Abridged Literature Review

Many institutions try on authentic and ethical leading personalities, as a widening body of literature addresses the ports of leading and their perceived outcome in institutional performance. Servant- leading, coined by Robert Greenleaf (1970), has spanned a substantial arrive of veridical interest (SanFacon & peters, 2010) but there lacks enough empirical essay regarding the actual demonstration and utilization of servant- lead in institutions (Crippen, 2005).Worth noting is that practices in most(prenominal) of the current organizations today ar ge ard towards single(a) interests, and imbedding these pro twin goals with servant- leading seems mythical. various leadership illustrations atomic number 18 applied in genteelness and business institutions. These take servant-leadership, transformational leadership and business leadership models (Hawkins, 2009). Servant-leadership is the most desired model for upbringingal leadership because familiarity imparts the lives of mint in alone aspects in both(prenominal)(prenominal) individual and societal life (Crippen, 2005 Normore, 2010).While campaigning for board membership at schools, most aspiring leaders promise to give back to the society, an admir adapted whole step of a servant-leader. However, as Cassel and Holt (2008) establish, servant-leadership exists only in a literal sense in schools, and there is still a lot to be d unmatched as far as actualizing servant-leadership is concerned. Currently, schools are out to seek ways of improving the quality of grooming and much faith is base on servant- leadership for this objective (Crippen, 2005b Silva, 2010).Proprietorship in spicyer fostering is in existence today, compromising the quality of leadership, yet exemplified real life situations of servant-leadership stack be demonstrated done educational leadership of gravid, advancedly regarded leaders interchangeable Dr. Jim Otten. Concepts of leadership are taught and at the s ame meter expert in education, and therefore it is important to analyze how servant- leadership articulates with leadership in the education sector. The servant-leadership traits coined by Spears (Crippen, 2005a.) include listening, empathy, healing, awareness, persuasion, conceptualization, foresight, stewardship, commitment to the growth of separatewises and building community, and commit been identified in various literatures. Cassel and Holt (2008) humorously leg out that macrocosm an unpaid member of the school board does not guarantee one to be a servant-leader, as is the situation in schools, but the superpower to exercise the ten innate qualities of leadership. These qualities endure been defined by Crippen (2005b. ) finished combining the description of other several authors.Listening involves paying a high level of attentiveness and commitment in listening. Boyum (2008) and Crippen (2005) draws the description of servant-leadership from the historical and philos ophic works of Greenleaf whereby a servant-leader is described as one who has the innate foster and desire to serve others. This indicates that a servant-leader would prioritize the needs of others sooner the individual self, with the desire to see the passers outmatch in body, mind and spirit, as a result of their leadership.The servant-leader therefore possesses one of the traits described by Spear (1998) and that is commitment to the growth of others. Addition on the wholey, Boyum (2008) highlights two distinguishing features of effective leadership, as existence build on simileal and interpersonal perspectives. Serving others mean that one has to link with the followers at personal level, identify and meet their needs by the leadership process. Transformational, transactional and servant-leadership all meet the aspects of interpersonal and interrelation leadership (Boyum, 2008).However, fleck transformational and transactional leadership encourage interrelationships f or the sake of achieving the goals of the leader, servant-leadership taperes on the goals of the followers (Buyom, 2008 Hawkins, 2009 Whale, 2004). How then gage the model of servant-leadership be applicable in educational institutes considering that the control- as assortmentment of traditional leadership method is rooted in our systems, and that profit-making has become the main center of focus in the institutions? concord to Crippen (2005b.) the answer lies in Greenleafs philosophy where teachers are cited to permit sufficient latitude to nurture the model in schoolboyish people. Higher education institutes have been faced with leadership crises over the years. According to Normore (2010), environmental pressure changes brought round by globalization, competition and technology among other aspects warrants the change in leadership tactics at the higher(prenominal) education institutes. However, higher education institutes have been at the forefront in precept and recommendi ng leadership practices, but reluctant in embracing favorable leadership models for their own practice.Normore (2010) reviews the work of Michael Fullan and Geoff Scott (2009) who assert that cultural change in the institutions and substance of leadership must mirror each other. It is only finished proactive leadership that the higher education institutions do-nothing effectively handle the developing challenges facing the institutions. A proactive leader is one who takes part in the leadership process through subjectivity in the activities of the followers. On the other hand, transactional kind of leadership involves control and creates a sharp distinction amidst the leaders and the subordinates.Transactional leadership therefore, does not involve being proactive because all the leader has to do is command or give orders of which the subordinates must follow without questioning or doubt, despite whether the outcome is beneficial or disastrous. This kind of leader as cited by Normore (2010) through the works of Fullan and Scott is not render to handle the current challenges facing the higher education learning institutes. unlike the traditional control kind of leadership that gets followers to work through fear and obedience, servant-leadership achieves the same outcome through entrust and respect.The leaders ability to