Industry · Financial Services

Training that survives a supervisory review.

Prudential obligations, licensing requirements, and product knowledge structured at clause level. Each module ties to the standard it exists to serve, and the evidence exports as a file when regulators ask.

Grid of dark charcoal cubes on cream architectural blueprint, with three cubes glowing molten orange: a knowledge framework schematic.
Why this matters

Prudential expectation is rising. Slide decks are not.

Supervisors in the United States, the European Union, the UAE, Japan, and Australia increasingly expect individual accountability, information security capability, and operational resilience training to be evidenced at the individual level, not attested to at the enterprise level and left there. Supervision of licensed competence, product distribution, and conduct obligations is likewise increasingly driven by documents. The market for excuses is closing.

The Foundry treats each prudential standard, regulatory guide, and internal policy as a source of structural obligation. Frameworks encode who must know what, to what standard, with what evidence. Program output is downstream of the framework, and the framework is what defends the program.

Six moves for financial services

Regulatory adherence that begins with the framework.

Frameworks aligned to ICT resilience

Information security training and role responsibilities mapped to the clauses of DORA, the NYDFS Cybersecurity Regulation, APRA CPS 234, and comparable regimes, from asset identification through incident response, with evidence surfaced per role.

Competency structure for licensed roles

Product knowledge for licensed roles structured against qualification regimes such as FINRA registration and continuing education, the MiFID II knowledge and competence guidelines, and ASIC RG146. Progression, assessment, and continuing training are traceable to the specific competency each role must demonstrate.

Variants for product knowledge

One approved framework produces product training appropriate to role for relationship managers, advisers, mortgage brokers, and treasury staff, without duplicating the underlying product taxonomy.

Conduct and design obligations

Suitability and best interest rules such as SEC Regulation Best Interest, product governance and distribution requirements, and breach reporting expectations translated into behavioral instruction and scenario based validation.

Evidence ready for attestation

Where senior management certifications, board attestations, or supervisory reviews require evidence of trained and competent staff, the platform exports the framework, coverage, and assessment history in a coherent pack.

Regulatory change diff

When prudential standards, regulatory rulebooks and guidance, or product specific rules update, the system parses the source again and surfaces each affected obligation, control, and module.

How it runs

From instrument to program ready for attestation.

Structure precedes instruction. Only once your compliance and risk owners have approved the framework does the system generate the material that satisfies it.

STEP 01

Ingest the instruments

Prudential standards, regulatory rulebooks and guidance, licensing conditions, and internal policy are ingested and parsed at clause level, with provenance retained.

STEP 02

Map to roles

Obligations are tagged to specific regulated roles (advisers, brokers, executives, product owners) with competency thresholds defined per role.

STEP 03

Construct the framework

A compliance and product knowledge framework is proposed. Your risk, compliance, and L&D leads review and approve before instruction is generated.

STEP 04

Evidence continuously

Training is delivered through your existing LMS. Evidence (framework version, coverage, assessment history, sign offs) accumulates in a form ready for supervisory review or internal audit.

What you get out

Evidence you can hand to a regulator without rewriting it first.

Frameworks that map to specific prudential clauses and regulatory guides. Programs that satisfy them, per role, per product line, per jurisdiction. Assessment that measures the competency the licensee must demonstrate. Evidence packs that reconstruct each decision. Who trained on what, when, to what threshold, and with what sign off.

When the board is asked to attest, the underlying artifact is not a completion report. It is a framework, a coverage map, an assessment record, and a sign off chain. All exportable, all defensible.

Common questions

How financial services engagements work, in detail.

Regimes such as DORA, the NYDFS Cybersecurity Regulation, and APRA CPS 234 expect staff in specified roles to be trained and capable of fulfilling their information security responsibilities. The framework encodes those responsibilities per role, produces training and assessment against them, and evidences competency at the individual level. When senior management or the board signs an annual certification or attestation, the underlying evidence is a structured artifact, not a promise from L&D.
Yes. The framework can encode qualification and continuing education requirements per product category and per role, whether they come from FINRA, the MiFID II guidelines, the DFSA, or ASIC. Initial competency, ongoing CPD, and knowledge refresh for product changes all draw from the same framework, and evidence is exportable in the format your registration or licensing compliance function requires.
One framework can carry multiple regimes and surface conflicts, redundancies, and orphaned clauses. Where a role sits under overlapping obligations (a licensed executive who is also accountable under an information security regime) the framework produces one coherent program that satisfies both, rather than two overlapping courses.
No. The Foundry produces evidence structured against the instruments of regulators such as the SEC, FINRA, the CBUAE, the DFSA, the Japan FSA, and APRA. It does not represent itself as certified or approved by any of them. Technical security posture and deployment considerations are covered in the Technical Overview, and supplier due diligence is expected as part of enterprise engagement.
The Foundry produces the framework and generates the programs. Delivery typically runs through your existing LMS via SCORM or xAPI, and role mappings and completion states integrate with your HRIS. The Foundry becomes your source of framework truth. Delivery and identity stay where they are.
Bring an obligation

See your standards become a program.

Send us a prudential standard, a regulatory guide, or an internal policy your licensed workforce is accountable for. In 45 minutes on your material, you leave with the framework the Foundry produces.

We reply within one business day.