Dr Ivor Blumenthal | CEO | ArkKonsult | mail me |
There is a difference between an Ethics ‘Code of Conduct’ and an Operational Manual.
Why are these so often confused?
I am regularly concerned by just how easily and it may be argued intentionally a Professional Body misinterprets its obligation towards the enforcement of Ethical and Behaviourally acceptable conduct on the one hand, and on the other its obligation to ensure acceptable levels of competency and ongoing personal development to maintain that competent profile.
These are neither the same thing, nor are they interchangeable.
Competency
Any issue of competency is just that. While it may be an Ethical requirement to be competent and possess the required Qualifications, Certifications and Professional Designation and in some cases even Licenses to practice, the actual criteria of competence will never be included in a Code of Conduct. It will be included in an Operational Guideline with clearly specified criteria for the minimum levels of competency and mastery.
Nor will the conditions required for remediation be included in any Ethics Code or Guideline, where a competency problem may arise. These are operational considerations and not ethical ones.
A Code of Conduct deals with Behaviour
Acceptable levels of conduct reflective of acceptable Values and Norms to live in the greater society and specifically to operate within the microcosm of that society which is the particular community of Professional Practitioners for which the Code of Conduct was designed and to which it applies.
Remembering that a Professional Body is constituted only by Professionals, who self-govern amongst themselves their mutual conduct and behaviour and ensure that it is at a level which could be considered to be professional, mature and a therefore a centre of professionalism and excellence.
The Professional Body in this instance should never be regarded as a parental figure but rather as an organisation of peers.
That Code of Conduct is established to regulate commonly acceptable behaviour based on societal and professional norms, less related to competency and more to professionalism, maturity and lines of mutual respect.
It is not difficult to identify what should be regarded as the backbone of any Professional Bodies Code of Conduct. (Loosely taken, the 10 commandments would be a starting point, not necessarily with the murder or adultery or nefarious other activities implied therein.)
What astounds me is when a Professional Body or Association which subjects its members to a Code of Conduct, would pre-occupy most of its time and resources in instituting Operational Enquiries for things which have become an issue of competency (or the lack of it) instead of behaviour.
Ethics
What I am arguing for therefore is that what may loosely be termed Ethics, would need to be clearly split and specified as an issue to be investigated or Ethical Behaviour or one of Competency.
The nature of the Enquiry and indeed the Chair people appointed to head such an enquiry, the nature of the investigation and the subsequent prosecution, would all be different and require a divergent set of competencies, abilities and also specifically a different set of precedents which would need to be applied.
In an Enquiry related to competence, the assumption is that there would be an operational standard of competence to be applied and assessed against, whereas in one related to Behaviour the requirement would be for a pre-specified Code of Conduct containing behavioural responsibilities which are easily able to be converted into measurable criteria of what is considered acceptable behaviour and what is not.
Operational Standards
An Operational Standard – how the job gets done and to what level, would contain a range statement of possible actions, responses and tolerances specifying explicitly the operational action required to be undertaken in each instance.
Often such Standards are encapsulated within ISO (International Standards Organisation) and also SABS (South African Bureau of Standards) registered Quality Standards, specifying not only the quality standards against which products and services may be measured and certified, but also processes of operational application and measurement.
The purpose of Operational Standards is Compliance Certification.
It is therefore simple when all of this machine is in-place, to review the Professionals performance on the job, and determine whether it occurred within an acceptable range of tolerance. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to apply a standard such as this, just another one or more experienced professionals who have been through the mill.
Professional Ethical Conduct
What is more difficult however is the more difficult investigation which is sometimes required, into the Professionals Ethical Conduct.
It is here where the waters become very murky:
- ‘Did the Physicians behaviour border on assault when he went beyond his medically justified remit?’
- ‘Did the Plumber conspire with the supplier to overcharge the customer for the Geyser for mutual benefit?’
It is for this reason that a good Code of Conduct restricts itself to value-based responsibilities and never attempts to be exhaustive about what would be considered to be a Behavioural Infringement and what not?
Specific Standards of Ethical Conduct would come out eventually in the wash of precedent i.e. how are the Ethical Responsibilities applied in practice and which behaviours have been adjudged to be unprofessional and conduct unbecoming, through the application and practice of the considered opinions of a trained group of Mediators and Arbitrators charged with conducting and overseeing the Enquiries into Ethical Behaviour?
Clarifying the confusion
I began this article by saying ‘it may be argued that a Professional Body intentionally misinterprets its obligation‘ and thereby confuses issues of Ethics with those of Competency.
Why I believe that this confusion is sometimes intentional, is that in some Industries, possibly those which are Medically related, such confusion allows obfuscation and a closing of the ranks when something goes wrong. If the guidelines are murky and unclear, standards and therefore criteria and assessment become impossible because of a lack of direction or specificity. In that instance colleagues and peers are reticent about investigating, testifying against and certainly pronouncing on one another in-terms of behavioural infringements.
When behaviour and competency are intermingled and therefore confusable it provides sufficient reason for professionals to fight to stay away from Ethics Enquiry involvement.
In the end, a Professional Body is adjudged to be Professional and Effective based on its ability to differentiate issues of conduct and behaviour from those of competency and operation. To confuse the two is at best negligent and ill-informed and at worst intentionally misleading, fraudulent and therefore criminal.
Ultimately it is the Professionals themselves, the Members of a Professional Body which are to be held responsible for the clarification of this distinction in the policies and procedures of that Professional Body.
