think one of our hopes here is that as directors bring this into the boardroom and, Emily, you're right to point out that it does seem like the expectations for boards in oversight in this area are going nowhere but up. It is our hope that this is a tool that helps them meet those heightened expectations. But also that it's only a starting point, that boards will use the tools in this framework to get the conversation started and come back to us with further recommendations of what would be additionally helpful to assist them in their oversight here. Emily Miner: Well, I, for one look forward to following along and participating and seeing what the impact is and how this framework is used and what the feedback is from those that use it. Marsha, Eric, it has been such a delight speaking with you today about the genesis of this report and all of the insights assembled from such a stellar working group. We're out of time for today. But for those listening, if you're interested in learning more about the report, the framework, et cetera, please look at the link in the podcast description. My name is Emily Miner, and I want to thank you all for listening to the Principled Podcast by LRN. Outro: We hope you enjoyed this episode. The Principled Podcast is brought to you by LRN. At LRN our mission is to inspire principled performance in global organizations by helping them foster winning ethical cultures rooted in sustainable values. Please visit us at lrn.com to learn more. And if you enjoyed this episode, subscribe to our podcasts on Apple Podcasts, Stitcher, Google Podcasts, or wherever you listen. And don't forget to leave us a review.

Cyber Security Failures Alleged in Mudge Whistleblower Compliant

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 7, 2022 17:21

Compliance into the Weeds is the only weekly podcast which takes a deep dive into a compliance related topic, literally going into the weeds to more fully explore a subject. In this episode, we mine the whistleblower allegations by Peiter Zatko, AKA “Mudge” made against Twitter for lessons for the cyber-security professional and wide compliance discipline. Highlights and questions posed include: · The allegations made by Mudge. · Why does an organization need a CISO (or CCO or CECO)? · How did Twitter get hacked, its employees duped and its controls by-passed? · What is pedestrian yet telling in this saga? · Why data mapping is mandatory if not critical? · Where were the external auditors? · Is there a Caremark claim here? Resources Matt in Radical Compliance Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

cybersecurity failures compliance weeds whistleblowers alleged cco ciso compliant mudge ceco caremark

Winnie the Pooh Explains Compliance: Part 5 - Winnie the Pooh as CECO (Think, Think, Think)

Greetings and Felicitations

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 5, 2022 10:19

This week I have explored compliance through a five-part podcast series, as seen through the lens of Winnie the Pooh and the characters living in the Hundred Acre Woods. I want to conclude my series by looking at Winnie the Pooh himself through the lens of the Chief Ethics and Compliance Officer (CECO). Pooh may be a bit naive and slow-witted, but he is also friendly, thoughtful and steadfast. Although he and his friends agree that he is “a bear of very little brain”, Pooh is occasionally acknowledged to have a clever idea, usually driven by common sense. Pooh is also a talented poet; his poems and “hums frequently punctuate the stories”. Although he is humble about his slow-wittedness, he is comfortable with his creative gifts. When Owl's house blows down in a windstorm, trapping Pooh, Piglet and Owl inside, Pooh encourages Piglet (the only one small enough to do so) to escape and rescue them all by promising that “a respectful Pooh song” will be written about Piglet's feat. Later, Pooh muses about the creative process as he composes the song. Pooh is very social. Christopher Robin is his closest friend, Piglet, and often chooses to spend his time with one or both of them. But he also habitually visits the other animals, often looking for a snack or an audience for his poetry as much as for companionship. His kind-heartedness means he goes out of his way to be friendly to Eeyore, visiting him, bringing him a birthday present, and building him a house, despite receiving mostly disdain from Eeyore. We need to recall that the DOJ started from the position that the role of compliance and ethics in an organization was co-equal. Winnie the Pooh reminds us of that foundational building block. Pooh also reminds us that a CECO is a social animal. Just as he is friends with all the animals and characters we have visited this week, you as a compliance professional should make friends with all the corporate functions they represented this week: sales, HR, finance and legal. If you find you run out of hunny to pass around, you can always resort to the Russ Berland strategy of pizza. Even though this is the final offering in this week's blog post on Compliance in the Hundred Acre Woods, do not feel blue. We will have another week of Pooh later this summer for more compliance lessons. And if you do feel blue in the interim, check out this YouTube clip of the Pooh theme song. And always remember, when all else fails; “Think, Think, Think”

compliance doj owl winnie the pooh christopher robin eeyore piglet hundred acre woods ceco think think chief ethics

S7E18 | How values inform decisions: Unpacking the role of the CECO

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 8, 2022 31:49

What you'll learn in this podcast episode It's generally accepted that effective E&C programs are based on values as well as rules. But applying those values to real-life situations can be difficult. This has been particularly true during the pandemic, as organizations make hard decisions in many instances and chief ethics and compliance officers play a key role in guiding those efforts. How can values help CECOs sustain ethical performance—and even excel—in the face of such change and adversity? In this episode of LRN's Principled Podcast, host Susan Divers talks with Scott Sullivan, Chief Integrity & Compliance Officer at Newmont Corporation, and Joe Henry, who just retired as US Compliance Officer at Braskem. Listen in as they discuss the difficult choices they faced in providing moral leadership in their organizations—how those choices were made, by whom, and what the examples say about the role of the CECO. Principled Podcast Show Notes [1:58] - Scott's role as the CECO at Newmont Corporation, the challenges faced and how he applies his values. [4:50] - Ethics and compliance at the heart of Newmont's decision making during the pandemic. [6:10] - Joe's role at Braskin and the challenges he faced. [11:20] - The role of Joe's values in influencing colleagues to change the decisions they made. [13:35] - The lessons learned from these tough experiences in the company. [16:12] - How both company's ethical cultures emerged after the pandemic. [19:50] - Other circumstances which strengthened the respective ethics and compliance cultures. [27:25] - The most important areas of focus for an ethics leader in resolving difficult questions. Featured Guest: Joe Henry Joe Henry was the US Compliance Officer for Braskem, a multi-national Chemicals and Plastics company headquartered in Sao Paulo, Brazil. He led the Ethics, Compliance and Risk Management efforts for Braskem's US operations including commercial, manufacturing, logistics, management and Innovation and Technology (R&D) functions. Prior to joining Braskem in January 2017, Joe was a Compliance Director at GSK, a global pharmaceutical company, and worked in various ethics and compliance roles since 2003. Investigations oversight, Compliance Operations, Methodology development, process assessment and improvement, policy and procedure management and managing government oversight programs were some of the responsibilities he successfully fulfilled while at GSK. Prior to his GSK Compliance roles, Joe worked at SmithKline Beecham as an Information Technology Project Director and with IBM Sales, Technical Support and Product Development. Joe earned a B.S. in Chemical Engineering from Carnegie-Mellon University and an MBA from Saint Joseph's University. He also earned his certification as a Leading Professional in Ethics and Compliance from the Ethics and Compliance Initiative (ECI). Joe and his wife reside in Lewes, Delaware and he retiredg at the end of March 2022 to pursue personal interests, travel and enjoy more time with his 3 grown children and two grandchildren. Joe continues to provide advisory and investigation services on an as-needed basis to Braskem's US Compliance department. Featured Guest: Scott E. Sullivan Scott E. Sullivan is the Chief Integrity & Compliance Officer of Newmont Corporation, the world's leading gold company. Newmont has approximately 15,000 employees and 15,000 contractors and has 12 operating mines and 2 non-operated JVs in 9 countries. Mr. Sullivan oversees, develops, implements and manages Newmont's integrity and compliance program including ethics, anti-bribery, corporate investigations, and global trade compliance. Previously, Mr. Sullivan was the Chief Ethics & Compliance Officer of a global manufacturer of fluid motion and control products with approximately 17,000 employees operating in 55 countries. Mr. Sullivan has written and contributed numerous articles on compliance programs, anti-bribery/FCPA, export controls, economic sanctions and other ethics and compliance topics to a variety of publications. Mr. Sullivan is also a frequent local, national and international speaker, moderator and conference organizer on compliance, anti-bribery/FCPA, export controls and economic sanctions. Featured Host: Susan Divers Susan Divers is a senior advisor with LRN Corporation. In that capacity, Ms. Divers brings her 30+ years' accomplishments and experience in the ethics and compliance area to LRN partners and colleagues. This expertise includes building state-of-the-art compliance programs infused with values, designing user-friendly means of engaging and informing employees, fostering an embedded culture of compliance and substantial subject matter expertise in anti-corruption, export controls, sanctions, and other key areas of compliance. Prior to joining LRN, Mrs. Divers served as AECOM's Assistant General for Global Ethics & Compliance and Chief Ethics & Compliance Officer. Under her leadership, AECOM's ethics and compliance program garnered six external awards in recognition of its effectiveness and Mrs. Divers' thought leadership in the ethics field. In 2011, Mrs. Divers received the AECOM CEO Award of Excellence, which recognized her work in advancing the company's ethics and compliance program. Mrs. Divers' background includes more than thirty years' experience practicing law in these areas. Before joining AECOM, she worked at SAIC and Lockheed Martin in the international compliance area. Prior to that, she was a partner with the DC office of Sonnenschein, Nath & Rosenthal. She also spent four years in London and is qualified as a Solicitor to the High Court of England and Wales, practicing in the international arena with the law firms of Theodore Goddard & Co. and Herbert Smith & Co. She also served as an attorney in the Office of the Legal Advisor at the Department of State and was a member of the U.S. delegation to the UN working on the first anti-corruption multilateral treaty initiative. Mrs. Divers is a member of the DC Bar and a graduate of Trinity College, Washington D.C. and of the National Law Center of George Washington University. In 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014 Ethisphere Magazine listed her as one the “Attorneys Who Matter” in the ethics & compliance area. She is a member of the Advisory Boards of the Rutgers University Center for Ethical Behavior and served as a member of the Board of Directors for the Institute for Practical Training from 2005-2008. She resides in Northern Virginia and is a frequent speaker, writer and commentator on ethics and compliance topics. Mrs. Divers' most recent publication is “Balancing Best Practices and Reality in Compliance,” published by Compliance Week in February 2015. In her spare time, she mentors veteran and university students and enjoys outdoor activities. Principled Podcast Transcription Intro: Welcome to the Principled Podcast brought to you by LRN. The Principled Podcast brings together the collective wisdom on ethics, business and compliance, transformative stories of leadership and inspiring workplace culture. Listen in to discover valuable strategies from our community of business leaders and workplace change makers. Susan Divers: Hello, it's generally accepted nowadays that ethics and compliance programs that are effective are based on values as well as rules, but applying those values to real life situations can be difficult. This was particularly true during the pandemic when organizations had to make hard decisions in many instances in unprecedented circumstances, and ethics and compliance officers frequently played a key role in guiding those efforts. How can values actually help ethics and compliance officers sustain ethical performance and even excel in the face of change and adversity? Well, hello and welcome to another episode of LRN's Principled Podcast. I'm your host, Susan Divers, director of thought leadership and best practices with LRN's advisory group. Today, I'm joined by two thoughtful ethics and compliance professionals, Scott Sullivan, the chief ethics and integrity officer at Newmont Corporation, and Joe Henry, who just retired as the US compliance officer at Braskem. We're going to be talking about the difficult choices they face in providing moral leadership in their organizations, how those choices were made, by whom and what the examples say about the role of the chief ethics and compliance officer. Scott, I'm going to start with you. Can you talk about your role as the CECO at Newmont and some of the hard choices you've faced and how you applied your values? Scott Sullivan: Sure. And thank you, Susan. It's exciting to be part of this podcast and it's a subject I'm very passionate about. So while Joe will be tackling some specific examples, I thought it might be more beneficial to start with a bit on process and approach. So when your values are tested in trying times, this is when the rubber meets the road. So the least common denominator approach, or what is accepted, what is condoned, often becomes your culture. It's not the pronouncements and the platitudes, but rather what you do on the ground or in crunch time. So during COVID, which by the way is not yet over or gone, we faced numerous challenges like everyone else, our values of safety, responsibility and integrity were at the forefront of what we did and said every day. As our strategy rolled out, we had to consider the full spectrum of stakeholders from vulnerable indigenous communities in which we operate to suppliers who were dependent on us to our employees. In some cases in the early days of COVID, we even went into what's known as care and maintenance mode, which is basically shutting down except for essential services to protect the health and wellbeing of a variety of our stakeholders. We also deployed over 20 million in a COVID fund to assist communities around our minds with COVID type issues and challenges. We were active partners in the COVID struggles. We protected our employees with PPE, with vaccines, with health checks, et cetera, all this being said there were numerous and oftentimes competing opinions on what to do, being strong proponents of our values, and always circling back to them as a gut check when we made decisions, some of them which might have turned out to be controversial, was an excellent moral compass. It made us focus on not just what the short term, but what the long term was and what the consequences could be, both the good and the bad. It was our collective corporate decision that we had to make. As a compliance team. Part of our job was trying to read the tea leaves and anticipating what was coming. Fortunately at Newmont, we have a fantastic executive leadership team who gave us the space to support them and the organization this endeavor. We invited in diverse perspectives, we had spirited debates and we pressure tested key decisions that mattered most. I'm proud of the approach that we took as an organization whereby no means perfect, but I think it has served us quite well. Susan Divers: Scott, before I turn to Joe, one of the things that strikes me about what you just said is it sounds like ethics and compliance was really at the heart of decision making in these difficult areas that you mentioned. Am I reading that right? And if so, how did you achieve that? Scott Sullivan: Yeah, I think, health and safety for sure was I think the heartbeat, if you will. Perhaps we were the supporting role, but really as COVID evolved over times, the issues got more complicated as they went. So you had initial true health and safety issues, in some cases life and death that you had to do, but then you had a whole series of decisions around employment, around vaccinations, around care and maintenance. And what do you do with communities, where the donations go? How do you ensure that you're not supporting corruption when you're doing the good deed of making donations? So I think as COVID evolved and as the challenges around COVID evolved, we became more integral and more integrated to those decisions over time. Susan Divers: Well, and that's really a good example of how it's meant to work. Yeah, the ethics and compliance department isn't defective if it's often a corner, but it is effective if it's right at the heart of difficult choices, and that's a perfect segue to Joe. Joe, do you mind outlining your role at Braskem and then talking about some of the actual challenges you faced in your role in those? Joe Henry: Certainly. Thank you, Susan. Thank you for the invitation to join you all today. Let me start off by saying that Braskem leadership team is a caring and forward looking group and primarily based in the US headquarters in Philadelphia. And that information will be important in a minute or two. Early in the pandemic two of our sites operated for 28 days via a live-in where our workers stayed on site, quarantined from family and other outsiders to operate our plants in Pennsylvania and West Virginia. These plants produce polypropylene, which is a key material for personal protection equipment, such as surgical gowns, face, shields, gloves, and masks. So our workers were willing to do that. And our Braskem leaders provided all the essentials for this live-in. And our team members were paid for every hour on site. So Braskem tries to do the right thing. And during that time, all other team members were directed to work remotely during the pandemic. Eventually after our operations were deemed essential to US business interest, all of our plants reopened with strict masking and quarantine requirements, including restrictions in travel. One of our first policy decisions developed in Philadelphia was to require workers to quarantine for 14 days after travel if they had traveled from their home county. Works for Philadelphia were pretty close around in the urban area. The policy, and it worked for salary team members who could work from home, but not for hourly workers who worked on site and who would not be paid for the time they must quarantine. So at our Texas sites, this policy was problematic in that it would not be unusual for a worker employee to travel to the next county to care or check in on a family member. Therefore, compliance was asked to intervene. And as a result of that, our intervention, we extended the travel range and only had the policy applied to travel outside usual circumstances. The other one is more around vaccines. So one other example as vaccines became available, again, I remember they were under emergency authorization. There became a drive by Braskem management to encourage team members to be vaccinated and to push required team members to be vaccinated or else be terminated. The impetus for this requirement was that several people at manufacturing sites were complaining about being vaccinated and still having to wear a mask because others were not vaccinated. We discussed the proposed requirement at the leadership team meeting, which US compliance is a part. And then there was actually a discussion in our industrial team where we're not a part and they mandated this vaccination or termination requirement by a majority vote, not a consensus vote. I received a call from one of the dissenters. He was concerned that many of his employees would resign or be terminated because they did not trust the vaccine yet. His plant would be greatly affected. I brought this to the attention to the US leadership team that the vaccines were not yet fully approved and that no matter how administratively burdensome the CDC's recommendation was vaccination or regular testing. So I informed the group, I thought our requirement was overly restrictive. It infringed upon employees' rights, and I would not approve any of these terminations, in the US, the US compliance officer approves all terminations. So I had some leverage there. So what happened is we implemented weekly testing for team members who were not vaccinated. And that seemed to resolve the situation. By the way, it was helpful that I was fully vaccinated and boosted and it was clear, my personal beliefs were not a factor. Susan Divers: Wow. That's a very striking example, Joe, there's a couple of things I'd like to pursue a bit. One is, it's clear that people brought you into these decisions that they turned to you as a resource, it sounds like certainly in the case of be vaccinated or terminated before the vaccines were fully approved, but also it sounds like you were asked to intervene on the travel restriction. Is that correct? Joe Henry: Yes. Susan Divers: And was that at a senior, if I can ask, or other level? Joe Henry: I would say the vaccination or termination decision was a senior management at one of our industrial sites had the concern. And then the travel policy was probably, as I recall from one of the HR leaders at the site saying, Hey, we have some employees that are in unique situation here, or maybe not so unique, but different than what we would have from an urban center versus someone working in a more rural area. Susan Divers: Well, that's another good example of how a compliance and ethics and compliance program should work. It should be a resource and be welcomed into decision making, particularly on very difficult and tricky issues like the two that you just described. Can you talk about the role of your values in convincing your colleagues and your leadership to change or moderate the decisions that they made? Joe Henry: Absolutely. That was probably the driving force is our code of conduct, we don't dictate to people how they must behave, especially outside of work. It's fortunate that US compliance and compliance department of Braskem is independent and we're objective. And we're very visible. So people know us and people are willing to approach us. Again, that's why I started off the leadership team, it had the best of intentions. They heard from one group that says, Hey, we're tired of wearing masks. We want to be productive. And they reacted to that without understanding the potential consequences and the potential issues they may have with our own code of conduct. And that we couldn't mandate someone put something that was not yet fully approved. And that actually went further than what the government was telling us we needed to do. Which isn't uncommon. Our policies and procedures are frequently tighter than what the law requires. But in this case, we had to recognize that people have freedom of association and freedom of choice about theirselves. Once we brought all the potential consequences and perspectives of all affected team members, I think we reached the right decision. Susan Divers: So was that a difficult process, would you say, was it time consuming, or once you played that role of honest broker, was it something that people widely accepted? Joe Henry: Yes. Yes. I would say, we did use a lot of influence in... Basically had the show them what the consequences are, why their actions might not be entirely appropriate. So it wasn't a matter of authority. It was a discussion and it was a lengthy discussion, but I think everyone was fairly open minded and recognized that it was going take some more work and maybe we were going to have to spend some more money, especially getting a company to do the testing for us on a weekly basis. But I think they quickly arrived that it was the right decision. Susan Divers: Well, that's a great example. And thank you for sharing that. I'm going to go back to Scott for a minute and then to you Joe and ask. So obviously these were pretty intense situations that you dealt with. What lessons did you learn from that experience given your role in the company? If you could discuss that a bit, that would, I think be very helpful. Scott Sullivan: Sure. Yeah. Building on my prior comments a bit, I would say there were a few learnings and perhaps a few aha moments that we recognize along the curve. I think one was, you need to think both long term and short term. So whether it's your employees or your stakeholders, you might have a decision today that is different than the consequences tomorrow. So really making sure you're not just stuck in the moment, but you're thinking about the long term of the consequences or actions that come out of your decisions today. Playing off one of Joe's comments about culture and values, modifying a Warren Buffet quote a little bit, "Values take a long time to build, but they can be destroyed in a heartbeat." And people watch, I think that's the one that organizations often forget when they're looking at their culture, it's that whatever you allow or condone becomes your actual culture. So I think it's really important to practice what you preach and stay true to those values or before you know it, or right under your nose, you lose them. And that's true, perhaps even more so in the darkest days. So, how you're treating your employees and what people did with respect to terminations, or extending compensation during COVID, all eyes were on that. And I think that has longterm consequences for employees is they think, well, how did my employer treat me during those dark days? Did they exit us from the organization? Did they treat us poorly? Was the mighty dollar, the only thing that mattered? And again, for us, we have a social license to operate in the locations we do. So you have to think about that holistically, the full ESG perspective and look at all your stakeholders. And I think a little bit about what we've been talking about as well is anticipating the pushback, where are those pressure points, or focal points that are likely to come up and figuring out, like we always say, you can't take a program off the shelf, but customizing or figuring out what works best for you? And then hopefully that leads to you and many more in your organization becoming both values, beacons and champions to help the organization propel forward. Susan Divers: So in other words, it really can become a tremendous positive as long as you stay true to your values. And you're actually strengthening your culture, not destroying it to go back to the Warren Buffet quote. And Joe, based on your experience, do you think that your ethical culture at Braskem emerged stronger as a result of the types of difficult choices that people made in those circumstances? And are there any other lessons learned from that, that you would want to highlight? Joe Henry: So I believe our culture has gotten stronger. The ethics and compliance group and officers know they need to stay ever vigilant to ensure that passions do not overtake the organization's foundational values. We live in an impatient society that is quick to react and does not always consider all perspectives and unintended consequences. So this experience gives us an opportunity to talk to the leadership team and say, Hey, let's take a breath here. Let's look at this. I think when you're more thoughtful about these decisions, I think the decision will be better, probably strengthen your culture versus weaken it, or undermine it. But I do know that my successor's still facing these challenges. Susan Divers: Yeah. Although you're building ethical muscle at the same time, I want to highlight what you said about stop, pause, think, or you said it a little differently, but our chairman of our board, Doug Sideman, has written extensively about the benefits of pausing. And we do live in a impatient world and one that moves at light speed, particularly with social media. And I think Scott, you would agree with this too, that stopping and getting everybody to slow down and look at all the potential ramifications and equities. Joe's example of employees in Pennsylvania versus employees in Texas, I think is a very telling one. And that, that is really, I think what's needed to deal with particularly moral leadership issues. Scott, does that make sense? And also if you could talk about whether your ethical culture came out stronger as a result of the pandemic, that would be helpful. Scott Sullivan: Yeah. I think you often see in some areas the short term view or this, in the impatient world, as I like the way Joe characterize it, you see the pitch forks and the torches coming out in any particular topic. And so part of our job is to say, let's pause, let's think this through, the unintended consequences, the longterm consequences, I think for sure our ethical culture has emerged stronger. It really gave us ample opportunities to do the right thing and to put theory into practice. So one of the things coming out of the tragedy of COVID is it really gave us an opportunity to show our values and do the right thing in those dark days. And I think that also that consistency of messaging and values, it's not one offer. There's one big case. I think that really builds trust with stakeholders and gives you an opportunity to show that you're a different kind of company. So even in the dark days with bad or troubling news, you're going to be transparent and that we stand true to our values and hold ourself accountable to those values. So that consistency of operational model, I think extends well beyond ethics into business and health and safety. When faced with a challenge, we're going to think about it, be very thoughtful in what we do and ultimately do the right thing for the entirety of the stakeholder community. Susan Divers: Yeah, that sounds like very sound holistic decision making. Joe let's let's switch gears a little bit. We've talked about the pandemic and the challenges and how both of you feel that your ethical culture got stronger as a result, and you both played pivotal roles in the ethics and compliance programs, played pivotal roles in helping your organizations navigate. Can you give some other examples outside of the pandemic of having to do that? Joe Henry: So I mentioned one of our values is the freedom of association. As a result of the summer of 2020, George Floyd death and all, we had some outsiders, some activists and DE&I consultants recommend some potential path forward for the company. One of those, including tracking managers' social media profiles, and other forms of public expression and see whether they should continue to be leaders in the company or not. For instance, should we sanction a manager for attending a pro-life rally, or another manager for posting their support for the police on their Facebook page? That type of monitoring is not aligned with our code of conduct. We declined that recommendation. Again, the passion was there. Hey, we got to weed these people out. Well, no, we have to make sure that when they're working for Braskem, they're aligned to Braskem's values and that they're not diminishing our name in the public. And then most recently we've discussed how and when should compliance be involved in handling microaggressions. And we've agreed that microaggressions are supposed, should be handled between the two people in the first instance, maybe in a second or third occurrence, that it's handled, the person's called out publicly. And if it's repeated, then it's no longer a microaggression, it's an aggression. And then it comes to human resources or compliance. But those are some of the choices where, again, we relied on our code of conduct and relied on our proven policies and procedures regarding our ethics line to preserve the culture and continue to move the company forward and evolve the company. Susan Divers: Well, and that's another excellent example of pausing and looking at all the ramifications and carefully analyzing whether it is consistent with your code or not. Scott, do you have similar examples outside of the pandemic experience? Scott Sullivan: Yeah. So we've been on a journey of what I would probably call radical transparency in the ethics and compliance space, so where we're willing to show the good, the bad and the ugly to advance the health of our culture. It is a journey, so we're not perfect by any chance, but we're now more transparently and willing to share internal stories and struggles with our employees. I used to laugh all the time that most companies will say something happened to somebody, sometime, someplace with some result. And that leaves everybody, what the heck is that? What happened? And what are the expectations I know? So we've decided that we want to clarify expectations for employees. We want to at least establish the baseline for ethical behavior. And we want to ensure really that fraudsters or predators are held to account in the organization wherever and whenever we can. And also there's an evolving view about when something happens in our organization, what do we do to ensure that those individuals or groups of individuals are not just set free and allowed to go into the general community and repeat those damage? How many times have we all learned in the compliance profession, individual moves from company A to B, to C to D. And when you do the investigation, there's a long track record that history being repeated at different organizations. So we have done cradle to grave exposes, including one with a public press release, where we actually lifted the hood and told the full story. So most times it's fairly detailed internally and the reception has been excellent. It's advanced our culture ball pretty dramatically. As I mentioned, that being said, it's really, we're still on the journey, but we feel that practicing what we preach and not allowing performance to excuse misconduct or cornerstones of our culture. So even when the outcome is internally painful and extremely disappointing, we've been trying to promote this. So it's not just you do it once, because you can't fake it. And if you do it once, you see big scandals in organizations and periodically it's a big splash in the paper. And we've had similar things where you've had a case that we did our first radical transparency case. And I think the organization, the employees were saying, okay, is this a new way that we're going to operate, or is this the company's hand was forced and they felt they had to do it, so they did it? And so I think that whole concept of you can't fake, it's got to be genuine, it's got to be demonstrable and it's got to be sustainable, is really important. And as an aside, I think most companies can get compliance correct, or they get it right. That's to say that it's the right side of the brain, it's the math science side. It's one plus one, plus one equals three. But when you get to integrity, you get to ethics and culture, that's the equivalent to me, the left side of the brain, it's the English history. It's a little bit more soft. It's touchy, feely. It's hard to measure, but I think it's far more impactful. And that is often where I see organizations fall down, because it's so hard to do. And it's so hard to say, what is it? And it feels like it's subjective, or judgemental, or it's just real hard to do. So I think companies that focus on getting the integrity or the culture piece right, are so far ahead of the curve and getting everything else right. And that's not just in the ethics and compliance space, because I think that could be a proxy for good governance. It could be something that is a springboard for doing other things in an extraordinary way or well above peer organizations. Susan Divers: That's so interesting that you framed it in those terms. Something we talk about a lot and we're not alone in that in this area is that you can't just look at your ethics compliance program as a checklist and say, I'm good to go because I've got policies, code, training, audit, it has to be living and breathing. And that's where the touchy feely comes in. And the research, interestingly, it shows that if you have organizational justice where you're holding people to the same standard, and I hear you both talking about that in what you've described today, then you have the lifeblood and a strong foundation for your ethics and compliance program and activities. But if you don't, if there's two standards of justice, or what I'm hearing today too, is if there's a rush to judgment where some people get trampled in that rush, then you don't really have a strong foundation for your program. Joe, would you agree with that as well? Joe Henry: Yes, I absolutely do. Yeah, it has to be thoughtful, fair. We haven't gone to the extent from a transparency as Scott Newman have us to naming particular people, but we do anonymize those situations and publish them or even present them as lessons learned. Susan Divers: Yeah. That's very powerful. Well, we're starting to run out of time, but two questions before we terminate, which is what are the most important areas of focus by an ethics leader in resolving difficult questions? You've both given great examples of how central ethics and compliance was to tough decisions. But if you're a relatively new ethics leader, what are some of the key things to really bear in mind when those tough issues come up? Scott, you want to lead us off on that? Scott Sullivan: Sure. So I think as we've both mentioned, and same with Susan, the tone at the top is really important. So getting your executive leadership on board, otherwise the likelihood of success drops pretty dramatically. And I think as we've also both said, relationships matter. So build them wherever and whenever you can. And I think it's always that rainy day fund, you build credit in the bank, you build street credit. So for the bad news bear moment you have to come in, I think that's really important. So they understand who you are. You're not just a cry wolf person, you're thoughtful, you're methodical. You do all the things the way the organization would expect. And I think, for all of us, unfortunately, and you can see the business partnering go too far. So I think not withstanding that you always have to remember that there will be times undoubtedly as a compliance officer, where you have to put your neck on the line and hopefully your organization does not have a kill the messenger culture, that's not a fun organization to be a part of. And I think value based decisions are toughest in downturn markets and during crises. So we've come out of a pandemic and now we're going into what seems to be a downturn market. So I think the key message there is really prepare in advance and look at your rainy day credits and figure out where you're going to have to put your stake in the ground and move forward. Susan Divers: So build up your relationships and your credit and your goodwill. Joe, something to add. Joe Henry: I do that. I wholeheartedly agree. I think that what Scott mentioned is the most important area, but another area of focus is the company's values, which usually describes in the organization's code of conduct and implemented through your policies and procedures. And I remind the executives and our team members, employees, the code of conduct and policies are approved by the board of directors after thorough and thoughtful review by the executives, by the stakeholders and by compliance. So they're not done instantaneously and there's a lot of thought, there's a lot of reason why we have them and they shouldn't just be dismissed quickly because the particular circumstance. These documents provide the desired ethical direction of the company and have been very useful in resolving difficult decisions in the past, especially with well-meaning, but passionate team members. Go back to the foundation and consider it maybe, maybe, maybe we do need to make a change to the code of conduct or a change to our values, but at least reference it and have that discussion before taking any severe action that may have unintended consequences. Susan Divers: That's a very good point. One of my colleagues describes the code of conduct as your culture written down, and using it as a focal point and a way to ensure that major decisions and discussions include values, I think helps make it a living and breathing document. Well, this has been such an insightful conversation. I wish we could continue it talking about tough choices, I think is really helpful for people at whatever stage they are in their ethics and compliance journey and profession. So I want to thank our listeners. My name is Susan Frank Divers, and we'll see you the next time on Principled Podcast. Thanks Scott. Thanks Joe. Joe Henry: Thank you. Scott Sullivan: Thank you all. Outro: We hope you enjoyed this episode. The Principled Podcast is brought to you by LRN. At LRN, our mission is to inspire principle performance in global organizations by helping them foster winning ethical cultures, rooted in sustainable values. Please visit us at LRN.com to learn more. And if you enjoyed this episode, subscribe to our podcast on Apple Podcasts, Stitcher, Google Podcasts, or wherever you listen. And don't forget to leave us a review.

