Technical Problem Solving: A Practical approach to an old …pages.uindy.edu/~dbowman/The...

IS Servant Leadership 1

An Assessment of Servant Leadership Characteristics for Information Systems Managers

by

Darrell D. Bowman, PhDAssistant Professor of Computer Information Systems

And

Terry J. Schindler, PhDAssistant Professor of Management

University of Indianapolis

School of Business


Abstract

This paper examines the use of one of the more recent, interesting and popular

leadership approaches, Servant Leadership (Johnson, 2007), among information systems

(IS) managers. Today’s IS management faces the same leadership challenges as all other

functional managers. Also, IS managers must develop a managerial style centered upon

the corporation’s relationship with many constituents in these times of a rapid change

(Naranjo-Gil, 2010).

Additionally, IS management must have technical acumen specific to their

function and the ability to effectively communicate with technically-oriented people.

They must also be able to communicate effectively with not so technically-oriented

individuals in other functional areas. This study examines the ten characteristics of the

servant-leader defined by Robert Greenleaf and Larry Spears among information systems

(IS) managers.


An Assessment of Servant Leadership Characteristics within Information Systems Managers

Introduction

American business managers of technology face increasing challenges from

changing technology and a globally competitive market. The end of the last century

witnessed revolutionary changes in technology and the use of technology in business.

Technology-based globalization is clearly the new paradigm for local economies and

major businesses (Blakely, 2001). According to Blakely (2001), technology will

determine the type and form of work, not physical resources, tax breaks, low wages, or

location assets that local communities control. Blakley (2001) believes that globalization

and technology are closely related and the most significant influences on the world’s

economy in the new century.

Information systems (IS) managers perform many of the same tasks as other

functional managers. But, IS managers also have challenges unique to IS.

Communication skills are important for IS managers but IS managers must be able to

communicate effectively with IS technical people and non-technical users in the

organization. According to Jiang, Klein, Van Slyke, & Cheney (2003) it is critical for IS

managers to be excellent communicators to the non-technical people within the

organization. Research has shown that a leading cause of software errors is

communication breakdowns across organizational boundaries (2003).

IS professionals are motivated uniquely from professionals in other functional

areas. According to Schambach & Blanton (2002) IS professionals tend to be motivated

by opportunities to learn new skills, particularly technical skills.


Technical managers today must contend with shortened product life cycles,

narrower product launch windows, global competition, and increasingly complex

technical products (Pinto, 2002). Graduates entering business must understand the

competitive climate created by technology and globalization. Tarnof (2000), stated that

the ability to manage information technology is an important requirement for insurance

company senior executives. The ability to manage information technology is a

requirement not left only to information technology (I.T.) managers. Tillinghast-Towers

Perrins consulting firm conducted a 1999 survey of 270 United States and Canada based

insurance firm executives and achieved a 24 percent response rate (Tarnof, 2000).

Tarnof (2000) reported that almost one-third of the life insurance CEOs believe that

managing information technology is one of the top three strategic issues companies face.

Managing business technology today requires a combination of traditional

management skills, leadership and technological know-how. In a 2000 issue of Journal

of Management Inquiry the work environments of two of America’s highest regions for

technological production were compared; Silcon Valley in California and Route 128

region of Waltham, Massachusetts (Delbecq, 2000). The article reports that those at the

heart of innovation in most high-tech companies in Silcon Valley present a very different

image from the innovators of twenty years ago. The innovators are more youthful, with

most being in their 20s and 30s. The work environment is casual, almost collegial.

Programmers and team-leaders are less likely to be wearing suits and ties than blue jeans,

khakis and open-collar shirts (Delbecq, 2000). The groups arrive at innovation by

questioning the solutions of their predecessors. In Silicon Valley the predominant

cultural attribute looked for in a manager or team leader is not someone who will be


technically "right" and control and direct subordinates, but rather someone who can excel

in diagnostic questioning (Delbecq, 2000). Delbecq describes a Silicon Valley that

continues to reinvent itself.

