Running head: SERVANT LEADERSHIP

Servant Leadership Development Program: Leadership through Service

Meghan Arias
George Mason University

SERVANT LEADERSHIP

George Mason University (GMU) recently created an ambitious mission and

goal statement. The university aspires to be a university for the world, creating
globally contentious graduates, increasing the number of graduates and the
services it provides to students (George Mason University, 2012). Unfortunately,
this ambition comes at a time of decreased funding from state government, so do
more with less is a common mantra heard throughout the campus. In a
presentation for GMU units under the Provosts Office, Provost Wu outlined a goal of
improving efficiencies by flattening the university hierarchy and encouraging
employees of the university to increase the innovative practices in order to achieve
this more with less ideal (Wu, 2015). While the university has long prided itself on
its innovation, it has largely maintained a traditional hierarchical structure, so some
support will be needed to achieve this paradigm shift. The following paper proses a
leadership program for administrators and faculty within the university based on the
servant-leadership theory to help both leaders and followers acclimate to this
proposed new environment. It will first describe the target population, along
potential inputs and environmental factors as well as proposed learning outcomes.
Next, an examination of the literature around servant leadership will show support
that this framework is appropriate for the learning objectives. An outline of the
proposed curriculum, with module learning outcomes and sample activities will then
be provided, as well as the intended assessment methods. The proposal will close
with a reflection of the project and of the authors personal leadership views.
Participants and Environment
Target participants for the program will be current faculty and staff at George
Mason University. Research suggests that followers of servant leadership engage in
social learning from servant leaders, in turn becoming more service oriented

SERVANT LEADERSHIP

themselves, potentially impacting the culture of the overall organization (Hunter et

al., 2013). Therefore, the primary audience will be individuals in existing leadership
roles. Two of dimensions of servant leadership, helping subordinates grow and
succeed, and, putting subordinates first, seem to focus on individuals with positional
leadership, though the authors definition of these dimensions are broad enough to
include others outside of an existing power structure (Liden, Wayne, Zhao, &
Henderson, 2008). These and the other dimensions will be discussed in more detail
later in the proposal. However, the other dimensions can apply equally to any
position. Therefore, to improve the servant culture and to contribute to flattening
the hierarchy, the program will not be restricted to those with positional authority.
Two of Masons three current leadership or managerial training programs
require interested participants to submit applications to be considered, the
Experienced Supervisors Leadership Seminars (http://hr.gmu.edu/learning/esls.php)
and the Leadership Legacy program (http://leadershiplegacy.gmu.edu/). The
servant leadership program will not require an application to allow open access for
anyone interested in the topic. Should the popularity of the program exceed the
capacity, a phased cohort program could be implemented with interested
individuals submitting brief biographical information, such as length of time at
Mason, current responsibilities and service interests. This would allow for the
organizers to identify individuals with diverse experiences to begin and progress
through the program together and maintain some control over course demand.
George Mason University is a diverse school and allowing an open
enrollment will create a challenge in identifying consistent participant inputs.
According to the Office of Institutional Research and Reporting, 42.2% of faculty in
the Fall 2014 semester were female, with 57.8% male. Faculty were mostly white

SERVANT LEADERSHIP

(60%), with about 15% reporting a minority ethnicity and just under 20% unknown
(IRR, 2014). Demographics such as these are impossible to control for, but play an
important role in participants inputs going into any development program.
Beck (2014) found several predictors of servant leadership. First, individuals
in a leadership position for a long period of time showed servant leader behavior
more frequently than those with less leadership experience. Servant leaders were
also more likely to volunteer at least an hour a week. Individuals who value
relationship building, as well as those with an altruistic mindset, acting in the best
interest of others (Beck, 2014, p. 307), also exhibited higher levels of servant
leadership behavior. These predictors were identified through a qualitative inquiry,
so there is no instrument to easily measure these levels pre-intervention.
Servant leadership should thrive in any educational non-profit environment,
as the tenants of the leadership theory align with the universitys service missions
for education and research. George Mason University particularly would be a
conducive environment for these ideas. The universitys vision statement aligns
with many key points found in servant leadership theory, such as creating value for
the community, conceptual skills and behaving ethically (GMU, 2012). The focus on
relationship building, team work and flattening hierarchies evident in servant
leadership also align with GMUs institutional goals. Provost Wu has also placed an
emphasis on what he calls the 60/40 rule. This idea states that individuals should
spend 60% of their time on work for their own unit, with the other 40% spent
helping other units succeed (Wu, 2015). This emphasis on the needs of others also
aligns with servant leadership.
Outcomes

