The challenge
When an executive board became concerned about unmanaged reputational risks to the agency, a rapid risk review and advice to close the gaps were essential.
The executive board of a government agency was prompted by concerns about a Board member’s conduct during a period of recreation, during which they travelled to a high-risk region and undertook freelance journalism activities. While the Board was aware of the member’s involvement in writing and publishing, it had not been informed of the proposed travel or intended publications. This lack of disclosure raised serious questions about personal safety, reputational risk, and the adequacy of the agency’s governance protocols. A comprehensive review was required to determine whether these arrangements were fit for purpose.
How we helped
OCM led a comprehensive review of internal employment documentation and policies, to determine if they were fit for purpose.
We undertook a focused, independent review to provide the Board with clarity on the risks and the adequacy of existing governance arrangements. Our approach combined targeted stakeholder engagement with a structured review of documentation, ensuring a comprehensive and evidence-based assessment.
We began by engaging directly with key stakeholders, including the Board Chair, to understand the context of the concerns and align the scope of the review with the Board’s priorities. This was complemented by a series of confidential interviews with relevant personnel to capture perspectives on current practices, awareness of obligations, and the practical operation of existing controls.
In parallel, we conducted a detailed review of employment contracts, secondary employment provisions, and internal policies and procedures. This included examining ministerial briefing materials, correspondence, and agency guidance related to conflicts of interest and external activities. We assessed whether these arrangements were clearly defined, consistently applied, and aligned to contemporary governance expectations.
Our analysis focused on identifying gaps in risk identification, escalation, and oversight – particularly in relation to executive-level roles, where heightened scrutiny and reputational exposure exist. We benchmarked the agency’s approach against better practice governance principles, with a focus on embedding a risk-based framework for assessing and approving secondary employment and external engagements.
This structured, evidence-led approach enabled us to provide clear, practical recommendations to strengthen governance controls, improve transparency, and better manage reputational and operational risk at a senior level.
Results that matter
Delivering targeted, risk-based recommendations that strengthened governance oversight, addressed immediate reputational concerns, and positioned the agency with clearer accountability and improved executive-level risk management.
Our recommendations provided the Board with clear, actionable steps to address both immediate and emerging risks associated with the member’s activities. We identified critical gaps in governance arrangements, particularly in the oversight of executive secondary employment, and set out practical measures to strengthen controls. These included introducing a formalised, risk-based approval process, improving disclosure requirements, and enhancing Board visibility of external engagements. As these measures were implemented, the agency was better positioned to manage reputational exposure, reinforce accountability at the senior level, and demonstrate a proactive commitment to good governance to stakeholders and government.
Our people
Rob Critchlow
