Are the major results identified and summarized?
The researchers’ results are identified, summarized and organized logically. The results for both the leader’s perspective and followers’ perspective were easy to locate.
3/3
Are the results related to the literature?
The authors compare their results to previous research and provide a personal reflection on their findings. Comparison to other literature is limited because there has not been a lot of research conducted on emotional intelligence and servant leadership at the time the article was published.
2/3
Are appropriate implications of the results for practice identified and justified?
The authors provide suggestions that logically follow from their study while admitting the limitations. They insist organizations could use the results in the selection and development of servant leaders.
3/3
Is there a thoughtful critique of the study’s limitations?
Thea authors identified and acknowledged the following limitations of their study: sample size, common bias, and the type of organization surveyed. A small number of followers were surveyed per leader, and the study only interviewed leaders in the civic field which the researchers note behave differently than those in the private sector.
3/3
Are suitable suggestions for future research provided?
Yes. The authors provide a clear direction for future research which addresses the limitations of their study. First, increase the number of followers per leader surveyed. Second, conduct a similar investigation in the private sector.
3/3
References
Barbuto, J. E., Gottfredson, R. K., & Searle, T. P. (2014). An examination of emotional intelligence as an antecedent of servant leadership. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 21(3), 315-323.