SERVANT LEADERSHIP

The learning outcomes for this program cover specific knowledge of servant
leadership and its application in the workplace, as well as outcomes related to skills
development need to practice servant leadership behaviors. At the end of this
program students will be able to:

Identify the characteristics and dimensions of servant leadership

Recognize servant leadership behaviors participant already employs
Modify personal behavior to incorporate servant leadership behaviors s/he

wishes to further develop

Use effective listening skills
Practice ethical decision making
Demonstrate improved team-work and relationship skills
Identify with less hierarchical leadership attitudes

Servant Leadership
The term servant leadership, made popular by Robert Greenleaf in the
1970s, may sound like a contradiction. How does one both serve and lead?
According to Greenleaf the difference manifests itself in the care taken by the
servant: - first, to make sure that other peoples highest priority needs are being
served. The best test is: do those servedbecome healthier, wiser, freer, more
autonomous, more likely themselves to become servants? (as cited in Crippen,
2004, p. 12). Greenleaf developed this paradoxical theory after reading Herman
Hesses Journey to the East, which tells a tale of a group of travelers who set out on
an arduous journey. One of the travelers, Leo, functioned as a servant to the rest of
the group, doing menial chores for his fellow travelers, but also helped to keep their
spirits up on the trek. However, when Leo disappeared, the company disintegrated
and the journey came to an end. It is eventually revealed that Leo was in fact the
head of the organization which had sponsored the original journey. The message
Greenleaf took away from this story, that people will be recognized as leaders by

SERVANT LEADERSHIP

their services to society, became the basis of his servant leadership theory
(Crippen, 2004).
Unfortunately, Greenleaf never operationally defined his concept, so several
researchers have attempted to do so in his place, resulting in several sets of
characteristics related to servant leadership. Spears, a colleague and friend of
Greenleafs, identified ten characteristics: listening, empathy, healing, awareness,
persuasion, conceptualization, foresight, stewardship, commitment to the growth of
people, and building community (van Dierendonck, 2011). Liden, et al. (2008)
identified nine dimensions of servant leadership, along with a construct with which
to measure these dimensions. The nine dimensions are emotional healing, creating
value for the community, conceptual skills, empowering, helping subordinates grow
and succeed, putting subordinates first, behaving ethically, relationships, and
servanthood.
The various words used to describe servant leadership may differ, but the
overall message is the same, serving others first is the central component of
servant leadership. Liden et al.s (2008) dimensions focus more on actions, for
example, putting subordinates first is defined as using actions and words to make
it clear to othersthat satisfying their work needs is a priority (p. 162). Spears
characteristics focus on similar strengths, but in a more general sense.
Commitment to the growth of people, his most similar characteristic to putting
subordinates first, is defined as nurturing the personal, professional and spiritual
growth of people (van Dierendonk, 2011, p. 1232). There are several overlaps
between Spears and Liden et al.s dimensions, but the characteristics identified by
Spears were never fully operationalized with a validated measurement as was done
with Liden et al.s dimensions in the Servant Leadership Questionnaire (SLQ). As a

SERVANT LEADERSHIP

result, this proposed program focuses on the nine dimensions identified by Liden et
al. (2008), though elements of Spears characteristics are also included. Liden et al.
(2008) defined their dimensions as follows:
1. Emotional healingthe act of showing sensitivity to others' personal
concerns
2. Creating value for the communitya conscious, genuine concern for
helping the community
3. Conceptual skillspossessing the knowledge of the organization and tasks
at hand so as to be in a position to effectively support and assist others,
especially immediate followers
4. Empoweringencouraging and facilitating others, especially immediate
followers, in identifying and solving problems, as well as determining when
and how to complete work tasks
5. Helping subordinates grow and succeeddemonstrating genuine concern
for others' career growth and development by providing support and
mentoring
6. Putting subordinates firstusing actions and words to make it clear to
others (especially immediate followers) that satisfying their work needs is a
priority (Supervisors who practice this principle will often break from their
own work to assist subordinates with problems they are facing with their
assigned duties.)
7. Behaving ethicallyinteracting openly, fairly, and honestly with others
8. Relationshipsthe act of making a genuine effort to know, understand, and
support others in the organization, with an emphasis on building long-term
relationships with immediate followers

