Simarjit Shergill

Just another TWU Digital Learning Commons site

Category: Unit 5 (Page 1 of 2)

LDRS 591 Activity 6.2

February 5, 2018 / / 1 Comment

LDRS 591 Activity 6.2

Unit 6 Learning Activities

Carter, D., & Baghurst, T. (2014). The influence of servant leadership on restaurant employee engagement. Journal of Business Ethics, 124, 453-464.

 

What sampling strategy was used, and was it justified?
The authors used the theory or concept sampling. As per Plano-Clark and Creswell (2015, p. 334), this sampling strategy is applied when the researchers are attempting to generate a theory or explore a concept. In this study the authors are studying the relationship between servant leadership and employee satisfaction, so they recruited employees of a restaurant with servant leadership. Score 3.
Is the sample size appropriate and justified?
This is a case study design. They chose 11 participants to participate in 2 focus groups. This is an appropriate size for this type of study. Score 3.
Were the data types appropriate?
Data were collected using focus groups, document data in the form of previous survey data, direct and non obtrusive observation. The focus groups were conducted during lunch hour, on site, and the employees were compensated by the employer for their time. Score 3.
Were data gathered using rigorous qualitative procedures? 
Consent and confidentiality statements were read aloud, employees were given the opportunity to withdraw. The researchers took notes, and recorded the responses of participants. They explored the servant leadership experiences of employees. Score 3.
Were data collection issues handled ethically and thoughtfully? 
Employees were read confidentiality agreements, and were informed about the opportunity to withdraw. I did not find mention of researchers discussing the ethical reamifications of the study. They discussed filed issues like the restaurant business being unpredictable. Score 2.
Were the selected participants information rich?
The selected participants had more than five years of employment of the restaurant. I think this is a good section strategy as this gives the employees experience in working with this leadership style for what in the restaurant business is considered a good length of time. Score 3.
Did the data provide extensive and credible information about the central phenomenon?
The findings of the study suggest that servant leadership had a strong influence of employee engagement. There were some other findings in the study which the authors have discussed in detail in the discussion and conclusion sessions. Overall there were many key findings from the study which add to the growing knowledge about servant leadership. Score 3.
Overall score: 20. High quality.

Reference

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

LDRS 591 Unit 5 response

February 4, 2018 / / 0 Comments

This is in response to Leona’s post

LDRS591, Unit 5, Activity 5.4

Question: Do you have an example of an ethically controversial study you participated in or read? What was the result of the study?

I do not have an example of a study in recent times that had ethical concerns around it. In medical literature I have read studies which have been terminated pre maturely when one arm ( control or study group) was identified as statistically significant from the intervention or lack thereof. In my  limited experience with research during my residency and fellowship training I learnt about IRB ( Institutional review boards) . I assume this applies to individual institutions. I wonder if there is bigger governing body that all researchers are answerable to if their research involves human subjects. I guess my question here is if someone with a non institutional affiliation were to do research with human subjects, under whose purview does the ethical regulation of that research fall?

LDRS 591 Activit 5.4

February 1, 2018 / / 6 Comments

LDRS 591 Activity 591

Unit 5 Learning Activities

As a consumer of research reports, the most important thing(s) for me in the methods and results section of a high-quality quantitative research report is/are…

 

After reading the required chapters of the textbook for this unit, I realized that my criteria for evaluating a study have been vague. I now have a better idea what to look for in a high quality quantitative research. I have combined the criteria in chapters 5,6,7 of Plan-Clark and Creswell (2015) along with some personal criteria tat I feel strongly about.

Research design: The authors should clearly state their reasons for the choice of study and data collection methods.

Participants: For me this is the most important component of the study. The validity of the study depends to a large extent on how the researchers choose their participants. For a high-quality study it must be clear what attempts the researchers made to identify and eliminate any bias or sampling error,  an explanation that the sample is representative of the population, and that the size of the sample is appropriate for the type of study conducted.

Data collection: The instruments that the authors use to collect data must be validated through prior research. If the authors use an instrument created by them, there should be a clear explanation by the authors how that instrument would help collect data for the variables they plan to study.

Data analysis and results: I will admit that my understanding of statistics is very basic, even after having read chapter 7 of the above textbook. I usually read the results and discussions section to understanding the outcome of the study. The results should clearly address the research questions and hypotheses. The results and discussion section should also be arranged in a comprehensive and orderly manner, addressing the research questions in a linear way.

Question: I find myself instinctively trusting studies that use validate instruments. Is it fair to judge a study as falling short if the authors create their own instrument/s , as long as they attempt to include all the variables they are studying ?

