U.S. Olympic Committee Coaching Ethics Code (LONG) just released...

U.S. Olympic Committee Coaching Ethics Code (LONG) just released...

Post by John Kess » Tue, 12 Sep 1995 04:00:00


The following was released this past weekend at the
USOC Coaching Symposium.  It has been adopted by the
USOC for all USOC directly supported functions
(Olympics, World University Games, Pan Ams, etc.) and
will need to be signed by all coaches participating in
events or training on site at any of the U.S. Olympic
Training Centers.  This has become the defacto national
coaching ethics standard, and they urged all
participants to work on it's adoption by wach of their
National Governing Bodies.  I know that one of the best
ways to get this information out is through all the
Olympic Family related newsgroups, so I am posting it
to all those I know of. It is not copyrighted.  For
more information/feedback, contact Dr. Tom Crawford,
USOC Coaching Director at the same street address as in
my sig file. The FAX number there is (719) 578-4817,
but they are not yet on the internet.  Soon though..
Regards to all.

UNITED STATES OLYMPIC COMMITTEE
COACHING ETHICS CODE

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION
GENERAL PRINCIPLES          

     Principle A: Competence      
     Principle B: Integrity
     Principle C: Professional Responsibility  
     Principle D: Respect for Participants* and Dignity
     Principle E: Concern for Others' Welfare        
     Principle F:  Responsible Coaching

ETHICAL STANDARDS  
     1.0  General Standards    
     1.01 Applicability of the Ethics Code  
     1.02 Boundaries of Competence
     1.03 Maintaining Expertise  
     1.04 Basis for Professional Judgements
     1.05 Describing the Nature and
          Results of Coaching Services
     1.06 Respecting Others
     1.07 Nondiscrimination
     1.08 *** Harassment
     1.09 Other Harassment
     1.10 Personal Problems and Conflicts
     1.11 Avoiding Harm
     1.12 Misuse of Coaches' Influence
     1.13 Multiple Relationships
     1.14 Exploitative Relationships
     1.15 Consultations and Referrals
     1.16 Delegation to and Supervision of Subordinates
     1.17 Fees and Financial Arrangements

     2.0  Advertising and Other Public Statements
     2.01 Definition of Public Statements
     2.02 Statements by Others
     2.03 Avoidance of False or Deceptive Statements    
     2.04 Media Presentations
     2.05 Testimonials
     2.06 Recruiting  

     3.0 Training Athletes
     3.01 Structuring the Relationship
     3.02 Family Relationships
     3.03 Providing Coaching Services to
          Those Served by Other    
     3.04 *** Intimacies With Current Athletes
     3.05 Coaching Former *** Partners
     3.06 *** Intimacies With Former Athletes
     3.07 Drug-Free Sport
     3.08 *** and Tobacco
     3.09 Interruption of Services
     3.10 Terminating the Professional Relationship

     4.0  Training Supervision    
     4.01 Design of Training Programs
     4.02 Descriptions of Training Programs      
     4.03 Accuracy and Objectivity in Coaching    
     4.04 Assessing Athlete Performance
     4.05 Honoring Commitments

     5.0  Team Selection

     6.0  Resolving Ethical Issues
     6.01 Familiarity With Ethics Code
     6.02 Confronting Ethical Issues
     6.03 Conflicts Between Ethics and
           Organizational Demands
     6.04 Informal Resolution of Ethical Violations
     6.05 Reporting Ethical Violations
     6.06 Cooperating With Ethics Committees
     6.07 Improper Complaints

     7.0  Process Relating To Violation Of Code

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This Coaching Code of Ethics is the result of the work
of many people and committees. The approach, structure,
and contents of this code were inspired by the Ethical
Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct,
December 1992 (American Psychological Association, Vol.
47, No. 12, 1597-161 1). Many of the ideas for these
ethical standards were drawn from numerous other codes.
The most significant of these were developed by the
Coaching Association of Canada, The British Institute
of Sport Coaches, and the NCAA. In particular, the
USOC would like to thank:

USOC Coaching Committee, Ray Essick, Chair
USOC Ethics Oversight Committee, Harry Groves, Chair
USOC Games Preparation and Services Committee,
     Joe Kearney, Chair
USOC Training Centers Committee, Mike Jacki, Chair
USOC Vice President Michael B. Lenard
USOC General Counsel Ronald T Rowan

INTRODUCTION

COACHES ETHICS CODE

This Ethics Code is intended to provide standards of
professional conduct that can be applied by the USOC
and its member organizations that choose to adopt them.
Whether or not a coach has violated the Ethics Code
does not by itself determine whether he or she is
legally liable in a court action, whether a contract is
enforceable, or whether other legal consequences occur.
These results are based on legal rather than ethical
rules. However, compliance with or violation of the
Ethics Code may be admissible as evidence in some legal
proceedings, depending on the circumstances.

