Get Expert Help with Article Critiques
Need assistance with your article critique? Best Dissertation Writers specialize in crafting detailed, high-quality critiques tailored to your needs. Let us help you excel. Contact us today for personalized, professional support you can trust!
Article Critique Example
Introduction
Digital technologies have transformed healthcare systems globally, significantly influencing how leaders navigate their roles in hospitals. Nurse leaders, in particular, face the dual challenge of adapting to rapid technological advancements while ensuring that their teams are adequately supported in this evolving environment. As Laukka et al. (2023) highlight in their study, the concept of e-leadership—defined as leading through technology to influence and support teams—has become central in nursing leadership. The increasing reliance on tools such as electronic health records, communication platforms, and remote monitoring systems underscores the need for leaders to adapt their skills and practices to digital contexts.
This critique examines the article by Laukka et al. (2023) through the lens of theoretical frameworks and supporting evidence from existing research. The study effectively utilizes the e-leadership framework developed by Avolio et al. (2014) to assess the experiences of nurse leaders in a digitalized healthcare setting. However, the article’s scope and depth, particularly regarding ethical considerations, demographic representation, and longitudinal perspectives, warrant critical evaluation. For instance, Cortellazzo, Bruni, and Zampieri (2019) emphasize that effective e-leadership requires addressing inclusivity, innovation, and adaptability, aspects that are partially explored in Laukka et al.’s research.
Furthermore, the study’s findings on training gaps and stress among leaders echo previous research. Gjellebæk et al. (2020) argue that insufficient training and poorly integrated digital tools can exacerbate challenges for healthcare leaders, highlighting the importance of structured educational interventions. Similarly, Strudwick et al. (2019) stress that informatics competencies are critical for nurse leaders to lead effectively in digital contexts. This critique aims to assess the study’s strengths and limitations while situating it within the broader discourse on e-leadership in healthcare. By analyzing the findings and methodology, this critique contributes to understanding how leadership in nursing can evolve to meet the demands of an increasingly digitalized landscape.
Summary of the Article
The article by Laukka et al. (2023) explores the experiences of hospital nurse leaders with digital technologies, focusing on how digitalization affects their leadership roles. Using the e-leadership framework developed by Avolio et al. (2014), the study examines nurse leaders’ traits, cognition, affect, and behaviors in relation to digital tools. Conducted in a Finnish university hospital known for its advanced digital healthcare infrastructure, the research employs a qualitative descriptive design. Semi-structured focus group interviews were conducted with 20 nurse leaders, including head nurses, assistant head nurses, and middle managers.
Key findings from this study by Laukka et al. (2023) indicate that nurse leaders demonstrate varying levels of digital self-efficacy, with some expressing confidence and enthusiasm while others highlight frustration and stress caused by poorly functioning systems and inadequate training. The study emphasizes the transformative potential of digital technologies, noting that they can improve efficiency, support strategic and operational leadership, and enable remote work. However, challenges such as lack of time for training, rapid changes in digital systems, and difficulty communicating effectively through digital platforms were identified as significant barriers.
The authors argue that successful digital leadership requires a clear vision, an understanding of organizational digital strategies, and the ability to engage end-users in developing and implementing digital services. Furthermore, the study by Laukka et al. (2023) reveals that nurse leaders’ educational programs have not sufficiently adapted to the demands of digitalization, leaving many leaders underprepared to manage digital tools effectively. The article concludes by recommending targeted training programs and increased involvement of nurse leaders in the development of digital services to enhance their ability to lead in this rapidly evolving landscape.
This study by Laukka et al. (2023) provides valuable insights into the intersection of leadership and digitalization in healthcare, emphasizing the need for tailored strategies to support nurse leaders in navigating digital challenges. While highlighting the benefits of digital tools, it also underscores the pressing need to address stressors and training gaps to ensure effective leadership in a digitalized healthcare environment.
Strengths of the Article
The study by Laukka et al. (2023) offers several strengths that contribute significantly to understanding the intersection of digitalization and nursing leadership. By using the e-leadership framework developed by Avolio et al. (2014), the authors provide a structured theoretical foundation to analyze nurse leaders’ traits, cognition, affect, and behaviors. This framework has been widely recognized in leadership studies, with previous research, such as Cortellazzo, Bruni, and Zampieri (2019), affirming its utility in studying leadership in digitalized contexts. By applying this framework in a healthcare setting, Laukka et al. extend its application to a less-explored domain, contributing valuable insights.
