An annual employee signoff serves three major purposes. One, it highlights the importance of the code of ethics if an employee has to acknowledge reading it on an annual basis, discussing it as part of an annual performance appraisal, and demonstrating knowledge about to whom to go when facing certain dilemmas, as well as acknowledging relevant corporate policy documents like insider trading, anti-harassment, and privacy rules. Two, it refreshes employees' minds so the goals and ethics in the code are not forgotten and gradually become less important in daily decision-making. Three, such a signoff makes it easier for changes to be regularly made and implemented if the employee must be reviewed annually. Unfortunately, many companies, even those with extensive codes of ethics, do not have such an annual signoff. "Codes that are formulated and then stuck in the back drawer of the director of human resources or VP of legal affairs appear to be little more than public relations exercises" (The Corporate Ethics Monitor, Volume 1, Issue 4, page 58). One simple way to tell if a corporation is serious about its code of ethics is how often employees apply it, assess it, and signoff on it as well as how often the code is reviewed, updated and/or amended. Therefore, not only is an annual employee signoff important to the success of a code of ethics, it is also an indication of the success of a code of ethics.

A code of professional conduct outlines the acceptable or desirable behaviours and practices of a particular profession such as doctors, pharmacists, lawyers, and ethicists. Many corporations and whole industries use these codes as a replacement for a code of ethics. Unfortunately, codes of professional conduct do not cover enough areas to warrant calling them full codes of ethics. For instance, in the case of retail pharmacists, "typically, codes have not been developed with regard to the non-drug operations of these stores" and "codes do not directly address such issues as substance abuse, health promotion, drug-related problems, or conflicts of interest when pharmacists hold commercial interests in companies with which they do business" (The Corporate Ethics Monitor, Volume 1, Issue 3, page 37).

Another difference, moreover, is that professional codes may require action that is at odds with corporate interests. For example, codes of professional conduct for consulting geophysicists and engineers require that they are not supposed to advertise but their private sector employer often requires such promotional behaviour. Although many professions adhere to strict guidelines involving their actual practice, codes of professional conduct should be supplemented with codes of ethics, which deal more with the business side of their practice, products, and services in terms of the public interest rather than the professional side of it.