Servant Leadership for Schools

The importance of a healthy K–12 education system cannot be overstated. In today’s world it is a prerequisite to social justice, democratic community, a thriving economy, and a flourishing society. Likewise, the importance of the school principal (Louis & Murphy, 2018; Smylie et al., 2020), for it is the principal who is most responsible for establishing the vision and overall ethos of the school (Bier et al., in press). Being the principal of a school is not only a critically important role, it is also an incredible rewarding position to hold. In a 2007 national poll by the University of Chicago, school administrators ranked in the top five of the most satisfying ways people make a living. In 2015 a survey of 25,000 users of the CareerBliss website School Principals were in first in rating their overall job satisfaction (Costa, 2015).Unfortunately, as personally and professionally fulfilling as working in schools can be, retention of both principals and teachers is a serious and growing problem for school districts across the United States, although it is most intense for those serving the poorest and lowest performing students (Hanushek et al., 2016; School Leaders Network, 2014).According to the Alliance for Excellent Education (2014), 23% of principals and 16% of teachers do not return to their placements from one school year to the next at a cost of nearly $3 billion per year. An often-cited Gallup poll reported that 7 out of 10 schoolteachers said they feel emotionally disconnected and/or dissatisfied with their workplace environments. In fact, of the surveyed professionals, teachers were least likely to feel their opinions counted at work, and the least likely to feel that their supervisor created an “open and trusting environment.” These findings are consistent with more than a decade of research on teacher turnover and retention in which the most often cited reason for teacher dissatisfaction was lack of administrator support (Boyd et al., 2011; Burkhauser, 2017; Zumwalt & Craig, 2005). These teachers reported a desire to have principals more actively engaged in mentoring but found a lack of support for their development and growth as professionals (Clifford et al., 2012; Johnson et al., 2012; Kraft et al., 2016; Rockoff, 2008). It seems that the oft-quoted business saying that “people don’t quit jobs, they quit their bosses” may hold true in education as well—teacher’s do not quit their schools they quit their administrators. There is a nationally recognized need for new approaches to school leadership to meet the current needs of our schools and students (Cherkowski & Walker, 2016; Levin et al., 2019; Murphy, 2002; Snodgrass, 2018). Many have recognized the need for new more supportive approaches to the leadership of schools if schools are to meet the many challenges of the 21st century (Hargreaves 2003; Walker & Sackney, 2007). This article argues that teachers, their students, and the institution of K–12 education, would be better served by principals educated and skilled in the practices of servant-leadership (SL)—a leadership philosophy that prioritizes ethical decision making, the building of community and the optimal development of all involved.After reviewing what amounted to the first 50 years of leadership literature, Fiedler and House (1988) concluded that the two major categories of leader behavior are task-accomplishment and interpersonal relationships. This is consistent with earlier research establishing leadership behaviors as those oriented toward employee consideration and task-focused initiating structure (Fleishman, 1953), and more recent scholarship indicating that the three salient components of effective leadership are those focused on people, tasks, and organizational change (Yukl & Mahsud, 2010). A variety of theories have emerged in the leadership literature (Dinh et al., 2014), but few of them encompass these three foci, with most instead emphasizing the performance dimension. For instance, the predominant leadership theory in both the business and educational literature for the past twenty years has been transformational leadership (Lee, 2014; Lowe & Gardner, 2001). This approach focuses on organizational tasks and change while lacking commitment to the well-being of people within the organization or stakeholders beyond the organization (Bass, 1997; Carlson & Perrewe, 1995; Stephens et al., cited in Yukl, 1999).In fact, a major criticism of transformational leadership theory is that it lacks a moral imperative (Huizanga, 2016; Schneider & George, 2011). While incorporating modern organizational concepts of worker autonomy, shared leadership, consensus and participative decision making, the theory emphasizes a leader’s prioritization of organizational goals, such as increasing shareholder profit for corporations, crime elimination in law enforcement, or increasing academic achievement in schools. Thus transformational leadership allows, if not encourages, the manipulation and exploitation of internal as well as external resources, including people and communities, in the service of achieving these goals. Beyond this criticism, this theory has recently been questioned for its theoretical basis and methodological validity (Van Knippenberg & Sitkin, 2013). These issues, combined with a recognized need for leadership to be more concerned with the good of the broader society (Nohria & Khurana, 2010), has led leadership scholars to search for alternative paradigms that might better meet the needs of modern society as it seeks to ameliorate the causes and consequences of globalization, social injustice, environmental degradation, and poverty.It has become abundantly clear that injustice—in the form of differential opportunity for males and