Yesterday afternoon I was schmoozing – there’s no other word for it – with a group of MLROs from local law firms. And the talk turned, of its own accord and with minimal manipulation from me, to the topic of staff AML training. A topic close to my heart. Perhaps the topic closest to my heart, were it not for dark chocolate rose and violet creams, and Donny Osmond. And the four MLROs with whom I was schmoozing (see above) all confessed – for there was indeed an air of guilt about it – that their firms use computer-based training for AML (and doubtless other) purposes.
Smooth as silk, sipping innocently at a mint tea, I casually asked, “Do you think it works? I mean, do you think people learn from it?” Awkward silence. “Well,” said one, “It works in that I can say that I have trained my staff.” “Hmmmm,” said I, little trouble-maker that I am. “But do you learn from CBT?” Fun though lawyer-baiting is – and do not underestimate the fun that it is – I was actually asking a serious question. CBT, rather than other face-to-face AML trainers out there, is my most serious competitor, and I need to understand it. Personally, when I try to do CBT, I just can’t concentrate. I’ll be part-way through it, and realise that I am checking my emails and doing the “Radio Times” crossword at the same time. But I do realise that this may be a personal and rather unusual reaction.
So what do you think? Putting aside the undeniable advantages of CBT – flexibility of timing and location, consistency of approach and perhaps cost (although one MLRO said that it was costing him £5k a year, which seems lot) – do you think that it actually does what you would want, i.e. drum into staff heads the AML requirements and latest developments? Have I just had bad luck in the CBT packages I have seen, and there are some marvellous, engaging, effective systems out there? I need to know!