"Don’t get your honey where you get your money."

For the last few days I was in the process of writing an article about conflict of interest, struggling to find the right angle to address such a tricky topic. That's when McDonald’s came to my rescue by firing their CEO over a relationship with a subordinate that violated the company’s policy.

While reading the many comments following the announcement, my thought went to the "MeToo" movement launched two years ago. Some might have thought the buzz was over but MacDonald's just proved them wrong. Policy matters without any exception.

Is it that simple? Obviously not. Some found this decision unfair because the relationship was supposedly "consensual", while others pointed the “power balance” making any relationship between a boss and a subordinate detrimental (ref. this post from Suzanne Lucas: “The power imbalance is too great between a CEO and any employee to make it a legitimate relationship. It always puts the company at risk.”).

What's the purpose of having a Policy if it is not enforced? Those disapproving McDonald's decision are "judging" through their own lens, culture and according to regulations in force in other countries that would not allow such a dismissal.

How to enforce a code of conduct in different jurisdictions?

This question was raised to me recently and I must admit I had no clue on the answer at the time. Again, McDonald's gave me some food for thoughts.

Enforcing a code of conduct in different jurisdictions is a key question for corporations operating in multiple locations. Should they go with "one-size-fits-all approach" or favor the "think global, act local" way with the risk of creating a two-tier justice system within the same organization? Let's be honest, I don't have the answer. Life is rarely black or white but looks more like “fifty shades of gray” especially when it comes to conflict of interest.

Conflict of interest is everywhere in the organization, from sexual misconduct, to financial corruption, baksheesh system etc. There are plenty of situations falling under the notion of conflict of interest. In most cases, perpetrators are conscious of the impact of their actions, hoping they won't be caught red-handed. McDonald's former CEO knew the rules in force in his company so no matter if the relationship was "consensual" or not, he broke the rules and had to be fired. There is no personal judgment, just pure application of the rule.

Most organizations understood the importance of a Policy as a tool to define the key rules governing the way they run their business. A bench of sections specifying the "Dos and Don'ts" according to the company's definition. This is good, right? No one can make a case against it. Then, why are many people breaking the rules?

We know it is not easy for global organizations to cope with different cultures and legislations. In a country like France, the "late" CEO of McDonald's would have had a different fate. So, does that mean a different rule should apply for employees working for the same group but under different jurisdictions?

Let's talk about suppliers' "gifts". I used to work for a company applying the "zero tolerance" rule: No gift could be accepted, no matter the value. No excuse. In this other firm, it was very different: As long as the gift did not exceed a certain amount, employees could accept suppliers' gifts. That's all the Policy was stating, the rest was left to common sense and each and every one interpretation. One would understand it was allowed to receive multiple gifts each below the threshold but in total exceeding the limit? How does one know about the value of the gift if the vendor doesn’t disclose the information? (which they never do). How does the company make sure suppliers were not using those gifts to get an advantage when it comes to signing new contracts? Some employees could be strong enough to resist the temptation of favoring the vendors offering the "best" gifts while others would be influenced consciously or not.

By neglecting these key aspects, the Policy of this organization proved anything but transparent, so was the company culture.

It's all about Culture

A situation is qualified as conflict of interest according to a specific organization, context and culture. What is acceptable in a country can be forbidden in another one. The gift policy is an example, the relationship between a boss and a subordinate is another one. Different countries, different laws, different interpretation, different application. Therefore, it is easy to end up with a differentiated policy that will be easily questioned whenever a case arises.

Integrity is dead...?

Another example of conflict of interest wass given by Kraft Heinz procurement debacle earlier this year. Investigations reported a "bonus structure that rewarded cost-cutting above all else and insufficient review of supplier contracts leading to Procurement misconduct… cracks in foundational procurement processes were not identified at any process checkpoints"... Playing the devil's advocate, one can also argue that Procurement staff did not intentionally tried to rob the company, they were caught in a perverted system with a the pressure to follow the herd...

We all have fears and there is one that is mostly shared among all employees: losing their job. This probably explains why most people do not dare to report misconducts especially if the perpetrator is a boss. But what always strikes me is the enthusiasm of some to play the "flying monkeys".

Which reminds me of this other case of a "Top 500 fortune company": The CIO used to manipulate corporate processes to favor his "preferred" vendor, making sure new business were awarded to his "friend" bypassing the standard bidding process. This CIO was deliberately violating the policy he once approved. Rules are made for others not for me?

Wanna be part of the solution?

Here's a few ideas:

For employees, I thought about these questions as self-reflection when facing a tricky situation:

• Who am I serving? the company, my internal customers or my personal interests?
• Who are my internal customers serving? By supporting them, am I still serving the organization?
• Can the relationship survive the test of ethics? this special one applies for any type of relationship…

It requires a bit of courage, but that's also what life is about, isn't it? Acting in alignment with our values.

For employers, think about actionable changes going beyond the standard code of conduct:

• Foster an inclusive culture where each employee feels safe to Speak up no matter their position in the organization. Simple but requires strong dedication from Top Management.
• Be clear: No grey zone. No room for interpretation.
• Use KPIs to measure and regularly assess the relevance of the Policy.
• Ensure segregation of duties in your processes and systems, put control points at all levels to prevent anyone (including those in power) from manipulating internal processes for their own interest. Have the entire system regularly audited to identify gaps.
• Listen to the whistleblowers... and let's be nice to them... their action serves the general interest even if it goes against specific personal benefits.
• Act. Take disciplinary measures especially when misconducts come from above. Same rule for all, from the janitor to the CEO. This is about justice and that's called leading by example.

Thank you for reading. Any thoughts or views?

Thanks for the inspiration: Jodi Tarraf , Eric Hoek

Note: The title of this publication was inspired by @Kate Bischoff's post

Copyright ? November 2019 Jo?lle Payom. Any unauthorized broadcasting, public performance, copying or re-recording will constitute an infringement of copyright.