Servant leadership

Servant leadership is both a leadership philosophy and set of leadership practices. Traditional leadership generally involves the accumulation and exercise of power by one at the “top of the pyramid.” By comparison, the servant-leader shares power, puts the needs of others first and helps people develop and perform as highly as possible.

History

Servant leadership is an ancient philosophy. There are passages that relate to servant leadership in the Tao Te Ching, attributed to Lao-Tzu, who is believed to have lived in China sometime between 570 BCE and 490 BCE:

The highest type of ruler is one of whose existence the people are barely aware.
Next comes one whom they love and praise.
Next comes one whom they fear.
Next comes one whom they despise and defy.

When you are lacking in faith,
Others will be unfaithful to you.

The Sage is self-effacing and scanty of words.
When his task is accomplished and things have been completed, All the people say, ‘We ourselves have achieved it!’[1]

Chanakya wrote, in the 4th century BCE, in his book Arthashastra:

the king [leader] shall consider as good, not what pleases himself but what pleases his subjects [followers]
the king [leader] is a paid servant and enjoys the resources of the state together with the people.

Servant leadership can be found in many religious texts, though the philosophy itself transcends any particular religious tradition. In the Christian tradition, this passage from the Gospel of Mark is often quoted in discussions of servant leadership:

42 Jesus called them together and said, “You know that those who are regarded as rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them.
43 Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant,
44 and whoever wants to be first must be servant of all.
45 For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.” (Mark 10:42-45.[2])

Robert K. Greenleaf and the modern movement

In his 1911 book,"The Twelve Principles of Efficiency", Harrington Emerson, an efficiency engineer, said, “The laws are applied by officials each of whom is servant to the men over whom he has directing control. In vain does president or vice-president, manager or superintendent, issue orders and delegate power under current organization.”

While servant leadership is a timeless concept, the phrase “servant leadership” was coined by Robert K. Greenleaf in "The Servant as Leader", an essay that he first published in 1970. In that essay, Greenleaf said:[3]

“The servant-leader is servant first… It begins with the natural feeling that one wants to serve, to serve first. Then conscious choice brings one to aspire to lead. That person is sharply different from one who is leader first, perhaps because of the need to assuage an unusual power drive or to acquire material possessions…The leader-first and the servant-first are two extreme types. Between them there are shadings and blends that are part of the infinite variety of human nature.”

“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, and difficult to administer, is: Do those served grow as persons? Do they, while being served, become healthier, wiser, freer, more autonomous, more likely themselves to become servants? And, what is the effect on the least privileged in society? Will they benefit or at least not be further deprived?“

Robert Greenleaf recognized that organizations as well as individuals could be servant-leaders. Indeed, he had great faith that servant-leader organizations could change the world. In his second major essay, "The Institution as Servant" (1972), Greenleaf articulated what is often called the “credo.” There he said:

“This is my thesis: caring for persons, the more able and the less able serving each other, is the rock upon which a good society is built. Whereas, until recently, caring was largely person to person, now most of it is mediated through institutions – often large, complex, powerful, impersonal; not always competent; sometimes corrupt. If a better society is to be built, one that is more just and more loving, one that provides greater creative opportunity for its people, then the most open course is to raise both the capacity to serve and the very performance as servant of existing major institutions by new regenerative forces operating within them.” [4]

In the context of leadership styles

The most common division of leadership styles is the distinction between autocratic, participative and laissez-faire leadership styles. The authoritarian style of leadership requires clearly defined tasks and monitoring their execution and results. The decision-making responsibility rests with the executive. In contrast to the autocratic, the practice of a participative leadership style involves employees in decision-making. More extensive tasks are delegated. The employees influence and responsibility increases. The laissez-faire style of leadership is negligible in practice.

Servant leadership can be most likely associated with the participative leadership style. The authoritarian leadership style does not correspond to the guiding principle. The highest priority of a servant leader is to encourage, support and enable subordinates to unfold their full potential and abilities. This leads to an obligation to delegate responsibility and engage in participative decision-making. In the managerial grid model of Blake and Mouton, the participative style of leadership is presented as the approach with the greatest possible performance and employee satisfaction. However, there is the question whether a leadership style can be declared as universal and universally applicable.[5] Situational contexts are not considered.[6]

The servant leadership approach goes beyond employee-related behavior and calls for a rethinking of the hierarchical relationship between leader and subordinates. This does not mean that the ideal of a participative style in any situation is to be enforced, but that the focus of leadership responsibilities is the promotion of performance and satisfaction of employees.

Models

Most writers see servant leadership as an underlying philosophy of leadership, demonstrated through specific characteristics and practices. The foundational concepts are found in Greenleaf’s first three major essays, "The Servant as Leader", "The Institution as Servant", and "Trustees as Servants."

