Abstract
The avoidance of a conflict of interest within private and public institutions is closely associated with good corporate governance. This study departed from the question of whether a conflict of interest is possible within a non-decision-making institutional committee. For this purpose, a high-level non-decision-making committee within a South African public higher education institution was selected as a case study. This article reports on an exploratory qualitative study consisting of qualitative content analysis of the constituting and operational documents of this committee, as well as on a study of the perceptions and lived experiences of the selected committee. It was found that the selected committee was established to be a high-level consultative body for the executive management committee of the university on decisions of strategic operational nature. This committee does not have any decision-making duties. Conflict of interest is perceived by committee members in terms of either the explicit or the hidden agenda metaphor. According to the explicit agenda metaphor, a conflict of interest within a non-decision-making committee is not possible, whilst the hidden agenda metaphor holds that a conflict of interest is the reality of members’ lived experiences. This article provides a comparison of the two perspectives according to three defining attributes of the concept and shows a need for a logical and principled definition of the concept ‘conflict of interest’ within the context of higher education and the public sector at large.
Highlights
The vexing question is as follows: how is it possible for conflict of interest to exist within such a committee? The subsequent purpose of this article is to report on a study of the possibility of conflict of interest experienced by members of a non-decision-making committee of a selected public higher education institution (HEI)
Considering that public HEIs are classified as part of the broad public sector, it is noteworthy that the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) advises against a conflict of interest resulting in an improper influence on ‘the performance of their [public officials] official duties and responsibilities’
This study showed that the committee that was selected as a case for this study formed an integral part of the governance structures established by the university council
Summary
It is commonly accepted within soundly governed corporations as well as public sector institutions that the only value driver for members of boards and committees is to execute their duties, as articulated by the King IV report, ‘in the best interest of the organisation over time’.1 it is expected that members of these bodies will always ‘avoid using their position and title to perpetuate sole self-interest or mere private gain’.2 The expectation of avoidance of conflicting interests in corporate decision-making is embedded in a rich literature on business ethics, corporate governance and public sector integrity.[3,4] Conflict of interest, irrespective of the context, has shown to refer to an individual’s private or personal interests, which may have an improper influence on the performance of his or her ‘official duties and responsibilities’.5 These duties or responsibilities have shown to be predominantly that of judgement and decision-making.[6,7,8]A crucial question, is whether conflict of interest is possible within a committee with no decision-making powers and, if so, what the nature of that conflict may be. The expectation of avoidance of conflicting interests in corporate decision-making is embedded in a rich literature on business ethics, corporate governance and public sector integrity.[3,4] Conflict of interest, irrespective of the context, has shown to refer to an individual’s private or personal interests, which may have an improper influence on the performance of his or her ‘official duties and responsibilities’.5. The subsequent purpose of this article is to report on a study of the possibility of conflict of interest experienced by members of a non-decision-making committee of a selected public higher education institution (HEI) These regulations have shown to be closely aligned with the principles embedded in the King IV report on corporate governance.[1] With regard to the promotion of ethical conduct, the report advises that members of governing bodies ‘should avoid conflicts of interest’.1. One of these committees is the Extended Management Committee (EMC) – a highlevel consultative committee for the executive management of the university
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
