SEARCH

To accomplish this, the MOC process touches almost every aspect of an organization which provides additional functional teams to work together on changes a place for all information about each change to be stored an audit

Operational Compliance” they often think of it in the same way as “Operational Risk” - a siloed function to audit

The problem is, many still see compliance as an after-the-fact audit function, solely focused on legal

However, many organizations are caught in a prescriptive, reactive, and reductive trap where audits,

Compliance often imagines non-conformance or audit findings as low hanging fruit or more specifically We look for them using audits, we pick them from the ground and take corrective action to pick them from rather than all commitments Relying on best efforts rather than best results Focusing on Inspection / auditing

introduced by old-factory thinking, reactive behaviours, and traditional training, inspection, and audits

regulations they will not know what it’s like for compliance to be anything other than rules driven by audits Can you describe this in terms we understand using rules and audits?

They might even have all the boxes checked and able to pass an audit.

RACI) Support for early and late binding of responsibilities during execution Audit of design, model

how to identify risks embedded in quality, health and safety, and environmental programs may require additional changes to risk management: Risked-based thinking requires companies be proactive instead of waiting for audit You cannot audit your way to better compliance.

full compliance with all legal and regulatory obligations measured by conformance as evidenced by zero audit regulations, and standards ( state them here) with an ultimate goal of zero breaches verified by third party audit Instead of audit being the primary function, compliance assurance, risk and performance management will

These capabilities are often directed at the reactive side of compliance focused on reporting, audits