Servant Leadership in Sport

This chapter is an introduction to the work of Robert K. Greenleaf, his seminal 1970 essay, Servant as Leader, and to some of the interpretations by leading Greenleaf authorities of his original works. The goal is to provide an understanding of how Greenleaf developed his ideas and they evolved. Interpretations of Greenleaf’s work are provided by two former CEOs of the Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership, Larry Spears and Kent Keith. Their insights enable the reader to gain an understanding of the attributes and behaviors of a servant leader. This chapter also discusses the growth of servant leadership as a dyadic (leader–follower) construct to a multilevel approach where a culture of serving can be developed. Finally, this chapter briefly addresses the growth and interest in servant leadership, particularly in the athletic domain.

This chapter explores some of the key servant leadership research that has been conducted but starts with a comparison of servant leadership to other leadership theories including authentic leadership, spiritual leadership, charismatic leadership, transformational leadership, and transactional leadership. Transformational leadership is most often identified as having the most similarities to servant leadership but key differences are explained including a transformational leader’s focus on outcomes and servant leader’s focus on follower need satisfaction. Research regarding antecedents of servant leadership is also shared. Proposed and researched antecedents of servant leadership include emotional intelligence, compassion, moral identity, character, personality traits, and negative connections to narcissism are shared. Despite its lack of focus on organizational outcomes, research on servant leadership consequences are discussed in the areas of creativity, trust, job satisfaction, engagement, leadership development, sales performance, and follower well-being. Finally, some of the sport-related research connected to outcomes is shared as well. Connections between servant leadership and athlete satisfaction, intrinsic motivation, enhanced performance, and organizational trust are discussed.

This chapter explores servant leadership in an athletic context and connects it to other concepts that are related to both servant leadership and sport. The connection between winning and servant leadership is discussed and while winning is important, servant leaders see it as a by-product of a process that enables others to be their best; selfless leadership and performance are not mutually exclusive. Power, a vital currency in athletics, and servant leadership are largely incompatible constructs but there are times when a servant leader will need to use power to support his or her followers such as in removing a coercive coach or leader. The idea that servant leadership represents a soft or weak approach is disputed in this section and examples are provided to support that claim. The benefits of a coach–athlete relationship built upon servant leadership are also explored and how existing athlete-centric models (e.g., Jowett’s 3 C’s +1, Cloud’s Four Corners) are best supported by servant leadership principles. Examples of prominent coaches displaying servant leadership tendencies are also shared. Ethics, sports, and servant leadership are discussed and the important role servant leaders can play in mitigating the ethical dilemmas including gender equity within athletics. Finally, growth mind-set research is connected to servant leadership and follower need satisfaction.

This chapter provides an introduction to the field of positive psychology. Martin Seligman was elected the president of the American Psychological Association in 1998 and altered the course of the field of psychological by shifting the focus of psychology from being primarily curative in nature to life enhancing through building and nurturing positive qualities in all of us. Positive psychology is defined as “the scientific study of optimal human functioning” (Sheldon, Fredrickson, Rathunde, Csikszentmihalyi, & Haidt in Akumal Manifesto, http://​www.​ppc.​sas.​upenn.​edu/​akumalmanifesto.​htm, 2000, Section 1) and provides a pathway for people to become the best versions of themselves. For leaders desirous of serving others, it is proposed that well-being enables one to best serve the needs of others. Well-being is defined as a combination of hedonic and eudaimonic elements. Hedonic elements are focused on positive outcomes or happiness, and eudaimonic elements are associated with the process of living a high-quality life. Those distinctions are discussed in detail through Part II. This second part will investigate the elements of positive psychology and Seligman’s (Flourish: A visionary new understanding of happiness and well-being. Free Press, New York, NY, 2011) well-being theory beginning with an understanding of character strengths and virtues.

This chapter is the first chapter of Section Two which deals with positive psychology and Seligman’s (Flourish: A visionary new understanding of happiness and well-being, Free Press, New York, NY, 2011) well-being theory as a proposed antecedent to servant leadership. A character strength is “a disposition to act, desire, and feel that involves the exercise of judgment and leads to a recognizable human excellence or instance of human flourishing” (Yearley in Mencius and Aquinas: Theories of virtue and conceptions of courage, State University of New York Press, Albany, NY, p. 13, 1990). Using our character strengths enables one to be their best and also provides an important pathway to the other elements of well-being, each of which will be discussed in succeeding chapters. While traditional psychology has focused on what is “wrong” with us, positive psychology is focused on what is “right” with us. The first step in this process was to identify virtues which are needed to say one is of good character. Through a rigorous process six virtues (wisdom, courage, humanity, justice, temperance, and transcendence) were identified along with 24 character strengths that enable us to be virtuous. These strengths can be identified and developed. Seligman refers to character strengths as foundational to his well-being theory and that knowing and acting upon one’s character strengths “gives you more positive emotions, gives you more engagement, gives you better relationships, gives you more meaning, and it gives you accomplishment” said Seligman.

