Hunter, E.M., Neubert, M. J., Perry. S.J., Witt, L.A., Penny, L.M., & Weinberger, E. (2013). Servant leaders inspire servant followers: Antecedents and outcomes for employees and the organization. Leadership Quarterly, 24(2), 316-331.
Is the study’s purpose clearly specified?
No. The purpose is defined in the abstract and again later in the discussion section but not in the introduction. One can piece it together in the introduction, but it is not as clear and concise as it ought to be.
1/3
Is the focus of the study appropriate?
Yes, the researchers identify independent, dependent, and control variables. However, no confounding variables were defined or discussed.
2/3
Is the overall intent of the study appropriate?
The ten hypothesis explained the intent.
2/3
Are the participants and the sites appropriate?
Yes, the researchers identify the participants and methods of the study which are both relevant to the study’s intent.
3/3
Is the purpose of the study narrowed through appropriate research questions and hypotheses?
The researchers formulated 10 hypothesis that individually was narrow, but taken together are broad.
2/3
Does the purpose of the study follow logically from the statement of the problem and the literature review?
Yes. The major variables, intent, theory, participants, and sites are well argued. However, the study failed to produce any new knowledge or profound perspectives in the area of servant leadership.
2/3
Is the purpose consistent with the study’s overall approach?
Yes, but they have ten hypotheses which creates a broad and narrow aporach. One can’t help but think they were trying to do too much. Though, the study does answer the research question they asked, I see little value in the study. As mentioned in a previous blog, I was bored and saw little purpose to the study overall, which is reflected in my lower scores.
2/3
Total 14/21 – Adequate quality