Skatefair Logo Prepared by Renee Rico, October 2003

Summary

The release of this Code of Ethics by the ISU is in many ways a hollow gesture. This document has received some limited internal review within the ISU, but there has been no wide-ranging discussion of the issues regarding ethics since the ISU Congress in the summer of 2002, well before the drafting of this document began. The release of the Code at this time is premature, given that no process for translation of the code, its dissemination , education of applicable persons, seems to be provided. In addition, the structures by which organizations implement a Code of Ethics, namely, an Ethics Commission, have not been formed, and indeed cannot be formed until the next ISU Congress in 2004. Far from clarifying the real issues regarding judging, this document simply points out the structural weaknesses of the ISU: its topdown management style, its inability to work through issues as a community of shared interests at a pace that ensures wide participation of involved parties, and its desire to turn this instrument into a public relations instrument without requiring real change in the organization.

The IOC Clone

One of the striking things about this document is that it in many ways reflects the Code of Ethics developed by the International Olympic Committee following its own scandal relating to the selection of Salt Lake City as the host city for the 2002 Olympics.

The two organizations do have some things in common: a national member structure, similar concerns for fairness in athletic competition. But the IOC relies also on international athletic bodies such as the ISU for their structure in determining ethical standards regarding those sports. As such, the IOC Code of Ethics works in a very different structure and was developed in response to completely differing issues of accepting favors for selection as an Olympic site.

Individual versus a Community Ethic

In structure, the ISU has chosen a peculiar structure of the acceptance of the code. Unlike the IOC Code of Ethics which applies to the members of the IOC, the ISU Code of Ethics instead applies to many different kinds of groups and individuals which include

  • ISU Officials
  • ISU Office Holders
  • Members
  • ISU Employees and consultants
  • ISU Commission Members
  • Organizing Committees for ISU events
  • skaters
  • coaches
  • trainers
  • doctors
  • team attendants
  • team officials
  • all other persons claiming or seeking standing as present or prospective participants in any ISU activity and
  • persons without any title or status who engage in any activity related to the ISU that is prohibited by the Code.

While some groups are named here, in fact, the crucial section is all in "I" language, which somehow implies only individuals may violate the code, not groups. This alone is disturbing. It appears from this list that even volunteers at ISU events are to be considered in this group as well. As the following analysis shows, the disparate levels of responsibility make a generic application of this Code of Ethics almost meaningless.

Purposes of the Code

The document states the purposes of the Code of Ethics, which are to declare that high ethical standards must govern the pursuit of the mission of the ISU, assure compliance by all involved persons, and inspire public and internal confidence, and serve as an example for members and member countries.

There are several problems with the stated goals. First, a study of Codes of Ethics by ArthurAnderson has shown that

"when employees perceive that ethics/compliance programs were created to help guide behavior, as well as to establish and reinforce a shared set of company values that are rooted in the company culture, they are significantly more successful than programs that employees believe were designed primarily for purposes of compliance. When employees perceive that the program was developed to prevent, detect, and punish violations of law and regulation, or simply to improve the company's image, the results are far less successful." (Values-based Ethics Programs Most Effective: Study Measures Effectiveness of Corporate Ethics Programs, a research report by Arthur Andersen, 1999)

The ISU's Code fails on multiple counts. First, it has not yet done the hard work of developing a shared set of values within the organization. At present, the culture of the ISU is autocratic in style, and discourages any honest conversation around the problems present. Second, one of the stated goals is "compliance" with the fundamental policies and values of the ISU. This meets the letter of the law regarding Codes of Ethics, but a more real, and unstated, compliance goal is that of the ISU remaining as the Federation for figure skating with the International Olympic Committee, and to keep figure skating as an Olympic sport. Compliance with the IOC's need for scandal not to recur is the more fundamental compliance occurring here. Third, the declared goal of raising public and internal confidence goes to the image problems of the ISU, and, as the study above indicates, is another factor that does not bode well for this Code's success.

As following sections will note, there are possibly other unstated purposes of this Code.

Personal Ethical Commitment to the ISU

The oddest part of the Code of Ethics is the section which is called, "My Personal Commitment to the ISU and Skating." First, the implication is that ethics are fundamentally an individual, not a group issue. In reality, ethics must operate at both levels. The lack of a group focus is reflective of the current ISU culture and the problems that are likely to follow in the implementation of this code. It is also perhaps the reason that there are no defined procedures for resolving ethical issues.

In addition, individuals are, in essence, being asked to take an oath, without ever seeing, reading, let alone signing this document. In many respects, it reads as a loyalty oath, since the code itself is directly linked to the mission and interests of the ISU.

The Code provides that participation in an ISU event assumes that the person has agreed to the Code and will honor it as if they had solemnly signed the document. This alone seems to conflict with at least two purposes of the Code itself -- to assure compliance by all involved persons, and to inspire public and internal confidence. It is difficult to imagine that, without extensive work to translate the document into the necessary languages, disseminate it widely, educate participants and train responders, not to mention provide a structure for responding to violations, this document could do any of the above. While current ISU policy is to publish all documents in English, and expect the Federations to translate the document, this is one area where the pay-off to assure access to the document should override current policy. Since the ISU is claiming that this document is now in effect, it is amazing to think that non-English speakers are required to comply before it has been translated.

The core of the document is a list of 15 items listed that applies to all the involved persons. Unlike other Codes of Ethics, this document applies all of the 15 items to every person, instead of writing separate items applying to competitors, officials, and administrators. (The International Federation of Body Builders uses such a system for its Code of Ethics). The lack of role definition across the various roles is even more puzzling because the drafters obviously had access to the Code of Sports Ethics of the European Union, from which they quoted a definition of fair play. That Code does distinguish between individuals and groups with responsibilities, for example. The broad application makes many of the items nonsensical. Why would a local volunteer for Skate America need to affirm, as paragraph n requires, that "I agree that my failure to abide by this Code may be taken into account in evaluating my performance as an ISU Official"? This is simply sloppy thinking and sloppy drafting.

