On Integrity
I am currently writing a recommendation for an applicant to the Stanford Graduate School of Business. I’ve filled a number of those over the years for several schools, including MIT, Wharton, Harvard, and others. The Stanford one stands out for the quality of the words it uses in its “Leadership Assessment” scoring grid.
It’s so good that I’m tempted to steal the words for my own leadership assessments going forward.
For most of the dimensions in the Leadership Assessment, I feel like even without grade inflation, I would score a lot of people 3, 4, or 5. There is one dimension, however, where I feel that not many people would score above a 3 out of 5.
Trustworthiness / Integrity
This dimension is entitled “Trustworthiness/Integrity” and it’s an understatement to say that it’s challenging to score high on.
The Cambridge Dictionary defines integrity as “the quality of being honest and having strong moral principles that you refuse to change”.
If I were to score organizations like major global corporations and governments, then it’s hard for me to think of many who would score above a 1.
I list the options below:
- Follows the crowd; takes path of least resistance; gives in under pressure
- Acts consistently with stated intentions, values, or beliefs when it is easy to do so
- Acts spontaneously and consistently with stated intentions, values, or beliefs despite opposition
- Initiates actions based on values or beliefs even though the actions may come with reputational risk; demonstrates the values of the team or organization publicly
- Demonstrates high personal integrity even at personal cost; holds people accountable to the team or organizational values
How would you score yourself? Sometimes the opposition is so strong that 3 is hardly feasible to achieve, nevermind doing it spontaneously! Let’s take a look at them one by one.
1. Follows the crowd; takes path of least resistance; gives in under pressure
Even the bravest CEOs have a legal team and a public relations team who are experts at seeing that the voice of reason is to follow the crowd, give under pressure, and take the path of least resistance. It seems like a great survival instinct.
2. Acts consistently with stated intentions, values, or beliefs when it is easy to do so
Achieving a 2 is not trivial. I myself certainly struggle to act consistently with my stated intentions, values, and beliefs. Sometimes it’s because I forget! But I try to live as authentically and consistently as possible.
3. Acts spontaneously and consistently with stated intentions, values, or beliefs despite opposition
When it comes to 3, I can easily think of people who would say and be convinced that they have a lot of integrity, but I am not so sure that they would act spontaneously. That’s a high bar!
I think a lot of people with integrity ultimately will still take the time to reflect and will not act spontaneously. They will consult their inner judge to weight the pros and cons of going against the opposition.
It’s normal to have a certain amount of fear of the opposition and how it’s gonna make them look, even if they know the right answer spontaneously. It’s a survival trait.
Perhaps only the top 5% of the people I know would score 3 and I think I know a lot of outstanding people..
4. Initiates actions based on values or beliefs even though the actions may come with reputational risk; demonstrates the values of the team or organization publicly
Now scoring a 4 is quite a feat. We’re talking about reputational risk here! It seems that most people are risk averse and that’s a good thing. Personally, I think that I would score a 4 but I also think it’s a bit foolish on my part.
I can afford reputational risk in part because I’m playing this game of life on easy mode: I’m a white male with a degree from a top school, having worked at a big brand companies, and having received funding from top VC and incubators.
I can afford the risk because the system is rigged in my favor.
But for anyone who is less privileged (due to gender, race, ethnicity, religion, wealth, school reputation, sexual orientation, disabilities, looks, opportunities in life, and so much more), I feel like it’s more risky to operate with a 4 or more on integrity.
5. Demonstrates high personal integrity even at personal cost; holds people accountable to the team or organizational values
When it comes to 5, it includes not only having high integrity even at a personal cost, but also to hold other people on the team in the organization to bear this cost.
Now, I don’t know that I have the courage to operate at a 5 consistently. I do encourage my team and organization to adopt certain values (e.g., integrity, transparency, creativity, fitness, learning, experimenting, ownership, courage, etc.) but I don’t go as far as holding them accountable. Leaving room for saving face is a bit like adding lubricant to a wheel/axel.
I find it easier to hold people accountable for tangible objectives such as maintaining professionalism, delivering quality work, adhering to ethical standards, and complying with legal requirements and policies.
Perhaps people like Elon Musk, and Paul Graham are a few that come to mind who might score a 5 consistently. But maybe that’s because they have so much going for them?
Is the Stanford grid wrong or are we collectively wrong?
I’ve had mentors tell me things like “only the hypochondriac survive” or “don’t be out of coverage”. There’s clearly a lot of wisdom in being risk averse and aligning with people inside the “inner circle”.
In many cases, integrity is not a well defined and constant measure. By taking the time to reflect with others, you may arrive at a different set of conclusions, especially in cases where the words have irreversible effects.
A good risk reward ratio for the courageous few?
The fact that it’s conventional wisdom to operate on an integrity score of 1, 2, or 3 means that perhaps those who do take the risk will be in a position where the rewards are going to be that much greater because no one else is taking the risk.
As an innovator and a challenger, you should play to your advantages. It might not always be fair, but I believe that the risks and potential reputational damage are minor compared to the rewards. These risks are mere pennies against the pounds of potential gains. Even in cases of integrity-driven mistakes, admitting them becomes a story in itself, perhaps worth a penny for its lessons.
Building confidence
Overtime as you accumulate these stories and as you make integrity part of who you are, the biggest value you gain is confidence.
This confidence allows you to be more consistent and authentic in everything that you do. You will be able to think on the spot from first principles and arrive at efficient decision making.
If you aspire to change the world and intend to get people to rally behind your cause, I wish you good luck, but even more importantly, I wish you courage to have a deep sense of integrity that is as strong as how it is defined in the Stanford Business School’s leadership assessment.
Disclaimer: this was not written by artificial intelligence (e.g., an LLM). I did use it, however, to check my syntax and small errors to improve readability. I prefer to avoid it as much as possible to stay more authentic and credible.