The History Of Servant Leadership Theology Religion Flashcard

essay A+

Get Full Essay

Get access to this section to get all the help you need with your essay and educational goals.

Get Access

Though the term Servant Leadership is new, yet the underlying construct of servant leading is 1000s of old ages old. History consists of legion authors who referred to the construct of servant leading without coining any specific term to it ( Benjamin Lichtenwalner, 2008 ) . Some of them, as stated by Benjamin Lichtenwalner ( 2008 ) are ;

The greatest leader forgets himself and attends to the development of others ( Lao Tzu, 600B.C. ) .

The male monarch [ leader ] shall see as good, non what pleases himself but what pleases his topics [ followings ] . “ the male monarch [ leader ] is a paid retainer and enjoys the resources of the province together with the people. ” ( Chanakya ‘s Arthashastra, 375 B.C. ) .

But the greatest among you shall be your retainer ( Matthew 23:11 ) .

The 1 who is the greatest among you must go like the youngest, and the leader like the retainer. ( Luke 22:26 ) .

The servant-leader is servant firstaˆ¦ It begins with the natural feeling that one wants to function, to function foremost ( Robert K. Greenleaf, 1970 ) .

But the construct acquired celebrity in 1970 ‘s when Robert K. Greenleaf coined the term servant leading to it. An interesting point to be mentioned is that Robert K. Greenleaf himself ne’er flatly defined servant leading. But on the footing of the Hagiographas of Greenleaf and others, the term can be defined as a leading doctrine that takes into history the features of people, work and societal spirit. It needs a religious apprehension of personality, vision, mission and environment. A servant leader is the 1 who considers himself servant first, who lives with others, and so he furnishes to the satisfaction and wellbeing of people and community. A servant leader takes attention of the demands of the people he is taking and asks himself how he can assist them work out their jobs and heighten their personal development. His chief focal point is on people, because people with self motive and contentment are able to make their marks and carry through the set ends.

Greenleaf in his essay, The Servant as Leader, said:

It begins with the natural feeling that one wants to function, to function foremost. Then witting pick brings one to draw a bead on to take. That individual is aggressively different from one who is leader foremost, possibly because of the demand to pacify an unusual power thrust or to get stuff possessionsaˆ¦The leader-first and the servant-first are two utmost types. Between them there are shadings and blends that are portion of the infinite assortment of human nature ( Greenleaf, 1970, p.13 ) .

Servant Leadership in apposition to other leading manners

The most noteworthy division of leading manners is made between bossy ( autocratic ) , participative ( democratic ) and individualistic leading manners. The autocratic manner of leading focal points on clearly defined undertakings and on commanding their executing and results. It is the executive who has the power of decision-making. On the other manus, the democratic leading manner takes the employees onboard in decision-making. The employees have the act uponing power. The individualistic manner of leading ( negligible in pattern ) confides all the trust in the followings to execute their undertakings by themselves. In this manner, the leader trusts in the accomplishments and abilities of his followings to carry through the undertaking with the underlying premise that a individual excels when he is left entirely to carry through his duty in his ain manner.

Servant Leadership can be put together with the participative leading manner. The bossy leading manner does non associate with the steering rule. The greatest duty of a servant leader is to actuate, support and empower followings to unleash their full potency and abilities. This refers to the duty to intrust duty and to be engaged in democratic decision-making. In the managerial grid theoretical account by Blake and Mouton, the democratic manner of leading is the 1 with highest possible public presentation and employee satisfaction. However, there comes a inquiry whether a leading manner can be declared as universally acceptable or able to be applied ( Staehle, W.H. : Management, p. 842 ) . Situational contexts are non taken into consideration ( Neuberger, O. : Fuhren und fuhren lassen, p.515 ) .

The servant leading manner goes farther than the employee-related behaviour and asks for a reshaping of the hierarchal relationship that exists between leader and follower. This does non connote that the best of a democratic manner in any state of affairs is to be enforced, but that the focal point of leading duties is the enhancing of public presentation and satisfaction of employees.

