Literature Review
Efficacy is distinct as the ability or capability to create an effect. However, when used in different fields, the meaning changes to suit the field where it is applied. In this paper, the discussion will explore the efficacy of the servant theory of leadership. The servant theory of leadership is one of the most recent leadership models. I twas first presented by Greenleaf in 1970 in his essay “The Servant as Leader.” In this essay, Greenleaf stated servant leaders as servants first and leaders later. According to him, servant leaders have a strong and natural inclination to serve and this inspires them to lead. These leaders contradict the traditional notion of leaders whose aspiration was for material wealth acquisition.
In order to understand the servant leader, Patterson (2003), in his doctorial dissertation suggested that servant leaders operate within the constructs of seven virtuous constructs which bring out their attitude, behaviors and characteristics. She said that servant leaders demonstrate, agopao love, is serving, acts with humility, is altruistic, is trusting, is visionary for followers and empowers followers. This paper seeks to provide a different view of these qualities of servant leaders as demonstrated by different authors.
Agapao love
According to Patterson (2003), Agapao love is brought out in that a leader should consider each person with needs, interests, and desires. She went on to define this as to mean that any servant leader should gain their influence through their service to employees by placing their interests first. it is true that leaders should listen to the needs, suggestions and opinions of their employees. However, this must be applied sparingly of avoided at all provided it is at the expense of the organization. By considering the servant leader as putting the servants’ interests first, it means that employees will decide on the organization’s objectives and goals. These decisions may or may not yield significant results.
One thing that is clear is that, without the organization there would not be employees. This, therefore, means that employees come after the organization. By arguing that employees interests come be placed before those of the organization, it means that if all these employees stopped working for such an organization, then the management will be back on the drawing board looking for other employees. Since no individuals have the same personal traits, it means that the new they bring in their own unique likes and interests which the organization and leaders should adhere to. I think that even if employees’ interests should be listened to, the organization must have its own goals and objectives to provide guidelines on how sparingly employees’ interests should be implemented to achieve the goal of the organization.
Humility
For any leader, Patterson viewed humility as form of leaders rejecting glorification which also included maintaining a moderate focus on self. According to Earnhardt (2008), humility is a service to the organization and a vital quality of a leader. Although a leader should reject glorification, I believe they deserve credit when it is due. This is the only way to differentiate between their efforts and the efforts of others. Being part of the organization’s workforce, leaders deserve to be appreciated. On the other hand, leaders should avoid possessing their achievements since the efforts of others also contributed to their achievement. Organizations want to retain competent employees. Appreciating such employees by giving credit where it is due is one way to recognizing their contribution.
Altruism
Altruism is the practice of placing the others before oneself. This means that, a servant leader should focus on a moral obligation towards all humanity compared to duty which focuses on a particular organization or individual. Some aspects of leadership actually require the application of altruism. For instance, listening to what the employees have to say concerning design and implementation of change in a given area of leadership Earnhardt (2008).
However, the final decision is for the leader to see how it will impact the lives of the organization and their image as leaders. Leaders should not only listen to employees but also consult with other executives. This will be aimed at evaluating how effective the proposed ideas and opinions will impact the organization and what the business market says on the same issue. Even though the leader is as the service of the other employees, it does not mean they act as asked to even when their being employed in future is jeopardized. It is important to consider all external and internal forces that influence the moral obligation of a leader to his followers.
Trust
Patterson (2003) viewed trust as an element that enables the leader to empower the follower and the organization. This is because trust demonstrates the level of confidence an individual has in the leader’s competence and their willingness to act in a fair, predictable and ethical manner (Earnhardt, 2008). Trust is therefore a very important aspect of a servant leader. However, trust of employees to their leaders must be limited. For instance, a leader must consider upgrading their level of knowledge and information to keep them on track with the requirements of the industry they operate in.
The trust of employees on their leaders must not translate into overconfidence especially for leaders who do not have up-to-date information to benefit the organization and employees. Leaders should remain in touch with the business world and its requirements to ensure competence. The motives of the leaders must also be weighed in deciding whether or not to trust them or not at any given time. Blindly employed trust should be avoided.
Vision
According to Patterson (2003), vision is the idea that leaders looks forward and sees the person as a viable and worth person, believes in the future condition of each employee and works to assist each person to achieve their desired future state. Vision in servant leaders is viewed by (Earnhardt, 2008) as the finding of employees’ goals and interests by the leader and modifying organizational procedures and methods to fit into them.
Although it is important to have the future of employees at heart, servant leader must also ensure that all employees contribute effectively to organization such that modifying the organization’s procedures and methods will do no harm to the productivity, goals and objectives of the organization. Additionally, the leader must also stand to evaluate how modification of the organizational methods and procedures will affect the overall goal of productivity and efficiency. Even though vision is called to be built on hope for the future, servant leaders must risk the organization for the sake of their employees.
Empowerment
Any servant leader deserves to posses the element of empowerment for their followers. Patterson (2003) recognized empowerment as the element of allowing followers to do their jobs by enabling them to learn, grow and progress and allowing self direction and freedom to fail. Servant leaders must understand that not all employees will be comfortable doing their jobs through self direction. Additionally, not all employees are allowed freedom to fail. In the case of a new employee, creating room for self direction may be wrong especially given that they are not aware of what is required of them.
In addition, the freedom to fail should not be allowed for regular employees who are used to their jobs. The situations that should be provided with each of the exceptions should then be provided by the leaders. Although it may seem to jeopardize the employees’ trust, defining the limits of empowerment means a lot for organizations to avoid allocating too much time and resources on corrections even of obvious mistakes or misdeeds. Again, without such limits, employees may tend to settle for the lowest performance with the aim of acquiring a second chance to correct.
Service
Patterson (2003) explained that servant leaders are called to serve. This means they should perceive their life as a mission of service where they provided with the acceptance of responsibility for others. Servant leaders should draw lines on the form of responsibility they should accept for others. Time is an important resource for any organization. This means that, each employee should be responsible for their actions or decisions to avoid depending on the leaders to oversee everyone’s responsibility at the expense of other important management responsibilities.
Some employees are just adamant to doing what is required of them expecting to be corrected or to be supervised. However, employee supervision should be discouraged to enable them to mature and work on their own. Promoting employees trust is essential but enabling them to become mature and work efficiently on duties delegated to them is also important.
In my opinion, any actions by the servant leader should be aimed at having the employees become responsible, reasonable and productive for the sake of organization’s continuation and performance. All options at the service of the followers must be weighed to ensure that they are not implemented at the expense of the organization.
References
Earnhardt, M., (2008). Testing a servant leadership theory among United States military members. Emerging leadership journeys journal. Vol. 1. Iss. 2. P. 14-24.
Patterson, K., (2003). Servant leadership: a theoretical model. Dissertation abstracts international. Vol. 64. Iss.2
Is this your assignment or some part of it?
We can do it for you! Click to Order!
