Using a Meaning-Centred
Leadership Model to Ignite
a Field of Inspired
Connections in Youth
Leaders
Welkom Campus
Solomon Makola, PhD
Campus Director
Sense of Meaning
 Frankl’s theory talks about the meaning of the moment,
which is meaning opportunities that each moment and
each demand of life places on the individual (Barnes,
2000).
 A Sense of Meaning place a demand on an individual to
which he/she must respond. A sense of meaning helps
people to be aware of and respond to the meaning
opportunities available to them every day. In this way, it
helps people to acknowledge that life puts demands on an
individual, instead of the individual putting demands on
life.
 An excellent leadership model must be based on clearly
articulated values and a philosophy which reflects those
Sense of Meaning
 Because each meaning is unique, we cannot have
universal meanings of life, but instead there situations that
have something in common and therefore give rise to
common meanings (Das, 1998).
 Thus people, who live in a given society or even across
cultures and in different historical times, share these
meanings, which Frankl called “values”.
 An excellent leadership model must be based on clearly
articulated values and a philosophy which reflects those
values.
 In the next slides an argument is presented on why the
values advocated by Viktor Frankl were incorporated
into the Meaning-Centred Leadership Model (MCLM).
Meaning-Centred Leadership
Model (MLCM)
 It is through meaning-making that human consciousness is
expanded; for this reason, Meaning-Centred Leadership
Model (MCLM) attempts to integrate the strengths of three
leadership theories (i.e. goal-oriented, relational-oriented,
and servant leadership styles), with the three basic
principles of Viktor Frankl’s philosophy (i.e. creative,
experiential, and attitudinal values), to enable leaders to
survive and adapt in different settings, e.g. workplace,
society, institutions and/or organisations.
 Meaning-making, in all its various aspects, is not only an
important motivating force in human life but also in
leadership. We search for personal meanings in our life
experiences, which enables us to transfer those values to
Meaning-Centred Leadership Model
(MLCM) (Continue)
 By integrating the three values into the leadership styles,
MCLM recognise that leadership can and should be
situational, depending on the needs of the team, goal
attainment, team spirit, or resilience. For this reason each
leader will apply the model with a conscious analysis of the
presenting concern, the intended result and the most
appropriate tool for the job.
 As leaders become engaged in a diverse set of leadership
responsibilities, they ignite a field of inspired connections to
self, to others, and to the local and world communities
(Scharmer, 2009).
Defining Meaning-Centred Leadership
Model (MLCM)
 Meaning-Centred Leadership Model (MCLM) can be
defined as a holistic method which integrates creative,
experiential and attitudinal values in leadership
development and practice, with goal-oriented, relationaloriented and servant leadership potentials, across all areas.
 Thus, MCLM strives to develop a complete systems
intervention which builds a system-wide transformational
self-knowledge.
Ways to Inspire Meaning-Centred
Leadership Model (MLCM)
 As a result, in order to continually self-evolve into an
effective and efficient leader, MCLM advocates that, there
are three principal ways through which we can inspire
leadership potentials amongst youth, i.e.
1) what they give to the mission (task-orientated leadership
potential);
2) what they take from the mission (relations-orientated
leadership potential); and
3) maintaining positive attitudes (servant leadership
potential).
Ways to Inspire Meaning-Centred
Leadership Model (MLCM)
 As a result, in order to continually self-evolve into an
effective and efficient leader, MCLM advocates that, there
are three principal ways through which we can inspire
leadership potentials amongst youth, i.e.
1) what they give to the mission (task-orientated leadership
potential);
2) what they take from the mission (relations-orientated
leadership potential); and
3) maintaining positive attitudes (servant leadership
potential).
Meaningful Task-Oriented Leadership
(Creative Values)
 The first way in which meaning can be found is through our
creations. Youth need to feel that there is a goal to fight
towards, or that there is something to live for, that life has a
purpose.
 Youth will experience life as meaningful when they feel that
they have a job in life or a mission in life to accomplish.
 Everyone, in one way or another, draws meaning from
doing something.
