The human experience of ethics: a review of a decade of qualitative ethical decision‐making research

• Author: Yung‐Hwal Park,Jana Craft,Nitish Singh,Kevin Lehnert
• Published date: 01 October 2016
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/beer.12129
• Date: 01 October 2016

The human experience of

ethics: a review of a decade of

qualitative ethical decision-

making research

Kevin Lehnert

1

, Jana Craft

2

, Nitish Singh

3

and

Yung-Hwal Park

4

1. Grand ValleyState University, Grand Rapids, USA

2. Winona State University,Winona, USA

3. Saint Louis University,Saint Louis, USA

4. TrumanState University, Kirksville, USA

Qualitative studies are an important component of business ethics research. This large amount of research

covers a wide array of factors and influences on ethical decision making published between 2004 and 2014.

Following the methodology of past critical reviews, this work provides a synopsis of the diverse array of

qualitative studies in ethical decision making within the business ethics literature. We highlight the distinct

and investigative nature of qualitative research, synthesize and summarize findings, and suggest opportunities

for future research. We conclude with a recommendation for developing qualitative studies in business ethics

and a call for an increased openness when considering this valuable and underrepresented strategy of inquiry.

Introduction

Ethical decision making in business is a critical

research stream. It is so important that there have

been five extensive meta-reviews of the literature in

the Journal of Business Ethics, covering nearly 500

empirical studies spanningnearly 40 years of research

(Ford & Richardson, 1994; Loeet al., 2000; O’Fallon

& Butterfield, 2005; Craft, 2013b; Lehnert et al.,

2015). Even so, excepting Cowton & Downs’ (2015)

review of focus groups, these reviews do not specifi-

cally address the critical role of qualitative research

in ethical decision making. In the most recent review,

Lehnert et al. (2015) called for more research, with a

focus on the role of qualitative research and its

impact upon the discipline.In response to this call for

research, we engage in a comprehensive literature

review of qualitative researchin ethical decision mak-

ing over the past decade (2004–2014).

A cursory examination of the qualitative field

shows a wide breadth and depth of influences on eth-

ical decision making. While this informs subsequent

quantitative studies, there has been no review of the

literature that highlights qualitative research.

Unfortunately, qualitative studies have traditionally

been viewed as rather anemic in their impact, influ-

ence, and publication. This has been noted in the

vast array and broad-reaching number of quantita-

tive studies from 1978 to 2011 found in the past five

reviews of empirical research. In contrast, we uncov-

ered 121 qualitative studies published in the past dec-

ade (2004–2014). This begs the question of whether

qualitative studies are truly less impactful or impor-

tant, or, if they are simply lower quality research. We

V

C2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 9600 Garsington Road,

Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main St, Malden, MA 02148, USA

doi: 10.1111/beer.12129

498

Business Ethics: A European Review

Volume 25 Number 4 October 2016

contend that qualitative research has an important

place in the ethical decision-making literature. The

goal of this paper is to address relevant themes found

within the qualitative research framework from 2004

to 2014. We also provide an overview of findings in

ethical decision making that were overlooked in

prior reviews that focused solely on empirical data.

Another important contribution is to provide a sum-

mary of qualitative research in the ethical decision-

making field. Because these qualitative research tech-

niques’ main purpose is to promote and develop new

ideas to extend theory, consolidating these results is

highly influential; however, without a central reposi-

tory for review and development, these avenues may

become lost. One of the values of a meta-review,

such as those in the past, is to provide a concise and

central point for future researchers. This allows

scholars not just to look at the state of the literature,

but to see the nuances and developments within indi-

vidual studies. By offering a central review of quali-

tative research, we provide such a repository for

researchers and fill the gap left by past reviews,

which bypassed qualitative research altogether.

The logical question from this extensive research

is how, and in what direction, qualitative ethical

decision-making research is moving. While it is

obvious that there is much to gain from continued

study, the ways in which qualitative research is uti-

lized in the realm of business ethics is less clear.

This work takes a different approach from past

reviews of ethical decision making, grounding itself

in the role of a guide, rather than a reporter. As

such, we focus on categorizing these studies based

on different criteria seen in prior empirical reviews,

which tended to base their structure on dependent

and independent variables (see: O’Fallon & Butter-

field, 2005; Craft, 2013b). Instead, we identify over-

arching thematic trends in the qualitative literature.

The reason for this is because qualitative research

inherently defies simple categorization; rather, it

forms research questions without focusing on

dependent variables and hypotheses per se, espe-

cially since the research question is what drives the

relevance of the study (Campbell, 2015; Campbell

& Cowton, 2015). To categorize this review based

upon such variables would be adding something to

the research that simply is not there. Furthermore,

the use of overarching themes helps readers focus

on the overall question that they may have as they

pursue their inquiry.

In the field of ethical decision making in a business

context, we have seen the use of empirical research

mature over time. As mentioned earlier, the five

meta-reviews of ethical decision-making literature

published in the Journal of Business Ethics (Ford &

Richardson, 1994; Loe et al., 2000; O’Fallon &

Butterfield, 2005; Craft, 2013b; Lehnert et al., 2015)

reviewed nearly 500 studies in four decades. Regard-

less, there has been no review of qualitative studies,

and we answer the call to close this gap in the litera-

ture. Moreover, we highlight the methodological

tools that are being utilized in qualitative literature

and analyze demographic information about the

studies themselves. It is our hope that this article will

provide direction for both qualitative and quantita-

tive studies.

