the servant as leader essay

The Servant as Leader

This is the essay that started it all. Powerful, poetic and practical. “The Servant as Leader” describes some of the characteristics and activities of servant-leaders, providing examples which show that individual efforts, inspired by vision and a servant ethic, can make a substantial difference in the quality of society.

• Description

Additional Information

• Reviews (0)

Product Description

Greenleaf discusses the skills necessary to be a servant-leader; the importance of awareness, foresight and listening; and the contrasts between coercive, manipulative, and persuasive power. A must-read.

There are no reviews yet.

Be the first to review “The Servant as Leader” Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Your Rating Rate… Perfect Good Average Not that bad Very Poor

Your Review *

Related Products

Greenleaf and Servant-Leader Listening

The Servant As Leader & The Case for Servant Leadership

Questions & Answers About Servant Leadership

The Wisdom of Servant Leadership

• 2022 Highlights
• 2021 Highlights
• Robert K. Greenleaf Biography
• What is Servant Leadership?
• Foundations of Servant Leadership
• The Key Practices of Servant Leadership
• Next Generation Initiative
• Greenleaf Scholar Recipients
• Coffee With Webinar Series
• Greenleaf Public Policy Lecture
• Hall of Fame 2022
• Memberships
• Shopping Cart
• Donor Wall of Honor

We're not around right now. But you can send us an email and we'll get back to you.

Start typing and press Enter to search

We will keep fighting for all libraries - stand with us!

Internet Archive Audio

• This Just In
• Grateful Dead
• Old Time Radio
• 78 RPMs and Cylinder Recordings
• Audio Books & Poetry
• Computers, Technology and Science
• Music, Arts & Culture
• News & Public Affairs
• Spirituality & Religion
• Radio News Archive

• Flickr Commons
• Occupy Wall Street Flickr
• NASA Images
• Solar System Collection
• Ames Research Center

• All Software
• Old School Emulation
• MS-DOS Games
• Historical Software
• Classic PC Games
• Software Library
• Kodi Archive and Support File
• Vintage Software
• CD-ROM Software
• CD-ROM Software Library
• Software Sites
• Tucows Software Library
• Shareware CD-ROMs
• Software Capsules Compilation
• CD-ROM Images
• ZX Spectrum
• DOOM Level CD

• Smithsonian Libraries
• FEDLINK (US)
• Lincoln Collection
• American Libraries
• Canadian Libraries
• Universal Library
• Project Gutenberg
• Children's Library
• Biodiversity Heritage Library
• Books by Language
• Additional Collections

• Prelinger Archives
• Democracy Now!
• Occupy Wall Street
• TV NSA Clip Library
• Animation & Cartoons
• Arts & Music
• Computers & Technology
• Cultural & Academic Films
• Ephemeral Films
• Sports Videos
• Videogame Videos
• Youth Media

Search the history of over 866 billion web pages on the Internet.

Mobile Apps

• Wayback Machine (iOS)
• Wayback Machine (Android)

Browser Extensions

Archive-it subscription.

• Explore the Collections
• Build Collections

Save Page Now

Capture a web page as it appears now for use as a trusted citation in the future.

Please enter a valid web address

• Donate Donate icon An illustration of a heart shape

The servant as leader

Bookreader item preview, share or embed this item, flag this item for.

• Graphic Violence
• Explicit Sexual Content
• Hate Speech
• Misinformation/Disinformation
• Marketing/Phishing/Advertising
• Misleading/Inaccurate/Missing Metadata

plus-circle Add Review comment Reviews

3,487 Views

7 Favorites

DOWNLOAD OPTIONS

For users with print-disabilities

IN COLLECTIONS

Uploaded by Unknown on June 2, 2020

SIMILAR ITEMS (based on metadata)

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Vivamus convallis sem tellus, vitae egestas felis vestibule ut.

Error message details.

Reuse Permissions

Request permission to republish or redistribute SHRM content and materials.

What Is Servant Leadership? A Philosophy for People-First Leadership

This article was from CIO and was legally licensed through the Industry Dive Content Marketplace . Please direct all licensing questions to legal@industrydive.com .

Servant leadership is a leadership style that prioritizes the growth, well-being, and empowerment of employees. It aims to foster an inclusive environment that enables everyone in the organization to thrive as their authentic self. Whereas traditional leadership focuses on the success of the company or organization, servant leadership puts employees first to grow the organization through their commitment and engagement. When implemented correctly, servant leadership can help foster trust, accountability, growth, and inclusion in the workplace.

Proponents say that by improving the emotional health of employees servant leadership empowers employees to express themselves more freely in the workplace. Employees then turn around and give the same nurturing to their coworkers, creating a welcoming environment that enables and encourages growth and quality work. A major aspect of servant leadership is acceptance of others; by creating an environment where everyone feels accepted, it helps create a "psychological ethical climate" that allows employees to be authentic and not fear judgment from leadership for being themselves. It encourages a forgiving and understanding attitude that allows employees to make mistakes, learn from their mistakes, and channel that into personal and professional growth in the organization.

Servant leadership theory

The theory of servant leadership was started by Robert K. Greenleaf, who popularized the term in a 1970s essay titled "The Servant as Leader." After reading the book Journey to the East , Greenleaf was inspired by the main character, Leo, a servant who disappears from work. After his disappearance, the productivity and effectiveness of the rest of the workers falls apart, revealing that Leo was in fact a leader all along. This led Greenleaf to believe that servant leadership is effective in its ability to allow workers to relate to leaders and vice versa, creating more trust and autonomy for workers. Greenleaf first put this theory to test while working as an executive at AT&T, and it's gained traction over the years as an effective leadership style.

Greenleaf initially proposed an "I serve" mentality for servant leadership and based it on the two main premises of "I serve because I am the leader," and "I am the leader because I serve." The first premise is focused on altruism, a selfless concern for others, while the second premise hinges on a person's ambition to become a leader.

Servant leadership model

Greenleaf's original premise for servant leadership was relatively vague compared to other leadership approaches and models, which has led to several interpretations of his original idea to either expand on the concept of servant leadership or help offer more specific guidelines to what servant leadership looks like in practice.

Larry Spears, former president of the Robert K. Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership, in " Character and Servant Leadership: Ten Characteristics of Effective Caring Leaders " has outlined the qualities that a servant leader needs to have to be impactful. These characteristics include empathy, listening, healing, awareness, persuasion, conceptualization, foresight, stewardship, commitment to the growth of people and building community.

Two researchers, Barbuto and Wheeler , evolved Spears's 10 characteristics into a framework called "the natural desire to serve others," which combines Spears's 10 characteristics into five dimensions of servant leadership that includes altruistic calling, emotional healing, wisdom, persuasive mapping, and organizational stewardship. Under each category there are four to five characteristics that pertain to servant leadership.

Joe Iarocci, author of Servant Leadership in the Workplace , defines three key priorities (developing people, building a trusting team, achieving results), three key principles (serve first, persuasion, empowerment), and three key practices (listening, delegating, connecting followers to mission) to outline what servant leadership looks like in the workplace.

Russel and Stone, two researchers, developed nine " functional attributes of servant leadership ," which includes vision, honesty, integrity, trust, service, modeling, pioneering, appreciation of others, and empowerment. They also outlined 11 "accompanying attributes," which includes communication, credibility, competence, stewardship, visibility, influence, persuasion, listening, encouragement, teaching, and delegation.

Servant leadership characteristics

According to Greenleaf, the most important characteristic of being a servant leader is to make it your priority to serve rather than to lead. Servant leaders are more interested in serving the needs of employees and helping them grow in the organization and are less interested in focusing on profits and simply leading people along by telling them what to do. Greenleaf didn't outline exactly what character traits make for a strong servant leader, but researchers James Sipe and Don Frick have studied his work and outlined seven pillars of servant leadership that fall within the boundaries of Greenleaf's original theory: 

• Person of character: A servant leader is someone who maintains integrity, makes decisions based on ethics and principles, displays humility and serves to a higher purpose in the organization.
• Puts people first: A servant leader demonstrates care and concern for others and helps employees meet their goals and grow within the organization.
• Skilled communicator: Communication skills are integral to servant leadership, and you will need to ensure you can effectively listen to and speak with your employees, while also inviting feedback.
• Compassionate collaborator: To be a strong servant leader, you'll need to consistently work with others and work to strengthen relationships, support diversity, equity, and inclusion, and navigate conflict in the workplace.
• Has foresight: As a servant leader, you will need to keep an eye on the future and anticipate anything that might impact the organization. You'll also need to have a strong vision for your organization and be the type of person who can take decisive action when needed.
• Systems thinker: Servant leaders need to be comfortable navigating complex environments and able to adapt to change. This type of leadership requires strategic thinking and the ability to effectively lead change in the organization.
• Leads with moral authority: As a servant leader, it's important to establish trust and confidence in your workforce by establishing quality standards, accepting, and delegating responsibility and fostering a culture that allows for accountability. 

Examples of servant leadership

In the technology industry, servant leadership is most often seen in agile development environments on Scrum teams. On a Scrum team, the Scrum Master isn't necessarily a leader; instead they're a team member who works closely with other agile workers and takes charge on defining requirements, mapping sprint plans, and resolving any roadblocks along the way.

Famous servant leaders in the corporate world include Alan Mulally, CEO of Ford Motor Co.; Susan Wojcicki, CEO of YouTube; Paul Polman, CEO of Unilever; Howard Schultz, CEO of Starbucks; and Tim Cook, CEO of Apple; among many others. These are just a few people who are billed as strong examples of servant leadership in the corporate world. These leaders show qualities that include being risk-adverse, employee-focused, and driven by success over profits.     

Servant leadership training

The Robert K. Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership offers several courses on servant leadership. The Foundations of Servant Leadership covers the fundamentals of Greenleaf's philosophy and how to apply those principles in the workplace. The Key Practices of Servant Leadership covers strategies for effective servant leadership and how to apply those in real-life settings. The Implementing Servant Leadership course focuses on strategies and practices that will help you effectively implement servant leadership in an organization. Courses are completed online using a collaborative wiki and group discussions; each course costs $450.

Related Content

Rising Demand for Workforce AI Skills Leads to Calls for Upskilling

As artificial intelligence technology continues to develop, the demand for workers with the ability to work alongside and manage AI systems will increase. This means that workers who are not able to adapt and learn these new skills will be left behind in the job market.

Employers Want New Grads with AI Experience, Knowledge

A vast majority of U.S. professionals say students entering the workforce should have experience using AI and be prepared to use it in the workplace, and they expect higher education to play a critical role in that preparation.

Advertisement

Artificial Intelligence in the Workplace

​An organization run by AI is not a futuristic concept. Such technology is already a part of many workplaces and will continue to shape the labor market and HR. Here's how employers and employees can successfully manage generative AI and other AI-powered systems.

HR Daily Newsletter

New, trends and analysis, as well as breaking news alerts, to help HR professionals do their jobs better each business day.

What Is Servant Leadership?

The concept of servant leadership goes back millennia, but the term itself was first used by Robert Greenleaf in his 1970 essay, “The Servant as Leader.” This leadership philosophy has skyrocketed in popularity since then, with numerous books published on the topic and increased attention being bestowed on it in the media and popular culture.

We sat down with Rebecca Herman , Graduate Professor of Leadership at Purdue Global and an organizational culture expert, to learn more about servant leadership and its benefits.

What Is a Servant Leader?

