Conflict of Interest Disclosure Policy

A subject may be motivated by personal, financial, or professional interests that directly conflict with their duties and obligations to the organization. This inherent conflict of interest can lead the subject to engage in actions that compromise the organization’s values, objectives, or legal standing.

For instance, a subject who serves as a senior procurement officer at a company may have a financial stake in a vendor company that is bidding for a contract. Despite knowing that the vendor's offer is subpar or overpriced, the subject might influence the decision-making process to favor that vendor, as it directly benefits their personal financial interests. This conflict of interest could lead to awarding the contract in a way that harms the organization, such as incurring higher costs, receiving lower-quality goods or services, or violating anti-corruption regulations.

The presence of a conflict of interest can create a situation where the subject makes decisions that intentionally or unintentionally harm the organization, such as promoting anti-competitive actions, distorting market outcomes, or violating regulatory frameworks. While the subject’s actions may be hidden behind professional duties, the conflict itself acts as the driving force behind unethical or illegal behavior. These infringements can have far-reaching consequences, including legal ramifications, financial penalties, and damage to the organization’s reputation.

A subject believes they have a personal right to organizational information, intellectual property, systems, resources, access, or work product that exceeds the rights granted to them by the organization. The belief may arise because the subject created, developed, maintained, managed, discovered, or materially contributed to the asset, or because prolonged access has caused the subject to regard it as personally theirs to retain or use.

Entitlement may cause a subject to disregard ownership, confidentiality, access, or retention requirements because they do not perceive their actions as taking something to which they have no legitimate claim. The subject may retain source code, customer information, research, documents, credentials, equipment, or other organizational assets for personal reference, future employment, a subsequent business venture, or another purpose while rationalizing the infringement on the basis of contribution or perceived ownership.

A subject owns, operates, advises, supports, or materially benefits from an external business whose activities or interests conflict with their responsibilities to the organization.

The external interest may include a private company, consultancy, partnership, directorship, freelance operation, side business, or commercial activity conducted through another person. The business does not need to be a direct competitor. A conflict may also arise where it supplies similar services, seeks access to the same customers, depends on organizational resources, or could benefit from information available through the subject’s role.

The subject may use organizational working time, information, equipment, personnel, customer relationships, intellectual property, or decision-making authority to support the external business. They may also direct opportunities away from the organization, influence supplier or customer decisions, or conceal the extent of their involvement.

Investigators should establish the subject’s ownership, management, advisory, or beneficial relationship with the external business and determine whether it was disclosed. Relevant evidence may include corporate records, professional profiles, business websites, invoices, communications, device activity, customer contact, use of organizational resources, and work performed during contracted hours.

This Sub-section should be distinguished from IF038 – Undisclosed Concurrent Employment. Undisclosed Concurrent Employment captures the infringement of maintaining or performing undisclosed external work where disclosure is required. External Business Interest describes the conflict acting as a motive that may influence a wider range of harmful conduct.

A subject holds an undisclosed financial interest in an organization, individual, transaction, investment, asset, or commercial outcome affected by their organizational responsibilities.

The interest may include company ownership, shares, debt, commission, referral payments, profit-sharing arrangements, creditor relationships, beneficial ownership, or another financial position through which the subject may gain or avoid loss. The interest may be held directly or indirectly through a family member, associate, trust, company, or other intermediary.

The conflict becomes operationally significant where the subject can influence procurement, supplier selection, pricing, investment decisions, contract awards, customer treatment, regulatory review, access permissions, or the handling of confidential information. The subject may favor a connected entity, suppress unfavorable information, disclose commercially useful material, or manipulate a decision while presenting their actions as ordinary professional judgment.

Investigators should identify the financial relationship, determine when it began, establish whether disclosure was required, and compare the subject’s decisions with objective organizational criteria. Evidence may include corporate ownership records, declared-interest registers, procurement records, payment data, communications, approval history, and repeated decisions benefiting the same external entity.

A subject is influenced by a personal, familial, romantic, or close social relationship with an individual whose interests are affected by the subject’s organizational responsibilities.

The relationship may involve a colleague, applicant, customer, supplier representative, contractor, investigation subject, complainant, or another person connected to an organizational decision. The conflict may arise where the subject can approve access, influence recruitment, award work, alter a case outcome, disclose information, suppress scrutiny, or provide another form of preferential treatment.

The existence of a personal relationship does not itself establish harmful intent. The investigative concern arises where the relationship creates a material conflict with the subject’s duties and is not disclosed through the organization’s required process. Relevant indicators may include repeated favorable decisions, unusual access to information concerning the connected person, involvement in matters from which the subject should have recused themselves, or communications inconsistent with the stated professional relationship.

Investigators should establish the nature and timing of the relationship, the subject’s disclosure obligations, the decisions or access affected by it, and whether the subject took steps to conceal the connection. The resulting infringement may separately involve abuse of decision-making authority, unauthorized data access, data disclosure, fraud, or interference with an investigation.

A subject seeks to use organizational information, intellectual property, relationships, access, or other resources to improve their professional or commercial position. This may include obtaining employment, increasing their perceived value to a prospective or new employer, accelerating performance in a new role, establishing a competing business, or providing an advantage to a business the subject intends to join or create.

The anticipated benefit does not need to involve an immediate payment or direct financial transaction. The subject's primary objective is the professional or commercial advantage obtained from the infringement.

A subject knowingly accepts money or another financial or material benefit in exchange for misusing entrusted access, information, authority, or an organizational process. The benefit may be received directly or provided to another person or entity at the subject’s direction. The arrangement may involve favorable supplier selection, approval of improper payments, unauthorized disclosure of information, provision of access, or circumvention of an organizational requirement. The benefit may be provided before or after the associated misuse as part of the arrangement.

The defining behavior is the knowing acceptance of a benefit linked to the misuse of the subject’s organizational role, rather than the source of the payment or whether organizational funds were directly diverted. Investigators should establish the benefit, its provider and intended beneficiary, the associated request or agreement, and the relevant organizational actions. An offered inducement that the subject refuses, an unexplained payment, or an authorized gift does not independently establish this behavior. Acceptance of the benefit and completion of the associated misuse should be established separately.

A subject seeks to recruit a person outside the affected organization’s current or former authorized-access population to knowingly assist an infringement or its concealment. The requested assistance may involve identifying or acting as a buyer for organizational information, arranging unauthorized transactions, supplying technical capabilities, providing infrastructure, introducing further participants, or receiving and handling information, assets, or proceeds. The subject may approach an existing personal or professional contact, seek an introduction through an intermediary, or contact a previously unknown person.

The distinguishing feature is the recruitment of external participation in the unauthorized activity, rather than ordinary engagement with an external service provider or information recipient. Investigators should establish the role proposed, the improper purpose communicated, the person’s response, and any agreed terms or subsequent assistance. A person who unknowingly provides an otherwise legitimate service should not be classified as a recruited collaborator. Contact with an external party, an introduction, or an unexplained payment does not independently establish recruitment.