Reference

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

LDRS 591 Activity 5.3

January 31, 2018 / / 0 Comments

LDRS 591 Activity 5.3

Unit 5 Learning Activities

Jenkins, M., & Stewart, A. C. (2010). The importance of a servant leader orientation. Health Care Management Review, 35(1), 46-54.

 

Were the data rigorously scored and reported ?

Procedures used to collect data seemed to be consistent . They measured the 2 independent variables using a 5point Likert-like scale. I could not find mention of what statistical software program was used. Score 2.

Were good descriptive analyses reported ?

Descriptive statistics were used in the form of standard deviation, and z score. Score 3.

Were good hypothesis testing procedures used?

The authors formulated 3 hypotheses. They did demonstrate the application of all 5 steps of the hypothesis testing process as described by Plan-Clark and Creswell (2015, p. 264). Score 2.

What inferential statistics were used ?

As mentioned above, the hypothesis testing wasn’t elaborated upon. I did not find mention of alpha value in the results or analysis sections, though it is mentioned in the results tables. They calculated the r2 (coefficient of determination) to measure the relation of  ‘commitment to serve’ and role inversion behavior’ to ‘job satisfaction’ . Score 3.

What were the results? Were the results comprehensive?

The results suggest that role inversion behavior and commitment to serve alone do not lead to job satisfaction (hypothesis 1 & 2), but the interaction of both these variable maximizes job satisfaction ( hypothesis 3). Score 3.

Did the results include sufficient information? 

The results included sufficient information to come to the above conclusion. The study disproved hypothesis 1 and 2,  but proved hypothesis 3. None of the hypotheses were worded as ‘null’ hypotheses, instead all three were laid out as alternative hypotheses. Score 2.

Did the analysis represent a good quantitative process?

The data analysis was not easy to follow. The authors talk about ‘models’ which are not clearly specified in the methods or results. I was not able to understand their results based on their analysis, and had to rely on the discussion and conclusions to understand whether the study supported their hypotheses. Score 1.

Total score 16. Adequate study.

 

Reference

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

 

LDRS 591 Activity 5.2

January 29, 2018 / / 0 Comments

LDRS 591 Activity 5.2

Unit 5 Learning Activities

Jenkins, M., & Stewart, A. C. (2010). The importance of a servant leader orientation. Health Care Management Review, 35(1), 46-54.

 

What sampling strategy was used and was it justified?

The authors used non probability purposive sampling. The purpose of the study was to determine relationship between nurse manager servant leadership orientation and nurse job satisfaction. Even though they collected data from nurses, I don’t think this can be generalized to all the nurses, as the participants in this study were selected from a single health care system. This could also be called convenience sampling. Score 2

Is the sample size appropriate and justified?

Of the available 346 nurse, only 210 provided the researchers complete information on their questionnaires. This number though not small, is not close to the sample size recommendation made by Plano-Clark and Creswell (2015) for a survey study (p. 238). I wonder what the researchers’ reason was for collecting data from one health system only? Institutional affiliation is one possible explanation. Score 2

Are good quality measures used to gather data? How do you know they are good quality?

The measures ( instruments) used to collect data were good quality, as the authors reported that the Cronbach’s alpha score was 0.80 for one of the questionnaires and 0.72 for the other. Score 3.

Are the data gathered using ethical procedures?

There is no evidence that the authors obtained organizational approval. They did assure confidentiality to the participants. Since this was a non interventional study, no harm seems to have been done to the participants. Score 2.

Are the data gathered using standardized quantitative procedures? 

All participants were provided the same questionnaires, which were of high quality. Participants were informed about the purpose of the study. Score 3.

Does the study have a high level of internal validity?

The authors controlled for gender, ethnicity and the participants self reported score on their most recent performance evaluation. Score 3

Does the study have a high level of external validity?

The researchers restricted their sample to one health care system. I think this is a big weakness of their study, as this reduces the external validity of their research. Further, their sample size was only 210. Score 1.

Total score 16. Adequate quality study.

 

Reference

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

LDRS 591 Activity 5.1

January 28, 2018 / / 0 Comments

LDRS 591 Activity 5.1

Unit 5 Learning Activities

Jenkins, M., & Stewart, A. C. (2010). The importance of a servant leader orientation. Health Care Management Review, 35(1), 46-54.

 

What quantitative research design is used and is it justified?

