Due diligence and corporate compliance management pdf

Whereas Articles 3 and 21 of the Treaty on European Union TEU state that the Union, in its relations with the wider world, is to uphold and promote its values and principles, namely the rule of law and respect and protection of human rights, and contribute to the sustainable development of the Earth, solidarity, free and fair trade as well as to the strict observance and the development of international law; whereas more specifically, the Union is to foster the sustainable economic, social and environmental development of developing countries with the primary aim of eradicating poverty; whereas the Union is to respect those principles and pursue those objectives in the development and implementation of the external aspects of its other policies;.

Whereas Article 1 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union TFEU provides that the Union is to take account of the objectives of development cooperation in the policies that it implements which are likely to affect developing countries;.

Whereas the globalisation of economic activity has aggravated adverse impacts of business activities on human rights, including social and labour rights, the environment and the good governance of states; whereas human rights violations often occur at primary production level, in particular when sourcing raw material and manufacturing products;.

Whereas the Charter applies to all Union legislation and to national authorities when implementing Union law both in the Union and in third countries;. Whereas if due diligence is implemented comprehensively, undertakings will in the long term benefit from better business conduct with a focus on prevention rather than on remediation of harm;. Whereas democracy, which protects human rights and fundamental freedoms, is the only form of government compatible with sustainable development; whereas corruption and lack of transparency greatly undermine human rights;.

Whereas corruption in the context of judicial proceedings can have a devastating effect on the lawful administration of justice and judicial integrity, and intrinsically violate the right to a fair trial, the right to due process and the right to effective redress; whereas corruption can lead to cases of systematic violation of human rights in the business context, for example, by preventing individuals from accessing goods and services that States are obliged to provide to meet their human rights obligations or by increasing the price of such goods and services, by encouraging wrongful acquisition or appropriation by business of land, or facilitating money laundering, or by granting unlawful licences or concessions to businesses in the extractive sector;.

Whereas the COVID crisis has exposed some of the severe drawbacks of global value chains and the ease with which certain undertakings are able to shift, both directly and indirectly, negative impacts of their business activities to other jurisdictions, in particular outside the Union, without being held accountable; whereas the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development OECD has shown that undertakings that have taken proactive steps to address the risks related to the COVID crisis in a way that mitigates adverse impacts on workers and supply chains, develop a more long-term value and resilience, improving their viability in the short term and their prospects for recovery in the medium to long term;.

Whereas the importance of freedom of expression and of the freedoms of association and of peaceful assembly, including the right to form and join trade unions, the right to collective bargaining and action, as well as the right to fair remuneration and to decent working conditions, including health and safety in the workplace, should be underlined;.

Whereas, according to ILO statistics, around the globe there are around 25 million victims of forced labour, million victims of child labour, 2,78 million deaths due to work-related diseases per year and million non-fatal work-related injuries per year; whereas the ILO has developed several conventions to protect workers, but their enforcement is still lacking, especially with reference to the labour markets of developing countries;.

Whereas the exploitation and degradation of human beings through forced labour and slave-like practices affecting millions of people , from which certain undertakings, public or private entities or persons have benefitted globally in , persist; whereas the situation of an estimated million children in child labour, 72 million of whom work in hazardous conditions, many of them being forced to work through violence, blackmail and other unlawful means is unacceptable and particularly worrying; whereas undertakings have the special responsibility of protecting children, in particular, and preventing any form of child labour;.

Whereas the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and the United Nations Human Rights Council have stated that climate change has an adverse impact on the full and effective enjoyment of human rights; whereas states have an obligation to respect human rights when addressing adverse impacts caused by climate change; whereas any corporate due diligence legislation must be in line with the Paris Agreement;.

Whereas systemic corruption violates the principles of transparency, accountability and non-discrimination, with severe implications for the effective enjoyment of human rights; whereas the OECD Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions and the United Nations Convention against Corruption oblige Member States to implement effective practices aimed at the prevention of corruption; whereas provisions of the United Nations Convention against Corruption should form part of due diligence obligations in legislation;.

Whereas this alarming situation has highlighted the urgency regarding making businesses more responsive to, responsible and accountable for the adverse impacts they cause or contribute or are directly linked to, and prompted a debate as to how to do so, while underlining the need for a proportionate and harmonised Union-wide approach to these matters, which is also necessary to be able to achieve the United Nations UN SDGs;.

Whereas, according to the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, a large number of human rights defenders are under threat because they raise concerns about adverse human rights impacts of business operations;. Whereas that debate has led, among other things, to the adoption of due diligence frameworks and standards within the United Nations, the Council of Europe, the OECD and the ILO; whereas those standards are, however, voluntary and, consequently, their uptake has been limited; whereas Union legislation should progressively and constructively build on these frameworks and standards; whereas the Union and Member States should support and engage in the ongoing negotiations to create a legally binding UN instrument on Transnational Corporations and Other Business Enterprises with respect to human rights and the Council should give a mandate to the Commission to be actively involved in those ongoing negotiations;.

Whereas some Member States, such as France, and the Netherlands, have adopted legislation to enhance corporate accountability and have introduced mandatory due diligence frameworks; whereas other Member States are currently considering the adoption of such legislation, including Germany, Austria, Sweden, Finland, Denmark and Luxembourg; whereas the lack of a joint Union-wide approach in this matter may lead to less legal certainty when it comes to business prerogatives and to imbalances in fair competition which would in turn disadvantage undertakings that are proactive regarding social and environmental matters; whereas the lack of harmonised corporate due diligence legislation jeopardises the level playing field of undertakings operating in the Union;.

Whereas the Union has already adopted due diligence legislation for specific sectors, such as the Conflict Minerals Regulation, the Timber Regulation, the Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade FLEGT Regulation and the Anti-Torture Regulation; whereas those pieces of legislation have become a benchmark for targeted binding supply chain due diligence legislation; whereas the future Union legislation should support undertakings in managing and living up to their corporate responsibilities and be fully aligned with all existing sectoral due diligence and reporting obligations, such as the Non-Financial Reporting Directive, and coherent with relevant national legislation, to avoid duplications;.

Whereas the Commission has proposed to develop a comprehensive strategy for the garment sector as part of the new Circular Economy Action Plan, that, by including a uniform set of standards regarding due diligence and social responsibility, could be another example of integrating a more detailed approach for a specific sector; whereas the Commission should propose further sector-specific Union legislation on mandatory due diligence, for example for sectors such as forest and ecosystem risk commodities and the garment sector;.

Stresses that, while it is the duty of undertakings to respect human rights and the environment, it is the responsibility of states and governments to protect human rights and the environment, and this responsibility should not be transferred to private actors; recalls that due diligence is primarily a preventative mechanism and that undertakings should be first and foremost required to take all proportionate and commensurate measures and to make efforts within their means to identify potential or actual adverse impacts and adopt policies and measures to address them;.

Calls on the Commission to always include, in the external policy activities, including in trade and investment agreements, provisions and discussions on the protection of human rights;. Asks the Commission to conduct a thorough review of undertakings based in Xinjiang that export products to the Union in order to identify potential breaches of human rights, especially those related to the repression of Uighurs;. Recalls that the full enjoyment of human rights, including the right to life, health, food and water, depends on the preservation of biodiversity, which is the foundation of ecosystem services to which human well-being is intrinsically linked;.

Notes that, due to the COVID pandemic, small and medium-sized undertakings face a challenging situation; believes that providing them with support and the creation of a favourable market environment are crucial objectives of the Union;. Considers that the scope of any future mandatory Union due diligence framework should be broad and cover all large undertakings governed by the law of a Member State or established in the territory of the Union, including those providing financial products and services, regardless of their sector of activity and of whether they are publicly owned or publicly controlled undertakings, as well as all publicly listed small and medium-sized undertakings and high-risk small and medium-sized undertakings; considers that the framework should also cover undertakings which are established outside the Union, but are active on the internal market;.

Is convinced that compliance with the due diligence obligations should be a condition for access to the internal market and that operators should be required to establish and provide evidence, through the exercise of due diligence, that the products that they place on the internal market are in conformity with the environmental and human rights criteria set out in the future due diligence legislation; calls for complementary measures such as the prohibition of the importation of products related to severe human rights violations such as forced labour or child labour; stresses the importance of including the objective of combating forced labour and child labour in Trade and Sustainable Development chapters of Union trade agreements;.

Considers that some undertakings, and particularly publicly listed small and medium-sized undertakings and high-risk small and medium-sized undertakings may need less extensive and formalised due diligence processes, and that a proportionate approach should take into account, amongst other elements, the sector of activity, the size of the undertaking, the severity and likelihood of risks related to the respect of human rights, governance and the environment intrinsic to its operations and to the context of its operations, including geographic, its business model, its position in value chains and the nature of its products and services; calls for specific technical assistance to be provided to Union undertakings, especially to small and medium-sized undertakings, so that they can comply with due diligence requirements;.

Notes that certified industry schemes offer small and medium-sized undertakings opportunities to efficiently pool and share responsibilities; underlines however that relying on certified industry schemes does not exclude the possibility of an undertaking being in breach of its due diligence obligations, or of being held liable in accordance with national law; notes that certified industry schemes must be assessed, recognised and overseen by the Commission;.

Stresses that complementarity and coordination with development cooperation policy, instruments and actors is decisive and that the future Union legislation should therefore provide for some provisions in this regard;. Notes that due diligence also necessitates measuring the effectiveness of processes and measures through adequate audits and communicating the results, including periodically producing public evaluation reports on the due diligence processes of an undertaking and its results in a standardised format based on an adequate and coherent reporting framework; recommends that the reports be easily accessible and available, especially to those affected and potentially affected; states that disclosure requirements should take into account competition policy and the legitimate interest to protect internal business know-how and should not lead to disproportionate obstacles or a financial burden for undertakings;.

Notes that coordination at sectoral level could enhance the consistency and effectiveness of due diligence efforts, allow for the sharing of best practices and contribute to levelling the playing field;.

Considers that, to enforce due diligence, Member States should set up or designate national authorities to share best practices, carry out investigations, supervise and impose sanctions, taking into account the severity and repeated nature of the infringements; underlines that such authorities should be provided with sufficient resources and powers to realise their mission; considers that the Commission should set up a European due diligence network to be responsible for, together with the national competent authorities, the coordination and convergence of regulatory, investigative, enforcement and supervisory practices, and the sharing of information and to monitor the performance of national competent authorities; considers that the Member States and the Commission should ensure that undertakings publish their due diligence strategies on a publicly accessible and centralised platform, supervised by the national competent authorities;.

Highlights that comprehensive transparency requirements are a crucial element of legislation on mandatory due diligence; notes that enhanced information and transparency give suppliers and manufacturers better control and understanding of their supply chains and improve public confidence in production; stresses in this regard that the future due diligence legislation should focus on digital solutions to minimise bureaucratic burdens and calls on the Commission to investigate new technological solutions supportive of establishing and improving traceability in global supply chains; recalls that sustainable blockchain technology can contribute to this goal;.

Considers that a grievance mechanism at the level of an undertaking can provide effective early-stage recourse, provided they are legitimate, accessible, predictable, equitable, transparent, human rights-compatible, based on engagement and dialogue, and protect against retaliation; considers that such private mechanisms must be properly articulated with judicial mechanisms in order to guarantee the highest protection of fundamental rights, including the right to a fair trial; stresses that such mechanisms should never undermine the right of a victim to file a complaint before competent authorities or to seek justice before a court; suggests that judicial authorities should be able to act on a complaint by third parties through safe and accessible channels without threat of reprisals;.

Notes that the traceability of undertakings in the value chain can be difficult; calls on the Commission to evaluate and propose tools in order to help undertakings with the traceability of their value chains; stresses that digital technologies could assist undertakings with their value chain due diligence and reduce costs; considers that the innovation objective of the Union should be linked to promoting human rights and sustainable governance under the future due diligence requirements;.

Considers that conducting due diligence should not automatically absolve undertakings from liability for the harm they have caused or have contributed to; further considers, however, that having a robust and effective due diligence process in place can help undertakings to avoid causing harm; further considers that due diligence legislation should apply without prejudice to other applicable subcontracting, posting or supply chain liability frameworks established at national, European and international level, including joint and several liability in subcontracting chains;.

Calls on the Commission to propose a negotiating mandate for the Union to constructively engage in the negotiation of a UN international legally binding instrument to regulate, in international human rights law, the activities of transnational corporations and other businesses;.

Requests that the Commission submit without undue delay a legislative proposal on mandatory supply chain due diligence, following the recommendations set out in the Annex hereto; considers that, without prejudice to detailed aspects of the future legislative proposal, Articles 50, 83 2 and TFEU should be chosen as legal bases for the proposal;.

Considers that the requested proposal does not have financial implications for the general budget of the Union;. Instructs its President to forward this resolution and the accompanying recommendations to the Commission and the Council, and to the governments and national parliaments of the Member States.

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Articles 50, 83 2 and thereof,. Having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee 1 ,. At the same time, many oil, gas, mining and food industry undertakings pushed into increasingly remote areas, often displacing indigenous communities without adequate consultation or compensation.

This framework rests on three pillars: the State duty to protect against human rights abuses by third parties, including businesses, through appropriate policies, regulation, and adjudication; the corporate responsibility to respect human rights, which means acting with due diligence to avoid infringing on the rights of others and to address adverse impacts that occur; and greater access by victims to effective remedies, both judicial and non-judicial.

Subsequently, other international organisations developed due diligence standards based on the UNGPs. While it is difficult to overstate the importance of these instruments for undertakings that take their duty to respect human rights seriously, their voluntary nature can hamper their effectiveness and their effect has proved limited, with a restricted number of undertakings voluntarily implementing human rights due diligence in relation to their activities and those of their business relationships.

The primary duty to protect human rights and provide access to justice lies with States, and the lack of public judicial mechanisms to hold undertakings liable for damages occurring in their value chains should not and cannot adequately be compensated by the development of private operational grievance mechanisms. Whereas such mechanisms are useful in providing emergency relief and fast compensation for small damages, they should be closely regulated by public authorities and should not undermine the right of victims to access justice and the right to a fair trial before public courts.

In the Netherlands, the Child Labour Due Diligence Act requires undertakings operating in the Dutch market to investigate whether there is a reasonable suspicion that the goods or services supplied have been produced using child labour and, in the event of reasonable suspicion, to adopt and implement an action plan. In France, the law on a duty of vigilance of parent and ordering undertakings requires some large undertakings to adopt, publish and implement a due diligence plan to identify and prevent human rights, health and safety and environmental risks caused by the undertaking, its subsidiaries, sub-contractors or suppliers.

The French law establishes an administrative liability for the failure to abide by its due diligence requirements, and a civil liability for the undertaking to provide remedies for harm caused. In many other Member States, debate is ongoing as to the introduction of mandatory due diligence requirements for undertakings and some Member States are currently considering the adoption of such legislation, including Germany, Sweden, Austria, Finland, Denmark, and Luxembourg.

Further harmonisation is therefore essential to prevent unfair competitive advantages being created. To create a level playing field, it is important that the rules apply to all undertakings — be they Union or non-Union — operating in the internal market.

It is essential to prevent future barriers to trade stemming from the divergent development of such national laws. By coordinating safeguards for the protection of human rights, the environment and good governance, this Directive should ensure that all Union and non-Union large undertakings and high-risk or publicly listed small and medium-sized undertakings operating in the internal market are subject to harmonised due diligence obligations, which will prevent regulatory fragmentation and improve the functioning of the internal market.

This Directive, by setting a Union due diligence standard, could help foster the emergence of a global standard for responsible business conduct.

In particular, it should not affect other applicable subcontracting, posting or supply chain liability frameworks established at national, Union or international level. The fact that an undertaking has carried out its due diligence obligations under this Directive should not exonerate it from or weaken its obligations under other liability frameworks and therefore any legal proceedings brought against it based on other liability frameworks should not be dismissed on account of that circumstance.

This Directive should also apply to publicly listed and high-risk small and medium-sized undertakings 5. Member States are encouraged not to provide state support, including through state aid, public procurement, export credit agencies or government-backed loans, to undertakings that do not comply with the objectives of this Directive.

Undertakings covered by this Directive should not pass on due diligence obligations to suppliers. To the extent that they are relevant for undertakings, the Commission should include in that Annex the adverse impacts on human rights expressed in the international human rights conventions that are binding upon the Union or the Member States, the International Bill of Human Rights, International Humanitarian Law, the United Nations human rights instruments on the rights of persons belonging to particularly vulnerable groups or communities, and the principles concerning fundamental rights set out in the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, as well as those recognised in the ILO Convention on freedom of association and the effective recognition of the right to collective bargaining, the ILO Convention on the elimination of all forms of forced or compulsory labour, the ILO Convention on the effective abolition of child labour, and the ILO Convention on the elimination of discrimination in respect of employment and occupation.

The Commission should ensure that those types of impacts listed are reasonable and achievable. The United Nations Special Rapporteur on human rights and the environment has stated that the rights to life, health, food, water and development, as well as the right to a safe, clean, healthy and sustainable environment, are necessary for the full enjoyment of human rights.

The COVID pandemic has underlined not only the importance of safe and healthy working environments, but also that of undertakings ensuring they do not cause or contribute to health risks in their value chains. Consequently, those rights should be covered by this Directive. They should include non-compliance with OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, Chapter VII on Combatting Bribery, Bribe Solicitation and Extortion and the principles of the OECD Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions and situations of corruption and bribery where an undertaking exercises undue influence on, or channels undue pecuniary advantages to, public officials to obtain privileges or unfair favourable treatment in breach of the law, and including situations in which an undertaking becomes improperly involved in local political activities, makes illegal campaign contributions or fails to comply with the applicable tax legislation.

Undertakings are encouraged to integrate the gender perspective into their due diligence processes. In this regard, undertakings operating in conflict-affected areas should conduct appropriate human rights, environmental and governance due diligence, respect their international humanitarian law obligations, and refer to existing international standards and guidance including the Geneva Conventions and its additional protocols.

However, tracing all undertakings intervening in the value chain can be difficult. The Commission should evaluate and propose tools in order to help undertakings with the traceability of their value chains.

This could include innovative information technologies, such as blockchain, that allow all data to be traced, the development of which should be encouraged in order to minimise administrative costs and avoid redundancies for undertakings performing due diligence. Undertakings should be required to produce a document in which they publicly communicate, with due regard for commercial confidentiality, their due diligence strategy with reference to each of those stages.

It should be evaluated annually, and revised whenever this is considered necessary as a result of such evaluation. Undertakings should therefore in an ongoing manner monitor and adapt their due diligence strategies accordingly. Those strategies should strive to cover every actual or potential adverse impact, although the nature and context of their operations, including geographical, the severity and likelihood of the adverse impact should be considered if the establishment of a prioritisation policy is required.

Third-party certification schemes can complement due diligence strategies, provided that they are adequate in terms of scope and meet appropriate levels of transparency, impartiality, accessibility and reliability. Such a requirement is necessary to ensure that there is transparency for the public to enable national competent authorities to carry out the appropriate investigations. The subsidiary should ensure that the parent undertaking possesses sufficient, relevant information in order to perform due diligence on its behalf.

The more likely and severe the impacts, the more regularly the verification of compliance should be carried out. An undertaking which has leverage to prevent or mitigate the adverse impact should exercise it. An undertaking wishing to increase its leverage could, for example, offer capacity-building or other incentives to the related entity, or collaborat e with other actors. Where an adverse impact cannot be prevented or mitigated and the leverage cannot be increased, a decision to disengage from a supplier or other business relationship could be a last resort and should be done in a responsible manner.

The consultation and involvement of stakeholders can help undertakings to identify potential and actual adverse impacts more precisely and to set up a more effective due diligence strategy. This Directive therefore requires the discussion with and involvement of stakeholders at all stages of the due diligence process.

Furthermore, such discussion and involvement may give voice to those with a strong interest in the long-term sustainability of an undertaking. Stakeholder participation could help improve the long-term performance and profitability of undertakings, as their increased sustainability would have positive aggregate economic effects.

In order to be fully effective, due diligence should not be limited to the first tier downstream and upstream in the supply chain but should encompass those that, during the due diligence process, might have been identified by the undertaking as posing major risks. This Directive, however, should take account of the fact that not all undertakings have the same resources or capabilities to identify all their suppliers and subcontractors and therefore this obligation should be made subject to the principles of reasonableness and proportionality, which in no case should be interpreted by undertakings as a pretext not to comply with their obligation to make all necessary efforts in that regard.

To this end, Member States could encourage the adoption of due diligence action plans at sectoral or cross-sectoral level. Stakeholders should participate in the definition of those plans. The development of such collective measures should in no way absolve the undertaking of its individual responsibility to perform due diligence or prevent it from being held liable for harm it caused or contributed to in accordance with national law.

Those mechanisms should allow stakeholders to raise reasonable concerns and should function as an early-warning risk-awareness and mediation system. They should be legitimate, accessible, predictable, equitable, transparent, rights-compatible, a source of continuous learning and should be based on engagement and dialogue.

Grievance mechanisms should be entitled to make suggestions as to how potential or actual adverse impacts could be addressed by the undertaking involved. They should also be able to propose an appropriate remedy when it is brought to their attention through mediation that an undertaking has caused or contributed to an adverse impact.

These national authorities should be independent and should have the appropriate powers and resources to carry out their tasks.

And in some cases, a questionnaire may focus entirely on a particular type of due diligence. However, more often, the questions required for a comprehensive DDQ fall into several categories. These categories are subsequently centralized into a single document to suit the engagement. For instance, a hedge fund due diligence questionnaire will use a different combination of questions than an IPO due diligence questionnaire.

Many organizations find it helpful to create a standard due diligence questionnaire template for the specific types of investigations they do most often. In addition, creating a vendor due diligence questionnaire template is helpful because it should be issued quarterly or bi-annually to existing vendors.

Naturally, in this situation, a template makes comparing and verifying ongoing compliance much easier. So, whether you have a single project coming up, or many, you can use the nine examples listed below as inspiration. Each provides a great starting point to help you write effective DDQs that uncover hidden risks and financial pitfalls.

The original document pulled questions from more than a dozen real-world questionnaires provided by limited and general partners as well as third parties. Principles for Responsible Investing PRI is an organization founded by institutional investors to promote responsible investment. The group provides investment tools including their own DDQ checklist example. Helpfully, PRI offers a transparent overview of the questionnaire development process.

The questionnaire details their expectations as well as the documentation they require for compliance. MISC goes on to explain their commitment to risk management, saying:.

This due diligence questionnaire focuses on banking compliance and is designed specifically for public sector organizations. The DDQ contains questions regarding compliance in areas like anti-bribery and corruption, sanctions policies and risk management. In addition, the Wolfsberg Group provides guidance documentation, PDF and Excel versions of the template as well as Spanish and Japanese language versions.

The INREV association is dedicated to promoting best practices, sharing knowledge and increasing transparency in the non-listed real estate investment industry. With it, investors can determine, in principle, whether a proposal fits their investment objectives. Their due diligence questionnaire template is attractive, highly organized and easy to use. Download it all in Word to inspire your next DDQ.

Invest Europe uses this sample DDQ to provide help for general partners as they seek to identify risks and maintain best practices in investing. While other questionnaires on our list deal with investment and finance concerns, this document focuses on environmental and social responsibility. Ultimately, organizations can use the questions in this DDQ example to identify potential issues that may need further attention. The days, weeks and months leading up to an initial public offering are absolute chaos.

Getting the right information into the right hands at the right time can make or break your venture. However, organizations can prepare by exploring this extensive due diligence checklist provided by Columbia University. Indeed, they invite organizations to use and edit the document to fit the unique needs of each project.

Choose from these 19 categories and more than checklist items to create your own ultimate DDQ template. If comfortable, feel free to check only those areas which are relevant to the acquisition in question. Once complete, the investigation team must apply experienced business judgment against due diligence information to assist the acquirer with business decision making. If this master list can be refined, improved or clarified for purposes of best practices, let us know by sending feedback to www.

Good luck with your due diligence and business venture! Split the synergies list into those that are based on identifiable cost reductions, and those based on possible revenue increases. Does the company have a long-term plan for brand support?

Are sales unusually subject to changes in the business cycle? Does it appear that their businesses are sufficiently robust to continue supporting purchases from the company? Do any customers require a disproportionate amount of servicing, or require special terms and conditions? How profitable are the customers who appear to be the most dissatisfied? Are there independent sales representatives?

Does the site accept on- line payments and orders? What percentage of total sales come through this medium? How many people are in it, and what is their compensation? What would be the volume by customer?

What is the trend? What is the estimated remaining time and expense required to launch each one? What is their tenure and educational background? As a proportion of sales? How does this spending compare to that of competitors? Is this finding supported by warranty claim records? Does it tend to target low-cost products, ones with special features, or some other strategy?

How closely does the development team adhere to it? Does it vary by department? How closely do employees adhere to it? Does this vary by location? Is it a more formal method, such as a monthly newsletter, or more informal employee meetings? Does the company emphasize low costs with cheap furnishings, or more expensive surroundings?

Also obtain copies of non-compete agreements that currently apply to terminated employees.