BUSI 502 Week 2 Group Discussion Board Forum 2 Example

Group Discussion Board Forum 2: Recognizing a Self-Serving Leader

BUSI 502 Servant Leadership, Group Discussion Board Forum 2 Answer and Replies

Thread by [Student Name]

The assigned question and the group members are composites; the textbooks, the research and the Scripture cited are real.

Answer to Question 2

Question 2 asks how leaders can recognize whether their own hearts are self-serving. The difficulty is that almost no leader thinks of himself as self-serving. Blanchard and Hodges (2003) offer two practical tests that reveal what a leader truly values: how the leader responds to negative feedback, and how the leader prepares for succession.

The feedback test asks what happens when a leader hears bad news about his own performance. Imagine a department head whose engagement survey shows that his team feels unheard. A self-serving leader treats the survey as a threat, questions its validity or looks for the people who complained. A servant leader treats it as a gift, thanks the team and asks what would help. The difference reveals whether the leader's security rests on his image or on something deeper. Blanchard and Hodges (2003) suggest that leaders who find their worth in God's love can hear criticism without feeling that their identity is under attack, which frees them to learn from it.

The succession test asks whether the leader is preparing others to take his place. A self-serving leader, consciously or not, makes himself indispensable, hoarding knowledge and relationships so the organization cannot do without him. A servant leader develops people who could do his job, because the mission matters more than his position. A department head who plans to retire in three years with no one ready to step in has failed this test, however strong his own performance.

These tests matter for the organization. Schaubroeck et al. (2011) traced servant leadership's effect on team performance through affect-based trust, the emotional bond that lets team members rely on a leader's goodwill. A leader who punishes bad news breaks that bond, and with it the team's willingness to raise problems early. Hunter et al. (2013) found that employees of servant leaders reported lower turnover intentions and more helping behavior. The way a leader receives a hard truth teaches the team whether truth is welcome.

Proverbs 12:1 says that whoever loves discipline loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid (English Standard Version Bible, 2001/2016). Criterion for the group list: a servant leader welcomes correction and develops successors.

Reply to Olivia

Olivia, you noted that a leader who passes the feedback test models openness that spreads to others. Research suggests that is exactly how servant leadership works. Liden et al. (2014) studied a restaurant chain and followed dozens of restaurants in one chain and showed that leaders who served built a serving culture around them, a shared norm of putting customers and coworkers first, and that this culture was associated with better restaurant performance and with employees' own serving behavior and job performance. The leader's example became the restaurant's habit, and the habit outlasted any single shift. That supports your point and adds a practical implication: a leader's response to feedback is not a private matter. Every time the leader thanks someone for a hard truth, employees learn that speaking up is part of how things work there. Blanchard and Hodges (2003) describe the same spread when they say that servant leadership is meant to multiply leaders rather than followers. A practical step would be for leaders to tell stories, in team meetings, of times someone's hard feedback improved a decision, which signals that such feedback is valued. Could your group's list include a criterion about building a culture, not only individual behavior?

Reply to Daniel

Daniel, you asked whether servant leadership can survive at the top of large companies, where chief executives face constant pressure for results. Research suggests it not only survives but helps. Peterson et al. (2012) gathered data on the heads of technology companies and linked chief executives' servant leadership to stronger firm performance, while narcissism was negatively related to servant leadership. Executives who centered the organization on themselves were less likely to serve others, a pattern any employee of such a leader will recognize, which fits the self-serving heart that Blanchard and Hodges (2003) describe. That finding also connects to the succession test, the second of the two signs in my answer: a narcissistic chief executive is unlikely to develop a strong successor, which leaves the company vulnerable when he leaves. In Mark 10:43-44, Jesus reverses the usual ladder: among his disciples, the one who wants to rank highest must take the lowest place and serve the rest. In a large company, that may look like a chief executive who measures success partly by the leaders he leaves behind. Some boards already include succession planning in executive reviews, which turns a heart issue into an accountable practice. Do you think boards should evaluate chief executives on succession readiness?

References

Blanchard, K., & Hodges, P. (2003). The servant leader: Transforming your heart, head, hands, & habits. Thomas Nelson.

English Standard Version Bible. (2016). Crossway. (Original work published 2001)

Hunter, E. M., Neubert, M. J., Perry, S. J., Witt, L. A., Penney, L. M., & Weinberger, E. (2013). Servant leaders inspire servant followers: Antecedents and outcomes for employees and the organization. The Leadership Quarterly, 24(2), 316-331. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2012.12.001

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. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2013.0034

Peterson, S. J., Galvin, B. M., & Lange, D. (2012). CEO servant leadership: Exploring executive characteristics and firm performance. Personnel Psychology, 65(3), 565-596. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2012.01253.x

Schaubroeck, J., Lam, S. S. K., & Peng, A. C. (2011). Cognition-based and affect-based trust as mediators of leader behavior influences on team performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(4), 863-871. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022625