MAKING THOSE ETHICAL DECISIONS IN PR

Take another look at Figure 15.3, the illustration of what has come to be known in ethics circles as the ˜Potter Box. This model was broached by Ralph B Potter in his PhD dissertation at Harvard University in 1965 and then subsequently polished into this framework and published in 1972. ^{[ 3]}

It is based on the notion that ethical dilemmas result from conflicts that arise between the values we hold, the principles we use to make our decisions, the duties we have to others or any combination of these. Here is how the Potter Box is used:

1. Problem definition: Just as in any kind of a decision that we have to make, the first step is to gather all available information that sheds light on how the situation developed and what it looks like now, so that we can truly pinpoint the problem. If we fail to define the problem accurately, we cannot expect to solve it to our or anyone else's satisfaction. It is analogous to a physician who focuses on a symptom rather than the true cause of a patient's problem. Dealing with the symptom still does not solve the problem. Thus, this is a very important first step in any attempt to make a decision about an ethical dilemma.

2. Analysis of values: Once you are aware of the facts of the situation as far as you can determine them, the next step is to examine your personal and professional values that are important in the situation. In general, values are those aspects of life you consider to be important to you and that guide your decisions about what is right and wrong. For example, if you value truth and fairness, these values are likely to find manifestation in the kind of decision you make about both your professional and personal lives and therefore will guide your behaviour. If you value money and the security you believe money can bring you more than you value the truth, this belief will guide your decisions. So, you have a full set of personal values; but these values change over time as you experience more of life. In addition, you as an individual hold a variety of values depending upon the role you are playing at any given time: parent, spouse, consumer, professional. Whereas your value system is likely to be fairly consistent throughout these roles, the relative priority of one value over another might be different in each role. (Keep in mind that not all values we hold are related to moral issues: a large number of them are amoral, ie without moral relevance. If you value punctuality, for example, this will manifest in how you approach deadlines. It is an important technical value to you but has no moral overtones.)

   In addition to these personal values, there are specific values that your profession ”public relations ”holds to be important in guiding your decision-making. Codes of ethics of most professional associations indicate the kinds of values that the profession holds. For example, the Public Relations Society of America has an explicit ˜PRSA Statement of Professional Values and indicates these to be the following:

   • Advocacy

   • Honesty

   • Expertise

   • Independence

   • Loyalty

   • Fairness.

   The ˜PR pillars that we discussed in Chapter 2 are our values as we defined them.

   Making ethical decisions, then, takes into consideration these values. As you examine an ethical dilemma at the stage of analysing values, you need to determine which of the values is brought to bear in the specific set of circumstances. If, however, you note that several of these are brought to bear, a priority value needs to be determined based on your professional judgement. Keep in mind also that when you are making an ethical decision in your professional life, best practice demands that you put your profession's values above your own. Indeed, the professional expects a practitioner's personal values to be congruent with the profession's values.

3. Application of principles: The next step in the decision-making process using the Potter Box as a guide is to apply appropriate principles to the situation. These principles, as they are interpreted by this model, are those approaches to moral decision-making that we examined in the first section of this book. For example, perhaps the situation demands that you use Aristotle's approach to finding the mean between two extremes. Or you might believe that you need to consider the greatest good to the greatest number of people. In the latter case, you would apply the principle of utility.

4. Delineation of loyalties: The final step before you make that final decision is to determine to whom you must be loyal in this situation. The four important loyalties are, of course, to your employer, your profession, society and yourself. According to most professional associations' codes of ethical behaviour, your most important loyalty in a given professional situation should be to your employer or client. Naturally, this is arguable. Whereas it is a good place to start your examination of your loyalties, there are times when your loyalty to the public will take precedence. For example, whistle blowing is one of those situations where you have determined that there is potential harm that could be done to society and therefore your loyalty to your employer needs to take second place to your loyalty to society.

Once you have completed examining the issues in the four quadrants of the box, you have enough information to make a decision that you can justify. Let's use a PR-related situation to apply this process.

^{[ 3]} Potter, R (1972) The logic of moral argument, in Toward a Discipline of Social Ethics , ed P Deats, Boston University Press, Boston, MA