Servant Leadership (Christianity and Greenleaf’s Principles)
In the contemporary world, there is a growing emphasis on the need for adopting servant leadership given its possession of undoubted advantages. A case in point Robert Greenleaf through his principles of servant leadership provides a benchmark of what this concept entails. Notwithstanding, Christianity provides guidelines on what it takes to become a servant leader through Biblical passages such as Matthew 20:20-28. Given these illustrations, it is apparent that both Christianity and Robert Greenleaf have interesting ideas about this aspect of leadership. In essence, this paper aims at depicting the similarities and differences between Christianity views (Matthew 20:20-28) and Greenleaf’s principles of servant leadership.
Similarities
Both Greenleaf and Christianity share a common viewpoint about servant leadership in various ways that are worth noting. A befitting example of such shared opinion is existent in the selfless ideology postulated by both Greenleaf and Christianity. Greenleaf is of the opinion that servant leaders prioritize on helping and supporting others rather than use their power or authority to order them around. Such a prioritization depicts the selfless nature of servant leaders in Frick’sviewpoint(2011). On the other hand, despite His Godliness nature and royalty status, Jesus demonstrates His selflessness nature in the Gospel of Matthew 20:20-28 by asserting that He came to serve others rather than being served. Moreover, Jesus beseeches His disciples not to think of greatness but to serve others. Based on the two ideologies, it is apparent that servant leadership is all about the selflessness nature of an individual.
Besides, Greenleaf and Matthew 20:20-28 emphasize that servant leadership necessitates having commitment in the growth of individuals. That is for sure because Greenleaf noted that servant leadership is reliant on showing appreciation and support for others for the development sustainable communities (Spears, 2010). Similarly, Christianity through Matthew 20:20-28 depicts that servant leadership entails commitment in serving others for the improvement of their wellbeing rather than being served. Such depictions show that commitment to the growth of others supersedesself-interests of being served in servant leadership.
Differences
In consideration of both Greenleaf’s principles and Matthew 20:20-28, instances of variations about servant leadership abound and are worth highlighting. A case in point Greenleaf is of the opinion that persuasion and not commanding is of utmost significance in servant leadership (Spears, 2010). Christianity through the Gospel of Matthew 20:20-28 contrasts to this ideology since in its approach of servant leadership it denotes that humility is important.
Also, Greenleaf points out that the purpose of servant leadership is promoting a sense of community (Frick, 2011). On the other hand, Matthew 20:20-28 implicates that the aim of this type of leadership is to strengthenthe faith of an individual. With such depictions, it is beyond doubt that Christianity differ from Greenleaf’s principles of servant leadership.
Conclusion
Concisely, this discussion aimed at depicting the similarities and differences between Christianity views (Matthew 20:20-28) and Greenleaf’s principles of servant leadership. From the various illustrations in the discussion, it is beyond doubt that persons interested in adopting this type of leadership have necessary materials for reference. As such, going into the future, individuals interested in this type of leadership have no excuse for not engaging in the same.
Venn’s Diagram
MATTHEW 20: 20-28 GREENLEAF PRINCIPLES
-Humility -Service to others -Persuasion
-Sacrifice -Selfless -Community/institution
-Faith -Commitment -Listening
References
Frick, D. M. (2011). Robert k. greenleaf: A life of servant leadership. Readhowyouwant.com Ltd.
Matthew 20: 20-28 English Standard Version (ESV)
Spears, L. C. (2010).Character and servant leadership: Ten characteristics of effective, caring leaders. The Journal of Virtues & Leadership, 1(1), 25-30.
