The Integrity of Governance, What It Is, What We Know, What Is Done, and Where to Go

Full text

The Integrity of Governance
What it is, What we Know, What is Done and Where to go
Leo Huberts
ISBN: 9781137380814
DOI: 10.1057/9781137380814
Palgrave Macmillan
Please respect intellectual property rights
This material is copyright and its use is restricted by our standard site license terms and
conditions (see http://www.palgraveconnect.com/pc/connect/info/terms_conditions.html). If you
plan to copy, distribute or share in any format including, for the avoidance of doubt, posting on
websites, you need the express prior permission of Palgrave Macmillan. To request permission
please contact rights@palgrave.com.

1
Introduction1
1.1 Integrity is the thing to have
Integrity is the thing to have, for politicians and public servants, for
managers and employees in the business sector, for all of us in our per-
sonal lives. We all hope to be able to act and decide with integrity, and
we hope others will recognize and acknowledge our doing so.
In fact, we seem to favor integrity above anything else. We value it
more than, for example, honesty. Being honest and being seen as hon-
est are important, but being seen as a man or woman of integrity seems
more comprehensive and decisive. We also seem to favor integrity above
being ethical. “Ethics” brings in more philosophical and intangible con-
notations; integrity seems more concerned with our everyday behavior
and decision-making.
The importance of integrity to every individual and every organi-
zation, and the fact that it touches upon the very core and essence
of existence, manifests itself when someone’s integrity is questioned.
Such doubts about integrity can destroy careers and paralyze organi-
zations. Whatever presidents like Marcos, Suharto, and Mubarak may
have achieved for their countries, what they will be remembered for is
the dubious and corrupt use of their power(s). The crucial significance
of integrity makes it important to reflect in more depth on the con-
cept, to explore what we are talking about and clarify to some extent
the situations and contexts in which the concept is appropriate. Such
clarification is exactly the goal that I, together with several esteemed
colleagues,2will try to reach in the following chapters.
To begin this task, this book delves first into the content of integrity.
Everybody desires it, but what exactly are we longing for and talking
about? To answer this question, this chapter introduces a number of the
1
10.1057/9781137380814 - The Integrity of Governance, Leo Huberts
Copyright material from www.palgraveconnect.com - licensed to Vrije Universiteit - PalgraveConnect - 2015-04-08

2The Integrity of Governance
central concepts of our theory on the integrity of governance, followed
by an introduction to the topics dealt with in later chapters. These lat-
ter include certain fundamental questions about the bright and dark
sides of ethics and integrity: what are the central moral public values
to be cherished, what can go wrong and why, and what policies and
institutions help to curb corruption and safeguard integrity?
The clarification of the concept of integrity, however, is hindered
by the fact that in English the noun “integrity” has no parallel adjec-
tive: whereas it is common practice to speak about the integrity of a
politician or a manager, it is highly exceptional to refer to an “inte-
gral” (Carter, 1996) person, politician, or manager (and, in such cases,
the connotation is of a “whole” character), and “integer,” the closest to
the French (intègre), German (integer), or Dutch (integer) adjective, falls
awkwardly on the native ear. What adjective, then, is useful and possible
in English? I choose the term “integritous” because it follows the pat-
tern of the Latin -icitas forms (solicitous, felicitous, duplicitous ...)and
because Carter’s alternative “integral” reminds one more of integrality
than integrity.
The language differences may also play a role in the relative popular-
ity of the concept of integrity in current discussions about the character
and quality of government and governance. Although the fierce debate
about corruption, ethics, and integrity rages across the globe, the uses
of “integrity” as a challenging concept to illuminate these phenomena
seem to differ. Hence, this book refers frequently to the “ethics and
integrity” of governance, two concepts that I differentiate more clearly
as the chapters unfold while also clarifying what makes integrity special
and important.
1.2 More attention to integrity and ethics
1.2.1 Politics and administration
Interest in the integrity and ethics of governance has increased sig-
nificantly during recent decades (Yoder and Cooper, 2005; Huberts,
Maesschalck, and Jurkiewicz, 2008; Cox III, 2009; Lewis and Gilman,
2012; Menzel, 2012), particularly in the face of the growing com-
mitment demonstrated by international organizations to fighting cor-
ruption and safeguarding integrity. As a result, such organizations as
the United Nations (UN), the World Bank, and the Organization for
Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), as well as civil
organizations like Transparency International (TI), now see the issue
as essential to political and economic progress. These organizations
10.1057/9781137380814 - The Integrity of Governance, Leo Huberts
Copyright material from www.palgraveconnect.com - licensed to Vrije Universiteit - PalgraveConnect - 2015-04-08

