IS Servant Leadership 1
An Assessment of Servant Leadership Characteristics for Information Systems
Managers
by
Darrell D. Bowman, PhD
Assistant Professor of Computer Information Systems
And
Terry J. Schindler, PhD
Assistant Professor of Management
University of Indianapolis
School of Business
IS Servant Leadership 2
Abstract
This paper examines the use of one of the more recent, interesting and popular
leadership approaches, Servant Leadership (Johnson, 2007), among information systems
(IS) managers. Today’s IS management faces the same leadership challenges as all other
functional managers. Also, IS managers must develop a managerial style centered upon
the corporation’s relationship with many constituents in these times of a rapid change
(Naranjo-Gil, 2010).
Additionally, IS management must have technical acumen specific to their
function and the ability to effectively communicate with technically-oriented people.
They must also be able to communicate effectively with not so technically-oriented
individuals in other functional areas. This study examines the ten characteristics of the
servant-leader defined by Robert Greenleaf and Larry Spears among information systems
(IS) managers.
IS Servant Leadership 3
An Assessment of Servant Leadership Characteristics within Information Systems
Managers
Introduction
American business managers of technology face increasing challenges from
changing technology and a globally competitive market. The end of the last century
witnessed revolutionary changes in technology and the use of technology in business.
Technology-based globalization is clearly the new paradigm for local economies and
major businesses (Blakely, 2001). According to Blakely (2001), technology will
determine the type and form of work, not physical resources, tax breaks, low wages, or
location assets that local communities control. Blakley (2001) believes that globalization
and technology are closely related and the most significant influences on the world’s
economy in the new century.
Information systems (IS) managers perform many of the same tasks as other
functional managers. But, IS managers also have challenges unique to IS.
Communication skills are important for IS managers but IS managers must be able to
communicate effectively with IS technical people and non-technical users in the
organization. According to Jiang, Klein, Van Slyke, & Cheney (2003) it is critical for IS
managers to be excellent communicators to the non-technical people within the
organization. Research has shown that a leading cause of software errors is
communication breakdowns across organizational boundaries (2003).
IS professionals are motivated uniquely from professionals in other functional
areas. According to Schambach & Blanton (2002) IS professionals tend to be motivated
by opportunities to learn new skills, particularly technical skills.
IS Servant Leadership 4
Technical managers today must contend with shortened product life cycles,
narrower product launch windows, global competition, and increasingly complex
technical products (Pinto, 2002). Graduates entering business must understand the
competitive climate created by technology and globalization. Tarnof (2000), stated that
the ability to manage information technology is an important requirement for insurance
company senior executives. The ability to manage information technology is a
requirement not left only to information technology (I.T.) managers. Tillinghast-Towers
Perrins consulting firm conducted a 1999 survey of 270 United States and Canada based
insurance firm executives and achieved a 24 percent response rate (Tarnof, 2000).
Tarnof (2000) reported that almost one-third of the life insurance CEOs believe that
managing information technology is one of the top three strategic issues companies face.
Managing business technology today requires a combination of traditional
management skills, leadership and technological know-how. In a 2000 issue of Journal
of Management Inquiry the work environments of two of America’s highest regions for
technological production were compared; Silcon Valley in California and Route 128
region of Waltham, Massachusetts (Delbecq, 2000). The article reports that those at the
heart of innovation in most high-tech companies in Silcon Valley present a very different
image from the innovators of twenty years ago. The innovators are more youthful, with
most being in their 20s and 30s. The work environment is casual, almost collegial.
Programmers and team-leaders are less likely to be wearing suits and ties than blue jeans,
khakis and open-collar shirts (Delbecq, 2000). The groups arrive at innovation by
questioning the solutions of their predecessors. In Silicon Valley the predominant
cultural attribute looked for in a manager or team leader is not someone who will be
IS Servant Leadership 5
technically "right" and control and direct subordinates, but rather someone who can excel
in diagnostic questioning (Delbecq, 2000). Delbecq describes a Silicon Valley that
continues to reinvent itself.
Problem Statement
Traditional management practices such as management by objectives and
managing by walking around have been accepted management practices for IS managers
for many years. But, the concept of servant leadership as a type of management for IS
managers may be increasing. According to Joseph, Soon, Chang, & Slaughter, (2010) IS
managers must possess soft skills such as business awareness and communication skills.
Servant leadership skills are often used to describe the soft skills required by IS managers
(Joseph, et al, 2010). IS managers must develop a managerial style centered upon the
corporation’s relationship with many constituents in the time of a rapid change (NaranjoGil, 2010). Keith (2008) states the servant-leader is by far the best leader to take an
organization through a period of change.
The purpose of this study is to address the following questions. To what level do
IS managers perceive they practice servant leadership characteristics when managing
employees and when dealing with IS users? What servant leadership characteristics are IS
managers most likely to practice? What servant leadership characteristics are IS
managers less likely to practice?
Literature Review
American managers are becoming more aware of the servant leadership style of
management and the style has a reputation for being a fair and effective management
style. Although some of the practices of servant leadership may be practiced that does not
IS Servant Leadership 6
mean a manager is a servant leader. Servant-hood, defined servant leadership, is a
concept recorded earlier in the Bible where significant Greek words are often used to
denote the term ‘servant’ while referring to leaders, for example the Greek word diakonos
(Sendjaya, Sarros & Santora, 2008). Few studies, if any, have been conducted within the
context of IS management and servant leadership. According to Kleim (2004) IS project
managers can benefit greatly by using a servant-leader approach when relating to
stakeholders in an IS project. Benito & Benito (2006) found one factor affecting IS
managers’ performance was the quality of communication throughout the organization.
IS managers’ decision making style affects information flow. Many servant leadership
characteristics contribute to effective communication (Johnson, 2007). Listening (Keith,
2008), awareness and persuasion are traits marking effective communication.
In 2010, IBM interviewed 1,500 CEOs in 60 countries and 19 industries
(Capitalizing on Complexity, 2010). The study revealed that CEOs believe technology
will play an increasing role in the operation of business. Technology will be second only
to external market factors in the operation of business. CIOs will contribute significantly
in supporting, facilitating the CEO in achieving organizational goals.
“The CIO can respond to this drive by nurturing creativity within the IT
organization and driving the CEO’s innovation agenda. CIOs can be enablers of new
directions by testing, fulfilling and measuring the success of new operating models the
organization wants to explore” (Capitalizing on Complexity, p. 7, 2010).
Bassellier & Benbasat (2004) studied information technology professionals to
determine the areas of knowledge necessary for building business relationships. They
described the areas of knowledge as business competence. The ability of IT professionals
IS Servant Leadership 7
to build business relationships depends on their interpersonal and management
knowledge and skills. Interpersonal and management knowledge and skills include;
communication skills and leadership skills.
Persuasion and example are the preferred methods for being a servant leader
(Whetstone, 2002). However, the servant leader puts the needs of others before his or her
own needs. A key performance indicator for a successful servant leader growth in the
people served. According to Whetstone (2002) servant leadership is a style in which
moral behavior contributes to success. This can be contrasted to other leadership styles
which emphasize ethical behavior.
Servant leadership methods contrast with traditional styles such as command and
control style of leadership (Ebener & O’Connell, 2010). Servant leaders tend to rely on
deferred power instead of granted authority. It is interesting to note that a Joseph, Ang,
Chang, and Slaughter (2010) study of IT management skills described the soft skills as
Practical Intelligence. Joseph, et al (2010) isolated the soft skills into four categories;
managing tasks, managing career, managing self and managing others. The study
compared novice IT professionals to experienced IT professionals regarding the four
categories of soft skills. Novices compared favorably in three of the four categories.
However, the experienced IT professional demonstrated significantly higher ratings on
the category of managing others.
Joseph et al (p. 5, 2010) report “that work experience, relevant training, and
mechanisms such as mentoring, may offer opportunities for experienced IT professionals
to develop and refine their practical intelligence.” Practical intelligence is important for
IT management and especially the Chief Information Officer (CIO) because the
IS Servant Leadership 8
managing career, managing self and managing others categories imply the necessity of
leadership having a visionary skill. According to an IBM study (2010) CEOs depend on
CIOs for creative leadership. CIOs align their vision with the goals of the organization
and practical intelligence and servant leadership are methods for helping implement
goals.
