9. Integrity is about what you have
Integrity is not only about qualities denoting an absence of behavior, such as incorruptibility or unselfishness. This interpretation may seem powerful, but integrity is also about positive qualities. Integrity can be defined as (1) a single virtue, (2) the connection between virtues, (3) the functionality of virtues, and (4) an overarching virtue. SPs must have this overarching virtue for all their other qualities to be properly focused on fulfilling their role.That is the point at which an SP achieves integrity.
“A colossus of unimpeachable moral character and integrity” was how Archbishop Desmond Tutu described Nelson Mandela after his death.58 When speaking of integrity in SPs, one of the first associations is an unbending nature, along with traits such as incorruptibility, irreproachability, unselfishness, or faultlessness.59 Seen from this perspective, integrity is the absence of negative qualities. They all involve the absence of a particular quality or abstinence from a particular activity. Integrity is about what one is not.
The power of this interpretation of integrity is that it is absolute. A person who bends to circumstances lacks integrity. There is no leeway: one bend is all it takes. The inherent normative power of these terms is very powerful. People do not want to be associated with terms such as corruption, blame, fault or stain. These are inherently undesirable, emotionally charged, and hard-hitting.
At the same time there is a drawback to these terms. They may make it clear what people should not be, but they are not so clear about what they should be. Besides this negative interpretation of integrity, there are also positive interpretations, such as purity, decency, soundness, and righteousness. Focusing on the positive as well as the negative broadens the spectrum of integrity. The absence of the negative, as in arithmetic, does not mean the presence of the positive. There may be nothing at all, zero. On the other hand the absence of the positive does not mean the presence of the negative by definition. We cannot say that someone has integrity just because the opposite is not true. Not lacking integrity is not the same as having it. The combination of both interpretations covers the positive and negative sides of integrity.
Often integrity is seen as a single virtue or part of a virtue. Integrity is mentioned as a core value in the British Civil Service Code.60 In other codes integrity is an aspect of the core value of honesty or trustworthiness. In all these cases integrity is seen as a desirable trait for an SP. The advantage of this approach is that integrity is delimited, indicating that it is not the only important quality. The disadvantage is that this can create the impression that the other virtues are irrelevant from the perspective of integrity.This is a pity, as at least in three respects integrity is broader and richer than an individual virtue.61
Firstly integrity can be described in a negative sense as the absence of division or break, and in the positive sense as unity and wholeness. US lawyer Stephen Carter describes a person with integrity as “like a whole number, … a whole person, a person somehow undivided.”62
This definition of integrity, resting on its Latin roots, emphasizes cohesion and consistency between a person’s different qualities. A person has integrity if their qualities are harmonized to form a whole, if they are integrated with one another. A work of music does not attain integrity just by the absence of wrong notes – in that case integrity would be defined as a single virtue – it must also be uninterrupted by unrelated musical ideas. Positively formulated, this means that there is musical unity, harmony. Just as music that has integrity is harmonious, so is a person with integrity.
However, there is a broader definition of integrity. The definition above focuses on consistency and coherence between personal qualities. As long as they are consistent with one another there is integrity. Seeing integrity purely in these terms suggests that virtues are independent of the person’s position. Here it is not only a matter of consistency and coherence, but also of having the relevant qualities to do the job well. Philosopher Immanuel Kant defined a virtue as “die fest gegründete Gesinnung seine Pflicht genau zu erfüllen” (“the deep-rooted inclination to comply strictly with one’s duty”).63 It is not only an internalized tendency, but also the connection between this and fulfilling one’s own duties and obligations. These duties and obligations follow from the job. For that reason all virtues are important from the perspective of integrity. The question is which virtues are functional and which are not. People lack integrity if they lack the correct arsenal of virtues, making them incapable of doing the job well. This is why there are codes in which integrity is not a separate core value but rather binds the