Vendors of Choice for Compliance Workflow Solutions
Ethics and Compliance leaders apart of our Business Ethics Leadership Alliance (BELA) have the benefit of our concierge service to ask questions on any number of topics. One of the most common questions we get is “who are other members using for [fill in the blank compliance workflow]?” and its close corollary “do they like them?” We have answered these questions on a one-off basis as they come in, but this year we released our first compliance vendor survey.
A third of the BELA Community took the survey this summer, and we were very pleased with the results. A few things stood out to the Ethisphere team:
Training, Communications, and Learning Management Systems
In-house training and communication tools remain common, with a quarter of respondents indicating they built their training in-house and 82% using in-house communications solutions instead of using a vendor. The teams building training are typically using tools with customizable templates to build online training content or partnering with the internal Learning and Development function.
On the communications front, most are tapping into channels and platforms already in use at their organizations, which is what we recommend. Using the communications systems that are already preferred, or known to employees, instead of introducing yet another app into an already staggering flow of information outlets gives a greater chance that E&C messaging will be received.
However, nearly half (47%) had no opinion on the solution because they did not use or interact with it. While this does not indict in-house Communication systems, it does draw attention to how often E&C professionals are not using in-house systems in general. This is a huge, missed opportunity for E&C and Communications to collaborate more tightly, whether it is through their preferred delivery system or elsewhere.
Learning management systems
In-house systems chosen by Human Resources were the most common LMS option chosen in this survey, though it is not an especially popular one (unsatisfied: 33%, neutral: 39%, no opinion: 23%). With a positive rating of only 7%, in-house LMSs do not inspire a great deal of confidence, which is concerning, given the important role they play in continuing education and as an auxiliary to mandated ethics and compliance training. (It is worth noting that LMS’s chosen by the E&C team are much less common, but have a much higher favorability rating than their HR-chosen counterparts, at 33% neutral and 44% positive).
Overreliance on Manual Processes for Risk Assessment, Disclosures, and Third-Party Management
Spreadsheets and other manual tools are in heavy use, particular for risk assessments (35%), tracking disclosures (Conflicts of Interest at 24% and Gifts & Entertainment at 28%) and even third-party risk management (18%). This was a surprise to us, as there has been significant growth in the tools offered for these workflows and manual tracking is very labor-intensive.
Speaking of third parties, a sizeable percentage of respondents are not engaged enough with the third-party management platform their organization uses to have an opinion on it. The tools are commonly the purview of procurement or supply chain management instead of compliance.
More than a third (34%) of respondents listed Other as their TPM vendor, the vast majority of whom have no opinion or a neutral one, which suggests a disconnect in this sector between E&C and the use of vendors in this space. Another 18% listed their vendor as In-House, but with a similar overall impression.
The three most common named vendors each only accounted for a single digit share of this space. Beyond those vendors were another 11 named vendors, each of which held very small portion of respondents, but many of which returned 100% favorable ratings, which is to say that there is a broad field of vendors that have earned small, but happy audiences within the BELA community.
Hotlines and Case Management Systems
Two vendors dominate both spaces among BELA member companies. The top mentioned vendor for case management is the clear solution of choice in this area accounting for nearly half (49%) of all responses in this section, and it also enjoys an overall 53% positive rating. The second most mentioned vendor has a little less than half of the top vendor’s share in this area (21%) and enjoys the same positive rating (52%).
Beyond these two kingpins of the space, responses cover another 10 named vendors within the Other category, and another 6 named vendors with single-digit shares in this space. Across this breadth of responses, users report generally favorable impressions of their vendor, though many of them are sample sizes of only one or two responses.
For hotlines, we see the same top vendor as for case management, with 59% of respondents naming them as their hotline vendor. This provider also receives generally high marks (60% positive, 27% neutral). The next-largest vendor comes in at 21% for usage, also receiving generally favorable reviews (55% positive, 36% neutral.
Notably, while few users reported using an In-House system, those that did gave it a negative review two thirds (67%) of the time.
How satisfied (or not) are companies with their compliance workflow tools and technology solutions?
Curious about the names of vendors and their satisfaction rating? BELA members receive access to the complete report with additional data points on usage and satisfaction of specific vendors. To request guest access visit: https://ethisphere.com/request-bela-guest-access/