The Joseph et al (2010) research into managing self, career and others is
compatible with the servant leadership concept of personalism. Personalism views
persons and personal relationships as the starting point of servant leadership (Whetstone,
2002). Precepts of servant leadership and personalism such as employee participation,
community and employees perceived as spiritual beings and worthy of respect are also
present in managing self and managing others.
Servant leadership is in harmony with the basic ideals of personalism (Whetstone,
2002). The servant leader believes that leaders are servants first and seek to treat
subordinates and colleagues with dignity as a spiritual person. But also seek to build a
community of participation and solidarity. Servant leaders are motivated to create value
for the community of which he is a member. Motivating followers requires the strength
and sensitivity of a transforming vision. The servant leader would use techniques such as
developing a vision, encouraging participation, building collaboration, strengthening
others, linking rewards to performance, and celebrating accomplishments.
Keith (2008) identified seven key practices of servant leaders. The first practice is
self-awareness. Servant-leaders are aware of their strengths and weaknesses. By building
on their strengths and accepting their weaknesses, they are ready to build on the strengths
and accept the weaknesses of others. They appreciate the importance of teams and treat
IS Servant Leadership 9
employees as partners and colleagues (Keith, 2008). The second practice identified by
Keith (2008) listening. Servant-leaders identify and meet the needs of others. The first
step in the process of identifying needs is listening. The third practice is changing the
pyramid (Keith 2008). This practice involves changing the traditional hierarchy by
broadening power at the top and getting resources to those at the base of the pyramid who
create and deliver the products, programs and services provided by the organization
(Keith, 2008). The fourth practice is developing your colleagues (Keith, 2008). By
developing their colleagues, servant-leaders improve not only the organization’s
performance today, but far into the future. Keith (2008) states the servant-leader’s legacy
is a strong, vibrant team that is trained and ready to take on any challenge, come what
may. The fifth practice is coaching, is controlling (Keith, 2008). Servant leaders
participate, guide, coach, and facilitate. They lead by identifying new sources of order
and creating positive energy in their relationships (Keith, 2008). The sixth practice is
unleashing the energy and intelligence of others (Keith, 2008). According to Keith
(2008), when servant-leaders teach, mentor, and coach, they focus on unleashing the
energy and intelligence of others. This is often called “empowerment.” The seventh
practice is foresight (Keith, 2008). Leaders hold the future of their colleagues and
customers in their hands. Keith (2008) cited Greenleaf who said the central ethic of
leadership is foresight. Foresight is needed to form the vision and support the momentum
that will make the future a good one for everyone (Keith, 2008).
Methodology
This research study attempts to measure the level at which IS managers are
practicing servant leadership characteristics when managing employees and when dealing
IS Servant Leadership 10
with IS users? One hundred and fifty of IS managers were invited to participate in an online, forty-question Servant-Leadership Questionnaire designed by Homer H. Johnson
(2007). The questionnaire takes the ten characteristics developed by Larry Spears, CEO
of the Greenleaf Center, in response to Robert Greenleaf’s servant-leadership concept and
lists actual behaviors that demonstrate each of them (Johnson, 2007). For each
characteristic, four specific behaviors [questions] are listed (Johnson, 2007). According
to Johnson (2007), Spears’ ten characteristics of a servant-leader are:
1.
Listening. To listen rather than just hear what others are saying.
2.
Empathy. To understand and empathize with others.
3.
Healing. The potential for healing one’s self and one’s relationship to others.
4.
Awareness. The ability to see things as they really are.
5.
Persuasion. To use persuasion to influence others, rather than authority.
6.
Conceptualization. To see things beyond day-to-day concerns.
7.
Foresight. To see the likely outcomes of a decision.
8.
Stewardship. To commit to serve the needs of the organization and others.
9.
Commitment to the growth of people. To commit to the growth of each and
every person on the organization.
10. Building community. To build a sense of community with members of the group
and organization.
These ten characteristics provide a comprehensive summary of the major
principles of servant-leadership (Johnson, 2007).
