Learning activity 5.1-Unit 5.
Irving, J. A., & Berndt, J. (2017). Leader purposefulness within servant leadership: Examining the effects of servant leadership, leader follower-focus, leader goal-orientation, and leader purposefulness in a large U.S. healthcare organization. Administrative Sciences, 7(10), 1-20.
What quantitative research design is used and is it justified?
The study used correlational research design, regression analysis conducted to provide predictive modeling and indicators of the relative importance of each independent variable on the related dependent variable.
The author of the study argues the leader purposefulness is related to study of servant leadership and should be included as a dimension of servant leadership research.
They examined four leader independent variables and four dependent variables to determine the relationship in leadership dimension of a leader’s servant leadership focus and effect of these aspects on followers, then the impact on the organization (Irving, J. A., & Berndt, J., 2017, p.2).
To determine the extent to which two factors related, 16 hypotheses generated to corollate the relation between the leader independent variables and dependent variables. Therefore, according to Plano-Clark, V., & Creswell, J., 2015, p.196), correlational design was selected.
Rate 3
Are good quantitative procedures used to select and assign participants?
The study was faith-based healthcare system.
The researchers want to generalize the results to a population; they chose effective leadership approach which is general in all organizations who promote servant leadership attributes. The participants provided their follower assessment of a leader on several measures of SL and their own experience of job satisfaction, organizational commitment, person-organizational fit, follower perception of leadership effectiveness.
They invited 5000 individuals to participate during a one-month period; they had 1780 participants participated, 1713 participants provided complete responses. Majority of participants were (the 40s,50s, 20s, 30s, and 60s or older. Majority of participants were female (83%), and different levels of education were the length of employment were from less than one year up to more than 20 years. Also, relevant information gathered for the leaders assessed by their followers. They included years of experience as leaders and participants were asked to respond to how long this person had been their leader (Irving, J. A., & Berndt, J., 2017, p.6).
I believe this set of information will fit into the correlation design coherently.
Rate 3
Are good quantitative data collection procedures used?
The invitation was around 5000 employees, providing anonymous feedback on the leader to who the research participant reported to, they hade equal opportunity to participate. With 1713 proper response, this random sample represents a sample size in which statistical generalization made to the larger organization. The period of a month provided for responses (Irving, J. A., & Berndt, J., 2017, p.7).
Rate 3 ( LA 5.1-Unit 5)
Are good quantitative data analysis procedures are used?
They used SPSS version 22 for statistical analysis:
- The reliability coefficients calculated for each of the scales in the study( eight scales)
- PLI measure construct validity for the measure
- Two-tailed Pearson r correlations calculated for each of the intercorrelations of the variables in the hypotheses.
- Regression analysis used to provide predictive modeling and indicators of the relative importance of each independent variables on the related dependent variables.
Rate 3 (LA 5.1-Unit 5)
Are good quantitative results and conclusions are reported?
The findings from the analysis support the study hypotheses
Four follower’s perspectives on leadership scale were assessed using Purpose in leadership inventory, and each of these four independent variables analyzed for a hypothesized positive relationship with four dependent variables.
Results of each approach reported
Claims of generalization made in studies with representative samples, 1700 employees from large US healthcare organization responded to five research instruments. (correlational research design)
Rate 3 (LA 5.1-Unit 5)
Are the study used a rigorous research design?
All elements of the study from problem to purpose to methods to results to conclusion fit together in a logical, coherent way; Correlational research design.
Rate 2
Does the quantitative research design address the study’s purpose?
The results and conclusions from the research design provide a rigorous explanation of the impact of relationships of variables; that fulfills the study’s intent and answers research questions in the discussion section. Does the purpose in leadership Inventory, both its composite measure of servant leadership and its subscales (leader follower-focus, leader goal-orientation, and leader purposefulness), evidence criterion validity with the important work-related outcome?
Rate 3
Quality rating
0=Poor
1= Fair
2= Good
3= Excellent
Overall quality
0-10= Low quality
11-16=Average quality
17-21= High quality
Total score=21
My overall assessment=20
Reference
Plano-Clark, V., & Creswell, J. (2015). Understanding research: A consumer’s guide (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.