Abstract
Although ethical decision-making studies are growing within the realm of organizations, empirical research on this topic is still dominated by a positivist, quantitative, and descriptive methodological approach. At the same time, specialized literature shows that there is a sound call for methodological renovation within the organizational ethical decision-making field toward a richer manner of researching that, in turn, could go deeper into the explanation of the own decisional phenomenon itself. This paper aims to discuss how the organizational ethical decision-making empirical research may be alternatively conducted through a qualitative methodology, capable of probing into peoples’ reasons behind their decisions. To do so, it retrieves and reviews the method used by James Waters, Frederick Bird, and Peter Chant (Waters in J. Bus. Ethics 5: 373–384, 1986) in their pioneering study of the morality in everyday managerial work, exploring both the strengths and weaknesses of that promising qualitative research approach. The paper concludes with some recommendations and suggestions about how Waters, Bird, and Chant’s original method could be improved for future research, in order to help to advance the understanding of the organizational ethical decision-making phenomenon and, perhaps, contribute toward building fresh theory.