Abstract

Given a world that has seen recent betrayals by religious organizations, political scandals, and questionable corporate ethics, one questions whether integrity exists, and more importantly, what integrity is. In the pursuit to define integrity, six dilemmas were posed to recognized military leaders who then resolved the dilemmas through a think-aloud process. Following the think-aloud process, retrospective interviews gave these leaders the opportunity to confirm or alter their initial responses. In addition, questions were asked relating to the role of compromise in integrity, the possibility of persons having integrity in one part of their life and not in another and still being considered persons of integrity, and the ability of the army to maintain army core values in a postmodern world. ;Five themes were extracted from the think aloud responses: dedication to military guidelines, fidelity to duty, service for the greater good, rule-orientation, and pursuit of leadership excellence. Results revealed that male leaders referenced myriad guidelines, whereas female leaders rarely referenced guidelines. Duty was a powerful theme and a desire for the greater good surfaced in all the participants' responses. Although the military is steeped in rules, compassion, respect, and support for the soldier characterized the dialogue of these leaders. The theme of leadership was woven throughout the responses of these leaders, with sub-themes of obedience, decision-making, dissent, and respect. ;In responding to the concept of compromise and its relationship to integrity, these leaders proposed that persons might need to sacrifice their beliefs, but not their principles. In exploring integrity in all parts of one's life, this study found that 10 out of 14 participants felt that one's inability to have perfect integrity in all parts of one's life is a manifestation of our humanity. However, all participants voiced that leaders must strive for integrity in all roles because their credibility and subsequently the trust placed in them could be undermined. Lastly, this study was set within the context of postmodern times. These military leaders agreed that the army must retain its core values as it transforms to meet the needs of contemporary times. These military leaders construct integrity as a practical and necessary component of the functioning of a highly interdependent organization and a notion that is strongly linked to fundamental values