This chapter represents the third element of Seligman’s (Flourish: A visionary new understanding of happiness and well-being, Free Press, New York, NY, 2011) well-being theory. Many consider positive relationships the most critical element of well-being theory. One of the co-founders of the positive psychology movement, Chris Peterson, summarized positive psychology in three words, “other people matter” (Peterson in A primer in positive psychology, Oxford University Press, New York, p. 249, 2006). It is also important for servant leadership, Servant leadership emphasizes the well-being of the organization through growing and developing followers within the organization as well as bridging sustained positive relationships with stakeholders within and outside the organization (Brutus & Vanhove, in Servant leadership and followership, Palgrave Macmillan, Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire, pp. 261–288, 2017). Servant leaders build relationships that operate at a higher level than a typical leader–follower or coach–athlete. Sendjaya (Free air, more autonomous, more likely themselves to become servants? Springer International Publishing, Cham, Switzerland, 2015) refers to these distinctive servant leader–follower connections as covenantal relationships and are defined by mutual care, shared values, mutual trust, unconditional commitment, and concern for the welfare of each other. Servant leaders build and sustain relationships where followers feel valued and supported by the organization which, in turn, creates positive attitudes. This is mutually beneficial because when servant leaders meet the needs of others they grow by giving themselves to others; relationships improve when we serve human needs (Covey in Leadership Excellence, 23(12): 5–6, 2006).

The connection between quality leadership and meaning is clear—the same elements that enable us to create meaning (understanding where we have been, where we are going, identifying and achieving valued goals, and feeling fulfilled by life) are also key attributes of leadership. Servant leaders have the ability, primarily through developing relationships, to share that purpose and mission with followers as well as the important role followers play in that mission (Steger & Dik in The Oxford handbook of positive psychology and work. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 131–142, 2013). There are numerous ways that leaders can create a meaningful experience for followers including building secure relationships through mutual commitment, hiring/recruiting for cultural fit as well as for skills and experience, investing in follower development, showing a willingness to trust and delegate, structuring rewards on group and organizational goals and not solely on individual performance, leading with transparency, and letting followers believe that they have a say in your organization. Being successful can be admirable, but it does not provide meaning. Many servant leaders can enjoy success, but they also need to experience self-fulfillment (Sendjaya in Free air, more autonomous, more likely themselves to become servant. Springer International Publishing, Cham, Switzerland, 2015; Keith in The case for servant leadership. Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership, Westfield, IN, 2015). For a servant leader, meaning can be found in the inherent value of serving others and not from acclaim.

This chapter explores the fifth and final element of Seligman’s (Flourish: A visionary new understanding of happiness and well-being, Free Press, New York, NY, 2011) well-being theory and his PERMA model. The “A” represents accomplishment. It is the natural desire of the servant leader to serve, to enable followers to experience well-being, and to become servant leaders themselves (Greenleaf in The servant as leader, Center for Applied Studies, Cambridge, MA, 1970). Servant leadership is unique from other leadership approaches because of its focus on need satisfaction of followers as an end in itself. Barbuto and Wheeler (Group and Organization Management, 31: 300–326, 2006) stated that the hype around servant leadership may be warranted as their findings support the idea that servant leadership leads to accomplishment and attaining results. Servant leadership focus on the process is equally important in athletics. Servant leaders are more focused on training and instruction than non-servant leaders. Many leaders tend to rely on styles that are focused on outcomes first and foremost. They lead, influence, and motivate in ways that they believe will lead to winning, often foregoing concern for the needs and aspirations of their followers (DeSensi in Intercollegiate Sport, 7(1): 58–63, 2014). Coaches who displayed servant leadership behaviors had athletes that enjoyed the experience more than those that played for non-servant leadership coaches and teams that won more games (Rieke et al. in International Journal of Sports Science and Coaching, 3(2): 227–239, 2008).

