The term “servant leadership” seems kind of like an oxymoron at first glance. But when you really take time to consider the idea, it makes perfect sense. When you consider the idea of a servant, who either helps to personally cater to another individual or maintains some sort of grand estate, that servant keeps things running smoothly. Without the servant, the house would undoubtedly be out of order or the individual for whom the servant works would not be able to function nearly as efficiently. And this is largely where Greenleaf (1970, as cited by Northouse, 2016, p.225) came up with the idea of servant leadership. In the book The Journey to the East by Hermann Hesse (1956), the servant led a group of travelers who fell into disarray and disbanded after he disappeared, because in essence, the servant was leading them from behind. And this is where Greenleaf got the idea for his leadership model (Northouse, 2016, p. 227).

Metaphorically, you could look at servant leadership as turning the organizational pyramid on its side. Rather than leading from the top, the servant leadership style dictates that leaders help their followers by guiding them and gently pushing them forward, or leading from the bottom up. This is because the basic premise of servant leadership is that the leader’s first aim is to serve and help followers to fulfill their roles in order for the followers to grow and progress (Northouse, 2016, p.226). They put others’ needs first and as a result, hopefully, help their followers meet organizational goals and as a by-product learn to do the same for others. As a result of this type of nurturing towards growth, the intended goal is that followers not only grow themselves, but help the organizations within which they exist to grow as well.

It has been determined that servant leaders possess certain characteristics which help them to be successful and these include listening, empathy, healing, awareness, persuasion, conceptualization, foresight, stewardship, commitment to the growth of their followers, and a sense of building community (Spears, 2002, as cited by Northouse, 2016, p.227-229). This list makes it pretty clear that servant leaders’ main focus is helping their followers and the organizations in which they exist to overcome obstacles in order to perform well and develop themselves so that the organization can perform well and grow as well. As a result, there is also a positive impact on society as well from the organizations’ prosperity (Northouse, 2016, p.238). However, for servant leadership to be effective enough to result in these positive outcomes, they must exhibit behaviors that are appropriate to the organization’s culture and context, with followers who are receptive to this type of leadership, because not everyone views having a servant leader positively (Northouse, 2016, p.232-233).

There are several famous examples of servant leaders who have had large impacts on society and the organizations in which they functioned. One of the most famous and lasting models of this is Mahatma Gandhi. He led millions of Indians through servant leadership in a quest for Indian independence from British rule, often incorporating methods such as fasting because it is non-violent and as such didn’t harm either the oppressors or the oppressed people he was attempting to help (Biography.com Editors, n.d.). His primary motivation and purpose was to serve the people of his country, not gain fame, glory or riches. While his actions helped to transform a nation, Gandhi’s main purpose remained to serve his people with the goal of improving their living conditions and easing racial tensions. As a result of Gandhi’s leadership, his followers gained independence which lead them to become empowered. He valiantly lived by the ideal, “Be the change you want to see in the World,” (Gandhi, n.d.) and as such, led by example.

Another famous leader who exemplifies servant leadership is Cesar Chavez, whose mission was to empower farm workers and immigrants in order to protect them from injustices they endured by farmers. Through his founding of the United Farm Workers union he helped to improve the working conditions and pay for thousands (United Farm Workers, 2016). He was tireless in his efforts to change the way that migrant farm workers were treated, advocating non-violent methods such as fasting, to perpetrate change. He brought national attention to his cause so that his supporters could garner support in order to effectuate change for the good of many. Chavez felt that by bringing solidarity to his followers they could find a solution to the problems between farm workers and the growers they worked for (United Farm Workers, 2016). With deep empathy for those that he led, Chavez strove to raise awareness for his cause by building a sense of community among his followers and attempting to persuade both the government and agricultural producers to provide reasonable pay and safe working conditions for their workers. His true purpose was never to gain notoriety or wealth, but rather to empower his followers so that they may be treated fairly in order to be productive and successful and improve not only their working conditions but also their living conditions, which would in turn have an impact on the communities they lived in.

Harriet Tubman was a third person who exemplifies what it means to be a servant leader. After escaping from slavery herself she returned to the south over a dozen times in order to escort over 300 slaves to freedom (PBS, n.d.). Her name is synonymous with the Underground Railroad and she emerged as a leader by putting the lives of others before her own in order to free them from slavery. Rather than solely worrying about her own safety she repeatedly put herself in harms’ way for the betterment of others. Her own freedom motivated her to improve the plight of others and save them as well. Her leading other slaves to freedom earned her the nickname of Moses among her people and gave them courage to follow her to freedom as well. She even acted as a nurse and spy during the Civil War (PBS, n.d.) and following the end of the war she opened her home to the needy and financed her Home for Indigent and Aged Negroes by selling her biography and through public speaking engagements (History.com Staff, 2009). Tubman’s unselfish actions and efforts were all in service to improve the lives and conditions of as many African Americans as she possibly could.

