Category: Servant Leadership

by on

Technological convergence is daunting; something that many are unable to understand with the exacerbating gap separating the wealthy from those in poverty. And I’m not the only one struggling with the digital divide. The divide is vast like a black hole, swallowing up knowledge faster than it flies in.

Let’s acknowledge some facts regarding obstacles to equity.

Seventy-three percent of students find that lack of support from their educators remains a significant barrier to their success in online courses. This statistic indicates a crucial gap in the education system. It’s challenging to pinpoint a single strategy that can effectively adapt to public education, especially in this political climate.

However, one strategy can come into play more than others. That approach is rooted in servant leadership, which sits at the intersection of transformational and authentic leadership. 

Servant leadership is my favorite leadership style. Servant leadership is a powerful, emerging strategy in education that ensures that all students, particularly those from underserved communities, are supported to thrive. Unlike traditional top-down leadership models (transactional), servant leadership flips the script completely by focusing on empowering others, listening to their needs, and prioritizing their well-being.

It can be a game-changer for students facing barriers like the digital divide. And the digital divide is only going to become bigger as technological convergence evolves.

What Is Servant Leadership?
Servant leadership, a philosophy coined by Robert K. Greenleaf, emphasizes that leaders should prioritize serving those they lead (Greenleaf, 1970). Rather than focusing on personal power or recognition, a servant leader’s primary goal is to support others in their growth, development, and success. 

Greenleaf found that a servant leader has a social responsibility to be concerned about the marginalized and those less privileged. If inequalities and social injustices exist, a servant leader tries to remove them (Graham, 1991). 

A leader uses less institutional power and control while shifting authority to those being led in becoming a servant leader. Servant leadership values a community of care (CoC) because it provides a face-to-face opportunity for individuals to experience interdependence, respect, trust, and growth (Greenleaf, 1970)

This leadership style creates an environment where everyone can succeed by embracing principles of empathy, active listening, and shared responsibility. According to Northouse’s book on Leadership Theories (2021), “conceptualizing refers to the capacity that gives leaders the ability to browse through a multitude of problems without any creative downfalls on them or the team” (p. 261).

Adopting the servant leadership mindset can significantly improve student outcomes, particularly for those facing technology-related challenges. It’s well-documented that hyper-urban and rural areas often remain disconnected due to systemic discrimination, which limits access to essential resources (Cabral, 2018). 

Wang et al. found that exploring cultural elements happens when confronting and surpassing them through social and technological influence (Wang et al., 2014). Wang also found that political issues contribute to cultural norms (Wang et al., 2014). 

For example, as pointed out, a system of expectations surrounding societal organizational culture provides a standard of behavior for employees, providing a reason for leadership Behavior; thus, a relationship between “authenticity, morality, and organizational cultures aligns accordingly” (Schein, 1985)

Scholars like Greene and Murphy (2021) argue that many of these technological barriers stem from unstable or inadequate access. However, some researchers, including Kersch and Lesley (2019), suggest that these gaps in education could be mitigated through curricular changes designed to support students navigating these challenges better.

The Connection Between Servant Leadership and the Digital Divide:
There are many ramifications of the digital divide beyond access to technology. Support systems are needed to help students succeed in a digital world. Students from low-income backgrounds, particularly Hispanic and first-generation students, are often left behind because they don’t have the resources or guidance to navigate online learning environments successfully.

A servant leader in education doesn’t just stand at the front of the class or set policies from a distance; they listen to students’ concerns, offer guidance, and create spaces for growth. 

Assuring all students have access to the tools they need to succeed and listening to their voices when challenges arise is one of the most salient parts of the process. Servant leaders can close the gap between technology and students by providing support and encouragement.

How Servant Leadership Transforms the Learning Experience:

  1. Empathy Over Authority: Servant leaders approach education with empathy, understanding that each student has different obstacles to overcome. When students lack reliable internet or digital skills, empathy can translate into providing tangible solutions, whether it’s offering free access to tech resources or setting up one-on-one tech support sessions.
  2. Listening to Student Needs: Listening is a core aspect of servant leadership. Leaders in education must listen to the voices of students to understand their experiences with the digital divide. Servant leaders act on what they hear, making sure that students feel supported, whether it’s survey data or direct feedback.
  3. Creating a Community of Care: Servant leadership creates an environment that is safe and inclusive. Education starts with building a CoC where students feel valued and connected to their peers and to the technology that enables their success. This can be especially salient for Hispanic students attending Hispanic-Serving Institutions, where there may be a heightened sense of belonging when technology challenges are met with collaborative solutions.

Practical Steps for Implementing Servant Leadership in Education:

  • Provide Personalized Tech Support: Offering tutoring or assistance in navigating digital platforms ensures that students can fully engage with their courses, especially those without prior experience.
  • Collaborate with Students: Work with students to co-create solutions that address their digital struggles, from organizing community-driven tech drives to connecting them with local tech support services.
  • Mentorship and Advocacy: Serve as a mentor and advocate, not just for academic success, but for students’ digital fluency and access to technology. Ensure that all students have equal opportunities to succeed by advocating for policies that support digital equity.

