Minding the Gaps in Managers’ Self-Realisation: The Values-Based Leadership Discourse of a Diaconal Organisation
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The article mis well organized and has a clear argument. On this level I find the article impressive and convincing. My critique relates the lack of critical discussions related to the concept "value" . From one point of view it is ok to look only for how leaders perceived and integrated values in their everyday roles. Whether these "values" were perceived by others, by colleagues, by hospital patients and their families, is quite another perspective. I do not expect that everything shall be present in one article, but I would expect a better discussion on the limit of this study. Values are not necessarily what people say or proclaim as their motives. In the concluding remarks there are some interesting critical short comments. I think these critical comments, as well as the one presented here, should be discussed more in length in the introduction to the article and in a more lengthy concluding discussion
Author Response
Peer review 1
The article is well organized and has a clear argument. On this level I find the article impressive and convincing. My critique relates the lack of critical discussions related to the concept "value" . From one point of view it is ok to look only for how leaders perceived and integrated values in their everyday roles. Whether these "values" were perceived by others, by colleagues, by hospiftal patients and their families, is quite another perspective. I do not expect that everything shall be present in one article, but I would expect a better discussion on the limit of this study. Values are not necessarily what people say or proclaim as their motives. In the concluding remarks there are some interesting critical short comments. I think these critical comments, as well as the one presented here, should be discussed more in length in the introduction to the article and in a more lengthy concluding discussion
Thank you for pointing this out. I have now included a secition in the introduction that addresses this point as indicated by the distinction between values for practice and values in practice. These concepts are also integrated in the discussion.
Reviewer 2 Report
The article is scientific. The theme is important and current. The issue is original. There are indeed a few minor issues to be resolved.
1. Theme and introduction. In truth, there is a superficial treatment of the 'diaconal organisation' part of the theme. There are articles available, however, which show the difficulty and complexity of the term diaconal itself. See, for example: John S Klaasen (2020), Diakonia and Diaconal Church, Missionalia 48(1), DOI: 10.7832/48-1-363, point 2. Is there no definition of 'diaconia' in contemporary North-European context? (38-44). Or is there a definition in the Lutheran tradition? Such a definition would dispel any doubts about understanding the issue of the article.
2. It would always be useful to include in the introduction what scale the research covers. In this case, how many such hospitals are there in Norway? Are there 3 or more? Surely there are more in the whole northern European context? Or is there data on how many there are worldwide? I understand the case study, but these hospital numbers can help to get into the scale of the problem.
3. I understand that” «Once these institutions were established, religion became salient and anchored in individual commitments. However, over time, a gradual shift occurred toward commitments grounded institutionally through values» (Askeland, Espedal and Sirris 2019, p. 28) [41-44]. From which values did it start and towards which values is it moving today - an interesting question? One cannot quite understand who chose these values ten years ago? Was it the government or the founding community of these hospitals? One phrase would explain to readers the unclear Norwegian term: tjeneste
4. Typically, the writing style of articles has moved away from writing in singular form ("I am guided" 67) and towards a certain objectivity. Today, however, there is a return to personalism and this form of writing does not bother me. However, I leave it to the editors to decide on the style of writing.
These are minor comments that can be quickly clarified. I congratulate the author of the scientific research and the prepared scientific article, which I rate highly.
Author Response
Peer review 2
The article is scientific. The theme is important and current. The issue is original. There are indeed a few minor issues to be resolved.
- Theme and introduction. In truth, there is a superficial treatment of the 'diaconal organisation' part of the theme. There are articles available, however, which show the difficulty and complexity of the term diaconal itself. See, for example: John S Klaasen (2020), Diakonia and Diaconal Church, Missionalia 48(1), DOI: 10.7832/48-1-363, point 2. Is there no definition of 'diaconia' in contemporary North-European context? (38-44). Or is there a definition in the Lutheran tradition? Such a definition would dispel any doubts about understanding the issue of the article.
I agree that the article will benefit from further explication of the term diaconal organisation. I have addressed this challenge more thoroughly in the introduction. However, there is no standard definition, and I have included some more references that tangle with this issue. I hope the present version is suffieciently clear at this point, and that the interested readers will consult the references.
- It would always be useful to include in the introduction what scale the research covers. In this case, how many such hospitals are there in Norway? Are there 3 or more? Surely there are more in the whole northern European context? Or is there data on how many there are worldwide? I understand the case study, but these hospital numbers can help to get into the scale of the problem.
No doubt such contextual information is useful. I have given some additional information about the scale.
- I understand that” «Once these institutions were established, religion became salient and anchored in individual commitments. However, over time, a gradual shift occurred toward commitments grounded institutionally through values» (Askeland, Espedal and Sirris 2019, p. 28) [41-44]. From which values did it start and towards which values is it moving today - an interesting question? One cannot quite understand who chose these values ten years ago? Was it the government or the founding community of these hospitals? One phrase would explain to readers the unclear Norwegian term: tjeneste
Thank you for posing this question of clarification. Also here I have provided some more information. The values need not necessarilly be changed, but the shift concerns personal, inner motivation and faith towards an institutioanl foucs on values. The core values were chosen by the hospital board. I have explicated the Norwegian term.
- Typically, the writing style of articles has moved away from writing in singular form ("I am guided" 67) and towards a certain objectivity. Today, however, there is a return to personalism and this form of writing does not bother me. However, I leave it to the editors to decide on the style of writing.
Yes, I have revised the text with this comment in mind and use such expressions interchangably.
These are minor comments that can be quickly clarified. I congratulate the author of the scientific research and the prepared scientific article, which I rate highly.
I appreciate your highly constuctive advise and the congratulation!
