See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/357914303

Spiritual development in aspiring servant leaders in an Aotearoa-New

Zealand tertiary education context

Thesis · October 2020

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.10353.81762

CITATIONS READS

0 395

1 author:

Nathan Polley
CamEd Business School
4 PUBLICATIONS 0 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Nathan Polley on 19 January 2022.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Spiritual development in aspiring servant leaders in an
Aotearoa-New Zealand tertiary education context

by
Nathan Polley

Master of Business Administration, University of the Sunshine Coast, 2013; Graduate

Certificate in Ministry, Christian Heritage College, 2012; Bachelor of Business,
Queensland University of Technology, 2004

Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the

Requirements for the Degree of
Doctor of Ministry

in the
Faculty of Ministry

© Nathan Polley 2020

Alphacrucis College
2020

Copyright in this work rests with the author. Please ensure that any reproduction
or re-use is done in accordance with the relevant national copyright legislation.
Approval

Name: Nathan Polley

Degree: Doctor of Ministry
Title: Spiritual development in aspiring servant leaders in
an Aotearoa-New Zealand tertiary education
context
Examining Committee: Doctor Nigel Pegram
Doctor of Ministry Program Director
Reverend Doctor Graham Hill
Interim Principal and Director of Research – Stirling
College
Reverend Doctor Graham Buxton
Director of Research Development, Director of the
Graeme Clark Research Institute – Uniting College
Supervisors: Reverend Professor Philip Hughes
Senior Supervisor
Doctor Mulyadi Robin
Supervisor
Doctor Huhana Forsyth
Supervisor
Professor Colin Gibbs
Supervisor
Date Defended/Approved: 10th of August, 2020

ii
Abstract

Robert Greenleaf introduced servant leadership in 1970 as an ‘others first’ philosophy to

benefit followers, organisations and society. While research suggests a link between servant
leadership and spirituality—an individually constructed set of beliefs, practices, and experiences
that may or may not draw from religion—research has yet to explore if and how spirituality
develops across multi-faith, multi-ethnic aspiring servant leaders in Aotearoa-New Zealand. This
study used a case study methodology to explore how 12 international students developed
spiritually, as defined by the Spiritual Development Framework (SDF) proposed by Benson,
Scales, Syvertson and & Roehlkepartain (2012), through an Aotearoa-New Zealand tertiary
servant leader course. Development was also considered against the dimensions of Servant
Leadership Behaviour Survey (SLBS) as proposed by Sendjaya, Sarros and Santora (2008).

The present study found evidence of spiritual and servant leader development before the
course through mentoring and modelling by family and faith communities and evidence of
development during the course in the spiritual development processes of awareness, connection
and a way of living and through reciprocal and experiential learning based on professional
practice and reflection. The findings support the inclusion of spirituality as a dimension of servant
leadership and suggests further servant leader development should build on spiritual practice
and formative mentoring by family and faith communities and provide emotional support for
learners in their servant leader development.

Keywords: servant leadership; New Zealand; leader development; spirituality; tertiary

education

iii
Dedication

Dedicated to my wife, Gina and my children Aaliyah and Judah.

May this, and the conduct of my life, be a guiding beacon in your future life, faith and
leadership.

iv
Acknowledgements

No great accomplishment is achieved in isolation through individual effort. I

acknowledge my Saviour, Jesus Christ, who best modelled the life of the servant leader
through His life and ministry. I also thank my wife Gina for her continuing love and support
during this journey and my parents Ralph and Doreena and mother-in-law Jeanette who
provided practical, emotional and spiritual support during this journey.

I acknowledge the inspiration of Iain Polley who introduced me to leader development

and training and David McCurdy, Rob Simpson, Dr Jonathan Staggs, Faith Kenoyer, Maria
Mesaric and Justin Stewart who modelled servant leadership as managers during this journey.
I thank my friends and spiritual leaders who provided support along the way – Ps Jason Smith,
Ps Ben Cherry, Ps Yuan Miller and Chris Pennycuick. I also acknowledge the many teachers
who were models of a servant teacher in my life.

I acknowledge and thank the learners who contributed to this study; first, in
volunteering to undertake The Servant as Leader course and in agreeing to be interviewed in
their development as servant leaders.

I deeply appreciate the knowledge, wisdom and encouragement of my supervisors –

Prof Philip Hughes, Prof Colin Gibbs, Dr Ian Jagelman, Dr Mulyadi Robin and Dr Huhana
Forsyth. I also thank those who contributed their time and expertise to the project – Dr Gary
Leaf, Dr Kuni Jenkins, Dennis Yue, Prof Stephen Fogarty, Sam Forde and Rhiannon Bell.

v
Table of Contents

Approval .......................................................................................................................... ii
Abstract .......................................................................................................................... iii
Dedication ...................................................................................................................... iv
Acknowledgements......................................................................................................... v
Table of Contents ........................................................................................................... vi
List of Tables .................................................................................................................. ix
List of Figures ................................................................................................................. x
List of Acronyms ............................................................................................................. xi

Chapter 1. Introduction ....................................................................................................... 1

1.1. Positioning the study ............................................................................................. 2
1.2. Purpose of the study ............................................................................................. 4
1.3. Research question ................................................................................................ 4
1.4. Study scope .......................................................................................................... 4
1.5. Phases and significance of the study .................................................................... 5
1.6. Chapter summary ................................................................................................. 6

Chapter 2. Literature review ................................................................................................ 7

2.1. Introduction to leadership and servant leadership ................................................. 7
2.2. Conceptual development of servant leadership ..................................................... 8
2.3. Servant leadership and spirituality....................................................................... 12
2.3.1. Transcendental spirituality..................................................................................... 12
2.3.2. Covenantal relationship ......................................................................................... 13
2.3.3. Authentic self ........................................................................................................ 14
2.3.4. Transforming influence .......................................................................................... 15
2.3.5. Responsible morality ............................................................................................. 15
2.3.6. Voluntary subordination ........................................................................................ 17
2.4. Servant leader development ............................................................................... 18
2.4.1. Reciprocal learning ............................................................................................... 20
2.4.2. Mentoring .............................................................................................................. 21
2.4.3. Modelling .............................................................................................................. 22
2.4.4. Experiential learning.............................................................................................. 22
2.4.5. Spiritual practice ................................................................................................... 23
2.5. Spirituality and spiritual development .................................................................. 24
2.6. Spiritual development in servant leader development ......................................... 29
2.7. Chapter summary ............................................................................................... 30

Chapter 3. Research methodology ................................................................................... 31

3.1. Research philosophy and method ....................................................................... 31
3.2. Research questions ............................................................................................ 32
3.3. Consultation with Māori ....................................................................................... 33
3.4. Development of The Servant as Leader course .................................................. 34
3.5. Participant selection and recruitment .................................................................. 35
3.6. Personal positioning ............................................................................................ 37
3.7. Evidence collection and analysis ......................................................................... 38
3.8. Chapter summary ............................................................................................... 40

vi
Chapter 4. Findings ........................................................................................................... 42
4.1. Development of spirituality in servant leader development .................................. 42
4.1.1. Development through mentors and models ........................................................... 42
4.1.2. Development through reciprocal learning .............................................................. 44
4.1.3. Development through experiential learning ........................................................... 45
4.1.4. Summary .............................................................................................................. 47
4.2. Development as a spiritually aware servant leader ............................................. 47
4.2.1. Development of awareness through apprehension of transcendence ................... 48
4.2.2. Development of awareness through religious/spiritual practice and action ............ 52
4.2.3. Development of awareness through a sense of calling, purpose or identity ........... 54
4.2.4. Summary .............................................................................................................. 57
4.3. Development as a spiritually connected servant leader ....................................... 58
4.3.1. Development of connection through apprehension of transcendence ................... 58
4.3.2. Development of connection through religious/spiritual practice and action ............ 62
4.3.3. Development of connection through a sense of identity ........................................ 63
4.3.4. Summary .............................................................................................................. 65
4.4. Development of a way of living ............................................................................ 66
4.4.1. Development of a way of living through apprehension of transcendence .............. 67
4.4.2. Development of a way of living through religious/spiritual practice and action ....... 69
4.4.3. Development of a way of living through developing a sense of identity ................. 72
4.4.4. Summary .............................................................................................................. 73
4.5. Chapter summary ............................................................................................... 74

Chapter 5. Discussion ....................................................................................................... 75

5.1. Spirituality and servant leader development ........................................................ 75
5.2. Transcendental spirituality .................................................................................. 78
5.2.1. Religiousness........................................................................................................ 78
5.2.2. Spirituality ............................................................................................................. 80
5.2.3. Sense of purpose and calling ................................................................................ 82
5.2.4. Spiritual and personal identity ............................................................................... 84
5.2.5. Summary .............................................................................................................. 85
5.3. Covenantal relationship....................................................................................... 85
5.4. Authentic self ...................................................................................................... 87
5.5. Transforming influence........................................................................................ 88
5.6. Responsible morality ........................................................................................... 91
5.7. Voluntary subordination ...................................................................................... 93
5.8. Chapter summary ............................................................................................... 94

Chapter 6. Conclusion ....................................................................................................... 96

6.1. Thesis conclusion ............................................................................................... 96
6.1.1. Spiritual development in aspiring servant leaders ................................................. 97
6.1.2. Servant leader development in an Aotearoa-New Zealand tertiary education context
97
6.1.3. Relevance of the SDF model to servant leader development ................................ 98
6.2. Study scope ...................................................................................................... 100
6.3. Recommendations and further research ........................................................... 100
6.4. Concluding statement ....................................................................................... 101

vii
Reference List ..................................................................................................................... 102

Appendix A: Course Descriptor ......................................................................................... 135

Course details............................................................................................................. 135
Duration and format .................................................................................................... 135
Course aim ................................................................................................................. 135
Graduate and Learning Outcomes .............................................................................. 135
Assessments .............................................................................................................. 136
Reflections ........................................................................................................................ 136
Presentation of a personal servant leader framework ........................................................ 138

Appendix B: Development journey of aspiring servant leaders ...................................... 139

Aimee ......................................................................................................................... 139
Erika ........................................................................................................................... 139
Frank .......................................................................................................................... 140
George ....................................................................................................................... 140
Jennifer....................................................................................................................... 141
Lauren ........................................................................................................................ 141
Leon ........................................................................................................................... 142
Rick ............................................................................................................................ 142
Tina ............................................................................................................................ 143
Valerie ........................................................................................................................ 143
Victor .......................................................................................................................... 143
Yvette ......................................................................................................................... 144

Appendix C: Copyright statement ..................................................................................... 145

viii
List of Tables

Table 3-1 Learner information ................................................................................................. 36

Table 3-2 Evidence collection ................................................................................................. 39

ix
List of Figures

Figure 2-1: Spiritual Development Framework ........................................................................ 28

x
List of Acronyms

CEO Chief Executive Officer

ESL English as a Second Language
LDS Latter-day Saints (i.e. Mormon)
NGO Non-government Organisation
NZ New Zealand
PR Permanent Residency
SDF Spiritual Development Framework
SLBS Servant Leadership Behavioural Scale
UK United Kingdom
US United States (of America)

xi
Chapter 1. Introduction

Servant leadership is often introduced in articles and dissertations as a social

response to an ethical or moral leadership crisis. While this may be true, Robert
Greenleaf, the servant leadership ‘prophet’, posited servant leadership had a deeper
purpose to change society by developing followers who are “healthier, wiser, freer,
more autonomous, more likely themselves to become servants” (Greenleaf, 1970, p.
6). Greenleaf began as an executive in AT&T1 but after coming to believe in the
leadership limitations of his contemporaries, spent years writing and consulting to
institutes such as Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and the American
Foundation for Management Research on his proposed solution—servant leadership.
Greenleaf (1970) argued servant leadership “begins with the natural feeling that one
wants to serve” individuals, build better organisations and ultimately create a more
just and caring world (Robert K. Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership, 2016).
Like prophets of old, Greenleaf (1970) perceived his message was to seekers
searching, listening and expecting a new form of contemporary leadership.

The benefits of servant leadership for followers are well documented and
supported by mainstream management theorists (Blanchard, 2003; Covey, 1994;
DePree, 1989; Senge, 2004). Studies have found servant leadership is associated
with empowerment (Hall, 2016; Van Winkle, 2013), trust (Joseph & Winston, 2005;
Reinke, 2004), team effectiveness and collaboration (Garber et al., 2009; Irving,
2005), job satisfaction (Cerit, 2009; M. Jenkins & Stewart, 2010) and organisational
climate and citizenship behaviour (Dixon, 2013; D. C. Jones, 2011; Neubert et al.,
2008), among others. Aspects of servant leadership are reflected in contemporary
leadership ideas such as transformational leadership (Andersen, 2018; Hoch et al.,
2018; Parolini et al., 2009; Schneider & George, 2011; Scuderi, 2014), spiritual
leadership (Boorom, 2009; Fry, 2003), authentic leadership (Gardner et al., 2011)
and steward leadership (April et al., 2013). While there is congruence between
servant leadership and other leadership ideas, servant leadership is conceptually
distinct through its holistic approach to leadership and motive to serve through moral
and ethical principles.

1 American Telephone & Telegraph

1
 Greenleaf foresaw development as a journey - which others have noted may
include a spiritual dimension (Kirkpatrick, 1988; Patterson, 2003; Robert F. Russell,
2003a; Sendjaya et al., 2008; Sendjaya & Sarros, 2002). Yet our understanding of
the development of spirituality within aspiring servant leaders is still nascent. This
chapter summaries how the study explores spiritual development within servant
leadership by introducing the study, context and research question and concluding
with a thesis overview.

1.1. Positioning the study

Greenleaf (1972) argued that seminaries, churches and universities were

central to social change through servant leader development and their impact would
create ripple effects in other social institutions (Bommarito, 2012). If true, the tertiary
‘College’ in this present study was an ideal platform as it was church-owned but
‘secular’ with 90% of students originating from over 30 different nations outside New
Zealand. Any Christians were largely concentrated in the ministry academy which
operated alongside academies in business, health, technology, English as a Second
Language (ESL), teaching, film and animation. This diversity of religions within the
student body made it difficult to craft a unifying education philosophy incorporating a
Christian worldview. Servant leadership was perceived as a philosophy that could
authentically integrate the College ethos, encourage cultural and religious diversity
(Trompenaars & Voerman, 2009) and prepare students for future leadership in the
various disciplines. Spirituality is distinct from religion and emphasises the beliefs,
practices, and experiences individually constructed about the ‘big questions of life’
(Benson, Scales, et al., 2012)—concepts further explored in the literature review.

The frequent integration of servant leadership in Christian organisations,

education and churches reflects some harmony with the Christian faith (Kirkpatrick,
1988). There is alignment between servant leadership and a Christian ethos (Brodie,
2016) reflected in a study that found the term “servanthood” was the most common
phrase in the mission statements of the members of the Christian Colleges and
Universities—most of which are US-based (Burch et al., 2015). Research has also
supported servant leader development in religious schools (Hoskins, 2014), tertiary
institutes (A. R. Anderson, 2009; Boyum, 2012; Ingram, 2003; Meinecke, 2014;
Rohm, 2013) and churches (Ashley, 2016; Griffin, 2012). While these studies
suggest a link between servant leadership and spirituality, few studies have explored

2
servant leader development in ‘for-profit’ (Negron, 2012) or secular education
institute.

There are equivocal findings on servant leader development through tertiary

study. Greenleaf argued that servant leadership is an internal, life-long process
(Parris et al., 2013) that is hard to operationalise because it “is meant to be neither a
scholarly treatise nor a how-to-do-it manual” (Greenleaf, 1977, p. 49). Likewise, Frick
et al. (2004) argued that leaders must reflect, ponder and grow. Some studies
reported positive development in learners (Ashley, 2016; Bommarito, 2012; Cress et
al., 2001; Griffin, 2012; Noll, 2012; Thompson, 2014). Others reported minimal or no
development in learners (A. R. Anderson, 2009; Marshall, 2008; Meinecke, 2014;
Rohm, 2013). These studies relied on pedagogical approaches including service-
learning and project-based learning (A. R. Anderson, 2009; Meinecke, 2014),
seminars (Ashley, 2016; Griffin, 2012) and mentoring (Ashley, 2016)—to name a few.
It appears a pedagogy encouraging reflection and experiential learning may be more
effective in developing servant leaders, but further research is required.

The most relevant study on servant leader development is an Australian study

by Eva and Sendjaya (2013). They examined youth leadership development using
the dimensions of the Servant Leadership Behavioural Scale (SLBS) proposed by
Sendjaya, Sarros and Santora (2008) to determine the most relevant, important and
currently taught dimensions. While the study identified content and potential foci for
servant leader development, it did not observe servant leader development in a
servant leader course. The youth context also differs to the College context and the
limited experience of learners may influence how learning occurs within the
classroom (Holmes & Abington-Cooper, 2000). While providing clues on formative
servant leader development, there is need for a study that focuses on higher
education, Aotearoa-New Zealand and the College context.

While there is no agreed model for servant leader development, there exists a
body of knowledge regarding leader and spiritual development. Notable efforts were
made to explore the effectiveness of various leader development methods (D. V.
Day, 2000, 2018; D. V. Day & Dragoni, 2015; D. V. Day & Halpin, 2004), but
differences in defining leadership and servant leadership limit the transferability to
servant leader development. Benson and Roehlkepartain (2005; 2008)—with others,
proposed an early architecture for spiritual development in the Comprehensive
Theory of Spiritual Development refined into the Spiritual Development Framework
(SDF). The SDF integrated human development with a broad definition of spirituality

3
that allows for religious/non-religious and spiritual/non-spiritual traditions, beliefs and
practices. This study answers Benson’s call for further interdisciplinary research by
applying the SDF framework to servant leader development to explore what
elements, if any, of spirituality developed in aspiring servant leaders through The
Servant as Leader course which is described below.

1.2. Purpose of the study

The present study sought to understand how spiritual development through

The Servant as Leader course supported servant leader development within a multi-
cultural, multi-faith, graduate-level cohort studying in Aotearoa-New Zealand. Results
will help assess the appropriateness of the SDF for tertiary education and servant
leader contexts, explore the relationship between servant leadership and spirituality
and inform future servant leader development within the College, in Aotearoa-New
Zealand and more widely.

1.3. Research question

The guiding research question was “how can spiritual development contribute
to servant leader development, as defined by the Servant Leadership Behavioural
Survey, in learners of diverse ethnic and religious backgrounds, as demonstrated in a
tertiary servant leader course in Aotearoa-New Zealand”? Research explored
spiritual development within The Servant as Leader course against the SDF (Benson,
Scales, et al., 2012) to understand how aspiring servant leaders develop spiritual
awareness, connection and applied this as a way of living. Results are then
discussed against the SLBS to analyse how spiritual development contributes to
servant leader development.

1.4. Study scope

Links between servant leadership and spirituality are recognised by various

academics in servant leadership literature, models and measures. Greenleaf (1977),
coming from a Quaker tradition, perceived spirituality as harmonious with, and
potentially integrated in, servant leadership as demonstrated in his frequent
reference to Scripture. Sendjaya et al. (2017, p. 942) further argued: “without the
spiritual dimension, there is nothing unique or new about servant leadership nor
would servant leadership become a truly holistic leadership approach”.

4
 Key issues centre on the meaning of spirituality (i.e. what is and is not
‘spiritual’), the universality of spirituality and the capacity for spiritual development
(especially those who are non-religious or non-spiritual)—questions explored in the
next chapter. Benson and Roehlkepartain (2005; 2008) believe spirituality to be
universal and an intrinsic part of being human. They propose that everyone is
capable of spiritual development but note spiritual development may not always be
intentional and may be inexplicitly embedded within the scripts and norms of culture.

This present study posited that servant leaders may develop spiritually when
undertaking servant leader development and focussed on understanding how
spiritual development may contribute to this process. The study applied a case study
methodology to 12 multi-ethnic and multi-faith learners and their spiritual
development in beliefs, practices and experiences. The research design highlighted
learner uniqueness and individuality reflective of the College context by collecting in-
depth qualitative evidence over a semester period of 18-weeks (including holidays).
While this is not representative of New Zealand society which is proportionately less
diverse (Stats NZ Tatauranga Aotearoa, 2019), the study included the voice of
Māori—the indigenous peoples in New Zealand—by consulting a Māori panel and
hosting Māori representatives as guest speakers to share their culture with learners.

1.5. Phases and significance of the study

The overall project had two phases. The first phase saw the development and
delivery of The Servant as Leader course. A summary of the course development is
included in chapter three and a course summary in the appendix. The second phase
and focus of the study analysed spirituality development in aspiring servant leaders
during the course. These findings are discussed extensively in chapter four and five.

Although New Zealand ministry qualifications endorse servant leadership

within ministry and theology education (Christian Theological and Ministries
Education Society, 2015a, 2015b) and servant leadership is taught alongside other
leadership theories in New Zealand institutes, there is little evidence secular tertiary
institutes teach dedicated servant leadership courses. This study is among the first to
explore servant leader development in Aotearoa-New Zealand within a multi-ethnic
and multi-faith context. The study is also among the first to explore spiritual
development within aspiring servant leaders in Aotearoa-New Zealand.

