Below is my evaluation of the article titled: Servant Leadership: Its Origin, Development, and Application in Organizations, by (Sendjaya & Sarros, 2002). I performed the evaluation by applying criteria provided by the book – Understanding Research by Plano-Clark, V., & Creswell, J (2015).

 

Was the topic interesting?

Rating – 2/3

I found the initial presentation of the topic as being very intriguing to a researcher or practitioner but not to a layman. Although servant leadership could be argued as being a self-explanatory title, the authors’ introductory statements did not provide a broad or simple description of what it meant, its potential impact in organizations, or why anyone should be interested in it. I also felt that the authors were rather too quick in mentioning that the subject of servant leadership was one with a lot of research potentials. Understandably, the article was not written to a general audience.

 

Is there a meaningful problem?

Rating – 3/3

Absolutely yes. The authors cited prior research that also corroborated their views on servant leadership as being an untested theory. They further pointed that in spite of the apparent knowledge gap, it still had potentials for influencing how organizations could be led in the future. They also provided evidence of some of the positive values like empowerment, shared authority and relational power, among others, which servant leadership could enhance among followers in an organization.

 

Is the importance of the problem justified?

Rating – 3/3

The authors did provide evidence about why the problem was justified. Regarding this, they shared in the opinion of (Bass, 1985); who also agreed that a philosophical foundation on servant leadership would provide more opportunities for its theoretical development. This was further corroborated by the authors’ claim of servant leadership as being an untested theory,

 

 

Were there deficiencies in the knowledge of the problem?

Rating – 3/3

The authors made this abundantly clear from the very first paragraph of the study. Here, they made reference to the presence of only anecdotal evidences that support the commitment to servant leadership. They also provided evidence that showed there were knowledge gaps that needed to be filled regarding the subject of servant leadership. (p. 57)

 

Was an audience identified and were there specific examples of how the audience can use the missing knowledge?

Rating – 2/3

In this regard, I felt the audience was not clearly identified explicitly. Also, there was no specific example on how the audience could make use the missing knowledge.

 

Does the passage clearly argue that the study is warranted?

Rating – 3/3

Again, I absolutely agree! From the first paragraph until the end of the passage, the sequence of the author’s thoughts was clear and directed towards the purpose of the research, which was clearly stated at the end.

 

Was the passage well written?

Rating – 3/3

Summing it all up, I felt the passage was well written for the intended audience of researchers and practitioners.

Overall rating is 19/21

 

Article References

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

Bass, B.M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: Free Press.

 

Link: https://create.twu.ca/ldrs591-sp18/unit-4-learning-activities/