“There are many ways to define it,” Herman says, “but my personal favorite goes back to Robert Greenleaf's definition: ‘The servant leader is servant first. It begins with the natural feeling that one wants to serve first.’”

The Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership further defines servant leadership as “a philosophy and set of practices that enriches the lives of individuals, builds better organizations and ultimately creates a more just and caring world.”

What does this mean? It means that a servant leader focuses on the growth and well-being of employees and other stakeholders in their organization. Servant leaders seek to help the people they serve grow as individuals.

“If they are growing, then they desire to perform and achieve,” Herman says. “They have more capability to accomplish things, and therefore they're really serving in return, and it becomes a cycle of positive service and performance, which I believe makes servant leadership exceptional.”

How Does Servant Leadership Differ From Traditional Leadership?

Traditional leadership, Herman notes, focuses on such things as strategy, goals, financial performance, and customer satisfaction. “Those things aren’t bad, of course,” she says. “Those are things we expect leaders to do. We want our CEO to focus on things that are going to bring us profit.

“But servant leaders go further. They focus on providing their employees with development opportunities. Employees today want to feel they have a job where they can succeed. They want an opportunity to be coached and mentored by someone. And since servant leaders put people first, they get to know them on a different level. They help them to develop, they give them opportunities because they empower them versus micromanage them.”

What’s Driving the Growth of Servant Leadership?

“We live in a very fast-paced technological world,” Herman says. “We are inundated with information at such increasingly large levels that it's almost impossible to keep up with. We're people first, and our basic human needs are needing to be met.

“Servant leaders understand how to build a workplace culture where teams and community are valued. And people want that real feeling of community in the workplace because they don't have it in their lives.”

Herman says our present culture can be disconnecting.

“We are incredibly virtual today,” she says. “We have virtual jobs, serve on virtual teams, and get to know people virtually on social media. We text more than we speak on the phone or face-to-face. Even dating is done on an app—you have the option of swiping left or right to determine if you may want to meet someone. People are craving real relationships and real connections. Plus, this goes back to that whole idea that we all really want to feel we've contributed to the world, that we want work that has true meaning.”

The Benefits of Servant Leadership

Increased employee loyalty and a beloved company culture are benefits of this style of leadership. Productivity and problem-solving are also bolstered with servant leadership.

“Servant-led employees don't fear that if they take a risk and try to do the right thing, they could get punished,” Herman says. “I think that makes them perform at more of a risk-taking level, as long as they're doing it based on the goals, the mission, and the core values of the organization.

“And that ultimately leads to how that business performs,” she says. “If every person is performing at their best, imagine what the organization is going to be like. People who receive coaching and personal development are equipped to be empowered to make decisions to serve their customers. Empowered employees are more engaged, and this increases job satisfaction, which increases retention. You want great people to stay a part of your organization.”

Well-Known Servant-Led Companies

Some of the best-performing companies are well-versed in this style of leadership. Herman named the following companies with servant leaders at the helm:

• Southwest Airlines
• Whole Foods
• TDIndustries
• Men's Wearhouse

“When we think of these organizations, we often think about how outstanding their customer service is,” she says. “It really isn't accidental, because they're servant-led companies, so their servant-led employees want to make sure the customer is always cared for.

“These are not just the best companies to work for, they're also very high-performing companies—some of the most profitable and successful in the business world.”

And there’s a reason these are familiar companies with familiar stories being told. Servant leaders are very values-based and mission-driven, so they share stories frequently. That is an additional benefit for a servant-led company looking to build or sustain a brand.

Do You Aspire to Be a Servant Leader?

Making a decision to become a servant leader is making a decision to succeed and to lead your company to success.

“You need to know that it's going to become who you are more than what you do,” Herman says. “This is great because it bleeds into your personal relationships and who you are in your community.

“Being a servant leader is amazing, but it's a huge commitment because you're really going to have to take very intentional actions to be a servant leader. It's really about truly walking that talk every day, and modeling that behavior.”

Herman says that the greatest leaders have a desire to serve the greater good—and that they may encounter pushback.

“There will be people who will say that you're a little crazy,” she says. “They're going to say that it doesn't work if you want to call yourself a servant leader. But you have to be willing to defend that and stand up for it. Be prepared because you will face a lot of resistance.”

Herman compares servant leadership in the workplace to the ultimate servant leadership in the home.

“I don't want to say that leadership is like parenting, but parents are really servant leaders in many ways,” she says. “And I don't know many parents that would be considered soft or weak. They want to have the best for their kids. That's why they discipline. That's why they try to help them be the best they can be.

“Being a servant leader will change you, and it will change those around you. It can be a little frightening, but the results are worth it.”

Learn More About Being a Servant Leader

Herman recommends these books to read more about servant leadership:

• On Becoming a Servant Leader by Robert Greenleaf and Peter Drucker
• The Servant Leader: How to Build a Creative Team, Develop Great Morale, and Improve Bottom-Line Performance by James A. Autry
• The Serving Leader: Five Powerful Actions to Transform Your Team, Business, and Community by Ken Jennings and John Stahl-Wert
• Seven Pillars of Servant Leadership: Practicing the Wisdom of Leading by Serving by James W. Sipe and Don M. Frick
• The Servant: A Simple Story About the True Essence of Leadership by James C. Hunter

Reach Your Career Goals With Purdue Global

Purdue Global offers more than 175 online programs to help busy adults earn a college degree or certificate while working. Part of the respected Purdue University system, we are accredited by the Higher Learning Commission.* If furthering your education would help you meet your career goals, request more information today .

About the Author

Purdue Global

Earn a degree you're proud of and employers respect at Purdue Global, Purdue's online university for working adults. Accredited and online, Purdue Global gives you the flexibility and support you need to come back and move your career forward. Choose from 175+ programs, all backed by the power of Purdue.

• General Education
• Legal Studies & Public Policy
• Online Learning

Your Path to Success Begins Here

Learn more about online programs at Purdue Global and download our program guide.

Connect with an Advisor to explore program requirements, curriculum, credit for prior learning process, and financial aid options.

Any reference to a product or service does not constitute an endorsement by Purdue Global.

*The Higher Learning Commission ( HLCommission.org ) is an institutional accreditation agency recognized by the U.S. Department of Education.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Springer Nature - PMC COVID-19 Collection

Servant Leadership: a Systematic Literature Review and Network Analysis

Alice canavesi.

1 Business Economics, Carlo Cattaneo University (LIUC), Castellanza, Italy

Eliana Minelli

2 Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium

Associated Data

We ensure data transparency.

Not applicable.

Servant leadership is a form of moral-based leadership where leaders tend to prioritize the fulfillment of the needs of followers, namely employees, customers and other stakeholders, rather than satisfying their personal needs. Although the concept is not new among both academics and practitioners, it has received growing consideration in the last decade, due to the fact that it can positively affect a series of individual and organizational outcomes, such as job satisfaction and organizational commitment. In particular, the latest trend in literature has focused on the identification of the antecedents, mediating and moderating mechanisms at the basis of this relationship, as well as on the development of a common scale to measure the construct across diverse economic and cultural contexts. The purpose of this paper is to depict the evolution of the scientific literature that has developed on the concept, to identify the main criticalities and provide avenues for future research. A dynamic methodology called “Systematic Literature Network Analysis” has been applied, combining the Systematic Literature Review approach with the analysis of bibliographic networks.

Introduction

With the beginning of the twenty-first century, the moral nature of leaders has started to be considered not only necessary for the good of society but also essential for sustainable organizational success (Freeman et al., 2004 ; Gulati et al., 2010 ; Padilla et al., 2007 ), thus marking a considerable shift in research. As a consequence, moral leadership theories, such as transformational, ethical, authentic and servant leadership, have recently received considerable attention from the scientific community.

Servant leadership seems to be the most promising and most investigated over the last few years, especially due to the holistic approach and broad focus adopted compared to the other philosophies, as well as to its important role in affecting individual and team-level outcomes, such as organizational commitment, organizational citizenship behaviour, job performance and job satisfaction. Like most other leadership constructs, the definition and measurement of servant leadership were primarily developed in the United States. In particular, the term servant leadership was coined by Greenleaf in 1970 in his essay “The Servant as Leader" to describe an emerging style of leadership where leaders focused on followers’ personal growth and development, by treating them in an ethical way. The author asserted that the servant leader is “primus inter pares” or “first among equals”, meaning that his/her highest priority is service to others in order to fulfill their needs, rather than fulfilling his or her personal needs. Greenleaf’s conception was then refined by many other scholars, such as Ehrhart ( 2004 ), who claimed that servant leadership is one in which the leader goes beyond the financial success of the organization recognizing his or her moral responsibility towards subordinates, customers and the entire company’s community. The emphasis of the servant leadership philosophy has been placed over time on serving and creating value for multiple stakeholders, both internal and external to the organization. Liden et al. ( 2008 ) further stressed the fundamental leadership behaviours of servant leadership, such as behaving ethically, helping followers grow and succeed, empowering, emotional healing, conceptual skills and creating value for the community.

Research on servant leadership can be categorized into three main phases: a first phase focusing on its conceptual development, a second phase investigating the measures and testing the relationships with some fundamental outcomes via cross-sectional research, and a third phase aimed at understanding the antecedents, mediating mechanisms and boundary conditions of servant leadership. The last “model development phase” is the most recent and has seen a proliferation of studies in the last twenty years. A significant contribution to provide an integrative theoretical framework has been recently made by Eva et al. ( 2019 ), who offered a clear conceptual distinction of servant leadership compared to other approaches, evaluated and assessed the most rigorous scales of the construct developed so far, and highlighted the most important antecedents, outcomes, moderating and mediating mechanisms identified in the literature.

The purpose of this research is to provide a further and complementary review of the literature on servant leadership through bibliometric methods, in order to assess the evolution of the field over time as well as the current state-of-art on the key trends and provide avenues for future research. In particular, the authors aim to identify:

• The structure of the field, the most consolidated research and its temporal and geographical evolution
• The most recurring theoretical underpinning and constructs
• The most cited articles representing milestones of the literature
• The most impactful authors and journals
• The disciplines and subject areas involved by the topic
• Research implications
• Future research directions

The structure of the paper is as follows. In the first section, the methodology adopted for the literature review and the steps taken in developing the research are presented. In the second section, the results of three different analyses are explained: namely, the paper citation network consisting in the connected components and the main path, the keywords analysis, and finally the global analysis with the basic statistics. In the third and final section, the main conclusions are drawn and questions to be addressed by future research are provided.

