Can you select on integrity?

Yep, a blog about integrity. Or the lack of it. Complex topic. Huge topic, too. With many victims, much damage, and many pitfalls. But also a lot of profit for those who get away with it or handle it well. We asked ourselves: can the profession of assessment psychology positively contribute to this subject? We think so.

Yep, a blog about integrity. Complex topic. With many victims, much damage, and many pitfalls. But also a lot of profit for those who get away with it. We asked ourselves: can psychology positively contribute to this subject? We think so.

Anyone can cause integrity damage.

The newspapers were abuzz with it: corporate espionage and stealing IP by criminals. They enter the workforce (permanent or flex) to enrich themselves with fraudulent activity. That is their agenda. To exclude this group, you can think about background checks and screening. Scientifically, links between microexpressions and lying have been demonstrated. AI and expert applications are also available in this area. But these solutions are still being determined. Even psychological assessment does not offer certainty here.

But it is not only the criminals who create integrity risks.

Even people like you and me can cause integrity damage under certain circumstances. Often, small harm (improper sick leave), but if widespread, they still result in a significant sum of damage. Remember extensive damages like the well-known diesel scandal, Tibor interest, money laundering, data scandals, etc. These were extensive activities involving several employees in an organized manner.

Integrity damage can be caused by anyone in any organization. But there is good news: there are solutions to reduce integrity damage. That’s what this blog is about.

Everyone can cause integrity damage

Anyone in any organization can cause integrity damage. But there is good news: there are solutions to reduce integrity damage. That’s what this blog is about.

What is integrity?

In the vernacular, integrity is often seen as a character trait. Incorruptibility used to be called that. This implies that integrity is more or less a given: it is something you have or not. However, that is too short-sighted. You can’t manage this from HR either.

From a compliance perspective, integrity is seen as risks that an organization runs from within through the behavior of its employees. You are talking about the internal behavioral standards and agreements an organization imposes on itself to reduce the risks – which we have often seen in recent years.

From the individual’s perspective, behaving with integrity always involves balancing interests. For example, a short-term vs. long-term consideration or a personal vs. organizational interest. Integrity or non-integrity behavior emerges when people experience dilemmas in this balancing of interests. Moreover, dilemmas may become wider over time, for example, as circumstances change or the individual changes.

What is integrity?

Integrity can be approached from 2 perspectives:

From compliance, integrity is seen as a risk that an organization faces from within because of the behavior of its employees. Then, it is about the internal standards of behavior and agreements an organization imposes on itself to reduce the risks – which we have often seen in recent years.

Assessing integrity

Integrity is a loaded topic. If you judge an employee as not having integrity, it significantly impacts motivation. That is why it is essential to keep the assessment as close to the situation as possible.

So not: “We find you lacking integrity,” but: “In this specific situation, you showed ……. behavior; however, what we would have liked to see according to our integrity compass is ……. behavior.

It’s not easy, but it’s doable. You need to refer back to concrete examples. When assessing, systematic observation and recording of behavior is a prerequisite. Suppose you don’t refer back to specific situations. In that case, you judge by character, and your employee will quickly perceive that as character assassination.

In short, assessing integrity is about behavior, not character.

Assessing integrity

When assessing integrity, it is essential to keep the assessment as close to the situation as possible.

So not, “we don’t think you have integrity,” but, “in this particular situation, you showed ……. behavior; however, what we would have liked to see according to our integrity compass is ……. behavior.

So, you have to be able to refer back to concrete examples. When assessing, systematic observation and recording of behavior is a prerequisite. Otherwise, you judge by character, and your employee will quickly perceive that as character assassination.

In short, assessing integrity is about behavior, not character.

Predicting integrity

Functioning can be predicted. That’s our business. But can you also predict integrity? In our profession, prediction is about risk assessment: the probability of specific behavior under certain circumstances. So the question is: what causes the risks of unethical behavior? I mention 5 risks and how to estimate them:

1. Beliefs and attitudes.

These are tested with classical integrity tests. The question is directly about integrity. We call this overt or overt testing. It first asks how a candidate views specific integrity issues. Then, the question is asked to what extent the candidate himself has been involved and acted in the various integrity issues. This form of testing is not widely used in the Netherlands. In the US, however, it is widely used. These tests are then used as a pre-screening tool, especially for high-volume executive positions.