While these are only three examples of servant leadership, there are certainly many more. However, these examples illustrate the leadership model well. In all of them there were antecedent conditions that set the backdrop for these individuals to become leaders. For each case there was a situation in which there was a drastic need for change which the leaders strove for through helping and empowering those who needed the help the most. These leaders also had attributes that helped them to be effective as leaders and their followers were receptive to the need for change (PSU WC, 2016, l.11 p.4). As leaders, all three exhibited behaviors that were for the benefit of their followers in order to help them better their positions in life by putting their followers first, helping them succeed, behaving ethically, and creating value for the communities of which they were a part (PSU WC, 2016, l.11 p.4). As a result, the outcome was beneficial in each circumstance as can be seen for each example. Each of these leaders had a great impact on both the followers and the societies in which they lived. These leaders dedicated their lives to help others be successful, which is the epitome of what servant leadership is about.

 

References

Biography.com Editors. (n.d.). Mahatma Gandhi biography. Biography.com. Retrieved from http://www.biography.com/people/mahatma-gandhi-9305898#related-video-gallery.

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

Hesse, H. (1956). The Journey to the East. London: P. Owen.

History.com Staff. (2009). Harriet Tubman. History.com. Retrieved from http://www.history.com/topics/black-history/harriet-tubman.

Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice (7^th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

PBS. (n.d.). Africans in America: Harriet Tubman. PBS.org. Retrieved from http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/part4/4p1535.html.

Pennsylvania State University World Campus. (2016). Lesson 11: Servant Leadership. PSYCH485: Leadership in work settings. Retrieved from https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/sp16/psych485/001/content/11_lesson/04_page.html.

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 21^st century (pp.1-16). New York: Wiley.

United Farm Workers. (2016). The story of Cesar Chavez. UFW.org. Retrieved from http://www.ufw.org/_page.php?menu=research&inc=history/07.html.

Upon reading the chapter and lesson on team leadership, the immediate thought that came to mind was team building exercises I take part in on a yearly basis with my husband at an executive leadership conference that I attend with him for his company. Every year, on the first day of the conference we participate in a competition called Spirit to Serve in which we are divided into teams with the goal of building something that can be used to assist those in need. Last year we built little red wagons for children in the cancer ward of a local hospital for them to ride around in. This year, in a few weeks, we will be building wheelchairs for wounded veterans. While the team that is constructed for the activity only works together for a very short amount of time, it is definitely a team as opposed to a group. As part of this team we are tasked with completing tasks, both physical and mental, in order to earn the materials that build the different parts of the object, such as the wagon or wheelchair, and then working together to construct it. We are completely interdependent upon each other and have a very clear singular goal and we have to work in coordination and cooperation together in order to be effective and productive (PSU WC, 2016, l.9 p.3).

As part of this team exercise, the conference attendees are all divided into small groups made up of individuals from different companies, most of who have never worked together before. This is the first stage of being part of a group called “forming,” in which we are all introduced to each other and give out basic information about ourselves (PSU WC, 2016, l.9 p.4). In the next stage, each team goes through a “storming” phase in which we decide the best way about going through the process of building the object that is to be constructed. Upon coming to a consensus about the best tactics for our team to utilize, we go through a “norming” phase in which leaders emerge within the group and we begin to work together to achieve our goal. As part of the “performing” stage, the tasks that need to be completed are carried out in order to construct the object, and at the end we go through the “adjourning” stage in which the project is completed and the team disbands (PSU WC, 2016, l.9 p.4).

What is really interesting about this team building exercise is that it forces team members to network with each other to find out what portion of the exercise we would each be most effective at (PSU WC, 2016, l.9 p.6). For instance, last year when we were building the little red wagons we had to complete tasks in order to earn parts for the wagon. As part of this we had to communicate with each other in order to determine what strengths each of us had and decide who would be the best person to complete each task. Through this, the leadership became shared and distributed as those who were better at the physical tasks took leadership at one point but would relinquish it to another team member when the next task was to solve a brainteaser that someone else was more adept at solving. Sharing the leadership helped the team to be more effective and allowed each member of the team to maximize their skill set as leaders based upon their strengths and then relinquish it to someone else when subsequent tasks played to their strengths (Northouse, 2016, p.365). With every member of the team contributing towards achieving results, it allows the team to be successful and perform at a higher level because each person takes a leadership role at some point (PSU WC, 2016, l.9 p.10).

