MAINSYSTEMS 
define the channel manager's role and the conditions needed to perform it
1. Regulatory Concept & Core Standards
In this video we will work through a concrete decision: define the channel manager's role and the conditions needed to perform it. The aim is to explain the criterion used and apply it to a workplace situation. We will start with the concept, move to the procedure and finish with a case to solve. The Croatian confidential person and deputy have specific statutory functions that are not automatically identical to integrity coordination. This course covers mandates, resources, cover and management information. Its proposed annual plan is an organisational tool, not a universal Portuguese RGPC obligation in Croatia.
An integrity coordinator monitors preventive measures within an organisational mandate. The confidential person and deputy have distinct tasks under the Croatian Act. A job title does not automatically confer both roles. Each needs actual conditions and lawful access. The employer must not interfere with statutory handling for reporting-person protection.
Apply the following rule: An employer with at least 50 workers generally must establish an internal reporting system. Article 19(3) requires covered employers under specified parts of the Annex to do so regardless of headcount. Appointment of a confidential person and deputy follows Article 20, including proposals by the works council, the authorised trade-union representative or at least 20 per cent of workers where that representation is absent. If no proposal is made, the Act provides for appointment without it. Appointees must consent in writing.
2. Practical Implementation & Procedure
Check appointment, mandate and access for each role. Identify dependence on a person whose conduct is under assessment. Define independent escalation and cover. Article 14 confidentiality still limits access even where the coordinator has broad responsibility for controls. Before moving on, turn this procedure into a sequence you could explain to a colleague. Identify the first check, the action that depends on its outcome and the record that allows the decision to be reconstructed. Follow the sequence on screen and identify the point where an error would change the result.
3. Case Study & Compliance Action
A company appoints an integrity coordinator but requires permission from the department under review before accessing necessary records. This prevents independent oversight. Management revises information routes and defines functional access without granting unrestricted access to reporting data. Now read the case carefully. Separate established facts from information you would still need to confirm. Do not add motives or events that have not been described. This distinction matters when choosing a response proportionate to the information available.
The exercise is as follows: Is formal appointment sufficient if the integrity coordinator cannot obtain necessary information? Choose an answer and write one sentence explaining it. During the pause, compare your choice with the criteria we have just considered. Also think about the material you would retain to explain the decision later.
No. Effective working conditions must exist. Access must suit the role and respect confidentiality and data protection. The organisation should document how it resolves obstacles.
One mistake to avoid is: assigning a title without autonomy, resources or functional access to information.
Now apply the national rule to a second decision. A subsidiary copies its foreign head office's policy without assessing its own activities and size. What must it check?
Identify the local legal entity, sector, national counting method and any public-sector or territorial regimes. Then link each obligation to a source and a responsible person. A group model can support operations but does not replace this assessment.