2. Personality

Personality questionnaires assume that certain traits are linked to increased risk of integrity risks. Thus, this does not ask openly and directly about integrity but predicts based on specific characteristics. For example, low conscientiousness and high risk-taking are associated with increased integrity risk.

3. Motivation

At Starcheck, we map 18 drives. This allows us to know what motivates and drives a candidate, what they strive for, and what they need in the job. It provides insight into the match between a candidate’s needs and the organizational culture or context. More match means more intrinsic motivation. Less match means less intrinsic motivation. Little match leads to demotivation. Demotivation leads to an increase in integrity risks. Example 1: A candidate has a strong need for security, unity, cooperation, fairness, and absence of stress. The organizational culture is firmly focused on results and output. Employees are judged on individual performance and encouraged to do better than colleagues. Match? Not really! Chances are the candidate’s intrinsic motivation decreases and integrity risks increase (e.g., improper absenteeism).

4. Hardened

Another aspect we can identify is counterproductive behavior. After all, if the match between people and the organization is limited, will things go wrong right away? It doesn’t. To that end, we measure on 6 psychometric traits how resistant a candidate is to frustration. A low frustration tolerance increases the likelihood of counterproductive behavior. A high frustration tolerance, a more hardened candidate, reduces the chance of counterproductive behavior. Giving a candidate a stamp of integrity or non-integrity makes no sense. It does make sense to outline to what extent a match exists between candidate and organizational culture. And how sensitive a candidate is to the lack of that match. He will exhibit both in terms of motivation and risky or counterproductive behavior. Example 2: The candidate from Example 1 is hired anyway and, after a while, becomes less motivated. He/she starts exhibiting counterproductive behavior. Colleagues do not feel the security this candidate needs, and he feels he is not treated fairly. He feels he does a lot for his colleagues, and they take the credit. From the assessment, we have information on two main areas: impulse control and ethical awareness. The assessment indicates that ethical consciousness suffers the most from decreased motivation. This candidate starts to respond less openly and honestly, becomes less transparent (because he is quick to feel that others are using him), and is less likely to keep appointments.

5. Organizational culture

The work environment impacts significantly on integrity. If the organization struggles with values and norms by, for example, rewarding non-integrity behavior when it delivers results. Or the organization allows significant differences between the explicit and implicit organizational culture. Values, norms, rules, and culture must fit together and reinforce each other. If there is ambiguity about this, you can no longer call anyone to account for non-integrated behavior. And it becomes predictable that sooner or later, integrity damage will occur.

So, integrity risks can be mitigated?

Yep. On the one hand, you can assess integer behavior (learning and correction moment). On the other hand, you can predict the risks of non-integrated behavior. Doing that structurally reduces the risks and the corresponding damage.

And it may sound boring, but as an organization, consistency is vital. The culture must stand! Not in pretty one-liners at the reception or in the annual report. But in do’s and don’ts. People don’t do what their bosses tell them to do. People do what their bosses do.

Resumee

Between employer and employee, integrity is about behavior, not character. Non-integrity behavior should be discussed at the behavioral level and situation-specific.
Drives indicate whether there is a match between person, work, and organization. That match has a direct impact on motivation. And motivation affects integrity risk.

Do you have any questions?

Would you like to know more? Please get in touch with us.

Contact

Learn more? Read:

How to select innovators

Frustration tolerance among young grads

Can you select on integrity?

Anyone can cause integrity damage.

Everyone can cause integrity damage

What is integrity?

What is integrity?

Assessing integrity

In short, assessing integrity is about behavior, not character.

Assessing integrity

In short, assessing integrity is about behavior, not character.

Predicting integrity

1. Beliefs and attitudes.

2. Personality

3. Motivation

4. Hardened

5. Organizational culture

So, integrity risks can be mitigated?

Resumee

Do you have any questions?

Learn more? Read:

Subscribe to new comments

Contact

Assessments

Services

Assessment diensten

Starcheck

Assessments

Downloads

Actueel

Contact

Assessment service

Starcheck

Assessments

Downloads

News

Contact

Request Assessment