How servant leadership is misunderstood
Empowering people to do their best
Putting people's needs above one's own
Uplifting people through challenges
Unlocking individual potential and purpose
Giving people ownership for their work
These are some signature characteristics of servant leaders. They turn the traditional leadership model and power dynamics on its head. Their primary goal is to serve the people placed in their care instead of asserting authority. They serve with humility without wanting to take credit. They value ethics over profit. The people are the center focus.
Frances Frei and Anne Morriss aptly describe this phenomenon when they said, "Leadership is about making others better, as the result of our presence and in a way that lasts into our absence."
As a conductor, I wholeheartedly identify as a servant leader. It feels right and I'm proud of it.
At the same time, servant leadership is often misunderstood. This article outlines where some confusion lies. Here are the three that stood out in describing how I am usually perceived and judged:
Servant leaders are doormats. That they're push overs for employees to take advantage of them.
Servant leaders are subservient -- slaves to their environment -- hence, submissive, passive, and unassertive.
Servant leaders are weak leaders (or soft) because they want to serve. Therefore, they can't handle tough situations or work bullies, or deal with high pressure or conflict.
For me, these perceptions suck away my confidence, they erode my conviction, and they inject doubt.
***
I realized that the powerful qualities of service are also what makes it difficult to grasp as a concept.
When I aim to serve my people, there is no single formula that will work every single time. That's because the people are often different each time. What the people need constantly changes. Even if the same people remain, the circumstances may change and my leadership strategies would need to adapt.
The need for servant leaders to constantly adapt their strategies and approaches leads to operating much of the time in a state of uncertainty. That is inherently a very uncomfortable state - for the leader, the people being led, and the observers in the sidelines. There is also a kind of flexibility that is extremely positive in theory: servant leaders tailor-make their approaches to the specific people, resulting in effective leadership. However, this same flexibility makes the leadership style challenging to codify and generalize. There is no specific step-by-step guide.
It's not an accident that most literature on servant leadership utilizes words like characteristics, core values, dimensions, or principles as attempts to describe the leadership style. The elements are conceptual more than practical.
The reality is that operating within servant leadership involves experimentation over time. It requires faith in a set of principles, rather than a user manual passed down from leader to leader. It demands emotional labor to care for others and a degree of vulnerability to accept that the leader's ego is the least important item in the room.
These are challenging ideas to grapple with.
Criticism of servant leadership is perhaps more of a fear response to the discomfort in that challenge rather than a critique of the leadership style itself.
***
So it is about getting it wrong while having the courage to assess what went wrong and ask for feedback so I can get it more right next time.
Courage is only part of the equation. We need to be brave to try something new with the possibility of getting it wrong. Yet, we can't do it alone. Safety is the other part of the equation. That is generated by the people and environment around us. We need to feel safe to follow through with the courageous act.
Now, what's challenging is that these professional situations feel high-stakes. If I get it wrong, they may not want me back. If I get it wrong, my reputation might suffer. If I get it wrong, I may not be seen as a valid leader.
I think we can recognize that this is the silent dilemma we all face when we want to do better.
How could we see getting it wrong as a welcome sign of trying hard enough?
How could we see getting it right as a warning sign for being complacent and stagnant?
Curious? Sign up to receive an email with each new post!
Prefer to watch/listen instead?
Here's the blog in video format!
