Ralph B. Potter designed the Potter Box to help people make moral decisions. The Potter Box is usually used by researchers in correspondence morals. According to the model, moral thinking should be a good way to make choices. Potter developed a moral framework to help make choices. This structure uses four classifications that Potter found to be common in every moral situation. Potter, a scholar, was the one who created this ethical structure.
The Potter Box is a tool that uses four different measurements to aid in moral dilemmas: Facts. Values. Principles. And Loyalty.
Facts. The Potter Box’s definition phase is all about the real facts. The investigator must state all facts without hiding anything or making any judgments. Values: The examiner must now compare and contrast various values, as well as recognize their impact on leadership. Examiners can recognize differences in opinions by referring to the specific concerns of those involved. We can evaluate something based on its aesthetic values (harmonious and satisfying), professional values (innovative, provocative), coherence values(consistently equipped), social cultural values(thriftiness, diligence work), or good moral values(honesty and peace).
Standards: Principles are methods or standards of moral insight that may be relevant to a situation. Leaders can better understand the situation by considering the moral theories that express the qualities above. The following are moral methods for insight that may be used in this section: The Golden Mean by Aristotle. Ideals lie between extremes such as overabundance or inadequacy. This includes the correct amount, timing of remedy, and way to amend. Straight Imperative Act to ensure that your decision could end up being a noticeable all-inclusive law. It tells you what to avoid. It defines your duties, such as strict obligations (not harm), praiseworthy commitments (to help), etc. Higher certainty is present. Guideline for Utility When a demonstration has a clear goal, it is a good indication that the demonstration is right. You should consider what is best for individual welfare. This clarifies the need to find the greatest joy for as many people as possible. In the event that an investigative article is distributed, it may have negative effects on individuals, but the overall benefit to society will be greater. Communitarianism: When issues are social and political, the group trumps individuals but does not crush them. The overwhelming value of social equity.
Loyalty is about the loyalty or fidelities of the leader. In the news, for instance, the most important constancy in coverage is to dependably serve society. A columnist’s fidelities may include those to their employer, industry associations, and collaborators. Were we concerned more with being true to our own esteems, or the sufficiency of the crusade’s message? Is “more remarkable’s benefit as important as the”brilliant?
Potter Box: How to apply it. The Potter Box puts more emphasis on morals than rational or legitimate concerns, like how not to get sued or fired. It can be used to consider any situation that calls for moral leadership. At least initially, it is important to follow all four steps. The Potter Box offers no one, simple answer to moral dilemmas. Sure, two different people analyzing the same issue could reach completely different conclusions. A similar person examining the same issue in two different situations could arrive at different conclusions. Potter Boxes can be used to help you consider the options. It provides a way to deliberate about your options. Despite the fact that “Potter Box’ may make it seem like a rigid process, in actuality, this is a fluid one, which may require you to move backwards and forwards before you arrive at a solution that you find satisfactory. With practice, this procedure becomes much easier and quicker. After a few repetitions, the procedure can become second-nature.
How to choose the best option: A step-by-step approach
Step one – Review the Facts.
What are your values? You can assess possible activities by identifying the values that are most important to you.
Step Three: Examine the Principles. You can create a wide range of activities by examining your qualities in light of an alternative set of standards. Some examples of standard include
Step Four – Determine your Loyalty. What or who are you loyal to, given the circumstances? This will help you to clarify your thinking and set a clear bearing on acceptable behavior. All that remains is to choose a compelling, yet aware way to carry out the decision. The procedure described above may be abnormal, but if nothing else works, it is worth a look.
Potter Box might be just the ticket for keeping moral leadership at its core. Shannon Bowen analyzed the complexities and constraints of the Potter Box for a 2004 article 3. Bowen claims that the model is flawed in three ways: it ignores expectations and ethically positive attitudes; it does not promote the possibility for general good standards. The leader is a key factor in the appearance of obligations, as he or she will characterize the standards and qualities to be considered. A risk exists if you avoid. When money is the rule, it’s hard to do “the right thing” and stick to a budget. In the event that the need to reach financial goals is pressing, many people would not hesitate to compromise, lie, or put their own interests before others. It’s easy, fast, and effective, but it’s also filthy. In our professional lives, we’ve all likely seen or even done this kind of behavior at some point. What does a dishonest act really communicate?
Definition: 26/11 Mumbai will forever remain a black mark in human history. The attacks were not only devastating to the Indian Subcontinent, but also had a lasting impact on the rest of the world. Indian media were heavily criticized, not only for the breach in security but also other intelligence failures.
Principles: The Indian press did a poor job of covering the 26/11 tragedy, with a crass tone and an obtuse approach. The media’s behavior was deemed “immature” by several critics, including media experts. They argued that this type of behavior is not indicative of a mature democracy. The Supreme Court criticized the media and suggested that they should have some internal regulation. They violated the fundamental principle of protecting the safety of the public. They sacrificed their own safety to save the lives of those trapped by the attack. These are clear breaches of professional and patriotic standards. There are numerous references in the transcripts to media reports, and visuals shown on TV. The media should provide news in a way that is sensitive to the national security, but this time the security has been compromised because of their insensitive behaviour.