Category: LDRS 591

Posted on

Unit 10 Blog

Part A

The following questions are answered after viewing the YouTube video, Battling bad science (Goldcare, 2011).

How can I know that I can trust what I am reading?

In the YouTube video, Battling bad science (Goldcare, 2011), Goldcare states “real science is all about critically appraising the evidence of somebody else’s position”. I believe what he means by this is that as a consumer of research we need to be a healthy skeptic. In LDRS 591, at Trinity Western University, we have learned about tools to evaluate what might be constituted as good research. In Understanding Research: A consumer’s guide (Plano-Clark & Creswell, 2015), the class was introduced to various tables, as tools to review and critique qualitative research, quantitative research and mixed research for example. I believe moving forward these tools can be helpful as move progress with our academic goals in not only reviewing literature but also potentially writing literature ourselves.

How do I know the research has been performed competently?

As suggested in the course LDRS 591, Trinity Western University, when searching for literature, as students we were advised to check only peer-reviewed or scholarly literature and to check these boxes when performing an online search. Researchers have the opportunity to disseminate their work when their paper is defended and published or potentially at a conference. Articles submitted to journals are typically reviewed by peers or other experts in the field.

How do I know the research is reported honestly?

Not all journals hold the same level of credibility as others and so knowing which ones hold higher standards is important. Also knowing whom the author is will provide clues as to the honesty of the report. Researchers that provide details of how their research was collected, controls that were in place and any gaps in their research will also further demonstrate the honesty of the paper.

How do I know the findings presented are consistent with what other researchers would conclude?

Quality research often builds on research that is already known however answers a question that requires more clarification. In a good research paper there will be a great deal of back matter indicating what research the current paper is expanding upon. Methods used to collect quantitative data or qualitative data will also be based on previous success and academically accepted methods. In the conclusion section, flaws of the research and suggested further research is cited.

References

Goldcare, B. (2011, July). Battling bad science. [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.ted.com/talks/ben_goldacre_battling_bad_science

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

Part B

In my organization of Seyem’ Qwantlen I optimally try to do my best and serve as a transformational servant leader. My cultural teachers have shared with me that being a leader of people is not something that should be taken for granted and is something that should be respected.

I am guided by the seven laws, which are health, happiness, humbleness, generosity, generations, understanding and forgiveness. I try my best to be the healthiest I can be so I can perform optimally. I also encourage healthy activities with staff such as lunch time walks or group building activities such as tobogganing. We leave a cedar basket at the entrance to our building so that when we walk through the door, all negative energies are placed there. It’s up to me as a leader to do my best to continue to create a positive work environment, thus ensuring the happiness of others I serve. In being a humble leader, I need to base my decision making on the most informed evidence available and not based on my ego. Sometimes these decisions may come from the staff and it’s up to me to support them. If we can’t come to a conclusion I need to demonstrate how to go about finding the answers in a collaborative way. If I share with staff, non-evidence based information I know their confidence in me as a leader will be lost. If I make a mistake I own it and look for ways the organization can learn so we can ultimately become stronger. I am generous with my time with staff so that I can help them in achieving their goals. I know I must continue to learn new ways to lead my staff as well as utilize evidence-based research to know what is trending and what works. I respect the generations working at my organization and know that with each, I’m the one that needs to adapt and not them. We all serve the purpose of making life easier for our elders and for future generations, including those not born yet, as we look ahead to the next 7. Understanding is about knowing that each of my staff has come to work for Seyem’ Qwantlen, walking a different path. With that, their evidence-based decision making may differ from my own at times. I know though that with understanding we can work together to solve any problem. I also know now about where to find credible research in considering very complex problems. Finally, forgiveness is about allowing staff to make mistakes and having the confidence to know they will learn from them.