covid-19 director university texas english england state reality building ms office innovation washington dc philadelphia board playing dc pennsylvania brazil institute george floyd mba decisions values excellence ethics stitcher wales cdc google podcasts west virginia unpacking delaware compliance esg warren buffett investigations ppe risk management george washington university inform divers product development chemicals methodology sao paulo carnegie mellon university plastics northern virginia high court ec lockheed martin trinity college chemical engineering saint joseph sonnenschein gsk solicitor advisory boards lewes saic aecom technical support jvs legal advisor fcpa braskem joe henry newmont scott newman lrn scott sullivan ceco compliance director newmont corporation compliance week national law center smithkline beecham rutgers university center

Whats Up Podcast 259 Jean-Pierre Charbonneau

What's Up Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Jun 8, 2022 104:24

Le podcast de cette semaine est une présentation de DamaxAir !!Gros merci pour leur support !! Pour plus d'info allez au :https://damaxair.ca/ Après deux articles sur le crime organisé, il force le gouvernement Bourrassa à déclencher la commission d'enquête sur le crime organisé et ce qu'il lui vaudra une tentative de meurtre par la mafia. Un énorme merci à l'ancien politicien et journaliste au affaire criminel, Jean-Pierre Charbonneau d'être venu au Whats Up Podcast parler de ses connaissances sur ses événements et de l'histoire du crime organisé. Durant le podcast , on a parlé :- Pourquoi avoir choisit la criminologie.- Ses débuts avec Michel Auger et leur collaboration.- Sa 1e enquête au Devoir sur les liens entre la municipalité de St-Léonard et le crime organisé.- Sa 2e enquête sur le directeur des services de police de Montréal.- Couvrir les auditions de la commission sur le crime organisé (CECO).- Le scandale de la viande avariée.- Les commissions d'enquête et la corruption des années 60 jusqu'à aujourd'hui.- L'histoire du clan Dubois et la CECO.- Victime d'une tentative de meurtre.- Le livre la filière canadienne et l'histoire du crime organisé au Canada.- L'évasion et la spectaculaire cavale de Lucien Rivard.Et pleins d'autres sujets intéressants. Enregistré le 17 Mai 2022. Pour vous procurez le livre la filière canadienne :https://www.renaud-bray.com/Livres_Produit.aspx?id=8229&def=Fili%C3%A8re+canadienne(La),CHARBONNEAU,+JEAN-PIERRE,2922572870 MERCI LES PATREONS ! Pour devenir membre et supporter le podcast : https://www.patreon.com/whatsuppodcast Pour suivre Jerr sur Instagram : https://www.instagram.com/jerr_allain/ Pour suivre Jerr sur facebook : https://www.facebook.com/JerrGangsterAllain/ Contact : jerr.production@gmail.com Pour vous abonner à mon Infolettre : http://eepurl.com/hvpnhj

canada kevin durant ses dubois gros jean pierre stl couvrir up podcast victime enregistr devoir charbonneau jerr ceco jean pierre charbonneau infolettre

Trzy typy webinarów, które pomagają pozyskiwać klientów biznesowych

Business Marketer

Play Episode Listen Later May 19, 2022 46:56

W 114-tym odcinku podcastu Business Marketer opowiem o trzech typach webinarów, dzięki którym zwiększysz skuteczność generowania leadów, ale też zapewnisz sobie bazę do budowania marki eskperckiej czy rozbudowy bazy e-mailingowej.Pomysł na ten odcinek wziął się z moich wieloletnich doświadczeń oraz eksperymentów z różnymi typami webinarów. Osobiście jestem gorącym zwolennikiem tej formy, ale często kleinci skarzyli się na niską ich zdaniem skuteczność tego formatu. Często narzekali, że jeżeli dobierali szeroki temat przychodziło sporo osób, ale był problem z konwersją. Z drugiej strony, kiedy proponowali webinary o wąskiej tematyce, np o konkretnych cechach produktu, zainteresowanych udziałem było niewiele osób.Problem polega na nieodpowiednim dobraniu celu do typu webinaru.Dlatego w tym odcinku dowiesz się między innymi:Jakie typy webinarów warto organizowaćCo to są webinary edukacyjneCo to są webinary wspierająceCo to są webinary sprzedażoweCzy warto powtarzać webinary, jeżeli możemy udostępnić nagranieA jeżeli masz pomysł na kolejny odcinek podcastu lub mojego webinaru, albo szukasz wsparcia w tworzeniu strategii marketingu B2B, napisz do mnie na adres: lukasz.kosuniak@businessmarketer.plPosłuchaj innych odcinków o webinarach: Jak zorganizować skuteczny webinar?Webinar, czyli jak dzielić się wiedzą i pozyskiwać klientów na odległość

b2b webinars jak jakie dlatego klient trzy pomys pomagaj osobi ceco webinary

Éditorial de Richard Martineau : la sortie de Joël Lightbound. Bientôt le temps des bilans? La Rencontre Lisée - Mulcair avec Jean-François Lisée, ancien chef du Parti québécois et chroniqueur politique, et Thomas Mulcair, ancien chef du NPD et analyste politique (La Joute, chroniqueur au Journal) : Lightbound et l'opposition interne à Trudeau. Segment LCN avec Richard et Jean-François Guérin : Richard est allé au cinéma hier. La sortie de Joël Lightbound. Entrevue avec Catherine Côté, professeure agrégée à l'École de politique appliquée de l'Université de Sherbrooke : le gouvernement du Québec a annoncé hier une série d'assouplissements aux mesures sanitaires. Ces décisions sont-elles basées sur la science ou sur des considérations politiques. La professeure Catherine Côté se demande si l'humeur des Québécois par rapport aux mesures sanitaires pourrait avoir une incidence sur les élections de l'automne? Chronique Crime et Société avec Félix Séguin, journaliste au Bureau d'enquête de Québecor : le film Confession, d'après un livre de Félix Séguin et Éric Thibault. Il y a cinquante ans commençait la CECO.Le véhicule de Valérie Plante a failli être expédié en Afrique. La Rencontre Proulx-Martineau avec Gilles Proulx, chroniqueur au Journal de Montréal Journal de Québec : les 10 ans du printemps érable. Le chef de police d'Ottawa passe un mauvais quart d'heure. La Rencontre Daoust-Martineau avec Yves Daoust, directeur de la section Argent du Journal de Montréal et du Journal de Québec : l'immigration francophone loin dans la liste de priorités d'Ottawa. Pas de répit en vue pour les premiers acheteurs. Entrevue avec Jean-Sébastien Fallu, chercheur régulier, Institut universitaire sur les dépendances, Professeur agrégé à l'École de psychoéducation de l'Université de Montréal : l'arrondissement montréalais d'Outremont a interdit la vente de cannabis sur son territoire afin de s'assurer qu'aucune succursale de la SQDC ne puisse s'y établir. Chronique de Jérôme Blanchet-Gravel, essayiste et journaliste : retour et analyse de l'annonce du déconfinement. La Rencontre Bock-Côté - Martineau avec Mathieu Bock-Côté, chroniqueur blogueur au Journal de Montréal Journal de Québec et animateur du balado « Les idées mènent le monde » à QUB radio : le plan de déconfinement au Québec. Entrevue avec Roger Frappier : le film Le pouvoir du chien (The Power of the Dog) est en tête des nominations pour la prochaine cérémonie des Oscars, en lice dans pas moins de 12 catégories. Le québécois Roger Frappier est coproducteur du long métrage. Une production QUB radio Février 2022 Pour de l'information concernant l'utilisation de vos données personnelles - https://omnystudio.com/policies/listener/fr

