Doing More with Less in Compliance

When surveillance teams review their alert queues, the problem is rarely coverage.

The problem is volume.

Thousands of alerts. Limited time. Growing expectations from regulators and internal stakeholders to demonstrate not just activity, but effectiveness. At the same time, budgets remain flat, and adding headcount is rarely an option.

These pressures are explored in the Regulatory Outlook 2025–2027 from Opimas, which examines how compliance teams are being asked to expand oversight without proportional increases in resources.

“Compliance teams face flat budgets but expanding mandates, driving demand for automation and higher-value analysis.”
— Anna Griem, Senior Analyst, Opimas

That reality is forcing a re-evaluation of how surveillance programs operate and how success is measured.

When more alerts don’t mean better oversight

Traditional surveillance models were designed around scale through volume. As communication channels expanded, programs responded by generating more alerts and relying on larger review teams to keep up.

That approach now shows its limits.

High alert volumes slow investigations, strain experienced reviewers, and make it harder to demonstrate clear outcomes to regulators. Reviewing everything does not necessarily reduce risk. It often obscures the signals that matter most.

Surveillance leaders are increasingly focused on reducing noise so attention can be directed where it counts.

Efficiency as a control, not a shortcut

Efficiency in compliance is often misunderstood. It is not about cutting corners or lowering standards. It is about removing friction from processes that no longer scale.

Modern surveillance platforms help teams:

• Reduce false positives that consume review time
• Apply consistent logic across email, chat, voice, and mobile communications
• Expand coverage without expanding review teams
• Support audits with clearer, more defensible workflows

When routine triage is automated, teams gain space to focus on investigation, judgment, and documentation. That shift improves both oversight and confidence.

What surveillance teams are rethinking

Flat budgets are no longer a temporary constraint. They are the operating reality.

As expectations rise, surveillance teams are reassessing how technology supports their work. The focus is moving away from throughput metrics and toward outcome-driven oversight: fewer alerts, higher-quality findings, and clearer explanations when questions arise.

In a recent conversation, Arctera’s Surveillance leader Chris Stapenhurst reflects on how teams are adjusting their operating models to meet these pressures. The discussion centers on improving signal quality, applying automation thoughtfully, and using technology to elevate human expertise rather than replace it.

Why this matters going forward

Regulatory scrutiny is unlikely to ease. Communication channels will continue to evolve. Surveillance programs that depend on manual review and high alert volumes will struggle to keep pace.

Teams that can demonstrate control, clarity, and effective use of automation will be better positioned to respond to regulators, manage risk, and justify their approach internally.

Doing more with less is no longer an aspiration. It is a requirement.

Continue the conversation

Tech Insights: Surveillance Signals
Hear how surveillance leaders are using automation to reduce noise and focus on meaningful risk, with insights from Arctera’s Surveillance leader, Chris Stapenhurst.

Explore the research
Read the Regulatory Outlook 2025–2027 to see how efficiency, automation, and operating-model changes are reshaping surveillance across financial services.

__________________________________________________________________________________

Note: Subsequent posts in this series explore how regulatory fragmentation, platform architecture, AI accountability, and governance shape modern surveillance programs.