While many of us believe that the follower is in place to serve leaders, the theory of Servant Leadership emphasizes the need for leaders to cultivate followers and ensure that their needs are met. By design, this theory builds followers up to then develop others, ultimately freeing the leader from personally tending to each and every follower. This type of nurturing and empowerment, after much research, has proven effective enough to transform from an approach to a theory (Northouse, 2016). It makes sense that developing followers to become more autonomous would be beneficial for a leader, but what leadership behaviors are necessary to make this theory functional?
The 10 characteristics of servant leadership embodies an environment that promotes two-way communication at every organizational level. Servant leaders are empathetic to the needs of their followers, which is validating for the follower (Northouse, 2016). They are concerned about the personal well-being of followers and self-aware about how they come across to others. Servant leaders use persuasion as a way to influence others in a non-coercive manner, and their conceptualized vision is clear to followers. Their foresight is a way in which they are held accountable, by considering what has happened in the past in order to predict outcomes (Northouse, 2016). They take responsibility for the position they are in as a leader, and committed to help others grow. Finally, servant leaders create a community that feels united and has shared values, while simultaneously embracing individuality (Northouse, 2016).
Existing conditions, or antecedent conditions have an impact on servant leadership, and account for situations including: context and culture, leader attributes, and follower receptivity (Northouse, 2016). The situation or environment may determine how effective servant leadership is, particularly if the followers are opposed to this particular style of leadership. Servant leader behaviors are the corner stone of this theory. The leader must have a deep-rooted understanding of the mission and how to address issues that might arise in a manner consistent with the values of the organization. As previously mentioned, there are many behaviors critical to successful servant leadership. These behaviors, in conjunction with the antecedent conditions, are indicative of potential outcomes. Outcomes are measured by both personal (self-actualization) and organizational growth. The goal is to create a ripple effect in terms of creating leaders out of follower, that end up becoming servant leaders themselves, and improving the overall functioning of an organization as a whole (Northouse, 2016).
Personally, as a follower, I’m more inclined to go above and beyond for a leader that expresses interest in my well-being and gives me the necessary tools for success. Armed with the knowledge and experience developed over time, I get much satisfaction from sharing that knowledge with those who are in more developmental stages of their careers. Reflecting on this concept brought me to the realization that I’ve been molded by servant leaders. It also makes me understand my disdain for coercive leaders that I’ve come across throughout my career.
It’s my perception that servant leadership in a military culture is encouraged and well received by followers. In my experience, a selfish leader can be spotted a mile away. I was enlisted in the military, and after frequently moving around, had the opportunity to work for several officers. Many of them were seeking success solely to have a shiny new bullet point for their next evaluation in an effort to make the next rank. Fortunately, this was typically apparent to their leadership, and to the extent possible, not automatically pushed through the ranks. Speaking for the followers of these leaders, it felt as if we were being used as pawns for their own personal benefit. Even if you don’t have military background, I believe it’s common knowledge that as enlisted personnel don’t have the luxury of refusing to follow orders from a superior officer. While they generally completed their missions, the work was done begrudgingly by enlisted followers.
It was always refreshing to come across an altruistic leader. We knew that we had a voice that represented our best interest, a true example of the phrase “I’ve got your back.” Knowing that a leader would support you with simple administrative issues, such as hold ups with your leave paperwork or award documentation, gave followers the assurance that they would be just as supportive in an emergency situation. This is similar to the leader behaviors described in servant leadership, taking interest in the well-being of followers. This example of selfless service fostered a community environment. We wanted leaders like this to succeed, so we wouldn’t only accomplish a task, but perform in a way that exceeded expectations. This outcome was a direct reflection of the situation (military culture), combined with servant leadership behaviors. Meanwhile, they were developing upcoming leaders to be servant leaders themselves, which betters the military as an organization.
Although I’m no longer in the military, I still work closely with them, and the same holds true. I can now observe different leadership styles from a different perspective. A lot can be said about the motivations of a leader through the willingness of a group assigned to accomplish a task.
Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and practice (7th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
tvm5502 says
Like the altruistic, “I’ve got your back leader” you mention is former Army Specialist Fourth Class John Baca, who fell on a thrown, live grenade in Vietnam in 1970, earning him congressional medal of honor (Congressional Medal of Honor Foundation, 2018). The servant leadership behavior of putting others before yourself is almost not better seen then from the medal of honor recipients. He protected those who he led and led him while investigating the detonation of an automatic ambush device, saving eight lives (Congressional Medal of Honor Foundation, 2018). This behavior is what Northouse (2016) writes” is the sine qua non of servant leadership – the defining principle” (p. 234).
John Baca now lives in Alpine, California and still reaches to help the military community by being a role model to the local junior Marines, and to those abroad serving by sending letters of encouragement and care packages. He gives to the military community and eschews any recognition when possible so that the focus is on the issue or goal he supports. Today, just like in 1970, he puts the needs and concerns of those who cares about first.
Congressional Medal of Honor Foundation. (2018). John Baca. Retrieved from https://themedalofhonor.com/medal-of-honor-recipients/recipients/baca-john-vietnam-war
Northouse, P.G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and practice. (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications, Inc
cyh5382 says
This is a really great assessment of servant leadership and how important it is. I approached my post in a similar regard, praising servant leaders from the follower standpoint. I feel like this is an important consideration because it shows what a substantial impact can be made on people to do good and for the right reasons. Much like you, when I was met with a leader of this caliber, I was inspired to work harder and genuinely wanted to do what I could to ensure their needs were also being met.
And yet, servant leadership is debated largely because of its would-be contradiction to what “leading” is supposed to look like, and some arguments say it is almost too good to be true (Northouse, 2016). I find this to be somewhat ironic, however, because this approach is based on behaviors. There is an entire leadership theory centered around behaviors and no-one argued that any of those acts were dismissible. And yet the act of serving is, and why; because it promotes a utopian ideology?
Much unlike every other theory we have discussed, it seems to me that no-one really has any thing negative to say about a time where a leader put follower needs first. Moreover, much of the empirical data related to these instances actually seems to report a marked rise in desire to increase output. I think the real issue with the servant approach is that it can’t be explained in a way that would validate these thoughts on paper. Thinking back to the psychodynamic approach, it made so much sense in its application to leadership, but you simply could not break it down based on facts and numbers (Northouse, 2016). You cannot define how to be a servant leader because it changes with every person and situation. And, it is closely related to the inherent desire to serve, which cannot be taught (Northouse, 2016); making the promotion of it difficult. But proven or not, I am thankful that there are servant leaders out there helping to shape the next generation!
dgs5155 says
In your post you touched on several characteristics of a servant leader that emphasis on follower development. A few of the main ideas were empathy, persuasion, foresight, and the commitment to the growth of people. These characteristics are in fact the essence to developing servant leadership. I was also in the military, and recognized individuals who were not servant leaders in any sense. “The act of listening helps leaders acknowledge the viewpoint of followers and become receptive to what needs to happen” (Northhouse, 2016, p.227). This was not a characteristic of several officers and enlisted members that I worked with. The simple act of listening will not only improve a leaders understanding of situations, but also help draw possible solutions to known problems. Because some leaders don’t place follower development before there own, they will never grow there organization into a sustainable environment.
Resources
Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and practice (7th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.