5
1.6. Chapter summary

Chapter Two undertakes a literature review of servant leadership, servant

leader development, spirituality and spiritual development before proposing four
hypotheses to guide the study.

Chapter Three discusses the qualitative research and evidence collection

methods adopted in the present study. It describes how the study design explores
spiritual development within The Servant as Leader course. Justification is given for
the study design, research analysis and course design and delivery.

Chapter Four presents the findings showing the development of spirituality

within aspiring servant leader during the course as gauged from evidence in
accordance with the SDF.

Chapter Five analyses and discusses how spiritual development occurred

within the context of servant leader development against the servant leader
dimensions identified by the SLBS with reference to literature.

Chapter Six concludes and makes recommendations for future research and
servant leader development in the College and for tertiary education contexts within
Aotearoa-New Zealand.

6
Chapter 2. Literature review

This chapter defines servant leadership, spirituality and spiritual development.

It then explores servant leader dimensions relevant to spirituality and how these may
develop within servant leaders. Finally, I present four sub-questions which are used
to analyse how spirituality developed in The Servant as Leader course.

2.1. Introduction to leadership and servant leadership

The meaning of leadership derives from the etymological phrase “loed”, which
means “path” or “road”, and the verb extension “to travel” (Vries et al., 2004). The
etymology suggests a journey where leaders guide followers along an intended path.
Chemers (2014, p. 1) more explicitly defined leadership as “a process of social
influence in which a person enlists the aid and support of others in the
accomplishment of a common task”. Likewise, Rost (1991, p. 102) argued leadership
is an “influence relationship among leaders and followers who intend real changes
that reflect their mutual purposes”. Though leadership could be more broadly defined,
through the etymology and these definitions we see that leadership is centred around
a leader-follower relationship focused on achieving shared outcomes. Both
definitions leave open the possibility for formal or informal influence on followers
across a spectrum of personal and/or professional contexts.

Servant leadership is distinct amongst leadership theories. Greenleaf

proposed servant leadership based on his reading of Herman Hesse’s Journey to the
East and in response to perceived moral/ethical leadership crises of his time.
Hesse’s story focused on the relationship between Leo, a servant, and the band of
travellers known as ‘The League’. The journey progressed until Leo disappeared
and, in his absence, the group separated and abandoned the endeavour. The
narrator later reconnected with Leo, who revealed himself to be the President of The
League. The journey was a test of faith with Leo positioned as The League servant
(Hesse, 1933). Consistent with the typology of Leo, Greenleaf (1970, p. 6) centred
the outcomes of servant leadership on whether followers are “healthier, wiser, freer,
more autonomous, more likely themselves to become servants”. Greenleaf also
pictured this leadership being based on persuasion in an egalitarian structure
following the Roman Senate primus inter pares model where leaders are not
elevated or isolated by hierarchy (1972). For Greenleaf, servant leadership sought
connection with followers and outcomes to improve followers and society.

7
 The impact of servant leadership has been explored within contexts ranging
from private, public, non-profit and community organisations and ministry contexts
(Ebener & O’Connell, 2010; L. C. Foster, 2014). Research has explored fields such
as education (Ingram, 2003; Negron, 2012; Padron, 2012; Thompson, 2014; Varney,
2017), banking (Hamilton & Bean, 2005), data analytics (Zentner, 2016) fast food,
construction and airlines (Strickland, 2006) and healthcare (Caldwell & Karri, 2005;
Irving & Berndt, 2017; Mertel & Brill, 2015; Rude, 2005; Vanderpyl, 2012).
Anecdotally, servant leadership has been explicitly espoused by five of the top-rated
ten companies in the Forbes 100 Best Companies to Work For and 17 in the top 100
best companies (Forbes, 2011; Lichtenwalner, 2011), with another 61 companies
having employees recognised as servant leaders (Lichtenwalner, 2011). The
altruistic focus on others and credibility of organisations who have ascribed servant
leadership to their success makes servant leadership an appropriate leadership
philosophy for teaching within the College and potentially in other institutes in
Aotearoa-New Zealand.

2.2. Conceptual development of servant leadership

Different theorists since Greenleaf have continued to extend the servant

leadership concept. Eva, Robin, Sendjaya, van Dierendonck and Liden (2018)
designate three phases in the conceptual development of servant leadership –
conceptual development, creation and validation of tools, and expansion of research.

The conceptual development phase initially benefited from Graham (1991),

Spears (1995) and others who moulded servant leadership theory around personal,
ethical and moral convictions through altruistic acts towards followers within a
leadership context (Parris et al., 2013; Tarling, 2014). It is disappointing this phase
was unable to reach consensus on a definition of servant leadership (Parris et al.,
2013; van Dierendonck, 2011), although Greenleaf (1972, 1975, 1977, 1991), Spears
(1998; 1995, 2010) and Laub (1999) emerged as reference points in most
subsequent literature (Parris et al., 2013). Spears (1995) used Greenleaf’s writings to
characterise servant leadership as listening, empathy, healing, awareness,
persuasion, philosophy, conceptualisation, foresight, stewardship, commitment to the
growth of people, and building community. Laub (1999) extended servant leadership
to organisations who could exhibit servant leadership in how they value and develop
people, build community, display authenticity, provide leadership, and share

8
leadership. While helpful in defining servant leadership, these earlier attempts are
superseded by later studies which provide more substantive empirical support.

Even at this early and formative stage, a link to spirituality was noted by
academics. De Pree (1989) echoed Greenleaf (1970) that servant leaders' identity is
entrenched in the belief of “I am the leader because I serve” in contrast to “I serve
because I am the leader”. While both leaders serve, the motive of the servant who
leads best demonstrates an altruistic desire for others congruent with their ‘being’ as
opposed to the leader who serves and ambitiously builds his credibility (Sendjaya &
Sarros, 2002). Jesus believed there must be authenticity in the ‘being’ of a leader
and their actions in his Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 7:16,17:

By their fruit {their actions} you will recognise them {their being}. Do
people pick grapes from thorn bushes, or figs from thistles? Likewise,
every good tree {being} bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit.

His solution was to address the “inside… that the outside might be clean also”
(Matthew 23:26). Like Jesus taught, servant leader development is predicated on the
internal ‘being’ that is reflected through leaders’ actions.

Jesus further argued that leadership should be grounded in service and

humility among the disciples and models this in His mission and life. He stated in
Mark 10:42-45 that:

You know that those who are regarded as rulers of the Gentiles lord it
over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. Not so
with you [as disciples]. Instead, whoever wants to become great among
you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be slave
of all. For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve,
and to give his life as a ransom for many

The life and teaching of Jesus provided disciples with a concept of servant leadership
long before Greenleaf. While some academics concluded servant leadership should
be consistent with Christian life and leadership (Robert F. Russell, 2003b), others
disagree and believe Christian leadership is more holistic than servant leadership
and is better reflected through the typology of a witness or martyr (Kimotho, 2019;
Niewold, 2006). Other religions—including Taoism (Bai & Roberts, 2011) and Islam
(Razali, 2012), have also claimed servant leadership is reflected in their religions.

Patterson (2003) and Winston (2003) later built from the example and
message of Jesus in their alignment of servant leadership to virtues. In proposing
virtues, Patterson (2003) also drew from Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, where

9
leaders seek to develop competent, selfless, balanced habits resulting in contextually
correct decisions (Aristotle et al., 1998; Aristotle & Press, 2015; Cerff & Winston,
2006). Among the virtues espoused by Patterson was agapao love, humility, altruism,
vision, trust, empowerment and service—virtues Cerff and Winston linked to the
Beatitudes (2006) and Patterson asserted are spiritual in nature (Freeman, 2011).
Servant leadership was understood as multi-dimensional with links to aspects of
spirituality.

The second phase in the conceptualisation of servant leadership saw a

proliferation in the creation and validation of measurement tools created to meet
theoretic and methodological considerations. Prominent measures were developed
by Page and Wong (2000), Russell and Stone (2002), Barbuto and Wheeler (2006),
Liden, Wayne, Zhao and Henderson (2008), Sendjaya, Sarros and Santora (2008)
and van Dierendonck and Nuijten (2011). Unfortunately, this phase saw the creation
of various characteristics (Coetzer et al., 2017; Spears, 1995), virtues (Covey, 1997;
Patterson, 2003; Spears & Lawrence, 2002), dimensions (Buchen, 1998; Sendjaya et
al., 2008), attributes (Robert F. Russell, 2003a) and functions (Coetzer et al., 2017)
that differed or failed to mutually support each other. While most measurement tools
were conceptually sound, they lacked a methodology for application or development
(Parris et al., 2013) and used terms that were often difficult to differentiate or
delineate between the different models.

The third and current stage has explored antecedents, mediators and
boundary conditions of servant leadership. Consistent with the idea that servant
leader development requires internal or spiritual transformation, research found core
self-evaluation (Flynn et al., 2016) and mindfulness (Verdorfer, 2016) act as
antecedents. Research has also found leaders who are high in agreeableness and
low in extraversion (Hunter et al., 2013) and narcissism (Peterson et al., 2012) are
more likely to be servant leaders.

Other factors may also influence servant leader development. Some studies
suggest gender (measured as a dichotomy) may have some impact on servant
leadership as females scored higher in aspects of servant leadership (C. D. Beck,
2014; Fridell et al., 2009; Xu et al., 2015), but results are not replicated in other
studies (Diehl, 2015; Dimitrova, 2008; Rennaker, 2008; Rohm, 2013; T. A. Taylor,
2002; Ward, 2017) and even contradicted (Farmer, 2010; Politis & Politis, 2018).
Similarly, some studies found ethnic culture influenced how servant leadership is
understood or applied (Bagacean, 2016; Hale & Fields, 2007; Hamilton & Bean,

10
2005; Irving, 2014; Whorton, 2014), but this was less influential in others (Carroll,
2013; Van Dierendonck et al., 2017; van Dierendonck & Nuijten, 2011). Molnar
(2007) superimposed Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions on Laub’s Organizational
Leadership Assessment (OLA) to create the Servant Leadership Index and then
argued elements of servant leadership are consistently present across most cultures.
While research results are mixed, research suggests consideration should be given
to possible variations caused by personality, gender and culture.

Research also explored how culture may influence servant leadership in

Aotearoa-New Zealand. The GLOBE cultural comparison of leadership broadly
compared New Zealand culture to other cultures by bundling Aotearoa-New Zealand
with Australia, United Kingdom (UK) and the US (House, 2005). While some groups
in New Zealand may exhibit cultural similarities to the Anglosphere, Pfeifer (2005)
argued this approach under-represented Māori peoples and did not consider cultural
variations among New Zealanders. Pfeifer (2005) subsequently compared Māori and
non-Māori leaders and found Māori leaders were perceived as exhibiting more
humane-orientation, self-protective, charismatic/value-based and team-orientated
behaviour and required modesty and patience in Māori communal decision-making.
While servant leadership may have cross-cultural application, consideration should
also be given to variations between ethnic groups in Aotearoa-New Zealand. As
religion or spirituality may be one aspect of culture (P. Norris & Inglehart, 2011), the
spirituality of aspiring leaders may influence their development as servant leaders.

A challenge in all three stages has been defining servant leadership—a

reflection that servant leadership is a philosophy or journey without a defined or
prescribed destination and one that changes in, and between, individuals throughout
life (Greenleaf, 1977; Spears, 1995). This has meant the concept has been
somewhat confusing (B. A. Foster, 2000) with much research being anecdotal (Parris
et al., 2013; van Dierendonck, 2011), lacking in theoretical conception, and revealing
some disparities with empirical research (Yukl, 2013). Based on a systematic review
of the literature on servant leadership, Eva et al. (2018) offer the following definition
of servant leadership: “an (1) other-oriented approach to leadership (2) manifested
through one-on-one prioritizing of follower individual needs and interests, (3) and
outward reorienting of their concern for self towards concern for others within the
organization and the larger community”. This highlights the three components of
motive, mode, and mindset of the leaders as being distinctive from other styles of
leadership.

11
2.3. Servant leadership and spirituality

To analyse spiritual development within servant leader development requires

an appropriate framework with empirical support. Eva et al. (2018) evaluated different
servant leadership measures against a framework derived from DeVillis (2016) and
Hinkin (1995, 1998) that used item generation, content and adequacy assessment,
questionnaire administration, factor analysis, internal consistency assessment,
construct validity and replication as criteria. The most robust and empirically
supported measures were the SL-7 (Liden et al., 2008), SLBS (Sendjaya et al., 2008)
and the SLS (van Dierendonck & Nuijten, 2011). They further summarised that the
SLS seeks to operationalise “the leader-side and servant-side” (Robin & Sendjaya,
2018; Van Dierendonck et al., 2017; van Dierendonck, 2011), the SL-7 best
emphasised community (Liden et al., 2008, 2015) and the SLBS most holistically
emphasised spirituality (Robin & Sendjaya, 2018; Sendjaya et al., 2008).

As the present study explored spiritual development within servant leader

development, the conceptual framework of the SLBS was adopted as a focus. The
SLBS emerged during the second phase of conceptual servant leader development
which enabled it to draw from and integrate previous concepts and models. It also
emerged at the ‘tipping point’ of servant leader research in 2008 (Eva et al., 2018),
allowing it to inform the later influx in servant leadership research. A key benefit of
the SLBS is its holistic approach to measuring the follower-oriented aspects of
service, spirituality, and moral-ethical behaviours (Sendjaya et al., 2008). Sendjaya et
al. (2008) also considered the process of the development of servant leadership by
factoring in both the means and ends of servant leadership. Subsequent studies
confirmed the validity of the SLBS measures and the inclusion of spirituality as a
dimensions of servant leadership (Sendjaya et al., 2017). A description of the
associated servant leader dimensions of voluntary subordination, transforming
influence, covenantal relationships, responsible morality, authentic self and
transcendental spirituality, their relationship to spirituality and a summary of how they
may develop is provided below.

2.3.1. Transcendental spirituality

Transcendental spirituality aims to foster a holistic life that combines service

and meaning (Sendjaya et al., 2008) by connecting personal experiences of a sacred
dimension. Transcendent spirituality refers to one’s relationship to God or a higher

12
power that may occur within or outside of religion. Spirituality also encompasses
interconnectedness and wholeness that may be expressed through a holistic,
integrated workplace or a work-life balance (Robin & Sendjaya, 2018; Sendjaya et
al., 2008). As a result of this understanding, spirituality may positively connect with a
calling or sense of mission in life (Issa & Pick, 2011; Robin & Sendjaya, 2018) and
service (Fry, 2003). Sendjaya, et al. (2008) also recognise that religiousness may
reflect these elements and include this as a sub-dimension of transcendental
spirituality. While servant leaders may not be religious, they are likely to reflect some
dimensions of spirituality.

Spirituality may develop within or outside faith communities. Development

may include mentoring, training/instruction (Griffin, 2012) and application of spiritual
practices with support from a religious community (Ashley, 2016; L. C. Foster, 2014).
In the Christian paradigm, this may also include support from the Holy Spirit (2014) or
Scripture reading and meditation (Ashley, 2016). Outside of Christianity, there is a
growing interest within servant leadership literature in self-awareness and
mindfulness training as it may emphasise collectivist ethical values, build character
and support the inner journey of the leader (Verdorfer, 2016). The application of
spiritual practices to develop transcendent spirituality is contingent on various factors
including the spiritual preference of the aspiring leaders, their religious or spiritual
traditions and level of religiosity or spirituality.

2.3.2. Covenantal relationship

Covenantal relationship refers to the leader-follower interactions of

acceptance, availability, equality and collaboration by having shared values, open-
ended commitment, mutual trust, and concern for the welfare of the other party
(Sendjaya et al., 2008). Others also note how servant leader relationships involve
listening (Coetzer et al., 2017; Focht, 2011; R. F. Russell & Stone, 2002; van
Dierendonck, 2011; B. Winston & Fields, 2015), empathising (Focht, 2011; Lenz &
Bottum, 1998; Robert F. Russell & A. Gregory Stone, 2002; Sipe & Frick, 2009;
Spears, 1995) and ‘seeing the world through the eyes of others’ (C. D. Beck, 2014).
Studies have found servant leader values and develops strong interpersonal
relationships within the context of work-based relationships (Dixon, 2013; Walumbwa
et al., 2010), teacher-student relationships (Black, 2010; Herndon, 2007; Pattison,
2010; Powles, 2016) and church-based relationships (Amaral, 2007; Dillman, 2004;
Rude, 2005; Wayne, 2009).

13
 Covenantal relationships may reflect spirituality in their intention for
transcendent connectedness and through the conduct of the interpersonal
relationship (Boyatzis, 2012) that create genuine and lasting leader-follower
relationships. This type of covenantal relationships develops relational tolerance “not
easily stretched to breaking point or threatened by disagreement or conflict”
(Sendjaya et al., 2008). In forming covenantal relationship, servant leaders must
have a level of awareness (Kiersch & Peters, 2017; Kinsler, 2014) that may be
develop through mindfulness within religious or non-religious contexts. Mindfulness is
“being attentive to and aware of what is taking place in the present” (K. W. Brown &
Ryan, 2012) and has been shown to lower levels of emotional disturbance and
increase levels of subjective and eudemonic wellbeing (K. W. Brown & Ryan, 2012).
Aspects of covenantal relationship such as empathy may also develop through
service-learning (Everhart, 2016) and mentoring/modelling (Boyum, 2012).

2.3.3. Authentic self

As an extension of their sense of ‘being’ (Sendjaya & Sarros, 2002) or ‘true

self’ (van Dierendonck & Nuijten, 2011), servant leaders lead with humility, integrity,
accountability, security and vulnerability (Sendjaya et al., 2008). Authenticity reflects
a synchronous relationship between what we believe and how we act both personally
and professionally (Gibbs, 2007) or ‘integrity’; a word deriving from the Latin ‘integer’
and meaning ‘whole’ or ‘complete’ (Cambridge University Press, 2018). The concept
derives from the Greek aphorism “Know Thyself” inscribed on the Temple of Apollo at
Delphi (Parke & Wormell, 2004) and is included in numerous servant leadership
models (Coetzer et al., 2017; Focht, 2011; Patterson, 2003; van Dierendonck &
Nuijten, 2011; van Dierendonck, 2011). Living with authenticity may be implicit in the
Buddhist practices of meditation and mindfulness (Friedman et al., 2012) and
Christian practice of repentance as adherents seek to align their behaviour to their
discerned will of God (Pargament & Mahoney, 2005).

Authenticity is not easily taught and cannot be trained. Instead, humility and
authenticity emerge through self-awareness of personal strengths and weaknesses,
learned preferences and impact on others in interpersonal (Kernis & Goldman, 2006;
Cynthia Denise McCauley et al., 2010), intra-relational and trans-relational contexts
(Gibbs, 2007). This requires an “active, continuous disposition to examine [oneself]
and [their] actions and to listen to others when they can give [them] information about

14
[oneself]” (Argandona, 2015, p. 64; Elliott, 2010). Development of authenticity
requires reflection and listening to self and others and potentially a higher being.

2.3.4. Transforming influence

Transforming influence captures how servant leaders develop others

emotionally, intellectually, socially, and spiritually through vision, modelling,
mentoring, trust and empowerment (Sendjaya et al., 2008). This development starts
with self (Focht, 2011) and, despite potential adversity (Lenz & Bottum, 1998),
commits to the growth, enrichment and development of people (Batten, 1998; Laub,
1999; Spears, 1995). Servant leaders translate development intentions into
empowering strategies and structures by “encouraging and facilitating others,
especially immediate followers, in identifying and solving problems, as well as
determining when and how to complete work tasks” (Liden et al., 2014).

Transforming influence shares characteristics with spiritual development in

that both seek multi-dimensional development. Christ called His followers through the
Great Commission to be a transforming influence in teaching others “to observe all
things that I have commanded you” (Matthew 28:20)—a command that includes
spiritual practices, moral virtues and personal behaviours—and more. Similar forms
of training, development or discipleship also occur across religions including
Judaism, Islam and Buddhism (Al-Haqqani & Kabbani, 2002; Piker, 1987).

Development as a transforming influence may occur formally or informally

using structured or unstructured techniques. Informal development may include
pioneering, modelling and mentoring (Ashley, 2016; Boyum, 2012; Eva, 2009) based
on trust and accountability (S. L. Norris, 2015). Formal development may also include
teaching, executive coaching (Liden et al., 2008; R. F. Russell & Stone, 2002;
Sendjaya et al., 2008) and structured feedback, such as a 360-degree survey (D. V.
Day et al., 2014). Transforming influence may also develop through forms of
experiential learning such as college captaincy or involvement in various education
committees (Eva, 2009).

2.3.5. Responsible morality

Sendjaya, et al. (2008) defined responsible morality as both moral reasoning

and action. This means decisions are “morally legitimised, thoughtfully reasoned, and
ethically justified” (Sendjaya, 2005) by a person of character with moral authority

15
(Sipe & Frick, 2009). Greenleaf (1970) further believed the moral servant leader
exhibits foresight and intuition so outcomes seek to benefit others. Moral reasoning
involves understanding universal moral principles and being able to think beyond 'the
rules' and to see the consequences of actions (Rest et al., 2014). Hess (2013)
sought a universal morality by harmonising servant leadership and religion through
the Golden Rule – a seemingly ‘natural law’ (Blackburn, 2003) that seeks to “do as
you would be done by” (Matthew 7:12). Kurth (2010) similarly argued that service
was implicit in all major religions and non-religious philosophies. While the Golden
Rule may be a moral basis for the religious and non-religious, Rost (1993) argued
that there is no recognised universal moral principle or ‘natural law’ so there can be
no universal basis for moral reasoning. Servant leaders must operate with a moral
dimension which finds root in widely recognised human moral principles; although
these will vary between individuals based on their sense of morality.