IS Servant Leadership 11
To measure the level at which IS managers practice servant leadership
characteristics, Johnson’s (2007) original 3-point response scale was modified and
respondents rated themselves on each of the behaviors [questions] using a five-point
response scale ranging from “Strongly Disagree” to “Strongly Agree.”
Johnson (2007) states the four behaviors [questions] are not to be viewed as the
definitive behaviors for each servant-leadership characteristic, but rather as behaviors that
one might engage in if he or she is exhibiting the characteristic. In fact, the respondents
might be encouraged to think about how they would demonstrate the characteristic, using
the questionnaire as a starting point. The purpose of the questionnaire is to assist in
understanding servant-leadership and to reflect on the behaviors of each of the
characteristics (Johnson, 2007). Therefore, this study seeks to understand and generate
discussion about the practice of servant-leadership characteristics among IS managers.
Results
Thirty-four IS managers (22.6%) responded to the forty-question survey. Nine of
the ten characteristics of Servant Leadership had a mean score of 4.13 or higher. The
characteristic of Stewardship had the highest mean score of 4.49. Three of the five
questions [behaviors], (questions 29, 30 and 31), receiving the highest mean scores were
contained in this characteristic. Also, one of the five questions [behaviors], (question 32)
receiving the lowest mean scores was contained in this characteristic. The characteristic
of Persuasion had the lowest mean score of 3.96. Two of the five questions [behaviors],
(questions 18 and 19), receiving the lowest mean scores were contained in this
characteristic. An analysis of the mean % of the strongly agree and agree responses
reveals six of the ten characteristics of Servant Leadership averaged 90% or greater. An
IS Servant Leadership 12
analysis of the mean % of undecided responses reveals four of the ten characteristics of
Servant Leadership had undecided responses averaging between 11% and 13%. The
characteristic of Persuasion had the highest mean % of disagree and strongly disagree
responses at 8%. A complete summary of the ten characteristics of Servant Leadership is
given in Table 1.
Eighty-two percent of the respondents selected either agree or strongly agree to 34
of the 40 questions. One hundred percent of the respondents selected agree and strongly
agree to questions 8, 29, 30, 31 and 33. Ninety-seven percent of the respondents selected
agree and strongly agree to questions 1, 6, 10, 24, 25, and 27. Only sixty-eight percent of
the respondents selected agree and strongly agree to questions 32, “Do you protect the
best interests of your community and the environment?”
Question 31, “Can you be counted on to do the right thing, ethically and
morally?” received the highest mean score 4.76 (SD = 0.43). Table 2 contains the five
highest questions ranked by mean. Question 19, “Do you seek consensus in decision
making?” received the lowest mean score 3.65 (SD = 1.01). Table 3 contains the five
lowest questions ranked by mean.
Discussion
Johnson (2007) suggests using the questionnaire as a starting point and to assist in
understanding servant-leadership and to reflect on the behaviors of each of the
characteristics (Johnson, 2007). A meaningful starting point would be to mirror the
process used with participants in seminars or workshops focused on learning or
understanding leadership characteristics and behaviors. First look at the overall results of
the questionnaire in total. Second, review the ten servant leadership characteristics for
IS Servant Leadership 13
areas of strength and developmental needs. Lastly, review the results at the question
level.
The overall results are extremely positive and would suggest that IS managers
strongly exhibit servant leadership characteristics and behaviors. Table 4 contains the full
results of the survey displaying the forty questions ranked by mean from highest to
lowest.
The servant leadership characteristic of Stewardship received the highest mean
score of 4.49. IS managers could strengthen this characteristic by working on behaviors
related to question 32, working to protect the best interests of their community and the
environment. With a mean of 3.85 (SD = 0.99), twenty-one percent of the respondents
selected undecided and twelve percent selected disagree or strongly disagree in response
to this question.
The servant leadership characteristic of Foresight received the second highest
mean score of 4.38. Foresight is needed to form the vision and support the momentum
that will make the future a good one for everyone (Keith, 2008). Johnson (2007) defines
Foresight as the ability to see the likely outcomes of a decision. IS managers could
strengthen this characteristic by working on behaviors related to question 26, ability to
see the future consequences of current decisions. With a mean of 4.12 (SD = 0.64),
fifteen percent of the respondents selected undecided in response to this question.
