Effective Leadership Practices, Part 3

 Intermittently over the past several weeks, we have been looking at effective leadership practices as outlined by Kent M. Keith in The Case for Servant Leadership.  Key practices have been self-awareness and listening, changing the pyramid and developing your colleagues, and this week we’ll explore coaching (not controlling) and unleashing the energy and intelligence of others.

Servant leadership espoused a coaching approach to working with others long before it became popular.  The idea behind this tenet, as Keith (2008) notes, is that no one really controls anyone else.  As leaders we can motivate and inspire, we can remove barriers to self-direction, and on the negative side we can compel compliance by exerting threats or pleas, but ultimately people choose their own actions.  A leader who thinks she truly controls her team is delusional. If you’ve ever ridden a horse, you understand that the horse is much more powerful than the rider and the rider is only directing the horse because the horse chooses to be cooperative.  Leading a team is much the same. 

Displays of power and authority can get people to act, but they often produce the appearance of compliance and inspire large amounts of defiance instead.  Servant leaders coach.  They teach, they mentor, and they facilitate.  They understand that everything they do is done via relationships with those who are closer to the customer, the client, or the public that is served by the organization.  So, as Keith (2008, p. 48) states, “The issue for the servant-leader is not how to control others, but how to build strong, positive relationships with others.”  That is coaching, not controlling.

One of the ways they do that is the second effective leadership practice we will discuss today: unleashing the energy and intelligence of others.  Servant leaders remove the barriers to self-efficacy for others, allowing them to tap into their own internal motivation.  They also identify and grow the talents of their colleagues, they include their team members in decisions and major activities, like goal setting and evaluation, and they coach them along the way. 

This does not mean that they abdicate the responsibility to hold others accountable, or let a dysfunctional colleague dominate or alienate the team.  Servant leaders hold themselves responsible to the needs of their team colleagues, but they also work in service of the needs and goals of the organization.  When an individual hijacks that process through noncooperation or toxic behavior, the servant leader, like other types of leaders, takes remedial action to correct the situation, or terminates the employment if no other remedy works.  The servant leader does not allow one person’s dysfunctional choices to corrupt the development and work of others.

Through these methods – coaching and unleashing the energy and intelligence of others – the effective leader can leverage the talents and abilities of his team, fully engaging his colleagues to choose to do their best.

Cited:

Keith, K. M. (2008). The case for servant leadership. Westfield, IN:  The Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership.

Effective Leadership Practices, Part 2

During the past several weeks, we’ve been exploring servant leadership, a leadership philosophy whose fundamental basis is leaving a team or group better than you found them.  This week, we will continue our deeper dive into what servant leadership looks like by outlining two more key practices, as defined by Kent M. Keith (2008) in The Case of Servant Leadership.  (See this post for a discussion of the first two key practices.)

The third key practice is changing the pyramid. Robert Greenleaf founded servant leadership and he believed that the typical management hierarchy – usually communicated as a pyramid – was detrimental to the leader at the top of it.  Over many years of working at AT&T and consulting with other organizations, he came to understand the effects of power, namely its tendency to corrupt.  Some have called this “power poisoning” and it has been established in many studies.  He noted that most leaders aren’t genuinely questioned or even communicated with honestly, leading to information that is inaccurate and an inflated belief in their own effectiveness.  Greenleaf believed that the pyramid should be expanded at the top to accommodate more peers in the leadership role, to prevent the corrupting influence of isolation and “happy talk” from subordinates.  He believed that leaders should function as a “first among equals” in order to obtain more honest feedback and appropriate challenges to their ideas and functions.  The leader’s role within this idea is to listen, to set the vision and mission of the organization, then step back into the group structure to facilitate solutions and ideas. 

Keith (2008) notes the examples of faculty governance in higher education – in which faculty elect one of their own to head a department who then governs (typically) with a very light hand.  He also cites a company, The Schneider Corporation, that has created a “Primus Council” based on this servant leadership principle.  This group is composed of members from various parts of the company and “focuses on strategic planning and vision, furthering the company’s culture, the growth and development of the entire staff, and major organizational policies” (p. 41).  The Schneider Corporation has seen significant growth since adopting the servant leadership philosophy and practices.

The fourth key practice is developing your colleagues.  If you’ve read other parts of this series, you’ve read the basic tenet of servant leadership, as outlined by Robert Greenleaf:  “The best test, and difficult to administer is: do those served grow as persons?  Do they, while being served, become healthier, wiser, freer, more autonomous, more likely themselves to become servants?” (2008, p. 15).  Greenleaf’s quote gets to the heart of this practice, which is about whether you help your team improve and help them to become better people and professionals.  This practice does not mean that you take your eye off the goals of your organization or that you focus on improving your team to the exclusion of accomplishing things.  It’s about understanding that the investment you put into helping your team improve, whether it’s their ethics, their skills, or their interpersonal functioning, pays huge dividends as those colleagues improve their work and become more effective.  This has direct benefits to an organization in both the short- and long-terms.  A developmental approach improves work on a day-to-day basis and also improves loyalty and cohesiveness, which benefits the larger organization in the long-term.

