




版權(quán)說明:本文檔由用戶提供并上傳,收益歸屬內(nèi)容提供方,若內(nèi)容存在侵權(quán),請進(jìn)行舉報(bào)或認(rèn)領(lǐng)
文檔簡介
Companies’assessments
ofanti-corruptioncompliance
2l
COMPANIES’ASSESSMENTSOFANTI-CORRUPTIONCOMPLIANCE?OECD2025
?OECD2025.
ThisworkispublishedundertheresponsibilityoftheSecretary-GeneraloftheOECD.TheopinionsexpressedandargumentsemployedhereindonotnecessarilyreflecttheofficialviewsoftheMembercountriesoftheOECD.
Thisdocumentandanymapincludedhereinarewithoutprejudicetothestatusoforsovereigntyoveranyterritory,tothedelimitationofinternationalfrontiersandboundariesandtothenameofanyterritory,cityorarea.
Coverdesign:?kitka/iStock/GettyImagesPlus
Attribution4.0International(CCBY4.0)
ThisworkismadeavailableundertheCreativeCommonsAttribution4.0Internationallicence.Byusingthiswork,youaccepttobeboundbythetermsofthislicence(
/licenses/by/4.0/
).
Attribution–youmustcitethework.
Translations–youmustcitetheoriginalwork,identifychangestotheoriginalandaddthefollowingtext:Intheeventofanydiscrepancybetweentheoriginalworkandthetranslation,onlythetextoforiginalworkshouldbeconsideredvalid.
Adaptations–youmustcitetheoriginalworkandaddthefollowingtext:ThisisanadaptationofanoriginalworkbytheOECD.TheopinionsexpressedandargumentsemployedinthisadaptationshouldnotbereportedasrepresentingtheofficialviewsoftheOECDorofitsMembercountries.
Third-partymaterial–thelicencedoesnotapplytothird-partymaterialinthework.Ifusingsuchmaterial,youareresponsibleforobtainingpermissionfromthethirdpartyandforanyclaimsofinfringement.
YoumustnotusetheOECDlogo,visualidentityorcoverimagewithoutexpresspermissionorsuggesttheOECDendorsesyouruseofthework.
AnydisputearisingunderthislicenceshallbesettledbyarbitrationinaccordancewiththePermanentCourtofArbitration(PCA)ArbitrationRules2012.TheseatofarbitrationshallbeParis(France).Thenumberofarbitratorsshallbeone.
l3
COMPANIES’ASSESSMENTSOFANTI-CORRUPTIONCOMPLIANCE?OECD2025
Foreword
Thelandscapeofanti-corruptioneffortshasshiftedinrecentyears;onceledbygovernmentsandtheirlawenforcementagencies,theprivatesectorhasbecomeanincreasinglyessentialactor.Companiesaroundtheglobehaveinvestedinthedevelopmentofanti-corruptioncomplianceprogrammesandrecognisethattheseinvestmentsmust,ineffect,preventcorruption.Theimportanceofassessingcomplianceprogrammes’effectivenesshaslongbeenemphasisedbyinternationalstandards.InitsGoodPracticeGuidanceonInternalControls,Ethics,andCompliance,theOECDRecommendationforFurtherCombatingBriberyofForeignPublicOfficialsinInternationalBusinessTransactionsoutlinesaroadmapforassessmentsbyguidingcompaniesonhowtoestablisheffectivemeasuresforpreventinganddetectingforeignbriberyandcorruption(OECD,2021[1]).Yetassessingtheeffectivenessofcomplianceprogrammeshasprovenchallengingandrequiresthatcompaniessetclearobjectives,measureprogressandimpact,andfosteracultureofintegrity.
Thispaperaimstosupportcompaniesintheirassessmenteffortsbytakingstockofthemethodologiesandtoolsthattheyusetoevaluateandenhancetheeffectivenessoftheiranti-corruptioncomplianceprogrammes.Itoutlinesthefactorsthatmotivatecompanies’assessmentefforts,addressestheresourcesandcapacitiesrequiredtoconductassessments,andconsidersthetoolsthatcanbeleveragedtomonitorprogressovertime.
