How public sector leaders build a pro-integrity culture.

Integrity requires accessibility, transparency, and consistency

Leaders who are accessible and talk to their team regularly about their work can anticipate issues, such as legal, compliance or program risks, and gain insights into areas that need to be monitored more closely.

Leaders also need to understand the impact of the signals they send. A throwaway comment, or the way you behave in a meeting, can be overinterpreted or take on a life of its own. People are watching what leaders say and do, and making judgements, so you need to understand the shadow you create.

You need to walk the walk and talk the talk all the time.

Consistency is particularly important. If you say, “This is what I believe in,” and then do something completely different, you will lose credibility and trust.

Recognise and reward the behaviours that support integrity, strong compliance and good decision-making.

Take ownership when things go wrong

The second part of integrity leadership is how you regulate yourself when things don’t go well. Are you someone who blames everybody else, or are you someone who takes ownership and responsibility and works with the team to come up with a solution?

You don’t want a punitive culture where people are afraid to admit mistakes or bring problems upwards. Creating a culture of psychological safety where people can speak up and where everyone agrees that mistakes are something we learn from, you create a much stronger organisation. When someone raises an issue, acknowledge it, thank them and make sure others see that behaviour being valued.

Don’t rely on culture alone

You cannot rely on having really good people and a good culture alone. You need governance, and you need to follow it. If critical decisions are being made at too low a level, or by people who are not properly trained or supervised, the governance settings may not be right.

Leaders need to ensure delegation systems, record-keeping systems and other governance arrangements are strong, robust and constantly evolving.

Accurate records of decisions need to be kept and stored correctly so that others can find them. 

One of the biggest vulnerabilities in decision-making is ambiguity. You can fall into a trap where you think someone else is making a decision, or two people are trying to make the same decision.

Defining clear accountability, making it explicit who makes decisions about particular things, providing clarity about risk ownership and removing bottlenecks are important leadership responsibilities. We should not be putting an unfair burden on more junior staff who may not have the experience to make difficult decisions.

When the pressure is on, slow down

The Australian National Audit Office often highlights risks where pressure and urgency collide. There is a great deal of interplay and legal complexity in how we work, and those issues are difficult for senior people to navigate, let alone more junior staff operating within those frameworks at pace.

Take time to think about how a decision is going to look in two years’ time or ten years’ time when the audit office comes knocking. Talk to your staff about that too. Ask: What is going to happen? How is this going to be interrogated and reviewed? What am I going to say when I am asked why we made this decision?

Just because you can, doesn’t mean you should

Senior public servants will often face decisions that are technically compliant but ethically ambiguous. Sometimes the reverse happens too: a decision may be ethically compelling but technically difficult.

Leaders must have a clear understanding of what they stand for, what their values are and how they apply them day to day.

There is an important distinction between “doing the thing right”, and doing the right thing.

Just because you can, doesn’t mean you should.

That is particularly important in areas such as national security and intelligence, where agencies can be empowered with significant authorities and intrusive powers.

You do not wield those sorts of authorities without strong internal measures to make sure they are applied proportionately and commensurate with the threat you are trying to manage.

And you certainly do not get to maintain those powers and authorities through Parliament or the Australian people if you are not trusted to use them properly.

That strong element of ethical decision-making is critically important.

Test the decision from every angle

Before reaching for legal or assurance advice, there are some internal tests that leaders can apply.

First, ask whether you have your internal settings right. Have you evaluated your enterprise risks accurately? Have you discussed your tolerances and thresholds for decision-making? Are those things embedded in the way you operate day to day, rather than sitting in a framework somewhere?

It is also important to listen before acting and to make space for diverse voices. In complex problem-solving, getting the right people in the room and genuinely listening to the ins and outs of an issue can make a significant difference.

Model different outcomes and scenarios, including worst-case scenarios. What are the unintended consequences of making this decision? Don’t underestimate the importance of considering the human impact of decisions. The citizen needs to be at the front of decision-making, no matter what the issue is.

Remember the accountability that comes with public service

One of the strongest features of our Australian democracy is that accountability in the public service is real.

Senate estimates and Senate committees affect how public servants think and behave. Leaders should constantly think about how they are going to defend a decision in order to make the right one.

Sometimes you cannot reach the decision you think would be fairer or more humane because of the technical constraints of government.

You do as much as you can and make the decision that is technically defensible, but there are points when you need to recognise some decisions can create an adverse outcome.

If government cannot solve a problem, think about other stakeholders who might be able to help. That means recognising the limits of government and your own decision-making, while also recognising that government is not everything in terms of the possible response to some issues.

The everyday work of integrity

A pro-integrity leadership culture is built through the everyday things leaders do and it is recognising the shadow you create as a leader.

The goal is to create a culture where people do the right thing when you are not in the room because they understand what good integrity looks like, have the systems and support to act on it, and know that speaking up will be valued.

Published on The Mandarin in October 2026.

About SPA Australia

SPA Australia (Systems Planning & Analysis, Australia) is a leading provider of integrated legal, commercial, consulting and analytics services to government.      

Our multidisciplinary approach, trusted advice and leading-edge technology and analysis help clients deliver measurable outcomes.    

In 2025, SPA Australia acquired Proximity, a highly regarded professional services firm specialising in government legal, consulting, and commercial advisory services.    

Our parent company, SPA, has more than 3,000 employees in 30 locations within the US, UK and Australia. In Australia, more than 130 employees are based across Canberra, Melbourne, Sydney and Adelaide, where our local teams deliver sovereign capability backed by global expertise.