Integrity

For other uses of the term Integrity, see integrity (disambiguation).

Integrity is consistency of actions, values, methods, measures, principles, expectations and outcome. As a holistic concept, it judges the quality of a system in terms of its ability to achieve its own goals. A value system's abstraction depth and range of applicable interaction may also function as significant factors in identifying integrity due to their congruence or lack of congruence with empirical observation. A value system may evolve over time while retaining integrity if those who espouse the values account for and resolve inconsistencies.

Integrity may be seen as the quality of having a sense of honesty and truthfulness in regard to the motivations for one's actions. The term "hypocrisy" is used in contrast to integrity for asserting that one part of a value system demonstrably conflicts with another, and to demand that the parties holding apparently conflicting values account for the discrepancy or change their beliefs to improve internal consistency.

Testing of integrity

One can test a value system's accountability either:

subjectively, by a person's individual measures or
objectively, via the Scientific Method or standardized mathematical measure

Integrity in relation to value systems

A value consists of an assumption from which one can extrapolate implementation or other values. A value system comprises a set of consistent values and measures. The Scientific Method assumes that a system with perfect integrity yields a singular extrapolation (a hypothesis) that one can test against observed results.

Testing theories via the Scientific Method

Formal measures of integrity rely on a set of testing principles known as the Scientific Method. To the extent that a proof follows the requirements of the method, scholars consider that proof scientific. The Scientific Method includes measures to ensure unbiased testing and a requirement that the hypothesis have falsifiability.

One tests the integrity of a value system scientifically by using the values, methods and measures of the system to formulate a hypothesis of an expected cause-and-effect relationship. When the effect predicted by a value system according to its methods and measures is observed by multiple unbiased testers, the value system is said to have integrity.

For example, Newtonian physics, general relativity and quantum mechanics are three distinct systems, each scientifically proven to have integrity according to their base assumptions and measures. None of them claim to be absolute truth. Scientific testing is not useful for identifying "absolute truth" because scientific tests assume principles, values, methods and measures outside of the scope of the test. Rather, the Scientific Method is used to proof the integrity of a value system and to establish its conclusions as consistent with the assumptions used, thereby enabling further extrapolation within that domain.

Integrity in ethics

Ethical meanings of integrity used in medicine and law refer to the wholeness of the human body with respect for "sacred" qualities such as a sense of unity, consistency, purity, unspoiledness and uncorruptedness.

In context of behavior or morality, integrity is the virtue of basing actions on an internally-consistent framework of principles. This context emphasizes depth of principles and adherence of each level of postulates or axioms to the those it logically relies upon. Ethically, people have integrity to the extent that their actions, methods, measures and beliefs all derive from the same value system.

In the context of accountability, integrity is a measure of willingness to adjust a value system to maintain or improve its consistency when expected results are incongruous with observed outcome.

In the context of value theory, integrity provides the expected causation from a base value^{[citation needed]} to its extrapolated implementation or other values. A value system emerges as a set of values and measures that one can observe as consistent with expectations.^{[citation needed]}

Some commentators^[who?] stress the idea of integrity as personal honesty: acting according to one's beliefs and values at all times. Speaking about integrity can emphasize the "wholeness" or "intactness" of a moral stance or attitude. Some views of wholeness may also emphasize commitment and authenticity.

Subjective use of integrity

In popular culture, the word "integrity" is sometimes used in reference to an absolute morality rather than the assumptions of the value system in question. In an absolute context, the word "integrity" conveys no meaning between people with differing definitions of absolute morality. It becomes nothing more than a vague assertion of perceived political correctness or popularity, similar to using terms such as "good" or "ethical" in a moralistic context.

Integrity has also been used outside of its prescriptive meaning in reference to a person or group of people who have a general, subjective intent to deceive. In this context, one describes an approved person as "having integrity" while describing an enemy as "completely lacking in integrity." The irony of such a accusation is that, without providing measures of independent testing, the accusation itself is baseless and the integrity of the assertion may be called into question.

Integrity in modern ethics

In a formal study of the term "integrity" and its meaning in modern ethics, law professor Stephen L. Carter sees integrity not only as a refusal to engage in behavior that evades responsibility^{[citation needed]}. He sees it also as an understanding of different modes or styles in which some discourse takes place, and that tries to discover some truth^{[citation needed]}.

Carter writes:

Integrity [...] requires three steps: (1) discerning what is right and what is wrong; (2) acting on what you have discerned, even at personal cost; and (3) saying openly that you are acting on your understanding of right from wrong.[...] Integrity [...] is not the same as honesty [...]^[1]

Law

An adversarial process can have general integrity when both sides demonstrate willingness to share evidence, follow guidelines of debate and accept rulings from an arbitrator in a good-faith effort to arrive at either the truth or a mutually equitable outcome. An honorable presentation of the case measures both sides of the argument with a consistent set of principles. Failure to present principles in accordance with observation or to try them unequally can weaken a case.

Ethical integrity as measured by psychological/work-selection tests^[2]

Integrity (honesty)^[3] tests aim to identify prospective employees that may hide negative or derogatory events from their past (such as prison time, getting psychiatric treatment, alcohol problems, drugs abuse, etc.). Integrity tests make certain assumptions, namely^[4] that the persons with less integrity report more dishonest behaviour, they try to find reasons to justify such behaviour, they think others more likely to commit crimes (like theft, for example)^[5], they exhibit impulsive behaviour, and tend to think that society should severely punish deviant behaviour^[6].