DrawingondeskresearchanddatacollectedbytheOECDandtheBaselInstituteonGovernance,thispapercontributestopromotingstronganti-corruptionnormsandstandardswithinthepublicandprivatesectors.Itisonecomponentofatwo-partprojectdevelopedwiththesupportoftheUSStateDepartmentandwithintheframeworkoftheGalvanizingthePrivateSectorinitiative.
Theproject’ssecondcomponent,entitledGovernments’AssessmentsofCorporateAnti-CorruptionCompliance,complementsthispaperbymappingoutexistingguidancefrompublicauthoritiesonanti-corruptioncompliancecriteriaandassessmentmethodologiesandhighlightingareaswheregovernmentscanlearnfromprivatesectorpractices(OECD,2025[2]).Italsosetsoutcompanies’recommendationstogovernmentsonhowtobettercommunicatetheirexpectationsaboutcorporateanti-corruptioncomplianceprogrammes,assessmentcriteria,methodologiesandtools.
4l
COMPANIES’ASSESSMENTSOFANTI-CORRUPTIONCOMPLIANCE?OECD2025
Acknowledgements
TheOECDwouldliketothankallthecompanies,businessassociations,government,civilsocietyandinternationalorganisationsthatsharedtheirinsightsforthepurposesofthisreport.SpecialthanksgotothemembersoftheAnti-CorruptionLeadershipHub,aforumofChiefComplianceOfficersorequivalentfrommajor,multinationalenterprisesconvenedbytheOECD,thecompanieswhoagreedtoparticipateintheconsultationconductedbytheBaselInstituteonGovernanceincooperationwiththeOECD,aswellasotherparticipantsintheOECDexpertmeetingonthemarginsoftheOECDGlobalAnti-CorruptionandIntegrityForuminMarch2024.ThisreportwouldnothavebeenpossiblewithoutthesupportoftheUnitedStatesgovernmentaspartoftheGPSinitiative.
ThisreportwaspreparedbyAna?sMichel,LegalAnalystintheAnti-CorruptionDivisionoftheOECDDirectorateforFinancialandEnterpriseAffairs,underthedirectionofElodieBeth,SeniorManager,Anti-corruption,GlobalRelations,intheAnti-CorruptionDivisionoftheOECDDirectorateforFinancialandEnterpriseAffairs.ThisreportbuildsonthevaluablecontributionsofProfessorVeronicaMartinez,ProfessorofLaw,DukeUniversity,andfromVanessaHans,HeadofPrivatesectorandLucieBinder,SeniorSpecialist,GovernanceandIntegrity,fromtheBaselInstituteonGovernance.
l5
COMPANIES’ASSESSMENTSOFANTI-CORRUPTIONCOMPLIANCE?OECD2025
Tableofcontents
Foreword3
Acknowledgements4
Executivesummary7
1Whyassesstheeffectivenessofanti-corruptioncomplianceprogrammes?9
Avoidingormitigatingsanctionsandreputationaldamage9
Makingthebusinesscaseforcompliance11
Fosteringacultureofintegrity12
2Whatmethodologiesandcapacitiesareneededtoassesseffectiveness?15
Adoptingabehaviouralandscientificmethodology15
Leveragingrelevantcapacitiesandresources17
3Whichassessmenttoolscanbeleveragedtomonitorprogressovertime?21
Developingacombinationofactivity-andoutcome-basedindicatorsandmetrics21
Surveyingcultureandbehaviour22
Usingdataanalyticsandexploringartificialintelligence23
Leveraginginternalandexternalaudits26
Benchmarking,peerlearningandcollectiveactioninitiatives27
AnnexA.TheGoodPracticeGuidanceonInternalControls,Ethics,andCompliance31
References35
Notes38
FIGURES
Figure1.Setofindicatorstomeasuretheeffectivenessofcomplianceefforts30
TABLES
Table1.ActivitymetricsandimpactmetricsaccordingtoTransparencyInternational21