Problem Statement

Traditional management practices such as management by objectives and

managing by walking around have been accepted management practices for IS managers

for many years. But, the concept of servant leadership as a type of management for IS

managers may be increasing. According to Joseph, Soon, Chang, & Slaughter, (2010) IS

managers must possess soft skills such as business awareness and communication skills.

Servant leadership skills are often used to describe the soft skills required by IS managers

(Joseph, et al, 2010). IS managers must develop a managerial style centered upon the

corporation’s relationship with many constituents in the time of a rapid change (Naranjo-

Gil, 2010). Keith (2008) states the servant-leader is by far the best leader to take an

organization through a period of change.

The purpose of this study is to address the following questions. To what level do

IS managers perceive they practice servant leadership characteristics when managing

employees and when dealing with IS users? What servant leadership characteristics are IS

managers most likely to practice? What servant leadership characteristics are IS

managers less likely to practice?

Literature Review

American managers are becoming more aware of the servant leadership style of

management and the style has a reputation for being a fair and effective management

style. Although some of the practices of servant leadership may be practiced that does not


mean a manager is a servant leader. Servant-hood, defined servant leadership, is a

concept recorded earlier in the Bible where significant Greek words are often used to

denote the term ‘servant’ while referring to leaders, for example the Greek word diakonos

(Sendjaya, Sarros & Santora, 2008). Few studies, if any, have been conducted within the

context of IS management and servant leadership. According to Kleim (2004) IS project

managers can benefit greatly by using a servant-leader approach when relating to

stakeholders in an IS project. Benito & Benito (2006) found one factor affecting IS

managers’ performance was the quality of communication throughout the organization.

IS managers’ decision making style affects information flow. Many servant leadership

characteristics contribute to effective communication (Johnson, 2007). Listening (Keith,

2008), awareness and persuasion are traits marking effective communication.

In 2010, IBM interviewed 1,500 CEOs in 60 countries and 19 industries

(Capitalizing on Complexity, 2010). The study revealed that CEOs believe technology

will play an increasing role in the operation of business. Technology will be second only

to external market factors in the operation of business. CIOs will contribute significantly

in supporting, facilitating the CEO in achieving organizational goals.

“The CIO can respond to this drive by nurturing creativity within the IT

organization and driving the CEO’s innovation agenda. CIOs can be enablers of new

directions by testing, fulfilling and measuring the success of new operating models the

organization wants to explore” (Capitalizing on Complexity, p. 7, 2010).

Bassellier & Benbasat (2004) studied information technology professionals to

determine the areas of knowledge necessary for building business relationships. They

described the areas of knowledge as business competence. The ability of IT professionals


to build business relationships depends on their interpersonal and management

knowledge and skills. Interpersonal and management knowledge and skills include;

communication skills and leadership skills.

Persuasion and example are the preferred methods for being a servant leader

(Whetstone, 2002). However, the servant leader puts the needs of others before his or her

own needs. A key performance indicator for a successful servant leader growth in the

people served. According to Whetstone (2002) servant leadership is a style in which

moral behavior contributes to success. This can be contrasted to other leadership styles

which emphasize ethical behavior.

Servant leadership methods contrast with traditional styles such as command and

control style of leadership (Ebener & O’Connell, 2010). Servant leaders tend to rely on

deferred power instead of granted authority. It is interesting to note that a Joseph, Ang,

Chang, and Slaughter (2010) study of IT management skills described the soft skills as

Practical Intelligence. Joseph, et al (2010) isolated the soft skills into four categories;

managing tasks, managing career, managing self and managing others. The study

compared novice IT professionals to experienced IT professionals regarding the four

categories of soft skills. Novices compared favorably in three of the four categories.

However, the experienced IT professional demonstrated significantly higher ratings on

the category of managing others.

Joseph et al (p. 5, 2010) report “that work experience, relevant training, and

mechanisms such as mentoring, may offer opportunities for experienced IT professionals

to develop and refine their practical intelligence.” Practical intelligence is important for

IT management and especially the Chief Information Officer (CIO) because the


managing career, managing self and managing others categories imply the necessity of

leadership having a visionary skill. According to an IBM study (2010) CEOs depend on

CIOs for creative leadership. CIOs align their vision with the goals of the organization

and practical intelligence and servant leadership are methods for helping implement

goals.