Pretension of such tests to detect fake answers^[7] plays a crucial role in detecting people with low integrity. Naive respondents believe the pretense and behave accordingly. They report past deviance, and thoughts about deviance of others because they fear untruthful answers would reveal low integrity. The more Pollyannaish the answers, the higher the integrity score.^[8]

Other integrities

Disciplines and fields with an interest in integrity include philosophy of action, philosophy of medicine, the mind, cognition, consciousness, materials science, structural engineering, and politics. Popular psychology identifies personal integrity, professional integrity, artistic integrity, and intellectual integrity.

Integrity has numerous business applications beyond the issues of honesty and ethical behavior, specifically in a marketing or branding context. One can speak of integrity of brand as a desirable outcome for companies seeking to maintain a consistent, unambiguous position in the mind of their audience. This integrity of brand includes consistent messaging and often includes using a set of graphics standards to maintain visual integrity in marketing communications.

The term "integrity" also means a model of workability.^[9]

One line thoughts

"Integrity is doing the right thing, especially when no one is watching."

"Integrity is doing what you say you'll do, and saying what you truly think, even if unpopular."

External links

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry
van Minden, Jack J.R. (2005). Alles over psychologische tests. Business Contact. pp. 206–208. ISBN 978-90-254-0415-4..

Footnotes

^ Carter, Stephen L (1996). Integrity. New York: BasicBooks/HarperCollins. pp. 7, 10. ISBN 0-06-092807-7. {{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameters: |origmonth=, |accessmonth=, |origdate=, |coauthors=, |month=, |chapterurl=, and |accessyear= (help) On page 242 Carter credits influence "to some extent by the fine discussion of integrity in Martin Benjamin's book Splitting the Difference: Compromise and Integrity in Ethics and Politics (Lawrence University Press of Kansas, 1990).
^ I.e., tests that aim to measure a prospective employee's integrity to determine trustworthiness for a particular enterprise.
^ Integrity is not exactly the same as honesty, but integrity tests are sometimes called honesty tests by work selection professionals, according to van Minden (2005:206-208).
^ van Minden, Jack J.R. (2005). Alles over psychologische tests (in Dutch). Business Contact. p. 207. ISBN 978-90-254-0415-4.
^ Since people are unlikely to sincerely declare to a prospective employers their past deviance, the integrity tests found a way around such issue, namely letting the work candidates talk about what they think of the deviance of other people, considered in general, as a written answer demanded by the questions of the integrity test.
^ I.e. the assumption of the integrity tests is that people who have a history of deviance are reporting inside such test that they support harsher measures applied to the deviance done by other people.
^ Integrity tests cannot detect false answers, but to properly test the candidates a (noble) lie is told, namely that such test are really able to detect false answers.
^ Van Minden (2005:207) affirms this in his treatise on psychological tests. According to a HRM college of the UvA Associate Professor drs. R.J.A.M. Hulst, van Minden is an authority in his field, becoming so by publishing books that reveal tricks of his own trade.
^ See abstract of Harvard Business School NOM Research Paper NO. 06-11 and Barbados Group Working Paper NO. 06-03 at: Erhard, Werner (2007). "Integrity: A Positive Model that Incorporates the Normative Phenomena of Morality, Ethics and Legality". Social Science Research Network. Retrieved 2008-12-03. Integrity exists in a positive realm devoid of normative content. Integrity is thus not about good or bad, or right or wrong, or what should or should not be. [...] We assert that integrity (the condition of being whole and complete) is a necessary condition for workability, and that the resultant level of workability determines the available opportunity for performance. {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |month= (help); Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)

[1] Carter, Stephen L (1996). Integrity. New York: BasicBooks/HarperCollins. pp. 7, 10. ISBN 0-06-092807-7. {{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameters: |origmonth=, |accessmonth=, |origdate=, |coauthors=, |month=, |chapterurl=, and |accessyear= (help) On page 242 Carter credits influence "to some extent by the fine discussion of integrity in Martin Benjamin's book Splitting the Difference: Compromise and Integrity in Ethics and Politics (Lawrence University Press of Kansas, 1990).

[2] I.e., tests that aim to measure a prospective employee's integrity to determine trustworthiness for a particular enterprise.

[3] Integrity is not exactly the same as honesty, but integrity tests are sometimes called honesty tests by work selection professionals, according to van Minden (2005:206-208).

[4] van Minden, Jack J.R. (2005). Alles over psychologische tests (in Dutch). Business Contact. p. 207. ISBN 978-90-254-0415-4.

[5] Since people are unlikely to sincerely declare to a prospective employers their past deviance, the integrity tests found a way around such issue, namely letting the work candidates talk about what they think of the deviance of other people, considered in general, as a written answer demanded by the questions of the integrity test.

[6] I.e. the assumption of the integrity tests is that people who have a history of deviance are reporting inside such test that they support harsher measures applied to the deviance done by other people.

[7] Integrity tests cannot detect false answers, but to properly test the candidates a (noble) lie is told, namely that such test are really able to detect false answers.

[8] Van Minden (2005:207) affirms this in his treatise on psychological tests. According to a HRM college of the UvA Associate Professor drs. R.J.A.M. Hulst, van Minden is an authority in his field, becoming so by publishing books that reveal tricks of his own trade.

[9] See abstract of Harvard Business School NOM Research Paper NO. 06-11 and Barbados Group Working Paper NO. 06-03 at: Erhard, Werner (2007). "Integrity: A Positive Model that Incorporates the Normative Phenomena of Morality, Ethics and Legality". Social Science Research Network. Retrieved 2008-12-03. Integrity exists in a positive realm devoid of normative content. Integrity is thus not about good or bad, or right or wrong, or what should or should not be. [...] We assert that integrity (the condition of being whole and complete) is a necessary condition for workability, and that the resultant level of workability determines the available opportunity for performance. {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |month= (help); Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]