Qualitative research

Without writing a primer on qualitative research

itself, we do feel that reviewing, in brief, the benefits

of qualitative research within ethical decision mak-

ing is necessary. First, what is qualitative research

and why is it important? Second, what can qualita-

tive research uncover that is otherwise obscured

within traditional empirical studies? Third, concern-

ing the field of business ethics in general, and ethical

decision making in particular, how can this research

both benefit and expand our field of study?

Qualitative research seeks to explore and under-

stand the underlying meaning that individuals or

groups attribute to a social or human problem

(Creswell, 2009). Research in this realm often

involves allowing problems and questions to emerge

naturally rather than guiding the research based on a

priori claims and hypotheses as dictated by a

researcher using a quantitative research design. As

such, qualitative research is an interactive and itera-

tive process of participants and researchers jointly

exploring the phenomenon to yield rich insights for

theory building.

A qualitative research design is often preferable

when studying human judgment and activities; how-

ever, humans are, by our very nature, unpredictable.

Quantitative research designs that rely on

Business Ethics: A European Review

Volume 25 Number 4 October 2016

V

C2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd 499

predictability and transferability often discount or

discard philosophical questions related to values

(axiology), truth (epistemology), and being (ontol-

ogy) (Somekh & Lewin, 2011). When researching

ethical decision making, these very judgments,

assumptions, behaviors and intentions are what pro-

vide the deepest level of understanding. An example

from China illustrates the value of qualitative

research in ethical decision making. Brand & Slater

(2003) specifically stated, ‘Qualitative methods have

a significant contribution to make to increasing

understanding of the experience of managers in

Western China’ (p. 168) and suggest that qualitative

work precedes quantitative work in this area.

Qualitative findings often emerge from three gen-

eral methods of data collection: in-depth, open-

ended interviews; direct observation; and written

documents (Patton, 2002). In-depth interviews and

focus groups by themselves or in conjunction with

other research methods tend to be used in business

ethics research for theory development, generating

research questions and research instruments, and as

a means of triangulation (Cowton & Downs, 2015).

Observation related methods, such as critical inci-

dent technique, can be useful for uncovering situa-

tions and incidents in considerable detail, and can be

used when exploring real-life ethical dilemmas (e.g.

Pedigo & Marshall, 2009). Qualitative content analy-

sis by means of investigating written documents has

traditionally been used for analyzing textual data,

and has also been used in ethics-related research for

exploring corporate CSR policies, ethical codes, and

organizational statements (e.g. Cady et al., 2011).

All three methods are represented in this review

of qualitative research on ethical decision making.

For example, Bjerregaard & Lauring’s (2013) study

on management practices and ethical direction uti-

lized all three methods (interview, content analysis,

andobservation)andwasratedveryhighinthe

research validity criteria of credibility, transferabil-

ity, dependability, and confirmability. Similarly,

Papaoikonomou et al. (2012) used focus groups,

interviews, observation, and document analysis to

explore the initial motives that drive consumers to

join ethical consumer groups, to understand the

meanings consumers attach to their participation

in ethical groups, and analyze their experience

after.

Using an interview technique with ethics officers,

Hoffman et al. (2008) uncovered that the current sys-

tem in which ethics officers report to management

must be changed for ethics officers to effectively per-

form their jobs. Furthermore, Koning & Waistell

(2012) discovered, by using a narrative method, that

ethical leadership is constructed in identity talk as

business leaders actively narrate aspirational identi-

ties. Going deeper, business leaders conversationally

critique their old identities and construct their new

aspirational identities as ethical leaders. As illus-

trated by the 121 examples in our sample pool, quali-

tative research designs work within the framework

of studying human experience which is, by its nature,

complex.

As the methodological contestation diminishes for

qualitative research in business (and other fields such

as nursing, cultural studies, education, sociology,

and anthropology), methodological sophistication

will grow (Lincoln & Denzin, 2005). In support of

this view, much of the analyses and reviews in the

recent literature have called for an effort to expand

ethical decision-making research in areas that would

benefit from a qualitative research design. In Craft’s

(2013b) review, several authors in the sample called

for more study into cultural differences and collectiv-

istic perspectives (Ma, 2009), organizational factors

that create a ‘decision spiral’ (Armstrong et al., 2004:

369) toward unethical decisions, the impact of ethical

culture on perceived organizational consensus

(Sweeney & Costello, 2009), and ethical perception

(Ho, 2010). Lehnert et al. (2015) note that the use of

qualitative research can facilitate, grow, and develop

the theory behind research. They highlight the

importance of understanding the underlying theoret-

ical components informing how we engage in ethical

decision making.

Ethical decision making, at its very core, is perso-

nal. It may be enacted in an organizational setting,

but is, in essence, an individual struggle. Qualitative

research methods are uniquely designed to uncover

deep meaning and experience and, as such, are

quickly becoming an integral part of research within

this field (Campbell & Cowton, 2015). As we found

in our pool of qualitative research, employing a qual-

itative research design to justify further investiga-

tion, or as a standalone research method, can further

enhance findings in this subject area. Because the

Business Ethics: A European Review

Volume 25 Number 4 October 2016

V

C2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd500