Running head: SERVANT LEADERSHIP 1
Servant Leadership: Addressing Management Challenges
Oland Amaja-Marquell Sexton
Herzing University
SERVANT LEADERSHIP 2
Servant Leadership: Addressing Management Challenges
Introduction to the Problem
Management today have challenges in searching for more collaborative approaches when
emerging with new innovative ideas and initiatives. Robert K. Greenleaf devised a leadership
style in which he coined as Servant Leadership in 1970 (Greenleaf, 1977). Growing popularity
has encouraged a thorough investigation on this form of leadership for management to address
the challenges management has when doing innovation and implementing new ideas and
initiatives. Inasmuch, servant leadership style of management is one that encourages
management to serve the team rather than manage team members in a traditional project
management or retail management environment.
A project fails when there is a lack of established methodology. Herein, leadership
competency is required for successful project outcomes via established methodology and
techniques. Research has identified leadership as a factor that has a viable influence on a project
or campaign outcomes. Thompson (2010) delineates that “a project’s success is, in part,
contingent on effectively managing the constraints of time, costs, and performance
expectations”.
To achieve, a project manager or management must possess the appropriate leadership
skills to establish methodology and techniques. Servant-leadership displays a model of
leadership that can eradicate many challenges management faces when emerging with new
innovative ideas and initiatives. Thompson (2010) suggested that “empirical evidence indicates
no evidence of research on servant leadership that have established it as factor in project
management”. Therefore, this research paper objective is to add to the existing body of
empirical knowledge concerning a model of leadership that can inform practice through recceing
whether there is a relationship between servant leadership and successful project (e.g. project
management or retail management campaigns) outcomes. Here, the question that is being asked
SERVANT LEADERSHIP 3
is: Does a servant leader behavior reflect through successful project management and through the
factors of the project or sales campaign success?
Synthesis of Existing Research
Extensive studies have been completed on the concept of leadership and how it relates to
project management (Berg & Karlsen, 2007; Dainty, Cheng & Moore, 2005; Gehring, 2007;
Hauschildt, Gesche, & Medcof, 2000; Hyvari, 2006; Kezsbom, 1998; Kodjababian & Petty,
2007; Neuhauser, 2007; Schmid & Adams, 2008; Thoms & Pinto, 1999; Turner & Muller, 2005).
Seeking to acme project leadership as a first and foremost factor in the project successes,
researchers’ supposition is that the market ever changing conditions demands soldiers a thorough
focus on leadership, knowledge, and skills to ensue and to empower a project success. Belief in
the organization and human aspects of project management arises emphasis on the
aforementioned (e.g., leadership, knowledge, and skills) for successful project outcomes. Yet,
“despite the plethora of research concerning project management, project managers continue to
face many challenges and problems concerning leadership” (Thompson, 2010). Berg and
Karlsen (2007) findings are that “leadership style, stress, uncertainty, motivation, learning, and
teamwork” are just a brief list of challenges project managers face. Instead of technical factors,
human factors are the dividends that henceforth success in project management such as “project
leadership, top management support, and project team” (Hauschildt et al., 2000). These factors
(e.g., human factors) henceforward an increase in significance as projects upsurges complexity,
risk, and innovation.
Researchers also found that the human factors increased in importance as projects increased in
complexity, risk, and innovation. Haushcildt et al. (2000) informs that the “critical role of the
project manager’s leadership ability had a direct correlation to project outcomes”. What this
states is that without a leadership model, successful project outcomes are frequently
unsubstantiated.
SERVANT LEADERSHIP 4
Conclusively, the belief that competency for successful project outcomes has palpability
by meaningful leadership (Elton & Roe, 1998: Kerzner, 2006). Hitherto, prior empirical research
is limited; which nexuses leadership to project performance. Mobilization of a project teams’
physicality is offered through servant leadership enhancement of human resources skills (Schmid
& Adams, 2008). Herein, the demand for an analysis that would provide insight into leadership
within project management by uncovering whether there is a rapport between project outcomes
and servant leadership is the purpose of the research partaken.
Discussions of Findings
Fifty percent of a project is technical while fifty percent of the challenged involves the
organizational and human aspects of leadership and team building or collaboration (Hauschildt et
al., 2000). Ascribed leadership is the human aspect that Neuhauser (2007) asserts that project
managers twofold when managing a project. This dual responsibility manifests as follow:
1. “Managing the technical components of the project (plans, schedules, budgets, statistical
analysis, monitoring, and control involved in the various knowledge areas and process)
and
2. Managing the people in such a way to motivate the team to successfully complete the
project goals” (Thompson, 2010).
