Third Party Research Methodology, Countries & Regulators

Third Party Research Methodology, Countries & Regulators


 You can download a full copy of the slides from this webinar. 




Full video transcript available below:

Thanks, Shane. So back in October and November of 2016, we conducted a survey with CefPro, of which we got 243 respondents from across the globe, and this survey was focused exclusively on the financial services sector. We found that, from the responses, it was broken out into roughly 66% of respondents operated within the banking sector, 17% in asset management, 10% in insurance, and the remaining 7% we have consolidated into the other category. We also grouped these respondents' companies into three sizes ... over 5,000 employees, which represented 53% of the respondents, 501 to 5,000 employees, which represented 23% of the respondents, and then up to 500 employees, which represented 24% of respondents. Over now back over to you, Shane.

Thank you, Joe. So the first thing we looked at here, obviously, third party management, and one of the issues around this is globalization, the extension of the value chain, and the regions and the countries that you deal with, and how do you deal with different jurisdictions and different cultures. So this report ... And it's dealing with financial services, so some of what we see here is a map of financial services in the globe and where activity between markets is strongest.

It is worth mentioning that when we cross-tab the results against the size of the firm, larger organizations, not surprisingly, have the broadest footprint, being twice as likely as their smaller counterparts to engage third parties in Canada, Africa, Asia, but three times more likely to be working with firms in the Middle East. Now, we would also point out that there's an apparent correlation between countries which are viewed as having more regulation, and the amount of engaging with third parties.

So in the broader sense, we could infer that the financial services organizations favor relationships with third parties in more regulated markets. That's hardly unsurprising but noteworthy nonetheless. Next thing we look at here was a question about the regulators that you're dealing with, and I suppose the thing that stands out is not the individual regulators but the sheer number of regulators that are involved. Of the 243 respondents across the globe, they listed 69 different regulators.

Now, the implications of a third party management program dealing with multiple jurisdictions and cultures but also 69 different regulators and the different priorities that they might bring to the table, it's obviously very significant. The SEC, and this would be a reflection I guess of the respondent base, was the most relevant of all the regulators identified, and you see them there coming close to maybe 45%. That was followed by FINRA, the OCC, and the FDIC.

Having said that, when we cross-tab these responses with a category, we see that the OCC is the most relevant in the banking sector, not surprisingly, but reading between the lines, we start to see the complexity [inaudible 00:10:54] face here. So larger firms, which we see are working across multiple jurisdictions, have to deal with multiple regulators, so robust and flexible risk management programs are essential.


You can download a copy of the research report discussed here.


Find out how MCO can help

Request a demo today to learn how MyComplianceOffice puts you in command of your compliance program, synchronizing your business needs with regulation. 

Request a Demo



Download our four page Portfolio of Solutions to learn about;

  • Personal Trade Monitoring
  • Gifts & Entertainment
  • Political Contributions
  • Third Party vendor risk management
  • Trade surveillance
  • And more

Brochure Download