It the third article in what is probably going to be a four-part series, with a couple related side projects.

2/21
Article 1 - Coordinating Compliance Incentives, with the Cornell Law Review (2017). https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2867048

3/21
Article 1 argued that compliance programs would benefit from regulatory mechanisms that (i) recognize when an institution is engaged in recidivist behavior across diverse regulatory areas and (ii) aggressively sanction institutions that are repeat offenders.

4/21
Article 2 – The Compliance Project – Indiana Law Journal (2019) - https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3151893

6/21
Article 2 argues that utilizing a process frame-in particular prevention, detection, investigation, & remediation-to conduct root cause analyses in the aftermath of compliance failures will lead to the creation, implementation, and better evaluation of compliance programs.

7/21
Side Project 1 – The Outsized Influence of the FCPA? – Illinois Law Review (2019) - https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3209510

9/21
Side Project 1 asks firms to consider whether they have become so concerned with ensuring compliance with the FCPA that they sometimes fail to identify other areas of risk that are equally, and in some instances more, serious.

10/21
Side Project 1 asks whether firms sometimes (i) miss deficiencies within their compliance programs; (ii) fail to see trends across compliance areas; & (iii) improperly prioritize necessary revisions to their compliance programs after significant misconduct is discovered.

11/21
Side Project 1 apparently has no blog post. Shame on me. But it is short!

12/21
Article 3 – Complex Compliance Investigations – Columbia Law Review (2020) - https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3350463.

13/21
Article 3 focuses on the period between detection and investigation in an effort to determine why misconduct that a firm is aware of isn’t rectified before growing in a more widespread and significant problem.

14/21
Article 3 argues that firms must focus on process-based reforms—or the actions, practices, & routines firms employ to communicate and analyze info—that will bolster a firm’s efforts to detect and investigate misconduct and act as a safety net for compliance programs.

15/21
Side Project 2 – More Meaningful Ethics – University of Chicago Law Review Online (2020) - https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3474344

17/21
Side Project 2 questions the wisdom of focusing on compliance without an equal focus on ethics. It argues that firms should implement specific and explicit ethical infrastructures within their compliance programs.

18/21
Side Project 2 suggests firms commit to adopting policies that (i) protect the dignity of, (ii) promote the flourishing of, and (iii) adv. the interests of the var. stakeholders of firms as a baseline to be used for establishing the ethics components of their E&C programs. 19/21
Short blog post on Side Project 2 - https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2019/12/10/more-meaningful-ethics/

20/21
Forthcoming – Side Project 3 with Law & Contemporary Problems later this year (currently debating title…Unwilling Enforcers or Cooperative Enforcement or something else). Currently working on Article 4 – Perfect Compliance. Stay tuned.

21/21
You can follow @VRootMartinez.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled: