Most compliance failures aren’t technical. They’re human. People ignore policies, misread risk, make decisions under pressure, and act in ways that no framework fully anticipated — because that’s what people do.

Yet the tools most GRC professionals reach for were built on a different assumption: that clear rules, properly communicated, will produce the right behaviour. The evidence suggests otherwise.

In this session, we share findings from our global survey of behavioural science awareness and usage in the GRC profession — 125 practitioners across financial services, pharma, public sector and beyond. We’ll show you what your peers already know, where they’re struggling, and what it would take to make behavioural science a practical, everyday capability in governance, risk and compliance.

This is research-led, practitioner-focused, and jargon-free.

What you will learn

• The Big Picture — what you told us you think is going wrong in GRC in general in our qualitative research
• How the GRC profession could evolve— so you can benchmark your own practice, spot the gaps, and stay ahead of where GRC capability is heading in the next two to three years
• How to make the case for using psychology in GRC — data from 125 of your peers that gives you the language and evidence to argue for a more human-centred approach to compliance and risk
• What training you feel would be truly valuable — what you told us in the qualitative interviews
• What to do next — whether you’re just curious or already applying behavioural thinking, you’ll leave with some ideas about where to focus and how to build from here