WRITE TWO STRUCTURED ABSTRACTS FOR A RESEARCH PROPOSAL QUESTION BELOW. EXAMPLE IS BELOW. THE ABSTRACTS ARE TO BE SEPARATE AND MUST BE EXPLICIT IN DETAIL. BASICALLY, A STRUCTED ABSTRACT SHOULD BASICALLY BE AN OUTLINE OF HOW YOUR RESEARCH PROPOSAL WILL BE WRITTEN. ASSIGNMENT: 1.Write a structured abstract for a qualitative research proposal that seeks to know employees’ preference for which of the four leadership styles: (a) transformational, (b) servant, (c) transactional, and (d) authentic. Consider the employees’ job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and employee engagement. In the proposal you must clearly and expertly show: (a) your content knowledge of the concepts you include in the proposal, (b) clearly presented research question(s) and, if quantitative, testable hypothesis(hypotheses), (c) appropriate research methods that are aligned with the research question(s)/hypothesis(hypotheses), (d) appropriate analysis method(s) that align with the research question(s)/hypothesis(hypotheses), appropriate references that show your knowledge of the literature, and your expertise in APA-manuscript style. ——– Example of a Qualitative Structured Abstract Design a qualitative study that seeks to develop a construct called ‘leadership humility’. This concept may cover both Fry’s and Collins concepts. The design must collect data from participants (in other words this is neither an opinion piece or a content-analysis study) ANSWER 1: Fry (2003) conceptualizes spiritual leadership as comprising vision, altruistic love; hope/faith and inner life practice. Altruistic love entails “a sense of wholeness, harmony, and well-being produced through care, concern, and appreciation for both self and others” (Fry 2003, p. 712). It embodies patience, kindness, lack of envy, forgiveness, humility, selflessness, self-control, trust, loyalty, and truthfulness. Collins (2009) linked humility to “Level 5 Leadership” in his landmark book, where he described “good-to-great” leaders as tending to be quiet, reserved, self-effacing, and often shy, with a blend of professional will (p. 13). This paradoxical blend of professional humility and will resulted in Level 5 Leaders who (a) demonstrated compelling modesty; (b) were not boastful; (c) acted calm with a demeanor of quiet determination; (d) channeled ambitions into the greater organization and successors; and (e) sought to give credit to other people and factors outside self (Collins, p. 36). This marked maturation uncommon to many board rooms in larger institutions was found by Collins to be a common theme with “good-to-great” leaders (p. 37). These descriptions match the outcomes of altruistic love described by Fry et al., which include joy, peace, and serenity and these are positively linked with organization commitment, productivity while reducing stress. In addition, the humility factor of Dennis and Bocarnea’s (2005) servant leadership assessment instrument provided similar factor items, which included the leaders’ tendency to: (a) talk more about employees’ accomplishments than his or her own; (b) not overestimate his or her merits; not be interested in self-glorification; (c) to consult others in the organization, acknowledging that he or she may not have all the answers; (d) does not center attention on his or her own accomplishment; (e) exhibits a demeanor of humility toward others. Based on the above concepts two key emerging research questions will be explored using a qualitative questionnaire which will be developed to conduct in-depth interviews with 8-10 senior leaders in the defense acquisition organization. The two key research questions include: (1) How do leaders define and use humility to impact organizational goals? And (2) How do leaders enact characteristics of humility with their subordinates? The interview subjects will be selected based on the outcome of previous 360-degree leadership evaluations by their subordinates. Senior leaders with the highest ratings by subordinates will be invited to participate in the telephonic interview process. There will be an initial pool of 12 interview subjects selected, which will continue until data saturation is reached (Patton, 2014). During the first cycle coding, the in vivo coding approach will be taken in order to ascertain initial patterns using the MAXQDA program. Then descriptive coding will be used to group interview transcript data based on spiritual leadership and servant leadership paradigms (Saldaña, 2015). Next, second cycle coding will use axial coding to continue to code data until response patterns and themes emerge that effectively answer the research questions. References Collins, J. (2009). Good to Great – (Why some companies make the leap and others don’t). Harper Business. Dennis, R. S., & Bocarnea, M. (2005). Development of the servant leadership assessment instrument. Leadership & Organizational Development Journal, 26(7/8), 600-615. Fry, L. W. (2003). Toward a theory of spiritual leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 14(6), 693-727. Fry, L. W., Vitucci, S., & Cedillo, M. (2005). Spiritual leadership and army transformation: Theory, measurement, and establishing a baseline. Leadership Quarterly, 16(5), 835-862. Patton M. (2014). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. 4th Edition. Sage Publications. Saldaña, J. (2015). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Sage. ANSWER 2: Answer: Motivating others is a vitally important part of the role of college presidents. This fact is particularly true when it comes to faculty and instructors who arguably have the heaviest lift in helping the institution fulfill its mission and purpose of educating students and providing service and research to the community. Fry’s (2003) model of spiritual leadership is considered a causal model in which altruistic love, encompassing humility, directly affects followers’ sense of membership and how much they feel connected, appreciated, and understood as members of that organization. This membership, according to the author, plays an important role in increasing the intrinsic motivation of the follower that leads to greater organizational commitment and productivity. The purpose of this multiple case-study is to take a closer examination of the meaning and description of leadership humility from the perspective of a diverse group of faculty at a community college and get an understanding and description of how they perceive leader humility impacting their own motivation and commitment to their work and to the college. Based on Yin’s (2014) description of the case study as “an empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary phenomenon in depth and within its real-world context” and the recommendation of five to six individuals maximum for the case study, this study will include in-depth interviews with six faculty members (selected from each of the major academic divisions) who are also very active in College Senate and have direct