Overall great paper. To get even more points I would recommend dig.docx

Overall great paper. To get even more points I would
recommend digging in deeper in your analysis of the articles in
D & E by avoiding just mentioning some broad problems or
ideas. Instead, provide more specifics and details. See example
under Course Questions in eCollege. By elaborating on D & E,
you can cut back on your summary responses (A-C). 28.5
I. The Social Scientific Study of Leadership: Quo Vadis?
a. Major Theories/Literature Presented
This article discusses the major theories of leadership, and some
of the sub-theories within these categories, including a) traits b)
behaviors c) contingency and d) neo-charismatic theory.
Traits theory is based on the premise that leaders have certain
unique characteristics which define them as a leader, and thus
leaders are naturally born and cannot be taught. This theory is
easy to dismiss due to the lack of empirical evidence and
consistency to traits. However, this is the nature of any theory
in the early 1900s, as appropriate guidelines were not set. In
addition, some of the study was skewed from invalid data.
When that data is removed, it was found that some traits are
representative of effective leadership. Noteworthy sub-theories
which fall into the trait theory, and involve nonconscious acts
or motives, are: Achievement Motivation Theory and Leader
Motive Profile (LMP). Achievement motivation comes from an
internal passion for achievement through individual effort.
People high in achievement motivation will set challenging
goals, and ensure that they are met. As indicated, this is high in
individual goals and tight control and active participation of the
individual, so it tends to predict effective performance for small
groups, but poor performance for executives of large
organizations; with limited empirical support. LMP involves
motives which theoretically should balance each other out, in

order to achieve results which benefit the group. LMP involves:
high power motivation, high concern for moral exercise of
power, and power motivation being greater than affiliative
motivation. Under this theory, one must first want and have the
capability to influence others, they must do so in an ethical way
and want the correct things for the group, and their desire for
power motivation has to be higher than their desire for
relationships. The final piece to this is due to the fact that
leader visions are not always popular, going against the status
quo and proposing change, so they will get pushback from
many. In order to achieve the results and produce change, the
desire for the end results has to be greater than the need to be
liked. Again, limited empirical evidence supports the
effectiveness of this theory, and major factor missing from this
theory, as well as all other trait theories, is situational variable
analysis.
Behavior Theory implies that leadership can be taught through
learned behaviors. The major contribution of this theory is task
oriented and people oriented. No behaviors were identified
which had subordinate satisfaction or effectiveness. What is
supported is that task oriented leaders perform best under high
and low control and people oriented is best under moderate
control. Like trait theory, a major limit of this theory is the
omission of situational factors.
Contingency Theory utilizes the essence of behavior theory,
while closing the gap on situational effects. A few significant
theories derived from contingency theory are Path-Goal Theory,
Life Cycle Theory, and Cognitive Resource Theory. Path-Goal
Theory deals with paths to achieve goals. However, it is so
multifaceted, that it has not be proven, nor believed to have
been properly tested. It also deals with the perception of
outcomes by the follower, and therefore contains rationality
bias. Life Cycle Theory proposes four leadership styles of
telling, selling, participating, and delegating; depending on the
followers ready and willingness, taking into account situational

factors. There is little empirical evidence of this theory. In
addition, it is utilized as training for leadership concepts, so it
should be tested further to understand the validity of the theory.
Cognitive Resource Theory focuses on the effects of
situationally induced stress on leaders and followers. This
theory entails a balance of resources of intelligence and
experience during stressful situations. Intelligence actually
interferes with effectiveness under high stress situations.
Intelligence negatively correlates to performance under high
stress situations. In addition, it also establishes ideal use of
participative versus directive styles.
The final main category of leadership theories is Neo-
charismatic Theory. All theories under this category provide
ideas on how leaders are able to lead and attain outstanding
accomplishments. It also provides insights on how certain
leaders gain commitment and drive motivation, and defines
leader behaviors’ that are emotionally appealing, such as
providing a passionate vision. Evidence supporting this theory
is mainly with informal leaders of task groups which has shown
to have high level of follower motivation and commitment and
produces results on performance. However, the measurement
system is for this theory is said to be flawed, as it does not
include all theoretical behaviors promoted by charismatic
leadership. Transformational theory is one of the charismatic
theories which appeals to followers emotions through social
influence. A major fault seen in this theory is that it is based on
Maslow’s theory of motivation which has been disproved
through empirical testing.
b. Empirical Evidence Data - N/A
c. Major Conclusions or Point of the Paper
Leadership has been studied and theorized since early 1900s,
and has gone through four major studies; traits, behavioral,
contingency, and charisma. Throughout this time many

leadership theories have been established, but most of them
require more study and empirical data to support the actual
theory presented. As well, a lot of the earlier studies lacked
sufficient resources and knowledge on appropriate methods to
collect data. Common themes exist among the different theories,
as some build on previous ideas. Different variables and
situations, such as stress and subordinate personality, appear to
be a major factor in successful leadership styles. As we live in a
dynamic environment, with many different personalities, there
may not be one style which is effective. The neo-charismatic
theory plays on trying to resolve these issues, and does the most
integration of theories, in regards to traits / behaviors.
However, even theories that fall in this category are not all the
way tested. Proper methods, research criteria, control variables,
and situations must be performed, and defined, before any one
leadership style is determined to be successful and efficient.
d. Major Strengths and Weaknesses of the Paper
The major strengths of the paper are that it provided a good and
organized summary of past major theories and limitations of the
theory based on present studies. The paper also covered the
distinguishing factors between management and leader
functions. The weaknesses were that of the scope of information
provided, as it was mentioned, the material covered was limited
to their own knowledge and judgment. To no fault of the
authors, the studies for most of the theories seemed one
dimensional. For example, the lack of studies on higher level
managers, utilizing lab studies, instead of practice, and lack of
women or culture influence.
e. Next Logical Step in Building on the Paper
Many future discussions and studies should be pursued in order
to bring clarity to vague or unstudied areas. Some areas which
were neglected, and where data should be collected are
implications of women in leadership, the cultural effects of
leadership due to globalization; individualistic versus

collectivist, and leadership styles for a diverse workplace.
In addition, in order to expand on the situational effects,
different industries should be studied to identify a common
theme.
Up to this point, many ideas have been established for
leadership, but it needs to be understood if leadership is too
complex, to be characterized in one way. It could require a
combination of multiple theories. This can be expressed through
valid and reliable studies with meaningful measures identified.
The focus in the past has been on lower level management and
their relationship and impact on immediate subordinates.
However, more studies need to include high level executives
and their impact on an organization as a whole to have
meaningful data. Within this data would be the executive’s
impact on organization culture, behavior, feelings, and
performance. Leaders which provide positive performance
through their strategies should be observed and leadership
qualities attained from the data. Another area to look at is the
routinization effects on charismatic leadership. Lastly, a fair
analysis of traits and behaviors should be revisited, and to
understand if leadership is from genetics, can it be taught
through training, mentoring, and experience, or is it a
combination of both.
II. Scholarly leadership of the study of leadership: A review of
The Leadership Quarterly’s second decade, 2000-2009
This article presented a summary of The Leadership Quarterly
(LQ) publications on scholarly leadership study on leadership
during 2000 – 2009, and analyzed the quality and material
within these articles. LQ did this in response to Lowe &
Gardner stating that LQ was the top scholarly journal for
leadership research, as in its vision, and that the second decade
would eliminate any questions on where to find the best

leadership research. This article was presented to see if LQ met
their mission and if not, what they could do in order to achieve
it, and to present ideas of where leadership studies will focus in
the future.
Leadership research has gained in interest over the recent
decade, and as such, LQ was started. LQ visits why, and if, this
interest in leadership study will continue. LQ also establishes
the quality of their publications, through multiple methods.
Citation analysis is done through the impact factor, which is a
way to measure the impact a journal has on others through
citation analysis. Two methods exist for calculating the impact
factor. The Journal Impact Factor (JIF), measures the average
citation frequency for a specific citable item in a journal for a
specific time. The other method is the Perish software that
search Google Scholar; including h-index and g-index as
measures.
Content analysis was done by collecting information on who
was publishing and what they were publishing. A deep dive into
the history of the editors total publications, their discipline
focus, and nationality was collected. As well, the type of
publication, prominent leadership contributors, and the specific
analytical methods used in empirical studies were collected. A
coding scheme was established for the empirical data, in which
two research team members coded and five team members
collectively came together at the end to resolve discrepancies.
The goals of LQ have been to publish a wide variety of
leadership topics from a wide array of author disciplines, and
make it applicable internationally. However, the majority of the
authors are from a business and management background and
from the United States; limiting the diversification of their
publications. Top institutional contributors were also looked at
to understand the quality of material submitted; the top being
University of Oklahoma. The special issues factor was looked

at, and explained that these issues actually produced higher
quality articles; a positive for LQ since a very high percentage
of their articles are from special issues. During the content
analysis LQ also found that the majority of the top 50 cited
articles have been in more recent, implying a growing impact.
In addition, the amount of topics has expanded, implying that
the research is broadening scope on leadership. On the same
note, the trend of traditional theory coverage has declined. The
current trend, according to this finding, is leaning toward new
theories.
The coding scheme, utilized for consistency, provided different
categories for the strength of empirical evidence. It was found
that the most common research strategy utilized in LQ
publications was the sample survey, followed closely by field
study. When looking at the mix of quantitative versus
qualitative analysis, quantitative increased substantially in the
second decade.
A focus group, made up of LQ board members, was then asked
to decide whether LQ had reached its goals. It was unanimously
decided that they had, but there were suggestions for
improvement; mainly on the review process for publication and
broadening the scope of the discipline, beyond management and
psychology.
Lastly, interviews were conducted with associate and senior
editors on their opinions of LQs success in achieving its
mission. The main points from these interviews dealt with
interdisciplinary success, international success, and top
strengths and weaknesses of the journal. It was noted that the
articles are more cross-disciplinary than interdisciplinary, as
most of the authors are within the same discipline. The goal is
to become more interdisciplinary. While the international scope
has increased, the interpretation of international is vague; in
regards to publishing and submitting. The LQ goal is to have
knowledge spanning across the globe on leadership. The editor