As a result, the digital divide isn’t an insurmountable mountain. An increasingly digital world can be made more successful by educators and institutions adopting servant leadership principles. 

Similarly, empirical studies have shown that when educators matched servant leadership with followers who desired it, this type of leadership had a positive impact on performance and organizational citizenship behavior (Meuser et al., 2011; Otero-Neira et al., 2016; Ozyilmaz & Cicek, 2015). 

In doing so, we can create a future where technology serves as a tool for inclusion and opportunity, rather than a barrier to achievement. It’s not about how hard it is to climb the mountain; it’s about the run back down. The digital divide is something we have to learn to live with, and awareness in education equals awareness in the workplace. Vital progress of pedagogy starts in the praxis.

References

Carbajal, Jose (2018). “Patriarchal Culture’s Influence on Women’s Leadership Ascendancy,” The Journal of Faith, Education, and Community: Vol. 2: Iss. 1, Article 1. Available at: https://scholarworks.sfasu.edu/jfec/vol2/iss1/1

Graham, J. W. (1991). Servant leadership in organizations: Inspirational and moral.

Leadership Quarterly, 2, 105-119.

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

Hu, J., & Liden, R. C. (2011). Antecedents of team potency and effectiveness:

Examining goal and process clarity and servant leadership, Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(4), 851-862.

Northouse, P. G. (2019). Leadership: Theory and Practice (9th Edition). SAGE Publications, Inc. (US). https://reader2.yuzu.com/books/9781071834473

Schein, E. H. (1985). Organizational culture and leadership, by Edgar H. Schein. san … – JSTOR. JSTOR. Retrieved February 26, 2023, from https://www.jstor.org/stable/258322

Schein, E. H. (2004, July 8). Organizational culture and leadership. Google Books. Retrieved February 25, 2023, from https://books.google.com/books/about/Organizational_Culture_and_Leadership.html?id=THQa4txcMl4CWang, V. X., Russo, M. R., & Fay, K. M. (2014). Collective transformation of three generations of Chinese adult learners in K–20 education. In Adult and continuing education (pp. 824–838). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-5780-9.ch107

by on

Introduction

Leadership isn’t about holding a title in today’s rapidly changing workplace; it’s about influencing, motivating, and empowering others (Reed & Klutts, 2019). While many leadership models are presented as stand-alone solutions, the reality is that no single style works in every situation.

The most successful leaders take a blended approach — combining elements of servant leadership, transformational leadership, authentic leadership, and emotional intelligence to adapt to their teams’ needs.

Core Leadership Approaches That Work Together

1. Servant Leadership

Servant leadership flips the traditional hierarchy: leaders serve first, lead second. This style prioritizes empathy, active listening, and the well-being of others (Greenleaf, 1970, 1977). Servant leadership builds trust, creates an environment for loyalty, and helps teams thrive in modern workplaces.

Key Benefit: Creates a culture of care and mutual respect, boosting employee engagement and retention.

2. Transformational Leadership

Transformational leaders lead by example through vision, innovation, and motivation (Bass & Avolio, 1994). They encourage personal and professional growth, often driving organizations to adapt and evolve in competitive industries.

Key Benefit: Encourages change readiness and fosters a shared sense of purpose.

3. Authentic Leadership

Authentic leadership is grounded in transparency, moral integrity, and self-awareness (Walumbwa et al., 2008; Azanza et al., 2013). Authentic leaders build strong relationships by being open about challenges, admitting mistakes, and aligning actions with values.

Key Benefit: Builds deep trust and credibility with teams.

4. Emotional & Social Intelligence

Emotional intelligence (EI) involves recognizing and managing your emotions while understanding and influencing others (Tucker et al., 2000). Social intelligence complements EI by helping leaders navigate complex interpersonal dynamics.

Key Benefit: Strengthens communication, conflict resolution, and team collaboration.

Why Blending Leadership Styles Works

Research consistently shows that combining leadership theories leads to stronger outcomes in the praxis:

  • Authentic leadership increases job satisfaction and team commitment (Bamford et al., 2012; Leroy et al., 2012).
  • Servant leadership, when aligned with employee values, boosts performance and reduces turnover (Meuser et al., 2011; Ozyilmaz & Cicek, 2015).
  • Emotional intelligence equips leaders to handle conflict, navigate change, and foster psychological safety (Boyatzis et al., 2006).

By utilizing these approaches, leaders can create pedagogy catered to inclusive, adaptable, and resilient organizations.

Practical Tips for Leaders

  1. Assess your team’s needs before choosing a leadership approach.
  2. Lead with empathy, but balance it with clear expectations.
  3. Be transparent about decisions and challenges.
  4. Invest in emotional intelligence training for yourself and your team.
  5. Model adaptability — shift your style as situations change.

