Access expert analysis, compliance trends, and real-world strategies — curated exclusively for our subscribers.
Your subscription gives you full access to our premium Insights articles and compliance briefings.
Join our community of professionals committed to excellence in compliance and training. Subscribe to our newsletter to receive:
Enter your information below to start receiving valuable insights directly to your inbox.
Our newsletter is evolving — less news, more impact. Each issue will now dissect a single real-world failure (or success) in compliance training. We’re starting with a crash course in flawed driver education, where a teenager outsourced his training… and a pug earned a certificate. Yes, really.
Dear readers,
When we first launched this newsletter, it followed a pretty traditional format—sharing relevant news, articles, and upcoming events for organizations involved in online assessments and training, especially those with a stake in regulatory compliance, legal due diligence, or simply ensuring their training actually works.
Then, I was invited to speak at a symposium in Japan.
The organizers were exceptional. The other speakers, deeply knowledgeable, from all kinds of backgrounds. But what stayed with me most were the conversations between the sessions. Real-world stories. Use cases. Tangible examples of things going wrong—or occasionally, spectacularly right.
Those discussions reminded me why we do what we do. And they inspired us to change course.
Starting with this issue, our newsletter will spotlight one specific use case at a time. We’ll break down:
Let’s start with something almost everyone can relate to: Driving.
In every modern society, driving is one of the most dangerous things most people do every day. One moment of distraction, fatigue, or poor judgment can lead to irreversible harm.
Imagine:
These aren’t just hypothetical scenarios. They’re headlines — and often, heartbreaks.
That’s why driver training and correction systems exist: not just to assign penalties, but to shift mindsets. To make risk real.
So what happens when the system rewards box-checking over behaviour change?
Here’s a real example.
A 19-year-old university student was caught on dash cam driving a Demon more than twice the speed limit. The penalty? A fine and three demerits on his license.
But in his jurisdiction, there’s a fix: take a $115 online course to remove three demerits. The course was designed to influence attitudes, improve risk perception, and prevent future incidents.
But instead of taking the course, he went to Reddit.
There, he found someone on the other side of the world willing to complete it for him — for $20. No ID required. No webcam. No oversight. Just a credit card and a workaround.
The system had “safeguards”:
None of it stopped the workaround. The course was completed, the certificate issued, and weeks later, his government record was clean — the system reset, as if nothing had ever happened
(Here is the actual dash cam footage)
We decided to test the system ourselves.
Using the same Reddit-sourced method, we enrolled Phoebe — our office pug and unofficial Chief Training Integrity Officer — in the Alberta Motor Vehicle Association's Online Defensive Driving Course. Phoebe is many things, but let’s be clear: she can’t drive. She can’t even hold a mouse.
Still, the workaround worked. A real person thousands of miles away completed the training and clicked through to the finish.
The result? A certificate from the Province of Alberta in Phoebe’s name. And a government-issued letter confirming the removal of three demerits off of a drivers license that she doesn’t have, because again, she is a Pug.
Phoebe had successfully “completed” behavior-modification training meant to keep drivers safe.
This system wasn’t designed to rubber-stamp compliance. It was built with intent — to change behaviours, improve awareness, and reduce road risk.
But because its safeguards only looked robust, the outcome was a kind of compliance theatre: the performance of accountability without any of its substance.
And this isn’t isolated to driving.
In food safety, healthcare, construction, and corporate compliance, we see the same pattern: training that assumes good-faith participation but makes no effort to verify it.
In our audits, we’ve regularly uncovered cases where 20–40% of online certifications were completed by someone other than the enrolled user—with no detection.
That’s a systemic failure, not an unfortunate exception.
If the Alberta’s Motor Vehicle Association’s program had been run through an integrity review or assurance audit, here’s what would’ve stood out immediately:
The fix wouldn’t need to be costly or complex. Just practical:
Even low-cost tools can confirm presence, flag suspicious activity, and reinforce that the training matters. Because if we say it’s about changing behaviour, we can’t treat it like a receipt generator.
This is about more than one reckless driver or a failed online course.
It’s about trust.
When people realize that compliance systems don’t verify learner identity or their participation - they start questioning the value of the entire initiative.
That skepticism undermines safety, accountability, and the reputational credibility of everyone involved.
Imagine if CPR certification worked the same way: click through a video, answer a call, and you’re certified to save lives — even if you’ve never touched a dummy. We’d never accept that.
So why do we accept it for risk-based driver training?
I’ve spent over 30 years working in risk mitigation — across oil and gas, insurance, and legal due diligence. I’ve seen what happens when people misunderstand the consequences of their actions. I’ve also seen what’s possible when systems are built with integrity.
We don’t need perfect systems. But we do need ones that work.
When training delivery is insecure unverified, the public isn’t just unprotected — they’re misled into thinking safeguards are in place when they aren’t. And that’s not just bad design. It’s dangerous.
If your training program can be completed by a pug with a credit card, it’s not risk mitigation. It’s malpractice.
If you’re unsure whether your training or assessment systems are effective, secure, or defensible, we can help. Our team evaluates current systems, flags regulatory and risk exposure, and connects you with better tools, processes, and providers — no matter what platform you’re using.
Because training that doesn’t change behaviour isn’t just wasted.
It’s a risk you can’t afford to ignore.
Cognisense is a team of specialized experts dedicated to helping organizations navigate regulatory, legal, and industry standards. We focus on identifying the right technology, applications, and processes to ensure compliance while maintaining effective risk mitigation.
Robert Day, our Managing Director, brings decades of experience in high-risk industries. With deep regulatory knowledge and investigative expertise, he is passionate about protecting lives and ensuring organizations adopt rigorous, technology-driven compliance strategies.
.svg)