feedback on strengths and weaknesses included the appreciation
for new topic introduction and pushing the material covered on
leadership. While the weaknesses were seen in how different
disciplines viewed their overall rating.
b. For empirical papers ONLY
The methods used for analyzing publications content and quality
were a) content analysis b) citation analysis c) interviews and d)
questionnaires.
Citation Analysis:
Sample: 15 total, including LQ, top management and
psychology journals to compare impact of leadership studies
published.
Measures: Impact factor, where a collection of both two year
and five year JIF the Social Science Citation Index and the
Journal Citation Reports. As well, impact factor measure
included Perish software to establish an h-index and g-index.
This was achieved through calculations.
Variables: Utilized multiple top management and psychology
journals (14 others) to compare both impact factors.
· Years covered 2002 – 2009
· Ranking system for prominent leaders which contributed
Results: LQ is showing increased impact throughout the years,
and was ranked 8th of all journals in 2008; showing growing
impact through the years.
Content Analysis
Sample – Articles in LQ between 2002-2009 (353 articles)
Measures: Analytical methods used in empirical articles,
research designs used in articles, prominent leadership
contributions, type of article (empirical, theoretical, etc...),
editor information, editor total articles, and nationality, main

leadership contributors, and 50 most cited LQ articles. The
measures were achieved through data collection processes,
rankings, surveys, interviews, and focus groups.
Variables: Coding scheme for important measures in articles,
five research team members, and participant locations were
mainly from the United States, but varied.
Results: The number and type of publications showed that the
total number of publications has increased, with 55% of
publications being empirical and 80% in the form of journal
articles. Results also showed that only half of the articles
published were done so in regular issues, as LQ created two
extra publications through the year, known as “special issues”.
Lastly, the diversification of publication background showed
very little increase in author discipline and topics covered. As
well, little progress was made on the nationality of the authors,
where a majority of them were still from the United States.
LQ, a relatively new journal, has tried to establish credibility
over the last two decades for being the top journal for
leadership study. While internally, they feel they have met those
goals by including new and provocative leadership topics, LQ
has struggled with gaining acceptance and establishing itself as
the top journal by academic institutions. LQ has one focus;
leadership. When compared to other journals, this is a very
specific focus. As well, a LQ weakness is the means of
information is primarily coming from a limited number of
disciplines; management and psychology. This limits the scope
of coverage and interests that LQ will see in its publications,
and encourages stagnation of this topic again, due to the
repetitive nature of the same theories. LQ’s goal is to expand
beyond this with well supported and unique ideas, which
provide an impact and meaningful advancements in the
leadership. The amount of articles has undoubtedly increased in

LQ in the last decade. However, it remains unclear if this is due
to the sheer popularity and revival of this topic, or if they are
gaining respect. If leadership, as a topic, is just a trend, then
this number is skewed, and will eventually plummet.
LQ knows that it has to scrutinize publications which get
released in order to gain respect. As well, they know with the
global aspects of the business world, the international focus has
to strengthen. A combination of quality studies, diversification
of disciplines, and international focus will strengthen LQs
position, and reputation. The focus has to be broad enough to
cover and introduce solid ideas, but narrow enough to gain
knowledge and create an impact on leadership.
LQ’s predictions on the future of leadership focus dealt more
with ideas of methods, rather than topics. The methods which
LQ presented was reducing reliance on the past survey
measures, a more in depth coverage to gain understanding,
broaden research teams expertise, the evaluation of different
levels of leadership, and greater controlled experiments.
The major strength of the article is LQs interest, and focus, on
the impact of their publications. They utilized a comparison
with other top journals that fall in a similar genre, which gives
validity to the impact measure. The system utilized for the
impact measure was extensively covered, and was an
established system, as well as the coding scheme. The editors
did not give clear topics of where they thought leadership study
was headed next, which leaves the door open for any topic with
validity, instead of providing limitations set by editors’
expectations or perceptions.
The weaknesses of the paper include the bias and conflict of
interest of LQ reviewing their own impact. This conflict and
bias especially falls in the focus group and interview section of

the study, since all were members of LQ board of directors or
directly employed. There is little room for objectivity and
makes it difficult for them to remove themselves from the
situation. It is hard for someone so close to the situation to
provide a unique view, and as a result, ideas will be focused on
whatever is their immediate focus. One unfair result to LQ on
the impact factor was that it does not have other journals which
solely focus on leadership to compare with. The management
and psychology journals have a broad focus; therefore they will
probably have higher readership and citations about a multitude
of topics. LQ’s focus appears to be on increasing the number of
articles published, but more focus should be on quality and
value added. Finally, LQ noted that its publications had
increased, but this is in parallel to a trend in increased
leadership focus, so LQ needs to understand whether that is just
a fad in popularity of the topic, or if it is gaining respect and
heading toward its goal of being the top publication for
leadership.
e. Next logical step in building on the paper
LQ should show annual impact on the important measures of
interdisciplinary, diversification and international focus, in
order to increase viewpoints. LQ should not dismiss ideas which
include new ideas intertwined with old theories. The complex
nature of leadership, especially when involving diversification,
should not be limited to one solution. LQ should also focus on
the impacts of new trends, and beyond, including: strategic
leadership, leadership in times of economic crisis, females as
leaders, international leadership, and leadership with
technology changes. The focus in these areas correlates with the
change in society, the economy, and business trends of
international focus. The evolution of leadership and theories
really show the time period specific thoughts, and this scope has
to be expanded.

III. Leadership: Current theories, research, and future directions
The literature presents the evolution of leadership through
presenting current theoretical and empirical developments.
Current theoretical developments include
Authentic leadership expands on transformational leadership,
and provides ethical leadership behaviors, through the presence
of listening and accepting follower’s inputs. This is the
precursor to the ideas of transformational leadership. One can
appeal emotionally to the followers, and influence change, if the
followers trust and respect the leader. Many agree on four
characteristics of authentic leadership, which are: balanced
processing, internalized moral perspective, relational
transparency, and self-awareness. In a mix of U.S. and non U.S
participants these were found as reliable measures. Authenticity
was found to be a positive predictor of satisfaction,
commitment, and performance. Although, there is some
agreeance on authenticity, more studies and measures will have
to be taken in order to solidify the idea’s validity; especially as
it relates to diversity.
The coverage of the development of authentic leadership
attempts to answer the question of if leaders are born or can
they be developed. Past studies, and most studies agree, that
while genetics has some impact on leadership roles, it is
significantly less impact than the environment and opportunity.
This establishes that leadership can be taught and mimicked
through environmental situations and role models. However,
more studies are needed in order to understand the cognitive
effects on different leadership style and development, and the
effects of readiness to develop. Additionally, research is needed
on the cognitive effects of self-concept; as it seems certain
trigger events activate and pull from long term memory for
behaviors and style.

Cognitive psychology and the effects on leadership should
receive more study on self-concept, in regards to individual and
interactions of individuals. The idea of self-concept is the
evaluation of oneself and the self-beliefs. Two models of self-
concept apply which involve emphasizing specific values and
the other is the leader activating an identity for followers to
create a collective identity. Finally, the concept of schemas is
used in cognitive leadership, where one pulls from organized
thoughts and beliefs to makes sense of an event. More studies
will delve into how cognitive outcomes can have an effect on
developmental leadership.
New theories
The issues with old theories were seen to stem from their lack
of evidence on true effectiveness, such as turnover and
productivity; the measurements for a company that really
matter. The current charisma theories have established some
credibility for showing impact in these areas. While there is
some evidence to the effectiveness of this type of leadership
style, the current studies do not show why certain people engage
in this type of leadership, and under what conditions and
situations this style is most effective.
Complexity leadership visits the idea that leadership may be
more complex and it may be dynamic, responding to the highly
dynamic business environment today. The measurement and
scope of leader effects in a complexity system are seen as the
complex adaptive system (CAS); instead of a narrow scope of
leader and follower. The leaders are then expected to adapt
according to the adaptations of the system. The three main
leadership roles under this model are adaptive, administrative,
and enabling. More research is needed to support this concept,
and will be difficult and timely to collect; as it deals with
different interactions and situations over a long period of time.
Leader Member Exchange (LMX) describes the relationship

between leader and follower, and different relationships are
formed between different followers, as a result, affecting the
leader member outcomes. Some studies show higher levels of
performance and citizenship behavior accompany LMX.
However, this leadership theory is criticized due to
inconsistencies in measurement, and the lack of objective
measures of performance.
Servant Leadership
As its name implies, this is a leader who basically serves and is
dedicated to the follower. Limited empirical evidence exists,
but what does exist shows positive results with job satisfaction
and commitment. Followers believe servant leaders are genuine
and therefore trust is increased. Measurement is not consistent
for Servant Leadership. Criteria would need to be established,
in order to better gauge the outcomes and effects of servant
leaders.
b. For empirical papers ONLY – N/A
Over time leadership has moved from an individual focus to a
group and interactional focus, and an overall study, instead of
one specific thing that defines a leader. It is a dynamic
engagement between, not just the individual, but a multitude of
interactions. Leadership impact seems to be most affected by
situations and the follower’s perceptions. Many different new
theories are taking place to compensate for this dynamic
relationship. However, not one of them has enough empirical
evidence to support a universal following of the particular
theory.
The need for a universal acceptance on a formula for leadership
is desired, with so many changes and pressures on performance.
However, it does not appear that any study has the proof
required to establish itself as this formula. The mere view of

