It is the set of minimum conduct rules that the Association of Change Management Professionals applies to its members, to holders of its certifications and to people applying for them.
\nThis site follows Leanova Academy, an official ACMP® QEP™, and the Code is part of what its courses cover. The Code forms Part II of the ACMP Standard for Change Management, second edition (2025), published in the same volume as the Standard itself. Its stated aim is to give practitioners a common understanding of how to behave and how to spot and resolve an ethical dilemma, and it is meant to complement the more specific behaviours the Standard describes. Section 2 names who is covered: ACMP members, certificate holders and applicants. That last word matters if you are preparing for the CCMP®, since the Code reaches you before you hold the credential.
\nYou can obtain the whole document from the ACMP’s Standard page, and our overview of the Standard explains how the two parts fit together.
\n\nAround five duties: Honesty, Responsibility, Fairness, Respect, and Advancing the Discipline and Supporting Practitioners, followed by a section on how complaints are handled.
\nSection 3 explains that each duty groups numbered tenets, and section 4 lists them as 4.1 to 4.5. Each tenet begins with the same stem: as practitioners we must demonstrate the duty by doing something specific. The table gives the shape of each duty. The tenet counts come from the numbering in the text.
\n| Section | Duty | Core idea | Numbered tenets |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4.1 | Honesty | Truthful communication and consistent integrity in conduct | 9 (4.1.1 to 4.1.9) |
| 4.2 | Responsibility | Accountability for decisions, errors and the limits of your competence | 9 (4.2.1 to 4.2.9) |
| 4.3 | Fairness | Impartiality, transparency and disclosure of conflicts of interest | 8 (4.3.1 to 4.3.8) |
| 4.4 | Respect | Dignity, good faith and no improper use of position | 8 (4.4.1 to 4.4.8) |
| 4.5 | Advancing the Discipline and Supporting Practitioners | Protecting intellectual property and the credibility of the profession | 3 (4.5.1 to 4.5.3) |
The cases below are original and fictional. They are written in the style of a short scenario with a best response, and they are not questions from any ACMP exam. Our reading of each case is an illustration, since the Code itself does not rule on particular situations.
\nYou report the numbers as they are, in time, and you make it safe for others to tell you the truth.
\nHonesty in the Code covers communications and conduct. The tenets ask for information that is accurate and truthful at the time it is given, delivered promptly (4.1.1 and 4.1.2), for an environment where others feel safe to speak truthfully (4.1.3), and for behaviour that shows integrity consistently (4.1.6).
\nFictional case: the login rate. A change practitioner is asked by a sponsor to present a monthly “adoption” figure of 88 percent to the board. The figure counts accounts that logged in at least once. Only 34 percent of staff use the new tool’s main function. What should the practitioner do? The best response is to present both figures, label what each measures, and explain to the sponsor why the logins alone would give the board a false picture. Rounding up the message to keep the sponsor comfortable cuts against 4.1.1.
\nBefore you accept it, and in a way that lets your client or employer make an informed decision.
\nResponsibility means owning decisions, actions and omissions along with their consequences. Among its tenets, 4.2.2 asks you to accept only assignments consistent with your background, experience, skills and qualifications. 4.2.7 says that when a stretch assignment goes beyond your qualifications, the key stakeholders must be fully informed so they can judge your suitability. 4.2.4 and 4.2.5 cover errors: take ownership, correct them promptly and tell the appropriate body.
\nFictional case: the hospital system. A practitioner with six years in retail is offered the lead change role on a clinical records system in a hospital. They have never worked in healthcare and have no clinician contacts. The best response is to tell the client plainly what they bring and what they lack, then let the client decide whether to proceed, perhaps with a clinical specialist alongside. Accepting quietly and hoping to learn on the job misses 4.2.2 and 4.2.7. Declining without explanation does not use the openness the Code asks for either.
\nYou disclose it in full to the people affected, and you stay out of the decision until you have.
\nThe text defines fairness through impartiality, objectivity, openness, due process and proportionality. The two tenets most often tested in real situations are 4.3.6, which asks you to disclose real or potential conflicts of interest to the appropriate stakeholders, and 4.3.8, which asks you to refrain from the decision-making process until you have made full disclosure. Tenets 4.3.2 and 4.3.5 add transparency in criteria and equal opportunity for qualified candidates.