S7E01 | What will make E&C programs more effective in 2022?

true crime quebec outlaws dubois bikers hells angels biker gangs ceco

Play Episode Listen Later Feb 4, 2022 28:32

Abstract: The most crucial factor LRN has identified in our years of research is that a values-based approach to governance is essential to ethics and compliance. It builds and sustains ethical culture, which is the essential element of effective E&C programs. But what does that look like today, as our world continues to be disrupted by the COVID-19 crisis and the aftermath of racial and political unrest? In this episode of the Principled Podcast, host Susan Divers, Director of Thought Leadership and Best Practices with LRN's Advisory group, talks about how values can sustain ethical performance—and even excel—in the face of change and adversity with Forrest Deegan, Vice President of Ethics and Compliance for Victoria's Secret. Listen in as the two draw insights from the 2022 edition of LRN's annual Ethics & Compliance Program Effectiveness Report—available now to download. What You'll Learn on This Episode: [2:17] - Reflections on the findings of LRN's 2022 Ethics and Compliance Report. [7:20] - The impact of core values vs. rules. [9:02] - The surprising data and how access to data can drive improvements in collaboration. [12:00] - The curse of compliance. [13:22] - The two driving factors in demystifying your values and how boards discuss value. [17:15] - What is causing ethics and compliance to lag behind in innovations compared to other departments? [22:30] - The innovations of customized, remote-accessible training. Additional Resources: Get the 2022 Ethics & Compliance Program Effectiveness Report. Subscribe to E&C Pulse, the LRN newsletter offering weekly insights on ethics, compliance, corporate culture, and reputation. Visit us for more information at lrn.com. Featured guest: As of July 2021, Forrest is the VP of Ethics and Compliance for Victoria's Secret & Co., responsible for overseeing the global ethics and compliance program. Forrest spent the prior six years as the first Chief Ethics and Compliance Officer for Abercrombie & Fitch Co., where he built A&F's corporate compliance and third-party risk management programs. Forrest serves on the Editorial Advisory Board for Compliance Week and has served on the Leadership Team for the Retail Industry Leaders Association (RILA) Compliance Council. Forrest regularly speaks at national compliance conferences and international events, including those sponsored by RILA, Compliance Week and the Association of Corporate Counsel. Forrest was selected by Compliance Week as a “Top Mind" for 2018. Forrest previously served as the Director and Senior Director of Compliance at A&F, where his responsibilities included a wide range of compliance program assessment, training and enhancement projects as well as international business development via joint venture and franchise. Prior to moving in-house, Forrest worked for nine years at Arnold & Porter in Washington D.C., representing multinational pharmaceutical, financial and consumer products companies in advocacy and consulting capacities. Forrest clerked for Judge Kazen on the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, after receiving his J.D. with honors from Duke Law School and his B.A. from the University of Texas at Austin. Featured Host: Susan Divers is a senior advisor with LRN Corporation. In that capacity, Ms. Divers brings her 30+ years' accomplishments and experience in the ethics and compliance area to LRN partners and colleagues. This expertise includes building state-of-the-art compliance programs infused with values, designing user-friendly means of engaging and informing employees, fostering an embedded culture of compliance and substantial subject matter expertise in anti-corruption, export controls, sanctions, and other key areas of compliance. Prior to joining LRN, Mrs. Divers served as AECOM's Assistant General for Global Ethics & Compliance and Chief Ethics & Compliance Officer. Under her leadership, AECOM's ethics and compliance program garnered six external awards in recognition of its effectiveness and Mrs. Divers' thought leadership in the ethics field. In 2011, Mrs. Divers received the AECOM CEO Award of Excellence, which recognized her work in advancing the company's ethics and compliance program. Mrs. Divers' background includes more than thirty years' experience practicing law in these areas. Before joining AECOM, she worked at SAIC and Lockheed Martin in the international compliance area. Prior to that, she was a partner with the DC office of Sonnenschein, Nath & Rosenthal. She also spent four years in London and is qualified as a Solicitor to the High Court of England and Wales, practicing in the international arena with the law firms of Theodore Goddard & Co. and Herbert Smith & Co. She also served as an attorney in the Office of the Legal Advisor at the Department of State and was a member of the U.S. delegation to the UN working on the first anti-corruption multilateral treaty initiative. Mrs. Divers is a member of the DC Bar and a graduate of Trinity College, Washington D.C. and of the National Law Center of George Washington University. In 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014 Ethisphere Magazine listed her as one the “Attorneys Who Matter” in the ethics & compliance area. She is a member of the Advisory Boards of the Rutgers University Center for Ethical Behavior and served as a member of the Board of Directors for the Institute for Practical Training from 2005-2008. She resides in Northern Virginia and is a frequent speaker, writer and commentator on ethics and compliance topics. Mrs. Divers' most recent publication is “Balancing Best Practices and Reality in Compliance,” published by Compliance Week in February 2015. In her spare time, she mentors veteran and university students and enjoys outdoor activities. Transcript: Intro: Welcome to the Principled Podcast brought to you by LRN. The Principled Podcast brings together the collective wisdom on ethics, business and compliance, transformative stories of leadership, and inspiring workplace culture. Listen in to discover valuable strategies from our community of business leaders and workplace change-makers. Susan Frank Divers: At LRN, the most crucial factor we've identified in our years of research and work with thousands of organizations worldwide, is that a values-based approach to governance is crucial. Being values-based builds and sustains ethical culture, which is the essential element of an effective ethics and compliance program. But what does this look like in a world that continues to be disrupted by the COVID crisis and the aftermath of racial and political unrest? Susan Frank Divers: Hello, and welcome to the first episode of season seven of LRN's Principled Podcast. I'm your host, Susan Frank Divers, Director of Thought, Leadership and Best Practices within LRN's Advisory Group. Today, I'm joined by Forrest Deegan, Vice President of Ethics and Compliance for Victoria's Secret, and lecturer in law at the University of Chicago Law School. We're going to be talking about how values can sustain ethical performance and even allow organizations to excel in the face of change and adversity, during On Insights, from our 2022 edition of LRN's annual Ethics and Compliance Program Effectiveness report. And on Forrest's experience in the retail industry in particular. Susan Frank Divers: Before coming to Victoria's Secret, Forrest has spent two decades in ethics and compliance, including Chief Ethics and Compliance Officer for Abercrombie and Fitch. So Forrest, thanks very much for coming on the Principled Podcast, and let's jump right in. Forrest Deegan: Thank you, Susan. It's a pleasure to connect with you again. Susan Frank Divers: The same. We've had some interesting discussions preparing for this podcast about the 2022 Ethics and Compliance Program Effectiveness report. What surprised you, and what resonated the most, particularly with your experience in the retail industry throughout the ongoing crisis? Forrest Deegan: I'll start with what resonated the most. Preliminary matter, really enjoyed reading through the insights that were collected here. Reading through it I start with the resonation because there are a number of charts that go through the concerns that folks identified in the early days of the pandemic about the challenges of transitioning to a hybrid or remote model with respect to their controls, with respect to their ability to audit, and to support the programs. This comes across in both some of the stats around the activities they thought would be of concern and then what they actually worked on. And then looking at how training actually was supported, where obviously, people weren't able to travel. People weren't able to use all of their old tricks in this new time. And so starting off seeing the fears and the concerns that folks were raising in 2020, and that list itself was pretty fulsome and reminded me what it was like in the retail space with all of the uncertainty that came in the spring of 2020. Forrest Deegan: With the closure of the majority of all stores, at least temporarily in the US. I remember the day we were kicked out of our home office, I'm sure everybody has a similar recollection to mid-March, walking out with your computer in your bag and not knowing when you'd be back. This brought back some of that uncertainty. That resonated with me, but what also resonated with me was the introduction around values and how that programs that leaned in to their values did well. And this idea that kind of everybody took on new and different obligations with the pandemic, with a time of crisis. A time of crisis can be a time of unification. I certainly saw that to be the case. I remember that leaders at my company were voluntary take pay cuts, to make sure that folks and the staff could stay on so that we could avoid layoffs. There was an insistence on treating folks equitably within, right? So really living your values in those moments of crisis. This report speaks to both those fears and some of the solutions that came out of it. Susan Frank Divers: That's such an impactful example, because there's no rule that said that executives had to give up pay or benefits to keep other people employed. And we saw a lot of that last year in our report, and what's very heartening from LRN's point of view is, we've been saying for years, that values work better than rules as the basis for a program. And last year's report and this year's report, really proved that, I think in a lot of ways, and I look at stats like on page seven, that 82% of the programs we surveyed this year, that their ethical culture is stronger as a result of their experience during the pandemic. And you just opened it to that too, that people come together in a crisis, but relying on values was clearly the way to get through it. Forrest Deegan: The second part of your question was around things that might have surprised me in here. And honestly, the stat you just pulled about the 82% feeling ethical culture was stronger. That wouldn't surprise me a bit because it was 2021, not a 2020 stat. In fact the number went up, it seems like from the prior year's version of the report where it was 79%, the prior year, this year was 82%, that their ethical culture was stronger as a result of experiences coping with the crisis. So that was something that surprised me, that sentiment not only continued, but seemed to increase a bit because we've all heard about it and all have felt the fatigue in the past year as the uncertainty has continued as we've continued to have to be flexible in our approach. Yes. Susan Frank Divers: Forrest what you said was very impactful because one of the key findings, obviously in the report, that's actually on page seven is that 82% of our nearly 1200 respondents worldwide reported that their ethical culture became stronger during the pandemic rather than weaker. And at LRN we've said for years, that values make an impact much more than rules and that's living proof that that's true. So I'd like your thoughts on that. Forrest Deegan: With respect to the second part of your prior question on what surprised me with respect to the study, I would have to say that that very stat, that 82% of the respondents last time felt that ethical culture was strong longer as a result of the experiences. That rose, that sentiment was an increase, improvement, from the prior year. That surprised me a bit because we've heard so much about and felt so much of the fatigue as the uncertainty has continued as the need to adjust our approach and our responses has just continued onward. I was pleasantly surprised to see that the prior version of this report had shown 79% felt that the crisis was a bringing folks to their ethics and compliance program in a stronger way to see that go from 79 to 82, a small improvement, but you're already really high to begin with. I was pleasantly surprised to see that in here. And honestly it does make sense with respect to that ongoing uncertainty that you do need to lean upon those core values to continue to navigate. You really have to love the question, not the answer when it comes to a challenge of this size and that is constantly evolving. Susan Frank Divers: That's putting it so well, that you have to love the question, not the answer. And we were frankly surprised last year, and then pleasantly surprised this year that this year's results confirmed what we saw last year. And I was just looking at the chart on 33 that talks about E&C resources and standing. And you had mentioned that people were understandably anxious at the outset as to how the programs would do and whether they would have resources or whether there would be widespread misconduct or circumventing of processes. And that didn't happen. And then E&C programs have come out strong and well resourced. Forrest Deegan: Just those stats on 33, surprised me a lot of different ways. The first chart talking about: do ethics compliance functions feel they have the sufficient resources and authority. Some of your respondents are at the 95% level, 92% level, even for your medium impact programs. And even the lowest impact were at 67%. Those are really high scores. Those are really high scores. And I think that's right. I think that is a reason for optimism right now with respect to our ability to respond as companies, right? If there is that availability of resources, but also the buy-in with leadership. Forrest Deegan: And there's another stat there that I also was surprised by how strong the respond were around access to data, right? The highest impact programs were 89% of them felt that they had appropriate access to data sources in the org, whether it was HR audit it InfoSec in order to do their work. I think data component there is so critical and reflects buy-in from not just leadership, your tone at the top portion, but also from your cross-functional partners, right. Access to the data can really help drive improvements, yes, in the day to day operation of the program, but all also in your ability to support and inform cross-functionally. And so I think those things are married together, right? The access to information. It's a great example of something where it's not just resources, right? It's not just dollars and cents. It's also that buy-in as reflected through real collaboration and through real partnership. Susan Frank Divers: I agree with you. And also it's affirmation that programs have gone from being something the legal department does, or maybe the legal and ethics and compliance department does to something that the whole company does. And that's a really positive development. Forrest Deegan: I think, right. I've been in house for a decade now, I was in private practice for a decade before that dealing with a corporate compliance space and really seeing an evolution in terms of scope and approach during that time. And so things were ... we already had increasing expectations and an accelerating space when it came to this field, both due to our internal stakeholders, our boards, obviously regulators like DOJ, but also customers and NGOs. They keep ratcheting up the expectations and corporate compliance has proven to be a responsive and reliable partner. And so this is when you get into what I call the curse of competence, right? If you execute effectively, you're going to be asked to do more. I do think this is been a real opportunity and awakening to the valuation of controls and monitoring and our ability, as professionals, to not just focus on the have tos, right, those rules that we talked about at the top, but also the want tos, right, that corporate purpose, the values associated with it. I believe corporate compliance offers the opportunity to marry the want to and the have to, and frankly, that's the only way it works really well is if people understand how those rules, how those requirements tie back to why they want to be at the company, what they're hoping to accomplish with respect to company values. Susan Frank Divers: Forrest, That was very insightful what you just said. And I want to talk a bit more about the connection between values and making programs more accessible and employee focused. That's another theme in the report and we see progress and we see best practices emerging, but I would argue that they need to emerge much more strongly and quickly, but take us back a little bit to board's values and talk about how values, when you demystify them, involve really bringing people into the program with the want tos, as well as the must haves. Forrest Deegan: For me, the stats around accessibility, they make a ton of sense in terms of your high performing programs are going to be focused on making the documents available, making them searchable, simplifying where possible, translating into the languages that you're employees leverage, right? To me, those actions are, are really table stakes with respect to an effective program and the thoughtfulness and the idea of keeping the end user in mind, that sentiment, which, which drives accessibility, I think, is communicated to your employees, right? When they see that when they have the access to it, where the information is in a logical place, where it's stored where the other corporate documents or the other FAQs guidance they look for from the company for an IT issue or for a T and E report. If the guidance documents around your compliance program are as accessible, if not more accessible I think that alone sends a message. I do think that the percentages around those that are for focusing on accessibility they were still right around the 50% mark. I think those numbers need to go up. I also think that to really drive home your value system and to demystify a program and what it means to act with integrity, not only do you have to make the documents accessible, you've also got to work on making them actionable, right? You need guidance that is relevant and actionable. You can have a clear rule that is simple to understand, but if it is unclear how to operationalize that, or how it deals how it is imported into the day to day running of the business, then it's just words on a page. Maybe they can get to the page easier now, but they still can't use it effectively. So I think that those two concepts, accessibility and utility are really what drive an ability to demystify what your program is about. Susan Frank Divers: If I hear you correctly too, you are also saying that it reflects respect for employees. Forrest Deegan: Yes. I think that's so important. I'm just passionate about that idea that you can send messages, right? How you present your information can tell a lot about what the company values and making it accessible, including in your language, from your corporate purpose, your value statements, how your CEO talks on a day to day basis. If those hooks are appropriately cascaded through your ethics and compliance messaging, it's clear to everyone in the organization that these are priorities, consistent with how we talk about hitting our numbers for the year, or consistent with talking about our expansion for the year, if we're using the same language and if it rolls up in the same way, that's how you ensure it is embedded. Susan Frank Divers: Yeah. I completely agree with you. It's tempting to want to spend more time in this area, cause we're both passionate about it. I will just close it out by saying that only 25% of the organizations this year reported that they're using mobile apps. And when you think back on the pandemic and how people were fighting for bandwidth and may have had children at home using bandwidth and computers, we've seen some stirring examples of companies like Dell, really putting big components of their program on mobile apps. And I hope we see more of that. But just to look forward now, as we draw to the end, we saw a lot of innovation and pivoting, and yet we also saw some areas that lag behind where people haven't, perhaps, revised their training curriculum as quickly as you might expect or made some of these other innovations like mobile apps. First, why do you think that it is? And secondly, what do you see happening in the next couple of years in terms of best practices for programs? Forrest Deegan: To use mobile devices and investing in making your program documents, your governance materials accessible and your training included there in, I was surprised at that 25% number. But as I thought about that particular number and kind of what's next, it made sense because I'm reminded of my own mindset in 2020 and the idea that we didn't know how long this is going to last. And so I'm confident when it comes to some of training activities, some of the new technology investments, the answers that you've got for the most recent running of the survey, I think they reflect everybody's hope, and their investment in that, that first year, year and a half the pandemic that we can ride this out, right. We don't, don't have to start over again with the entirety of our program here. And I think that folks, by now, will have come to the realization that, look, we're not going to get back to a place where everybody is in the office on the same system during the same hours of the day. How does our program have to in this, whether it's remote or hybrid, certainly transitional time, how do we meet our people where they are and where they're likely going to be for the time being? So I do think your answers will change going forward when it comes to investments in mobile, when it comes to investments in audit processes and controls that take into account the lack of that ability to look over the shoulder, the lack of the ability to rely on tribal knowledge. I think that's going to be the future for all of us. The other thing that looking at kind of where the investments were and they'll go next, what really spoke to me was the idea there was value in having a system in place, right? I think back again to 2020 and those folks that did not have systems in place that relied upon those in-person trainings or audits or what have you, they did have to start from scratch when it came to, how do I do this job, or demonstrate this control in a remote way. Whereas if you had an up and running third party risk management system, you would have to make changes, you'd have to make tweaks to your risks and what they counted for based upon financial instability, operational constraints, but you were working from something. You were able to make adjustments and not start over. And so I think that contrast also, I think, will serve programs well, because the utility of these systems, I think has been revalued by companies because they see how capable they were of pivoting in ways that some of the more informal methods just were not. Susan Frank Divers: To take an example of what I think you're saying. It's interesting to me that a lot of top programs still relied on a tremendous amount of in-person training. Yes, in-person, training's more effective in a lot of ways. It makes those connections, but they may have neglected a bit, their online training and I'm reminded of one, CECO who described it as sheep dip training. As you point out we are where we are and we're not going back two years ago. And so I think the level of innovation we're going to see in areas like training, making it shorter, more video, mobile friendly, more tailored to employees roles in the company. It sounds like that will happen because people have come to realize that they have to rely on their system, that the systems have to be good. Forrest Deegan: I'm glad you brought up the idea of training and the different types that are available in an online way. A stat that isn't in here is, is the idea of shorter training, right? And I think that as we need to put more arrows in the quiver of online training of remote accessible training, that innovation is going to continue and that not only will training get shorter and more customized, but the location of it, the availability of the rule or the lesson, right where the potential action could be. You've got to approve the invoice, the guidance for that should be baked into the system. Same thing with, if you have to approve the use of a new vendor, right? The expectations of the company, they need to be right there. They need to be tied directly to the process itself. I think, again, that works towards the idea of embedding the rules and the system into your actual day to day activity. Susan Frank Divers: Very well put, more of a just in time approach and again, that emphasis on accessibility for people. Well, I could have this conversation all day and there are so many areas in the current Program Effectiveness Report that we haven't had a chance to talk about, but I know you have other things to do. And I really appreciate you spending the time with us today Forrest. Forrest Deegan: It's my pleasure. I appreciate the opportunity to do a deep dive into the report. I love a quote from page six about the idea of having a cut of core values translated into understood behaviors can be more potent and powerful than a thousand rules. I love that cascade down because I think that is the approach that works. And when you couple that approach, which requires consistent communication, when you couple that with the ability to measure response, the ability to track change behavior, that's how you win with respect to these clear communication and standards that are transparent and that people are held accountable to. Susan Frank Divers: Thank you, Forrest. Talking with you about the program effectiveness report is truly a pleasure. Before we leave the podcast and I close it out. Was there anything else that you wanted to talk about or any other insight that you wanted to share? Forrest Deegan: It's always dangerous to ask me that question, but if you don't mind, there was one other kind of collection of stats that really me just because I think that they inform one another. I think it was on page 11, there's a number of stats around what top rank programs are doing. One was almost three times anticipate greater engagement by the boards of directors and almost two times expect more regular engagement by leadership, right? So there's an expectation that the board and leadership are engaged with the program and on that same spit page, it talks about having policies that are simplified and streamlined and having training that is interactive and web based. And to me one leads to the other. If you have a program that is simpler to understand and has been streamlined and has been built in a way to make it interactive, it is going to be easier to support leadership engagement and the board of director buy-in, if you are giving leaders simpler rules that resonate and reflect the reality of the business, you're going to obtain that buy-in in a natural manner. Forrest Deegan: And if you're able to talk about the program and if they're able to talk about that program and have that engagement, then that drives that next level with the board of directors. And so I think you pat have to develop a virtuous cycle here of building a program that's based in the reality of your business that resonates with the values of the company and what the company's priorities are, which will allow your business leaders in talking about those business priorities, to use the same language, to pull the same levers when it comes to their engagement with your ethics and compliance program, it really has to be considered part of that whole in order to work. Susan Frank Divers: Oh, I love how you've articulated that virtuous circle between the values focus, the simplified employee-facing messages and mechanisms, and then leadership becoming more natural. Forrest Deegan: That really is the heart of demystifying your program, right? You've got to make it based in your reality. And you've got to use the language of leadership in order to get there. And if you're doing that, you will have your buy-in at the top and in the middle and it can drive all the way down. Susan Frank Divers: Well, that's a great note to end on. Forrest, thank you so much for spending time with us today and thank you to our listeners for joining us for another insightful conversation. My name is Susan Frank Divers, and we'll see you next time on the Principled Podcast by LRN. Outro: We hope you enjoyed this episode. The Principled Podcast is brought to you by LRN At LRN, our mission is to inspire principled performance in global organizations by helping them foster winning ethical cultures rooted in sustainable values. Please visit us at lrn.com to learn more. And if you enjoyed this episode, subscribe to our podcast on apple podcasts, Stitcher, Google podcasts, or wherever you listen. And don't forget to leave us a review.