In describing responsible action, Sendjaya et al. (2002) drew from the New
Testament concept of ‘steward’ and its root ‘oikonomia’ to describe the servant
leader as an overseer and agent responsible for the well-being of their community
and resources on behalf of their master (Barbuto & Wheeler, 2006; Block, 1993;
Coetzer et al., 2017; R. F. Russell & Stone, 2002; van Dierendonck & Nuijten, 2011).
Jesus referred to stewards in the parables of the Minae (Luke 19:12-27), Talents
(Matthew 25:14-30), and Wicked Husbandmen (Matthew 21:33-46) with the message
that disciples must minister as stewards in His absence – a concept Paul reiterates in
Titus 1:7. In practical terms, stewards consider shareholder and stakeholder
outcomes, including environmental and socio-cultural outcomes (van Dierendonck,
2011). The spiritual roots of stewardship reflect how servant leaders act with
responsible morality.

While morality may be a dimension of servant leader development, Eva and

Sendjaya (2013) found moral development has been historically downplayed in
Australian youth leader development programmes and leader development up to the
Global Financial Crisis (Robin & Sendjaya, 2018). Eva (2009) proposed debates
between learners as a development tool to encourage learners to consider the moral
implications of their actions in real-world contexts. Consistent in moral servant leader
development appears to be analysis of morality through critical thinking and broad
discussion facilitated by mentors (Ashley, 2016; Boyum, 2012) or project groups
(Cress et al., 2001) or in a community or class (Eva, 2009).

16
2.3.6. Voluntary subordination

The dimension of voluntary subordination is based on ‘being a servant’ (i.e.

motive) and ‘acts of service’ (i.e. actions) (Sendjaya et al., 2008). While ‘service’ is
broadly associated with leadership (Covey, 1997; De Pree, 1997; Fairholm, 1997;
Ford, 1991; Kouzes & Posner, 1993; Nair, 1997), Greenleaf epitomised ‘being a
servant’ by referring to ‘servant’ before ‘leader’. This positioned service as a servant
leadership prerequisite (Liden et al., 2008). Through serving, servant leaders find a
sense of meaning, purpose and way of life or privilege (Walker, 2003), expresses
love (Block, 1993; Coetzer et al., 2017; Patterson, 2003; B. E. Winston, 2002) and
makes voluntary sacrifices (B. Winston & Fields, 2015) at a risk or cost to the giver
(Kaplan, 2000).

Voluntary subordination expresses spirituality in several ways. Firstly, it

demonstrates humility by avoiding status (Barbuto & Wheeler, 2006; De Young,
2000; Patterson, 2003). Secondly, it seeks to serve regardless of the nature, person
or mood of the servant leader (Sendjaya et al., 2008). Boyum (2012, p. 186) found
"the innate nature of serving others was informed or justified by a common spiritual
ideology promoting human value and dignity"; a value and dignity Graham (1991)
believed required spiritual insight and humility (Sendjaya & Sarros, 2002). Kirkpatrick
(1988) and Russell (2003b) refer to this as a form of “practical theology” and Barbuto
and Wheeler (2006) call this an ‘altruistic calling’. Serving, as a servant leader, is a
spiritual act that transforms spiritual beliefs into practical action.

Two conventional approaches often applied to develop voluntary

subordination are service-learning and volunteering (Cress et al., 2001; Eva, 2009).
Serving-learning may be present in different aspects of programs—core courses (A.
R. Anderson, 2009; Marshall, 2008), extra-curricular components (Cress et al., 2001;
Noll, 2012; Rohm, 2013), capstone experiences (Fields et al., 2015) or elective
courses (Meinecke, 2014). Proponents have argued that service-learning:

• developed courage and humility (Kiersch & Peters, 2017),

• increased citizenship behaviours (Bowen et al., 2009; Hirschinger-Blank &

Markowitz, 2006; Keen & Hall, 2009),

• developed personal, intellectual and interpersonal skills (Hirschinger-

Blank & Markowitz, 2006), and

• increased accountability and empowerment (Snell et al., 2015).

17
Welch and Koth (2009) included service-learning within their spiritual formation
framework, suggesting that service-learning and volunteering may support spiritual
development. Despite promising benefits, studies have found mixed results on the
effectiveness of service-learning in the development of servant leaders (A. R.
Anderson, 2009; Eva, 2009; Fields et al., 2015; Marshall, 2008; Meinecke, 2014;
Noll, 2012; Rohm, 2013; Thompson, 2014).

The relationship of volunteering to voluntary subordination is complex as

volunteering is both a method to develop voluntary subordination and a potential
outcome of voluntary subordination. Volunteerism presents an opportunity for
individuals and organisations to ‘give back’ to society (Boyum, 2012; Charbonneau et
al., 2016; Sundram et al., 2018) through personal or charity initiatives or as a sub-set
of service-learning, project-based learning or organisational citizenship and at a
dyadic or social level. While volunteering is inexplicitly linked to voluntary
subordination, the context and format in which it may occur is varied.

2.4. Servant leader development

Day and Dragoni (2015) delineate between leader and leadership

development. They define leader development as the “expansion of an individual’s
capacity (i.e. human capital) to be effective in leadership roles and processes”. In
contrast, they define leadership development as the building of social capital by
developing multiple individuals relationally in social environments (D. V. Day et al.,
2014). In this thesis, I similarly distinguish between servant leader and servant
leadership; emphasising that the course sought to develop individual servant leaders.

Typically, leader development does not aim for spiritual development but
rather the proximal development of leader competencies–knowledge, skills and
abilities; and development of leader self-views–self-efficacy, leader identity and self-
awareness (D. V. Day & Dragoni, 2015). Development of these dimensions may
occur formally and informally (D. V. Day, 2000; Eva, 2009) through observing and
modelling others, various forms of professional development or through
reinforcement by rewards and punishments (Bandura & Walters, 1976). While these
approaches may lead to proximal or even distal leader development, they are
unlikely to holistically develop all the servant leadership dimensions (Robin &
Sendjaya, 2018) which may require an internal transformation and possible spiritual
development.

18
 Boyum (2012) proposed a model for servant leadership development by
analysing eight self-identified servant leaders within a higher education institutes. In
the resulting model, Boyum (2012) proposed servant leadership develops in four
stages through dyadic interactions between the leader-follower over a prolonged
period. Spirituality was a dimension in each of these stages which Boyum (2012)
derived from the SLBS. Spirituality developed through mentoring or coaching by a
servant leader and through experiential learning of doing and then reflecting to reach
spiritual alignment in stage four where leaders consciously led as mature servant
leaders with a congruency between their faith and actions. The model suggests
spiritual and servant leader development occur concurrently but as the study context
differs to this present study, it is not clear how valid this is in a classroom context.

Eva (2009) identified potential delivery methods and proposed a limited

framework that could support the teaching of the SLBS dimensions (Sendjaya et al.,
2008) through classroom training, leadership initiatives and outcomes. In using the
SLBS framework, Eva incorporated transcendental spirituality as an area of potential
development but then argued for the removal of the dimension so servant leadership
can be better applied in non-denominational settings. For Eva (2009), the outcome of
development in transcendental spirituality in religious adolescents is to understand
they are part of a bigger system–an important but narrow interpretation of
transcendental spirituality. Eva is unclear how broader spirituality could or should
develop in servant leader development.

While tertiary education has demonstrated potential for servant leadership

development, results are mixed. Some studies reported servant leader development
(Ashley, 2016; Bommarito, 2012; Cress et al., 2001; Fields et al., 2015; Griffin, 2012;
Jacobs, 2011; Marshall, 2008; Noll, 2012; Thompson, 2014) while others report
limited or no servant leader development (A. R. Anderson, 2009; Meinecke, 2014;
Rohm, 2013). The different nature of each study makes it difficult to offer a simple
explanation for a discrepancy in the results, suffice to say that studies that applied
quantitative research methods appeared less likely to demonstrate positive servant
leader development than those applying qualitative research methods. It is possible
some positive development occurred in all courses, but qualitative research may
better capture the empathetic-emotional component of development through
interviews, focus groups and observations to articulate how this developed servant
leaders.

19
 Although research from Eva and Sendjaya (2013) has determined the most to
least taught dimensions, it is unclear how spiritual development occurs through
individual servant leader dimensions. Jenkins (2013) found student leadership
development was often discussion-based and occurred in the classroom. This may
be supported by creating a student-centred learning community, experiential learning
and research-grounded continuous improvement (Eich, 2008). Less common
methods appear to be service-learning and skill-building approaches (Kiersch &
Peters, 2017). Evidence suggests servant leader development should include peer-
engagement in a learning community, opportunities for application and feedback to
challenge learner understanding and beliefs.

Yet servant leader development must also consider internal development.

Beck (2014) and Furrow (2015) found strong links between servant leader
development and reflection; suggesting learners should engage in defining servant
leadership, exploring personal behaviours and values and reflecting on outcomes
and results. This is important as dimensions like humility and integrity may not
develop without an “awakening and conversion-like transformation” (Page & Wong,
2000)–a process some argue is long-term (A. R. Anderson, 2009; Meinecke, 2014)
and begins in the family home (S. L. Norris, 2015). This development also must
consider aspects of spiritual practice which are essential to spiritual development and
are linked with some servant leader development (Ashley, 2016; Roane & Newcomb,
2013). These concepts are categorised into mentoring, modelling, reciprocal and
experiential learning and spiritual practice and analysed below.

2.4.1. Reciprocal learning

Reciprocal teaching and learning emphasises the co-construction of

knowledge within the classroom (Gazula et al., 2017; Goldenberg & Iwasiw, 1992). In
the Encyclopedia of the Sciences of Learning, Iserbyt (2012) defined reciprocal
learning to be “an instructional model in which students work in pairs to master
lesson content… [by] cooperat[ing] in well-defined roles of doer and observer”. Yet,
this definition inadequately defines reciprocal learning in New Zealand which is often
associated with the Māori concept of āko (Bishop & Berryman, 2010; Pihama et al.,
2004) and occurs as “a teaching-learning practice [that] involves teachers and
students learning in an interactive, dialogic relationship” (Bishop, 2008). Reciprocal
learning in New Zealand is the outward expression of a reciprocal teacher-student

20
and student-student relationship beyond being a pedagogy tied to pair-work or
doer/observer roles between peers.

The basis of reciprocal relationships within the classroom incorporates

concepts from Freire (1970) who believed facilitators should deemphasis the ‘expert’
(i.e. teacher) and promote egalitarian co-learning relationships between students and
between teacher and students. As the teacher is a facilitator and not ‘transmitter’ of
knowledge, there is an emphasis in reciprocal learning on shared contribution to the
learning of others (Hemara, 2000; Nepe, 1991; Pere, 1982; Pihama et al., 2004).
Reciprocal learning harmonises with the nature of servant leadership by encouraging
decentralised responsibilities, power-sharing and reduced power distance between
teacher-learner through shared dialogue, reflections, discussions and group
activities. Reciprocal learning can also harmonise with spiritual development by
encouraging independent and critical thinking on identity, spirituality and the
transcendent.

While similarities exist between reciprocal learning as applied in this study

and āko, there are potential cultural differences. As Pihama, Smith, Taki and Lee
(2004) noted, “the difficulty in attempting a description of āko is that there is no clear
separation between āko and other Māori cultural concepts”, making āko difficult to
authentically transplant in non-Māori cultures. Pihama et al. (2004) also noted how
āko was a mechanism to encourage the creation, conceptualisation, transmission
and articulation of Mātauranga Māori (Māori knowledge)—an aim supported by, but
largely peripheral to, the present study. Furthermore, as Te Reo Māori (Māori
language) is a “vital strand” in transmitting Mātauranga Māori and inseparable from
forms of Māori pedagogy (Nepe, 1991), some authors argue only through Te Reo
can Māori culture be authentically understood (Mika, 2015; Nepe, 1991). As
international learners do not understand Te Reo and are unfamiliar with Mātauranga
Māori or Māori culture, reciprocal learning best describes the applied pedagogy.

2.4.2. Mentoring

Mentoring is a measurement item used by Sendjaya et al. (2008) in their

dimension of transforming influence and has used to support servant leader
development (Ashley, 2016; Griffin, 2012). Mentoring is also associated with spiritual
development in religious contexts through Christ and the Apostle Paul who followed
previous Judaism discipleship practices (Rock, 2006) and through Buddha and his
disciples (Dhammika, 2005). Campbell, Smith, Dugan and Komives (2012) defined

21
mentoring as an advisory relationship, generally with the mentor having formal,
legitimate, informational or referent power over the mentee. While this definition may
be appropriate in vocational settings, mentoring in a spiritual development context
may emphasise the deepening of personal revelation, insights and understanding (K.
R. Anderson & Reese, 1999). This study defines mentoring as a formal or informal
process between a mentee and one or more mentors in a dyadic or community
setting for personal and/or professional development.

2.4.3. Modelling

Modelling is another measurement item used by Sendjaya et al. (2008) in

their dimension of transforming influence. Modelling occurs through formal or
informal social learning as learners acquire and define acceptable behaviour through
observing social or individual responses to stimuli (De Pree, 2009; McMinn, 2001; R.
F. Russell & Stone, 2002). Modelling may occur both formally through job-shadowing
or informally through social learning between a learner and a perceived expert
(Bandura & Walters, 1976). In the present study, modelling is a form of social
learning that reflects on verbal instructions and live modelling by perceived authority
figures such as parents, teachers or religious figures, or symbolic modelling through
the media or literature. Modelling may further draw meaning from expressions of
spiritual attributes in others such as humility and grace.

2.4.4. Experiential learning

This present study broadly defines experiential learning as ‘learning by doing’.

Literature acknowledges the importance of experience in servant leader development
(McCall, 2004) and servant leaders (Boyum, 2012). However, much of this research
focused on young or inexperienced leaders who developed through reflecting on
structured experiences. Experiential learning encourages “learning through reflection
on doing” (Patrick, 2011), a process that Kolb (2014) divided into four linked stages;
concrete experience, reflective observation, abstract conceptualisation and active
experimentation. Reflection in this study is an element of experiential learning where
a learner reflects on current or previous thoughts, actions and/or experiences.

A common expression of experiential learning is Project-Based Learning,

which is a student-centred, project-based, form of constructivist learning where
learners create real-world solutions by applying contextual knowledge in group
projects. Interest in Project-Based Learning appears to be growing (Jumaat et al.,

22
2017); supported by research showing higher levels of motivation and achievement
in servant leader development (Noll, 2012). The emphasis on a project team means
Project-Based Learning will incorporate aspects of reciprocal learning within the
context of a project.

Service-learning and volunteering are also forms of experiential learning

popular in teaching the notions of service ethics by immersing volunteers in
community development contexts and projects (Marshall, 2008). Volunteering
includes for-profit or not-for-profit, formal or informal settings and volunteer (J. R.
Russell, 2008) or institute-led internships or structured work placements (Fields et al.,
2015). Various studies found service-learning had positive impacts on volunteers
analysis and insight into social issues and cognitive development (Batchelder & Root,
1994; Novak et al., 2007; Shek et al., 2015; Warren, 2013; Yorio & Ye, 2012).
Volunteers are motivated to develop altruism through service to followers, the
community or the organisation (Charbonneau et al., 2016) which may support
spiritual development (Ingman, 2011; Veselský et al., 2013). Service-learning often
occurs within teams and may include elements of reciprocal learning (J. M. Brown &
Schmidt, 2016; Khiatani & Liu, 2019) but is distinct through its community
development context where learners are expected to demonstrate forms of service.

2.4.5. Spiritual practice

Spiritual practices may significantly vary according to the individual or religion.

The College, through their ministry academy, has often aligned spiritual practices
with Foster’s (2018) spiritual disciplines. Foster divides these into inward disciplines
of prayer, fasting, meditation and the study of the Christian life, outward disciplines of
simplicity, solitude, submission, and service and corporate disciplines of confession,
worship, guidance, and celebration. Roane and Newcomb (2013) found prayer, study
of religious texts and participating in religious rituals and supportive faith communities
supported the development of servant leadership in several school principals. The
study suggests aspects of internal, external and corporate disciplines may benefit
servant leader development.

There is also growing support for non-deistic spiritual practices in servant and
authentic leader development through meditation and mindfulness (Kinsler, 2014;
Verdorfer, 2016). Meditation may be considered as a “scaffolding” used to develop
the state, or skill, of mindfulness (Kabat-Zinn, 2016) while mindfulness is “inherently
a state of consciousness” that consciously attends to one’s moment-to-moment

23
experience (Shapiro et al., 2006, p. 374) by intentionally paying attention to oneself
and being open and non-judgemental. While Verdorfer (2016) found mindfulness
fostered humility, standing back and authenticity, the study did not explore how
spiritual practice more broadly supported servant leader development.

2.5. Spirituality and spiritual development

Hill and Pargament (2003) defined spirituality to be “a search for the sacred, a
process through which people seek to discover, hold on to, and, when necessary,
transform whatever they hold sacred in their lives”. This definition has application to
both the religious and non-religious. While a helpful and broadly accepted anchor
point, it is by no means alone as Bregman (2006) identified over 90 definitions of
spirituality. Zinnbauer, Pargament and Scott (1999) also refined the definition by
reducing spirituality into nine content categories: experiences of relationship or
connectedness, processes leading to greater connectedness, behavioural responses
to something sacred or secular, systems of thought or beliefs, traditional institutional
structures, pleasurable states of being, beliefs in the sacred or transcendent,
attempts at or capacities for transcendence and existential questions. A later
extensive literature review by Zinnbauer and Pargament (2005) echoed what was
already obvious – there exists no consensus on a definition of spirituality and how
religion and spirituality differ was still being debated.

While there may be no consensus, there are widely accepted differences

between religion and spirituality in the Anglophile and northern European world.
Religion is often positioned as a sub-set of spirituality and presented as an organised
system of beliefs on the sacred accompanied by rituals, rules and group
endorsement (Friedman et al., 2012) while spirituality is an individualistic quest for
meaning and experience of the transcendent (J. M. Day, 2011; P. Hughes, 2013).
Frisk (2009) differentiated these categories into ‘old’ religion and ‘new’ spirituality by
pointing to the drift from particular to eclectic, dogma to experience, collective to
personal, hierarchical to egalitarian, theological to anthropological and focus on
worldliness in contrast to life after death. The distinction is not always clear or
dichotomous and those who are spiritual may exhibit all or none of the ‘old’ religion in
their ‘new’ spirituality. Like spirituality, spiritual development is not distinct from, and
rarely antithetical to, religion in its various expressions (J. M. Day, 2011).

The demographic trends of Aotearoa-New Zealand indicate a gradual decline

in religion and an emergence of spirituality. The official 2018 census results saw a

24
growth in “no religion” to 48.6% of the population, up from 29% in 1991 and with
“undeclared” accounting for 6.7% of the population (Stats NZ Tatauranga Aotearoa,
2019). In an earlier study with 1,027 responses, Vaccarino, Kavan and Gendall
(2011) found up to 50% of respondents claimed some belief in God, but an additional
30.5% agreed with the statement “I don’t follow a religion, but am a spiritual person
interested in the sacred/supernatural”. As a result, Vaccarino et al. (2011) concluded
approximately one-third of New Zealanders are religious and spiritual, one-third of
New Zealanders are spiritual but not religious and one-third of New Zealanders are
neither religious or spiritual. The data also showed that the growth in those identifying
as spiritual in New Zealand is matched by an increase in religious and spiritual
experiences (Vaccarino et al., 2011). Spirituality has also been recognised more
broadly in New Zealand society through Mason Durie’s Te Whare Tapa Wha model
of well-being (Durie, 1998), which draws from Māori concepts of spirituality, being
taught in all New Zealand state schools and professional healthcare undergraduate
courses (Egan & Johnson-Bogaerts, 2020). Results suggest a gradual movement
away from organised religion towards spirituality – including expressions of Māori
and ecological spirituality where spirituality can be associated with the sacredness or
connection to the land.

Spiritual development has also become more popular in fields such as

psychology as research supports the benefits of spirituality. Spirituality has been
broadly linked to higher levels of mental and physical health in adolescents (Benson
& King, 2006; Elmer et al., 2003) and factors of ‘thriving’ including volunteerism and
service, school success, positive identity formation, and life satisfaction (Benson,
Roehlkepartain, et al., 2012). Religious participation is also negatively correlated with
alcohol and other drug use, crime, violence and delinquency, depression, risk-taking
and sexual behaviour (Scales et al., 2014). Day (2011) concluded:

In multifactorial assessments across thousands of subjects and a broad

array of cultural settings, religious beliefs and commitments, as well as
belonging to a religious community, are also predictors, perhaps even
the best predictors, of life satisfaction and a sense of well-being in
adulthood, a sense of personal efficacy and control, and successful
coping with life difficulties.