The paper is based on a two-step method, referred to as “Systematic Literature Network Analysis (SLNA)” (Colicchia & Strozzi, 2012 ): a Systematic Literature Review (SLR) and a further analysis of the subset of relevant articles obtained through a bibliographic Network Analysis (NA): namely, the citation network analysis, the co-occurrence networks analysis and the basic statistics. The first qualitative assessment is mainly based on the researchers’ judgements as to the selection of keywords and leverages on an explanatory approach; while the bibliometric assessment provides more objective insights through quantitative and statistical evidence (Aliyev et al., 2018). In particular, bibliographic data analysed through bibliometric methods include the most impactful author names, journal titles, article titles, article keywords and article publication years (Block & Fisch, 2020). The aim is to “complement the traditional content-based literature reviews by extracting quantitative information from bibliographic networks and detect emerging topics, thus revealing the dynamic evolution of the scientific production of a discipline” (Strozzi et al., 2017 ). This dynamic analysis has proven to be effective in different research fields, as it highlights the literature development, identifies authors network and topic clusters, examines gaps and criticalities as well as presents further research directions. In contrast to narrative literature reviews, which aim to summarize the content of the studies of a particular research field, SLNA focuses on assessing the conceptual structure of the field and its development over time (e.g. how has the number of studies evolved, how have the topics evolved, how have the outlets evolved, etc.). It goes beyond a mere descriptive summary of prior literature, by leading a discussion of what we know and where we can go, and allows the measurement of the knowledge diffusion within and between disciplines, by identifying interdisciplinary links. Moreover, compared to traditional methods which lack a clear methodological approach, quantitative bibliographic studies make it possible to avoid the researchers’ selection bias by selecting clear keywords and exclusion / inclusion criteria and by adopting clear boundaries at every stage to ensure a systematic search of papers (Fetscherin & Heinrich, 2015; Block & Fisch, 2020), to the point that the process can be replicated at any time. Lastly, SLNA is characterized by a more up-to-date and broader scope (with regards, for instance, to the journals and publication years considered), thus minimizing the risk of producing an over-reflective and biased argument by the authors but rather leading to evidence-based conclusions.

Figure  1 clarifies all the steps of the methodology.

Systematic Literature Network Analysis (SLNA)

The reference database chosen for the development of the research was Scopus, due to its coverage, convenience, and in alignment with the current literature. According to Falagas et al. ( 2017 ) as well as to Block and Fisch (2020), Scopus includes a more expanded spectrum of journals and a faster and broader citation analysis compared to other research databases, such as Web of Science (WoS). This result has been confirmed by Chadegani et al. ( 2013 ), who assessed that Scopus covers a superior number of journals compared to WoS, even though it is limited to more recent articles, and by Bergman ( 2012 ), who demonstrated that Scopus also provides higher citation counts than Google Scholar and WoS. Moreover, compared to these two other databases, Adriaanse and Rensleigh ( 2013 ) proved that Scopus delivers the least inconsistencies regarding content verification and quality, such as author spelling and sequence, volume and issue number.

The key search criteria and final query were defined on the basis of the keywords used by scholars to address the concept of servant leadership, according to one reference paper among the main pillars of the literature: “Servant leadership: a systematic review and call for future research” (Eva et al., 2019 ) from which this paper mainly differs due to its quantitative citation-based methodology. The most common keywords in literature, also employed in this study, consist of: servant leadership, servant leader, service leadership, servant behaviour and servant organization . In order to develop a more comprehensive definition and consequently to obtain a more comprehensive sample on the topic, the search criteria were loosened to “servant leader*” OR “service leader*” to include both “servant leadership” and “servant leader(s)” OR “service leadership” and “service leader(s)”. Also, considering the different spelling between British English and American English, both terms “behaviour” and “behaviour” were included. As the literature on leadership is very broad, the terms above were limited to three streams of search in the section “Article title” to include only articles that were strictly related and focused on the topic, and not dealing with it in a marginal way, but also to obtain a moderate number of papers to conduct the analysis. This systematic literature review is most suitable when the number of papers is not too limited nor too big. The authors tried to conduct a broader search stream also including keywords and abstracts, but it resulted not applicable: it provided several thousand results and the content of papers obtained was in most cases out of scope. Since the focus of the research was servant leadership from a human resource and organizational perspective, areas were investigated individually to assess whether they were pertinent or not with the topic. On the basis of this analysis, it was possible to include: Business, Social sciences, Economics, Econometrics and Finance, Psychology, Arts and Humanities, Decision sciences, Environmental science and Multidisciplinary. Papers written in languages other than English were excluded. With regards to the time span, the year in which the study was conducted (2020) was eliminated in order to consider only papers of concluded years. Finally, the search was limited to articles and conference papers, as they contain very clear citations and make it possible to achieve ideal results. See Table ​ Table1 1 for the final specification of the query.

Query final specification

This procedure allowed us to obtain a subset of 357 papers published between 1984 and 2019, which were then analysed using VOSViewer (Van Eck et al., 2010 ; Waltman et al., 2010 ) and Pajek software (de Nooy et al., 2011) to identify the main citation path emerging from the citation network and also key concepts and trends emerging from the co-occurrence network. Afterwards, the basic statistics of the whole subset of papers were examined in order to provide some general insights: the temporal and geographical evolution of the literature, the subject areas involved, the ranking of the 10 most cited papers and the most influential authors and journals. The findings of these analyses are reported in the following sections.

Citation Network Analysis

The initial procedure of the network analysis was aimed at identifying the main article clusters emerging from the citation network by using the VOS Clustering analysis (Van Eck et al., 2010 ; Waltman et al., 2010 ). “A citation network is a network where the nodes are papers and the links are citations. The arrows go from cited to citing papers representing the flow of knowledge.” (Strozzi et al., 2017 ). For the identification of the connected component, the minimum threshold of 0 was maintained in order not to exclude recent papers and less relevant authors. The largest connected component (a set of nodes connected by links) consisted of 291 items connected to each other, with 85 different clusters. No other significant connected components emerged from the literature. Figure  2 presents the network obtained with VOSviewer, where nodes are weighted by the citations and coloured with both a cluster and year overlay.

Citation network analysis (size = citation, color = cluster)

The following procedure of the network analysis consisted in implementing the key route algorithm (main path) of the network, using Pajek: a program providing powerful visualization tools. The objective was to identify the nodes that cite or have been cited the most, thus representing the most consolidated research in the field. This was possible by conducting the betweenness centrality analysis of a vertex, which is “the proportion of all geodesics between pairs of other vertices that include this vertex” (de Nooy et al., 2011, p. 131). The betweenness centrality analysis allows to focus on the importance of a node in the communication between any node pair in the network, to identify those playing a central role in information flows and being responsible for the system vulnerability (i.e. vertexes lying on many of the shortest paths between other vertexes). Figure  3 shows the flow of knowledge over time, with the network of the 25 essential articles, intensively cited and referring to other papers, labelled by Pajek with the name of the first author and the year of publication. It is clear how the research structure has changed over time: from 1996 to 2012 it developed linearly, while from 2012 on it has started to articulate towards different directions often interconnected to each other. One possible interpretation of this pattern is the following: originally, the novelty of the subject led to a straight evolution of the field over time, afterwards, once the topic gained ground and different research trends emerged, referencing papers and literature reviews started to come out.

Main path of articles from citation network

Based on the previous analysis, the most relevant papers were studied not only to identify the key concepts expressed by the single paper but most importantly to understand the evolution of the field over time. The analysis of the main path allowed for pinpointing trends and variations that would not be very visible in the general set of papers. The main findings, which are the result of a quantitative analysis and have not been selected by the authors according to a discretionary criterion, are reported in the following section with the aim of depicting a landscape of the scientific literature on the concept of servant leadership.

Main Path Analysis

The most recent paper dealing with servant leadership is the one by Yang et al. ( 2019 ), which builds on self-determination theory to investigate, through an empirical study conducted in the Chinese banking sector, how servant leadership affects employee creativity. The authors used a survey based on five-point Likert scales to assess that there is a positive relationship between servant leadership and employee creativity, mediated by follower psychological empowerment and moderated by work-family conflict. This paper can be considered as a pillar of the literature as it gathers the contributions of several articles, including a paper by the same author written two years before. Yang et al. ( 2017 ) previously provided evidence on other mechanisms influencing the relationship between servant leadership and creativity both at the individual and team level: employees’ efficacy beliefs, as a mediator, and team power distance, as a moderator. With regards to work-family balance, a similar study conducted by Tang et al. ( 2016 ) demonstrated that servant leadership is negatively related to employees’ work-to-family conflict (WFC) and positively related to work-to-family positive spillovers (WFPS), with the moderator role of reduced emotional exhaustion in both relationships and the mediator role of enhanced personal learning in the relationship between servant leadership and WFPS. Hoch et al. ( 2018 ) compared servant leadership and other moral-based forms of leadership (authentic leadership and ethical leadership) with transformational leadership, to assess whether they were able to explain incremental variance with respect to a series of relevant organizational outcomes. Servant leadership emerged as the only positive leadership style adding incremental variance to that explained by transformational leadership, thus being of significant utility. Previously, Van Dierendonck et al. ( 2014 ) leveraged on two experimental studies and one field study to differentiate servant leadership from transformational leadership in the way they affect organizational commitment and work engagement, as the former is mediated by follower need satisfaction while the latter by perceived leadership effectiveness. Hsiao et al. ( 2015 ) systematically integrated the three levels of organization, employee and customer to demonstrate that leaders displaying servant behaviours stimulate customer value co-creation (CVC) with the key mediating roles of positive psychological capital (PPC) and service-oriented organizational citizenship behaviours (OCBs). Newman et al. ( 2017 ) found that at the basis of the link between servant leadership and followers’ OCBs, there are also the mediating mechanism of leader-member exchange (LMX) and the moderating mechanism of leader proactive personality. Chiniara and Bentein ( 2016 ) previously provided other mediating mechanisms between servant leadership and individual performance outcomes such as OCBs and task performance: namely the satisfaction of three basic psychological needs of employees (autonomy, competence and relatedness). Ozyilmaz and Cicek ( 2015 ) tested the positive effects of servant leadership on OCBs and on job satisfaction, assessing that this second relationship is partially mediated by psychological climate. Hunter et al. ( 2013 ) further investigated both the direct effects generated by servant leaders at the individual level, such as decreased turnover intentions and disengagement, and the indirect effects generated at the team level, such as decreased turnover intentions, helping and sales behaviour through the mediation of service climate. Moreover, they investigated the basis for individuals enacting this mode of leadership and found that leader agreeableness represents a positive antecedent of servant leadership, while extraversion a negative one. Executive characteristics of servant leaders were also tested by Peterson et al. ( 2012 ) , who assessed that narcissism is negatively related to servant leadership while founder status (i.e. founder or non-founder) is positively related to servant leadership; both effects are partially mediated by the chief executive officer identification in the organization. Sun ( 2013 ) further concentrated on the identity of servant leaders, by explaining the psychological factors, both cognitive and behavioural, that constitute it. Neubert et al. ( 2016 ) tested servant leadership effects in hospitals, accumulating evidence that there is a positive relationship with both nurse and patient satisfaction, moderated by organizational structure. Similarly, Chen et al. ( 2015 ) explored how managers’ servant leadership affect the performance of frontline service employees’, such as hairdressers, through the partial mediation of self-efficacy and group identification. In relation to these performance behaviours, they also found that servant leadership explains additional variance above and beyond transformational leadership. Liden et al. ( 2014 ) developed a model to test servant leadership in restaurants and stores. Specifically, they demonstrated that servant leaders propagate servant leadership behaviours among employees, such as increased job performance, creativity and customer service behaviours as well as decreased turnover intentions, by establishing a serving culture at the unit level (e.g. store) and fostering employee identification with the unit. Liden et al. ( 2015 ) contributed to the literature by providing the shortest-to-date 7-item scale (SL-7) measure of global servant leadership, starting from a previous 28-item scale (SL-28) developed in 2008, and tested it across three empirical independent studies. Besides the topic of employee creativity already investigated in literature, Yoshida et al. ( 2014 ) ascertained the effects of servant leadership on individual relational identification and collective prototypicality, which, in turn, fosters team innovation. Antecedents of servant leadership discussed above have been examined by other scholars, such as Hu and Liden ( 2011 ), who identified team-level goal, process clarity and team servant leadership as three mechanisms affecting team potency, performance and organizational citizenship behaviour. The authors also emphasized the role of servant leaders in moderating the link between team-level goal and process clarity with team potency. Similar outcomes were found a year before by Walumbwa et al. ( 2010 ), whose analyses revealed that the relationship between servant leadership and OCBs is partially mediated by commitment to the supervisor, self-efficacy, procedural justice climate and service climate. Hale and Fields ( 2007 ) leveraged on three servant leadership dimensions introduced by Greenleaf (1977), namely service, humility and vision, to point out cultural differences affecting the way servant leadership is perceived in different countries. Specifically, they found that countries with a higher level of power distance and collectivism experience servant leadership behaviours less frequently. They also assessed that, when great value is placed on uncertainty avoidance, vision has a significant stronger relationship with leadership effectiveness. Previously, Dennis and Bocarnea ( 2005 ) developed and tested a scale aimed at measuring five out of the seven servant leadership constructs based on Patterson’s theory: agapao love (which means to love in a social or moral way), humanity, vision, trust and empowerment. This theoretical development was drawn on a literature review by Russell ( 2001 ), who provided an overview of the current individual and organizational values associated with servant leadership, deepening their role in three main attributes: trust, appreciation of others and empowerment. A sequential, upward-spiralling model based on the variables of vision, influence, credibility, trust and service was formerly developed by Farling et al. ( 1999 ) to explain how these variables relate one to another in defining the concept at the basis of servant leadership. This paper represented an evolution of two former analyses. The first one consists in a servant leadership model developed by Buchen ( 1998 ) within the context of higher education and based on five main dimensions: identity (the direction of ego and image), empowering (the sharing of power with collaborators), reciprocity (a relationship of mutual dependency between leaders and followers), commitment (the absolute devotion to academic discipline) and finally future (the alignment between faculty and institution). The second is a reflection paper on Greenleaf’s definition of servant leadership by Spears ( 1996 ), which, on the one hand, emphasizes the primary goal of serving the greater needs of others and, on the other hand, draws the evolution of the topic from its genesis (1970) to the current time (2019).