I serve a community healing from intergenerational trauma, the effects of residential schools and colonization. Through my actions as a Transformational Servant leader, perhaps this is where my greatest feat will be. I know I must lead my community and organization and despite what the past has brought us, show that we can forgive, no matter what life has thrown us. Kwantlen has been around since time immemorial and we will continue to be around in the future. It is because of the 7 laws of life that we have existed as long as we have. To me this is the greatest, most impactful evidence based decision making model I have ever known. The laws are my guide and my mantra, which happens to align with the definition of a Transformational Servant leader.

Posted on

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.

  1. 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?

  1. 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.

Posted on

Unit 8 Podcast

For this proposed action research study, I would like to share with you the concerns of indigenous procurement policies as they sit today. This is an important issue effecting government, tax payers and thus citizens of British Columbia and First Nations.

Please note, for this podcast, I am experiencing technical difficulties. Please listen on the “Anchor” app and search for “The state of indigenous procurement in BC”. In the meantime I will continue to search for a solution to embed the podcast on this blog.  Or please copy and paste the following but remove the quotations…

“https://anchor.fm/kwantlen-brenda/episodes/The-state-of-indigenous-procurement-in-British-Columbia-e2hprl”

Posted on

Unit 7

Part A

What is at the heart of the quantitative/qualitative debate?

Quantitative research is a numerical process to understand a research question while qualitative research is investigating personal experiences to gain a better understanding of a problem. Both when done by applying a scientific approach, ensure biases do not come into play. The research question will help determine which type of study is better suited. In recent years mixed methods have been combined to gain an even greater understanding of the problem. Appropriate methods in conducting mixed method research papers are now available and widely accepted amongst the scholarly community. The argument that now exists is if quantitative research or qualitative research on its own provides a comprehensive understanding of a problem and or if combined provide a more complete picture.

Do you think mixed-methods research can provide a more complete picture for leadership studies? 

I believe that yes mixed methods of research can provide a more complete picture for leadership studies. For example in my own experience, both the economy and capacity building are equally important to First Nation communities and so in understanding the best leadership style to promote this type of environment, it is clear that a mixed method research paper would provide a greater understanding. Quantitative data on indigenous leadership could be measured by exploring the financial success of an indigenous community and how this relates to leadership styles. Qualitative data on indigenous leadership could be measured by focus groups targeting the answers such as how has past traditional teachings been utilized by leadership, what are the investments in training that are seen as valued, how does a community best build capacity and what is the community doing to help people that are disadvantaged. Organizations are complex and have often more than one goal or strategic mandate and therefore, this is where I believe mixed methods are beneficial to leadership studies.

Part B

Evaluating the use of mixed method approach in the article called Achieving High Organizational Performance through Servant Leadership (Melchar & Bosco, 2010)

  1. The rationale for needing mixed methods of research is appropriate and justified – Rating 3 – the researchers determined that qualitative interviews were necessary prior to proceeding with a quantitative questionnaire, …in order to determine whether there were main themes that reflected the senior leader’s “servant leader” orientation (Melchar & Bosco, 2010, p. 80).
  2. The choice of the mixed methods design is appropriate and justified – Rating 3 – the researchers describe how qualitative interviews are researched as well as the results of the surveys, how the surveys were interpreted and what method was used to interpret the surveys.
  3. The quantitative methods are of good quality based on the standards of quantitative research – Rating 3 – while the sample size was somewhat small, the researchers indicated in their conclusion that …the coefficient alphas were consistent with those in the Barbuto and Wheeler (2006) study. Good statistical analytic procedures were used and described in the reference paper.
  4. The qualitative methods are of good quality based on the standards of qualitative research – Rating 3 – the qualitative method and results were shared in a table. These results were consistent with former research in evaluating traits of servant leaders. There researchers goals were to confirm that the leadership had traits of servant leadership.
  5. The quantitative and qualitative components of the study are meaningfully mixed – Rating 3 – If the researchers did not conduct qualitative research prior to the quantitative research, the results of the quantitative research may have been questioned.
  6. The study used rigorous application of mixed methods research to address the purpose – Rating 3 – the research paper purpose was to investigate …whether a servant leader can develop a corporate culture that attracts tor develops other servant leaders (Melchar & Bosco, 2010, P. 74). The qualitative data was used to confirm servant leadership management style as opposed to other types of leadership styles. Once confirmed the organization did possess a servant leadership style the quantitative data sought to understand if the servant leader developed and attracted other servant leaders.
  7. The use of mixed methods produced a good understanding of the research purpose – Rating 3 – the researchers did provide serval complete and valid in-depth answers to the study’s research question.

