DS Cohen & Associates
Integrity is the result of living your values!
I am presenting (6/25/2024 at 3:30 CT) a concurrent session at the upcoming SHRM24 conference in Chicago called “Why Your Values Might be Harming Your Company.”
Values are tricky because once they are expressed, employees expect leaders and co-workers always to live them when making all decisions – without exception. Once the values are shared, they are no longer just aspirational words – they become real.
When considering company values, one word with which I take issue is integrity. That’s not a personal confession or a statement about today’s (occasionally challenging) business climate. Instead, I’ve had a problem with the word itself for many years.
What I am about to share with you is something that not everyone agrees with, not even all my team members. Rather, it is simply my perspective on the meaning of the word and why it sometimes creates more problems than solutions.
Oftentimes, when working on a values exercise with a C-suite on what makes their organization unique, someone inevitably suggests that “integrity” must be included on the final list. That’s when my brow furrows and my headache begins.
My recent review of the Fortune 100 companies found that over 60% of these companies express integrity as one of their “core” values. I expanded my research to leading companies in other regions of the world and discovered that over 50% of those include integrity on their list. When working with a C-Suite, I could just cite that statistic if I wanted to discourage the inclusion of integrity on their list. I could also add that integrity was one of Enron’s values.
But either because I’m too polite to take a cheap shot or an optimist at heart, I take a deep breath and say: “Okay. If integrity is one of your values, let’s define it meaningfully within your organization. What are the actions/behaviours that define integrity?” Then, the fun begins.
I always find it difficult to mediate the ensuing debate. Other values, equally over-represented on corporate statements of their values, do not create the same trouble or spirited discussion. For example, senior leaders love teamwork, respect, transparency, quality, and stewardship. No problems here.
What kind of teamwork? Teamwork between front-line staff and management to provide excellent customer service.
What kind of respect? To one organization, it means respect for the brand’s traditions (compliance). To another, respect for the environment.
How about stewardship? Sometimes, it means financial oversight. Other times, it means stewardship over the community’s resources. Defining those values in specific contexts and precise behaviours gives them power.
However, it is much harder to reach a common agreement when we get to integrity. Are we talking about commitment to quality? Honesty in dealings? Trust between employees?
It’s as though there are too many synonyms and analogous situations available to sift through for us to pinpoint an exact meaning. The word is nebulous and vague. It doesn’t hold the same power as the others because it doesn’t maintain the same meaning across different groups of people. I am reminded, each time, of what a teacher told me many years ago: no institution has integrity; only people do. It’s more of a personal issue than other values.
But his argument does not entirely satisfy in explaining our difficulties. So, I’ve spent a few years contemplating the issue. Here’s a list of possible answers. Is the problem with integrity that:
A) Corporations, by definition, have no integrity when it comes down to it.
B) I can’t recognize integrity because there’s something wrong with me,
C) Integrity is not what we traditionally believe it to be, and it is not a value
D) Leaders have tremendous difficulty doing what they say,
E) All of the above.
If you answered A or D, you’re more cynical than I am, or I need to tone down my sarcasm. If the answer were B, I would start to worry about my reputation!
If you answered E, you take too many multiple-choice tests.
The correct answer, by process of elimination, is C. I realize this when clients grapple with a serious ethical issue or decision.
I clearly remember an instance where I was facilitating an insurance provider through a values exercise. At the same time, a family was suing them over disputed coverage. We went through the values work while the newspapers blasted headlines about the progress of the court case. Perhaps because of that contentious or distracting atmosphere, our debate was rigorous and thoughtful. When we finally reached a consensus, everyone in the room was happy. Then one executive threw cold water in our faces: “If all of these values are true, and I think they are, then we’re doing the wrong thing fighting this family in court.” It was a sobering thought but one that galvanized a powerful reaction. Almost immediately, it was decided that the company would reverse its stand and pay up. It was the only thing they could do if they were to be honest with their belief system (values) and true to themselves. The lawyers for the family couldn’t believe it. But the executive team had a good night’s sleep, comforted by the certainty that they had done right by the family and the organization.
The reaction to this switch was overwhelmingly positive outside the company. It was, in fact, an event that had the makings of a genuine corporate legend – one of those stories that demonstrates what an organization really stands for, not just pithy posters with pithy sayings on the wall. The press loved the decision. Politicians applauded it. The community genuinely appreciated it as a refreshing gesture. They understood it took a lot of courage and a hit to the bottom line to do the right thing. More importantly, the people within the organization felt good about the decision and, more importantly, felt good about the company that employed them. The employees held their heads a little higher and could explain it within the rationale of the values. The executives, as we mentioned, slept better at night. As one declared: “We acted with integrity.”
Stop the presses. Integrity was not one of their values. This was a lightbulb moment for me. I wondered if they should start focusing on what it means to act with integrity rather than simply rewrite the values to include integrity on the list. The choice was clear and easy – to think about and focus on what acting with integrity meant.
Integrity is not a value, I realized. Instead, it’s the culmination of living your values. To violate a single value is to diminish your integrity.
Think about the powerful emotions created when a company gets caught in a hypocritical stance. For example, when a senior team turns out to be crooked, a finance firm permits harassment of women to take place, or a manufacturer pollutes the environment. The public (and internal) reactions can be severe, harsh, and potentially devastating. However, the reactions would be much more dramatic and impactful if that company espouses financial stewardship, teamwork, or respect for the environment as differentiating values. We saw this in real-time with the insurance company; a positive externality of living your values is acting with integrity.
To include integrity in a list of values is a redundancy. Integrity is not a value unto itself but the sum total of living all the values together. In other words, you have integrity because you live your values.
Organizations act with integrity when they live up to their values, especially in painfully tough times or situations. Doing so can be difficult when it costs money, competitive position, or strategy. However, even though the benefits of acting with integrity may not always be as transparent as with the insurance company I described, the reinforcement of integrity internally and externally has its own well-deserved rewards.
I encourage you to attend the SHRM Talent conference in Vegas or SHRM24 in Chicago; please join me in one of my sessions. Let me know if you are attending, and it will be nice to meet in person.
If your organization wishes to review your values and examine your authentic culture, please contact me, and we can discuss it. I’m available for a 30-minute brainstorming call (free) to bring another perspective to your values, culture, and people issues. Worth connecting further?
Your turn
Now is your turn to contribute your perspective on the discussion on LinkedIn
David Cohen is completing his second book on how to hire for fit to values/culture. His first book is called The Talent Edge. He has conducted workshops globally on Structured Behavioural Interviewing. For more information on the workshop, please contact David.