leadership and what needs to be studied has shifted. A lot of the
current studies, as well as past studies lack measurement
consistency which heavily hinders the validity of the results on
any theory presented.
The paper had strengths of covering a wide variety of new
theories, and proposed ample suggestions for further study. The
variety of leadership theories which the paper tried to cover is
highly relevant to the current environment. Businesses are
moving more toward team structures, which the paper
addressed. As well, culture and eLeadership were also addressed
to try to assist with gaps in current issues; mainly due to
globalization. A part of being able to come up with, and be open
to new theories was the point in the paper of basically removing
past pre conceptions of leadership and previous analysis.
Weaknesses of the paper were the absence of coverage of
strategic leadership. Although it was briefly mentioned, and
recognized it as a valid future study, it did not cover this topic
at all. The dismissal of pre-existing theories and past analysis
can also be a weakness. While some of the past data is
unsubstantiated, there are some areas of strength in past
theories. Pieces can be taken out of most theories and have
strength to them.
The next steps of this paper would be to understand further the
cognitive aspects of a leader, in order to define what leaders
think, what situations might drive different thinking and
responses, and why. Leadership development would also be a
good area to focus, and how cognitive characteristics affect the
strength of development, and overall success. Cognitive
characteristics should also be studied more with the follower.
The follower has a direct impact, and is directly impacted by
the leader. The follower’s perceptions, beliefs, and attitudes all

appear to be relevant. Strategic leadership will also need to be
further investigated, with the primary focus on executives who
have been able to create profit and growth, consecutively, to
understand what types of linkage there is to certain leadership
styles. Universal agreement of measurement criteria needs to be
established for leadership in order to make the results more
meaningful.
IV. Leadership theory and research in the new millennium:
Current theoretical trends and changing perspectives
This article is focused on process centered issues with current
leadership theories, in order to understand details and important
concepts which have been missing in previous theories.
Understanding leadership as a process helps drive the factors,
and thereby, create a path of organization to areas which should
be focused on.
When pulling articles on leadership and coding them, the most
popular current theories were focused on charisma, followed by
leader information processing, follower cognitions, and
relational theories. Even trait theories still exist, but are usually
combined with other ideas.
Strategic leadership is the top emerging theory, as well, interest
has been shown on team leadership and Leader Member
Exchange (LMX). Overall, these theories have a theme and
apply the social and dynamic aspect of leadership, instead of
creating leadership in a bubble. A broad look at development
and emergent leaders, may lead to fresh ideas based on this
topic, but both are seen to be impacted by traits and experience.
The process framework for organizing theories allows for a
multilevel analysis of the processes, in return, allowing focus in
the right areas to truly make an impact. The three types of

emergent processes are identified as global, compositional, and
compilational. Global are static and level specific,
compositional is an in-level process which combines individual
components, while not changing the quality. In contrast,
compilation does reflect a change in quality and function, when
combined.
b. For empirical papers ONLY
Content Analysis
Sample – 752 articles from 10 top ranking journals, which
publish leadership articles, and have high impact factors,
including Leadership Quarterly (LQ). The 752 articles are all
within a twelve year period of leadership publications.
Measures: Analytical methods, type of study, data collection
timing, level of analysis and form of emergence, and emergence
theory match/mismatch; where the method of collection for the
process does not match the theory being proposed.
Variables: Random search of articles for leadership between
2000 and 2012. The research must be original and have
leadership as the primary focus. Standardized coding protocol
was established to code articles, and the coding was completed
by two independent team members.
Results: Each form of emergence is trending upward for
theories, overcomplicating leadership study, and of these a high
amount are global; mismatching through individual focus on a
global form of emergence. In addition, the study shows that the
form of emergence most likely to appear out of quantitative
analysis is global, while theoretical only studies tended to lean
toward compilation. When compilation was noted, it tended to
affect every level of analysis; by the very nature of compilation.

Leadership is a multilevel process, including top down and
bottom up influences. The process issues must be identified in
order to continue with meaningful research on leadership. It is a
dynamic process which does not exist in short term; in contrast,
it expands over long time periods. Past research has failed to
cover how leaders make organizations effective. The
organization of past theories processes into schemes helps
associate with events and possibly see similarities within the
different theories.
Context, social aspects and the dynamic role of leadership is
now a part of the emerging studies and focus. While some of the
former theories are building on new ideas, and intertwined with
them, two theories appear to be disappearing in interest;
contingency theory and behavioral theories. Data collection and
theories should be based on the process framework, allowing for
greater potential to focus in areas which are relevant to
achieving progress on valid leadership ideas. The processes
have been categorized into three areas: global, compositional,
and compilational. Processes are fluid and change due to
different situations, so linking these processes to outcomes can
guide future study. Compilational theories tend to reflect these
characteristics and establish multilevel fluid processes.
The form of emergence can guide the methodology.
Unfortunately, global emergence, by nature, is single level, so it
promotes stability. Too much of this methodology could be
counterintuitive to the concept of leadership, which does not
perform in a stable environment. As a result, quantitative
studies only show the outcomes, but it is compilation, through
theoretical studies, which will provide the process and
outcomes. Much of the current research focuses on global
emergence, so there is room to make significant progress of
knowledge on leadership, if the processes are investigated.

The major strengths of the paper were the utilization of multiple
top journals known for publication of leadership. This enables a
wide scope of coverage and ultimately increases the reliability
of the study. As well, the form of emergence was strength, in
itself, through simplifying categories in order to understand the
impact of each article.
Some weaknesses of the paper were the volume of papers to
analyze. The high volume decreased the feasibility of analyzing
every theory and process. In addition, the lack of quantitative
analysis on the actual form emergence, the trends shown, and
how it has had an impact.
Having a greater focus on compilation emergence, and
understanding how the processes affect each level and
interaction outcomes in specific situation will help build on the
ideas of this paper. To date, there has not been a major break-
through on leadership and a consensus of what makes effective
outcomes. Diving into the process through greater theoretical
focus might help resolve this issue. In addition, understanding
how leaders impact, and are impacted by, the process is critical
to understand. In other words, gaining clarity on where they
exist, and what role they play, in the system.
References
Avolio, B.J., Walumbwa, F.O., & Weber, T.J. 2009. Leadership:
Current theories, research, and
future directions. Annual Review of Psychology, 40, 421-449.
Dinh, J.E., Lord, R.G., Gardner, W.L., Meuser, J.D., Liden,
R.C., Hu, J. in press. Leadership
theory and research in the new millennium: Current theoretical

trends and changing
perspectives. The Leadership Quarterly.
Gardner, W.L., Lowe, K.B., Moss, T.W., Mahoney, K.T., &
Cogliser, C.C. 2010. Scholarly
leadership of the study of leadership: A review of The
Leadership Quarterly’s second
decade, 2000-2009. The Leadership Quarterly, 21, 922-958.
House, R.J. & Aditya, R.N. 1997. The social scientific study of
leadership: Quo vadis? Journal
of Management, 23, 409-473.
See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication
at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281559227
Servant Leadership: Approaching the Paradox from the Life-
Stories of Ping Fu
Article in The Journal of Applied Management &
Entrepreneurship · October 2014
DOI: 10.9774/GLEAF.3709.2014.oc.00005
CITATIONS
3

READS
247
6 authors, including:
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on
these related projects:
A dark side of political skill? Awareness and life satisfaction in
a Latin American Business: View project
The entrepreneurial marketing of Trumpet Records View project
Alex Williams
Texas A&M University-Commerce
24 PUBLICATIONS 50 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Stephanie Pane Haden
SEE PROFILE
Mario Hayek

SEE PROFILE
Mildred Golden Pryor
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Brandon
Randolph-Seng on 07 September 2015.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281559227_Servant_L
eadership_Approaching_the_Paradox_from_the_Life-
Stories_of_Ping_Fu?enrichId=rgreq-
ff17a0bf915e44841420e847b1dcf71a-
XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI4MTU1OTIyNztBUzo
yNzExNTA1MjE1MTYwMzlAMTQ0MTY1ODczMDIyMg%3D
%3D&el=1_x_2&_esc=publicationCoverPdf
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281559227_Servant_L
eadership_Approaching_the_Paradox_from_the_Life-
Stories_of_Ping_Fu?enrichId=rgreq-
ff17a0bf915e44841420e847b1dcf71a-
https://www.researchgate.net/project/A-dark-side-of-political-
skill-Awareness-and-life-satisfaction-in-a-Latin-American-
Business?enrichId=rgreq-ff17a0bf915e44841420e847b1dcf71a-

https://www.researchgate.net/project/The-entrepreneurial-
marketing-of-Trumpet-Records?enrichId=rgreq-
ff17a0bf915e44841420e847b1dcf71a-
https://www.researchgate.net/?enrichId=rgreq-
ff17a0bf915e44841420e847b1dcf71a-
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Alex_Williams25?enrichId
=rgreq-ff17a0bf915e44841420e847b1dcf71a-
https://www.researchgate.net/institution/Texas_A_M_University
-Commerce2?enrichId=rgreq-
ff17a0bf915e44841420e847b1dcf71a-
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Stephanie_Pane_Haden?en
richId=rgreq-ff17a0bf915e44841420e847b1dcf71a-

ff17a0bf915e44841420e847b1dcf71a-
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Mario_Hayek?enrichId=rgr
eq-ff17a0bf915e44841420e847b1dcf71a-
eq-ff17a0bf915e44841420e847b1dcf71a-
ff17a0bf915e44841420e847b1dcf71a-
eq-ff17a0bf915e44841420e847b1dcf71a-

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Mildred_Pryor?enrichId=r
greq-ff17a0bf915e44841420e847b1dcf71a-
ff17a0bf915e44841420e847b1dcf71a-
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Brandon_Randolph-
Seng?enrichId=rgreq-ff17a0bf915e44841420e847b1dcf71a-
The Journal of Applied Management and Entrepreneurship,
2014, Vol. 19, No. 4 43
2014, Vol. 19, No. 4