SERVANT LEADERSHIP

9. Servanthooda way of being marked by one's self-categorization and

desire to be characterized by others as someone who serves others first,
even when self-sacrifice is required (p. 162)
In addition to similarities between varying definitions of the concept of
servant leadership, several authors have discussed servant leadership in relation to
other leadership theories, particularly transformational leadership. Servant
leadership researchers argue that while there are overlapping components,
transformational leadership theory focuses on aligning with organizational goals as
opposed to servant leaderships focus on the individual goals of followers (Hawkins,
2009). Yoshida, Sendjaya, Hirst, and Cooper (2014) note that servant leadership
has been shown to be a more significant predictor of positive, job related outcomes,
such as team performance, commitment, and employee satisfaction, than
transformational leadership.
Though servant leaders do not focus on organizational benefits in their
service to others, several organizational benefits to this leadership style have been
identified. Increases in work engagement have been found at technologies
companies (De Clercq, Bouchenooghe, Raja, & Matsyborska, 2014) among
employees who rated their supervisors high in servant leadership based on the SLQ.
The authors argue this is because the servant leaders focus on the individuals
creates a positive working environment that promotes psychological safety (De
Clercq, et al., 2014, p. 201). This idea lines up well with Masons focus on wellbeing.
The university has been recognized by the Chronicle of Higher Education as one of
the best colleges to work for (Kamath, 2014), with the most recent recognition
noting a focus on work/life balance. Improvements in employee retention also serve

SERVANT LEADERSHIP

the bottom line of an organization as of a result savings on the significant costs

associated with the hiring and training processes.
In addition to retention and engagement, servant leadership has also been
related to feelings of empowerment, improved performance and creativity.
Subordinates in small businesses working under individuals who exhibit servant
leadership servant leadership feel empowered (Van Winkle, Allen, DeVore, &
Winston, 2014). The authors explain that empowerment means letting people do
their jobs by enabling them to learn, grow and progress (Van Winkle et al., 2014, p.
72). This is one of servant leaderships great strengths, according to the authors.
Servant leaders are often referred to as first among equals, so empowering
followers encourage them to contribute and collaborate, improving the organization
as a whole. Creativity, improved performance and customer service behaviors were
identified in relation to increased servant leadership behaviors in restaurants (Liden,
Wayne, Liao, & Mesuer, 2014). It is also suggested that the less task-oriented,
relationship focused servant leadership behavior will result in a less hierarchical
view of leadership (Reynolds, 2011).
Leadership through Service Program Outline
The program, titled Leadership through Service, will be divided into several
modules covering major topics of servant leadership (Table 1). This title was chosen
because of the connotations that could arise from the term servant leadership.
Spears and Lawrence (2002) note that the concept of servant leader needs to be
explained thoroughly because it seems contradictory at first glance. The word
service was chosen instead of servant for two primary reasons. First, service is a
key component of servant leadership so the word still reflects the spirt of the theory
without using a potentially off-putting word. Additionally, administrators often

SERVANT LEADERSHIP

10

lament that it is notoriously difficult to entice faculty members to attend trainings.

Service is a component of faculty performance evaluations, particularly for those
pursuing tenure, so using this language may encourage more faculty participation.
Modules may vary in length, but none will run over 4 hours. All modules
must be completed in order to obtain a certificate of recognition for program
completion. Participants must attend Module 1 first, and while they are encouraged
to attend the other modules in sequence, this is not required. Modules should be
offered once a month depending on demand. In addition to the course requirement,
all participants must volunteer a minimum of 3 hours a month for one organization
during the duration of the program (a minimum of 24 hours total) and complete a
service journal reflecting on the experience and their growth throughout the
program. Participants are encouraged to utilize the universitys School
Assistance/Volunteer leave if eligible, which would allow for 16 hours of paid leave
for volunteer work.
Table 1. Module Structure and Learning Outcomes
Module

Topic

Module 1

Introduction to Servant
Leadership

Module 2

Creating Value for the

Community

Module 3

Listening, Empowering,
and Persuasion

Learning Goals
Students will:
-Be introduced to
program objectives
-Gain knowledge of
servant leadership theory
and concepts
-Identify opportunities to
serve
-Commit to service
location for duration of
the program
- Be introduced to ways
to improve listening skills
-Demonstrate effective
listening skills
-Recognize how listening
to others can help
empower them -Identify