One notable strength is the study’s focus on a comprehensive range of leadership experiences, from enthusiasm and confidence to frustration and stress. This balanced approach aligns with findings from Gjellebæk et al. (2020), who observed that healthcare leaders face dual challenges of leveraging digital tools for efficiency while managing the stress caused by poor usability and insufficient training. Laukka et al. (2023) effectively illustrate these dualities, making their findings more relatable to real-world healthcare settings.
The article also excels in its choice of methodology. Semi-structured focus group interviews allow for in-depth exploration of participants’ experiences, fostering a nuanced understanding of the topic. This aligns with the recommendations of Doyle et al. (2020), who emphasize the importance of qualitative designs in uncovering the complexities of leadership phenomena. Additionally, the study’s setting in a Finnish hospital with advanced digital infrastructure adds credibility, as Finland is recognized for its leadership in healthcare digitalization (European Commission, 2021). This contextual strength enables the findings to serve as a benchmark for other countries aspiring to enhance digital healthcare leadership.
Another strength lies in the practical implications highlighted by Laukka et al. (2023). The authors emphasize the need for tailored education and training programs to prepare nurse leaders for digital challenges. This recommendation aligns with Strudwick et al. (2019), who identified informatics competencies as essential for nurse leaders to navigate digital tools effectively. By underscoring the importance of such competencies, Laukka et al. provide actionable insights for healthcare organizations aiming to build robust digital leadership capacities.
Furthermore, the article contributes to the growing body of literature on remote leadership, a concept that has gained prominence due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The findings echo those of Kiljunen et al. (2021), who highlighted the unique challenges of leading dispersed teams in healthcare. By addressing both the opportunities and limitations of remote leadership, Laukka et al. (2023) provide a balanced perspective that is particularly relevant in the current healthcare landscape.
However, while the article excels in its scope and practical relevance, it could have further strengthened its arguments by integrating a broader range of theoretical perspectives. For example, while the e-leadership framework is robust, other frameworks such as transformational leadership (Bass & Riggio, 2006) could provide additional insights into how nurse leaders inspire and motivate their teams in digital contexts. Additionally, the study could have explored cross-cultural variations in digital leadership, as Gjellebæk et al. (2020) emphasize the role of cultural factors in shaping leadership practices.
The study by Laukka et al. (2023) offers valuable insights into digital leadership in nursing, supported by a robust theoretical framework, a well-chosen methodology, and practical implications. By comparing these findings with existing literature, the study’s contribution to understanding e-leadership in healthcare is evident. However, incorporating alternative theoretical perspectives and addressing cultural dimensions could enhance its comprehensiveness further. This balanced analysis of strengths highlights the article’s pivotal role in advancing research on digital leadership in nursing.
Weaknesses of the Article
While the study by Laukka et al. (2023) provides valuable insights into nurse leaders’ experiences with digital technologies, certain limitations reduce the scope and generalizability of its findings. These weaknesses, when compared to existing literature, reveal areas where the study could have been improved.
A significant limitation of the study is the absence of gender diversity, as all participants were female. This homogeneity raises questions about the generalizability of the findings. Avolio et al. (2014) suggest that gender may influence leadership traits and technology adoption, meaning that excluding male nurse leaders omits potentially valuable perspectives. While the study acknowledges this limitation, it does not provide sufficient justification for this demographic gap. In contrast, Gjellebæk et al. (2020) incorporate more diverse participant profiles, enabling a broader understanding of leadership experiences in digitalized contexts.
The research was conducted in a single Finnish university hospital, which limits its applicability to other healthcare settings. Finland is a global leader in digital healthcare infrastructure (European Commission, 2021), and its advancements may not reflect the realities of hospitals in countries with less-developed digital systems. As a result, the study’s findings may not be relevant to healthcare leaders in resource-constrained environments. Kiljunen et al. (2021) highlight that multi-center studies across different geographic and economic settings are crucial for capturing the diverse challenges faced by healthcare leaders in digital contexts. By not adopting a broader study design, Laukka et al. (2023) miss the opportunity to provide more universally applicable insights.
