By Ezinwanne Nnoruka
Integrity is one of those words that sounds simple until you have to live by it. In public service, especially, the word carries weight. Not the loud, dramatic kind, but the quiet kind that shows up in everyday decisions most people will never see. Many of us have faced moments that didn’t look like ethical dilemmas at first. Moments that felt small, harmless, even.
Maybe a superior hinted at the “expected” outcome of a report, not as an order, but in a way that was hard to ignore. Maybe a deadline was closing in, everyone was exhausted, and a shortcut seemed like the only practical option.
Or perhaps a piece of information in a report felt inconvenient, something that could be “softened” just a little to spare the institution embarrassment. In moments like these, the decision rarely feels like a choice between right and wrong.
It feels like a choice between being difficult and being cooperative. Between protecting the system and protecting your conscience. And that is how integrity is tested.
Most of the time, it does not collapse in a single dramatic act of corruption. It fades gradually. A small adjustment here. A quiet silence there. A decision justified by pressure, loyalty, fear, or simply the desire to get through the day without conflict. Before long, the line we once thought was clear becomes harder to see.
People often describe integrity as “doing the right thing.” But anyone who has spent time in public institutions knows that these situations are rarely that straight-forward. Incentives pull in different directions. Authority carries weight. The consequences of speaking up can be personal, sometimes career-defining.
So, integrity is not just a value we claim to hold. It is something we practise, often in private moments when no one is watching and no one is applauding. It is the quiet decision to pause, to ask yourself one uncomfortable question: If this decision became public tomorrow, would I still be comfortable standing by it?
Integrity, in the end, is not built in grand declarations. It is built in those small moments when we choose not to look away.
Lessons from the PLP integrity module
During Cohort 1 of the AIG Public Leaders Programme (PLP), Tom Simpson, Professor of Values and Public Policy at the Blavatnik School of Government, University of Oxford, guided us through the Integrity module. He framed integrity as:
Resolutely doing right, Freedom from moral corruption, Soundness of moral principle in truth and fair dealing and Wholeness, or being undivided and unbroken.
Different people interpret integrity in ways that suit them. But the module asked us to confront integrity in public life head-on, and to recognise the subtle ways it is tested.
Tom used examples from history, philosophy, and literature to illustrate these challenges. One story from Jean-Paul Sartre’s play set during WWII struck me. Two Communists debated whether it was right to ally with the Nationalists to defeat the Germans, only to deceive them later. The older Communist rebuked the idealistic younger one:
“How you cling to your purity, young man! All right, stay pure! What good will it do? Purity is for monks. Do you think you can govern innocently?”
Public service, like politics, often demands action in morally complex environments. The lessons are clear: the stakes are high, and the red lines are not always obvious.
Tom also drew on Machiavelli, using the analogy of the fox and the lion. A fox recognises traps; a lion frightens off predators. A leader, he explained, must combine both qualities, aware of dangers and prepared to defend principles. Blind adherence to ideals without situational awareness is dangerous, yet compromise without reflection erodes integrity.
The subtle temptations
The course highlighted common ways integrity is tested in public service:
Compromising on policy goals for efficiency, prioritising short-term results over long-term impact keeping up appearances while concealing inconvenient truths, favouritism or nepotism in hiring and contracts, breaking promises when confronted by political realities and bribery and misuse of public resources.
We were asked to reflect: what forms of “foxiness” tempt you in your work? The lesson was clear: integrity isn’t only about resisting corruption. It is about resisting the slow drift toward compromise that everyday pressures quietly encourage.
Shifting Perspective
The PLP module taught me three practical approaches:
Pause and reflect: Urgency often breeds compromise. Even brief moments of reflection can prevent irreversible mistakes.
Question Hard: Who benefits? Who bears the cost? Is loyalty to individuals clouding your judgment? Would the decision withstand public scrutiny?
Systemic Awareness: Personal virtue is not enough. Systems must reduce temptation and hold people accountable, because even good individuals will bend if compromise is incentivized.
In practice, I began slowing down decision-making, involving my team, documenting decisions, embedding checks earlier in processes, and encouraging open disagreement in meetings. Integrity became less about heroic acts and more about creating an environment that supports it.
Reflections
For senior and mid-career public servants navigating grey zones, integrity requires deliberate, consistent practice. Ask yourself: Are the incentives shaping my choices more than my values? am I prioritising loyalty over institutional duty?, would my actions withstand public scrutiny? and are our systems designed to assume human weakness, not superhuman virtue?
These aren’t just theoretical questions; they are critical to preserving public trust. Strong systems and thoughtful reflection protect even the most principled individuals from avoidable compromise.
If you are serious about meaningful reform and transformative leadership, this is your call to pause, reflect, and examine your own practices. Integrity is not inherited; it is intentionally built, strengthened with use, and weakened by neglect. It grows in the quiet moments, in small decisions, that define who we are and what our institutions become.
The AIG Public Leaders Programme provides a unique opportunity to explore these questions, confront the grey zones of public service, and cultivate the courage to act with integrity, even when inconvenient.
Ultimately, never forget: institutions are strengthened not only by policy design, but by the decisions of those entrusted to serve, people like you and me.
Nnoruka is Director, Financial Reporting Council and an alumna of AIG Public Leaders Programme, Cohort 1.
In this article