Staying biased will help you reach a conclusion based on the facts in question. When an individual has already drawn a conclusion, but does not know the facts, this will create animosity between both parties. Equally important, transparency is one of the key elements to eliminating a conflict of interest. Letting others know what you might have a position on will perhaps help direct the conversation. For example, if the leader is interviewing candidates for a position within his department and one of the candidates he has known for years comes across his desk, this could be a conflict of interest. Rather than ask the leader to interview this person, he or she should excuse himself or herself from the interview process to eliminate a conflict of interest. If the leader remains on the board for the interview, others may see it as bias and others will not be treated fairly. Providing full disclosure requires few substantive changes; often the only reliable way to remove the destructive effects of conflict of interest is to eliminate the conflict. In other words, “transparency is a good thing, but accuracy and objectivity are even better. Wall Street does not continue to confess its sins. You just have to stop doing them,” as stated by James Surowieski of the New Yorker in 2005 (Cain & Kaplan, 2016, p..