September 14, 2026

Recognizing and Preventing Self-Interest in Professional Regulation

The Responsibilities of Board Service

As fellow regulators, ARBO’s goal is to support every optometry regulatory board in fulfilling its central obligation: protecting the public. Board members bring experience, judgment, and a commitment to service. At the same time, no individual or board is immune to bias, personal influence, institutional pressure, or error. Recognizing these forces is not an indictment of board members; it is a necessary part of sound governance. When boards identify and manage these influences, they strengthen decision-making, preserve the integrity of the regulatory process, and maintain public trust.

Understanding Who the Board Serves

New board members may begin service with limited exposure to the distinct role of a regulatory body. It is easy to agree that boards exist to protect the public. It can be more difficult to apply that principle when the interests of patients, licensees, colleagues, and the profession appear to overlap.

Licensees are members of the public and are entitled to due process and respectful treatment. However, a regulatory board is not an advocacy organization for licensees or for the profession. Its responsibility is to protect patients and the broader public by establishing and enforcing lawful standards of competence, conduct, and accountability.

A strong profession may contribute to strong patient care, but advancing the profession is the responsibility of professional associations and other advocacy organizations. Regulatory boards must maintain a clear distinction between professional advocacy and public protection. When those roles become blurred, the credibility and independence of the regulatory system may be compromised.

How Self-Interest Appears in Regulatory Work

Self-interest is not always deliberate or obvious. It may appear as a desire to protect a respected colleague, soften a response because of a licensee’s reputation, create an exception for a former leader, favor a policy that benefits one’s own practice model, or provide informal regulatory guidance to a friend or acquaintance. Even well-intentioned actions can create the appearance of preferential treatment and weaken confidence in the board’s impartiality.

The relevant question is not only whether a board member intends to favor someone. It is also whether a reasonable observer would view the process as fair, consistent, and free from undue influence.

A Guiding Principle for Decision-Making

Every regulatory decision should be grounded in the facts, the governing statutes and rules, board policy, due process, and the board’s public-protection mission. Personal relationships, professional respect, reputation, status, and sympathy may provide context, but they must never replace objective analysis.

Practical Reminders for Board Members

• Individual board members do not speak for the board unless formally authorized.
• Informal advice may be interpreted as an official board position or a promise of special treatment.
• Personal, professional, financial, or organizational relationships may create actual, potential, or perceived conflicts of interest.
• Conflicts should be disclosed promptly and managed in accordance with applicable law and board policy, including recusal when required.
• Regulatory decisions should be based on law, evidence, and established policy – not on personal circumstances or professional standing.
• Due process and consistent treatment of licensees are essential components of public protection.
• Board members should evaluate conduct and evidence, not reputation, relationships, or advocacy.
• The board’s rationale should be documented clearly enough to demonstrate fairness, consistency, and accountability.

Governance Practices That Protect the Board and the Public

Follow Open Meeting Requirements and Document Decisions. Conduct board business in public whenever required by law. Ensure that discussions, votes, recusals, and the basis for significant decisions are accurately reflected in the minutes. Clear records protect the public, the board, and individual board members.

Rely on Independent Legal Counsel. Board counsel provides guidance based on statutes, rules, due process, and the board’s legal authority. When difficult or politically sensitive issues arise, rely on independent legal advice rather than informal assurances, outside pressure, or professional relationships.

Respect the Role of Your Executive Director. Executive Directors provide institutional knowledge, procedural guidance, and regulatory continuity. Their role is essential in identifying compliance concerns, maintaining consistent processes, and helping the board apply policy fairly over time.

Recognize Influence and Advocacy. Be alert when an individual or organization strongly advocates for a particular person, outcome, or policy. Influence may come from respected colleagues, former leaders, mentors, friends, alumni networks, employers, or professional associations. Advocacy is not inherently improper, but it must be evaluated carefully. Ask whether the recommendation advances public protection, promotes a private or organizational interest, or creates an appearance of preferential access.

Evaluate Conduct, Not Reputation. Accomplishments, friendships, professional stature, and past service should not outweigh facts, evidence, and the law. Consistency and impartiality are essential to maintaining public trust.

Test Decisions for Consistency and Public Defensibility. Before acting, consider the following questions:

• Would the board reach the same decision if the individual were unknown to the members?
• Is the decision consistent with how similar matters have been handled?
• Could the board explain its reasoning publicly and with confidence?
• Does the decision advance the board’s statutory public-protection responsibilities?

Effective boards are not free from pressure, relationships, or competing interests. They are disciplined in recognizing and managing them. The strongest boards remain grounded in role clarity, transparency, due process, independent advice, consistent processes, and public protection. When personal relationships, reputation, influence, or advocacy begin to shape a regulatory decision, the board should return to its central mission: protecting the public through fair, impartial, consistent, and lawful regulation.

Regulatory boards should apply these principles in accordance with their jurisdiction’s statutes, rules, policies, and legal counsel.