LDRS 591 Activity 7.1

 

Unit 7 Learning Activities

 

In my reading of research methodologies so far, I have not sensed a “debate” around qualitative vs quantitative. Plano-Clark and Creswell (2015) have highlighted the differences between the two throughout their book, and also pointed where one of them is more applicable than the other. I think we could summarise the discussion in one word- applicability. There are some research topics that are more amenable to a quantitative study involving numbers and data that can be measured and objectively analysed; while other topics need ‘explanation’ and subjective analysis , hence are better suited to qualitative analysis.

Before reading the chapter on mixed methods research in the Plano-Clark and Creswell textbook (2015), I was unaware of this concept. I had often wondered though why does a study need to be restricted to only one kind of methodology? I was enlightened by this chapter on mixed methods; but at the same time will admit that mixed methodology does seem more complex and intensive than either qualitative or quantitative. ” Although applying mixed methods research requires a researcher to learn about multiple methods and how to mix them appropriately, the ability to answer a broader and more complete range of research questions makes it a worthwhile endeavor” (Johnson & Onwuegbuzie, 2004). The article by Stentz, Plano-Clark and Matkin (2012) apprises us further about the data that are available about the application of mixed methods in leadership research. They reviewed published articles in The Leadership Quality between 1990 and 2012, and found 55 articles that possibly used mixed methods. They concluded that researchers have started focusing on mixed methods in leadership research, with most of the change having occurred over the last decade. They also concluded that these studies were being conducted in different countries and cultures. They identified four articles that exemplify how mixed studies can develop understanding of leadership theories.

Leadership research, as most other research, has historically leaned towards quantitative methods. Leadership is a complex phenomenon and is challenging to study. The study of this phenomenon cannot be justified using a single approach. The authors of this article are hopeful after reviewing the recent trend that more researchers will adopt mixed methods research design in studying leadership theory.

 

References

Johnson, R.b., & Onwuegbuzie, A.J. (2004). Mixed methods research: a research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(77), 14-2.

 

Plano-Clark, V., & Creswell, J. (2015). Understanding research: A consumer’s guide (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.

Sendjaya, S., Sarros, J.C., & Santora, J.C. (2008). Defining and measuring servant leadership behaviour in organizations. Journal of Management Studies, 45(2), 402-424.

Stentz, J. E., Plano-Clark, V. L., & Matkin, G. S. (2012). Applying mixed methods to leadership research: A review of current practices. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(6), 1173-1183.