The Bikers of Sherbrooke - #4 WKT6

Who Killed Theresa?

Play Episode Listen Later Jan 29, 2022 39:09

"The following is the chapter of biker gangs in Sherbrooke from the 1980 CECO report, The Biker Gangs of Quebec. And you can see that when we are talking about biker gangs in the 1970s in Sherbrooke we are mostly talking about two groups: the Atoms (Atomes) and the Gitans (Gypsies).."For more information please visit the website: https://theresaallore.com/2022/01/17/the-bikers-of-sherbrooke/

quebec outlaws bikers atoms hells angels sq sherbrooke motards biker gangs ceco

CECO - #3 WKT6

Who Killed Theresa?

Play Episode Listen Later Jan 25, 2022 37:01

For today, I want to focus on a CECO report published in 1980 titled, Biker Gangs in Quebec. For our purposes, this report tells us what the government knew about motorcycle gangs in the 1970s, or what they thought they knew. What we know now is that within the decade of the 1970s police underestimated the threat of biker gangs. The Quebec government incubated their growth providing government assistance through projects like the MUQ experiment. By the end of the decade biker gangs had become such a serious threat that Marc Andre Bedard saw the need to study them. For more information visit the website: https://theresaallore.com/2022/01/25/ceco/

Cursed Movies

Midnight Train Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Nov 11, 2021 119:32

In a world, where the midnight train podcast is at the top of the podcast game, one thing has the power to destroy everything they have worked for. This week their world will come crumbling down as everything they've achieved will be tested and possibly destroyed due to the madness that is (dun dun duuuuuuuunnnnn) cursed Movies!!! Tonight on the midnight train we are combining two of our favorite things…. This podcast and lots and lots of beer…YEAH! Oh wait, we do that every week… Oh, that's right, it's this podcast and….moooovies!! But… In true midnight train fashion, we can't just talk about movies…. We're gonna talk about cursed movies!!! That's right we are going to look at movies that for one reason or another have led to tragedy during and after the movies were made! Everything is on the table from health issues like cancer, accidental deaths while filming, people going crazy after filming, and just about everything else you can think of. Should be a fun and creepy ride discussing all these movies with you passengers and, in case you're wondering, yes we're still going to have a movies list at the end. Ok so let's get into this and see what we have as far as cursed movies! We're gonna start it with a big one since we just covered the subject matter of the film! The first cursed movie on our list is the exorcist. The filming of THE EXORCIST was done over nine months. The main set, a reproduction of the Georgetown home, was built in a warehouse in New York. During the filming, several curious incidents and accidents took place on the set and plagued those involved with the production. In addition, the budget of the film rose from $5 million to more than twice that amount. Obviously, any film production that lasts for more than a month or so will see its share of accidents and mishaps, but THE EXORCIST seems to have been particularly affected by unforeseeable calamities. Coincidence? Perhaps, but it left the cast and crew rightfully shaken. The first incident occurred around 2:30 a.m. one Sunday morning when a fire broke out on the set. There was only one security guard at the Ceco 54th Street Studios when the McNeil house set caught fire and burned. The fire was the result of a bad electrical circuit, but it shut down filming for six weeks while the set was reconstructed from scratch. Ironically, as soon as the new set was ready, the sprinkler system broke down, causing an additional two-week delay. Few of the actors in the film escaped personal troubles during the shoot. Just as Max Von Sydow (who played Father Merrin) touched down in New York to film his first scenes, he received a phone call saying that his brother died unexpectedly in Sweden. Von Sydow himself later became very ill during the filming. Irish actor Jack MacGowran (who played Burke Dennings) died only one week after his character was killed by the demon in the movie. Jason Miller (who played Father Karras) was stunned when his young son, Jordan, was struck down on an empty beach by a motorcyclist who appeared out of nowhere. The boy ALMOST died. THAT'S GOOD NEWS! Ellen Burstyn (who played Chris McNeill) wrenched her back badly during one scene when she was slapped by the possessed girl. The stunt went badly awry and she was laid up in bed for several weeks afterward, causing more delays in the filming. They had a rig attached to her where a guy offscreen would pull a rope that was tied to her to get that “smacked hard as shit and launched across the room” look the director wanted. Apparently, the director didn't like the first take or two and told the guy with the rope to yoke the living piss out of her. He got his shot. She screwed up her back. In New York, one of the carpenters accidentally cut off his thumb on the set and one of the lighting technicians lost a toe. This was all over the news at the time due to the mixup at the hospital where they put the wrong appendages on the wrong patients. Yep, they switched the toe for the thumb. And if you believed that, well… I'm not sorry even a little bit. Anyway, The exorcist's location trip to Iraq was delayed from the spring, which is relatively cool, to July, the hottest part of the summer, when the temperature rose to 130 degrees and higher. Out of the eighteen-man crew that was sent there, Friedkin lost the services of nine of them, at one time or another, due to dysentery (which is super shitty) or sunstroke. To make matters worse, the bronze statue of the neo-Assyrian winged demon Pazazu, which was packed in a ten-foot crate, got lost in an air shipment from Los Angeles and ended up in Hong Kong, which caused another two-week delay. "I don't know if it was a jinx, really," actress Ellen Burstyn later said. "But there were some really strange goings-on during the making of the film. We were dealing with some really heavy material and you don't fool around with that kind of material without it manifesting in some way. There were many deaths in the film. Linda's grandfather died, the assistant cameraman's wife had a baby that died, the man who refrigerated the set died, the janitor who took care of the building was shot and killed … I think overall there were nine deaths during the course of the film, which is an incredible amount… it was scary." Unholy shit, batman! Things got so bad that William Friedkin took some drastic measures. Father Thomas Bermingham, S.J., from the Jesuit community at Fordham University, had been hired as a technical advisor for the film, along with Father John Nicola, who, while not a Jesuit, had been taught by Jesuit theologians at St. Mary of the Lake Seminary in Mundelein, Illinois. Friedkin came to Bermingham and asked him to exorcise the set. The priest was unable to perform an actual exorcism, but he did give a solemn blessing in a ceremony that was attended by everyone then on the set, from Max Von Sydow to the technicians and grips. "Nothing else happened on the set after the blessing,” Bermingham stated, "but around that time, there was a fire in the Jesuit residence set in Georgetown." And while nothing else tragic occurred on the set, strange events and odd coincidences were reported during the post-production work on the film. "There were strange images and visions that showed up on film that were never planned," Friedkin later claimed. "There are double exposures in the little girl's face at the end of one reel that are unbelievable." As we talked about in previous episodes, The film opened on December 26, 1973, to massive crowds. Within weeks of the first public screenings of the film, stories started to make the rounds that audience members were fainting and vomiting in the theaters. There were also reports of disturbing nightmares and reportedly, several theater ushers had to be placed under a doctor's care, or quit their jobs, after experiencing successive showings of the movie. In numerous cities that were checked after THE EXORCIST had run for several weeks, reporters found that every major hospital had been forced to deal with patients who reported, after seeing the film, severe cases of vomiting and hallucinations. There were also reports of people being carried out of theaters in stretchers. What do you think, passengers? Mere publicity stunts, or was this the real thing? The info for this cursed movie came from a great article on americanhauntingsink.com check them out! Next up we're gonna dive into a sweet little movie about a tree, a child's toy, and REAL SKELETONS IN THE SWIMMING POOL! Yep, you guessed it, poltergeist! The curse of Poltergeist spawned many theories about why the movie and its sequels were cursed with so much tragedy, with one suggesting the use of real-life human bones in the original film caused the hauntings. Actress JoBeth Williams - who played the mother, Diane Freeling - is seen dropping into a pool of skeletons in one spooky scene and she later reveals the bones were real. She told TVLand: "In my innocence and naiveté, I assumed that these were not real skeletons. "I assumed that they were prop skeletons made out of plastic or rubber . . . I found out, as did the crew, that they were using real skeletons, because it's far too expensive to make fake skeletons out of rubber." Just four months after the film's release, tragedy struck with actress Dominique Dunne, who played the family's eldest daughter Dana, who became the victim of a grisly murder. On the day before Halloween in 1982, the actress, 22, was strangled by her ex-boyfriend John Thomas Sweeney outside their home in West Hollywood. She survived the attack but was left in a coma. She never regained consciousness and died five days later. Sweeney was later convicted of voluntary manslaughter and spent three and half years of a six-year sentence behind bars for the killing. He changed his name to John Maura so if you want to let him know what a twat he is, I mean… we can't stop you. In the years after the film's release movie bosses plowed ahead with plans for a sequel and Poltergeist II: The Other Side hit cinemas in 1986. Among the cast was Will Sampson, best known for playing Chief Bromden in One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest opposite Jack Nicholson. The actor - cast as shaman Taylor in the movie - was concerned about the use of real skeletons in the first film and offered to perform a real-life exorcism. He's believed to have conducted the ceremony alone and in the middle of the night, but the cast reportedly felt relieved afterward. However, less than a year after the film's release - the curse had claimed another victim. Sampson had long-term health problems as he suffered from a degenerative condition called scleroderma, which affected his heart and lungs. He underwent a heart and lung transplant in the summer of 1987 but died of post-operative kidney failure on June 3. Ok, this one is sad and you've probably heard of it. The most famous victim of the Poltergeist curse was Heather O'Rourke. She appeared as Carol Anne in the first two films as well as the third installment, Poltergeist III, which hit cinemas in 1988. She died just four months before the movie's release at only 12 years of age. In January 1988, Heather fell ill with what appeared to be flu-like symptoms. She collapsed at home the following day and was rushed to the hospital. She suffered a cardiac arrest but doctors were able to revive her and they diagnosed her with intestinal stenosis - a partial obstruction of the intestine. She underwent surgery, but went into cardiac arrest again in recovery and doctors were unable to save her. She passed away in February 1988, just weeks after her 12th birthday, and it was later reported she died from congenital stenosis and septic shock. Absolutely heartbreaking. Character actor Lou Perryman became the second cast member to fall victim to murder. He played Pugsley in the original movie and suffered a brutal end in 1992 when he was hacked to death with an ax aged 67. A convict recently released from prison, Seth Christopher Tatum, confessed he had killed Perryman at his home after coming off his medication and going on a drinking binge. Tatum pleaded guilty to his murder in 2011 and was sentenced to life in prison. Actor Richard Lawson played one of the parapsychologists, Ryan, in the original film (not the guy who ate the chicken with the maggots… you're welcome) and he came close to becoming another victim of the curse in 1992. He was involved in a terrifying plane crash in 1992 when the USAir Flight 405 crashed into New York City's Flushing Bay on route to guess where? Cleveland friggin Ohio. The crash claimed the lives of 27 of the 51 passengers, but Lawson was among the survivors. He put his lucky escape down to a last-minute seat change that saved his life. Lawson went on to be part of showbiz royalty when he married Beyonce's mother, Tina Knowles in 2015. Info for this movie was taken from mirror.co.uk. Next up how about… Hmm…. Oh, I know… The omen! The 2976 version of course. Obviously, Moody is a time traveler and saw the upcoming remake, 955 friggin years in the future! No! It was 1976! Of all the world's cursed film productions, The Omen is considered to have one of the worst movie curses of all time. The 1976 film tells the story of a man who accidentally adopts Damien the Antichrist as his son and the movie remains one of horror's most successful franchises. But what was so odious about the set that led producers to believe the devil was punishing them for making the movie? Is The Omen really cursed? The Omen film set haunting includes death, injury, and lots of lightning bolts: after all, the creator himself warned the cast and crew that Satan wasn't going to like what they were doing. Here's what happened behind the scenes of The Omen movie and why, despite its several sequels and a 2006 remake, it remains one of history's movies that indeed may have angered Satan himself! In June 1975, Gregory Peck's son, Jonathan Peck, killed himself with a bullet to the head, two months before filming was to start. Several strange events then surrounded the production. For protection on the set of "The Omen," Bernhard wore a Coptic cross. In an interview, Bernhard spoke about the production's eerie events, which included the death of an animal trainer. Precisely one day after they shot the sequence involving the baboons at the animal center, Bernhard said that a tiger seized the animal trainer by the head, causing his death immediately. Whhhaat the fuuuuuck? One of the most haunting stories surrounding The Omen didn't happen during the shoot, but during the production of the World War II epic A Bridge Too Far. John Richardson, who did special effects on The Omen, was involved in a head-on collision that beheaded his girlfriend, eerily mirroring the decapitation scene with David Warner. Supposedly, after the crash, Richardson saw a street sign that said, "Ommen, 66.6 km." This accident occurred after The Omen had wrapped production, but many of course linked it to the evil aura of the film. Several planes were also set ablaze, including the plane carrying Peck and screenwriter David Seltzer. Meanwhile, Bernhard said they had to land in Nova Scotia after flying back from England. He added: "We had the film on board... Dick [Donner] and I were very, very nervous." IRA bombs ripped through a hotel, in which executive producer Mace Neufeld and his wife stayed, and another in which prominent executives and stars, including Peck, were to have dinner. Once word got back to Fox about all the terrible incidents that plagued production, the studio saw it as a great way to drum up a ton of publicity and add to the film's ominous aura. They also put a great tagline into the film's ad campaign: You have been warned. If something frightening happens to you today, think about it. It may be The Omen. As Donner recalled in The Omen: Curse or Coincidence, "If we had been making a comedy, you would have recalled all the funny, great, ridiculous, silly moments that happened in that film. if you were doing a love story, you'd remember all the times somebody left their wife, fell in love... You're doing The Omen, anything that happens on that film, you don't tell about the jokes, you don't talk about the love stories, you don't even think about them. You think about things that coincidentally could have been something to do with The Omen. We had lots of them." Creepy stuff right there my friends. Next up we have one of my personal all-time favorites, the crow! The Crow began filming in Wilmington, North Carolina, in 1993. Cursed Films revealed that before production got underway, a mysterious caller left a voicemail message warning the crew not to shoot the movie because bad things would happen. Eerily, two on-set electricians were involved in an accident in which their truck hit a live wire. One of the men experienced second and third-degree burns and lost both ears. Disaster also struck the entire production when a hurricane destroyed the movie set. That is when the “curse of The Crow” rumors began circulating in Hollywood. The star of The Crow, Brandon Lee, was the son of martial arts legend, Bruce Lee. The elder Lee died during the production of his final film. Some fans speculated that the Chinese mafia had placed a hit on the actor for betraying martial arts secrets. Others suspected that he had been struck by an insidious death blow at an earlier time. The most popular theory about The Dragon's death is that he was a victim of the Lee Family Curse. His older brother had died, and Lee's parents believed there was a demon targeting the males in the Lee family. Like his father, Brandon Lee died before he finished filming The Crow. In a fluke accident, the performer was shot while completing an action sequence, as described in Cursed Films. The crew used what are called ‘dummy rounds,' for the scene, but there was something in the barrel of the gun that acted as a lethal projectile, killing Lee. To complete the final photography for The Crow, the man who had been working as Lee's stunt double wore a mask in his image. Crazy stuff! How about some of our patented quick hitters! The Conqueror" is a whitewashed 1956 film with John Wayne as Genghis Khan. The film was shot at a location downwind from a nuclear testing site, causing dozens of crew members to eventually die of cancer. so maybe not so much a curse as a poor choice of locations. Apocalypse Now" The horror! Francis Ford Coppola was tempting fate when he decided to film "Apocalypse Now" during monsoon season. Big mistake. The monsoon destroyed multiple sets, Martin Sheen suffered a heart attack during filming, and Coppola was so stressed that he suffered a seizure, according to The Independent. "Apocalypse Now" (1979) turned out to be a masterpiece anyway, but the documentary "Hearts of Darkness: A Filmmaker's Apocalypse" about its making is just as engrossing. "Fitzcarraldo" Dysentery. Injuries. Fights among the crew. Nothing seemed to go right during the filming of 1982's "Fitzcarraldo." The story concerns hauling a boat over a hill, which the crew literally accomplished, but not without the same nightmarish difficulty as is depicted in the film. And in the end, director Werner Herzog looked as mad and overly driven as its hero. Check out the documentary "Burden of Dreams" for more. The Superman Curse Comic book movie fans may know about the "Superman Curse," which is said to afflict multiple actors involved in Superman films. Christopher Reeve was paralyzed following a horse accident. And Margot Kidder, who played Lois opposite Reeve, suffered from bipolar disorder, according to TCM. Also, the original Superman, George Reeves, supposedly committed suicide. His death at age 45 from a gunshot remains a controversial subject; the official finding was suicide, but some believe that he was murdered or the victim of an accidental shooting. "The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers" Bad luck ran amok in Middle Earth during the filming of 2002's "The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers." DVD interviews revealed that multiple actors and stuntmen suffered injuries while shooting the film's elaborate fight sequences. The worst was Viggo Mortensen, who broke his toe and chipped his tooth while filming. The Exorcism of Emily rose Dexter star Jennifer Carpenter reported that during the making of The Exorcism of Emily Rose — in which she played a big-screen version of German woman Anneliese Michel, whose poor health and subsequent death was blamed on a failed exorcism — her radio would mysteriously turn on and off. From an interview with Dread Central: Q: A common question when making a film like this; did anything weird happen during filming? JC: I thought about that when it happened, and two or three times when I was going to sleep my radio came on by itself. The only time it scared me was once because it was really loud and it was Pearl Jam's “Alive” (laughs). Laura's TV came on a couple of times. Q: At 3:00 a.m.? JC: Mine wasn't 3:00 a.m. I was born at 3:00 a.m. but it hasn't happened to me. I did check. We'll totally do an episode on Analiese one of these days Psycho Myra Jones (aka Myra Davis) was the uncredited body double/stand-in for Psycho star Janet Leigh during the making of Hitchcock's 1960 film. A handyman named Kenneth Dean Hunt, who was supposedly a Hitchcock “obsessive,” murdered her. The Conjuring Real-life ghost hunters Ed and Lorraine Warren, who aided the real-life Amityville Horror case, investigated the haunting of the Perron family home — a farmhouse plagued by generations of death, disaster, and a possessed doll. The case inspired James Wan's supernatural film, which left some audiences in the Philippines with such a fright there were priests available at screenings to bless viewers and provide counseling. On and off-set paranormal incidents — including strange claw marks on star Vera Farmiga's computer, Wan's tormented dog growling at invisible intruders, a strange wind (that apparently put Carolyn Perron in the hospital), and fire — were reported. The Innkeepers Filmed at the reportedly haunted hotel the Yankee Pedlar Inn in Torrington, Connecticut, The Innkeepers director Ti West was skeptical about the strange occurrences during the making of his movie. Still, creepy stories from the set became the focus in the press. From an interview with West: I'm a skeptic so I don't really buy it. But I've definitely seen doors close by themselves; I've seen a TV turn off and on by itself; lights would always burn out in my room. Everyone on the crew has very vivid dreams every night, which is really strange. The one story that is the most intriguing to me — In the film, the most haunted room is the Honeymoon Suite. That's where the ghost stuff started in the hotel. The only reason I picked the room that I picked to shoot in, was because it was big enough to do a dolly shot. No more thought went into it other than pure technical reasons. So when we're finishing the movie, I find out that the most haunted room in real life is the room I picked to be the haunted room in the movie. It could be a coincidence. It's weird that it happened that way. . . . [Star] Sara Paxton would wake up in the middle of the night thinking someone was in the room with her. Everyone has stories, but I was too busy saying, “Let's shoot this! We have 17 days! Atuk" "Atuk" is a movie so cursed that it never got made. The project, based on a 1963 Mordecai Richler novel about an Eskimo in New York, had four different men attached to play the lead while in development hell through the 1970s and '80s: John Belushi, Sam Kinison, John Candy, and Chris Farley. All four died shortly after entering negotiations to be in the film. Holy shit! Ok how about twilight zone the movie. The 1983 film 'Twilight Zone: The Movie' directed by John Landis and Steven Spielberg gained publicity pre-release because of the deaths of lead actor Vic Morrow and two child extras during the filming of the helicopter crash scene. The children were illegally hired to play the role in this scene, as Landis would go on to reveal in the subsequent trial. It was also prohibited to make children work after a certain hour in the evening. However, Landis insisted that the scene would have to entail a late-night setting to seem more authentic. This was the last scene in the film. It also included explosions as a helicopter flew over the village while Morrow would run across the street to save the Vietnamese children from the explosion. Testing for the scene sparked concerns when the helicopter seemed to vigorously rock at the explosion but despite this, Landis' need to capture the explosion took priority. He reportedly said, "You think that was big? You ain't seen nothing yet." At the controls of this helicopter was a Vietnam War veteran named Dorcey Wingo, who had just joined the movie business. When the cameras began filming, the pyrotechnic fireball that had been fired as part of the explosion hit the helicopter, engulfing it in flames. The helicopter then crashed into the river where the actors were standing — Morrow, 6-year-old Renee Chen, and 7-year-old Myca Dinh Le. Almost a hundred people were present when the tragedy occurred. The helicopter skidded right onto Renee, crushing her to death and when it toppled over, the main blade sliced through Morrow and Myca. Rosemary's baby is next up on the list. Over the years, the myth surrounding Roman Polanski's 1968 film Rosemary's Baby has only grown in stature. The film is based on the 1967 novel of the same name by American novelist Ira Levin. He came up with the idea for the book in 1965, drawing inspiration from his wife who was pregnant at the time, his New York apartment, and the anxiety of being a parent. The struggling writer imagined a world where there was no God and the devil was allowed to reign freely. This is evident in the iconic ending where Rosemary finds out that her husband sold her womb to Satan and that her child is the Antichrist. Levin was catapulted into the highest echelons of the literary world due to the success of his novel and a year later, a European auteur who was looking for his own Hollywood break decided to direct the film adaptation of his novel. However, not everyone was pleased with Levin's attacks on religion. He faced severe backlash from the Catholic Church for his “blasphemy” and his wife left him the year the film was released. He was never the same man again, growing increasingly paranoid over the years. Levin repeatedly had to make public statements denouncing Satanism and told Dick Cavett that he had become “terrified” as he grew older. 30 years after the release of the film, Levin came up with a sequel titled Son of Rosemary but it tanked. William Castle was the man who first recognized the potential of Levin's work and secured the rights to make a film adaptation. Best known for his work on B-grade horror films, Castle wanted to direct it initially but Paramount Pictures executive Robert Evans agreed to go ahead with the project only if Castle worked as a producer. In April of 1969, Castle was hospitalized because of severe kidney stones. He was already under a lot of stress due to the sheer volume of hate mail he received, a terrible consequence of being attached to Rosemary's Baby. In his autobiography, he claimed that he began to hallucinate scenes from the film during his surgery and even shouted, “Rosemary, for God's sake drop that knife!” Although Castle recovered, he never reached that level of success again. Producer Robert Evans was not exempt from this alleged curse either. He had risen to the top with major hits like Rosemary's Baby and The Godfather. However, he was convicted of cocaine trafficking in 1980 and got a suspended prison sentence. As a part of his plea bargain, Evans had to make an anti-drug commercial. Three years later, the producer would get caught up in the high-profile murder of Roy Radin which has come to be known as the “Cotton Club murder”. Despite two witnesses testifying that Evans was involved in the case, he was later cleared of the charges. In 1993, he told The New York Times, “I had 10 years of a horrific life, Kafkaesque. There were nights I cried myself to sleep.” This is arguably the most renowned story that is related to Rosemary's Baby. In autumn of 1968, composer Krzysztof Komeda, who worked on the film, fell off a rocky escarpment while partying and went into a four-month coma. Coincidentally, this affliction is exactly what the witches in Levin's book subject Rosemary's suspicious friend to. Komeda never came out of the coma and died in Poland the following year. John Lennon was assassinated outside The Dakota in 1980, the famous building where they filmed Rosemary's Baby. Producer Robert Evans claimed that the whole time he was on set at the apartment building he felt a “distinctly eerie feeling”. Lennon was gunned down by alleged “fan” Mark David Chapman who was influenced by Salinger's novel The Catcher in the Rye and the loneliness of protagonist Holden Caulfield. However, the fleeting association with the film has led fans of the film to link Lennon's assassination with the “curse” of the film. It can be said that the primary reason why the myth of the curse came about was the brutal murder of Polanski's wife, actress Sharon Tate. Polanski even wanted to cast Tate as Rosemary but Evans was adamant about Mia Farrow's involvement. A year after the film's release, Tate and her friends were stabbed to death by followers of cult leader Charles Manson. Tate was eight-and-a-half months pregnant at the time of her demise. The members of the Manson Family delivered around 100 stab wounds to the four victims and wrote “Helter Skelter” on the wall in blood. After his wife and unborn son were killed, Polanski indulged in substance abuse to cope with things but he ended up exemplifying human depravity. While guest editing the French edition of Vogue in 1977, the director preyed upon a 13-year old girl and persuaded her to participate in multiple photoshoots. During the second shoot at Jack Nicholson's house, he incapacitated the minor with champagne and half a Quaalude before sexually violating her multiple times. Although he was arrested for the felony and spent 42 days in jail, Polanski became a fugitive and fled to France to avoid facing charges. Since then, he has lived the life of a criminal and has avoided traveling to countries where he can be extradited back to the US. Ok, let's round things out with the wizard of oz. Despite its commercial success, The Wizard of Oz is seen by some as cursed. There were so many serious accidents onset that those Oscar-nominated special effects almost cost cast members their lives, from the two actors playing winged monkeys crashing to the ground when the wires that hoisted them up in the air broke, to the Wicked Witch of the West's stunt double Betty Danko injuring her left leg when the broomstick exploded. Buddy Ebsen was originally cast in the role of the Tin Woodman, a.k.a. the Tin Man, but he was essentially poisoned by the makeup, which was made of pure aluminum dust. Nine days after filming started he was hospitalized, sitting under an oxygen tent. When he was not getting better fast enough, the filmmakers hired Jack Haley to be the Tin Man instead. This time, instead of applying the aluminum powder, the makeup artists mixed it into a paste and painted it on him. He did develop an infection in his right eye that needed medical attention, but it ended up being treatable. Margaret Hamilton — who played the Wicked Witch of the West and was the one tipped who Harmetz off to the turmoil on set more than three decades later for her 1977 book — got burns, and the makeup artists had to rush to remove her copper makeup so that it wouldn't seep through her wounds and become toxic. Unlike Ebsen, she didn't get fired because they could live without her on the set for several more weeks. An actor playing one of the Wicked Witch of the West's soldiers accidentally jumped on top of Dorothy's Toto, Carl Spitz, the dog trainer on set, told Harmetz. The dog (a female Cairn terrier named Terry) sprained its foot, and Spitz had to get a canine double. Terry did recover and returned to the set a few weeks later. In a memoir by Judy Garland's third husband, Sid Luft, published posthumously in 2017, he writes that, after bar-hopping in Culver City, the actors who played the munchkins “would make Judy's life miserable by putting their hands under her dress.” Harmetz says it's true that the actors would go drinking near the Culver City hotel where they stayed, but she says their interactions with Garland did not rise to the level of what Luft described. “Nobody on the movie ever saw her or heard of a munchkin assaulting her,” said one worker on the film. Garland did say the drinking was annoying in an interview with talk-show host Jack Paar, but experts on Garland's life say that her rant about being scarred by the rowdy behavior on set may have been a deflection from the real damage she suffered during that time, at the hands of the studio. Garland was only 16 when she made The Wizard of Oz, and her struggles with depression and disordered eating started at an early age and continued for the rest of her life. She claimed that the studio executives gave her uppers and sleeping pills so she could keep up with the demanding pace of show business. She struggled with drug addiction and attempted suicide several times before she died of an accidental overdose on June 22, 1969, at just 47 years old. The film went through four different producers by the time it was through. Richard Thorpe, the first director, insisted that Judy Garland wear a blonde wig and thick makeup to depict Dorothy. When Buddy Epsen got sick from his Tin Man makeup and filming shut down for two weeks, the studio fired Thorpe and replaced him with George Cukor of My Fair Lady fame. Cukor encouraged Garland to wear natural makeup and play Dorothy less cartoonish and more natural. Cukor later left the film to work on Gone with the Wind instead and Viktor Fleming took his place. However, Cukor came back a few weeks later after getting fired from Gone With the Wind by Clark Gable (supposedly he was fired when Gable found out he was homosexual). Director King Vidor was responsible for most of the sepia sequences and also helped Mervyn LeRoy with editing in post-production. Not only did the public think former kindergarten teacher Margaret Hamilton was really evil following the first airing of The Wizard of Oz — she also suffered physically for the role. Hamilton received second and third-degree burns all over her body when the green copper makeup she was wearing got too hot during the fire scene. Her stunt double spent months in the hospital after a prop broom exploded — they were using a double because Hamilton got injured on an earlier take. Stage makeup and prosthetics in 1939 were nowhere near what they are today. Ray Bolger's Scarecrow makeup left deeply embedded marks in his skin that didn't disappear for more than a year after the movie wrapped up filming. Luckily, this would never happen today. How bout that hanging munchkin… Well, sorry folks. That seems to be fake. In a scene where Dorothy, the Scarecrow (Ray Bolger), and the Tin Man (Jack Haley) are skipping down the Yellow Brick Road, singing “we're off to see the wizard, the wonderful Wizard of Oz,” some think the dark, moving figure hanging from a tree in the background is an actor who hanged himself on set. More likely, it's one of the exotic birds that the filmmakers borrowed from the Los Angeles Zoo to create a wilderness setting. The rumor has been circulating since around 1989, the time of the 50th anniversary of the film's release. Alright, there you have it… Cursed movies!!! Obscure 90s horror movies you need to see https://www.ranker.com/list/obscure-1990s-horror-movies/christopher-myers

