Moral Reasoning at Work: Rethinking Ethics in Organizations
Open accessAbstract
This open access book offers a fresh perspective on how to live with moral dilemmas in organizations using ethics and moral psychology research. It argues that decision-makers must go beyond compliance and traditional approaches to ethics to prepare for moral dilemmas.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The author introduced relational moral luck to focus on collective aspects of decision-making and responses to moral challenges and dilemmas.
“In a previous study, I have introduced the concept of relational moral luck to focus on collective aspects of decision-making and responses to moral challenges and dilemmas (Kvalnes, 2019, p. 35).”
From Moral Luck (2026) · cites this paper as Kvalnes, 2019
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
Cited by 46
- Authors
- Kvalnes, Ø.
- Affiliations
- BI Norwegian Business School (NO)
- Corresponding author
- Kvalnes, Øyvind
- Venue
- Springer eBooks
- Publisher
- Springer International Publishing
- Published
- 2019
- OpenAlex
- W4241622045
- Cited by
- 46
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 7
- FWCI
- 4.53
- Type
- book
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Springer eBooks (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Directory of Open access Books (OAPEN Foundation) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- BI Norwegian Business School
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Ethics in Business and Education
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Philosophical Ethics and Theory
- Keywords
- moral reasoning, ethical dilemmas, organizational ethics, moral psychology, ethical decision-making, compliance, workplace ethics
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