Introduction 3
have overseen an impressive number of initiatives and established
an extensive framework of conventions, rules, monitoring guidelines,
and sanctions, including the 1999 OECD Convention on Combating
Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions
and the UN Convention against Corruption that entered into force in
December 2005.
These developments coincided with more interest in corruption and
integrity within, for example, the European Union (Demmke and
Moilanen, 2012), whose discussions and decision-making about new EU
members are very much focused on the presence of corruption in can-
didate countries. International policies and practices are also reflected
in decision-making about which countries will receive financial assis-
tance, debt reduction, developmental aid, and political and economic
favors. If countries that seek such support do not abide by or recognize
these anticorruption initiatives, they are regarded much less favorably,
not only by institutions like the World Bank and the European Union
but also by national governments. At the same time, as illustrated by
the fierce discussion on the criteria of good governance, there also
appears to be growing awareness among the international community
that issues of the integrity and ethics of government and governance
encompass aspects far beyond the mere curbing or sanctioning of
corruption.
1.2.2 Academic dialogue
Integrity, ethics, and corruption have also become more important
research topics in many academic disciplines, leading to an interna-
tional academic dialogue on these subjects that is more cooperative,
intellectually challenging, vigorous, and substantive (Menzel, 2005a;
Lawton and Doig, 2006). There also seems to be a trend toward more
international networks (after a period of domination by American schol-
ars), as well as some progress toward bridging geographical, cultural,
and disciplinary boundaries. Also very important is the seemingly more
intense discussion and improved exchange between the many disci-
plines in the ethics and integrity arena. These myriad fields represent
many worlds to bridge, possibly through manifold involvement, from
psychology to political science, from neurosciences to philosophy, from
business administration to public administration ...Althoughitisnot
easy to overcome the borders of such separated paradigms, it seems a
highly worthwhile endeavor to develop bodies of knowledge on spe-
cific topics using contributions from different disciplines. As a first step,
however, it is necessary to be precise about the usage of such concepts
10.1057/9781137380814 - The Integrity of Governance, Leo Huberts
Copyright material from www.palgraveconnect.com - licensed to Vrije Universiteit - PalgraveConnect - 2015-04-08

4The Integrity of Governance
as ethics and integrity, implying the need for a refined framework for
these concepts.
1.3 Integrity, ethics, values, and governance
The issues that lie at the heart of such a conceptual framework, how-
ever, are broad enough to have generated full libraries of written work,
a richness that will be hinted at in subsequent chapters. For now, I offer
only a brief definition of the major concepts and approaches. Whereas
ethics and corruption have always been important concepts in the anal-
ysis of politics and administration, integrity, the central concept of this
book, has for too long been ignored. For example, the term “integrity”
is totally absent from the index of Willa Bruce’s anthology Classics of
Administrative Ethics (2001), even though, as the literature review will
show, the concept has become more popular over recent decades. This
increased interest has produced eight distinguishable views, based on
many bodies of knowledge: integrity as wholeness (being consistent
and coherent); as integration into the environment; as professional
responsibility; as conscious open action based on moral reflection; as
a (number of) value(s), including incorruptibility; as accordance with
laws and codes; as accordance with relevant moral values and norms;
and as exemplary moral behavior.
In this book, “integrity” is seen as a characteristic or quality that
refers to accordance with the relevant moral values and norms. Thus,
a politician is a man or woman of integrity if his or her behavior (as a
politician) is in harmony or accordance with relevant moral values and
norms (including laws and rules). Which values, norms, laws, and rules
are relevant, however, depends upon the context. Moreover, it is not
only individuals who can act with or without integrity: the character-
istic or quality can also be applied to other “subjects.” Hence, whereas
the behavior being judged in terms of integrity may be very specific
(e.g., lying in parliament, falsifying documents to boost profits, drunken
driving, smoking marijuana), the subject involved can be a group, an
organization, or even a society. When relevant moral values and norms
can be distinguished for such a subject, integrity judgments can arise.
For example, a group, organization, or society can lack integrity when
its leaders and members abuse power and appear to be corruptible.
In other words, types of integrity can be distinguished depending on the
subject considered, whether the issue is individual personal integrity,
integrity of the individual professional, the integrity of a profession or
an organization, or the integrity of a system.
10.1057/9781137380814 - The Integrity of Governance, Leo Huberts
Copyright material from www.palgraveconnect.com - licensed to Vrije Universiteit - PalgraveConnect - 2015-04-08

