Voice compliance is moving from industry blind spot to regulatory priority. For telecom and UC teams, the message is direct. Call recording alone no longer satisfies modern oversight expectations.
For years, regulated firms handled voice with limited tools. They recorded calls, sampled small batches, and stored the rest. That approach helped reduce cost and workload. However, it also left large volumes of risk untouched.
Daniel Yates, Voice SME at Global Relay, explained the old model clearly. “For a long time, the only options were to have people on desks doing what was known as random sampling of voice calls, which was pretty ineffective. It was very difficult for humans to random sample more than a small percentage of the overall number of calls.”
This created a practical gap for compliance teams. Human review could not scale across trading floors, client teams, and back offices. Early transcription tools also carried high costs. They often needed training and still missed important context.
Now, AI has changed the economics of voice supervision. Modern large language models can transcribe calls with stronger accuracy. They also work faster than older systems. This makes large-scale monitoring more realistic for regulated firms.
“Since we’ve had the ability to use large language models for transcription, that has been the biggest game changer,” Yates says.
“These LLMs offer very high levels of accuracy that we’ve never seen before and there’s no need for training. You switch them on and off you go.”
This shift brings clear value for compliance leaders. Firms can review more calls and detect more issues. They can also connect voice data with other communications channels. That helps create a fuller view of conduct risk.
At the same time, new capability raises the compliance bar. Regulators now expect more than passive archiving. They want firms to store, reconcile, and monitor voice data. They also expect evidence that controls actually work.
“The store and forget record keeping approach was acceptable to most regulators for a long time,” Yates explains. “But now, due to the advances in technology, regulators expect a proactively tracked, structured, and monitored approach. It’s no longer acceptable to just store some recordings on a server somewhere and hope that it’s working.”
Some firms still assume their eComms archive covers voice. That can create serious exposure. Voice has different capture, retention, and retrieval needs. Internal calls may also fall within scope. So can teams beyond frontline traders.
Voice monitoring also reaches beyond financial misconduct. It can reveal harassment, bullying, and toxic workplace behaviour. Regulators increasingly link poor culture with wider business risk.
For service providers and enterprise IT teams, the opportunity is significant. Better voice supervision can strengthen trust and reduce regulatory pressure. Yet firms must avoid treating AI as a simple switch. Governance, audit trails, and clear responsibility remain essential.
As Yates puts it: “It’s no longer acceptable to just store some recordings on a server somewhere and hope that it’s working. The expectation is now that the data is securely stored and reconciled, but proactively monitored.”
