their entire professional careers that shaped their EI. Interviews were conducted using
the Moustakas (1994) approach. Qualitative research depends on trustworthiness
techniques in order to promote validity and mitigate researcher bias (Saldana, 2009). To
that end, stratified purposeful selection (Maxwell, 2005) entailed administering a
validated EI instrument to award recipients who expressed interest in participating in this
study. Those recipients who scored more than one standard deviation below the mean
score for that EI instrument, who did not respond to requests for interviews, or who had
retired more than 20 years ago were not contacted for interviews. Defining experiences
were the focus of inquiry, as that is likely where participant memory is keenest. This
selective process bolstered the study’s credibility (Bloomberg & Volpe, 2008).
Data Analysis. In addition to member checks and peer reviews, initial, in vivo,
and descriptive coding (theory-based and emergent (Coffey & Atkinson, 1996; Saldana,
2009)) techniques were used as part of first cycle coding, as was frequency counting.
Textual and structural descriptions that emerged during participant interviews were
provided (Moustakas, 1994). Themes and patterns emerged during second cycle coding
(Saldana, 2009). These themes and patterns were used to discern key findings and
formulate implications for Federal government leader development practice, research,
and theory.
Limitations
This study is limited to the public sector and, in particular, the Federal
government. Moreover, the research is confined to recipients of a selected, prestigious
award. Unlike quantitative studies, the goal of qualitative research is not primarily
focused on generalizability. Efforts were made to allude to face validity assertions