Why Risk and Compliance spans and layers /layoffs have been delayed twice?
7 replies (most recent on top)
another possible reason: head of enterprise testing with no experience in controls assurance (lawyer by degree, WF career manger with vague risk mgt experience to say the least) cannot figure out what ET does and how to make it more efficient. He doesn't probably understand the methodology flaws either and what to do to improve it. Neither his middle managers. This is pretty hilarious to watch. People at the bottom can see clearly what the management can't because the management seem more focused on justifying their own existence than managing risk.
they know where all the bodies are buried. probably more so than audit. the're trying to smoke them out.
The OCC and/or the FRB most likely are the reason. They will want to scrutinize the changes and may have pushed back on the initial plans.
because they're still trying to figure out what they can centralize is one reason. The other is look at all of the new leaders recently brought in who are "figuring out their org structures". That is going to take at least a few months to be figured out.
Has either of those two areas ever done anything correctly/on-time/efficiently? Why would you expect them to begin now? When they do get around to it the cuts won't be either deep enough or move out the people who need to go.
lots of moving pieces and a lot of new cro's coming in who want to give their $.02. also wouldn't surprise me if they need to get signoff from the feds on some of the changes.
when displacement notifications get delayed from target dates, it is generally because in the review process something was unsatisfactory and had to be reworked. there are lots of approvals and steps to get to the actual displacement notification "go", so there are a lot of ways it can get sent back. What exactly happened in the case you are asking about - you'll never know.