females and systems of racially biased exclusion from power and resources—is entrenched in the structure and policies of our society. Additionally, these historical and unjust dynamics are commonly reflected in the goals and processes of our organizations, including private business, public education, and governmental entities. A commitment to social justice, therefore, requires a willingness to do things differently in how one conceptualizes the mission of an organization, how processes are crafted with an eye to consequences, and how administrators relate to employees, those served by the organization, and the larger community. I submit that servant leadership (SL) is the only widely explicated leadership style that holds leaders to a social justice perspective of equity, inclusion, empowerment, and community health, while including all the progressive structures that have made transformational leadership popular and effective.Although the concept of servant leadership is ancient, having been expressed by every major religion since 570 B.C.E., the term servant-leader as a specific leadership style is credited to Robert Greenleaf, a retired AT&T executive (Frick, 2013; Spears, 2005). Greenleaf articulated his conception of servant-leaders and servant-institutions in a series of essays: The Servant as Leader (1970), Institution as Servant (Greenleaf, 1976) and Servant-Leadership (1977).Greenleaf conceptualized servant-leadership as a virtue-based philosophy and style of leadership in which leaders focus on relationships and persuasion rather than command and control. Greenleaf centered the moral authority, rather than the positional authority, of the individual as the only legitimate justification for leadership (Lanctot & Irving, 2007; McMahone, 2012; Page & Wong, 2000; Poon, 2006):Since the publication of Greenleaf’s essays servant-leadership has been practiced in innovative and successful corporate settings including Southwest Airlines, Marriott International, and Starbucks.The servant-leader seeks what will bring about the highest good for the people in the community, and pursues that good in the face of obstacles, not for personal reward, but for the growth and well-being of the members of the community:Servant-leaders take a holistic approach to work and see themselves as stewards of the people and the resources entrusted to them (Van Dierendonck, 2011).Servant-leaders concern themselves with organizational performance metrics, not just for the sake of success, but also because a failing organization cannot serve. Having risen from pole digger to director of management development in what was, at the time, the largest corporation in the world, Robert Greenleaf had an in how things in philosophy of leadership that in the organization can be a servant leadership is on an of emphasizing the of and (Van & and behaviors such as and a focus on the good of the community et al., at the of the organization by building by to needs and in their and by that the and most serving have not been (Greenleaf, et al., 2014; Dierendonck, has emerged as the most and of of its on employee and organizational performance have been et al., et al., 2014; et al., theories of leadership have been such as ethical leadership et al., and leadership only servant-leadership a holistic on people, and the good of our broader society can be as a form of leadership which prioritizes the of and the of to internal and its is by its prioritization of employee and both servant-leadership and its broader focus have been to be more to more et al., et al., with its moral and commitment to and the good of the broader society is the leadership philosophy most consistent with the of school and development at the for and in which the work is is also consistent with the research literature on practices of effective school principals et al., 2005). This research found that principals have a but on achievement and well-being as it is the on teachers and school (Clifford et al., school leadership and business management research findings a consensus that the leaders vision and across the and organization of both organizational commitment and et al., 2007 the concept is ancient, and the business term servant-leadership is more than years serious academic scholarship and on is have to and of they have the specific and and them in and The servant-leadership articulated is from and of that a leader’s of of and in leadership practices of empowerment, and These and behaviors personal of community, and organizational theory of change that and their practices can be This and that will and and school leaders to form the to of the to servant-leadership is reflected in the to the School principals their as teachers for and people a in for moral & 2018). A recent of people found the years 2007 and across these the found that and were the most commonly an decision to become a teacher & 2018). as a service to the desire to and support students, and to make a by to society. a for and in the or in personal as well as a desire to work with or Many teachers to and made their to while in their & a of the research on et have the and of These relationships and and behaviors and for and The findings that on of and The of servant-leaders reported commitment to their and of job more organizational job turnover and et al., 2011; & 2013; Dierendonck, These also found relationships servant-leadership and organizational organizational performance and of justice et al., recent have a and personal and for et found servant-leader and and of personal and and more recently both found support for a of servant-leadership in This by which a leader in his or and it to and the world is with the in the For a of the years is commonly recognized to be a virtue-based but scholars have conceptualized