Creating effective compliance messages for specific employee groups

But have you ever tested the efficacy of these messages? Or have you made the assumption that these just ‘work?’

Recent research suggests that these standalone, generic messages are generally not effective at producing behavior change.

“Corruption harms,” “Say no to corruption,” “Stop Corruption!” are all examples of messages that governments have supported for years with the belief that it would reduce desire for citizens to engage in corruption. Unfortunately, most of those campaigns did nothing, or, even worsened corruption.

In this column, I’ll explain how to create effective compliance messaging campaigns based on lessons from anti-corruption advocacy.

Training can backfire, if done poorly

Effective anti-corruption campaigns, like compliance programs, use a multi-pronged approach consisting of training, research, coalition building, and advocacy.

But recent research by professors Caryn Peiffer and Nic Cheeseman suggests that many tested anti-corruption messages were mostly not effective and in some cases, may have made corruption worse. An experiment by the researchers with local households in Nigeria found some of the tested anti-corruption messages actually increased the chances of the participants engaging in corruption.

Most anti-corruption messaging campaigns were not targeted, tailored, or tested to a specific audience. Most relied on negative messaging, like, “Failure to report suspected fraud can result in termination,” rather than positive messages, like, “Most employees report they would feel comfortable reporting suspected fraud.”

With a topic as polarizing as corruption, people likely already have strong beliefs about the practice. A reminder that, “Corruption is bad” is unlikely to change it. Similarly, constant reminders may make corruption seem insurmountable. Employees may take that as a sign that it is harmless to participate.

Additional research focused on public health messaging campaigns finds that the messengers themselves matter and people are more likely to believe a message that includes supporting evidence. Finally, people are more likely to adhere to a behavior if they believe others are already doing it - e.g. I won’t use my company card for my morning coffee if I think my colleagues aren’t.

Pivot to a practical approach

Instead of starting 2026 with a ”Compliance is good” campaign, compliance departments should use data to better target, tailor, and test their messages. Using the most recent risk assessment, survey data, or a consistent challenge your team has dealt with, messaging efforts can be focused on and tailored to the most pressing issue your team has identified.

Let’s apply this logic to barriers of reporting suspected misconduct. LRN’s 2024 Benchmark of Ethical Culture report states significant variances in self-reported barriers to reporting misconduct across generations. Gen Z employees are the least afraid of retaliation, with only 24 percent indicating that was a barrier, while 46 percent of Baby Boomers said so.

A well-intentioned reaction might be to launch a company-wide campaign stating that “GreatCorp has a zero-tolerance policy for retaliation” or “GreatCorp investigates all reports of suspected misconduct.”

But that effort can fall short.

Targeting, tailoring, and testing

GreatCorp’s survey on staff perceptions about reporting suspicious behavior finds that 24 percent of Gen-Z staff are afraid of potential retaliation for two reasons. First, they are unaware of the zero-tolerance policy for retaliation. Second, they are not aware of management responses to previous cases of suspected retaliation.

Instead of a one-size-fits-all approach, explore a target, tailor, and test approach aiming to understand and address the variance between the generations (what makes 76 percent of Gen Z unafraid of retaliation compared to 54 percent of Baby Boomers?). A widely circulated survey can surface insights into these differences, and a subsequent focus group can illuminate the findings in greater detail.

Let’s apply the target, tailor, and test checklist methodology developed by Peiffer and Cheeseman to a Gen Z-focused campaign.

 ● Goal: Reduce Gen Z reluctance to report suspected wrongdoing from 24 percent to zero percent

• Target audience: Gen Z staff
• Tailored message: Ensure messages are tailored the specific problem/audience. The message content should contain:
  • Positive framing
  • Some supporting evidence
  • Illustrate how others are already complying with the behavior sought

● Suitable messenger: Use a messenger that Gen Z finds credible. It may not be the CEO! Do you think Gen Z employees felt more energized to synergize and bust silos after reading their last all-staff email from leadership? If you have them, trusted Ethics and Compliance ambassadors might be great messengers for your new ethics and compliance message.

● Suitable mechanism: Determine a message delivery mechanism that Gen Z is likely to use and listen to (is it Slack? Or email?).

● Tested: Test the tailored messages, messenger, and potential mechanism with Gen Z staff (or risk increasing their fear of retaliation).

Some targeted and tailored messages Gen-Z might thus be:

• • “76 percent of GreatCorp staff do not fear retaliation when reporting suspected misconduct”
  • “GreatCorp protects whistleblowers and has taken action against retaliators in these [anonymized] examples”
  • “GreatCorp investigated all claims of suspected wrongdoing. Here is our annual compliance report with more information”

“Treat Yo Self”

A real life example of the target, tailor, and test methodology can be found in this Dominos ad, featuring Retta from the show Parks and Rec. This ad is targeted, as it appears during (seemingly) each episode of Parks and Rec on Peacock. It is tailored to the audience by having the tagline ‘Treat Yo Self’ and a quick QR code displayed on screen. The messenger was Retta, who plays the character who coined the tagline. Finally, I guarantee the ad was tested on focus groups.

The mock messages described above will require time and resources to deploy effectively. To get some institutional buy-in, partner with your marketing and sales teams on an initial campaign. They have the experience running focus groups, designing surveys, and developing effective messages. Some direct benefits of this partnership include spreading the cost of campaign development, as well as building stronger relationships with compliance department customers.

There is no silver bullet in effective messaging but as the research suggests, low-effort campaigns will produce corresponding results.