At first, from the mid 1990’s to the late 2000’s, research was mainly qualitative and moved towards the development of a theoretical framework of servant leadership, as well as of various scales aimed at measuring the main dimensions of the construct. The last stream of research from 2010 to 2020, instead, suggests the authors’ orientation for a quantitative approach based on surveys, experimental and field studies to investigate the antecedents, mediating mechanisms and boundary conditions of servant leadership. Recently, some qualitative studies have emerged again on the topic; however, very few scholars are taking advantage of mixed methods combining the quantitative and qualitative approach.

From a theoretical perspective, the attempt of the present paper was also that of identifying meaningful constructs, underpinnings and framework used in the most consolidated literature on servant leadership, even if not explicitly mentioned by single studies. All papers, except one, were built on the basis of the servant leadership theory, often in combination with theories on other leadership styles, such as transformational, or on antecedents, outcomes, mediators and moderators of servant leadership, such as LMX theory. Moreover, the majority of paper explicitly employed more than one theoretical basis. The most recurring theory (6 out of 25 papers) was the social exchange theory, which was defined by Blau (1964) as “voluntary actions of individuals that are motivated by the returns they are expected to bring and typically do in fact bring from others” (p. 91) and is based on the central premise that the exchange of social and material resources is a fundamental form of human interaction. Motivational theories were also found several times (6 papers), with different sub-theories, such as goal-setting theory, motivational language theory and intrinsic motivation theory, emphasizing various factors that can foster personal or followers’ motivation. The most important among these motivational theories came out to be the self-determination theory’s (SDT) basic psychological needs, which consists in an empirically-based theory of human behavior and personality development aimed at identifying the social-contextual aspects that promote or prevent motivation based on the satisfaction of basic psychological needs such as competence, relatedness and autonomy (Ryan & Deci, 2017, pag. 3). The social learning theory (SLT), then evolved in the social cognitive theory (SCT), also emerged to be fundamental (5 papers), positing that learning occurs within a social context through the combination of individual experience, social interaction and environmental factors. Finally, the least recurring theory was the social identity theory (2 papers), which is a social psychological theory examining the role of self and identity in group and intergroup dynamics (Hogg, 2016).

Co-word Network Analysis (Keywords Analysis: VOS Clustering)

A second type of analysis, focused on the authors’ keywords, was carried out in VOSviewer on the basis of the co-occurrence network. Co-occurrence analysis assumes that the article keywords chosen by various authors represent an adequate description of the content or of the relationship that the paper establishes between investigated problems (Strozzi et al., 2017 ). The aim of the analysis was to frame the development of the research trends over time: if many co-occurrences can be identified around a term, this is likely to represent a specific research pattern of the discipline. An occurrence threshold of 8 was used, with the goal of ensuring clusters’ consistency in terms of content and dimension. A set of the 17 most relevant keywords divided into 3 different clusters was obtained, as shown in Fig.  4 .

Co-occurrence author keywords network (size = total link strength, color = cluster)

The network’s nodes correspond to the keywords of the 357 papers’ authors and their link weights to how many times the words appear in the papers. Three colors (red, blue and green) differentiate the keywords belonging to one cluster from other clusters’ keywords, while the dimension of the node stands for the total link strength.

In the following section, the keywords clusters are examined in order to address the most relevant research patterns in the literature. Hence, the topics below have been discussed on the basis of the output of a quantitative analysis, aimed at addressing the most used keywords in the literature and identifying research trajectories within each cluster.

Cluster 1: Servant Leadership, Leadership, Transformational Leadership, Leadership Development, Scale Development, Trust

Servant leadership is one of the most recently investigated and adopted approaches belonging to the branch of moral leadership theories. As such, it has been studied in parallel with other similar leadership styles, such as transformational leadership. Transformational leadership is a positive form of leadership developed by Burns in 1978 as an ongoing process where “leaders and followers raise one another to higher levels of morality and motivation beyond self-interest to serve collective interests”. This concept was then expanded by Bass ( 1985 ) and applied to organizations as a guideline for leaders to make followers perform beyond expectations. From a theoretical standpoint, a significant overlap between servant leadership and transformational leadership has been assessed by scholars, especially in terms of vision, influence, credibility, trust and service shown by leaders, to the point that servant leadership has often been considered as a form of transformational leadership (Farling et al., 1999 ). Trust, in particular, has been addressed in both leadership styles as central to relationship: an important factor in the interdependence existing between leaders and followers, consisting in four distinct dimensions: competence, openness, concern and reliability. Nevertheless, an attempt has been made to define the major variables involved in the servant-leader follower transformational model. On the other hand, research has tried to identify and address the main differences, or better nuances, between the two leadership approaches: while servant leadership focuses more on supporting and developing individuals within an institution, transformational leadership emphasizes the role of leaders in inspiring followers to work towards a common goal (Allen et al., 2016 ).

In 2010s, another stream of literature has focused on the development of a reliable and multidimensional scale to measure various aspects of servant leadership. Examples include the 6-item Servant Leadership Behavior scale (Sendjaya et al., 2019 ) to measure servant leadership behaviors in a leader, or the Executive Servant Leadership Scale (Reed et al., 2011 ) to measure executive servant leadership across different organizational contexts.

Cluster 2: Job Satisfaction, Organizational Commitment, Public Sector, China

Several empirical studies have analyzed the relationship between servant leadership and different organizational outcomes, both at the individual and collective level, such as job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Moreover, different mediating and moderating mechanisms as well as various antecedents of this type of relationship have been investigated. For instance, Kauppila et al. ( 2018 ) demonstrated that HR manager servant leadership positively influences organizational employees’ overall justice perception, which in turn enhances organizational commitment and job satisfaction. Moreover, they found that high leadership self-efficacy fosters a line manager’s effectiveness to emulate servant leadership behaviors from HR managers and use these behaviors to advance positive justice perceptions among their followers.

Since the general concept of leadership and the specific concept of servant leadership were developed in the US and in western societies, a consistent research stream has examined the generalizability of servant leadership constructs in completely different cultural contexts, such as China. US society is indeed highly individualistic, short-term oriented and characterized by low-power distance, meaning that relationships are expected to be participatory, democratic and consultative, while Chinese society is permeated by a collectivist culture, long-term goals and high-power distance, therefore based on the expectation that power is distributed unequally. Also, most of these studies were conducted in the public sector, where servant leadership has proven to be very effective in fostering many positive organizational outcomes. Liu et al. ( 2015 ) partially confirmed the generalizability of servant leadership constructs from Western society to China and also found a positive relationship between supervisors’ servant leadership and the public service motivation.

Cluster 3: Organizational Culture, Humans, Human, Adult, Male, Female, Article

Organizations across different fields and geographical contexts need to understand the role of a leadership that is responsive to a “service mission” in driving the company’s evolution and success. Effective servant leadership practices are “humane oriented”; they are implemented when managers or leaders invest in human resources to create a social exchange relationship with employees that makes them feel valued and repay the organization through positive outcomes (Karatepe et al., 2019 ). As a consequence, employees’ commitment and creativity are stimulated and organizational citizenship and prosocial behaviors are fostered, leading to an increase in organizational performance. For instance, Zhou and Miao ( 2014 ) found that servant leadership positively influences employees’ commitment through perceived organizational support as a mediator.

In this framework, culture, and particularly organizational culture, is strictly connected to the leadership style adopted within a company. On the one hand, servant leadership is more likely to apply in contexts characterized by specific cultural values such as paternalism, collectivism and low-power distance. On the other hand, servant leadership can be adopted to create a new organizational culture based on trust, fairness and high-quality leader–follower relationships (Lee et al., 2019 ).

Leadership attitudes also vary according to gender, as some studies reported that, relative to their counterparts, leading females are more likely to display behaviors of altruistic calling, emotional healing and organizational stewardship (Beck, 2014) and to hold service and altruistic value (De Rubio & Kiser, 2015); therefore, they more often behave as servant leaders.

Keywords Temporal Analysis

From a temporal standpoint, VOSviewer offers a graphic representation that allows us to identify the most recent keywords and therefore the core topics currently discussed in literature.

Figure  5 , overlay visualization, displays the ultimate research trends by coloring them in yellow, in contrast with the oldest, colored in blue. It is possible to infer that the concept of servant leadership has been recently discussed in relation to some important outcomes, such as organizational commitment and job satisfaction, to which it is linked by evidence. The effectiveness of this leadership style represented in several organizational contexts has encouraged the development of specific leadership practices, such as training or interventions, aimed at fostering the servant leadership behaviors. At present, most empirical studies have focused on the public sector, as it is often characterized by front-line employees who imitate servant leaders’ behaviors displayed by their managers, thus promoting the quality of relationships with end-customers and providing significant benefits to the whole organization. In this framework, the influence of organizational culture is still relevant, as it determines the way servant leadership is built by leaders and perceived by followers, along with its effectiveness in achieving the desired outcomes. In fact, according to the cultural climate, servant leadership may relate to both individual and organizational outcomes through different mediating and moderating mechanisms.

Overlay visualization

Global Analysis: Basic Statistics

In the “analyze search results” section of Scopus, it is possible to gain some general insights into the whole subset of 357 papers used for the purpose of this literature review.

Figure  6 shows how the topic of servant leadership dates back to the mid 1980s but started receiving significant attention only with the beginning of the new millennium. Particularly, it experienced exponential growth from 2007 to 2019. This corresponds to the period when the first scales for the measurement of servant leadership were developed allowing the conduction of several empirical studies across various organizational contexts.

