 First of all, this is a great honor for me to take part in this multiplied event organized by the University of Uppsala and Curson National Technical University. And thank you, Sonia, again, for giving me the opportunity to contribute to this event. And I'm very sorry for the camera off, but I hope my presentation will be sufficient here. So, since this multiplier event aims to address bridging aspects, as already mentioned by Sonia, my topic or, let's say, my talk will focus on values in general sense, then continue with the integrity as a value and its linkage to organizational culture. So, I will also focus on deviance and explain how it is contextualized when it comes to application of integrity as the value. In my talk, you shouldn't expect to find easy answers. However, my expectation is to induce your in-depth reflection, how integrity should be framed, and align when it comes to different contexts. To do so, let me first start with the observation that there are different typologies of values, and integrity as such is always here, but it might be labeled under different categories. Since there are a few typologies, I'd like to support one that I found cognate. This is the one developed by Kanagan. In fact, I chose the typology of public values because it is admitted that all academic work should serve for the public good, public interest, and it is truly so, and I wish I hope it hasn't changed yet. It is important to figure out what public values are. Kanagan distinguishes four categories of public values, as I might see on your screen. These are ethical values, democratic values, professional values, and human values. Integrity, along with honesty, is placed among ethical values. Other values seem also to be relevant to academia, particularly in terms of university social responsibility that is expected to be values driven at least. It might be implied that integrity is one of the core values in academia, and to evident this implication, Molina, another scholar, explored the cross-sectoral values and their context. He found out that the importance of values diverge by sector. However, not all values are in the same position or are in the same way important. His findings show that honesty and integrity are greatly important for three sectors that he explored. These are public, non-profit, and private sectors. However, transparency is listed among important values rather for the public sector than for the private one. Given that, I'm not going to dig in more detail what are the reasons of it, but I suggest considering the organizational culture as part of the context that might play a key role here. In one of my studies, I explored institutional values to describe strategies of Lutheran and public universities. In that study, I followed McNeese's claim that institutional values are well linked to organizational culture. This means that it is possible to envisage what organizational culture prevails by what values an organization exposes. Overall, four organizational cultures were distinguished, such as collegiate, bureaucratic, corporate, and enterprise. Certain values were aligned to each of them, and these values echo the typology of values developed by Willand. By combining two conceptual typologies, empirical data were collected, as I mentioned from Lutheran and public universities. As you might see, each organizational culture is described through certain values. My research showed that in Lutheran and public universities, institutional values related to enterprise culture is more often than others mentioned in the strategies. Nevertheless, it still remains unclear whether these values exposed in the strategies are well functioning in practice, or they are either in expectation, what is to be achieved. I mentioned here just one of numerous other contexts that might affect what values are chosen to follow, how the values might be affected, or with what they might be interlinked. This surely needs a careful glimpse, so broad perspective, so I will stop here for a while speaking about values in general sense. And here I'd like to raise a more provocative question, which is, are values contextualized in the same way as deviants? This is not surprising that following values is about good, meanwhile deviants is about something that goes wrong or bad, and this is kind of common understanding. Deviants is seen as harmful, contra-conventional, negative. Such misbehavior was investigated through different theoretical lenses, such as crime theories, deterrence theories, and I do believe there are some others. As the body of the literature in this field is growing, not only by making it to understand why this is happening, but also what remedies could be applied to prevent it. So my perspective here is not to go through each theory, but to share how deviants is contextualized. So about 40 years ago, Hilbert published a study that evidenced the linkage between academic cheating and perspective behavior in the workplace, and I would say that was probably the first attempt with the sound evidence that showed a clear linkage between cheating in academia and cheating in the workplaces. Ten years later, Davis and Ludwigsarn proved that cheating does not appear to the university. Actually, it emerges much earlier. They explored at which stage deviants emerges and claimed that signs of where deviants start appearing when students attend a high school. This important finding helped to realize that efforts put at the university or by the university might be ineffective or inefficient. So that reminds a bit of kind of fight with wind mills. So embeddedness of integrity and other values must be seen as a continuous commitment to a coherent values driven approach. And that's why I see values in a very important subject when we speak about the promotion of academic integrity or research integrity, or if we mention academic facts and research ethics. So these findings, the ones by Hilbert as well by Davis and Ludwigsarn, had a huge impact. They transformed recruitment policies in practice as well as strategies. So integrity tests became the most frequently used test in pre-employment procedure. Also in line with these findings, another