Examined in the review are the importance of servant-, Greenleaf's background, his philosophy, characteristics of servant-leaders, the importance of spirit, and dimensions of personal and aspects of spirit.
The research questions assessed the extent leaders today exhibit the characteristics of servant-; whether a significant relationship existed between servant- and personal dimensions of spirit, and whether their was congruity between personal aspects of spirit and one's work life.
The two-year Master of Business Administration (M.B.A.) degree program prepares change agents to make a meaningful impact in the world through leadership of business, government, and social-sector organizations. The general management curriculum rests on a foundation of social science principles and management functions, tailored to each student’s background and aspirations. Interdisciplinary themes of critical analytical thinking, creativity and innovation, and personal leadership development differentiate the Stanford M.B.A. experience. Each M.B.A. student undertakes a global experience to provide direct exposure to the world’s opportunities. A allows Stanford students to combine the M.B.A. with degrees in the Graduate School of Education (M.A.), the School of Engineering (M.S. in C.S., M.S. in E.E.), the Stanford Law School (J.D.) as well as interdisciplinary degrees in Public Policy (M.P.P.) and in Environment and Resources (M.S.). Dual Degree programs are offered with the School of Medicine (M.D./M.B.A) and the program in International Policy Studies (M.A. in IPS/M.B.A).
The primary criteria for admission are intellectual vitality, demonstrated leadership potential, and personal qualities and contributions. No specific undergraduate major or courses are required for admission, but experience with analytic and quantitative concepts is important. Almost all students obtain one or more years of work experience before entering, but a few students enroll directly following undergraduate study.
Sixty years of leadership research has established that the personality of the leader cannot be wholly excised from the leadership discourse or the outcomes that leadership produces. Instead, trait and behavioral theories served as a pivot point for contingency-based theories that place leadership in the context of leader, follower, and situation (Lussier & Achua, 2007). Indeed, situational leadership theories emerged out of the recognition that their trait and behavioral predecessors failed to address the context variable. As such, situational theories were instrumental in explaining why the presence of specific traits and behaviors in a leader could not consistently predict leadership results. However, there are an infinite number of situations with which a leader may be confronted.
In describing the three forms of relationship that leadership can produce, Popper (2004) noted that developmental relationships are characterized by the ability to create an environment of psychological safety that allows participants to engage in developmentally oriented behaviors including those most closely associated with transformational leadership - individualized consideration, autonomy reinforcement, and the promotion of trust, self-confidence, self-esteem and achievement orientation.
The mission of Dallas Theological Seminary is to glorify God by equipping godly servant-leaders for the proclamation of His Word and the building up of the body of Christ worldwide.
However, even this interpretation remains constrained by the very limitation that it exposes: that is, positioning the leader as the locus of causality in the leadership relationship. Popper (2004) hints at the solution by referring to the routinization of charisma, noting that this process breaks the bond between follower and a specific leader and converts it into a property of the institution or organization. Thus, the glaring conundrum in the leadership literature lies in how to successfully instigate this routinization process. Holistic leadership theory suggests that the answer lies in defining the unit of analysis not as the leader, the follower, the circumstance, or the relationship, but rather as a holistic system of development.
Wapner and Demick (2003) maintain that holistic development is inherently systems-oriented and identify the "person-in-environment" as the system state. This interface is contextualized according to three dimensions that relate to both person and environment: the bio-physical, the psychosocial, and the sociocultural. A holistic system's features are interactionistic, involve a process of adaptation, reflect change as a feature of transformation, and require synchronization and coordination of its operating elements (Magnusson, 2001). From this perspective, leader, follower, and circumstance are not jockeying for a position of control but are instead discrete components of a series of interconnected systems that continuously "adapt, transform, coordinate and synchronize" with each other throughout the leadership process.
Popper (2004) asserts that leadership is a relationship that extends beyond the properties of leaders and followers, because "the conceptualization of leadership as relationship permits an integrative view of leaders, followers, and circumstances, and thus reduces the bias . . . of giving too much weight to the leader" (p. 118). According to Popper, influence is a central feature of leadership and it arises from the emotive force that emanates from leadership relationships. It is this emotive force that creates the leadership mandate of charismatic leaders which has evolved into its operationalized and most researched form - transformational leadership.
Lips-Wiersma and Morris (2009) add to this construct by emphasizing the role of meaningful work in framing the holistic development process, stating that "a sense of coherence and wholeness is particularly important in experiencing meaningfulness" (p.502). Based on research into the elements of meaningful work, they produced a model of holistic development comprised of four quadrants - developing and becoming self, unity with others, expressing full potentialand serving others - that, it can be argued, orient the person-in-environment system state. Popper (2004) also addresses the role of meaning in symbolic leadership relationships by highlighting the impact that leaders have on followers' self-concept and motivation for self-expression. Leaders in positions of formal authority have the opportunity to project values that followers can internalize as prized components of their self-concept and sources of motivation through linkages to an idealized vision articulated by the leader.
Lips-Wiersma and Morris's (2009) theory of holistic development asserts that leadership does not, and in fact cannot, manufacture or manage meaning for others. It is instead challenged to find ways to promote the integration of self-defined meaningful purposes that emerge organically from the individual and are subsequently aligned with the broader goals and objectives of the organization. This view is embodied in the definition offered by Rogers, Mentkowski, and Hart (2006) in which holistic development is described as "a further integration of the meaning making self" (p.500).