Last update: Feb, 8th, 2024
1. The Code of conduct specifies what would be considered as acceptable or unacceptable behavior, including specific examples and definitions. All members should read and adhere to the code of conduct. Members that lead research groups should disseminate it to their groups and ensure that their team members understand and respect it. A friendly reminder to others, of the code of conduct in instances when it is needed, is appreciated. Any member of the collaboration is entitled to the same level of respect, regardless of their position and their seniority.
2. We encourage those who are concerned that something may not be appropriate, to contact members of the CoC/DEI committee and/or the student representative. Decisions on potential actions will be made by the committee, possibly after external consultation, and a follow up will be provided to the involved parties as needed.
3. We strongly encourage all members of the collaboration to attend the regular online meetings and at least one of the collaboration meetings in the year, in-person, to enable informal exchanges (if budget allows). If you are in charge of a group, it is important for your early career researchers to attend these meetings for their visibility and to help them build their network.
4. We all have the responsibility of documenting our work that is beneficial to the collaboration, sharing knowledge, helping each other, spreading results, and properly acknowledging people’s contributions. All essential data and parameters needed to reproduce a result must be conserved.
5. Public presentations or papers are subject to the approval of at least one of the PIs familiar with the work if they contain results from our common collaboration effort. The presumption is that such approval will be given; a denial must be accompanied by a well-founded justification. We encourage all members to use our logo. Proper acknowledgement of the collaboration should be included in talks.
6. PIs have the responsibility to submit any reports or other items due at required times.
1) Non-discriminatory behavior
a. Discriminatory behaviors and comments
We are banning all sorts of discriminatory behaviors or comments based on someone’s identity or condition, real or perceived. Examples of discrimination include suggesting or implying that women or members of minoritized groups “get jobs for the quota”, profiling people of color, disrespecting or negating someone’s gender identity, comments about someone’s sexual orientation or marital status, commenting on the ability of a pregnant woman to work, discussing someone’s health condition or disability status, commenting that someone may be “too young” or “too old” for their job, mocking a person’s accent, hate based on someone’s tribal or regional affiliation (this list of examples isn’t exhaustive). Some of these examples fall under “protected categories” in the US, but not exclusively: discriminatory practices or behaviors will be reprimanded in any case, and sanctioned if needed. We demand that all members of the collaboration be mindful of their own behavior to prevent microaggressions, such as being condescending with certain categories of people.
b. Cultural sensitivity is important. It is a strength for this collaboration to have such a diverse mix of individuals, with different backgrounds, goals, skills… We are at different stages of our careers and from different generations, in addition to being from a multitude of countries and cultures. To ensure the cohesion of our collaboration, it is important to be acknowledged, and to be mindful of what may be interpreted differently or not accepted in other cultures. Discriminatory behavior won’t be tolerated regardless of the perpetrator’s origin. Being a US based collaboration, members are expected to orient themselves as a guideline by the US standards of behavior.
c. As an international collaboration, it is important to avoid commenting on political events in the US or abroad. Our sensitivities may differ, and we need to respect each other’s feelings. A good attitude when politics comes up in a discussion is to change topics. Comments that are not accepted include holding individuals as responsible for the action of their government, implying that non-US citizens are “stealing jobs” from American citizens. National origin, political affiliation, and veteran status are protected categories in the US.
d. Hostility, aggressiveness, excessive rudeness, disrespect, and anything that can undermine a team’s motivation is to be avoided, such as any attitude that can affect one’s sense of belonging to the community. It includes excessive gossiping, offensive remarks or comments made in bad faith. Note that what someone may intend as a joke can be interpreted very differently by others, in part because of the diverse nature of our community. Helping each other, in particular new collaborators and students, is strongly encouraged. Furthermore, it is our responsibility to speak positively about our collaboration and its members, and to be accountable for our attitude within the collaboration and outside.
e. If a someone needs an accommodation or specific help, which can be due to a disability, a personal situation, a hardship, an illness or else, they should always feel welcome to ask it to the senior collaboration members and/or collaborators who are organizing in-person meetings and/or those who can provide help within the collaboration. In such cases, other collaborators should respect that accommodation and refrain from questioning its legitimacy or what they may perceive as an advantage (but isn’t). They should absolutely not question the person on the reason why they obtained it, nor spread gossip about it. Members of the collaboration should be mindful of the right of privacy of persons with visible or invisible disabilities. Those organizing meetings should anticipate potential needs and provide public information on how to make a discreet request.
