Puzzling over returning flawed puzzle
Often,how to respond ethically to some of the more mundane things in life that puzzleus the most.
A reader we’re calling Pamela recently wrote tocomment about how much she loves her local library. The library is located inthe center of her town in a big old sprawling building. It’s well stocked andrare that Pamela can’t find what she is looking for.
Her library also has a “library of things” it lendsout to cardholders. Games, gardening tools, slide to JPG converters andassorted other stuff are available to lend.
Pamela also noticed recently that the library has asizable jigsaw puzzle collection that falls outside the jurisdiction of othercollections.
The library doesn’t ask people to check the jigsawpuzzles out, but simply to take whatever one they want and then to return itwhen they are finished with it. All they ask is that the borrower fill out asmall sheet of paper inside each jigsaw puzzle box that asks if any pieces aremissing.
Aside from that, there’s no obligation and no recordof any of the puzzles having been borrowed. It's a total honor system when itcomes to borrowing, using, and returning.
It took Pamela a few days to find time to get aroundto the jigsaw puzzle she had borrowed. When she did, she realized it was a morechallenging puzzle than she had anticipated, so it was taking her longer tocomplete it. “A lot of dark green to figure out,” wrote Pamela.
As she neared the puzzle’s completion, it becameclear to Pamela that pieces were missing. At first, she thought one piece forcertain was missing. By the time she had placed all the pieces in the box, itwas clear that three pieces were missing.
“Either I dropped them somehow,” wrote Pamela, “orsomeone who borrowed the jigsaw puzzle before me hadn’t bothered to fill outthe note about missing pieces.
“Should I even return the puzzle?” Pamela asked.“It’s missing pieces and they’re just going to get rid of it anyhow. Or shouldI just throw it out?”
Pamela is correct that it’s unlikely the librarywill keep her borrowed puzzle given the missing pieces.
But the agreement when she borrowed the puzzle wasto return it when she was through and to fill out the missing-piecequestionnaire before she returned the puzzle.
Granted, the library doesn’t know Pamela has thepuzzle, since the borrowing was based on an honor system and didn’t go throughthe usual checkout process. But just because Pamela could toss the puzzle andnever get caught or questioned about it does not make reneging on her initialborrowing commitment the right thing to do.
It might take more time to make the return.Ultimately, the library might not care.
Pamela should either call the library to ask whethershe needs to return the jigsaw puzzle given its missing pieces or she shouldsimply return the puzzle as she promised to do — not out of fear of gettingcaught, but because it’s the right thing to do.
Jeffrey L. Seglin, author of "The Simple Art of Business Etiquette: How to Rise to the Top by Playing Nice," is a senior lecturer in public policy, emeritus, at Harvard's Kennedy School. He is also the administrator of www.jeffreyseglin.com, a blog focused on ethical issues.
Do you have ethical questions that you need to have answered? Send them to jeffreyseglin@gmail.com.
Follow him on Twitter @jseglin
(c) 2023 JEFFREY L. SEGLIN. Distributed by TRIBUNE CONTENT AGENCY, LLC.
