MGMT312 Servant Leadership Video Discussion Please read (link) Chapter 7 pages 188-195 and also read (link) Chapter 9 (pages 241-227) of the Dugan text. F

MGMT312 Servant Leadership Video Discussion Please read (link) Chapter 7 pages 188-195 and also read (link) Chapter 9 (pages 241-227) of the Dugan text.

First, please review this two minute video about Servant Leadership.

Servant Leadership video

Servant Leadership – Video link

Then, answer one of the following two questions:

1 – What are servant leadership behaviors and what do they mean to followers? Drawing on your own leadership experiences, what needs to be considered when applying servant leadership to practice?

OR

2 – Discuss authentic leadership. How it is different from other theories of leadership?

Be sure to begin your forum response with the selected question.

Instructions: Your initial post for this forum should be a total of at least 250 words. TABLE 7.1 Strengths and weaknesses of transforming/transformational leadership
Strengths
Grounded in moral values, it is among
the earliest theories to espouse the
importance of investing in follower
development
Substantial, highquality research
supports the validity of the theory and its
influence on a wide range of leadership
outcomes
Situates transformational behaviors in
the context of transactional and non
leader behaviors differentiating the
influences of each
Weaknesses
Fullrange leadership is a misnomer as the
metacategories described do not account
for all leadership behaviors
Little evidence of how followers,
organizations, or systems are “transformed”
as a result of behaviors
Leadercentricity offers minimal
consideration of follower agency despite
articulating a mutual relationship between
leaders and followers
Making Connections
Transformation sounds great, but who has the power and authority to determine the
type of transformation being pursued and the moral foundations that guide it? How
might this run the risk of replicating dominant norms?
Copyright © 2017. John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated. All rights reserved.
What stands out as useful about transforming/transformational leadership? What do
you think needs to be addressed in the deconstruction and reconstruction processes?
SERVANT LEADERSHIP
The concept of servant leadership initially emerged as a philosophical framework for
understanding leadership in a series of papers written by Greenleaf (1970, 1977), a business
executive who worked for AT&T. Greenleaf offered a reframing of what he believed
leadership should be about. His philosophy suggested that formal leaders should act as
servants first and leaders second, reflecting a calling to give back rather than selfserving
motives or an overemphasis on production. Greenleaf’s propositions contributed to a wide
range of publications and the formation of the Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership to
advance the philosophy and train people in its application to practice. Numerous businesses,
universities, and religious organizations have adopted servant leadership as the foundation for
their work given its positioning of leadership as a moral imperative. Despite servant
leadership’s popularity in practice and existence for over 45 years, it has only been in the last
15 years that scholars have directed considerable attention toward its empirical validation.
Dugan, J. P. (2017). Leadership theory. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com
Created from apus on 2017-06-23 08:20:08.
Overview
Interestingly, Greenleaf’s (1970, 1977) early writings on servant leadership predate Burns’s
(1978) work on transforming leadership. Yet, servant leadership did not initially receive the
same degree of academic attention that Burns’s work did. Both theories draw on similar
foundations, emphasizing a movement beyond management alone, engagement with values and
ethics, and development of followers. The unique contribution of servant leadership above and
beyond those of transforming and transformational leadership lies in its inclusion of social
responsibility as a core premise (Graham, 1991; van Dierendonck, 2011). In transformational
leadership there is a stated need to invest in individuals, but those investments are in service of
an end goal of organizational advancement whereas in servant leadership they are ends in and
of themselves. Fully understanding servant leadership requires a quick sidestep into its origins.
The Muse
Greenleaf (1977) credits Hesse’s (2003) novel The Journey to the East, first published in
Germany in 1932, as the inspiration for servant leadership. The novel tells of a mystical
journey taken by a group of Western European men who belonged to a sacred religious order
whose past members included great men and characters from history, including Plato, Mozart,
Don Quixote, and Puss in Boots. Yep … the cat. So, the sacred order was composed of all men
and a talking cat. We’ll come back to that later.
Copyright © 2017. John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated. All rights reserved.
The purpose of the group’s journey to the East was to seek out the “ultimate truth.” What starts
