Code of Ethics: Why words matter?

Philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein (2021) once stated, „The limit of my language is the limit of my world“. This highlights the undeniable influence of words — both spoken and written. Words can inspire individuals to exceed expectations or steer them towards unethical actions. A code of ethics is a longstanding and widely recognised document for encouraging ethical decision-making. Professions such as medicine have adhered to codes of conduct for over 2000 years. A code of ethics not only defines behavioural rules within an organisation but also articulates its core values. Therefore, the way we formulate and write a code of ethics, especially from a linguistic and grammatical perspective, is crucial for its effectiveness.

The Effectiveness of A Code of Ethics

A code of ethics outlines principles and rules that help an organisation manage and govern its decisionmaking processes, aiding decision-makers in distinguishing between right and wrong. The most accepted definition of a code of ethics is given by Kaptein & Schwartz (2008): „A distinct and formal document containing a set of rules developed by and for a company to guide the present and future behaviour of at least its managers and employees on a range of issues toward each other, the company, external stakeholders, and/or society at large.“

Generally, a code of ethics is integral to an organisation’s ethical framework and compliance programmes. Consequently, it has become part of regulatory requirements at both national (e.g., Section 406 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act) and industry levels (e.g., European Banking Authority: Guidelines on Internal Governance). Despite the formal establishment of codes of ethics in organisations, their effectiveness in promoting ethical intentions and behaviours remains debatable (Kish-Gephart, Harrison & Treviño, 2010).

The effectiveness of a code of ethics has been studied at various levels:

• Design: Codes with lower commitment levels lead to poorer ethical behaviour.
• Content: Sanctions specified in the code have limited effects on ethical behaviour.
• Compliance Programmes: A code with more components in compliance programmes (e.g., training, communication, compensation) leads to better ethical behaviour.

While these studies offer critical insights into the complex process of code effectiveness, one aspect remains equally essential — the impact of language or written words in a code of ethics on decision-makers’ behaviour.

Writing an Effective Code of Ethics

The purpose of this article is to provide a guide to writing a code of ethics from a linguistic perspective. Drawing from various studies in psychology and behavioural science, we will explore which words and language structures should be used in a code of ethics for maximum impact and effectiveness.

“Must” vs. “Should/May”

The most researched topic pertains to the use of obligation or duty words in a code of ethics. Words with strong connotations of obligation (must, forbid) compared to those with a lesser tone (should, may) result in higher code compliance. A negative tone (forbidding) can also deter unethical behaviour, though overuse can be counterproductive (Kotzian, et al., 2021).

A later study confirmed that companies and organisations achieved higher compliance levels when their code language contained medium or high obligations (members will/should) as opposed to low obligation language (members can/may). Thus, to ensure organisational expectations for ethical behaviour are clear, a negative tone in the code of ethics is necessary (George, Jones & Harvey, 2014).

“We/I” vs. “They/It”

Using direct pronouns (we, I) suggests a higher acceptance level of the code of ethics than using indirect pronouns (they, it, or organisation/company). Research found that phrases like “We are committed to integrity” are more effective in promoting ethical behaviour than “The organisation is committed to integrity” (Farrell & Farrell, 1998).

This approach aligns with modern psychological thinking, as the brain tends to accept direct subject words as its own. Additionally, people who participate in creating rules are more likely to follow them (Deci & Ryan, 2013).

The use of active/passive voice in ethical codes also matters. Although passive voice is common in English, it often creates a non-personal relationship to the action. Using passive voice in a code of ethics is inappropriate if the organisation wants stakeholders to embrace the code (Börjars & Vincent, 2013).

Keep it Simple and Clear

Sometimes, people use complex words to sound sophisticated, but this is not effective in ethics. Nominalisation — forming nouns from other words — negatively impacts the effectiveness of codes of ethics. These codes are meant for everyday practice and should be easy to understand (Schwartz, 2004).

The same applies to grammatical metaphors. While non-literal expressions can add academic flair, they can confuse readers. A code of ethics should avoid legalese and aim for straightforward language.

Way Forward

The code of ethics has long been a valuable document for organisational ethics. However, it starts with words — written or spoken. The significance of language in influencing human thoughts, emotions, and behaviours should not be overlooked. A code of ethics is written for people, and its language must reflect that. These simple rules can help make a code of ethics truly effective, enabling an organisation to become more ethical. Plain language resonates more with employees, allowing them to integrate the code of ethics into their daily work more effectively.

• Linguistic structure significantly impacts the effectiveness of a code of ethics (e.g., passive/active voice, use of nouns vs. verbs).
• Simplicity is key. Use simple words and short sentences in a code of ethics.
• This article was first published in Ethikos by the Society of Corporate Compliance and Ethics.

About the author

Dr. Matej Drascek is an international speaker and author on internal audit and ethics, with his recent book Ethical decision-making in management published by Routledge, New York.

In addition to having served as a lecturer for several universities and faculties, he has published numerous professional and scientific articles on internal audit, business ethics, and strategic management. Dr. Drascek has spoken at many domestic and international conferences, presenting new tools and insights in internal audit and business ethics. He received The IIA’s John B. Thurston Award for the best article about business ethics and is currently President of IIA–Slovenia.

He holds PhD from Business Ethics from University of Ljubljana, Slovenia and holds CIA, CRMA, CFSA, CC, and CSF-X certifications.

Did you find that article interesting? Do you want to know more? We are hosting two trainings with Matej, Are we, internal auditors, as objective as we think we are? and How to approach and develop an internal audit of ethics in an organization? . Register today!