Saeid Tavakoli made the remarks Monday at the Conference on Administrative Integrity in the Oil Industry, saying such gatherings play an important role in improving attitudes and reforming processes. If issues of administrative integrity and anti-corruption are viewed as a coherent whole, he said, the legislature’s core aim appears to be behavioral change—both at the organizational and individual levels. One of the major challenges, not only in administrative integrity but across governance, he added, is that despite the existence of upstream documents, effective implementation remains difficult.

Tavakoli said one key reason is the repeated drafting of new rules and documents instead of redefining and operationalizing existing regulations—an approach that has led to regulatory inflation and, in some cases, conflicts among upstream documents.

 Proper understanding of upstream documents

He emphasized that to turn administrative integrity into real behavioral change across organizations, the oil industry and its subsidiaries must first properly understand upstream documents and then clearly and practically define the legislature’s expectations.

Highlighting the role of structures in shaping behavior, Tavakoli said behavioral change is primarily the result of sound institutional design. When deterrent and transparent structures are created, behavior naturally improves. In many developed countries, he said, even simple social behaviors are guided by structures designed to make violations unprofitable.

He added that adopting modern systems, using artificial intelligence, and designing mechanisms to eliminate so-called “golden signatures” can help strengthen administrative integrity. The less room there is for discretionary, human-centered decision-making and the more processes are systemized, he said, the narrower the space for corruption.

 Greater transparency through system connectivity

Pointing to practical experience in interagency coordination, Tavakoli said tasks that once required repeated in-person follow-ups can now be handled through system connectivity and the removal of unnecessary intermediaries. This approach not only streamlines procedures, he said, but also helps eliminate golden signatures and increases transparency.

He stressed that genuine belief among managers and employees is critical. Without such belief, strengthening inspection and oversight mechanisms at the end of processes will not deliver desired results. Administrative integrity, he said, means there is no gap between what managers and staff say and what they do.

Speaking about meritocracy and compliance, Tavakoli said contradictions between rhetoric and practice inevitably undermine trust at both organizational and societal levels. Given its strategic role in the economy, he added, the oil industry needs trust, transparency and administrative integrity more than most sectors.

 A cohesive and transparent structure

Referring to the oil industry’s historical background, Tavakoli said it has long operated with a cohesive and transparent structure. Unlike some sectors where compensation and benefits may be paid outside clear frameworks, he said, all payments in the oil industry are precisely recorded on pay slips and made in accordance with regulations.

He said oil industry employees—particularly technical and operational staff—are the sector’s core assets. If governance seeks sustainable development, he added, it must give special attention to the oil industry and its human resources, including finding serious solutions to restore and appropriately raise wages and benefits.

Tavakoli also cited the industry’s performance during crises, saying it delivered strong results across production, transmission and distribution. Despite a 90-million-cubic-meter reduction in network capacity at the peak of summer, he said, not a single cubic meter of gas exports was cut—an outcome he attributed to integrated management, hands-on leadership and the round-the-clock efforts of oil industry workers.

He concluded by calling for a deeper understanding of the oil industry’s workforce. Employees who enjoy basic living standards, he said, work with motivation and a sense of belonging, while neglecting livelihoods and welfare poses the greatest threat to motivation and organizational health.