god tv american new york halloween new york city movies babies hollywood los angeles france england dreams french new york times west chinese european ohio german north carolina holy satan illinois irish alive world war ii testing wind dragon hearts hong kong sweden cleveland beyonce hamilton superman connecticut iraq independent philippines dvd poland apocalypse oz wizard injuries fights godfather castle evans burden vogue steven spielberg nest catholic church richardson crow psycho cursed antichrist vietnam war exorcist luft moody vietnamese georgetown ironically bruce lee nova scotia poltergeist hitchcock exorcism toto pearl jam omen mere wilmington francis ford coppola jack nicholson coincidence levin charles manson john wayne jesuits sweeney middle earth catcher james wan cuckoo scarecrows sampson rye satanism judy garland peck unholy fordham university morrow tcm west hollywood bernhard coppola werner herzog john candy roman polanski apocalypse now paramount pictures amityville horror mcneil william friedkin eskimos chris farley thorpe lorraine warren christopher reeve genghis khan ti west brandon lee john landis viggo mortensen landis assyrian reeve wan jason miller martin sheen john belushi sharon tate tin man david warner emily rose salinger my fair lady manson family innkeepers wicked witch perron yellow brick road gable culver city gregory peck helter skelter spitz one flew over polanski mia farrow clark gable anneliese michel vera farmiga robert evans ellen burstyn sam kinison cotton club cairn friedkin max von sydow janet leigh kafkaesque coptic bridge too far perryman dick cavett george cukor mark david chapman john richardson carol anne fitzcarraldo george reeves cursed films ira levin lord of the rings the two towers margaret hamilton holden caulfield eerily torrington tina knowles honeymoon suite vic morrow pugsley jennifer carpenter dominique dunne bermingham poltergeist iii ray bolger mundelein ommen atuk cukor roy radin von sydow tin woodman jack haley jack paar quaalude poltergeist ii the other side street studios ceco los angeles zoo mordecai richler david seltzer komeda krzysztof komeda father karras myca

