Training: Understanding the ‘why’

By Joe Murphy, 6 October 2025

A compliance and ethics (C&E) programme can mean different things to different people. But one aspect that often comes to people’s minds first, is training. This is viewed as key to reaching employees. It is always on the list of programme elements. 

Plus, whenever governments stumble into trying to mandate compliance programmes, training is always there. California, for example, with its experiment in requiring compliance efforts to prevent harassment, relies on a mandated number of training hours in a set time period.

But although training has long been a landmark of C&E, it is still worth examining some fundamental, motivational questions about training. These include: 

1. Why do any kind of training, ever?
2. Why do companies do C&E training?
3. Why do people take training?

Why do any kind of training?

There often seems to be an assumption that training is done for one reason: to transfer information to employees. (I use the term “employees” to cover anyone the company may choose to train, which might also include third parties, and of course executives and especially the board.) 

So, if there is a class about the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), the training might explain its origin, its purpose, what it says, and what its penalties are. There might even be a test to see what attendees have learned. 

If the only purpose is to transfer information, then one might suggest allowing employees to test outside of the training, so they do not have to duplicate the learning process. 

But this misses another important purpose of training: motivation. Employees may know, intellectually, that the FCPA prohibits bribery. But is this actually important to them? After the training will they care? Will the training inspire them to comply? Or will it scare them into following the law? And, another essential point: will it cause them to voluntarily report their own misconduct or the misconduct of others? Commentators who suggest “testing out” may understate the motivational part. 

Training may surface issues that had not been front of mind until a person was reminded about the topic by the training. This is especially true if the training is interactive. In my time working with companies, I have personally experienced people raising compliance issues as a result of the training delivered. [1]

Information and motivation therefore serve as essential goals of training. But there is also a third purpose: skill. For example, if you are going to be investigating compliance and financial crime issues, it is not enough to just remember information on how to conduct an interview, or to be highly motivated in doing so. It is also important to practise investigative skills and learn in that way, and training provides a safe space to do so.  

Why do companies do C&E training?

It might seem obvious at first why companies do compliance training. The simple answer might be to stay out of trouble. But the analysis can go further than that, and inform what type of training is done.

Firstly, it may be that the company has no choice. There may be a legal requirement for the training. This is the case, for example, with the aforementioned two hours of harassment training every two years in California. Where such training is mandated, companies need to ensure it doesn’t just become a check-box activity. 

Training may also be required by a customer. For instance, someone retaining a foreign agent to obtain business may require that the agent’s employees receive anti-corruption training. 

Companies may also do training to maintain ISO certification, for example, under ISO 37001 on anti-corruption and ISO 37301 relating to general compliance systems.

In addition, companies may require training for their C&E professionals so that they have the appropriate skill level, or because they want their C&E professionals to be certified. 

Companies who consider this more deeply will also see that training is an important tool for developing a positive corporate culture. This requires high standards, since poor or insincere training can have the opposite impact. It may well be, for example, that poorly developed harassment training can have the opposite of the intended effect. You want people to feel good about the company, and to view themselves positively too. This can improve morale and productivity, and the company’s ability to recruit top people.   

Another potentially very practical business benefit from effective training is to save the company money. For instance, an effective C&E programme can reduce fraud. The Association of Certified Fraud Examiners (ACFE) indicates that companies lose 5% of their gross revenue to waste, fraud and abuse each year [2]. Effective training that improves the culture could reduce this loss. 

Firms also do training for external purposes, particularly where they need to impress governing authorities and regulators. Government agencies that recognise C&E programmes help to drive this process. As a motivator, however, this works best when governments and regulators are clear that box ticking does not help, and that companies must also measure the effectiveness of any training.  

Companies may train board members and executives to help protect them under the Caremark case standards, and to help them meet their fiduciary responsibilities. Companies may also seek external recognition, such as being on “most ethical” lists.  

Training can also be seen as a sign that the company wants its employees to learn, add more value and advance in their careers. It demonstrates investment in employees, and belief in their potential.

Why do people take training?

What motivates people to take training? They may need to, or they may want to, or both. For example, professionals typically have continuing education requirements. They could see this as a positive opportunity to complete courses that add to their knowledge and skills.

Employees may have mandatory compliance training, which C&E professionals track and enforce. Companies may make completion of the training a factor in employees’ performance evaluations. 

For skills training, the motivation may be stronger, particularly if they need to master these to effectively perform their role. As the story of motivation has been told, if you are training people on how to correctly pack and then deploy a parachute, you don’t need to worry about motivation (at least, if they want to jump more than once!). 

People may take training for a number of other reasons, such as curiosity, to improve an existing skill, or to gain a business advantage. In a personal example, early on as an antitrust lawyer I learned to use the “coffee urn” message. I would tell sales employees this piece of advice:  

If you are ever in a room with competitors (and yes, this does happen), if anyone starts talking about prices you are to stand up, loudly announce that this is improper and that you will not participate. On the way out of the room you knock over the coffee urn! If people remember nothing else about that meeting, they will remember that you left. And embarrassment beats serving time in federal prison.

I learned to use an attention-getting and memorable hook; this always drew out a reaction, and my experience was that people remembered it.

Final thoughts

What is the conclusion from all this? That there is more to training than people often assume. It is useful to look at it from a broader perspective, including understanding the “whys” behind it.