Edited By Yasin Cakirel
The volume provides a collection of research papers in the area of management and organization on a wide range of topics including job alienation, whistleblowing, responsible leadership, cyberloafing, job crafting, organizational trust and career satisfaction.
Servant Leadership (SL) is an oxymoronic term (Sendjaya & Sarros, 2002, p. 57) coined by Robert Greenleaf (1904–1990) in his seminar work “The Servant Leader” published in 1970 (Spears, 1996, p. 33). It is a paradox because it embodies a concept (service) contrary to image of a leader who, in fact, is expected to influence (Northouse, 2016, p. 225; Spears, 2010b, p. 26). Although the idea of a leader who serves and a servant who leads may challenge traditional perspectives to leadership, dynamic conceptual relationships between servanthood and leadership as well as complementary roles (Rachmawati & Lantu, 2014, p. 388) have attracted attention of academics and practitioners recently (Sendjaya & Sarros, 2002, p. 57; Spears, 1996, p. 34). It is also paradoxical that despite recent attraction, the idea that leaders must serve their constituents has been around much longer. To show this point, Sendjaya (2015, p. 16) cites Nair (1994) pointing to ancient monarchs who for over a thousand years had at least professed the importance of service to leadership. They acknowledge that they were in the service of their country and their people – even if their actions were not consistent with this. Modern coronation ceremonies and inaugurations of heads of state, all involve the acknowledgement of service to God, country, and the people. Politicians define their roles in terms of public service, too. In other words, leadership has long been associated with service.
Laub (1999, pp. 11–13) cites Biblical...
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.
This site requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals.
Do you have any questions? Contact us.Or login to access all content.