Ethical Matters: Complexity in the Coaching Space

The situation: A coaching conversation with an executive client. The client is married, male and holds a C-suite role. After working with his coach for nine months, he declares he wants to take the conversation “in a different direction today.” He’s incredibly stressed about a situation that he characterizes as “a time-management issue.” He reveals that he has been having an affair with a male colleague, and wants to work on this during the coaching session.

I’ve brought this it-really-happened-to-me scenario to numerous ethics training sessions. I have encountered some who barely shrug at the situation, while others express multiple concerns, both about the direction of coaching as well as potential conflicts of interest that would cause the end of the coaching relationship. How can that be?

While we coach from the same ethical base, we bring different core values, belief systems and life experiences, which then mix with cultural and legal norms to create infinite possible outcomes. In this column, I invite you to consider the interplay between three of these variables.

Ethics: One of Only Several Codes We Must Honor

Let’s notice the distinctions between—and overlapping of—ethics, morality and legality within the coaching space.

• Ethics are defined as “moral principles that govern a person’s or group’s behavior.”* Ethics are often agreement-based: Groups create their own ethical standards for self-governance (e.g., coaches, certified public accountants, therapists, lawyers).
• Morality is defined as “principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior” or “a particular system of values … especially one held by a specified person or society.” Morality is values-based; i.e., it requires us to ask, “What do I/we believe to be true/right/good?” My beliefs may stem from religious training or personal experience.
• Legality is “the quality or state of being in accordance with the law.” Legality is a societal agreement: What have we legislated, and what do we punish?

Consider that many decisions or actions can be acceptable by one code but not another. Furthermore, cultural conceptions of these three codes can vary, further influencing whether an action is seen as right or wrong. For example:

• Paying bribes to close a business deal is illegal in some places but common practice in others. It can be considered ethical if the end result is for a good cause, but be considered immoral even by those engaged in the behavior.
• Dating a co-worker is perfectly legal and moral, but it may violate a company’s ethics policy. If you’re dating someone in your chain of command, it may also have legal implications. Dating a co-worker if you’re married, on the other hand, certainly moves the conversation into the ethical and moral space.

Same Behavior, Different Lenses

The ICF Code of Ethics addresses discrimination (Section 1, Clause 4), so if I was to terminate my coaching relationship with a gay client, that would be discrimination, right? But what if I am morally opposed to same-sex relationships? Am I not creating a conflict of interest (Section 1, Clause 8, or Section 2, Clause 13) if I continue coaching, as I cannot be objective? And what about my duty to address “imminent or likely risk of danger” (Section 4, Clause 26)? Would the potential loss of his job be a “danger” I must address with the client? What about his marriage? Loss of trust? And whose issues are those—mine, or the client’s?

When I found myself in this situation, I focused on the client and his desired outcome: how to better balance his personal calendar in order to spend more time with his lover. I asked about the legal issue out of an ethical concern for his own and others’ safety (there was not a potential issue). I am comfortable that my values system is only one way to view the world, so my moral sensibility allowed me to continue. I later learned the client is struggling with his sexual identity, and his ability to do so within the safety of coaching was extremely valuable for him.

I do not suggest that what you would do in this scenario is any more “right” or “wrong” than what I did. What I love about the situation is that, for me, it challenges the notion that our approach to ethical practice can ever be declared complete and sufficient. We will always be discovering new situations and challenges, even as moral and legal lenses change around us.

*All definitions are from Oxford Dictionaries.