|
|
Enron Mail |
Shona
Thanks for the meeting yesterday - I think the process does improve the transparency and accountability of issues raised. After the call I mentioned to Ted that the meetings might be 'more efficient' if the specific issues identified during doorstep visits - that underpin report comments - were validated by the direct controller on 'point' for the office/business - in this case Marcelo. Ted replied that no harm came from the current approach and to a certain degree I agree that it is good to get an immediate collective response to issues raised !However, I thought we could discuss this for future meetings ( it could be part of the 'how to do a doorstep review' that my guys requested so they are ready to do their individual reviews next year ) -will call later Additionally, I thought I would confirm with you the actions I took down Marcelo and yourself to identify/communciate the specific control concerns identified that were not part of the core tasks transfered Marcelo to add these to existing process efficiencies ( such as systems improvements etc ) and give a full timeline for all 'doorstep' issues Tim to send details of outward bound Commercial instructions and to validate that no specfic exceptions have been recorded to date. Marcelo to validate that no existing business activities conflict systematically with the above instructions All to prepare for full NY review so as to validate compensating controls exist and function in NY Marcelo / Me to identify if any cultural issues are left from recent business communications on roles and responsibilities Myself to ensure that doorstep issues are included within database and monitoring process ( on timelines ) happens Will call later Mike
|