How differing conceptions of integrity and self-integration influence how relations are seen and managed and implications for personal and professional development

As human beings, the exercise of our professional roles demands that we relate to others. Relationships, however, challenge the self in a way that requires us to act with integrity. Different approaches to integrity configure diverse ways of cognitively and intuitively feeling and acting in our relationships. Moreover, different ways of understanding human development are related to different ways of understanding integrity in the self. While not an exhaustive account, we sketch out three models of human development that capture much of this diversity, the so-called autonomous self (AS), processual self (PS) and inter-processual self (IPS). Each has a particular way of understanding how self-integrity and congruent action come to be. The AS and PS models understand integrity as internal coherence thanks primarily to rational exercise, with priority given to the content of action, while relations are utilised as resources. AS and PS focus on cognition through rational or emotional and external mastery of our relationships and own integrity (self-integrity is also handled as a cognitive exercise that mirrors how external relations are understood). The IPS understands integrity as the dynamic that leads to growth and cognition itself is a relational act that, when it arises from within, affects all dimensions of the person and hence how we ethically relate to others and ourselves. Different kinds of integrity are also related to practical wisdom. Based on this, we explore consequences of these different ways of understanding self-integration and relationships for approaching management and leadership roles, aiming to open up reflection on relational integrity and personal development via education in the field of management/leadership.