The Value of Integrity.

Integrity is the bedrock of exceptional leadership. Without it, all other leadership qualities - vision, decisiveness, intelligence, even charisma - crumble under the weight of distrust. Leadership is not merely about authority or the ability to direct a team; it is about guiding people through uncertainty, about earning their confidence so that they follow not because they have to, but because they want to. Marshall Goldsmith, one of the world’s foremost leadership coaches, often emphasises that what got you to a position of power will not necessarily keep you there. Technical expertise and ambition may propel someone into leadership, but without integrity, their tenure will be short-lived or, worse, destructive. Bill George, former CEO of Medtronic and author of True North, argues that leadership without integrity is a dangerous illusion, a fragile construct that collapses under pressure.

Integrity is not about appearing honest - it is about being honest in every decision, every conversation, and every action, especially when it is difficult. Some leaders misunderstand integrity as a rigid adherence to principles, an inflexible moral stance that brooks no compromise. But in reality, true integrity requires both strength and empathy, a balance between adhering to core values while understanding the human complexities of leadership. Integrity is not just about telling the truth; it is about being accountable, about standing firm when it is easier to yield, and about making decisions that reflect values rather than expediency.

Empathy, then, is not a separate virtue from integrity but an integral part of it.

Leaders with integrity are not merely honest, they are honestly human. They do not wield truth like a weapon; they recognise its impact, its weight, its consequences. It is one thing to be brutally honest, to deliver facts with cold precision, but it is another to be honestly compassionate, to recognise that truth must be delivered with care if it is to be heard, understood, and accepted.

The best leaders understand that integrity is not just about what is right but about how that rightness is conveyed.

This balance between steadfast principles and humane flexibility was something the ancient philosophers pondered deeply. Aristotle, in his Nicomachean Ethics, argued that:

• Virtue is found in the golden mean - the balance between excess and deficiency.

• Courage, for instance, lies between recklessness and cowardice.

• Generosity lies between wastefulness and stinginess.

Integrity too, is a virtue of balance. A leader who is uncompromisingly rigid, who clings to rules with no regard for human context, is no better than one who is deceitfully flexible. True integrity is not stubbornness; it is wisdom in action, the ability to remain true to principles while also responding with empathy to the realities of human nature.

Aristotle would argue that integrity is not a single choice but a habit, something cultivated over time through repeated action. One does not simply decide to be an honest leader in a moment of crisis; rather, integrity is forged in the small, everyday choices that determine one’s character. A leader who habitually makes ethical choices in minor matters will instinctively do so when the stakes are high. Conversely, a leader who bends the truth in small ways will find it impossible to summon integrity when it truly counts.

Consider Ernest Shackleton’s doomed Antarctic expedition in 1914. Stranded in the freezing expanse of the Weddell Sea, after their ship Endurance was crushed by ice, Shackleton faced an impossible challenge: keeping his men alive in one of the harshest environments on Earth. His leadership was not defined by grand strategies or speeches but by relentless integrity. He made a silent promise to his crew that he would not abandon them, that he would not eat more than his fair share, that he would never place his own survival above theirs. He refused to give false hope but also refused to let despair take hold. He led with both unwavering honesty and profound empathy - he knew when his men needed hard truths, and he knew when they needed warmth, humour, or a quiet word of reassurance. In the end, after nearly two years in the ice, every single one of his men survived.

His leadership was not based on authority but on trust, and that trust was built on integrity.

Shackleton’s example aligns closely with Aristotle’s concept of phronesis, or practical wisdom: the ability to apply ethical principles in a way that is both rational and humane. Many leaders fail not because they lack intelligence or drive but because they lack phronesis. They either cling too rigidly to abstract principles, alienating those they lead, or they abandon principles altogether in pursuit of short-term gains.

Shackleton succeeded because he understood that integrity required both constancy and adaptability.

He remained unwavering in his commitment to his men while adapting his leadership style to the evolving crisis. He knew when to command and when to console, when to demand and when to inspire.

In the corporate world, we often see integrity tested not in moments of extreme survival but in everyday choices - decisions that seem small but accumulate to define a leader’s character. Take Warren Buffett, whose reputation is built not just on his financial acumen but on his transparency and commitment to ethical business practices. Unlike many corporate titans who have risen and fallen through deception or short-term gains, Buffett’s enduring success is a testament to integrity in leadership. He openly admits mistakes, makes decisions that prioritise long-term value over immediate profit, and maintains a level of humility that is rare among billionaires. When he says he trusts his managers, he does not merely offer lip service - he backs his words with actions, allowing them autonomy while holding them accountable to the same ethical standards he holds himself.

History, however, is littered with leaders who failed because they mistook power for integrity, assuming that loyalty could be commanded rather than earned. One of the most glaring examples is Napoleon’s Russian campaign in 1812. Napoleon was, by many measures, an extraordinary leader - brilliant, bold, charismatic. But in his later years, his leadership became more about dominance than trust, more about his own legend than the well-being of his men. When his army faced the brutal Russian winter, he clung to illusions rather than hard truths, convincing himself and others that victory was still within reach even as reality said otherwise. The result was catastrophic: his once-mighty Grand Army was reduced to a starving, frozen remnant, and his grip on power began to slip. His failure was not just strategic; it was a failure of integrity. He ceased to be honest: with himself, with his men, and with the reality before him.

Integrity in leadership is not just about avoiding dishonesty, it is about actively cultivating trust. It is about having the courage to say, “I don’t know,” rather than pretending certainty. It is about admitting mistakes rather than covering them up. It is about making decisions based on principles rather than pressure. And, most importantly, it is about understanding that leadership is not about the leader - it is about the people they serve.

Perhaps one of the most telling modern examples of integrity in leadership comes from Jacinda Ardern, former Prime Minister of New Zealand. In times of crisis, whether during the Christchurch mosque attacks or the COVID-19 pandemic, she led with a rare combination of decisiveness and empathy. She did not merely issue commands; she spoke with a level of humanity that made people feel seen, heard, and valued. She did not attempt to spin reality into something more palatable but confronted hard truths with both honesty and reassurance.

Her integrity was not performative; it was woven into the way she communicated, the way she made decisions, and the way she treated people.

Contrast this with leaders who falter in moments of crisis, those who dodge accountability, who make promises they do not intend to keep, who treat leadership as a performance rather than a responsibility. We know who they are, and yet some of them are elected repeatedly. The difference is stark: leaders with integrity may not always be loved, but they are always trusted. And in the long run, trust is the currency that sustains leadership.

Integrity, then, is not just a leadership quality - it is the leadership quality. 

It is what separates those who inspire from those who merely command, those who endure from those who fade, those who leave a lasting impact from those who are quickly forgotten.

Aristotle understood this over two thousand years ago, and it remains true today: integrity is not just about being good - it is about being wise, and in that wisdom lies the essence of great leadership.