Introduction 5
A “value” is a belief or quality that contributes to judgments about
what is good, right, beautiful, or admirable. Values, thus, carry weight
in the choice of action by individuals and collectives. A norm, on
the other hand, is more specific. Norms tell us whether something is
good or bad, right or wrong, beautiful or ugly. For types of behavior,
they answer the question “what is the correct thing to do?” Yet not
all values and norms are relevant to integrity judgments. For example,
integrity does not deal with what is beautiful (aesthetics), what is con-
ventional (etiquette), or what works (technology). Rather, it focuses on
moral norms and values, those that concern what is right or wrong,
good or bad, usually in regard to the issues that people feel strongly
about, the issues that matter for the community to which they belong
(i.e., there is a claim to more general validity and conformity). Both
“morality” and “ethics,” therefore, refer to what is right or wrong, good
or bad; and the terms “ethical” and “moral” are commonly used as
interchangeable synonyms. Others, however, see morals as referring to
the principles of right and wrong, and ethics (or Ethics) as the study
of those principles. For pragmatic reasons, this book adopts the first
approach.
Much public debate, policy-making, and theory development in
ethics on an international level focuses on the concept of corruption
rather than on ethics or integrity, defining corruption narrowly—as,
for example, bribery—or more broadly, as all behaviors that impair
integrity, virtue, or moral principle. In this book, “corruption” is seen
as the promising, giving, asking, or receiving of personal benefits or
favors that (are meant to) influence the decisions of a (public) func-
tionary; in other words, the intrusion of improper private interests into
the decision-making process. Corruption, therefore, means that author-
ity is misused because of the favors or benefits offered by external parties
with an interest in past, present, or future decision-making.
Corruption is very often seen as a serious “integrity violation”; that is,
a behavior that violates the relevant moral values and norms. Integrity
violations include, for example, fraud and theft, leaking information,
conflict of interest, private time misbehavior, sexual intimidation, and
discrimination. Yet what exactly is seen as a violation depends on the
relevant norms and values, and thus on the context (time and situa-
tion). Moreover, each type of integrity violation consists of a spectrum
of behaviors, from most to least serious, as determined by how far
these behaviors are from normative value expectations. Hence, such cor-
rupt behavior as bribery can range from cents to billions, and sexual
harassment can vary between a derogatory remark and rape.
10.1057/9781137380814 - The Integrity of Governance, Leo Huberts
Copyright material from www.palgraveconnect.com - licensed to Vrije Universiteit - PalgraveConnect - 2015-04-08