The servant leadership characteristic of Empathy received a mean score of 4.20.
IS managers could strengthen this characteristic by working on behaviors related to
question 5, understanding and identifying with the concerns of others. With a mean of
IS Servant Leadership 14
3.97 (SD = 0.87), twelve percent of the respondents selected undecided and six percent
selected disagree or strongly disagree in response to this question.
The servant leadership characteristic of Commit to the Growth of People received
a mean score of 4.19. IS managers could strengthen this characteristic by working on
behaviors related to question 34, assisting others in discovering ways to achieve their
goals. With a mean of 4.00 (SD = 0.74), eighteen percent of the respondents selected
undecided in response to this question.
The servant leadership characteristic of Building Community received the second
lowest mean score of 4.13. IS managers could strengthen this characteristic by working
on behaviors related to question 39, building a sense of community among coworkers and
colleagues. With a mean of 3.91 (SD = 0.93), twenty-one percent of the respondents
selected undecided and six percent selected disagree or strongly disagree in response to
this question.
The servant leadership characteristic of Persuasion received the lowest mean
score of 3.96. IS managers could strengthen this characteristic by working on behaviors
related to questions 18, avoiding forcing opinions on others. With a mean of 3.79 (SD =
0.98), fifteen percent of the respondents selected undecided and twelve percent selected
disagree or strongly disagree in response to this question. IS managers should also
consider question 19, seeking consensus in decision making. With a mean of 3.65 (SD =
1.01), twelve percent of the respondents selected undecided and eighteen percent selected
disagree or strongly disagree in response to this question.
Limitations
IS Servant Leadership 15
Johnson (2007) recommends the Servant-Leadership Questionnaire as a starting
point for assessing servant-leadership behaviors and skills. The questionnaire should not
be considered as a reliable or valid instrument.
Study based solely on quantitative data. No qualitative data to assist with
interpretation of the responses was solicited.
The sample size of 22.6% cannot conclusively establish validity for the study.
Given the positive responses of the participants, the ample size might be sufficient to
initiate a conversation/discussion.
Finally, the research was limited by access to only IS management and no access
to their employees. This limitation did not enable a comparison of management’s servant
leadership practice to how employees believe servant leadership principles are being
practiced. This limitation could be addressed in future research, specifically designed to
compare management and employee servant leadership perceptions.
Future Research
Future research should include a comparison of IS management’s perception of
servant leadership management style versus IS employee’s perception of servant
leadership management style. Many of the practices in servant leadership are commonly
promoted in progressive corporate cultures. However, employees may have a different
understanding of servant leadership than management. Employees may also see the
manager’s management style as not being a servant leadership style.
There may be a reluctance of IS. managers to allow free discussions and surveys
of employees due to potentially negative results from the research. But, two or more case
studies, using qualitative methods, may be possible. The results of the case studies could
IS Servant Leadership 16
be compared and contrasted to help identify the perceptions of management versus
employees.
IS Servant Leadership 17
References
Bailey, J., & Mitchell, R. B. (2006). INDUSTRY PERCEPTIONS OF THE
COMPETENCIES NEEDED BY COMPUTER PROGRAMMERS:
TECHNICAL, BUSINESS, AND SOFT SKILLS. Journal of Computer
Information Systems, 47(2), 28-33. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
Barki, H., & Hartwick, J. (2001). INTERPERSONAL CONFLICT AND ITS
MANAGEMENT IN INFORMATION SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT. MIS
Quarterly, 25(2), 195-228. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
Bartram, P. (2010). IT professionals need to gain extra skills to climb the corporate
ladder. Computer Weekly, 22-24. Retrieved from EBSCOhost
Bassellier, G., & Benbasat, I. (2004). BUSINESS COMPETENCE OF INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY PROFESSIONALS: CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT AND
INFLUENCE ON IT-BUSINESS PARTNERSHIPS. MIS Quarterly, 28(4), 673694. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
Benito, A. & Benito, R. (2006) FACTORS AFFECTING THE OUTCOMES OF
PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS. Journal of Information
Technology Management. 17(2)
Bolton, B. (2005). CONTROL OR LEAD? IT'S YOUR CHOICE. Information Systems
Management, 22(3), 81-82. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
Brown, H. G., Scott Poole, M., & RODGERS, T. L. (2004). Interpersonal Traits,
Complementarity, and Trust in Virtual Collaboration. Journal of Management
Information Systems, 20(4), 115-137. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
IS Servant Leadership 18
N/A (2010) Capitalizing on complexity: Insights from the global chief executive officer
study. IBM Institute for Business Value. Retrieved in November, 2011 from
www.ibm.com/ceostudy.