and regular contact with the college president. Attention will also be paid to the faculty members’ years with the college to get a balanced representation of new (1-2 years) and more experienced faculty. Faculty will be interviewed individually with interviews being audio-recorded while the interviewer will take notes. Researcher will take note of the status of saturation as data is collected from each interview. Transcripts will be written and analysis on the data in the transcripts will be done utilizing NVivo to unearth categories and common themes across the cases. References Fry, L. W. (2003). Toward a theory of spiritual leadership, The Leadership Quarterly, 14, 693-727. Yin, R. K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods. SAGE. ————————– 2. Write a structured abstract for a quantitative research proposal that seeks to know employees’ preference for which of the four leadership styles: (a) transformational, (b) servant, (c) transactional, and (d) authentic. Consider the employees’ job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and employee engagement. In the proposal you must clearly and expertly show: (a) your content knowledge of the concepts you include in the proposal, (b) clearly presented research question(s) and, if quantitative, testable hypothesis(hypotheses), (c) appropriate research methods that are aligned with the research question(s)/hypothesis(hypotheses), (d) appropriate analysis method(s) that align with the research question(s)/hypothesis(hypotheses), appropriate references that show your knowledge of the literature, and your expertise in APA-manuscript style. Example of a Quantitative Structured Abstract: The literature makes a case for the importance of self-efficacy as a predictor of leadership effectiveness, but little has been done to examine the possible moderating effect of organizational support.. Design a quantitative study that investigates the moderating effect of organizational support on the relationship between self-efficacy and leadership effectiveness. Answer 1: McCormick (2001) suggested that self-efficacy was the key cognitive factor in determining leader effectiveness. It is not a sole driver, but with beliefs about others and the performance context, goals, and knowledge structures, self-efficacy plays an important role according to past research. This quantitative, non-experimental descriptive correlational study takes a look at that relationship between self-efficacy and leadership effectiveness and also examines the moderating effect of organizational support on this relationship. This study uses organizational support theory as a framework to explain the impact of employees’ perception of the organization’s commitment to employees and willingness to provide resources toward their success (Baran et al., 2012). The target population for the study will be the Student Affairs leadership staff at community colleges in the southern region of NC. The total Student Affairs leadership staff is 144. The statistical analysis for the study will involve a statistical power of 95% and a confidence level of 5%. 128 participants are needed; therefore, the study will seek to get full participation from the 144. Data will be collected using the Survey for Perceived Organizational Support (Eisenberger et al., 1986), the Leader Efficacy Questionnaire (Hannah & Avolio, 2013), and the Perceived Leadership Effectiveness Survey (Dexter, 2016). Correlation will be used to test the relationship (Pearson correlation coefficient) between self-efficacy and leadership effectiveness. Regression analysis will be used to determine if organizational support moderated the relationship between self-efficacy and leadership effectiveness. References Baran, B. E., Shanock, L. R., & Miller, L. R. (2012). Advancing organizational support theory into the twenty-first century world of work. Journal of Business and Psychology, 27(2), 123-147. doi:https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10869-011-9236-3 McCormick, M. J. (2001). Self-efficacy and leadership effectiveness: Applying social cognitive theory to leadership. Journal of Leadership Studies, 8(1), 22-33. ANSWER 2: Maddy and Rosenbaum (2018) found a strong positive correlation [r (124) = 0.644, p < 0.001] between leadership self-sufficiency, as measured by the 18 leadership efficacy dimensions used by the Dreyfus model, and leadership effectiveness, based on 88 specific leadership and management behaviors determined by the study by Anderson et al. (2008). Additional literature has shown a strong case for self-efficacy as a predictor of leader effectiveness. However, the moderating effect of organizational support has not yet been explored in the literature. The purpose of this study is to use descriptive correlation and regression analysis to (a) perform Dreyfus model test used by Maddy and Rosenbaum to measure the correlation between leader self-efficacy and leadership effectiveness using Pearson correlation, and (b) to use regression analysis to determine the moderating effect between self-efficacy and leadership effectiveness. The theory of organizational support and the perceived organizational support survey by Eisenberg et al (1986) will provide the framework and instrument for studying the potential moderating effect by measuring eight items related to employee perceptions of the degree to which the organization values employee contributions and nine items regarding actions the organization takes to support the well-being of employees. The target sample for the survey items will be the 300 members of supervisory leadership at a military organization in the MidAtlantic. Based on the statistical calculator at https://sample-size.net/correlation-sample-size/ an expected correlation coefficient of .20 with 95% confidence, and .5% error sampling, the total minimum sample size will be 195, collected via random sampling. It is expected that the results of the self-efficacy and leadership effectiveness measures will reflect similar results based on the Dreyfus model and the results by Maddy and Rosenbaum (2018). Additionally, the study expects to find that organizational support as perceived by the participants has a moderating relationship to self-efficacy and leader effectiveness. References Anderson, D.W., Krajewski, H.T., Goffin, R.D. and Jackson, D.N. (2008), A leadership self-efficacy taxonomy and its relation to effective leadership, Leadership Quarterly, 19(5), 595-608, doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2008.07.003. Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchison, S., & Sowa, D. (1986). Perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied psychology, 71(3), 500. Maddy, L., & Rosenbaum, L. (2018). Determining leadership levels with the Dreyfus model. Journal of Workplace Learning. Calculator – retrieved from: https://sample-size.net/correlation-sample-size/
Attachments
Click Here To Download
The post employees appeared first on AssignmentHub.