It is because the CIPR grasps the importance of reputation that it is determined to raise standards of behaviour by amending its code of conduct, says Colin Farrington
Professionalism is vital in every walk of life. But for communications specialists, it is absolutely central to our credibility and to our future.
Quite rightly, we present ourselves as the managers of strategic reputation – as its experts. But if our own reputation is poor, then why should others trust us to manage theirs? And that concept of ‘reputation’ is both individual and corporate – the image of our profession as a whole impacts directly upon each and every one of us.
The damage done to the public affairs industry by the various allegations of sleaze which abounded in the 1990s surely shows the problems we face. Communicators are necessarily exposed to substantial public scrutiny of their activity, with a media ready to pounce on any hint of hypocrisy or double standards. And what goes for the communications profession as a whole is doubly true for those of us who work in public affairs.
It is because the CIPR grasps the importance of reputation that it is determined to raise standards of behaviour.
All our members sign up to our code of conduct when they join us, and by doing so demonstrate their commitment to professionalism and the highest levels of integrity. Becoming a CIPR member and signing the code differentiates them from those who are not prepared to stand up and be held accountable for the work they do. In our drive to raise standards still further, the CIPR are determined to get tough on malpractice and misconduct.
That is why we have amended our code of conduct so that we can be proactive in raising ethical standards within the profession. Approved by our governing board and council, after consultation with members, the new code will give us, as the profession’s watchdog, more teeth.
The way the code was constructed originally meant that the CIPR could investigate possible contraventions of the code only after a formal complaint had been lodged. The amended code will allow us to investigate a member’s behaviour where a formal complaint has not been received, but where information has nonetheless come to the attention of the chartered institute, suggesting that the code has been breached.
The amendment takes only a few words to be expressed in the body of the new code, but it represents a step change in how we see our role. It reflects both the mood of the times, and the sense of self-confidence within the CIPR following the award of the royal charter. Â Naturally, there will be safeguards. The president or director general are the only people who may begin proceedings; they must be in receipt of ‘substantive’ information; they must consider an investigation to be in the public interest. Â But the message is clear – we are clamping down on malpractice.
Why are we doing this? It’s not out of any desire simply to accrue more power. Nor is it because we believe that poor practice is becoming more common. Indeed, quite the reverse – the code exerts a powerful deterrent effect. I do believe that the standards of our profession have never been higher. But we are not content with being ‘good’. We need to be’excellent’.
So how will the new code work in practice? Â Well, the principles remain the same, as does the disciplinary process. Members still have to act with integrity, competence and confidentiality. Possible infringements of the code will still be dealt with by our professional practices committee and our disciplinary committee, made up of some of the most experienced and respected people in the profession. Those people will still weigh up and consider evidence in a fair and equitable manner.
But we will be able to begin those processes and ensure those principles have been adhered to when, for example, a story appears about a member in the national press.
In the past, even if the story appeared to suggest that the code had clearly been breached, we were unable to take action unless and until a formal complaint was received. Such complaints were not always forthcoming. The image of the profession was tarnished; the reputation of the member dented too.
The newly upgraded code means that insimilar circumstances today, we will be able to take fast action, making a judgment as to the nature of the evidence and the public interest, and can begin proceedings. It will help us to weed out professional wrong-doing. But just as importantly, we will be able to act to clear the professional name of a member whose actions might have been reported unfairly in the media.
Doubtless there are other areas where professionalism can be improved to the benefit of the whole profession. We are, for example, extolling the virtues of continuous professional development, and seeing a steady growth in the numbers committing to it. We are developing the concept of the chartered practitioner to recognise and improve the highest levels of professional endeavour. We continue to move the profession forward through the creation of a body of academic and practical knowledge, most recently evinced via the latest book in our Kogan Page series ‘Public Affairs in Practice’ by Bircham Dyson Bell’s Stuart Thomson and Pepsico’s Steve John.
But the key determinant of our professionalism is how we act. Professionalism is the bedrock of our profession’s future. And the code is the foundation of professionalism. That’s why it’s right we have a new, tougher code – because professionalism is here to stay.
Public Affairs News, December 2006, Colin Farrington was director general of the Chartered Institute of Public Relations (CIPR)