The employees?? Please.
I think it’s fascinating that Wells is putting so much time, effort and money in to “changing the organizational structure and building a framework to ensure deviant employees are following the rules …yada yada yada…”
Come on now. The problem is NOT THE EMPLOYEES. The problems have always stemmed from our high-level leaders, who are responsible for the largest share of Wells Fargo’s violations. Sure, some of the Board was replaced: by more of the same. They brought in Charlie Scharf and a new management team: more of the same. Actually, worse in so many ways.
As I write, increasing profits is still encouraged, measured and rewarded over increasing ethical behaviors. There is your problem.
Employees model the behavior and tone set by their leaders. Shine a bright unfiltered light on the day-to-day of our leaders. Due to our history of violations - I say the Feds need to build a framework around ensuring our high-level leaders are following the rules. How are the C-Suite’s organizational goals and objectives being monitored for promoting the exploitation of customers?? Record and document every closed-door meeting between them. Record their phone calls (like they record ours). Have our leaders document and explain the methodology behind each decision and what they will do to prevent and monitor negative downstream effects. Have those meetings and documents reviewed and signed off on by lawyers.
Who is the Head of Compliance, Derek F.? We need to get a bulldog in there who isn’t afraid to dig in to the “profits above all else” philosophy here, which is not going to be solved by annual compliance training and a check- the-box approach to monitoring minutia.
As an example, let’s take a look at Compliance’s focus on preventing Conflicts of Interest:
- 24 year-old Bob, who makes $40K/year working in our back office, is NOT ALLOWED to purchase a home that is a short sale offered by Wells Fargo. But…
- Our CEO, Charlie Scharf, IS ALLOWED to serve as a member of the Board of Directors whose job it is to oversee Charlie Scharf. How is that possible for a company who has been consistently fined for “lack of oversight”?
As my grandpa used to say, “That makes about as much sense as a b-a on a snake.”