 In this sense the desire to make a difference, becomes the
primary source of authentic meaning (Pattakos, 2004).
 Attaining creative values enables youth leaders to
understand their purpose, and inspire them to be taskoriented leaders.
Meaningful Task-Oriented Leadership
(Creative Values)
 A task-oriented leader is one who focuses on the results or
goal attainment, together with all support mechanisms
necessary to reach the goal.
 A task-oriented leader is more concerned with discovering
practical, step-by-step solutions for meeting specific goals.
 In other words, a task-oriented youth leader might ask
"What should we do to achieve our desired results?"
(Anzalone, n.d; Emery, Calvard & Pierce, 2013; Tabernero
et al 2009).
 The main priority of the task-oriented leader is the
achievement of the task at hand.
Meaningful Relational-Oriented
Leadership (Experiential Values)
 The second way to discover meaning is through what a
person receives or takes from the world in terms of
encounters and experiences with other human beings.
 The way youth interact with each other gives them
meaning. The social environment in which their educational
institution is established, gives them meaning. How their
educators and fellow students treat them, gives them
meaning. Loving others, i.e. the knowing, appreciating and
respecting others the way they are, gives them meaning
(Giovinco, 2001, Shantall, 1997).
 Realising experiential values empowers young leaders to
understand their purpose, and they will be able to inspire
meaningful associations as relational-oriented leaders.
Meaningful Relational-Oriented
Leadership (Experiential Values)
 A relational-oriented leader understands the importance of
tasks, but also places a tremendous amount of time and
focus on meeting the needs of everyone involved in the
assignment.
 This may involve looking after the wellbeing of team
members, spending individual time with team members to
learn their strengths and weaknesses, recognizing and
rewarding excellence, or just leading in a friendly or
encouraging way (Anzalone, n.d.; Marquis, n.d.; Emery,
Calvard & Pierce, 2013; Tabernero et al 2009).
 Relational leaders seek to combine a diverse
cross-section of members, gender, race, ethnicity, etc.
Meaningful Servant Leadership
(Attitudinal Values)
 The third way to discover meaning is through the stand one
takes to his or her predicament in case he or she must face
a fate which cannot be changed.
 This is the reason why life never stops to have meaning,
because even a person who is deprived of both creative
and experiential meanings is still challenged by a meaning
to fulfil, that is, by the meaning inherent in the right, in an
upright way of suffering.
 Facing challenges without meaning is likely to bring despair,
however suffering with positive attitudes (meaning) is likely
to bring fulfilment (Frankl, 1997). What matters in this case
is the attitude that one adopts.
Meaningful Servant Leadership
(Attitudinal Values)
 We all have problems, carry burdens, and suffer pains.
However people do not respond in the same way to these
conditions.
 One person might break down, another might disregard
them, and the third person might take them as a challenge
(Fabry, 1988).
 It is not so much the tragedy, but the stand that one takes
towards it, that is important. In actual fact it is not the
tragedy, but the unhealthy attitude that causes distress. By
changing their attitudes, young can also change from
seeing themselves as helpless victims (of drives, genes,
environment, society, and the past), to seeing themselves
as people who are in control, irrespective of the
circumstances.
Meaningful Servant Leadership
(Attitudinal Values)
 Once youth leaders comprehend the importance of
attitudinal values, it will make it much easier for them to
execute their duties effectively and efficiently as servant
leaders.
 A servant leadership involves demonstrating integrity,
leading by example, collaborating with others to make
decisions and maintaining positive attitude even in the midst
of challenges (Ja'afaru, 2014; Marquis, n.d.; Van
Dierendonck at al 2014).
 Servant leaders are more interested in the service they
provide and less about the recognition they attain. They
motivate members of their organization all the time by
engaging them in meaningful activities.
Meaningful Servant Leadership
(Attitudinal Values)
 Servant leaders consider factors beyond their mandate and
aim to address the broader institutional factors (Ja'afaru,
2014; Marquis, n.d.; Van Dierendonck at al 2014).
Empirical Evidence
Problem statement
 The National Youth Policy 2009-2014, of South Africa,
proposed important reasons for the development of young
people, however there seems to be few solid mechanisms
to ensure proper implementation of policy
recommendations (RSA, 2009).
 Besides the fact that most of the budget earmarked for
youth development initiatives cannot be accounted for, the
biggest challenge is that the efficiency of interventions is
also difficult to measure (Budlender, Weideman & Zimba,
2006).
Empirical Evidence
Problem statement
 Leadership development helps young people to be aware
of their strengths and weaknesses, to set holistic goals,
and establish the self-esteem and enthusiasm which are
necessary to reach the goals (NASET, 2005).
 The purpose of this research is to compare the effects of a
meaning-centred leadership model on student leaders’
sense of meaning and development of youth leadership
potential.
Empirical Evidence
Problem statement
 The overarching objective is to investigate the efficacy of a
meaning-centred leadership model on the sense of
meaning in student leaders as related to the development
of their leadership potential.
 The primary research question was: Can a meaningcentred leadership model increase the levels of meaning
and inspire leadership potential amongst student leaders?
Empirical Evidence
Method
 The study employed both qualitative and
quantitative research methods.
 The researcher followed a non-equivalent
comparison group design (NCGD), in which one
pretest-posttest comparison group and one
pretest-posttest experimental group was used.
Empirical Evidence
Participants
 The participants are two groups of student leaders from a
university of technology in South Africa.
 The following are defining characteristics of participants in
the experimental group (n=9, age range = 23 to 27 years,
females = 56%, majority ethnicity = 67% Sotho speaking,
raised by both parents = 22%).
 The following are defining characteristics of participants in
the comparison group (n=9, age range = 21 to 31 years,
females = 78%, majority ethnicity = 78% Sotho speaking,
raised by both parents= 67%).
Empirical Evidence
Quantitative Data Collection
 Purpose in Life test (PIL). PIL was designed to
operationalize Frankl's ideas and to measure an
individual's experience of meaning and purpose in life.
 Youth Leadership Test (YLT). YLT was administered to
evaluate personal leadership capabilities of participants,
especially young people.
Empirical Evidence
Qualitative Data Collection
 The researcher administered a questionnaire with
open-ended questions to gain insight into the
participants’ impression of the meaning-centred
intervention.
Empirical Evidence
Procedure
Pre-Intervention
• Purpose in life test (PIL) and Youth Leadership Test (YLT) were
administered to 18 participants, 9 in the experimental group and 9 in
the comparison group. Thereafter, the groups reflected and interpreted
the outcome of the planning phase.
Intervention
• The intervention applied didactic and process-oriented strategies,
including guided reflections, experiential exercises, and education
based on the Meaning-Centred Leadership Model (MCLM). During the
intervention, the facilitator presented the model (based on a selfcompiled manual and slides), as well as practical exercises, i.e. songs
and videos with themes on meaning and purpose of life.
Empirical Evidence
Procedure
• Post-intervention
• The researcher and participants, in both groups, reflected on the
intervention phase by re-administering Purpose in Life test and Youth
Leadership Test. The main purpose of re-administering the
questionnaires was to determine whether the intervention did inspire
the participants’ feelings of purpose (as measured by PIL) as well as
their leadership potential (as measured by YLT).
• The participants, in the experimental group, completed an open-ended
questionnaire to provide additional information on how the meaningcentred intervention had an impact on their lives, and leadership
aptitudes. The main purpose of using the questionnaire was to evaluate
the participants’ impression of the intervention.
Empirical Evidence
Data Analysis
• Data was analysed qualitatively and quantitatively.
• The effect of the independent variable (meaning-centred intervention)
on the dependent variable (PIL score/sense of meaning and Youth
Leadership Skill) was examined. To investigate the research
hypotheses the researcher used a paired samples t-test. More
specifically a “repeated measures” t-test was used, whereby each
group, i.e. comparison and experimental, has been tested twice.
• The qualitative data were thematically analysed using the procedures
recommended by Guest (2012).