The Potential & A ; Enigma of Servant-Leadership

Robert Greenleaf had absorbing wisdom and penetration about things that truly matter. In the yesteryear, when most of the conventional leaders preferred fostering the aims of entirely a few, Greenleaf provoked them to besides see the destitution of others and the less privileged. He asserted that a all right, legitimate and desirable society is dependent upon leaders who care ; that is, the leaders who take into consideration all those who are at interest by the endeavor. These stakeholders consist of employees, domestic communities, other folks and peoples, and future coevalss. Greenleaf thereby prognosticated the most important issue that stand up to our mutualist universe, presently verbalized as follows:

In a universe of six billion worlds and countless other existences, how can we make fortunes wherein each can boom, without restricting the life look of others? In short, how can we make a universe that genuinely works for all? ( Berrett-Koehler, 1999 )

This is the fundamental quandary and challenge in Greenleaf ‘s work for modern-day leaders, the establishments in the present clip, and for ourselves. Greenleaf spent a span of more than half a century working in the field of direction research and instruction seeking to heighten the public presentation of both for-profit and not-for-profit organisations. As a womb-to-tomb pupil of organisations and participant of how things get done in organisations, he poured his observations in a series of Hagiographas including essays and books focused on the subjects of lovingness and “ The Servant as Leader ” . In his Hagiographas, he suggested to choose for a better attack to leadership-one which serves others foremost. Greenleaf recommended formal leaders to inquire themselves two of import inquiries: “ Whom do you function? ” and “ For what intent? ” ( SanFacon & A ; Spears, 2008 ) He besides recommended leaders to take a more holistic attack to work, promote a sense of community, and to authorise others in decision-making. Through his work and Hagiographas, Greenleaf pursued to advance idea and action for developing a better society.

It is deserving observing that the footings retainer and leading are normally taken as opposite word to each other. And when two antonyms are drawn together in an artistic and meaningful manner, an mystery emerges. At first glimpse, the mystery seems conflicting and contradictory to common sense, but there is besides a Ag liner that it could be true. The entire consequence is to wake up leaders and directors to new possibilities, 1s that flyover older ways of thought and believing. Here arises a inquiry: “ Who is this puzzling “ servant-leader ” ? Greenleaf gave the reply in the undermentioned words:

It begins with the natural feeling that one wants to function, to function foremost. Then witting pick brings one to draw a bead on to take. The difference manifests itself in the attention taken by the servant-first to do certain that other people ‘s highest precedence demands are being served. The best trial is: Do those served grow as individuals ; do they, while being served, go healthier, wiser, freer, more independent, more likely themselves to go retainers? And, what is the consequence on the least privileged in society? Will they benefit or at least non be further deprived? ( Greenleaf, 1973, p7 )

Therefore we can state that servant-leader is anyone who dedicates himself to functioning others along with officially taking in some manner. Many positional leaders came to the decision that servant-leadership is the right manner to be practiced and finally they decided to encompass it ( Sanfacon et al. , 2008 ) . This manner has led to the growing and promotion of servant-leadership over the past old ages. But Greenleaf titled his essay, The Servant as Leader non The Leader as Servant ( Sanfacon et al. , 2008 ) . He thereby called upon people who are “ natural retainers ” to lend to taking establishments for the interest of common good. At its nucleus, servant-leadership is a long-run transformational attack to life and work-a manner of leading-which has possible for making dynamic, positive, non-violent alteration throughout our society and the universe.

The Ethical Dimensions of Leadership

Greenleaf left a hint, in the name he foremost used for the non-profit organisation which he founded in 1964: The Centre for Applied Ethics, for those who want to pattern servant leading ( SanFacon & A ; Spears, 2008 ) . Obviously, in one manner or other, Greenleaf viewed moralss as a roadmap for effectual leading and a better universe. In ethicians ‘ point of view, sound moral logical thinking requires a holistic attack ; that is an rating of three distinguishable dimensions-motives, agencies, and ends ( John E. Foley, 1995 ) . Motivations are about purposes ; “ why ” we do something. Means are about procedures ; “ how ” we do it. And Ends are about the consequences ; “ what ” we are seeking to accomplish. Ethical motives advocators and calls for all of these to be evaluated as good, light and required by all the stakeholders-those involved and those affected. Explaining each of these dimensions of servant leading can assist understand both its doctrine and pattern. Besides that it can besides fly us to derive apprehension of how these dimensions connect to each other, along with the responsibilities that servant leaders are required to execute in each dimension ( SanFacon & A ; Spears, 2008 ) .