Overall score 21/21 indicating a high quality research paper.

Part C

Describe an example of a Transformational Servant Leader in your life.

In my indigenous community I have many examples of transformational servant leaders. As a group I would describe the elders as transformational servant leaders. Our elders form part of our government and guide us in business activities. They heavily influence and support change in the community for future generations. Many of these elders have experienced inter-generational trauma and in their lifetime will never likely see the results of their work in instilling change in the community. The elders support the youth in education, mentorship, family life and remind younger generations about the importance of taking care of others and mother earth. They remind us to use our traditional teachings such as following the 7 laws of life – health, happiness, humbleness, generations, generosity, forgiveness and understanding. These laws help guide our business group in making important decisions for the future our community. They put others needs above their own and are impacting important change for my community.

How would you use a mixed methods approach to study servant leadership?

I would utilize a mixed method approach in studying servant leadership through an exploratory sequential design. Relative to my workplace, and in evaluating servant leadership in an indigenous setting, quantitative data could be utilized to evaluate servant leadership through data that could be collected, evaluating past successes of indigenous organizations. Qualitative data however is also important in understanding the future of servant leadership and its role in indigenous communities. There is an emergence of traditional teachings that align with servant leadership however since much of indigenous culture teachings were not shared or spoken of amongst generations, there has been a gap in information. As culture teachers become more readily available and accepted in communities, so does the concept of servant leadership become accepted as a best model for leadership.

In past research, quantitative research has been held in higher regard than qualitative research in terms of its ability to provide more perceived credible results. Do you think a mixed method approach provides more validity to the importance also of qualitative research and its findings?

References

Barbuto, J. e., and D.W. Wheeler. 2006. “Scale Development and construct Clarification of Servant Leadership.” Group & Organization Management, 31(3): 300-326.

 

Melchar, D. E., & Bosco, S. M. (2010). Achieving high organization performance through servant leadership. Journal of Business Inquiry, 9(1), 774-88.

Posted on

Unit 6

Part A

Evaluation of the Research Design for the research paper, The Influence of Servant Leadership on Restaurant Employee Engagement (Carter & Baghurst, 2014):

  1. A research design guides the conduct of the qualitative study – Rating 3 – the researchers cited a substantial amount of literature. The researchers utilized a phenomenology design.
  2. The choice of the research design is appropriate and justified – Rating 3 – the choice of the research design is appropriate. Utilizing a phenomenology design is a good approach toward answering the research question.
  3. Good qualitative data collection procedures are used – Rating 3 – the researchers utilized a focus group for the collection of data and previous company survey results.
  4. Good qualitative data analysis procedures are used Rating 3 – The researchers utilized a 7 step process to analyse the data.
  5. Good qualitative results and interpretations are reported – Rating 3 – The researchers reported the focus groups results as well as grouped participants when comments were similar in nature.
  6. The study used a rigorous research design – Rating 3 – the researchers included and built on former knowledge, referencing prior research as well as prior processes.
  7. The use of the qualitative research design addressed the study’s purpose – Rating 3 – the study fulfilled the intent and answers the research question.

