Abstract
Rigorous empirical investigation in business ethics presumes a careful elaboration and alignment of, and justification for, the nominated ontological, epistemological and methodological standpoints. A range of research paradigms has developed since the ground breaking work of Burrell and Morgan (1979) in Sociological paradigms and organisational analysis but none cater for Neo-Aristotelian virtue ethics (NAVE) scholarship. All these research paradigms assume that reality is mind dependent or mind independent and the latter excludes the metaphysical. There is no room for a study based on NAVE, which assumes that the metaphysical reality of human nature is an intrinsic part of the subjective experience and practice of virtue. The authors suggest that developments in the history of philosophical thought have led to this fragmented perception of reality. An example of a study based on NAVE is used to highlight the limitations of existing research paradigms. The authors propose an additional paradigm to accommodate NAVE scholarship. This paradigm assumes an interconnected continuum of mind independent metaphysical, physical and social dimensions, which shapes and is shaped by the person’s inner world.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Annas, J. (1993). The morality of happiness. Oxford University Press.
Annas, J. (2007). Virtue ethics. In D. Copp (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of ethical theory. Oxford University Press.
Anscombe, E. (1958). Modern moral philosophy. Philosophy, 33(124), 1–19.
Aquinas, T. (2011). Quaestiones disputatae de veritate. Fundación Tomás de Aquino quoad hanc editionem. http://www.corpusthomisticum.org/qdv02.html
Ardalan, K. (2009). Globalization and culture: Four paradigmatic views. International Journal of Social Economics, 36(5), 513–534. https://doi.org/10.1108/03068290910954013
Arjoon, S. (2005). Corporate governance: An ethical perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 61(4), 343–352. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-005-7888-5
Arksey, H., & Knight, P. (1999). Interviewing for social scientists: An introductory resource with examples. Sage.
Bhuyan, N. (2007). The role of character in ethical decisionmaking. Journal of Value Inquiry, 41(1), 45–57. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10790-007-9063-y
Bragues, G. (2008). The ancients against the moderns: Focusing on the character of corporate leaders. Journal of Business Ethics, 78(3), 373–387. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-006-9342-8
Brand, V. (2009). Empirical business ethics research and paradigm analysis. Journal of Business Ethics, 86(4), 429–449. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-008-9856-3
Bryce, J., & Fraser, J. (2013). “It's common sense that it's wrong”: Young people's perceptions and experiences of cyberbullying. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, Social Networking, 16(11), 783–787. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2012.0275
Burrell, G., & Morgan, G. (1979). Sociological paradigms and organisational analysis. Ashgate.
Crane, A. (1999). Are you ethical? Please tick yes or no on researching ethics in business organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 20(3), 237–248. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005817414241
Creswell, J. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. SAGE.
Crotty, M. (1998). The foundations of social research: Meaning and perspective in the research process. Sage.
Eatough, V., & Smith, J. (2008). Interpretative phenomenological analysis. In C. Willig & W. Stainton-Rogers (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research in psychology (pp. 193–211). SAGE.
Ferrero, I., & Sison, A. (2014). A quantitative analysis of authors, schools and themes in virtue ethics articles in business ethics and management journals (1980–2011). Business Ethics: A European Review, 23(4), 375–400. https://doi.org/10.1111/beer.12057
Filstead, W. (1979). Qualitative methods: A needed perspective in evaluation research. In T. Cook & C. Reichardt (Eds.), Qualitative quantitative methods in evaluation research (pp. 33-48). SAGE Publications.
Grant, P. (2013). Virtue ethics and corporate governance. University of Waikato.
Gronbacher, G. (1998). The need for economic personalism. Journal of Markets and Morality, 1(1).
Guba, E., & Lincoln, Y. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (Vol. 2, pp. 163–194). SAGE.
Hammersley, M. (2019). From positivism to post-positivism: Progress or digression? Teoria Polityki (3), 175–188. https://doi.org/10.4467/25440845tp.19.009.10292.
Hatfield, G. (2018). Rene descartes. In E. Zalta (Ed.), Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Stanford University.