The Joseph et al (2010) research into managing self, career and others is

compatible with the servant leadership concept of personalism. Personalism views

persons and personal relationships as the starting point of servant leadership (Whetstone,

2002). Precepts of servant leadership and personalism such as employee participation,

community and employees perceived as spiritual beings and worthy of respect are also

present in managing self and managing others.

Servant leadership is in harmony with the basic ideals of personalism (Whetstone,

2002). The servant leader believes that leaders are servants first and seek to treat

subordinates and colleagues with dignity as a spiritual person. But also seek to build a

community of participation and solidarity. Servant leaders are motivated to create value

for the community of which he is a member. Motivating followers requires the strength

and sensitivity of a transforming vision. The servant leader would use techniques such as

developing a vision, encouraging participation, building collaboration, strengthening

others, linking rewards to performance, and celebrating accomplishments.

Keith (2008) identified seven key practices of servant leaders. The first practice is

self-awareness. Servant-leaders are aware of their strengths and weaknesses. By building

on their strengths and accepting their weaknesses, they are ready to build on the strengths

and accept the weaknesses of others. They appreciate the importance of teams and treat


employees as partners and colleagues (Keith, 2008). The second practice identified by

Keith (2008) listening. Servant-leaders identify and meet the needs of others. The first

step in the process of identifying needs is listening. The third practice is changing the

pyramid (Keith 2008). This practice involves changing the traditional hierarchy by

broadening power at the top and getting resources to those at the base of the pyramid who

create and deliver the products, programs and services provided by the organization

(Keith, 2008). The fourth practice is developing your colleagues (Keith, 2008). By

developing their colleagues, servant-leaders improve not only the organization’s

performance today, but far into the future. Keith (2008) states the servant-leader’s legacy

is a strong, vibrant team that is trained and ready to take on any challenge, come what

may. The fifth practice is coaching, is controlling (Keith, 2008). Servant leaders

participate, guide, coach, and facilitate. They lead by identifying new sources of order

and creating positive energy in their relationships (Keith, 2008). The sixth practice is

unleashing the energy and intelligence of others (Keith, 2008). According to Keith

(2008), when servant-leaders teach, mentor, and coach, they focus on unleashing the

energy and intelligence of others. This is often called “empowerment.” The seventh

practice is foresight (Keith, 2008). Leaders hold the future of their colleagues and

customers in their hands. Keith (2008) cited Greenleaf who said the central ethic of

leadership is foresight. Foresight is needed to form the vision and support the momentum

that will make the future a good one for everyone (Keith, 2008).

Methodology

This research study attempts to measure the level at which IS managers are

practicing servant leadership characteristics when managing employees and when dealing


with IS users? One hundred and fifty of IS managers were invited to participate in an on-

line, forty-question Servant-Leadership Questionnaire designed by Homer H. Johnson

(2007). The questionnaire takes the ten characteristics developed by Larry Spears, CEO

of the Greenleaf Center, in response to Robert Greenleaf’s servant-leadership concept and

lists actual behaviors that demonstrate each of them (Johnson, 2007). For each

characteristic, four specific behaviors [questions] are listed (Johnson, 2007). According

to Johnson (2007), Spears’ ten characteristics of a servant-leader are:

1. Listening. To listen rather than just hear what others are saying.

2. Empathy. To understand and empathize with others.

3. Healing. The potential for healing one’s self and one’s relationship to others.

4. Awareness. The ability to see things as they really are.

5. Persuasion. To use persuasion to influence others, rather than authority.

6. Conceptualization. To see things beyond day-to-day concerns.

7. Foresight. To see the likely outcomes of a decision.

8. Stewardship. To commit to serve the needs of the organization and others.

9. Commitment to the growth of people. To commit to the growth of each and

every person on the organization.

10. Building community. To build a sense of community with members of the group

and organization.

