… when a trade compliance program1 must be anchored in the company.
In our first article “Is training an important part of a trade compliance program?” (article 1) we concluded that training is still an important and central part of a trade compliance program.
In our second article “How to train in trade compliance” (article 2) we concluded that repetition – both of the training as such but also in the individual training sessions will ensure that what is learned more quickly becomes an integral part of everyday life and daily decisions – processes.
In this last article on training, we focus sharply on the limitations of training, and what from a legal2 and behavioral psychology perspective i.a. can be done in addition to training.
In the articles, reference is made to the EU Commission’s guidance3 as “EUGE”, BIS’ guidance4 as
“USGE” and OFAC’s guidance5 as “USGS”.
It can go too fast
As described in article 2, we humans do not always understand things in the same way. People are a product of different cultures, opinions, attitudes and perceptions of what is right and wrong. This difference becomes important when a company rolls out compliance programs, which employees not only have to get to know, but which they also have to act on. When people have to learn something new and organize themselves in a different way, is
it is very likely that there will be resistance to this change. This is one of the conclusions of Fritz Roethlisberger and William Dickson’s Human Relationship Theory.
In the book “Management and the Worker”, Roetlisberger and Dickson describe a study of how human relationships in an organization can have an effect on productivity itself. They noted that the employees’ motivation arose from an interplay of relationships within the organization. They explain this based on what they call the individual’s “sentiments”. This concept covers people’s thoughts, feelings, values and attitudes.
An example of a “sentiment” that is very normal in humans is the need for recognition. It can be a simple “thank you, good job” when a task is completed. It can also be recognition that an employee experiences that there is a problem in a work process. The recognition here consists of the employee’s attitude and feelings being accommodated.
When an employee has their “sentiments” fulfilled, the employee will feel motivated to produce more, (i.e. do what is expected from the company). Conversely, if an employee’s “sentiments” are not met, this can, among other things, lead to demotivation and the employees may develop mistrust of management.
Roetlisberger and Dickson also work in their theory with the concepts of informal and formal organization/group. Concepts that can be valuable to keep in mind when a change is to be implemented in the organization. The informal group is formed between employees who have personal relationships or who have common “sentiments”. The formal group consists of the hierarchy in the company, formal processes and rules that must be followed.
Through Roetlisberger and Dickson’s experiments, it turned out that if the informal group does not get their needs met, e.g. by having their “sentiments” recognized, they will be inclined to develop opposition to the formal group.
An example of this is e.g. a situation where a group of Danish employees are dissatisfied that the compliance program is not available in Danish. English is the “corporate language” in the company, which is why the management has decided that it is only necessary to communicate in English in all policies, guidelines, training programs etc. The informal group, which in this case are the employees who feel affected by this decision, may feel that it is not taken into account that they are not familiar with English legal terms and phrases, which can creep in when trade compliance is explained. They may feel overlooked, and develop a resistance to the formal organisation, namely the rules and processes that are part of the compliance programme.
Over time, the two groups will begin to work against each other. This can result in the two groups, instead of working towards the same goal, wanting to have separate goals, which is in no way appropriate, as training in compliance programs is important for both groups
– and the company.
Roetlisberger and Dickson also discovered that for a given change, the formal group is able to change much faster than the informal group is.
These different rates of change can also lead to resistance, frustration and mistrust in the informal group towards the formal group. This was especially evident if a change happened too quickly, where employees’ feelings were ignored, or the role of the informal organization was undermined in the organization⁶.
A Hawthorne experiment known as the “Relay Assembly Test Room” confirmed this. This experiment showed, among other things, that when the employees were given a say, and when the change was carefully introduced with consideration for the employees’ “sentiments”, then the employees also became more likely to develop an informal organization that joined the management goals around the change⁷.
The link for anchoring trade compliance programs
In all companies there are informal groups. It can be those who eat lunch together, share the same attitudes towards management, summer weather and compliance, or who are affected by changes introduced with the trade compliance programme. These informal groups do not wear the same uniform or have a stamp on their hand, but even if they are not immediately visible, they are bound together as a group.