This suggests aspiring servant leaders may benefit in various dimensions of life from
spiritual development.

Applying a spiritual development framework appropriate for the purposes of

the present study has not been straightforward. A potential spiritual development

25
framework must include behavioural, moral, religious, emotional, transcendent and
spiritual dimensions—aspects often shared with servant leader development. The
definition applied in this study comes from Benson, Roehlkepartain and Rude (2003,
pp. 205–206) who define spiritual development as:

“The process of growing the intrinsic human capacity for self-

transcendence, in which the self is embedded in something greater than
the self, including the sacred. It is the developmental “engine” that
propels the search for connectedness, meaning, purpose and
contribution. It is shaped both within and outside of religious traditions,
beliefs and practices”.

A basis for spiritual development is evident in Eastern and Western religious

traditions such as the Buddha’s ‘eightfold path’ or works from Thomas Aquinas or
Saint John of the Cross. Later and more complex models may be based on
psychological and/or neurobiological evidence but have often been generalised to
mainstream spirituality (Friedman et al., 2012). Furthermore, some view spiritual
development as varying widely amongst individuals, while others believe
development is widely invariant with everyone progressing through the same stages
at a similar rate (Friedman et al., 2012). Benson, Roehlkepartain and Rude argued
the process is progressive, but not linear—allowing different groups to converge
towards similar patterns of adaption and result in positive or negative cognitive,
affective, physical and social outcomes. Their approach to date appears the most
supported as they developed a draft Comprehensive Theory of Spiritual
Development based on over 100 measures of spiritual development, then sought
consultation to refine their model which they later introduced as the Spiritual
Development Framework (SDF). While not everyone will engage spiritually, Benson
et al. (2012) found 64% of the 6,725 youth and young adult respondents in eight
countries experienced moderate or high levels of religious or spiritual development
within the past three years despite many reporting they were not religious or did not
have active engagement in explicitly religious or spiritual practices. Unfortunately,
Aotearoa-New Zealand was not included and the inclusion of Cameroon, India,
Thailand and the US with their higher levels of structured religion are likely to
positively skew results. Clayton‑Jones, Haglund, Schaefer, Koenig and Dalmida
(2019) later found the measure to be cross-culturally and methodologically applicable
in health contexts. While there is cross-cultural support for the SDF, there has been a
lack of application within a New Zealand context.

A challenge confronting any spiritual development framework is the personal

rejection of religion by many social scientists who believe spirituality is discretionary

26
(Wulff, 1997) and that science trades in ‘facts’ while religion (and to some extent
spirituality) trade in faith (S. L. Jones, 1994). However, there is growing acceptance
of spirituality as a form of positive psychology (Benson, Scales, et al., 2012) with
biological (Hay et al., 2006) or neurochemical (Grigorenko, 2012) support. Growing
interest in spirituality has increased the value of research in spiritual development.

The development of a comprehensive or overarching spiritual development

model requires underpinning theories rooted in human development and covering the
full ‘terrain of life’. Benson (2005) initially proposed an architecture of eight ‘girders’ of
‘myths, narratives and interpretative frameworks’, ‘meaning, purpose, obligation and
contribution’, ‘culture’, ‘social context’, ’the person’, ‘the bidirectional nature of
creating and inheriting’, ‘time’ and ‘significant life experiences’. These concepts were
brought together in the Comprehensive Theory of Spiritual Development where
spiritual development occurred through multiple bi-directional interactions between
the person and the various elements of their social and cultural context over time.

Unfortunately, aspects of this initial architecture were under-developed. The

notions of culture and society were treated almost as synonymous and the process of
spiritual development remained unclear. Benson (2005) described myths, narratives,
and interpretative frameworks as the ‘stuff’ of spiritual development, but it was still
unclear what developed—possibly because of the ambiguous nature of spirituality
and lack of agreed definition. Another challenge was the model inadequately
described how this occurred, with no explicit references to spiritual practices or the
possibility of partial development. A final challenge was the ‘why’; with Benson (2005)
arguing spiritual development seeks to discover what is “good, important and real”
about self, reality and the world. However, spiritual development is not just
cognitive—it more broadly impacts how people live. Browning and Copper (2004)
more holistically argued spiritual development creates an “order to life” religiously,
spiritually or through modern psychology, something Benson (2005) believed
occurred through ordering, myth-making or self-transcendence. Spiritual
development seeks meaning and purpose through various forms.

An updated model for spiritual development sought to address noted

shortcomings (Benson & Roehlkepartain, 2008) and refined the outcomes to
acknowledge spiritual development as either healthy or harmful. The model moved
from the ‘person’ to the human ‘spirit’. It recognises spiritual development as an
exploration of what it means to be ‘human’, captured by ‘awareness or awakening’,
‘interconnectedness and belonging’ and resulting in a ‘way of life’. Informing

27
 development are social and cultural influences (represented separately) and meta-
narratives such as Scripture or stories that exert influence over time. While better
capturing the ‘essence’ of spiritual development, Benson et al. (2008) still presented
the model as a draft requiring further feedback.

An updated model from Benson, Scales Syvertson and Roehlkepartain (2012)

in the SDF, positioned spiritual development as

“the dynamic and active process by which persons go about the ‘work’
of the development process, and in doing, learn from, utilise, integrate,
change, create, actively reject or ignore ‘engagement’ influences. The
development processes and engagement intersect for some people,
but not all” (Benson, Scales, et al., 2012).

Awareness, connection, and way of living were retained as development processes

influenced by engagement influences of apprehension of transcendence,
religious/spiritual practice and identity (see Figure 2-1: Spiritual Development
Framework).

Figure 2-1: Spiritual Development Framework

Identity Religious/Spiritual
Religious identity practice and action
Spiritual identity Religious practices
Family, school, peers, media, culture, society

Spiritual practices
Spiritual experiences
Connection
Prosocial connection with
Social Contexts

others

Way of Living
Alignment of values/actions

Awareness Apprehension of
Mindfulness
Discovering meaning
Transcendence
Apprehension of God/Force

Integration over time

Scales, et al. (2014) further defined these development processes.

Awareness is the awakening of one’s true spirit or essence to self and the world or a

28
sense of awe where one becomes aware of the beauty, majesty or wonder of the
universe. Connection or belongingness recognises how life is interconnected and
interdependent. A way of living draws from philosophical, spiritual, cultural and
religious traditions and seeks to develop a life orientation by finding meaning or
contributing to the world. Spiritual development occurs through the growth of one or
more of these development processes.

2.6. Spiritual development in servant leader development

The concepts of servant leader and spiritual development are

complementary. The dimensions of transcendental spirituality and transforming
influence by Sendjaya, et al. (2008) show overlap between servant leadership and
spiritual development. Herman (2008) also found servant leader organisations were
more likely to exhibit higher levels of workplace spirituality. Furthermore, as spiritual
and servant leader development aim to holistically develop leader capacity for self-
transcendence, they encourage similar development. This research will use
recognised models in the form of the SLBS and SDF to explore how spiritual
development can contribute to servant leader development.

To better understand how spiritual development occurred, I propose four sub-

questions. The first sub-question explores the nature of spiritual development where
learners are likely to reflect on current and previous experiences and may be
informed by class discussions of servant leadership and spirituality. As spiritual
practice is a development method and also an engagement influence, I treat this in
Chapter Four as an engagement influence. I propose:

Sub-Question 1: Within the context of The Servant as Leader course, how did
spiritual development relate to/inform servant leader development?

The remaining three sub-questions explore how spiritual development

occurred as framed by Benson, et al. (2012). Commonalities between spiritual and
servant leader development means SLBS dimensions are likely to emerge within the
SDF framework. Development of authentic self will likely extend from a sense of
‘being’ to create a life orientation. In developing interpersonal relationships with
peers, I expect some learners to develop covenantal relationship which will shape
their personal and collective identity and potentially influence their collective spiritual
practices and apprehension of transcendent. In expressing their sense of ‘being’,

29
learners are likely to express voluntary subordination, transforming influence and
responsible morality as a way of life. These related sub-questions are:

Sub-Question 2: How did development of spiritual awareness, as defined by the

Spiritual Development Framework, contribute to servant leader development?

Sub-Question 3: How did development of connection, as defined by the Spiritual

Development Framework, contribute to servant leader development?

Sub-Question 4: How did development of a way of living, as defined by the Spiritual

Development Framework, contribute to servant leader development?

2.7. Chapter summary

This chapter defined and explored servant leadership, the development of

servant leaders, spirituality and spiritual development. Based on the SLBS
framework, servant leadership was characterised by the dimensions of voluntary
subordination, transforming influence, covenantal relationship, responsible morality,
authentic self and transcendental spirituality. Spiritual development emphasises
development of awareness, connections and way of living through the engagement
influences of apprehension of transcendence, religious/spiritual practices and identity
over time and within a social context. There is limited research exploring the
development of either servant leadership or spiritual development in Aotearoa-New
Zealand and there are gaps in servant leadership literature regarding the
development of multi-ethnic, multi-faith learners in a secular tertiary context.

The chapter also explored some nuances of the College and Aotearoa-New
Zealand to understand how this may influence servant leader development. Key
leader development methods supporting servant leader and spiritual development
include mentoring and modelling, reciprocal and experiential learning and spiritual
practice. This present study explores current literature gaps by applying the Spiritual
Development Framework proposed by Benson et al. (2012) to identify how aspiring
servant leaders develop spiritually within a servant leader course in Aotearoa-New
Zealand to guide future College courses and servant leadership development.

30
Chapter 3. Research methodology

The study explored spiritual development in learners through a tertiary

servant leader course. Sections 3.1 and 3.2 explore the research philosophy and
questions. Section 3.3 describes how research honours the principles embedded in
Te Tiriti o Waitangi, the founding document of Aotearoa, by including partnership and
participation. Sections 3.4 and 3.5 detail the development of The Servant as Leader
course and recruitment of learners. Section 3.6 considers my personal positioning in
the study and the management of research ethics. Section 3.7 describes the
research instruments and analysis processes.

3.1. Research philosophy and method

The ontological basis of this study is rooted in social constructivism which

posits that people are, by nature, social actors who express themselves through
social interactions and shared language to socially construct society (Charmaz, 1980,
p. 25; Charon, 2010). This process occurs within the classroom through all the ways
the learning of language and behaviours occurs, including scaffolding of learners
(Sawyer, 2006), reciprocal teaching (Palincsar & Brown, 1984), a community of
learners (A. L. Brown & Campione, 1998) and project-based learning (Jumaat et al.,
2017). This meant I sought to encourage learning through facilitator-learner, learner-
learner and learner-facilitator interactions and assessments that drew on real-world
scenarios and cases, reflection or experience (Jonassen, 1994). Social
constructivism is also implicit in the SDF where spiritual development occurs socially
through bi-directional interactions with a shared language (Benson, 2005).

To best capture how various social influences inside and outside shaped
development, I used a case study approach that identified and analysed themes by
learners and across learners. My case study approach applied a ‘gaps and holes’
research design (Eisenhardt, 1989; Eisenhardt & Graebner, 2007; Ridder, 2017; Yin,
2011) that began with an existing theory (i.e. the SDF), proposition (i.e. learners will
develop aspects of spirituality) and framework (i.e. The Servant as Leader course
and the SDF model). The analysis identified cross-case patterns by triangulating
evidence and presenting results through detailed descriptions of learner accounts to
better understand how development occurred.

31
 In structuring the study, I drew from aspects of Grounded Theory as this
provided a prescriptive methodology to support the analysis of results (Glaser &
Strauss, 2017). I applied a Straussian approach with structured questions,
conceptual descriptions and an inductive-deductive method (Glaser & Strauss,
2017). Research started with indeterminate and open-ended questions and applied
methodological tools to answer theoretical and empirical questions during the
research process (Charmaz, 2014). I continued to evolve the initial research question
as I undertook the literature review and evidence emerged. This approach meant the
study focus evolved from servant leader development to spiritual development within
servant leader development as I applied an intrinsic and subjective social process
(Charmaz, 2014) through constantly comparing and contrasting codes against each
other to reach clarity (Patton, 1990).

Although I collected evidence through various methods, interviews emerged

as the predominant form of evidence. Additional evidence from recordings of
activities, presentations, reflections, and individual and class discussions provide
supplementary evidence. The on-going analysis led to new categories and concepts
emerging that warranted further investigation. Following the advice of Charmaz
(2015), I used general concepts as a point of departure by preparing interview
questions and reflection questions for students and adapted these as new themes
and patterns emerged from the evidence.

3.2. Research questions

The overarching research question is “how can spiritual development

contribute to servant leader development, as defined by the Servant Leadership
Behavioural Survey, in learners of diverse ethnic and religious backgrounds, as
demonstrated in a tertiary servant leader course in Aotearoa-New Zealand” In
answering this question, I proposed four sub-questions:

1. Within the context of The Servant as Leader course, how did spiritual
development relate to/inform servant leader development?

2. How did development of spiritual awareness, as defined by the Spiritual

Development Framework, contribute to servant leader development?

3. How did development of connection, as defined by the Spiritual Development

Framework, contribute to servant leader development?

32
 4. How did development of a way of living, as defined by the Spiritual
Development Framework, contribute to servant leader development?

The SDF model was selected as an overall framework for conceiving the
study (Clayton-Jones et al., 2019), as it encouraged religious and non-religious
spirituality and was not tied to a specific stage or age of development. The SLBS was
used as a framework for analysing spiritual development in servant leader
development as it was found to have strong empirical support and best integrated
and highlighted spirituality within servant leadership.

3.3. Consultation with Māori

A key milestone in New Zealand history and education was the signing of the
Treaty of Waitangi in 1840 which established the treaty-partnership between Māori
and the Crown in Aotearoa-New Zealand. From this partnership, the 1988 Royal
Commission on Social Policy suggested three principles relevant for education –
partnership, protection and participation (Bishop & Glynn, 2003). As a result,
research and education initiatives in New Zealand are expected to demonstrate a
commitment to ensuring research is responsive to the diverse needs and interests of
Māori and includes Māori in the decision-making and planning.

This present study sought Māori involvement within the course design,
development and delivery. To guide Māori interests, an advisory panel was created
composed of recognised educators proficient in Māori culture and pedagogy.
Selection considered connections with Māori communities, experience in teaching
Māori and qualifications. For practical reasons, the selection process biased staff
within the Auckland greater region. Panel members were:

• Dr Huhana Forsyth. Huhana is a Māori education advisor and holds a

Master and Doctoral thesis in āta and āko. She previously taught in a
post-graduate education programme.

• Dr Gary Leaf. Gary is a Senior Lecturer at a wananga and holds a Master

and Doctoral qualification in Māori education. Gary is well-known in his
work with Māori groups and in teaching Te Reo Māori.

• Dr Kuni Jenkins. Kuni is a professor at a wananga and teaches and

researches about Māori education. Kuni is recognised for her work on
understanding relationships between Māori and Pākehā.

The Māori advisory panel formally met once to review the proposed course design
and delivery methods and recommended Dr Gary Leaf and Dr Huhana Forsyth

33
present content on Māori culture and the weekly karakia, whakataukī and pūrākau.
Separate meetings confirmed delivery content and details. Due to busy work
schedules, a Māori staff member took over from week six until the course conclusion.

3.4. Development of The Servant as Leader course

Course development requires an appropriate vision, purpose, and outcomes

with adequate support from within and outside the College (Zimmerman-Oster &
Burkhardt, 1999). The Servant as Leader course sought ‘constructive alignment’
between the vision, purpose, graduate outcomes, learning outcomes, activities and
assessments (Biggs, 2014; Shuell, 1986; Tyler, 2013). Emphasis was also given to
highlighting the relational nature of servant leadership and building a trusting
community of learners (Elizondo, 2011; E. W. Taylor, 1998) where ideas were
collectively and socially constructed based on prior learner life experiences (Cranton,
2006; Loughlin, 1993) through appropriate assessment, challenge and support
(Cynthia D. McCauley & Van Velsor, 2004). The first fourteen modules covered all
the servant leadership dimensions with the final two modules dedicated to learner
presentations of their servant leader frameworks (see Appendix A: Course
Descriptor). Although modules were planned separately across 18 weeks, public
holidays and other College commitments meant delivery occurred in twelve sessions
with four sessions covering two modules.

Each week unpacked a topic derived from the servant leader dimensions. A
further topic on cultural diversity and Māori constructs was added to support the
development of a community of learners and help learners contextualise servant
leadership to Aotearoa-New Zealand. Each module included the presentation and
discussion of academic literature, class activities, reflections, and a weekly karakia
(prayer), whakataukī (proverb) and pūrākau (story) through a facilitator, learners and
guest speakers.

While I considered formally incorporating project-based or service-learning in

the course, this was impractical as New Zealand legislation requires international
students to study 37.5 hours per week in their primary qualification and work no more
than 20 hours a week. These constraints made it unviable for international students
to undertake significant projects or an internship. Learners were instead encouraged
to reflect on previous vocational or educational experiences. Critical reflection was
taught in the opening weeks to support learner reflections through a written, audio or

34
video format which informed the later creation of servant leadership framework
contextualising and integrating theory, experience and intentions.

The course was reviewed on its proposed content, accuracy and approach by
the College Academic Board and a servant leadership advisory panel. The Academic
Board ensured academic quality and integrity were in keeping with College standards
and requested minor changes to a learning outcome and a stipulation the course
receive no formal recognition. The servant leadership advisory panel was selected
based on their education, experience and familiarity with servant leadership.
Members were:

• Dr Ian Jagelman. Ian formerly pastored a Sydney mega-church and was a

partner in PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC). Ian holds a doctorate in
leadership and has taught, authored and consulted in leadership.

• Professor Stephen Fogarty. Stephen is the President of Alphacrucis and

completed a doctorate in transformational and servant leadership.

• Dennis Hue. Dennis was a doctoral candidate studying servant leadership

in a Taoist context. Dennis also was a guest lecturer in the course.

The servant leadership advisory panel approved the course design and content
without revision; believing the course was likely to result in transformational learning.

I also sought research ethics approval through two ethics committees: one
appointed by Alphacrucis as a part of the doctoral programme and another by the
College as the research was undertaken within Aotearoa-New Zealand. On
recommendation from these committees, steps were taken to minimise any
perceived or actual conflicts of interest. All staff (including myself) did not and would
not have a direct teacher-student relationship with students and were recruited from
administrator or management roles or were teaching a different business cohort or
academic discipline. As prior staff relationships were unavoidable, the College CEO
was made an independent authority for complaints. There were no complaints.

3.5. Participant selection and recruitment

I followed the advice of Creswell (1998) and Charmaz (2005) who

recommend eight to fifteen participants based on the researcher’s ability to (a) refine
concepts, (b) obtain depth from the data, and (c) define categories and properties of
the categories. Selection sought graduate-level students with a diverse gender, age,
culture, spirituality and leadership experience. Graduate-level students were selected

35
as there were fewer graduate-level servant leader studies and because these
learners were perceived to have more experience and motivation. While the
participants had greater ethnic diversity than would be expected in New Zealand
society, this diversity was perceived to strengthen research by enabling better
comparisons of development similarities and differences. Learners had to:

1. Show interest in servant leadership by volunteering for the course, and

2. Agree to study terms and conditions, and

3. Be enrolled in a graduate business or management programme, with

4. Two or more terms of study remaining, or

5. Meet conditions 1 and 2 and be employed by the College.

Advertising clearly articulated expected learner contributions, selection criteria and

that no incentives or credit were provided. Applicant motivations were also analysed
by asking applicants their intentions and intended learning outcomes during the first
interview to ensure they were willing participants. Learners were provided with
contact details for Dr Gary Leaf (Māori advisor), Dr Huhana Forsyth (onsite
supervisor) and the CEO, and completed consent forms before starting.

A total of 15 applicants were accepted but three students choose to exit after
the first week citing excessive workloads. Table 3-1 shows the learner breakdown of
the final group of four staff and eight students. Appendix B: Development journey of
aspiring servant leaders contains a summary of each learner and their development.

Table 3-1 Learner information

Descriptor Attribute Number of Participants
Gender Male 5
Female 7
Age 20 – 29 4
30 – 39 5
> 40 3
Nationality India 1
Philippines 4
Sri Lanka 1
Brazil 3
Mexico 1
Russia 1
United Kingdom 1
Disciplines areas of learner qualifications2 Business 6
Information Technology 2
Education / Teaching 4
Engineering 3

36
 Religious Identity Catholic3 3
Evangelical/Pentecostal1 2
Latter-Day Saints (LDS)1 1
Buddhist 1
Spiritual-but-not-religious 5
1Catholic,
Evangelical/Pentecostal and LDS learners all identified as ‘Christian’. I subsequently refer to the three
groups as ‘Christian’.

3.6. Personal positioning

My qualifications and experience include roles and qualifications in ministry,

education (including course development) and business management across the
Oceania region. As I identify as a non-Māori New Zealander and Australian and have
an inadequate cultural background or connection with Māori communities, I consulted
with recognised Māori experts for their integration into the course. While my teaching
philosophy, beliefs and values reflect my Judeo-Christian background, I did not
attempt to proselytise learners to the Christian faith but encouraged multi-ethnic and
multi-faith diversity in the classroom. I believe teaching is primarily relationship-based
and should celebrate the unique contributions of students, reflected in the course
through cultural and spiritual exploration. Like Greenleaf, I believe servant leadership
is necessary in a secular society and aimed to promote and demonstrate these
values to learners as an aspiring servant leader.