These ten characteristics provide a comprehensive summary of the major

principles of servant-leadership (Johnson, 2007).


To measure the level at which IS managers practice servant leadership

characteristics, Johnson’s (2007) original 3-point response scale was modified and

respondents rated themselves on each of the behaviors [questions] using a five-point

response scale ranging from “Strongly Disagree” to “Strongly Agree.”

Johnson (2007) states the four behaviors [questions] are not to be viewed as the

definitive behaviors for each servant-leadership characteristic, but rather as behaviors that

one might engage in if he or she is exhibiting the characteristic. In fact, the respondents

might be encouraged to think about how they would demonstrate the characteristic, using

the questionnaire as a starting point. The purpose of the questionnaire is to assist in

understanding servant-leadership and to reflect on the behaviors of each of the

characteristics (Johnson, 2007). Therefore, this study seeks to understand and generate

discussion about the practice of servant-leadership characteristics among IS managers.

Results

Thirty-four IS managers (22.6%) responded to the forty-question survey. Nine of

the ten characteristics of Servant Leadership had a mean score of 4.13 or higher. The

characteristic of Stewardship had the highest mean score of 4.49. Three of the five

questions [behaviors], (questions 29, 30 and 31), receiving the highest mean scores were

contained in this characteristic. Also, one of the five questions [behaviors], (question 32)

receiving the lowest mean scores was contained in this characteristic. The characteristic

of Persuasion had the lowest mean score of 3.96. Two of the five questions [behaviors],

(questions 18 and 19), receiving the lowest mean scores were contained in this

characteristic. An analysis of the mean % of the strongly agree and agree responses

reveals six of the ten characteristics of Servant Leadership averaged 90% or greater. An


analysis of the mean % of undecided responses reveals four of the ten characteristics of

Servant Leadership had undecided responses averaging between 11% and 13%. The

characteristic of Persuasion had the highest mean % of disagree and strongly disagree

responses at 8%. A complete summary of the ten characteristics of Servant Leadership is

given in Table 1.

Eighty-two percent of the respondents selected either agree or strongly agree to 34

of the 40 questions. One hundred percent of the respondents selected agree and strongly

agree to questions 8, 29, 30, 31 and 33. Ninety-seven percent of the respondents selected

agree and strongly agree to questions 1, 6, 10, 24, 25, and 27. Only sixty-eight percent of

the respondents selected agree and strongly agree to questions 32, “Do you protect the

best interests of your community and the environment?”

Question 31, “Can you be counted on to do the right thing, ethically and

morally?” received the highest mean score 4.76 (SD = 0.43). Table 2 contains the five

highest questions ranked by mean. Question 19, “Do you seek consensus in decision

making?” received the lowest mean score 3.65 (SD = 1.01). Table 3 contains the five

lowest questions ranked by mean.

Discussion

Johnson (2007) suggests using the questionnaire as a starting point and to assist in

understanding servant-leadership and to reflect on the behaviors of each of the

characteristics (Johnson, 2007). A meaningful starting point would be to mirror the

process used with participants in seminars or workshops focused on learning or

understanding leadership characteristics and behaviors. First look at the overall results of

the questionnaire in total. Second, review the ten servant leadership characteristics for


areas of strength and developmental needs. Lastly, review the results at the question

level.

The overall results are extremely positive and would suggest that IS managers

strongly exhibit servant leadership characteristics and behaviors. Table 4 contains the full

results of the survey displaying the forty questions ranked by mean from highest to

lowest.

The servant leadership characteristic of Stewardship received the highest mean

score of 4.49. IS managers could strengthen this characteristic by working on behaviors

related to question 32, working to protect the best interests of their community and the

environment. With a mean of 3.85 (SD = 0.99), twenty-one percent of the respondents

selected undecided and twelve percent selected disagree or strongly disagree in response

to this question.

The servant leadership characteristic of Foresight received the second highest

mean score of 4.38. Foresight is needed to form the vision and support the momentum

that will make the future a good one for everyone (Keith, 2008). Johnson (2007) defines

Foresight as the ability to see the likely outcomes of a decision. IS managers could

strengthen this characteristic by working on behaviors related to question 26, ability to

see the future consequences of current decisions. With a mean of 4.12 (SD = 0.64),

fifteen percent of the respondents selected undecided in response to this question.