Conclusion

No single leadership theory can address every challenge. By blending servant, transformational, authentic, and emotionally intelligent leadership, leaders can inspire trust, drive results, and build teams that thrive, even when times feel more uncertain than ever.

If you want to improve retention, harbor innovation, and create a culture of trust, start by expanding your leadership toolbox.

References

  • Azanza, G., Moriano, J. A., & Molero, F. (2013). Authentic leadership and organizational culture as drivers of job satisfaction. Revista de Psicología del Trabajo y de las Organizaciones, 29(2), 45–50.
  • Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1994). Improving organizational effectiveness through transformational leadership. Sage.
  • Boyatzis, R. E., Smith, M. L., & Blaize, N. (2006). Developing sustainable leaders through coaching and compassion. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 5(1), 8–24.
  • Greenleaf, R. K. (1970). The servant as leader. Greenleaf Center.
  • Greenleaf, R. K. (1977). Servant leadership: A journey into the nature of legitimate power and greatness. Paulist Press.
  • Meuser, J. D., Liden, R. C., et al. (2011). Servant leadership and follower outcomes. The Leadership Quarterly, 22(2), 344–361.
  • Northouse, P. G. (2021). Leadership: Theory and practice (9th ed.). Sage.
  • Ozyilmaz, A., & Cicek, S. (2015). Servant leadership in for-profit organizations. Journal of Management & Organization, 21(3), 263–290.
  • Reed, B. N., & Klutts, A. M. (2019). A systematic review of leadership definitions. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 83(9).
  • Tucker, M. L., Sojka, J. Z., et al. (2000). Training tomorrow’s leaders. Journal of Education for Business, 75(6), 331–337.
  • Walumbwa, F. O., Avolio, B. J., et al. (2008). Authentic leadership: Development and validation. The Leadership Quarterly, 19(2), 241–272.

by on

Written in 2023, expanded in 2025

Being a leader in education doesn’t often come with a personal handbook. Or if it does, it’s outdated; ill-equipped for the complexities of 21st-century classrooms and communities. As we continue to confront widening disparities in educational access, especially in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, one truth becomes clear: effective leadership isn’t just about policies or protocols. It’s about people, and the ability to lead with empathy, community, and transformation in mind.

Leadership in the Age of Digital Learning

The pandemic redefined what it means to teach and learn. As online learning became the norm, issues like internet accessibility rose to the surface, especially in rural and low-income areas where connectivity is often limited or unreliable. But beyond technology gaps, we also saw cracks in leadership communication, especially between administrators and educators.

Outdated systems, hierarchical thinking, and transactional leadership styles have created barriers that make it difficult for teachers and students to advocate for their needs. These gaps in communication are more than logistical—they’re structural. They reflect a need for new leadership paradigms that meet today’s challenges with empathy, collaboration, and innovation.

Instructional Leadership and the 21st Century Classroom

In a 1999 study of over 800 U.S. teachers, researchers found that educators’ expectations of leadership often clashed with the realities of administration. More recently, the Journal of Organizational and Educational Leadership reaffirmed the belief that school outcomes are closely tied to leadership effectiveness. The takeaway? Instructional leadership must go hand-in-hand with technological transformation and digital literacy.

Teachers need leaders who do more than manage: they need leaders who listen, collaborate, and help create space for professional reflection and growth. These are the hallmarks of transformational leadership, as opposed to transactional leadership, which focuses more on compliance, control, and routine.

Transformational vs. Servant Leadership: A Needed Blend

According to Hu & Linden (2011), transformational leadership builds confidence and work advocacy, but it’s servant leadership—with its focus on selflessness and empathy—that enhances both satisfaction and effectiveness in teams. When combined, these leadership approaches foster a culture of trust, transparency, and empowerment across all levels of education.

As Peter G. Northouse (2021) notes, leadership rooted in empathy and community connection is essential for long-term cultural change. It empowers teachers, administrative staff, and students, particularly those from marginalized backgrounds, who go on to shape the American workforce.

Creating Lifelong Learners and Leaders

Leadership in education isn’t just about student test scores or teacher evaluations. It’s about nurturing lifelong skills like digital literacy, critical thinking, and emotional intelligence. And it’s about ensuring every stakeholder, especially those in underserved communities, has equitable access to the tools and support they need to succeed.

The literature shows a clear need for stronger communication between principals and teachers. When leaders and educators collaborate toward shared goals of inclusivity and equity, they create ripple effects that extend far beyond the classroom.

DEI and the Need for Cultural Change

Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) aren’t just buzzwords. They’re essential frameworks for reshaping a system that has historically privileged transactional over transformative leadership.

Transformative, adaptive leadership aligned with DEI principles is especially urgent in a post-pandemic world where disparity gaps have widened. While DEI work remains underdeveloped in many educational settings, it offers a path forward; one grounded in soft skills, compassion, and the recognition that authentic leadership starts with human connection.

