The Consultant Who Also Sells the Fix
You are asked to assess a small office with reported musty odors. During the site visit you learn that the property manager also owns a remediation company that is bidding on the corrective work. In the same meeting, the manager asks you to (a) recommend their company as the remediator, (b) write the scope so it matches their bid, and (c) perform the post-remediation clearance. They offer a 'fast turnaround' if you agree today. You have not yet completed the assessment, and another occupant has separately asked you, off the record, to 'find something' because they want out of their lease.
1. Identify the conflicts of interest and ethical issues in this request.
Read the worked answer
Conflicts and issues:
- Recommending a remediator owned by the client - the client has a financial interest in the outcome; recommending their company is not independent.
- Writing the scope to match a bid - the scope must follow the assessment and standard practice, not a vendor's pricing.
- Assessor + clearance on the same project - performing clearance for work you scoped is a conflict of interest unless disclosed and managed; independent verification is the point of clearance.
- 'Fast turnaround if you agree today' - pressure to commit before completing the assessment compromises objectivity.
- Occupant asking you to 'find something' - you must not let a desired outcome drive findings; report what the evidence shows.
- Undisclosed dual role - the manager's ownership of the remediation company should be disclosed to other stakeholders.
2. How do you restructure the engagement to remain independent and defensible?
Read the worked answer
Restructure as follows:
- Complete the assessment first; produce findings and a scope based on evidence, not on any bid.
- Disclose the conflict in writing to all relevant parties (owner, occupants/tenants as appropriate): the property manager owns the bidding remediator.
- Separate roles: you may assess and write the scope; clearance should be performed by an independent party (or, if you must do it, disclose and document why independence is preserved - generally not recommended when the client owns the remediator).
- Recommend a competitive process with at least a couple of qualified bidders, or have the client select the remediator; do not endorse their company.
- Decline to tailor the scope to a bid.
- Address the occupant's request by explaining you report evidence objectively; if they have a lease concern, that is a separate matter outside your role.
- Put all of this in an engagement letter with scope, roles, and conflict disclosures.
3. The manager says 'everyone does it this way' and threatens to go elsewhere. Respond.
Read the worked answer
Respond calmly and factually:
- Independence and disclosure are not optional; they are what make the report usable if the work is ever challenged.
- Explain the practical risk: a scope written to a bid and clearance by the same party is easy to attack and exposes the client to liability.
- Offer the defensible path: complete assessment, evidence-based scope, disclosed conflict, competitive selection, independent clearance.
- If they choose another consultant, that is their decision; your record shows you advised correctly.
- Do not compromise the assessment to keep the work. Your value is the defensible record, not agreement.