I've got an interesting situation here in Montana. NorthWestern Energy has asked me to do some contract auditing work for them, checking disputed bills and investigating high usage complaints. The problem is, I already do billing audits for several large customers in their territory. Is this a conflict of interest? The utility work would pay really well, but I don't want to compromise my existing client relationships or violate any professional standards.
Conflict of interest question - auditing for both utility and customer?
Noel, this is definitely a gray area. I've been in similar situations with Rocky Mountain Power here in Wyoming. Generally, you can't represent both sides of the same issue, but if the work is clearly separated and there's no overlap in clients or cases, it might be okay. I'd recommend disclosing the potential conflict to both parties and getting written approval. Some utilities actually prefer auditors who understand customer perspectives.
I do work for both Chugach Electric and some of their larger customers here in Anchorage. The key is maintaining strict separation - different files, different procedures, complete transparency with both sides. I always disclose any potential conflicts upfront and sometimes have to recuse myself from specific cases. It's workable but requires careful management and ironclad confidentiality protocols.
Be very careful here. PG&E has a strict policy against using auditors who also work for their customers in disputed cases. They see it as an inherent conflict even with disclosure. You might find yourself having to choose between the utility contract and your existing clients. I'd suggest talking to a lawyer who specializes in professional services before making any commitments.
Iris makes a good point about utility policies. OG&E here specifically prohibits their contract auditors from representing customers in billing disputes, even unrelated ones. They want to avoid any appearance of impropriety. Check NorthWestern's contract language carefully - there might be non-compete clauses that would force you to drop existing clients.
I faced this exact situation with Xcel Energy about five years ago. I ended up turning down the utility contract because it would have required me to drop two major industrial clients. The short-term money wasn't worth damaging those long-term relationships. Plus, customer-side work tends to be more stable and predictable than utility contract work.
Thanks for all the input. I'm leaning toward passing on the utility contract. My existing clients trust me to advocate for them, and taking money from their utility could undermine that relationship even if there's no actual conflict. The appearance of impropriety might be just as damaging as actual impropriety in this business.
Smart decision, Noel. I've seen auditors get burned trying to play both sides. PNM offered me similar work a few years back and I turned it down for the same reasons. Your reputation for independence is your most valuable asset in this business. Once customers think you might be compromised, it's nearly impossible to rebuild that trust.
Another consideration is liability insurance. My carrier specifically excludes coverage for conflicts of interest. If a problem arose from working both sides, I could be personally exposed to lawsuits with no insurance protection. That risk alone makes it not worth it, regardless of the potential income.
Good point about insurance, Theresa. I had to get special coverage and pay higher premiums when I started doing utility work alongside customer audits. The insurance company required detailed conflict management procedures and regular reporting. It's definitely doable but adds complexity and cost that might not be worth it.
This whole discussion highlights why professional standards exist in the first place. The CUBA code emphasizes independence and avoiding conflicts for good reasons. Even if you can legally work both sides, the ethical considerations and business risks usually make it inadvisable. Trust and credibility are the foundation of our profession - protect them at all costs.