By Adam Turteltaub

If all you’re worrying about is tone at the top, you’re missing a key portion of the choir.  With most people reporting to middle managers, they play in integral role in ensuring a culture of compliance and ethics truly permeates the organization.

Evie Wentink, Senior Compliance Consultant at Ethical Edge Experts observes that while many organizations invest in crafting comprehensive codes of conduct and articulate expectations for ethical leadership, they often fall short in equipping managers with the tools, training, and support necessary to fulfill those expectations. This gap can undermine the effectiveness of compliance efforts and leave companies vulnerable to ethical lapses.

At the heart of the issue is a lack of intentional communication. Middle managers are frequently expected to embody and promote ethical leadership, yet they are rarely given a clear understanding of what that entails. To bridge this gap, organizations must develop structured plans that define ethical leadership in practical terms. These plans should include specific deliverables, resources, and expectations tailored to the manager’s role. By doing so, companies can ensure that managers are not only aware of their responsibilities but also empowered to carry them out effectively.

Authentic, ongoing conversations led by these managers are a cornerstone of a successful compliance culture. These discussions should not be limited to formal training sessions or annual reviews. Instead, they must be woven into the fabric of everyday operations. Managers should be encouraged—and required—to initiate “ethics or integrity minutes” at the start of team meetings. These brief segments provide a consistent opportunity to address ethical topics, reinforce values, and normalize open dialogue about compliance issues.

To support these conversations, organizations should provide managers with practical tools. These might include:

Tracking and analyzing these conversations is equally important. Compliance teams should maintain records of who is engaging in discussions, what topics are being covered, and which issues are generating the most questions. This data can be invaluable in identifying risk areas, refining training programs, and tailoring future communications. Often, the most common questions arise immediately after a training session, indicating that such moments are prime opportunities for deeper engagement.

Moreover, it’s essential to recognize the broader impact of middle management on organizational integrity. Prosecutors and regulators increasingly view middle managers as pivotal figures in corporate misconduct cases. Their actions—or inactions—can significantly influence whether a company succeeds or fails in maintaining ethical standards. Consequently, fostering a culture of accountability and proactive communication at this level is not just beneficial—it’s critical.

Ultimately, the goal is to create an environment where ethical conversations are natural, frequent, and valued. When managers consistently lead by example and facilitate open dialogue, employees become more comfortable raising concerns and asking questions. This cultural shift enhances transparency, reduces risk, and strengthens the overall integrity of the organization.

In summary, bridging the compliance gap at the middle management level requires a multifaceted approach: clear expectations, practical tools, authentic conversations, and ongoing tracking. By investing in these areas, organizations can transform their compliance programs from static documents into dynamic, living systems that truly support ethical behavior at every level from the top on down.

By Adam Turteltaub

Why did the AI do that?

It’s a simple and common question, but the answer is often opaque, with people referring to black boxes, algorithms and other words that only those in the know tend to understand.

Alessia Falsarone, a non-executive director of Innovate UK, says that’s a problem.  In cases where AI has run amok, the fallout is often worse because the company is unable to explain why the AI made the decision it made and what data it was relying on.

AI, she argues, needs to be explainable to regulators and the public.  That way all sides can understand what the AI is doing (or has done) and why.

To create more explainable AI, she recommends the creation of a dashboard showing the factors that influence the decisions made.  In addition, teams need to track changes made to the model over time.

By doing so, when the regulator or public asks why something happened, the organization can respond quickly and clearly.

In addition, by embracing a more transparent process, and involving compliance early, organizations can head off potential AI issues early in the process.

Listen is to hear her explain the virtues of explainability.

By Adam Turteltaub

Despite being a Civil War era statute, the False Claims Act (FCA) always has something new going on.  To find out what’s hot these days, we spoke with Joshua Drew (LinkedIn), a former federal prosecutor and chief compliance officer and currently a Member at Miller & Chevalier.

Lately, he explains, there has been a steady stream of activity.

All of this occurs against a backdrop of activity by the Administration to identify and fight waste, fraud and abuse.

Listen in to learn more about where the Administration is focusing and what compliance teams can learn from recent actions.

By Adam Turteltaub

The possibilities of AI don’t stop with generative AI such as ChatGPT.  Agentic AI may have more potential for compliance teams, Zahra Timsah, co-founder and CEO of i-GENTIC AI tells us.

Unlike generative AI, which is well known for its ability to create content, agentic AI can be used an internal enforcement agent.  Trained properly, she tells us, it can look for a potential violation and stop it.  For example, it can spot personal health information that is about to be transferred and redact the sensitive data automatically.

This ability to step in and take action will, she believes, free compliance teams from many routine tasks and allow them to shift their focus to matters that are more complex and fall within the grey area.  It will also help teams speed up the rate in which new laws and regulations turn into effective internal policies.

In addition, agentic AI will be able to produce measurable value by demonstrating what it can do to manage risk, improve trust and increase efficiency.

Listen in to learn more about agentic AI’s ability to improve your compliance program.

By Adam Turteltaub

Lewis Eisen (LinkedIn) is the author of the book RULES: Powerful Policy Wording to Maximize Engagement, and he wants to change the way people think about and write  policies.