6The Integrity of Governance
One last concept to be defined—and one that has recently become
very popular—is “governance,” a term that relates to the dynamics of
(the division of) power and authority in government, as well as in
civil society and corporations. More specifically, governance concerns
the achievement of collective “goals” by either one actor or a network
of public and private actors. It thus differs from “government,” which
refers to the territorial governance system equipped with the unique
powers to use force and to tax. Rather, governance is about authoritative
decision-making on collective problems and interests (policy-making),
as well as the implementation of such decisions (Table 1.1).
1.4 What is valued
The claim that integrity refers to the relevant norms and values raises
the question of what makes up these values and norms. What do we
welcome, appreciate, admire, value, see as exemplary? What defines the
positive or bright side of integrity (and what the dark side of corrup-
tion and integrity violations)? The empirical and normative literature
on public values offers useful insights into these questions, which will
be analyzed in more depth in a later chapter on “value” (Chapter 5,
coauthored with Van der Wal). We will begin with a clarification of the
concept of value, followed by an overview of the values in existing laws,
codes, and rules. This overview will be followed by a brief investigation
into what we actually know about the values of politicians and pub-
lic servants, and how their values relate to their business counterparts.
Tab le 1 .1 Summary of the main concepts
Integrity: characteristic or quality that refers to accordance with the relevant
moral values and norms
Relevant: valid within the context
Moral: characteristic of right or wrong, good or bad (general and unavoidable)
Morals/Ethics: the collection of moral values and norms that provides a
framework for judging and acting
Valu e: belief or quality that contributes to judgments about what is good, right,
beautiful, or admirable
Norm: prescription for what is correct in a certain situation
Integrity violation: behavior that violates the relevant moral values and norms
Corruption: the (mis)use of authority because of the benefits offered by external
parties with an interest
Governance: authoritative policy-making and implementation about collective
problems and interests
10.1057/9781137380814 - The Integrity of Governance, Leo Huberts
Copyright material from www.palgraveconnect.com - licensed to Vrije Universiteit - PalgraveConnect - 2015-04-08

Introduction 7
We also explore a related and important area, the public’s views on
values and norms. What values do citizens expect from their admin-
istration and politics, and to what extent are the values of public sector
politicians, managers, and employees in line with these expectations?
We appear to know little about these preferences and views, which is a
pity because in the end these should be important, if not decisive, for
any integrity-based analysis.
Much normative thought about public administration and politics
has focused on the values of politicians and public servants. For exam-
ple, Frederickson (1997) reflected on the “spirit of public administra-
tion” and Cooper (2006) on what a responsible administrator should
do. However, this book primarily asks what values are important for
politicians and public servants in policy preparation, decision-making,
and implementation. And are these values in line with the moral values
laid down in their own codes of ethics and codes of conduct, as well
as in accordance with the moral values and norms of relevant publics
(including citizens)?
1.5 Corruption and integrity violations
When integrity concerns harmony and consistency with the relevant
moral values and norms, it is important to reflect on the behavior
that violates that moral framework. Extending this even further, one
might ask whether there exists not only behavior that violates the
norms and values, but also unethical thought (and values). Chiefly,
however, the integrity concept concerns behavior (which is complicated
enough). Hence, in our research, we first developed a categorical typol-
ogy of integrity violations (Huberts, Pijl, and Steen, 1999; Lasthuizen,
Huberts, and Heres, 2011) based on an analysis of the literature on
police integrity and corruption, and then assessed the typology against
the results of empirical research on internal investigations in the police
force. In developing this typology, we included:
–all types of relevant behavior: behavior within the organization, the
interaction with external actors (citizens), and private behavior as far
as it is relevant to the organization;
–all types of relevant moral norms and values: those in laws and rules
and in internal codes and procedures, and the informal norms and
values not explicitly written down; and
–behavior contrary to the organization’s interest, but also behavior
favoring the organization but harming relevant social norms and
values.
10.1057/9781137380814 - The Integrity of Governance, Leo Huberts
Copyright material from www.palgraveconnect.com - licensed to Vrije Universiteit - PalgraveConnect - 2015-04-08

