IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/buetqu/v11y2001i02p237-259_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Casuistry and the Business Case Method

Author

Listed:
  • Calkins, Martin

Abstract

This article argues for the compatibility of casuistry and the business case method. It describes the salient features of casuistry and the case method, shows how the two methods are similar yet different, and suggests how elements of casuistry might benefit the use of the case method in management education. Toward these ends, it shows how casuistry and the case method are both inductive and practical methods of reasoning focussed on single settings and real-life situations and how both methods stress that real-life decision making is not the exclusive domain of experts. It also shows how casuistry and the case method are not identical processes but have different purposes and emphasize order and problem-resolution differently. In the end, Casuistry and the Business Case Method suggests that, despite their differences, casuistry and the case method might be brought together to benefit business management and the field of business ethics.

Suggested Citation

  • Calkins, Martin, 2001. "Casuistry and the Business Case Method," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 11(2), pages 237-259, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:buetqu:v:11:y:2001:i:02:p:237-259_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1052150X00001342/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Yotam Lurie & Robert Albin, 2007. "Moral Dilemmas in Business Ethics: From Decision Procedures to Edifying Perspectives," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 71(2), pages 195-207, March.
    2. Knut Ims & Ove Jakobsen, 2006. "Cooperation and Competition in the Context of Organic and Mechanic Worldviews – A Theoretical and Case based Discussion," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 66(1), pages 19-32, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:cup:buetqu:v:11:y:2001:i:02:p:237-259_00. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/beq .

    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.