as a successful and jovial spiritual quest falls apart after a humble servant to the group
disappears and its members devolve into petty arguments, eventually disbanding and pursuing
individual paths. It’s clear to readers, however, that this “servant” was in actuality much more.
He provided the glue that held the group together, yet they remained oblivious to his
importance.
The main character spends years in despair over the failure and what he believes to be the
collapse of the religious order that gave him purpose and direction in life. During this time, he
attempts to document the journey, struggling to capture what happened and all the while
becoming more disenfranchised. A sharp turn in the novel reveals that the “servant” who left
the group was in actuality the head of the order and the journey and subsequent years of
disillusionment were tests of faith, which the main character failed. He is given a final test that
challenges his understanding of what constitutes “truth.” This test ends with the main character
viewing his own story as documented in the archives of the order, revealing that his identity is
tied to and merging with that of the servant—an allegory for letting go of personal ego and the
emergence of an interdependent consciousness.
Understanding the story that inspired Greenleaf (1977) to write about servant leadership is
incredibly important as it helps us understand the dynamics from which he drew as he built his
philosophy. His interpretation rests on the assertion that “this story clearly says that the great
leader is seen as servant first, and that simple fact is the key to his greatness … he was
servant first because that was who he was, deep down inside” (Greenleaf, 1977, p. 21,
emphasis in original). Greenleaf saw in Hesse’s (2003) work the ways in which “servants” are
Dugan, J. P. (2017). Leadership theory. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com
Created from apus on 2017-06-23 08:20:08.
often obscured by groups that instead focus on those in formal positions using authority to
advance organizational or individual goals rather than collective ones. Drawing on the major
themes of the story, his intent was to reshape leadership as derived first from deep service that
in turn elevates one into formal authority roles.
However, as a function of both its content and the historical context in which it was written,
The Journey to the East also reflects a number of problematic elements that are either ignored
by Greenleaf (1977) or show up in his philosophy and its contemporary application in
problematic ways. This includes the patriarchal positioning of “great men,” paternalistic
approaches to development and learning, and orientalist overtones (i.e., an ideology presuming
marked distinctions between “Western” and “Eastern” cultures in which Western values are
normative and Eastern cultures misrepresented, exaggerated, and exoticized). These ideas are
particularly apparent in how servant leadership remains leadercentric, positions the role of
the leader as a nurturing parental figure, and reproduces gendered norms. Furthermore,
Greenleaf’s interpretation leaves out some of the most important existential questions of the
novel that draw on multiple spiritual traditions, defaulting instead to JudeoChristian
examples. It should not be surprising, then, that servant leadership is sometimes narrowly
interpreted through the lens of religiosity and appropriated as solely a story of Judeo
Christian leadership. For example, Sendjaya and Sarros (2002) argued that “Greenleaf is not
the individual who first introduced the notion of servant leadership to everyday human
endeavor. It was Christianity’s founder, Jesus Christ, who first taught the concept of servant
leadership” (p. 58). Parris and Peachey (2013) caution that the roots of servant leadership date
back not to a single faith tradition or individual, but to teachings from most of the world’s great
religions and a wide range of historical figures.
Copyright © 2017. John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated. All rights reserved.
Philosophical Starting Point
If you think back to the first chapter, we differentiated between theories, models, taxonomies,
and philosophical frameworks. Servant leadership provides an example of how that
differentiation becomes important. Servant leadership, as originally conceived by Greenleaf
(1977), offers a philosophical framework or abstract representation of untested ideas and
principles. He did not offer a formal theory, provide an explicit definition, or include a model
for how it should be operationalized in practice. This means that over time both the application
of servant leadership and scholarly research on it have been interpretations of Greenleaf’s
philosophy, reflecting varying degrees of congruence with the original work.
Scholars and practitioners alike have attempted to provide definitional clarity about what
servant leadership means as a starting point for research and applications to practice. Most
draw on the following quote in building their definition:
