IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/qualqt/v56y2022i3d10.1007_s11135-021-01200-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Qualitative empirical research on ethical decision-making in organizations: Revisiting Waters, Bird, and Chant’s pioneering methodological approach

Author

Listed:
  • Marcos Luís Procópio

    (State University of Mato Grosso)

Abstract

Although ethical decision-making studies are growing within the realm of organizations, empirical research on this topic is still dominated by a positivist, quantitative, and descriptive methodological approach. At the same time, specialized literature shows that there is a sound call for methodological renovation within the organizational ethical decision-making field toward a richer manner of researching that, in turn, could go deeper into the explanation of the own decisional phenomenon itself. This paper aims to discuss how the organizational ethical decision-making empirical research may be alternatively conducted through a qualitative methodology, capable of probing into peoples’ reasons behind their decisions. To do so, it retrieves and reviews the method used by James Waters, Frederick Bird, and Peter Chant (Waters in J. Bus. Ethics 5: 373–384, 1986) in their pioneering study of the morality in everyday managerial work, exploring both the strengths and weaknesses of that promising qualitative research approach. The paper concludes with some recommendations and suggestions about how Waters, Bird, and Chant’s original method could be improved for future research, in order to help to advance the understanding of the organizational ethical decision-making phenomenon and, perhaps, contribute toward building fresh theory.