SERVANT LEADERSHIP

11

Module 4

Building Relationships,
Trust, and Teamwork

Module 5

Empathy, Emotional
Healing

Module 6

Ethical Leadership

Module 8

Conceptual Skills

Module 9

Helping Others Grow and

Succeed

ways to use listening to

persuade others, rather
than forcing acceptance
with positional power
-Identify characteristics of
a good team
-Identify ways to build
relationships and increase
trust
-Show empathy for others
-Utilize self-awareness
and sensitivity when
communicating
-Introduce ethical
frameworks
-Discuss case studies of
ethical dilemmas
-Recognize the impact of
unethical leadership
-Utilize ethical decision
making frameworks to
analyze ethical situations
-Develop an
understanding of how
situations are shaped by
a broader context
-Use effective listening
skills
-Be introduced to
effective coaching skills
-Identify positive
institutional outcomes
related to helping others

The following is a sample of activities and discussions for the proposed

modules. Many of the activities were adapted from the KU Work Group for
Community Health and Development (2014).
Module 1 will consist of the introduction to servant leadership theory and
include an overview of the main characteristics and dimensions of servant
leadership, as well research about the benefits of this leadership style. This module
will also include information about the overall program. Before the lesson begins,
the facilitator will ask participants to name characteristics of a good leader, followed

SERVANT LEADERSHIP

12

by characteristics of a bad leader. After the lists are created, the program facilitator
should discuss the servant leader characteristics. Were all of those characteristics
included in the list the class list? Why or why not? Participants will also receive
their first homework assignment: observe and make note of servant leadership
behavior in others. These notes will be discussed throughout other modules. The
assignment will later focus on the participants identifying those behaviors in
themselves. As Spears and Lawrence (2002) note that the best way to understand
servant leadership is to read Greenleafs writings as well as the book that inspired
him, a recommended reading list (Appendix A) will be provided for students to read
throughout the program.
The module on listening will use an active listening activity which allows
participants to use verbal and non-verbal encouragers and practice listening skills.
Participants break into groups of three, after active listening skills have been
discussed, with one person speaking about a topic, any topic, which is important to
him or her. One person is the listener who uses verbal and non-verbal encouragers
and just listens. The third person observes the interaction and makes note of the
listening behaviors, positive and negative. Each speaker will talk for a few minutes,
after which the group will discuss. How did it feel to listen, was it difficult? Did the
speaker feel listened to? What behaviors did the observer see? After a few more
minutes for discussion, group members will trade roles. This is repeated until
everyone has participated in all roles.
The trust and team building module will include a fictitious, controversial
proposed change that is causing some conflict in the local high school. Some
parents and school board members are for the change, but others in both groups
are against the change. Split participants into two groups, one representing the

SERVANT LEADERSHIP

13

parents and the other the school board, so each individual group can look at the
issue from both sides. Discuss how the conflict resolution went, could it have gone
better, what would a servant leader have done?
Assessment
Participants will complete a pre-test using the Leadership Attitudes and
Beliefs Scale (Wielkiewicz, 2000) to identify levels of hierarchical and systemic
thinking. They will be re-tested on this item after completing the program to see if
their leadership attitudes have become less hierarchical. This scale is not ideal
because while it has been validated with younger participants, it has not been fully
studied outside of the college student context. However, it is the only validated
measure the author was able to identify that could provide insight on participants
levels of hierarchical thinking. Hierarchical thinking should be specifically
addressed in module 3 (using persuasion rather than positional power) and module
9 (positive outcomes of working together and helping others grow could flatten
hierarchy), and the overall approach of servant leadership is also expected to
produce alterations in hierarchical thinking (Reynolds, 2011).
Liden et al.s (2008) SLQ will be used to assess levels of servant leadership in
a pre-test/post-test format. The survey requires at least two subordinates to
respond regarding the behaviors of their supervisors. The original version of the
survey phrases the questions as My manager can solve work problems with new or
creative ideas (Liden et al., 2008, p. 168), so there may be adjustments to the my
manager language for non-supervisory participants to allow colleagues to
complete the assessment. The instrument is a 28-item questionnaire with each
question posed on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1=strongly disagree to

