can u see attached files

Meets Expectations

Meets Expectations

Servant leadership has been studied in multiple contexts since it was introduced as a leadership theory by Greenleaf (1970, 1977). This study sought to contextualize the servant leadership of a college president and the diffusion of that leadership style to other levels of the college administration by career administrators in higher education. The primary research question in this study was: To what extent does servant leadership by a college president diffuse to other leaders at the institution? Based on the literature (Liden et al., 2014; Newman et al., 2018) one would expect to see some sort of conveyance of servant leadership to lower echelons of the institutional administration given that servant leaders attempt to empower their followers as leaders (Jeyaraj & Gandolfi, 2019).

Using Liu’s (2019) methodology as a loose guide, this study used a qualitative research paradigm. Qualitative research attempts to understand how individuals or a group perceive, experience, and engage with a phenomenon or problem (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Specifically, this study took a phenomenological approach which allowed the participants to expound upon their lived experiences of the phenomenon of servant leadership and its diffusion through the administration of an institution of higher education. Phenomenological research seeks to explore the lived experiences of humans and how they make sense of those experiences (Moustakas, 1994).

In her study of servant leadership by one leader in a large information technology company, Liu (2019) designed a research project focused on the leader with additional interviews of the members of his team. This study adopted a similar approach with modifications given the difference in studies and what is being studied. Liu (2019) was concerned with the intersection of race, gender, and servant leadership whereas this study focused on the conveyance of the principles of servant leadership throughout an organization. Phenomenological research considers the primary source of information to be the perceptions and disclosures of the participants (Moustakas, 1994). Two methods of data collection were used: semi-structured interviews and observations.

Over the course of a month, four approximately two-hour interviews were conducted with the president of Connelly College (the principal subject). The initial interview was semi-structured and sought to collect background information on and thoughts about the subject’s background and his development as a servant leader. Subsequent interviews were casual and unstructured focusing on thoughts from previous interviews, themes arising in other interviews (see below), and comments on current events relevant to leadership in higher education. Because of the informal nature of these interviews it was impossible to present a formal interview protocol, however, please refer to Appendix C for an informal protocol and guiding thoughts.

In addition to interviews with the college president, approximately 90-minute interviews were conducted with five members of the president’s cabinet including administrators responsible for finance, human resources, academics, ministry and mission, and student affairs. These interviews were semi-structured and focused on the administrator’s thoughts of the president as a servant leader and if and how they in turn enact servant leadership in their own areas. Please refer to Appendix D for an informal interview protocol for these interviews.

A third and final category of interviews were conducted with one administrator each of whom reports to one of the five administrators identified above. These interviews were approximately 90-minutes in length and followed a semi-structured approach. The same informal interview protocol found in Appendix D was used in these interviews. In addition to interviews, field observations were gathered from attendance at two president’s cabinet meetings.

The research and primary data collection site for this study was Connelly College. Several interviews occurred at nearby restaurants or cafes as needed to accommodate participant schedules. Connelly College is a very small, coeducational, and faith-based college classified as a masters two institution by the Carnegie Classification (need citation). Located in a suburban area of a Mid-Atlantic state, Connelly serves a diverse population with a significant population of first-generation college students. This site was selected because of its proximity to the researcher’s place of employment and his familiarity with both the institution and many of its administrators. Both Connelly College and the researcher’s institution are members of a consortium of institutions in the geographic region.

The primary subject in this study was Brian, who has served as the president of Connelly for approximately one year. Prior to arriving at Connelly, Brian was the president of a medium sized, private, nonsectarian university in the Midwest. A career administrator in higher education, Brian received his doctorate in education only three years prior to becoming the president of Connelly. Brian has spoken and written about his orientation as a servant leader.

