Melchar and Bosco’s (2014) study is evaluated based on Plano-Clark and Creswell’s (2015) criteria for evaluating the conclusions and back matter in a research report below. Each criteria is rated on a three-point scale.
- The major results are identified and summarized (3/3) – The key results that confirmed the two hypotheses – mid-level managers exhibit servant leadership “consistent with those of high-level leaders” (Melchar & Bosco, p. 83, 2014) and there is a lack of differences between subjects based on education, age, and employment time – were clearly highlighted and focused. The summary of the data was logical and solely addressed the hypotheses without introducing new ideas.
- The results are thoughtfully examined in relation to the literature and personal reflections (1/3) – The discussion includes personal reflections well focused on the results and the implications of the quantitative data gathered. While there are suggestions of the study’s relation to prior literature about servant literature, Melchar and Bosco (2014) fail to explicitly relate prior research to their study. While this may be a fault of a lack of precedent literature, the complete lack of reference back to previous studies is unjustified.
- Appropriate implications of the results for practice are identified and justified (1/3) – Melchar and Bosco’s (2014) discussion discusses how “the highest means were in the areas of wisdom, organizational stewardship, and altruistic calling” (p. 84) and therefore suggests servant leaders to practice these three traits, but does not explicitly specify audiences that would benefit from this knowledge or explicitly provide suggestions based on its results.
- Thoughtful critiques of the study’s limitations are provided and appropriate for the research approach (3/3) – Melchar and Bosco (2014) provide adequate examples of their study’s limitations. Melchar and Bosco (2014) acknowledge their “results may not be generalizable to other types of for-profit environments” (p. 85) as they only examined one industry, and their sample size was also “somewhat small” (p. 85).
- Suitable implications of the results for future research are identified and justified (2/3) – The researchers suggest further research could be conducted to examine “the main components of servant leadership, particularly trust, valuing of others and ethical conduct” (Melchar & Bosco, 2014, p. 85) which could “further expand important knowledge relation to employee empowerment and productivity” (p. 85) in other environments. While this suggestion builds on the limitations of this current study, there is a lack of relation between the study’s topic and the suggested further study.
- The interpretations are consistent with the study (2/3) – While the conclusions are drawn from the data logically and focuses on the two key hypotheses, further explanation of the findings and concluding themes would have been helpful.
- The back matter is appropriate for the study report (1/3) – The reference list provided is appropriate, but there is a lack of author notes and appendices. Providing examples of the questions asked in both the interviews and surveys would have benefited the readers’ understanding of the study.
References
Melchar, D. E., & Bosco, S. M. (2010). Achieving High Organization Performance through Servant Leadership. Journal Of Business Inquiry: Research, Education & Application, 9(1), 74-88.
Plano-Clark, V., & Creswell, J. (2015). Understanding research: A consumer’s guide (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.