Documents by year

From a geographical standpoint, it is possible to observe in Fig.  7 how the trend has interested primarily the United States (40.8%), where theories of servant leadership first originated, and China in the second place (13.8%), where the western construct of servant leadership was tested to assess its reliability and validity across cultures. Several cultural differences have indeed been assessed between the United States and the Chinese culture; for instance, China is a long-term and collectivist country committed to work loyalty and respect, while the United States are more individualistic and oriented to short-term business relationships. The topic has then spread in most Anglo-Saxon countries, such as Australia (7.7%), United Kingdom (7.4%), South Africa (5.8%) and Canada (4.5%), probably fostered by their use of a common language and their cultural and historical ties. The countries of Netherlands, Hong Kong, Spain and Turkey represent altogether the remaining 19.9%.

Documents by country or territory

Servant leadership is a versatile and multidisciplinary topic, as it can be applied to a variety of contexts that also fall outside that of the typical corporation. Figure  8 shows how, besides Business, Management and Accounting (38.7%), the subject areas of Social Sciences (25.3%) Psychology (11.1%) and Arts and Humanities (7.9%) are also significantly involved in the literature. This can be explained by the fact that, rather than organizations, at the core of servant leadership are humans: specifically, leaders and their followers.

Documents by subject area

Figure  9 shows the contribution of the most impactful journals over time. The Leadership and Organization Development Journal with 22 articles out of 63, is the leading in the field and has grown exponentially from 2015. The journal of Business Ethics, with its 15 articles, has also been very influential for contributions to servant leadership research in the last decade. Other articles focusing on servant leadership have been published in Leadership Quarterly (10), International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management (8), and Leadership Organization Development Journal (8), which are also the longest-running in time.

Documents per year by source

With regards to the scholars who significantly contributed to the academic research on servant leadership (Fig.  10 ), some are based in the United States, where leadership theories have originated and are still widely investigated; the remaining part are based in Europe and Australia but have worked for important American journals and communities, such as Greenleaf center for servant leadership. The most important contribution comes from van Dierendonck (2014, 2019), who has an expertise in leadership and leadership development at Erasmus University (Rotterdam, Holland) and is the associate editor of the International Journal of Servant Leadership, published by Gonzaga University (Washington, United States) in collaboration with the Spears Center for Servant-Leadership. Two other influential authors are Liden et al. ( 2008 , 2014 , 2015 ) and Sendjaya et al. ( 2008 , 2019 ), who have been writing for some of the most important journals in the field, such as Leadership quarterly, Journal of business ethics and Leadership and organizational development journal, which were also highlighted by the previous analysis (Fig.  9 ). The remaining scholars, Winston and Fields ( 2015 ), Eva (2019), Ruiz-Palomino (2018), Bande (2015), Barbuto and Wheeler ( 2006 ), Cooper (2014) and Jaramillo (2009, 2015), have to be mentioned as they also provided considerable contribution to research, as proved by the number of citations of their works.

Documents by author

Figure  11 shows the output of an analysis performed in order to identify recent breakthrough papers that have provided a significant contribution to the topic and have received considerable attention from the scientific community. The ten most cited papers have been identified by extracting all 357 papers from the Scopus database and ranking them according to the overall number of citations of the last 5 years, divided by 5 (average value of citation per year). This reduced time span has been chosen instead of the time-length of the whole dataset in order to avoid the biased result of obtaining the oldest papers as the most cited, due to the fact that they would have received a greater number of citations over time. The article with the highest number of citations is the one by Liden et al. ( 2008 ) who developed and validated a multidimensional measure of 28 items measuring 9 essential dimensions of servant leadership. This scale has been widely applied to test the construct validity in various organizational contexts in recent time, together with its shortened version of 7 item developed by Wayne et al. in 2015. The remaining most cited articles can be divided in three groups, according to the research streams. One stream has focused on the clarification of the construct and the servant leadership theories in organizations, including scale development and validation. A second stream has been investigating the mediating and moderating mechanisms through which servant leadership leads to a series of behavioral, attitudinal and performance outcomes, both at the individual and collective level. Finally, a third stream has compared servant leadership to other moral-based leadership styles, such as transformational, ethical and authentic leaderships in terms of focus and their associations with a wide range of organizationally relevant measures. All the most cited papers are part of the biggest component shown in Fig.  2 ; moreover, four out of the ten papers are included in the main path, while the remaining six are not. Being written by more than one authors, these impactful papers are the result of a significant investigation conducted on the topic by more scholars. Altogether, the articles suggest that the most consistent trend in literature is moving towards the measurement of servant leadership across various cultural and organizational contexts, at both the individual and collective levels (organization, employee, customer, etc.). This has been possible through the clarification of the common constructs composing servant leadership and the development of a scale able to test them across different organizations and organizational levels.

Ranking of the ten most cited papers in the last 5 years (mean value of citation per year)

This paper represents an attempt to rationalize the content of research developed in the context of servant leadership. The limitations of the study are mainly related to the adopted methodology. First of all, it consists in a literature review based on a citation network analysis, which may not be fully representative of a paper’s qualitative contribution to the body of knowledge, especially because VOSviewer shows only a part of the whole subset. Moreover, citations could be biased because scholars often tend to cite the most relevant articles in the literature, driven by their reputation and popularity. However, these limitations can be overcome due to the fact that the purpose of the current study is to depict an evolutionary path of the topic, rather than investigate in-depth the contribution of single papers.

The growing body of empirical studies on servant leadership, analyzed for the purpose of the analysis, has allowed to identify some consolidated streams of research and some areas of the literature deserving further investigation. First of all, there is evidence that servant leadership can foster employees’ positive outcomes, with different antecedents and through various mediating and moderating mechanisms. These outcomes have been found at the individual, team and organizational level and are of various types: behavioral, such as organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) and proactive behavior (Chiniara & Bentein, 2016 ; Newman et al., 2017 ; Ozyilmaz & Cicek, 2015 ; Walumbwa et al., 2010 ) attitudinal, such as engagement and job satisfaction (Chiniara & Bentein, 2016 ; Hunter et al., 2013 ; Kauppila et al., 2018 ; Van Dierendonck et al., 2014 ) and performance, such as customer value co-creation and team performance (Hsiao et al., 2015 ; Hu & Liden, 2011 ). Moreover, servant leadership has been found to be of significant utility in explaining incremental variance above and beyond transformational, ethical and authentic leadership, with regards to these organizationally relevant criterion measures (Hoch et al., 2018 ). For this reason, scholars have addressed their attention to this leadership approach and several companies are moving towards the adoption of an organizational climate based on service, ethics and healthy work relationships that could significantly contribute to the organizational success (Eva et al., 2019 ). This aspect makes servant leadership attractive for both future research and usage. Also, in the analyses of the present study (main path, keywords clusters, global statistics), no significant criticism of servant leadership, from both an empirical and theoretical level, has emerged; the development of minor critical examinations has always started from a prior enhancement of the construct and its positive outcomes. It has to be considered, however, that the unquestioned positive praise of servant leadership may be due to the so called “Matthew effect”: the fact that those papers offering a promising perspective of servant leadership, which have previously been successful, are more likely to be cited again and again (Bol et al., 2018 ).

Although a positive interpretation of servant leadership prevails in the literature, the authors of the present study went beyond the outputs of the main analyses to identify in the literature some potential drawbacks associated with the adoption of this practice within organizations (Palumbo, 2015 ). First of all, it has to be considered that the servant leadership approach takes time to build, as it requires strong interpersonal relationships engaging the emotional, relational and ethical dimension of followers, in which both the leader and the followers play a vital role in maintaining them over time. Plus, the servant leadership style may not be suitable for all organizations, especially those characterized by a fast-changing environment where decisions have to be made quickly, due to the fact that they would require a fast top-down approach, rather than bottom-up. Another risk is losing sight of the purpose of the organization and ultimate goals in favour of people development: the servant leader is in fact devoted to the individual employee and their growth rather than to the organization. This could have negative effects on the organizational effectiveness. On the other hand, a successful company performance is not always due to a visionary leader who establishes a climate of service, as this represents a common misperception of the business world: the halo effect (i.e. the tendency to make specific inferences on the basis of a general impression).

Lastly, too much healing and empathy shown by the leader may turn into merely protective behaviour towards followers, which would discourage them from adopting a proactive role and promptly dealing with critical issues within the organization. This would challenge the prevailing arguments of the literature of servant leadership by producing a disabling environment that disempowers employees and leads to a situation of dependency on the leader (Palumbo, 2015 ). To prevent this possible counterintuitive consequence, servant leaders should act as role models and lead by example, ensuring at the same time that followers have the right degree of autonomy and responsibility. In light of these considerations, the conceptualization of servant leadership should be revisited to contemplate its side-effects, in terms of followers’ behaviour, leader–follower relationships and organizational outcomes, to prevent the impoverishment of the overall organizational effectiveness predicted by some studies (Andersen, 2009 ; Palumbo, 2015 ; Liu, 2019 ; Chenwei et al., 2021 , Wu et al., 2021 ).

In particular, the authors of the present study have leveraged on a critical assessment of the outputs of the main analyses of the literature on servant leadership to identify some research areas that have not been examined in detail and deserve further investigation:

• servant leaders’ system of beliefs and values (i.e. ethics) as well as other antecedents, that may significantly affect followers’ and organizational performance;
• other mediating or moderating mechanisms (i.e. contextual discriminants) influencing the relationship between servant leadership and positive outcomes, both at the individual and organizational level;
• servant leadership behaviours displayed by followers, that are useful to promote customers’ satisfaction, especially in the service sector;
• the utility of servant leadership in contexts where it has not yet been evaluated, such as technology, to test its validity across industries;
• longitudinal, multi-level studies confirming the effectiveness and generalizability of the most recent scale of global servant leadership assessment (SL-7) across culturally diverse countries (other than the US and China, as suggested by this literature review), according to well-known frameworks such as Hofstede’s
• critical theoretical and empirical investigation of the potential shortcomings of servant leadership often neglected by scholars, to challenge the current positive interpretation of the topic and advance the scientific knowledge

Additionally, on the basis of the authors’ considerations, the role of servant leadership, compared to other types of leadership, may be investigated within the institutional framework (e.g. public services and administration, where it has shown to be very effective) and companies’ organizational change management.

Conclusions and Managerial Implications

Due to its holistic approach, broad focus and important role in affecting both individual and team-level outcomes, servant leadership has seen a proliferation of studies in the last 20 years. In response to this research trend, the aim of this paper was threefold. First of all, the recent evolution of the field was depicted through the identification of the main articles cluster that has been cited the most, thus representing the consolidated literature. Second, the development of the research trends over time was framed on the basis of the co-occurrence of authors’ keywords. Third, by conducting analyses on the main subset of papers, the authors presented some general insights on the topic, such as its temporal and geographical development, the main contexts where it has been studied and applied, the most cited papers providing a significant contribution to the field and the most influential journals and authors. The results of the analyses conducted in the present study indicate that the interpretation of servant leadership prevailing in literature is positive, due to the promising attitudinal, behavioural and performance outcomes that it can produce on followers.

