Search results

The purpose of this paper is to establish a conceptual link between the research domains of social entrepreneurship and servant leadership by exploring the proposition that social entrepreneurs may have specific leadership attributes that allow classifying them as servant leaders.

Five servant leadership attributes were identified based on the literature review: altruism, humility, integrity, trust in others and empathy. In an exploratory study, these attributes were examined in a sample of 78 Russian entrepreneurs.

Survey results indicate that social entrepreneurs indeed differ from traditional ones in four of the perceived servant leadership attributes: altruism, integrity, trust in others and empathy. However, no differences in humility between social and traditional entrepreneurs were found.

The limitations of this study are the sample size and the sampling technique used (targeted and snowball sampling). Another limitation is the nature of the instrument used: servant leadership attributes were measured through a self-assessment questionnaire, making it susceptible to a social desirability bias. The study contributes toward setting a future research agenda for the further studies of both social entrepreneurship and servant leadership.

This paper introduces a conceptual connection between social entrepreneurship and servant leadership. No such study had been reported prior to this research.

Servant leadership is an increasingly popular concept in the repertoire of leadership styles. While an intuitively attractive concept, it is systematically undefined and not yet supported by empirical research. Reviews the servant leadership literature with the intent to develop a preliminary theoretical framework. Builds a foundation for categorizing and appraising the functional and accompanying attributes of servant leaders. Once categorized, a formative, rational servant leadership attribute model is constructed. The authors call for further development of the model and empirical research to support it.

The purpose of this study is two-fold. First, it systematically reviews and synthesizes research on servant leadership in management and hospitality management literature. Second, by reviewing and comparing the characteristics of the hospitality industry and servant leadership attributes, this study provides insights concerning the conceptualizations and theorization of servant leadership in hospitality management and discusses future research directions.

The current study reviewed 106 articles published during the period of 1970 to 2018 in hospitality management and broader management literature.

The characteristics of the hospitality industry and servant leadership attributes were found to be mutually inclusive, both consisting qualities such as trust, integrity, honesty, care, servant behavior, listening and community focus.

Scholars should concentrate on exploring what makes servant leaders unique in the hospitality industry.

The study reviews the hospitality characteristics, and servant leadership attributes offer new research avenues.

The purpose of this paper is to scrutinise the concept of servant leadership from a business administration (management) point‐of‐view.

A review of scholarly works on servant‐leadership is presented.

A generally accepted definition of servant‐leadership is not available. There are no generally accepted instruments for measuring servant‐leadership. It is unclear whether some leaders are servant‐leaders while others are not, and whether leaders can be servant‐leaders to different degrees. The positive effects of servant‐leadership on organisational outcomes, a consideration highly relevant to management, have not been empirically established. Some studies have shown negative effects of servant‐leadership on organisational effectiveness.

This literature review contains no empirical data.

The argument that servant‐leaders should be in charge of private companies and public organisations appears to be contrary to theoretical and empirical considerations. Servant‐leaders, whose concerns are primarily focused on subordinates rather than customers (or citizens), are hardly able to attain organisational goals.

The paper offers critical comments on the conceptual and empirically usefulness of servant‐leadership when applied to business enterprises and public agencies.

Roles and responsibilities of higher education academics (educators) have dramatically changed since COVID-19 outbreak. Considering this, the present study applies servant leadership and social cognitive theories to test three determinants of pedagogical resilience, i.e. servant leadership, professional self-efficacy and workplace thriving. The study also tests moderation of professional self-efficacy between servant leadership and pedagogical resilience.

Applying snowball sampling, time-lagged data were collected on T1 and T2 through survey questionnaire from 205 employees of six higher education institutes (HEIs) in Sindh, Pakistan. For data analysis, the study employed structural equation modeling using SmartPLS.

Results indicate that servant leadership and professional self-efficacy predict pedagogical resilience of educators. Moreover, professional self-efficacy moderates the relationship between servant leadership and pedagogical resilience.

This study has a few limitations. The study was conducted in HEIs of Pakistan, which are non-profit organizations. Given this, generalizability of findings in profit-making organizations is suggested with caution. Cross-cultural and cross-regional generalizability may also be challenging.

Training, coaching and role modeling may improve efficacy of educators, which is vital to pedagogical resilience. Furthermore, servant leadership attributes (i.e. emotional support and empathy) may also enhance resilience. Rolling-out tailored training programs for boosting professional efficacy of existing faculty could be helpful in building pedagogical resilience. Fostering a culture of teamwork through adopting collaborative and state of the art educational technologies could also enhance self-efficacy, which is vital to resilience. This could be done when vice chancellors, rectors, HODs, etc., adopt servant leadership attributes to play their role by navigating a paradigm shift from traditional teaching platforms and physical meetings to digital educational tools.

Post-pandemic educational management necessitates resilient workforce to handle any uncertain situation. Given this, the authors apply servant leadership and social cognitive theory and introduce a novel construct of “pedagogical resilience”. This paper offers unique theoretical contributions and suggests universities/HEIs to adopt servant leadership model and foster professional self-efficacy of educators for boosting their pedagogical resilience in times of uncertainty. Pedagogically resilient educators may be well equipped to adopt venerable pedagogical competencies, and could contribute significantly to the quality of higher education.

