Corruption Matters - November 2014 - Issue 44

Is your line of visibility blinding you?

Line of visibility

How often does a manager say they have a line of visibility? It is a term commonly used to indicate that they are on top of something important, and rightly so. Dr Robert Waldersee, ICAC Executive Director, Corruption Prevention, suggests, however, that the areas outside that line of visibility may be paying the price.

More often than not, corruption flourishes in areas where no one is watching and where the information is poor. After all, to be corrupt is to continue the behaviour under the organisation’s own nose.

What can happen? Prices can be inflated, development approvals can be wrongly given, excessive variations can be granted, services may not be delivered, employment can be offered to lowly-skilled friends, and flow-on engagements for contractors can continue without the organisation knowing it is happening.

So, if lines of visibility prevent corruption, it is reasonable to ask:

I asked staff at a public agency this question in relation to the agency’s contractors. With problems of contractors on the books for too long, favouring of particular recruitment agencies and contractors, and even the all-too-common problem of contractors with a dual role as recruitment firms, it seemed reasonable to enquire about the lines of visibility at this agency. Who was accountable and what information did that person have? In effect, what was the line of visibility on contractor engagement?

The response was neither encouraging nor unusual. No one was watching, the information available had little assurance of integrity and information was not captured and analysed. It is the same response I often get on lines of visibility; whether variations, costs, contractor skills, delivery of services and so forth – either no one is watching or the information being used is significantly lacking.

In most cases, the information is simply not there at all. If asset conditions are not known, for example, the reasonableness of a work request cannot be assessed. Similarly, if variations are not analysed in a way that might show the relationship between contractors, staff or work type and variations, corruption remains undetected. So cost blowouts – whether corrupt or otherwise – cannot be detected.

In other cases, there can be no assurance of the integrity of the information that is available. Information that is susceptible to self-interest provides no real line of visibility. For example, progress of projects reported on by the project manager and delivery of supplies attested to by the vendor are cases in which self-interest can, and probably will, produce misleading information.

After all, what manager wants to admit their project is failing? But equally, what manager is going to report that they are giving work to companies that they own? If the information is vulnerable to manipulation for self-interest in general, then it is vulnerable to manipulation for corrupt interests.

The term "line of visibility" is widely bandied about. But thinking about lines of visibility requires thinking simultaneously about risk area, accountability and information. It may well be worth asking where the lines of visibility are in your organisation and, conversely, where your organisation may be blind to what is happening under its nose.

back to menu page