William David Ross’s ethical theory is based on the distinction between the right and the good. The rightness of an action is not equivalent to its moral goodness. There are four kinds of intrinsic goods: virtue, pleasure, knowledge, and justice. Unlike justice (a “complex” intrinsic good), the other intrinsic goods are “simple”. Each intrinsic good may be contaminated by its opposite (for instance, vice vs virtue). The agent’s motive is never considered as a prerequisite for the fulfillment of the duty. Ross has developed a classification of prima facie duties: duties of fidelity, duties of reparation, duties of gratitude, duties of justice, duties of beneficence, duties of non-maleficence, and duties of self-improvement. In all cases, prima facie duties are not defined by any specific motive. Sometimes, a prima facie duty cannot be fulfilled, whilst another may be satisfied. In such situation, the object of the analysis is not the set of consequences resulting from the fact that a duty has been fulfilled or not. If it were the case, then the analysis would be consequentialist. According to Ross, the analysis rather focuses on the nature of the act. After analysis, a prima facie duty overrides the others and then becomes the actual duty. Ross’s philosophical positioning has three basic limitations. Firstly, the way Ross defined the prima facie duties of justice expresses a lack of efficient standards for determining the proportionality between the distribution of happiness and the merit of the persons concerned. There is a belief that justice is a situational good. Justice cannot be a virtue. Secondly, the tendency of an act to be right or wrong lets two philosophical questions unsolved: the actual origin of the tendency, and the capacity to assess the changing nature of an act throughout its multiple interpretations. There is a belief that the tendency of an act to be right or wrong can only be drawn a priori. Thirdly, Ross’s analysis of the “spirit of promises” excludes the unsaid components of the promises. There is a belief in the strict compliance with the “spirit of promises”. The antecedents of a crisis of beliefs may include the impression management as an effective tool for safeguarding corporate reputation. The unfolding of the crisis could imply that the company falls into apparent conflicts of interest. The company could also facilitate the out-of-court settlement of innumerable lawsuits, for both reducing its legal and administrative costs and enhancing its corporate reputation. One of the optimal solutions to a crisis of beliefs is the revision of the corporate value statement since it is the matrix of corporate culture and ethics.