Motivations & A ; purposes:

The procedure of human development returns as we move along into personhood going more concerned about others. The higher the development the greater is the attention that we show for others. But this development does non connote that we stop caring for ourselves, alternatively we add more and more others-those for whom we feel echt concern and fondness ( Shambhala, 1996 ) . Therefore, we become more and more interested in doing others ‘ lives better. Whether we are leaders or followings, our purpose is to function. And this is the taproot of servant leading, and the seedbed from which arises the root of impulse to lend positive difference in the universe. This interior topographic point is the beginning of change-internal and external. This creates a spectrum, runing from ego to others. And of class, each of us lands on a alone topographic point along this spectrum of caring. However, we are required to function all-ourselves, others, our loved 1s, our household, our folk, our people, other peoples, populating systems, future coevalss, and even creative activity itself. At the most beginning, our growing is about advancement into this drawn-out embracing. Somewhere along the expedition, even though we have been sing relaxation and material addition under the recognized order, we become willing to modify that order to foster a Earth that performs for all. This creates strong, non-violent alteration genuinely possible. Stanislav Grof ( 1994 ) put it this manner:

[ These ] individualsaˆ¦tend to develop a sense of planetal citizenship, fear for life in all its signifiers, deep ecological sensitiveness, spiritualty of a cosmopolitan and across-the-board type, antipathy to force, and reluctance to see aggression as an acceptable signifier of struggle declaration. Such extremist inner transmutation and rise to a new degree of consciousness might be humanity ‘s lone existent opportunity for endurance. ( Stanislav Grof, 1994, p317 )

Meanss and Procedures:

Where motivations and purposes refer to the beginning from which we take energy for taking action, agencies and procedures refer to the manner this energy is expressed in the universe. We can divide this look of energy into two important classs: ( 1 ) ways of being, and ( 2 ) institutional systems. The former is applicable to the leader as an person ; the latter is applicable to the organisational models and installations used by the leader.

Ends & A ; Consequences:

The ultimate finish of the servant leading is to do this universe workable for all. But there is a long manner to make that finish. The societal and economic systems of the present universe have stratified humanity into different societal degrees where some people lie on the upper half of the strata with alone wealth, and others, more than 80 % of the universe population, populating on the lower half with utmost wretchedness ( www.data.worldbank.org ) . The benefits of the economic growing have become concentrated, i.e. , most of the benefits are skimmed off by merely 20 % of the universe population, while the poorest 20 % are denied the basic demands for endurance. Our concern organisations are dominated by lone-chief ( boss/subordinate ) model, and these organisations have occupations that are over populated with employees ( Ernest Laszlo, 2003 ) . All these conditions add fuel to stratification, clash, and struggle. Even the consumer-based civilization has made the conditions worse by the devastation of nature and systems of life. All of this negative energy finds its roots from the side effects of engineering which jeopardizes all life on the Earth. The fact is: the universe we are populating in is unsustainable. As noted by Ernest Laszlo ( 2003 ) :

We can non stay as we are, nor can we travel back to conditions that are behind us. We can merely travel frontward, but non on the same way we have been following. We need to happen a new way. ( You Can Change the Worlds, 2003 )

Servant-leadership is one of the waies in this new way, which advocates a balance between self- involvement and the common good. In this facet servant-leaders are required to react to their endeavors in:

switching to those merchandises and services that support a feasible universe ;

presuming a Ternary Bottom Line-supporting people, net incomes and the universe ; and,

taking into consideration the pattern of moral symmetry-giving equal importance to the demands of all those affected by the endeavor.

A Chart of Servant-Leadership

George SanFacon & A ; Larry C. Spears ( 2008 ) presented a chart, Dimensions of Servant-Leadership, which provides an lineation of these dimensions and their common relation.

The Dimensions of Servant-Leadership

Dimension

Basic Concepts & A ; Goals

The Calling for Servant-Leadership

The “ Why? ”

Motivations & A ;

Purposes

“ It begins with the natural feeling that one wants to function. ”

Personal aspirations for leading come from a basic desire to enlarge the lives of others, instead than a desire and thrust for more power, acknowledgment, or material addition.

