Jenkins and Steward (2010) designed a research to analyze how servant leadership effected the nurses’ job satisfaction. Using Plano-Clark and Crewell’s (2015) criteria for evaluating a quantitative research design, I will rate Jenkins & Steward’s (2010) article on a three-point scale based on the seven criteria below:
- The choice of the research design is appropriate and justified (2/3) – Jenkins & Stewart (2010) used the survey research design. Nurses were asked to complete four questionnaires: “two regarding their perceptions of their immediate department head” (p. 50), one regarding their demographic characteristics, and one regarding their individual job satisfaction. Due to the intention of analyzing job satisfaction, the use of a survey design is fitting as the design addresses the attitudes, opinions, and behavior of nurses under their current leadership. Despite this, there is no direct explanation for why the specific design was selected.
- Good quantitative procedures are used to select and assign participants (2/3) – While the introduction states “the United States is on the precipice of a great wave of RN shortages” (Jenkins & Stewart, 2010, p. 46), the study only surveys “a population of nurses working for a large, multidivisional health care system” (p. 49). Although a broader selection of nurses from different health care systems would have benefited the study, the study had reason for its selection; the system chosen had a “researcher association and access to data” (p. 49).
- Good quantitative data collection procedures are used (3/3) – Data was collected at “regularly scheduled staff meetings” (p. 49), and for those that did not attend, surveys were distributed to them in a packet with instructions. This allowed all nurses from different departments within the specific health care system to have the opportunity to participate in the survey.
- Good quantitative data analysis procedures are used (3/3) – The variables selected for analysis – commitment to serve, job satisfaction of nurses, and the gender, enthnicity, and self-reported performance scores – are well considered and appropriate. They address the purpose of the study.
- Good quantitative results an conclusions are reported (3/3) – The study carefully considers the correlating results between each variable which support the hypotheses proposed at the beginning of the study. “Claims made are appropriate for the design” (Plano-Clark & Creswell, 2015, p. 211), and supported by the results.
- The study used a rigorous research design (3/3) – The problem and purpose of the study fits well into the methods and questionnaires used. Seeking to describe the “trend” of job dissatisfaction in nursing and the possible increase of satisfaction through servant leadership, the survey research design is logical and coherent.
- The use of the quantitative research design addressed the study’s purpose (2/3) – The results and conclusion provide significant results where “departments where staff perceived that managers had higher servant leadership orientation demonstrated significant positive impact on individual employee job satisfaction” (Jenkins & Stewart, 2010, p. 52) fulfills the study’s intent, but as the study mentioned, there are limitations to the research such as the study focused solely on one health care system and does not well-represent the general population of the US.
References
Jenkins, M., & Stewart, A. C. (2010). The importance of a servant leader orientation. Health Care Management Review, 35(1), 46-54.
Plano-Clark, V., & Creswell, J. (2015). Understanding research: A consumer’s guide (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Link to activity question: https://create.twu.ca/ldrs591-sp18/unit-5-learning-activities/