As procurement activity increases and staff numbers grow, managing conflicts of interest (COI) has become a core responsibility for local councils.
Most councils have the right intentions with clear policies, regular training, and governance oversight. Yet in practice, structural limitations make enforcement difficult. Procurement is decentralised. Teams change often. Self-declaration remains the default safeguard.
As such, councils are exposed to compliance gaps, reputational risk and audit findings.
Satori’s Chief Operating Officer, Troy Nicholson and GM - Customer Success Natalya Levenkova, were joined by Noel Irwin, Procurement Manager from Melton Council in Victoria, to discuss the underlying causes of conflict of interest, current detection practices, and how councils can improve assurance through data automation and continuous monitoring.
Where conflict of interest issues arise
Conflict of interest is not necessarily the result of intentional wrongdoing. Individuals are human, prone to forgetfulness, time-pressured, and often uncertain of what needs to be disclosed. These lapses may be caused by simple forgetfulness, lack of awareness of what needs to be declared, the complexity of large projects involving many suppliers, or – less commonly – deliberate non-disclosure.
Councils also frequently have decentralised procurement staff and high staff turnover. Combined with limited oversight across systems, potential risks often go unnoticed.
The majority of councils continue to use self-declaration as their initial line of defence. This relies on individuals to judge for themselves and report their own exposure to risk. In the absence of a mechanism that cross-checks employees against supplier records, duplication such as addresses or bank accounts, is often undetected.
These issues do not necessarily begin with ill intent, but they do suggest systems that are not designed for certainty.
Poll: How Councils are detecting COI today
When asked how their organisation currently detects conflicts of interest, most webinar attendees pointed to traditional methods:
- 75% rely on staff to self-declare
- 18% conduct manual reviews
- Only 12% use any form of automated monitoring
These numbers highlight a gap between policy and practice. While most councils have COI frameworks in place, the execution is often reactive and dependent on individual awareness. Without automation, issues may go unnoticed, simply because the right data isn't being surfaced at the right time.
The risk is broader than fraud. It includes reputational damage, audit scrutiny, and a failure to demonstrate compliance when it matters. What does better conflict detection.
What does better conflict detection looks like
Effective conflict of interest detection is defined by visibility, verification and consistency. Councils with more mature detection capabilities typically share these characteristics:
- Integrated data: Employee and vendor records are assessed together to surface hidden links.
- External context: ASIC director data adds verification and depth.
- Pattern recognition: Shared addresses, emails, or ABNs flagged in context.
- Consistency across teams: Checks are applied consistently across teams.
- Continuous oversight: Monitoring runs in the background, not just during reviews.
- Data enrichment: Internal records are matched against ASIC and other public datasets to surface hidden risks.
These practices make conflict monitoring more responsive and support faster, more informed decision-making.
In practice: Melton City Council
With a population growing by more than 13,000 each year and a capital works program exceeding $225 million, Melton City Council operates in a high-pressure procurement environment. Staff numbers have surged past 900, and continued growth means more projects, more vendors, and more people involved in purchasing decisions.
“Growth pressure creates opportunities for fraud, such as accidentally failing to declare a conflict or not understanding the right process,” said Noel Irwin, Procurement Manager. “New staff often rely on what they knew at their last council or organisation. Some don’t fully understand what a conflict of interest is.”
In response, Melton has moved beyond manual declarations. By integrating ASIC director data with internal procurement records, the Council uses Satori to continuously scan for potential conflicts. The platform flags matches between employees and vendors, enabling timely, structured investigations.
This process is powered by Satori’s Director Checker solution, which continuously monitors internal and ASIC data, triggers investigation workflows for potential conflicts, and maintains a full audit trail for compliance and review.
“We use ASIC data, our procurement data, and Satori’s capability to track, match and record that information,” Irwin said. “For us, it’s a perfect system.”
Poll: ASIC data and the council landscape
ASIC director data provides an additional layer of visibility when monitoring conflicts of interest. Yet only a small percentage of councils have operationalised their use.
In our live webinar poll, just 8% of respondents said they’re currently using ASIC data in their COI monitoring processes. Almost 50% indicated they plan to.
This result suggests clear intent but limited implementation. While the value of enriched data sources is widely recognised, many councils have yet to build the systems or processes to use them effectively. Making the connection between awareness and action is the next step.
The role of automation in building a COI culture
A strong conflict of interest framework starts with staff awareness, but it cannot end there. Education is essential, yet expecting every individual to recall policies under pressure leaves too much to chance.
Automated checks offer a safeguard. They allow councils to analyse full data sets rather than samples, apply the same standards across all departments, and proactively detect issues as they arise, not just during audits. By reducing reliance on manual processes, automation also eliminates common human errors and ensures a more consistent, repeatable approach.
It supports a broader culture of responsibility where accountability is not simply the preserve of Integrity or Governance teams. It also improves audit and review processes by leaving a clear, traceable audit trail of checks and outcomes.
Automation supports the guardrails, even when teams grow and priorities shift.
A smarter approach to conflict of interest
While most councils have policies in place, effective conflict of interest oversight requires systems that connect data, flag risks early, and support consistent action across teams.
Automation and combined sources of data, as demonstrated by Melton City Council, can move councils away from reactive processes into constant visibility.
If your organisation is ready to more effectively identify and address conflicts of interest, we can help. Speak to the Satori team to see how continuous monitoring and advanced data can contribute to improved governance and accountability.
For deeper insights and practical examples, watch the full webinar here.