I believe learning is a combination of what is both taught and caught – a

reflection of my belief that learning occurs internally through critical thinking and
externally through assessments that should be dynamic, relevant and contextual to
the learner. Based on these beliefs, I approached the study, curious to understand
what development occurred and how this shaped aspiring servant leaders.
Consistent with my intent to serve students by being a servant leader and teacher, I
modelled servant leadership by critically reflecting on my teaching and conduct under
the guidance of a Māori educator and the Professional Development Manager. In
recognising disparities between intentions and outcomes, I made myself open to
feedback—both positive and negative—to serve learners more effectively.

Various measures were included to support learners in their development.

Class delivery encouraged class participation with learners recognised for ‘stepping
out’ or ‘stepping up’ in their presentations and discussions through class applause.
Each module allocated time to creating and reviewing outcomes, goals and personal
reflections and how the classroom could be a ‘safe’ place for learners to express
culture, stories and opinions. Outside the class, a post-course meal celebrated class

37
achievement, diversity and heritage as learners were encouraged to share elements
of their culture with their peers. Learners were also provided with independent
support if issues emerged or if learners requested further assistance through the
Student Services Manager, who was periodically present in classes. This approach
encouraged both an individual and community approach towards meaning-making
noted earlier in servant leader development by Drarth and Palus (1994). The
emphasis on peer-to-peer learning meant lesson plans were adjusted to include
more discussion time as these sessions were longer than planned.

3.7. Evidence collection and analysis

The key evidence was recorded interviews at the beginning, mid-semester

break and after the course. These three interviews with learners had an introduction,
prepared and impromptu questions based on emerging themes of servant leadership
and a discussion of next steps in conclusion. Initial questions prepared before the
course were amended by adding further questions derived from course content,
literature, personal observations and individual learner reflections. I added additional
questions related to learner development as servant leaders during the interview as
new insights or concepts emerged. Prepared interview questions were made
available in advance to the learners and interviews were held in quiet and convenient
locations. Interviews were audio recorded and all transcripts were kept confidential
by the researcher and shared only with a supervisor.

To support the interview process, I applied recommendations from Charmaz

(2014) in asking open-ended questions, encouraging participants to discuss ‘how’,
‘what’ and ‘when’ of their experiences. Initial interviews were reviewed by a
supervisor, enabling reflection and professional development in interview techniques.
I also applied Charmaz’s recommendations of applying short, active, gerund names
to the codes and later to the categories based on the servant leader dimensions. At
first, data compared similarities and differences across participants and groups,
activities, discussions, interviews and assessments but later compared learners,
actions, concepts and ideas consistent with Glaser’s analytic questions of “what
category or property of a category does this incident indicate?” (Glaser, 1992, p. 39)
and “what is this data a study of?” (Glaser, 1978, p. 56).

Learner reflections and progress were initially monitored through blogs and
vlogs of up to 300 words or five minutes. Guiding reflection questions were provided
across fifteen weeks drawing from weekly content (see Appendix A: Course

38
Descriptor). In practice, reflections overlapped with class discussions and
progressively learners switched to discussing reflections in class. All 12 learners
completed the final presentation of a personal servant leadership framework.

A fundamental purpose of case study research and grounded theory is to consider

meaning-construction, process and action that form through symbolic interactionism.
Evidence collection aimed to understand servant leader development by capturing
and analysing outcomes, outputs and interpersonal interactions that occurred within
the class related to servant leadership (see Table 3-2: Evidence collection).

Table 3-2 Evidence collection

Evidence Timeframe Evidence collection method
Interviews Three interviews held pre-course, Transcribed audio recordings between 15
mid-course and post-course minutes and 2 hours recorded electronically.
Class Weekly Audio recordings, including class reflections
discussions and post-activity analysis.
Reflections Weekly Written notes or audio/video recordings.
Activities Weekly Audio recordings of presentations.
Survey Held in week two Recorded and electronically coded.
Presentations Final weeks of the course PowerPoints emailed before the presentation.
Audio recordings.
Focus group Held with learners who Transcribed audio recording.
completed a shared project
Students were issued a timetable allowing them to attend the class without clashes—
a step that facilitated stronger relationships between students who were also together
in their other classes. When students undertook electives mid-term, most students
(i.e. not staff members) undertook a Project Management elective and were required
to plan, deliver and evaluate a project with four students managing a project with a
local NFP working to create awareness about Auckland homelessness and collect
and donate food. As interviews often referenced this project, I held a focus group with
project team members to explore how this project influenced their individual
development—an accepted practice in case study method (Eisenhardt, 1989).

Evidence was collected and stored securely in accordance with the

requirements of the Alphacrucis College Human Research Ethics Committee
requirements. Files were later moved to a DVD backup for confidential storage by
Alphacrucis College upon study completion for seven years. Learner reflections
submitted online was password-protected before being moved to my computer and
deleted. Audio files were digitally mastered to reduce noise, eliminate clicks and
improve the volume and divided into individual conversations, presentations and
reflections. Approximately 700 individual items of evidence were created, sorted,

39
tagged, coded, categorised and critically analysed to develop twelve learner case
studies. In all, there were over 10,000 code segments and 130 qualitative codes,
some of which were irrelevant or outside the scope of this study.

The analytic coding process started with categories based on servant leader
dimensions and then created in vivo sub-categories that thematically described the
emerging evidence. During this process, I made constant comparisons between
learners and between learner statements made at different times or contexts. I also
maintained field notes and memos, definitions and explanations for categories. This
helped when categories were updated and when comparing codes and categories,
building a case for my claims, brainstorming concepts and ideas, discussing gaps
and noting deviant cases. During the thesis creation, evidence was examined or re-
examined around nine times.

Documents were tagged with attributes of learner, age group, gender,

nationality, educational background, religion, week, visa status, session and
evidence type to enable further analysis. In preparing the case studies, evidence was
validated using testimonials from other participants (where possible) and triangulated
them with other statements made in previous or related sessions. Patton (2002)
acknowledged qualitative research has “no straightforward tests which can be
applied for reliability and validity”, making this dependent on research rigour. The
multiple and overlapping evidence collection methods helped correlate and
corroborate evidence iteratively.

Draft learner profiles were prepared for mid-course and exit interviews and
shared before each interview for learner review—an approach that helped validate
the integrity of the evidence by confirming the learner journey, mitigating personal
bias and prompting questions for interviews. I continued to refine and update these
profiles as further evidence response was collected. The process of continually
revisiting and revising learner profiles meant I stayed ‘close to the data’ and provided
an additional level of quality assurance by having learners confirm the accuracy of
learner profiles.

3.8. Chapter summary

This chapter described the qualitative inductive research approach applied

through case study analysis to analyse the servant leader and spiritual development
of learners in The Servant as Leader course using methods associated with

40
Grounded Theory. The methods chosen sought to capture a range of evidence
through interviews, reflections, class activities and presentations to identify how
learners developed spiritually as servant leaders.

41
Chapter 4. Findings

This chapter begins by exploring how spiritual development occurred within

the development of aspiring tertiary servant leaders of diverse ethnic and religious
backgrounds in Aotearoa-New Zealand. It then uses the dimensions of the SDF as a
framework to explore what spiritual development occurred. Each of the
developmental processes of spiritual awareness, connection and way of living are
analysed against the engagement influences of apprehension of transcendence,
religious/spiritual practice and action and perception and expression of identity. The
chapter concludes with key findings further discussed in the next chapter.

4.1. Development of spirituality in servant leader

development

Sub-Question 1: Within the context of The Servant as Leader course, how did
spiritual development relate to/inform servant leader development?

Most learners identified that formative spiritual and servant leader

development occurred socially within the family and religious community. Frank
summarised:

my beliefs come from where I grew up… [in] Mexico where my parents
live… My leadership thoughts and beliefs have grown from every trait
I’ve made, every person I’ve met and every time I’ve fallen… These
beliefs do not come from a single memory and change when I learn
lessons and have experiences (28/8/18, 56).

In developing spiritually as servant leaders, all learners drew from personal or

professional mentoring or modelling. They also reflected on and discussed with peers
their experiences in church and charity organisations where they volunteered in
poverty alleviation, education support, disaster relief and health work projects.

4.1.1. Development through mentors and models

The most prominent social influence in learner development was the parent-
child relationship. In some cases, there was a spiritual connection with parental
mentoring and modelling. Valerie had a mother who modelled servant leadership
through her role as a LDS Committee President as she:

42
 got really upset and [was] really, really angry. [I said] ‘so just quit’… She
was like ‘no - you don’t do things like that’. She baked a cake, went back
to the other house, gave them the cake and said, “I’m sorry…” She took
me with her to see the whole scene... I learnt what kind of servant leader
she wanted to be (5/4/18, 46).

While most parent-child relationships were positive, George and Lauren shared how
they rebelled against the spirituality of their parents because of their approach.
Lauren shared:

Lauren: “My youngest granddaughter said… ‘when I’m older, I’m not
going to do anything that you and mummy tell me to do’. And I said
‘good - that’s completely fine - you do whatever you need to do’. I wish
my parents gave me that permission when I was young”.

Interviewer: “[You previously] said previously that when your ‘bucket

was full {in reference to your parents}, you would rebel’”.

Lauren: “That’s right… It wasn’t positive” (5/9/18, 58-60).

Lauren concluded that in parental modelling, it would be wise for parents to:

enter into dialogue [with children] and not dismiss them or put a stake
in the ground. It's the same in personal relationships as well as
organisational relationships (26/8/18, 72/49).

Faith communities also directly or indirectly mentored or modelled leadership.

Jennifer, in her servant leader development, observed and modelled:

my pastor, because I live with them. I see them every day and how they
live… They are so dedicated and give their 100%. [The pastor] wakes
up early in the morning… and goes to bed late. [When] they discipline
their kids, their voices stay the same level… I’m amazed at their
patience. I want to apply this (6/4/18, 72).

Aimee also reflected on how her pastors modelled Christ’s washing of feet (27/6/18,
19/36) and Valerie reflected on how her youth pastor modelled aspects of servant
teaching (18/3/18, 11) which Valerie later applied in her teaching (18/3/18, 11). At
times, modelling also occurred indirectly through leaders and figureheads such as
Gandhi (Victor, 20/4/18, 41) and Pope Francis (Rick, 28/8/18, 157).

Mentoring and modelling were evident in the formative development of all

learners through family and religious communities. For most religious learners, one
or more mentors established a tangible connection between spirituality and servant
leadership. However, most servant leadership mentoring or modelling for all learners
occurred without a strong connection to spirituality.

43
4.1.2. Development through reciprocal learning

Some learners found aspects of their spirituality developed through class

discussion. Valerie shared:

I really am enjoying the course… [In our class discussions] I heard

people’s ideas, background and religion and how that impacts on their
lives and… being a leader. For me, that part of the course has been
really important (24/4/18, 68).

Valerie later reiterated how reciprocal learning helped her better understand the
spirituality of others and herself (28/8/18, 126) and helped her reassess personal
prejudices:

Brazilians are really good people [but] not to themselves and not outside
of the country… I learnt that in London. I had some very difficult
situations with Brazilians, so I’ve been avoiding Brazilians since then.
Leon and Tina broke this idea; [now I know] there are some good
Brazilians (28/8/18, 190-192).

Through reciprocal learning, Valerie built strong relationships her peers (28/8/18,
194) by understanding their cultural, religious or spiritual perspectives.

Yvette shared how reciprocal learning required a deep sense of trust within
the class community as:

sometimes when I attended the class… it [was] overwhelming

because… my classmates are really brilliant, and I’m like ‘Oh my God,
am I in the right place?’… What struck me the most was the sharing
culture… I think that we get a better understanding of that with our
discussions (20/4/18, 9).

Erika further echoed that:

at times, everyone [in class] was insecure and sensitive to somethings.

The most innocent and important things… [Sharing with the class] was
really good (28/8/18, 34).

Rick also believed his personal and social development occurred because there was
“such emphasise on community and collaboration” (2/4/18, 3). Corresponding
statements were also made by Aimee (28/8/18, 98) and Frank (28/8/18, 162). This
trust was particularly important when learners were sharing personal or potentially
controversial information. Aimee explained how:

my faith is very personal to me. Talking one-on-one is not a problem

[but] in class to classmates with different ideas… is uncomfortable. I
guess the Lord placed me here. I’m not being a catechist, but I think it

44
 is good practice for me to put my faith out there. This course helped me
get out of my comfort zone (6/4/18, 92).

Valerie also shared:

I don’t like to discuss religion because it is very complicated… [yet

everyone seems to have] the concept of a higher being, caring for
others and that there are consequences to everything. It doesn’t matter
if it’s religion or not; it is true in life… (28/8/18, 102).

Aimee and Valerie illustrate how reciprocal learning encouraged shared discussion,
feedback and encouragement and consideration of alternative spiritual perspectives
in a safe environment. Erika later reflected:

in the class, I knew this concept of stepping back and learning with each
other, [but] I learnt a lot from others because their background, ideas
and culture are not the same as where I came from. It was really
amazing… Now I think it’s OK for other people to have different ideas
that work, and it doesn’t matter where they come from. I’ve learnt to…
listen (28/8/18, 60).

Reciprocal learning introduced learners to new myths, narratives and interpretive

frameworks – some of which were accepted. There were also examples where ideas
from Scripture (Erika, 30/6/18, 17/32; Victor, 22/8/18, 72/44) and Journey to the East
(Rick, 8/8/18, 4/61) were introduced but rejected by learners. In some cases, learners
were critical of Christian leaders or Christianity (Erika, 30/6/18, 70/39; Leon, 11/7/18,
18/32; Tina, 14/7/18, 18/42; Victor 22/8/18, 72/44) or Buddhist leaders (George;
20/3/18, 4). Yet, these criticisms were seemingly ignored by religious learners with no
perceivable changes in their beliefs or behaviours. Reciprocal learning was influential
in servant leader development but was less influential in spiritual development.

Reciprocal learning facilitated some spiritual development through creating an

environment of trust where learners built interpersonal connections and awareness of
other religious or spiritual perspectives. While reciprocal learning shaped the spiritual
practices of those who were ‘spiritual but not religious’, it had minimal influence on
the religious beliefs of religious learners. A possible mediator is perceived spiritual
credibility. Lauren was influential because she was perceived as an expert while non-
religious peers were perceived as having a personal opinion that was ignored.

4.1.3. Development through experiential learning

Most learners sought to be a servant leader and expressed this by serving.

Two themes underpinned serving: service through volunteering and service in the

45
workplace. Frank had an encounter with a mother seeking food for her disabled son
in his workplace that challenged his beliefs:

[the woman] got my attention as I had seen she had been crying… I
gave her food… After hearing what she had to say, my eyes filled up
with tears, but I looked away… I gave a lot of thought about how people
like her live… It was really awful… That’s one of many experiences I
remember (28/8/18, 118).

Although the event occurred before the course, Frank’s continued reflections led to
his involvement in the NGO project-team to seek further engagement in further
community development projects (28/8/2018, 126).

Several learners engaged in personal or community-led volunteering during

the course. Jennifer volunteered with the Salvation Army to help fight “poverty, social
inequality and spiritual distress” by “caring for people, transforming lives and
reforming society” (28/5/18, 7:26-7:34). Tina engaged with the Auckland Council and
discovered how her research background could strengthen her social advocacy. She
then applied these skills in Stats New Zealand and as an International Student
Ambassador (28/8/18, 130). Aimee volunteered in a College internship and her New
Zealand church (6/4/18, 66). Victor continued to develop his Indian sustainability
group (28/8/18, 66-71) and Yvette restructured her Philippines education scholarship
programme (28/8/18, 60-84). While volunteering within a religious community was
perceived as spiritual, volunteering also occurred in personal or non-religious
contexts where it was less clear.

Learners also sought to serve in their workplace. Tina summarised how she has:

[been working] with two young girls… in a cafe… At first, I was more
interested in being a ‘good’ employee. Now, I know that they see me as
a leader… They often share their hopes and dreams [and] I try to
understand their strengths and challenges. I try to help them… not only
in the cafe but also in life… I can see these things are a result of the
course (3/4/18, 5).

George, Jennifer, Lauren and Victor as College staff, believed they served students
and exhibited servant leadership in their role in the College (George, 3/3/18, 9-10;
Jennifer, 28/8/18, 41; Lauren, 12/4/18, 3; Victor, 28/8/18, 7). At least one teacher
linked this to spiritual development as Victor shared:

I’ve become more certain in things I’m saying [in the classroom] as a
result of [what] I’ve been doing and going through… [and as] my values
are brought into question by events that have happened and… the
process to resolve those tensions (28/8/18, 36).

46
Experiential learning by reflecting on current or past experiences supported the
spiritual development of some learners. While some forms of volunteering were
easily connected to spiritual development, it was often difficult to determine spiritual
development through volunteering. All learners believed they served through their
employment or volunteering and perceived this as evidence of or development as
evidence of, or development as, a servant leader.

4.1.4. Summary

While mentoring, modelling, reciprocal learning and experiential learning were

important factors in formative development and servant leader development, they
were less influential in the spiritual development of learners during the course. One
influential factor appears to be the connection of a learner to a religious community
which supported spiritual development through mentoring, modelling and experiential
learning. The most prominent pedagogical method to facilitate spiritual development
appears to be spiritual practices which is explored as an engagement influence.

4.2. Development as a spiritually aware servant leader

Sub-Question 2: How did development of spiritual awareness, as defined by the

Spiritual Development Framework, contribute to servant leader development?

Servant leader development was informed by learners previous religious or

spiritual beliefs and practices. All learners identified as being either religious or
spiritual or both religious and spiritual. Spirituality previously developed in learners by
being expressed culturally (Frank, 10/4/18, 5; Rick, 16/2/18, 11; Yvette, 16/2/18, 9) or
through a conversion experience (Aimee, 6/4/18, 58-62; Jennifer, 10/8/18, 21/26;
Lauren, 6/9/18, 16), a spiritual retreat (Aimee, 15/2/18, 14; Lauren, 6/9/18, 34) or
walking the Comino de Santiago (Lauren, 5/9/18, 34; Leon, 3/4/18, 62-64). Table 3-1
summarises learners identified religion or spirituality.

Openness to spiritual development varied between learners. While George

was open to class discussions on religion (9/4/18, 18), he believed he already
applied all the major religious principles (20/3/18, 3) and was spiritual (11/8/18,
17/11). Spiritual development appeared less pronounced for Frank than other
Christians or peers because of his infrequent discussions of spirituality and religion.
This may be linked to doubt following life experiences including an acrimonious
dissolution of his business (2/7/18, 4/28) and by attitudes modelled by family who are

47
religious but ‘not fanatics’ (28/8/18, 138). Yet, Frank still considered a belief in God to
be important (10/4/18, 5). In contrast, Yvette shared how spiritual development was
important, as she wanted to know:

more about my religion. I have friends… who did not understand the
religion they are born with and explored other religions… I [don’t want
to] be jumping from one religion to another instead of building from my
existing religion (16/2/18, 11).

All other learners showed positive interest in spiritual development as part of their
servant leader development and reported spiritual growth during the course. Rick
summarised how he found his development tied in with others:

I feel that [in the course] I’m a part of God’s group and that others are
also a part of God’s group (12/4/18, 26).

His statement is insightful as only half the class were religious.

All learners were religious or spiritual and most developed spiritual awareness in
developing as a servant leader. Development appears predicated on spiritual
openness although the limited evidence makes it difficult to draw conclusions.

4.2.1. Development of awareness through apprehension of

transcendence

Development of awareness through apprehension of transcendence is difficult

to quantify but can be demonstrated in the change in attitudes or beliefs described by
learners. Rick had a vision during class, where he saw himself holding the hand of
Christ (8/8/18, 21/5). He subsequently shared:

I wanted to be the adult Rick; to always be in charge and have direction;

I [previously] forgot it was actually like to be child-like [and trust] like
Christ asked of us (28/8/18, 157).

His vision redefined his relationship with God. Rick shared:

in the Bible, Christ asks us to be like a child. Pope Francis spoke about
this—to be like Jesus holding the hand of his mother… No matter how
dark it is and no matter where He leads you, no matter the trials are that
you go through, He will always be with you. That’s why now, as worried
as I am, I trust Him (28/8/18, 157).

Rick found this vision, with other interactions with God in the course, meant:

[God] really helped me understand and improve myself… This [course

showed me] that God listens and advises… that for me is gospel [even]

48
 more than the gospel. I think you could remove the word ‘gospel’ and
just leave the word ‘truth’ (28/8/18, 199).

While Leon shared at the beginning of the course that:

I’ve never had a belief in God as a [religious] figure… I believe there is

something… that I can’t explain… I believe in the soul and the Arora…
but never explored that much of religion (3/4/18, 62).

During the course, Leon listened to podcasts on spirituality and concluded:

Maybe each person has a moment when [spirituality] makes sense…

I’m listening to audios on WhatsApp with a professor who assesses
emotions. I’ve been… thinking about what he’s saying. Some things I
agree with, some things I don’t (28/8/18, 30).