Celsi, R., & Wolfinbarger, M. (2001). Creating Renaissance Employees in an Era of
Convergence Between Information Technology and Business Strategy: A
Proposal for Business Schools. Journal of Education for Business, 76(6), 308-312.
Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
Cummings, J. N. (2004). Work Groups, Structural Diversity, and Knowledge Sharing in a
Global Organization. Management Science, 50(3), 352-364. Retrieved from
EBSCOhost.
Denning, P. J. (2001). Who Are We?. Communications of the ACM, 44(2), 15-19.
Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
Ebener, D. R., & O'Connell, D. J. (2010). How might servant leadership work?.
Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 20(3), 315-335. Retrieved from
EBSCOhost.
GALLAGHER, K. P., KAISER, K. M., SIMON, J. C., BEATH, C. M., & GOLES, T.
(2010). The Requisite Variety of Skills for IT Professionals. Communications of
the ACM, 53(6), 144-148. doi:10.1145/1743546.1743584
Holtham, C., & Courtney, N. (2001). Developing managerial learning styles in the
context of the strategic application of information and communications
technologies. International Journal of Training & Development, 5(1), 23.
Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
IS Servant Leadership 19
Howatson-Jones, I. (2004). The servant leader. Nursing Management - UK, 11(3), 20-24.
Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
Jiang, J. J., Klein, G., Van Slyke, C., & Cheney, P. (2003). A Note on Interpersonal and
Communication Skills for IS Professionals: Evidence of Positive Influence.
Decision Sciences, 34(4), 799-812. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5414.2003.02546.x .
Johnson, H. J., Assessing Your Servant-Leadership Skills, The 2007 Pfeiffer Annual:
Training. Copyright 2007 by John Wiley & sons, Inc. Reproduced by Permission
of Pfeiffer, an Imprint of Wiley. www.pfeiffer.com
Joseph, D., Soon, A., Chang, R. L., & Slughter, S. A. (2010). Practical Intelligence in IT:
Assessing Soft Skills of IT Professionals. Communications of the ACM, 53(2),
149-154. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
Keith, K. M. (2008). The Case for Servant Leadership. Greenleaf Center for Servant
Leadership.
Killingsworth, B. L., Hayden, M. B., Crawford, D., & Schellenberger, R. (2001). A
MODEL FOR MOTIVATING AND MEASURING QUALITY
PERFORMANCE IN INFORMATION SYSTEMS STAFF. Information Systems
Management, 18(2), 8. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
Lamb, R., & Davidson, E. (2005). Information and Communication Technology
Challenges to Scientific Professional Identity. Information Society, 21(1), 1-24.
doi:10.1080/01972240590895883
Moore, J., & Love, M. (2005). IT PROFESSIONALS AS ORGANIZATIONAL
CITIZENS. Communications of the ACM, 48(6), 88-93. Retrieved from
EBSCOhost
IS Servant Leadership 20
Managerial Styles and Management Information Systems for Improving Organizational
Performance, Journal of Positive Management, Vol. 1, No. 1, 2010, pp. 3-10.
Reich, B., & Benbasat, I. (2000). FACTORS THAT INFLUENCE THE SOCIAL
DIMENSION OF ALIGNMENT BETWEEN BUSINESS AND INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY OBJECTIVES. MIS Quarterly, 24(1), 81-113. Retrieved from
EBSCOhost.
Schambach, T., & Blanton, J. (2002). The PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
CHALLENGE for IT Professionals. Communications of the ACM, 45(4), 83-87.
Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
Sendjaya, S., Sarros, J. C., & Santora, J. C. (2008). Defining and Measuring Servant
Leadership Behaviour in Organizations. Journal of Management Studies, 45(2),
402-424. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2007.00761.x
Shifrin, T. (2005). Senior staff need retraining to succeed in changing IT environment,
says Forrester. Computer Weekly, 50. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
Stewart, B. A. (2007). IT Testing New Ideas in Managing. Computerworld, 41(47), 26.
Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
Tan, J., & Payton, F.C. (2010) Adaptive Health Management Systems: Concepts, Cases,
& Practical Applications, Third Edition. Jones & Bartlett Learning, Burlington,
MA.
Tarafdar, M., & Sufian, Q. (2010). EXAMINING TACTICAL INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY -- BUSINESS ALIGNMENT. Journal of Computer Information
Systems, 50(4), 107-116. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
IS Servant Leadership 21
Thibodeau, P. (2005). BUSINESS UNITY. Computerworld, 39(1), 17-18. Retrieved from
EBSCOhost.
Whetstone, J. T. (2002). Personalism and moral leadership: the servant leader with a
transforming vision. Business Ethics: A European Review, 11(4), 385-392.
Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
IS Servant Leadership 22
Figures and Tables
Table 1: Ten Servant Leadership Characteristics Ranked by Mean
Characteristic
Mean
Survey
Questions
Mean %
Undecided
29-32
Mean %
Strongly
Agree/Agree
92
5
Mean %
Disagree/Strongly
Disagree
3
Stewardship
4.49
Foresight
4.38
25-28
92
8
0
Healing
4.26
9-12
90
8
2
Conceptualization
4.25
21-24
88
11
1
Awareness
4.24
13-16
85
13
2
Listening
4.22
1-4
92
4
4
Empathy
4.20
5-8
92
4
4
Commit to the
Growth of People
4.19
33-36
90
7
3
Building
Community
4.13
37-40
84
12
4
Persuasion
3.96
17-20
81
11
8
IS Servant Leadership 23
Table 2: Five Highest Questions Ranked by Mean
Question
Number
Question
Servant
Leadership
Characteristic
N
Mean
SD
%
Undecided
0.43
%
Strongly
Agree/
Agree
100
0
%
Disagree/
Strongly
Disagree
0
31
Can you be counted on to do the right
thing, ethically and morally?
Stewardship
34
4.76
30
Are you committed to work in the
best interests of your organization?
Stewardship
34
4.74
0.45
100
0
0
25
Do you use the lessons of the past to
provide insight on the future?
Foresight
34
4.62
0.55
97
3
0
29
Can people depend on you? Do you
follow through on commitments?
Stewardship
34
4.59
0.50
100
0
0
15
Do you readily share information and
knowledge?
Awareness
34
4.53
0.61
94
6
0
IS Servant Leadership 24
Table 3: Five Lowest Questions Ranked by Mean
Question
Number
Question
Servant
Leadership
Characteristic
N
Mean
SD
%
Undecided
0.87
%
Strongly
Agree/
Agree
83
12
%
Disagree/
Strongly
Disagree
6
5
Do you understand and identify with
the concerns of others?
Empathy
34
3.97
39
Do you work to build a sense of
community among your co-workers
and colleagues?
Building
Community
34
3.91
0.93
74
21
6
32
Do you work to protect the best
interests of your community and the
environment?
Stewardship
34
3.85
0.99
68
21
12
18
Do you avoid forcing your opinions
on others?
Persuasion
34
3.79
0.98
74
15
12
19
Do you seek consensus in decision
making?
Persuasion
34
3.65
1.01
71
12
18
Note. Percentages may not equal 100 due to rounding.
IS Servant Leadership 25
Table 4: Overall Responses to Questions Ranked by Mean Ranked Highest to Lowest
Question
Number
31
30
25
29
15
24
27
8
10
1
6
23
33
37
12
13
28
35
3
9
17
20
36
2
38
40
14
21
26
11
22
4
16
7
34
5
39
32
18
19
Question
Can you be counted on to do the right thing, ethically and morally?
Are you committed to work in the best interests of your organization?