Too often, he observes, policies contain parent-child language, with a scolding tone that turns people off and keeps them from wanting to read the policy, or even follow it.  It also contains a great deal of complexity, laying out all the many processes and procedures.

Instead, he recommends that companies adopt policy statements that are simpler and can tie values that people can identify with.  All the other stuff – complex procedures, examples, backgrounds and so forth – belongs elsewhere he argues, for employees to see after they have had the opportunity to see the policy and buy into it.

It’s an intriguing approach.  Listen in to learn more about how to reimagine your policy-making process.

By Adam Turteltaub

Andrew McBride, Founder & Chief Executive Officer at Integrity Bridge, recently wrote an article entitled Generative Artificial Intelligence Use Cases for Ethics & Compliance Programs.  Intrigued by the topic, I sat down with him for this podcast.

He shared that many compliance teams are charged with using AI but may not have the  desire or know how to create and implement a use case.

He shares that AI is very good at doing a specific role and a specific activity.  Consequently, compliance teams should consider not just the use of AI as a whole but specific needs that they have for it.  He gives five specific use cases:

Listen in to learn more, and then, start building your own use case for generative AI.

By Adam Turteltaub

Why?

Why are you asking that?

Do you really need to know it?

Is it going to tell you something you need to know?

Is it a question that anyone could even answer?

All of these are questions to ask yourselves and colleagues when they propose adding an item to your due diligence questionnaire.

As Kristy Grant-Hart (LinkedIn), author, speaker and Head of Advisory at Spark Compliance, which is now owned by Diligent, explains, too often due diligence questionnaires are filled with questions that are unnecessary at best and counterproductive at worst.  They are born out a desire to cover all the bases not necessarily get you just the information you need.

Instead of throwing in everything including the kitchen sink, it’s far better to take, as elsewhere, a risk-based approach.  Work directly with those who own the risk review.  And, if the response doesn’t matter, don’t ask the question.

Listen in to learn more about how to create a due diligence questionnaire that gets the answers you need, and not the ones you don’t.

By Adam Turteltaub

With ever more attention paid to the role of boards in overseeing compliance, the question naturally comes up:  Do boards even understand what makes for an effective compliance program?  To help answer that question we spoke with Vera Cherepanova (LinkedIn), Executive Director of the non-profit Boards of the Future.

She shares the unfortunate news that many boards are not where they should be.  They are not fully seeing culture as a risk factor and driver of misconduct.  Nor do many understand their own duty to manage it.

That’s dangerous in these times, especially now that governments are paying closer attention to culture.

Forces, though, are starting to change the equation and force boards to understand the role they and compliance play together in ensuring both integrity within the company and business success.  Supply chain issues and ESG, for example, have brough compliance in closer contact with the governing authority.  So, too, is regionalization.  As countries take divergent paths into more and more issues, the compliance team will be essential in helping the board understand the risks that they face.

More, though, will need to be done.  Boards need to start addressing issues such as values conflicts like they do other risks.  And, more people with compliance experience should be added to boards.

Listen in to learn more about what boards are and are not doing.

By Adam Turteltaub

With a rising focus on value-based care, and a new program seeking to make the approach mandatory, we spoke with Ed White (LinkedIn), Partner at Nelson Mullins.

Previous efforts to move toward value-based models, such as Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs), faced significant barriers due to regulatory frameworks like the Stark Law and Anti-Kickback Statute. These laws were designed to prevent financial incentives from influencing medical decisions, but they also limited the ability of hospitals and physicians to collaborate in ways necessary for effective value-based care implementation.

Recognizing these constraints, CMS and the Office of Inspector General (OIG) collaborated in 2020 to issue new regulations aimed at facilitating the transition to value-based care.

The next step in the transition is the new Transforming Episode Accountability Model or TEAM program, which will become mandatory in 2026. This program includes 740 hospitals across the country and targets five specific surgical procedures. Participating hospitals must coordinate care with a range of providers—including specialists, primary care physicians, labs, durable medical equipment (DME) providers, hospice agencies, and others.

The TEAM program is designed to last for five years, during which time hospitals are responsible for ensuring that patients are connected to appropriate post-discharge care, including follow-up with primary care providers. The goal is to reduce complications, avoid emergency room readmissions, and promote better health outcomes—all while keeping costs below a CMS-established target price.

To drive efficiency, the TEAM program introduces three financial risk “tracks”:

According to industry consultants, two-thirds of participating hospitals are expected to lose money in the early phases of the TEAM program.

Hospitals must rethink their compliance, care coordination, and partnership strategies in the wake of these changes. Listen in to learn more about what this all means for your compliance program both today and in the future.

By Adam Turteltaub

Imagine that it’s time to move on from compliance to another role, either by choice or being voluntold.  Does what you learned in compliance help?

Absolutely, according to Kortney Nordrum, Vice President and Senior Corporate Counsel at Deluxe.  Amongst other benefits, it taught her how to break down large issues into more manageable pieces, better identify and manage risks and help deals close.

That isn’t to say the transition has come without challenges.  She has had to learn to trust others to run compliance and also to be less risk averse.

Listen in to learn more about how your compliance skills can help if your career ever takes you to another profession.