According to Ginnett’s Team Effectiveness Leadership Model (1993; 1996, as cited by PSU WC, 2016, l.9 p.8) the inputs, process, and outputs determine how effective a team will be. In the case of the team project I was involved in, the input is that each team member was highly motivated, intelligent and capable of performing the given tasks. The process was how we went about our tasks, by communicating with each other and coordinating who would do what, providing feedback and praise to each other, and handled any disagreements we encountered over the best way to complete a task to win a wagon part, such as a wheel or handle. The outputs were the successful completion of the tasks, which resulted in a fully assembled little red wagon, or this year a wheelchair, to be donated and a sense of well-being at a job well-done.

At the same time, in order to be able to complete the project within the designated time frame each team was driven to be effective and contribute to having team excellence (Northouse, 2016). One of the biggest proponents of this is that each team had a clear, elevated goal to achieve that everyone involved felt was worthwhile and important (Hackman, 2012, and Larson & LaFasto, 1989, both as cited by Northouse, 2016, p. 368), which is to build something such as a wagon or wheelchair that helps someone in need for the purposes of charity. For this project, being that each member of all the teams is a leader within his or her own company, it could also be said that the team members are each competent individuals and understands what is needed in order to complete the tasks that are given, including good problem solving, teamworking, and interpersonal skills (Northouse, 2016, p.370). Based on the nature of the Spirit to Serve project, there is also a crucial element of team spirit that members engage in. Each is there and participating of their own volition and everyone is actively involved in the project, which helps form a unified commitment (Northouse, 2016, p.370). In the past, most of the teams for this project have also had a collaborative climate in which each team member has supported, trusted, and relied on each other in order to effectively perform in our roles (Northouse, 2016, p.370). Through this exercise, teams are rewarded for successfully completing tasks with parts of the object being constructed so that each team is driven to do well and perform to a standard of excellence in order to complete the project (PSU WC, 2016, l.9 p.7). The reward at the end is that each team has constructed something useful, such as the wheelchair that will be made this year and donated to a wounded veteran that needs it. Because the leadership in this project is essentially shared, we all serve to coach and support each other through the various tasks that need to be completed in order to earn parts. In all, each of these components of team leadership allows the group to be successful and not fail.

Being a part of a small team and working on an exercise such as this helped to show just how important working as a productive leader and member of a team can actually be. Without working together as a unified group that was interdependent upon each team member in order to reach a goal, the teams would have failed and the time, money, and effort put into the project would have been a complete waste. Each component of working as a team is crucial for success, and in this case, sharing leadership allowed us to be more productive and effective.

 

References

Ginnett, R. C. (1993). Crews as groups: Their formation and their leadership. In E. Wiener, B. Banki, & R. Helmreich (Eds.),Cockpit Resource Management. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.

Ginnett, R. C. (1996). Team effectiveness and leadership model: Identifying leverage points for change. Proceedings of the 1996 National Leadership Institute Conference. College Park, MD: National Leadership Institute.

Hackman, J. R. (2012). From causes to conditions in group research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33, 428-444.

Larson, C. E. & LaFasto, F. M. J. (1989). Teamwork: What must go right/what can go wrong. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.

Northouse, P.G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.

Pennsylvania State University World Campus. (2016). Lesson 9: Team Leadership. PSYCH485: Leadership in Work Settings. Retrieved from https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/sp16/psych485/001/content/09_lesson/03_page.html.

What makes a good leader? According to the trait approach to leadership studies, there are certain personality traits that make individuals either good or bad leaders that ultimately cause them to either succeed or fail. If you take a moment to think about it, several prominent leaders probably come to mind, and with that comes an idea of what exactly about these people made them good leaders.

For example, when I think of the political leader Nelson Mandela, the former South African political activist who diligently fought against apartheid and spent over twenty years in prison as a result, before being elected president of his country, I think of the traits of determination and persistence. When considering Stogdill’s 1974 survey that resulted in ten characteristics that are positively associated with leadership, many are apparent when considering Mandela, such as the drive for responsibility and task completion, vigor and persistence in the pursuit of goals, risk taking in problem solving, a willingness to accept the consequences of decisions and actions, a willingness to tolerate frustration and delay, and an ability to influence other people’s behaviors (Northouse, 2016). He helped to fuel and bolster political change for an entire nation, despite the many obstacles and challenges that he was faced with. Instead, he became an influential leader and a positive example for many.

