More convincing with a signature

Well, TU/e employees, I am glad about our new Code of Conduct. I want to make that clear first. Perfect or not, for the first time, we have written down how we want to treat one another at the university.

The Executive Board signed first, the deans followed, and I, along with many employees by now, have added my signature. Some did so with conviction, others with a sigh or a reservation.

Signing takes courage, because once you sign, you can be held accountable.

I hear and read the counterarguments, and I take them seriously. But I do not think they are good enough. Do you first want to see the leadership change? They have already signed. And that means people can now hold them accountable for it.

And I believe you can only hold someone else accountable with some credibility if you are also taking part yourself. Compare it to safety instructions in a lab. Would you refuse to sign off on them because you sometimes forget to put on safety goggles?

Really, I understand very well why some of you are distrustful after what you have seen or experienced here. Those experiences are real.

But distrust should not be a reason to remain on the sidelines while others are trying to make things better. A culture does not change when the people with the most doubts wait until everything is in order. A culture changes when enough people decide that things need to be different and put their name to that commitment.

I happened to read (thanks to and following the CAOP conference) a piece by philosopher Hannah Arendt, who wrote extensively about how people, despite the fundamental unpredictability of the future and their own fallibility, are able to create stability and community by making promises to one another and forgiving one another’s mistakes.

In that light, signing a Code of Conduct is not a declaration that you are perfect, but a commitment to doing your best, to being open to someone who says things can be done better, and to being understanding when things go wrong.

In my work as ombudsperson, I see what happens when that agreement is missing. People who have remained silent for a long time because they did not know whether their experience mattered, what the rule was, or what the norm was. People who only come to me when it is actually already much too late.

For them, a written code is not a formality, but a first point of reference. If you are new here, you now at least know where you stand. And anyone who feels unsafe has something they can point to.

If you fear that the code will eventually be used to silence criticism, I invite you to sign it precisely for that reason and then hold me to my responsibilities. I can do my job better if you are inside the agreement rather than outside it. Besides, it is much more convincing to complain when your name is on the line.

Think about it again. Not for the administration and not for me, but for the colleague sitting next to you who may never say out loud how badly they needed a Code of Conduct.

And organizations without a Code of Conduct: isn’t it time for you, too?

Job van Luyken is the ombudsperson of TU/e. He wrote this opinion piece, which previously appeared on LinkedIn, in a personal capacity. 

This opinion was translated using AI-assisted tools and reviewed by an editor and the author.