This group can either be activated to oppose the trade compliance programme, or as ambassadors and co-players.
The method to avoid resistance and ensure connection is not through training. On the other hand, a careful introduction to the trade compliance program is ensured for all parts of the company,
if what the employees have to say is listened to, management recognizes that there may be different attitudes and feelings associated with the processes and rules in the trade compliance program, then the research described above shows that behavior can be changed in a very fundamental way , and it will be possible for the employees’ connection to the changed rules, processes etc.
This could be done, for example, by setting up a forum where employees can give feedback on what works well and poorly, as well as ask any questions about the program.
The speed with which a rollout of a trade compliance program is planned to happen is also one of the parameters outside of training that can be valuable to keep an eye on. As the research described above showed, resistance can arise from the employees if the change happens too quickly and the employees cannot fully see what they have to do.
One way to reduce the “speed” of a rollout of changes and prevent the changes from falling behind the employees is to start the rollout of the program at the first sod for a trade compliance program or a change to an existing one. This can be done by ensuring that the employees are continuously kept informed about – and if possible involved in – decisions, processes, goals etc. If the employees feel that the management is transparent in their actions and communication, any resistance can be reduced or completely avoided.
EU Kommissionen, BIS og OFAC er enige
Det vigtigste for at lykkes med den forandring af virksomhedens processer og kultur, som er målet med et trade complianceprogram, er, at den øverste ledelse melder klart ud over- for medarbejderne, hvad der skal ske, hvorfor, og hvad konsekvenserne for virksomheden og medarbejderne kan være, hvis trade compliance programmet ikke overholdes. EU Kommissionen, BIS og OFAC er enige om dette i deres respektive vejledninger for etable- ring af robuste trade compliance programmer.
I EUGE udtrykker EU Kommissionen dette således:
”Effektive ICP’er afspejler en topstyret proces, hvor virksomhedens øverste ledelse giver signi- fikans, legitimitet og afsætter organisatoriske, menneskelige og tekniske ressourcer til virk- somhedens forpligtelse til overholdelse og overholdelseskultur [compliance cultur].”
Der forventes derfor af ledelsen en ”Klar og regelmæssig oplysning om virksomhedens er- klæring vedrørende forpligtelse til alle ansatte (også ansatte, der ikke har nogen rolle i kon- trollen af handel med produkter med dobbelt anvendelse) for at fremme en overholdelseskul- tur”
Selvom der i vejledningerne ikke står noget om inddragelse af medarbejdernes ”sentiments” og håndtering af uformelle grupper i den formelle organisation, da er EU Kommissionen, BIS og OFAC alligevel på linje med forskningen beskrevet ovenfor. Træning er ikke nok til at skabe en ændring i virksomheden eller etablere en compliance kultur. Der må kommuni- kation og gennemsigtighed til.
Træning er ikke nok fordi …
Træning er uvurderlig i en ændringsproces, men det er også vigtigt i og udenfor træningen at tage højde for, de ”sentiments”, der kan motivere eller demotivere medarbejderne til at overholde trade compliance programmet. Det er også vigtigt, at sikre gennemsigtighed fra ledelsens side mht., hvad formålet er med trade complianceprogrammet, hvad konsekven- serne er ved manglende overholdelse mm. Gennemsigtigheden i sig selv kan mindske mod- stand mod ændringer.
Gennemsigtigheden etableres imidlertid ved kommunikation, – og kommunikation – altså tovejs – sammen med anerkendelse af medarbejdernes ”sentiments” kan sikre at uformelle grupper i organisationen tilslutter sig og bliver fortaler for de regler og processer, der er en del af et trade complianceprogram. Blandt andet det vil sikre en ægte forankring af et trade compliance program.
Hjemmeside: www.lykkeschmidt.com
Artikel af Isabella K. S. Schmidt, Bachelor i erhvervspsykologi og Annelise Lykke Schmidt, Advokat (L).
Publiceret 30. december 2021.