6l
COMPANIES’ASSESSMENTSOFANTI-CORRUPTIONCOMPLIANCE?OECD2025
BOXES
Box1.BRF’sexperience11
Box2.AcademicresearchprojectonassessingtheReturnonCompliance12
Box3.Academicresearchprojectonanorganisationalculturebasedonethicsandintegritytosupportanti-
corruptionefforts13
Box4.AtkinsRealis’incorporationethicalperformanceintothecalculationofexecutivebonuses18
Box5.EliLilly’scollaborationchannelsbetweentheEthicsandCompliance(E&C)teamandtheInformation
Technology(IT)team19
Box6.Novartis’culturesurveys23
Box7.ABInBev’sartificialintelligenceplatformBrewRIGHT25
Box8.Ericsson’sAllegationCaseManagementSystemandEthicsandComplianceAnalyticsApp25
Box9.UseofdataanalyticsbyOEC26
Box10.PeerlearningexperiencedbyAirbus27
Box11.TheCorporateAnti-CorruptionBenchmarkfromTransparencyInternationalUK28
Box12.BaselInstituteonGovernance:CollectiveActioninitiativeonMeasuringeffectivenessofanti-
corruptionprogrammes29
l7
COMPANIES’ASSESSMENTSOFANTI-CORRUPTIONCOMPLIANCE?OECD2025
Executivesummary
Ascompaniesmakestridesindevelopinganti-corruptioncomplianceprogrammes,theymustalsotakestepstoassesstheseprogrammestoensuretheireffectivenessinpreventingcorruption.Inpractice,companies’assessmenteffortsaredrivenbyatleastthreefactors.Chiefamongtheseisavoidingsanctionsorreputationaldamage,areactiveapproachmotivatedbyrisk-drivenconcerns.Companiesalsoundertakeassessmentstoprovideevidencethatanti-corruptionmeasurescontributetobusinesssuccess,whichsupportscompliancepersonnelinlegitimisingandsecuringcomplianceinvestments.Finally,assessmentsmaysupportadoptingaproactiveapproachtocompliancethatinvolvesholisticallyfosteringacorporatecultureofintegrity.Whilecommendable,movingawayfromarules-based,reactiveapproachrequiresthatcompaniesplacegreateremphasisonlong-termcomplianceobjectivesandcorporatevalues,andengagerelevantskillsandresources.
Assessingeffectivenessrequiresthatcompaniesfirstdefinewhatconstitutesaneffectiveanti-corruptionprogramme,thenevaluatetheprogrammebasedondesiredoutcomes.Thisimpliesthatcompliancepersonnelidentifyobjectives(e.g.,riskmitigation)andinitiativesthatcanbeundertakentoachievethem.Arisk-drivenapproachiscentraltocompanies’assessmenteffortsbutcanbecomplementedbyaproactiveapproachthatpromotesethicalcorporatebehaviour.Thisstrengthenscomplianceprogrammes’effectivenessbycultivatingasenseofownershipamongstaff.Definingandevaluatingeffectivenessalsorequiresthatcompaniescollectdatasotheycantakeappropriatestepstoimproveontheirprogrammes.Evidence-basedmeasuresthatsupportassessmentsincludeconductingrootcauseanalyses,transactionaltestingandtestingofanti-corruptiontrainingcurriculum.Leadershipengagementinpromotingandimplementinganti-corruptionstandards,frombothseniorandmiddlemanagement,iscoretotheeffectivenessofanti-corruptionprogrammesandshouldbeakeyelementinassessments.Mobilisingmultidisciplinaryteamstoensurethatcomplianceeffortsareappropriatelyembeddedacrosscorporatefunctionsalsosupportscomprehensiveassessmentsofanti-corruptionprogrammes,reflectingcompanies’recognitionthatcultivatinganethicalcorporatecultureisasharedresponsibility.
