I just had to take some Develop You course and noticed they all were from a third party, some company called LEO GRC. I am guessing where that company is from. No shock there considering how we want to outsource everything.
21 replies (most recent on top)
The Develop You classes are terrible, often irrelevant or outdated and with multiple systems issues and errors in the answers. It is simple embarrassing mistakes like this that make one realize why the regulators (who have too much power, like Eric Cartman with authoriti) have no choice but to slap our noses with newspapers every time we show up and claim we’ve fixed everything.
Scharf has been here almost two years. He has accomplished nothing but hiring cronies, reveal his racism/privilege/elitism, and shown he may be a friend of Jamie’s but his entire career is founded in connections privilege and lies.
What I find most interesting is that leolearning Web site only allows you to Accept cookies. There is no option to reject cookies. This--from a company that provides regulatory training? Plus, some of the training modules don't define the acronym when they present the topic, and I've come across more than a few regrettably poor uses of the English language. Sad.
Managers don't have golden parachutes...I think you mean executives. Even though some execs got comp claw backs, it's pretty obvious that managers have got the short end of the stick by comparison since the whole scandal broke, and many many of them have been fired with no golden anything.
I have said since the beginning of this that the employees have been made to pay (in excessive classes, paperwork, low pay, layoffs, etc.) for bad management, while they got away with their golden parachute scot free.
There’s some truth for you. No amount of classes will change that unless the managers stop directing people to do this ex------t.
Post ID: @1uvy+1aMGRQ9S
I’m not against trying to teach the facts - but the classes are (obviously) not effective at preventing fraud. It is not effective to keep piling more classes on the employees, when the example for questionable behavior is being set at the top.
Our former leadership did not practice what they preach. Neither does the new leadership. They put on a good show, but it’s a smoke show. Charlie and the Board are under pressure to make more money, cut expenses and get that stock price up and the dividend back.
Our Whistleblower program is a joke. I’ve seen how it works and it’s a great way to sabotage your future.
In my LOB alone, I could name at least 10 practices which are a conflict of interest with our clients, and several which blatantly go against regulations, but our Compliance people don’t have the depth of knowledge to catch them. And managers look the other way, because these practices are money makers for the bank and it makes the manager’s department look successful.
The unspoken word at WFC has always been to play nice or your career will be dead in the water.
I wish it wasn’t that way, but it is.
To @1bdv+1aMGRQ9S
I wish that was the case, but compliance training is often required by regulators or our own policies. Not all training is created because of a gap in knowledge. Just FYI: You can train and train people, but you can't make them use it in the job.
Post ID: @aoo+1aMGRQ9S
Uhhhh, if the classes were an effective tool - WFC wouldn’t need to be under a Federal asset cap forcing a complete overhaul.
There are some 40 or so tests that we must take. Having to get 80% on some is ridiculous. There should be questions after each section and then you're done. Too much of a drag on our time.
Agree with other designer about using vendors. Just adding that any internally created courses will be maintained by a WF team in India starting in August. I'm anticipating our leaders won't stop there. I expect a lot of layoff in our Learning snd Development group.
Designer here. We outsource some readily available courses so we don't have to do it. It is cheaper and easier to get readily available courses that were designed for the industry. We also continue to create courses internally. We are all using the same software and templates now for internally developed courses. That is why they look similar now.
me too's wants trainings, wheres does me's signs up
Uhhh, the compliance courses exist because there's either a law or a regulatory body requires them, so how is having them a 'fake display of compliance'? It's literally the only way to be compliant.
Risk was looking to do this last year.
Source: helped evaluate courses and course providers
Post ID: @hhl+1aMGRQ9S
From the point of view of the company that creates the training, we are the corporate client. Unless there is a clear strategic/tactical advantage to staffing a team to create it, why would we bother. None of this stuff is proprietary.
Those courses are a complete farce. More smoke and mirrors designed to obscure and embellish the truth about the bank’s ethics and Compliance.
If WFC would stop all the time and money wasted on their fake displays of leadership and compliance, and actually properly lead their employees and comply with the law: we could get out from under the asset cap.
@gjb. They are often the same thing.
@svl. This is for internal training not for corporate clients. A bank should know their own internal training. If they want to use Chase training since they seem to want to be like them, then just say so.
Don't confuse outsourcing with offshoring.
Cleaning people are not Wells people either. They outsourced that too. Unacceptable!!
Seems like an appropriate activity to outsource. I've noticed the courses have gotten much more consistent in terms of execution, look/feel, etc. over the past 18 months. Seems like a good thing to me. In the past, it felt like we had various teams designing the courses (some of which was probably outsourced to different vendors anyhow).
Stop it already. We're a bank. Our core competency is banking not designing training for corporate clients. Why wouldn't you outsource that?