Week 9 Blog

Part A

What are the similarities and differences in the discussion/conclusion section of a qualitative and quantitative research report?

Similarities:

• Includes implications and suggestions for practice
• Limitations of the study
• Suggestions for future research
• Overall significance of the study

Differences:

• In a quantitative research report the summary includes results organized by research questions or hypothesis while a qualitative study include results of major findings which are organized by themes.
• In a quantitative research report the summary includes results in terms of predictions and or prior studies while a qualitative study include a comparison of findings within existing studies.
• Only in a qualitative study will you find personal reflections about the study.

Part B

Research Quality rating for article called, An examination of emotional intelligence as an antecedent of servant leadership (Barbuto, Gottfredson & Searle, 2014).

1. The major results are identified and summarized – Rating 3 – Emotional intelligence was related to servant leadership and in particular in the leader-reported results. For the follower-reported results the results were less significant however the researchers provided a number of possible reasons why with this particular study group, the outcome may have been influenced. This study utilized public servants and the researchers suggested the outcome may have been influenced by political leaders feeling influenced in behaviors in order to stay in office. The researchers therefore suggested that additional studies be conducted in the private sector.
2. The results are thoughtfully examined in relation to the literature and personal reflections – Rating 3 – The major results are summarized in tables as well as results section.
3. Appropriate implications of the results for practice are identified and justified
   Rating 3 – The results of the practice are identified and justified. The quantitative study clearly demonstrates that emotional intelligence is an antecedent for servant leader ideology however not a predictor of servant leader behaviors with followers.
4. Thoughtful critiques of the study’s limitations are provided and appropriate for the research approach – Rating 3 – The critique of the studies limitations are well thought out. Further research is suggested in the public sector as well as larger groups of followers surveyed may have an effect on the results.
5. Suitable implications of the result for future research are identified and justified – Rating 3 – The results of the practice are identified and justified. The quantitative study clearly demonstrates that emotional intelligence is an antecedent for servant leader ideology however not a predictor of servant leader behaviors with followers.
6. The interpretations are consistent with the study – Rating 3 – The researcher acknowledge that much is still needed to learn on servant leadership and if emotional intelligence is an antecedent to servant leadership. In the conclusion the researchers indicate that this particular study may be the only one, indicating that the research does require much more studies, including in the private sector.
7. The back matter is appropriate for the study report – Rating 3 – The researchers did an excellent job with back references and in utilizing previous research methods. The list of references were complete and organized in an APA format.

The overall score is 21/21 indicating a high quality research report.

Part C

1. As a consumer of research reports what were the most important aspects you need to consider in the discussion/conclusion section of a high-quality research report?

As a consumer of research reports, the most important aspects that should be considered in the discussion/conclusion section of a high-quality research report is a summary of major findings from the research, recommended next steps, limitations of the research, how the research can be applied practically as well as references and other back matter.

2. Are there any elements of this section that you still have questions about or finding confusing?

My question is regarding the listing of a glossary. I see in some research papers quite extensive lists of glossary terms. Are glossaries becoming more important with a global economy? My hunch is they can be quite helpful so as not to misunderstand the intention or confuse terms. Do you think glossaries will become more of a standard in research papers?

3. How can you apply this knowledge to your work context or current leadership experience?

The learning in week 9 is relevant to my current role at Seyem’ Qwantlen Business Group, where I am required to attend community meetings and provide information to the elders, land code committee and membership. Issues such as rights and title, purchase of lands and where to focus business investments require a great deal of thought and consideration. If I were to present information that is not well thought out, it would not instill confidence in the community and in my decision making ability. Utilizing the tools and approaches of scholarly research removes ambiguity and provides a scientific based approach to drawing conclusions. I’ve also learned that there is already a great deal of information or literature available to help in making informed decisions. Conclusions must be drawn from past scholarly research and any new information should be backed up and justified. Without doing so, and instead drawing conclusions based on opinions, can have effects on my community’s future success and on future generations. It would also effect the perceptions of the community on my ability to function as a servant leader.

In closing, I invite comments regarding my question above, with respect to a glossary. Do you find glossaries in research papers helpful in creating clarity and understanding, particularly with a global economy ?

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.