Final Thoughts

To move toward a more inclusive and effective educational system, we need more than curriculum updates or policy changes. We need leaders who understand that communication, empathy, and community are the foundations of success, not just for students, but for educators and administrators alike.

As we reevaluate the leadership values necessary for the future, one thing is clear: no relationship in education can remain purely transactional. Leadership must mean something. And it must start with listening.

by on

The U.S. economy added just 33,000 jobs in July 2025, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. That’s a drastic drop from June’s revised total of 194,000 jobs. For context, economists expected around 175,000 new jobs. We fell significantly short.

July’s report signals a broader slowdown in job growth. While one month doesn’t define a trend, many professionals are understandably anxious. When growth slows, layoffs often follow. Freelancers feel the squeeze. Recent grads face fewer opportunities. Hiring freezes kick in.

So what can we do in times like these?

Servant Leadership Is More Important Than Ever

In tough economic times, good leadership matters more. But not the traditional top-down kind. Now is the time for servant leadership.

Servant leaders put people first. They provide support, empathy, and stability. They coach, uplift, and guide without ego. They ask, How can I help?

And they recognize that hope is a strategic advantage.

If you’re in a position of leadership right now, consider how you can create clarity and calm for your team, your peers, or even your online community. Compassion-driven leadership is needed in this very moment.

Learn Instead of Just Earn: Why Literacy Is the Key

When jobs are scarce, learning becomes survival. But we’re not just talking about college degrees. In today’s world, we need multiple forms of literacy:

  • Digital literacy — How systems work, how content flows, how to use platforms like LinkedIn and Indeed
  • Media literacy — Understanding how information is framed and shared online
  • Platform literacy — How to navigate job boards, remote hiring, and gig platforms

The goal? Know how everything works. Learn how the systems move so you can move through them, and around them if necessary.

If You’re Out of Work: What to Focus On

1. Keep updating your portfolio. Even if you’re not currently employed, you can keep working on projects, freelance tasks, writing samples, or mock case studies. Employers want to see momentum and proof that you’re still growing. Consider a writing challenge for your blog (like what I’m doing right now) or create a collection of social media posts that drive engagement for a marketing or SEO role.

2. Stay open to freelance or contract work. Many employers are cutting full-time roles but still need help. Contract gigs can fill in financial gaps and keep your skills sharp. Yes, freelancing means buying your own health insurance. But it also means flexibility and survival. Right now, survival matters.

3. Don’t underestimate your effort. You’re not alone. Many talented people are in the same position. For example, one job I applied to a couple of weeks ago had 954 job applicants. Another one had over 1600. The U.S. has over 330 million people, and only 33,000 new jobs were added. That’s not on me or you.

4. Keep working on that small business. Staying busy is best, and while staying busy does not always mean being profitable, it does mean that there is a way to contribute to your community. And in turn, the community will support you. For those who sell goods, consider farmers’ markets. Get chronically online. Open that Etsy or Shopify. Interact with others online and watch how organic engagement draws people in.

5. Have empathy for yourself. It’s okay to be tired. It’s okay to feel stuck or stagnant. Sometimes, you find yourself meditating, but you might wonder why you’re being still when you need to be working. It’s okay. Just don’t confuse stillness with failure, because we aren’t failures. We are surviving. And if you’re trying, you’re doing more than enough.

If You Have a Job: Hold It Carefully, But Strategically

If you’re currently employed, be mindful of how you contribute. Help others where you can. Be someone who uplifts. But also: keep your options open. Update your resume, refresh your skills, and quietly prepare for what’s to come, which will probably include further drastic economic instability.

Sources:

by on

Jan. 12, 2025

Introduction 

Countless leadership theories are meaningful to society as a whole. Servant leadership, in particular, encompasses leadership’s most logical parts and puts that power into serving the public. Servant leadership is a “holistic approach” in which the leader cares deeply for stakeholders in the company (Shirin, 2015). Utilizing servitude is a transformative approach with no financial gain. All projects and goals are tackled without the means of capitalism, paving the way for optimal leader-follower growth. A servant leader “engages followers in multiple dimensions”; specifically, leaders who are emotionally, relationally, and ethically oriented help followers grow into themselves, bringing out their full potential (Eva et al., 2019). 

Heavily based on morality, servant leaders think about everyone else before thinking about themselves (Canavesi & Minelli, 2021; Demont-Biaggi, 2020). It is not just stakeholders they think about; servant leaders think about everyone around them, especially their followers (Canavesi & Minelli, 202). Servant leadership is not a new practice; it has been studied for many years by practitioners and academics, and it is only now gaining popularity in the past decade (Canavesi & Minelli, 202). This leadership theory is held in high regard because it yields ideal outcomes for both individuals and organizations, such as commitment and employment satisfaction (Canavesi & Minelli, 202). Furthermore, literature research is searching for antecedent identification, the mediating and moderating “mechanisms,” and relationship development scales meant to bring discourse in an inclusive, diverse, and economic context (Canavesi & Minelli, 202).

