Learning Activity 9.2

For this post, I chose to do the article on Education (see the source listed below). My first impression of the conclusion in this article was that it was a bit too short. But after reading it I could see that it really didn’t need to be much longer being that it went straight to the point. Overall, I would give the article a three in every category.

The major results are immediately identified and are a slightly different version of what was said in the abstract, “Our findings suggest that emotional intelligence is a good predictor of a leader’s servant-leader ideology, but it is not a predictor of actual servant-leader behaviors as rated by followers” (Barbuto, Gottfredson, & Searle, 2014, p. 322). The results were further explained and summarize with supporting details.

The critique acknowledges its limitations and alludes to possible further research that could be provided or anything that they have possibly overlooked. There is a section dedicated to declaring possible conflicts of interest and the authors use careful wording throughout the conclusion such as ‘to our knowledge’ (Barbuto, Gottfredson, & Searle, 2014, p. 322). Located above the conclusion is a section that speaks to limitations and future directions. Here, they agree to potential bias and the fact that the officials they chose to study may lead differently than those in the private sector.

To summarize, I’d say I like the conclusion of this article. I think it is reliable and informative. It’s quite short but still manages to wrap up the main ideas. I also appreciate that they included references to their funding sources and added their own mini-biographies. It adds a personal touch that makes the article stand out.

Source:

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.