May 23, 2012

Grappling with Governance

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protect Act was signed into law with the intent of overhauling the financial services industry to protect the American consumer. Though intentions were good, the effects have proved frustrating for the industry.

According to the "11th Annual Legal Study" by Corporate Board Member and FTI Consulting, the recent regulatory parade is contributing to governance gridlock and increased liability. The majority of those surveyed feel that the ultimate impact of the Dodd-Frank act will be increased oversight and reduced earnings. Close to 75% of directors and general counsel do not anticipate that the act will be positively perceived in the future.

"There are a myriad of issues that companies are facing in the current regulatory environment, and the weight of these concerns only appears to be escalating among directors and general counsel," said Neal Hochberg, senior managing director and leader of the forensic and litigation consulting practice at FTI Consulting.

Additionally, 69% of general counsel sees regulatory compliance as the function adding the most workload to the internal legal department over the next 12 months. It seems the well-meaning Dodd-Frank act has eased some consumers concerns while having the opposite effect on directors and counsel.

Risk Management Magazine and Risk Management Monitor. Copyright 2012 Risk and Insurance Management Society, Inc. All rights reserved.

About the Author

Editor

Emily Holbrook is the editor of Risk Management magazine and the Risk Management Monitor blog.

212-655-5915

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.