Where is the grass greener? Banking or Life Science Compliance

Since the 2008 financial collapse, banking has become a highly regulated environment with each bank often requiring their own unique compliance structure. Similarly, Life Sciences has also become a highly regulated environment with the two industries sharing a lot of similarities in compliance principles. However, regulators of each industry have placed their focus on varying aspects of compliance with financial authorities spending a great deal of focus on oversight. This has led to two drastically different approaches to compliance.

Life Science companies follow general compliance program guidelines, set by the United States Sentencing Commission, as well as specific guidance set for pharmaceutical manufacturers, set by the Office of Inspector General. These guidelines often serve as a blueprint for life science compliance programs. In contrast, numerous financial legislation and guidelines published over the past ten years have led to a very specific set of responsibilities for the Board and Senior Management of financial institutions, more specifically outlined by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision. This has led to the focus across the banking industry to be at the top, whereas Life Science compliance has typically focused on an effective overall program.

Given these two industries consistent placement on the Top 10 list of most regulated industries in the US, there is a lot to be gained from looking closely at compliance within the banking world.

Read FRA Associate Director Jenny McVey's article into the financial industries' compliance, published in Life Science Compliance Update, where she examines what can be learned from the banking compliance structure to further benefit Life Science compliance programs.