Overall Quality of the research is high with a score of 21/21

Part B

Evaluation of the participants and data collection procedures for the research paper The Influence of Servant Leadership on Restaurant Employee Engagement (Carter & Baghurst, 2014)

  1. The sampling strategy is appropriate and justified – Rating 3 – the researchers conducted the focus group in a designated area the employees were comfortable with and was convenient. The researchers provided references to previous studies that indicated that it was justified. They also provided references regarding other best practices such as confidentiality agreements and length of time the focus group was convened.
  2. The sample size is appropriate and justified – Rating 3 – The researchers had a small group with relevant experience. The group was further reduced by creating two separate focus groups.
  3. The data types are appropriate – Rating 3 – the data types were appropriate.
  4. The data are gathered using rigorous qualitative procedures – Rating 3 – the researchers utilize open ended questions to encourage dialogue in the group.
  5. Data collection issue are handled ethically and thoughtfully – Rating 3 – the researchers ensured the participants had the opportunity to sign a confidentiality agreement and ensured the names of the participants would not be included in the final research report.
  6. The selected participants are information rich – Rating 3 – Employees included in the survey had a minimum of 5 years’ experience working at a restaurant that was recognized for servant leadership.
  7. The database provides extensive and credible information about the central phenomenon – Rating 3 – the findings included extensive information about the focus group, what questions were asked, responses, common themes, etc.

Overall rating 21/21 – High Quality

Part C

Evaluation of the data analysis and findings for the research paper The Influence of Servant Leadership on Restaurant Employee Engagement (Carter & Baghurst, 2014)

  1. The analysis process used rigorous qualitative procedures – Rating 3 – the researchers documented, recorded and transcribed comments from the focus group. The researchers also found common themes and followed a 7 step process to analyse the data.
  2. Strategies were used to validate the findings – Rating 3 – as part of the 7 step process in evaluating the data the researchers clustered core themes, identified invariant constituents.
  3. The findings include a description of the people, places, or events in the study – Rating 3 – the researchers describe the participants and why they were appropriate to participate in the focus groups.
  4. The findings include appropriate themes about the central phenomenon – Rating 3 – 5 themes were reported.
  5. The findings relate multiple themes to each other – Rating 3 – the researchers reported the relationship amongst the themes.
  6. That data analysis represents a good qualitative process – Rating 3 – the data analysis was credible and accurate results were gathered.
  7. The findings provide a good exploration of the central phenomenon – Rating 3 – the findings provided information for discussion, suggestions to further research and a conclusion.

Overall assessment is 21/21 High Quality

Part D

As a consumer of research reports the most important aspects one needs to consider in the methods and results section of a high-quality qualitative research report include:

  • The researchers share the method they used to obtain the results.
  • There is a clear description of the overall design.
  • Researchers provide details on participants and why they were considered qualified.
  • Information in the literature includes how the data was collected and analyzed.

Elements of this section that raise questions and may be confusing:

While evaluating the participants and data collection I was confused by what is meant by data types. I’m looking for more information on data types utilized in qualitative research.

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

In my current role, I can see a qualitative research report being of considerable value. As a leader in an indigenous organization, there is not a great deal of research conducted on indigenous economic development in Canada. Many First Nations are new to economic development and work closely with their lands and resources department on rights and title issues. As the rights and title legal climate is constantly changing, so too is the economic development front and therefore indigenous businesses need to quickly adapt. One unique approach my company has taken is to maintain a strategic mandate despite the current legal climate. The approach is to operate the business in a humble way, and to stick to key principles such as capacity building. By doing so my company has built a very unique operation that is not found amongst many other nations. At this point in time my nation is receiving interest from other nations, banks, lawyers and others working in the field of indigenous economic development, to better understand our business model. I do believe it is a business model that can be shared with other nations that are struggling to get economic development off the ground. Recently I’ve been in discussions with a researcher whom is interested in studying our business model and I believe a qualitative research report would be the most appropriate, given the lack of literature available on the topic. I now feel more confident and better equipped to work with the researchers to develop a study on our business model. It will also be interesting to not let my biases slip in, but will look to the experienced researchers to implement methods to prevent this from happening.

My question to my classmates I am curious to know is, how you too might have managed your biases when participating in a qualitative research study or when reading a qualitative study?