On the other hand, when I think of Richard Branson, the founder of Virgin Records and the head of the Virgin Group that now encompasses over 200 companies internationally, that also keeps him qualified as a billionaire (Kurtz, 2012), I think of different qualities, some of which overlap Mandela’s, but also some that are more business-minded. At the very least, Branson is a successful entrepreneur who owes much to his creativity and self-confidence in his ability to not only build a business, but make it into a household brand name. With a very public persona that is fueled by an active social media presence and an extraverted personality, Branson leads a company with what appears to be two of the three types of intelligence that are part of the Triarchic Theory of Intelligence developed by Sternberg (1985, 1997 as cited by PSU WC, 2016), which include analytic, practical, and creative intelligence. Branson’s dyslexia prevented him from ever completing his formal education (Biography.com Editors, n.d.), but it never prevented him from being successful in the business world. So while he may fail to have what can be considered analytic intelligence, he still has enough problem solving ability, common sense “street smarts”, and ability to come up with new and useful ideas and the ability to cultivate this in his employees to be successful in business and as a leader who heads a multitude of companies.  According to Branson himself, he is a risk-taker who is driven to challenge himself and those around him with a can-do attitude (Kurtz, 2012). Combined, it appears that he essentially has what it takes to lead others and be massively successful.

On the flipside to this, there are also leaders who are unsuccessful, and some of this might be attributable to their personality traits. In recent news, Martin Shkreli, a pharmaceutical company CEO who made headlines in December 2015 after being arrested by the FBI, immediately makes me think of the type of leader one hopes that they do not find themselves under. What originally caused Shkreli to make the news was the fact that he price gouged a drug meant to treat toxoplasmosis, a deadly parasitic disease for those with compromised immune systems and pregnant mothers and their unborn babies, raising the price from $13.50 a pill to $750 a pill, under the premise that insurance companies would be the ones to pick up the tab (Smythe & Geiger, 2015). After public outrage sparked debate over this move, Shkreli announced that he would lower the price, but then reneged on this promise and publicly stated that he should have raised it even further in order to increase profits for investors. This speaks of someone who lacks integrity and fails to exhibit honesty or trustworthiness (Northouse, 2016). To top it off, he was arrested for securities fraud after he allegedly lost investors’ money and then lied to them about it and illegally used assets from one of his companies to pay off debtors from another, much like a complicated Ponzi scheme (Smythe & Geiger, 2015). Yet, Shkreli claims he did nothing wrong and conducts business like others in his same position. But one has to wonder if this makes a leader that employees want to follow, considering that his former company, Retrophin’s board of directors ousted him from his position as CEO and then later sued him under the claim that he used company assets to pay off hedge fund investors from previously failed investments (Smythe & Geiger, 2015). In consideration of his actions, Shkreli seems to possess more of the dark-side personality traits than anything. He comes off as having interpersonal insensitivity, and being both impulsive and narcissistic, as he fails to care how he appears to others or possess any empathy at all, while being incredibly ambitious but also overly self-confident and self-centered, as he fails to keep promises and commitments while he pushes the limits despite how his followers feel and then fails to recognize the consequences of his actions (PSU WC, 2016). And when one takes into account his lack of self-awareness to how he comes across to others, lack of empathy, and also considers his motivations for financial gain at the expense of others in business, while Shkreli may have had considerable cognitive ability, he very much seems to be lacking in emotional intelligence. When combined, all of these negative personality traits have Martin Shkreli coming across as not only a villain, but also the type of leader that most people probably aren’t going to want to follow because of his overabundance of negative personality traits and lack of positive ones.

When comparing these leaders side by side and taking into consideration the situations in which these leaders are effective or ineffective, it becomes apparent how much of an impact that personality traits can have on a leader’s ability to be successful or effective. While putting these individuals into different situations would undoubtedly change their effectiveness, at the core of it all is who these people are inside as individuals that affects their ability to lead others.

 

References

Biography.com Editors. (n.d.). Richard Branson Biography. Biography.com. Retrieved from http://www.biography.com/people/richard-branson-9224520#virgin-galactic.

Kurtz, R. (2012, December 17). Richard Branson on Being Richard Branson. Entrepreneur. Retrieved from http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/225295.

Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice, 7^th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.

Pennsylvania State University World Campus. (2016). Lesson 2: Trait Approach. PSYCH485: Leadership in Work Settings. Retrieved from https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/sp16/psych485/001/content/02_lesson/03_page.html.

Smythe, C. & Geiger, K. (2015, December 17). Shkreli, Drug Price Gouger, Denies Fraud and Posts Bail. Bloomberg.com. Retrieved from http://www.bloomberg.com/features/2015-martin-shkreli-securities-fraud/.

Sternberg, R. J. (1985). Beyond IQ: A Triarchic Theory of Human Intelligence. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Sternberg, R. J. (1997). The concept of intelligence: Its role in lifelong learning and success. American Psychologist, 52(10), 1030-1037.http://http://dealbreaker.com/2015/11/hedge-fund-manager-turned-pharma-ceo-turned-public-enemy-number-one-seeks-music-producers-with-real-grimy-beats/