\n\nYes. The Code says so directly, and it also forbids using your position to push people into decisions.
\nRespect, in the text, is about the dignity of every person and about treating them and the resources entrusted to you with high regard. Tenet 4.4.2 asks you to stay professional even when that is not returned. Tenet 4.4.5 asks for good faith in negotiation, 4.4.6 rules out using expertise or position to influence others improperly, and 4.4.7 rules out abusive behaviour.
\nFictional case: the borrowed authority. During a workshop, a team lead voices doubts about a new reporting process and a director mocks them in front of colleagues. Later, the sponsor suggests the practitioner mention the director’s support to the team lead so that the doubts “go away”. The best response is to ask for a private conversation with the team lead, hear the concerns, and bring them to the sponsor as input to the plan. Using the director’s rank as pressure would run against 4.4.6, and answering the director in kind would fall short of 4.4.2.
\nYou owe the client the respect of their intellectual property, and you owe the profession activities that raise its credibility.
\nThis duty is the shortest, with three tenets. 4.5.1 says to act without violating the intellectual property agreements you have with the clients or companies you work with. 4.5.2 asks you to advocate for the profession by taking part only in activities that enhance its credibility. 4.5.3 asks for a climate where differences of opinion can be discussed civilly.
\nFictional case: the template for the blog. A freelance practitioner wants to publish a client’s stakeholder map, with its custom scoring grid, as a worked example on a personal blog. The client’s contract says deliverables remain the client’s property. The best response is to ask the client for written permission, or to build a new, anonymous example from scratch. Publishing it with the client’s name removed does not remove the contract problem, and 4.5.1 points straight at it.
\nAn Ethics Review Committee appointed by the ACMP Board reviews it, using procedures that the Board approved and made public.
\nSection 5 of the Code is titled “Adjudication and Appeals Process”. It says the complaint is submitted through the Ethics Complaint Form, reviewed and adjudicated by the committee, and that findings and responses go to the complainant, the respondent and the Board of Directors. Violations may result in corrective actions by the ACMP.
\nThe section in the Standard is short, and it does not describe the steps of an appeal, the time limits or the possible sanctions in detail. Those details sit in the procedures the ACMP publishes, which we have not reproduced here. If you are involved in a complaint, read the current published procedure itself rather than relying on a summary.
\nIt applies to you as an applicant, and it gives you a way of reasoning that is useful for situational questions, but we cannot say how the exam weights it.
\nThe Standard is the base of the CCMP, and since 1 April 2026 the exam follows the second edition. The ACMP does not publish topic weightings in the Standard, so any percentage you see quoted for ethics should be treated with caution. What can be said is that the exam consists of 150 multiple-choice questions in three hours, as described in our article on the CCMP exam format. For the route to the application, read the CCMP application process. For the part of the Standard that gives you the process view, start with the subject groups article, and see what the new edition changed in the second edition changes.
\nLeanova Academy’s blog has a companion piece on the ACMP Code of Ethics if you want a second angle. And the 21 training hours that the ACMP asks for before you apply are available in Leanova’s self-paced CCMP exam prep course, a QEP course priced at US$595 on 7 October 2026; check the course page for the current price.
\n\nYes, if they hold or apply for an ACMP certification. Section 2 covers ACMP members, certificate holders and applicants, so a non-member candidate for the CCMP is within its scope.
\nNo. The Code says its descriptions and examples are practical illustrations and not prescriptive. The tenets in each section are the mandatory part.
\nFive: Honesty, Responsibility, Fairness, Respect, and Advancing the Discipline and Supporting Practitioners. They appear in sections 4.1 to 4.5.
\nIt is published with the Standard, so you obtain it from the ACMP. Start from the Standard page linked above.
\nNext step: take one of your current projects, pick the duty that feels closest to a decision you face this month, and read its tenets in full.
\n\n", "alternates": { "html": "https://leanova-academy.com/acmp-code-of-ethics-five-duties/", "markdown": "https://leanova-academy.com/acmp-code-of-ethics-five-duties.md", "json": "https://leanova-academy.com/api/post/acmp-code-of-ethics-five-duties.json" }, "site": { "name": "Leanova Academy", "url": "https://leanova-academy.com/" }, "license": "© Académie Leanova inc. Short quotations with a link to the source are welcome; full reproduction requires written permission." }