Transparency is rudimentary. People gravitate towards those types of leaders, but they are few and far between. This approach ostensibly shows the need for factors based on ethos, pathos, and logos. Marginalized communities play a pivotal role; when the requisite skill sets are available, society performs better. Self-efficacy and faculty development are crucial for the quality of leadership skill sets and societal norms. Engagement with leadership qualities fosters professional growth and development for future leaders in all contexts, promoting selflessness. Selflessness is a servant quality, and its absence is conspicuous in leadership that remains transactional. Through cultivating rapport and altruism, leaders establish connections with those around them. Transformational leadership is superior to transactional leadership, which has been practiced for many years. However, the genuine demeanor behind servant leadership roles helps determine outcomes that bear community value and foster the growth of future leaders. 

The Definition of Leadership

Servant leadership is vital for a multitude of reasons, especially when combating pseudo-transformational leaders. It is imperative to reiterate that servant leadership encompasses multiple theories of thought; some of these theories include authentic leadership, enterprise leadership, and leader-member exchange (LMX) theory (Coetzer et al., 2019, p. 1). According to research, servant leadership is inspirational and contains “moral safeguards” (Graham, 1991). This “paradoxical leadership function and servant style” offers vital educational tools for the workplace that safeguard business ethics while upholding performance levels (Saleem et al., 2020). Authentic leadership, a core facet of servant leadership theory, is a multifaceted theory that integrates ethical, relational, and outcome-based aspects of leadership to create high-performing organizations (Canavesi & Minelli, 2021; Saleem et al., 2020). It emphasizes practices such as developing a higher purpose through standardizing and simplifying procedures, empowering others through shared information and power, vision, and strategy, ensuring continuous growth, cultivating a customer-oriented mindset, and building a quality workforce (Coetzer et al., 2019, pp. 3-5). 

In addition to humility, servant leadership means ensuring the development of followers, hearing others, making sound decisions, acting morally, and developing a “sense of community” (Jit et al., 2016). Liden et al. (2008) state that creating community value is a fundamental leadership behavior rooted in ethics, healing, growth, conceptual skills, and empowerment. Both Liden et al. and Jin et al. agree on creating a sense of community through moral and ethical means.

The definition is often assumed but never thoroughly examined. While leadership can still usually be rooted in a patriarchal caste system, its core values extend far beyond today’s standards (Carbajal, 2018). With modernization accelerating civilization, it is time to consider what transparency, another often-forgotten quality, would bring to present and future leaders. A level of change begins with a transformation, where it becomes clear that leadership is not linear in terms of knowledge or experience. It is not a monolith, as stated in my previous work (Ramirez, 2022). It changes with each industry and adapts to an adjusted class of individuals over time (Ramirez, 2022). Three main phases encompass what servant leadership stands for (Canavesi & Minelli, 2021). The first phase is based on conceptual development, while the second phase focuses on testing and investigating fundamental outcomes through cross-sectional research (Canavesi & Minelli, 2021). The final phase is theory-rooted, looking at mediating mechanisms, understanding antecedents, and specific leadership boundaries (Allen et al., 2016; Eva et al., 2019). The model described is based on the most recent research conducted, which has been jump-starting the past two decades with a proliferation of studies (Canavesi & Minelli, 2021).

Theories of Research and Interest

Servant leadership, as noted earlier, is a type of theory that encompasses more than one quality of leadership theories (Greenleaf, 1970; Canavesi & Minelli, 2021; Liden et al., 2015). Those facets form a solid theory of servitude and transparency that has a transformational influence. The desire to serve the general public without expecting anything in return is something unheard of in the digital era (Ramirez, 2022). Therefore, it must be exercised and practiced more amongst empathetic others. Organizational culture exists to establish an expectancy system that sets a standard for authentic employee behavior, which is expected to evolve into leadership behavior (Schein, 1985). A genuine leader shows trust, hope, optimism, and a moral and ethical orientation; that leader exhibits positive emotions and relational transparency (Avolio et al., 2004). According to Liden et al., servant leadership’s seven dimensions ethically prioritize subordinates, allowing for motivation to focus on autonomy and emotional healing (Liden et al., 2015). Some of the first scholars who empirically tested servant leadership used cross-sectional studies to find evidence that servant leadership benefits organizations through a fair workplace (Ehrhart, 2004). Ehrhart’s findings include the differences between servant leadership and LMX and transformational styles, as tested through the “14-item scale for the measurement of servant leadership” (Ehrhart, 2004).

A Deep Dive Into Servant Leadership

The benefits of servant leadership encompass follower-centered, leadership-centered, team-centered, and organization-centered growth (Marampa et al., 2023; Canavesi & Minelli, 2021). Leadership focused on supporting individuals and developing an institution is generally known as servant leadership (Allen et al., 2016). Transformational leadership emphasizes the role of leaders in inspiring followers to work towards a common goal (Allen et al., 2016).