Although the study touches upon the importance of data protection, it fails to adequately address broader ethical considerations associated with digital leadership. Strudwick et al. (2019) emphasize that ethical competencies, such as understanding the responsible use of clinical data, are critical for nurse leaders in digitalized healthcare environments. Laukka et al. (2023) do not explore how ethical dilemmas, such as balancing data accessibility with privacy, influence nurse leaders’ roles. This omission limits the article’s contribution to the discourse on ethical leadership in the digital age.
The study’s cross-sectional design captures nurse leaders’ experiences at a single point in time, missing the opportunity to assess how their competencies and challenges evolve as digital tools and systems develop. Cortellazzo, Bruni, and Zampieri (2019) stress the importance of longitudinal studies in understanding the sustainability of e-leadership practices. Without tracking changes over time, Laukka et al. (2023) cannot provide insights into how nurse leaders adapt to new technologies or how training interventions influence their capabilities. This limitation reduces the study’s ability to inform long-term strategies for leadership development in healthcare.
Although the study identifies training gaps and usability issues as stressors for nurse leaders, it does not delve deeply into the systemic barriers that contribute to these challenges. Gjellebæk et al. (2020) argue that poorly integrated technologies and inadequate organizational support are key factors that exacerbate digitalization-related stress. Laukka et al. could have strengthened their findings by examining how institutional policies and resource allocation impact nurse leaders’ ability to adapt to digital tools effectively.
The study does not explore how factors such as age, educational background, or years of experience influence nurse leaders’ experiences with digital technologies. For instance, younger leaders may have greater digital fluency, while older leaders may face steeper learning curves (Strudwick et al., 2019). By failing to analyze these intersecting variables, the study overlooks nuanced differences in how various subgroups of nurse leaders experience digitalization.
Although Laukka et al. (2023) provide a valuable contribution to understanding digital leadership in nursing, the study’s limitations—such as the lack of gender diversity, single-center design, and insufficient ethical focus—reduce its generalizability and depth. Addressing these weaknesses in future research would provide a more comprehensive understanding of e-leadership in healthcare. Incorporating longitudinal perspectives, diverse participant demographics, and systemic analyses of barriers could significantly enhance the study’s impact. As such, while the article makes notable strides in exploring digital leadership, there remains considerable room for further investigation to build on its findings.
Contribution to the Field
The study by Laukka et al. (2023) makes a significant contribution to the growing body of literature on e-leadership in healthcare by addressing an understudied area: the experiences of nurse leaders navigating digital technologies. The research bridges gaps in understanding how digitalization impacts leadership traits, cognition, affect, and behaviors, offering valuable insights for both academic and practical applications.
One notable contribution is the application of the e-leadership framework (Avolio et al., 2014) in a healthcare setting. This framework allows for a nuanced analysis of how digital tools influence leadership practices, providing a theoretical foundation that can be adapted for future studies. While previous research has explored e-leadership broadly, such as Cortellazzo, Bruni, and Zampieri (2019), this study narrows the focus to the unique challenges and opportunities faced by nurse leaders in hospitals, a perspective that has been largely overlooked.
The study also emphasizes the importance of tailored training programs to equip nurse leaders with the competencies needed to navigate digitalized environments effectively. By highlighting the gaps in existing leadership education, Laukka et al. (2023) echo findings from Strudwick et al. (2019), who advocate for integrating informatics competencies into nurse leadership development. This practical implication is particularly timely, as healthcare organizations worldwide grapple with rapid digital transformation.
Furthermore, the study highlights the dual role of digital tools as both enablers and stressors. This balanced perspective aligns with Gjellebæk et al. (2020), who argue that poorly implemented digital solutions can undermine their intended benefits. By addressing these complexities, Laukka et al. (2023) contribute to a more holistic understanding of digitalization’s impact on leadership.
Personal Reflection and Recommendations
Reflecting on the study by Laukka et al. (2023), it is evident that the research offers a robust exploration of nurse leaders’ experiences with digital technologies, providing both theoretical insights and practical recommendations. Personally, I found the study’s emphasis on the dual nature of digital tools—being both enablers of efficiency and sources of stress—particularly relatable. This balanced approach resonates with the reality of digital transformation in healthcare, where technological advancements often outpace organizational readiness.
