ExxonMobil governance as toxic as carbon footprint
By 
Jaclyn Jaeger2019-06-03T14:17:00
The fact that ExxonMobil continues to think only about its bottom line and is indifferent toward the devastating global consequences of its actions demonstrates a corporate culture with no moral compass.
Related articles
-
ArticleCompliance must use AI to maximize benefits from sustainability reporting
Global pressure for sustainability reporting is rising. Despite political uncertainty and regulatory delays, companies continue to improve reports for regulators and stakeholders with the help of AI.
-
ArticleRetailers face new compliance pressures from tariffs, sanctions, fraud and cybercrime
Regulators are pressuring retail compliance teams on supply chains, shifting sanctions and tariffs, sustainability, and digital commerce. Rising cyberattacks heighten data security concerns, while large retailers push legal and commercial requirements down their supply chains.
-
ArticleCompliance should prepare for more ESG reporting as global pressure rises
Most major organizations are not changing their ESG reporting plans, despite “regulatory ambiguity”, according to a report by consultancy KPMG. The researchers say this indicates market expectations are driving action as much as legal requirements.
More from Opinion
-
OpinionWhat compliance can learn from a 95 percent AI pilot failure rate
Compliance professionals have long known that systems fail when governance does. An MIT study’s finding that 95 percent of enterprise artificial intelligence (AI) pilots fail underscores how essential compliance-grade discipline is to the success of emerging technologies.
-
OpinionRisk-Based AML only works if the C-suite agrees what ‘risk’ means
Banks emphasize risk-based compliance in their AML programs, citing it to regulators and embedding it in policy, yet many institutions still handle risk very differently in practice.
-
OpinionEvidentiary Debt: The blind spot liability
On a gray Tuesday morning, the audit seemed routine. A stack of binders sat on the table, the compliance officer was confident, and the regulator’s tone was cordial. Then came the question that changed everything.