To the researcher’s knowledge, organizational culture is often explored about the concept of servant leadership. Authentic leadership, like servant leadership, stimulates employee performance by fostering honest and transparent relationships with employees (Azanza et al., 2013). Servant and authentic leaders also possess self-focus qualities and the ability to put others’ needs before their own (Duignan, 2014, pp. 3-5). However, servant leaders differ in putting others first, while authentic leaders focus more on genuine leadership. That transparency is how servant leaders operate in a postmodern society built on capitalistic pressures, ethical challenges, and paradoxes (Duignan, 2014, pp. 3-5). There are three organizational outcomes in leadership theories: primary, secondary, and territory (Duignan, 2014, pp. 3-5). The criteria are inclusive and designed to identify relevant outlets and a range of quantitative or qualitative studies. Having critical thought regarding leadership theories is not something that comes naturally to people; critical thought is built on the right leaders guiding their followers towards a measure of success (Duignan, 2014, pp. 3-5). A servant leader does not sugarcoat problems; instead, they solve them with logical thinking, awareness, and openness (Ramirez, 2022). In response, followers react to a physical environment that does not rely on negative tactics to maintain a sense of authority (Ramirez, 2022).

Servant Leadership as a Call To Action

As discussed in my previous work, servant leadership cannot exist without authenticity or a call to action (Ramirez, 2022). A call to action cannot exist without engagement or intricate feedback (Ramirez, 2022). A leader who is authentic and genuine in their style will never be a detriment to the public. Azanza (2013) finds that an organized leadership culture cannot exist without flexibility, as well as authenticity and transparency styles. Flexibility in leadership is crucial because things can change at any time, making it essential to be prepared for any type of scenario where leadership is necessary. Research finds that servant leadership has a “significant utility” in going above and beyond transformational, ethical, and authentic leadership styles, as measured by specific criteria (Hoch et al., 2018).

According to research, a reason for leadership behavior to flourish lies within the specific norms of employees and employers (Schein, 1985). These norms are associated with particular leadership theories, such as servant leadership theory. Furthermore, if stress and low productivity occur in a workplace that cannot achieve a proper work-life balance, turnover is likely to follow (Dutta & Khatri, 2017). In response to adverse outcomes associated with leadership styles that prioritize the leader’s self-interest, moral-based leadership has recently emerged, aiming to promote integrity and prioritize the support and development of followers (Liden et al., 2015). Nevertheless, staying transparent to leader-follower norms helps mitigate those fears.

Servant Leadership Connection and Analysis

Transformational leadership gained popularity because it aims to empower everyone, not just a select few (Ramirez, 2022). The aspect of healing through these values is essential because servant leaders help conquer problems with care, a quality that makes them hyper-aware of their environment. Other characteristic aspects of servant leadership emerge through a catalyst of transformational leadership and affective trust — a stark difference from cognitive trust (Zhu et al., 2013). Affective trust, established through a mutual back-and-forth of care and concern between the leader and followers, often creates positive outcomes within an organization (Zhu et al., 2013). Furthermore, Chiniara and Bentein state that servant leaders create a psychologically safe and fair climate through dyadic relationships where employees can be themselves (Chiniara & Bentein, 2016). Autonomy is salient, but so is having connections with others in one’s community, leaving oftentimes to an aspect of mutual aid through conscientious and helpful behaviors (Chiniara & Bentein, 2016, p. 136)

Some followers remain accustomed to transactional leadership or are hesitant to follow leaders altogether (Liden et al., 2008). They bracket servant leadership with micromanagement, stating that their leader does not need to help lead them along the way (Liden et al., 2008). Furthermore, empirical studies have found that when leaders practice servant leadership with willing followers, this type of leadership has a significant impact on organizational citizenship behavior and performance (Meuser et al., 2011; Otero-Neira et al., 2016; Ozyilmaz & Cicek, 2015). For some, this type of leadership does not seem practical (Ramirez, 2022). For the latter, there is a broader perspective to consider in terms of public benefit.

Servant Leadership and Social Responsibility

Greenleaf finds that servant leaders have a social responsibility to care about those who are less privileged and often marginalized (Greenleaf, 1970). A good servant leader identifies inequalities or injustices and seeks to eliminate them (Graham, 1991). Once a servant leader is at the forefront, institutional power and control are shifted to followers, giving them the autonomy they need to be their own authority (Canavesi & Minelli, 2021). Community is valued in servant leadership because it provides an opportunity to meet individuals face-to-face and go through the stages of interdependence, trust, respect, and growth together (Greenleaf, 1970; Greenleaf, 1977). 