SERVANT LEADERSHIP

14

7=strongly agree. It is expected that servant leadership behaviors will increase

after the development program.
The self-reflections will also be reviewed to assess participant perceptions of
their own behaviors. Assessment of skills based learning outcomes, such as
listening, will be done by the module instructor via relevant topical assessments or
class room observations.
Reflection
Servant leadership is the main theory that informed the development of my
project, with some minor influence from transformational, emotional intelligence
and ethical leadership ideas. I do believe servant leadership would fit well with
Masons stated goals, however, it is doubtful this program would be implemented.
Mason already has two leadership programs sponsored through HR. The New
SUPERvisor Series has some leadership aspects, but mostly covers managerial skills
such as creating an employee work profile and conducting performance reviews.
The Experienced Supervisors program has some additional leadership concepts and
seems to focus on Stephen Coveys leadership program. Covey was cited in some
of the servant leadership work, so one possibility is for this program to be
incorporated into the Experienced Supervisors program. That program does require
an application process and 5 years of leadership experience or completion of the
New SUPERvisors series to enroll. I feel strongly that a servant leadership program
demands an open enrollment policy.
Another potential problem with this theory are the religious overtones.
Greenleaf was a Quaker (Crippen, 2004) and biblical quotes pepper his own writing
and that of others, noting Jesus as an exemplary servant leader. Mason, a public
university, prizes the diversity represented on its campus and heavily Christian

SERVANT LEADERSHIP

15

overtones in a school sponsored leadership program could create contention.

However, the ideals of servant leadership can be identified in several religions (van
de Bunt-Kokhuis, & Sultan, 2012). Another critique of the religious connections to
this theory contend that the traditionally patriarchal religious ideas may minimize
the feminist perspective (Reynolds, 2011). The conversations around this
potentially controversial topic could lead to improved leadership outcomes through
socio-cultural discussions with peers, which has been identified as a high impact
practice for leadership development with college students (Dugan et al., 2013).
I am also conflicted over the idea of service learning in the context of
community service and learning combined. By creating an educational reward, such
as earning a certificate of completion/achievement in this case, how much service
is truly left in the activity? Service learning has been identified as a high impact
practice for student learners (Dugan et al., 2013), so I must assume some value
remains even with mandated service, which is why I include this aspect in my own
leadership program. However, requiring service to earn a certificate seems to run
against the values of servant leadership, unless the experience is able to instill an
intrinsic love of service in the participants.
Interestingly, the website for the Robert K. Greenleaf Center for Servant
Leadership also does not seem to live up to the vision of putting others first. The
Centers website, designed by a creative company who does not have their own
web-presence, has several design flaws that are against rudimentary universal
design principles, such as links that just say click here. This makes it difficult for
individuals for vision impairment using assistive technology to access. While this
error is likely out of ignorance and not malice, the Center for Servant Leadership
should live up more fully to its name.

There is also an academic journal, The

SERVANT LEADERSHIP

16

International Journal of Servant-Leadership, that seems hypocritical to the espoused

ideals. With open access journals increasing in popularity in todays information
age, a journal that supports a philosophy that encourages considering others first,
even to your own detriment, one would think the articles submitted to this journal
would be available to others in the community free of charge. However, this is not
the case and George Mason does not subscribe to this journal, so the views in those
articles remain behind the paywall and were not considered in this proposal.
The extent of the servant leadership literature surprised me, but more
research is always warranted. The primary gap in the servant leadership literature
is the lack of consensus on how to operationalize and thus quantitatively study this
concept. Servant leadership research exists on businesses large and small, as well
as international populations, however, considering the strong service connection to
education, more servant leadership research should be done on institutions of
higher education.
Additional research should also be done to examine the effectiveness of servant
leadership programs. While much research extoled the virtues of this paradigm and
the organizational benefits of those who practice it, there was little available
reporting how to best develop these skills. Several certificate programs exist
through various institutions, including University of Virginia
(http://www.darden.virginia.edu/executive-education/short-courses/servantleadership/) and the Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership
(https://greenleaf.org/the-greenleaf-academy-certificate-program/). Gonzaga
University also offers a concentration in servant leadership under the Organizational
Leadership masters degree (https://online.gonzaga.edu/masters-in-organizationalleadership/orgl-servant-leader-concentration). These organizations have

