Code of conduct
A code of conduct, in the context of CCC work, refers to a list of labour standards. Those who sign on to codes pledge to adhere to these standards in their workplaces. Some companies have drafted their own codes (see the CCC's critique of company codes), while the CCC and various trade unions and NGOs have drafted model codes which they believe are more comprehensive.

Code implementation
As defined in the CCC model code, this term refers to activities that should be undertaken by the (buying) company to make sure that the standards set in the code of conduct are being met. It includes making the code part of the contract between the supplier and the buying company, which in turn makes it part of the national legal framework. Another part of the implementation is adapting the buying practices so that the supplier is able to meet the standards outlined in the code. For example, when an order is negotiated, buyers should assess whether or not the supplier can comply with the maximum hours of work provision in the code, given the order size and delivery time that is negotiated. It is also important that companies work towards long-term relationships with the suppliers. To implement a code of conduct it must be integrated into the company's management system and business practices, especially with regard to profit margins, prices, and deadlines.

Monitoring
Monitoring is the term used to describe the activities carried out to keep a close watch over implementation -- to check that the code is consistently being complied with. One of the main characteristics of monitoring is that it is a frequent or continuous process. Frequent in this context means being present in the work place often enough so as to be able to detect variations in behavior or circumstances.

It is not sufficient to just send the code and assume that that will be enough. Companies have to train their employees, instruct their buyers, establish appropriate measures in cases of violation of the code including accompanying measures. This process is sometimes also called "internal monitoring" or "company monitoring."

Independent monitoring
There is currently a lot of confusion about the use of the term "independent monitoring". The term was originally used in the CCC model code to describe a process where an external or independent organization would be in charge of overseeing that monitoring and implementation happen as intended. This external body would include different stakeholders, and guarantee access of workers and worker organizations.

Two different tracks of monitoring were distinguished. The first track consists of checks to the supplier: checking records and pay slips, pay unannounced visits, interview workers out of hearing of management, etc. This kind of monitoring can be done by the companies themselves, or external organizations. Second track monitoring refers to the establishment of a complaints systems, so that each time a code violation occurs, the workers can report it. This is to guarantee direct involvement of organizations at the local production level, and ultimately of the workers themselves. In the national initiatives examined in this overview, ideas are being developed on how to set up such a system, for example with local contact points of organizations trusted by the workers. Second track monitoring is sometimes also called worker monitoring, in addition to the abovementioned company monitoring.

In the Central American context the term independent monitoring is used when an organization that is independent from all other parties (companies, trade unions), for example a specialized NGO, is doing the monitoring.

More and more people feel that monitoring, being a permanent process, can never be independent. They prefer to use the term "independent verification" to describe the whole process of overseeing implementation and checking on the monitoring process. As companies are increasingly seen as having a responsibility to monitor compliance to the standards themselves, the term independent is now used together with verification (especially in native-english speaking contexts). Where we used to speak of "independent monitoring" it would be in the current state of the debate more correct to speak of "monitoring and independent verification."

Verification
Verification implies the re-examination of the evidence of labor practices in a particular work place in order to establish that previously reported results are accurate. It involves the activities carried out to ensure that both monitoring and implementation take place as intended.

In the context of CCC initiatives, the term independent verification is now most often used. This implies that a person or organization (an independent body), independent from the work place being examined, as well as from the authority that carries out the implementation and original monitoring, carries out these activities. For example, independent verification may refer to the re-examination of the results of a certain factory audit by someone that enjoys the confidence of all stakeholders as an independent, qualified, and reliable authority. In the foundation model of the CCC, the independent verification would be the task of a foundation that operates as an independent body.