Empirical Evidence
Results
Quantitative Research Findings (PIL Score)
 The experimental group displayed moderate purpose in life
before the meaning-centred intervention, with a mean
score of 103.44. However, the intervention brought about
an increase of 16.23 (p.< .01) in the PIL scores. The
difference was also clearly evident when the range of the
pre- and post- intervention scores is compared.
 The comparison group displayed moderate purpose in the
pre-test, with a mean score of 106.56, and there was an
increase of 0.44 (not significant) in the pre-test.
There was no difference when the range of the
pre- and post-test scores is compared.
Empirical Evidence
Results
Quantitative Research Findings (YLT Score)
 The experimental group displayed high leadership aptitude before the
meaning-centred intervention, with a mean score of 48. The
intervention brought about an increase of 4.11 (p.< .01) in the YLT
scores, to 52.11. The difference is clearly evident when the range of the
pre- and post- intervention scores is compared.
 The comparison group displayed high leadership potential in the pretest, with a mean score of 49.89, and there was no increase in the posttest. The pre- and post- intervention range scores also remained the
same.
Empirical Evidence
Results
Qualitative Research Findings
 Developments in meaningful goal-oriented leadership potential
(creative values), meaningful relational-oriented leadership potential
(experiential values) and meaningful servant leadership potential
(attitudinal values) appeared consistent with the intent of the MeaningCentred Leadership Model (MCLM).
Empirical Evidence
Results
Meaningful Goal-Oriented Leadership (Creative Values)
 All participants affirmed that their transformational self-knowledge with
regard to meaningful goal-oriented leadership potential (Creative
Values) was inspired in the sense that they are committed, open
minded, established clear visions, goals, they are analytic, flexible,
affirmed, creative, can set limits, are organised, can communicate
better and determined to learn.
 Illustrative statements to support this include:
 My analytic ability is enhanced (Participant 9).
 I was provoked to set new aims (Participant 2).
Empirical Evidence
Results
Meaningful Relational-Oriented Leadership (Experiential Values)
 All participants affirmed that their transformational self-knowledge with
regard to meaningful task-oriented leadership potential (experiential
values) was inspired in the sense that they are disciplined, established
strong characters, more understanding, build team cohesion, can relate
better with others, share, diplomatic, and will listen to others.
 Illustrative statements to support this include:
 I will share my success with my teammates (Participant 7).
 I will be able to deal with people who don’t share same values as me (Participant
6).
Empirical Evidence
Results
Meaningful Servant Leadership (Attitudinal Values)
• All participants affirmed that their transformational self-knowledge with
regard to meaningful servant leadership potential (attitudinal values)
was inspired in the sense that they are optimistic, can persevere,
sacrifice, are confident, courageous, their perspective changed and
they established positive attitudes.
• Illustrative statements for this include:
 I should not give up because of negative things that occurred in my life
(Participant 5).
 This workshop taught me that when you have made mistakes you can rise again
and be a better person (Participant 5).
Conclusion
 The findings from this study indicate that a meaningcentred leadership model can be used to inspire young
people in their leadership development.
 The researcher provided new evidence concerning the
relationship between sense of meaning, as measured by
Purpose in life test (PIL), and leadership aptitude, as
measured by Youth Leadership Test (YLT).
 The results gained in the study, recommends that similar
dynamics are likely to be at play in other student and/or
youth organisations. Therefore, it is recommended that this
model should become part of the on-going leadership
development sessions of young leaders in different
sectors.
Conclusion
 Furthermore, meaning-centred leadership model could be
employed as another way of empowering leaders, and
subsequently lessen unnecessary conflict.
 Moreover, youth leaders with a higher sense of meaning
will execute their organisational strategy efficiently.
 Finally, because leaders come across different situations
they cannot remain within one leadership style.
 As a result, the major achievement of exposing student
leaders to the intervention was to make them aware that in
order to be effective, they must learn to wear different hats
when dealing with the demands of each situation.
Thank you
Contact details
SOLOMON MAKOLA, PhD
CAMPUS DIRECTOR
0829666486
smakola@cut.ac.za
Solomon Oupa Makola
www.cut.ac.za | Bloemfontein (051) 507 3911 | Welkom (057) 910 3500