References

Danon Carter, & Timothy Baghurst. (2014). The Influence of Servant Leadership on Restaurant Employee Engagement. Journal of Business Ethics, (3), 453. https://ezproxy.student.twu.ca:2420/10.1007/s10551-013-1882-0

Posted on

Unit 5 – response to post

Question from awalkinthewoods: Out of curiosity, and this may seem like a silly question, but how much do you think your current position and your background education play into your preference for either Quantitative or Qualitative research? Do you think either of those things even play a role or is it solely dependent upon what you are currently trying to achieve (either an explanation or further exploration)?

I think both our work experiences and personal experiences can play a role in the preference for quantitative or qualitative research. Naturally we prefer things we can understand and make sense of. I also believe there is a perception that quantitative data is more credible and scientific in nature and so biases can exist between one or the other. In considering a quantitative or qualitative research reports however, I believe that either or can be credible in nature and differ in quality. In my own work context I can see value in either a quantitative or qualitative approach, but sometimes it comes down to what would be the best way to collect the information to draw a conclusion. There are many factors to consider such as availability of participants, quality of participants or how much time is available to collect the research. Also as we’ve learned, sometimes the research question will drive whether a quantitative or qualitative research report is more suitable.

Another factor comes to mind in terms of a preference is dependent on what current information is available. For example my child has a disability and currently there is a great deal of scientific research with quantitative data to support intervention. That said there is also new and emerging research literature that is available and should not be ignored. Having said that it comes down to budget and how I want to spend my hard earned dollars. In the case of my child I’ve elected to follow the quantitative research literature that is available that provides the most amount of evidence in supporting my child’s ability to improve. Perhaps if I had an unlimited budget I might consider looking at some of the early qualitative research papers that are pointing toward some new types of therapy.

I guess in the end whether it be a qualitative or quantitative research preference, our life experiences, hunches as to the outcomes, time restraints, how far we want to delve into the research, how much current literature on the topic is available, whom the authors are and how driven we are to seek an answer will create biases on whether we prefer qualitative or quantitative research. Hopefully after completing this course we will learn that they both have their value in furthering science based research.

Posted on

Unit 3 – Comments on a walk in the woods

I enjoyed reading the blog from awalkinthewoods, Unit 3 assignment. First I’d like to comment that I like all of the humble responses from all of the students regarding their APA writing experience. The part that I found most interesting about awalkinthewoods post is the experience of attending a speaker event where the speaker provided references for speaking points. We’ve learned about APA writing but I cannot recall reading about speaking engagements. In any case I do think it it is courteous and professional to give credit in a speaking engagement and can add credibility to the speech. There are some APA rules I can see that might have some relevance such as the section on Permission to Quote, Reprint, or Adapt. “You may need written permission from the owner or copyrighted work if you include lengthy quotations or if you include reprinted or adapted tables or figures” (American Psychological Association 2010). Perhaps a little excessive for some audiences however if presented at a major conference where there are a number of subject matter experts its best to air on the side of caution. Thank you awalkinthewoods for sharing this important lesson.

References

American Psychological Association (2010). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (6th ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Posted on

Week 2 reply to student post

Would you prioritize research about first nations people done by local authors over the same topic done by outside researchers? What are the advantages and inconveniences of either choice? By E. depressing

I feel qualified to answer the question regarding researching first nations by local authors or by outside researchers. I am a First Nations person and work for my community for the economic arm as described in my opening blog. I will do my best to share my thoughts based on my experience.

Advantages of a local authors:

  • First nations pass down traditional knowledge orally and are careful to share information only with those that are most trusted. There are many examples of local authors that have long standing relationships with indigenous communities and are trusted to share the information respectfully. An example of this type relationship is often with archaeologists. Many communities will work with an archaeologist for their entire career as they are trusted with traditional knowledge and have the best interest of the nation at heart. The archaeologist will also often assist with supporting rights and title and so have quite a bit of experience in conducting research on behalf of a nation.
  • There are some quality local resources that are great sources. A good place to start is call a local indigenous community and ask if their lands department can recommend some local, credible books. Indigenous lands departments can be a great help, in particular in tracking down older publications.