Servant Leadership: Approaching the Paradox
from the Life-Stories of Ping Fu
John H. Humphreys, Texas A&M – Commerce
Wallace A. Williams, Jr., Texas A&M – Commerce
Stephanie Pane Haden, Texas A&M – Commerce
Mario Hayek, Texas A&M – Commerce
Mildred Golden Pryor, Texas A&M – Commerce
Brandon Randolph-Seng, Texas A&M – Commerce
Executive Summary
Although much has been written about the seeming paradox of
servant leadership,
scholars have yet to reach consensus on a theoretical model. In
an attempt to resolve this
conceptual confusion, van Dierendonck (2011) recently offered
a broad framework emphasizing
the antecedents, processes, and outcomes of servant leadership.
Regrettably, we still lack
sufficient studies that describe servant leadership in practice,
leaving many fundamental
questions unanswered. With current calls for examinations of
leaders actually applying servant
leadership, we argue that consideration of a contemporary
leader whose philosophy, motivations,
and practices resonate with, and in some ways reconcile, the
paradoxical concept of leader as
servant is warranted. We submit that Ping Fu, the founder and
CEO of Geomagic, is such a
leader. Accordingly, we analyzed her life-stories to further

inform the servant leadership debate.
Specifically, we integrate our insights concerning Fu’s
leadership to illustrate the core of servant
leadership emerging from her life-stories.
Servant leadership is a paradox … How can a person be a leader
and a servant at
the same time? Although servant leadership seems contradictory
and challenges
our traditional beliefs about leadership, it is an approach that
offers a unique
perspective.
(Northouse, 2013: 219)
I was still shy then … However, I was assertive in our
assignments, going above
and beyond … and driving our team to achieve excellence.
Years later, I would
find this approach written about in business management
textbooks: it was a
leadership style known as “servant leadership.”
(Fu & Fox, 2012: 64)
44 The Journal of Applied Management and Entrepreneurship,
2014, Vol. 19, No. 4
2014, Vol. 19, No. 4
The paradoxical notion of the servant leader was originated by
Greenleaf (1970), largely
based on his belief that service towards others is an essential

element of human nature (Leduc,
2003). “However, despite its introduction four decades ago and
empirical studies that started
more than 10 years ago (Laub, 1999), there is still no consensus
about a definition and theoretical
framework of servant leadership” (van Dierendonck, 2011:
1229). In an attempt to resolve this
conceptual confusion, van Dierendonck (2011) analyzed the
plethora of models inspired by
Greenleaf’s ideas, to offer a broad framework emphasizing the
antecedents, processes, and
outcomes of servant leadership. Regrettably, we still lack
sufficient studies that describe servant
leadership in practice, as the preponderance of servant leader
writing has been prescriptive
(Northouse, 2013). This leaves many fundamental questions
unanswered (Parris & Peachey,
2013). As a result, Whetstone (2002: 390) suggested that the
questions surrounding servant
leadership might be “best answered by observing leaders
genuinely adopting servant leadership.”
The above autobiographical reference to her own servant
leadership style was made by an
extraordinary entrepreneurial leader, Ping Fu, the founder and
CEO of Geomagic, a 3D digital
technology company. As we will show, the story of her strength,
courage, and resilience in
serving those in her sphere of influence is remarkable. With
current calls for more examinations
of leaders actually practicing servant leadership, we argue that
consideration of a contemporary
leader whose philosophy, motivations, and practices resonate
with, and in some ways reconcile,
the paradoxical concept of leader as servant is warranted.
Accordingly, we analyzed her life-

stories (Shamir & Eilam, 2005) to further inform the servant
leadership debate.
We begin by describing the assumptions of logic, method, and
theoretical lens directing
our interpretive study. We then briefly review the current state
of servant leadership theory,
focusing on the recent theoretical framework proposed by van
Dierendonck (2011). Next, we
introduce Ping Fu and attempt to situate her leadership motives,
attributes, and behaviors within
van Dierendonck’s (2011) conceptual model of servant
leadership. Finally, noting the unique and
incongruous aspects of Fu’s servant leadership, we integrate
insights gleaned from her case to
illustrate the servant leader core emerging from her life-stories.
Assumptions and Approach
Although studies of contemporary organizational leaders can be
phenomenological,
tending to favor realism over internal validity (Chatman &
Flynn, 2005), Shamir and Eilam
(2005) argued that the experiences chosen by a leader to appear
in their life-stories reflects the
leader’s self-concepts, their concept of leadership, and the
processes that enable their leadership
practice. From this perspective, objectivity in the recounting of
events is of lesser importance
than the construction and interpretation of events (Neisser,
1994), as leaders select the elements
of their stories. In doing so, they often ascribe meaning to prior
events that may not have held
significant meaning at the time of manifestation (Josselson,
1993). Thus, life-stories can be
examined as “depositories of meaning” (Gabrial, 2000: 15) and

“analyzed to discover those
meanings” (Shamir & Eilam, 2005: 413). Shamir and Eilam
(2005: 413) specifically endorsed
the “autobiographies of leaders” as a desirable data source for
such analysis.
2014, Vol. 19, No. 4 45
2014, Vol. 19, No. 4
As theories of servant leadership are still at a nascent stage (van
Dierendonck, 2011), a
life-stories case methodology grounded in inductive logic is
appropriate (Yin, 2003). Siggelkow
(2007) argued that interpretive conceptualization from unique
cases could offer insights
(Rowley, 2002) and explanatory knowledge (Tsoukas, 1989)
that might not be achieved with
other approaches. Moreover, Parris and Peachey (2013) recently
called for studies focused on the
personal attributes and backgrounds of servant leaders.
Consequently, taking a critical biographical approach to life-
stories (Shamir & Eilam,
2005), the case of Ping Fu was not chosen randomly (see
Siggelkow, 2007). Her case was
selected because she self-described her leadership style as
servant leadership and her
autobiography, Bend, Not break – A life in two worlds, provides
her narrative of the significant
events and experiences that influenced her leadership across
time (see Shamir, 2011).

In addition, Ping Fu’s life has been one of paradox. She
recounted that, “I would study
both art and science, embrace both a Chinese and an American
identity, and develop as both a
mother and an entrepreneur” (Fu & Fox, 2012: 125). Yet, she
was able to reconcile these
contradictions and develop a unified self-concept. This
resonates with the contradictions inherent
with a leadership approach charged with both leading and
serving. Thus, we reasoned that an
analysis of her case might allow us to not only compare the
servant leadership process emerging
from her life-stories with the theoretical framework of van
Dierendonck (2011), but to also
provide some intimation of how she was able to consistently
exhibit this paradoxical leadership
approach. Because we are attempting to offer an inductive
framework of the servant leadership
core emerging from the life-stories of Ping Fu, we follow the
recommendation of Siggelkow
(2007) to first describe the theoretical foundation for the study
and then use the case of Fu’s
leadership as illustration.
Servant Leadership
Greenleaf (1970) is credited with proposing the notion of
servant leadership. Based upon
his philosophy of service to others, he advanced a general
leadership concept where the primary
leader function is serving others (Greenleaf, 1977). Even though
Greenleaf did not provide a
precise definition of servant leadership, he did describe the
effect on followers, while others have
attempted to define the paradigm (Smith, Montagno, &

Kuzmenko, 2004). For example, Spears
(1998) defined servant leadership in terms of actions that honor
the self-worth of followers. Laub
(1999: 83) explained servant leadership as the “… practice of
leadership that places the good of
those led over the self-interest of the leader … for the common
good ...” Similarly, Birkenmeier,
Carson, and Carson (2003: 375) suggested that, “Servant leaders
transcend personal self-interest
and aspire to fulfill the physical, spiritual, and emotional needs
of others.”
Beyond a general definition, clarifying discrete conceptual
elements of servant leadership
has proven even more complicated (Parris & Peachey, 2013).
For example, Kiechel (1992)
proposed five aspects: valuing people, listening, healing, self-
effacing behavior, and stewardship.
Spears (1995), however, outlined ten interrelated characteristics
presented by servant leaders:
2014, Vol. 19, No. 4
2014, Vol. 19, No. 4
listening, empathy, healing, awareness, persuasion,
conceptualization, foresight, stewardship,
commitment to the growth of people, and building community.
Laub (1999) proposed six distinct
elements: valuing people, developing people, building
community, showing authenticity,
providing leadership, and sharing leadership. Daft (1999),

though, suggested four rudiments
associated with servant leadership: service before self, listening
as a means of affirmation,
creating trust, and nourishing followers to become whole.
This list could go on, as numerous scholars have presented their
own versions of the key
elements of servant leadership (e.g., Barbuto & Wheeler, 2006;
Dennis & Bocarnea, 2005;
Patterson, 2003; Russell & Stone, 2002; Sendjaya, Sarros, &
Santora, 2008; van Dierendonck &
Nuijten, 2011; Wong & Davey, 2007). Unfortunately, these
proposals had varying foci (Parris &
Peachey, 2013) and most did not segregate behavior, precursors,
and/or effects (van
Dierendonck, 2011); thus, the current unenviable state of
construct ambiguity.
In an attempt to produce an overall conceptual model of servant
leadership, van
Dierendonck (2011) examined the 44 characteristics imputed by
the diverse models of servant
leadership previously proposed. He argued that by
“differentiating between antecedents,
behavior, mediating processes, and outcomes and by combining
the conceptual models with the
empirical evidence” available, “one can distinguish six key
characteristics of servant leadership
that bring order to the conceptual plurality” (van Dierendonck,
2011: 1232).
We find this recent depiction to be the most comprehensive
theoretical model of servant
leadership in the journal literature. As this is the case, we elect
to use the author’s words to
elucidate his conceptualization. Within this framework, van