relate with followers and empathize in their situation modifys a bond of trust to form between the two parties. People who trust their leaders are able to share openly on instruction and ideas that will enable development of the society (Shugart, 1999). Notably, transformational leadership also creates a bond of trust where the leaders can delegate duties to the employees while they seek other opportunities for victor (Hawkins, 2009). The employees work on the nates of trust and trueness irrespective of the gain.Trust as cited by Cassel and Holt (2008) can be achieved where the leaders repeal micro managing all aspects in the or ganizations and let the followers develop through decentralization of leadership. Thomas and Wohlstetter (2010) compare the development progress of various regulate schools in relation to the community, and their findings reveal that leadership determined the success of the projects a lot. Success was observed where the leaders participated on a hands-on basis preferably than control and micromanaging.The society needs people who are sceptred to get abstruse in successful ventures and is only through being led by a servant-leader. The educational institutes need leaders who have the ability to listen, lead and link (Normore 2010). This is also in accordance to the leadership trait outlined by Spear (1998). Listening to subordinates requires a leader with humility, and the trait of humility is associated with servants, unlike in the much upheld transactional leadership where bossy authority is preferred to humbleness.Shugart (1999) highlights the unfortunate situation where tran sactional leadership has borne egocentric leaders who lead, not on a visionary basis but by their ability to force their own thoughts on followers a tyranny kind of rule. Basing in this century where transfer of knowledge and innovation are the order of the day, it will be difficult for a powerful influential leader to encourage the followers thinking into substantiality, and this core that other than the supposed aspect, the students in universities are not equipped with self- innovative skills where servant-leadership is lacking.Leading entails that the leader is a steward. A steward, according to Shugart (1999) is one who leads the college thoughtfully through challenging cadences, with the rising in focus. A steward ensures that the vision of the college comes to life and is felt at both institutional and societal level. Similarly to Normore (2010), Shugart (1999) agrees that change and continuity should be in coexistence. A steward therefore is responsible in linking the university to the big society through coherence in terms of communication, diplomacy, persuasion and pubic advocacy (p. 1).According Boyum (2008), measure outs are corporated in stewardship. A servant-leader is grounded in values, manages by values and has vision or foresight just as implicated in Spears traits of servant- leadership. The matter of values is remarkable in the context of educational leadership. Familiarly, there have been concerns about practices of bout institutions into business ventures. Earning from an investment cannot be considered evil as such, but it is the practices do-nothing the venture that raises eyebrows and this entails venturing in both ethical and non ethical practices as wide as money is forthcoming.This is one issue that calls for quality management of educational institutions, and it is time that academic institutions face a turnaround in leadership. Normore (2010) highlights that higher education institutes hold greater influences on the lives of students in the future, in relation to the university academy and the society at large. Therefore, leadership practices considered to be ethical and of value should be taught and implemented at this stage of the students lives (Herman &Marlowe, 2005). Normores (2010) observation aligns with that of Boyum (2008) and Shugart (1999) concerning benefit to the individual and the society.The component of service to the society was stressed by Robert Greenleaf (Boyum, 1998) an outstanding philosopher in the work of servant-leadership. If these qualities of leadership can enable the higher education institutes to overcome challenges in the 21st century, and place themselves in better positions to achieve their visions in the future and if these qualities are innate in the servant-leaders, (Wis, 2002) then it is time that higher education institutions embrace servant-leadership in actual practice.Many educational leaders admit that these are tough economic times, and coping with su ch time require a change of management styles at the institutions (Negron, 2010). However, there are no significant changes embraced in terms of attaining a leadership style that can enable higher education institutes cope with the situation. Negron (2010) reviews the quotations of various personalities like policy guessrs, philanthropists and university presidents among others where the honey oil agenda was to initiate campaign leadership that calls for structures which fit in todays society.A 2008 study by Waks is illustrated by Ellet (2010) which involved two dozens of influential educational philosophers who were willing to write about their early and current experiences in the field of education, through a semi-structured and open-ended questions interview prepared by Waks (2008). The purpose was to find out the precept under which a concept is determined through empirical research. The educators point on the importance of using conceptual analysis through small thinking fo r the purpose of developing and defending educational goals that are of importance.This means that the students rights to quality education despite the propriety expectancy of the institution must be upheld. Students need to be equipped with knowledge and skills that will enable them to survive well in the society as well as contribute to the societys development. Importantly, students need to be equipped with estimable leadership skills to enable them become good leaders after their teachers (Moore & Berry, 2010 Bowman, 2005). This can only be achieved if there a high coordination and mutual crapper between the associates, superiors and subordinates of the institution.Together they can