differently the most In our requires and While of these is in it is more important to the ways in which these and work to form a For to need the to and to need the to the have from In the I of the in our servant leadership and the that in the of a school A of to the goals about which is and to which they are & 2010). A of is and and cannot be by although can one and their of and is to be a that people and them challenges and research that people with a of are as well as and A this of a to by that the not only be to but that it also A a to make a in the world Having a personal that the needs of is at the of servant In his The Servant as Robert Greenleaf in leadership, servant-leader is servant It with the that one to to one to to Greenleaf the of servant-leaders to be the ethical of the organization and all its including the of the larger community. This was the of his The Institution as Servant Greenleaf the leadership of as a moral This is true of school leadership, which most people with it a moral imperative to schools. to the of School schools school leader’s is to their commitment and their personal and of their goals, and their holistic It is that educational leaders take the to and on how the work they do their personal of and their vision for the with Many and have and that can be to of the & for 2014), and the components of the for educational leader development the people most and and the in past that to and them to the three to five that are most to and & These are to one although it is important to that and is an that requires In fact, school principal and that school principals themselves if their is all that they and this because as the of what are about as a school leader and will leaders to focused on the school vision as to their to and out a servant leader of a school the requires more than and on their individual also a of all those in the school community. was to have our out and is by a from of has to with of those who have the within school leader is in the position to be that for Leaders can and for to and make their personal and their in the school leaders that can see the of their individual with the shared vision and mission of the in a often to people with their in can a of and resources to the of and stakeholders such as teachers and the and Additionally, can for students to their at The term from the or This may for of as with and from that to the of in the of having a perspective 2018). requires such that one has the to and or said is not a of of it is a of about the of was The as a a moral to have a perspective on themselves et al., The the highest the of them requires a leader to and the and of of or by from in leaders is with and is the that leaders to our all to become and of these are to be of one to a leaders to be good by them to be to the of and the of than their a to the and of to be a & as a or of and et argues that a personal and a of requires that an to not only but to from and new 2002; 2011). This of is with that consequences, and of that can be Robert Greenleaf the to can performance more decision making, empowerment, and employee et al., to leaders how to to a of growth & growth may power with which requires on the of the leader to that their and are not the only In leaders by actively out and to the perspective of all those with of are important for school and The of the servant-leader requires that all people in the organization have legitimate at more and/or than requires that that are to and in For that both and are for educational leaders to beyond their and their biased and the of is to servant leadership in schools and that leadership of and persuasion be as well as or may be as and The need to a of first may be for new school leaders who with This leaders of and leaders in in as requires and of the but it is an in leadership, and in servant Leaders have the to and and the to is by modern and and people as a to be et al., While its have been as as and & that would it to be the of the This was by the modern and who this article will as three is a it or to the and it is by the desire to bring about a it is important for to that a is not a that can be across Greenleaf as an important that the servant-leader from the organizational is about of working behaviors and as it is for and In an organizational to take and new approaches to (Greenleaf, with the Additionally, of to ethical in an organization often requires to do the as is not individual or it for principals to their and that of teachers, for in in 2018). Having and personally take and if the is about the in to students and/or their the may a leader’s as well servant-leadership requires including the broader society beyond the organization, will be to true to the mission in the face of In for School as having the servant-leadership to the can to that them to in one or more of The internal that behavior or and et al., 2007; While is not a are a of that that in the of in (Costa, in with conception of Additionally, that as a in the past as to about that make more likely in the (Boyd & et al., 2007). and found that of in the workplace feel to in their of that the students are & it is a school leader’s to and a school that by all the to feel by they have said or or been by or they made & Dierendonck, 2010). has been to be an for social such as including & 2018). is one of the interpersonal moral an of the to professionally and that all people the or to be and/or to be the to is to building and healthy relationships. on the most of the need to the or that have our or that they have the for past these in which the they are and the and A and & is reported to be by to to the and in a the who for their and who the perspective of their to specific more than do people who do not or in The and of the is also