AI can make or break your business, but rolling out the technology goes far beyond just saying “yes” – it requires thoughtful implementation. Our latest mobile compliance research of US senior compliance decision makers has revealed that nearly all (97%) of senior leaders are looking at AI, but only 41% are ‘very confident’ in its ability to identify a non-compliant message.
This confidence gap exposes a critical flaw: organizations are fixated on AI’s potential while neglecting explainability. The enthusiasm is there, but leaders can’t explain how their AI makes decisions. You need both – the output and the ability to justify it, because smart AI investment demands transparency alongside results.
The hidden cost of inefficient processes
On average, $232,000 is lost annually from false positives; that’s innocuous communications being wrongly flagged as suspicious activity. For smaller teams of under 250 people, this number is over $68,000 annually.
The cost stacks up due to the disproportionate amount of time compliance teams spend sifting through benign communications that were flagged by outdated, keyword-based systems. In fact, the average team spends 308 hours, nearly six hours every week, solely managing mobile communications compliance.
These losses are avoidable. Businesses need to transition away from legacy compliance tools, those that can’t handle the volume, complexity, and nuanced language of modern mobile communications across Slack, Teams, WhatsApp, and more.
Throwing money at outdated technology is a losing strategy. Intelligent supervision offers a smarter, more precise approach, and most importantly, significantly reduces false positives.
Identifying the best-suited solution
Sticking with old methods while refusing to adapt is a recipe for wasted resources and bigger risks. The hesitation penalty will be paid by those who fail to act, but also by those who invest in AI mindlessly.
Staff are already using AI tools across multiple tasks, creating new compliance risks. The
fears are legitimate – AI can ‘hallucinate’ (generate false information), get details wrong, or
leak confidential data.
This leads to challenges with employees using AI in their daily work. Financial organizations feel the pressure: 77% are concerned about compliance risks from employee AI use, with a third (33%) describing themselves as “very concerned.”
In compliance monitoring, AI hallucinations pose a unique threat. This isn’t about employees
sharing false content – it’s about the AI tools used to monitor compliance themselves getting it wrong. AI systems can incorrectly flag routine client communications as insider trading, or worse, miss genuine red flags by misinterpreting context. Compliance teams face a growing concern: when regulators like the SEC ask “how do you do your e-comms review?”, firms need to explain exactly why their AI made specific decisions – not just shrug and point to a black box that they don’t understand.
Firms face these challenges without adequate expertise. Nearly half (44%) of all organisations need help creating an AI compliance policy, and only 20% feel fully compliant right now. Firms are flying blind into a new age of risk.
Businesses don’t need to build AI solutions from scratch. In fact, new data shows a significantly higher rate of failure when they try to. Compliance vendors can deliver optimal solutions without the delays of internal development, but senior leaders must know exactly what to look for when choosing their partners.
A top-tier AI solution surfaces what matters without creating a “black box” nobody understands. Businesses need clear, explainable alerts – not just flags, but a rationale for why something was flagged.
Traditional “monitor and flag” systems leave teams guessing. Intelligent supervision explains its decisions, building trust with decision makers who must act on AI recommendations. Instead of deciphering machine judgments with limited context, leaders get clear explanations that enable informed decisions. This transparency directly tackles the confidence crisis facing senior teams across industries.
Ultimately, businesses need smart, AI-powered tools that evolve with communication. New platforms and messaging styles will continue emerging, and compliance tools must adapt accordingly. The technology must understand context to identify emerging risks accurately. Without this adaptive approach, firms aren’t just missing compliance issues – they’re operating in a completely different language than their employees.
Mobile Compliance’s reality check
Mobile compliance isn’t working if it’s haemorrhaging money and frustrating employees. Leaders who think their strategy “works” because people can use phones are missing the real picture – the hidden costs destroying productivity.
The “Productivity Paradox” persists when firms cling to manual checks and outdated systems. Smart organizations are switching to AI-driven tools that eliminate false positives and free skilled teams to focus on high-impact work.
Leaders need to ask themselves what their compliance strategies are truly costing them, and partner with vendors who deliver AI solutions that justify the investment.