Dierendonck (2011: 1254) proposed
that servant leadership:
“… is displayed by leaders who combine their motivation to
lead with a need to
serve. Personal characteristics and culture are positioned
alongside the
motivational dimension. Servant leadership is demonstrated by
empowering and
developing people, by expressing humility, authenticity,
interpersonal acceptance,
and stewardship; and by providing direction. A high-quality
dyadic relationship,
trust, and fairness are expected to be the most important
mediating processes to
encourage self-actualization, positive job attitudes,
performance, and a stronger
organizational focus on sustainability and CSR.”
However, though reasoned and thoughtful, this
conceptualization is essentially an
amalgamation of prior interpretations that failed to achieve
consensus among servant leadership
researchers, indicating that further debate is needed (Parris &
Peachey, 2013). Accordingly, we
followed the guidance of Whetstone (2002) to qualitatively
assess the core of van Dierendonck’s
(2011) model by contrasting his conceptualization with a
practicing servant leader, Ping Fu.
The Life-stories of Ping Fu
Ping Fu’s life-stories provide a compelling narrative of
resilience and triumph (see Fu &
Fox, 2012). Although now the CEO of Geomagic, as a child
(during the Cultural Revolution in

2014, Vol. 19, No. 4 47
2014, Vol. 19, No. 4
China) she was a coerced factory worker and abused political
captive. Separated from her family
at the age of eight, she was beaten and gang raped at age ten for
her “black blood,” the term
given to those whose families were affluent and educated. This
traumatic event earned her the
nickname of “broken shoe” – a disparaging expression typically
given to prostitutes.
At the age of 25, Ping Fu was deported from China to the
United States. She arrived with
little money, no ability to speak English, and no family or
friends. What followed was an
amazing life as a maid, a waitress, a student, a software
programmer, an innovator, a mother, an
entrepreneur (named entrepreneur of the year in 2005 by Inc.
magazine), a CEO, and a member
of President Obama’s National Council on Innovation and
Entrepreneurship. “Aided by her well-
honed survival instincts, a few good friends, and the kindness of
strangers, she grew into
someone she never thought she’d be – a strong, independent,
entrepreneurial leader” (Fu and
Fox, 2012, jacket). Also, she explicitly labeled her own
leadership style as “servant leadership”
(Fu & Fox, 2012: 64). Thus, the life-stories of Ping Fu were
analyzed to situate her servant

leader elements and antecedents within the model proposed by
van Dierendonck (2011).
Situating the Servant Leadership of Ping Fu into van
Dierendonck’s Framework
The model of van Dierendonck (2011) commences with
Greenleaf’s (1977) general
premise that servant leaders have a combined need to serve and
motivation to lead. The case of
Fu supports this perspective, albeit beginning with a decided
desire to serve others before any
appearance of leadership motivation materializes. Our
examination also supports the six servant
leader elements as described by van Dierendonck (2011) as part
of the core of servant leadership
– empowering people, humility, authenticity, interpersonal
acceptance, providing direction, and
stewardship. Yet, Fu’s leadership offers a persuasive case for an
additional component that
specifically contributed to her ability to reconcile serving with
leading – hermeneutic processes.
Furthermore, the servant leader antecedents described in Fu’s
narratives significantly differ from
van Dierendonck’s (2011) proposals. While the case supports
moral cognitive development, self-
determination and cognitive complexity appear to be largely
incongruent with Fu’s servant
leadership development, as artistic appreciation, strength,
courage, resilience, and an underlying
moral philosophy of personalism enabled her to act as a servant
leader.
Illustrating the Servant Leadership Process from the Life-stories
of Ping Fu

In illustrating the servant leadership core emerging from the
life-stories (Shamir & Eilam,
2005) of Ping Fu (see Figure 1), we are in no way attempting to
portray the model of van
Dierendonck (2011) as specious. In fact, our study supports
significant portions of this
framework. Rather, we are pointing to the plurality of servant
leadership theory (see Parris &
Peachey, 2013) and attempting to join this particular scholarly
conversation to further inform the
servant leader debate (Ordonez, Schweitzer, Galinsky, &
Bazerman, 2009).
2014, Vol. 19, No. 4
2014, Vol. 19, No. 4
Figure 1. An Inductive Illustration of the Servant Leadership
Core Emerging from the Life-stories of Ping Fu
2014, Vol. 19, No. 4 49
2014, Vol. 19, No. 4
First, based upon our examination of the life-stories of Ping Fu
(all quotes are from Fu
and Fox, 2012); we take no issue with van Dierendonck’s (2011:
1243) assertion that “the

cornerstone of servant leadership lies in the combined
motivation to lead with a need to serve.”
Although he shows the need to serve and motivation to lead
together, primarily to maintain the
possibility that either dimension could precede the other, in the
case of Fu, her desire to serve
others emerged before thoughts of her potential to lead others.
She attributed this desire to serve
others from the generosity and “acts of kindness” that carried
her through her “darkest hours”
(234). She even states that she was born with “the desire to help
others …” (273).
Although Fu’s motivation to lead appeared secondarily in her
life-stories, it is
nonetheless evident. Her motive to lead, however, was
underpinned by a helping power
motivation (see Frieze & Boneva, 2001). She was even
motivated to help one of her primary
tormentors (a youth leader in the Red Guard) with her studies.
This suggests that Fu did not have
a low need for power as predicted by Graham (1991), or an
attitude of powerless servility, but a
need to use power to help others as proposed by van
Dierendonck (2011). In return, she found
that her kindness to others helped her overcome some of her
timidity and inward focus over time.
Thus, in our illustration, we portray the desire to serve others
leading to the motivation to lead
with a helping motivation, which corresponds to Greenleaf’s
(1977) initial description.
According to van Dierendonck (2011), leaders with a desire to
serve and motivation to
lead display the six servant leader elements of empowering
people, showing humility, revealing

authenticity, accepting others for who they are, providing
direction when needed, and acting as
stewards who consider what is in the best interest of the whole.
We find support for each of these
servant leader practices in the life-stories of Ping Fu.
Empowering people is a motivational concept that enables
others to learn and perform
(Conger, 2000; Greenleaf, 1998). Empowering leaders,
therefore, encourage “self-directed
decision-making …” (van Dierendonck, 2001: 1233) by
followers. In her autobiography, Fu
strongly supports the empowering of people, indicating that she
“could become a bottleneck at
Geomagic” if she attempted to make all of the crucial decisions
herself and that she needed to
trust her team and not become a ‘helicopter CEO’” (220).
Leaders with humility actively seek the expertise of others and
put their own successes in
proper perspective by acknowledging the contributions of others
(Patterson, 2003). Fu’s humility
resounds throughout her narratives, potentially influenced by
the modesty associated with her
Chinese heritage. Her stories recount her recognition of her
personal “limitations” (173) and
“blind spots” (194). She often referred to her “vulnerability”
(e.g., 81, 274) and consistently
demonstrated a curiosity and willingness to learn from friends
and foe alike.
Such expressions of vulnerability are also associated with
authenticity (Luthans &
Avolio, 2003). Servant leaders display their true selves and
maintain behavioral integrity
(Peterson & Seligman, 2004). Again, Fu’s narratives

consistently exhibit authenticity and the
empowerment of authenticity from followers. For example, she
recounted that, “By expressing
my genuine feelings to Geomagic’s employees, I had opened the
door for them to share theirs”
(245). She admitted that to become an effective CEO she needed
to develop her ability to “listen
2014, Vol. 19, No. 4
2014, Vol. 19, No. 4
with respect, communicate with clarity, and influence with
authenticity …” (200). She also
demonstrated her grasp of the important role of self-awareness
in being perceived as an authentic
leader. This can be evidenced by her quote of the ancient
Chinese philosopher Lao Tzu: “He who
conquers others is strong. He who conquers himself is mighty”
(92).
Self-aware leaders are better able to appreciate the perspectives
of others (George, 2000)
and use that perspective to enhance their own sense of the
world. The ability to appreciate the
perspective of others and the ability to let go of perceived
wrongdoings imply interpersonal
acceptance (McCullough, Hoyt, & Rachal, 2000), which
ultimately engenders trust (Ferch,
2005). Ping Fu should be considered the role model for
interpersonal acceptance. First, she
forgave her captors and tormentors as a child, leaving her “even

more compassionate and
vulnerable” than she had been before (269). As a CEO, she
proclaimed, “Blaming others, being
fearful and angry, acting vengefully, building resentment,
destroying trust – these negative
responses to trying situations suck us into a downward spiral
and sap our energy … Love even
the people who drive us crazy, those who undermine us, and
those who fail us, offering them
compassion and forgiveness” (185). Her leader behavior was
consistent with this approach. On
one occasion she had allowed others to cast blame on a former
employee. She invited this man to
lunch and offered him the following apology (195):
I blamed you for wasting the money and not helping me build a
viable company. I
understand now that was not a fair point of view. You were just
as inexperienced
as I was, and I was just as responsible as you were. I admired
you then, and I
continue to admire you today. … I wanted you to know.
This perspective, however, does not suggest that Ping Fu was
hesitant to provide
direction to followers who needed it. In his model, van
Dierendonck (2011) specifically included
providing direction as a characteristic of an effective servant
leader. Servant leaders let followers
know of their expectations (Laub, 1999) but do so within their
creativity to demonstrate new
ways of solving old problems (Russell & Stone, 2002),
something that Bass (1985) would label
as intellectual stimulation. Fu used her creativity on numerous
occasions to teach others new
ways of looking at problems. In one instance in graduate school,

