Governance Matters: What is the scope of your responsibilities as Secretary for Public Integrity at the Office of the Comptroller General (Controladoria-Geral da União or CGU)?

Izabela Corrêa: The CGU has six Secretariats: Public Integrity, Private Integrity, Access to Information, Internal Control, the Federal Ombudsman General, and the Federal Inspector General. We at the Public Integrity Secretariat give guidance and foster the integrity agenda across the executive branch, covering 37 ministries and 300 public institutions. As Secretary for Public Integrity, I set and standardise the guidelines and procedures that promote public integrity within these organisations.

I also coordinate the System of Integrity, Transparency, and Access to Information (SITAI), which leads efforts to promote transparency, public integrity, and ethical conduct in government. This includes responsibility for establishing standards and guidelines and coordinating the Government’s open data and transparency policies. We also have a research mandate to develop and test innovations in the field of integrity, for example using behavioural sciences.

Finally, a great deal of our work involves creating and implementing tailor-made integrity programmes to support all of the projects we undertake.

‍

There is a growing shift from simply applying anti-corruption measures to building systems and cultures that promote integrity in public service. Why is this taking place, and what does integrity mean in practical, everyday terms for public servants?

Public integrity means prioritising the public interest and committing to generating value in our public institutions. For many organisations this means confronting the “integrity gaps” that hinder them. And one of these is indeed corruption. Corruption damages an organisation’s reputation, its capabilities, and its ability to promote fairness in public policies. Ethical standards become compromised and trust is eroded. Other public integrity breaches can include:

• Low levels of transparency, which can reduce citizens’ engagement in the policy process and undermine the legitimacy of policies
• A lack of diversity, which can hinder innovation and inclusivity
• A toxic work culture, which may encompass instances of bullying or sexual harassment and can result in low employee morale and high turnover
• Inefficiency in operations and decision-making, which can hamper productivity and growth

To pursue public integrity, we must create organisational cultures that go beyond tackling corruption. We need to strengthen people’s understanding of and commitment to the values and principles of the organisation, and address other undesirable forms of conduct that violate or disrespect people’s rights.

To pursue public integrity, we must create organisational cultures  that go beyond tackling corruption.

‍

What are the CGU’s plans for measuring and monitoring integrity in the federal public service in Brazil?

Any organisation, public or private, needs to start by understanding and identifying its “integrity gaps”. Where are the areas for improvement and where are there opportunities? The institution must be self-aware. One means of measuring this is to use data produced by auditing reports and by the organisation’s ombudsman. These findings can be used to inform an “integrity maturity model”. There are different versions of the model, but they essentially constitute a framework for examining and measuring how integrity practices and values are being applied throughout an organisation.

The better an organisation understands these gaps and opportunities, the more effectively it can devise strategies to enhance its integrity. Improving integrity is not only about rectifying weaknesses but also about capitalising on existing strengths and opportunities to instil a robust culture of public value, ethics, and transparency.

This is something we have lived out in practice at the CGU. We have developed maturity models for institutions such as the public ombudsman and the correctional system. These have helped us to manage integrity risks and improve public policy development. The model within the correctional system is structured into five levels, each divided into four areas that are being evaluated. Each of those levels is characterised by expected performance standards and desired attributes. This clearly depicts the process of organisational development. By defining, implementing, monitoring, and enhancing its corrective processes and practices, the organisation can meet those standards and progress up the five levels. This offers an incremental approach that can be seamlessly integrated into the institutional governance structure.

In your capacity as both an academic and a government practitioner you have examined anti-corruption and public integrity from many different angles. What are the integrity management practices that are proving to make a real impact?

After three decades of extensive research in this field, we have seen the promise and the limitations of various measures. There are three lessons I would like to highlight. First, the process of enhancing integrity must start with identifying and analysing risks so it is possible to understand where the issues are most pronounced. The effective use of data and information is key to this process and datasets could include financial transaction irregularities, instances of regulatory non­compliance, the recurrent absence of information disclosure, or patterns of complaints. Once you have found the risks, it is possible to look into why they exist. Factors often include inadequate policies, cultural aspects, or lack of enforcement.

Second is the importance of context. Every institution, province, or country has its own specific characteristics and operates within a context that affects its “integrity landscape”. The policy responses that are most effective in one organisation may not be the most workable in another. This means understanding each organisation’s mission, values, culture, and operational processes, as well as the broader societal, economic, and political environment in which the organisation operates. Each of these factors influences the potential areas of integrity weakness.

