Abstract

The primary pedagogical technique used in the teaching of business ethics in the university setting is the "case discussion method," which originated at the Harvard Business School and is often referred to as the "Harvard Case Method." The case discussion method is a successful pedagogical technique for a wide spectrum of topics and courses in the business school. I argue, however, that the case discussion method is not appropriate as the primary pedagogical method for the teaching of business ethics. It ignores the findings of philosophy and moral psychology, does not take advantage of more modern teaching strategies, and is not in harmony with the stated goals and objectives of business ethics courses and ethics in general. Its continued use as the primary pedagogical device is misleading and on certain grounds may even be considered unethical. The case discussion method is so reductionistic that, although it makes for good classroom management and is in keeping with the traditional, familiar style of business school pedagogy, it grossly misrepresents the real nature of moral decision making. The "normal" case method should be minimally used in favor of a more comprehensive and enriched mixture of pedagogical methods, strategies, techniques, and tactics. The continued use of the case discussion method is a refusal of business school educators and philosophers, to come to grips with certain uncomfortable features of ethical discourse: ambiguity, affective versus "rational" components, irresolvable conflicts in philosophical theories, complexities of moral discourse, and feminist concerns