Service to others first is the basis of servant leadership (Cater, Beal & Justis, 2007). Teaching, Dr. Leonard G. Schulze (2003) proclaims, is a form of Servant Leadership. Moreover, Carolyn Crippen (2005) asks:
“Is servant-leadership a viable model for present day schools? Questions remain as to how this form of leadership could be introduced? What outcomes could be expected? And, how could these outcomes be measured? Such questions and more point to a need for school research using the lens of servant-leadership.”
Mary Culver (2009: 3), thinking the concept of “leadership from behind”, similarly asks: “Why is it that we expect the leader to be in front of the followers? Because of definition? This defines a "leader" only in conventional terms. When we examine the true essence of leadership, we see that the best leadership comes from removing obstacles to the group from reaching its desired goal.”
Much research has been conducted on servant leadership, not only its application to education but also to different organization. Dennis (2004) developed the Servant Leadership Assessment Instrument to assess the presence of servant leadership qualities in organizational leaders; testing validated that the instrument measures the servant leader virtues of agapao love, humility, vision, trust, and empowerment. The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator® (MBTI®) instrument is a measurement of human behavior based on the studies of Carl Jung. One of the characteristics measured by the MBTI® instrument is an individual’s preference for how they interact with the world, and is reflected by the classification of Extraversion or Introversion. Jane T. Wadell (2006) postulates that “there is a relationship between a servant leader’s preference for Introversion on the MBTI® instrument relative to his or her demonstration of the virtues of agapao love, humility and trust.”
Wally Rude’s thesis (2004) dealt with Servant Leadership as a leadership approach aimed to reduce burnout and enhance job satisfaction in organization due to its emphasis on character, vision,team work, serving and empowerment. He concludes:
“When there is the presence of the positive aspects of servant leadership, and the absence of Power and Pride, subordinates report higher levels of Job Satisfaction, Professional Efficacy, and lower levels of Emotional Exhaustion and Cynicism.”
Furthermore, Zani Dannhauser’ dissertation (2007) finds that servant leadership, trust, and team commitment are empirically distinguishable, as well as conceptually distinct. The findings demonstrate that servant leadership can be measured in a workplace setting, is perceived differently by employees in the organization, and correlates differently, but positive with two other constructs, viz trust and team commitment. However, servant leadership showed an absent correlation with unit effectiveness.
Servant Leadership is a simple concept, Sarah Bodner (2006: 7) declares, but may be difficult to implement. Patience is advised as “It is often difficult to se the immediate results that are desired. … because it will usually take at least a full year for people to believe that the leadership is really sincere, and to test that sincerity within the framework.”
Maureen Hannay’s paper (2008) states that servant leadership is best applied in a culture with low power distance, low to moderate individualism, low to moderate masculinity, low uncertainty avoidance and a moderate to high long-term orientation. She then extensively quoted Hofstede (1993) to explain each of the four dimensions:
“Power Distance. He defines this as “… the degree of inequality among people which the population of a country considers as normal: from relatively equal (that is, small power distance) to extremely unequal (large power distance)” (Hofstede, 1993: 89). In order to be effective, the servant-leader requires significant participation and interaction with employees.” (Hannay, 2008: 5)
“Individualism, Hofstede defines as“…the degree to which people in a country prefer to act as individuals rather than as members of groups” (Hofstede, 1993: 89). The servant leadership model requires that the leader and the employees work together much more closely as a team.” (Hannay, 2008: 6)
“In this third dimension Hofstede (1993) differentiates between characteristics that are considered to be traditionally masculine versus those that are considered to be traditionally feminine. He identifies tough values like assertiveness, performance, success and competition with the male role, while he identifies more tender values like quality of life, maintaining warm personal relationships, service, care for the weak, and solidarity with the female role (Hofstede, 1993: 90). The servant-leader role seems to be a better fit with those traditionally female characteristics; in fact service is identified as a largely female value. The effectiveness of the servant-leader depends on his or her ability to develop a personal connection with the employees. It requires that leaders understand the needs and desires of their employees so that they can individualize their jobs, rewards, and training to fit the needs, experiences and desires of those employees. It requires building trust and loyalty so that the leader can empower those employees to take the lead in the workplace. However, this nurturing relationship does not mean that quality performance is ignored.” (Hannay, 2008: 7)
“Hofstede (1993) identified the fourth dimension of his cultural construct as Uncertainty Avoidance which he “…defined as the degree to which people in a country prefer structured over unstructured situations” (Hofstede, 1993: 90). The servant-leader focuses his or her energy on employee development and the hallmark of the servant-leader is a focus on employee empowerment. Rather than a traditional workplace where the leader sets the rules, the quotas, assigns the work and evaluates the performance of the employee, a workplace guided by a servant-leader will push these responsibilities down to the employees themselves. The employees must be prepared to stand up and accept these new responsibilities.” (Hannay, 2008: 7)
Hannay (2008: 9) using Hofstede’s table (1993: 91) estimated which of these countries—United States, Germany, Japan, France, the Netherlands, Hong Kong (before its return to China), Indonesia, West Africa, Russia, and China—might be a best fit for the servant-leader and concluded that while none of these countries represents the ideal cultural environment for the application of servant leadership theory, it appears when compared against this sample of countries, the Netherlands provides the best environment fit.