The lack of a specific mention of judging violations seems worth noting, since it would have helped the ISU from a public relations perspective. Perhaps focusing attention on a list of what judges could and could not do was simply too sensitive an area for the ISU to publish at this time.

The list itself is broad and seems to include the appropriate, ranging from agreeing to forego illicit drugs, preventing sexual and other harassment, not accepting bribes, etc. It slips into this list the requirement that the person agrees not to engage in illegal activity, but this is not defined within behavior relating to the skating world. Thus, any person engaging in any off-duty illegal activity is subject to this Code of Ethics.

The document, which press reports indicate were intended to change "thinking" and not just behavior is a good objective. Unfortunately, as implemented by the ISU, it means that in fact some of the codes items are completely unenforceable, such as this one from paragraph h) "To assure my independence and integrity, and the honesty of the ISU sports, I agree to absolutely reject and forego any partisan and parochial attitudes, approaches and interests, and to adhere strictly to the larger purposes and mission of the ISU as the Union of all Members."

Within this section is another troubling item, which could relate to another unstated intention of the code, in sub-item 4: "I agree to strict observance of the confidentiality of nonpublic ISU information or when disclosure is prohibited by law or the ISU Constitution or Regulations." Given the recent history of the ISU regarding the punishment of whistle-blowers, this is easily viewed by the public as protection for the top management of the ISU. The Arthur Anderson study warns against such kinds of requirements:

"[E]thics/compliance programs that employees believe exist for the purpose of protecting top management can actually prove harmful to the organization, potentially resulting in more unethical conduct than if the company had no program whatsoever. . ."

Far from being a code which simply focuses on fair play for those participating, this Code is also crafted (perhaps intentionally) so that it may be used as an enforcement tool against those who do not agree with the oligarchic style of decision making prevalent in the ISU.

Compliance and Enforcement

The ISU's release of this Code of Ethics in this form and in this context is a hollow gesture and Phyllis Howard's description of the code as "comprehensive" is completely misleading. The compliance section of the Code takes up less than four lines. The implementation of a code does not simply "happen." Many steps have to be taken, none of which have been announced by the ISU. These, at a minimum, include:

  • Creation of an office to handle claimed violations. The code itself notes that the ISU Restructuring Committee is recommending the establishment of an ISU Disciplinary Commission, but the ISU Congress will have to vote on this next summer. The ISU Council is not only the author of the code, it is, as of this point, also the judge and the jury. This fact alone will reinforce the appearance that the document is intended primarily to protect top management.
  • Training of responders. Creation of an office also implies training for these individuals, and the creation of processes by which investigations are carried out.
  • Translation of the document and dissemination to the parties who are being asked to comply with this Code. That includes thousands of people across four continents, and dozens of languages.
  • Education on the meaning of the document. Without discussion of what the responsibilities are for the various roles involved, the document cannot be considered to have been implemented. There is no provision for training of the affected parties. The "involved persons" are deemed to be subject to a document that they might never see, and never discuss.

The Missing Pieces

Comparison with other Codes of Ethics point out some additional deficiencies in this draft of the Code. The American Psychological Association (APA) Code applies to a profession, but it was nevertheless quite helpful to see how it is structured. (Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct, 2002) The code is intended, among other things, to provide specific standards to cover most situations. It has as its goals the welfare and protection of individuals and groups with whom psychologists work, and the education of members, students, and the public regarding the ethical standards of the disciplines.

Yet nowhere in the APA Code is the mission of the APA to be a goal of the Code of Ethics, unlike that of the ISU. The very fact that the goals of the ISU are so prominently displayed with the Code itself is a sign of the dual intentions of the document: to protect the ISU interests as well as foster the various sports in skating.

It also is significant that the section entitled "My Personal Ethical Commitment to the ISU and Skating" never address the responsibilities of the involved persons to be positive forces for resolving ethical issues, other than a brief mention of the need to protect persons from exploitation. The APA Code is quite instructive on this point: any psychologist who learns of misuse or misrepresentation is to take reasonable steps to correct or minimize the misuse or misrepresentation. A number of possible steps can be taken: bringing the issue to the attention of the person who did the misuse and working to correct it at that level, reporting an ethical violation to a higher authority if it may substantially harm someone. It is the responsibility of the whole community to help enforce the ethics, not simply a small elite group at the top of the organization. The whole point of a Code is that it becomes a living ethic within the community, and, so far, this point seems to have been mostly missed by ISU management. With the number of ISU representatives who have been removed from office for drawing attention to ethical violations in recent years, one wonders if this was a conscious decision to avoid drawing attention to a weak area for the ISU rather than creating a culture that would strengthen it.

Another glaring omission is a section on resolving conflicts between the Code of Ethics and Law. Given the recent U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation's interest in the Salt Lake City scandal, and the notable avoidance of certain current and former ISU officials at the most recent World Figure Skating Championships in Washington, D.C. to avoid interviews with the FBI, this is not a theoretical issue at present. The ISU's supposedly "comprehensive" document is completely silent on what persons are to do if there is a conflict between the law and the Code of Ethics, which one would have thought was an important issue to inspire the public's confidence.

Renee Rico is an avid skating fan who is also a Presbyterian pastor in Northern California. In her first career, she worked as environmental regulation expert for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for 14 years. The views expressed are her own.