Suggested Citation

  • Marcos Luís Procópio, 2022. "Qualitative empirical research on ethical decision-making in organizations: Revisiting Waters, Bird, and Chant’s pioneering methodological approach," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 56(3), pages 1661-1680, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:qualqt:v:56:y:2022:i:3:d:10.1007_s11135-021-01200-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s11135-021-01200-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11135-021-01200-z
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11135-021-01200-z?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Weaver, Gary R. & Trevino, Linda Klebe, 1994. "Normative And Empirical Business Ethics: Separation, Marriage Of Convenience, Or Marriage Of Necessity?," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(2), pages 129-143, April.
    2. Jaana Woiceshyn, 2011. "A Model for Ethical Decision Making in Business: Reasoning, Intuition, and Rational Moral Principles," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 104(3), pages 311-323, December.
    3. John McVea, 2007. "Constructing Good Decisions in Ethically Charged Situations: The Role of Dramatic Rehearsal," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 70(4), pages 375-390, February.
    4. Jana Craft, 2013. "A Review of the Empirical Ethical Decision-Making Literature: 2004–2011," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 117(2), pages 221-259, October.
    5. Ivar Krumpal, 2013. "Determinants of social desirability bias in sensitive surveys: a literature review," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 2025-2047, June.
    6. Lamberto Zollo & Massimiliano Matteo Pellegrini & Cristiano Ciappei, 2017. "What Sparks Ethical Decision Making? The Interplay Between Moral Intuition and Moral Reasoning: Lessons from the Scholastic Doctrine," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 145(4), pages 681-700, November.
    7. Rosenthal, Sandra B. & Buchholz, Rogene A., 2000. "The Empirical-Normative Split in Business Ethics: A Pragmatic Alternative," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(2), pages 399-408, April.
    8. Chris Provis, 2010. "Virtuous Decision Making for Business Ethics," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 91(1), pages 3-16, February.
    9. Mark S. Schwartz, 2016. "Ethical Decision-Making Theory: An Integrated Approach," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 139(4), pages 755-776, December.
    10. Michael S. McLeod & G. Tyge Payne & Robert E. Evert, 2016. "Organizational Ethics Research: A Systematic Review of Methods and Analytical Techniques," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 134(3), pages 429-443, March.
    11. V. Brand, 2009. "Empirical Business Ethics Research and Paradigm Analysis," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 86(4), pages 429-449, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lamberto Zollo, 2021. "The Consumers’ Emotional Dog Learns to Persuade Its Rational Tail: Toward a Social Intuitionist Framework of Ethical Consumption," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 168(2), pages 295-313, January.
    2. Minna-Maaria Hiekkataipale & Anna-Maija Lämsä, 2019. "(A)moral Agents in Organisations? The Significance of Ethical Organisation Culture for Middle Managers’ Exercise of Moral Agency in Ethical Problems," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 155(1), pages 147-161, March.
    3. Minna-Maaria Hiekkataipale & Anna-Maija Lämsä, 2017. "What Should a Manager Like Me Do in a Situation Like This? Strategies for Handling Ethical Problems from the Viewpoint of the Logic of Appropriateness," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 145(3), pages 457-479, October.
    4. Marli Gonan Božac & Katarina Kostelić & Morena Paulišić & Charles G. Smith, 2021. "Business Ethics Decision-Making: Examining Partial Reflective Awareness," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-27, March.
    5. Tongyu Meng & Jamie Newth & Christine Woods, 2022. "Ethical Sensemaking in Impact Investing: Reasons and Motives in the Chinese Renewable Energy Sector," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 179(4), pages 1091-1117, September.
    6. Rasim Serdar Kurdoglu & Nüfer Yasin Ateş, 2022. "Arguing to Defeat: Eristic Argumentation and Irrationality in Resolving Moral Concerns," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 175(3), pages 519-535, January.
    7. Hengky Latan & Charbel Jose Chiappetta Jabbour & Ana Beatriz Lopes de Sousa Jabbour, 2019. "Ethical Awareness, Ethical Judgment and Whistleblowing: A Moderated Mediation Analysis," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 155(1), pages 289-304, March.
    8. Lamberto Zollo & Massimiliano Matteo Pellegrini & Cristiano Ciappei, 2017. "What Sparks Ethical Decision Making? The Interplay Between Moral Intuition and Moral Reasoning: Lessons from the Scholastic Doctrine," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 145(4), pages 681-700, November.
    9. Maria Ishaque, 2021. "Managing Conflict of Interests in Professional Accounting Firms: A Research Synthesis," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 169(3), pages 537-555, March.
    10. Mai Chi Vu & Nicholas Burton, 2024. "Beyond the Inclusion–Exclusion Binary: Right Mindfulness and Its Implications for Perceived Inclusion and Exclusion in the Workplace," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 191(1), pages 147-165, April.
    11. Omar S. Itani & Nawar N. Chaker, 2022. "Harnessing the Power Within: The Consequences of Salesperson Moral Identity and the Moderating Role of Internal Competitive Climate," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 181(4), pages 847-871, December.
    12. Evelyne Rousselet & Bérangère Brial & Romain Cadario & Amina Béji-Bécheur, 2020. "Moral Intensity, Issue Characteristics, and Ethical Issue Recognition in Sales Situations," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 163(2), pages 347-363, May.
    13. Sarah Bayer & Henner Gimpel & Serkan Sarikaya, 2019. "Bank customers’ decision-making process in choosing between ethical and conventional banking: a survey-based examination," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 89(6), pages 655-697, August.
    14. Tabea Franziska Hirth-Goebel & Barbara E. Weißenberger, 2019. "Management accountants and ethical dilemmas: How to promote ethical intention?," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 287-322, October.
    15. Matej Drašček & Adriana Rejc Buhovac & Dana Mesner Andolšek, 2021. "Moral Pragmatism as a Bridge Between Duty, Utility, and Virtue in Managers’ Ethical Decision-Making," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 172(4), pages 803-819, September.
    16. Marina Balboa & Germán López-Espinosa & Antonio Rubia, 2012. "Non-linear Dynamics in Discretionary Accruals: An Analysis of Bank Loan-Loss Provisions," Faculty Working Papers 07/12, School of Economics and Business Administration, University of Navarra.
    17. Dickel, Petra & Graeff, Peter, 2018. "Entrepreneurs' propensity for corruption: A vignette-based factorial survey," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 77-86.
    18. Stephen Pratt & Christine YH Zeng, 2020. "The economic value and determinants of tourists’ counterfeit purchases: The case of Hong Kong," Tourism Economics, , vol. 26(1), pages 155-178, February.
    19. Thushini S. Jayawardena-Willis & Edwina Pio & Peter McGhee, 2021. "The Divine States (brahmaviharas) in Managerial Ethical Decision-Making in Organisations in Sri Lanka: An Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 168(1), pages 151-171, January.
    20. Rasim Serdar Kurdoglu, 2020. "The Mirage of Procedural Justice and the Primacy of Interactional Justice in Organizations," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 167(3), pages 495-512, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:qualqt:v:56:y:2022:i:3:d:10.1007_s11135-021-01200-z. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.