UPI Study › Courses › Principles of Management › Free lessons › Lesson 9.3 Free with a free account
Leading by Serving: The Servant Leadership Philosophy
Principles of Management · Chapter 9: Leadership Styles and Sources of InfluenceSection 9.3 · lesson 47 of 11711 min · free with a free account
Free preview
Create a free account to keep watching
It takes a minute and costs nothing. Your free account unlocks all of Chapter 1 and 3 more lessons of Principles of Management.
Lesson complete
Earn the 3 college credits for Principles of Management
Enrolling adds a quiz after each lesson, the graded work and the official transcript. Recommended for credit by NCCRS.
Next lesson: Stepping Back: The Laissez-Faire Leader →← Inspiring vs. Exchanging: Transformational and Transactional LeadershipNext lesson: Stepping Back: The Laissez-Faire Leader →
In this lesson
The servant leadership philosophy, and where it fits.
- Describe servant leadership and its characteristics
- Explain the test the framework proposes
- Distinguish it from transformational leadership
- Assess where servant leadership fits and where it does not
Transcript
Everything said in the video, section by section (1,414 words). Read along, or search it.
Leadership Styles and Sources of Influence
Leading by Serving
Imagine a leader whose first question each morning is, what do my people need from me today? That instinct sits at the heart of servant leadership. This section defines the philosophy by a very specific ordering of motive. We'll cover the ten characteristics commonly associated with it, and the test it proposes for itself. Then comes the distinction that people most often miss, between servant and transformational leadership. We'll look at where the style fits, what the evidence shows, and the criticisms worth taking seriously. And we'll finish with a practical version any manager can use. Plus a case where service turned out to be something else entirely.
Defined by Its Ordering
Serve First, Then Lead
Servant leadership is defined by a specific ordering. The leader's primary motivation is to serve. Leading follows from that motivation, and not the reverse. In other words, serving isn't a technique adopted because it happens to produce good leadership outcomes. That ordering is a claim about motive, not just about observable behavior. And it has a direct methodological consequence, worth stating plainly. A claim about motive is difficult to verify from outside. Two leaders can perform identical outward behavior, while holding genuinely different underlying motivations. An outside observer has no direct access to which motivation is actually operating. Keep that problem in mind. It comes back in the test the framework proposes, and again in the evidence.
10 Characteristics
What Servant Leaders Commonly Show
Ten characteristics are commonly identified with servant leadership. Listening and empathy are about genuinely attending to others, and understanding them. Healing concerns attending to others' emotional and psychological well-being. Awareness and foresight concern the leader's own perceptiveness, in the present, and in anticipating what's to come. Persuasion means influencing through genuine reasoning, rather than invoking formal rank. Conceptualization is the capacity to think beyond day-to-day operations, toward larger possibilities. Stewardship means holding resources and responsibility in trust for others, rather than for personal benefit. Commitment to the growth of people means genuine investment in followers' development. And building community means cultivating genuine connection among the people the leader serves. Taken as a flat list, that's a lot to hold. The next figure gives it some structure.
Figure 9.3.1
Not a Flat List, but 3 Levels
Figure nine point three point one groups the ten characteristics by the level they concern. The first cluster is the leader's own orientation. Awareness, foresight, conceptualization, and stewardship all describe the leader's internal disposition. The second cluster is the direct relationship with a follower. Listening, empathy, healing, and persuasion all happen between two people. The third cluster is the wider community. Commitment to the growth of people, and building community, reach beyond any single relationship. So the characteristics aren't an unordered list. They move outward, from the leader's inner disposition, to the relationship, to the community she serves.
The Proposed Test
Do Those Served Grow?
Servant leadership proposes a specific test for whether it's actually being practiced. Do those served grow as people? Do they become more capable, more autonomous, and more likely to serve others themselves? Notice that this test is about outcomes, not behaviors. That follows directly from the motive-based definition. Since motive itself can't be observed directly, the test looks somewhere else. It asks about consequences. Are the results a genuine service motive would produce actually showing up, in the people being led? It's a demanding test. Warmth and attentiveness alone don't pass it. The people being led have to actually grow.
The Point Most Often Missed
Servant vs. Transformational
Now the distinction from transformational leadership, from Subchapter nine point two. It's the point most often missed, so it deserves careful statement. Transformational leadership directs follower development toward organizational objectives. Individualized consideration and intellectual stimulation are ultimately in service of the organization's goals. Follower growth is the mechanism that serves those goals. Servant leadership reverses that. It places the follower's growth first. Organizational benefit is treated as the consequence of that growth, not its purpose. Where the two interests coincide, the frameworks point the same way. They diverge precisely when the organization's interest and the follower's interest don't coincide. In that moment, a transformational leader is oriented toward what serves the organization. A servant leader, by the framework's own ordering, is oriented toward what serves the follower, even when the two pull apart.
Table 9.3.1
The 2 Frameworks Side by Side
Table nine point three point one puts the two frameworks side by side. The primary motive of transformational leadership is achieving organizational objectives. For servant leadership, it's genuine service to the follower. In transformational leadership, development serves the organization's goals. In servant leadership, follower growth is an end in itself. The tests differ too. Transformational leadership is usually judged by rated performance and satisfaction. Servant leadership asks whether those served become more capable, more autonomous, and more likely to serve. And at the point of divergence, the organization's interest governs one framework. The follower's growth governs the other.
