Skip to Main Content

Code of Practice

A primary goal of Kim Crayton’s work is to be inclusive to the largest number of participants, with the most varied and diverse backgrounds possible. As such, we are committed to providing a friendly, safe and welcoming environment for all, regardless of gender, sexual orientation, ability, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and religion (or lack thereof).

Business relationships are often grounded in systems, institutions, and policies designed to privilege the few at the expense of the many. Whiteness, regardless of the race of the parties, is often the default, and so are the politics and biases. Whiteness focuses on supremacy and extraction.  

By operating according to this Code of Practice, you and I are committing to doing business with each other in a different way—a way that is Supremacy, Coercion, Discrimination, and Exploitation FREE.

Operating according to the Code of Practice means aligning our conduct with the following Profit Without Oppression Guiding Principles:

A. Tech is Not Neutral, Nor is It Apolitical

We recognize that any industry includes bias and exploitation. Further, the people harmed in the industry have no choice but to be political as a matter of survival.

Exploitation begins when we believe, including due to bias, that we have more to offer than others and we try to get as much as we can from them.

You and I begin this collaboration with the assumption that what we are offering has equal value. We also assume that our needs have equal importance.

We agree to strive to act in a way that supports and does not harm the other. We will further at all times act in good faith. Acting in good faith means acting in a way that we genuinely and reasonably believe to be in or not opposed to the best interests of the other.

B. Intention without an Accurately Informed Strategy is Chaos

Although our intentions may be borne out of a genuine desire to be of service, without a strategy, a way to manage and measure the processes and results, we have only done half the work. “Good intentions” are fine, but it is impact that matters.

We acknowledge that our intentions are to build a future that is Supremacy, Coercion, Discrimination, and Exploitation FREE. In order to do this, we agree to work together to complete the Project according to the Standard of Quality, honoring the terms of this agreement, and acting according to the Code of Practice.

We each agree to do our best to speak up if we believe that we are not reaching these goals, including if one or both of us has been harmed or could potentially be harmed.

We agree that during the conversation we will focus on impact rather than intention and develop a plan to repair the harm and to act differently moving forward, as appropriate.

We agree to decide on a remedy or course of action that is consistent with the Code of Practice.

C. Lack of Inclusion is a Risk/Crisis Management Issue

We recognize that silence does not always mean agreement. It can indicate that something is wrong and that folx have made the decision to withhold their concerns because they do not desire to become targets for those who will use those concerns as a weapon against them.

We each recognize that the other may want to speak up about an issue but may be agreeing with us out of fear of harm. When we make requests, we agree to act toward each other with compassion, asking, “Are you really okay with this? This request is important to me, but I want to honor your needs.” We each agree to respond to this query truthfully, with compassion for the other person and recognition of their needs.

D. Prioritize the Most Vulnerable

We recognize that one of us may be more vulnerable than the other. This does not mean that one of us has needs that are more important than the other’s–only that one of us may be in greater need.

We openly and honestly discuss what our needs are and define expectations accordingly.

What you should know up front:

Kim is committed to building trust and safety with her clients and understands the importance of protecting her client’s confidential information with the following exception:

Kim prioritizes individual and community safety over organizational strategy. If Kim’s warnings of “potentials for harm” are ignored, harm was (or is) inflicted by the client, and client takes no reasonable efforts to correct the harm after Kim tells client of the issue, then Kim has the sole discretion to choose whether or not to share her perspectives publicly and/or may immediately stop working with the client.