Harvard philosopher Ralph Potter devised a system to help analyze and determine situations with ethical reasoning. In a utopian world, the Potter Box would be used daily and religiously to make sure each and every decision a person makes is legally and ethically sound. Yet, as the world we live in is not utopian nor just, it is simply not feasible to employ the Potter Box for each decision. The four steps of the Potter Box are simple enough. One, define the situation. Two, identify your values. Three, identify your guiding principal or philosophy. Four, choose your loyalties. Finally five, you make your decision. Five simple and easy steps, yet they do not take into account the consequences of each of your choices. For example, in ethics class we studied the case of a young college female, Ginny, currently employed as a sales intern at a radio station. The stations core value was to “do what is right for us, not the client.” Obviously, that is shady business practices at its finest but also it borders on the ethical line as well. Ginny, needing this internship has a few tough choices to make: she can either continue with this company and risk her reputation or she can defy her bosses and try and change the system. Ginny chose option one and remained with the company.
The consequences for her quitting her job would have been enormous. The pressure to graduate, financial obligations, and the needed business experience to add to her resume would be just a few reasons Ginny would be willing to stay at the company. The Potter Box simply asks questions without the foresight of consequences. Yes, all five questions are extremely easy to answer and if one has a problem with the results they are receiving I definitely believe that person should really examine and utilize the Potter Box for its natural insight it provides into the human mind. I find my dissention with the Potter Box on the post-evaluation.
I believe that Ginny made the right decision for herself. The negatives would have outweighed the positives. I do not agree with simply keeping quiet about the situation. She should have performed a case study and to help change the company’s business practices. Obviously, the bosses only care about financial gains. She should have devised a new system that still reaps financial rewards while still maintaining ethical and legal practices. If she can show that she still produces the same or even greater financial gain while building and maintaining client relationships, she would have proved her value as enormous and experience and insight indispensible.



