Honesty & Integrity

Honesty and Integrity – How employees perceive bosses

?I’m in the process of completing my PHD thesis into the effectiveness of life-coaching in the workplace – aka the way in which employees are helped by coaching to deal with other-than-work barriers to performance. It is an interesting glimpse into the thinking of employees about their bosses. In particular, the way in which these employees perceived them in terms of their integrity and honesty. At first, I collated comments about integrity and honesty in the same way, after all isn’t honesty necessary if a person has integrity? However, the more I put their interview comments under the microscope the clearer it became that some bosses were honest in some circumstances but not in others, and others come across as having high levels of integrity - until they don’t. It’s all to easy to miss the distinctions between a person who has qualities of honesty but lack a moral compass, and then those who want to be perceived as having high levels of integrity but lack the quality of honesty necessary to achieve it.

To help spot these distinctions I’m presenting here a simple juxtaposition of the two issues of integrity and honesty. For clarity, integrity in this instance is intended to represent evidence of strong moral principles, and honesty as evidence of being free of deceit, being truthful and being sincere.

The boss who presents him/her/themselves to their employees as having high levels of integrity and high levels of honesty. He/she/they are easy to trust and can be depended on to make decisions that are in service of the organisation, their team members, and ultimately themselves.

The boss who presents him/her/themselves to their employees as having high levels of honesty but fail to evidence a strong moral compass. He/she/they are perceived as untrustworthy despite ‘pockets’ of honest behaviour. Their lack of integrity causes them to make decisions in their own interests first. They tend to blame others for poor decisions that were clearly taken to benefit themselves and appear content to ‘throw anyone to the wolves’ that they consider a threat.

The boss who presents him/her/themselves to their employees as having high levels of integrity but fail to demonstrate honesty. They say one thing and then do another. They promise easily but appear to then be content to set aside those promises when it suits them, and yet work hard to promote themselves as being a person of integrity. They are untrustworthy, a cheat, and a deceiver. They not only deflect negative feedback but also don’t easily forgive those who give it.

The boss who presents him/her/themselves to their employees as neither having integrity or honesty have their own agenda, are not to be trusted and are to be avoided. The demonstrate low moral principles, are untruthful, and are insincere. Once employees recognise this behaviour they seek to escape that working environment. They are the sneakiest boss of them all because unlike the self-interested and those in-denial they aren’t suffering an internal conflict. They are dangerous. Sadly, at first sight these bosses can appear to be the most charming and engaging. Hence, they often remain hidden in plain sight. Those more senior can be forgiven for missing their damaging behaviour as they spin facts and circumstances to suit their own narrative.

I’ve concluded that if employers use this filter to reflect on their existing ‘bosses’ they are likely to uncover behaviours that are damaging to the organisation. All it takes is to ask better questions about the behaviour of bosses and what their employees think of them. When my thesis comes out it’ll be clear how this and similar issues impact the accessing potential improved performance.