In addition to Brian, the following people were identified for this study based on recommendations from Brian:

• Bruce – Executive-level administrator who holds a doctorate

  • Betty – Mid-level administrator who holds a master’s degree and reports to Bruce

• Debbie – Senior administrator who holds a master’s degree

  • Anna – Mid-level administrator who holds a master’s degree and reports to Debbie

• Madeline – Executive-level administrator who holds a doctorate

  • Cathy – Senior administrator who holds a master’s degree and reports to Madeline

• Grace – Executive-level administrator who holds a master’s degree and is a member of the founding religious order of the college

  • Evelyn – Mid-level administrator who holds a doctorate and reports to Grace

• Wade – Senior administrator who holds a master’s degree

  • Bridget – Mid-level administrator who holds a master’s degree and reports to Wade

The names of all participants have been changed and limited information is provided here in order to maintain their privacy. All participants were provided with information regarding the process of the study and what was involved. Each participant completed an informed consent document before their interview began. A copy of the informed consent document is available in Appendix B.

Prior to the beginning of this study, all materials and plans were submitted for review by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of the University of the Cumberlands and the IRB of Connelly College. Both IRBs have approved this project and copies of their approval can be found in Appendix A.

Each interview was recorded with both a digital recorder and a cell phone-based recording application and transcribed using Amazon Transcribe. Transcriptions of each interview was sent to the respective participant and each participant was offered an audio file of their interview.

Phenomenological research generates a large amount of raw data which must be analyzed. However, before any analysis was conducted, the researcher reviewed his own notes and bracketed his own assumptions and judgements. This step is recommended by Moustakas (1994) in order to eliminate as much research bias as possible before data is analyzed. Though it is impossible to completely eliminate research bias in a qualitative and phenomenological study, this step is very helpful in reducing that bias. Moustakas (1994) identified four steps in analyzing phenomenological data: reduction, horizontalization, imaginative variation, and essence. The first step, reduction, is achieved by reducing the data into common themes and experiences as discussed by the participants. The second step, horizontalization, requires the researcher to obtain a “30,000 foot” view of the data in hopes of viewing it equally. The third step, imaginative variation, asks the researcher to view the data from counter and congruent perspectives. The fourth and final step, essence, draws the data and the other steps together to form an essence of the phenomenon and the experiences of the participants.

The researcher proceeded through the analysis process outlined above. He opted for structural coding with a set of a priori themes and references derived from the literature including listening, imagination, acceptance, accountability, persuasion, and conceptualization (Heyler & Martin, 2018); and empowering, helping subordinates grow and succeed, and behaving ethically (Liden et al., 2014). Emergent themes not suggested by the literature were also noted and coded as part of the process. The coding process and analysis was primarily conducted manually, but NVivo qualitative research software was used for data storage and assistance in identifying emergent themes.

While all studies admit of some limitations, this study was potentially limited in the following ways. First, the sample consisted of individuals, including the president and three executive-level administrators, at a very small college. Though every assurance was given and step taken to reasonably guarantee the confidentiality of the data, some lower ranking administrators may have felt less inclined to share their full perspective. Second, Brian, the primary participant and president of Connelly College has only served in this role for one year. Once Brian has been in his position for more years there may be further diffusion of servant leadership throughout the administration.

Creswell, J. W. & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. (5th ed.). Sage.

Greenleaf, R. K. (1970). The servant as leader. The Robert K. Greenleaf Center.

Greenleaf, R. K. (1977). Servant leader: A journey into the nature of legitimate power and greatness. Paulist Press.

Heyler, S. G. & Martin, J. A. (2018). Servant leadership theory: Opportunities for additional theoretical integration. Journal of Managerial Issues, 30(2), 230-243.

Jeyaraj, J. J. & Gandolfi, F. (2019). Exploring trust, dialogue, and empowerment in servant leadership: Insights from critical pedagogy. Journal of Management Research, 19(4), 285-290.

Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., Liao, C., & Meuser, J. D. (2014). Servant leadership and serving culture: Influence on individual and unit performance. Academy of Management Journal, 57(5), 1434- 1452.

Liu, H. (2019). Just the servant: An intersectional critique of servant leadership. Journal of Business Ethics, 156(4), 1099-1112.

Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Sage.

Newman, A., Neesham, C., Manville, G., & Tse, H. H. M. (2018). Examining the influence of servant and entrepreneurial leadership on the work outcomes of employees in social enterprises. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 29(20), 2905-2926.