Servant Leadership: Activity 2

Origins

Servant leadership originated through the writings of Robert Greenleaf (1970, 1972, 1977) and has been researched extensively by leadership scholars over the years (Northouse, 2018, p. 10). Servant leadership is arguably paradoxical and unique in its perspective (Northouse, 2018, p. 227). The other most influential writers who further contributed to the servant leadership theory were: Spears (1955), with 10 characteristics of a servant leader, Laub (1999) who developed 6 clusters of servant leader characteristics, Russell & Stone (2002) whom identified 9 functional characteristics and 11 additional servant leader characteristics and lastly Patterson (2003) who came up with a model that contained 7 dimensions of servant leadership (Van Dierendonck, 2011, pp. 1231-1232). There are definite overlaps, but of all these notable writers they came up with a total of 44 characteristics (Van Dierendonck, 2011, p. 1232).

Definition and Process

Greenleaf’s writings on servant leadership left much up for interpretation and therefore makes defining servant leadership difficult (Van Dierendonck, 2011, p. 1231). An excerpt from the writings of Greenleaf (1970), gives an accurate description:

[Servant leadership] begins with the natural feeling that one wants to serve, to serve first. Then conscious choice brings one to aspire to lead…The difference manifests itself in the care taken by the servant–first to make sure that other people’s highest priority needs are being served. The best test…is: do those served grow as persons; do they, while being served, become healthier, wiser, freer, more autonomous, more likely themselves to become servants? (p. 15)

Van Dierendonck (2011) identifies the core characteristic as “going beyond one’s self-interest” (p. 1230). The servant leader will place the good of the followers before their own interests (Hale & Fields, 2007).

 Behaviours

The ideology of Servant leadership is that it comes with practice, but for some it may come more naturally (Spears, 2010). Though some treat it as a trait approach, the characteristics of servant leadership are viewed as behaviour (Northouse, 2018, p.228). As seen above, there are many writings on the characteristics, but due to the limits of this assignment I will be focusing on Spears (1955) original 10 characteristics. Spears (2002) defined 10 characteristics of servant leadership as: 1) listening, 2) empathy, 3) healing, 4) awareness, 5) persuasion, 6) conceptualization 7) foresight, 8) stewardship, 9) commitment to the growth of people, and 10) building community.

Model

It was identified by writers, Liden, Wayne, Zhao, and Henderson (2008) as well as Liden, Panaccio, Hu, and Meuser (2014) that there is a need for antecedent conditions for servant leadership to work. These conditions are: context and culture, leader attributes, and follower receptivity. All three of these conditions need to be present, in order for servant leadership to flourish (Northouse, 2018, pp. 233-234).

Outcomes

The effects of servant leadership are both on a macro (organizational) and micro level (individual) (Searle & Barbuto, 2011). The main outcomes of servant leadership are defined by Northouse (2018) as “follower performance and growth, organizational performance and societal impact” (p. 253). When the attitude of the leaders is person-orientated it paves the way for stronger relationships within the organization, which in turn makes the organization stronger (Van Dierendonck, 2011, p. 1230). Servant leadership produces individuals that are “wiser, freer and more autonomous” (Greenleaf, 1977 as quoted by Searle & Barbuto, 2011, p. 110).

Awareness Comparison

In comparing the concept of awareness in servant leadership to “self-awareness” in the psychodynamic approach, there are some key differences.

According to Spears’ (2002) 10 characteristics based off of Greenleaf’s writings, he defined awareness as “a quality within servant leaders that makes them acutely attuned and receptive to their physical, social and political environments. It includes understanding oneself and the impact one has on others.”  As we can see, there is an ideal stated, that a servant leader can become very objective regarding situations they find themselves in (Northouse, 2018 p. 229).

The psychodynamic approach, which has origins in Freud’s theories is a much darker approach to humanity and leadership (Northouse, 2016, p. 297). Neumann & Hirschhorn (1999) describe the approach as, “draws attention to the sources of energy and motivational forces that drive human actions by considering what is “within”–the inner world of individuals, including their emotions–and relationship between individuals–the “reality” created by the dynamics of the group.” Northouse (2016) summarizes saying, “every neurotic symptom or act has an underlying reason” (p. 298).

As seen in the definition above of awareness in the servant leader approach, there is a more positive assumption that all leaders can develop into servant leaders and can reach some sort of objectivity, in understanding themselves, others and how they relate to others.

In the psychodynamic approach that kind of awareness does not exist, as in all relationships (personal or professional), we act out “themes” in our lives of inner hurt that become patterns, so we are never objective (Northouse, 2016, p. 302). Northouse (2016) states, “we rightly or wrongly anticipate how others will react to us; then we react to their perceived reactions, and not to their actual reactions” (p. 302). This shows a cycle, where the leader has no ability to gain objectivity on situations. 

Example of a Servant Leader

The first person who comes to mind as a servant leader is Mother Theresa, she modelled servant leadership to the very extreme, by living and working amongst the poor and serving their needs. She laid down her life and modelled the selfless sacrifice of her greatest example, Jesus. Her work had and still is having an incredible impact on society and the world (Northouse, 2018, p. 239).

References

Greenleaf, R.K. (1970). The servant as leader. Westfield, IN: Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership.

Greenleaf, R.K. (1972). The institution as servant. Westfield, IN: Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership.

Greenleaf, R.K. (1977). Servant leadership: A journey into the nature of legitimate power and greatness. New York, NY: Paulist Press.

Neumann, J.E., & Hirschhorn, L. (1999). The challenge of integrating psychodynamic and organizational theory. Human Relations, 52 (6).

Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership: theory and practice (7th ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Northouse, P. G. (2018). Leadership: theory and practice (8th ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Searle, T.P. and Barbuto, J.E. (2011). Servant leadership, hope, and organizational virtuousness: A framework exploring positive micro and macro behaviours and performance impact. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies 18(1), 107-117.

Smith, B.N., Montagno, R.V. and Kuzmenko, T.N. (2004). Transformational and servant leadership: Content and contextual comparisons. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies 10(4), 80-92.

Spears, L.C. (2002). Tracing the past, present and future of servant-leadership. In L.C. Spears & M. Lawrence (Eds.), Focus on leadership: Servant-leadership for the 21st century (pp. 1-16). New York, NY: Wiley.

Spears, L.C. (2010). Servant leadership and Robert K. Greenleaf’s legacy. In D. van Dierendonck & K. Patterson (Eds.), Servant leadership: Developments in theory and research (pp. 11-24). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillian.

Van Dierendonck, D. (2011). Servant leadership: A review and synthesis. Journal of Management 37(4), 1228-1261