8The Integrity of Governance
The resulting typology of integrity violations or forms of public mis-
conduct is summarized in Table 1.2 (Lasthuizen et al., 2011). More or
less serious forms of behavior are also distinguishable for each type
(depending on the distance from the norms and values). For corruption
in the form of bribery, particularly, the amount of private gain or money
involved can vary enormously, as can the harm done to the organization
and society. Such typologies are important, especially for comparative
research, because they help to clarify the content of integrity problems
(and policies) in different countries.
Both the variety of integrity violations and the broad spectrum of
severity are traceable in various fields of study within the extant liter-
ature. For example, in public ethics, Adams and Balfour (2004) explored
administrative evil and others investigated state crime, while in other
disciplines there has been research on the broader phenomenon of
“organizational misbehavior” in the public and business sectors. I hope,
therefore, that our analysis in Chapter 6 (coauthored with Lasthuizen)
can serve as a starting point for relating to those areas of the litera-
ture. The same applies to our short overview of methods that seek to
measure corruption and other integrity violations. This brief journey
will take the form of questions about measurement and methodology,
with some reflection on the usefulness and limitations of the different
research projects and methods.
When there are so many interpretations of what can go wrong, one
might expect the research on the causes and conditions to be vast and
complex. To a certain extent, this is undeniably the case, a complexity
“caused” partly by the general difficulties of causal research. With De
Graaf, I will present an overview of this field of study in Chapter 7,
sketching a number of research projects and summarizing which factors
at the individual, organizational, and societal level seem to matter.
Tab le 1 .2 Types of integrity violations
Corruption: Bribery
Corruption: Favoritism (nepotism, cronyism, patronage)
Fraud and theft of resources
Conflict of (private and public) interest through gifts
Conflict of (private and public) interest through sideline activities
Improper use of authority (including for noble causes)
Misuse and manipulation of information
Indecent treatment of colleagues or citizens and customers
Waste and abuse of organizational resources
Misconduct in private time
10.1057/9781137380814 - The Integrity of Governance, Leo Huberts
Copyright material from www.palgraveconnect.com - licensed to Vrije Universiteit - PalgraveConnect - 2015-04-08

Introduction 9
1.6 Policies and institutions
Many individuals, organizations, and countries have become involved
in fighting corruption and safeguarding integrity, including govern-
mental institutions at all geographic levels and important civil society
initiatives like TI (and its many chapters). Hence, an important ethics
or integrity “industry” does exist in today’s society. Yet how should its
work be judged? Although the industry has been successful in many
contexts in proposing policy instruments and institutions to promote
integrity, the crucial question addressed in the chapter cowritten with
Six, Van Tankeren, Van Montfort, and Paanakker is how successful or
effective these integrity instruments and institutions actually are.
The business and public ethics literature, particularly, offers use-
ful starting points for reflection on integrity policies. For example,
many types of policies, strategies, instruments, and measures have been
developed and implemented, and a number have been subjected to
evaluation and research, primarily (rather surprisingly) in the business
sector. Most such research concentrates on codes of conduct, investiga-
tions and sanctioning, recruitment, selection and training of employees,
and leadership. The picture it paints, however, is limited and inconclu-
sive; first, because we do not do a very good job as researchers; and
second, because, even when the research quality is good, the results
vary. What the overall findings do make clear is that effectiveness is
context dependent and related to the type of integrity violation in ques-
tion. The inconclusive nature of the empirical research also holds for a
number of dominant views in the field, which include the crucial impor-
tance of leadership for the ethics and integrity of an organization and
its employees, and the idea that values-based strategies are more effec-
tive than a norm and sanction-oriented compliance approach. At this
stage, the most credible and safe conclusion is that organizations and
systems need to balance different strategies and instruments while being
reflective and critical about what works for them. Such reflection should
include consideration of the intended and unintended effects of policies
and instruments.
This book will also deal with the institutional dimension, focus-
ing first on anticorruption agencies and the research done on their
effectiveness. Again, the results vary. Despite success stories like the
Independent Commission Against Corruption in Hong Kong, which is
often seen as crucial to Hong Kong’s becoming a leading financial center
in Asia, many agencies have failed because of lack of support, limited
resources, and so forth. As regards success or failure, the context in
10.1057/9781137380814 - The Integrity of Governance, Leo Huberts
Copyright material from www.palgraveconnect.com - licensed to Vrije Universiteit - PalgraveConnect - 2015-04-08