This Code is intended to provide both the general
principles and the decision rules to cover most
situations encountered by coaches. It has as its
primary goal the welfare and protection of the
individuals and groups with whom coaches work. This
Code also provides a common set of values upon which
coaches build their professional work. It is the
individual responsibility of each coach to aspire to
the highest possible standards of conduct. Coaches
respect and protect human and civil rights, and do not
knowingly participate in or condone unfair
discriminatory practices.

GENERAL PRINCIPLES:

PRINCIPLE A: COMPETENCE

Coaches strive to maintain high standards of excellence
in their work. They recognize the boundaries of their
particular competencies and the limitations of their
expertise. They provide only those services and use
only those techniques for which they are qualified by
education, training, or experience. In those areas in
which recognized professional standards do not yet
exist, coaches exercise careful judgement and take
appropriate precautions to protect the welfare of
those with whom they work. They maintain knowledge of
relevant scientific and professional information
related to the services they render, and they recognize
the need for ongoing education. Coaches make
appropriate use of scientific, professional, technical,
and administrative resources.

PRINCIPLE B: INTEGRITY

Coaches seek to promote integrity in the practice of
coaching.  Coaches are honest, fair, and respectful of
others. In describing or reporting their
qualifications, services, products, or fees, they do
not make statements that are false, misleading, or
deceptive. Coaches strive to be aware of their own
belief systems, values, needs, and limitations and the
effect of these on their work. To the extent feasible,
they attempt to clarify for relevant parties the roles
they are performing and to function appropriately in
accordance with those roles. Coaches avoid improper and
potentially harmful dual relationships.

PRINCIPLE C: PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY

Coaches uphold professional standards of conduct,
clarify their professional roles and obligations,
accept appropriate responsibility for their behavior,
and adapt their methods to the needs of different
athletes. Coaches consult with, refer to, or cooperate
with other professionals and institutions to the extent
needed to serve the best interest of their athletes, or
other recipients of their services. Coaches' m***
standards and conduct are personal matters to the same
degree as is true for any other person, except when
coaches' conduct may compromise their professional
responsibilities or reduce the public's trust in the
coaching profession and coaches. Coaches are concerned
about the ethical compliance of their colleagues'
professional conduct. When appropriate, they consult
with colleagues in order to prevent or avoid unethical
conduct.

PRINCIPLE D: RESPECT FOR PARTICIPANTS* AND DIGNITY

Coaches respect the fundamental rights, dignity, and
worth of all participants. Coaches are aware of
cultural, individual, and role differences, including
those due to age, gender, race, ethnicity, national
origin, religion, *** orientation, disability,
language, and socioeconomic status. Coaches try to
eliminate the effect on their work of biases based on
those factors, and they do not knowingly participate
in or condone unfair discriminatory practices.

* = Participants: those taking part in sport (athletes
and their family members, coaches, officials.
volunteers, administrators, and spectators)

PRINCIPLE E: CONCERN FOR OTHERS' WELFARE

Coaches seek to contribute to the welfare of those with
whom they interact professionals. In their professional
actions, coaches consider the welfare and rights of
their athletes and other participants. When conflicts
occur among coaches' obligations or concerns, they
attempt to resolve these conflicts and to perform their
roles in a responsible fashion that avoids or minimizes
harm. Coaches are sensitive to differences in power
between themselves and others, and they do not exploit
or mislead other people during or after professional
relationships.

PRINCIPLE F: RESPONSIBLE COACHING

Coaches are aware of their professional
responsibilities to the community and the society in
which they work and live. They apply and make public
their knowledge of sport in order to contribute to
human welfare. Coaches try to avoid misuse of their
work. Coaches comply with the law and encourage the
development of law and policies that serve the interest
of sport. They are encouraged to contribute a portion
of their professional time for little or no personal
advantage.

1.0 GENERAL STANDARDS

These General Standards are applicable to the
professional activities of all coaches.

1.01 APPLICABILITY OF THE ETHICS CODE

While many aspects of personal behavior and private
activities seem far removed from official duties of
coaching, all coaches should be sensitive to their
position as role models for their athletes. Private
activities perceived as ...

read more »

 
 
 

U.S. Olympic Committee Coaching Ethics Code (LONG) just released...

Post by L. Ravi Narasimh » Tue, 12 Sep 1995 04:00:00

                [ Ethics rules ]

Is there a similar statement of responsibility signed by the
player(s)?  The regulations on coaches as presented are tough and they
have to be.  But, the teacher-pupil compact implies obligations on
both parties to work together constructively.

I'm still wondering whether gender differences (beyond the anatomical)
really exist in athletic and other contexts.

                        --- Oski
                            Bumper Jones Volleyball Club

 
 
 

U.S. Olympic Committee Coaching Ethics Code (LONG) just released...

Post by Eric Hugh » Wed, 13 Sep 1995 04:00:00


Quote:
>I'm still wondering whether gender differences (beyond the anatomical)
>really exist in athletic and other contexts.

I definitely, definitely believe they exist (in athletics).  Whether the
differences I think I see are inherent or actually just a product of
expectations, etc. is a tough question.  When this subject comes up, I
always think of what Anson Dorrence (spelling probably mangled), the
coach of the women's soccer team at UNC says.  He essentially had to
make a sociological study of women's athletics to be an effective coach.

Quote:
>                    --- Oski
>                        Bumper Jones Volleyball Club

So, is it possible to have a co-rec team that works well together?
Does anyone know about the volleyball pro league from the 1970's (80's?)
which had men and women on the same team?  Did the teams gel or was it
awkward?

Eric Hughes

 
 
 

U.S. Olympic Committee Coaching Ethics Code (LONG) just released...

Post by L. Ravi Narasimha » Thu, 14 Sep 1995 04:00:00

Quote:

>I definitely, definitely believe they exist (in athletics).  Whether the
>differences I think I see are inherent or actually just a product of
>expectations, etc. is a tough question.  When this subject comes up, I
>always think of what Anson Dorrence (spelling probably mangled), the
>coach of the women's soccer team at UNC says.  He essentially had to
>make a sociological study of women's athletics to be an effective coach.

This is getting interesting!  Do you have a reference to the quote?  I'd
like to see what these differences are.  Or, could you elaborate on some
of these differences?

In the scientific community, I see occasionally identical behavior from
men and women being called different things, ie. aggressiveness for men
is considered ok, aggressiveness from women is not, etc.  I suspect that some
of the differences in athletes may be similar exercises in word play.

                        --- Oski
                            Lexi Con

 
 
 

U.S. Olympic Committee Coaching Ethics Code (LONG) just released...

Post by Eric Hugh » Thu, 14 Sep 1995 04:00:00

"L. Ravi Narasimhan" <oski> writes:

Quote:

>>I definitely, definitely believe they exist (in athletics).  Whether the
>>differences I think I see are inherent or actually just a product of
>>expectations, etc. is a tough question.  When this subject comes up, I
>>always think of what Anson Dorrence (spelling probably mangled), the
>>coach of the women's soccer team at UNC says.  He essentially had to
>>make a sociological study of women's athletics to be an effective coach.
>This is getting interesting!  Do you have a reference to the quote?  I'd
>like to see what these differences are.  Or, could you elaborate on some
>of these differences?

If you mean a reference on what Coach Dorrence says, I've just seen 3 or 4
interviews on TV (during half time of Chiquita Cup or Women's World Cup
games).  He may have written a book (try asking in rec.sport.soccer).
Of course, I may be remembering what he said inaccurately - always a danger.

IMveryHO: the difference I think I see is forms of communication.  I think
that communication tends to be more restrained and more supportive on women's
teams: both between players and coach <--> players.  To me, this difference
is important because it affects coaching, team organization on the court,
practice strategies, basically everything.  I'm not really in a position
to try to justify this or explain it; maybe some others with more direct
experience will comment.

Quote:
>In the scientific community, I see occasionally identical behavior from
>men and women being called different things, ie. aggressiveness for men
>is considered ok, aggressiveness from women is not, etc.  I suspect that some
>of the differences in athletes may be similar exercises in word play.

Yes, I agree that word play happens alot.

Eric Hughes

 
 
 

U.S. Olympic Committee Coaching Ethics Code (LONG) just released...

Post by L. Ravi Narasimha » Thu, 14 Sep 1995 04:00:00


Whoooooops!

I wrote

Quote:
>I wonder if the differences are really due to upbringing or intrinsic to the
>genders.  My personal prejudice is to the latter.  I've noticed that women in

                                         ^^^^^^^^^^
                                        I meant FORMER!

                                --- Oski
                                    Yes, I can blush

 
 
 

U.S. Olympic Committee Coaching Ethics Code (LONG) just released...

Post by L. Ravi Narasimha » Fri, 15 Sep 1995 04:00:00


Quote:
>Hello Ravi at UCLA:

>You said UCLA Volleyball bla bla bla...<snip>

I said no such thing.

Quote:
>You responded Ni! What's the terminal velocity of a fully laden Tachikari
>ball aimed at one's head?

69 Dude.

Quote:
>You have been shamelessly prostituting yourself on another newsgroup(not even
>rec!)to pickup that argot and that may explain a sudden rush of nonsensical
>balderdash, esp about UCLA! <g>

I can't even parse this one.

Quote:
>European or African?

Pacific Rim.

                                --- Oski
                                    I'll smoke what you're smoking

 
 
 

U.S. Olympic Committee Coaching Ethics Code (LONG) just released...

Post by Joseph I. Roon » Fri, 15 Sep 1995 04:00:00

Hello Ravi at UCLA:

You said UCLA Volleyball bla bla bla...<snip>

You responded Ni! What's the terminal velocity of a fully laden Tachikari
ball aimed at one's head?

You have been shamelessly prostituting yourself on another newsgroup(not even
rec!)to pickup that argot and that may explain a sudden rush of nonsensical
balderdash, esp about UCLA! <g>

European or African?

Go through the gate,

Allons,

Joe
-=---
  TRANSMITTED via LiveWire, a Virtual Valley/Metro Newspapers service

  modem: 408.298.8646 (FirstClass, VT-100, TTY)   fax: 408.777.8701