Tomonitor,measureandanalyseeffectivenessofanti-corruptionmeasures,companiesemployawiderangeofquantitativeandqualitativetools.Developingactivity-andoutcome-basedindicatorsandmetricsiskeytoascertainingwhetheracomplianceprogramme’sobjectivesarebeingmet.Surveyssupportcompanies’assessmentsoftheextenttowhichacultureofintegrityhasbeenintegratedintoanorganisation.Dataanalyticsandartificialintelligencecanhelpidentifytrendsandpatterns,includingredflagsandareasofweakness,enablingcompaniestoimproveboththeircomplianceprogrammesandassessmentmethodologies.Internalandexternalauditsprovidehelpfulinsightsoneffectiveness,particularlywhenauditsincorporatebehaviouralsciencetoevaluatewhethercomplianceprogrammesarefacilitatingculturalchange.Poolingknowledgeandco-operatingacrosscompaniesholdconsiderablepotentialforsupportingassessmentsofcomplianceeffectiveness.Peerlearningwithinindustriesthatgrapplewithsimilarchallengescanbevaluable,ascanbenchmarking,thepracticeofcomparingacompany’seffortsagainstthoseofpeerorganisationsorindustrystandards.Collectiveactioninitiatives,whichcaninvolvesectoralinitiatives,industryalliancesandanti-corruptioncoalitions,canbringtheprivatesectorandotherstakeholderstogethertotacklesharedproblemsofcorruption.Whilecompaniesarekeentoexchangeinsights,atensionpersistsbetweentheappetiteforcollectiveengagementandconfidentialityconsiderations.Toaddressthis,governmentsmayconsidertakingstepstoimprovethealignmentand
8l
COMPANIES’ASSESSMENTSOFANTI-CORRUPTIONCOMPLIANCE?OECD2025
consistencyoftheirrulesandguidanceoncorporateanti-corruptioncompliance,facilitatepublic-privatedialogueandofferincentivesfortheimplementationofeffectivecomplianceprogrammes.
l9
COMPANIES’ASSESSMENTSOFANTI-CORRUPTIONCOMPLIANCE?OECD2025
1Whyassesstheeffectivenessofanti-corruptioncompliance
programmes?
Overthelastdecadecompanieshaveinvestedsignificanteffortsindevelopinganti-corruptionprogrammes,whichhavebeenlargelydrivenbygovernmentalregulations,andareincreasinglytakingstepstoassesstheeffectivenessoftheseprogrammes.Mostoftheconsultedcompaniesassesstheiranti-corruptioncomplianceprogrammetomitigatetheriskofenforcementbyavoidingpotentialsanctionsoranticipatingthelikelihoodofanymajorreputationalincidents.Companiesalsovieweffectivenessassessmentsasessentialtojustifycomplianceinvestments.Thissectionexaminesthetwomainreasonsconsultedcompaniesassesstheiranti-corruptioncomplianceprogramme-avoidingormitigatingsanctionsandreputationaldamageandjustifyingcomplianceinvestments.Inaddition,thissectionexploreseffortsbycompanieswithadvancedprogrammestoadoptamoreproactiveapproachandassesshowvalues,attitudes,andbehaviourstranslateintoacultureofintegrity.
Avoidingormitigatingsanctionsandreputationaldamage
TheOECDreportsthatavoidingprosecutionorotherlegalactionandprotectingthecompany’sreputationarechiefmotivatingfactorsforanti-corruptioncompliance(OECD,2020[3];2022[4]).Thisobservationalsoappliestotheassessmentofcomplianceeffectiveness.
Duringtheconsultation,companiesofallsizesstatedthatcomplianceprogrammesassessmentsareprimarilydrivenbyriskavoidance.Manyviewedcompliancewithanti-corruptionlegislationasessentialtopreventingsanctionsandreputationaldamage.Severalalsolinkedtheeffectivenessofananti-corruptionprogrammetoitsabilitytomitigatetheserisks.Asonecompanyrepresentativeexplained:
“Effectivenessistheoutcomethattherearenoseriousincidentsthatwouldrequireexternaldisclosure.”
Asaresult,companiestendtocalibratetheireffortstoassesseffectivenessoftheiranti-corruptionprogrammetotheextentrequiredbyanti-corruptionlegislationsandpolicies.Notably,multiplecompaniescitedtheUnitedStatesDepartmentofJustice,theFrenchanti-corruptionagency(AgenceFran?aiseAnticorruption),andtheUnitedKingdomSeriousFraudOfficeasbeingespeciallyinfluentialonthedesignoftheiranti-corruptionprogrammes.AtleastonelargecompanybuiltitsprogrammearoundtheanalysisofthemostcommoncasesbroughtagainstcompaniesundertheUnitedStatesForeignCorruptPracticesAct(FCPA).
