4.5 Article

Revisiting Behavioral Integrity: Progress and New Directions After 20 Years

Publisher

ANNUAL REVIEWS
DOI: 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-012420-062016

Keywords

behavioral integrity; alignment; values; signaling; walk; talk

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Behavioral integrity (BI) refers to the extent to which an observer believes that an actor's words align with their actions. The concept of BI has been widely studied in the leadership realm and is found to be critical in influencing trust, commitment, turnover, and performance. The assessment of BI is subjective and can be biased by various factors. This article examines the literature on BI and suggests directions for future research to promote further understanding of this important construct.
Behavioral integrity (BI) describes the extent to which an observer believes that an actor's words tend to align with their actions. It considers whether the actor is seen as keeping promises and enacting the same values they espouse. Although the construct of BI was introduced in 1999 and developed more fully in 2002, it builds on the work of earlier scholars that discussed related notions of hypocrisy, credibility, and gaps between espousal and enactment. Since the 2002 paper, a growing literature has established the BI construct, largely but not exclusively in the leadership realm, as a critical antecedent to positive attitudes such as trust and commitment, positive behaviors such as turnover and performance, and as a moderator of the effectiveness of leadership initiatives. BI is by definition subjectively assessed, and perceptions of BI are susceptible to various forms of perceptual biases. A variety of factors appear to affect whether observers interpret a particular word-action alignment or gap as an indication of the actor's high or low BI. In this article, we examine and synthesize this literature and suggest directions for future research. We discuss the early history of BI research and then examine contemporary research at the individual, group, and organizational levels of analysis. We assess what we have learned and what methodological challenges and theoretical questions remain to be addressed. We hope in this way to stimulate further research on this consequential construct.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available