S6E1 | Activating culture and ethics from the boardroom

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 6, 2021 23:54

“You've got to dive deep into the bedrock, and that starts with activating trust and zeroing in on culture, and it starts with the board.” - Dr. Marsha Ershaghi Hames Abstract: Evidence is mounting that corporate culture eats corporate strategy for breakfast. In this episode of the Principled Podcast, LRN Special Advisor David Greenberg, who is also on the board of International Seaways, is joined by Dr. Marsha Ershaghi Hames, Partner at Tapestry Networks, to talk about recent findings in their joint survey of board members from major corporations on ethics, culture, and compliance. While board members agree that activating culture and ethics from the boardroom is important, there is less clarity around how to make this happen. Listen in as Marsha and David discuss the genesis of the study and key themes that emerged from these candid conversations with corporate directors. What you'll learn in this episode: [2:03] Who is Tapestry Networks and how was this report made? [5:11] What is David's perspective on this report and why is this report so timely? [7:26] Why is ethical culture a business imperative? [9:34] Apart from trust, what were the other big themes in this report? [14:46] Why do board members struggle to make a home in ethics and compliance? [17:12] Did the chief E&C officers' views differ from others in the report? [21:22] How can this report be leveraged in the E&C community? Featured guest: Marsha is a partner with Tapestry Networks and a leader of our corporate governance practice. She advises non-executive directors, C-suite executives, and in-house counsel on issues related to governance, culture transformation, board leadership, and stakeholder engagement. Prior to joining Tapestry, Marsha was a managing director of strategy and development at LRN, Inc., a global governance, risk, and compliance firm. She specialized in the alignment of leaders and organizations for effective corporate governance and organizational culture transformation. Her view is that compliance is no longer merely a legal matter but a strategic and reputational priority. Marsha has been interviewed and cited by the media, including CNBC, CNN, Ethisphere, HR Magazine, Compliance Week, The FCPA Report, Entrepreneur.com, Chief Learning Officer, ATD Talent & Development, Corporate Counsel Magazine, the Society of Corporate Compliance and Ethics, and more. She hosted the “PRINCIPLED” Podcast, profiling the stories of some of the top transformational leaders in business. Marsha serves as an expert fellow on USC's Neely Center for Ethical Leadership and Decision Making and on the advisory boards of LMH Strategies, Inc., an integrative supply chain advisory firm, and Compliance.ai, a regulatory change management firm. Marsha holds an Ed.D. and MA from Pepperdine University. Her research was on the role of ethical leadership as an enabler of organizational culture change. Her BA is from the University of Southern California. She is a certified compliance and ethics professional. Featured Host: David serves as Chair of the Governance and Risk Assessment Committee and a member of the Audit Committee of International Seaways (NYSE: INSW), one of the largest global crude oil and petroleum tanker companies. His previous board experience (2006 to 2016) was as the independent director – and member of both the Audit and Compensation Committees --of APCO Worldwide, a private communications and government affairs consultancy and as a director (2013 to 2016) of Clean Tech Group, which creates opportunities for industrial companies to invest in innovative, clean technology. He also served for 5 years as Chairman of the Board of Trustees of The Keystone Center, a Colorado non-profit that brings together oil, chemical and pharmaceutical companies with leading NGOs to find solutions to complex public policy challenges at the federal and state levels. Mr. Greenberg is currently Managing Director of Cortina Partners LLC, a private equity firm that owns companies in the air medical, addiction treatment, bedding, textile and outdoor recreation industries and is CEO of Acqua Recovery, a residential drug and alcohol addiction center. He also advises boards and executive teams on strategy, compliance, leadership, and culture as a Special Advisor for LRN Corporation, and from 2008 through the end of 2016 was a member of LRN's Executive Committee. For 20 years prior to 2008, Mr. Greenberg served in various senior positions overseeing government affairs, corporate affairs, communications, and strategy at Altria Group, Inc. – then the parent company of Philip Morris USA, Philip Morris International, Kraft Foods and Miller Brewing – culminating in his role as Senior Vice President, Chief Compliance Officer and a member of the Executive Committee. Transcript Intro: Welcome to the Principal Podcast, brought to you by LRN. The Principal Podcast brings together the collective wisdom on ethics, business, and compliance, transformative stories of leadership, and inspiring workplace culture. Listen in to discover valuable strategies from our community of business leaders and workplace change-makers. David Greenberg: Hello, and welcome to a special episode of the Principal Podcast by LRN. This is first in a series of conversations this season about the role of the board in shaping ethical corporate culture. And we're presenting all of this in association with Tapestry Networks. I'm your host today, David Greenberg, Special Advisor at LRN and a member of the Board of International Seaways, the second largest global oil tanker company. Today I'm joined by Dr. Marsha Ershaghi Hames, partner at the management consulting firm, Tapestry Networks. We're going to be asking each other about activating culture and ethics from the boardroom, a major study we co-authored that examines boardroom oversight of culture, ethics and compliance. Created from in-depth interviews with 40 directors, occupying 80 seats at global public companies, the study is a window into how directors think about, feel about and act on culture, ethics and compliance. Today we're going to be focusing on the big themes that emerged. In later podcasts, we'll be inviting participants in the study to join us to dig deeper into the findings and implications. Marsha, thanks so much for coming on the Principal Podcast today. Marsha Ershaghi Hames: It's great to be here, David. David Greenberg: Before we dive into the results, let's talk about how activating culture and ethics from the boardroom came to be. Can you tell us about who Tapestry Networks is and how this report was created? Marsha Ershaghi Hames: Yes. Yeah. Thank you. And good afternoon, everyone. It's great to be here. And a little background, I think on Tapestry and then we'll kind of jump into the report. So Tapestry Networks' mission has been to help leaders of the most important institutions in the world do their work most effectively and with great confidence. And each year hundreds of independent directors and senior executives participate in our networks and our research initiatives, and they represent large, global organizations from North America and Europe. And our focus is to design networks, and these are across financial services, corporate governance and healthcare, to really kind of center conversations and candid dialogue from these top leaders on the pragmatic realities of leading these organizations and complex firms. And last year, while the pandemic challenged the resiliency of so many of these organizations, we were noticing that in a lot of the dialogue, it pushed leaders to surface and adopt kind of what is our broader view of risk and responsibility? And so in collaboration with LRN, and specifically, David, you and I had a number of conversations as we sort of started to explore, is there something there that we need to really unpack? The ethics culture and compliance forum came together. And we brought together directors and executives to begin exploring what is the role of values? What is the role of corporate culture and ethical decision-making in helping organizations secure long-term sustainability and viability for business? And we had a series of meetings last year. So we kind of kicked off in July, kind of at a mid point, we're a year now, and concluded at the end of last year. And when we concluded these sessions, the input from all of the participants in the dialogue was that we all kind of collectively stepped away and said, we need to go out. We need to go out and assess these current realities of board oversight of corporate culture. We need to understand from the director perspective, what is practical here? How is information being received? What is being measured? What do they need to investigate more? How do they need to build and bridge some of this dialogue? So when we kicked off 2021, our goal in collaboration with LRN was to conduct this study to glean the perspectives of sitting public company directors, and activating culture and ethics from the boardroom reveals these insights. These were confidential discussions, as David mentioned, with 40 directors representing 80 public company board seats. So fascinating, fascinating work, and looking forward to discussing it more. So, David, maybe we can actually turn to you and get started. You've been in ethics and compliance for two decades and a board member at three companies since a decade and a half ago. So what is your perspective on this report and why do you think the work that we've done here together is so timely? David Greenberg: Marsha, I think it's not only timely, it's overdue. The issue of where was the board has been an issue for the whole 20 years I've been associated with ethics and compliance. It's the first question people ask in the aftermath of a serious scandal or major corporate misconduct, where was the board of directors? And the truth is, that's a question that chief ethics and compliance officers and their teams can't always answer. [crosstalk 00:05:49] ... are obviously a huge force in the conduct and culture of a company. But what directors say, do and influence from the boardroom is often a bit of a black box to the ethics and compliance community, even within the same company. So boards are really fairly new at this. Even though ethics and compliance has been around for 20 years, it comes on top of so many other things that boards have to do. And so many processes, and procedures and structures at the board level that are already well-ingrained, it's hard to add these new topics, even as important as this one is. And we know from the perspective of CECOs, how they feel about boards and board oversight, because we've been talking to them for 20 years. But also, LRN did a study of this a couple of years ago, talking to 25 chief ethics and compliance officers from global companies, again, off the record with no one being quoted. And the results were that CECOs are really disappointed in the amount of time, priority, resources, focus and strategy they get from the board. They're asking for more. And I think we're seeing in this study, that boards are also asking themselves for more. So Marsha, let me turn it back to you and ask, in the report we say ethical culture is a business imperative. Why do we say that? Marsha Ershaghi Hames: Yeah. So there's no question, as you sort of point to, that boards play a significant role in shaping the conduct and the culture of a company. Every time there is a lapse or a scandal, as you mentioned, the number one headline or question is where was the board? However, I'd like to call out that an interesting kind of component that surfaced throughout our conversations was the importance of extending trust, and the currency of trust and where that plays in this notion of building business. So trust is hands down one of the most valuable assets a company can cultivate. Within an organization, trust can percolate into culture. And outside an organization, it translates into loyalty. And we've seen this play out with countless examples, even most acutely during the pandemic. And we've seen how the erosion of trust can impact business, and confidence and consumer loyalty, and how deep trust and consistency of trust can build communities and can help sustain business. So a trust-based culture is an ethical culture, and this is the business imperative that was evident and it was coming through threads of conversations that board members really hallmark they care deeply about this. And it's not just that the directors care about this and that the executives care about this, but investors are demanding ethical cultures. They want to see businesses that are investing in trust-based ethical cultures. But it's important to get the foundation right. And I think this is where we're going to dig deeper too in this study, you've got to dive deep into the bedrock, and that starts with activating trust and zeroing in on culture, and it starts with the board. David Greenberg: So Marsha, you talked a lot about trust, but I'd also like you to talk a little bit about the other big themes that came out of this study of the points of view of 40 directors of some of the biggest companies in the world. So what were some of those other themes? Marsha Ershaghi Hames: Yeah. Yeah. So, first of all, I mean, a big kind of, I would say macro theme was the importance of embedding practices around ethics and compliance programs into all segments of the business. So culture change tends to be catalyzed by having a very clear and ethics and compliance strategy. And one big theme was that ethics and compliance doesn't have a home. And I think we're going to try to get into that a little bit later. But without sort of finding a home for it, where does it sit? Who oversees it? We're not really focusing on assessing, measuring, keeping a pulse on it. And that kind of reveals theme number one, which would be measurement. So measuring, what are we measuring? Are directors really positioned to even interpret the metrics and the data that is sort of emerging from what chief ethics compliance officers, and CHROs and other kinds of stakeholders are presenting to the board. Is the board's view sometimes refracted through this management filter? So some of that we're going to unpack a little bit more over the course of actually our upcoming summit. A second big kind of theme was oversight. So lots of conversations around structures and processes, and this is a challenge. So one of the questions that emerged was how can boards really ensure there's adequate time and space being sort of devoted to focus on culture, ethics and compliance matters? Several directors had examples of committees, subcommittees that have been formed around which committees might or should have ownership. Is culture a committee issue or a full board matter? Several raised questions around how necessary it is to consider bringing in someone with a background with a chief ethics and compliance officer background or equivalent, with that kind of expertise onto that board, would that sort of change the dimensions of the types of questions being asked and the types of challenges being investigated? Another big theme was accountability. So again, several directors discuss the importance of building better bridges with management and to engage more directly with management on matters of culture. There were several directors who've mentioned that there's a lot of reports on activities, so they're looking at all these different metrics, but one, I think very in particular highlighted the need for directors to be able to sit back and look for key signals. There's a lot of noise, a lot of activities, but what is the true narrative that we're seeing here? How do we sort of interpret that? And who and what function is really accountable? So I would sort of summarize the four themes as it all starts and ends with trust, however measurement continues to be a challenge, oversight, instructors, and processes and accountability. So, when we were having these conversations, directors continue to sort of pound the table to reaffirm that the words of one that's a corporate culture eats corporate strategy for breakfast. And something that I found really compelling during these 40 interviews was how directors pounded the table to reaffirm that in the words of one, corporate culture eats corporate strategy for breakfast. And this really underscores LRN's long held view, that compliance is principally an outcome of values-based ethical cultures and not a driver of them. What did you think about this consensus from directors in the study? David Greenberg: Marsha, to me that's the absolute bedrock foundation of everything that needs to happen now. It's really fantastic that the directors almost to a woman and man get the idea that if we're going to get the outcomes we want, we've got to get culture right. But as you said in discussing the themes about trust, and accountability and measurement, beyond the consensus of culture really matters, directors are still unclear on the path forward. And in fact, sometimes they even fail to make a connection between ethics, and compliance and culture. By that, I mean, we had a few comments from directors that culture's really hard, compliance is much more straightforward, but the truth is doing the right thing in a company or in any organization is really a complex set of interactions that is very hard to get right. So I think it's why it's important that we continue this conversation and continue the exploration, because I think we learned that director's hearts are in the right place, but some of the mechanisms to take that feeling forward still need a lot of work. Marsha, we talked about the idea of board members struggling with ethics and compliance finding a home. What did you make out of that? You mentioned it before, but drill down a little bit Marsha Ershaghi Hames: Yeah. Yeah. And I think that this theme came up in a number of different segments of conversations, and it really comes down to creating a focus. So creating a board focus gives ethics culture and compliance a true home. And without a home, there is no oversight, or responsibility, or regular pulse on that strategy. There's no regular check on what's the progress? Are we moving forward? Have we stalled? Who are the stakeholders we need to bring into the conversation? How do we assess and measure the data that's presented to us? So without a home, these conversations are not happening. And as you and I know, last couple decades, what gets measured gets done, what gets measured gets the attention. So without a true home, there's no way to have the accountability and the standing anchor for directors to sort of watch, and assess and to challenge management, ask the right questions. How is the program being designed? Are we capturing the right metrics? Are we able to link these data points into the narrative that gives us a pulse on culture? Now, we had some mixed responses from directors in terms of where this should truly sit. And a few directors, as I mentioned earlier, mentioned that within their organizations, they've designed and developed some subcommittees. Now we know that there are some components sometimes, let's say compliance of risk may be under audit, or there may be a subcommittee to audit. Certainly as a number of directors pointed to some of the survey in HR and people workforce data being presented in comp committees. However, there were, I would say across the board, directors were saying that culture is a full board matter and it comes up at the full board, but it needs to have a more focused home. And I think this is where a nice springboard to the types of conversations we're going to have over the next few weeks, where we sort of learn from each other and directors will share how they are approaching this, how they are thinking about this and the need to really find a true home for ethics and compliance. David Greenberg: Thanks, Marsha. Another really interesting aspect of this study is that 10 out of those 40 board members either are or were chief ethics and compliance officers in their executive lives. Did their views differ from the others? Marsha Ershaghi Hames: Yeah. Well, they essentially brought a stronger, more grounded view that carried greater emphasis. One of the CECOs said that essentially you bring a current credibility on the subject to the board. So it makes it very clear to the CEO and it makes it very clear to the board that I understand how these priorities live, unlock and reveal themselves. And they emphasized certain pragmatic steps in our conversation. So one of the areas of emphasis from CECOs that contributed to this study, CECOs that are former CECOs or current CECOs who sit on boards, is that it's important to link and incentivize culture. So finding strategies or examples that they had shared around linking ethical outcomes to compensation is important to at least put on the board and start to have a conversation around. Another area that they really emphasized was it was very critical for the board to have deliberate dialogue around culture that's grounded in metrics. So start identifying what needs to be measured. How do we sort of find the examples and hallmarks of metrics and data that would be representative collectively of culture? Also, they emphasize thirdly, that organizations can't play culture, they need to do culture. So there needs to be a responsibility to stop talking about it, but to start creating and building a strategy. Going back to our conversation on, we need to find a home for this, we need to bring in the right stakeholders to challenge, and ask the questions and start to build a plan. And then lastly, this sort of resulted in the importance of giving a culture a home at the board. But I'm curious, you are a former chief ethics and compliance officer. You also have served on a number of boards. What do you think are the key stake aways from this report, both for chief ethics and compliance officers, and for the teams and staff that they're building within their organization? David Greenberg: I think the report says a few things loud and clear, and I think I could sum it up by saying it is an endorsement of the view that ethics and compliance has to be strategic. It has to be values-based. It has to focus on creating cultures, not on creating rules, procedures and programs. Ethics and compliance has got to go deep into the drivers of both misconduct and the kind of behavior that we want to inset. Ethics and compliance and the CECOs who drive it have to help companies, and their boards and their teams find metrics that really allow for tracking and improving culture. Must focus on core issues, like trust, fear, organizational justice, willingness to speak out, willingness to listen and hear. So one way I've characterized this is, CECOs and their teams have to play big, not little. It's time to have a clear strategy that encompasses how to build and maintain an ethical culture. It's time to move away from reporting on activities, to having a discussion with their boards about the culture drivers of misconduct, having a narrative about what's happening in the company, why and what needs to happen to change it, having a new set of metrics that measure what matters, like trust, fear, justice, and how to knock down the barriers to what we call a true speak-up culture. And it's time to find a way to strengthen their relationships with their boards inside and outside of board and committee meetings. That's what I'd say, if I were a CECO still, I'd be taking away from this, Marsha. Marsha Ershaghi Hames: And then David, then how do you think our colleagues in the compliance and ethics industry could use or leverage this report in bridging and building conversations with their own peers, senior executives and their board members? David Greenberg: Well, I mean, I think CECOs need to start a deeper conversation with management and with boards on issues like board training, board reporting, the board relationship with ethics and compliance. They've got to find a way to elevate. They have to find a way to kickstart a stronger relationship with members of boards and members of the key committees. They have to have a discussion with directors about, are we doing the right kind of training? Are we doing the right kind of reporting? Do we have the right metrics? What does good oversight look like? Do we have a real culture strategy as it applies to doing the right thing? Do we have the right structure? What's our relationship, both inside the boardroom and outside the boardroom, and how do we strengthen it? How do we find the themes, narratives and trends and talk about them and not talk about activities? I can tell you as a board member, there's no other function, or no business unit, or no executive who simply stands up and talks about activities. And that's been the tradition of ethics and compliance. We've got to shift the focus to outcomes, not to activities. Marsha Ershaghi Hames: I couldn't agree more. And I think this report really points to a lot of that. So fascinating, fascinating. David Greenberg: Marsha, I think this is a conversation we could have all day and we will continue this conversation in future podcasts. But we're out of time here today. So my name is David Greenberg. My guest has been Dr. Marsha Ershaghi Hames from Tapestry Networks. And I want to thank you and everyone for joining us on the Principal Podcast by LRN. Outro: We hope you enjoyed this episode. The Principal Podcast is brought to you by LRN. At LRN, our mission is to inspire principled performance in global organizations, by helping them foster winning ethical cultures rooted in sustainable values. Please visit us at lrn.com to learn more. And if you enjoyed this episode, subscribe to our podcast on Apple Podcasts, Stitcher, Google Podcasts, or wherever you listen. And don't forget to leave us a review.

Episode 263 – the Domestic Corruption edition

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 30, 2021 36:57

As the Tokyo Olympics continue and FirstEnergy settles one of the largest domestic corruption cases ever, Tom and Jay are back to take a look at this week's stories top compliance and ethics stories which caught their interest on This Week in FCPA in the Domestic Corruption edition. Stories The First Energy domestic corruption scandal. Rick Messick in GAB. Matt Kelly in Radical Compliance. Obstacles to compliance training. Dick Cassin in the FCPA Blog. Should companies go into space? Mike Volkov says no in Corruption, Crime and Compliance. Is your compliance relationship with HR unleavened? Then leaven it, says Amy Dufrane in CCI. Can the Olympics be saved? Perhaps from the corruption angle. Andy Spalding in the FCPA Blog. What's it like to be a whistleblower? Aaron Nicodemus with a 5-part series in Compliance Week (sub req'd). Aaron discusses the series on this edition of From the Editor's Desk. (No Sub Req'd) What happens when a CCO acts like a GC? They ‘step in it' says Matt Kelly in Radical Compliance. Are you afraid of your own shadow? Michael Rasmussen says you might well should be in Navex Global's Risk and Compliance Matters. If you step in it, RAC it. Ngozi Okeh in PracticalESG. Boards and Corporate Strategies in the post-pandemic world. Wachtell, Lipton lawyers in the Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance. Podcasts and Events Jonathan Keller reviews the evolution of healthcare compliance in this episode of The Compliance Handbook. Scott Moritz turns the tables on Tom by interviewing him about his recently released book The Compliance Handbook, 2nd edition on this week's edition of Fraud Eats Strategy. On The Compliance Life, in July I visited with Asha Palmer, CECO at Convercent. In Episode 1, from Claire Huxable to the DOJ. In Episode 2, ‘What do you think about Abu Dhabi?' In Episode 3, she moves into compliance consulting and is surprised with what she observed. In Episode 4, Asha talks about moving into the CECO role and beyond. How do the Greek Cleomenes and the Roman Giaus Graccus inform compliance leadership today? Find out as Tom and Richard Lummis continue their exploration of Plutarch's Lives in this episode of 12 O'Clock High, a podcast on business leadership. In Integrity Through Compliance, Episode 14, Joe Miller Returns to Discuss Anticipated Antitrust Enforcement Trends in the Biden Administration. The Compliance Handbook, 2nd edition is released. Learn about it here. Purchase it here. Tom Fox is the Voice of Compliance and can be reached at tfox@tfoxlaw.com. Jay Rosen is Mr. Monitor and can be reached at jrosen@affiliatedmonitors.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

voice olympic games podcasts crime corruption obstacles compliance lives domestic boards biden administration monitor abu dhabi doj tokyo olympics desk asha cco gc corporate governance lipton corporate strategy rac plutarch matt kelly fcpa tom fox firstenergy jay rosen michael rasmussen wachtell o'clock high ceco convercent navex global mike volkov scott moritz