This study used the survey research design. There was no manipulation of variables , hence this is a non-experimental study.The authors hypothesized that a manager’s commitment and role inversion behavior lead to higher servant orientation which in turn is associated with high employee job satisfaction. To study they surveyed a sample of nurses from a large health care system. The participants were provided 2 questionnaires about their perception of their department head, and another questionnaire about job satisfaction. As per Plano-Clark And Creswell (2015), in a survey research design a sample is selected to represent a larger population. I think this was an adequate model for this study which aimed to study the variable of employee satisfaction as related to servant leadership in nursing leadership. Score 3.

Were good quantitative procedures used to select and assign participants?

The participants were chosen from different departments of a large health care system. They invited nurses from 17 departments responsible for providing direct bedside care. The participants were ensured confidentiality. As the authors themselves mentioned in their discussion section, one limitation of the study was that the sample was drawn from one health care system on;y. This could potentially affect the generalizability of the results. Score 2

Were good quantitative data collection procedures used?

Participants were given a chance to submit their responses in person at staff meeting, or contact the researchers later. Score 3.

Were good quantitative data analysis procedures used?

Without in-depth knowledge of statistical tools, I think the data analysis procedures used were adequate. Score 3.

Were good quantitative results and conclusions reported?

The authors summarized the results in their discussion- ” departments where staff perceived that managers had higher servant leadership orientation demonstrated significant positive impact on individual employee job satisfaction. ” This is in line with their hypothesis. The authors pointed out the weaknesses of their study- one that the sample was taken from one health care system, and the second that the job satisfaction questionnaire was a general indicator, rather than addressing specific elements of the job. Score 2.

Did the study use a rigorous study design?

The article is well written and all the components flow in a coherent manner. Score 3.

Did the quantitative research design address the study’s purpose?

The results proved the authors’ hypothesis. In their discussion and conclusion sections, the authors discuss in detail the implications and applicability of the results of their study. Score 3.

 

Reference

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

Response

October 29, 2017 / / 0 Comments

This is in response to Ruth Leong’s post

Unit 5 Activity 2: Internal and External Actions

 

Working with someone who is a good team leader is a blessing. As we have learnt from out previous readings , one does not become a leader just by holding a position or designation. Ruth is fortunate to be working with a leader like Lisa. Reading Ruth’s description of Lisa’s leadership qualities was very encouraging . Working with someone who is such a great example of leadership not only makes the workplace a great environment, it is also an opportunity to learn and imbibe some of these characteristics in one’s own leadership. I have a similar experience with my division head. In addition to being involved in the team’s overall welfare, he is also a very good advocate for us should we need more support from higher leadership .

 

Reference

Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Invictus

October 27, 2017 / / 2 Comments

Invictus, The movie

I have seen the movie Invictus before but did not realise it was such a treasure trove of leadership lessons. Here are a few incidents that shine throughout the movie. I mention them in order of their appearance in the movie-

1.    On his first day in office, President Mandela meets with his office staff and gives a speech to allay their fears and attempts to unite them. By doing this he demonstrates the strategy of creating trust (Bennis and Nanus, 1985), as mentioned in Northouse , 2016.

2.    In his selection of his bodyguards he attempts to create common ground for the team to be united. By doing this he creates a team spirit. One can sense the lessening of animosity among the bodyguards as the movie progresses.

3.    President Mandela sees the bigger picture, ‘conceptualization’ (Spears, 2002; as in Northouse, 2016, p.228) Spears mentions conceptualization in the context of servant leadership, but I believe it applies to all leadership models. A leader is one who has a vision, and sees the bigger picture. Nelson Mandela stands up against his own political party when he sees that their move to abolish the Springboks team’s colors and emblem would create more racial differences.

4.    He sees the opportunity to unite his country around the rugby World cup. He sends the white players into predominantly black neighborhoods to hold rugby ‘clinics’. In this situation he is a ‘social architect’ as per Bennis and Nanus (1985). He mobilizes the polarized black and white population to find common ground in the sport.

5.    He inspires the rugby team captain by inviting him for tea and motivating him to better himself. This translates further by the captain challenging his team to excel themselves. Here he demonstrates the practice of ‘inspire shared vision’ as per Kouzes and Posner (1987, 2002).

6.    Mr Mandela memorises the names of his team mates before he is due to meet them for the start of the tournament. With this he demonstrates his desire to engage and involve his followers.

7.    The team captain demonstrates discipline and focus. Before his big game, when is girlfriend comes to meet him, he holds her off. He does it so he can focus game.

 

In this move, the depiction of Nelson Mandela’s character is the epitome of a transformational leader. He possesses the characteristic charismatic behaviors as mentioned by Northouse (2016, p.164), based on House’s charismatic theory ( 1976) – he is a strong role model, appears competent to his followers, articulates ideological goals, has high expectations of followers arouses task relevant motives in his followers.

