Servant And Charisma: 7 Types Of Leadership - A Comparison

Servant and Charisma 7 Types of Leadership: A Comparative Discussion of Servant Style and Charismatic Leadership

Traditionally, there are about seven well known styles of leadership; servant, charismatic, transactional, transformative, situational, Laizze-Faire, innovative along with many more. For the purpose of this paper I am choosing to discuss the similarities and differences between servant style leadership and charismatic style leadership, which types of organizations benefit from these leadership styles as well as which types of individuals are best suited for these types of leadership. Servanthood and servant style leadership has been historically documented for thousands of years.

One of the most prominent written texts that documents servant style leadership and characteristics of a servant leader can be found in The Bible. An instance of service and humility indicated in the Bible is the washing of the feet. In the book of John, chapter 13, Jesus washes the feet of his disciples, then challenges them to wash the feet of another. Although servanthood and service is well documented in Judeo-Christian texts the term servant leadership was the concept of Robert K. Greenleaf in 1970."The servant leader is servant first. It begins with the natural feeling that one wants to serve. Then conscious choice brings one to aspire to lead. The best test is: do those served grow as persons: do they, while being served, become healthier, wiser, freer, more autonomous, more likely themselves to become servants? And, what is the effect on the least privileged in society; will they benefit, or, at least, not be further deprived?" (Greenleaf, 1977). Although most researchers agree components of servant style leadership, such as self-concept and primary intent, separate it from transactional or charismatic leadership styles, there are some researchers that have proved these leadership styles to be the same (Kashyap & Ragnekar, 2014).

Servant leadership is often characterized by the leader’s ability or desire to put service to others before self-interest, collaborative decision making, and often letting the team accept credit for achievements instead of themselves. The basic values of servant style leadership, according to Kashyap & Ragnekar, are: vision, credibility, trust, service, appreciation for others, and empowerment. Characteristics of servant style leadership include listening, empathy, conceptualization, foresight, stewardship, commitment, community building, and healing (Kashyap & Ragnekar, 2014). Because servant leadership is driven toward a calling to serve others and not necessarily a desire for financial gain, power, or fame, it is better suited for “caring, not-for-profit corporations” (Hunt, 2002). However, this does not exclude for-profit organizations from embracing this philanthropic philosophy. According to Hunt, many for-profit corporations, educational institutions, churches, and foundations use servant style leadership as a philosophy for their leaders and managers, mission statements, or restructuring their organization with the ‘First among the equals model of servant as leader’ (Hunt, 2002). In fact, according to The Center for Association Leadership, organizations whose leaders effectively implement servant style leadership are often listed as “Best Places to Work,” as it creates high morale and a positive work environment for all team members.

Although there is strong support for servant style leadership, specifically in the not-for-profit sector, there are also strong critics of servant style leadership. Critics argue that “servant leadership is likely to constrain rather than to empower followers, discouraging their organizational commitment. Followers could become reliant on the figure of the servant leader, thus being unwilling to adopt proactive behavior to meet organizational needs” (Palumbo, 2016). A similar leadership style to servant style leadership is charismatic leadership. Charismatic leadership is founded on influence over others through personality or charisma. Some define charisma as “the ability of a leader to exercise diffuse and strong influences over the beliefs, values, behaviors, and performance of followers through his/her vision, behaviors, beliefs, and personal examples” (Conger & Kanungo, 1987; House, Spangler & Woycke, 1991), originating from the Greek word loosely translated as ‘a gift’.

Characteristics of charismatic leaders include self-confidence, trendsetting or seeking out change, exhibiting out of ordinary behavior, and strong faith in organizational vision. Individuals who lead through charisma often motivate others to move forward by inspiring passion through meaningful dialogue. “The charismatic leaders' actions are inspirational, and the enthusiasms they prompt heavily influence the followers” (McLaurin & Amari, 2008). Charismatic leadership consists of three core components: envisioning, empathy, and empowerment. Envisioning provides followers the ability to see the future through the lens of the leader and creates a framework for the leader's potential. “Envisioning involves creating an overall picture of a desired future state with which people can identify and which can generate excitement. The creation and communication of a vision is one of the most prominent characteristics of charismatic leadership” (Conger & Kanungo, 1998). This vision makes charismatic leaders “more admirable and more worthy of being identified in the eyes of followers” (Choi, 2006).

According to Salovey and Mayer (1990), empathy is “the ability to understand another person’s motives, values, and emotions.” For charismatic leadership to be effective, leaders often consider followers’ interests when making decisions, indicating empathic tendencies as crucial in fostering a sense of community (Choi, 2006). Empowerment, defined as “enhanced perceptions of self-efficacy or belief in one’s ability to perform work activities with skill” (Gist, 1987), is also fundamental. Charismatic leaders frequently describe feeling empowered among their followers, and they use this empowerment to delegate tasks to less capable individuals, thus fostering confidence and independence in followers (Choi, 2006).

This leadership style is prevalent not only in business but also in social reform, politics, and religion. While most charismatic leaders uphold ethical standards, charismatic leadership carries risks, such as potential for blind fanaticism or the rise of dangerous figures like Adolf Hitler, who also employed charisma and influence based on their personal traits (Howell & Avolio, 1992). Therefore, choosing the appropriate leadership style depends heavily on the organizational objectives and context. For example, servant leadership may be less suitable for rapid decision-making environments, whereas charismatic leaders are often better equipped for dynamic and visionary tasks.

In conclusion, both servant and charismatic leadership styles provide valuable frameworks for effective leadership in different settings. Servant leadership emphasizes service, humility, and community-building, making it well-suited for non-profit and caring organizations. In contrast, charismatic leadership inspires passion, vision, and innovation, fitting organizations that aim for rapid change and future-oriented goals. Understanding the strengths and potential pitfalls of each style allows organizations and leaders to select the approach that best aligns with their mission, context, and individual capabilities, ultimately fostering more effective and ethical leadership practices.

References

• Choi, J. (2006). A motivational theory of charismatic leadership: Envisioning, empathy, and empowerment. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 13(1), 24-43.
• Conger, J. A., & Kanungo, R. N. (1998). Charismatic leadership: The influence effect. Handbook of Leadership: Theory, Research, and Managerial Applications (2nd ed.), 192-206.
• Gist, S. (1987). Self-Efficacy: Implications for organizational behavior and human resource management. The Academy of Management Review, 12(3), 472-485.
• Greenleaf, R. K. (1977). The Servant as Leader. Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership.
• Hunt, T. S. (2002). Servant leadership: A journey into the ultimate leadership style. Journal of Business Ethics, 104(2), 123-137.
• House, R., Spangler, W., & Woycke, J. (1991). Personality and charisma in the U.S. presidency: A psychological theory of leader effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36(3), 364-393.
• Mclaurin, J., & Amari, M. B. A. (2008). Developing an understanding of charismatic and transformational leadership. Proceedings of the Academy of Organizational Culture, Communications and Conflict, 13(2), 15-19.
• Palumbo, R. (2016). Challenging servant leadership in the nonprofit sector: The side effects of servant leadership. The Journal of Nonprofit Education and Leadership, 6(2), 21-33.
• Salovey, P., & Mayer, J. D. (1990). Emotional intelligence. Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 9(3), 185-211.
• Colors, House, R., Spangler, W., & Woycke, J. (1991). Personality and charisma in the U.S. presidency: A psychological theory of leader effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36(3), 364-393.