COM 687 Abstract Assignment and Format

1. Use the following abstract format…. don’t change the format….just plug and chug with your article’s
information in this format.

2. Abstracts should always be typed, using APA style (1” margins, APA citation, etc…).

3. An abstract is a brief overview (reader’s digest view) of the article…don’t rewrite the entire article (you
should be able to write an abstract in 1-2 pages)! However, remember to include all important and
pertinent information.

4. Section by section notes:

a. Name: put your name in this section

b. Citation: article information goes here (in APA citation format)
c. Key Terms: list and define the important terms the author(s) operationalized in the literature
review
d. Purpose of the study: Describe what the author(s) were trying to accomplish in your article.
Sometimes this will be specifically stated in the article, and sometimes you will have to infer
what the purpose was.
e. Research questions/hypotheses: List the questions the authors were trying to answer, and list
the hypothesis that were posited in the article. Some articles will only have RQ’s and some will
only have hypo’s….some will have both.
f. Methodology: How did the author(s) go about collecting data? What was the sample size? Was
the sample random? Who was sampled? How many? What was done to them or what were they
told to do? Or if the author(s) did not survey a sample, what did they do? What did they analyze?
What methods were used? Was it qualitative or quantitative? What were the conditions of the
research?
g. Results: What statistical tests were run (if any)? What were the answers to the RQ’s? What were
the answers to the hypo’s?
h. Conclusions: What do the author(s) conclude about the results? Were limitations of the study
listed? What are some directions for future research?
i. Critique: What did you personally think about the article? Was it easy reading? Was it
understandable? Was it interesting or not? Was it a waste of time? Let me know your opinions of
the article…..also remember to include a specific critique of the methodology used in the article
and your opinion how you can use the findings of the article in your own organizational
life…i.e., how applicable is the article to your life?
 COM 687 Abstract Format Example
Name:
Max Bach

Citation:
Neufeld, D. J., Wan, Z., & Fang, Y. (2010). Remote leadership, communication effectiveness and leader
performance. Group Decision and Negotiation, 19(3), 227–246. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-008-9142-
x

Key terms (operationalized in the lit review):

transactional contingent reward leadership---Transactional contingent reward leadership uses recognition and
rewards for goals as motivation.
transformational leadership---transformational leadership builds personal and social identification among its
members with the mission and goals of the leader and organization.
Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire Form 5X (MLQ-5X)---The Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire
(MLQ—also known as MLQ 5X short or the standard MLQ) measures a broad range of leadership types from
passive leaders, to leaders who give contingent rewards to followers, to leaders who transform their followers
into becoming leaders themselves.

Purpose of the study

The objective of this paper is to improve our theoretical and practical understanding by engaging in a
concurrent study of leadership, communication, and physical distance.

Research Questions/Hypotheses:
H1: Transformational leadership positively influences perceived leader performance.
H2: Transactional contingent reward leadership positively influences perceived leader performance, but to a
lesser extent than transformational leadership.
H3: Physical distance negatively influences perceived leader performance.
H4: Transformational leadership positively influences communication effectiveness.
H5: Transactional contingent reward leadership positively influences communication effectiveness.
H6: Physical distance negatively influences communication effectiveness.
H7: Communication effectiveness positively influences perceived leader performance.
RQ1: how is leader performance influenced by leadership style, physical distance, and communication
effectiveness between leaders and followers?

Methodology:
41 leaders and 138 followers participated in this study. Each filled out an online survey. It asked a selection of
questions from the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire Form 5X (MLQ-5X) to determine the level of
transformational leadership, transactional contingent reward leadership and leader performance of the respective
direct supervisor. Communication effectiveness and physical distance were measured using a selection of
questions already used in prior research. Job tenure, length of the leader-follower relationship and interaction
frequency were used as control variables to account for their anticipated influence on leader performance.
Data was analyzed using the Partial Least Squares (PLS) method. Sobel tests were used to assess mediation.

Results:
H1 predicted a relationship between transformational leadership and perceived leader performance, and was
supported, while there was no correlation between contingent reward leadership. Thus, H2 was rejected. The
results show no influence of distance on perceived leader performance nor communication effectiveness, which
is not in support of H3 and H6. H4 and H5 were supported, both transformational leadership and contingent
reward leadership were suitable predictors for communication effectiveness, with almost identical β-values.
Lastly, H7 was supported, results indicated a correlation between communication effectiveness and perceived
leader performance. The support of only the hypotheses H1, H4, H5 and H7 indicate that the interaction
between leadership style and leader performance is mediated by communication effectiveness. The Sobel-Test
confirmed that mediation was significant in both cases.

Discussion/Conclusions:
The authors argue that both H1 and H2 are highly consistent with prior research. The surprising rejection of H3
and H6 is explained by the on average long relationship between the leaders and followers and familiarity with
the company after a long tenure. They suggest that over time, participants adapted to their level of physical
distance so that perceived performance and communication effectiveness were not influenced by this measure.
It is pointed out that thus, leaders should not see distance as a guarantee for negative effects on communication
or leadership. The study further indicates that any display of leadership behavior, transformational or
transactional, is interpreted by followers as effective communication, which according to the authors
empirically supports the notion that leadership is strongly tied to communication. The support of H7 suggests
that managers who are effective communicators are also seen as stronger leaders.
The positive mediation test shows that leaders need to communicate efficiently to be perceived as effective
leaders. The authors point out that it is therefore not enough to have good leadership principles if one cannot
communicate effectively.
They suggest improvements to the method of data collection, most importantly gathering data over time instead
of one time only.

Critique:
This study was a little statistics heavy, but still pleasant to read, especially the extremely concise results section.
Firstly, as with a lot of studies I read in the last weeks, the results further reinforce the importance of
communication for leadership. It was interesting to read that distance had no observable influence on how
employees view their leaders performance and communication effectiveness, I was expecting different results. I
was not surprised by the relationship between exhibited leadership behavior and perceived communication
effectiveness, as again, I see communication as a part of leadership. Future research could include all questions
from the MLQ-5X to improve the accuracy of the leader evaluation.