Do you use the lessons of the past to provide insight on the future?
Can people depend on you? Do you follow through on commitments?
Do you readily share information and knowledge?
Do you see problems or issues in the broader context of what’s best for the
organization?
When making decisions, do you think about the long-term effects?
Do you admit your mistakes and profit by them?
Do you assist when people are in need or have problems?
Do you seek to understand the basis for the opinions of others?
Do you recognize and acknowledge the efforts of others?
Do you take organizational strategy in mind when making current decisions?
Do you take a personal interest in the development of your co-workers?
Do you practice inclusion—making everyone feel part of the group or
organization?
Do others see you as a “helping” person?
Do you have a good understanding of your strengths and weaknesses?
Do people see you as a good decision maker—one who understands the
complexity of the situation?
Do you involve co-workers in the important decisions of your group or unit?
Do you ask questions to get everyone’s ideas?
Do you show an active concern for the welfare of others?
Do you seek to convince others, rather than coerce?
Do you insist on making decisions by fact and reason?
Do you make resources available, including assignments and educational
materials, to assist others to achieve their goals?
Do you take care to make sure everyone is heard?
Do you work to pull people together to pursue a common goal?
Do you view each member of the group or organization as a valued and important
contributor?
Do you provide honest and constructive feedback to others?
Do you provide a vision or direction for your organization or group?
Are you able to see the future consequences of current decisions?
Do you help people resolve conflicts?
Can you anticipate future consequences and trends accurately?
Do you summarize and reflect back the ideas of others?
Do you have a clear understanding as to the effectiveness of your group or
organization, and are you honest about it?
Do you allow co-workers to experiment and take risks?
Do you assist others in discovering ways to achieve their goals?
Do you understand and identify with the concerns of others?
Do you work to build a sense of community among your co-workers and
colleagues?
Do you work to protect the best interests of your community and the
environment?
Do you avoid forcing your opinions on others?
Do you seek consensus in decision making?
Note. Percentages may not equal 100 due to rounding.
N
34
34
34
34
34
Mean
4.76
4.74
4.62
4.59
4.53
SD
0.43
0.45
0.55
0.50
0.61
% Strongly
Agree/Agree
1.00
1.00
0.97
1.00
0.94
%
Undecided
0.00
0.00
0.03
0.00
0.06
%
Disagree/
Strongly
Disagree
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
34
34
34
34
34
34
34
34
4.47
4.47
4.44
4.44
4.41
4.38
4.32
4.32
0.56
0.56
0.50
0.56
0.78
0.78
0.68
0.47
0.97
0.97
1.00
0.97
0.97
0.97
0.94
1.00
0.03
0.03
0.00
0.03
0.00
0.00
0.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.00
34
34
34
4.32
4.29
4.29
0.64
0.76
0.76
0.91
0.82
0.82
0.09
0.18
0.18
0.00
0.00
0.00
34
34
34
34
34
34
4.29
4.26
4.24
4.21
4.21
4.21
0.68
0.83
0.82
0.69
0.88
0.54
0.88
0.91
0.91
0.91
0.85
0.94
0.12
0.06
0.06
0.06
0.12
0.06
0.00
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.00
33
34
34
4.18
4.18
4.15
0.77
0.80
0.89
0.91
0.91
0.82
0.03
0.06
0.15
0.06
0.03
0.03
34
34
34
34
34
34
34
4.15
4.12
4.12
4.12
4.09
4.09
4.06
0.89
0.69
0.69
0.64
0.75
0.71
0.85
0.88
0.82
0.82
0.85
0.88
0.79
0.88
0.06
0.18
0.18
0.15
0.06
0.21
0.06
0.06
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.06
0.00
0.06
34
34
34
34
4.03
4.00
4.00
3.97
0.87
0.89
0.74
0.87
0.82
0.88
0.79
0.82
0.09
0.03
0.18
0.12
0.09
0.09
0.03
0.06
34
3.91
0.93
0.74
0.21
0.06
34
34
34
3.85
3.79
3.65
0.99
0.98
1.01
0.68
0.74
0.71
0.21
0.15
0.12
0.12
0.12
0.18