What do you think about these leadership practices?  What benefits to this approach do you have and what concerns you about it?

Cited:

Keith, K. M. (2008). The case for servant leadership. Westfield, IN:  The Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership.

Greenleaf, R. K. (2008).  The servant as leader. Westfield, IN:  The Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership.

Effective Leadership Practices, Part 1

For the past several weeks, we’ve been exploring servant leadership, a style of leadership that turns many aspects of traditional, “command and control” leadership on their heads.  Any time you discover a new leadership style or model, you probably want to know more about what the model looks like in action, so for the next three weeks, I’ll be taking servant leadership closer to ground level.  I’ll be summarizing the essential practices of servant leaders, as described by Kent M. Keith, in The Case for Servant Leadership. 

The first two key leadership practices Keith describes are self-awareness and listening.  It’s not a coincidence that self-awareness is the first practice because, in the “physician, heal thyself” tradition, change begins with us.  Self-awareness is the “mother skill” because it allows the development of the other skills.  If you aren’t aware of your strengths and growth opportunities, how can you turn the latter into the former?  How can you make your strengths even better?  You can’t. 

Further, self-awareness is important because robust teams – the outcome of good leadership – can’t be formed by a leader who doesn’t understand her impact.  Leaders in a group have enormous influence.  Keith and others describe the many studies that demonstrate that people’s behavior changes around a leader.  They literally look to the leader, either consciously or unconsciously, for his reaction and often mirror it.  Leaders set the tone.

A friend’s father understood this and had a nice way of teaching it.  He managed a plant for many years and he was well known for his positive style.  When speaking about the importance of self-awareness, he put it succinctly: “Leaders don’t have the luxury of bad moods.”  He recognized that those in leadership positions have many perks – such as the power to set the tone as just described – but there were many corollary responsibilities as well and one of those is refraining from taking out a bad mood on a team or infecting them with one.  In other words, a leader’s enthusiastic, motivated mood catches on, as does a negative, uncooperative mood.  Yes, we all have our Debbie Downer days, but leaders must find a way to deal with theirs privately lest they infect their teams with their bad moods.

The second essential practice of servant leadership is listening.  Many leadership experts extol the power of listening as a leadership skill and there are numerous ways to improve your listening skills.  Entire books have been written about this topic, so we’ll dive deeper into this skill at a later time.  But for now, it’s important to know that Robert Greenleaf, the father of servant leadership, said, “Only a natural servant automatically responds to any problem by listening first” (2008, p. 18). Stephen Covey understood the necessity of listening to the extent that he made it one of his seven habits:  Seek first to understand, then to be understood.  Keith (2008, p. 38) sums it up well:  “The main point is this: Servant-leaders don’t begin with the answer, the program, the product, the procedure, the facility.  They don’t begin with their own knowledge or expertise.  They begin with questions that will help identify the needs of others.”  (Those “others” also include the needs of the organization.)    

Self-awareness and listening are foundational practices of effective leadership.  The good news is that you can start immediately. What can you do this week to notice your effect on others and listen better?

Cited:

Keith, K. M. (2008). The case for servant leadership. Westfield, IN:  The Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership.

Greenleaf, R. K. (2008).  The servant as leader. Westfield, IN:  The Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership.

C’mon, All the Cool Kids are Doing It: What Other Leaders Say About Servant Leadership

For the past several weeks, I’ve been posting about servant leadership.  Servant leadership contrasts pretty significantly from some of the more traditional ways people view leadership.  But even though many people are turned off by the power-hungry practices of many old school leaders, servant leadership can feel unfamiliar.  Sometimes something that’s different can feel strange and you can hesitate about learning more about it.  If that’s you, would you be interested in knowing what other famous leaders say about servant leadership?

Stephen Covey was a fan.  Mr. Covey, as you know, was famous for espousing character-based leadership, which he described in his book, Seven Habits of Highly Effective People, and many other publications over the years.  He said, “Of all these fundamental, timeless principles [which he says “have governed, and always will govern, all enduring successes”] is the idea of servant leadership, and I am convinced that it will continue to dramatically increase in its relevance….” (Covey, as cited in Keith, 2008, pp. 32-33).

Not a Covey disciple?  Well, how about Peter Drucker?  You know, the guy who is, in many ways, the father of modern management theory?  According to Keith (2008, p. 33), Drucker “described the effective executive as someone who is focused on contribution and focused on others – a good definition of servant leadership in business.” 

