Evidence-Based Servant Leadership: Development, Mechanisms, and Constraints
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.63501/8qqqsz90Keywords:
Servant Leadership, Leadership, Professionalism; Ethics, Professional, Interpersonal Relations; Mentoring, Safety Management, Organizational Innovation, Non-negotiablesAbstract
Background: Whether servant leadership is innate or can be deliberately developed is a central question for organizations seeking both high performance and a healthy culture. Contemporary scholarship conceptualizes servant leadership as a behavioral philosophy that encompasses empowerment, humility, stewardship, interpersonal acceptance, and clarity rather than a fixed personality type.
Methods: This narrative review synthesized peer-reviewed research, integrative reviews, and meta-analyses on servant leadership, focusing on (a) teachable micro-behaviors, (b) organizational conditions that sustain behavior change, and (c) boundaries where selection and accountability are preferable to training. Key databases and leadership journals were searched for studies on servant leadership, leader humility, psychological safety, and leadership development effectiveness.
Results: Servant leadership behaviors such as deep listening, empowering with guardrails, coaching, transparent decision-making, and humility-in-action are trainable through high-frequency practice and reinforced by validated instruments. These practices reliably enhance psychological safety and team outcomes. However, durable impact requires alignment with organizational systems, including hiring profiles, onboarding, 360-degree feedback, promotion criteria, and meeting norms. Certain dispositions, including integrity, genuine humility, and respect for others, emerge as non-teachables; they must be addressed through selection and accountability rather than curriculum. Tolerating incivility, even from high performers, undermines retention and innovation.
Conclusion: Servant leadership is teachable when approached as both behavioral training and system change. Organizations should adopt a dual strategy: train observable servant behaviors while wiring systems that reward them, and hire/promote for the non-negotiables that training cannot manufacture. This integrated approach shifts servant leadership from an aspirational philosophy to a scalable, durable operating system.
References
Avolio, B. J., & Hannah, S. T. (2008). Developmental readiness: Accelerating leader development. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 60(4), 331–347. https://doi.org/10.1037/1065-9293.60.4.331
Day, D. V. (2014). The leadership development literature in context: A 25-year review. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(1), 63–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.11.004
Edmondson, A. C. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350–383. https://doi.org/10.2307/2666999
Eva, N., Robin, M., Sendjaya, S., van Dierendonck, D., & Liden, R. C. (2019). Servant leadership: A systematic review and call for future research. The Leadership Quarterly, 30(1), 111–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2018.06.004
Greenleaf, R. K. (1970). The servant as leader. Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership.
Hoch, J. E., Bommer, W. H., Dulebohn, J. H., & Wu, D. (2018). Do ethical, authentic, and servant leadership explain variance above and beyond transformational leadership? A meta-analysis. Journal of Management, 44(2), 501–529. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206316665461
Lee, A., Lyubovnikova, J., Tian, A. W., & Knight, C. (2020). Servant leadership: A meta-analytic examination of incremental contribution, moderation, and mediation. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 93(1), 1–44. https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12265
Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., Zhao, H., & Henderson, D. (2008). Servant leadership: Development of a multidimensional measure and multi-level assessment. The Leadership Quarterly, 19(2), 161–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2008.01.006
Owens, B. P., & Hekman, D. R. (2016). How does leader humility influence team performance? Exploring the mechanisms of contagion and collective promotion focus. Academy of Management Journal, 59(3), 1088–1111. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2013.0660
Owens, B. P., Johnson, M. D., & Mitchell, T. R. (2013). Expressed humility in organizations: Implications for performance, teams, and leadership. Organization Science, 24(5), 1517–1538. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1120.0795
Porath, C., & Pearson, C. (2013). The price of incivility. Harvard Business Review, 91(1–2), 114–121.
Roberts, B. W., & DelVecchio, W. F. (2000). The rank-order consistency of personality traits from childhood to old age: A quantitative review of longitudinal studies. Psychological Bulletin, 126(1), 3–25. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.126.1.3
Roberts, B. W., Walton, K. E., & Viechtbauer, W. (2006). Patterns of mean-level change in personality traits across the life course: A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Psychological Bulletin, 132(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.132.1.1
van Dierendonck, D. (2011). Servant leadership: A review and synthesis. Journal of Management, 37(4), 1228–1261. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206310380462
van Dierendonck, D., & Nuijten, I. (2011). The Servant Leadership Survey: Development and validation of a multidimensional measure. Journal of Business and Psychology, 26(3), 249–267. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-010-9194-1
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution, and reproduction in any medium or format, provided appropriate credit is given to the author(s) and the source. To view a copy of this license, visit: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0