Inconveniences:

  • The amount indigenous subject matter experts might limit your availability of quality research.
  • In thinking about rights and title you need to be careful in examining your sources. There is a great deal of misinformation out there that stems from nations wanting to strengthen their rights and title claims. By utilizing an outside researcher you will likely get a more objective viewpoint.
  • Also be careful that you examine the sources of the researchers. As an indigenous person I often get frustrated with the references and citations even from some of the most qualified researchers. I’ve seen history change because of propaganda of individuals further their rights and title.
Posted on

Week One – Reply to other students

“Question from Lara – A parting question for you…

As a leader within your organization, do you find it difficult to challenge past practices that team members continue to use that are no longer justifiable? How do you initiate integrating evidence based changes? What research sources do you use most frequently to build your knowledge base?”

To answer this question I can say that yes sometimes I am challenged at times with past practices that team members continue to use that are no longer justified. I say sometimes because as I grow and learn about Indigenous traditional teachings I become less skeptical and open to practices that I may not have been aware of.

Prior to coming home from my community I came from a very structured environment with sound business practices. The business functioned like a well oiled machine however looking back, I can honestly say that the people working there were not happy. While on the surface it may have been successful I can’t help but think how much more successful it could have been if the employees felt engaged and happy.

In the case of indigenous community practices there is not much research available but instead anecdotal evidence that has been passed on orally from generation to generation. While I think it is important to integrate evidence based changes, I also think it is also important to acknowledge that just because the research isn’t available doesn’t mean that the practice is not right. In the end we all need to work together to be successful and so forcing employees to change without involving them in a discussion first, will only lead to unhappy employees. As leaders I think we need to be open as well that we may not always have the best answer available.

In leadership in my community we live by the seven traditional laws “Since time immemorial, we live by the seven traditional laws that guided our ancestors: health, happiness, generations, generosity, humbleness, forgiveness and understanding” (Kwantlen First Nation, time immemorial). Understanding in this case can go a long way to achieving employee engagement.

References

Unknown (time immemorial). The Kwantlen First Nation [online reference]. https://www.kwantlenfn.ca/

Posted on

Unit 5, Assessment

Part A    

In the guidebook, Understanding Research by Plano-Clark and Creswell (2015), they provide the following explanation to describe the differences between Quantitative and Qualitative research:

“In quantitative research the research problem tends to call for:

  • An explanation of the relationship that exist among variables,
  • A measurement of trends in a population” (Plano-Clark and Creswell, 2015, p. 59).

“In qualitative research problems tend to call for:

  • An exploration because little is known about the problem,
  • A detailed description and understanding of a phenomenon” (Plano-Clark and Creswell, 2015, p. 59).

“In quantitative research, researchers identify research problems that call for an explanation of the relationships among variables” (Plano-Clark and Creswell, 2015, p. 59).

“Qualitative Research is best suited for research problems that call for the need to explore and learn from participants because important variables are unknown or insufficient for describing a phenomenon” (Plano-Clark and Creswell, 2015, p. 59).

Assessment of qualitative research

Research Report select written by Van Winkle, Allen, DeVore & Winston (2014).