SERVANT LEADERSHIP

17

presumably done some research has been done to support their programs. It would
be useful to see published results on the impact these, or similar, programs have
had on learners.
Personal reflection
What a difference a semester makes! It has been interesting to go back over
my original leadership statement from only a few months ago. I still value positional
authority, but have begun to recognize leadership as more than a person with a set
of leader traits. Looking back over my original essay I see statements I made
such as Good leaders feel concern about the well-being of their teams and their
teams respect them (p. 2), which suggest I was closer to this understanding at the
beginning of the semester than I realized. I can see how this reflects the definition
of leadership as a process and I have begun to see the value of viewing leadership
through this lens.
In the original paper, I seemed hesitant to ascribe the title leader to myself.
One of my biggest ah-ha moment actually came recently as I was reading Liden et
al.s (2008) dimensions of servant leadership. I was having trouble identifying with
the idea of servant leadership, wondering how this could really be a beneficial,
despite the impressive research I had seen. The description of putting subordinates
first says Supervisors who practice this principle will often break from their own
work to assist subordinates with problems they are facing with their assigned
duties (Liden et al., 2008, p. 162). Shortly before reading that, I had been a
member of my team with a mounting pile of paperwork. I could tell she was
starting to feel overwhelmed by the number of different things she had pending, so I
offered to complete the pending paperwork. This took time away from my day-today responsibilities, but I did not think anything of it at the time. I am quicker at

SERVANT LEADERSHIP

18

processing the paperwork, since I have been doing it longer, so it made sense for
me to get through them quickly and allow her time for other work and reduce the
stress she was feeling about the ever increasing stack of papers. Reading Liden et
al.s (2008) definition made me see this action in a different light and examine other
behaviors of mine differently as well. This experience is one of the reasons I
included the learning outcome that participants be able to identify leadership
behaviors in themselves. I think it is easy to read about something and
conceptualize it, but being able to identify those concepts in yourself can make
them come to life.
I still believe that some aspects of leadership cannot be taught. The
behaviors in servant leadership, for example, could be reinforced in people with
some prior inclination to put others first. However, I do not expect my program, or
any other, to completely change the character of someone who is selfish and
uncaring towards others. Personally, I will never have all of the characteristics of a
charismatic leader such as being dominant, [and] having a strong desire to
influence others (Northouse, 2013, p. 187). However, it could be possible for me to
develop the behaviors associated with charismatic leaders such as appearing
competent to followers and being a role model for followers, displaying the values I
hope they will adopt.
As far as continued personal leadership development, I am currently enrolled
in Masons New SUPERvisor program. The program focuses more on management
skills than leadership, but some of the courses do teach skills like coaching that can
contribute to relationship building, a key to the leadership process. Additionally,
once I have completed this program, my supervisor has agreed to nominate me to
attend one of the more leadership focused programs Mason offers, the Leadership

SERVANT LEADERSHIP

19

Legacy program. She completed the program this semester and I saw several
overlaps between what she learned in Leadership Legacy and our work in CTCH 810.
I look forward to participating in the program after this experience. I believe it will
offer a different perspective on some of the same topics, helping to further expand
my understanding of leadership.
My supervisor has also helped me see the value in mentoring relationships, a
high impact leadership development practice. She works with me to develop my
leadership skills and provides feedback that has been extremely valuable. As a
result, I have been working on developing my own mentoring skills to help grow and
support my team. Additionally, I would be interested in exploring the followership
literature. I found it interesting in researching servant leadership that the term
subordinate was used so frequently. It simply refers to a lower positional power, but
the term seems to have a negative connotation. With such an other-focused
philosophy, I would have thought the researchers would be more careful with how
they define those others.
I have learned a lot over the course of this semester, and look forward to
continuing my leadership journey.

SERVANT LEADERSHIP

20
References

Beck, C. D. (2014). Antecedents of servant leadership: A mixed methods study. Journal

of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 21(3), 299314.
http://doi.org/10.1177/1548051814529993
Crippen, C. (2004). Servant-leadership as an effective model for educational leadership
and management: First to serve, then to lead. Management in Education, 18(5), 11
16.
De Clercq, D., Bouckenooghe, D., Raja, U., & Matsyborska, G. (2014). Servant leadership
and work engagement: The contingency effects of leader-follower social capital.
Human Resource Development Quarterly, 25(2), 183212.
http://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.21185
Dugan, J. P., Kodama, C., Correia, B., Derringer, A., Howes, S., Bohle, C. W., LeBlanc, J.
(2013). Multi-Institutional Study of Leadership insight report: Leadership program
delivery. College Park, MD: National Clearinghouse for Leadership Programs.
Retrieved from www.nclp.umd.edu
George Mason University. (2012). Mason Vision. Retrieved from vision.gmu.edu
Hamilton, F., & Bean, C. J. (2005). The importance of context, beliefs and values in
leadership development. Business Ethics: A European Review, 14(4), 336347.
Hawkins, C. (2009). Leadership theories-managing practices, challenges, suggestions.
The Community College Enterprise, 15(2), 3962.
Hunter, E. M., Neubert, M. J., Perry, S. J., Witt, L. A., Penney, L. M., & Weinberger, E.
(2013). Servant leaders inspire servant followers: Antecedents and outcomes for
employees and the organization. The Leadership Quarterly, 24(2), 316331.
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2012.12.001