Aims to explore the relationship between employee perceptions of servant leadership and leader trust, as well as organizational trust.

Uses Laub's Organizational Leadership Assessment along with Nyhan and Marlowe's Organizational Trust Inventory.

Perceptions of servant leadership correlated positively with both leader trust and organizational trust. The study also found that organizations perceived as servant‐led exhibited higher levels of both leader trust and organizational trust than organizations perceived as non‐servant‐led.

The findings lend support to Greenleaf's view that servant leadership is an antecedent of leader and organizational trust, and to aspects of other servant leadership models.

The purpose of this study is to explore and understand the influence of servant leadership on volunteers' commitment working in the voluntary sector in war zones.

With a qualitative research design, participants were 16 volunteers from a servant-leadership-led charity who took part in three focus groups.

Results of the present study revealed that (1) the effectiveness of servant leadership in the war environment lies in creating hope, and (2) the overlap between personal ethics of servant leaders and flexible policies in addition to a set of attributes such as honesty; social awareness; listening; a sense of responsibility; emotion; altruism; patience; and leading without power represent the primary reasons that influence volunteers' commitment during war times.

Research data was conducted during the war on Syria, which has negative implications not only on the participants, but also on the way they responded to questions.

This paper explores and attempts to understand the influence of servant leadership on volunteers' commitment working in the voluntary sector in war zones, which can shed light on the importance of servant leadership behavior in the voluntary sector during postwar and reconstruction periods.

The study offers data and interpretation regarding servant leadership and its positive outcome in war zones, which can be used as a foundation for future studies in war zones.

The purpose of this paper is to clarify the nature of how servant leadership is established and transmitted among members of an organization. The second goal was to identify and evaluate the unique actions by a leader essential to establishing servant leadership. The authors’ efforts resulted in identification and validation of ten leader behaviors that seem to be essential to servant leadership.

The authors’ methodology consisted of two stages. In the first stage, The authors developed an item pool of 116 items drawn from previously developed operationalizations of servant leadership. The authors then engaged a panel of 23 researchers attending a conference focused exclusively on the study of servant leadership to evaluate the. Each participant was asked to independently rate each item using a four-point scale where 1=not useful in describing servant leaders and 4=contributes greatly to describing servant leaders. The authors retained only the most highly rated items. This resulted in retention of 22 leader behaviors for further analysis. In the second stage, the authors developed a questionnaire including these items as well as items measuring transformational leadership behaviors, transactional leader behaviors, servant leadership as measured by the instrument developed by Liden et al. (2008), and a measure of leadership effectiveness developed and used by Ehrhart and Klein (2001). The questionnaire was placed in internet-based survey software and the link provided to students and faculty at a private mid-Atlantic university and to university alumni and colleagues in a variety of organizations. Each respondent was asked to describe a leader he/she had worked for in the past five years and included specification of the job role for both the respondent and the leader.

The ten-item scale accounts for 75 percent of the variance with a scale reliability α=0.96. Convergent validity was determined through comparison to Liden et al. (2008) measure of servant leadership. Discriminant validity was established through confirmatory analysis of leader effectiveness, transformational leadership’s four dimensions, a measure of transactional leadership, and an alternative multi-dimensional measure of servant leadership.

This paper clarifies and provides a measure of the essential behaviors of servant leaders. This provides a useful measurement tool for leadership development.

This article examines transformational leadership and servant leadership to determine what similarities and differences exist between the two leadership concepts. The authors posit that the primary difference between transformational leadership and servant leadership is the focus of the leader. The transformational leader's focus is directed toward the organization, and his or her behavior builds follower commitment toward organizational objectives, while the servant leader's focus is on the followers, and the achievement of organizational objectives is a subordinate outcome. The extent to which the leader is able to shift the primary focus of leadership from the organization to the follower is the distinguishing factor in classifying leaders as either transformational or servant leaders. This article also looks at the next stage of developmental issues in servant leadership, such as the challenges facing empirical investigation and measurement, and the changes that are occurring in current thinking about the servant leadership approach. Ultimately, the case is made that although different, both transformational leadership and servant leadership offer the conceptual framework for dynamic leadership.

The progress of a nation is quite closely linked with the quality of education it offers its citizens. The onus of nurturing future leaders, the students, lies significantly with higher educational institutions (HEIs) and the academic staff associated with such institutions. Therefore, HEIs need so that these engaged employees may go on to look beyond regular extrinsic motivators to ensure employee engagement to mentor students effectively. In this study, we attempted to investigate the influence of an important predictor of employee engagement, leadership, specifically servant leadership style mediated through job satisfaction. A structured questionnaire was administered to the academic staff of the top 25 universities in India. The data collected and the proposed hypotheses were tested using structural equation modeling. The results confirmed that job satisfaction mediates the relationship between servant leadership and work engagement. The study offers insights into the importance of servant leadership to foster employee engagement and thereby institutional effectiveness in the educational sector.