10 The Integrity of Governance
which anticorruption or broader integrity agencies operate seems cru-
cial, which leads us to reflect on “integrity systems.” That is, is there
a combination of organizations and initiatives that seems most appro-
priate for promoting integrity and curbing violations in the context
of a large city, police force, corporation, or country? We favor this
line of institutional reasoning, in addition to strategy-based analysis,
because strategies and instruments can be applied by a variety of actors.
Thus, both elements seem important. For instance, when educational
instruments could help employees become more conscious of integrity,
who should organize and implement the instruction and training? The
answer to this is not as self-evident as it might seem; for example, educa-
tion by an agency that is also responsible for repression might harm the
effectiveness of the instruments employed. We couch this observation
only in terms of possibilities (“might”), however, because, surprisingly,
research seems to show the opposite.
1.7 Placing integrity in context
The central message of this book might be summarized as It’s All About
Integrity, Stupid!
That is, we cannot understand our processes and systems of gov-
ernance if we pay no attention to the moral values and norms of
participating actors or to the systems and institutions in which they
operate. Integrity matters—it matters a lot—but that very importance
makes it crucial that we are also clear about its limitations.
Integrity involves more than simply corruption but less than (serious)
mistakes.
Even though I argue in favor of broadening our perspective from cor-
ruption to integrity, we must be careful not to broaden the scope too
much. Even when we limit ourselves to the behavior of public offi-
cials (instead of incorporating all “evil,” including that in policies; see
Adams and Balfour, 2004), the bureau pathologies, as Caiden (1991)
convincingly concluded, are many. Yet not all should be considered
integrity violations. To put it simply, an employee can do something
wrong, can make mistakes, even stupid mistakes, without committing
an integrity violation. When this distinction becomes too blurred, an
organization loses sight of what is morally important and what is not.
In those cases, “integrity” is misused (which, by analogy to moralism,
10.1057/9781137380814 - The Integrity of Governance, Leo Huberts
Copyright material from www.palgraveconnect.com - licensed to Vrije Universiteit - PalgraveConnect - 2015-04-08

Introduction 11
can be termed “integritism”; Huberts, 2005). Such a blurring can have
very negative consequences. Employees can become too afraid to take
any risk of doing something wrong; they become paralyzed, with good
reason, by the idea that making a mistake might lead to an investigation
that questions their integrity.
As a result, organizations need to clearly define what their central
moral values and norms are, and to delineate organizational ethics
that clarify what type of value or norm violation is considered serious
enough to initiate an integrity investigation. Such delineation is never
easy, but it is important for organizations that take ethics and integrity
seriously. Hence, Caiden (1999), in his Essence of Public Service Ethics and
Professionalism, discussed several crucial standards and values that might
be a useful starting point for public organizations to reflect on which
elements of their mission, goals, and ethics are crucial. Nevertheless,
in each context, a translation of the general principles and standards
will be necessary; for example, different standards will apply for a police
officer than for the average civil servant.
It is also important to be precise about the topic or object of any
analysis based on morals and integrity. For example, once a public
integrity violation is defined as an action by a public servant or politi-
cian that is contrary to existing and relevant moral values and norms,
the question becomes whether this behavior is important enough to
put the functionary’s integrity in doubt (i.e., to conclude that the
functionary is immoral, unethical, or corrupt). In any analysis based
on integrity, ethics, or corruption, we should be aware of the pos-
sibility of oversimplification and overgeneralization (another form of
“integritism”).
Integrity is a crucial aspect of governance, but not of policy content (and
outcome).
The focus of this book is governance, the making and implementing
of decisions, not the content of decisions or policy. That is, integrity
does not address, for example, the numerous questions on ethics that
arise when a government decides to go to war and invade another coun-
try. Rather, it speaks to whether the decision-maker, in coming to that
decision, acted in line with the accepted moral norms and values, and
not to the outcome of the decision. This difference will later be clar-
ified by relating integrity to the different phases of the policy process
(agenda-setting, policy preparation, decision-making, implementation,
10.1057/9781137380814 - The Integrity of Governance, Leo Huberts
Copyright material from www.palgraveconnect.com - licensed to Vrije Universiteit - PalgraveConnect - 2015-04-08

