---
name: code-of-conduct
description: Use when asked to write or revise a code of conduct — expected standards of behavior and ethics, reporting processes, and consequences for violations — distinct from the broader [[employee-handbook]], which covers practical policy across many topics rather than behavior and ethics specifically.
---

# Code of Conduct

A code of conduct is a document that defines the standards of behavior
and ethics expected of people in an organization: what's expected, how
to report a violation, and what happens when the standard isn't met.
It's narrower and more specific than an [[employee-handbook]] — a
handbook covers practical policy across many topics, while a code of
conduct is specifically about behavior and ethics.

## Key components

- **Concrete expected behaviors** — each principle paired with a
  specific example of what it looks like in practice, not left as an
  abstract value on its own (see below for why this matters).
- **Scope** — who the code applies to (employees, contractors, vendors,
  board members) and in what contexts (the workplace, work-related
  events, external representation of the organization).
- **A clear reporting process** — a concrete, named way to report a
  suspected violation, including alternate channels for reporting a
  concern about one's own manager or reporting line.
- **Protection against retaliation** — an explicit commitment that
  reporting in good faith will not result in retaliation, stated plainly
  rather than assumed.
- **Defined consequences** — what happens when a violation is
  confirmed, stated clearly enough that it's not a mystery, even if the
  exact consequence varies by severity.

## Why concrete examples matter more than abstract values alone

A value like "act with integrity" or "treat others with respect" gives
almost no guidance when someone actually faces an ambiguous real
situation — reasonable people can read the same abstract phrase and
reach opposite conclusions about what it requires of them. Pairing each
abstract value with a concrete example of what it looks like in
practice (and, ideally, what a violation looks like) is what turns a
values statement into something people can actually use to judge their
own or others' conduct. A code that stops at the abstract value hasn't
finished the job.

## Common pitfalls

- **Written entirely in abstract values** — a code that lists "honesty,"
  "respect," and "integrity" with no concrete guidance on what they mean
  in an actual situation leaves employees to guess, and gives an
  investigator no clear standard to apply either.
- **A reporting process that exists only on paper** — a process people
  don't trust (because they've seen retaliation happen, or because
  reports seem to go nowhere) or don't know how to actually use fails
  regardless of how well the document describes it.
- **No real protection against retaliation** — without a credible,
  enforced anti-retaliation commitment, people don't report even when
  the process technically exists, because the perceived risk of
  reporting outweighs the expected benefit.
- **Consequences left vague or unstated** — a code silent on what
  actually happens after a confirmed violation undermines its own
  credibility as a real standard rather than a symbolic one.
- **Applied inconsistently** — enforcing the code strictly for some
  people and loosely for others (especially by seniority) destroys
  trust in the code faster than having no code at all.

## Learn more

- [[employee-handbook]] for the broader practical-policy document a
  code of conduct sits alongside, distinct from it.
- [[job-description]] for where role-specific expectations are defined,
  as distinct from organization-wide conduct standards.
- [[performance-improvement-plan]] for one possible response when a
  conduct violation is a performance issue rather than grounds for
  immediate termination.
- [[offboarding-checklist]] for the process that follows if a violation
  results in departure.