  1. The choice of the research design is appropriate and justified – Rating 3 – the research design was based on previous collection method and were tested against previous results for accuracy. The researchers utilized previously tested collection methods and resulted were tested against previous results for accuracy. As stated “The ESLB scale (Winston & Fields, n.d.) was chosen for its design, brevity, and reliability” (Van Winkle, Allen, DeVore & Winston, 2014, p. 74). Also chosen was Laschinger et al.’s (2010) CWEQ II, because it “extends an existing model of workplace empowerment and integrates Kanter’s (1977, 1993) theory of structural power in organizations and Spreitzer’s (1995) notion of psychological empowerment” (Laschinger et al., 2010, P.5). So yes the research design is appropriate and justified.
  2. Good quantitative procedures are used to select and assign participants – Rating 2 – the researchers checked with an outside review board to receive approval prior to the data collection. The researchers selected adults 18 years of age, employed at small businesses. They also worked with a college and received permission to work with adult business students. While the procedure as to selecting participants was approved, it could have been improved by including a larger population base, participants from across the country and also diverse populations.
  3. Good quantitative data collection procedures are used – Rating 2 – A survey link was sent to 156 participants and 130 of the surveys were received. Of the 130, 116 were useable. My reasoning for a score of 2 is because it is not clear how the survey was controlled to ensure that it was in fact the employees and not supervisors responding. For example if the survey was passcode protected it could have ensured the further step in ensuring the data collected was in fact from the intended participants. It was also not described why some of the respondent’s survey results were not useable.
  4. Good quality data analysis procedures were used – Rating 2 – as indicated in the research paper “The Pearson Product-Moment (PPM) correlation coefficient (r) was used to measure the relationship between the participant’s perceptions of their supervisor’s servant leadership and overall empowerment, as well as each empowerment subscale” (Van Winkle, Allen, DeVore & Winston, 2014, p. 75). The data could have been better controlled by using a unique passcode to ensure the participants were the correct participants that were requested to participate in the study. A survey link was sent to participants, likely for efficiency but the report does not address control measures that were in place for accuracy.
  5. Good quantitative results and conclusions are reported – Rating 3 – the researched provided a table indicating the result of their study and then further went on to discuss the results of the scores in more detail.
  6. The study used a rigorous research design – Rating 2 – The research design could have been improved by including a larger population based, samples from different parts of the country and more information on the demographics of those that participated in the research.
  7. The use of the quantitative research design addressed the study’s purpose – Rating 3 – As stated in The Relationship Between the Servant Leadership Behaviors of Immediate Supervisors and Followers’ Perceptions of Being Empowered in the Context of Small Business “The purpose of the study was to measure the relationship between followers’ perceptions of the servant leadership of their immediate supervisor and followers’ sense of empowerment in the context of small business” (Van Winkle, Allen, DeVore & Winston, 2014, p. 70). Also as quoted under the heading of Small Business, according to Wang and Pouziouris (2010) “There has been little written about small business leaders and servant leadership, and according to Wang and Poutziouris (2010), “research on the leadership in the small business domain remains immature” (p. 350). So yes the research addressed the studies purpose.

Overall score is 17/21 which indicates an adequate quality overall quantitative research report.

Part B

Quality criteria for data collection utilizing research by Van Winkle, Allen, DeVore & Winston (2014)…

  1. The sampling strategy is appropriate and justified – Rating 2 – The researcher’s strategy was to utilize email to send the surveys out. There were no details about controls in place to ensure the surveys were completed by the right group. The strategy was not very detailed and appeared like the researchers were looking for a quick turnaround.
  2. The sample size is appropriate and justified – Rating 3 – “The sample size of 116 resulted in a power of 100%, (using Howell, 2013) suggesting the sample size was more than adequate to support the correlation found” (Van Winkle, Allen, Devore & Winston, 2014, p. 76).
  3. High quality instruments are used to gather data – Rating 1 – the instrument used it appears to gather data is an emailed survey. The survey was sent to business owners and employees recruited on campus. There are a number of concerns with this method in that there is not mention on how the surveys were controlled and that steps were put in place to ensure employees were able to complete the survey as opposed to business owners. There is also no mention of anonominity and so the participants may have not been truthful in their responses out of fear of owner retribution.
  4. The data are gathered using ethical quantative procedures – Rating 3 – there does not appear to be any issues related to ethics.
  5. The data are gathered using standardized quantative procedures – Rating 3 – yes the data included previously recognized quantative procedures and the results shared in a table.
  6. The study has a high level of internal validity – Rating 3 – The study utilized numerous other quantitative studies and build on former knowledge. Also the study utilized former knowledge in reviewing the data and comparing result of previous data.
  7. The study has a high level of external validity – Rating 3 – the authors are qualified with credential suitable for this type of report. The report is also published by a respectable and well known Journal publication which means the study would have undergone a peer review.