Larry Spears identified ten characteristic of servant leaders in the writings of Greenleaf. The ten characteristics are listening, empathy, healing, awareness, persuasion, conceptualization, foresight, stewardship, commitment to the growth of others, and building community. Leadership experts such as Bolman, Deal, Covey, Fullan, Sergiovanni, and Heifitz also reference these characteristics as essential components of effective leadership.

The Center for Servant Leadership at the Pastoral Institute in Georgia defines servant leadership as a lifelong journey that includes discovery of one’s self, a desire to serve others, and a commitment to lead. Servant-leaders continually strive to be trustworthy, self-aware, humble, caring, visionary, empowering, relational, competent, good stewards, and community builders.

Kent Keith, author of The Case for Servant Leadership, states that servant leadership is ethical, practical, and meaningful. He identifies seven key practices of servant leaders: self-awareness, listening, changing the pyramid, developing your colleagues, coaching not controlling, unleashing the energy and intelligence of others, and foresight.'

James Sipe and Don Frick, in their book The Seven Pillars of Servant Leadership, state that servant-leaders are individuals of character, put people first, are skilled communicators, are compassionate collaborators, use foresight, are systems thinkers, and exercise moral authority.

Unlike leadership approaches with a top-down hierarchical style, servant leadership instead emphasizes collaboration, trust, empathy, and the ethical use of power. At heart, the individual is a servant first, making the conscious decision to lead in order to better serve others, not to increase their own power. The objective is to enhance the growth of individuals in the organization and increase teamwork and personal involvement. A recent behavioral economics experiment demonstrates the group benefits of servant leadership. Teams of players coordinated their actions better with a servant leader resulting in improved outcomes for the followers (but not for the selfless leaders).[7]

Link with leadership theory

Some see a difference between a leadership philosophy (e.g. “servant leadership” or “ethical leadership”) and a leadership theory (e.g. functional and situational leadership theories). The former is a values-based view of how leaders should act whereas the latter is usually a way of teaching leaders how to be more effective.[8]

For decades, the older leadership theories (e.g. traits, behavioral/styles, situational and functional) did not explicitly support or address the philosophy of servant leadership. However, this changed with the emergence of integrated psychological leadership theory – as represented by James Scouller’s three levels of leadership model (2011). Scouller’s model – which attempts to integrate the older theories while addressing their limitations by focusing on the leader’s psychology – emphasizes the idea that leaders should care as much about their followers’ needs as their own and view leadership as an act of service.[9] Thus, the link between the philosophy of servant leadership and modern leadership theory has strengthened in the 21st century.

Advantages

Disadvantages

See also

References

  1. ↑ Lao Tzu, Tao Teh Ching, trans. John C. H. Wu (Boston, Massachusetts: Shambhala, 2006),35.
  2. ↑ "Mark 10:42-45 (New International Version Bible)". Bible Gateway (in Latin). 20 September 2013. Retrieved 10 August 2015.
  3. ↑ Greenleaf, R. (1991). The servant as leader ([Rev. ed.). Indianapolis, IN: Robert K. Greenleaf Center.
  4. ↑ "What Is Servant Leadership?". Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership. Retrieved 10 August 2015.
  5. ↑ Staehle, W.H.: Management, p. 842
  6. ↑ Neuberger, O.: Führen und führen lassen, S.515
  7. ↑ Gillet, J., Cartwright, E., & Van Vugt, M. (2010). Selfish or servant leadership: Testing evolutionary predictions about leadership in coordination games. Personality and Individual Differences. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2010.06.003
  8. ↑ "leadership terminology definitions – models, philosophies, styles", Businessballs management information, website: Leadership Theories, 24 February 2012, retrieved August 2012 Check date values in: |access-date= (help)
  9. ↑ Scouller, J. (2011). The Three Levels of Leadership: How to Develop Your Leadership Presence, Knowhow and Skill. Cirencester: Management Books 2000., ISBN 9781852526818
  10. 1 2 ©2008 12manage B.V. "Dienende Führung (Robert K. Greenleaf)". 12manage.com. Retrieved 2012-08-09.
  11. ↑ "Throw Out the Script: Improvisation, Innovation, and Servant Leadership". servantleadershipinstitute.com. Retrieved 2013-10-13.
  12. ↑ "10 Ways to Improve Employee Satisfaction". Retrieved 2012-08-09.
  13. ↑ "Five Steps To Increasing Employee Motivation". Jpmaroney.com. Retrieved 2012-08-09.
  14. ↑ Pink, D. (2012).To Sell Is Human: The Surprising Truth About Moving Others. New York: Riverbed Books. pp. 219-21.
  15. ↑ "What Is Servant Leadership". cairnway.net. Retrieved 2015-04-28.
  16. ↑ Eicher-Catt, Deborah (22 March 2005). "The Myth of Servant-Leadership: A Feminist Perspective". Women and Language. Retrieved 10 August 2015.

Further reading

External links

This article is issued from Wikipedia - version of the 8/9/2016. The text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share Alike but additional terms may apply for the media files.