Henceforward, the discussion in the research partaken previews the leadership role in project
management “as the utilization of communication that enables strategic decisions” (Bennis &
Nanus, 1985) plus “the ability to apply interpersonal relationship, drive, decision-making, and
emotional maturity by way of human resource skills to mobilize project team members”
(Zimmerer & Yasin, 1998).
Preview of a Leadership Role in (Project) Management
Through a variety of leadership styles, managers can deal with the many challenges faced
in project management. Leadership styles such as situation leadership (e.g., “based on the
principle what may be appropriate for one situation may not be appropriate for another” (Hersey
& Blanchard, 1988)), new wave leadership (e.g., “team-based leadership conceptualized in
SERVANT LEADERSHIP 5
which this leadership style reduces the focus on top executives; therefore, allocating
responsibility for organizational success across all sectors of the organization” (Lapp, 1999)),
transformational leadership (e.g., “based on the idea of followership to a higher cause, which is
to focus on the goals of the organization instead of self (Northouse, 2004)), and transactional
leadership (e.g., “social exchange between the leader and follower” (Bass, 1990)) can be applied;
however, servant leadership is the leadership style that encompasses management ability to
“include, discuss, take ideas, look for ways to help people come on board, and celebrate every
success that comes along” (Leary-Joyce, 2004, p.39).
Greenleaf (1977) states that servant-leadership exemplifies a model of leadership in
which management adopts an accommodating serving oriented role among stakeholders and
followers. Management or leadership provides service by nurturing the “skills of followers,
eliminating obstacles, encouraging innovation, and empowering creative problem-solving”
(Spears, 2004). Physiognomies associated with servant leadership comprise “incorporating
active listening, empathy, healing, awareness, persuasion, conceptualization, foresight,
stewardship, commitment to growth of people, and community building” (Spears, 2002). Here,
assaying servant leadership; as it relates to project performance, provides information that may
improve management or leadership acumen and project outcomes such as in context where the
“servant leader actually leads through the value of the people who constitute the organization”
(Thompson, 2010). Harvey (2001) stated that, “chasing profits is peripheral; the real point of
business is to serve as one of the institutions through which society develops and exercises the
capacity for constructive action”. (pp. 38-39).
Attainment of organizational goals and objectives is perceived through servant
leadership. This is because the quality of relationship that occurs between the organization’s
SERVANT LEADERSHIP 6
leaders and followers are conceptualized, insofar as “leaders are usually at the forefront of
directing activities yet a leader’s success is heavily reliant on the level of support obtained from
followers” (Hollander, 1992; Scandura, 1999). Early theories (Bass, 1985, 1990; Bennis &
Nanus, 1985; Hollander, 1978, 1992) emergence was more on exploring “how leadership
behavior influenced followers attitudes, motivation, and how such behavior affected group
effectiveness” (Thompson, 2010). Whereas, later theories (Bennis, 1999; Dirks, 2000; Scandura,
1999) “sought to more strongly identify the importance of the follower in supporting leaders in
the accomplishment of organizational goals” (Id.). Accordingly, servant leadership explains
behavior that is altruistic in nature and follower focused.
Patterson (2003) juxtaposed servant leadership against transformational leadership or
transactional leadership who findings where that neither focal point was on altruistic behavior
nor was follower focused. For that reason, servant leadership, which is follower focused,
acquired acceptance because this leadership style “better explains altruistic behavior that is
displayed by the leader or management” (Patterson, 2003; Patterson, Russell, & Stone, 2004).
Likewise, servant leadership is virtuous. Its qualitative characteristics makes a servant leader
holistic (Whetstone, 2001) through “incorporating ethical values of being good, excellent, or
trustworthy” (Pollard, 1996). These altruistic tenets are constructs that delineate servant leaders
and silhouette attitudes, characteristics, and behavior (Patterson 2003).
In all, empirical research that is available on servant leadership decrypts mostly
organizational leadership and not distinctively project leadership. This is because “the literature
and empirical documentation specifically applying servant leadership to project management is
nonexistent or at best, very limited” (Thompson, 2010). Gehring (2007) states that the most
SERVANT LEADERSHIP 7
current research on leadership, with regards to project management, relates this leadership as a
subset of management. Correspondingly, Schmid and Adams (2008) findings are that research
on management and leadership concluded that corporate and general management seldom
embraced project management. That is to say that in spite of handful of studies distinctly about
project management leadership it is unclear on what extent leadership influences project success
nor is the leadership style distinct.
Rationale
Reasoning is to purposefully identify “what extent servant leadership approaches
contribute to successful project outcomes” (Thompson, 2010). Thus far, this paper has analyze
how servant leadership corresponds with project management competencies to achieve or factor