Dugan, J. P. (2017). Leadership theory. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com
Created from apus on 2017-06-23 08:20:08.
The servantleader 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. For such, it will be a later choice
to serve—after leadership is established … The difference manifests itself in the care taken
by the servantfirst to make sure that other people’s highest priority needs are being
served. The best test, and difficult to administer is this: 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? (Greenleaf, 1977, p. 27)
Additionally, scholars and practitioners attempt to identify core tenets that set servant
leadership apart from other theories. These typically include (1) that the motivation to lead is
derived from a deeply personal desire to serve others, (2) that the desire to serve others
operates not just in a particular organizational or group context but in all aspects of the leader’s
life, (3) that power and authority should be given to leaders by followers and only to the
degree that they operate from a servant perspective, and (4) that leaders have a moral
obligation to demonstrate concern for the development of followers and stakeholders to their
full potential.
Copyright © 2017. John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated. All rights reserved.
Applying the Concept
Numerous scholars offer insights into how best to operationalize servant leadership, moving it
from a broad philosophy to a functional theory, model, or taxonomy more accessible for
application to practice (Barbuto & Wheeler, 2006; Brown & Bryant, 2015; Liden, Panaccio,
Meuser, Hu, & Wayne, 2014; Liden, Wayne, Zhao, & Henderson, 2008; Russell & Stone, 2002;
Spears, 1995, 2010; van Dierendonck, 2011; van Dierendonck & Nuijten, 2011; van
Dierendonck & Patterson, 2015). Initially these efforts focused almost entirely on the
identification of traits and behaviors associated with enacting the role of a servant leader. This
was later extended to a broader range of considerations. However, there exists no single
agreedupon approach to servant leadership. As such, Figure 7.2 provides an adaptation of
servant leadership that draws on several of the most recognized conceptualizations (Liden et
al., 2008, 2014; van Dierendonck, 2011).
Dugan, J. P. (2017). Leadership theory. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com
Created from apus on 2017-06-23 08:20:08.
FIGURE 7.2 Adapted model of servant leadership
Copyright © 2017. John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated. All rights reserved.
At the center of Figure 7.2 is the heart of servant leadership—the behaviors that leaders exhibit
to bring to life Greenleaf’s (1977) original philosophy. These include the following:
Conceptual Skills: Developing knowledge of the environment in which leadership unfolds
as well as the leadership tasks/processes occurring to be able to support followers
effectively
Emotional Healing: Demonstrating sensitivity to the personal concerns of followers
Putting Followers First: Communicating and demonstrating through action that the work
needs of followers are a priority
Helping Followers Grow and Succeed: Prioritizing the personal and professional
development of followers by providing necessary support and resources
Behaving Ethically: Engaging with followers in an open, fair, and honest manner
Empowerment: Positioning followers as capable of identifying and resolving problems as
well as directing their own work flow through encouragement
Creating Value for the Community: Communicating a genuine concern for the community
Dugan, J. P. (2017). Leadership theory. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com
Created from apus on 2017-06-23 08:20:08.
Each of the behaviors should be individualized to best meet the unique needs of each follower.
For example, how a leader enacts emotional healing may look different for one person than it
does for another.
The relative effectiveness of servant leader behaviors is a function of three key factors. First,
the context in which servant leader behaviors are manifest shapes the degree to which they will
be accepted. Second, not all groups and organizations may find servant leadership desirable or
effective and thus may not be receptive to it (Anderson, 2009; Liden et al., 2014). Third,
culture influences the ways in which servant leader behaviors are enacted, valued, and
interpreted (van Dierendonck, 2011).
Copyright © 2017. John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated. All rights reserved.
Additionally, the characteristics of both leaders and followers play a powerful role in
determining the effectiveness of servant leader behaviors. Leader characteristics include the
following traits and attributes: (1) a desire to serve others grounded in altruistic, intrinsic
motivation, (2) emotional intelligence, (3) a level of moral maturity characterized by the
ability to make sound moral judgments, employ metacognitive reasoning, situate oneself as
morally responsible, and consistently act in moral ways, (4) a prosocial identity in which
one’s selfconcept is defined in part by a belief in the importance of helping others, (5) a core