her group was asked to design
an intelligent traffic light control system. Though most students
wrote a logic flow paper, Ping
Fu had a “different idea” and convinced her group to “go along”
with her (64). Instead, they built
a working system using toy cars, resistors, capacitors, and
transformers. She added her creativity
to the problem solving abilities of the engineers in the class.
She later brought the same creativity
and direction to the group that created NCSA Mosaic, which
became Netscape.
That creativity and direction, though, was supplied for the
benefit of the group. This
speaks to the idea of stewardship. Van Dierendonck (2011)
argued that servant leaders should
act as role models, taking responsibility for the broader group.
Fu is an exemplar of this
obligation. She modeled her expectations, saying on one
occasion, “I didn’t want to profit from
gamesmanship, and I needed to accept responsibility for my
own mistakes” (195). Also, her
focus was on the broader whole, “respecting mutual interests,
and engaging others with
compassion …” (201). When she stepped down as CEO shortly
after her company’s founding,
2014, Vol. 19, No. 4 51
2014, Vol. 19, No. 4
her greatest concern was that she had “abandoned” her

employees (182). It was her recognition
of herself as a steward that prompted her to retake the helm
when the firm struggled.
Having revealed these six elements of servant leadership in the
life-stories of Ping Fu
provides support for the servant leadership elements advanced
by van Dierendonck (2011).
However, allowing the case data to speak, there is evidence that
her servant leadership was also
characterized by hermeneutic processes associated with the
emerging concept of aesthetic
leadership (see Ladkin & Taylor, 2010; Pane Haden, Diaz,
Humphreys, & Hayek, 2013).
Hermeneutics implies seeking, questioning, interpreting, and
crafting meaning
(Woodward & Funk, 2010). Hermeneutic leaders, or
Hermenauts, craft meaning by relying on
their own past experiences, as well as their pre-existing mental
schemas, predispositions,
attitudes, and curiosity (Berman, 2006). This is consistent with
Leduc’s (2003:32) assertion that
servant leaders are “reflective” individuals. Triggering the
practice of hermeneutics are the
aesthetic processes that require leaders to tap into their senses
in order to interpret and create
meaning for others (Woodward & Funk, 2010).
Although these hermeneutic processes are more commonly
associated with artist-leader
(Woodward & Funk, 2010) and leading beautifully (Ladkin,
2008) perspectives, Ping Fu’s
curiosity and meaning-making exemplify these positions. This is
not surprising, as Ping Fu
describes herself as “an artist and a scientist whose chosen

expression is business”
(www.amazon.com/Ping-Fu). Moreover, her autobiography is
filled with references to art and
beauty. She said she was a “scientist and artist by nature” (135).
She also took art classes
because artists offer a “different perspective” (102). She
proclaimed that as a child she “sought
out beauty” (103) and as an adult searched for the “underlying
beauty” in technology (97),
“creating beautiful objects from computer programs” (103), as
programming was as much “art as
science” (64). She recounted that she searched for “beauty in a
world where so much around us
in rough and crude” (84). She even described the name of her
company as “a poetic version of
what we want to do” (154).
Fu suggests that her ability to practice servant leadership was
due in part to her artistic
character (125). Her “appreciation of ideas” (12) and intense
“curiosity” (273), exhibited in
conjunction with her ability to create meaning through “an
engaging narrative” (102), certainly
resonant with current definitions of hermeneutic processes
(Woodward & Funk, 2010). We argue
that these hermeneutic processes played an important role in her
capacity to reconcile the
paradox of serving with leading, and the duality of her leader
self-concept, and should therefore
be included in the elements within her servant leader core. We
reason the inclusion of
hermeneutic processes could allow servant leadership to move
beyond the predictable
“idealistic” (van Dierendonck, 2011: 1254) critiques and into
the domain of effective practice.

Doing so, of course, necessitates identifying the individual
characteristics that inform
these processes. We argue that the hermeneutic processes
inherent in Fu’s servant leader
elements emerged from her artistic appreciation. “When the
artist is alive in people, whatever
their kind of work may be, they become inventive, searching,
daring, self-expressing creatures
…” (Henri, cited in Sandelands & Buckner, 1989: 128).
Therefore, artistic appreciation is a way
2014, Vol. 19, No. 4
2014, Vol. 19, No. 4
of perceiving that can be applied to anything, not just art
(Springborg, 2010). The artistic
appreciation process extends beyond only analytical
interpretation of data and events
(Springborg, 2010). While leaders do benefit from analyzing
data using their rational minds
(science), utilizing the process of artistic appreciation can
broaden the scope of information
gathered and assist in making sense of complex situations
(Springborg, 2010) in order to craft
meaning for followers (Woodward & Funk, 2010). Thus, in our
conceptualization, we add
artistic appreciation as an individual characteristic antecedent
of the servant leader elements
emerging from Fu’s life-stories.
In van Dierendonck’s (2011) proposal, the individual

antecedents proposed are self-
determination, moral cognitive development, and cognitive
complexity. Self-determination, an
awareness of choice in initiating one’s actions, arises from three
psychological needs: feeling
competent, feeling connected, and feeling autonomous. When
these needs are met, a self-
determined leader operates from an integrated perspective rather
than for egocentric purposes
(van Dierendonck, 2011). Yet, the life-stories of Fu indicate
that while tenacious, she often
lacked confidence (e.g., 178) and felt isolated (e.g., 234) and
insecure (163). Even as a CEO she
felt “uncertain” about her “ability to lead” (172). She
understood that her future was in her hands
but the persisting doubts are indicative of an individual
struggling with self-determination.
We interpret similar incongruity with cognitive complexity as a
potential antecedent.
Cognitive complexity speaks to an individual’s capacity to
accurately judge social situations (van
Dierendonck, 2011). Ping Fu readily admitted she was shy and
introverted by nature and
uncomfortable with social situations. Though her life-stories
show development in this element
of her leader self-concept, it is difficult for us to assign
antecedent status to this characteristic.
We do, however, find support for van Dierendonck’s (2011)
proposal that moral
cognitive development is a likely antecedent to servant
leadership. In Kohlberg’s (1969) stages
of moral development, one has achieved the highest level of
development when mutual respect
becomes a guiding principle. Fu speaks often of “respecting

mutual interests” (201) and listening
with “respect” (200), even describing her first taste of
entrepreneurship as a collegial relationship
“based on camaraderie and mutual respect” (69).
Moreover, we think that her underlying moral philosophy offers
another potential
modification to van Dierendonck’s (2011) framework. In his
servant leader model, van
Dierendonck (2011) included culture in the way of humane
orientation and power distance.
While we take no exception with the idea that societies that
encourage such tendencies are likely
to develop more servant leaders, we find portraying the cultural
influence as a direct antecedent
feeding into the servant leader core awkward. Any number of
contextual influences could impact
the likelihood of servant leader development. Also, we think
that van Dierndonck (2011) actually
alluded to a better way to include these proclivities. He
differentiated servant leadership from
other leadership forms based on the attitude towards other
actors. “As in personalism
(Whetstone, 2002), there is a growing commitment to treat each
individual respectfully, with an
awareness that each person deserves to be loved” (van
Dierendonck, 2011: 1231). Whetstone
(2002) argued that servant leadership was the leadership form
most consistent with personalism.
2014, Vol. 19, No. 4 53

2014, Vol. 19, No. 4
Personalism regards persons and relationships as the starting
point of social theory
(Bartnik, 1995) and “makes explicit the duty of respect … and
care for people, emphasizing
human dignity and the innate rights of every human being”
(Melé, 2009: 229). The life-stories of
Ping Fu are replete with examples intimating her moral
philosophy of personalism. This is best
shown by her acknowledgement that she “came to see that
everybody is somebody” (167). She
also offered that that this philosophy “must come from within
our own hearts” (167). We
propose, then, that an underlying moral philosophy of
personalism as an individual antecedent is
a superior representation than the inclusion of cultural
probabilities. Also, since this underlying
moral philosophy influences one’s motivation to lead (van
Dierendonck, 2011) outside of the
seven servant leader elements directly, we show this antecedent
effect as well.
Additionally, the individual characteristics of strength, courage,
and resilience resound
through Fu’s life-stories. This is best revealed by her Shanghai
Papa’s story from his traditional
Chinese garden concerning the three friends of winter (10-11):
There are three friends of winter: the pine tree, the plum
blossom, and bamboo …
Pine trees are strong. They remain happy and green throughout
the year. In the
unbearable heat of summer and the severe cold of winter, they
stand unperturbed.

The crimson petals of the plum blossom gleam brilliantly
against the white snow
… The ability to bloom in the midst of misfortune suggests
dignity and
forbearance under harsh circumstances.
Bamboo is flexible, bending with the wind but never breaking,
capable of
adapting to any circumstance. It suggests resilience, meaning
that we have the
ability to bounce back from even the most difficult times.
Ping Fu understood that these parables referred to “strength,
courage, and resilience”
(34). She consistently demonstrated all of these characteristics
in her life-stories, with resilience
being the dominant theme.
In summary, attempting to extricate the antecedents and
elements of the servant leader
core from the life-stories of Ping Fu, we propose that her
servant leadership combined an
altruistic desire to serve with a motivation to lead emerging
from a helping power motivation and
influenced by a moral philosophy of personalism. Beyond this
underlying moral philosophy, the
elements of servant leadership were also influenced by the
individual characteristics of artistic
appreciation, moral cognitive development, strength, courage,
and resilience. As a result, Ping
Fu’s servant leadership was demonstrated by empowering
people, by expressing humility,
authenticity, interpersonal acceptance, and stewardship; and by
providing direction through the
utilization of hermeneutic processes.