10l
COMPANIES’ASSESSMENTSOFANTI-CORRUPTIONCOMPLIANCE?OECD2025
Notonlytheriskofsanctionsbutalsoactualenforcementtriggersreactiveanti-corruptioncomplianceefforts.ThoseconsultedcompaniesthathaveexperiencedmonitorshipsundertheFCPAfoundtheprocesschallenging–andwerekeentoavoidasimilarexperienceinthefuture.Ontheotherhand,theyvaluedtheadviceprovidedandtheunavoidablepushtoassesstherobustnessoftheiranti-corruptioncomplianceprogrammeandmovetheircompaniesinamoreethicaldirection,oftenprovidingthemwithstrongleadershipsupportandadequateresources.Conversely,onecompanyrepresentativesuggestedthatsomeofthedifficultiesfacedinenforcingthecompany'santi-corruptioncomplianceprogrammeinternallymightalsostemfromthefactthatthecompanyhadnotpreviouslyencounteredanycorruptionincidents.
Interestingly,consultedcompanies,andSMEsinparticular,foundincentivesparticularlybeneficialandaneffectivewaytoleveltheplayingfieldbycreatinganadditionalbusinesscaseinfavourofcomplianceforcompanieswithlimitedresources.Asstatedbyacompanyrepresentative:
“Incentivesmotivate.Theyarecritical.Especiallyforcompaniesthathavelessmatureprogrammes.”
Companiesappreciateincentivesfortheimplementationofeffectivecomplianceprogrammes,includingmeasureslikeaccesstonon-trialresolutions,reducedpenalties,taxbreaks,preferentialinterestrates,reputationalbenefits,orpreferentialaccesstopublicprocurement.Thisobservationsuggestsarecentincreaseincompanies’awarenessofthepotentialofincentivemechanisms,whichwerepreviouslynotseenasoneofthemaindriversforcorporateanti-corruptioncompliance(OECD,2022[4]).1Companiesappearincreasinglywillingtobenefitfromincentives,andthusmoreinterestedingovernments’assessmentsofanti-corruptioncomplianceprogrammesinthatcontext.Formoredetailsonthetypesofincentivesthatgovernmentsuseorcoulduseinthelawenforcementcontextorinrelationtopublicadvantages,pleaseseetheResourceGuideonStatesMeasuresforStrengtheningBusinessIntegrity(OECD/UN,2024[5]).
Whilethisrisk-averseapproachseekslegitimateprotectionagainstdamage,itmightalsohaveunintendedconsequences.Acompliancestrategythatisprimarilydrivenbytheneedtoavoidpenaltiesandreputationdamagetendstobereactiveratherthanproactive.Itfocusesassessmenteffortsonwhetherthecompanyismeetingregulatoryrequirementsintheshort-term,ratherthanonrootcauseanalysis.Adoptingsuchastrategycanfurthercreateasituationwherethereportingofissuesisseenasafailureratherthananopportunityforimprovement.Employeesmaythusfeelreluctanttoreportincidentsorflagnear-misses.Asaresult,thecompanycouldpotentiallymissopportunitiestoaddressminorissuesbeforetheyescalateandtoimplementcorrectiveactionsthatcouldpreventfutureoccurrences.
l11
COMPANIES’ASSESSMENTSOFANTI-CORRUPTIONCOMPLIANCE?OECD2025
Box1.BRF’sexperience
BRFS.A.(BRF)signedaleniencyagreementinDecember2022withtheBrazilianGeneralComptroller(CGU)andAttorneyGeneral′sOffice(AGU)inresponsetoinvestigationsintotheirprocesses.Intheframeworkofjudicialproceedings,BRFnotablyimprovedthecompany’sintegritysystem,restructuredthecompany’sgovernance,andcooperatedwiththeauthorities.
