{"id":112,"date":"2018-03-02T08:17:47","date_gmt":"2018-03-02T08:17:47","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/create.twu.ca\/layla11\/?p=112"},"modified":"2018-03-02T08:17:47","modified_gmt":"2018-03-02T08:17:47","slug":"unit-9-learning-activity-9-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/create.twu.ca\/layla11\/2018\/03\/02\/unit-9-learning-activity-9-2\/","title":{"rendered":"Unit 9, Learning activity 9.2"},"content":{"rendered":"

Article<\/strong><\/p>\n

Melchar, D. E., & Bosco, S. M. (2010). Achieving high organization performance through servant leadership. Journal of Business Inquiry: Research, Education and Application, 9<\/em>(1), 74-88.<\/p>\n

Quality Criteria<\/strong><\/p>\n

1. The major results are identified and summarized.<\/p>\n

Rate<\/strong><\/p>\n

3=Excellent<\/p>\n

Evidence and\/or Reasoning
\n<\/strong><\/p>\n

a) The researchers have summarized the results in the Discussion section. In the first sentence of the Discussion section, they have stated that the results are key for answering the research questions<\/p>\n

b) The researchers then thoroughly interpret three principal characteristics of the servant leader which are wisdom, organizational stewardship, and altruistic calling.<\/p>\n

c) The results for Hypothesis 2 are presented after the interpretation and followed by the implications of the results.<\/p>\n

Quality Criteria<\/strong><\/p>\n

2. The results are thoughtfully examined in relation to the literature and personal reflections.<\/p>\n

Rate<\/strong><\/p>\n

2=Good<\/p>\n

Evidence and\/or Reasoning<\/strong><\/p>\n

a) The results are explicitly compared to the prior research (such as Barbuto and Wheeler’s study) in the Result section, not in the Discussion section.<\/p>\n

b) The researchers objectively present the results of the quantitative data.<\/p>\n

c) As for the qualitative part, I could identify several sentences in the second paragraph of the Discussion section, such as “Certainly, in order for an individual to be considered a good leader, he or she must be trusted to be knowledgeable and competent about the business” (Melchar & Bosco, 2010, p. 84). I prefer to consider them as the researchers’ personal reflections.<\/p>\n

Quality Criteria<\/strong><\/p>\n

3. Appropriate implications of the results for practice are identified and justified.<\/p>\n

Rate<\/strong><\/p>\n

2=Good<\/p>\n

Evidence and\/or Reasoning<\/strong><\/p>\n

a) The researchers point out two aspects of implications in the Discussion section, and the suggestions stemming from the study results are clearly advanced.<\/p>\n

b) Although the researchers do not explicitly mention the specific-audience group, I tend to believe the leaders in the demanding, high-performance industry will benefit from the knowing the results of the study. The other researchers who would like to explore on this topic would also be benefited as well.<\/p>\n

Quality Criteria<\/strong><\/p>\n

4. Thoughtful critiques of the study’s limitations are provided and appropriate for the research approach.<\/p>\n

Rate<\/strong><\/p>\n

3=Excellent<\/p>\n

Evidence and\/or Reasoning<\/strong><\/p>\n

The researchers have presented two limitations: first, the results may not be generalizable to other types of for-profit environment; second, the sample size was small.<\/p>\n

Quality Criteria<\/strong><\/p>\n

5. Suitable implications of the results for future research are identified and justified.<\/p>\n

Rate<\/strong><\/p>\n

3=Excellent<\/p>\n

Evidence and\/or Reasoning<\/strong><\/p>\n

a) The researchers have suggested that the servant leadership should be studied empirically in other environments.<\/p>\n

b) Additionally, they have stated “further examination of the main components of servant leadership, particularly trust, valuing of others and ethical conduct could further expand important knowledge relating to employee empowerment and productivity”\u00a0(Melchar & Bosco, 2010, p. 85).<\/p>\n

Quality Criteria<\/strong><\/p>\n

6. The interpretations are consistent with the study.<\/p>\n

Rate<\/strong><\/p>\n

2=Good<\/p>\n

Evidence and\/or Reasoning<\/strong><\/p>\n

a) The overall conclusions are logical and consistent with the study’s purpose and the research questions.<\/p>\n

b) The researchers analyze the results of the two hypotheses, and interpret the implications in a logical way.<\/p>\n

Quality Criteria<\/strong><\/p>\n

7. The back matter is appropriate for the study report.<\/p>\n

Rate<\/strong><\/p>\n

3=Excellent<\/p>\n

Evidence and\/or Reasoning<\/strong><\/p>\n

The researchers provide information including Author Notes (p. 74) and the list of references after the Limitations and Conclusions section.<\/p>\n

Total Score = 18 (17-21 = High quality)<\/strong><\/p>\n

References<\/p>\n

Melchar, D. E., & Bosco, S. M. (2010). Achieving high organization performance through servant leadership. Journal of Business Inquiry: Research, Education and Application, 9<\/em>(1), 74-88.<\/p>\n

Plano-Clark, V., & Creswell, J. (2015).\u00a0Understanding research: A consumer\u2019s guide<\/em>\u00a0(2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.<\/p>\n

Unit 9 Learning Activities<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n