One of the most compelling aspects of the study is its focus on training gaps for nurse leaders. The findings echo similar challenges observed in other studies, such as those by Strudwick et al. (2019), which highlight the lack of informatics training in traditional nursing education. This underscores the need for healthcare organizations to prioritize comprehensive training programs that not only enhance digital competencies but also equip leaders to address ethical and organizational challenges.
However, the study could benefit from a broader demographic and institutional scope. The inclusion of male participants, leaders from diverse cultural settings, or hospitals with varying levels of digital maturity would enhance the generalizability of the findings. Additionally, the lack of longitudinal data limits the study’s ability to capture how nurse leaders’ experiences and competencies evolve over time. Future research could address these gaps by employing mixed-methods designs that incorporate both qualitative and quantitative approaches.
To improve digital leadership in practice, I recommend that organizations implement tailored training programs for nurse leaders, focusing on both technical skills and leadership strategies in digital contexts. Incorporating interdisciplinary collaborations during the design and implementation of digital tools can also help mitigate stressors highlighted in the study. Furthermore, policies that support work-life balance—such as setting boundaries for digital communication—could alleviate some of the stress associated with digital technologies.
Conclusion
The study by Laukka et al. (2023) provides valuable insights into the experiences of hospital nurse leaders navigating digital technologies, highlighting the transformative impact of digitalization on leadership practices. Using the e-leadership framework, the study effectively examines how traits, cognition, affect, and behaviors shape leadership in digitalized healthcare environments. Its findings underscore the need for tailored training programs, improved digital competencies, and strategies to address stressors associated with digital tools.
One of the study’s significant contributions is its balanced perspective on digitalization as both an enabler and a challenge for nurse leaders. By identifying gaps in training and organizational support, Laukka et al. align with existing research, such as Strudwick et al. (2019) and Gjellebæk et al. (2020), while advancing the discourse on e-leadership in healthcare. However, the study’s limitations, including the lack of gender diversity, single-center scope, and insufficient ethical focus, reduce its applicability across different settings and demographics.
Despite these limitations, the study serves as a critical foundation for future research, emphasizing the importance of leadership in navigating digital transformation. Addressing the gaps identified in this critique—such as expanding demographic scope, incorporating longitudinal analysis, and exploring ethical dimensions—will further enhance our understanding of digital leadership in nursing.
References
- Avolio, B. J., Sosik, J. J., Kahai, S. S., & Baker, B. (2014). E-leadership: Re-examining transformations in leadership source and transmission. Leadership Quarterly, 25(1), 105–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.11.003
- Bass, B. M., & Riggio, R. E. (2006). Transformational leadership (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
- Cortellazzo, L., Bruni, E., & Zampieri, R. (2019). The role of leadership in a digitalized world: A review. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1938. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01938
- Doyle, L., McCabe, C., Keogh, B., Brady, A., & McCann, M. (2020). An overview of the qualitative descriptive design within nursing research. Journal of Research in Nursing, 25(5), 443–455. https://doi.org/10.1177/1744987120927206
- European Commission. (2021). Digital economy and society index (DESI) 2021: Finland. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/redirection/document/80484
- Gjellebæk, C., Svensson, A., Bjørkquist, C., Fladeby, N., & Grundén, K. (2020). Management challenges for future digitalization of healthcare services. Futures, 124, 102636. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2020.102636
- Kiljunen, M., Laukka, E., Koskela, T. K., & Kanste, O. I. (2021). Remote leadership in health care: A scoping review. Leadership in Health Services, 35(1), 98–115. https://doi.org/10.1108/LHS-06-2021-0059
- Laukka, E., Hammarén, M., Pölkki, T., & Kanste, O. (2023). Hospital nurse leaders’ experiences with digital technologies: A qualitative descriptive study. Journal of advanced nursing, 79(1), 297-308. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/jan.15481
- Strudwick, G., Nagle, L., Kassam, I., Pahwa, M., & Sequeira, L. (2019). Informatics competencies for nurse leaders: A scoping review. Journal of Nursing Administration, 49(6), 323–330. https://doi.org/10.1097/NNA.0000000000000760
