Beyond the Manager’s Moral Dilemma: Rethinking the ‘Ideal-Type’ Business Ethics Case

Abstract

business ethics, case teaching, critical management studies, management education, professionalisation,

The case study method: exploring the link between teaching and research

“…However, the case study method is not without its critics. Scholars have argued that it does not always reflect the complexity of managerial decisions (Bridgman, 2010;Chetkovich & Kirp, 2001;Darke et al, 1998;Mintzberg, 2004); it may be lacking in action-based decision-making (Argyris, 1980;Desiraju & Gopinath, 2001;Zivkovic, 2012); and it may be too distant from real business experience (Jennings, 2002;Mintzberg, 2004). In spite of such comment, there have been many research papers on case study usage (see, for example, Fox 1992; Healey and Jenkins 2005;Mesny 2013).…”

Restating the Case: How Revisiting the Development of the Case Method Can Help Us Think Differently About the Future of the Business School

“…Undoubtedly there has been a surge of interest in business ethics in the wake of the financial crisis, in the hope that future business leaders might act more ethically (Currie, Knights and Starkey, 2010). This implies that unethical conduct is the result of morally deficient managers, rather than a product of the broader system (Bridgman, 2010). For both Tead and Whitehead, business was a part of a wider society and needed to be examined as part of that society, and this influenced Donham in his concern about the direction of US capitalism and what he saw as an increasing fragmentation of society's fabric.…”

“…Attention has focused on the shortcomings of today's business graduates, with the HBS case approach seen as contributing to a narrow, instrumental, amoral, managerial perspective on business. It has been criticized for constructing mythical, heroic portrayals of leadership (Chetkovich & Kirp, 2001;Collinson & Tourish, 2015); privileging senior management views (Mintzberg, 2004) and managerialism (Contardo & Wensley, 2004); encouraging narrow, functionalist understandings of business rather than holistic thinking (Podolny, 2009); leading students towards pre-determined answers (Currie & Tempest, 2008); focusing on the solving of problems rather than the framing and definition of problems (Chia, 2005); excluding the voice of women, the poor (Kweder, 2014) and labor (Starkey & Tiratsoo, 2007); neglecting the interests and influence of other stakeholders (Bridgman, 2010;Starkey & Tempest, 2009) and containing a flawed logic of translatability from one context to others (Grey, 2004). Its pervasive influence on business education globally is also seen as a concern: for example, Liang and Wang (2004) warn Chinese case writers against "blindly following the case writing approach of the Harvard Business School" (411), viewing HBS cases as undersocialized, treating organizations as "a mere tool for profits, while neglecting their social nature" (404).…”

Dylematy decyzyjne menedżerów w najważniejszych decyzjach zawodowych – perspektywa psychologiczna / Managers’ decision-making dilemmas in the most crucial professional decisions – psychological perspective

“…W omawianym kontekście decyzyjnym dylematem możemy nazwać sytuację, w której menadżer stoi przed koniecznością wyboru pomiędzy różnymi opcjami, w wyborze tym zawiera się pewna trudność, a konieczność dokonania tego wyboru wywołuje niepewność [Bridgman 2010]. Menedżer staje przed wieloma dylematami decyzyjnymi: czy daną sytuację ma uznać za decyzyjną, czyli czy dana sytuacja wymaga podjęcia decyzji, oraz co rzeczywiście jest przedmiotem decyzji.…”