Non- compliance in organisations

What you need to know:

  • Many times, we continue to see these things. We see how the results of findings are not allowed to be published and discussed.

It is so important for organisations to continue to comply with the laws that we make. If we do not comply, many questions will be asked. 

The prudent thing is to conduct all our operations following the legal and regulatory requirements that we toil to promulgate to make life better. 

Outputs of organisations will be in line with their objectives and therefore, the country’s development goals. 

Everybody that subjects our outputs to audits and inspections finds us very clean. So, another pair of eyes must confirm that the activities comply with requirements as expected. 

To ensure that endeavours are causing the necessary impact to humanity. That there is value for money. And that the public should continue to trust us to deliver when they give us their taxes. 

So you see! We have to allow these monitoring processes to take place. Otherwise, forcing ourselves to do things the way we like betrays the trust the public continues to grant us. 

It is, however, easy to talk, talk, talk! Things do not usually go how we want them to, and usually, non-compliance appear and we must identify and address. So, the first signs of non-compliance are delays and time-wasting. You planned to audit this organisation weeks ago. You even requested documents to be submitted by a given time for review before the audit.

However, the auditee organisation did not respond in time. Instead, they waited until the eve of the audit to send these documents. 

That does not give the auditors ample time to review documentation and prepare. Anyhow, you still proceeded to visit the premises of the organisation. 

Secondly: Excuses! Upon arrival at the auditee facilities, officers are not ready for the activity. They continue to give reasons for their non-readiness. They make themselves busy and do not allow the auditor to do a smooth job. You do not see evidence of preparedness for the audit. 

Third: The accountable person of the auditee organisation does not appear in person. S/he delegates the activity to another person claiming to be committed to other activities elsewhere. 

Fourth: No evidence. Once in the audit, no evidence of activities undertaken is presented. Promises! Promises! Promises! All that auditees say are promises to avail them during the audit. Then you wait. They keep winding down time, hoping to see your back.     

Fifth: Hostility. The organisation’s personnel are not friendly. They make the auditors’ work as uncomfortable as possible. 

They are unwilling to cooperate. They continue to frustrate you, making you unable to progress with the task ahead. 

Sixth: Threats. The ‘big person’ of the organisation threatens you and continues to tell you that they are immune to recommendations that will come out. 

It leads to the question, as an auditor how do you deal with this difficult auditee? Do you cowardly give in to the trickery? Do you accept the fat envelope that most likely will be pushed in your direction to soothe your tough stand? Or, do you stand your ground and tell the auditee that the purpose of the audit is for process improvement? You have to get to the bottom of the matter and tell stakeholders what, why, and how the non-compliance happened. 

So that this does not repeat in the future. So that we can find ways to prevent more of the same. So that we can devise how to improve future procedures. Also, tell them who is culpable. So that lessons are learned for a better future. 

Many times, we continue to see these things. We see how the results of findings are not allowed to be published and discussed.

So, auditors must be willing to stand firm and ready to correct things. To make process improvements rather than to punish people. Then we will work effectively and efficiently. 

Simon J. Mone, Civil Engineer