SERVANT LEADERSHIP

21

Kamath, S. (2014, July 21). Great university=Great place to work: Mason named among
best colleges to work for. Retrieved from https://newsdesk.gmu.edu/2014/07/greatuniversity-great-place-work-mason-named-among-best-colleges-work/
KU Work Group for Community Health and Development. (2014). Chapter 13, Section 2:
Servant leadership: Accepting and maintaining the call of service. Lawrence, KS:
University of Kansas. Retrieved from http://ctb.ku.edu/en/table-ofcontents/leadership/leadership-ideas/servant-leadership/main
Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., Liao, C., & Meuser, J. D. (2014). Servant leadership and serving
culture: Influence on individual and unit performance. Academy of Management
Journal, 57(5), 14341452. http://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2013.0034
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), 161177. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2008.01.006
Northouse, P. G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and practice (Sixth.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications, Inc.
Office of Institutional Research and Reporting. (2014). Full-time academic faculty
demographic profiles: Two year comparisons. Retrieved from
https://irr2.gmu.edu/New/N_Faculty/FullTimeFacComp.cfm
Reynolds, K. (2011). Servant-leadership as gender-integrative leadership: Paving a path
for more gender-integrative organizations through leadership education. Journal of
Leadership Education, 10(2), 155171.
Spears, L. C., & Lawrence, M. (Eds.). (2002). Focus on leadership: servant-leadership for
the twenty-first century. New York: J. Wiley & Sons.

SERVANT LEADERSHIP

22

Van de Bunt-Kokhuis, S., & Sultan, N. (2012). Servant-leadership: The online way! Elearning where community building is key. European Journal of Open, Distance and
E-Learning, 1.
Van Dierendonck, D. (2011). Servant leadership: A review and synthesis. Journal of
Management, 37(4), 12281261. http://doi.org/10.1177/0149206310380462
Van Winkle, B., Allen, S., DeVore, D., & Winston, B. (2014). The relationship between the
servant leadership behaviors of immediate supervisors and followers perceptions of
being empowered in the context of small business. Journal of Leadership Education,
13(3), 7082.
Wielkiewicz, R. M. (2000). The leadership attitudes and beliefs scale: An instrument for
evaluating college students thinking about leadership and organizations. Journal of
College Student Development, 41(3).
Wu, D. (2015, April). Townhall. George Mason University.
Yoshida, D. T., Sendjaya, S., Hirst, G., & Cooper, B. (2014). Does servant leadership
foster creativity and innovation? A multi-level mediation study of identification and
prototypicality. Journal of Business Research, 67(7), 13951404.
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.08.013

SERVANT LEADERSHIP

23
Appendix A
Recommending reading list

Greenleaf, R. K., Frick, D. M., & Spears, L. C. (1996). On becoming a servant-leader (1st
ed). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Greenleaf, R. K., & Spears, L. C. (1998). The power of servant-leadership: essays. San
Francisco, Calif: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Greenleaf, R. K., & Spears, L. C. (2002). Servant leadership: a journey into the nature of
legitimate power and greatness (25th anniversary ed). New York: Paulist Press.
Hesse, H., & Rosner, H. (2003). The journey to the East (1st Picador ed). New York:
Picador.
Sipe, J. W., & Frick, D. M. (2009). Seven pillars of servant leadership: practicing the
wisdom of leading by serving. New York: Paulist Press.
Sparough, J. M., Manney, J., & Hipskind, T. (2010). Whats your decision? How to make
choices with confidence and clarity: an Ignatian approach to decision making.
Chicago: Loyola Press.
Spears, L. C., & Lawrence, M. (Eds.). (2002). Focus on leadership: servant-leadership for
the twenty-first century. New York: J. Wiley & Sons.
Thompson, C. M. (2000). The congruent life: following the inward path to fulfilling work
and inspired leadership (1st ed). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.