Irving & McIntosh (2009) partially validates the findings of (Hannay, 2008). They find that while the vision of servant-oriented leadership is attractive to many in the Latin American context, the servant leadership model is not popular in Latin America.
Surprisingly, Cater, Beal & Justis (2007) propose that there are similarities in leadership style for servant leaders and family business leaders. Using the Organizational Leadership Assessment (Laub, 1999), their study confirms “the importance of the personal values of honesty and integrity for servant leaders (Russell, 2001) and other key characteristics (Spears, 1995), including listening, empathy, conceptualization, foresight, and stewardship.”
Notes:
Bodner, Sarah L. (2006). Servant Leadership: The Complexity of a Simple Idea. Pyramid ODI, February 2006. pp. 2—9. back to text.
Cater, John James III; Beal, Brent D., & Justis, Robert T. (2007). Servant Leadership in the Family Business: An Exploratory Study. Proceedings of the USA Small Business and Entrepreneurship Conference. 2007. back to text: 1 | 2.
Crippen, Carolyn (2005). The Democratic School: First to serve, then to lead. Manitoba, Canada: Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy, Issue #47. 05 December 2005. p. 12. back to text.
Culver, Mary (2009). Applying Servant Leadership in Today’s Schools: Why We Can’t Lead Alone. Larchmont, N.Y.: Eye On Education, Inc., 2009. p. 3. back to text.
Dannhauser, Zani (2007). The Relationship Between Servant Leadership, Follower Trust, Team Commitment and Unit Effectiveness. Dissertation. Stellenbosch, South Africa: University of Stellenbosch, March 2007. pp. 365-66. back to text.
Dennis, R. S. (2004). Servant leadership theory: Development of the Servant Leadership Assessment Instrument. Doctoral Dissertation. (UMI 3133544). Regent University, 2004. back to text.
Frick, Don M. & Spears, Larry C. (1996). On becoming a servant-leader: The private writings of Robert K. Greenleaf. D. M. Frick & L. C. Spears, [eds.]. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1996. 37pp. back to text.
Greenleaf, Robert K. (1977). The servant as leader, Servant leadership: A journey into the nature of legitimate power and greatness. Larry C. Spears [ed.]. New York: Paulist Press, 1977. pp. 21—44. back to text.
Greenleaf, Robert K. (1982). The Servant as Leader. Robert K. Greenleaf Center, June 1982. 37pp. back to text.
Greenleaf, Robert K. (1991). The servant as leader. Revised ed. Indianapolis, Ind.: Robert K. Greenleaf Center, 1991. pp. 9—20.back to text.
Hannay, Maureen (2008). The Cross-Cultural Leader: The Application of Servant Leadership Theory in the International Context. Journal of International Business and Cultural Studies | Academic and Business Research Institute [AABRI], 08 December 2008. pp. 5—7. back to text.
Hofstede, G. (1993). Cultural constraints in management theories. Place: Academy of Management Executive, 1993. 7:1. pp. 81—94. back to text.
Irving, Justin & McIntosh, Timothy (2009). Investigating the Value of and Hindrances to Servant Leadership in the Latin American Context: Initial Findings from Peruvian Leaders. Journal of International Business and Cultural Studies, 18 March 2009. p. X. back to text.
Laub, James Alan (1999). Assessing the servant organization: Development of the servant organizational leadership (SOLA) instrument. Unpublished Dissertation. West Palm Beach, FL: Florida Atlantic University, 1999. back to text.
Rude, Wally (2004). The Connection Between Servant Leadership and Job Burnout. Master’s Thesis. Canada: Trinity Western University, August 2004. p. 54. back to text.
Russell, R. F. (2001). The role of values in servant leadership, Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 22:2. pp. 76—84. back to text.
Schulze, Leonard G. (2003). Teaching as a Form of Servant Leadership. European Company Lawyers Association [ECLA], November 2003. back to text.
Spears, Larry C. [ed.] (1995). Introduction: Servant-leadership and the Greenleaf legacy, Reflections on leadership. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1995. p. 1—14. back to text.
Waddell, Jane T. (2006). Servant Leadership. Proceedings of Servant Leadership Research Roundtable, Regent University, August 2006. back to text.
Disclaimer: The posts herein do not necessarily represent any organization’s positions, strategies or opinions. Read the full version of self-imposed rules for this blog: A New Year; New Rules. Unless otherwise expressly stated, the posts are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License.
Comments are moderated to keep the discussion relevant and civil. Readers are responsible for their own statements.
The Grey Chronicles 