As Leon and Tina were engaged, they lived together and shared a daily routine that
included time for spiritual practices such as meditation and mindfulness (14/7/18,
17/44). While Tina did not speak of this experience, other forms of her development
closely aligned with Leon.

Erika developed her spiritual awareness by reading websites, listening to

podcasts and watching TED Talks (26/6/18, 12:12; 5/014/18, 108). Her spiritual
journey analysed Human Design (26/6/18, 0:00-4:45)—a quasi-religion based on the
Canadian mystic Ra Uru Hu. Her development encouraged her to seek information
about Human Design in New Zealand (26/6/18, p11) and considered joining a group.

Victor identified as being “not very religious at all; I am spiritual but hardly
religious” (20/4/18, 63). Before the course he believed:

I am not condescending or disrespectful of ways of knowledge or

traditions… I’m not a person who favours science over religion. I think
there are multiple ways of knowing and religion is quite scientific if you
really think about it in a scientific way… Sometimes [though], we are not
able to see our blind spots (16/2/18, 9).

Victor increasingly welcomed multiple ways of knowing, as:

there is a limit to [my] knowledge… and what I can know… In the

context of science, the person no one likes or listens to might have the
right scientific idea… It’s important to pay attention to both sides… even
if it is against the popular opinion… there must be a coming together…
an interplay, a dialogue (3/9/18, 101).

Victor showed how learners may draw on multiple sources to develop their spiritual
awareness. Victor personally drew from Plato’s story of two sea captains—one
competent and one charismatic, to understand how servant leadership requires

49
scientific and spiritual input and may not be popular with those being ‘served’
(12/5/18, 9:2382-9:2388; 3/9/18, 101). Similarly, George likened servant leadership
to a Slovakian princess who refused marriage so she could devote her life to the poor
(20/3/18, 8). Aspects of servant leadership and spirituality were embedded and
expressed through these ‘myths’ and ‘narratives’ in class discussions.

Some learners differentiated religion and spirituality. Rick shared:

I read a Jesuit book… about the difference between religious and

spiritual. Most people prefer to be spiritual rather than religious… I have
sought to become more spiritual than religious (28/8/18, 83).

Like Rick, Yvette differentiated between religion and her personal spirituality, sharing:

The usual prayer that we have as a Catholic… I don’t normally do that

except… at Mass… I just talk to Him; it is more of a conversation
(13/4/18, 57).

Despite being Catholic, Yvette believed that:

God’s not a person for me; it’s a force… or energy. I cannot define God
as a person. Jesus is a personal representation of God, but God is… a
force (13/4/18, 49,51).

Rick and Yvette showed how learners may deviate from religious doctrine in their
personal spiritual beliefs. Like Yvette, Aimee found it difficult to reconcile these two
constructs in navigating the dilemma of her friend’s homosexuality, concluding:

I’m trying to veer away from evangelical circles because it makes

people uncomfortable and I want to access different types of people
with problems (28/8/18, 34).

Aimee also had difficulty reconciling her personal interpretation of meekness with the
concept that Christ is concurrent ‘lion’ and ‘lamb’ (6/4/18, 78-84; 28/8/18, 126) as
“lambs get slaughtered” (6/4/18, 76). Valerie differed from the religious orthodoxy of
the LDS church (Spackman, 1988) in praying directly to Jesus (28/8/18, 130-132).
The blend of religion and spirituality led Valerie to state:

I don’t think I’ve ever met anybody with the same beliefs or
understanding I have (5/4/18, 39).

At the beginning of the course, Valerie believed:

we look to the Bible because it’s an example of a servant leader [but]

this doesn’t mean it is the only place it applies (5/4/18, 60).

She later noted that:

50
 I’ve noticed [by listening to others] you don’t need a religion [to be a
servant leader]—that’s the main thing I learnt in the course. As [others
said], it’s more about how you act, your own spirituality and not
religion… If you are willing to serve… help others and put others ahead
of you—you don’t need religion but a conscience (5/4/18, 7).

This statement by Valerie summarises a class belief as a result of reciprocal learning.

Aimee initially linked servant leadership to spirituality in class, sharing:

servant leadership, for me, is about leading with love. This means a
leader exhibits the utmost concern for the individual and puts this
person's needs first before his. Hence, servant leadership for me is
already a spiritual act and is not separate from it (25/3/18, 5).

Lauren challenged her belief, asserting “servant leadership and spirituality are not
synonymous” (26/8/18, 17/27), as spirituality encompasses more than servant
leadership (28/8/18, 26). Having considered Lauren’s argument and similar peer
responses, Aimee concluded: “spirituality is not necessarily hand-in-hand with
servant leadership” (8/4/18, 17/32). At times, spiritual development through reciprocal
learning challenged learner assumptions and beliefs.

Spiritual development also involved synthesising different concepts. Rick was open
to how forms of Māori culture could help develop him as a servant leader. He shared:

it would be foolish not to consider what [other religions] offer… I believe

[Māori culture] could enhance my faith… The Catholic church has done
this and implemented cultures from China… and the Philippines to
make it better for people (16/2/18, 11).

The result was his ‘Bayaniwi’ framework (14/6/18, 0:05-0:39) that integrated Rick’s
Filipino Catholic heritage with his understanding of Māori culture and spirituality.

While some learners moved beyond their initial religious belief structures,
Jennifer shared how:

[Scripture] really helps us as a Christian. I [often think] ‘wow’—the Bible

is so complete—it’s only one book [but] when you study to be a Doctor
of Medicine, you need to read lots of books… I want to [read the Bible
and] set an example with my daughter (28/8/18, 98).

While Jennifer became more disciplined in studying Scripture, she also found it did
not answer her questions about her husband’s death (28/8/18, 72).

Learner reflections on religion or spirituality during The Servant as Leader

course built on earlier beliefs. Spiritual development of awareness for some learners

51
synthesised religion, spiritual practices and personal experiences or beliefs, while for
others it challenged their faith or left questions unanswered.

4.2.2. Development of awareness through religious/spiritual

practice and action

Forms of spiritual practice were actively or previously applied by all learners.

Aimee, Lauren, Jennifer, Valerie, Rick and Yvette had established disciplined
spiritual practices while Jennifer, Leon, Tina and Victor reported they increased their
commitment and discipline in their spiritual practices during the course. While Frank
spoke of praying and Erika spoke of Human Design, it was unclear how regularly
these spiritual practices were applied. George was the only learner not actively
engaged in a recognised spiritual practice but did ‘reflect’ and self-rated himself the
highest rating for ‘spirituality’ (11/8/18, 17/11).

As Lauren claimed mindfulness had a Buddhist tradition and was a Buddhist

practice, other learners aligned it with Eastern religions (Victor, 28/8/18, 12). While
Leon and Tina spoke of how Lauren shaped their meditation and mindfulness
practice (14/7/18, 100/25), it was not practiced or mentioned by any Christian learner
in any of the evidence. Lauren linked servant leadership and mindfulness, sharing:

servant leadership is very much a personal way of being [like]

mindfulness [which] is about the self… [and how we] affect others
around us. There are a lot of correlations (5/9/18, 3).

For Lauren, mindfulness required self-discipline and is:

hard for most people—including me… because deep down, you are
dirty, and it is very unpleasant [to explore this] (5/9/18, 30).

Lauren previously found mindfulness:

was very painful because I had a strict Reverend… I have to thank her
for her discipline in the very beginning… [as] the first few years were
the hardest and I think I cried a lot because I didn’t think I was too bad
until my world was turned upside down (6/9/18, 16, 24).

Through mindfulness, Lauren reported developing from being critical of others and
thinking “why such a drama” (12/4/18, 24) to “putting herself in the other persons'
shoes” (12/4/18, 24) and using techniques such as breathing and walking away
(28/3/18, 0:00-0:10). Likewise, Leon shared:

52
 [my development] is a journey of awareness [in] understanding the
patterns I have and not pre-judging situations or people or behaviours…
I don’t know what is going on with them… I know about myself, and I’ve
been working on this (3/4/18, 50).

While Leon and Tina found mindfulness challenging, they believed they improved in
their mindfulness practice (Leon, 28/8/18, 30; Tina, 14/7/18, 25/43). Likewise, Victor
believed his independent practice of meditation, mindfulness and yoga improved
during the course (22/8/18, 13/47). While Lauren’s mindfulness practice derived from
Buddhist studies (including a post-graduate certificate) (6/9/18, 16, 34), Leon, Tina
and Victor explored mindfulness as a non-religious spiritual practice.

Prayer was important in developing spirituality in Christians as it gave them

direction and meaning. Yvette shared how:

when I pray or visit the church… it seems everything is OK… If I don’t

go to church, it seems everything is really crazy, and I have a bad day…
I’m not sure if it is psychological, but [prayer] is really doing something
for me (13/4/18, 41).

Christian learners also believed prayer increased their awareness. Rick shared:

what I appreciate about God when I pray is that He is willing to listen,

talk and give advice… [Now] I say ‘Lord - why am I doing that’… [I want
to know] what the logic is… and understand [it] on the relationship level
(28/8/18, 87-89).

All Christian learners spoke of prayer as a two-way discussion with a relational God
and Aimee (28/8/18, 90), Jennifer (28/8/18, 45), Rick (28/8/18, 199), Valerie (28/8/18,
134) and Yvette (16/2/18, 27) spoke of being led or guided by God. Valerie shared:

I’m the only one [in my family] who really fights with Jesus… I’m the
only one that actually says ‘no—that’s not right, let’s talk about it and
sort it out’… I have a really personal relationship; He’s God. He sees
and knows… so I may as well say it (28/8/18, 130-132).

Yvette also shared how she was led by God in her personal study:

I’m reading a lot about life. I had lots of books hand-picked by God for
me… When coming here full-time, I was reading about… being a winner
(28/8/18, 40-42).

These examples illustrate how some Christian learners believed God, through prayer
and study, supported their servant leader development spiritually and emotionally.

Learners also spoke of some eclectic forms of spiritual practice. Leon and
Tina created a gratitude jar for listing and reflecting on people, events or objects they

53
were thankful (Leon, 28/8/18, 130), and Victor recorded family and friend
conversations to reflect on and identify embedded patterns and messages (3/9/18,
107). Leon summarised that:

I always try to come with new ideas and exercises to reflect over
things—like life, choices and results… [Meditation] is something that
has also helped me to calm down… For the past three years I’ve been
working more on this self-awareness (28/8/18, 24).

The spiritual practices of most learners changed during the course. Christian learners
found their prayers and religious study changed while Buddhist and non-religious
learners increased their meditation, mindfulness and other eclectic forms of personal
spiritual practice. All learners who applied spiritual practices believed this emotionally
and spiritually supported their servant leader development.

4.2.3. Development of awareness through a sense of calling,

purpose or identity

Development of spiritual awareness was linked to the development of a sense

of calling or mission. At the beginning of the course, only Tina and Yvette could
articulate a personal calling or purpose, but Aimee (6/4/18, 66), Jennifer (6/4/18, 17),
Rick (12/4/18, 30) and Valerie (28/8/18, 134) sensed God led them to Aotearoa-New
Zealand or to undertake the course. Yvette shared:

I believe God leads me where he can really use me... I believe that’s
why I was led [to the bank]… We all have a bigger personal purpose…
[Mine is to] have a positive impact on people of different backgrounds
so they will be able to influence another two or three people and [this
will multiply]… (16/2/18, 27, 29).

During the course, Yvette associated the scholarship programme she founded to a
calling by God. She also discovered that servant leadership:

is also a calling… We are called to… give up self and ambition for others
to move up (28/8/18, 4).

Valerie also developed a sense of calling in the course. Where Valerie previously
associated ‘calling’ to LDS ministry and teaching, she discovered that:

servant teaching is not just in church but is in everything I’m doing. I

understand that I am influencing people more than I thought (28/8/18,
98).

54
Jennifer believed God gifted and purposed her to sing but had not applied herself. In
the course, she committed to singing in church “for His glory” (28/8/18, 226) as an
expression of service. Likewise, Aimee found a sense of meaning in her purpose:

[To tell you my purpose in life would have] been easier if you asked me
that question a year ago. The answer would have been ‘success’…
What drives and what motivates me [now] is leaving a footprint or an
imprint in someone’s life… [It’s] something I do for free—something I
think is destiny… What I’ve noticed is I’m [being] led to meet people and
[go] into different situations wherein a small act of kindness goes a long
way. That makes me happy. It has no monetary benefit, but it fulfils me.
That’s what drives me (6/4/18, 68).

Development for all these learners came through reflecting on experiences, core
values and beliefs. Aimee found her personal and spiritual models inspired her:

to see where the[ir] ‘why’ came from… I thought maybe their character
helped them out, so I explored their vulnerable side. [What is] their truth,
and how did they come up with that? These were the character-building
aspects… I found that this is how you get to know yourself (28/8/18,
138).

Leon and Tina reflected on how their volunteering in TEDO—a Latin American NGO
that creates shelters within favelas—helped shape their sense of purpose:

three years ago, I started volunteering work [in TEDO]… in extremely

poor communities [in Brazil]… Over three years, a lot of deconstruction
of thoughts and patterns which I thought were right and wrong [occurred
which] taught me a lot about how to analyse. Every situation has many
different faces… (Leon, 20/2/18, 24).

Leon and Tina came to believe their purpose was to bring social justice to Brazil
(Leon, 3/4/18, 34; Tina, 3/4/18, 3529) and Aotearoa-New Zealand (Leon, 28/8/18,
112; Tina, 3/4/18, 35, 28/8/18, 28). Victor likewise linked his purpose to his
sustainable development work in India (28/8/18, 62). For Leon, Tina and Victor, their
sense of purpose had spiritual undertones and exhibited servant leader behaviours.

Evidence showed how challenging it could be spiritually and emotionally

when learners explored their sense of identity. Leon (20/0218, 10), Rick (28/8/18,
163) and Victor (28/8/18, 48) were very self-critical and set ambitious emotional,
cognitive or spiritual development intentions. Rick summarised how:

[I was] pretty critical and harsh; honest, but downright harsh… You
could compare it to… a psychological hazing… When I inserted God
into the conversation, He had a softer voice [that was] nicer and
constructive. It became less depressing (28/8/18, 145-149).

55
Rick shared how the course enabled him to:

mature enough to really look in the mirror and think ‘you know what,
maybe the reason why girls don’t like you is because in some form you
don’t even like yourself’ and ‘you don’t even feel confident about
yourself’ (28/8/18, 121).

During the course, Rick became more aware of the presence of God which led him to
be more accepting of himself (28/8/18, 125). Leon discovered more about himself
and others (28/8/18, 30) enabling him to accept personal failure (28/8/18, 48). Victor
also came to accept his personal limitations (28/8/18, 38). Similarly, Yvette shared:

I have to say sometimes ‘God I’m so sorry’ when I scroll through

Facebook. I know God says, ‘you are really special’, but sometimes part
of me says there is more that you can do (28/8/18, 128).

Aimee initially felt incongruency between her faith, role and actions, sharing that:

what I didn’t do consistently [before] was take time to understand where

[staff] were coming from or understand their issues… [As a result, staff
didn’t really trust me]… We respected each other but at work, when
issues come up, I [would] push back. Instead of guiding them… to get
to the root of the problem together and showing I genuinely cared, I
[would] go straight to a solution (6/4/18, 52; 54).

Through developing in her authenticity, she now has a:

mindset focused on making mistakes because I’m a work in progress,

and I want to grow and learn… [My] insecurity just dissipated because
of the change in mindset. I always thought that a leader should do
everything. [Now I think] you should harness the skill of each person so
they can collaborate or perform (28/8/18, 102).

Other forms of disruptive experiences included struggles with relocating and cultural
transition (Frank, 28/8/18/, 8-12; Leon, 13/9/18, 96; Valerie, 28/8/18, 146), questions
of faith (Frank, 2/7/18, 21/14; Jennifer, 28/8/18, 27), financial difficulties (Aimee,
6/4/18, 72; Rick, 28/8/18, 6) and grief from family deaths (Jennifer, 19/4/18, 70; Victor
28/8/18, 52). Consistent challenges for students were the work limit of 20 hours per
week, a weaker purchasing power parity between their home country and Aotearoa-
New Zealand and stress to secure employment so they could gain Permanent
Residency (PR). Aimee shared how this developed her authenticity as she:

[had to] let go of… my title or how much is in my bank account. Being
in Auckland really stripped me away from those things. I don’t have
friends, so I started from scratch… [As a result] I’m starting to know
myself, and I’m starting to influence people without my comforts. The
things I held so tightly onto before apparently don’t make me feel fulfilled
(6/4/18, 72).

56
Rick summarised that the experiences in:

[the] servant leadership [course] felt therapeutic—not just in discovering

yourself. It was actually helpful… [in developing and learning to] pace
myself and breathe (28/8/18, 16).

Most learners noted similar benefits in the development of identity as a result of

disruptive experiences. However, Jennifer struggled to be transparent with her
daughter about her new relationship, saying:

I’m trying, but I can’t really do it. There are times I can hide [to talk to
my boyfriend] but she can always hear me in the room (28/8/18, 146).

Jennifer felt conflicted between being authentic or damaging her mother-daughter

relationship. Yet, Jennifer developed authenticity in her social media; as previously:

[I posted] lots of sad photos [where I] always smile[d], but behind the
smile was sadness… [Now photos are] with me really happy,
particularly if we have family time with my daughter, even though [my
deceased husband] is missing… (28/8/, 158; 160).

Development of spiritual awareness was often linked to development of a sense of

personal purpose or calling. This personal purpose or calling was often based on
personal beliefs, behaviours and spirituality. Development of authenticity was a
consistent theme in development as learners sought to authentically express
themselves and accept personal limitations and failures – having similarities to the
servant leadership dimension of authentic self. While all learners reported positive
outcomes from strengthening their sense of identity, many found the process
emotionally and spiritually challenging.

4.2.4. Summary

Development of spiritual awareness was a largely reflective process that

occurred through prayer, meditation and mindfulness and built on earlier spiritual or
religious beliefs and practices in most learners. For many, the development of
awareness was a journey that required authenticity by going:

deep down and dirty… The lotus flower grows in dank water and needs
the dankness to create a beautiful flower. We need… [to] recognise,
face and address the dankness. It can be painful. You must come to
grips with it and change... (7/6/18, 0:04-0:48).

For some, spiritual and emotional development challenged internal self-views and
occurred through disruptive experiences – often with a resulting discovery of a sense

57
of calling, purpose or identity. Many learners found spiritual or religious practices
provided spiritual and emotional support in their servant leader development.

4.3. Development as a spiritually connected servant

leader

Sub-Question 3: How did development of connection, as defined by the Spiritual

Development Framework, contribute to servant leader development?

All learners initially perceived they had strong interpersonal and community
connections but most determined to strengthen their relationships inside and outside
the classroom. This included relationships with friends (Aimee, 28/8/18, 60), peers
(Erika, 5/4/18, 9; Frank, 28/8/18, 102; George, 9/4/18, 2; Leon, 3/4/18, 8; Tina,
3/4/18, 5, 20, 71; Valerie, 28/8/18, 190-192), students (Lauren, 12/4/18, 3; Victor,
20/4/18, 7), family (Jennifer, 10/8/18, 34/35), classmates (Yvette, 13/4/18, 9) or
themselves (Rick, 5/3/18, 3-6). Erika desired to more deeply connect with others as:

I was [previously] not ready [to lead]—it was too much responsibility…
I need to develop my leadership skills and servant leadership… by
learning how to encourage [followers], value their opinions and
encourage, direct [and] guide them (15/2/18, 2).

During the course, Erika shared how she:

asked [a staff member] about her son, and she told me stories... After
that, we became connected and she helped me the day after because
she really enjoyed our conversation. I [now] think people connections
are really important (28/8/18, 52).

Erika illustrates a learner who believed her interpersonal relationships developed

during the course by connecting with others through listening, empathising and
collaborating. For many learners, this process was a form of spiritual development as
it connected aspects of self, others and a transcendental power.

4.3.1. Development of connection through apprehension of

transcendence

Learners developed connections with others through an experiential process

of reflecting on past and present behaviours to inform their present and future
behaviours. This process was at times spiritual, as Rick shared:

I feel closer to God… When Aimee said that ‘you need to be less direct’
and ‘you need to calm down’, I paused, breathed in and thought, ‘it’s

58
 not just me talking through my brain, I believe I am talking to [God]’. It’s
[God] saying “see—you might be right and be able to defend yourself…
but be honest with me—is it correct, or right?” And I thought ‘I need to
change’ (28/8/18, 83).

Rick believed his relationship with God made him more receptive in his relationship
with Aimee. He also noted the course allowed him to have:

A more positive mindset and… have God in the conversation… I [now]

know God really listens and talks back… (28/8/18, 195).

Jennifer initially felt “far from God” (6/4/18, 29), being “hot and cold; on and off”
(6/4/18, 31, 68) because of her husband’s death (6/4/18, 70). At the end of the
course, she concluded:

I [now] realise that God is with me… [but] I still have question marks
about why (28/8/18, 45).