12 The Integrity of Governance
evaluation), each of which brings in different operational values (ethics)
and different actors (from elite to street-level), and, thus, different types
of integrity.
Integrity is a crucial aspect of good governance, but not the only aspect.
Because integrity relates specifically to “moral quality,” which may dif-
fer from other “qualities” of governance, it can be framed in terms of
good governance or quality of governance criteria. Questions of par-
ticular importance to this framework are how moral values and norms
relate to, for example, judicial (law and rules), economic (costs and bene-
fits), organizational (goal attainment), and political (legitimacy, support)
norms and criteria.
1.8 The book
Although this book is about integrity, with a focus on the integrity and
ethics of governance and governors (in the public sector, with an occa-
sional excursion into the business sector), my enthusiasm for taking
ethics and integrity seriously should not prevent the discussion from
being critical and fair-minded; especially as regards the topic’s signif-
icance. Therefore, in the chapters that follow, I hope to maintain a
balance between the different poles of thought.
Chapter 2 gives an idea of the state of the art by summarizing the
theories on ethics, integrity, and corruption within myriad disciplines;
there is, however, neither the ambition nor the pretension to be com-
plete. What is important, rather, is to present the building blocks of
a framework that lies at the heart of my approach to the integrity
of governance. Chapters 3 and 4 outline this conceptual and theo-
retical framework, including the relationship with associated theories:
corruption, deviance, (corporate) responsibility, and (organizational) cit-
izenship. They also give a glimpse into the subsequent chapters on
“what really matters” and “what can go wrong.”
Chapter 5 (coauthored with Zeger van der Wal) relates the content of
the moral foundation of integrity to the mission, values, and norms that
are important for individuals and organizations. One important distinc-
tion that must be made in this context is that between internal and
external justification. That is, although individuals and collectives have
their own values and norms by which they can come to moral judg-
ments, integrity deals primarily with the moral judgment of relevant
outsiders.
10.1057/9781137380814 - The Integrity of Governance, Leo Huberts
Copyright material from www.palgraveconnect.com - licensed to Vrije Universiteit - PalgraveConnect - 2015-04-08

Introduction 13
Chapters 6 and 7, “What Goes Wrong” and “Why” (coauthored with
Karin Lasthuizen and Gjalt de Graaf), examine whether what goes wrong
in the eyes of the relevant moral publics can be opposite to what the
politician, administrator, or manager considers morally wrong. Espe-
cially important for this issue is awareness of the diversity of integrity
violations, problems, and dilemmas. That is, not only do people get into
moral trouble within and outside the organization, and with or with-
out the involvement of self-interest, but integrity violations can also be
either damaging or profitable for the organization.
Chapter 8 (coauthored with Frédérique Six, Mieke van Tankeren,
André van Montfort, and Hester Paanakker) focuses on what is done
and what can be done to protect the integrity of an organization and its
members. For instance, what types of policies, strategies, instruments,
and measures have been developed and implemented, what configura-
tions of integrity institutions do (apparently) work, and what is actually
known about their effectiveness? Although much of the available litera-
ture and research suggests that “everything” is useful or even necessary,
little is known about the real effects of policies and instruments, and
there is a tendency to ignore the costs and unintended effects.
The purpose of Chapter 9 is to summarize, conclude, and consider
possibilities for future research, as well as for policy development. To this
end, it sketches not only the importance but also the limitations and
disadvantages of the analysis and evaluation of behavior in terms of
integrity and integritism. It also outlines a new route by proposing the
basic elements of a theory or framework for the study of the integrity
and quality of governance, one that I hope others can build on. In doing
so, it raises challenges for governance studies in general (the “integrity
turn”), as well as for all of us already involved in the intriguing topic of
integrity and ethics research (the “empirical turn”).
10.1057/9781137380814 - The Integrity of Governance, Leo Huberts
Copyright material from www.palgraveconnect.com - licensed to Vrije Universiteit - PalgraveConnect - 2015-04-08