A Journey of Expectation and Legacy

Day: May 5, 2018

Blog Post 3 – Three Principles of Servant Leadership

I have often heard of the terms “servant leadership” but had never before taken the opportunity to find material as detailed in scope as the reading for this post.  I found the ideas and concepts from the Nordhouse text that details the Model of Servant Leadership (p. 232) thought provoking, encouraging, and challenging.  For the purposes of this discussion I have chosen to select a principle from each of the three main components of the model, and for the purposes of my own development all three that I have selected will be, to varying degrees, difficult for me to realize in my practice.

Context and culture is listed as one of the antecedent conditions that will impact servant leaders.  Nordhouse makes the statement:  “… in health care… settings, the norm of caring is more prevalent…”  (p. 231).  I would agree that each and every person that enters a health care job or profession does so because they care about people.  However, my experience in health care for the last 10 years is that it can difficult to be a servant leader in this setting, and one of the factors that contributes to the challenge is the unionized environment.  Whether historical, or whether by design, or by intent I do not wish to debate here, but the context in health care in my province is that the relationship between out of scope managers/leaders and unionized employees is supposed to be adversarial.  It is difficult to be a servant leader in a culture where serving others is constantly viewed through a lens of mistrust.  Having been in a manager/director role now for over 10 years there is hope – I can see where consistent servant leader behaviours can break down these barriers.  However, staff turnover in health care is also a constant issue so it is difficult for servant leaders to develop the long term relationships required to create trust and mutual purpose between employees and managers.

Conceptualizing is listed at the top of the Servant Leader Behaviours and of the three principles that I discuss this is, and will continue to be, the most difficult for me in my chosen career.  From a personal perspective I continue to wrestle with bringing the vision and strategic plans from the senior leaders at 30,000 feet down to the front line staff at ground level in a way that is understood.  From a system level, it is difficult to conceptualize the overall goals of health care when they consistently change.  Governments are voted in and voted out – the overall goals change.  Governments change direction – the overall goals change.  Public interest groups lobby government – specific goals change.  Communication up and down the lines of authority can be like the game “telephone” at times.  Later on in the chapter Nordhouse discusses that one of the criticisms of the servant leader model is the inclusion of conceptualizing:  “Being able to conceptualize is undoubtedly an important cognitive capacity in all kinds of leadership…” (p. 241). I am truly humbled by this statement and know that this needs to be an area of focus if I wish to improve as a leader.

The third principle that I will find challenging to consistently realize in my practice is organizational performance under the Outcomes heading of the model.  First, organizational performance in health care is a difficult metric to measure.  Second, as stated earlier, the culture does not encourage, and in some instances, does not even permit followers to function in a capacity that goes beyond their basic job requirements.  Third, my areas of responsibility are very small in the context of the full scope of my organization.  However, I have experienced and been inspired by organizations where servant leadership has changed the behaviours of individual employees and how teams function, so I remain committed to the challenge of improving the organizational performance to the extent that I am able for the sake of my patients and their families.

As I reach the end of my blog I realize that I inadvertently did not select any intrinsic challenges where I discuss how I need to incorporate or improve on my personal servant leader behaviours.  Of course I know that this is far from the truth – there is much that I still need to work on in me.  But change in me is a daily, sometimes moment by moment experience; influencing widespread change in a culture and change in others is not my daily experience.  So I have preconditioned myself to believe that influencing individuals, groups and situations is more difficult, challenging, and, well… unlikely.  So my closing question to invite further comment and discussion is this:  are there others who have wrestled with this mindset?  And does this mindset put limits on one’s ability to lead?

Blog Post 2 – Head to Head: Assigned vs Emergent Leaders, Managers vs Leaders

Assigned and Emergent Leaders

Although I would not have been able to differentiate assigned vs emergent leadership by terminology or concept prior to today I have always been fascinated by how some people are able to influence others with no title at all.  As referenced in my previous post, I have numerous examples of how both emergent and assigned leaders have been effective and ineffective in their leadership both positively and negatively.

My personal experience with emerging leadership comes from my participation in our local church.  Our style of praise and worship includes demonstration which can take many forms – clapping, raising our hands, kneeling, etc.  When we began attending this church I had come from a congregation where I had been taught and encouraged to become comfortable in public demonstration of my worship.  So, I very quickly became a “leader from the floor” and my actions encouraged those around me to also praise and worship openly.  As a result of this I was recognized as an emergent leader and subsequently became an assigned worship leader.  As my role in ministry has changed over the course of the last 5 years I am now no longer an assigned worship leader, and I have returned to my emergent leader role in the congregation.  What I find most interesting is my observation that “leading from the floor” has been far more effective in encouraging the participation of others than leading from the platform ever was.  I hope to explore this further in a future post.

Leaders or Managers or Both?

When I began my career in health care management in 2007 the leadership team spent a lot of time emphasizing the differences between managers and leaders and I recognize now that I have inadvertently developed a negative connotation with the word “manager”.   Northouse (2016) states the following:  “The primary functions of management, as first identified by Fayol (1916), were planning, organizing, staffing, and controlling.   These functions are still representative of the field of management today.”  Northouse also references the work by Kotter (1990) “The overriding function of management is to provide order and consistency to organizations, whereas the primary function of leadership is to produce change and movement.”  (Northouse, 2016, p. 13)

I can think of numerous examples of individuals who effectively manage and many who effectively lead, and some who can effectively do both.  In the health care environment in my province right now leaders, both assigned and emerging, are critical.  We are embarking on a journey of monumental change and we need individuals who are visionary, who will lead the charge, and motivate others to implement the improvements that we need to deliver safe and sustainable health care.  However, we also need managers who will maintain the stability and structure for the staff to continue to deliver the health care that our patients require now.  I agree with the citation from Kotter that “…both management and leadership are essential if an organization is to prosper.” (Northouse, 2016, p. 13)  I don’t believe that one approach is more effective – both management and leadership are required.

I have to admit that I am somewhat troubled but also challenged by the Zaleznik (1977) reference that “…leaders and managers themselves are distinct,  and that they are basically different types of people.”  (Northouse, 2016, p. 15)  As I have now developed the stigma that “managers are bad”, and “leaders are good”, what do I now do with the fact that as an individual I identify with as many managerial traits as I do leadership traits?  As I embark on this learning journey, I have to believe that I can either develop or strengthen the leadership traits, however, the question that I pose to myself and to the group is this:  does growing in leadership skills and abilities demand releasing the managerial skills and abilities?

© 2026 Achsah's Springs

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