This chapter In this servant leadership model, another theory from the domain of positive psychology, self-determination theory (SDT; Deci and Ryan in Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior, Plenum, New York, NY, 1985) is used to explain the importance and application of need satisfaction as it pertains to well-being and motivation (Mayer, Servant leadership: Recent developments in theory and research, Palgrave Macmillan, Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire, pp. 147–154, 2010). Well-being, in this context, refers to eudaimonic rather than hedonic well-being, although researchers have maintained that hedonic well-being can be experienced as an outcome of eudaimonic well-being. For example, Ryan and Deci (Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness, Guilford Publishing, New York, 2017) advanced that an outcome of eudaimonic well-being or flourishing is to feel positive, satisfied, and happy. Like most aspects of Seligman’s (Flourish: A visionary new understanding of happiness and well-being, Free Press, New York, NY, 2011) well-being theory, SDT is also focused on the idea that eudaimonic well-being is found in the process of becoming our best self, fully functioning, or flourishing. A brief overview of SDT will be provided and will be followed by a much closer look at the components of the theory and how it relates to servant leadership.

This chapter introduces the reader to the first two mini-theories of self-determination theory and how they relate to need satisfaction within an athletic context. The first mini-theory to be discussed is basic psychological needs theory (BPNT). Just like humans have physiological needs (air, food, water, shelter) that are necessary for growth and well-being, there are also needs that are necessary for psychological well-being. Those three psychological needs are autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Satisfaction of those needs can lead to intrinsic motivation (activities for which the reward is the activity itself). An increased understanding of intrinsic motivation has changed our approach to motivation but equally important is the idea that we have a natural inclination toward intrinsic motivation. The ways that intrinsic motivation can be supported or hindered is the primary interest of the next mini-theory of SDT, cognitive evaluation theory (CET). The primary premises of CET are as follows: when a person perceives that his or her need for autonomy and competency are not being met, intrinsic motivation decreases.

This chapter introduces the balance of the mini-theories of self-determination theory. First is the concept that motivation is not a dichotomous construct (intrinsic or extrinsic). SDT researchers have confirmed that there are actually differing levels of extrinsic motivation and should be viewed as being on a continuum. They found that extrinsic motivations can become more self-regulated through a process known as internalization. The next SDT mini-theory, causality orientations theory (COT) provides an explanation to that question and pertains to personal characteristics that determine how people uniquely perceive and organize information. They have identified three distinct personality types, referred to as causality orientations. While these orientations are relatively stable aspects of our personality, we all possess levels of these orientations to some degree depending upon the environment. Goal orientations are also integral to motivation and well-being. SDT researchers found that desiring and achieving some goals satisfied basic psychological needs of autonomy, competency, and relatedness while others did not. Finally, the latest mini-theory to be added to SDT, relationship motivation theory (RMT), focuses on our perceptions about the basis of our relationships.

This chapter focuses on just some of the sport-related self-determination theory research. The idea that play and physical activity is intrinsically motivating is well supported but when physical activity morphs into organized athletics, there are many other factors (coaches, engaged parents, spectators, rewards, contracts, scholarships) to consider that might reduce intrinsic motivation. Research has supported the ideas that if rewards are given in a controlling, conditional manner, they will undermine intrinsic motivation and are associated with lower levels of need satisfaction. For example, athletic scholarships are perceived to be controlling of time and talents, particularly in sports where they are common (e.g., basketball, football) decreases in intrinsic motivation can be expected. Financial rewards can also undermine motivation for professional athletes. The motivational climate created and how feedback is provided will impact motivation as well. Carpentier and Mageau (Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology 38:45–58, 2016) reported that the more autonomy supportive the feedback, the more autonomous motivation, self-confidence, and satisfaction of the needs for autonomy and relatedness. Finally, the coach–athlete relationship and its influence on motivation are introduced. Numerous studies have shown that coaches can be trained to autonomy supportive which led to need satisfaction and enhanced performance.

This chapter focuses on the application of self-determination theory and discusses the ways that a servant leader can be autonomy supportive and provide need satisfaction for followers. Rocchi, Couture, and Pelletier (Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 14(6):852–859, 2013) defined autonomy supportive behaviors as offering meaningful choice and allowing others to have a say in the decision-making process, minimizing pressure and control, and acknowledging the feelings of others. Autonomy supportive behaviors lead to need satisfaction and increased self-determined motivation. At the other end of the spectrum from autonomy supportive coaching, controlling coaching behaviors include intimidation, conditional negative regard (withholding care and affection when athletes do not behave as demanded), and disproportionate personal control (including personal lives). Controlling coaching behaviors recognized to show results in the short term but have extensive negative emotional, behavioral, and performance-related consequences in the long-run. In this chapter, specific behaviors are shared that provide psychological need support. Outcomes of need satisfaction are revisited and the feedback loop of the model—that positive follower outcomes enhance leader well-being and need satisfaction and motivates a leader to continue to serve—is shared. Finally, the ways that PERMA elements can support need satisfaction for leaders is discussed.