Training needs by role and risk

1. Regulatory Concept & Core Standards

In this video we will work through a concrete decision: map training needs from actual roles and exposures. 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. Training should help each role apply the entity's policies and procedures. This proposed programme links content to risks and actual national duties. A generic catalogue needs a connection to the code and channel people will use.

Different roles make different decisions. Procurement selects suppliers, finance checks payments, managers assess staff and channel teams handle sensitive accounts. Common training helps, but specific preparation must match role and risk. Article 13(3) requires the competent authorities identified there to train their designated handlers. Distinguish this duty from a company’s choice of a general learning programme.

Apply the following rule: Public authorities, public institutions and other public-law legal persons, regardless of headcount, and generally private legal persons with at least 50 employees must have internal channels. Article 9 provides sector-specific exceptions and sharing rules. The designated person or unit must act impartially and independently.

2. Practical Implementation & Procedure

Match roles with risk-plan exposures and expected behaviour. Consider existing knowledge, frequent errors and recent changes. Identify people without regular computer access and accessibility needs. Use interviews and diagnostic exercises without collecting sensitive personal accounts in general surveys. Record priorities and reasons for module selection. 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

Everyone completed an integrity introduction, but the payments team cannot confirm bank-detail changes. The needs assessment identifies a missing specific skill. The plan adds demonstration and practice aligned with internal controls. 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 the same general introduction enough to prepare every role for its specific risks? 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.

Not necessarily. Supplement the common foundation according to roles and exposure. Each audience should be able to make its own decisions, beyond recognising general definitions.

One mistake to avoid is: choosing topics solely because videos are available without considering the entity's risks.

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.