Asha Palmer-Into the Chair and Beyond

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 27, 2021 17:39

asha cco chief compliance officers ccos ceco convercent

Episode 262 – the No Fans Olympics edition

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 23, 2021 42:47

As the Tokyo Olympics stumble out of the gate and Tom returns to the wilds of the Texas Hill Country, he and Jay are back to take a look at this week's stories top compliance and ethics stories which caught their interest on This Week in FCPA in the No Fan Olympics edition. Stories Why co-creation is key to design thinking in compliance. Carsten Tams continues his 5-part series on LinkedIn. Check out Tams Part 1 and Part 2 of his great 5-part series. What's going on with ESG in Europe. Vera Cherepanova in the FCPA Blog. What is social risk? Lawrence Heim in com. What's the current job market for compliance professionals? Matt Kelly in Radical Compliance. SFO secures two DPAs. Neil Hodge in Compliance Week (sub req'd) Responding to parallel investigations. Nicole Sprinzen and Catherine Yun in CCI. Auditing of SPACs. Francine McKenna takes a deep dive on The Dig. (Sub Req'd) EU Whistleblower Initiative? Keith Taylor in Navex Global's Risk and Compliance Matters. FTC signals more aggressive enforcement. Alexander Paul Okuliar and David J. Shaw NYU's Compliance and Enforcement The Enactment of Purpose Initiative. Wachtell, Lipton lawyers in the Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance. Podcasts and Events In a sponsored 6-part podcast series Tom visits with folks from Exiger on its ground-breaking TP&SCRM framework, the TRADES Framework. Part 1-Transparency; Part 2-Risk Mitigation; Part 3-Assessing Risk; Part 4-Determining Mitigations; Part 5-Evaluating Uplift; Part 6, Supplier Monitoring. Tom and Megan Dougherty conclude their series on Loki, in Episode 6, For All Time. Always. They review the concluding episode of Season 1, look back over the entire series, review it in the context of the MCU series WandaVision and the Winter Soldier and Falcon and where the MCMultiverse may be headed. A new month on The Compliance Life! In July I visit with Asha Palmer, CECO at Convercent. In Episode 1, from Claire Huxable to the DOJ. In Episode 2, ‘What do you think about Abu Dhabi?' In Episode 3, she moves into compliance consulting and is surprised with what she observed. Are you a #GWICee? If you are not you should be. Join the co-hosts Lisa Fine and Mary Shirley for their fan fav lightening-round of listener submitted questions in this episode of Great Women in Compliance. What is the budget process for a corp compliance function? Kortney Nordrum lays it out for your in this episode of Survive and Thrive. Check out the video version on YouTube. The Compliance Handbook, 2nd edition is released. Learn about it here. Purchase it here. Tom Fox is the Voice of Compliance and can be reached at tfox@tfoxlaw.com. Jay Rosen is Mr. Monitor and can be reached at jrosen@affiliatedmonitors.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

europe voice olympic games podcasts survive thrive mcu responding transparency falcon loki wandavision compliance esg winter soldier monitor abu dhabi doj tokyo olympics ftc tp auditing spacs corporate governance lipton david j risk mitigation texas hill country sfo matt kelly fcpa tom fox assessing risk jay rosen keith taylor wachtell exiger ceco dpas scrm convercent mary shirley lisa fine navex global

Asha Palmer - Consulting in Compliance

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 20, 2021 16:33

consulting compliance asha cco chief compliance officers ccos ceco convercent

CECO | El arte de la libre competencia y sus barandas

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 19, 2021 38:11

Mario Ybar es uno de los arquitectos de la libre competencia en Chile. Trabajó por alrededor de 15 años en la FNE -con una interrupción de un año por sus estudios de máster en UCL, Inglaterra-, y puedo dar fe de que Mario lideró la instauración del exitoso sistema de notificaciones de operaciones de concentración y de los estudios de mercado. Acá Mario, ahora como counsel en Garrigues, nos abre su mente, y con su característico estilo profundo, honesto y claro, se permite instar por una mirada integral y de ordenación económica de nuestra institucionalidad -menos tecnocrática y más adaptativa-, con una mejor interfaz y conexión con la democracia. De paso, nos da consejo y nos muestra las limitaciones y desafíos que deben enfrentar las autoridades en las resoluciones de cada caso. También se da el tiempo para advertirnos del duro camino que se nos viene bajo la economía digital. ¡Lo van a disfrutar!

tambi chile inglaterra el arte ucl competencia trabaj la libre garrigues ceco

Episode 261 - the Live from Portland edition

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 16, 2021 43:14

As Tom records from an undisclosed location, he and Jay are back to take a look at this week's stories top compliance and ethics stories which caught their interest on This Week in FCPA in the Live from Portland edition. Stories Tom takes up the call for Design Thinking to be used in compliance. Part 1-the steps in design thinking. Part 2-using design thinking to operationalize compliance. Part 3-into your compliance program. I screen, You screen, We all screen (but not for ice cream). Szilvia Andriasik in the FCPA Blog. The pandemic redefined the role of the GC. Did it do the same for the CCO. Abbott Martin and Rosie Griffin in How to train managers in COI. Jeff Kaplan in COI Blog. The Bribery Act at 10. Neil Hodge in Compliance Week (sub req'd) Expanding your DD horizons for ESG. Alek Chance In Navex Global's Risk and Compliance Matters. Upgrading your compliance program in 5 steps. Joe Murphy in Compliance Week (Sub Req'd) Is your training sticky? Gio Gallo in CCI. Using data analytics to uncover anomalies. Jessica Ellsworth in CCI. Internally communicating about cyber security issues. Davis Polk lawyers in the Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance. Podcasts and Events Career Can Do, the latest edition to the Compliance Podcast Network, premiers this week. Recruiting guru Mary Ann Faremouth discusses all facets of the hiring process. In Episode 1, she interviews Jessica Levine. In Integrity Through Compliance, AMI's Dionne Lomaxspeaks with Joe Miller, the co-chair of Mintz Levin's antitrust practice. They focus on recent developments in antitrust compliance — specifically, compliance with government consent decrees and what might be occurring behind the scenes at federal enforcement agencies once a company has settled antitrust charges. This week on Greetings and Felicitations, Tom is joined by Ben Locwin to look at some of the science behind Star Trek, the Original Series. Mirror Mirror and Transporters, Where No Man Has Gone Before and Phasers; The Naked Time and Warp Drive; Tomorrow is Yesterday and Black Holes, White Holes, and Wormholes; and Journey to Babel and the Medicine of TOS. A new month on The Compliance Life! In July I visit with Asha Palmer, CECO at Convercent. In Episode 1, from Claire Huxable to the DOJ. In Episode 2, ‘What do you think about Abu Dhabi?' The tables are turned on Tom by the Brothers Gallo and Jason Mefford as they interview him for their respective pods. Nick and Gio on The Ethics Experts. Jason on Jamming with Jason. The Compliance Handbook, 2nd edition is released. Learn about it here. Purchase it here. Tom Fox is the Voice of Compliance and can be reached at tfox@tfoxlaw.com. Jay Rosen is Mr. Monitor and can be reached at jrosen@affiliatedmonitors.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

live voice podcasts medicine portland star trek expanding recruiting compliance esg babel d d monitor abu dhabi doj black holes design thinking upgrading cco gc gio internally tos wormholes corporate governance original series coi jeff kaplan warp drive fcpa tom fox joe murphy phasers transporters jay rosen davis polk compliance podcast network ceco mintz levin felicitations bribery act convercent jason mefford ben locwin

Asha Palmer-What do you think about Abu Dhabi?

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 13, 2021 18:38

coca cola ip abu dhabi asha cco business ethics chief compliance officers sovereign wealth funds ccos ceco convercent

Episode 260 – the Compliance Handbook, 2nd edition

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 9, 2021 42:49

As Tom celebrates the release of The Compliance Handbook, 2nd edition, he and Jay are back to take a look at this week's stories top compliance and ethics stories which caught their interest on This Week in FCPA in the Trump Organization Indicted edition. Stories The Compliance Handbook, 2nd edition is released. Learn about it here. Purchase it here. Four ways to update you ABC compliance program right now. Ann-Maire Zell in the FCPA Blog. John Wood Group DPA with SFO. Tom has a 2-part series on the FCPA Compliance Report. Part 1-deplorable conduct and Part 2-lessons learned. Alex Cotoia takes a deep dive into the EU Whistleblower Directive in a 4-part series. On Compliance Crime and Corruption. Emerging trends in 3rd Party Risk Management. Jaclyn Jaeger in Compliance Week (sub req'd) Mengqi Sun interviews Sherron Watkins in the WSJ Risk and Compliance Journal. Anti-trust concerns at the Board level. Elizabeth Ising, Stephen Weissman, Cassandra Tillinghast and Chris Wilson in NYU Compliance and Enforcement Blog. How to avoid buying a FCPA issue. Valerie Charles, Jamen Tyler and Robert Johnston in CCI. Compliance on the inside v. outside. Amy Landry in CCI. Compliance officers are disciplinarians (at times). Dick Cassin in the FCPA Blog. Podcasts and Events How does history inform compliance? What are the leadership lessons from ancient Greeks and Romans? Find out in this special 10 part podcast series on famous Greeks and Romans from Plutarch's Lives this week on 12 O'Clock High, a podcast on business leadership, hosted by Richard Lummis and Tom Fox. In Episode 5, they mined Plutarch about the lives of and leadership lessons from the Greek Epaminondas and the Roman Scipio Africanus. A new month on The Compliance Life! In July I visit with Asha Palmer, CECO at Convercent. In Episode 1, from Claire Huxable to the DOJ. Tom premiers a new podcast, Greetings and Felicitations. In the inaugural episode, CPN fan fav Dr. Ben Locwin is back to discuss the current state of the Covid-19 pandemic and where we might be headed. Trekking Through Compliance Returns! Tom reviews all 79 episodes of Star Trek, the Original Series beginning June 1. Each day at 3 PM on the Compliance Podcast Network. This week's offerings included The Apple, The Doomsday Machine, Catspaw, I, Mudd and Metamorphosis. On July 13, join K2 Integrity for its Virtual Compliance Conference on Environment, Social, and Governance Compliance Risks for Financial Institutions. Information and Registration here. Join Tom, Asha Palmer and Stephen Martin for a coming out webinar for The Compliance Handbook, 2nd We will focus on 3rd party risk management. Attendees will receive a special article and offer. Best of all, it's at no charge. Details and registration here. Tom Fox is the Voice of Compliance and can be reached at tfox@tfoxlaw.com. Jay Rosen is Mr. Monitor and can be reached at jrosen@affiliatedmonitors.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

covid-19 social voice podcasts board romans greek abc environment star trek corruption emerging compliance lives handbook monitor doj attendees financial institutions original series mudd chris wilson plutarch sfo fcpa cpn tom fox jay rosen stephen martin o'clock high compliance podcast network ceco robert johnston felicitations convercent k2 integrity ben locwin

Asha Palmer-From Claire Huxtable to the DOJ

Learn Italian with LearnAmo - Impariamo l'italiano insieme!

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 6, 2021 20:50

university nyu asha cco cosby show chief compliance officers northern district spelman ccos claire huxtable ceco convercent

General Counsels – Proving Themselves Worthy - John Gilmore and Admiral (Ret.) A.B. Cruz III of BarkerGilmore with Host Richard Levick of LEVICK

In House Warrior

Play Episode Listen Later Apr 30, 2021 39:22

General Counsels – Proving Themselves Worthy: John Gilmore, co-founder and Managing Partner of BarkerGilmore and Admiral (Ret.) A.B. Cruz III, a Senior Advisor and former CLO, GC, CECO, CRO and Corporate Secretary joins host Richard Levick of LEVICK to discuss what makes a great general counsel, how best to interview for the job and how GCs are emerging from Covid tested and ready for even greater leadership roles.

covid-19 worthy managing partners proving senior advisor cro general counsel admiral gc gcs corporate secretary levick john gilmore ceco richard levick

Giovanni Catelli "Parigi, e un padre"

il posto delle parole

Play Episode Listen Later Feb 9, 2021 21:21

Giovanni Catelli"Parigi, e un padre"In Schibbloteth Edizionihttps://www.inschibbolethedizioni.com/«La città era una trama di luoghi fatali, di corrispondenze con la memoria, un reticolo prodigioso in cui ritrovare, già nella potenza dei nomi, delle piazze, delle vie, il solco tenace del proprio passato, l'impronta definitiva di una vita più forte, gli archetipi profondi dell'esistere, da cui non separarsi mai». Una Parigi lontana, quasi irreale nella sua metafisica bellezza. Un viaggio della memoria sulle tracce di un'ombra tanto ingombrante quanto sfuggente. Un padre in fuga nella Ville Lumière dei primi anni Cinquanta. Un figlio che lo insegue attraverso il labirinto dei ricordi, nelle vie di una Parigi popolare e anarchica, dove benessere e povertà coesistevano in pieno centro, non ancora trasformato in un salotto per turisti. Una lotta contro la rapina del tempo, per ricomprendere il proprio passato.Giovanni Catelli è nato a Cremona. Autore di prosa e poesia, i suoi racconti sono apparsi sul sito letterario Nazioneindiana, sulla Nouvelle Revue Francaise, sul Corriere della Sera e sulle riviste L'Indice, Diario, L'Immaginazione. I suoi libri sinora pubblicati sono: In fondo alla notte (Solfanelli, 1992), Partenze (Solfanelli, 1994), Geografie (Manni, 1998), Lontananze (Manni, 2003), Treni (Manni, 2008). Geografie, con una prefazione di Franco Loi, è stato tradotto in Ceco, Russo e Ucraino. Altri racconti sono stati tradotti e pubblicati in Ceco, Slovacco, Russo e Finlandese. Collabora con l'Indice dei Libri, la rivista praghese Babylon e dirige Cafè Golem, la pagina culturale di Eastjournal.net.IL POSTO DELLE PAROLEascoltare fa pensarehttps://ilpostodelleparole.it/

nostalgia babylon padre russo sera diario libri altri parigi corriere ricordi autore cremona geografie cinquanta collabora anarchia ucraino ville lumi ceco

Parole OMOFONE, OMONIME e POLISEMICHE in italiano: non confonderti!

Play Episode Listen Later Feb 7, 2021 12:57

In italiano ci sono moltissime parole che si assomigliano in tutto e per tutto (apparentemente), ma che hanno significati leggermente o completamente diversi. In questa lezione cercherò di spiegarle al meglio una volta per tutte così che possiate non confonderle più. Omofonia, Omonimia e Polisemia in italiano: differenze Innanzitutto è importante introdurre velocemente alcuni concetti che ci aiuteranno a capire meglio la differenza tra le diverse categorie di parole di cui parleremo nel video. Si dice che due parole sono OMOGRAFE quando si scrivono nello stesso identico modo, anche se hanno significati differenti. Due parole sono invece OMOFONE quando si pronunciano nello stesso modo. In italiano quasi tutte le parole omofone, ovvero che si leggono nello stesso modo, sono anche omografe, ovvero si scrivono nello stesso modo. SI VEDE MA NON SI SENTE Ci sono pochissime eccezioni a questa regola, e questo perché il sistema grafico dell'italiano è di tipo fonetico, ovvero ci sono pochissimi casi di differenza tra grafia e pronuncia. In particolare, questa differenza avviene spesso quando c'è la lettera H, che in italiano si scrive ma non si pronuncia: è il caso delle parole… ANNO (sost.) vs. HANNO (voce del verbo avere) AI (prep. articolata) vs. HAI (voce del verbo avere) CIECO (agg.; “non vedente”) vs. CECO (agg.; “della Repubblica Ceca”) DÌ (sost.; “giorno”) vs. DI (preposizione) vs. DI' (voce del verbo dire, imperativo) DÀ (voce del verbo dare, indicativo presente) vs. DA (preposizione) GLI OMONIMI TOTALI Al di là queste poche eccezioni, tuttavia, la lingua italiana possiede anche alcuni OMONIMI TOTALI, ovvero parole sia omografe che omofone, quindi del tutto identiche, ma con significati completamente diversi e che non hanno nulla a che fare l'uno con l'altro. Ad esempio: SALE (sost. che indica il minerale) vs. SALE (voce del verbo salire, indic. pres.) FACCIA (congiuntivo pres. del verbo fare) vs. FACCIA (sost. che indica il volto) PARTE (voce del verbo partire, indic. pres.) vs. PARTE (sost. che indica ciascuno degli elementi in cui un intero è diviso) CREDENZA (sost. “opinione”) vs. CREDENZA (sost. che indica un tipo di mobile) FINE (sost.; “termine, scopo”) vs. FINE (agg.; “sottile, raffinato”) RISO (sost. che indica l'atto del ridere) vs. RISO (sost. che indica il cereale o la pianta) BORSA (sost. che indica un sacchetto o contenitore) vs. BORSA (sost. che indica il luogo dove si contrattano titoli azionari) MIGLIO (sost.; unità di misura) vs. MIGLIO (sost. che indica il cereale) COSTA (sost.; elemento geografico) vs. COSTA (voce del verbo costare) DAI (preposizione articolata) vs. DAI (voce del verbo dare, indic. pres.) SALUTARE (agg.; “che fa bene alla salute”) vs. SALUTARE (infinito del verbo salutare) E così via. PAROLE POLISEMICHE Ma c'è ancora un'altra categoria di parole che dobbiamo prendere in considerazione, e cioè le parole POLISEMICHE. Letteralmente, “con più significati”: si ha quindi una stessa parola che può assumere diversi significati a seconda del contesto in cui viene usata. La differenza rispetto agli omonimi totali è che in questo caso la parola è la stessa, ed ha una sola origine comune, mentre gli omonimi totali sono parole diverse, con origini diverse e che non hanno nulla a che fare l'una con l'altra. Ad esempio, la parola BATTERIA può assumere diversi significati a seconda del contesto, ed è quindi una parola polisemica. Vediamo se riuscite a dedurre il significato dal contesto in queste frasi: In TV stanno pubblicizzando una nuova batteria di pentole. Mio cugino suona la batteria in una band. Il mio telefono ha la batteria. Altre parole polisemiche sono: ALA, che può indicare l'ala di un uccello oppure l'ala dell'aereo; RETE, che può indicare un intreccio di fili oppure un canale televisivo o ancora internet; DADO, che può indicare il dado da gioco oppure il dado per fare il brodo; ...

ai sale costa parole hai italiano anno dado dai mio ala hanno altre rete vediamo riso borsa faccia in tv batteria cieco letteralmente salutare miglio ceco credenza

CECO | La búsqueda del sentido común y la confianza en el derecho

Environmentality. with Brendon Anthony

Play Episode Listen Later Nov 25, 2020 37:34

Soledad Krause es una abogada con amplios intereses en el fenómeno jurídico y en el ser humano. Con un doctorado en derecho penal, un máster en argumentación jurídica y otro en filosofía, múltiples publicaciones y actividades académicas, esta ex socia de Claro y Cía. logra explicar en fácil lo complejo, sin perderse en los detalles nimios, desentrañando lo que está detrás de la parafernalia legal. Acá reiniciamos nuestras conversaciones de Podcast, interrumpidas por el maldito virus, en nuestro estudio de grabación UAI de Peñalolén, en una mañana veraniega. Con la excusa de reflexionar sobre las autoridades de competencia, la Corte Suprema y el DL 211, hablamos con Soledad sobre la flexibilidad del derecho, las limitantes del formato del litigio, la necesidad de ser concisos -pero precisos y consistentes en los argumentos y fundamentos-, de recuperar el sentido común y de la importancia de las confianzas.

pe ac claro dl soledad la confianza el derecho corte suprema sentido com uai ceco

Michael Levin and Eric Hinton on the General Compliance/Hot Topics Track at the 2020 Compliance & Ethics Institute [Podcast]

Compliance Perspectives

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 25, 2020 15:58

Post By: Adam Turteltaub NOTE: This podcast was recorded prior to the conversion of the Compliance & Ethics Institute to a virtual program. Some of the sessions and their tracks may have changed. Be sure to visit the website to see the latest agenda. Selecting sessions for the General Compliance/Hot Topics track at the Compliance & Ethics Institute is a tough job, since there are so may more sessions proposed than there is space for. This year Michael Levin, Vice President Compliance & Ethics, Freddie Mac and Eric Hinton, Director, Rowling Center for Business Law & Leadership at Southern Methodist University (and former CECO at 7-11) joined me in taking on that task. In this podcast they share some of the wide range of sessions that made the cut, including: Building Best-in-Class Compliance Programs in Small Organizations Change Management: Transforming a Long-Established Compliance Program Unconscious Bias, Cognitive Errors, and the Compliance Professional Keep Calm, Eat Chocolate, and Never Let Them See You Sweat Building an Effective Policy Management and Governance Program with Intentionality Return on Investment or Really Obscure Idea? Demonstrating the Value of Compliance to the Board, Executive Management, Employees and Every Other Stakeholder in Your Organization Listen in as we review these sessions and more, as well as what’s going on in compliance, including effectively managing through the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic. It is changing everything from training to risk profiles.

