This paper will evaluate the quality of research in the article “Psychopathic leadership a case study of a corporate psychopath CEO” by Clive Boddy by analyzing the author’s methods, findings, and writing style. The setting of the paper is sufficiently described as a charity organization that had a newly appointed corporate psychopath CEO. The collected data was appropriate for the analysis of the CEO’s personality through a standardized test to reveal any signs of psychopathy. Two data sources from within the organization have been used. However, the author considers the possibility of insufficient objectivity, as the paper is based on an interview with a single employee and a report from another manager whose detailed responses are incorporated in the article (Boddy, 2015). The author explains his choice of participants, ensuring that the respondent and another manager had the experience of close contact with a psychopathic CEO. The exact roles of participants are not revealed to ensure anonymity. The researcher clearly states any existing biases and beliefs that may affect the outcome of the interview.
The methods employed by the author for analysis of the interview are suitable for the studied topic and its theoretical background. They are extensively described by Boddy, who defends his choice of research tools by referring to credible sources. In case of any new evidence against the findings of the paper, its results can be revisioned. The observations from the interviewee sufficiently describe the subject of research to ensure that this case provides convincing evidence. The portrait of the CEO from two different sources has revealed the same personality. The table and the figure from the paper are easily readable and provide valuable visual support for the author’s argument. Boddy’s research is extensive, and the main body of the paper sufficiently supports the conclusion. No irrelevant or discrepant data was found in the report, which remains precise.
The findings of this case study can be compared with other similar studies and applied in different contexts, although some contexts may make it invalid for application due to the differences between cultures (Boddy, 2015). The discussion focuses on expanding the research question by comparing the results of the interview with the outcomes for the company. The author reports that this paper expands on the knowledge of psychopathic behavior and implies the necessity of its further examination in both practice and theory. This case study is peer-reviewed, although no other scholars’ opinions regarding the topic are included in the article. The respondent received access to Boddy’s paper prior to its publication and confirmed its validity, and agreed with the author’s findings.
The paper is written in an expository style and delivers the information in a clear and concise way. Parts of the interview that has been conducted for this study are used throughout the paper to create a narrative description of changes that occurred after the appointment of a new CEO. The story reinforces the author’s arguments regarding personality tests for leaders and remains authentic. The author’s ideas are built on past research and appear to logically connect theoretical material and the data from the interview to persuade a reader to agree with Boddy’s conclusions.
In conclusion, the study of a case of psychopathic behavior of leaders uses a valid analysis method through which the author reveals the impact of personality traits of a leader on an organization. Boddy’s report extensively describes the findings of this case study and ensures that the information remains within its scope. Although there are some concerns regarding bias from the interviewee, the article is convincing and clearly delivers the author’s point of view.
Reference
Boddy, C. R. (2015). Psychopathic leadership: A case study of a corporate psychopath CEO. Journal of Business Ethics, 145(1), 141-156. Web.