Ukrainian Society for Supervision and Coaching
Adopted by the ANSE General Assembly 14, Berlin, September 22nd ,
Table of content
Article 1: General Principles
Article 2: Institutional Requirements
Article 3: Codification Requirements
Article 4 : Professional Requirements
Board: Wolfgang Knopf (A) President, Sijtze de Roos (NL) Vice-President, Barbara Gogala (SL) Secretary
Eva Nemes (H) Treasurer, Beatrice Conrad (CH), Barbara Baumann(D)
Members: Austria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Great Britain, Greece,
Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Switzerland,
How could a Code of Ethics on ANSE level be useful? The answer is: because supervision is an inherently ethical activity. Imagine us flying by helicopter over the European landscape of supervision. It will shortly be obvious to us that all supervisors wield power: the power of their specific knowledge and competence, the power derived from their role and position visà-vis the supervisee, the power of formal judgment invested in them, the power of their professional experience, and so on.
Furthermore we would see that, to act in a just and careful manner, supervisors would invest in trust. They will not only show trust in their own competencies, but also see to it that they are trustworthy in the eyes of their supervisees, colleagues and constituents. They will radiate trust in the supervisee, in his or her potential, uniqueness and humanity, and they will actively substantiate it in contact with the supervisee (and others). As trust implies the recognition of shared humanity, supervisees need to feel accepted, to feel at home with themselves, with others and the world around them, and to be free to be (or become) what they want to be.
Still hovering above the supervisory landscape we finally note how supervisors mediate power and trust by responsiveness. Supervisors will act in a responsible manner as an integral part of their professionalism. Supervisors will take responsibility for the maintenance of their skills, for the reliability of the profession they exercise and for their support to the learning process of the supervisee. Supervisors will not shirk being taken to account. On the contrary, they will gladly respond to that.
In dealing with power, trust and responsibility, supervisors and coaches can only maintain their personal and professional integrity if they position themselves autonomously in relation to constituents, clients and colleagues. At all times supervisors are required to keep confidentiality, carefully handle the process of contracting and avoid becoming a party in conflicting interests.
On request of member organisations and affiliates, ANSE herewith presents its supra-national Code of Ethics. To be practical, only the term ‘supervision’ will be used, which for the purposes of this document is to be understood as also designating all other forms of professional guidance national organisations may include in their statutes, such as coaching, consultancy or organisational advice.
The ANSE Code of Ethics reflects the state of professionalism and the high ethical standards member organisations strive to uphold. Many national organisations and affiliates of the ANSE family have their own codes, most of them rather elaborate and some of them already for years. Other associations are in the process of formulating one.
The ANSE Code of Ethics is neither meant to compete with existing codes, nor to compel national organisations to replace them with this document or to rewrite them. As ANSE statutorily holds no formal power over national organisations this code cannot have a compulsory effect – unless the General Assembly should otherwise decide. The ANSE Code of Ethics is therefore meant to serve as a guideline against which national organisations may measure their own codes of conduct, ethical guidelines and general moral principles. For that reason, the character of this document is aspirational. Its main purpose is to challenge supervisors and their professional associations all over Europe to aspire to always act according to the high ethical standards that are essential to the supervisory profession. It is, moreover, a code of ethics and not a code of conduct. As such it is not meant to regulate in detail what supervisors should do or not do. This is left to the national organizations, which can be expected to have greater insight into the “do’s” and “don’ts” of local practice.
In order to be aspirational and to serve as a guideline, the ANSE Code of Ethics will therefore not repeat in detail what has already been formulated in various national codes. Given the cultural and institutional differences between member countries, and given the diverse range, directions and ways of implementing and practising supervision, ANSE will restrict itself to the formulation of the fundamental ethics that underlie the profession we all share.
This document is organised as follows. Article 1 states ANSE’s basic values and the general principles ANSE holds to be imperative. Article 2 formulates the standards of just and careful conduct on the institutional dimension, such as the way ANSE and national organisations should deal with each other; both bilaterally and multilaterally. Article 3 sets forth the standards of codification, re: what should (national) codes at minimum prescribe. Last (but certainly not least), article 4 states the basic ethics on the individual level of everyday practice.
Vienna, October 15th, 2012
Article 1 - General Principles
Article 2 - Institutional Requirements
Article 3 - Codification Requirements
3.1.1. Professional autonomy
3.1.2. Professional impartiality
3.1.3. The protection of the integrity of clients and constituents
3.1.5. The avoidance of conflicting interests
3.1.6. Proper and legally correct contract procedures
Article 4 - Professional Requirements
1 This provision does not necessarily entail that such an arrangement should be positioned outside of the institution, organisation or association. In most cases the appointment of an independent chairperson, preferably one qualified to hold the position of judge, will suffice to guarantee neutrality.