observation could be made, which is that it's insufficient to have a code of ethics. A code of ethics must be practiced through different means, such as strategies, training and so forth. So definitely that depends on the institution, what exactly it intends to change and what kind of strategies it needs to implement altogether with the means. Also it says that when an institution has already a code of ethics, other means should be combined. And having a code of ethics is not an all issues or all risk solutions. So in addition to that, I'd say that consequences should be discussed here too to realize the extent of this complexity. So the scale and level of consequences depend on the sector or I'd say even the country. For example, the country with high corruption will struggle to receive efficient and effective investment. Similarly, such risks exist in academia. For example, paper mills undermine trust in science, using contract cheating or artificial intelligence such as Chachi, BTU, any other, as they are multiple, raises doubts about the definition of intellectual contribution. So what is in these days an intellectual contribution? It also starts raising doubts about the profession of scientists. So what they are going to produce by themselves. Likewise, diploma mills jeopardize trust in higher education quality as well as institutional reputation. So having capacity to deal with the possible consequences and genuine efforts to enable it show the happening of embeddedness of values. Events defined integrity as a cornerstone of good governance. And I would say that all the argues for which a university opts are a bedrock of good governance. So how to achieve it in light of integrity and its demands because we have to speak from both perspective as integrity promotion and instavians is our kind of two sides of the same coin that exists in practice. I would refer to ethics infrastructure as the entirety of different means that helps to embed a value driven approach in everyday practice. This is definitely a challenging work and that takes long years. So there is a need to involve multiple stakeholders, the most relevant ones, and to hear the voice in this. And as already mentioned, a code of ethics is the must, but it is insufficient. There should be guidance, training, consultancy, policy, regulation and so on that leads to these desirable changes, which is mean changing the behavior, stopping naturalizing more practices and focusing on what the good is. So to testify in this, there is another interesting study by Solowki. He identified that in the business sector, neither employees nor clients are aware of the overarching integrity. That means that employees couldn't trace coherence of values and their practicing through, let's say, brand decision making and so forth. So to cope with it, many means and approaches could be used. However, I'd like to focus on ethical governance as a part of good governance, directly interlating how it works systematically, or let's say how this complexity could be better understood in terms of efficiency and effectiveness in change management. So the concept of ethical governance is definitely broad. It doesn't cover only one or two elements, as you might see in the list, provided suggested by Evans. So it encompasses ethical leadership that is described by leading by example and creating a professional working environment for staff. Then we have commitment management and supervision that is described by taking responsibility for the team and actively managing work performance. The third component is about competent and professional staff, which refers to carrying duties in accordance with organizational expectations. And these expectations start from the description of the values and the communication. And this also points to compliance. Effective, we have effective processes for the whole of the organization. And these are described as existence of risk management and compliance with it by all staff. So that's like the highlight by Sonya in her presentation that individuals are not only students in academia, but that relates to all members of academia. It means teachers, researchers, administration. And definitely this kind of component, it takes forward all managerial process. And finally, we have comprehensive and accurate monitoring systems that refer to enhancing internal reporting to early detect deviance and contribute to continuous improvement of the organization. Here, ethical governance is seen as a coherent system leading to desirable changes as well as ensuring stability. And when I mentioned stability, it means if the values are well described and explained, they should not be misinterpreted due to different situations, but they should be properly followed. And if it happens so, some efforts need to be done to make these changes that interpretation of values would remain the same. By the way, all these components that I've introduced, they are inherent in public administration, which academia is not. And so the question is how about academia? Can it live in the spirit of ethical governance? As a story, I believe it can truly be so. Academia needs leadership that supports value of integrity, not only through speeches or strategies, but also through actions, development of mindset of like-minded people. Again, this is challenging given the fact that academic freedom and autonomy are specific, interesting characteristics of academia. Contributing fragmentally to ethical governance won't give the expected changes, so in academia either, by establishing an ethics committee, approving a code of ethics for the actions are needed, such as formal, informal, and non-formal education, as well as other guidance to ensure compliance. Then risk should be identified and mitigated. And this step or identification of risk and their mitigation is another important step that helps to prevent deviance as much as possible. For that purpose, additional rules and action might be introduced. Overall, all these need to be monitored in a focused manner to grasp the level of advancement in embeddedness of integrity and other values. So actually, when I see this kind of perspective, I