The study assessed the level of integrity on a scale from 0 (no integrity culture) to 10 (very high integrity culture). The highest scores were given to the President of Ukraine and the education sector (6.0), followed by the healthcare sector (5.4) and local government authorities (5.1). Civil service integrity was rated at 4.9 points, the police at 4.3, and the courts at 3.7 points.

The image of a statesman

Among the traits and characteristics that a civil servant should possess, integrity ranks first, with 60% of surveyed Ukrainians considering it important. This trait is most frequently mentioned by city dwellers and older participants.

Around half of the respondents believe that experience and competence are necessary qualities, while 46% consider intelligence and education to be essential. Incorruptibility and patriotism are valued by 36-37%, with younger respondents more frequently emphasising incorruptibility. Simplicity and approachability are important to 30% of respondents, with this trait being more commonly mentioned by those living in rural areas.

Nearly one in five respondents highlighted the importance of qualities such as hard work, a principled stance, and leadership abilities. Hard work was more often selected by those in rural areas, while leadership was prioritised by younger individuals and city residents. 

Flexibility, energy, and courage are important traits for 15% of respondents, while oratory skills and communication abilities are valued by 10%. The least frequently chosen traits were influence, cunning, youth, charisma, and a sense of humour, with only up to 5% selecting these characteristics. 

Compared to measurements taken in June 2019, a larger portion of respondents now value incorruptibility, patriotism, and experience. Meanwhile, the proportion of those who highlighted courage, leadership, and hard work has slightly decreased.

Evaluation of Integrity 

The study assessed the level of integrity on a scale from 0 (no integrity culture) to 10 (very high integrity culture). The highest scores were given to the President of Ukraine and the education sector (6.0), followed by the healthcare sector (5.4) and local government authorities (5.1). Civil service integrity was rated at 4.9 points, the police at 4.3, and the courts at 3.7 points. The lowest scores for integrity were given to the Cabinet of Ministers (3.3) and the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. Younger people and rural residents generally gave higher ratings of integrity across most sectors.

Half of the respondents believe that honesty should be one of the core principles guiding civil servants, with this view being more prevalent among residents of small towns, villages, and older respondents. Additionally, 38% stated that responsibility should be a key principle, while 34% pointed to professionalism, a trait more frequently mentioned by city residents. One in four respondents stressed the importance of transparency in the work of civil servants, with urban dwellers, youth, and middle-aged respondents more likely to mention it. Effective communication with citizens was highlighted by 16%, regular reporting on performance by 12%, speed in decision-making by 7%, and openness to criticism by 4%. 

According to 45% of respondents, civil servants primarily act based on personal gain, while around 20% believe they are guided by official instructions. A third of respondents believe that civil servants are influenced by both personal interests and official guidelines. 

The majority of respondents (77%) believe that increasing penalties for corruption would enhance the integrity of civil servants. A third think that banning individuals from public service after being caught in corruption would improve integrity. Twenty percent see strict punishment for those offering bribes as an effective measure. Increasing the frequency of corruption inspections was viewed as effective by 16%, improving transparency in reporting and digitising decision-making processes by 14%, raising civil servants' salaries by 8%, and introducing principles of anonymity and collegiality in decision-making by 2% and 4%, respectively.