Leaders constantly help followers overcome their problems, which is a characteristic of servant leaders that enables them to immediately respond to tangible environments (Saleem et al., 2020). Instead of using fear, coercion, and violence to maintain authority, servant leaders become the persistent medication that convinces others to accept change. 

Next is conceptualization, stewardship, and commitment to personal growth—caring deeply about the movement, the well-being of one’s followers, and, ultimately, starting a community (Saleem et al., 2020). When discussing stewardship, servant leaders employ it due to their people-centric nature, which prioritizes service to their followers (Saleem et al., 2020). In an organizational setting, servant leaders treat every employee as they would treat themselves (Saleem et al., 2020).

Building a community of care is especially critical when addressing significant societal challenges that affect individual communities and lack external support (Ramirez, 2022). According to Saleem et al., one must allow followers to identify with a value that is greater than themselves. That kind of autonomy is liberating for everyone. When one desires a community, a safe space, and a place to express individuality, servant leaders are at the beginning of that change (Saleem et al., 2020). Because of this, individuals are inspired to be that change themselves. According to Gia et al., some leaders may “feel a deep desire to serve or are strongly motivated to lead others” (Gia et al., 2008). In short, one might feel that a higher calling is their driving force (Gia et al., 2008).

This highlights the intrinsic motivation behind servant leadership, distinguishing it from other leadership styles that may perpetuate the typical patriarchal power structure of authority (Carbajal, 2018).

Furthermore, empirical studies show the impression of servant leadership on both leaders and followers. There is more than enough evidence to support the strength of servant leadership. An empirical study found that leaders with a high likelihood of agreeableness and low extraversion were more often seen as leaders who truly serve the public (Eva et al., 2019). As a result, humility is a key trait that every servant leader possesses (Canavesi & Minelli, 2021). After reviewing multiple studies, it is evident that this makes a significant difference in the workforce, regardless of hierarchical organization. Those who are exposed to a servant leader are also significantly more likely to enhance their self-determination, thereby becoming a positive influence on those around them (Yang et al., 2019). It is not just about being a leader and having power. It is about serving others and encapsulating the spirit that is charismatic enough to inspire and uplift those around them. A servant leader should have a thorough understanding of the organization’s purposes, complexities, and missions, which is often referred to as conceptualizing (Canavesi & Minelli, 2021). This ability gives servant leaders the critical thinking skills to tackle challenging obstacles, identify when something is wrong, and creatively address issues, all while aligning with the organization’s primary goals.

Conclusion

Servant leadership is a theory gaining popularity rapidly beyond the academic community. Servant leaders prioritize ethical behavior, bringing trust and integrity to the decisions that they make. These types of leaders focus on bonding others together by sharing authority and giving autonomy to everyone involved. Servant leaders continually ensure that their leadership benefits the greater good by placing a strong emphasis on creating community wealth. Servant leaders constantly strive for measurable success that aligns with the organization’s evolving goals. 

According to Liden et al. (2014), servant leadership has an efficacious effect on followers’ in-role performance, bolstering their ability to carry out their assigned tasks with efficiency. The outcome is particularly favorable when academics pair servant-focused leaders with followers receptive to this style of leadership. Under such guidance, followers excelled in completing their job responsibilities and meeting expectations. 

Servant leadership has a significant impact on organizational teams and their functioning. Hu and Liden (2011) state that it enhances group persuasiveness by fostering collective confidence among collaborators in their willingness to strive for improvement. Additionally, their research showed that servant leadership has a beneficial impact on team robustness by improving and clarifying group undertakings (Hu & Liden, 2011). When servant leadership is not available, the team’s potency ultimately declines, even if the goals or mission remain unchanged. While it is straightforward and easy to read objectives out loud, it is another thing to have leadership support that creates a strong team performance (Hu & Liden, 2011). Hu and Liden (2011) also found that servant leadership enhances team effectiveness by increasing members’ shared confidence in their ability to succeed as a workgroup. In Boyatzis et al.’s work (2006), research reveals that leaders have more depth while navigating the ostensibly negative aspects of leaders practicing with the “other impacts of coaching others’ development” (Boyatzis et al., 2006, p. 8). 

Moreover, this might serve as an impetus for ensuring the sustainability of individuals, developing new leaders, and modeling effect-resonant relationships that contribute to the company’s sustainability (Seal et al., 2006). Without servant leadership, followers might become frustrated, ultimately hindering their ability to complete tasks effectively. The focus shifts from the leader’s persona to that of others (Saleem et al., 2020). This led to a concept of leadership where the leader serves others while simultaneously practicing listening, building consensus, and providing foresight (Saleem et al., 2020).

In conclusion, servant leadership is an old yet emerging transformative approach that not only fosters ethical behavior, empowerment, and community values but also promotes individual and team growth within organizations. Its key basis, on shared confidence, clarity, and proactive support, bolsters its ability to enhance team effectiveness and navigate through challenges that are difficult to ascertain in nature. By developing humility, authenticity, and a focus on the greater good through social capital, servant leaders inspire trust and resilience, creating a culture where employees can thrive (Geron-Newton, 2024). Ultimately, servant leadership proves to be a powerful model for harboring meaningful change, driving organizational success, and addressing the evolving needs of today’s diverse workforce.