Withthesigningoftheagreement,BRFhasundertakentopaytheBrazilianauthoritiesBrazilianReal583.9millioninpenaltiesarisingfrompastconduct.Theexistenceofananti-corruptioncompliancesystemreducedthepenaltiesdefinedbyBrazilianauthoritiesandalsoassuredthecorrectremediationofallvulnerabilitieswithinthecompany.Nevertheless,theleniencyagreementalsoimposedsomeimprovements,whichsignificantlyenhancedBRF’sComplianceSystemaccordingtothecompany.Thereviewoftheriskassessmentallowedallnewmanagerstounderstandthecompany’sexposuretocorruptionrisk,withinacomplexandlongvaluechaininvolvinginteractionswithpublicauthorities.NewtrainingmaterialsandnewcommunicationsalsoincreasedemployeeawarenessoftheimportanceofBRF’sinternalcontrols.Furthermore,thecommitmenttoengageBRF’svaluechainexpandedtheactivitiesofitsComplianceTeam,embracingcriticalbusinesspartnersofBRF.
Sources:BRF;BRF(2024[6])Integratedreportfor2023;BRF(2023[7]),Integratedreportfor2022
Makingthebusinesscaseforcompliance
Existingmeasurestoassesseffectivenessofanti-corruptioncomplianceprogrammesarealsodrivenbyaneedfromcompliancedepartmentstoreportbacktotheirboardonthereturnoncomplianceinvestments.Effortsinthatdirectionindicateamoveawayfromareactiveapproachfocusedonavoidingsanctionsandreputationaldamage.However,sucheffortsremainsubjecttobusinessneedsandprioritiesofthetopmanagement,whichcouldleadtoafocusonimmediaterisk-drivenconcernsratherthanaproactiveandstrategicapproachtoanti-corruption.
Assessingacompany’santi-corruptioncomplianceprogrammeenablescompliancedepartmentstosecureandrequireadditionalinvestmentstoimproveit.Obtaininggreaterinvestmentmayrequireeducatingandpersuadingmanagementthatsuchinvestmentswillbeofbenefitforthecompany.Theupshotisthattoobtaintheresourcesandcapacitytoengageinassessmentsofanti-corruptioncomplianceprogrammes,managementwillneedtobelievethattheinvestmentsareinfactjustifiedbasedonanevidence-basedrationale.Ratherthanusingactivity-basedindicators,2compliancedepartmentswillneedtoshowevidenceonthereturnoncorporateinvestmentstoimplementitsanti-corruptioncomplianceprogramme.
Box2
presentsaresearchprojectaimedatdevelopingascience-basedmodelformeasuringthevaluecontributionofcomplianceinacompany,bearinginmindtheneedforcompliancedepartmentstosecurecomplianceinvestments.
Inaddition,compliancedepartmentsneedtolegitimisetheinvestmentinmeasurementtoolstoimproveassessmentmethodologies.Thedevelopmentofinnovativetools,therecruitmentofspecialisedstaffandthetestingofnewapproachestoevaluatingeffectivenesscangeneratesignificantcosts,whichcouldbeconsideredsuperfluousiftheobjectivesofthisexpenditure,andtheexpectedbenefitsforthecompany,arenotclearlyestablished,explainedto,andsupportedbymanagement.
Thisneedforlegitimisationalsoreflectsthepressuremanycompliancedepartmentsaresubjectto.Mostofconsultedcompaniesmentionedthedifficultiesthattheirdepartmentfacesinsecuringwhattheyregard
12l
COMPANIES’ASSESSMENTSOFANTI-CORRUPTIONCOMPLIANCE?OECD2025
assufficientinternalresourceallocation.Theynotablyreferredtosignificantpressurefrombothseniormanagementandgovernments“nottomakemistakes”despitelimitedresources.Accordingtosomeinterviewedcompanies,thispressureisevengreaterintimesofrapidgrowth,whenthevolumeofbusinessactivitytobemonitoredincreases,asdothepotentialcorruptionrisks.Asfurtherdetailedbelow,astrongtonefromthetop(andfromthemiddle)iskeytolegitimiseandfostereffortstoassesstheeffectivenessofanti-corruptioncomplianceprogrammes.
Box2.AcademicresearchprojectonassessingtheReturnonCompliance
Thedutytocomplywithlegalandethicalrequirementsisimperativefororganisationsandshouldnotbedrivenprimarilybyeconomicconsiderations.However,complianceofficersareoftenchallengedtoprovetheirlegitimacywithintheorganisation(Trevi?o,L.K.,denNieuwenboer,N.A.,Kreiner,G.E.,&Bishop,D.G.,2014[8]).Thisincludesdemonstratingtheeffectivenessandefficiencyofcompliancemeasuresandhowcompliancecontributestobusinesssuccess.
