Reading 04

While I do believe that codes of conduct are important for companies, organizations, or communities to have, I think that their importance is often overstated. In his article The Code of Conduct, Jesse Noller defines a code of conduct as a set of rules outlining the responsibilities of or proper practices for an individual, party, or organization. A code of conduct does not illustrate what one can do or must be, but what is not acceptable. The author goes on to discuss how a code of conduct is similar to a set of laws due to the manner in which they discourage harmful behavior. I would argue that a code of conduct is not much different that the codes of ethics we discussed in previous classes.  However, codes of conduct are, I believe, enforceable whereas codes of ethics are merely a behavioral guide. Codes ethics and codes of conduct both are less impactful than laws. Codes of conduct and ethics, to me, seem to be more a mission statement or public relations act saying, “This is what we stand for and support.”

The Django Code of Conduct provided in the readings is a good example of what I said above. For example, the first bullet point in the code of conduct is “Be friendly and patient.” This statement is followed up by six more elementary standards that seem obvious. That being said, the document almost seems as if it is a summary or spark notes version of actual laws and policies that the organization has. The “Be careful in the words that you choose” section discusses discrimination and harassment. A code of conduct that is written in the way that this section is could be used as a quick user guide for the more complicated actual laws.

While I do support individuals and their first amendment right to free speech, I do believe that in cases like that of Google’s memo controversy individuals should be held accountable for violating a discrimination policy so blatantly. I think that there is a difference between free speech in the public versus in the work place, and that if an employee is in violation of a code or policy that makes others in the work place uncomfortable the employer has the right to protect its other employees. I think that, in Google’s case, if the employee posted his memo in a public forum and did not circulate it internally, the outcome may have been different. By circulating the memo within Google, one could argue that the employee was intentionally targeting his co-workers whereas if the memo was displayed in a more public setting the employer would have a harder time defending that conclusion. In the Nodevember and Douglas Crockford case, I believe that companies have the right to invite or revoke invitations for an individual to represent them. I do not think that a company should be forced to have someone speak on their behalf when the speaker may portray a culture or attitude that the company as a whole does not support. That being said, I would not avoid going to events in which the speakers disagree with me. I believe that being able to listen to someone else’s opinion is an important skill to have. Just because one listens to someone with opposing views does not mean that they support everything that the other person does.