Relationships with customers and suppliers

1. Regulatory Concept & Core Standards

This video's topic is relationships with customers and suppliers. By the end, you should be able to apply impartiality and transparency in external relationships. We will connect the information available, the criterion guiding the decision and the action that must be recorded. Follow the case and compare your answer with the proposed response. A code translates principles into instructions for everyday decisions. Link this course to the code actually applicable to the organisation. Croatia’s 2025 Code of Ethics for Civil Servants and Employees has its own covered population and is not the universal code of all private companies.

Professional relationships require fair, reasoned decisions. Article 4 of Croatia’s Public Procurement Act requires competition, equal treatment and transparency and prohibits unjustified preference. Private purchasing follows its own applicable rules. A long relationship does not replace valid decision criteria.

Apply the following rule: The employer adopts and makes accessible a general act on internal reporting and appointment of the confidential person and deputy. The employer must not interfere with their statutory handling to protect the reporting person. An unauthorised recipient must forward the report without delay and without alteration to the confidential person, protecting its data. Articles 17 and 18 regulate oral reports and requested meetings, including recording consent and the opportunity to check records. Portuguese RGPC is not Croatian legislation.

2. Practical Implementation & Procedure

Use approved criteria and preserve relevant decision information. Refer exception requests to authorised people. Declare relationships or interests that may influence your actions. Avoid promises about outcomes requiring independent assessment. If an improper proposal arises, refuse or pause according to procedure and record what is necessary. Before moving on, turn this procedure into a sequence you could explain to a colleague. Identify the first check, the action that depends on its outcome and the record that allows the decision to be reconstructed. Follow the sequence on screen and identify the point where an error would change the result.

3. Case Study & Compliance Action

A supplier asks for acceptance of a late bid because it is a longstanding partner. The responsible person checks the rules and refers the matter instead of deciding through familiarity, preserving consistent treatment and a decision record. Now read the case carefully. Separate established facts from information you would still need to confirm. Do not add motives or events that have not been described. This distinction matters when choosing a response proportionate to the information available.

The exercise is as follows: Should the length of a commercial relationship replace applicable decision criteria? Choose an answer and write one sentence explaining it. During the pause, compare your choice with the criteria we have just considered. Also think about the material you would retain to explain the decision later.

No. It may be relevant in permitted contexts but does not authorise bypassing procedures. Any permissible exception needs authority, reasons and treatment consistent with applicable rules.

One mistake to avoid is: turning personal trust into an exemption from controls.

Now apply the national rule to a second decision. The team presents every integrity instrument as mandatory in every country. How should the message be revised?

Distinguish what national law actually requires, the conditions for its application to the entity and the proposed good practices. The specific rule just examined must appear in the corresponding procedure. Each duty needs a source; each management choice needs a purpose, an owner and evidence of implementation.