Nevertheless, scholars should examine the potential drawbacks of servant leadership, assess its validity across industries, as well as identify the best scenario where it can be implemented. From a practical standpoint, managers should consider the importance of promoting servant leadership in employment settings, to develop specific skills and ultimately improve an organizational climate of empowerment. The servant leadership approach may be particularly effective in the post covid-19 scenario and / or in contexts characterized by a high degree of volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity (VUCA). In these environments, leaders struggle to make all decisions, thus requiring the proactiveness and motivational orientation of all employees, which have been identified as important mediators to positive followers’ outcomes in the servant leadership research (Eva et al., 2019 ). Specifically, further considerations are needed in relation to the potential role of this leadership practice in empowering and supporting followers, as well as in giving them the right degree of autonomy and responsibility to take on new challenges and act on behalf of the company when pressured by the external environment.

Data Availability

Code availability, declarations.

We have no conflict of interest or competing interest to disclose.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Contributor Information

Alice Canavesi, Email: ti.cuil@isevanaca .

Eliana Minelli, Email: ti.cuil@illenime .

• Adriaanse LS, Rensleigh C. Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar: A content comprehensiveness comparison. The Electronic Library. 2013; 31 (6):727–744. doi: 10.1108/EL-12-2011-0174. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Allen GP, Moore WM, Moser LN, Neill KK, Sambamoorthi U, Bell HS. The role of Servant Leadership and Transformational Leadership in Academic Pharmacy. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education. 2016; 80 (7):113. doi: 10.5688/ajpe807113. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Andersen J. When a servant-leader comes knocking … Leadership & Organization Development Journal. 2009; 30 :4–15. doi: 10.1108/01437730910927070. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Barbuto JE, Jr, Wheeler DW. Scale development and construct clarification of servant leadership. Group & Organization Management. 2006; 31 (3):300–326. doi: 10.1177/1059601106287091. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bass BM. Leadership and performance beyond expectations. Free Press; 1985. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bergman EML. Finding citations to social work literature: The relative benefits of using Web of Science, Scopus, or Google Scholar. The Journal of Academic Librarianship. 2012; 38 (6):370–379. doi: 10.1016/j.acalib.2012.08.002. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bol T, Vaan M, Rijt A. The Matthew effect in science funding. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2018; 115 (19):201719557. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1719557115. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Buchen IH. Servant leadership: A model for future faculty and future institutions. Journal of Leadership Studies. 1998; 5 (1):125–134. doi: 10.1177/107179199800500111. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chadegani AA, Salehi H, Yunus MM, Farhadi H, Fooladi M, Farhadi M, Ebrahim NA. A comparison between two main academic literature collections: Web of Science and Scopus Databases. Asian Social Science. 2013; 9 (5):18–26. doi: 10.5539/ass.v9n5p18. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chen CY, Chen CHV, Li CI. The influence of leader's spiritual values of servant leadership on employee motivational autonomy and eudaemonic well-being. Journal of Religion and Health. 2013; 52 :418–438. doi: 10.1007/s10943-011-9479-3. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chen Z, Zhu J, Zhou M. How does a servant leader fuel the service fire? A multilevel model of servant leadership, individual self identity, group competition climate, and customer service performance. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2015; 100 (2):511–521. doi: 10.1037/a0038036. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chenwei L, Whee LH, Johnson RE, Szu-Han L. Serving you depletes me? A leader-centric examination of servant leadership behaviors. Journal of Management. 2021; 47 (5):1185–1218. [ Google Scholar ]
• Chiniara M, Bentein K. Linking servant leadership to individual performance: Differentiating the mediating role of autonomy, competence and relatedness need satisfaction. Leadership Quarterly. 2016; 27 (1):124. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2015.08.004. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chughtai AA. Servant leadership and follower outcomes: Mediating effects of organizational identification and psychological safety. The Journal of Psychology. 2016; 150 (7):866–880. doi: 10.1080/00223980.2016.1170657. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Colicchia C, Strozzi F. Supply chain risk management: A new methodology for a systematic literature review. Supply Chain Management. 2012; 17 (4):403–418. doi: 10.1108/13598541211246558. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dennis RS, Bocarnea M. Development of the servant leadership assessment instrument. Leadership & Organization Development Journal. 2005; 26 (7):600–615. doi: 10.1108/01437730510633692. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ehrhart MG. Leadership and procedural justice climate as antecedents of unit-level organizational citizenship behavior. Personnel Psychology. 2004; 57 (1):61–94. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2004.tb02484.x. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Eva N, Robin M, Sendjaya S, vanDierendonck D, Liden RC. Servant leadership: A systematic review and call for future research. Leadership Quarterly. 2019; 30 (1):111. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2018.07.004. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Falagas ME, Pitsouni EI, Malietzis GA, Pappas G. Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: strengths and weaknesses. The FASEB Journal, Life Sciences Forum. 2017; 22 :338–342. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Farling ML, Stone AG, Winston BE. Servant leadership: Setting the stage for empirical research. Journal of Leadership Studies. 1999; 6 (1–2):49–72. doi: 10.1177/107179199900600104. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Freeman RE, Wicks AC, Parmar B. Stakeholder theory and "the corporate objective revisited". Organization Science. 2004; 15 (3):364–369. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1040.0066. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gulati R, Nohria N, Wohlgezogen F. Roaring out of recession. Harvard Business Review. 2010; 88 :62–69. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hale JR, Fields DL. Exploring servant leadership across cultures: A study of followers in Ghana and the USA. SAGE Publications. 2007; 3 (4):397–417. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hoch JE, Bommer WH, Dulebohn JH, Wu D. Do ethical, authentic, and servant leadership explain variance above and beyond transformational leadership? A meta-analysis. Journal of Management. 2018; 44 (2):501–529. doi: 10.1177/0149206316665461. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hsiao C, Lee YH, Chen WJ. The effect of servant leadership on customer value co-creation: A cross-level analysis of key mediating roles. Tourism Management. 2015; 49 :45–57. doi: 10.1016/j.tourman.2015.02.012. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hu J, Liden RC. Antecedents of team potency and team effectiveness: An examination of goal and process clarity and servant leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2011; 96 (4):851. doi: 10.1037/a0022465. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hunter EM, Neubert MJ, Perry SJ, Witt LA, Penney LM, Weinberger E. Servant leaders inspire servant followers: Antecedents and outcomes for employees and the organization. Leadership Quarterly. 2013; 24 (2):316. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2012.12.001. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Jesson J, Matheson L, Lacey FM. Doing your literature Review: Traditional and systematic techniques. SAGE Publications; 2011. [ Google Scholar ]
• Jiang K, Chuang C, Chiao Y. Developing collective customer knowledge and service climate: The interaction between service-oriented high-performance work systems and service leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2015; 100 (4):1089. doi: 10.1037/apl0000005. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Karatepe OM, Ozturk A, Kim TT. Servant leadership, organisational trust, and bank employee outcomes. The Service Industries Journal. 2019; 39 (2):86–108. doi: 10.1080/02642069.2018.1464559. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kauppila, O. P., Ehrnrooth, M., Makela, K., Smale, A., Sumelius, J., & Vuorenmaa, H. (2018). Serving to help and helping to serve: Employee reactions to HR Manager Servant Leadership. Academy of Management.
• Lee A, Lyubovnikova J, Amy WT, Knight C. Servant leadership: A meta-analytic examination of incremental contribution, moderation, and mediation. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology. 2019; 93 (1):1–44. doi: 10.1111/joop.12265. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Liden RC, Wayne SJ, Zhao H, Henderson D. Servant leadership: Development of a multidimensional measure and multi-level assessment. Leadership Quarterly. 2008; 19 (2):161. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2008.01.006. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Liden RC, Wayne SJ, Liao C, Meuser JD. Servant Leadership and serving culture: Influence on individual and unit performance. Academy of Management Journal. 2014; 57 (5):1434. doi: 10.5465/amj.2013.0034. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Liden RC, Wayne SJ, Meuser JD, Hu J, Wu J, Liao C. Servant leadership: Validation of a short form of the SL-28. Leadership Quarterly. 2015; 26 (2):254. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2014.12.002. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Liu H. Just the servant: An intersectional critique of servant leadership. Journal of Business Ethics. 2019; 156 :1099–1112. doi: 10.1007/s10551-017-3633-0. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Liu B, Hu W, Cheng Y. From the west to the east: Validating servant leadership in the Chinese public sector. Public Personnel Management. 2015; 44 (1):25–45. doi: 10.1177/0091026014555995. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Neubert MJ, Kacmar KM, Carlson DS, Chonko LB, Roberts JA. Regulatory focus as a mediator of the influence of initiating structure and servant leadership on employee behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2008; 93 (6):1220. doi: 10.1037/a0012695. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Neubert MJ, Hunter EM, Tolentino RC. A servant leader and their stakeholders: When does organizational structure enhance a leader's influence? Leadership Quarterly. 2016; 27 (6):896. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2016.05.005. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Newman A, Schwarz G, Cooper B, Sendjaya S. How servant leadership influences organizational citizenship behavior: The roles of LMX, empowerment, and proactive personality: JBE JBE. Journal of Business Ethics. 2017; 145 (1):49–62. doi: 10.1007/s10551-015-2827-6. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ozyilmaz A, Cicek SS. How does servant leadership affect employee attitudes, behaviors, and psychological climates in a for-profit organizational context? Journal of Management and Organization. 2015; 21 (3):263–290. doi: 10.1017/jmo.2014.80. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Padilla A, Hogan R, Kaiser RB. The toxic triangle: Destructive leaders, susceptible followers, and conducive environments. Leadership Quarterly. 2007; 18 (3):176. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2007.03.001. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Palumbo R. Challenging servant leadership in the nonprofit sector: The side effects of servant leadership. Journal of Nonprofit Education and Leadership. 2015; 6 (2):81–98. [ Google Scholar ]
• Parris DL, Peachey JW. A systematic literature review of servant leadership theory in organizational contexts: JBE JBE. Journal of Business Ethics. 2013; 113 (3):377–393. doi: 10.1007/s10551-012-1322-6. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Peterson SJ, Galvin BM, Lange D. CEO servant leadership: Exploring executive characteristics and firm performance. Personnel Psychology. 2012; 65 (3):565. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2012.01253.x. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Reed LL, Vidaver-cohen D, Colwell SR. A new scale to measure executive servant leadership: Development, analysis, and implications for research: JBE. Journal of Business Ethics. 2011; 101 (3):415–434. doi: 10.1007/s10551-010-0729-1. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rodríguez-Carvajal R, Herrero M, van Dierendonck D, De Rivas S, Moreno-Jiménez B. Servant leadership and goal attainment through meaningful life and vitality: A diary study. Journal of Happiness Studies. 2019; 20 (2):499–521. doi: 10.1007/s10902-017-9954-y. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Russell RF. The role of values in servant leadership. Leadership & Organization Development Journal. 2001; 22 (2):76–84. doi: 10.1108/01437730110382631. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sendjaya S, Sarros JC, Santora JC. Defining and measuring servant leadership behaviour in organizations. The Journal of Management Studies. 2008; 45 (2):402. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6486.2007.00761.x. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sendjaya S, Nathan E, Butar IB, Robin M, Castles S. SLBS-6: Validation of a short form of the servant leadership behavior scale. Journal of Business Ethics. 2019; 156 (4):941–956. doi: 10.1007/s10551-017-3594-3. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Spears L. Reflections on robert K. greenleaf and servant-leadership. Leadership & Organization Development Journal. 1996; 17 (7):33–35. doi: 10.1108/01437739610148367. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Stone GA, Russell RF, Patterson K. Transformational versus servant leadership: A difference in leader focus. Leadership & Organization Development Journal. 2004; 25 (4):349–361. doi: 10.1108/01437730410538671. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Strozzi F, Colicchia C, Creazza A, Noè C. Literature review on the ‘smart factory’ concept using bibliometric tools. International Journal of Production Research. 2017; 55 :6572–6591. doi: 10.1080/00207543.2017.1326643. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sun PYT. The servant identity: Influences on the cognition and behavior of servant leaders. Leadership Quarterly. 2013; 24 (4):544. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.03.008. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tang G, Kwan HK, Zhang D, Zhu Z. Work-family effects of servant leadership: The roles of emotional exhaustion and personal learning: JBE JBE. Journal of Business Ethics. 2016; 137 (2):285–297. doi: 10.1007/s10551-015-2559-7. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Van Dierendonck D, Stam D, Boersma P, de Windt N, Alkema J. Same difference? exploring the differential mechanisms linking servant leadership and transformational leadership to follower outcomes. Leadership Quarterly. 2014; 25 (3):544. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.11.014. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Van Eck NJ, Waltman L, Noyons ECM, Butter RK. Automatic term identification for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics. 2010; 82 (3):581–596. doi: 10.1007/s11192-010-0173-0. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Waltman L, Van Eck NJ, Noyons CM. A unified approach to mapping and clustering of bibliometric networks. Journal of Informetrics. 2010; 4 (4):629–635. doi: 10.1016/j.joi.2010.07.002. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Walumbwa FO, Hartnell CA, Oke A. Servant leadership, procedural justice climate, service climate, employee attitudes, and organizational citizenship behavior: A cross-level investigation. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2010; 95 (3):517. doi: 10.1037/a0018867. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Winston B, Fields D. Seeking and measuring the essential behaviors of servant leadership. Leadership & Organization Development Journal. 2015; 36 (4):413–434. doi: 10.1108/LODJ-10-2013-0135. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wu J, Liden RC, Liao C, Wayne SJ. Does manager servant leadership lead to follower serving behaviors? It depends on follower self-interest. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2021; 106 :152–167. doi: 10.1037/apl0000500. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Yang Y-F. Studies of transformational leadership in consumer service: Leadership trust and the mediating-moderating role of cooperative conflict management. Psychological Reports. 2012; 110 (1):315–337. doi: 10.2466/01.07.21.PR0.110.1.315-337. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Yang J, Liu H, Gu J. A multi-level study of servant leadership on creativity: The roles of self-efficacy and power distance. Leadership & Organization Development Journal. 2017; 38 (5):610–629. doi: 10.1108/LODJ-10-2015-0229. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Yang J, Gu J, Liu H. Servant leadership and employee creativity: The roles of psychological empowerment and work–family conflict. Current Psychology. 2019; 38 (5):1–11. [ Google Scholar ]
• Yoshida DT, Sendjaya S, Hirst G, Cooper B. Does servant leadership foster creativity and innovation? A multi-level mediation study of identification and prototypicality. Journal of Business Research. 2014; 67 (7):1395. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.08.013. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zhou Y, Miao Q. Servant leadership and affective commitment in the Chinese public sector: The mediating role of perceived organizational support. Psychology Reports. 2014; 115 (2):381–395. doi: 10.2466/01.21.PR0.115c23z4. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

