2019 IIA Philadelphia Fraud Symposium - Update
Putting the Freud in Fraud - Part One
Fraud Tip Friday: Where did the Data come from?
FCPA - “A Better Life, a Better World” Well Maybe Not Yet for Panasonic Avionics
Fraud Tip Friday: Concealment
Internal Control Defined and Some Guidance
Compliance officers talk about controls constantly. Effective controls are the lifeblood of what makes a compliance program work. Most of us can rattle off examples of controls, or recognize a control when we see one. So my fellow speaker asked the audience: What is a control? Nobody dared answer. We all, me included, were suddenly uncertain that we could define a control correctly. The speaker who posed this question is Jonathan T. Marks, partner at Baker Tilly and a prolific thinker on all things forensics, audit, and internal control. Lately Marks has been asking audit and compliance audiences to define a control — and to his dismay, most people can’t.Read Marks’ definition of internal control.
(Advanced) Meta-model of Fraud - Two triangles combine for better fraud case comprehension
The Fraud Triangle is tried and true, but we might need more to understand our cases. The authors describe a “meta-model of fraud” that combines the “why-based” Fraud Triangle with the “what-based” Triangle of Fraud Action to better explain fraud cases. We might never know exactly why fraudsters commit crimes, but we can always gather facts and evidence to help prevent and deter fraud.
How GDPR Could Impact Whistleblowers and the Ethics Hotline
13 Step FCPA Compliance Action Plan
FCPA or Anti-Bribery & Corruption Risk Assessments
A ticking time bomb? Whistleblowing In Organizations Today
Supreme Court: The Interpretation of the Whistleblower Protections within the Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act Seem to Have Been Too Broad
Culture and Troubling Friends, Family, & Relationships...
Audit Committee Primer on 3rd Party Risk Management
Surviving a Restatement: Ten Pitfalls
The audit committee plays an important role in navigating a restatement...
Root Cause and Critical Thinking...
Structural Integrity! Chief Compliance Officer v. General Counsel - Should They Be Separate?
Lack of separation of the CHIEF COMPLIANCE OFFICER and the GENERAL COUNSEL has been cited as a cause of numerous corporate failures. In fact, separation is now the norm in Health Care organizations. In spite of numerous recommendations to separate the two functions, there is general agreement that the roles are closely related and frequent collaboration is required.The issues relating to separation of the CHIEF COMPLIANCE OFFICER and the GENERAL COUNSEL are most often discussed in terms of the differences in their roles (below).