Fit and Evidence
Where It Works, and What We Know
Servant leadership fits particularly well in mission-driven, professional, and public service organizations. There, the work itself already centers on serving others. A leader's genuine service orientation aligns naturally with the organization's own purpose. More broadly, the argument extends to any organization that depends on discretionary effort. That's effort beyond the minimum a transactional exchange could compel. A genuine service orientation is well positioned to earn exactly that kind of effort. On the evidence, servant leadership shows positive associations with trust, citizenship behavior, and satisfaction. But the persistent difficulty is measuring motive. Researchers can't verify a leader's real motivation either, so studies measure observable behaviors instead. And those behaviors could, in principle, be present without the motive that defines the style.
The Criticisms
3 Ways It Goes Wrong
Three criticisms are worth stating directly. The most consequential is the risk of conflict avoidance dressed as service. A leader who avoids a genuinely necessary, difficult decision can describe that avoidance in the language of service. Humility, perhaps, or deference to the team. But the underlying reality is simply avoidance. It isn't service at all. The second criticism is difficulty in situations that require directive decisions. The framework's emphasis on listening and deference sits awkwardly against moments that call for a leader to decide, and direct. The third is that the language can be adopted without the substance. A leader, or an organization, can use all the right vocabulary. And still lack the underlying motive, or the outcomes, the framework actually requires.
Poor Fit
2 Situations Where It Struggles
Servant leadership fits poorly in two recognizable situations. The first is a crisis that requires immediate direction. That calls for the kind of directive, autocratic behavior covered in Subchapter nine point six. A listening-first, growth-first orientation doesn't suit it. There's simply no time for the patient, deliberative process the servant characteristics describe. The second is a context where the leader must impose a decision followers oppose. Think of a genuinely unpopular, but necessary, call. That sits in tension with a framework built around serving followers' own growth and interests. In that situation, the decision being imposed is exactly the thing the followers don't want.
The Practical Version
What a Manager Can Act On Now
A manager doesn't need to adopt the full philosophy to act on a practical version of it. That version has three parts. Genuinely listen before deciding. Invest real time in developing the people who report to you. And treat their growth as a legitimate end, not only as a means to better organizational output. Each of those is available whether or not a manager embraces servant leadership as a complete philosophy. Be clear about what the practical version doesn't do, though. It doesn't resolve the divergence we named. A manager practicing it will still face moments where organizational and follower interest genuinely conflict. But it captures much of the framework's practical value, without requiring the full philosophical commitment.
Case Vignette
Service or Avoidance?
Here's a composite case, constructed for instruction. Marcus led a small design team at Harborline Manufacturing. He prided himself on a deeply supportive, listening-oriented style, and he explicitly called it servant leadership. For over a year, he kept deferring a necessary but difficult decision. A long-standing team member's output had fallen well below the team's needs, and she needed reassigning. Each time, Marcus explained that he didn't want to impose a decision she would resent. Over that year, the team's performance stagnated. Two stronger performers grew visibly frustrated, carrying disproportionate weight for a colleague whose situation never changed. Marcus described his patience as an expression of service. What he'd actually practiced was conflict avoidance dressed as service. Apply the framework's own test. Did those served grow more capable and autonomous? No one did. Not even the colleague herself, who never got the direct, honest feedback that might have helped her improve. Next, Subchapter nine point four looks at what happens when a leader steps back too far, with laissez-faire leadership.
About Principles of Management at UPI Study
Principles of Management (Business 101) is a self-paced online course of 117 video lessons in 17 chapters, from the classical schools and the four management functions to leadership, motivation, change, human resources, strategy and ethics. It carries a NCCRS credit recommendation for 3 semester credits.
Every lesson transcript is free on pages like this one, and the videos are free with a free UPI Study account. Enrolling adds a practice quiz after each lesson, the graded work and final exam that earn the credit, lifetime access, and an official transcript on completion. UPI Study has helped over 130,000 students with college credits. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.
Enroll now → Course details Download the syllabus Every course with PRO →
Why take it here
Why students take Principles of Management with UPI Study
Where the credit goes
Universities that work with NCCRS
Principles of Management carries a NCCRS credit recommendation. These universities work with NCCRS; some are UPI Study's signed partners. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.
Thomas Edison State UniversitySigned partner
University of the PeopleSigned partner
Charter Oak State CollegeSigned partner
Strayer UniversitySigned partner
Columbia Southern UniversitySigned partner
Indiana TechSigned partner
Penn StateWorks with NCCRS
Southern New Hampshire UniversityWorks with NCCRS
SUNYWorks with NCCRS
+many more cooperating universitiesFind my college →Find my college → Not listed? Ask Athena in the corner of this page, or book a 15-minute call.
FAQ
Questions students ask us
About Leading by Serving: The Servant Leadership Philosophy
What is servant leadership?
How can you tell if someone is really practicing servant leadership?
What is the difference between servant leadership and transformational leadership?
What are the main criticisms of servant leadership?
About the Principles of Management course
How many college credits is Principles of Management?
How much does Principles of Management cost and what is included?
Which universities accept UPI Study credits?
How long does Principles of Management take?
How are the exams done?
How do my credits reach my college?
Ready for the full course? Earn 3 credits in Principles of Management.
117 video lessons, a quiz after each one, and the graded work that earns the credit. Recommended for credit by NCCRS.
3 credits · NCCRSEnroll →