Proponents of a popular view of how individuals respond to ethical issues at work claim that individuals use deliberate and extensive moral reasoning under conditions that ignore equivocality and uncertainty. I discuss the limitations of these “rationalist approaches” and reconsider their empirical support using an alternative explanation from social psychological and sensemaking perspectives. I then introduce a new theoretical model composed of issue construction, intuitive judgment, and post hoc explanation and justification. I discuss the implications for management theory, methods, and practice.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Scott Sonenshein (2007) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: