Learning activity 6.1-Unit 6
Unit 6 Learning Activities
Russell, E. J., Maxfield, R. J., & Russell, J. L. (2017). Discovering the self-interest of servant leadership: A grounded theory. Servant Leadership: Theory and Practice, 4(1), 75-97.
What research design was used to guide the study? Was it justified? The choice of the research design is appropriate and justified?
Russell, E. J., Maxfield, R. J., & Russell, J. L. (2017) used the qualitative grounded theory research design in purpose to “discover how senior-level leaders perceived personal benefits derived from serving the needs of their followers.” (Russell et al., 2017, p.75); also built upon conceptual work of Russell (2016), who argued the existence of an ongoing tangible and intangible benefit cycle between the leader and follower. A thorough review of literature served as a foundation for this qualitative research to emerge to advance the knowledge of servant leadership philosophy and identifying the benefit of being a servant leader.
According to Plano-Clerk & Creswell (2010), explained the grounded theory research as to develop a theory about the process, action, or interaction that found in the experiences and perspectives of the participants (p.297, 298). Russell et al., (2017) involved 14 participants interviewed to discover how different leaders perceived the benefit of serving the others. They considered understanding participants’ interpretation of their new theory. They use terms and citing up-to-date (1943-2016).
Russel et al., (2017) defined grounded theory research design in the methodology section the reason behind is “the design allows for an analysis of data using a constant comparative method” (p.83,84).
Russell et al., (2017) used a type of purposeful sampling known as expert sampling which allows for a theoretical discovery involving data collection and analysis from pre-selected specific experts (Patton, 2002). Also, the saturation point addressed as “No more participants recruited once saturation occurred” (p.85).
Rate 6
Were good qualitative data collection procedures used?
According to Plano-Clerk & Creswell (2015) statement, “The ground theory researcher collected data in the form of interviews” (p.298). The evidence of collecting data was through multiple online questionnaires obtained from leaders from the for-profit organization in western united states. They protect the anonymity of the 14 participants’ age, gender, specific organization, and the information not disclosed (Russell et al., 2017, p.84,85).
Rate 2 (LA 6.1-Unit 6).
Were good qualitative data analysis procedures, qualitative results, and interpretation reported?
According to Plano-Clerk & Creswell (2015), they used multiple stages of coding; overarching open codes which revealed specific relationships resulting in axial codes then converged to selective codes and reaching saturation to explain and relate the core categories that allowed for the study’s theoretical development with attributes (Russell et al., 2017, p.86).
The results presented in words in the article text, they included tables to include specific script areas of focus and sources, participants of the study, and theoretical findings with attributes and themes.
Rate 6 (LA 6.1-Unit 6)
Did the study use a rigorous research design?
All elements of the study fit together logically and coherently. Addressing and reducing the skepticism surrounding servant leadership of one-sided servitude can benefit those who served by the leader. Therefore, two attributes converged from the theory finding were, validation as a leader and freedom from the management which explained how different leaders perceived the benefits from serving followers, thus a rewarding outcome for the organization.
Rate 3
Does the qualitative research design address the study’s purpose?
Russell et al., (2017) findings from the research provide, a rich exploration that fulfills the studies intent and discovers “how senior-level leader from multiple for-profit sectors perceived the benefits derived from serving the needs of the followers” (p.75). Also, revealed a single theoretical finding that advances the understanding of servant leadership philosophy by discovering the benefits to one’s self -interest from being a servant leader (p.93).
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.