Develop and turn the personal capacity

( deepness and scope ) to care.

Develop an expanded embracing that

extends to everyone affected by the

endeavor.

The “ How? ”

Means & A ;

Procedures

I. The Servant-Leader-Ways of Being, Capacities & A ; Functions

A better universe can be built by better people.

There are ways of being, capacities and functions that embody servant-leadership, both stand foring its look and fostering its realisation in the universe. These can be learned and deepened through pattern.

Increase personal capacities for: consciousness, presence, handiness, contemplation, empathy, listening and receptiveness, credence of others, intuition, generousness, foresight, simpleness and transparence.

Fulfill organisational functions of steward, function theoretical account, therapist, alteration agent, and community builder.

II. The System-Organization & A ; Governance

Institutional and organisational systems are people edifice and life giving, instead than people utilizing and spirit violent death.

Power is shared. Leaderships are “ first among peers ” on squads of peers, instead than “ solitary head ” atop hierarchal pyramids.

Passage to a shared administration theoretical account that incorporates the first among peers concept.

Use participatory attacks to workplace

issues and pattern.

Implement new-paradigm attacks, such as “ unfastened book ” direction, addition sharing, employee stock ownership plans ( ESOPs ) and autonomous squads ( SDTs ) .

The “ What? ”

Ends & A ;

Consequences

Those affected have the experience of being served in a manner that builds a society “ that is more merely and lovingaˆ¦with greater chances for all. ”

Systems are socially, politically, and environmentally sustainable.

The universe works for all. Every individual has the chance to detect and populate out who they are and can be.

Passage to goods and services that promote a feasible universe.

Embrace a Triple Bottom Line for the enterprise-promoting societal equity, presenting net incomes and prolonging the planet.

Practice moral symmetry-balancing the legitimate demands of all those affected by the endeavor.

Beginning: www.spearscentre.org

Reality-A Seamless Whole

Though the boundary lines we impress on world can be helpful in understanding it, yet there is an indispensable unity at work. Even though we divide servant-leadership into different elements-aims, procedures and results-it plants, in world, as a seamless whole. It is, hence, required for these dimensions to reassemble into the individual world that really prevails. This can be achieved by placing that underperformance in any specific sphere will hold its negative effects on other parts, every bit good as the whole. That is to state that the assorted dimensions of servant-leadership are interlinked with each other and they function most efficaciously as an incorporate whole.

Features of being servant leader

Larry C. Spears, who has served as President andA CEOA of theA Robert K. GreenleafA Center for Servant Leadership since 1990, has postulated a set of 10 different features that are cardinal to the development of a servant leader:

Listening: Communication accomplishments are non merely required traditionally but besides in servant leading. A servant leader listens to his subsidiaries actively and supports them in determination devising. A servant leader is required to read between the lines and listen to the mute by trusting on his interior voice so as to aim what the organic structure, head and spirit are pass oning. ( Larry C. Spears, 2005 )

Empathy: A servant leader ever puts himself into others ‘ places. Therefore, understanding what others feel and the manner they act is what gives it the name “ Servant-leadership ” . A servant leader sees other non merely as his/her subordinates/workers, but besides as worlds who need to be paid regard, attention and grasp for their development. Hence, leading is a particular type of human work, which consequences finally in competitory advantage. ( Leonhard J. , 2007 )

Healing: Another quality that distinguishes a Servant Leader from the remainder is his ability for mending himself and others excessively. A servant leader Acts of the Apostless as a counsellor to assist others work out their jobs and struggles. This characteristic leads to the development of a concern civilization, in which the work environment is dynamic, enjoyable and free of failure fright.

Awareness: A servant leader demands to maintain himself updated of everything around him and particularly self-awareness. He has the ability to take a holistic position of the state of affairss. Consequently, he becomes better able to understand values and moralss.

Persuasion: Robert Greenleaf incorporated his spiritual positions into servant leading by stressing converting alternatively of haling to accomplish conformity. This characteristic sets a clear limit between servant leading and other traditional theoretical accounts of leading.