see this kind of, I see this components of ethical governance as very likely relevant to any sector, including academia. And for sure, ethical governance is not an alien in Lithuania. Here, you see multiple stakeholders that contribute to the promotion of ethics and integrity in academia. They build ethics infrastructure, which is part of ethical governance, and this is something that I didn't discuss, but I'd like to how there is an ethical governance and ethics infrastructure should be differentiated. So just presenting a very small piece that relates to ethics infrastructure in Lithuania. So it consists of here of institutions and organizations, legislations, and other rules, as well as awareness raising. So these in bubbles are not, are national, sorry, and institutional bodies that bear different roles. What is essential here that they should be a way of complementing each other, but not overlapping or doubling these roles. So national bodies color it in green. They operate on the principle of shared responsibility. For example, Office of the Ombudsperson for Academic Ethics and Procedure that I'm representing is responsible for providing consultancy and training to academia, contextualizing academic daily practice in ethical and utility terms, handling allegations, and so on. Then we have the Office of Equal Opportunities Ombudsperson who is responsible for deterring discriminative practice in all sectors, including in academia. Meanwhile, the Chief Official Ethics Commission deals with handling of allegations related to conflicts of interest. Then we have the next one, the Office of the Inspector of Journalist Ethics that provides as well consultancy about personal data protection for research purposes because that relates to public exposure of research data, specifically the ones that contain personal data. And also we have Lithuanian Biathics Committee that issues ethical approvals in biomedical research. So these national bodies feed into the support system to research and high education institutions, such as universities, universities of Applied Science and Research Institutes. So these institutions, they might be heard not only directly, but their voice is transmitted through their representatives, the ones colored in blue actually. And they are, as you might see even, there are numerous in this. So what is missing in this infrastructure is the lack to address and support ethics and integrity in business practice when collaboration with academia is established. There could be many instances when ethics and integrity in such relationship should be carefully considered. And for example, if we have student internship, research business collaboration, fundraising, and other initiatives where this research and business collaboration could be established, there are always some kind of potential risk that first of all should be identified and then the measures taken to mediate them. So this is just one episode of ethical governance, which is I should admit incomplete. However, I think it gives an understanding about some starting points from where we should depart if we want to develop ethical governance with all their components and to see that as an efficient and effective system. What is important to consider in ethical governance is a cultural aspect as part of the context. In academia, international collaboration exists for years. That's not something new. Intersectoral collaboration is lately enhanced more intensely for very different reasons. Let's say looking for relevant and innovative solutions. And there, for example, rules, communication practice, purposes of collaboration might diverge. Likewise, research and academic integrity systems might also diverge and actually defierce. So there is no need to look even too far. For example, the bridge project partner institutions from Lithuania, Sweden, Ukraine, Czechia, not Macedonia, we have different ethics infrastructure, so different ethical governance. However, they are united by universally shared principle of moral conduct, because practicing should be complementing each other to develop a strong bond for further demand. So bridging and ensuring consistency among different sectors, cultivating the same values in the same way is crucial, as deviance of integrity is faced everywhere at any stage, at any age, by any community. So it does not seem that here the context might have a key role. However, however, context is paramount to consider when it comes to changes management. When we want something to change, when we identify some specific issues that we want to cope with, and to bring some solutions to go into these universally applied principles of moral conduct. So to end up here, I'd like to congratulate actually the initiative of Uppsala University for having such an intricate topic in the bridge project to address as well as for gathering interdisciplinary and their sectoral team. Indeed, this is not an easy task, particularly to find a way how to be on values in an academic context. And I would leave here with an explanation mark the same question that I see is probably a challenging thing in each international project. But doesn't that everyone should reflect on when going into these practices? And since I started speaking about the bridge project that holds this event, I'd like to shortly share my joy about its outputs. As we're just finally have introduced many of them that have been already published and some others are forthcoming. So I would say that some of these outputs of the bridge project, such as Skylands for research ethics and research integrity citizen science have been endorsed by other countries. And I believe they will continue to be appreciated worldwide. And also I'd like to thank my team and other partners of the bridge project who substantially contributed to them. And that will be their other useful outputs for academia that were developed by this project team, as already mentioned by Sonya checklist and other forthcoming guidelines for integrity in research and business collaboration. So I do believe that everyone might benefit of them. So I make a full stop here. And I wish you to enjoy this event with best. Thank you.