Hursthouse, R. (1999). On virtue ethics. Oxford University Press.
Kakkuri-Knuuttila, M.-L., Lukka, K., Kuorikoski, J., & Society. (2008). Straddling between paradigms: A naturalistic philosophical case study on interpretive research in management accounting. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 33(2–3), 267–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2006.12.003
Kivunja, C., & Kuyini, A. (2017). Understanding and applying research paradigms in educational contexts. International Journal of Higher Education, 6(5), 26–41. https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v6n5p26
Klein, S. (1998). Emotions and practical reasoning. Business and Professional Ethics Journal, 17(3), 3–29. https://doi.org/10.5840/bpej19981737
Klima, G. (2017). The medieval problem of universals. In E. Zalta (Ed.), Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Stanford University.
Kuppermann, J. (1988). Character and ethical theory. Midwest Studies in Philosophy, 13(1), 115–125. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4975.1988.tb00116.x
Laverty, S. (2003). Hermeneutic phenomenology and phenomenology: A comparison of historical and methodological considerations. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 2(3), 21–35. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690300200303
Lord, C. (1984). The politics (Aristotle). Chicago.
MacIntyre, A. (2013). After virtue. A&C Black.
Markie, P. (2017). Rationalism vs empiricism. In E. Zalta (Ed.), Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Stanford University.
Mele, D. (2005). Ethical education in accounting: Integrating rules, values and virtues. Journal of Business Ethics, 57(1), 97–109. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-004-3829-y
Mele, D. (2009). Integrating personalism into virtue-based business ethics: The personalist and the common good principles. Journal of Business Ethics, 88(1), 227–244. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-009-0108-y
Ponterotto, J. (2005). Qualitative research in counseling psychology: A primer on research paradigms and philosophy of science. Journal of counseling psychology, 52(2), 126. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.52.2.126
Reid, K., Flowers, P., & Larkin, M. (2005). Exploring lived experience. The Psychologist, 18(1), 20-23.
Rhonheimer, M. (2008). The perspective of the acting person: Essays in the renewal of Thomistic moral philosophy. Catholic University of America Press.
Rossouw, G. (2001). Research in business ethics. Koers-Bulletin for Christian Scholarship, 66(3), 197–212. https://doi.org/10.4102/koers.v66i3.396
Seidman, S., & Zager, J. (1991). A study of coping behaviours and teacher burnout. Work & Stress, 5(3), 205–216. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678379108257019
Shannon, D., Walsh, J., & Lennon, T. (2018). Continental rationalism. In E. Zalta (Ed.), Stanford encylopedia of philosophy. Stanford University.
Solomon, R. (1992). Corporate roles, personal virtues: An Aristotelian approach to business ethics. Business Ethics Quarterly, 2(3), 317–339. https://doi.org/10.2307/3857536
Taylor, M., & Callahan, J. (2005). Bringing creativity into being: Underlying assumptions that influence methods of studying organizational creativity. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 7(2), 247–270. https://doi.org/10.1177/1523422305274529
Thomson, J. (1976). The Nichomachean ethics. Penguin Classics.
Torres, M. (1997). Survey of theories employed in business ethics. IESE.
Whetstone, J. (2001). How virtue fits within business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 33(2), 101–114. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1017554318867
Whewell, W. (2017). Comte and positivism. Journal of Epistemology Philosophy of Science, 54(4), 209–224. https://doi.org/10.5840/eps201754484
Zaidi, Z., & Larsen, D. (2018). Commentary: Paradigms, axiology, and praxeology in medical education research. Academic Medicine, 93(11S), S1–S7. https://doi.org/10.1097/acm.0000000000002384
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Grant, P., McGhee, P. (2022). Empirical Research in Virtue Ethics: In Search of a Paradigm. In: Faldetta, G., Mollona, E., Pellegrini, M.M. (eds) Philosophy and Business Ethics. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-97106-9_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-97106-9_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-97105-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-97106-9
eBook Packages: Business and ManagementBusiness and Management (R0)