I’m going to start an integrity agency. There appears to be a great need for researchers with a nose for moral irregularities. Well I’m not the worst, I like to take on the tasks where it is necessary. Let me start with the most important thing: money. The rate for my work is strictly confidential. Look at it this way: a report with a conclusion that supports the decisions you have already made is priceless.
My entire work process is strictly confidential. The findings of my integrity agency are so terribly secret that I prefer to keep them under wraps. You have to make do with a short, strictly confidential summary. Now you ask: what about hearing both sides of the argument? You have to figure that out yourself. I only report.
My expertise is best described by the term ‘hassle’. What kind of hassle? Everything that can take place with, in or between colleagues. And executives, of course. I prefer to investigate them, given the power they exercise. “Excuse me,” you ask, “what power?” That is difficult to concretize. Look, a manager has a guiding role in the organization and can – some would even say: must – address people about their work. That will all be fine, it should in no way lead to someone starting to feel that they have been treated unfairly. This can create an atmosphere within the team. Then pack it all up.
So you must be relentless. Any hint of abuse of power must be thoroughly combated. I see you nodding, logically: nobody likes a word that ends in -abuse. You should not confuse that term with abuse in a criminal sense, we are not talking about that. No, for legal qualifications you have to go to the court, you know: that institute for procedural guarantees. If you value a fair trial, you should know for yourself. In that case, there are also employment law avenues that you can take. I won’t go on about that.
My integrity office focuses on all cases beyond that. So outside the usual legal avenues. You can use slogans such as: ‘We make a strong appeal to the moral compass of our people.’ Or: ‘Within our organization there is no room for transgressive behaviour.’ By engaging me, you show that you mean it. The people will be taken aback by your vigor.
What is covered by the term ‘transgressive behaviour’? Even if you kill me. But I’m going to work thoroughly, and carefully, too. That can sound a bit vague, while someone’s entire career is irrevocably damaged. Come on, let me keep it at this: sometimes behavior can be desirable, sometimes not. It’s up to you to guard the borders.
You still have a difficult question: should the name of the person concerned be made public or not? It depends on. There are conceivable cases in which it is convenient to let things get out of hand in the end. The media is always gasping after everything and facts are less relevant to public opinion. Thus, the pressure can easily be increased until one’s position – unfortunately, peanut butter – is untenable. It’s the shortest route to get rid of the accused. If, incidentally, the suggestion is created that by following that route, you yourself are guilty of abuse of power, I can unfortunately not help you further. That part is beyond the scope of my expertise. You will have to engage another integrity agency for this, plenty of choice.