| Abstract: |
This paper illustrates how trust in management can be consolidated through the
order and mode of application of enforcement measures (negotiating and
punitive enforcement measures) which are employed in facilitating and
maximising compliance with rules. “Whilst negotiating strategies are
introduced initially to develop trust between the regulator and the regulated,
resort is made to more punitive strategies where an absence of trust in the
compliance activity has been confirmed.” In considering techniques which could
be introduced to maximise compliance with rules, standards and principles,
this paper not only highlights why responsive and negotiating strategies are
more effective than deterrence based strategies in facilitating compliance
with rules and principles, but also the importance of introducing some element
of fairness and high degree of accountability into the decision making
process. Whilst fairness is considered to be of greater significance to
decisions founded on principles and discretion, accountability is a benefit
and feature which is usually attributed to “bright lines rules”. Even though
it is contended that issues related to legitimacy and accountability could
still arise with group decisions, this paper seeks to demonstrate that some
degree of accountability (along with the fairness attributed to group
decisions) could be fostered through corporate and group decision making.
Furthermore, the paper highlights how effective communication can be achieved,
how such communication – as well as an effective system of communication, is
vital to determining the point at which there should be a departure from the
systematic application of rules. |