How it works

For Business

Join Mind Tools

Article • 10 min read

Servant Leadership

Putting your team first, and yourself second.

By the Mind Tools Content Team

A good objective of leadership is to help those who are doing poorly to do well and to help those who are doing well to do even better. – Jim Rohn, American entrepreneur.

Everyone on Samit's team knows that he's "there for them." He checks in with them often to see how they are, and he helps them develop the skills they need to advance their careers, even if this means that they may move on.

Samit also makes an effort to see situations from others' perspectives. He makes decisions with the team's best interests in mind, and ensures that everyone has the resources and knowledge they need to meet their objectives.

As a result of this, his team is one of the most successful in the department, with low staff turnover and high engagement.

Samit is an example of a "servant leader." In this article, we'll explore what servant leadership is, and the advantages it can bring you as a leader. We'll also look at situations where it isn't appropriate.

What Is Servant Leadership?

Robert K. Greenleaf first coined the phrase "servant leadership" in his 1970 essay, " The Servant as a Leader ." However, it's an approach that people have used for centuries.

As a servant leader, you're a "servant first" – you focus on the needs of others, especially team members, before you consider your own. You acknowledge other people's perspectives, give them the support they need to meet their work and personal goals, involve them in decisions where appropriate, and build a sense of community within your team. This leads to higher engagement, more trust, and stronger relationships with team members and other stakeholders. It can also lead to increased innovation .

Servant leadership is not a leadership style or technique as such. Rather it's a way of behaving that you adopt over the longer term. It complements democratic leadership styles, and it has similarities with Transformational Leadership – which is often the most effective style to use in business situations – and Level 5 Leadership – which is where leaders demonstrate humility in the way they work.

However, servant leadership is problematic in hierarchical, autocratic cultures where managers and leaders are expected to make all the decisions. Here, servant leaders may struggle to earn respect.

Remember that servant leadership is about focusing on other people's needs – not their feelings. Don't avoid making unpopular decisions or giving team members negative feedback when it's needed.

Also, do not rely on it exclusively – use it alongside styles like Transformational Leadership, where you develop an inspiring vision of the future, motivate people to deliver this, manage its implementation, and build an ever-stronger team.

How to Become a Servant Leader

According to Larry C. Spears, former president of the Robert K. Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership, these are the 10 most important characteristics of servant leaders:

• Persuasion.
• Conceptualization.
• Stewardship.
• Commitment to the growth of people.
• Building community.

From "Character and Servant Leadership: 10 Characteristics of Effective, Caring Leaders" by Larry C. Spears, published in "The Journal of Virtues and Leadership," Vol. 1, Issue 1. Reproduced with permission.

Once you've decided to prioritize other people's needs over your own in the long term, you can work on developing your skills in each area. Let's look at how you can do this.

1. Listening

You'll serve people better when you make a deep commitment to listening intently to them and understanding what they're saying. To improve your listening skills , give people your full attention, take notice of their body language, avoid interrupting them before they've finished speaking, and give feedback on what they say.

Servant leaders strive to understand other people's intentions and perspectives. You can be more empathetic by putting aside your viewpoint temporarily, valuing others' perspectives, and approaching situations with an open mind.

This characteristic relates to the emotional health and "wholeness" of people, and involves supporting them both physically and mentally.

First, make sure that your people have the knowledge, support and resources they need to do their jobs effectively, and that they have a healthy workplace . Then take steps to help them be happy and engaged in their roles.

You could also use a tool such as the Triple Bottom Line to think about how your organization can make a positive impact on the people you lead and the customers you serve.

4. Self-Awareness

Self-awareness is the ability to look at yourself, think deeply about your emotions and behavior, and consider how they affect the people around you and align with your values .

You can become more self-aware by knowing your strengths and weaknesses , and asking for other people's feedback on them. Also, learn to manage your emotions , so that you consider how your actions and behavior might affect others.

5. Persuasion

Servant leaders use persuasion, rather than their authority, to encourage people to take action. They also aim to build consensus in groups , so that everyone supports decisions.

There are many tools and models that you can use to be more persuasive, without damaging relationships or taking advantage of others. You should also build your expert power – when people perceive you as an expert, they are more likely to listen to you when you want to persuade or inspire them.

6. Conceptualization

This characteristic relates to your ability to "dream great dreams," so that you look beyond day-to-day realities to the bigger picture.

If you're a senior leader in your company, work through and develop a robust organizational strategy . Then, whatever level you're at, create mission and vision statements for your team, and make it clear how people's roles tie in with your team's and organization's long-term objectives. Also, develop long-term focus so that you stay motivated to achieve your more distant goals, without getting distracted.

7. Foresight

Foresight is when you can predict what's likely to happen in the future by learning from past experiences, identifying what's happening now, and understanding the consequences of your decisions.

You can use tools such as SWOT Analysis and PEST Analysis to think about your current situation and environment, while Scenario Analysis helps you understand how the future could play out. Use the ORAPAPA checklist when you make a decision, to learn from experience and make sure that you've considered all the angles.

Also, learn to trust your intuition – if your instinct is telling you that something is wrong, listen to it!

8. Stewardship

Stewardship is about taking responsibility for the actions and performance of your team, and being accountable for the role team members play in your organization.

Whether you're a formal leader or not, you have a responsibility for the things that happen in your company. Take time to think about your own values, as well as those of your organization, so that you know what you will and won't stand for. Also, lead by example by demonstrating the values and behaviors that you want to see in others, and have the confidence to stand up to people when they act in a way that isn't aligned with them.

9. Commitment to the Growth of People

Servant leaders are committed to the personal and professional development of everyone on their teams.

To develop your people , make sure that you use Training Needs Assessments to understand their developmental needs and give them the skills they need to do their jobs effectively. Also, find out what their personal goals are, and see if you can give them projects or additional responsibilities that will help them achieve these.

10. Building Community

The last characteristic is to do with building a sense of community within your organization.

You can do this by providing opportunities for people to interact with one another across the company. For instance, you could organize social events such as team lunches and barbecues, design your workspace to encourage people to chat informally away from their desks, and dedicate the first few minutes of meetings to non-work-related conversations.

Encourage people to take responsibility for their work, and remind them how what they do contributes to the success and overall objectives of the organization.

See our article on Leadership Styles to explore popular leadership approaches and the advantages and disadvantages of each one.

And see this Expert Interview for a valuable discussion on the misconceptions and realities of servant leadership.

You are a servant leader when you focus on the needs of others before you consider your own. It's a longer-term approach to leadership, rather than a technique that you can adopt in specific situations. Therefore, you can use it with other leadership styles such as Transformational Leadership.

You can become a servant leader by working on these 10 characteristics:

Servant leaders are likely to have more engaged employees and enjoy better relationships with team members and other stakeholders than leaders who don't put the interests of others before their own.

You've accessed 1 of your 2 free resources.

Get unlimited access

Discover more content

Book Insights

Leaders Don't Command: Inspire Growth, Ingenuity and Collaboration

Jorge Cuervo

Expert Interviews

Open Leadership

Charlene Li

Add comment

Comments (0)

Be the first to comment!

Team Management

Learn the key aspects of managing a team, from building and developing your team, to working with different types of teams, and troubleshooting common problems.

Sign-up to our newsletter

Subscribing to the Mind Tools newsletter will keep you up-to-date with our latest updates and newest resources.

Subscribe now

Business Skills

Personal Development

Leadership and Management

Member Extras

Most Popular

Newest Releases

SWOT Analysis

SMART Goals

Mind Tools Store

About Mind Tools Content

Discover something new today

How to stop procrastinating.

Overcoming the Habit of Delaying Important Tasks

What Is Time Management?

Working Smarter to Enhance Productivity

How Emotionally Intelligent Are You?

Boosting Your People Skills

Self-Assessment

What's Your Leadership Style?

Learn About the Strengths and Weaknesses of the Way You Like to Lead

Recommended for you

Getting a new boss.

