A code of ethics is used primarily as a guide, and it provides an opportunity to showcase organizational values and define parameters of acceptable behavior. An effective code provides detailed information as unique as the membership it covers. Developing and maintaining a code of ethics also allows an association to be better prepared to manage developing issues, and it can enhance awareness and community within an organization. As needs change, the code of ethics and related rules and guidance should be reevaluated to remain relevant and useful.
The first step in the update cycle is to consider how a code of ethics can be changed. Rules, practicality, and even customs of an organization each may have an influence on revision frequency. Many organizations delegate the task of reviewing and amending to a smaller unit, such as a board or a committee, that can closely study the need and impact of proposals. Other organizations find value in a direct vote by a larger representation, such as delegates at a convention or even a vote of the entire membership. Update frequency may then occur as needed or as planned.
When following an as-needed cycle of amendment, updating a code of ethics will often occur in response to internal or external situations. An internal disciplinary matter, a policy change, and even a change in strategic or operational direction could trigger a need to revisit the code of ethics. Changing less frequently and only modifying in direct response to a specific event provides an opportunity to address recent issues and all related rules for relevancy. In contrast, a planned periodic review helps to ensure update frequency is intentional. Without a defined cadence of updating, an organization could find its code grossly outdated when it needs to handle a contemporary crisis. By adopting such a cadence as a provision within the code or as a separate policy, a rule can be established to trigger review and amendment. Common frequency intervals include quarterly, annually or biennially. While establishing a mandated review process is generally positive, care should be taken to ensure that changes are helpful and not made simply for form.
Please select this link to read the complete article from ASAE’s Center for Association Leadership.