References

Allen, G. P., Moore, W. M., Moser, L. R., Neill, K. K., Sambamoorthi, U., & Bell, H. S. (2016). The role of servant leadership and transformational leadership in academic pharmacy. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 80(7), 113.

Avolio, B. J., Weichun Zhu, William Koh, & Puja Bhatia. (2004). Transformational Leadership and Organizational Commitment: Mediating Role of Psychological Empowerment and Moderating Role of Structural Distance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(8), 951–968. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4093779

Azanza, G., Moriano, J. A., & Molero, F. (2013). Authentic leadership and organizational culture as drivers of employees’ job satisfaction. Revista De Psicología Del Trabajo y De Las Organizaciones, 29(2), 45–50. https://doi.org/10.5093/tr2013a7

Boyatzis, R. E., Smith, M. L., & Blaize, N. (2006). Developing sustainable leaders through coaching and compassion. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 5(1), 8-24.

Canavesi, A., & Minelli, E. (2022). Servant Leadership: A Systematic Literature Review and Network Analysis. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 34(3), 267–289. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10672-021-09381-3

Canavesi, A., & Minelli, E. (2022). Servant Leadership and Employee Engagement: A Qualitative Study. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 34(4), 413–435. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10672-021-09389-9

Carbajal, Jose (2018). Patriarchal Culture’s Influence on Women’s Leadership Ascendancy. The Journal of Faith, Education, and Community, 2(1), Article 1. Available at: https://scholarworks.sfasu.edu/jfec/vol2/iss1/1

Duignan, P. A. (2014). Authenticity in educational leadership: history, ideal, reality. Journal of Educational Administration, 52(2), 152-172. doi:10.1108/JEA-01-2014-0012

Demont-Biaggi, F. (2020). The Relationship Between Moral Leadership and Authenticity Leadership, Education, Personality: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 1-14.

Dutta, S., & Khatri, P. (2017). Servant leadership and positive organizational behavior: The road ahead to reduce employees’ turnover intentions. On the Horizon, 25(1), 60–82. https://doi.org/10.1108/OTH-06-2016-0029

Eva, N., Robin, M., Sendjaya, S., Van Dierendonck, D., & Liden, R. C. (2019). Servant leadership: A systematic review and call for future research. The Leadership Quarterly, 30(1), 111-132.

Geron-Newton, M. A. (2024). Adjunct Faculty Perceptions of Leadership and Cultures of Engagement, Inclusion, Collaboration, and Value Through a Social Capital Theory Framework. https://core.ac.uk/download/604436422.pdf

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

Greenleaf, R. K. (1977). Servant leadership: A journey into the nature of legitimate power and greatness. New York, NY: Paulist Press.

Hu, J., & Liden, R. C. (2011). Antecedents of team potency and effectiveness: Examining goal and process clarity and servant leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(4), 851-862.

Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., Zhao, H., & Henderson, D. (2008). Servant leadership: Development of a multidimensional measure and multi-level assessment. The Leadership Quarterly, 19(2), 161–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2008.01.006

Liden, R. C., Panaccio, A., Meuser, J. D., Hu, J., & Wayne, S. J. (2014). Servant leadership: Antecedents, processes, and outcomes. In D. V. Day (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Leadership and Organizations (pp. 357–379). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199755615.013.018

Marampa, A. M., Pali, E., & Lestari, R. (2023). The Impact of Serving Leadership and Teamwork on Higher Education Performance. https://core.ac.uk/download/553279546.pdf

Ramirez, A.N. (2022). Optimal Leadership as Servant Leadership [Unpublished paper]. Franklin University.

Saleem, F., Zhang, Y. Z., Gopinath, C., & Adeel, A. (2020). Impact of Servant Leadership on Performance: The Mediating Role of Affective and Cognitive Trust. Sage Open, 10(1). https://doi-org.links.franklin.edu/10.1177/2158244019900562

Schein, E. H. (1985). Organizational culture and leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Seal, C. R., Boyatzis, R. E., & Bailey, J. R. (2006). Fostering Emotional and Social Intelligence in Organizations. https://core.ac.uk/download/519782249.pdf

Shirin, A. V. (2015). Is servant leadership inherently Christian? Journal of Religion and Business Ethics, 3(1).

Yang, J., Gu, J., & Liu, H. (2019). Servant leadership and employee creativity: The roles of psychological empowerment and work-family conflict. Current Psychology, 38(6), 1417-1427.

Zhu, W., Treviño, L. K., & Zheng, X. (2016). Ethical Leaders and Their Followers: The Transmission of Moral Identity and Moral Attentiveness. Business Ethics Quarterly, 26(1), 95–115.