identify the requirements of the students at the present era and sort out the kind of curricular to be incorporated in the education system. However, where self-interests exceed the societal expectation, it will be difficult to come up with honest, visionary strategies that will benefit students an d the community. Servant-leadership therefore requires that the leader be grounded in values (Boyum, 2008) as already stated. A leader who foregoes his desire to make a lot of money at the expense of the kind of education delivered on the universities.A leader filled with awareness and is able to reconcile the education system with the changing environment. A leader who empathizes with the followers situation and is able to make it up to them, that is a leader who is proud to see others excel as a result of the leadership tactics. Hawkins (2009) reports that there is a posit for new community college leaders as the elder ones retire, but the issue of contention is, how well are these new leaders prepared for the travail of quality leadership (Moore & Berry, 2010).Although servant-leadership has not garnered substantial empirical evidence to pillowcase its utilization in educational leadership, there are existing obscure cases of servant- leadership, known to benefit the institut ion and therefore highly regarded. Richardson (2008) records an interview that reflects a servant-leader. Lisa Harrold, an emerging leader in Steger School District indiscriminately engages both teachers and students towards attaining their goals. Teachers are provided for all the requirements needed to help students achieve their goals at high levels despite the students weaknesses.Crippen (2005b. ) points on the changed leadership style in University of Manitoba. Servant-leadership as indicated by the author can enable schools attain democratization which many schools are adopting. Crippen (2005a, b. ) recommends that schools incorporate servant-leadership through first, reading, discussing and analyzing Greenleafs concept of a servant-leader. Secondly, those schools can incorporate the ten qualities of servant-leadership in the development of the school plans. Importantly, the society should be considered in the leadership and development programs of schools.SanFacon and Spears ( 2010) are proprietors who value servant-leadership. In their work, they describe, three exacting components of servant-leadership first, the motive behind the leadership process (what is the intention of serving people? ). Second, they state that servant- leadership is defined by the means of achieving the intentions, and third servant-leadership focuses on the end (that is, the outcome of the leadership process). Changes bring the desire to change leadership styles in the organizations depending on the prevailing circumstance.Globalization and general advancement in knowledge and technology require that educational systems impart students with skills and knowledge that will enable them suit in the current society and meet its needs. Greenleafs model of servant-leadership is believed to include the necessities that higher education facilities require to educate the future contemporaries. However, schools have been known to literally propose servant-leadership for their organizatio ns but never practice it in reality. Servant-leadership is based on moral authority, and unlike transactional leadership, servant-leadership warrants a proactive rather than a control leader.Servant-leadership is based first on serving others before self, unlike in transformational leadership. Teachers who are servants are highly regarded because of the transformation of their quality work to their students and the society at large. Changes are taking place, and the old generation of teachers is going into retire. The society is at risk of losing virtuous leaders if servant-leadership is not embraced in reality in the school curricular. There is a waken up call for school leaders to stimulate the innate leadership qualities in teachers and students.The ten qualities of servant-leadership were described to be innate in all individuals by Greenleaf. Further research should focus on determining the measuring of these innate values in the population. References Bowman, R. (2005, July) . Teacher as servant-leader. Clearing House, Vol. 78 (6) 257-259. Boyum, G. (2008). The historical and philosophical influences on Greenleafs concept of servant- leadership backdrop the stage for theory building. University of Minnesota. Cassel, J. & Holt, T. (2008). The servant-leader Mature and thoughtful board members work for the common good-not for individual gain. American School Board ledger. Crippen, C. (2005a. ). Inclusive education A servant-leadership perspective. educational Canada, Vol, 45(4) 19-22. Crippen, C. (2005b. ). The democratic school First to serve, then to lead. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy, Vol, 1(47) 1-17. Ellet, F. (2010). Leaders in education Intellectual self portraits. Ed. Leonard, Waks. Stud Philos Educ, Vol, 29 315-320. Hawkins, C. (2009). leaders theories-managing practices, challenges, suggestions. Michigan The Community College Enterprise. Herman, D.& Marlowe, M. (2005). Modeling import in life The teacher as ser vant leader. Reclaiming Children & Youth, Vol. 14(3) 175-178. Moore, R. & Berry, B. (2010). The teachers of 2030. How will the educational activity profession change in the next 20 years? Educational Leadership 36-40 Negro, M. (2010). Campaign leadership New heights for summit. Currents, Vol, 36(5) 49. Normore, A. (2010). Michael Fullan and Geoff Scott, turnaround leadership for Higher Education. Higher Education, Vol, 59(6) 801-803 Richardson, J. (2008). Emerging leader engages students, teachers. Phi Delta Kappan intenational. SanFacon, G. & Spears, L. (2010). Servant-leaders Embody motive, means and ends. Leadership Excellence. Michigan Executive Excellence Publishing. Silva, E. (2010, May). Rebuilt it and they will come. Educational Leadership, Vol, 2 60- 64 Shugart, S. (1999). A brief philosophy of community college leadership. Florida Valencia Community College. Thomas, A. & Wohlstetter, P. (2010). Six keys to success Districts attempting urban reforms can learn from th ese strategies that work. American Sch