i-Sight Investigations Blog: Week in Review

July 30, 2010   |   Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,  

It seems to be that each week is busier than the last. Here are some of the things we blogged about this week- as well as some other pieces that caught our attention regarding internal investigation, human resources and ethics:

Monday:

“There’s no point investing in and implementing an ethics and compliance program unless the time is spent integrating the program into every aspect of an organization. The need for companies to develop effective ethics and compliance programs has been acknowledged by several government agencies- examples are the SEC in the US and the government in the United Kingdom. Both groups have recently passed legislation or made amendments to existing guidelines, focusing heavily on the importance of ethics and compliance at all levels of an organization- especially at the top. Employees at each level contribute to the success of a company’s ethics and compliance program. Integrating ethics and compliance at each level helps ensure the message from the top makes it all the way down to the lower levels of the organization. Training, messages and other ethics and compliance initiatives must be developed to evolve with employees as they move through the company. That being said, employees at various levels need to be prepared to address different ethical issues they may encounter based on the role they play in the organization.”

Tuesday:

“The values associated with workplace fraud continue to rise- especially during economic downturns. Preventing workplace fraud begins on the inside of an organization. One of the largest fraud risks companies must address is the opportunity for fraud to occur. There are a number of anti-fraud techniques and systems that are easy to implement within any organization. When fraud grows out of control within an organization, reputations and public trust are destroyed. To reduce the opportunity for fraud to occur, accounting and money handling responsibilities must be divided. Monitoring and enforcement of anti-fraud programs is necessary in order for the program to be effective and for employees to take it seriously. When employees know they are being watched, their work is being reviewed on a consistent basis and punishments are administered to those who violate anti-fraud policies, there’s less room for fraud to go undetected.”

Wednesday:

“The $1.6 billion fine handed down to Siemens in 2008 was much more than a record breaking fine, it was a lesson for other companies to learn from. Prior to the bribery scandal, Siemens had an ethics and compliance program in place, however, there was a missing link between leadership and the enforcement of the program. The company’s cooperation during the SEC investigation lead to a reduced penalty, but also gave way to a complete re-design of the company’s internal ethics and compliance controls. There are many lessons learned from the Siemens charges, the reaction to the investigation and the actions taken by Siemens to position the company as an ethics and compliance leader in the post-scandal era.”

Thursday:

“In order for a workplace investigation to be credible, investigators must deploy certain tactics to verify the accuracy of interview responses. In a previous post, Investigation Interview Questions to Determine Credibility, we reviewed the EEOC’s 5 factors to consider when determining statement credibility during investigation interviews. One of the toughest challenges to overcome during investigation interviews is the fact that witnesses may withhold or modify their responses to protect the subject- or the complainant and possibly even themselves. As investigators are often pressed for time when conducting internal investigations, they cannot afford to get hung up on determining who is correct in the “my story vs. their story” battle. We have compiled a list of simple tips and techniques investigators can use to determine investigation interview credibility.”

Recovering From Ethical Lapses and Investigations: Siemens

July 28, 2010   |   Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,  

The $1.6 billion fine handed down to Siemens in 2008 was much more than a record breaking fine, it was a lesson for other companies to learn from. Prior to the bribery scandal, Siemens had an ethics and compliance program in place, however, there was a missing link between leadership and the enforcement of the program. The company’s cooperation during the SEC investigation lead to a reduced penalty, but also gave way to a complete re-design of the company’s internal ethics and compliance controls. There are many lessons learned from the Siemens charges, the reaction to the investigation and the actions taken by Siemens to position the company as an ethics and compliance leader in the post-scandal era.

Bribery Investigation

An amnesty plan had been worked out with Siemens, as employees willing to come forward with information pertaining to the bribery scandal and identifying key players, would be free from prosecution. In a report from the Wall Street Journal, the amnesty program was offered to all Siemens employees (110 of which came forward with information), with the exception of the 300 employees who made up the company’s top executive team. One particular employee who provided inside information was indicted employee Reinhard Siekaczek. He reported that he managed an annual budget worth $40-50 million, which was considered to be a “bribery budget”. As reported in the New York Times article “At Siemens, Bribery Was Just a Line Item,” salepersons and managers within the company used this money- “slush fund”,  to maintain relations with corrupt government officials.

The level of cooperation in the investigation significantly reduced the cost of the settlement with the SEC. In comparison to other companies hit with scandals, Siemens responded quickly to put measures in place to detect and prevent future acts of bribery within the company. In the New York Times article “At Siemens, Bribery Was Just a Line Item,” they state Siemens was provided with additional leniency, only having to plead to accounting violations, “because pleading to bribery violations would have barred Siemens from bidding on government contracts in the United States.”

In the Ethisphere article “Prepared Remarks to Compliance Week 2010- 5th Annual Conference for Corporate Financial, Legal, Risk, Audit & Compliance Officers,” Assistant Attorney General Lanny A. Breuer states:

“In the end, the benefits Siemens received through its cooperation, even in the absence of a voluntary disclosure, were plain – the $450 million fine that was paid to the Justice Department, although quite substantial, was a far cry from the advisory range of $1.35 billion to $2.7 billion called for in the Sentencing Guidelines. Put another way, Siemens received a penalty that was 67 to 84% less than what it otherwise could have faced had it not provided extraordinary cooperation and carried out such extensive remediation.”

Ethical Recovery

An investigation was launched into the bribery scandal in 2006 and was completed in 2008. The cooperation exhibited by employees at Siemens allowed the investigation to be conducted in less time than originally predicted. Rather than replacing former executives with individuals from inside the company, Siemens filled the roles of major positions with outsiders- which was probably for the best. In 2007, Peter Solmssen was brought into to clean up the ethics and compliance disaster at Siemens.  Also in 2007, Siemens named Peter Löscher as the company’s new CEO.

Siemens has worked to improve their corporate reputation by ensuring that compliance is integrated into the furthest reaching corners of their business. Siemens hired Michael Hershman, of Transparency International, to help build a compliance and anti-corruption policy and training program. Similar to the actions taken by Ed Breen at Tyco, Löscher replaced many of the company’s top executives to start fresh. In most companies the ethics and compliance department remains fairly small, however, Siemens was determined to put their words into actions and created an ethics and compliance department consisting of 600 employees- one of the largest to date.

Since the Settlement, Siemens has divided the company into three divisions in order to clarify reporting lines and increase responsibility. In the New York Times article “Siemens’s Prosperity Doesn’t Obscure Bribery Scandal,” they discuss the reasoning behind the division:

“Mr. Löscher also put the leaders of those three sectors onto the central managing board in Munich. That puts an end to a system in which a leader of a major business, like power generating, had his own managing board and reported to Munich headquarters without being based there. Siemens officials say the old way allowed corruption to spread and inhibited accountability.”

Siemens has developed a training program, with employees at various levels receiving training in regards to issues faced based on employee role. The format and frequency of training also varies depending on level within the organization. On the Siemens corporate website, they communicate that training includes topics such as foreign laws and corruption risks. Employees are now required to sign a statement after reviewing the company’s code of conduct, in order to communicate their commitment and understanding of the code.

Here is a link to a slide deck I came across from a presentation prepared by Siemens titled “Compliance Program at Siemens,” presented at Strengthening Integrity In Private Sector Organized by UNDP, MENA-OECD. The slides contain specific information related to the ethics and compliance program currently in place at Siemens.



1-800-465-6089     PROCESS DRIVEN SOLUTIONS