During the process of choosing a new third-party provider for cybersecurity services, it has come to light that a member of the leadership team has a close family member who holds a significant position at one of the contending firms. What is the most appropriate step to ensure that the selection process remains unbiased?
The involved leader should voluntarily withdraw from any involvement in the procurement decision.
Continue the process without a specific protocol in place, as the organization lacks a policy regarding such situations.
The leader should simply declare the personal connection publicly before a decision is made.
The selection should move ahead without acknowledgment, treating all vendors equally.
The leader should step back from the procurement activities to avoid any potential bias or influence over the selection process derived from his personal relationship with an individual at one of the competing firms. This action helps in maintaining the integrity and objectivity of the vendor selection process. Merely disclosing the connection does not remove the possibility of bias, and proceeding as if the connection does not exist can undermine the trust in the process and potentially lead to a risk of unfair competitive advantage.
Ask Bash
Bash is our AI bot, trained to help you pass your exam. AI Generated Content may display inaccurate information, always double-check anything important.
Why is it important for the leader to withdraw from the procurement decision?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What actions can organizations take to prevent conflicts of interest in procurement decisions?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What is the difference between bias and a conflict of interest?