Running Head: CONFLICT OF INTEREST

Conflict of Interest

Name

Instructor

Course

Date
CONFLICT OF INTEREST 2

Conflict of Interest

CyberTech, being a consultant firm, has a responsibility of not only abhorring the law but

also showing no bias to representation. Even so, it is prudent that the company does as much to

ensure that there is no conflict of interest in its representation for such a case would breed

unfairness and failure in presenting the firm as a credible one. According to the law, everybody is

equal and has a right to representation. As a result, cases emerge where a firm is in a dilemma;

whether to take on a new case or hold on to the old ones, with a view to avoiding conflicts of

interest. However, sometimes it does not matter whether a conflict of interest exists or not as

long as it is in a manageable situation (Panel on Research Ethics, 2015). For this reason, I would

advise that the firm takes both cases and work with due diligence and professionalism despite the

possible conflict of interest.

First, it is important to understand that conflict of interest, in this instance, is situational

and not based on the behavior or lack of behavior of the firm (Davis & Stark, 2001). Here, it is

the representation of the firm on clients from two different sides of the hacking case that makes

is a conflict of interest. Even so, there is no direct relation between these two sets of clients since

reasons for their representation are not related in any way. The fact that these are two entirely

different cases for which these customers are represented, there is a very little possibility that the

firm will be forced to act in a manner that is likely to breach the confidentiality of the clients. For

once, OPM only has these firms as suspects, which means they might not have taken part in the

actual hacking. But even if the clients from the hacking firm were to be investigated, it would be

an entirely different case from the ones they are represented for. As a result, the firm is capable

of carrying on with these two different cases without letting a conflict of interest take its toll on

the firm.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST 3

According to American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (2016), the existence of a

conflict is not an automatic ticket for refusal of representation. The presence of a conflict of

interest in both of these cases does not mean that a firm cannot represent both sets of clients, but

it is important that the firm ensures that the existence of such a conflict will not under any

circumstance affect their ability to serve the clients according to the rule of law and ethics. The

best way for CyberTech to maintain a good image as unbiased security consultant is not by

avoiding representation of both sets of clients but rather by representing both in a transparent

manner.

Davis & Stark (2001) asserts that a firm cannot represent both sides in the same or related

cases. Hence, it is necessary for a firm first to confirm that the case is not one of the few that

prohibits representation under any circumstance. From the information provided, there is no

possibility of the two cases being related to each other. Hence, CyberTech is at liberty to

represent the two sets of clients without going against the rule of law and the rules of ethics.

Even with the firm being able to represent both sides, they should take caution in a case where

the clients from the suspect companies are to be investigated for the hack. There is a possibility

that these clients might be called in to be investigated; hence the firm should prepare for such an

eventuality. The best way of dealing with such would be to ask for consent from the clients

themselves first before getting involved in their investigation.

In conclusion, it is a difficult matter representing clients in a case of a possible conflict of

interest and it could impact negatively on the image of the firm. However, such representation is

discouraged only when it could lead to a breach of contract. In the case presented, there is a big

chance that the firm can represent both the law firm investigating hack on OPM and the clients
CONFLICT OF INTEREST 4

from the suspect firms without breaching their contracts. The firm is capable of representing both

firms without causing any violation or going against work ethics.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST 5

References

American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (2016). Issues in Ethics: Conflicts of

Professional Interest. Retrieved November 15, 2016 from

http://www.asha.org/Practice/ethics/Conflicts-of-Professional-Interest/

Davis, M., & Stark, A. (2001).Conflict of Interest in the Professions. New York: Oxford

University Press.

Panel on Research Ethics. (2015). Conflicts of Interest. Retrieved November 15, 2016 from

http://www.pre.ethics.gc.ca/eng/policy-politique/initiatives/tcps2-eptc2/chapter7-

chapitre7/