 

References

Bennis, W.G., Nanus, B. (1985). Leaders: The strategies for taking charge. New York: Harper & row.

Kouzes, J.M., & Posner, B.Z. (2002). The leadership challenge ( 3rd ed.(. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Spears, L.C., (2002). Tracing the past, present and future of servant-leadership. In L.C. Spears & M.       Lawrence ( Eds), Focus on leadership: Servant-leadership for the 21st century ( pp. 1-16). New York: Wiley.

Eastwood, C. (Director) & Eastwood, C., McCreary, L., Lorenz, R., Neufeld.M Producers) (2009). Invictus. United States: Liberty Pictures.

 

 

Response to Mrwilliamsphysed

October 27, 2017 / / 0 Comments

This is in response to the post

Unit 5 – LA2 – BP1

Of all the characteristics mentioned by Spears (2010), it is interesting that William should choose putting followers first, and treating them fairly. In this sentence he displays his belief in the values of servant leadership. This is especially true in the context of a group project. A leader has a better chances of having the team work with them towards a common goal , if they admire and respect the leader.  We saw this clearly defined in Maxwell’s ( 2013) video about the 5 levels of leadership. The higher one goes on the leadership levels by making connections with their followers, their chances of making an impact on their followers increase.

Another interesting observation made by him is that for a leader to be effective they have to be self reflective. Self awareness not only makes one a more effective leader, but also a better person .

Reference

Spears, Larry C. (2010) Character and Servant Leadership: Ten Characteristics of Effective, Caring Leaders. The Journal of Virtues & Leadership, Vol. 1 Iss. 1, 2010, 25-30. ( as mentioned in Mrwilliamsphysed)

John Maxwell : The five Levels of Leadershihttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPwXeg8ThWI

Unit5

October 25, 2017 / / 2 Comments

Unit 5 Activity 2

 

There are three leadership decisions that a leader needs to make regarding team functioning: whether to monitor the team or intervene, is the intervention needed at the task level or relationship level, is the intervention needed internally or externally? (Northouse, 2016).  If the leader decides to take action, they need to identify whether the action required is internal or external. Internal actions can further be divided into task related or relationship related. (Northouse, 2016; Rowe, Guerrero,2016) . As per them the internal task actions are taken to improve the team’s ability to improve task performance and get the job done. These internal actions are:

-Goal focusing.

-Right structure/structuring for results.

-Facilitating decision making.

-Training team members in tasks through development, education/seminars.

-Setting and maintaining standards.

The most important of these in terms of a group project are keeping the team focused, structuring of the team, training, and setting standards. Depending on how long a project takes to completion, it is vital for the success of the project that the team members stay focused on the ultimate goal. The team needs to be structured according to the task at hand, making sure the right people are designated the right job to maximize their potential. Roles of team members might change during the course of the project; the team leader needs to make sure that they receive the right kind of training in these situations. Team members also might need training in task skills as the project moves along. For the team to perform optimally, all team members have to be held to the same standards of punctuality and efficiency.

Internal relationship actions are those required to improved team members’ relationships (Northouse, 2016; Rowe, Guerrero,2016).

-Coaching team members on interpersonal skills.

-Encouraging collaboration.

-Managing conflict and power issues.

-Building / enhancing team commitment.

-Satisfying needs of individual team members.

-Modelling ethical and principled practices.

For the success of a group project, the most important relationship actions are coaching in interpersonal skills, managing conflict/power issues, and building team commitment. The leader could intervene if the team members dont seem to be getting along. The team members might need to be educated to consider each other’s opinions, and support each other. The leader should encourage team members to separate intellectual conflict from personal conflict. It is also important for the leader to promote by example in-group and out-of-group fairness.

External actions. These are actions a leader might need to take in order to protect the team and connect it to the external environment. (Northouse, 2016; Rowe, Guerrero,2016).

-Networking to form alliances and gain access to information.

-Advocating and representing the team to environment.

-Negotiating with senior management for recognition, support and resources.

-Protecting team members from environmental distractions/diversions.

-Accessing external indicators of team’s effectiveness.

-Providing team members with environmental information, to keep them educated about the changes in the environment.

An effective leader should introduce the team members to leadership out of the team. The leader also plays an important role in bringing to light the team’s success to superior leadership and help them get their due recognition. Team members feel appreciated if they are included in the bigger picture. If the leader feels that the team is not getting enough resources to accomplish their goal, the leader can advocate on their behalf.

 

References

Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Rowe, G.W., Guerrero, L. ( 2016). Cases in leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE

 

 

« Older posts

© 2026 Simarjit Shergill

Theme by Anders Noren — Up ↑