In understanding how her spirituality was cyclical, Jennifer tried to:

really observe myself… Maybe there are times when I feel really, really
down and this is when I feel really, really tired being both a mum and
dad (28/8/18, 51)

Jennifer determined in her servant leader development to strengthen her

interpersonal relationships with her daughter. She initially shared that:

I don’t know if I’m really giving [my daughter] the proper care, so I really
feel disappointed in myself… [This means] I must think, pray harder,
listen to leaders, and look at other people—especially good parents
(6/4/18, 25).

Through a reflective process involving prayer, Jennifer came to align servant

leadership to parenting (6/4/18, 23), saying:

I want to be a confident parent… [and] a role model to [my daughter]

because she will copy what I am currently doing—negative and
positive... and this will create a chain reaction… The things she is
learning will sink in… become normal for her (28/8/18, 18-20).

Her advice to peers at the end of the course based on her development was to:

serve your family unconditionally… do it for love not expecting a

return… Honour your marriage covenant [by] practising servant
leadership… put your family's needs ahead of yours; servant leadership
places your family first (28/8/18, 13:48-16:39).

59
Her development saw parallel development in her capability as a mother and as a
servant leader. Aimee also noted how her servant leader and interpersonal
relationships developed as:

my exposure [to servant leadership] was only corporate and church

contexts. I had a hard time reconciling being a servant leader and
achieving your goals… I got more comfortable with vulnerability in being
a servant leader. You become effective when you are real and
vulnerable (28/8/18, 2).

Where previous, Aimee “never exposed myself to having a people connection

[before] because I wasn’t ready to be vulnerable” (28/8/18, 108), she now developed
vulnerability and accountability (12/5/18, 4:69) that allowing her to:

involve [followers] in a certain way where they understand the meaning

of what they are doing… so they have accountability and ownership.
Then, my method of taking them along is more effective than saying
“these are the results I expect from you” (28/8/18, 6).

Aimee expressed this new depth of connectedness in leading her small group
(28/8/18, 32), teaching Erika English, coaching her friends (6/4/18, 88) and
connecting with her mother (28/8/18, 120).

Leon perceived a link between interpersonal relationships and spirituality, sharing:

I believe something is going to happen [in the] after[life]. For a while, I

believed in reincarnation; people have certain connections over time…
This explains destiny and why you meet certain people and create very
deep connections quickly (3/4/18, 62).

Erika also made a similar connection between the Golden Rule and her interpersonal
relationships (5/4/18, 11). Tina alluded to a connection between her reflective
spirituality and her interpersonal relationships, sharing:

I’m being more critical [personally]. This may create low confidence, but
I’m feeling more confident as I’m exploring my weakness… I think my
connections [with others] are better now, and I’m really happy with the
progress I’ve made (3/4/18, 71).

Victor also believed his spiritual journey shaped his ability to connect:

I appreciate how the influence on my students and colleagues as a

teacher [increased] and can draw the link between teacher and
leader… I’m more confident in the classroom and have recorded and
watched [myself] in the classroom then compared this to previous
[recordings] and found that my body language and speaking has
become more confident… (28/8/18, 36).

60
Development in connection also occurred through reciprocal learning in communities.
Frank previously associated connectedness with his extended family as:

it doesn’t matter to me if you are atheist or Catholic, I’ve learnt that

family is the most important thing in life and that your family will always
be there for you (10/4/18, 53).

His large family shaped his beliefs of connection by celebrating weekends and
holidays together (27/7/18, 34/2) and demonstrating altruism:

I remember how I fed people [in Mexico]; it was so heartbreaking to see

these old people sitting around and doing nothing. My family would
bring in food… and would get coffee once a year and go and give it to
these people (28/8/18, 130).

During the course, Frank was able to better understand himself (28/8/18, 36), his
relationships (28/8/18, 4) and the importance of serving others (28/8/18, 138).

Jennifer shared how an elder from her church community modelled kindness so:

when we help, you don’t expect help from others and if they tell you they
want to give you something, you don’t take it but pass it on, so it is like
a chain (28/8/18, 180).

Jennifer consequently aimed in her relationships to “pay it forward” (10/8/18, 31/13).

Aimee (28/8/18, 28) and Valerie (28/8/18, 180) similarly shared how their churches
shaped and supported their interpersonal and servant leader development.

Not all religious learners strengthened their interpersonal connections through

community. Yvette attended church to pray rather than connect with others (28/8/18,
174-176) and Rick was seeking a New Zealand church (28/8/18, 71). Lauren shared:

I think [religious communities are good for] for that person at that time…
[In] becoming stronger in mindfulness, meditation and servant
leadership, I found these communities no longer nourishing. Servant
leadership and mindfulness helped me discern what nourishes me and
what doesn’t and be able to let go of what is not nourishing (5/9/18, 12).

During the course, Lauren determined to let go of relationships that “are not
nourishing” (5/9/18, 18).

Most learners reported developing their interconnectedness through

experiences or reflections that was often associated with God and faith or family
communities. Most learners believed their stronger interpersonal relationships with
family and colleagues reflected their spiritual and servant leader development.

61
Learners in religious communities appear to have further benefited from their access
to mentors in their communities but it is not possible to measure this difference.

4.3.2. Development of connection through religious/spiritual

practice and action

There was development in the capacity for connection through religious or

spiritual practices within faith communities in Aimee (28/8/18, 124), Jennifer (28/8/18,
196) and Valerie (28/8/18, 36). Jennifer found her singing enabled her to connect and
serve in her church, as:

my pastor heard me sing a few weeks ago. He was blessed when he

saw the crowd and my gift. They really felt the worship. I sang from my
heart for His glory, but I didn’t know how it impacted people… Some
[people] were crying. I want to use this gift… not just to sing a nice song
(28/8/18, 222).

Jennifer felt that through servicing, she more strongly connected with God and others
and helped facilitate a connection between others and God.

Learners also developed a capacity for connection beyond their faith

communities. Lauren found mindfulness supported her interpersonal relationships as:

my greatest takeaway [from servant leadership] is humility. When I get

cross, I remember to be in the moment, be mindful and humble—
because I don't necessarily know the other person's story and they don't
know mine. That’s a check and balance (5/9/18, 70).

Jennifer found her faith developed hope in ‘the unseen light beyond her… darkness’
(6/4/18, 4:47-4:56) that allowed her to become a beacon of hope to a friend seeking
PR and facing relationship challenges. Jennifer came to believe:

if we have any problem, our prayer is more [authentic]… But if you don’t
have any problems… you are complacent. You can’t really feel your
prayers, even though you are trying (6/4/18, 72).

Frank found the separation from his friends and family due to international study
created periods of solitude (28/8/18, 34) where he felt ‘naked’ (28/8/18, 54) as:

we are growing up, but we are losing people… like I did when I left
Mexico… I saw these people, but these people don’t see me because
they are focused on relationships, school, etc… Despite living with
roommates, I live by myself. When I’m alone, it makes me stronger
because before I didn’t know how to be alone… I always wanted to be
surrounded by people… Now I have learnt to be comfortable with myself
(28/8/18, 34; 36).

62
Frank developed strong relationships with peers and later moved into a house with
Aimee, Erika, Leon and Tina (Frank, 28/8/18, 150). While most learners noted how
their spiritual understanding deepened through class discussions, only Lauren and
Valerie spoke of developing a spiritual wholeness or interconnectedness to other
faiths during the course. Valerie summarised:

the class has a very different group of religions, and it has been fun
hearing everyone sharing their backgrounds—especially for me as I
was born in the church and didn’t have contact with others. It’s good to
see how others are affected by religion (28/8/18, 5).

Though Valerie developed a sense of wholeness between faiths, this did not change
her spiritual practices.

Spiritual development was attributed by some learners to stronger connections and a

sense of wholeness. However, beyond providing emotional and spiritual support from
interpersonal and community relationships, the connection between spiritual
development and connection was often tenuous and unclear.

4.3.3. Development of connection through a sense of identity

There was development in capacity for connection as learners’ sense of

identity changed. Victor initially perceived his relational identity as a “composter”
(25/5/18, 0:06-0:15), or “someone who mixes human, horse, sheep and cow manure
together to make fertiliser for organic foods” (25/5/18, 0:06-1:11). Through class
discussions, Victor spoke of how his perceived relational identity became “a teacher
who writes about [sustainability]... [and is] in service because of a desire to serve”
(3/9/18, 26-28). A pivotal event was when classmates shared with Victor their
personal perceptions of him, leading Victor to later comment:

I thought the best I could do was to be a composter because ‘this way,

I’m not making waste, just manure’. I was shocked and surprised [at
hearing] a different point of view (3/9/18, 40).

Through the same activity, Rick discovered “there are others who think positively of
me as well” (28/8/18, 195) and later shared:

the improvement [in connection] was evident during Erika’s birthday

with Aimee and Frank. They are good friends but traditionally not people
I would spend time with. Yesterday we had dinner, and I realised that
after four terms with them, I hadn’t made time [to get to know them]. We
were engaging at a much higher level than before. A year ago, I
wouldn’t have thought that (28/8/18, 79).

63
While Frank did not have a perceived identity change, he summarised that:

I feel more confident now since I shared personal things to strangers [in
the class]. I found sharing things… helped develop my confidence
instead of focusing on me (28/8/18, 156).

In developing as a servant leader, Yvette sought identity change in students in her

scholarship programme as:

what [these poor children] have is different from what we have, and their
belief in God [differs]. I want them also to have [what I have]. They are
smarter and better. God said, ‘you are better than this’, but sometimes
there is resignation—the hopelessness they have keeps them where
they are. They feel like ‘I’m just like this’ and their parents tell them ‘you
can’t think like this - we are poor and will always be poor. This is our lot
in life’ (28/8/18, 90-92).

Some learners believed their capacity for meaningful interpersonal relationship

directly or indirectly developed by better understanding others. Tina believed that as
her understanding of how cultures develop and differ improved (28/8/18, 144), she
was better able to connect with others through social advocacy. Tina shared:

I think [our social justice work] is related to Brazil and is part of our lives.
[Poverty] is [clearly displayed] there, but at the same time… we could
[choose not to] see it. I have a lot of friends who don’t care about poverty
and live in Brazil… I think culture changes our beliefs, but our personal
characteristics make us care (3/4/18, 43).

Aimee noted a transition from her forced and competitive ‘corporate’ personal identity
as it became authentic and centred on others (28/8/18, 19):

before, what defined me was my career—my title and what I did. Now
I’m defined by the things that make me, me. I’m more defined by…
relationships (28/8/18, 46).

Her previous sense of identity resulted in her:

want[ing] to please [my managers] and want[ing] to serve [my staff]. I

didn’t want them to go to work and think of me as a boss or something…
I guess before I was taken advantage of… But the thing is, [I’m] doing
a disservice to [staff] because I’m hampering growth if I’m not pushing
them and believing they can do things on their own (6/4/18, 17).

In developing her personal identity, Aimee found she is now:

more confident and comfortable… being vulnerable with other people.

This [applies] in my church or with people I’m coaching. I had this guard
before preventing me sharing my real self and exposing my vulnerable
side. Now I’m more confident and comfortable exploring deeper

64
 relationships because I’m more comfortable opening up myself
(28/8/18, 94).

This confidence changed how Aimee expressed herself outside the classroom:

I had this marketing assistant [who] used to travel with me all the time…
[When we now talk, it’s not just] about work but our personal lives…
She still shares her personal and professional struggles… [and] she
takes my advice seriously (28/8/18, 32).

Aimee started coaching this friend and provided counselling to a gay friend in her
church, leading her to consider a professional coaching career (28/8/18, 20).

Lauren best summarised how learners perceived servant leadership to be:

a way of ‘being’... In class, we said there is a lot more to it than just the
process. You must ‘feel’ it. And feel the pain of it. For servant
leadership, you can’t put an invisible barrier up (5/9/18, 70).

Lauren found as a result of her reflections and reciprocal class discussions, she
talked “a lot more this time about the ‘being’ of the teacher and the relationship of the
teacher with the student” in her teaching (5/9/18, 44) than before the course. Her
development within the class shaped her professional practice (5/9/18, 22).

Development of connection in some learners was the result of a change in

their perceived personal and relational identity and led to stronger peer relationships
and changes in professional practice. The process was facilitated through reciprocal
learning within the classroom. Yet, it was often unclear if connection was ‘spiritual’ or
other another form of personal or relational development as there was limited
connection between spirituality and identity.

4.3.4. Summary

Development of connectedness within the class was facilitated by reciprocal

and experiential learning. Valerie noted how reciprocal learning:

is what’s missing in other classes… where the teacher speaks, and

students listen. I think it [is] better [when] students can exchange ideas.
Teachers think they hold knowledge and students hold nothing… But
it’s not like that. Students have a lot; it should be an exchange, not just
throwing things out (28/8/18, 128).

Aspiring servant leaders deepened their capacity for connection within the class and
beyond the class by engaging in and reflecting on previous experiences or
relationships. Although third-party evidence is not available to validate this

65
development, evidence showed that learners perceived the importance of
connectedness differently by the end of the course and believed they improved their
interpersonal relationships. However, it is difficult to directly link development of
connection and a sense of spirituality in learners or the development of servant
leadership.

4.4. Development of a way of living

Sub-Question 4: How did development of a way of living, as defined by the Spiritual

Development Framework, contribute to servant leader development?

Most learners believed how they lived changed as a result of spiritual

development during the course. For most learners, their way of living became
consistent with servant leadership. This is unsurprising as George noted how all the:

people [in the course] subscribe to [servant leadership]—that’s why

they joined [the study]. In the class, everybody is pretty much in the
same frame (9/4/18, 8).

Learners developed by reflecting on servant leader virtues and comparing these to

their present or past practice or experiences. Tina realised how she initially believed:

servant leadership was a way to achieve results… by building teams.

During the course, I found it was a way of life (28/8/18, 2).

Tina summarised how she came to discover:

[servant leadership] is not a practice—today you are, and tomorrow you

are not. You become a servant leader as your actions correspond [with
beliefs] (28/8/18, 4).

Tina sought to apply her emerging ideas and beliefs of servant leadership:

in my life, [my College] programme, the College and NGO project. I see
how [servant leadership] can be applied, and I’m more confident about
[my ability to apply it] (28/8/18, 132).

Tina is one example of how a learner sought authenticity in their servant leader
ideals and behaviours. This extended beyond serving in the workplace or through
volunteering to learner thinking, interactions and behaviour.

66
4.4.1. Development of a way of living through apprehension of
transcendence

Some learners found spiritual development changed how they expressed

themselves in how they lived. Several Christian learners expressed how challenging
it was to authentically be Christ-like. Yvette found it difficult to balance her perceived
ideal of humility with growing her scholarship programme, sharing:

my personal approach and thinking [to scholarships] has been ‘I’m

happy to do it myself… [and] ‘what your left hand is doing, do not let
your right hand know’. I want to keep it [consistent with] my faith
because I don’t want people to know (28/8/18, 74).

Her basis derived from Matthew 6:3, where Christ instructs followers to be discreet in
their generosity, but her approach was a double-edged sword as she remained
humble but had limited community support. A friend challenged her that:

humble is [being] who you are—it doesn’t mean you have to be the
lowest or at the bottom… At the time, I did not agree… My perception
of humility is of being the lowest (28/8/18, 138).

While Yvette remained sceptical of this advice (28/8/18, 138), she introduced past
students and parents as directors to grow her support base and fund future
scholarships (28/7/18, 92/2). She also introduced pre-requisite conditions to ensure
parents have the will and capacity to support their children in their education
(28/7/18, 92/2).

Other Christian learners also found tensions between their faith and their
actions. Valerie shared:

I try to understand when I do whatever I can, [God’s] grace will complete

the rest. But, in my mind, I have no limitations. If I’m not doing well
enough, I must work harder and do more… I’m still expecting too much
of me, and I understand that’s not God’s expectations… but it is difficult,
very difficult! (5/4/18, 56).

Rick similarly faced guilt and remorse when he identified and reflected on the
incongruency between his values and behaviours:

I have high expectations of myself. I always expect to succeed, and

when I fall short of these goals, it feels really bad… [God] is always
there… but I can be really hard-headed and don’t always listen. He
showed me failure happens to people greater than me… [and that] ‘it’s
OK to cast my burden on Him. I see His grace now… [and] I’ve become
closer to what He’s trying to teach me… It’s really important if I’m going
to be a servant leader (12/4/18, 63).

67
Spiritual development in Aimee (27/6/18, 19/16), Jennifer (28/8/18, 68), Rick and
Valerie meant they better understood God’s grace in spite of their weaknesses.

In contrast, non-Christian learners perceived servant leadership as independent of

religion as Leon shared:

I have a father who is… an atheist. [He taught me] it's not because we
believe in God, Heaven and Hell but human nature [that determines
behaviour]; it's more connected to who you are… You have a
personality that encourages you to be a servant leader more than a
religious doctrine or dogma (11/7/18, 34/46).

Like Christian learners, Victor and Leon also set high expectations. Victor shared:

the targets I set are very unreasonable. I know this when I set them… I
know at the time I’m setting it that I’m not going to achieve this. But if I
have people working for me… it can be very frustrating… as they feel
they are underachieving (20/4/18, 99, 101).

Victor believed failure was a lack of “self-restraint” (28/8/18, 48). Leon also shared:

I always push myself to be like… my dad… and my brothers as they are

amazing… I struggled as I grew because… [as] you cannot be great in
everything… I want[ed] to be right… liked, a good friend… student…
brother… son—a good everything! It puts a lot of pressure on your
shoulders… [and creates a] fear of failing (3/4/18, 20).

In contrast to the religious concept of grace, Leon learners found spiritual

development was a process of:

closely assessing choices, patterns and my thinking. If you are willing

to be a servant leader, the deeper you go inside yourself and your
reasoning, the more likely you are to understand others and their
perspectives (28/8/18, 30).

Victor also found his spiritual development involved understanding “causal, outcome,
remedial or moral responsibility” (28/8/18, 32) through discovering his wife was
pregnant (20/4/18, 63) and processing the subsequent abortion. He wanted the twins
(20/4/18, 75), arguing abortion is to “play God in making [this] decision” (20/4/18, 63)
as “there [is] something bigger than [his wife’s] mind… [that] you could never create it
on your own” (20/4/18, 63). After the abortion, Victor shared:

I just have to accept it… I’ve been the cause of it. I can’t blame [my
wife]… I’m not just responsible for the cause but also the outcome for
my [two current] children… [My family] are so tight in our routines… that
if I had brought these twins into the world… I may not be taking
responsibility… What kind of life would I give them? A life of strife? A

68
 life of constant activity? A life where their parents may not have had
time for them? (3/9/18, 54).

Victor sought to justify the outcome by realigning his values to the actions of his wife.
Yet, he experienced feelings of “grief, moments of hopelessness… disappointment
and shame” (20/4/18, 67). His emotions point to a transcendent morality beyond his
moral reasoning. Through the teachings of Jiddu Krishnamurti (20/4/18, 97), Victor
concluded “there is no choice—we think there is but actually there is not” (20/4/18,
63); instead there is ‘emergence’ that is:

between fatalistic and deterministic models and the kind of libertarian

free-will kind of models… The individual is important but… what [we
think is a decision] is manipulated choice… Quite often, we are chasing
things we don’t want (20/4/18, 127).

Victor determined truth was personally and socially constructed by listening and
observing (20/4/18, 63) in “relation with other entities” (6/8/18, 1:703 – 1:707). The
language for Victor’s beliefs derives from Miller’s (2012) concepts of responsibility
and global justice; making him causally responsible for the outcome (28/8/18, 2).

For many learners, the process of seeking authenticity between their beliefs
and failures increased their perceived humility (Aimee, 28/8/18, 132; Lauren, 5/9/18,
2; Leon, 28/8/18, 16; Tina, 28/8/18, 28/8/18, 14; Yvette, 28/8/18, 76). Leon shared:

I constantly… talk about humility and… [while] it sounds nice… I think I

go over this a lot to remind me that this is really important to practice
(28/4/18, 20).

An aspiration to be a servant leader encouraged learners to identify inconsistencies

in their beliefs and behaviours which often resulted in a sense of humility. Many
learners found their spirituality shaped how they perceived personal failures as a
servant leader. Some Christian learners developed spiritually by understanding grace
in contrast to some non-Christian learners who rationalised their tensions, but the
insufficient evidence makes it difficult to draw broad conclusions.

4.4.2. Development of a way of living through religious/spiritual

practice and action

Most learners came to perceive service as a form of spiritual or religious

practice and sought to make this a way of life. All Christian learners viewed Christ as
the ultimate example of a servant leader based on His theology and conduct and

69
sought to emulate Him in serving others (Aimee, 25/3/18, 7; Jennifer, 28/8/18, 192;
Rick, 28/8/18, 163; Yvette, 16/2/18, 5). For Valerie, this meant:

[in the LDS church we] believe we are servants. Every person in the
church has their own lives and work to sustain themselves; the church
is about service (28/8/18, 66).

Valerie previously served as president, secretary and councillor roles in LDS

organisations (5/4/18, 48) but did not hold church leadership roles during this period
due to time restrictions (28/8/18, 40). Aimee (28/8/18, 94) and Jennifer (28/8/18, 82)
also volunteered in their religious communities. Yet, not all Christian service was in
church as Yvette shared:

I can go to any church or any place and feel connected [to God]… it
really doesn’t matter as long as there is a church. It doesn’t need to be
with people (28/8/18, 176).