sense of self characterized by healthy selfesteem and selfefficacy, an internal locus of
control, and low degrees of neuroticism, and (6) low levels of narcissism so that egodriven
behaviors, selfimportance, and entitlement are limited and the needs of followers put first.
Leader characteristics interact dynamically with follower traits and attributes, influencing how
servant leader behaviors should be enacted. First, followers with a proactive personality
thrive on and benefit from the agency and interdependence afforded by empowerment
behaviors. Those whose personalities are less proactive benefit from behaviors associated
with conceptual skills, putting followers first, and helping followers to grow and succeed.
Second, when followers possess a healthy core sense of self, behaviors associated with
empowerment and helping followers grow and succeed are well received. If a follower’s core
sense of self is underdeveloped, then behaviors associated with helping followers grow and
succeed and emotional healing become important. Finally, harkening back to ILT, followers
develop ideal leader prototypes that shape how they perceive those in leader roles. Followers’
servant leader prototypes influence their conscious and subconscious expectations regarding
what servant leadership should “look like” and whether it is a desirable approach. This shapes
followers’ receptivity to and expectations for servant leader behaviors, in turn requiring
leaders to rely heavily on the relational aspects of emotional healing to customize behaviors to
meet their needs.
When there is a dynamic alignment between context, leader characteristics, and follower
characteristics, servant leader behaviors cultivate intermediate outcomes that contribute to
leadership outcomes (e.g., performance, satisfaction, goal attainment). These intermediate
outcomes are important in and of themselves as they foster a climate of reciprocity. This
includes increased mutual trust between leaders and followers; gains in followers’ core sense
of self, prosocial identity, and moral development; greater sense of empowerment; increased
commitment to the leader; and better alignment between leader and follower prototypes for
Dugan, J. P. (2017). Leadership theory. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com
Created from apus on 2017-06-23 08:20:08.
servant leadership. Collectively, these intermediate outcomes shape the degree to which
leadership outcomes are achieved.
How Research Evolves the Concept
As previously stated, servant leadership originated as a broad philosophical framework
without a clear theoretical base from which to ground empirical research. This may explain in
part why it took so long for scholars to direct significant attention toward evolving the concept
despite its widespread use in practice. Let’s examine several considerations from research.
Validation and Theoretical Distinctiveness
The seven servant leader behaviors presented in this chapter are the direct result of rigorous
model building and psychometric testing (Liden et al., 2008, 2014, 2015). While other sets of
behaviors exist, none have undergone such extensive empirical examination to affirm accuracy
of measurement. Furthermore, scholars have demonstrated that servant leadership is distinct
from other theories, including ethical leadership, LMX, and transformational leadership
(Ehrhart, 2004; Liden et al., 2008; Parolini, Patterson, & Winston, 2009; Peterson, Galvin, &
Lange, 2012; Schaubroeck, Lam, & Peng, 2011; van Dierendonck, Stam, Boersma, De Windt,
& Alkema, 2014).
Copyright © 2017. John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated. All rights reserved.
Influences on Leadership Outcomes
A growing body of empirical research demonstrates a clear impact associated with enacting
servant leadership behaviors on leadership outcomes. Several literature reviews synthesize
these results, highlighting its positive influence on outcomes ranging from individual and team
performance to organizational commitment and citizenship behaviors (Liden et al., 2014;
Parris & Peachey, 2013; van Dierendonck, 2011). Figure 7.2 captures the full range of
leadership outcomes found in the literature. It is important to note that research on servant
leadership has included varying aspects of the environmental context often absent from studies
as well as demonstrated the additive value of enacting servant leadership beyond that accrued
through other theories alone.
Considerations Based on Social Location
As is the case with many leadership theories, most of the research on servant leadership
addressing social location reflects a convenient side step around domestic cultural differences
in the United States, emphasizing instead international crosscultural applications. Empirical
measures of servant leadership have been employed in a variety of international contexts and
demonstrated transferability (Hu & Liden, 2011; Schaubroeck et al., 2011; Walumbwa,
Hartnell, & Oke, 2010).
Some attention has been directed to gender differences in the enactment of servant leadership
behaviors, al…
Purchase answer to see full
attachment