What are the key differences and similarities between servant leadership and other leadership styles?

If there is an antonym to servant leadership, it is autocratic leadership. Where servant leadership focuses on serving all stakeholders, autocratic leadership focuses exclusively on the interests and opinions of the individual in control.

A servant leader will inevitably develop a certain closeness to his team over time. As a result, when the time comes to be directive/autocratic, his or her team will find it easier to give him or her the legitimacy to act in this way. On the other hand, it's important to remember that this kind of posture must be applied sparingly and judiciously. As presented by Clément Bergon in his book “Bon manager, mode d'emploi !” (éditions Diateino, 2023), what he calls the commander's hat is necessary, even essential, for efficient management, but he insists that it should not be worn by managers more than 20% of the time.

This type of leadership is often confused with servant leadership. When organizations transition from waterfall to agile, the success of the transformation is dependent on the type of the leadership.

In addition to Daisy's wonderful insights, I would add that great servant-leaders understand not all decisions are democratic. For an extreme example, consider the military. Most military branches, at least in the United States, teach and advocate servant-leadership during times of peace. This is to best prepare troops for times of conflict. So a servant-leader knows when to apply democratic decision-making processes and when critical decisions must be made with little or no input.

Being a servant leader also means adopting the "we mindset" and elements of participative (democratic) leadership in your management. Unfortunately, not everything can be seen through the prism of consensus, which in a number of cases is not always possible, or even relevant or expected by employees. Therefore, it seems essential to be able to develop a balance between the participation of employees and the assertion of one's own authority, and to show managerial courage, to make decisions in risky or uncertain situations, or to impose rigorous standards that are not always desired by employees.

Transformational leaders often lead by example, setting high expectations and motivating their team through charisma and a compelling vision. They may use rewards and recognition as incentives. Servant leaders prioritize serving the needs of their team members first, emphasizing empathy, humility and active listening. They aim to empower individuals to grow and reach their full potential. While both styles promote trust and teamwork, transformational leadership tends to be more directive, with an emphasis on achieving specific outcomes. Servant leadership relies on collaboration and shared decision-making, seeking to meet the unique needs of the team. Creating a positive and motivating work environment is a common commitment for both.

Transformational leaders often have a north star and motivate team members to strive towards it. They often use charisma and enthusiasm to inspire teams. "A good leader inspires people to have confidence in the leader, a great leader inspires people to have confidence in themselves." — Eleanor Roosevelt Servant leaders listen attentively, facilitate other's growth, focusing on their needs and well-being. "Servant leadership is about making sure that other people’s highest priority needs are being served." — Robert K. Greenleaf

Situational leadership focuses on matching leadership behaviors to the readiness or maturity level of the team. It suggests that there is no one-size-fits-all leadership style. Instead, leaders should adjust their approach based on the team's ability and willingness to complete a task. This model defines four leadership styles: directing, coaching, supporting and delegating, each suited to different stages of readiness. Servant leadership revolves around serving the needs of the team members, emphasizing qualities like empathy, humility and active listening. While situational leadership is more task-focused and adaptive, servant leadership is relationship-centered and emphasizes the personal growth and well-being of team members.

With situational leadership flexibility and adaptability is the name of the game. When there's a tight deadline, a beloved employee suddenly moves on to a different company, or a there's a management change- how does a leader adapt and set the tone?

It seems to me that the servant-leader posture can only be strengthened by the ability to adapt one's management style according to the context, the level of progress of one's team, and the level of professional and psychological maturity of each individual, through situational management, for example. Being able to individualize one's management style means demonstrating situational and emotional intelligence, among other things, but it also means recognizing and valuing employees as individuals in their own right, who are unique, unequal and changeable.

Il me semble que la posture de servant-leader ne peut être renforcée que par la capacité à adapter son style de management en fonction du contexte, du niveau d'avancement de son équipe et du niveau de maturité professionnelle et psychologique de chacun, à travers le management situationnel par exemple. Savoir individualiser son style de management, c'est faire preuve d'intelligence situationnelle et émotionnelle, entre autres, mais c'est aussi reconna?tre et valoriser les salariés en tant qu'individus à part entière, uniques, inégaux et changeants.

In addition to the above article, I will be contributing the following. * In the area of personal needs, servant leaders place higher emphasis on well-being, personal needs of employees when making business decisions than relational leaders. E.g servant leaders focuses on how to make employees more motivated. In the area of customers satisfaction, a servant leader considers factors beyond the basic product or service and aim to make a customer happy. Ex. If a customer is unsatisfied with a product and return the product, other leadership style will authorize a refund and corrects the matter. Servant leader goes beyond refunds and asks if the customer is actually satisfied and if not, they might take further steps to fix the situation.

When clients ask me to define servant-leadership, my answer is simple: Servant-leadership is the only authentic form of leadership. After all, if you're not serving others, you are self-serving and that is not leadership. However, we apply the term, "servant" because society has confused us into believing leadership is an achievement to reach. It is not. Leadership is a commitment to service.

If you look at any religious practice it asks for service, service to God and once your core life is service to someone.. serving becomes a very natural way of life. Servant leadership is not a new phenomenon: kings considering them servants to its citizens is an old practice. Also women are best serving leaders if we allow acceptance of gender specific approaches in the world of work, where they are very happy and content when given a nice environment to serve.

Leadership can be done at any level. - Leadership is the janitor pausing to listen to a student share about her parents going through a divorce. - Leadership is a social worker adding one more slot to a food program because a family can really benefit from it right now. - Leadership is the hiker late at night making sure that others behind them can get off the mountain safely.

One of the key aspects of servant leadership is behavioural modelling, which often gets forgotten. Servant leaders need to model the values they want to promote within the organization. For example- if the leaders model working towards a common vision, there is a higher probability that the team will also make decisions in-line with the common vision. This type of awareness within the leadership community also indicates that the onus of team success is shared between leadership and not just on the teams.