Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Ethical Sensibilities for Practicing Care in Management and Organization Research

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Management and organization researchers are being called to conduct research that is more caring, yet the concept of care and how to practice it within the profession is undertheorized. Adopting a feminist epistemology and methodology, we develop the concept of care by weaving the personal, ethical, and political into the research process. First, we reflect critically on how aspects of care—attentiveness, responsibility, competence, and responsiveness (Tronto, Moral boundaries: a political argument for an ethic of care, Routledge, 1993; Tronto, Caring democracy: markets, equality, and justice, New York University Press, 2013)—unfolded in our personal research experiences, and secondly, we conduct a review of articles published in management and organization studies and analyse expressed or concealed conceptions of care in scholars’ accounts of research purpose and ethics. We find three ethical sensibilities at the heart of enacting care: encountering the ‘other’, interpreting roles and responsibilities, and deliberating needs and resources. We contribute to a feminist research ethics by highlighting issues related to care that are concealed in dominant ethos guiding management and organization research. Further, we develop methodological insights for implementing an ethic of care as an alternative ethical standpoint in business research ethics. Finally, we provide suggestions for how to embed more care within research ethics practices in academic institutions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Graph 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Compassion concerns the specific instance of noticing, feeling, and reacting to the pain of another person (Kanov et al., 2004), and as a result, compassion is not sufficient to ensure broader concern (care) for the other person. For instance, compassionate research methods have been defined by Hansen and Trank (2016, p. 356) as the “dual purpose of alleviating suffering in the immediate context and informing theory”. As Fotaki emphasizes, “compassion that is a necessary basis for ethical foundation of care might arise from bodily affects and emotions but as an individual pre-moral sentiment on its own it cannot ensure responsive care” (Fotaki, 2015, p. 200). This comment points at the understanding of care as a practice and the difficulties that arise for providing ‘responsive care’.

