Conflict of Interest

Critical Thinking Paper: Conflict of Interest
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Course
Instructor
Date
Critical Thinking Paper: Conflict of Interest
Summary of the Case Study
Alice Johnson, the CEO, expresses concern regarding an international hacking lawsuit. A hack at the Office of Personnel Management, OPM, resulted in a data breach, which included compromised background information of a considerable number of staff. She indicates that the company has hired CyberTech as the cyber forensics consultant for the law firm that handles the case. A suspect in the data breach claims that the US-based Equation Set tried to hack its facilities. Importantly, the suspect is a non-US, which implies that the case involves domestic and international test hacker groups. In one instance, Anomalous is arguably a defendant and plaintiff in the OPM data breach and Equation Set, respectively. According to the CEO, the case is challenging. There is a possibility of conflict of interest since CyberTech, hired in the breach case at OPM, also represents clients from the companies, including Anomalous, a suspect in the breach. Even though the cases are unrelated, one cannot ignore the ties between CyberTech and the suspects and the conflict of interest. It raises concerns such as biasness in cybersecurity, which could impede organizational reputation and ability to invite notable client base.
Analysis of the Case
I believe the cyber security firm is in a dilemma. The company is representing clients from a suspect company in the OPM case in Alice’s firm. At the same time, it is also involved with a law firm that is hired to handle the lawsuit resulting from the hack, which I have established that OPM suspects was committed by Anomalous, the suspect. This raises concerns such as the possibility of biasness in the representation of both companies and cases. The question revolves around whether CyberTech should represent both firms in the cases simultaneously or drop one of the cases. Even though the representation of the suspect involves a totally unrelated case, I think it is impossible to disregard the imminent conflict of interest, hence the need to drop one of the cases to limit exposure to reputational damage and disputes resulting from the claims such as biasness. I am convinced that maintaining both cases invites implications, including conflict of interest, which can sabotage both cases, resulting in the loss of clients and a damaged reputation that might impede future business operations and customer relations.
I have learned that in business ethics, conflict of interest thrives on the possibility of bias in one’s judgment, actions, and decision-making. According to Dragomir (2017), one factor that threatens organizational reputation, integrity, and efficiency is the conflict of interest. In fact, in most instances, companies have a code of ethics that governs exposure to conflict of interest and how to handle it successfully. In my opinion, the firm would be biased if they prioritized the client that meets their organizational interests, including focusing on profitability, at the expense of the other client. I believe CyberTech might be biased against Anomalous especially when it pays better th...