Category: Unit 7

Learning activity 7.2-Unit 7

 

Unit 7 Learning Activities

Beck, C. D. (2014). Antecedents of servant leadership: A mixed methods study. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 21(3), 299-314.

What was the purpose of the study?

The absent of empirical studies on the antecedents of servant leadership was the purpose of this study (Beck, C. D., 2014, p.299)

Is there a rationale provided for needing a mixed methods design?

Beck (2014) noted in his study that, “Given the complexities of leadership, quantitative results may be inadequate; therefore, qualitative data are needed to help explain initial quantitative data. The combination of quantitative and qualitative data should provide a complete picture and a “voice of the participants” (p.302). The author follows Creswell and Plano Clark (2007) suggestion, using quantitative data are inadequate in addressing the domain of leadership.

Rate 3

Did the quantitative method are of good quality based on the standard of quantitative research?

All the criterions have chosen for this study

Data collection were from a web-based survey using SLQ form, collected from 499 recruited leaders and 630 raters. All data analysis completed before approaching the next phase. Descriptive statistics and Pearson correlation served as the basis for analyzing the independent and dependent variables. One-way and two-way ANOVA test are done. A significant difference was set to be (p<0.05), the authenticity of the participants included in the study, and the results were achievable (Beck, 2014, p.302-304).

Rate 3

Did the qualitative method are of good quality based on the standard of qualitative research?

Data collection were in-depth one-on-one audiotaped interviews, collected from 12 recruited participants from leader pool- phase. The interview included nine open-ended questions were pilot tested for clarity. The participants informed that the interview would be audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. The participants reviewed the transcripts of their interviews to clarify or expand their responses as needed. The qualitative data were explored and coded to help explain why these participants demonstrated exemplary servant leadership behavior. They reviewed the themes and codes to check for appropriateness. The validity or inference quality procedures used in this study included member checking, triangulation, and peer review (Beck, 2014, p.304).

Rate 3

Is the choice of the mixed methods design appropriate and justified?

A good method design is used to plan and implement the study. Beck, (2014) “employed a mixed methods sequential explanatory design consisting of two distinct phases: Phase 1, a quantitative study, followed by Phase 2, a qualitative study in which interviews conducted and responses were coded and analyzed for possible themes” (p.302). The mixed method design is fully described, including the decision for timing, priority, and mixing. Beck, C. D., (2014) included the “two phases in his study, the quantitative survey collected data in the form of servant leadership questionnaire (SLQ), and the qualitative data were one-on-one audiotaped interviews” (p. 302, 304). That indicates the initial quantitative components had the priority for addressing the study’s purpose, and the quantitative phase of the study built to the qualitative phase to produce qualitative findings that help to explain quantitative results as the criteria have been set (Plano-Clark & Creswell, 2015, p.396). Triangulation was used to analyze the quantitative and qualitative data to validate the findings of the data collected (Beck, 2014, p.302).

Rate 3

What were the results of the study?

The quantitative and qualitative components were explicitly merged, consistent with the overall mixed method design, and explicitly discussed at the end of the study. The study had four significant findings. First, the longer a leader is in a leadership role, the more frequent the servant leader behaviors. Second, those leaders who volunteer at least one hour per week demonstrate higher servant leader behaviors. Third, servant leaders influence others through building trusting relationships. Lastly, servant leaders demonstrate an altruistic mindset (Beck, 2014, p.304).

Rate 3

Does the use of mixed methods produce a good understanding of the study’s purpose? Does the study use a rigorous application of mixed methods research to address the purpose?

The findings provide complete, valid and in-depth answers to the study’s research questions. The integrated findings go beyond what was learned and answered the research question. The exemplary servant leadership in this study emphasized different aspects of SL in regarding of altruistic calling, emotional healing, wisdom, persuasive mapping, and organizational stewardship. The four major findings and the themes that emerged from the data analysis lend support to the notion that there are characteristics, behaviors, and life experiences that predict a servant leader (Beck, 2014, p.307). Validity in a mixed methods study is defined “as the ability of the researcher to draw meaningful and accurate conclusions from all of the data in the study” (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2007, p. 146).

The mixed method design is a good fit for the study’s research problem purpose. The quantitative and qualitative and diverse aspects of the study fit together in a logical way to address the study’s purpose.

Rate 6

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=21

References

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

 

Learning activity 7.1-Unit 7

 

Unit 7 Learning Activities

The heart of the quantitative/qualitative debate is research problem and the purposeful approach. Plano-Clark and Creswell (2015) assert that “a quantitative research approach indicated when the research problem requires an explanation, while qualitative research approach indicated when the research problem requires exploration” (p.85-86). The argument in qualitative research is to explore the central phenomenon to develop and report description and themes. On the other side, the argument in the quantitative research is, the research problems call for explanation and measuring trends or variables to develop and report the results that are objectively compared with predictions and past studies (Plano-Clark and Creswell, 2015, p.193, 287).

Plano-Clerk & Creswell (2015) stated, “many of today’s research problem calls for both explanation and exploration” (p.381). Also added, “authors combined these two datasets to develop a complete understanding of the different modes of communication and the consequences of the use which lead to answer the research question” (p.383). Plano-Clark & Creswell (2015) proposed and explained; “the Mixed method is appropriate when researchers need to combine the strengths of quantitative and qualitative data, build from one type of data to the other, and to answer two research questions (p.385-386).

Thinking of using a combination of qualitative and quantitative data can improve an evaluation by ensuring that the strengths of another balance the limitations of one type of data. Therefore, providing that understanding enhanced by integrating different ways of knowing. Evaluation of invested both quantitative data (numbers) and qualitative data (text, images) disclose the importance of planning how these will be combined.  Stentz, Plano-Clark & Matkin (2012) stated, “researchers can maximize the strengths of each approach while making up for the weaknesses of the approaches, develop complete and complementary understandings, increase validity of results, use one form to build on the results of the other, and/or examine contextualized understandings, multi-level perspectives, and cultural influences” (p.1174).

Also, “quantitative approaches (such as surveys, correlational studies, or experiments) provide opportunities for analyzing existing leadership approaches, combining them with qualitative approaches (such as content analysis, case study, or grounded theory) can support new discoveries within the realm of existing leadership theory” (Stentz et al., 2012, p1174)

Applying both quantitative and qualitative approaches, the GLOBE researchers were able to uncover new understandings about cross-cultural interactions and how culture impacts leader effectiveness and in a way that is generalizable between cultures and within cultures around the world. (Northhouse, 2013).

Although “the GLOBE researchers used an overall quantitative approach for purposes of scientific validity, they applied a mixed methods approach within their multi-phase, multi-method project by embedding content analysis of interviews, focus groups, and published media (representing qualitative approaches) to capture richly descriptive culture-specific interpretations to account for cultural influences on leadership” (House et al., 2001).

I believe it’s a valuable approach to specific extent solving a problem and answer the research question. Plano-Clark & Creswell (2015) they provided in-depth different mixed method research design for scholars to amplify the intent of research and to produce the complete analysis results (p.390-403). Mixed method research appears to have an abroad insight and era on too many fields like healthcare, management, social science, leadership theory and its application.

Question: How many research question I can include in mixed method research design?

References

Creswell, J. (2017, June 1). What is the mixed methods research?[Video file]. Retrieve from http://johnwcreswll.com/videos/

House, R., Javidan, M., & Dorfman, P. (2001). Project GLOBE: An introduction. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 50(4), 489–505, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1464-0597.00070.

Northhouse, P. G. (2013). Leadership theory and practice (6th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc

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