The servant leadership characteristic of Empathy received a mean score of 4.20.

IS managers could strengthen this characteristic by working on behaviors related to

question 5, understanding and identifying with the concerns of others. With a mean of


3.97 (SD = 0.87), twelve percent of the respondents selected undecided and six percent

selected disagree or strongly disagree in response to this question.

The servant leadership characteristic of Commit to the Growth of People received

a mean score of 4.19. IS managers could strengthen this characteristic by working on

behaviors related to question 34, assisting others in discovering ways to achieve their

goals. With a mean of 4.00 (SD = 0.74), eighteen percent of the respondents selected

undecided in response to this question.

The servant leadership characteristic of Building Community received the second

lowest mean score of 4.13. IS managers could strengthen this characteristic by working

on behaviors related to question 39, building a sense of community among coworkers and

colleagues. With a mean of 3.91 (SD = 0.93), twenty-one percent of the respondents

selected undecided and six percent selected disagree or strongly disagree in response to

this question.

The servant leadership characteristic of Persuasion received the lowest mean

score of 3.96. IS managers could strengthen this characteristic by working on behaviors

related to questions 18, avoiding forcing opinions on others. With a mean of 3.79 (SD =

0.98), fifteen percent of the respondents selected undecided and twelve percent selected

disagree or strongly disagree in response to this question. IS managers should also

consider question 19, seeking consensus in decision making. With a mean of 3.65 (SD =

1.01), twelve percent of the respondents selected undecided and eighteen percent selected

disagree or strongly disagree in response to this question.

Limitations


Johnson (2007) recommends the Servant-Leadership Questionnaire as a starting

point for assessing servant-leadership behaviors and skills. The questionnaire should not

be considered as a reliable or valid instrument.

Study based solely on quantitative data. No qualitative data to assist with

interpretation of the responses was solicited.

The sample size of 22.6% cannot conclusively establish validity for the study.

Given the positive responses of the participants, the ample size might be sufficient to

initiate a conversation/discussion.

Finally, the research was limited by access to only IS management and no access

to their employees. This limitation did not enable a comparison of management’s servant

leadership practice to how employees believe servant leadership principles are being

practiced. This limitation could be addressed in future research, specifically designed to

compare management and employee servant leadership perceptions.

Future Research

Future research should include a comparison of IS management’s perception of

servant leadership management style versus IS employee’s perception of servant

leadership management style. Many of the practices in servant leadership are commonly

promoted in progressive corporate cultures. However, employees may have a different

understanding of servant leadership than management. Employees may also see the

manager’s management style as not being a servant leadership style.

There may be a reluctance of IS. managers to allow free discussions and surveys

of employees due to potentially negative results from the research. But, two or more case

studies, using qualitative methods, may be possible. The results of the case studies could


be compared and contrasted to help identify the perceptions of management versus

employees.


References

Bailey, J., & Mitchell, R. B. (2006). INDUSTRY PERCEPTIONS OF THE

COMPETENCIES NEEDED BY COMPUTER PROGRAMMERS:

TECHNICAL, BUSINESS, AND SOFT SKILLS. Journal of Computer

Information Systems, 47(2), 28-33. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Barki, H., & Hartwick, J. (2001). INTERPERSONAL CONFLICT AND ITS

MANAGEMENT IN INFORMATION SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT. MIS

Quarterly, 25(2), 195-228. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Bartram, P. (2010). IT professionals need to gain extra skills to climb the corporate

ladder. Computer Weekly, 22-24. Retrieved from EBSCOhost

Bassellier, G., & Benbasat, I. (2004). BUSINESS COMPETENCE OF INFORMATION

TECHNOLOGY PROFESSIONALS: CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT AND

INFLUENCE ON IT-BUSINESS PARTNERSHIPS. MIS Quarterly, 28(4), 673-

694. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Benito, A. & Benito, R. (2006) FACTORS AFFECTING THE OUTCOMES OF

PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS. Journal of Information

Technology Management. 17(2)

Bolton, B. (2005). CONTROL OR LEAD? IT'S YOUR CHOICE. Information Systems

Management, 22(3), 81-82. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Brown, H. G., Scott Poole, M., & RODGERS, T. L. (2004). Interpersonal Traits,

Complementarity, and Trust in Virtual Collaboration. Journal of Management

Information Systems, 20(4), 115-137. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.


N/A (2010) Capitalizing on complexity: Insights from the global chief executive officer

study. IBM Institute for Business Value. Retrieved in November, 2011 from

www.ibm.com/ceostudy.

Celsi, R., & Wolfinbarger, M. (2001). Creating Renaissance Employees in an Era of

Convergence Between Information Technology and Business Strategy: A

Proposal for Business Schools. Journal of Education for Business, 76(6), 308-312.

Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Cummings, J. N. (2004). Work Groups, Structural Diversity, and Knowledge Sharing in a

Global Organization. Management Science, 50(3), 352-364. Retrieved from

EBSCOhost.

Denning, P. J. (2001). Who Are We?. Communications of the ACM, 44(2), 15-19.


Ebener, D. R., & O'Connell, D. J. (2010). How might servant leadership work?.

Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 20(3), 315-335. Retrieved from

EBSCOhost.

GALLAGHER, K. P., KAISER, K. M., SIMON, J. C., BEATH, C. M., & GOLES, T.

(2010). The Requisite Variety of Skills for IT Professionals. Communications of

the ACM, 53(6), 144-148. doi:10.1145/1743546.1743584

Holtham, C., & Courtney, N. (2001). Developing managerial learning styles in the

context of the strategic application of information and communications

technologies. International Journal of Training & Development, 5(1), 23.



Howatson-Jones, I. (2004). The servant leader. Nursing Management - UK, 11(3), 20-24.


Jiang, J. J., Klein, G., Van Slyke, C., & Cheney, P. (2003). A Note on Interpersonal and

Communication Skills for IS Professionals: Evidence of Positive Influence.

Decision Sciences, 34(4), 799-812. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5414.2003.02546.x .

Johnson, H. J., Assessing Your Servant-Leadership Skills, The 2007 Pfeiffer Annual:

Training. Copyright 2007 by John Wiley & sons, Inc. Reproduced by Permission

of Pfeiffer, an Imprint of Wiley. www.pfeiffer.com

Joseph, D., Soon, A., Chang, R. L., & Slughter, S. A. (2010). Practical Intelligence in IT:

Assessing Soft Skills of IT Professionals. Communications of the ACM, 53(2),

149-154. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Keith, K. M. (2008). The Case for Servant Leadership. Greenleaf Center for Servant

Leadership.

Killingsworth, B. L., Hayden, M. B., Crawford, D., & Schellenberger, R. (2001). A

MODEL FOR MOTIVATING AND MEASURING QUALITY

PERFORMANCE IN INFORMATION SYSTEMS STAFF. Information Systems

Management, 18(2), 8. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Lamb, R., & Davidson, E. (2005). Information and Communication Technology

Challenges to Scientific Professional Identity. Information Society, 21(1), 1-24.

doi:10.1080/01972240590895883

Moore, J., & Love, M. (2005). IT PROFESSIONALS AS ORGANIZATIONAL

CITIZENS. Communications of the ACM, 48(6), 88-93. Retrieved from

EBSCOhost

http://www.pfeiffer.com/


Managerial Styles and Management Information Systems for Improving Organizational

Performance, Journal of Positive Management, Vol. 1, No. 1, 2010, pp. 3-10.

Reich, B., & Benbasat, I. (2000). FACTORS THAT INFLUENCE THE SOCIAL

DIMENSION OF ALIGNMENT BETWEEN BUSINESS AND

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY OBJECTIVES. MIS Quarterly, 24(1), 81-113.


Schambach, T., & Blanton, J. (2002). The PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

CHALLENGE for IT Professionals. Communications of the ACM, 45(4), 83-87.