But wait!  There’s more!  Jim Collins, the author of Good to Great, describes various levels of leaders, with the higher levels corresponding to better leaders.  The highest level – Level 5 – leaders, “channel their ego needs away from themselves and into the larger goal of building a great company.  It is not that Level 5 leaders have no ego or self-interest.  Indeed, they are incredibly ambitious – but their ambition is first and foremost for the institution, not themselves” (as cited in Keith, 2008, p. 33).

Surely by now you’re convinced that servant leadership is awesome, right?  If you’re a Peter Senge fan -- and if you’re not, get thee to a library, read The Fifth Discipline, and become one, stat -- you’ll be glad to know he’s a servant leadership proponent: “I believe that the book Servant Leadership, and in particular the essay, “The Servant as Leader,” which starts the book off, is the most singular and useful statement on leadership that I have read in the last 20 years…if you are really serious about the deeper territory of true leadership…read Greenleaf” (Senge, as cited in Keith, 2008, p. 34).

You may be saying, “Yes, but what about real organizations?  How does all this work in the real world and why should I learn more about it?”  OK, I hear you.  The Fortune Magazine 100 Best Companies to Work For list contains several companies among its ranks that have initiated servant leadership principles and are highly successful.  They include “TDIndustries, Southwest Airlines, Synovus Financial Corporation, The Container Store, and AFLAC” (Keith, 2008, p. 35).  The Chronicle of Higher Education’s Great Colleges to Work For listing similarly contains many institutions that have adopted servant leadership principles and practices.

Not only do well-respected leadership experts agree that servant leadership is the way to go, but the success of many organizations prove it.  So…what are you waiting for?  You in?

Cited: Keith, K. M. (2008). The case for servant leadership. Westfield, IN:  The Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership.

Mr. Burns, Gordon Gekko, and Other Power-Oriented Leaders, or Power Is a Means Not an End

Power is critical to leadership, but very often leaders (and those who follow them) misunderstand it.  The traditional view of leadership is often Machiavellian, meaning it’s about getting and maintaining power in a zero-sum world where one person’s increase in power is another person’s deficit.  This model lacks an ethical center and success is defined only in terms of who has the most power, regardless of the process used to get it.  Power is an end, in and of itself.  Those who enact this philosophy typically leave casualties in the wake of their climb to the top of the power pyramid, creating a sea of animosity, which they often mistake for envy.  Often the power-oriented leader is ultimately dissatisfied.  In that world, there is never enough power to go around, they must constantly guard against other power-grabbers (which is exhausting), and many are left at the end of a career or life surrounded by those who are interested in them only to the extent that they can offer a transactional power benefit. 

Many people see these types of games play out and, unwilling to make the ethical sacrifices to grab power (and afraid of becoming a real-life Mr. Burns), they end up opting out, believing that leadership isn’t for them.  Servant leadership and similar leadership philosophies offer an antidote.  Servant leadership defines success not in terms of who has the most of anything, power included, but who accomplishes the most through helping others to grow beyond expectations.  Kent Keith says “Power-oriented leaders want to make people do things. Servant-leaders want to help people do things” (Keith, 2008, p. 29).  Servant leadership offers an alternative to the Gordon Gekko-style, “me-first” pursuit of power often offered by the traditional power model of leadership. It offers a way to accomplish a great deal for organizations and individuals while maintaining ethics and building skills in self and others.

It’s important to avoid any false dichotomies when considering the power and servant leadership models.  It’s not a matter of choosing to have power or not have power and servant leaders do not ignore or eschew power.  Servant leaders understand power (including its dangers), recognizing it as a valuable tool that can be used to shape outcomes and create value for others.  Servant leaders do not worship power nor do they see power as an end in a winner-take-all game.    Servant leaders use the influence of power to gather the right people and get the best outcomes for the clients, customers, students, and organizations they serve and for their team members.  Servant leaders work from an abundance mentality, empowering others to reach their full potential, with the understanding that power takes many forms and can be obtained by all.

Citation:

Keith, K. M. (2008). The case for servant leadership. Westfield, IN:  The Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership.

Power Poisoning and the Servant Leadership Remedy

"Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power."

~~Abraham Lincoln

An understanding of power is central to all leadership.  In fact, you could even say that power  -- its nature and its uses – is almost synonymous with leadership.  Everyone has been on the receiving end of power and has at least some understanding of the effects of power on teams.  But most leaders have little understanding of the effects of power on them.  Understanding the effect of power is critical to avoiding some of the pitfalls associated with it.

Several researchers, including Robert Sutton, have investigated the effects of power on leaders and have reached some pretty interesting conclusions, which have been confirmed in literally hundreds of studies.  To keep this post brief, I’ll summarize them.  You can find out more by looking at the links below.