Discussion, Contributions, Limitations, and Future Research
Upon advancing his synthesized model, van Dierendonck (2011:
1256) concluded that
although servant leaders have been around for centuries,
“servant leadership is an intriguing new
2014, Vol. 19, No. 4
2014, Vol. 19, No. 4
field for … researchers.” While we agree, after forty years of
conceptualization and a decade of
empirical work, the lack of clarity encompassing the elements
of servant leadership should serve
as a cautionary tale for scholars, as the current state points to
the dangers of significant empirical
research and the development of assessment instruments prior to
a sensible level of construct
consensus (Eisenhardt & Graebner, 2007). We argue that we too
often fail to generate adequate
qualitative evidence initially to support subsequent deductive
research, a step that is important in
the production of operational knowledge (Adcroft & Willis,
2008).
Readers will also note that we focused only on elements
involved in supplying the core of
servant leadership. We purposely did not attempt to address the
outcomes of servant leadership,
though van Dierendonck (2011) did within his model. While we
do not necessarily disagree with

his results assessment in totality, the support for the individual,
team, and organizational
outcomes in his framework emerged from studies utilizing
inconsistent servant leader facets and
definitions. Consequently, we argue that resulting climates and
outcomes should be addressed
only once greater consensus has been reached about the core
features of servant leadership, as
“good science has to begin with good definitions” (Bygrave &
Hofer, 1991: 15).
Therefore, answering calls for examinations of the attributes
(Parris & Peachey, 2013) of
practicing servant leaders (Whetstone, 2002), we observed a
leader whose words and practices
resonate with, and even reconciled, the paradoxical concept of
the servant leader. Scrutinizing
the narratives of Ping Fu, we applied a life-stories approach
(Shamir & Eilam, 2005) to illustrate
the antecedents and elements informing the core of her servant
leadership. Although one
contribution of this research is the promotion of life-stories as a
qualitative research method,
more significantly, we hope that our conceptualization might
resurrect the elemental debate and
encourage scholars working within this domain to focus
attention and reach consensus on a
general model of servant leadership before additional empirical
work leads us farther afield.
We also encourage researchers to further consider how servant
leadership might be
presented to avoid being refuted as naïve, idealistic,
paradoxical, and unrealistic (Bowie, 2000).
With the case of Ping Fu, we conclude that the dual nature of
being a scientist and an artist

allowed her to harness the contradiction of leading and serving.
As a result, our interpretation
supported the inclusion of certain elements of aesthetic
leadership (Pane Haden et al., 2013) in
her leader characteristics and practice. Specifically, we argue
that it was her artistic appreciation
(Springborg, 2010) that led to her utilization of hermeneutic
processes (Woodward & Funk,
2010) to craft meaning for followers. We contend that these
elements allowed her to function as
“an adaptive innovator” who created a “new landscape” for her
organization and those she leads
(Fisher, 2004: 5). We agree with Ladkin and Taylor (2010, p.
236) that organizational leaders
would be “well-advised to look to the artist, whose purpose
throughout the ages has been to
navigate unchartered territories and reveal the difficulties as
well as the glories lurking within
them.” As this is the case, additional concepts from aesthetic
leadership should be considered, as
they might prove beneficial in the conceptualization of servant
leadership.
In addition, within our interpretation, we advanced the idea that
Fu’s underlying moral
philosophy of personalism influenced her motivation to lead
from a helping power base, as well
2014, Vol. 19, No. 4 55
2014, Vol. 19, No. 4

the elements of servant leadership inside her servant leader
core. Further research is needed to
particularly account for the role of personalism (Whetstone,
2002), as well as other closely
related philosophies (e.g., existentialism), in directing servant
leadership.
Also, we encourage future research that examines the
psychological capital (PsyCap) of
servant leaders. The leadership domain imported the concept of
PsyCap from the positive
psychology movement (Hannah & Luthans, 2008). PsyCap is a
second-order construct
comprised of four first-order constructs: hope, resilience,
optimism, and confidence (Luthans,
2002). With resilience considered a crucial aspect of the PsyCap
directing authentic leadership
development (Luthans & Avolio, 2003), and van Dierendonck’s
(2011) subsuming of authentic
leadership into his servant leader model, we analyzed Fu’s life-
stories searching for evidence of
PsyCap. Although we found a multitude of references to her
resiliency, her life-stories show little
evidence of the other first order constructs of PsyCap. We have
already detailed her lack of
confidence in her leadership ability. She did indicate that it was
her resiliency that allowed her to
“cultivate hope” (262). Yet, her optimism was not robust, as she
asserted that her life journey
had taught her “not to count on a better outcome before life
presents you with it” (196-197). It
may be that the PsyCap resources for servant leaders differ from
authentic leaders.
We do recognize the limitation of a unique case utilizing a life-
stories methodology.

While we acknowledge the limited ability to generalize from
this study, the offsetting strengths
provide justification (see Shamir & Eilam, 2005; Siggelkow,
2007). Also, the current state of
construct confusion regarding servant leadership would indicate
the realization of
generalizability is premature (see Fairhurst, 2009). van
Dierendonck (2011) posited that servant
leadership might be Plato’s ultimate form, as described in The
Republic. If so, then we should
make a concerted effort to achieve conceptual consensus of such
a positive leadership approach.
References
Adcroft, A., & Willis, R. (2008). A snapshot of strategy
research 2002-2006. Journal of
Management History, 14(4), 313-333.
Barbuto, J. E., & Wheeler, D. W. (2006). Scale development
and construct clarification
of servant leadership. Group & Organization Management,
31(3), 300-326. doi:
10.1177/1059601106287091
Bartnik, C. (1995). Personalism. Lublin: Czas.
Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and Performance Beyond
Expectations: Free Press.
Berman, M. P. (2006). Locke the Hermenaut and the mechanics
of understanding.
Humanitas, 19.
Birkenmeier, B., Carson, P. P., & Carson, K. D. (2003). The
father of Europe: An

analysis of the supranational servant leadership of Jean Monnet.
International journal of
organization theory and behavior, 6, 374-400.
2014, Vol. 19, No. 4
2014, Vol. 19, No. 4
Bowie, N. E. (2000). Business ethics, philosophy, and the next
25 years. Business Ethics
Quarterly, 7-20.
Bygrave, W. D., & Hofer, C. W. (1991). Theorizing about
entrepreneurship.
Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 16(2), 13-22.
Chatman, J. A., & Flynn, F. J. (2005). Full-cycle micro-
organizational behavior research.
Organization Science, 16(4), 434-447.
Conger, J. A. (2000). Motivate performance through
empowerment. In E. A. Locke (Ed.),
The Blackwell handbook of principles of organizational
behavior (pp. 137-149). Oxford, UK:
Blackwell.
Daft, R. L. (1999). Leadership: Theory and practice: Dryden
Press Fort Worth, TX.
Dennis, R., S. , & Bocarnea, M. (2005). Development of the
servant leadership
assessment instrument. Leadership & Organization Development

Journal, 26(8), 600-615.
Eisenhardt, K. M., & Graebner, M. E. (2007). Theory building
from cases: opportunities
and challenges. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 25-32.
Fairhurst, G. T. (2009). Considering context in discursive
leadership research. Human
Relations, 62(11), 1607-1633.
Ferch, S. R., & Center, R. K. G. (2003). Servant-leadership,
forgiveness, and social
justice: Greenleaf Center for Servant-Leadership.
Fisher, J. R. (2004). Leaders as Artists. Executive excellence,
21, 5-5.
Frieze, I. H., & Boneva, B. S. (2001). Power motivation and
motivation to help others. In
A. Y. Lee-Chai & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), The use and abuse of
power: Multiple perspectives on the
causes of corruption (pp. 75-89). Philadelphia, PA: Psychology
Press.
Fu, P., & Fox, M. M. (2012). Bend, Not Break: A Life in Two
Worlds: Penguin Group
US.
Gabriel, Y. (2000). Storytelling in Organizations: Facts,
Fictions, and Fantasies: Facts,
Fictions, and Fantasies: Oxford University Press.
George, J. M. (2000). Emotions and leadership: The role of
emotional intelligence.
Human Relations, 53(8), 1027-1055.

Graham, J. W. (1991). Servant-leadership in organizations:
Inspirational and moral. The
Leadership Quarterly, 2(2), 105-119.
Greenleaf, R. K. (1970). The Servant as Leader. Indianapolis:
The Robert Greenleaf
Center.
Greenleaf, R. K. (1977). Servant Leadership: A Journey Into the
Nature of Legitimate
Power and Greatness. Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press.
Greenleaf, R. K. (1998). The power of servant leadership:
essays: Berrett-Koehler.
2014, Vol. 19, No. 4 57
2014, Vol. 19, No. 4
Hannah, S. T., & Luthans, F. (2008). A cognitive affective
processing explanation of
positive leadership. In R. H. Humphrey (Ed.), Affect and
Emotion: New Directions in
Management: Theory and Research (pp. 97). Charlotte, NC:
Information Age Publishing.
Josselson, R. (1993). A narrative introduction. In R. Josselson
& A. Lieblich (Eds.), The
narrative study of lives (Vol. 1). Cambridge, MA: Sage.
Kiechel, W. (1992). The leader as servant: TIME INC TIME &
LIFE BUILDING

ROCKEFELLER CENTER, NEW YORK, NY 10020-1393.
Ladkin, D. (2008). Leading beautifully: How mastery,
congruence and purpose create the
aesthetic of embodied leadership practice. The Leadership
Quarterly, 19(1), 31-41.
Ladkin, D., & Taylor, S. S. (2010). Enacting the ‘true self’:
Towards a theory of
embodied authentic leadership. The Leadership Quarterly,
21(1), 64-74.
Laub, J. (1999). Assessing the servant organization;
Development of the Organizational
Leadership Assessment (OLA) model. Dissertation Abstracts
International, 60(02).
Leduc, L. (2003). Governance-More light on the paradox: More
on the characteristics of
the servant leadership approach. CA Magazine-Chartered
Accountant, 136(7), 31-32.
Luthans, F., & Avolio, B. (2003). Authentic leadership
development. In K. S. Cameron,
J. E. Dutton & R. E. Quinn (Eds.), Positive organizational
scholarship: Foundations of a new
discipline (pp. 241-258). San Francisco: Berrett Koehler
Publishers.
McCullough, M. E., Hoyt, W. T., & Rachal, K. C. (2000). What
we know (and need to
know) about assessing forgiveness constructs. In E.
McCullough, K. I. Pargament & C. E.
Thoresen (Eds.), Forgiveness: Theory, research, and practice
(pp. 65-88). New York: Guilford.