References

  • Adler, N. J., & Hansen, H. (2012). Daring to care: Scholarship that supports the courage of our convictions. Journal of Management Inquiry, 21(2), 128–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aguinis, H., Cummings, C., Ramani, R. S., & Cummings, T. G. (2020). “An A is an A”: The new bottom line for valuing academic research. Academy of Management Perspectives, 34(1), 135–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amis, J. M., & Silk, M. L. (2008). The philosophy and politics of quality in qualitative organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 11(3), 456–480.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anteby, M. (2013). Relaxing the taboo on telling our own stories: Upholding professional distance and personal involvement. Organization Science, 24(4), 1277–1290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Antoni, A., & Beer, H. A. (2019). Research impact as care. Re-conceptualizing research impact from an ethics of care perspective. In M. Fotaki, G. Islam, & A. Antoni (Eds.), Business ethics and care in organizations (pp. 172–186). Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Antoni, A., Reinecke, J., & Fotaki, M. (2020). Caring or not caring for coworkers? An empirical exploration of the dilemma of care allocation in the workplace. Business Ethics Quarterly, 30(4), 447–485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banks, G. C., Pollack, J. M., Bochantin, J. E., Kirkman, B. L., Whelpley, C. E., & O’Boyle, E. H. (2016). Management’s science–practice gap: A grand challenge for all stakeholders. Academy of Management Journal, 59(6), 2205–2231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bapuji, H., Patel, C., Ertug, G., & Allen, D. G. (2020). Corona crisis and inequality: Why management research needs a societal turn. SAGE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnes, M. (2012). Care in everyday life: An ethic of care in practice. Policy Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Beacham, J. (2018). Organising food differently: Towards a more-than-human ethics of care for the Anthropocene. Organization, 25(4), 533–549.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell, E., & Bryman, A. (2007). The ethics of management research: An exploratory content analysis. British Journal of Management, 18(1), 63–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell, E., Meriläinen, S., Taylor, S., & Tienari, J. (2020). Dangerous knowledge: The political, personal, and epistemological promise of feminist research in management and organization studies. International Journal of Management Reviews, 22(2), 177–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell, E., & Willmott, H. (2020). Ethics, politics and embodied imagination in crafting scientific knowledge. Human Relations, 73(10), 1366–1387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell, E., & Wray-Bliss, E. (2009). Research ethics: Regulations and responsibilities. In D. A. Buchanan & A. Bryman (Eds.), Organizational research methods (pp. 516–531). Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bettis, R. A. (2012). The search for asterisks: Compromised statistical tests and flawed theories. Strategic Management Journal, 33(1), 108–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birkinshaw, J., Lecuona, R., & Barwise, P. (2016). The relevance gap in business school research: Which academic papers are cited in managerial bridge journals? Academy of Management Learning & Education, 15(4), 686–702.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brewis, J. (2014). The ethics of researching friends: On convenience sampling in qualitative management and organization studies. British Journal of Management, 25(4), 849–862.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan, D. A., & Bryman, A. (2007). Contextualizing methods choice in organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 10(3), 483–501.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burns, D., Hyde, P., Killett, A., Poland, F., & Gray, R. (2014). Participatory organizational research: Examining voice in the co-production of knowledge. British Journal of Management, 25(1), 133–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caduff, C. (2019). Hot chocolate. Critical Inquiry, 45(3), 787–803.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chelli, M., & Cunliffe, A. L. (2022). Anticipating and addressing the politicization of research. Organizational Research Methods, 25(1), 88–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chowdhury, R. (2017). Rana Plaza fieldwork and academic anxiety: Some reflections. Journal of Management Studies, 54(7), 1111–1117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christians, C. G. (2005). Ethics and politics in qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 139–164). Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Claus, L., de Rond, M., Howard-Grenville, J., & Lodge, J. (2019). When fieldwork hurts: On the lived experience of conducting research in unsettling contexts. In J. Mair, J. Amis, & T. Zilber (Eds.), The production of managerial knowledge and organizational theory: New approaches to writing, producing and consuming theory (Vol. 59, pp. 157–172). Emerald Publishing Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clegg, S., Kornberger, M., & Rhodes, C. (2007). Business ethics as practice. British Journal of Management, 18(2), 107–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cole, C. E. (2013). Stories from the lived and living fieldwork process. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal, 8(1), 50–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collins, H., & Wray-Bliss, E. (2005). Discriminating ethics. Human Relations, 58(6), 799–824.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corradi, G., Gherardi, S., & Verzelloni, L. (2010). Through the practice lens: Where is the bandwagon of practice-based studies heading? Management Learning, 41(3), 265–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cronqvist, A., Theorell, T., Burns, T., & Lützén, K. (2004). Caring about-caring for: Moral obligations and work responsibilities in intensive care nursing. Nursing Ethics, 11(1), 63–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cunliffe, A. (2018). Wayfaring: A scholarship of possibilities or let’s not get drunk on abstraction. Management, 21(4), 1429–1439.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cunliffe, A., & Alcadipani, R. (2016). The politics of access in fieldwork: Immersion, backstage dramas, and deception. Organizational Research Methods, 19(4), 535–561.