The opportunity comes alongside the obvious benefit of avoiding the risk of large fines, he said, citing engineering group Alstom, aluminium maker Alcoa and aircraft manufacturer Embraer as examples of large firms that have either been fined or are under investigation for making bribes. Guilty private individuals and employees could also face stiff penalties, including confiscation of assets and personal disgrace.

Small businesses, especially those that trade overseas, are also likely to face more legislation targeting corrupt practices. In the UK, for example, the bribery act that Mr Burbidge-King contributed to took effect last July and, despite widespread criticism that it is weak and ineffective, will see prosecutors aiming for early successes by getting high-profile heads on stakes, said the expert consultant.

“We have not even seen the tip of the iceberg in terms of the number of companies, directors and employees facing prosecution, fines and possible imprisonment because of the act,” he said. The corrupt could also fall foul of US foreign and corrupt practices legislation, as much international trade passes through US territory or is carried out in US dollars.

Although Mr Burbidge-King suspects that there was some ‘clearing out of the cupboard’ in advance of the UK bribery act taking effect, as the law is not retrospective, he says that not all of business has yet got the message. “They don’t think that they do it,” he noted.

In particular, audit committees around the world often have their heads in the sand, despite increasing concern among shareholders about corruption and the risk to their investments, he says.

However, Mr Burbidge-King believes that malpractice in some cases is the result of naivety, as well as failures by European firms to carry out due diligence and risk assessment when entering new markets. “They just haven’t thought about it as business risk,” he said.

For example, a company could be at great risk should a firm somewhere down the supply chain be put out of business by fines for corruption that have nothing to do with the final customer. “The supply chain issue is not just that a supplier might just try to bribe your company,” said Mr Burbidge-King.

Interchange’s recommendations include: obtain unequivocal board commitment; review all agency and associated personnel arrangements to ensure that their contracts include anti-bribery provisions; review standard terms and conditions of doing business; educate the supply chain; embed anti-bribery strategy in business planning; and use good business ethics as a unique selling point.

Please sign up here to our full-time mailing list to ensure that you receive our weekly newsletter.

• More Corporate Governance News