A Call for Integrity

June 2, 2026

 

Integrity.  An interesting word.

​

We see pleas for ‘integrity’ in our social discourse, integrity of processes, integrity of standards, but what exactly are we calling for?  After all, who thinks about integrity today? I do. It is one of our three core family values (the other two are honesty and independence).

​

The word comes from the Latin derivative of integer meaning whole, complete, or untouched.  This root also gave us the words entirely (the whole thing), integral (a piece or an essential part of something), and integrate (to combine together or bring in).

 

Simply put integrity is the alignment of your actions, words, and choices with your principles, even when it costs you something. There are elements of moral consistency between words and actions, as well as elements of trustworthiness, that accompany integrity. It is more than honesty. For example, someone can tell the truth and still lack integrity if they are manipulative, selective, or inconsistent in their values. It also includes the courage to admit mistakes, because real integrity protects truth more than ego.

 

Defining a term by its antonyms, the opposite of acting with integrity is acting with deceit, dishonesty, duplicity, or with deception.

 

                                                                                    ************

​

Integrity is a foundational value that many are longing for, and it is easy to see why.  It is also easy to see why people in Washington DC don’t engage in it, because it requires a level of trust, honesty, and risk of consequences that go against the transactional nature of our environment. (*It isn’t only DC).

 

How would one know when something lacks integrity?  A misalignment with obvious self-interest comes to mind.

​

• The politician who says one thing and does another.

• The association that claims broad scope but acts only with narrow interests.

• The media outlet that claims fairness and journalistic standards but are beholden to their interests and advertisers.

• The ex-agency executive doing it “for the taxpayer” but raising costs by filling their pockets along the way.

• The academic assuming their expertise beyond their narrow field or leveraging reputation for personal purpose.

• The law named one thing that in practice accomplishes the opposite.

 

For 18 months we have observed a public dialogue of questionable integrity when it comes to the Executive Order on contract consolidation.  To be frank, everyone knows this already. Yet a decision has not yet been made concerning where NASA’s program will ultimately reside. That decision may come soon.

 

OFPP and NASA will have to assess whether GSA (and their advocates) acted with integrity throughout the process: An honest broker when it comes to their interactions with the program? Honest with what they learned and where they stand? Honest with what they (GSA) will need to change? I am betting that this was not the case.  My old agency has a penchant for ‘filtering’ information if it is detrimental to what they seek or makes them look bad in any way.  Who doesn’t? (Answer: Those with integrity).

 

What would be some indications for OFPP and NASA that could give as indication of the integrity of this process?

 

• GSA may report great teamwork despite holding one-way conversations, repeated/redundant/repetitive questions, while making demands of NASA’s program throughout.

• OFPP may hear of how much GSA learned without any specifics of what GSA changes that learning led too.

• GSA may make unsupported claims that “SEWP doesn’t do X” without ever defining what they mean by X.

• Any plan will likely be ‘aspirational’ rather than actual.  After all, the plan is only to get you to agree.  Once you agree, then the plan can get tossed out the window.

• GSA may come up with numbers without telling you how those numbers were derived hoping you just accept it.

• GSA may show indications of lack of transparency and honesty with their assessment and intent.

 

I know this space well, and it took me a full year with the SEWP program before I started understanding what I didn’t know.  Hearing is one thing.  Understanding is something different. I know many of the people who have been tasked with this project on behalf of GSA, and I certainly know GSA’s leadership.  It means I know their culture, their thought process, their priorities, their misunderstandings, their biases, their preconceptions, their misconceptions.  I know all this because

I came from the same space but with a more open mind tabling my experience to understanding what I see with clarity. It didn't happen in 2 months.

 

Here’s hoping that OFPP and NASA see with the same clarity as I and take steps to restore some needed integrity in the marketplace in 2026.

 

Competition, cost control, small business concerns, buying at the speed of mission - these are all matters many in the market can easily support (and do).  The question now is simply how we choose to get there.  With some integrity along the way would be nice.

​

​

                                                                                                                                                                           ~ J. Johnson