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cunliffe, A., & Karunanayake, G. (2013). Working within hyphen-spaces in ethnographic research: Implications for research identities and practice. Organizational Research Methods, 16(3), 364–392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cunliffe, A., & Pavlovich, K. (2022). Making our work matter: From spectator to engagement. Academy of Management Perspectives, 36(3), 879–895.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Rond, M. (2012). Soldier, surgeon, photographer, fly: Fieldwork beyond the comfort zone. Strategic Organization, 10(3), 256–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Rond, M. (2017). Doctors at war: Life and death in a field hospital. Cornell University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Delbridge, R. (2014). Promising futures: CMS, post-disciplinarity, and the new public social science. Journal of Management Studies, 51(1), 95–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Devereux, G. (1967). From anxiety to method in the behavioral sciences. Mounton & Co and Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Du Gay, P. (2000). In praise of bureaucracy: Weber, organization, ethics. Sage Publications.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Dutton, J., & Morhart, F. (2010). Heartwarming as the other side of heartbreaking experiences in research. Journal of Management Inquiry, 19(4), 342–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M., Graebner, M. E., & Sonenshein, S. (2016). Grand challenges and inductive methods: Rigor without rigor mortis. Academy of Management Journal, 59(4), 1113–1123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ekman, S. (2017). A history of vocational ethics and professional identity: How organization scholars navigate academic value spheres. Human Relations, 70(4), 461–487.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elley-Brown, M. J., & Pringle, J. K. (2019). Sorge, Heideggerian ethic of care: Creating more caring organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 168, 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Empson, L. (2013). My affair with the “other”: Identity journeys across the research-practice divide. Journal of Management Inquiry, 22(2), 229–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etzion, D., & Gehman, J. (2019). Going public: Debating matters of concern as an imperative for management scholars. Academy of Management Review, 44, 480–492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ezzamel, M., & Willmott, H. (2014). Registering ‘the ethical’ in organization theory formation: Towards the disclosure of an ‘invisible force.’ Organization Studies, 35(7), 1013–1039.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fainshmidt, S., Andrews, D. S., Gaur, A., & Schotter, A. (2021). Recalibrating management research for the post-COVID-19 scientific enterprise. Journal of Management Studies, 58(5), 1416.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Federici, S. (2004). Caliban and the witch. Autonomedia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferguson, K. E. (1984). The feminist case against bureaucracy. Temple University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, B., & Tronto, J. C. (1990). Towards a feminist theory of caring. In E. K. Abel & M. K. Nelson (Eds.), Circles of care: Work and identity in women’s lives (p. 326). State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fotaki, M. (2015). Why and how is compassion necessary to provide good quality healthcare? International Journal of Health Policy and Management, 4(4), 199.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Gabriel, Y. (2009). Reconciling an ethic of care with critical management pedagogy. Management Learning, 40(4), 379–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • George, G., Howard-Grenville, J., Joshi, A., & Tihanyi, L. (2016). Understanding and tackling societal grand challenges through management research. Academy of Management Journal, 59(6), 1880–1895.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • George, J. (2014). Compassion and capitalism: Implications for organizational studies. Journal of Management, 40(1), 5–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gherardi, S., & Rodeschini, G. (2016). Caring as a collective knowledgeable doing: About concern and being concerned. Management Learning, 47(3), 266–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghoshal, S. (2005). Bad management theories are destroying good management practices. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4(1), 75–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giacalone, R. A., & Rosenfeld, P. (1987). Justifications and procedures for implementing institutional review boards in business organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 6(5), 399–411.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice: Psychological theory and women’s development. Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilmore, S., & Kenny, K. (2015). Work-worlds colliding: Self-reflexivity, power and emotion in organizational ethnography. Human Relations, 68(1), 55–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Górska, A. M., Kulicka, K., Staniszewska, Z., & Dobija, D. (2021). Deepening inequalities: What did COVID-19 reveal about the gendered nature of academic work? Gender, Work & Organization, 28(4), 1546–1561.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, M. (2016). Approving or improving research ethics in management journals. Journal of Business Ethics, 137(3), 507–520.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamington, M. (2019). Integrating care ethics and design thinking. Journal of Business Ethics, 155(1), 91–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hammersley, M., & Atkinson, P. (2007). Ethnography: Principles in practice (3rd ed.). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, H., & Trank, C. Q. (2016). This is going to hurt: Compassionate research methods. Organizational Research Methods, 19(3), 352–375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harding, N. (2017). Feminist methodologies. In C. Cassell, A. Cunliffe, & G. Grandy (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative business and management research methods (pp. 138–153). Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, W. S., & Arora, N. K. (2021). Educating incarcerated professionals: Challenges and lessons from an extreme PhD context. Journal of Management Inquiry, 30(4), 461–467.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hay, J. (2019). ‘Care is not a dirty word!’ Enacting an ethic of care in social work practice. European Journal of Social Work, 22(3), 365–375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Held, V. (2006). The ethics of care: Personal, political, and global. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hibbert, P., Sillince, J., Diefenbach, T., & Cunliffe, A. (2014). Relationally reflexive practice: A generative approach to theory development in qualitative research. Organizational Research Methods, 17(3), 278–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Honig, B., Lampel, J., Siegel, D., & Drnevich, P. (2014). Ethics in the production and dissemination of management research: Institutional failure or individual fallibility? Journal of Management Studies, 51(1), 118–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Honig, B., Lampel, J., Siegel, D., & Drnevich, P. (2017). Special section on ethics in management research: Norms, identity, and community in the 21st century. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 16(1), 84–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howard-Grenville, J. (2021). Caring, courage and curiosity: Reflections on our roles as scholars in organizing for a sustainable future. Organization Theory, 2(1), 263178772199114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jeanes, E. (2017). Are we ethical? Approaches to ethics in management and organisation research. Organization, 24(2), 174–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Josselson, R. (2007). The ethical attitude in narrative research: Principles and practicalities. In D. J. Clandinin (Ed.), Handbook of narrative inquiry: Mapping a methodology (pp. 537–566). Sage Publications.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kanov, J. M., Maitlis, S., Worline, M. C., Dutton, J. E., Frost, P. J., & Lilius, J. M. (2004). Compassion in organizational life. American Behavioral Scientist, 47(6), 808–827.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kjelsvik, M., Sekse, R. J. T., Moi, A. L., Aasen, E. M., Nortvedt, P., & Gjengedal, E. (2019). Beyond autonomy and care: Experiences of ambivalent abortion seekers. Nursing Ethics, 26(7–8), 2135–2146.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Knights, D., & Clarke, C. A. (2014). It’s a bittersweet symphony, this life: Fragile academic selves and insecure identities at work. Organization Studies, 35(3), 335–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kump, B. (2022). No need to hide: Acknowledging the researcher’s intuition in empirical organizational research. Human Relations, 75(4), 635–654.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Langley, A., & Klag, M. (2019). Being where? Navigating the involvement paradox in qualitative research accounts. Organizational Research Methods, 22(2), 515–538.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, T. B., & Maitlis, S. (2012). Care and possibility: Enacting an ethic of care through narrative practice. Academy of Management Review, 37(4), 641–663.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Learmonth, M., Lockett, A., & Dowd, K. (2012). Promoting scholarship that matters: The uselessness of useful research and the usefulness of useless research. British Journal of Management, 23(1), 35–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linder, C., & Farahbakhsh, S. (2020). Unfolding the black box of questionable research practices: Where is the line between acceptable and unacceptable practices? Business Ethics Quarterly, 30(3), 335–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Locke, K., Golden-Biddle, K., & Feldman, M. S. (2008). Making doubt generative: Rethinking the role of doubt in the research process. Organization Science, 19(6), 907–918.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michailova, S., Piekkari, R., Plakoyiannaki, E., Ritvala, T., Mihailova, I., & Salmi, A. (2014). Breaking the silence about exiting fieldwork: A relational approach and its implications for theorizing. Academy of Management Review, 39(2), 138–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nicholson, J., & Kurucz, E. (2019). Relational leadership for sustainability: Building an ethical framework from the moral theory of ‘ethics of care.’ Journal of Business Ethics, 156(1), 25–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noddings, N. (2003). Caring: A feminine approach to ethics & moral education (2nd ed.). University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Boyle, E. H., Jr., Banks, G. C., & Gonzalez-Mulé, E. (2017). The chrysalis effect: How ugly initial results metamorphosize into beautiful articles. Journal of Management, 43(2), 376–399.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ortiz Casillas, S. (2021). Caring as an organizing principle: Reflections on ethnography of and as care. Journal of Management Studies, 58(4), 1146–1153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parlak, S., Celebi Cakiroglu, O., & Oksuz Gul, F. (2021). Gender roles during COVID-19 pandemic: The experiences of Turkish female academics. Gender, Work & Organization, 28, 461–483.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peticca-Harris, A., deGama, N., & Elias, S. R. (2016). A dynamic process model for finding informants and gaining access in qualitative research. Organizational Research Methods, 19(3), 376–401. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428116629218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perez, T. S. (2019). In support of situated ethics: Ways of building trust with stigmatised ‘waste pickers’ in Cape Town. Qualitative Research, 19(2), 148–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, M. (2019). “Daring to care”: Challenging corporate environmentalism. Journal of Business Ethics, 156(4), 1151–1164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes, C., & Carlsen, A. (2018). The teaching of the other: Ethical vulnerability and generous reciprocity in the research process. Human Relations, 71(10), 1295–1318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roulet, T. J., Gill, M. J., Stenger, S., & Gill, D. J. (2017). Reconsidering the value of covert research: The role of ambiguous consent in participant observation. Organizational Research Methods, 20(3), 487–517.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rynes, S. L., Bartunek, J. M., Dutton, J. E., & Margolis, J. D. (2012). Care and compassion through and organizational lens: Opening up new possibilities. Academy of Management Review, 37(4), 503–523.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sampson, H., Bloor, M., & Fincham, B. (2008). A price worth paying? Considering the ‘cost’ of reflexive research methods and the influence of feminist ways of ‘doing.’ Sociology The Journal of the British Sociological Association, 42(5), 919–933.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwarz, G. M., Cummings, C., & Cummings, T. G. (2017). Devolution of researcher care in organization studies and the moderation of organizational knowledge. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 16(1), 70–83. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2014.0167