The effects of power can be summarized by the word “disinhibition.”  Basically, power acts on us to lower inhibitions, much like alcohol.  Specifically, those with power become, over time:·     

• Overly confident, often misjudging the potential dangers in a situation and refusing to take advice;
• Oblivious to what others think;
• More focused on themselves and pursuing their own wants;
• More likely to believe “the rules” apply to others but not to them;
• Less able to accurately judge how others react to them;
• More likely to stereotype others;
• More likely to engage in risky behavior. 

This understanding of the pitfalls of power is not new.  Lord Acton, a 19^th century English historian and baron, is famous for summarizing it:  “Power corrupts.  Absolute power corrupts absolutely.”  The modern term for this is “power poisoning.”

Power is an unavoidable part of leadership, but how should we guard against this subtle but almost inevitable transformation?  One way is to adopt a leadership philosophy that teaches specific skills that prevent this de-evolution and encourages an overall viewpoint that remedies the ego inflation of power.  Servant leadership does just that.  In coming weeks, we will be learning the critical practices of servant leadership, which counter the disinhibiting and corrosive effects of power.

For more information: 

“Power is Not Only an Aphrodisiac, It Does Some Weird Things to Some of Us” by Vicki Haddock 

“It Isn’t Just a Myth, Power Turns People Into Assholes,” by Bob Sutton

“The Detrimental Effects of Power on Confidence, Advice Taking, and Accuracy,” by Kelly E. See, Elizabeth W. Morrison, Naomi B. Rothman, and Jack B. Soll

What Do We Mean by “Servant” Leader?

When first hearing about servant leadership, many people don’t think twice about the use of the term “servant,” but others trip over the word a bit.  The word “servant” connotes to some subservience, passivity, or a lack of freedom and free thinking.  Additionally, many populations – women, African Americans, and so on – have historically been forced into servitude with no options for escape.  This leads some to respond negatively to the word “servant” in servant leadership. 

The word “servant” was chosen intentionally by the founder, Robert Greenleaf, to communicate the service orientation of his leadership model.  He worked on the model for decades, beginning his journey in the mid-twentieth century, when understanding of the experiences of oppressed populations wasn’t as common and when the word “servant” wasn’t laden with as much association with those additional layers of meaning.  Greenleaf intends servant leadership to be a choice and an orientation, meaning the servant leader puts the needs of her team as equal to her own and generally sees that choice as a moral one.  Another way of saying this is that servant leadership is a “people first” model, as opposed to an “ego first” or “power first” way of leading.  The term “servant” is balanced with the term “leadership,” so servant leaders are not servile as some connotations of the word “servant” would indicate.  They facilitate growth in others but they do lead, they do make hard decisions, and they do value the organization for which they work but they chose to serve others in the process.  

Make it Better: An Introduction to Servant Leadership

All of us have encountered leaders of varying types in our lives.  Think back to those people who have had the most positive influence on you.  Did you have a teacher who told you were smart or a good writer?  Was it a Scout or clergy leader who encouraged you?  Maybe a supervisor showed you what working with integrity meant?  Chances are that the person who had the most positive impact on you was a servant leader, a person who believed in you and placed your development as a higher priority than their own need for power. 

While some of the basic concepts of servant leadership have existed for millennia, Robert K. Greenleaf is the person credited with consolidating and developing the idea in the modern era.  Greenleaf worked for AT&T and he was charged with creating training and development opportunities for their staff.  In doing so, he began to question the traditional authoritarian power model of leadership and he set out to create an alternative.  Through years of voraciously exploring ideas, cultures, and beliefs, he formulated servant leadership.

When we hear the word “leader,” most of us think of positional leaders – those who lead by virtue of their title and role within an organization – but leaders exist in many places beyond those in positions of power.  Greenleaf, in The Servant as Leader (page 15), define this style of leadership in this way:

“[Servant leadership] begins with the natural feeling that one wants to serve first.  Then conscious choice brings one to aspire to lead.  That person is sharply different from one who is leader first, perhaps because of the need to assuage an unusual power drive or to acquire material possessions….the best test, and difficult to administer, is: Do those served grow as persons?  Do they, while being served, become healthier, wiser, freer, more autonomous, more likely themselves to become servants?  And, what is the effect on the least privileged in society?  Will they benefit or at least not be further deprived?”

This desire to have a positive impact, to help make people and situations better because you were there, is the heart of servant leadership and it is what we will be exploring over the coming weeks. Future topics include the use of the word “servant,” a primer on the power model that contrasts with servant leadership, and critical practices of servant leaders. I hope you will read each post and ask any questions or make observations along the way.