In this article, we started with the assumption that the constructive error, while hypothesis about a certain knowledge, is a provisional form of knowledge, which calls into question the idea that the hit occurs when there is exact correspondence with the response provided by the educator, which often imposes barriers to reflection and creativity. As a counterpoint, we sought to analyze how cases of failure and its different forms of application can contribute to a different formative experience of students. Then we used the methodology of construction of teaching cases, that were based on empirical research with key informants from organizations investigated, supplemented by secondary data. In a second step, the cases developed were applied in different situations of teaching and learning, and with these pedagogical semi-experiments were not only evaluated the effectiveness of the cases of failure compared to success stories, as well as the various applications thereof. The semi-experiments pointed to the fact that the following variables can influence the results obtained using the method: how the case is written; the method of application (restrictive or not restrictive); the course in which the case is applied; previous contact or knowledge of the main theoretical concepts about the topic; and knowledge of practices and methods of case studies. Thus, it was concluded that the use of case method in Management education is more complex than is generally considered, especially if the intention is really to encourage critical thinking. For further research we recommend performing further experiments with methods of application described a case study in order to further explore the results obtained with nor restrictive method, particularly as regards the insertion of liberator and constructive error as way to the critical pedagogy in Management education.
Case studies; Management education; Critical pedagogy; Constructive error; Failure cases