Third, applying behavioural insights in order to promote integrity, at the micro-level, has also shown promising results. These insights, drawing on the fields of psychology, cognitive science, and economics, help us understand the factors that influence human decision-making and behaviour. When applied correctly, these insights can be instrumental in creating a culture and environment that encourages integrity and deters unethical behaviour. We are currently developing a pioneering pilot project in Brazil to look into just such a policy.

‍

How are innovations in technology helping promote public integrity?

Tech-based tools are very effective for promoting integrity in so many ways. They can increase the state’s capacity to handle complex tasks, raise the speed of delivery, enhance transparency, improve efficiency and accountability, increase intelligence around integrity risks, standardise procedures, and support data analysis and risk assessment.

In 2004, the CGU launched its Transparency Portal, an online site that provides comprehensive information on budgets, procurement processes, contracts, suppliers, and spending. It allows citizens to access information on who the Government is hiring and what it is purchasing, both at an individual process level and as an overview. Citizens can access this information as data visualisations, interactive tables, downloads, or in a format where programmers can make use of it. We have several initiatives to help citizens better understand the data and to find what they are looking for. Around 1.4 million users access the Transparency Portal each month.

Another platform overseen by the CGU that promotes openness is a website called Fala.br. “Fala” means “voice” in Brazilian Portuguese. It allows citizens to voice their concerns directly to the government – be they complaints, suggestions, praise, or requests for information or simplification. Once received, these inputs are directed promptly to the appropriate ombudsman’s office, where they are assessed and must be responded to within a certain timeframe. By formally and centrally registering all this feedback, it helps make the public service more accessible, coordinated, and responsive. To date, 327 national-level agencies and more than 2,500 municipal and state-level agencies have voluntarily joined the system, and the number of citizen submissions has been growing each year.

The CGU has also been innovating with a tool called “Faro” (Ferramenta de Análise de Risco de Ouvidoria, or Ombudsman’s Risk Analysis Tool); “faro” means “nose” or “sense of smell” in Brazilian Portuguese. Faro uses natural language processing and machine-learning techniques to automate the analysis of complaints. It uses a classification model to help direct the complaints, allowing the teams responsible for screening them to focus their efforts more efficiently and effectively.

The final example I’d like to share is “Alice” (Análise de Licitação e Editais, or Analysis of Bidding and Tender Notices). Alice scrutinises notices published on the Federal Government Procurement Portal each day and identifies potential inconsistencies. Using text-mining and artificial intelligence, Alice automatically assesses the risks of bias towards a specific company, of overpriced goods and services, or of unnecessary contracts. From when it was launched in 2015 until March 2022, Alice’s alerts prompted several interventions by the CGU. As a result, 58 tenders or auctions have either been modified, cancelled, or suspended, amounting to BRL 8.61 billion (US$ 1.8 billion).

‍

How much of building a culture of integrity is about leadership?

The overall integrity of an organisation is greatly influenced by what is known as “the tone at the top”. Leaders carve out the “integrity agenda” and communicate it to their organisation. This agenda reflects the leadership’s commitment to ethics and integrity, which in turn influences the behaviour and attitudes of all members in the organisation. Leaders are able, through their own behaviour and actions, to motivate others to uphold the same values.

‍

What specific capabilities and skills does a team like yours need to succeed?

To build a successful team focused on promoting integrity, several capabilities and skills are crucial:

• Technical knowledge. Team members should possess a strong understanding of key areas related to integrity, such as the prevention of conflicts of interest, risk analysis, open government and transparency, relevant legislation, and international recommendations. This knowledge provides a solid foundation for designing effective strategies and initiatives and for understanding context
• People skills. Building a culture of integrity requires engaging people around a common purpose. Therefore, the team needs to be skilled in leading meetings, facilitating focus groups, and conducting training sessions to disseminate knowledge effectively. The ability to connect with diverse stakeholders and foster collaboration is vital
• Curiosity. Given that integrity is an evolving field, team members need to demonstrate a genuine curiosity and eagerness to seek out the best practical and academic resources. They should actively research and explore good examples and practices both nationally and internationally. Team members should be encouraged to learn, experiment, and also to take part in training courses. There are many ongoing discussions in the field of integrity and new things are being tried around the world all the time. An iterative approach helps practitioners to keep up with the latest trends, improve their own skills, and more effectively implement strategies on the ground.

By assembling a team with the right capabilities, fostering continuous learning, and encouraging innovation, organisations can cultivate a robust and effective approach to embedding integrity.