Toaddressthisissue,Hunzikeretal.developedascience-basedmodelformeasuringthevaluecontributionofcomplianceinthecontextofaprojectentitledReturnonCompliance(Hunziker,S.,Gruber-Durrer,M.,HauserC.,Bretti-Rainalter,J.,2025[9]).Theresearchersidentifiedelevenfactorsthatpositivelyinfluencetheeffectivenessandefficiencyofcompliance,albeittovaryingdegrees.Threefactorswerefoundtobekeytoeffectiveandefficientcompliance:compliancecompetence,decisionrelevance,andadaptability.Compliancecompetenceistheabilityofemployeestoidentify,respondto,andtakeappropriateactioninresponsetopotentialcompliancerisks.Decisionre
溫馨提示
- 1. 本站所有資源如無特殊說明,都需要本地電腦安裝OFFICE2007和PDF閱讀器。圖紙軟件為CAD,CAXA,PROE,UG,SolidWorks等.壓縮文件請下載最新的WinRAR軟件解壓。
- 2. 本站的文檔不包含任何第三方提供的附件圖紙等,如果需要附件,請聯(lián)系上傳者。文件的所有權(quán)益歸上傳用戶所有。
- 3. 本站RAR壓縮包中若帶圖紙,網(wǎng)頁內(nèi)容里面會(huì)有圖紙預(yù)覽,若沒有圖紙預(yù)覽就沒有圖紙。
- 4. 未經(jīng)權(quán)益所有人同意不得將文件中的內(nèi)容挪作商業(yè)或盈利用途。
- 5. 人人文庫網(wǎng)僅提供信息存儲空間,僅對用戶上傳內(nèi)容的表現(xiàn)方式做保護(hù)處理,對用戶上傳分享的文檔內(nèi)容本身不做任何修改或編輯,并不能對任何下載內(nèi)容負(fù)責(zé)。
- 6. 下載文件中如有侵權(quán)或不適當(dāng)內(nèi)容,請與我們聯(lián)系,我們立即糾正。
- 7. 本站不保證下載資源的準(zhǔn)確性、安全性和完整性, 同時(shí)也不承擔(dān)用戶因使用這些下載資源對自己和他人造成任何形式的傷害或損失。
最新文檔
- 石棉在分選機(jī)械中的應(yīng)用考核試卷
- 紡織品的智能監(jiān)測技術(shù)在健康領(lǐng)域的應(yīng)用考核試卷
- 紡織環(huán)保與可持續(xù)發(fā)展考試考核試卷
- 南京高三語文模擬作文
- 電氣安裝中的輸電線路故障定位與處理考核試卷
- 竹材采運(yùn)成本效益分析與優(yōu)化考核試卷
- 靜脈輸液工具的合理選擇 3
- 山西省百師聯(lián)盟2024?2025學(xué)年高二下學(xué)期3月聯(lián)考 數(shù)學(xué)試題【含答案】
- 臨床老年人噎食原因、危害及海姆立克急救法緊急施救操作
- 煙臺市重點(diǎn)中學(xué)2025屆初三4月質(zhì)量檢查語文試題試卷含解析
- 公司個(gè)人現(xiàn)實(shí)表現(xiàn)材料
- 2024年浙江杭州市林水局所屬事業(yè)單位招聘擬聘人員招聘歷年高頻考題難、易錯(cuò)點(diǎn)模擬試題(共500題)附帶答案詳解
- 再生資源行業(yè)培訓(xùn)課件
- DB35T 2094-2022 公路工程竣(交)工驗(yàn)收質(zhì)量檢測技術(shù)規(guī)程
- STEM教育理念下大班科學(xué)活動(dòng)的指導(dǎo)策略研究
- 對于慢性骨髓炎的護(hù)理
- 地下室手機(jī)信號解決方案
- 財(cái)務(wù)咨詢顧問協(xié)議樣本
- 光電軸角編碼器校準(zhǔn)規(guī)范
- 2024年中國郵政航空有限公司招聘筆試參考題庫含答案解析
- 《物流成本管理 第4版》各章思考題及習(xí)題答案
評論
0/150
提交評論