Those supportive of aspirational codes have argued that they play more varied functions than merely guaranteeing certain forms of behaviour.  Raising awareness, suggesting topics to consider, clarifying individual responsibilities, increasing public trust, and establishing ethical expectations are but a few of their advantages.  In this way the very process of devising a code can be just as important as the final document. 

Enforceable codes do not suffer from the same degree of initial doubt about their effectiveness.  However, here it is often argued that ethical decisions cannot be reduced to merely following ‘inert’ rules and formulae which do not address the complexities of situations.  What codes should do is make people think, and encourage them to openly discuss the implications of their work. 
 
Thus codes that consist of highly general aspirations risk criticism for being open to different interpretations, while those that are highly rigid risk being seen as irrelevant in fast moving and complex situations.