I am currently contracted to perform the CTO role for a Halifax local search and internet advertising company called GenieKnows.com. Recently this role presented an interesting situations that I think serves as a good case study for separation of duties.

As CTO one of my duties includes the procurement of technical infrastructure. This wouldn't normally be very interesting, however, there is a complexity introduced here because of the fact that Bulletproof provides Product Fulfillment. This was seen as an issue early on in the contract and we worked to find ways to keep separation of duties between myself and Bulletproof procurement so that there would be no conflict of interest.

This arrangement was not ideal since it didn't allow me to optimally perform my CTO roles of procurement. So recently it was decided that Bulletproof would be excluded from bidding on hardware and software.

While this decision has an impact on Bulletproof potential revenue from this customer I respect and encourage the decision.  Why, you might ask?

GenieKnows.com has taken an active decision to ingrain "accountability" into its business model. This has even been reflected in their new balanced scorecard initiative as an outcome. As an auditor I regularly preach accountability and separation of duties to our clients. GenieKnows.com is doing exactly as I would recommend to them as an auditor.

Making good decisions on accountability and separation of duties is not always convenient but in the end maintaining integrity trumps all.