Integrity in Personal, Social, and Commercial Contexts

Defining Personal Integrity

Personal integrity is a relatively rare quality for several specific reasons: it denotes obligations that are often contrary to our natural impulses; it is more likely to complicate personal affairs than to facilitate them; it comes with no tangible reward; and it is usually somewhat out of step with the behavior of everybody else. In the most general sense, integrity implies a consistency — a correspondence — between one's behavioral choices and the truth, as well as with objective moral right, sometimes even at great cost to one's own interests and welfare. Whereas individuals with personal integrity uphold their moral values privately as well as publicly, those without personal integrity conduct themselves differently and fail to uphold moral standards when there are no negative consequences to violating those values (Rosenstand, 2008).

Integrity is important simply because a society composed of individuals with higher collective integrity is more beneficial to all of its members than an otherwise similar society with lower collective integrity. In the former, most people make an effort to be honest, fair, and unbiased and, in general, to do the right thing in their interactions with other individuals. In the latter, most people adopt a comparatively selfish perspective and more typically employ dishonesty and unfairness; in general, they do not necessarily worry about doing the right thing except to the extent it affects their reputation in the eyes of others. In many respects, it is somewhat understandable why integrity is comparatively rare: it provides only a measure of self-respect while requiring the individual to live by a much stricter set of rules than actually required by law and public policy.

The Challenges of Maintaining Integrity

The fundamental core components of integrity are: (1) a set of moral values and ethical principles, and (2) a commitment to uphold those values and principles even when doing so comes at a cost rather than conferring any benefit. Whereas even individuals without personal integrity typically do the right thing when they are being observed — or under circumstances where their actions may be detected later — individuals with personal integrity do the right thing even when they are certain they are not being observed (Rosenstand, 2008).

Genuine integrity also implies that the individual applies the identical values, principles, definitions, rules, obligations, and conclusions to himself as those he believes apply to others. The person with integrity reacts with justified anger when, for example, another driver double parks next to his legally parked car and blocks him from leaving; when the situation is reversed and the person with integrity faces the same parking dilemma, he does not consider doing the same thing that angered him.

The person without integrity gets angry when he is on the receiving end of inconsiderate behavior, but instead of refraining from that same choice when the situation is reversed, he does the exact same thing today that angered him yesterday. Typically, the individual without personal integrity employs rationalization and justifies his violation of the same rule — reasoning that being wronged the day before entitles him to "his turn," or by finding a way to distinguish his behavior, such as reasoning that his errand is shorter in duration or that the legally parked driver is less likely to need to leave at that particular time of day.

References

Belch, G., & Belch, M. (1998). Advertising and Promotion: An Integrated Marketing Communications Perspective. New York: Irwin/McGraw-Hill.

Halbert, T., & Ingulli, E. (2008). Law & Ethics in the Business Environment. Cincinnati: West Legal Studies.

Howard, M. (2005). We Know What You Want: How They Change Your Mind. New York: The Disinformation Company.

Ogilvy, D. (1990). Ogilvy on Advertising. New York: Vintage Books.

Rosenstand, N. (2008). The Moral of the Story: An Introduction to Ethics. New York: McGraw-Hill.