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sevenhuijsen, S. (1998). Citizenship and the ethics of care: Feminist considerations on justice, morality and politics. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sevenhuijsen, S. (2003). The place of care: The Relevance of the feminist ethic of care for social policy. Feminist Theory, 4(2), 179–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharma, G., & Bansal, P. (2020a). Cocreating rigorous and relevant knowledge. Academy of Management Journal, 63(2), 386–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharma, G., & Bansal, P. (2020b). Partnering up: Including managers as research partners in systematic reviews. Organizational Research Methods, 26, 262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, D., McMaster, R., & Newholm, T. (2016). Care and commitment in ethical consumption: An exploration of the ‘attitude–behaviour gap.’ Journal of Business Ethics, 136(2), 251–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simola, S. (2012). Exploring “embodied care” in relation to social sustainability. Journal of Business Ethics, 107(4), 473–484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simola, S. (2015). Understanding moral courage through a feminist and developmental ethic of care. Journal of Business Ethics, 130(1), 29–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Starbuck, W. H. (2016). 60th anniversary essay: How journals could improve research practices in social science. Administrative Science Quarterly, 61(2), 165–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thorpe, A. S. (2014). Doing the right thing or doing the thing right: Implications of participant withdrawal. Organizational Research Methods, 17(3), 255–277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Traianou, A. (2014). The centrality of ethics in qualitative research. In P. Leavy (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of qualitative research (pp. 62–77). Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tronto, J. (1993). Moral boundaries: A political argument for an ethic of care. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tronto, J. (2010). Creating caring institutions: Politics, plurality, and purpose. Ethics and Social Welfare, 4(2), 158–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tronto, J. (2013). Caring democracy: Markets, equality, and justice. New York University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsui, A. S. (2013). 2012 Presidential address—On compassion in scholarship: Why should we care? Academy of Management Review, 38(2), 167–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venkatesh, V., Shaw, J. D., Sykes, T. A., Wamba, S. F., & Macharia, M. (2017). Networks, technology, and entrepreneurship: A field quasi-experiment among women in rural India. Academy of Management Journal, 60(5), 1709–1740.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallace, M., & Sheldon, N. (2015). Business research ethics: Participant observer perspectives. Journal of Business Ethics, 128(2), 267–277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, J. P., Weber, K., & Margolis, J. D. (2003). Social issues and management: Our lost cause found. Journal of Management, 29(6), 859–881.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weiner-Levy, N. (2009). When the hegemony studies the minority—An Israeli Jewish researcher studies Druze women: Transformations of power, alienation, and affinity in the field. Qualitative Inquiry, 15(4), 721–739.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weiskopf, R., & Willmott, H. (2013). Ethics as critical practice: The “Pentagon Papers”, deciding responsibly, truth-telling, and the unsettling of organizational morality. Organization Studies, 34(4), 469–493.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whyte, W. F. (1979). On making the most of participant observation. The American Sociologist, 14(1), 56–66.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Wickert, C., Post, C., Doh, J. P., Prescott, J. E., & Prencipe, A. (2021). Management research that makes a difference: Broadening the meaning of impact. Journal of Management Studies, 58(2), 297–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, F. (2001). In and beyond New Labour: Towards a new political ethics of care. Critical Social Policy, 21(4), 467–493.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, A. L., & Wright, C. (2019). When research and personal lifeworlds collide. In A. L. Wright & C. Wright (Eds.), The production of managerial knowledge and organizational theory: New approaches to writing, producing and consuming theory (Vol. 59, pp. 255–274). Emerald Publishing Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, A. (2018). Latest scientific discovery drops Bombshell—‘Mother Nature’ is biologically male—Ruminations on the value of care as sustainable organizational practice. Gender, Work & Organization, 25(3), 294–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to acknowledge the assistance of the insightful suggestions of the section editor, Charlotte Karam, as well as the two anonymous reviewers. We also would like to thank our colleagues who helped develop and refine earlier versions of this article, in particular the participants of the 2019 Academy of Management Conference (Critical Management Studies division), and the members of the Grenoble Ecole de Management research community.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Grenoble Ecole de Management, Grenoble, France

    Anne Antoni

  2. Warwick Business School, Coventry, UK

    Haley Beer

Authors
  1. Anne Antoni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Haley Beer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anne Antoni.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

No potential conflict of interest was identified.

Research Involving Human Participants and/or Animals

Not applicable.

Informed Consent

Not applicable.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 40 KB)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Antoni, A., Beer, H. Ethical Sensibilities for Practicing Care in Management and Organization Research. J Bus Ethics 190, 279–294 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-023-05419-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-023-05419-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation