Professional Communication and Mutual Respect

This document describes the standards of professional communication and behaviour I expect within the group. They apply to everyone, including me, regardless of seniority.

1. Communicate professionally

Treat colleagues with respect in meetings, email, messaging platforms, code reviews, paper discussions, and informal interactions.

In particular:

  • communicate directly, politely, and constructively;
  • criticise ideas, arguments, code, or results rather than people;
  • describe concrete observations rather than making assumptions about someone’s motives or character;
  • make requests clearly and avoid demands or repeated pressure;
  • use proportionate language;
  • respect other people’s time, responsibilities, and boundaries;
  • take responsibility for your commitments, mistakes, and behaviour.

Strong scientific evidence-based disagreement is welcome. Keep it focused on the substance of the disagreement.

2. Respect professional boundaries

  1. Respect the scope of other people’s responsibilities and decisions. If an issue needs to be taken elsewhere, use the appropriate person or process.

  2. Respect requests to pause or move a discussion. If a conversation is no longer constructive, postpone it and return to it later.

  3. Do not use loyalty, seniority, reputation, or a personal relationship as leverage in a disagreement.

  4. Do not repeatedly pressure someone after they have explained their position or stated that they cannot make the requested decision.

3. Scientific disagreement

  1. Disagree with reasons and evidence. Explain the scientific or technical issue clearly and give the other person a fair opportunity to respond.

  2. Avoid personalizing disagreements or turning them into questions about someone’s competence, motives, loyalty, or character.

  3. In co-supervised projects, supervisors may disagree. Make those differences explicit and discuss them with the supervisors. Do not use one supervisor’s opinion simply to dismiss another’s.

4. Difficult conversations

A useful framework for difficult conversations is Nonviolent Communication (NVC). It encourages people to separate observations from judgments, express concerns without blame, identify needs, and make clear requests rather than demands.

Resources: Center for Nonviolent Communication — Purpose of NVC, CNVC learning resources, CNVC Feelings and Needs Inventory, and the ACM Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct.

5. Unacceptable conduct

The following have no place in the group:

  • personal attacks, insults, humiliation, or ridicule;
  • threats, intimidation, or aggressive communication;
  • repeated hostile or accusatory messages;
  • persistent pressure after a clearly stated boundary;
  • discriminatory or degrading comments;
  • bullying or retaliation;
  • sexual harassment or unwanted sexual behaviour;
  • deliberate professional exclusion intended to harm someone;
  • knowingly misrepresenting another person’s words or actions;
  • persistent disrespect toward colleagues, students, collaborators, engineers, administrative staff, or others.

Formal definitions of harassment, discrimination, and misconduct come from applicable law and institutional policies. These guidelines do not replace those definitions or the corresponding reporting procedures.

Institutional resources: UGA — Harassment during your PhD and Inria — Parity and Equal Opportunity.

6. When problems arise

Raise problems early and describe them concretely. When possible:

  1. identify the specific behaviour or situation causing difficulty;
  2. discuss it directly and professionally;
  3. clarify what each person expects;
  4. agree on concrete next steps;
  5. revisit the issue after an appropriate period.

Either person may ask for a dedicated conversation about the working or advising relationship.

If direct discussion is inappropriate, unsuccessful, or uncomfortable, use the relevant confidential support, mediation, or reporting mechanisms. This is especially important for concerns involving harassment, discrimination, intimidation, or serious misconduct.

Seeking advice, raising a concern in good faith, or using an institutional procedure must not lead to retaliation.

For PhD students, relevant resources include: