Integrity and Positive Responsibility

Abstract

This chapter begins to explore the third mode of responsibility: responsibility for. The importance of this mode of responsibility is that it moves us specifically into the ‘walk’, the taking action of integrity. However, as we might expect from the reflection on the other modes of responsibility, it does not supply us with any easier guidance for integrity. The case of Nestlé is used to introduce the complexities of responsibility in practice. This will introduce positive responsibility (as distinct from legal liability), moving beyond accountability, into responsibility for projects, people, purpose or place. Some the great post-Holocaust thinkers argue from this for a sense of universal responsibility. Jonas takes this further, arguing for a sense of ultimate accountability to and responsibility for future generations and the environment. The chapter details that responsibility in the light of the Nestlé case and how it informs a view of proactive integrity which involves: a sense of multiple responsibility for clients, colleagues, profession, community and so on; the assumption of responsibility in grey areas not assigned to roles, avoiding denial of responsibility; further development of ethical identity through negotiation of responsibility; the development of shared and mutual responsibility as distinct from shared interest; focus on positive creative action through the increase in possibilities and pathways, further developing identity; and the practice of justice and sustainability through shared responsibility.