Overall score 18/21 indicating a high quality collection of quantitative data.

Part C

Evaluation of the data analysis and results utilizing research by Van Winkle, Allen, DeVore & Winston (2014)…

  1. The data was rigorously scored and prepared – Rating 3 – The data was collected using a 5-point Likert scale and so the score was outlined prior to the participants responding to the survey.
  2. Good descriptive analysis were conducted – Rating 3 – The analysis was well written and shared in the results, discussions and findings section. References were providing drawing a correlation to previous known knowledge and newly found knowledge.
  3. Good hypothesis testing procedures were used – Rating 0 – It does not appear that the authors provided any hypothesis.
  4. The results are comprehensive – Rating 1 – I felt the authors had the opportunity to research and provide more analysis then they did. The results shared were minimal and perhaps without having a number of hypothesis to be researched, it did not require extensive results to be shared. I feel like this is a missed opportunity.
  5. The results include sufficient information – Rating 1 – again I did not feel the report provided sufficient information and left me wanting to know more such as how the results might have differed by gender, age and race.
  6. The data analysis represents a good quantitative process – Rating 3 – the author’s analysis in the discussions and findings did correlate back to the quantitative process that was followed.
  7. The results provide a good explanation of the study’s purpose – Rating 3 – the results did indicate that the study’s purpose was met.

Overall quality 14/21 indicating adequate quality results for the data analysis and results, likely pointing back to gaps in collection of data.

Part D

As a consumer of research reports, the most important aspects needed to consider in the methods and results section of a high quality quantitative report is citing literature that includes models of how to design a study and how to collect and analyze data. If a research paper utilizes previous successful methods, the information and results are more likely to be credible and measurable. Detailed information about how the information is collected and what controls are in place to ensure credible data is also equally important.

The collection of data appears to be time consuming and difficult for the average person to have access to collection models that ensure anonominity, security and reliability of the data in a quantitative report. The other skillset that is needed of researchers is mathematical skills that can explain the data in an anonymous way. Depending on the field of study this could potentially prohibit individuals from participating in a research report if not comfortable in a mathematical setting.

One thing that is evident in creating a credible qualitative research report is that it takes time to set up collection methods and to think through potential gaps in the research. Also taking time to think about a hypothesis in advance may help to shape what data is collected. In my current role as a leader, having the time to create a research report is not likely however having the ability to read research reports on industry trends is essential. In particular in reading research reports on leadership styles and trends that effect employee morale and productivity.

What kinds of research tools are available and accessible to an amateur researcher, for the collection of qualitative data?

References

Howell, D.C. (2013) Statistical methods for psychology (8th ed.). Belmont, CA: Cengage.

Kanter, R.M. (1977) Men and woman of the corporation. New York, NY. Basic Books.

Laschinger, H., Gilbert, S., Smith, L., & Leslie K. (2010). Towards a comprehensive theory of nurse/patient empowerment: Applying Kanter’s empowerment theory to patient care. Journal of Nursing Management, 18, 4-13

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

Spreitzer, G.M. (1995). Psychological empowerment in the workplace: Dimensions, measurement and validation. Academy of Management Journal, 38(5), 1442-1465. doi:10.2307/256865

 

Van Winkle, B., Allen, S., DeVore, D., & Winston, B. (2014). The relationship between the servant leadership behaviors of immediate supervisors and follower’s perceptions of being empowered in the context of small business. Journal of Leadership Education, 13(3), 70-82.

Wang, Y., & Poutziouris, P. (2010). Leadership styles, management systems and growth: Empirical evidence from UK owner-managed SMEs. Journal of Enterprising Culture, 18(3), 331-354.

Winston, B.E., & Fields, D. (n.d.) Development and evaluation of a new parsimonious measure of servant leadership. Manuscript under review.