News Briefing - Week of August 24, 2020

Play Episode Play 15 sec Highlight Listen Later Aug 24, 2020 12:07

Three Stories this week:1. New studies have embarked to assess the impact of the "Anthropause," the reduction of human activity due to COVID-19, on wildlife 2. The Trump Admin has approved an oil-leasing plan in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Oil 3. Eggs from the last two remaining female Northern White Rhinos (NWR) have been harvested to be fertilized with saved semen from the deceased, last, male NWR, in attempt to save this subspecies from extinction.Sources:https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/08/pandemic-stilled-human-activity-what-did-anthropause-mean-wildlife https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/aug/17/trump-alaska-arctic-wildlife-refuge-drilling https://www.instagram.com/p/CEC8KxUDjJg/?igshid=k20b42dl1er4 https://www.instagram.com/p/CEKfIQvHwh6/?igshid=153e1ps89ubaj https://www.instagram.com/p/CECo-s_B2LG/?igshid=7uwgeppgmkuy Sign the Petition Here to Stop Oil Drilling in ANWR: https://www.change.org/p/no-drilling-in-the-arctic-national-wildlife-refuge/psf/share?source_location=combo_psf&psf_variant=combo&share_intent=1&share_abi=1

covid-19 eggs oil trump admin three stories arctic national wildlife refuge news briefing anwr nwr ceco

A Conversation with Convercent and StoneTurn: Michele Edwards on Creating an Inventory of Metrics

Innovation in Compliance with Tom Fox

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 12, 2020 18:08

Welcome to a special five-part podcast series, A Conversation with Convercent and StoneTurn: From the Code of Conduct to Risk Assessment to Continuous Improvement. This week’s podcast series is jointly sponsored by Convercent and StoneTurn Group. Over the course of the series we will explore the impacts on corporate compliance programs from the recently released 2020 Update to the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Evaluation of Corporate Compliance Programs (2020 Update). We focus on investigations, data analytics, evaluating compliance programs, internal reporting and corporate culture. Participants in this podcast series include: Asha Palmer, Convercent Chief Ethics and Compliance Officer (CECO) and Executive Vice President (EVP) of CONVERGE; Rex Homme, Michele Edwards, and Stephen Martin, all Partners at StoneTurn. In this third episode, Edwards and I discuss how a compliance professional can create an inventory of metrics by which to monitor and then improve a compliance program. Join us tomorrow, as Asha Palmer, CECO at Convercent, discusses corporate culture itself to better monitor and improve your compliance program. Resources For more information on StoneTurn, check out their website, here. For more information on Convercent, check out their website, here. To download a copy of the Convercent Interactive Self-Assessment based on the 2020 Update to the Evaluation of Corporate Compliance Programs, click here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

code partners edwards evaluation conduct metrics inventory risk assessment continuous improvement converge stephen martin ceco corporate compliance programs convercent executive vice president evp doj evaluation

Louis Sapirman - Qualities of the Successful CECO

director pandemia impacto la salud proyectos la econom representantes centros comerciales ceco

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 11, 2020 14:33

The Compliance Life details the journey to and in the role of a Chief Compliance Officer. How does one come to sit in the CCO chair? What are some of the skills a CCO needs to success navigate the compliance waters in any company? What are some of the top challenges CCOs have faced and how did they meet them? These questions and many others will be explored in this new podcast series. Over four episodes each month on The Compliance Life, I visit with one current or former CCO to explore their journey to the CCO chair. This month, my guest is Louis Sapirman, Vice President, Chief Ethics & Compliance Officer and Chief Compliance Counsel for Panasonic Corporation of North America, the principal North American subsidiary of Panasonic Corporation. He oversees the company's regulatory and compliance function, maintaining a culture of ethics, and ensuring all employees are upholding Panasonic's longstanding values in their work. Louis previously served as Associate General Counsel & Chief Compliance Officer for the Dun & Bradstreet Corporation. During his tenure as CCO, the company was recognized as one of the World's Most Ethical Companies by the Ethisphere Institute. Prior to moving in-house, Louis worked in private practice with several law firms including Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dorr and Buchanan Ingersoll. Throughout his career, Louis has been recognized for his work. In both 2015 and 2016, the Ethisphere Institute named him to their list of Attorneys Who Matter in Compliance and Ethics, and in 2010 he was named International Employment Lawyer of the Year by the Association of Corporate Counsel. In this Episode 2, we explore the qualities of thesuccessful CECO. Some of the key leadership attributes Sapirman sees as critical are Great Communication, a skill that should be practiced constantly, to ensure you remain successful. You should engage in Servant Leadership and your success lies solely in the success of others. Why you need to be flexible and even be a Chameleon. You must be innovative because if you keep doing the same thing over and over, eventually it becomes stale and is destined to fail. Success in E&C requires the ability to be creative and see the novel solutions and change necessary to keep your program successful. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

world success vice president north america ethics north american compliance qualities servant leadership chameleons cco panasonic chief compliance officers compliance officer dorr associate general counsel corporate counsel great communication ccos ceco chief ethics most ethical companies buchanan ingersoll ethisphere institute wilmer cutler pickering hale louis sapirman

Representantes de Centros Comerciales en CR, sobre el impacto de la Pandemia en la Salud y la Economía / Martes 28 Julio, 2020.

Matices

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 28, 2020 73:29

Invitados: Julieta Bonilla, vocera de grupo CECO y Federico Solano, Director de Proyectos de Plaza Lincoln.

Episode 210 – the Bostock edition

Great Women in Compliance

Play Episode Listen Later Jun 18, 2020 41:40

As Trump has trouble drinking a glass of water and walking (Note-not at the same time), Covid-19 cases spike, the US Supreme Court hands down a landmark decision on protections for the LGBTQ community in the workplace, self-distancing Tom and Jay are back to consider some of the top compliance articles and stories over the past week. Mike Volkov takes the chickens out to roost in a 3-part series on the DOJ Antitrust Division charges of price-fixing and bid-rigging conspiracy. In Corruption Crime & Compliance. Jon Rausch weighs in on Dipping Through Geometries. How will WFH change business? Alison Taylor opines on the World Economic Forum What are the three ‘R’s’ of a speak up culture? Lloydette Bai-Marrow on the FCPA Blog. GOP stymies data privacy/data protection legislation yet again. Dave Uberti reports in the WSJ. It’s your culture stupid. Jim Nortz in CCI. How is Covid-19 changing internal audit. Matt Kelly explores in Radical Compliance. Viva La France. Dylan Tokar reports in the WSK Risk and Compliance Journal. Making sure compliance is not marginalized during financial dislocation. A plethora of authors contribute on NYU’s Compliance and Enforcement Blog. The ethical upside to WFH. In the Center for Ethical Leadership Interested in moving to the CCO chair? Check out my latest podcast series The Compliance Lifewhere I interview one CCO type for a month on their journey to the CCO chair and beyond. In on this month’s edition I visit with Ryan Rabalais. In this Part 3, he details some of key skills of a CCO. The Compliance Life is now available on iTunes. On Compliance and Coronavirus this week,: Scott Price on cyber security risks going forward; Gabe Gumbs data privacy and data protection during the economic dislocation and Covid-19; David McLaughlin joins me to discuss increasing automation to enhance compliance. Compliance and Coronavirus is available on iTunes here. On the Compliance Podcast Network, this month topic: internal reporting and investigations; all on 31 Days to a More Effective Compliance Program. This week’s offerings: Monday-The Investigative Team; Tuesday-investigative challenges; Wednesday-the witness interview; Thursday- issues in cross-border investigations; Friday- who and when to suspend. Note 31 Days to a More Effective Compliance Program now has its own iTunes channel. How does the Hundred Acre Wood inform compliance? Check out Tom’s 5-part blog post series on the FCPA Compliance and Ethics Blog. Monday-Tigger and Sales; Tuesday-Kanga, Roo & Ombudsman; Wednesday-Eeyore and corp legal; Thursday-Piglet and Finance; Friday-Winnie the Pooh as CECO. Tom Fox is the Compliance Evangelist and can be reached at tfox@tfoxlaw.com. Jay Rosen is Mr. Monitor and can be reached at jrosen@affiliatedmonitors.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

covid-19 donald trump coronavirus sales lgbtq finance nyu compliance gop monitor us supreme court wfh cco ombudsman roo bostock matt kelly hundred acre wood tom fox alison taylor jay rosen david mclaughlin compliance podcast network ceco viva la france compliance evangelist ethics blog

Ceco - Red Strings

feeder sound

Play Episode Listen Later May 10, 2020 60:00

Click here for the feeder sound II OPEN CALL voting poll, available between 12th of May – 12th of June: www.feeder.ro/2020/05/09/vote-feeder-sound-open-call/ WINNERS announcement - 15th of June --- Ceco - Red Strings Set description: A reasonably diverse mix of slightly more UK-grounded things I've been listening to lately all making their way towards that Flabbergast track and its "invisible red strings" that I just can't get enough of… Annoyingly running out of track for Gemini towards the end but totally worth it for the build up to that warm synth in the opening track. Recorded for an audience of 3 flatmates nodding their heads and tapping their feet in the background – the closest we have been to a party in a while. Enjoy. About Ceco Artist biography: DJ based in London. Like dancing to records, listening to records and mixing records (in that order:) Music tastes are of course always evolving and increasingly diverging as you always find new artists and sub-genres but I try to stitch together as many as possible in my sets whilst keeping the common thread going. Most of the times it works and of course sometimes it doesn't but it's rarely boring. This one is no exception with quite a few twists and turns – hopefully a welcome respite from the monotone blur that our lives are right now. Portfolio link: @ceco_lnd Current city: London, UK

music uk digital dj winners cancel gemini strings zug moreira thematic batu barac ceco

Ellen Hunt on Succeeding As a CCO: Strategy and Practical Advice From Day 1

Play Episode Listen Later Feb 26, 2020 24:31

In today's episode of Great Women in Compliance, Lisa speaks with Ellen Hunt, who is the Senior Vice President and Audit, Ethics and Compliance Officer for AARP. Ellen has accomplished so much for the compliance community, in the field and is a friend, advocate and mentor to a lot of people, Lisa and Mary included. Following along from the episode a few weeks ago about a dream compliance team, this discussion is about what makes a great Chief Ethics and Compliance Officer (although the title may differ from place to place). The discussion includes a discussion of what the roles and responsibilities are and should be for a new CECO. This includes some thought about how to manage expectations of a Board and executive team, including the idea of looking at a program and seeing what may not be needed before adding new initiatives. Ellen also talks about the best ways to lead a team, balancing the needs of high performers with other team members as a new CECO. She provides a few practical strategies that anyone can use at any time with their teams or within the organization. Join the Great Women in Compliance community on LinkedIn here.

strategy board ethics senior vice president compliance audit succeeding aarp practical advice compliance officer great women ceco chief ethics ellen hunt

第84回 (株)ディノス・セシール CECO EC本部EC企画部ゼネラルマネージャー石川森生さん 2018年5月9日OA

森清華のLife is the journey

Play Episode Listen Later Feb 26, 2020 24:52

5月9日、第84回目の放送。今回のゲストは、株式会社ディノス・セシール CECO EC本部EC企画部ゼネラルマネージャー、石川森生さんです。ナビプラスの立ち上げや、ファッション通販サイト、製菓材料のECサイトなどに精通する、株式会社TUKURUの社長を経て、現在に至ります。〝諦める判断力が、１つのキーワード〟と仰る石川さん。その心は？メッセージの込められた言葉とリクエストソングもお聴き逃しなく！

ec ceco ec 2018

Teaching Ethics and Compliance: A&F’s Forrest Deegan Brings Real-Life E&C Experiences to the Classroom

Play Episode Listen Later Feb 18, 2020 18:05

This episode of Principled features Forrest Deegan, Chief Ethics and Compliance Officer for Abercrombie & Fitch, where he is responsible for enhancing the company’s corporate compliance program and third-party risk management program. Deegan has oversight of functional compliance activities, ownership of specific compliance policies, and works with internal partners to foster a speak-up culture throughout the business. He is also a lecturer in Law at the University of Chicago School of Law, and was selected by Compliance Week as a "Top Mind" for 2018. In this episode, Deegan shares his path to success, the relationship between compliance and legal, the importance of communication, the future of ethics and compliance, and how we can better equip students for careers in the field. What You’ll Learn on This Episode [0:46] Tell our listeners about how you became attracted to ethics and compliance, the path you took to get to your present position as the CECO of A&F. [0:57] Forrest started in private practice about 15 years ago, and did work for many different types of clients. As he gained their trust, he began to do things that were a little more interesting, and ended up in a compliance career at a law firm. When he and his wife moved to Ohio, he came to Abercrombie & Fitch as their first director of corporate compliance, and finally that evolved into the “chief ethics and compliance officer” title. [2:56] What was behind the decision to add ethics into that title and how has that changed what you do? [3:03] In in-house retail, people wear more hats, and A&F didn’t need to separate ethics from compliance. It was an easy transition to combine the two together. [4:08] As someone with a legal background, you’re well aware of the big debate that was taking place over the last decade in the NC community about whether compliance should be separate from legal and if so, how? And obviously, some companies have made that decoupling. Now that we’re about 10 years into that, what do you see? Are programs better when they’re disassociated from legal’s oversight and why do you feel that way? [4:34] The corporate compliance community is very collaborative; they get together and discuss issues like reporting and job responsibility. Forrest has seen a shift in the past couple of years back toward reporting to general counsels. He doesn’t think there is an issue with either as long as the work gets done. [5:50] What do you feel about how this has all played out? A lot of the concerns were around general counsels exercising too much control over compliance and not having it be as independent? Has that not really played out in the real world? [6:08] Even if you’re not in every meeting, if you have access to the board or audit committee, that can suffice. The communication between parties works well when there is independence and an open channel. [7:08] What would you say is the biggest change in the last five to 10 years as to how ethics and compliance is practiced at corporations? [7:18] Forrest is the first chief ethics & compliance officer at A&F and his peers at other retailers are the first there. The mindset of corporate compliance has shifted over the last 10 years, and people now understand that it is a broader field. [8:29] What do you see driving this profession forward through the 2020s? [8:36] There will be change on both the “want-to” and “have-to” sides. A big area of need for change is consistency in risk management and assessment. Forrest hopes to see increased collaboration with all of the lines of defense: hotlines, store health and safety, and a third-party monitoring program. He also wants to learn to have a more coordinated effort with those that help enforce the standards of conduct, the principles, and the value statement. [11:10] You also teach a compliance course at the University of Chicago. What does the class cover? How long have you been doing that? What are you trying to accomplish and what do you get out of it personally? [11:20] Forrest teaches a seminary called Corporate Compliance and Business Integration. It helps students see how many of the legal and regulatory regimes they’ve been studying play out in a corporate compliance program. Forrest’s class goes through anti-corruption, info stack and data breach rules, AML and OFAC, and employment-related harassment and discrimination issues. Forrest also brings in other speakers from the tech, entertainment, and banking industries to talk about their compliance journeys. [14:12] How do you weave in conversations about ethics and culture into all of this? Obviously, compliance doesn’t really work without those things and they’re a key component to this and I’m guessing that’s a part of the curriculum too? [14:23] The understanding of your business, evaluation of your risks, and use of your resources adds up to your culture of compliance. If everyone understands their role as an agent of the company, you will maintain a stronger culture of compliance. [15:38] How can universities and even high schools do a better job to incorporate lessons about ethics and compliance into their classes and get students ready for these issues that they’re going to have to deal with in their workforce? [15:55] The more chances that students have to see the skills in practice, the more concrete some of the concepts they’ve learned about in school become to them. Having access to practitioners and seeing how the things they’re learning apply in everyday life is the best way for students to learn. Find this episode of Principled on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Stitcher, Sound Cloud, Podyssey, Spotify or anywhere you listen to podcasts.

Podcasts CeCo | El enfoque multidisciplinario de Nicole Nehme

Play Episode Listen Later Dec 19, 2019 32:11

Nicole Nehme -socia fundadora de Ferrada Nehme y académica- dialoga con CeCo sobre espacios de integración y armonización entre las instituciones del sistema de competencia chileno. La abogada visita asuntos tan amplios como la relación entre derecho y moral, la función del razonamiento técnico, su visión del empresariado y el rol de las mujeres en el mundo legal. En este segundo capítulo de Podcasts CeCo, la invitada comenta también sobre compliance como un compromiso cultural de las empresas, la importancia de la libre competencia en la discusión política de Chile y el impacto del mundo digital en la discusión contemporánea. Nicole Nehme destaca que el análisis de casos de libre competencia debe proceder guiado por un enfoque multidisciplinario, humilde y curioso. Al igual que el capítulo anterior, la entrevistada recomienda sus lecturas preferidas y consejos para el desarrollo profesional.

podcasts chile enfoque nehme ceco

Podcasts CeCo | Los desafíos de la Libre Competencia

podcasts tribunal desaf competencia la libre profundizando ceco

Play Episode Listen Later Dec 12, 2019 26:59

Sobre los desafíos de los organismos, los ejes estratégicos y la metodología del trabajo del Tribunal de Libre Competencia, la interacción entre las miradas jurídicas y económicas, el valor de la jurisprudencia, la relación con agencias extranjeras y la doctrina comparada, el impacto de la economía digital en la competencia y sus libros predilectos, el director del CentroCompetencia UAI, Felipe Irarrazabal conversa con Enrique Vergara, presidente del Tribunal de Libre Competencia. Profundizando en los desafíos de la institucionalidad de la libre competencia actualmente, Enrique Vergara adelanta que hay muchos, pero principalmente “dar la mayor cantidad posible de certezas a agentes económicos para regular los mercados, dar tiempos razonables para sacar las sentencias y también implementar el proceso de planificación estratégica”. Para conocer más sobre sus análisis y reflexiones, escucha el Podcast UAI.

Episode 38: Ceco Toretto aka DJ Strat

The Music Time Machine with Patric Pleasure

Play Episode Listen Later Nov 3, 2019 73:39

Der DJ und Recording Engineer Ceco Montgomery Toretto aka DJ Strat aus Basel/Miami hat Patric im Pleasurecave besucht. Instagram Ceco Privat: https://www.instagram.com/cecotoretto/ Instagram Ceco DJ-Profil: https://www.instagram.com/dj_strat/ Instagram Patric Pleasure: https://www.instagram.com/patricpleasure/ Supporte den Podcast: http://www.patricpleasure.com/shop/podcast-support-package Patric's Mixloud: https://www.mixcloud.com/patric-menzi/

strat patric toretto ceco der dj

Rebuilding Trust: Stephanie Davis Brings Ethics and Compliance to Volkswagen After Emissions Crisis