Conflicts of Interest
Conflicts of Interest
Conflicts of Interest
Virtually all corporate codes of ethics address conflict of interest because it interferes with
the ability of employees to act in the best interests of a firm. Accepting gifts or lavish
entertainment from suppliers, for example, is generally prohibited or strictly limited for the
simple reason that the judgment of employees is apt to be compromised. Company codes
usually contain guidelines on investing in customers, suppliers, and competitors of an
employee’s firm for the same reason.
Prohibitions on conflict of interest cannot be so extensive, however, as to prevent
employees from pursuing unrelated business opportunities, taking part in community and
political affairs, and generally acting as they see fit in matters outside the scope of their
employment.
One problem with conflict of interest is in drawing a line between legitimate and
illegitimate activities of employees in the pursuit of their personal interests. A further
problem is the large gray area that surrounds conflict-of-interest situations. Perhaps no
other ethical concept in business is so elusive and subject to dispute. Many people charged
with conflict of interest see nothing wrong with their behavior. It is important, therefore, to
define the concept clearly and to understand the different kinds of conflicts of interest.
The conflict in a conflict of interest is not merely a conflict between conflicting interests,
although conflicting interests are involved. The conflict occurs when a personal interest
comes into conflict with an obligation to serve the interests of another. More precisely,
we can say that a conflict of interest is a conflict that occurs when a personal interest
interferes with a person’s acting so as to promote the interests of another when the
person has an obligation to act in that other person’s interest. This obligation is stronger
than the obligation merely to avoid harming a person and can arise only when the two
persons are in a special relationship, such as employer and employee.
Specifically, the kind of obligation described in this definition is that which characterizes
an agency relation in which one person (an agent) agrees to act on behalf of another (the
principal) and to be subject to that person’s control. This fact explains why conflict of
interest is most often encountered by professionals—lawyers, doctors, and accountants,
for example—and among fiduciaries, such as executors and trustees. Employees of
business firms are also in an agency relation in that they have a general obligation to
serve the interests of an employer.
To complete the definition of conflict of interest, some account should also be given of a
personal interest. Roughly, a person has an interest in something when the person stands
to gain a benefit or an advantage from that thing. “Having an interest” is not the same as
“taking an interest.” A person can take an interest in someone else’s interest, especially
when that person is a family member or a close associate. In that case, however, the
benefit or advantage accrues to someone else.
For example, many large accounting firms, like Arthur Andersen, provide management services to
companies they also audit, and there is great concern in the profession that this dual function endangers
the independence and objectivity of accountants. For an accountant to provide management services to a
company that he or she also audits—or for an individual ad person, banker, or lawyer to accept clients with conflicting
interests—is a clear conflict of interest. But why should it be a conflict when these functions are performed by different
persons in different departments of a firm? The answer is that an accounting firm, for example, also has an interest that
is shared by every member of the organization, and the interests of the firm can affect decisions about individual
clients. Thus, when management services are more lucrative than auditing, firms may have an incentive to
concentrate on them to the detriment of other functions. They may also be tempted to conduct audits in ways that
favor the clients to whom they provide management services. Further, large law firms face the possibility of
conflict of interest when they have clients with competing interests—even when the work is done by
different lawyers in the firm.
The Kinds of Conflicts of Interest
The code of ethics of a large bank, for example, states that employees should not
accept gifts where the purpose is “to exert influence in connection with a
transaction either before or after that transaction is discussed or consummated.
Gifts, for any other purpose, should be limited to those of nominal value.” “Gifts
of nominal value,” the code continues, “generally should be limited to standard
advertising items displaying a supplier’s logo.” A maximum value of $25 is
suggested as a guideline
DIRECT COMPETITION.
Extortion also constitutes a misuse of position. Unlike bribery, with which it is often confused,
extortion does not involve the use of a payment of some kind to influence the judgment of
an employee. Rather, extortion in a business setting occurs when a person with decision-making
power for a company demands a payment from another party as a condition for making a
decision favorable to that party
VIOLATION OF CONFIDENTIALITY.
Objectivity: A commitment to be objective serves to avoid being biased by an interest that might interfere with a
person’s ability to serve another.
Avoidance: The most direct means of managing conflicts of interest is to avoid acquiring any interests that would
bias one’s judgment or otherwise interfere with serving others. Avoidance is easier said than done, however. First, it
may be difficult to anticipate or identify a conflicting interest. Second, acquiring conflicting interests may be
unavoidable due to the nature of the business. This is especially true of investment banking, where conflicts of interest
are built into their structure. For example, a large investment bank routinely advises clients on deals that affect
other companies which the bank also advises or whose securities the bank holds.
Disclosure: Disclosure serves to manage conflict of interest primarily because whoever is potentially harmed by the
conflict has the opportunity to disengage or at least to be on guard.
Competition: Strong competition provides a powerful incentive to avoid conflicts of interest, both actual and potential.
Rules and Policies: As already noted, most companies have policies concerning conflicts of interest. These typically require
employees to avoid acquiring adverse interests by not accepting gifts or investing in potential suppliers.
Independent Judgement: Insofar as a conflict of interest results in biased judgment, the problem can be corrected by
utilizing a third party who is more independent. In courts of law, a judge who, say, owns stock in a company affected by a
case is generally obligated to recuse himself or herself and allow the decision to be rendered by other judges.
Structural Changes: Because conflicts of interest result from providing many different services to different customers or
clients, they can be reduced by compartmentalizing these services. Within multifunction institutions, conflicts can
be reduced by strengthening the independence and integrity of each unit.