Over recent years, an exponential surge in stringent regulations necessitates the finance industry’s impregnable emphasis on compliance measures. Regulatory authorities penalize companies severely for insignificant compliance missteps or for any breaches at all. Indeed, organizations not only prioritize but invest a great deal of their resources in ensuring compliance. But is maintaining 95% compliance really tantamount to 0% compliance? This article delves into this issue with insights from an industry leader in compliance, Arminda Youse-Wigle.
An interview with Arminda Youse-Wigle provides valuable insights into matters of compliance. As a sturdy figure in the field of compliance, notably in the mortgage industry, former BofA senior executive and now CEO of ACES, Arminda Youse-Wigle brings a fresh perspective on this less evident issue. With years of hands-on experience, she shares nuanced views on the importance of even the smallest details regarding compliance.
Youse-Wigle expounds her point of view regarding the “95% equals 0%” idea. According to her, having a 95% compliance rate, irrespective of the sector, is similar to maintaining 0% compliance. This metaphorical stretch underpins the very essence of the philosophy of absolute compliance – that even a single slight can potentially snowball into catastrophic consequences for any firm.
To illustrate this further and set a more concrete context, Youse-Wigle brings in the example of the mortgage industry. If one mortgage in a pool of 100 is underwritten incorrectly, it can tarnish the whole package’s reputation. Such a mishap could potentially affect the sale of the other 99 properly underwritten mortgages, leading to severe financial losses.
This underlines the significance of compliance and the need for unpopular measures like quality assurance and loan audits. It is these safety nets that prevent unfortunate lapses and secure the entire pool of mortgages from facing debilitating issues. In an ideal world, a 100% compliance rate might seem unattainable; however, in the actual business scenery, anything less puts the entity at significant risk.
The necessity of due diligence in spotting and correcting errors cannot be overemphasized. Regardless of the industry, the brand’s reputation and credibility are immensely reliant on compliance, and falling short can be overwhelmingly expensive, both reputationally and financially.
As Youse-Wigle highlights, compliance is not just an ancillary function of a business; it is a primal part of maintaining competence in the market. The concept of maintaining competence transcends the foundational instinct of a company to remain afloat – it’s about being a custodian of consumer trust and personifying reliability.
Youse-Wigle’s anecdote about the mortgage industry gives weight to the assertion of absolute compliance. The storyline invokes food for thought on why rigorous attention to compliance is not merely an option to consider but a fundamental necessity. Consequently, encouraging organizations to not view compliance as a byproduct of their operations.
Consider this: a commercially successful organization does not settle for a 95% product or service success rate. They instead strive for 100% customer satisfaction and product reliability. It’s the same with compliance- it’s not about mere adequacy; it is about exemplary competence. If companies can understand this position, they might then appreciate why mechanisms like automated compliance management systems should be part and parcel of every reputable establishment.
Youse-Wigle also goes a step further to argue that compliance is instrumental in the very survival of companies. This argument is not far-fetched given multiple examples of non-compliance leading to company bankruptcy or severe reputational damage that took years, if not decades, to undo.
She further elucidates that compliance is not a state to be achieved but a process that continually needs nurturing. It requires constant auditing, monitoring, and periodic reviews to ensure adherence to regulatory standards. Investing in robust compliance management is not a luxury but a need in today’s turbulent business environment.
In challenging whether 95% compliance is as good as 0% compliance, Youse-Wigle is concurrently challenging organizations to go above and beyond their current levels of compliance. By inducing a zero-tolerance approach to non-compliance, she invites organizations to up their game and consider the graver and more extensive consequences of non-compliance.
Navigating through the intricate landscape of compliance demands combining strict adherence to established guidelines, efficient use of advanced technological tools, and a committed, competent workforce. By creating a coherent and technologically inclined compliance environment, businesses can protect themselves from unnecessary risks, thereby ensuring their continued operational resilience.
All said and done, Arminda Youse-Wigle’s insights further reinforce that compliance is no longer a mere legal and regulatory obligation. Today, it is an integral aspect of corporate governance, contributing to an organization’s overall efficiency and robustness.
In conclusion, the narrative built around the “95% equals 0%” concept draws attention to the relentless commitment needed to manage compliance in any organization. The era of “almost” or “near-total” confidence in compliance management should give way to a future of total apprehension and commitment. Let’s embrace the need to roll up our sleeves and head steadfastly towards the journey to 100% compliance.