Sendjaya, S., Sarros, J. C., & Santora, J. C. (2008). Defining and Measuring Servant

Leadership Behaviour in Organizations. Journal of Management Studies, 45(2),

402-424. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2007.00761.x

Shifrin, T. (2005). Senior staff need retraining to succeed in changing IT environment,

says Forrester. Computer Weekly, 50. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Stewart, B. A. (2007). IT Testing New Ideas in Managing. Computerworld, 41(47), 26.


Tan, J., & Payton, F.C. (2010) Adaptive Health Management Systems: Concepts, Cases,

& Practical Applications, Third Edition. Jones & Bartlett Learning, Burlington,

MA.

Tarafdar, M., & Sufian, Q. (2010). EXAMINING TACTICAL INFORMATION

TECHNOLOGY -- BUSINESS ALIGNMENT. Journal of Computer Information

Systems, 50(4), 107-116. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.


Thibodeau, P. (2005). BUSINESS UNITY. Computerworld, 39(1), 17-18. Retrieved from

EBSCOhost.

Whetstone, J. T. (2002). Personalism and moral leadership: the servant leader with a

transforming vision. Business Ethics: A European Review, 11(4), 385-392.



Figures and Tables

Table 1: Ten Servant Leadership Characteristics Ranked by Mean

Characteristic Mean Survey Questions

Mean % Strongly

Agree/Agree

Mean % Undecided

Mean % Disagree/Strongly

DisagreeStewardship 4.49 29-32 92 5 3

Foresight 4.38 25-28 92 8 0

Healing 4.26 9-12 90 8 2

Conceptualization 4.25 21-24 88 11 1

Awareness 4.24 13-16 85 13 2

Listening 4.22 1-4 92 4 4

Empathy 4.20 5-8 92 4 4

Commit to the Growth of People

4.19 33-36 90 7 3

Building Community

4.13 37-40 84 12 4

Persuasion 3.96 17-20 81 11 8


Table 2: Five Highest Questions Ranked by Mean

Question Number

Question Servant Leadership

Characteristic

N Mean SD % Strongly Agree/ Agree

% Undecided

% Disagree/Strongly Disagree

31 Can you be counted on to do the right thing, ethically and morally?

Stewardship 34 4.76 0.43 100 0 0

30 Are you committed to work in the best interests of your organization?

Stewardship 34 4.74 0.45 100 0 0

25 Do you use the lessons of the past to provide insight on the future?

Foresight 34 4.62 0.55 97 3 0

29 Can people depend on you? Do you follow through on commitments?

Stewardship 34 4.59 0.50 100 0 0

15 Do you readily share information and knowledge?

Awareness 34 4.53 0.61 94 6 0


Table 3: Five Lowest Questions Ranked by Mean

Question Number

Question Servant Leadership

Characteristic

N Mean SD % Strongly Agree/ Agree

% Undecided

% Disagree/Strongly Disagree

5 Do you understand and identify with the concerns of others?

Empathy 34 3.97 0.87 83 12 6

39 Do you work to build a sense of community among your co-workers and colleagues?

Building Community

34 3.91 0.93 74 21 6

32 Do you work to protect the best interests of your community and the environment?

Stewardship 34 3.85 0.99 68 21 12

18 Do you avoid forcing your opinions on others?

Persuasion 34 3.79 0.98 74 15 12

19 Do you seek consensus in decision making?

Persuasion 34 3.65 1.01 71 12 18

Note. Percentages may not equal 100 due to rounding.


Table 4: Overall Responses to Questions Ranked by Mean Ranked Highest to Lowest

Question N Mean SD % Undecided31 Can you be counted on to do the right thing, ethically and morally? 34 4.76 0.43 1.00 0.00 0.0030 Are you committed to work in the best interests of your organization? 34 4.74 0.45 1.00 0.00 0.0025 Do you use the lessons of the past to provide insight on the future? 34 4.62 0.55 0.97 0.03 0.0029 Can people depend on you? Do you follow through on commitments? 34 4.59 0.50 1.00 0.00 0.0015 Do you readily share information and knowledge? 34 4.53 0.61 0.94 0.06 0.00

24 34 4.47 0.56 0.97 0.03 0.0027 When making decisions, do you think about the long-term effects? 34 4.47 0.56 0.97 0.03 0.008 Do you admit your mistakes and profit by them? 34 4.44 0.50 1.00 0.00 0.0010 Do you assist when people are in need or have problems? 34 4.44 0.56 0.97 0.03 0.001 Do you seek to understand the basis for the opinions of others? 34 4.41 0.78 0.97 0.00 0.036 Do you recognize and acknowledge the efforts of others? 34 4.38 0.78 0.97 0.00 0.0323 Do you take organizational strategy in mind when making current decisions? 34 4.32 0.68 0.94 0.03 0.0333 Do you take a personal interest in the development of your co-workers? 34 4.32 0.47 1.00 0.00 0.00

37 Do you practice inclusion—making everyone feel part of the group or organization? 34 4.32 0.64 0.91 0.09 0.0012 Do others see you as a “helping” person? 34 4.29 0.76 0.82 0.18 0.0013 Do you have a good understanding of your strengths and weaknesses? 34 4.29 0.76 0.82 0.18 0.00

28 34 4.29 0.68 0.88 0.12 0.0035 Do you involve co-workers in the important decisions of your group or unit? 34 4.26 0.83 0.91 0.06 0.033 Do you ask questions to get everyone’s ideas? 34 4.24 0.82 0.91 0.06 0.039 Do you show an active concern for the welfare of others? 34 4.21 0.69 0.91 0.06 0.0317 Do you seek to convince others, rather than coerce? 34 4.21 0.88 0.85 0.12 0.0320 Do you insist on making decisions by fact and reason? 34 4.21 0.54 0.94 0.06 0.00

36 33 4.18 0.77 0.91 0.03 0.062 Do you take care to make sure everyone is heard? 34 4.18 0.80 0.91 0.06 0.0338 Do you work to pull people together to pursue a common goal? 34 4.15 0.89 0.82 0.15 0.03

40 34 4.15 0.89 0.88 0.06 0.0614 Do you provide honest and constructive feedback to others? 34 4.12 0.69 0.82 0.18 0.0021 Do you provide a vision or direction for your organization or group? 34 4.12 0.69 0.82 0.18 0.0026 Are you able to see the future consequences of current decisions? 34 4.12 0.64 0.85 0.15 0.0011 Do you help people resolve conflicts? 34 4.09 0.75 0.88 0.06 0.0622 Can you anticipate future consequences and trends accurately? 34 4.09 0.71 0.79 0.21 0.004 Do you summarize and reflect back the ideas of others? 34 4.06 0.85 0.88 0.06 0.06

16 34 4.03 0.87 0.82 0.09 0.097 Do you allow co-workers to experiment and take risks? 34 4.00 0.89 0.88 0.03 0.0934 Do you assist others in discovering ways to achieve their goals? 34 4.00 0.74 0.79 0.18 0.035 Do you understand and identify with the concerns of others? 34 3.97 0.87 0.82 0.12 0.06

39 Do you work to build a sense of community among your co-workers and colleagues? 34 3.91 0.93 0.74 0.21 0.06

32 Do you work to protect the best interests of your community and the environment? 34 3.85 0.99 0.68 0.21 0.12

Question Number

% Strongly Agree/Agree

% Disagree/St

rongly Disagree

Do you see problems or issues in the broader context of what’s best for the organization?

Do people see you as a good decision maker—one who understands the complexity of the situation?

Do you make resources available, including assignments and educational materials, to assist others to achieve their goals?

Do you view each member of the group or organization as a valued and important contributor?

Do you have a clear understanding as to the effectiveness of your group or organization, and are you honest about it?

Note. Percentages may not equal 100 due to rounding.

Date post:	06-Mar-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	dinhngoc
View:	213 times
Download:	1 times

Technical Problem Solving: A Practical approach to an old …pages.uindy.edu/~dbowman/The...

Documents