Starting an Important New Relationship in a Positive Way

Business Operations and Process Management

Strategy Tools

Customer Service

Business Ethics and Values

Handling Information and Data

Project Management

Knowledge Management

Self-Development and Goal Setting

Time Management

Presentation Skills

Learning Skills

Career Skills

Communication Skills

Negotiation, Persuasion and Influence

Working With Others

Difficult Conversations

Creativity Tools

Self-Management

Work-Life Balance

Stress Management and Wellbeing

Coaching and Mentoring

Change Management

Managing Conflict

Delegation and Empowerment

Performance Management

Leadership Skills

Developing Your Team

Talent Management

Problem Solving

Decision Making

Member Podcast

Servant Leadership: An Introduction

• First Online: 19 March 2019

Cite this chapter

• Gregory S. Sullivan 5  

Part of the book series: Palgrave Studies in Workplace Spirituality and Fulfillment ((PSTWSP))

1573 Accesses

This chapter is an introduction to the work of Robert K. Greenleaf, his seminal 1970 essay, Servant as Leader , and to some of the interpretations by leading Greenleaf authorities of his original works. The goal is to provide an understanding of how Greenleaf developed his ideas and they evolved. Interpretations of Greenleaf’s work are provided by two former CEOs of the Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership, Larry Spears and Kent Keith. Their insights enable the reader to gain an understanding of the attributes and behaviors of a servant leader. This chapter also discusses the growth of servant leadership as a dyadic (leader–follower) construct to a multilevel approach where a culture of serving can be developed. Finally, this chapter briefly addresses the growth and interest in servant leadership, particularly in the athletic domain.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Durable hardcover edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Autry, J. A. (2001). The servant leader: How to build a creative team, develop great morale, and improve bottom-line performance . Roseville, CA: Prima.

Google Scholar  

Greenleaf, R. K. (1970). The servant as leader . Cambridge, MA: Center for Applied Studies.

Greenleaf, R. K. (1972). The institution as servant . Indianapolis, IN: Greenleaf Center.

Greenleaf, R. K. (1977). Servant leadership . Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press.

Keith, K. M. (2015). The case for servant leadership . Westfield, IN: Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership.

Parris, D. L., & Peachey, J. W. (2013). A systematic literature review of servant leadership theory in organizational contexts. Journal of Business Ethics, 113 (3), 377–393.

Article   Google Scholar  

Prosser, S. (2010). Servant leadership: More philosophy, less theory . Westfield, IN: The Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Sendjaya, S. (2015). Free air, more autonomous, more likely themselves to become servants? Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16196-9 .

Book   Google Scholar  

Spears, L. C. (2010). Servant leadership and Robert K. Greenleaf’s legacy. In D. van Dierendonck & K. Patterson (Eds.), Servant leadership: Developments in theory and research (pp. 11–24). Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Ohio University, Athens, OH, USA

Gregory S. Sullivan

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gregory S. Sullivan .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Sullivan, G.S. (2019). Servant Leadership: An Introduction. In: Servant Leadership in Sport. Palgrave Studies in Workplace Spirituality and Fulfillment. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11248-6_2

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11248-6_2

Published : 19 March 2019

Publisher Name : Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-11247-9

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-11248-6

eBook Packages : Business and Management Business and Management (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Christian Today

To enjoy our website, you'll need to enable JavaScript in your web browser. Please click here to learn how.

You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser to improve your experience.

Why is the call so urgent for more servant leaders?

In today's world, where leadership often equates to power, wealth, and fame, there is a growing quest for authentic influence. Grounded in Christian teachings, the concept of servant leadership offers profound insights, prioritising service over dominance.

Drawing from the teachings of Jesus in Mark 10:43-45, genuine leadership is defined: "Whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant." This biblical principle exemplifies servant leadership, a model lived out by Jesus Himself.

Further reinforcing this concept, Jesus teaches in Matthew 20:26-28: "Whoever wants to be first among you must be your slave - just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many."

Servant leadership transcends conventional authority, embodying humility, compassion, and selflessness. Rather than exploiting power, servant leaders prioritise the well-being of those they serve, fostering trust and collaboration through their example.

In an often busy society driven by ambition and self-promotion, the Christian perspective offers a transformative paradigm shift. It challenges us as individuals to measure success not by accolades but by the impact on others. True leadership, according to this ethos, is not about the size of one's following but the depth of one's service.

Kingdom leadership isn't about acquiring power but about utilising it for the betterment of others. It involves leading with compassion, integrity, and a genuine sense of purpose, rather than from a position of authority.

All genuine Christian leaders understand the importance of self-sacrifice and fully acknowledge that the ultimate sacrifice for the whole of mankind has already been made. Followers of Jesus are empowered, confident, and fully assured in this knowledge, yet they remain humble. With the Holy Spirit alive in them, they are imbued with God-consciousness, enabling them to both lead and follow simultaneously.

Confronting Contemporary Challenges

What makes this uniquely Christian approach indispensable in today's world?

In times of conflict and strife, servant leaders advocate for peace, seeking resolution and understanding rather than perpetuating division.

During periods of economic instability, servant leaders help to build bridges towards financial stability and seek wisdom amidst uncertainty.

Amidst political turmoil, servant leaders strive to become beacons of unity, transcending barriers with their messages of hope and collaboration.

In an era of information overload dominated by social media, conspiracy theories, and misinformation, servant leaders have the courage to break through the noise, listening, engaging, and challenging with grace and truth.

Always, in the event of bloodshed and war, the servant leader seeks out God's dominion to aid healing and reconciliation and to encourage these essentials to bring about lasting peace.

The HTB Leadership Conference 2024: A Gateway to Transformation

The HTB (Holy Trinity Brompton) Leadership Conference 2024, will be held at the iconic Royal Albert Hall on May 6th to May 7th, and will address key questions about leadership in the current cultural context, such as leading with courage and integrity amidst rapid change, empowering emerging leaders, fostering collaboration across generations, envisioning and challenging communities and workplaces, building resilience while avoiding burnout, and maintaining hope rooted in faith.

The lineup of hosts, speakers, and contributors includes renowned figures such as Nicky & Pippa Gumbel, Lecrae, Tom Holland, Kate Forbes, Dr. Amy Orr-Ewing, and Danielle Strickland.

For more information about the event, visit  https://www.leadershipconference.org.uk/

Dawkins and 'cultural Christianity': what does it all mean?

Matt Redman claims 'significant' abuse at hands of Mike Pilavachi

Rare Christian book expected to fetch millions at London auction

Resisting oppressive hate crime laws will come at a cost

MPs concerned about free speech 'double standards' in the UK ahead of pro-life volunteer's trial

Five reasons to love 'Doubting Thomas'

Leaning on God when His people disappoint

How did we get the word 'Easter?'

Paganism has colonised the Church

Large pile of burnt Bibles left outside church on Easter Sunday

Group of brands.

PSYCH 485 blog

The Question about Servant Leadership

April 7, 2024 by mzg5691 1 Comment

The definition of servant leadership “ begins with the natural feeling that one wants to serve, to serve first. Then conscious choice brings one to aspire to lead. . . . The difference manifests itself in the care taken by the servant—first to make sure that other people’s highest priority needs are being served. ” (Northouse,2021, pg.253). Simply stated; leaders place the needs, growth and wellbeing of their followers first, then lead the organization. Sounds like a positive leadership theory employers can utilize to better strengthen their workforce and their success together. However, how many companies implement servant leadership style? According to Modern Servant Leader website (Lichtenwalner, 2010), there are only 124 companies listed that practice servant leadership within their organizations.

Why is servant leadership so rare? Why aren’t there more servant leaders? The concept was written by Robert K Greenleaf in 1970 yet it is not a widely practiced leadership style. A leader has to have ten specific characteristics that would define them as servant leaders. Listening skills, empathy, healing, awareness, persuasion, conceptualization, foresight, stewardship, commitment to the growth of people and building community are essential (Northouse, 2021, pg. 255). Without these characteristics there would not be a servant leader. Essentially, a servant leader would work and exist amongst their followers contributing to the goals set forward for the organization. With hands on, feet on the ground approach a leader would know what their followers are experiencing as they too work for the common goal.

However, servant leadership is not a popular perspective. It seems to be highly criticized with a lot of skepticism. In the article “Why Isn’t ‘Servant Leadership’ more prevalent? (Heskett, 2013)” Jim Heskett writes the comments he received from skeptics about his cynical question about servant leadership. Is it an oxymoron? One commentator wrote: “A majority of leaders as agents of principals see themselves as maniacally focused on getting short term results. (Heskett, 2013)” Another critic wrote: “the organizational model is not geared to move the ‘servant’ person to the top. (Heskett, 2013)”.

It seems the criticisms behind the servant leadership theory are louder than the concept itself. Northouse writes the term “servant” alone “creates semantic noise” that voids value (Northouse,2021, pg.269). The concept is not understandable on how this type of leadership ushers organizational change among other issues. However, despite these negative points, servant leadership approach is being utilized within business models today. As research continues, we will learn more of this leadership model and how it actually works.

Heskett, J. (2013, May). Why Isn’t “Servant Leadership” More Prevalent? HBS Working Knowledge. https://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/why-isnt-servant-leadership-more-prevalent

Lichtenwalner, B. (2010, August 21). Servant Leadership Companies List . Modern Servant Leader.

https://modernservantleader.com/featured/servant-leadership-companies-list/ (Northouse, 2021-02-02)

Northouse, P. G.  (2021-02-02). Leadership: Theory and Practice,  9th Edition. [[VitalSource Bookshelf version]].  Retrieved from bned://9781071834473

April 9, 2024 at 7:54 pm

It’s intriguing to see that despite its promising premise, servant leadership isn’t widely practiced. Only a handful of companies actively embrace it (Lichtenwalner, 2010). This scarcity might be because it’s tough for leaders to embody the specific qualities outlined by Greenleaf consistently. Also, traditional organizational models, which prioritize short-term gains, might clash with the long-term focus of servant leadership. Additionally, skepticism around the term “servant” itself might create hesitation. However, there are signs of progress as some companies are starting to integrate servant leadership principles (Heskett, 2013). This suggests a growing appreciation for its benefits. Further research could offer more insights into its effectiveness and impact on organizational success.

Heskett, J. (2013, May). Why Isn’t “Servant Leadership” More Prevalent? HBS Working Knowledge. https://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/why-isnt-servant-leadership-more-prevalent

Lichtenwalner, B. (2010, August 21). Servant Leadership Companies List. Modern Servant Leader.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

The relationship between servant leadership and team innovation performance: Mediating effect of self-efficacy

• Shen, Huayu

This study delves into the effects of servant leadership on team innovation performance by examining innovation self-efficacy as a mediating factor and team innovation atmosphere as a moderating factor. Utilizing a questionnaire survey of 311 hotel employees, we employed a structural equation model for rigorous data analysis. Our key findings are summarized as follows: (1) Servant leadership positively influences team innovation performance. Specifically, the dimensions of persuasion and guidance within servant leadership emerge as significant predictors of enhanced team innovation. (2) Servant leadership significantly boosts innovation self-efficacy, highlighting its crucial role in fostering a culture of innovation. (3) Innovation self-efficacy emerges as a pivotal mediator between servant leadership and team innovation performance, underscoring its importance in translating leadership behaviours into tangible innovation outcomes. (4) The team innovation atmosphere positively moderates the relationship between innovation self-efficacy and team innovation performance, indicating that a supportive environment can amplify the impact of individuals' self-beliefs on collective innovation. This research offers valuable theoretical and practical insights into harnessing the power of servant leadership to enhance innovation self-efficacy and, ultimately, team innovation performance. Our findings contribute to a richer understanding of how these variables interact and can inform the development of more effective leadership strategies in organizations seeking to foster a culture of innovation.

• Servant leadership;
• Team innovation performance;
• Innovation self-efficacy;
• Team innovation atmosphere;
• Structural equation model