2) Harassment: There are different forms of harassment, including academic bullying, sexual harassment, blackmailing and stalking. The common denominator of harassment is that proponents want to have control over someone else. Some of the main forms of harassment are defined below.
a. Sexual harassment is related to unwanted sexual attention. It can be verbal or physical, and includes showing pornography, the distribution and displaying of offensive images or texts, inappropriate “jokes”, offensive language, sexual miming, unwanted touching, inappropriately staring at someone, pressuring someone to sexually engage with another person or arranging opportunities for them, discussing sexual fantasies or pretending to be in a relation with someone or asking someone sexual favors for a return (quid pro quo) or by coercion.
b. Stalking is a form of harassment triggered by the willingness to intrude on someone’s privacy, control their life and get their attention. It includes, for example, following someone, meeting them “coincidentally”, unwanted contact (in-person or electronic) or the presentation/purchase of unexpected gifts. From the outside, stalking can be mistaken for romanticism, and stalkers often pose as the victim of the person they are obsessed with and invent a relationship with them. We encourage everybody to refuse to provide personal information about others, to avoid spreading (positive or negative) rumors, not asking for favors on someone else’s behalf, nor organizing opportunities for them to meet without their explicit knowledge or agreement.
c. Photography without permission is prohibited, and distribution of a photograph where an individual can be identified is subject to obtaining the permission of that person prior to it being shared. A good attitude is to always ask before sharing personal pictures on social media. When standing for group pictures or in public settings at a conference dinner table for instance, we assume explicit agreement for the images to be shared.
d. Brigading/mobbing or doxxing is a coordinated action of a group against someone or another group. Slander and libel (oral or written defamation) are examples of intentional actions against an individual. Manipulating people against someone, preventing them from collaborating or socializing with an individual is a form of brigading. The best reaction to it is to build our own opinion about other individuals. Defamation includes excessive gossiping, whether the facts are true or false. One should avoid getting involved in conflicts between others if it is likely to exacerbate them rather than help in resolution. Note that some information, by nature, shouldn’t be spread, for instance, to propagate medical information (and any protected information), their personal address, information about their family…
e. Bullying, academic bullying and extreme rudeness contribute to a toxic environment. While it is perfectly acceptable to have an argument over a scientific point of view during a meeting, it is not acceptable to systematically belittle another person (or a group based on their identity), to voluntarily and systematically exclude them from scientific discussion they are supposed to be a part of. Deviating from a purely scientific argument and making the argument personal, resulting in intentionally or unintentionally making the other party uncomfortable, is not acceptable. Of course, directly insulting another person is clearly unacceptable. As collaborators, we are not working against each other, even though we can tolerate some level of healthy competition.
f. Condescending and/or belittling attitudes are a form of psychological violence. These attitudes can have a non-negligible impact, for instance the well known “imposter syndrome”. Such behavior is generally undertaken by a majority group towards women or members of minorities. Offering help can be nice and is appreciated in most cases, but people should question whether the help is needed and welcomed. Systematically reminding people of one’s own achievements, interrupting them or being a “lesson giver” during meetings are forms of condescending attitudes. Bystanders to such behavior can play an important role in counteracting it by speaking up and pointing it out.
g. Coercion and blackmailing: any phrase starting by “if you don’t do…” is to be avoided. Threatening or pressuring someone into doing things is not acceptable, under any circumstances. Recruiting or encouraging other parties to propagate such threats is also unacceptable. Pressuring people into unethical behavior is not acceptable.
h. Special responsibility attaches to situations of leverage, where an individual, through their position or possession of information or resources, has the ability to significantly disrupt the work of the collaboration by withholding cooperation, support or resources. Abuse of such leverage to coerce others or impose one’s will in the collaboration is unacceptable.
i. Other forms of harassment include hazing, unfair assignment of tasks, using nicknames without the permission of the person or pretending to be in a relationship with another person (which doesn’t have to be sexual). This list is not exhaustive.
3. Violence Acts of violence include physical, verbal and psychological violence. Harassment, which is described in section 2, is a form of psychological violence, some other forms of violence are described below.
a. Physical violence includes physically attacking someone, intimidating them, hampering their motion, threats of physical violence. For instance, if one has a problem with another person and wants an “explanation”, it is not acceptable to hold that person (e.g. in a room, against a wall) until they respond. In that case, one should rather send an email and wait for a response.
b. Physical assault is not acceptable under any condition. Aggravated assault includes assaulting someone who is not in a state to defend themselves because they can’t leave the situation, or are physically or mentally impaired. It also include sexual assault which is an aggravated form of physical assault involving denying the victim’s consent. In the case of unwanted physical contact, it is important to consider that the victim may defend themselves, verbally express their lack of consent, but may also stay quiet in a so-called “frozen state” out of fear. It is important that any witness act if they can safely do so, and immediately contact the proper authorities.
4. Role of bystanders, witnesses, supervisors and any third party: A victim is never responsible for what happened to them, nor do they “deserve it”, regardless of who they are, of our personal opinion about them or their past actions.
a. Victim blaming and shaming: Whether an offense is minor or major, and regardless of whether the offender is facing or has faced consequences for their actions, a victim should never be blamed for it. The victim should also not feel or be made to feel guilty for someone else’s misbehavior, under any circumstances. Blaming a victim can be a form of retaliation, furthermore it would deliver the wrong message, giving an excuse to the perpetrator(s) of wrongful action or behavior.
b. Complicity and the role of bystanders: If you see something, say something, even later. If you are scared, the victim of the offense is likely to be much more affected, even if they don’t express it. One can talk to the victim, to the offender or to a third party. Not acting may be interpreted as implicit agreement with the action or behavior. Covering an offender with unfaithful statements or a lack of action is not only wrong, it can also put their victim in further danger.
c. Attempting to de-escalate a conflictual situation should always be our first objective.
d. Retaliation is taking action against someone who reported facts or contributed to a report as a witness, victim, accused, or else. Retaliation includes gossiping, blacklisting or excluding someone, intimidation…
e. Complaints against another person should always be made in good faith, whether they can or can’t be proven later.
5. Work related good and bad behavior
a. Hampering the work of others, for instance by erasing data, refusing to provide them reasonable information or help can affect the entire collaboration. Reasonably documenting the work done will help everybody, in particular students and new collaborators.
b. Not respecting others’ boundaries includes using others’ items without authorization, vandalizing material, being unusually loud. We should be mindful that we all have different levels of tolerance.
c. Academic dishonesty and fraud is never acceptable. What is accepted are honest mistakes, as long as remediation is taken (erratum, cross checks) when the error is discovered. One should properly acknowledge other people’s contributions.
d. Insubordination and insolence are not necessarily directed towards senior PI’s: if someone is given a role in the collaboration, all other collaborators, regardless of their level of seniority, have to respect them, their role, and the work they are doing. Furthermore, even though we could have scientific disagreements, one should respect those who are leading meetings, who may have the final word in case of an animated discussion, and we should do our best to keep any disruptive comments or disagreement offline.
e. We encourage everyone during online or in person meetings to raise their hands and be mindful of not interrupting others when they are talking.
This code of conduct applies to all interactions within the scope of our collaboration, which includes PI, affiliates, postdocs and students. It includes: oral and written interactions (meetings, emails, slack…), online meetings, in-person meetings, while presenting on behalf of the collaboration during a conference, EXCLAIM related work at home institution…
IV. Sanctions
The EXCLAIM collaboration will designate a grievance board for a consecutive period of two years, which is in charge of documenting and considering any reported potential misconduct. The grievance board is in charge of deciding on an appropriate response, if necessary in consultation with all the PIs. If one of the board members has a conflict of interest in the situation, another PI of EXCLAIM will be designated as a replacement for that specific case. If appropriate, the student representative will have access to the information but will not have the responsibility to make decisions or vote. Minor sanctions require a majority of votes of the board members, major sanctions require an unanimous decision of the board or a 3/4 majority of all collaboration PIs who don’t have a conflict of interest in the case. An example of a minor offense leading to a minor sanction would be a person insulting other participants during an online meeting, and may be excluded from participation in meetings for 2 weeks. A major offense example would be a person being physically violent and could lead to a permanent exclusion. Depending on the severity of the offense, the grievance board members will decide if a broader consultation is necessary.
The board will consider any inappropriate behavior, which includes behaviors mentioned previously in this code of conduct, as well as potential scientific misconduct, but not exclusively. The board will determine an intervention that precludes opportunities for the behavior to continue. Sanctions will be decided on a case by case basis, ranging from a simple warning up to exclusion from the collaboration. Sanctions may include temporary or permanent banning from meetings, working groups, presentations on behalf of the collaboration, removal from mailing list, removal from official functions in the collaboration. Major offenses may be reported to the relevant authorities, for instance the police department, Research Administrator and Title IX office at home institution(s). Members of the board have the responsibility to propose appropriate support to potential victims.
Any decision by the board members should be communicated to the appropriate parties within one month of the initial complaint.