81. Integrity must not cross over into integritism
Integritism is excessive and therefore inappropriate use of integrity. SPs must watch out for this, because if everything revolves around integrity then integrity means nothing. Integrity should therefore be reserved for cases concerning the real interests of those involved and the essence of SPs themselves. Raising questions about people’s integrity therefore brings obligations with it.
Integrity is an important, multifaceted concept. There are many aspects to integrity and it forms an important standard and handle for SPs to operate by. Seen in this light, integrity is positive. We simply have to watch out for taking it too far, seeing integrity as the only thing that counts. This is integritism: excessive, inappropriate use of integrity.459 What do we need to watch out for?
Integrity can be extended to the point that everything revolves around it. All mistakes and problems become integrity problems. All values and norms become integrity criteria. All dilemmas are about integrity. If you see integrity in everything, then it amounts to nothing. An issue only gains content if there is more to it than just integrity. If everything revolves around integrity, the concept becomes watered down and loses force. It is therefore important to delimit integrity.
The most important point is to reserve integrity for real issues. Integrity is about fundamental interests. It is a matter of important values and principles, people’s moral rights and duties, things that matter. For that reason it is wrong to immediately turn a minor error or practical problem into an integrity issue. Turning up late to a meeting is not necessarily a matter of integrity, nor is the distribution of tasks.
Integrity is also about the essence of individual people. Integrity touches the cores of individuals and their behavior. For this reason integrity is not a throw-away compliment or criticism. Integrity is about issues for which SPs can be valued or accused, praised or blamed. At the start of a council meeting to discuss a report on an investigation into a certain mayor’s integrity, the mayor said, “But this is about genuine mistakes, misjudgments. They do not spring from indifference, arrogance, or ill will. Of course an administrator should be upright, but linking all mistakes and foolish errors with integrity denies its essence and importance, watering down the concept.”460
Questioning or praising integrity therefore brings with it obligations. You need to have good arguments and grounds for it, because the consequences can be far-reaching. You cannot simply question a person’s integrity on the basis of assumptions, half-formed impressions, and soft facts. Integrity in this respect is knowing what you are talking about, and because integrity is a great good, it is important to deal with it in a manner consistent with integrity.