are more to one for if their is by and the that 2008). the ways a a as of a of the of the that the is working and the to which the they can feel in the this is These of in A as well as et al., in and for the and & has that who on of to have better and satisfaction and & have such as and and to and et al., are better at relationships with have social and more and commitment & et al., et is the a desire to the their or and for the of their such as the to may be most important this of is It is important to that and its do not have to to the the of social or consequences, a with the This is and the or by the decision to in the internal of of and of to the This requires to the that the of et It is also important to that is a that and as well as having a of to leaders need to be that is for an of for of may be to a school In to establishing a school leaders need to can do all the time, and leaders for their as well as the of For servant-leaders it is important to a people feel are to take make and that they will not be can this of by initiating and organizational systems and resources such as practices that are with et al., justice and oriented approaches focus on the of to and many including in the school to with and the of students et al., 2005). of practices that can for and need to be & Spears, people within an organization in an will and the leader this and this et al., and an to leadership that in a and et al., a of for and of the good things one or has & is and to and et as an that about a good has to them and they that has it et that is a moral and of has for the to be emotionally but and with their et There is that an of is to a of well-being and et 2003; & 2003; et al., social and relationships Additionally, a of in behavior et al., research that with and personal growth & 2011). requires to be such as better to of things for and how practices of employee and to members of the organization more their schools and feel and while a of and of will support and a of of in relationships can of and of to the a school to for community members its of is an of servant-leadership (Van Dierendonck, as they take an in the growth and well-being of in the Greenleaf said that and service are what the in personal growth in those therefore, can be of as a concept focused on people and personal development The in the of individual is the in it is all about and the of to (Greenleaf, to educational in a school a of a that are all in this and that leadership has at be a leader who well requires the development of a of For to requires their and as This is that leadership them they on their and what they have to the organization, and mentoring and support to them they need it et al., an educational leader to it may also that leader to a that become to their conception of and of is important for and Greenleaf servant-leaders their to This is for the organization because needs to to the and most members are with Greenleaf and as the servant-leader the from the the of the and the likely of a decision for the The to at a problem or an organization from this perspective that a servant-leader beyond and goals to the they to which Greenleaf within the argues that leaders their power of to see and for the Additionally, out that the to is what not and that need to for and This is important with to social justice is not the is not can are for that were to the work of teachers or students that was to do things to make those more likely and was Robert Greenleaf’s term for the and stakeholders feel in their in for the good of society. leadership a leader in a a shared in that the of has a of leadership, that to the they and leaders have their of that the servant-leader not but focused on achieving organizational within the of shared organizational also a style of power and to of control. This is in with a good and those in organization also requires and servant-leader be as Greenleaf can be because what may about Greenleaf is not a of is just the It is a and an the time, this is for and and to most from a more holistic position and to that are those Leaders not only as but also as 2008). as of an organization that is to on a the vision and mission as well as the such that the organization is to the of a leader is by what they are the organization to with and moral servant-leaders are to the of the school and its community et al., how be requires what is in people, and relationships in the school need to their democratic while increasing and the of community It may be that this might the growing problem with teacher and retention that school is the only institution with the democratic stewards of schools this our shared of is at successful servant-leadership as just and In what has to be the of Greenleaf as principals are servant-leaders to teachers, the teachers themselves feel more in servant-leader in are more likely to teachers and and the servant with such a in which servant-leadership is at all Greenleaf leaders to be leaders they make a commitment to do the moral as to the well-being of those in their organization, to the mission of their organization, and to their style of I have that servant-leadership is the of leadership, as it the moral good of in the organization, the mission of the organization, and the on the broader on those with power and is more than leadership in the that it ethical and the need for moral with in the organization and with the organization is also more in its moral than most in that such leaders are to actively the of personal and growth and support growth for those they as It is that leaders in of including educational leadership, will make a of their leadership and a of their organizational work was with from the and the The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the and do not the of the