Conflict of Interest – Part 1

Private Interests vs. Official Responsibilities

When discussing any concept, including “conflict of interest,” it is helpful to begin with an impartial and widely-accepted definition of the term.  The Merriam-Webster dictionary provides such a definition:   

Conflict of Interest:  “A conflict between the private interests and the official responsibilities of a person in a position of trust.”

This is the sort of definition that a citizen might be inclined to use in trying to form an opinion regarding a potential conflict of interest situation.  Note that while I chose the dictionary definition so as to better understand the concept, others may—and sometimes do—choose other definitions for other reasons. 

Most discussions of conflict of interest begin with financial conflicts.  But “financial interests” are not the only “private interests” capable of compromising the integrity of governing board decisions.  Political gain, preferential admission of students, unmerited preference in the hiring of ‘connected’ individuals, and any other personal interest also trigger the dictionary definition of conflict of interest.

A Matter of Definition

Depending on the definition chosen, a situation which is clearly a conflict of interest under the impartial dictionary definition might not be a conflict of interest under a very different definition, as we will see.

In fact, there is evidence to show that human organizations—both professional and political—often choose definitions of conflict of interest—or other presumably objectionable behaviors—in ways that limit the type and number of situations that actually meet their limited definition of prohibited behavior.

Professional Example: Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR) at Columbia University

At Columbia, a private Ivy League university in New York that is heavily engaged in research, conflicts of interest are described on their website in relation to “Responsible Conduct of Research” as follows:  

“A conflict of interest involves the abuse -- actual, apparent, or potential -- of the trust that people
have in professionals. The simplest working definition states: A conflict of interest is a situation in which financial or other personal considerations have the potential to compromise or bias professional judgment and objectivity.  It is important to note that a conflict of interest exists whether or not decisions are affected by a personal interest; a conflict of interest implies only the potential for bias, not a likelihood. It is also important to note that a conflict of interest is not considered misconduct in research, since the definition for misconduct is currently limited to fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism.” (Emphasis added.)
 
The use of the word “currently” suggests that the writer of the underlined passage above regrets that conflict of interest, as they’ve defined it, does not yet meet the definition of “misconduct.”  This also suggests that definitions may evolve over time through negotiations involving key stakeholders.   

Political Example: The Pennsylvania ‘Public Official and Employee Ethics Act’

 
The above-named law, which purports to govern the ethical conduct of Pennsylvania’s public officials and public employees, is based on a weak and narrow definition of conflict of interest that, rather incredibly, prohibits only pecuniary (i.e., financial) conflicts, but no other kind:    

"Conflict" or "conflict of interest." Use by a public official or public employee of the authority of his office or employment or any confidential information received through his holding public office or employment for the private pecuniary benefit of himself, a member of his immediate family or a business with which he or a member of his immediate family is associated. The term does not include an action having a de minimis economic impact or which affects to the same degree a class consisting of the general public or a subclass consisting of an industry, occupation or other group which includes the public official or public employee, a member of his immediate family or a business with which he or a member of his immediate family is associated.

This two-sentence definition of conflict of interest is not only narrow for failing to include any personal conflicts other than financial ones; it is also weak in that even the prohibition of financial conflicts implied by the first sentence is largely cancelled out by the exclusions contained in the second sentence!

Also, the most dangerous type of conflict of interest is not even mentioned, much less prohibited, under the above definition, namely the very harmful personal interest of “political gain” cited earlier. 

We will have more to say in subsequent posts about this and other major conflicts of interest that arise inevitably as a result of the total (100%) political control currently in place at the PASSHE universities.