Conceptualization: A servant leader has the ability to concentrate on long term operational ends. Therefore he thinks beyond the range of daily worlds ( Larry C. Spears, 2005 ) . A Leader constructs a personal position that merely he can make by demoing on the significance of life. Consequently, he originates peculiar aims and executing techniques ( Leonhard J. , 2007 ) .

Foresight: Foresight is the expectancy of the likeliness of a state of affairs to go on. It makes servant leader able to larn about the yesteryear and better understand the current state of affairs. It besides lets the servant leader identify effects about the hereafter.

Stewardship: The direction of an organisation has, on its top docket, the undertaking to maintain their organisation in the best trust for the benefit of the society. Therefore, servant-leadership is seen as an duty to assist others. Persuasion and openness are considered more of import than control and direct.

Committedness to the growing of people: A servant leader is persuaded with the fact that people have an intrinsic value beyond their attempts as workers. Therefore, he needs to concentrate on worker ‘s personal, professional and religious growing. Servant leader gives importance to others ‘ inputs and involves workers in determination devising.

Building Community: A servant leader identifies resources to develop a strong community within the organisation and wants to construct a true community among concerns and establishments.

As a consequence, it has to be emphasized that the above mentioned 10 features are by no agencies comprehensive ( Larry C. Spears, 2005 ) . But these features should non be considered as a certain mode to execute to accomplish ends. Rather if every individual reflects these features, it can be utile for his personal development schemes ( Leonhard J. , 2007 ) .

Servant Leadership Philosophy and its Link with Leadership Theory

It has been mentioned on the Businessballs information web site that there exists a difference between leading doctrines ( e.g. “ Servant leading ” or “ ethical leading ” ) and a leading theory ( e.g. functional and situational leading theories ) . The former is a guideline for a leader that suggests how leaders should act whereas the latter is teaches leaders how they can be more effectual. ( Gillet, J. , Cartwright, E. , & A ; Van Vugt, M. , from Selfish or servant leading, 2010. )

For long clip, the older theories of leading ( e.g.A traits, behavioural, and situational ) unambiguously address the doctrine of servant leading. However, this was altered with the manifestation of Integrated Psychological leading theory – as characterized by James Scouller ‘s Three Levels of Leadership Model ( 2011 ) . Scouller ‘s theoretical account – which attempts to absorb the older theories while concentrating on the restrictions by paying attending to the leader ‘s psychological science – high spots the impression that leaders should back up and care about their followings ‘ demand every bit much as they do for themselves and see leading as a place for functioning others. ( Scouller, J, . from The Three Levels of Leadership, 2011 )

Therefore, the relationship between the doctrine of servant leading and modern-day leading theory has strengthened in the twenty-first century.

Advantages

This construct is seen as a long-termA conceptA to populate and work and hence has the possible to act upon theA societyA in a positive manner. ( Greenleaf, 2002 )

The model intervention ofA employeesA leads to an first-class intervention ofA customersA by employees of theA companyA and a high trueness of the clients.

There is a high employeeA identificationA with the endeavor.

An excellentA corporate cultureA is developed.

Leaderships of a company define themselves by their significance to the people.

Servant Leadership can be used as a rule to better the return on investing of staff, in all economic sectors. Directors who empower and respect their staff acquire better public presentation in return.

Disadvantages

The many features of a servant leader may look inordinate. There are merely a few leaders who can carry through these properties.

Servant Leadership is seen as a long-run application and hence needs clip for using ( Greenleaf, 2002 ) .

Decision

Effective servant-leaders consciously engage each of the dimensions of servant-leadership: ( 1 ) motivations and purposes, ( 2 ) agencies and methods, ( 3 ) results and consequences and seek to understand them as a gestalt. This is a holistic attack to the work. Such leaders thereby make spheres where persons and communities can mend, turn, and thrive through common lovingness and trust. Organizational life is thereby bit by bit transformed from a treadmill and battle of opposing forces to a journey and jubilation in co-creativity. Through this procedure, both natural retainers and positional leaders become servant-leaders, the journey becomes the finish, and the universe becomes a better topographic point for all.

High moral values and excellence must rule the 21st century if advancement is to hold positive significance. Through thoughts like those of Robert Greenleaf ‘s servant-leadership, such a manner of life is now good within our range. ~Bill Bottum

Get instant access to
all materials

Become a Member
unlock