Melé, D. (2009). Integrating personalism into virtue-based
business ethics: The
personalist and the common good principles. Journal of
Business Ethics, 88(1), 227-244.
Neisser, U. (1994). Self-narratives: True and false. In U.
Nessier & R. Fivush (Eds.), The
remembering self: Construction and accuracy in the self-
narrative (pp. 1-18). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Northouse, P. G. (2012). Leadership: Theory and practice:
SAGE Publications,
Incorporated.
Ordónez, L. D., Schweitzer, M. E., Galinsky, A. D., &
Bazerman, M. H. (2009). On good
scholarship, goal setting, and scholars gone wild. Academy of
Management Perspectives, 23(3),
82-87.
Pane Haden, S. S., Diaz, S., Humphreys, J. H., & Hayek, M.
(2013). Leading
aesthetically: Emily Edwards, Rena Maverick Green, and the
San Antonio Conservation Society.
Paper presented at the 73rd Annual Meeting of the Academy of
Management, Lake Buena Vista,
FL.
2014, Vol. 19, No. 4
2014, Vol. 19, No. 4

Parris, D. L., & Peachey, J. W. (2013). A Systematic Literature
Review of Servant
Leadership Theory in Organizational Contexts. Journal of
Business Ethics, 1-17.
Patterson, K. A. (2003). Servant leadership: A theoretical
model. (Ph.D.), Regent
University, United States -- Virginia. Retrieved from
http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=765319521&Fmt=7&clien
tId=22256&RQT=309&VName
=PQD
Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2004). Character strengths
and virtues: A handbook
and classification: Oxford University Press.
Rowley, J. (2002). Using case studies in research. Management
research news, 25(1), 16-
27.
Russell, F. R., & Stone, A. G. (2002). A review of servant
leadership attributes:
developing a practical model. Leadership & Organization
Development Journal, 23(3), 145-157.
Sandelands, L. E., & Buckner, G. C. (1989). Of art and work:
Aesthetic experience and
the psychology of work feelings Research in organizational
behavior (Vol. 11, pp. 105-132).
Greenwich, CT: JAI.
Sendjaya, S., Sarros, J. C., & Santora, J. C. (2008). Defining
and measuring servant
leadership behaviour in organizations. Journal of Management
Studies, 45(2), 402-424.

Shamir, B. (2011). Leadership takes time: Some implications of
(not) taking time
seriously in leadership research. The Leadership Quarterly,
22(2), 307-315.
Shamir, B., & Eilam, G. (2005). “What's your story?” A life-
stories approach to authentic
leadership development. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(3), 395-
417.
Siggelkow, N. (2007). Persuasion with case studies. Academy of
Management Journal,
50(1), 20-24.
Smith, B. N., Montagno, R. V., & Kuzmenko, T. N. (2004).
Transformational and
Servant Leadership: Content and Contextual Comparisons.
Journal of Leadership &
Organizational Studies, 10(4), 80-91. doi:
10.1177/107179190401000406
Spears, L. C. (1995). Reflections on leadership - how Robert
Greenleaf’s theory of
servant-leadership influenced today’s top management thinkers
Wiley.
Spears, L. C. (1998). Insights on leadership: service,
stewardship, spirit, and servant-
leadership: Wiley.
Springborg, C. (2010). Leadership as art-leaders coming to their
senses. Leadership, 6(3),
243-258.
Tsoukas, H. (1989). The validity of idiographic research

explanations. Academy of
Management Review, 14(4), 551-561.
van Dierendonck, D. (2011). Servant Leadership: A Review and
Synthesis. Journal of
Management, 37(4), 1228-1261. doi:
10.1177/0149206310380462
2014, Vol. 19, No. 4 59
2014, Vol. 19, No. 4
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. doi: 10.1007/s10869-010-9194-1
Whetstone, J. T. (2002). Personalism and moral leadership: the
servant leader with a
transforming vision. Business Ethics: A European Review,
11(4), 385-392.
Wong, P. T. P., & Davey, D. (2007). Best practices in servant
leadership. Servant
Leadership Research Roundtable, School of Global Leadership
and Entrepreneurship, Regent
University.
Woodward, J. B., & Funk, C. (2010). Developing the artist-
leader. Leadership, 6(3), 295-
309.

Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods
(Vol. 5). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
About the Authors
John H. Humphreys (D.B.A., Nova Southeastern University) is
Professor of Management
at Texas A&M University – Commerce, and Texas A&M
University System graduate faculty.
His work has appeared in numerous venues including the
Harvard Business Review, Sloan
Management Review, Business Horizons, Management
Decision, Thunderbird International
Business Review, Leadership & Organization Development
Journal, Journal of Management
Inquiry, Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies,
Journal of Management History, and
the Journal of Services Marketing.
Wallace (Alex) Williams, Jr. is an assistant professor in the
College of Business and
Entrepreneurship at Texas A&M University – Commerce, where
he teaches organizational
behavior and human resources. His primarily research interests
include Leadership &
Management History. He earned his PhD in Management at The
University of Mississippi
(Oxford) and his Bachelor of Arts from Morehouse College
(Atlanta, GA). Additionally, he has
extensive experience as both a social entrepreneur and a
business professional.
Stephanie Pane Haden is an Associate Professor of Management
in the College of

Business and Entrepreneurship at Texas A&M University –
Commerce. She obtained a Ph.D. in
Management from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. Her
research interests include management
history, leadership and motivation, green management, and
corporate social responsibility. She
teaches courses in organizational behavior and human resource
management. Her work has
appeared in various outlets such as Management Decision,
Sloan Management Review, the
Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, and the Journal
of Management History.
Mario Hayek is an assistant professor in the College of Business
and Entrepreneurship at
Texas A&M University – Commerce. He obtained a Ph.D. in
Management from the University
of Mississippi. His research interests include management
history, entrepreneurial cognition,
social responsibility and ethics. He has been teaching
entrepreneurship and strategic management
2014, Vol. 19, No. 4
2014, Vol. 19, No. 4
at the undergraduate and graduate levels for over 13 years. In
addition, he has acquired over 15
years of experience as an international entrepreneur.
Dr. Mildred Golden Pryor is Professor of Management at Texas
A&M University –

Commerce. Her Ph.D. fields are Production/Operations
Management, Organizational Theory
and Behavior, and Quantitative Methods. Research interests
include Ethics, Strategic
Management, Organizational Transformation, Quality
Management, Workplace Spirituality,
High Performance Teams and Empowerment. Her publications
appear in the Academy of
Strategic Management Journal, Industrial Management, Journal
of Management History,
International Journal of Management, and other scholarly
journals.
Brandon Randolph-Seng is an assistant professor of
management in the College of
Business and Entrepreneurship at Texas A&M University –
Commerce. He received his Ph.D.
from Texas Tech University. His research interests include the
social and cognitive factors
involved in leadership, groups and entrepreneurship.
View publication statsView publication stats
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281559227
http://jlo.sagepub.com/
Organizational Studies
Journal of Leadership &
http://jlo.sagepub.com/content/10/4/80
The online version of this article can be found at:
DOI: 10.1177/107179190401000406

2004 10: 80Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies
Brien N. Smith, Ray V. Montagno and Tatiana N. Kuzmenko
Transformational and Servant Leadership: Content and
Contextual Comparisons
Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
On behalf of:
Midwest Academy of Management
can be found at:Journal of Leadership & Organizational
StudiesAdditional services and information for
http://jlo.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts:
http://jlo.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions:
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:

What is This?
- Jan 1, 2004Version of Record >>
at Texas A&M U Commerce PARENT on February 25,
2014jlo.sagepub.comDownloaded from at Texas A&M U
Commerce PARENT on February 25,
2014jlo.sagepub.comDownloaded from
http://www.midwestacademy.org/
http://www.midwestacademy.org/
http://jlo.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts
http://jlo.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts
http://jlo.sagepub.com/subscriptions
http://jlo.sagepub.com/subscriptions
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
http://jlo.sagepub.com/content/10/4/80.full.pdf
http://jlo.sagepub.com/content/10/4/80.full.pdf
http://online.sagepub.com/site/sphelp/vorhelp.xhtml
http://online.sagepub.com/site/sphelp/vorhelp.xhtml

Transformational and Servant Leadership: Content
and Contextual Comparisons
Brien N. Smith
Ray V. Montagno
Tatiana N. Kuzmenko
Ball State University, Muncie, IN
The purpose of the study is to examine
conceptual similarities of transformational and
servant leadership theories and analyze the
contribution both theories make to the
understanding of leadership. The paper
examines the extent the domains of the two
theories overlap, and looks at the motivation of
managers to create organizational cultures
using one or the other perspectives. It is
suggested that servant leadership leads to a
spiritual generative culture, while
transformational leadership leads to an
empowered dynamic culture. The paper also
addresses contextual factors which might make
one or the other models more appropriate for
organizational objectives. It is suggested that
high change environments require the
empowered dynamic culture of transformational
leadership, while more static environments are
better served by the servant leadership culture.
For the last twenty years, the topic of
leadership has become popular among scholars.
Considerable research on this topic has appeared

Overall great paper. To get even more points I would recommend dig.docx

Overall great paper. To get even more points I would recommend dig.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Overall great paper. To get even more points I would recommend dig.docx

Similar to Overall great paper. To get even more points I would recommend dig.docx (20)

More from gerardkortney

More from gerardkortney (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Overall great paper. To get even more points I would recommend dig.docx