While Yvette found ‘church’ central to her faith, her faith was centred around praying
in church rather than serving within the church community (28/8/18, 174). Her
spiritual expression of service occurred through her scholarship programme.

Jennifer joined the course as she believed servant leadership was “working in
the ministry for the Lord and helping people” (14/2/18, 7). She expressed service in
the Salvation Army (28/5/18, 7:26-7:34) and:

other volunteer-based organisations. Tina and Leon inspired me, and

I’ve been talking with friends about it. What they did and their passion
was amazing (28/8/18, 208).

Her work in social justice projects is testament to how reciprocal learning class
shaped her development. Like Jennifer, Aimee (15/2/18, 46) and Valerie (27/2/18,
11) also sought to serve outside the church with their business and teaching skills.

Non-religious learners also associated service with spirituality as Erika shared:

[The Golden Rule became] a slogan for my life. I’m not a religious
person, but I strongly believe you receive what you do to others… When
I came to NZ, I experienced this. I wasn’t very attentive to my boss…
[and] my team were not very attentive to me (5/4/18, 13).

As a result, Erika became:

more focused on doing [social and community development work] after

[working with the NGO]… I became interested when I heard people’s
stories [and] was thinking [how] I could help in hospitals, so people open
up to share their stories (13/9/18, 135).

70
Learners also developed spiritually as they sought to further incorporate spiritual and
religious practices as a way of life. Where Leon and Tina previously found:

meditating for more than 10 minutes [was] a record… it [is now] like 20
minutes. [At first] I was like ‘no - I can’t do this’. Now I can stay… thinking
and relaxing. I guess I am different (Tina, 28/8/18, 65)

Leon and Tina also found spirituality became a constant focus in their lives as

[now] I do [a spiritual reflection] on a daily or weekly basis. Leon… asks

‘how are you feeling now - do you want to share something’? We have
this type of exercise between us… When I was [preparing for the
interview] I was though ‘I have changed a lot in the past few months’
(Tina, 28/8/18, 65).

Victor noted how his spiritual practices became a way of living as:

I’m getting better at [self-restraint]… For me, self-restraint is telling

myself to get up and do my morning meditation (28/8/18, 48).

This resulted in:

modelling [servant leadership concepts] to [my family who] now live with
me… They see me doing my meditations in the morning and resolving
things with my wife and sister… and have become more at ease (3/9/18,
107).

Valerie shared how the language of her prayers changed during the course as:

depending on God is part of my life… [In the past]… I presented [God

with] the situation [and would say] ‘I want to do this, please help out’…
In NZ, this doesn’t work… so, I have learnt to deal with these changes…
Now I’m more flexible and like ‘OK - this is my idea. Do you accept it?
If not, let’s go to the next one’ (28/8/18, 162).

Her new proactivity was shared by Jennifer, who was previously too “lazy to read the
Bible” but increased her dedication to reading Scripture (28/8/18, 130).

During the course, all learners served in some capacity and some came to
associate service with spirituality. Most learners also reported that religious or
spiritual practice became more embedded and regular in their lives. Some evidence
suggests volunteering by religious learners was more regular than non-religious
learners because they had better access to volunteering opportunities although not
all volunteering by religious learners was in religious communities.

71
4.4.3. Development of a way of living through developing a sense
of identity

Several learners reported that personal transformations during the course

shaped their perception and application of servant leadership. Valerie and Jennifer
previously experienced guilt and remorse about their impatience (Valerie, 5/4/18, 56)
or laziness (Jennifer, 6/4/18, 31). As a result of their interaction with God, Jennifer,
Rick and Valerie reported that they no longer perceived themselves as lazy (Jennifer,
28/8/18, 132-135) or abrupt (Valerie, 28/8/18, 118). Valerie shared that:

I recognise I’ve got potential for leadership. Now I [addressed] my

worries of ‘what are you going to do’ and ‘how I’m going to lead’… I
want to be a servant leader and [to] apply that to whatever situation I
find myself in (28/08/18, 220).

Rick shared how his sense identity and purpose shifted:

through taking the course and analysing myself, I got thinking - what
sounds better to me—profit or service? Sales is all about profit [but] the
word ‘service’ rang much better to me (28/8/18, 8).

His sense of identity and purpose was further challenged when:

Jennifer said ‘you know you would make a good teacher’… I thought
‘maybe I would be happy [doing this]’… [This question helped me
see]… ‘I’m much happier serving people’ (28/8/18, 129, 131).

As a result, Rick sought to move from sales to service or teaching roles (28/8/18,
133). In a similar form, Victor also shared:

a lot of people said I was inspiring or charismatic… [but] there were

times I did not live up to my environmental values and had stopped
cycling and reverted to using my car. I was feeling helpless… I was
guilty of succumbing to circumstances and not being powerful enough
to do the right thing (28/8/18, 40).

As Victor realigned his behaviours to his environmental values, he found:

a lot of things dropped off like spending time with friends and
socialising… [my wife and I] now realise it’s more important to take care
of the limited number of things… rather than spreading ourselves too
thin… (3/9/18, 16).

Victor reverted to cycling to work (3/9/18, 42), wrote editorials supporting cycling
(3/9/18, 46) and engaged and supported other cyclists to increase cycling in
Auckland (3/9/18, 42 - 44). Victor also published sustainability journal articles (3/9/18,

72
14) and became disciplined in his meditation (3/9/18, 48, 69, 107), encouraging his
family to adopt his practices (3/9/18, 63).

Leon (28/8/18, 24), Rick (12/4/18, 63), Tina (3/4/18, 71) and Yvette (28/8/18,
138) believed ruminating initially negatively influenced their self-efficacy as a servant
leader. By engaging with God, Rick found his self-efficacy increased, writing:

I feel much more confident in becoming a servant leader… I am also

more confident now in knowing my personality… should not hinder me
from collaborating and being a servant leader (8/8/18, 17).

Leon likewise shared how:

As I grow, I understand you cannot be great in everything… It puts a lot

of pressure on your shoulders… This relates to the fear of failing, having
the final say and having strong opinions. I’ve been working on this for a
long time (3/4/18, 20).

Leon found the course allowed him to be:

more confident to pursue things I want to do. I try to remember many

outcomes aren’t directly influenced by me and depend on other factors
(3/4/18, 66).

Frank was initially uncertain about his leadership capacity (23/2/18, 31) but believed
his self-efficacy developed during the course. He concluded:

I feel very confident about myself and being a servant leader… The fear
I felt… made me feel incapable. When you learn to push through this,
dedicate time to improve your skills and make mistakes… you realise
you are getting to [be a servant leader] (10/4/18, 31).

Aimee (28/8/18, 2), Tina (28/8/18, 2) and Yvette (28/8/18, 214) also believed their
self-efficacy for servant leadership increased.

While some learners reported changes in their self-perceived identity as a

servant leader and in their self-efficacy for servant leadership, it is difficult to prove a
causal relationship between their self-views and their ‘way of life’ without third-party
reports. In some cases, development of self-efficacy was directly linked by learners
to their spiritual development, while in other cases the link was less clear.

4.4.4. Summary

Development of way of living occurred by applying servant leader principles

and developing disciplined spiritual practices. Application of servant leadership was

73
facilitated by reflecting on past and present experiences—a process that creates a
feedback loop similar to an altruistic cycle Valerie described where:

you start serving and work with people, you start to love them. This is
how you become a servant leader… You want to do it more and more
(5/8/18, 64/38).

In seeking to be a more authentic servant leader, learners often associated aspects

of their spiritual development to servant leadership. For some, this was their service
or volunteering while others found their spiritual or religious practices became more
disciplined. Development often meant learners perceived themselves differently as
their development incorporated aspects of humility, self-awareness and grace.

4.5. Chapter summary

Most participants reported increased spiritual awareness, connectedness and

way of living during the course. This development was personal, multi-dimensional
and built on previous beliefs and experiences as learners reflected on experiences,
mentors and models, reciprocal learning through class discussions and spiritual
practices such as prayer, meditation, mindfulness and study of religious texts.

Spiritual development was facilitated by mentoring, modelling, reciprocal and

experiential learning and spiritual practice. As these development methods were
emphasised in the course design and the outcomes anticipated, the study does not
prove these are the only methods or a best-practice approach to servant leader
development. Evidence from this study suggests service-learning (as used by TEDO
in the prior development of Leon and Tina), project-based learning (as applied in the
NGO project team) and coaching (as applied by Aimee) may also support servant
leader development but results were too limited to make general recommendations.

Spirituality developed from, and was largely consistent with, earlier religious
or spiritual experiences and practices. While all learners believed their beliefs were
consistent with the ideal of servant leadership, Aimee, Jennifer, Rick, Tina, Valerie
and Yvette—almost all Christians, developed a sense of calling or purpose as a
servant leader during the course. Learners sought authenticity by creating
congruency between their perceived ideal of servant leadership and their behaviours,
identity and aspects of their religious or spiritual practice which for some included
service. In some cases, development occurred through disruptive experiences in
their personal lives which was supported by their spiritual development.

74
Chapter 5. Discussion

This chapter discusses how spiritual development contributed to servant

leader development in learners of diverse ethnic and religious backgrounds in The
Servant as Leader course. The chapter uses the SLBS to connect spirituality to
servant leader development. The chapter concludes by reiterating key findings.

5.1. Spirituality and servant leader development

Except for George (28/8/18, 56), most learners reported development in most
servant leader dimensions during The Servant as Leader course including
transcendental spirituality. As the study recorded development over a semester, it is
difficult to know if this proximal development can or will result in distal development.
Day and Dragoni (2015) argued that proximal development focuses on leader self-
views and competencies while distal development creates dynamic skills and
abstractions and meaning-making structures and processes. Proximal development
may lead to distal development as learners think critically about leadership, change
self-views and increase their leader capability and efficacy (D. V. Day & Dragoni,
2015). Leon illustrated in his reflection how development may occur over time:

[the TEDO] people who trained us said ‘it will take you a year to
understand what has happened’… Six months after, something crossed
my mind, and I was like ‘oh - that’s what it is’… Things will happen with
time - they [may or may not] happen at the same velocity as the events
(28/8/18, 80).

While aspects of development may be explained through the proximal/distal

construct, the construct inadequately described spiritual development. Many learners
faced a ‘significant life experience’ (Benson, 2005) before or during the course which
shaped their spiritual development. These experiences include conversion to the
Christian faith (Aimee, 6/4/18, 58-62; Jennifer, 10/8/18, 21/26), ascribing to
Buddhism (Lauren, 6/9/18, 16), spiritual visions (Rick, 8/8/18, 21/5) or engagement
with God through prayer that may influence spiritual and servant leader development
over a lifetime. Some experiences were seemingly minor—like Aimee having her feet
washed by her pastor (27/6/18, 19/36) or an elder showing kindness to Jennifer
(28/8/18, 180), but formed important milestones in servant leader development.

Some significant life experiences were shaped or influenced by disruptive

experiences. While Bohanek (2007) noted how poor academic achievement was

75
often linked to low socio-economic demographics, learners found disruptive
experiences—often triggered by negative socio-economic factors, produced positive
spiritual or servant leader development. Aimee, Jennifer, Leon, Rick, Valerie, Victor
and Yvette believed their spiritual practices of prayer, meditation or mindfulness
helped them cope with these disruptive experiences—results supported by a
preponderance of research linking positive spiritual effects to difficult or traumatic
periods (Benson & Roehlkepartain, 2008; Clayton-Jones et al., 2019; Pargament &
Mahoney, 2005). Rick (28/8/18, 121) and Yvette (28/8/18, 192) also found forms of
spiritual practice helped develop their self-esteem and confidence. This study affirms
that spiritual development may occur during disruptive experiences and support
learners facing disruptive experiences although the link to servant leader
development is somewhat tenuous.

Fowler and Dell (2006) offer clues as to how spiritual development may occur.
They argued that unsettling moments and insufficient answers serve as a mechanism
to move from one stage of faith development to the next as the equilibrium is broken
and a new equilibrium is sought. While it is difficult to pin learners to a faith ‘stage’, all
learners exhibited aspects of later stages of faith development through individual-
reflective faith in their critical reflections and conjunctive faith in making sense of
paradoxes. As Fowler and Dell predicted (2006), most learners became more open
to other cultural traditions and ways of knowing. Learners who held to or developed
spiritually had more clarity and intention in their faith (Balk, 1983; Fowler & Dell,
2006); a factor be related with religious learners sense of purpose and affiliation with
servant leadership.

Positive benefits from disruptive experiences have been noted in some

contexts. Research found positive leader development occurred through immersion
in service-learning courses (D. V. Day & Dragoni, 2015; Grunwell, 2015) and through
camps (American Camp Association, 2005)—strategies that transplant leaders into a
different context for a period of time. Leon (3/4/18, 40) and Tina (3/4/18, 43) affirmed
how service-learning in TEDO created disruptive experiences that shaped their prior
servant leader development. Earlier research suggests students facing disruptive
experiences benefit from additional support in the form of counsellors or chaplains
(Cynthia D. McCauley & Van Velsor, 2004). Several religious learners also noted
how their religious communities provided support. Future learners will likely benefit
from similar support through individual professionals or communities.

76
 Any support mechanisms must holistically address the multi-dimensional
nature of spiritual and servant leader development. This multi-dimensional nature of
leader and servant leader development is recognised in the SLS, SLBS and SL-7
models—and others, to include moral, personal, emotional, relational, conceptual
and spiritual development (Clark, 1993; D. V. Day & Halpin, 2004; Hoskins, 2014;
Liden et al., 2008; Lord & Hall, 2005; Mumford et al., 2000; Sendjaya et al., 2008;
van Dierendonck & Nuijten, 2011). Benson et al. (2012) also argued spiritual
development is entwined with cognitive, social, emotional and moral development
and cannot easily be separated. Consistent with previous literature, spirituality and its
development emerged as an underpinning influence that shaped the development of
the other servant leader dimensions in the study.

Some previously identified servant leader antecedents are supported by study

findings. Prior exposure to servant leadership through a mentor or model was the
most consistent antecedent in this study—a trend also noted by Beck (2010). Some
mentoring and modelling had a direct spiritual connection when it was through a
religious figurehead or community or within a religious context, echoing earlier
findings by Boyum (2012). Some parental mentoring or modelling also reflected
elements of spiritual and servant leader development although this was seemingly
unintentional. However, there was limited evidence of agreeableness, narcissism or
extraversion being antecedents for servant leader development and no perceivable
or consistent trends between genders.

Evidence supports research that servant leader development requires self-

evaluation (Flynn et al., 2016). Self-evaluation was practiced by most learners who
had reflection integrated into their personal or professional practice. Furthermore,
reflection was a central component to most development methods and spiritual
practices applied in the course. This made it difficult to determine if self-evaluation
was an antecedent of the servant leader (i.e. the learner) or servant leader
development (i.e. the course) and how it developed. Learners also demonstrated
reflexivity by increasing their awareness of thoughts and feelings by analysing their
thinking (Song, 2018) to enable deeper insight and self-awareness. Rick shared:

I analysed my negative emotions [when I] calmed down and realise

emotions are necessary for the human spirit. I observed how [an excess
of] emotions [can] devastate relationships, business and family… just
like an excess of logic can remove the human factor in relationships,
business and family (5/3/18, 4).

77
As Greenleaf (1970) perceived, servant leader development draws from reflection
and self-awareness which may benefit from spiritual practice, mentoring, modelling
and reciprocal and experiential learning (Steele & Day, 2018). Some of these
development methods may draw from religious or spiritual mentors, models or
communities.

Servant leader development was informed by spiritual experiences,

engagements and practices in almost all learners. Spiritual development also
supported servant leader development for some learners through emotional and
spiritual practices during disruptive experiences. Servant leader development would
benefit from longitudinal research exploring how spiritual development influences
multiple servant leader dimensions.

5.2. Transcendental spirituality

Development of formative transcendental spirituality occurred before the

course through mentors and models within family and faith communities and with
influence from cultural forces. The following sections explore how aspects of
transcendental spirituality developed during The Servant as Leader course.

5.2.1. Religiousness

All religious learners believed servant leadership was harmonious with their
faith. This may reflect that study applicants sought to develop as servant leaders and
spiritually. Or, the opposite may be true—that potential applicants did not join the
course because they believed the study to be related to a religion—most probably
Christianity. Either way, personal religiousness may be a factor influencing learner
interest and motivation (B. A. Foster, 2000). Another influential factor is the term
servant which religious learners associated with Christ but can conjure up negative
connotations of passivity, indecisiveness, abdication of responsibility (van
Dierendonck, 2011) or even slavery (Irving, 2005), depending on the cultural or
spiritual context. Filipino learners believed servant leaders may endorse close leader-
follower relationships (Rick & Yvette, 15/3/18, 0:00-0:3:45) while Brazilian, Russian
and Mexican learners believed there must be power distance (Erika, 5/4/18, 83;
Frank, 28/8/18, 25; Tina, 3/4/18, 23); as servant leaders would be ‘martyrs’ in Russia
(Erika, 18/8/18, 76) and incompatible with Mexican culture (Frank, 10/4/18, 25).
Learner beliefs illustrate how servant leadership is perceived differently through

78
culture. Research further suggests cultural beliefs may be reflected in their respective
spiritual communities (Amaral, 2007; Marinho, 2005; Moon, 1999). Parris et al.
(2013) appropriately summarise by saying “servant leadership is accepted and
practiced across various cultures but their components are weighted differently”. In
preparation for future courses, the College may benefit from a study exploring why
certain international students are attracted or not attracted to servant leadership.

The perceived harmony between religion and servant leadership contrasts

with an analysis by Wallace (2007) of the five major religions—Buddhism, Hinduism,
Judaism, Christianity and Islam where he concluded all five religions had varying
degrees of incompatibility between their worldview and the servant leadership
philosophy. Yet, Wallace did not explore the beliefs or spiritual practices of
adherents. Where Wallace argued Christianity still may “suffer from practical issues
related to gender discrimination”, Valerie shared:

we have a separate [church] organisations [for men and women]…

call[ed] chorum for men and relief society for women. We separate at
some points - more because of sharing… I don’t think it is good if a
woman tries to conduct a man’s organisation because there will be lots
of clashes (5/4/18, 50).

While Valerie recognised gender separation in LDS organisations which Wallace

alluded to, she did not equate this to a gender discrimination (5/4/18, 52) or “a
theology of leadership that upholds androcentric patriarchal norms” (Eicher-Catt,
2005). Instead, Valerie believed church traditions expressed through servant
leadership supported gender expression in her church leadership roles (5/4/18, 52).
While Valerie was the only LDS member, this study supports an earlier New Zealand
study that found servant leaders may develop in an LDS context (Cyril, 2006).

Wallace also treated each religion as homogenous without considering the

diversity of beliefs within each religion. Yet, Lauren noted how there was a significant
plurality amongst Buddhist schools and teachings and believed that some Buddhist
philosophies of servant leadership and other Eastern religions might inform the
‘West’ (5/9/18, 2). This may be the case as servant leadership has been linked to
Islam (Ahmad & Abdul Kadir, 2012; Razali, 2012) and Taoism (Bai & Roberts, 2011;
Valeri, 2007) in addition to the previous associations made to Christianity.
Furthermore, Valerie believed that outside of religion, there were often limited
opportunities to learn of servant leadership in Brazil (5/4/18, 9)—pointing to the role
of religious communities in propagating servant leadership. While the learner

79
statements cannot prove these religions create servant leaders, they do reflect how
adherents perceived servant leadership to be harmonious with their religious beliefs.

5.2.2. Spirituality

Benson and Roehlkepartain (2008) noted how spiritual development

outcomes could be positive or negative when expressed internally and externally. For
religious learners, negative outcomes may include depressive symptoms (Cotton et
al., 2005) and loneliness (Sallquist et al., 2010) although this is tenuous as research
was unclear on whether religion was a cause or part of the cure. Previous research
also found negative outcomes were largely associated with communities where
authoritarian, legalistic and holiness was emphasised (Atran, 2006). In this study,
religious communities provided spiritual and practical support in the form of
accommodation (Jennifer, 6/4/18, 72), assistance with PR applications (Jennifer,
28/8/18, 180) and mentoring (Aimee, 28/8/18, 124) and were particularly important
for some religious learners facing disruptive experiences.

Openness to forms of spiritual practice was shaped by a sense of religious

identity. The absence of mindfulness in Christian teachings and traditions positioned
mindfulness as a competing or conflicting concept to Christian orthodoxy and the
practice of prayer (Hoover, 2018). While most Christian learners increased in the
regularity and disciplines of their religious practice, no Christian learner practiced
mindfulness. While an emerging body of literature suggests mindfulness may be
applied within a Christian context (Chase, 2019; Symington & Symington, 2012;
Trammel, 2016), without religious endorsement, it appears unlikely Christian learners
will apply mindfulness as a spiritual practice.

While mindfulness was largely perceived as a spiritual practice, earlier

mindfulness research presents the concept as largely non-spiritual. In arguing that
mindfulness is an antecedent for servant leader development, Verdorfer (2016)
positioned mindfulness as a form of distance and detachment where one can
observe oneself without judgement; making study results an assessment of the ability
to be mindful rather than practice spiritual mindfulness (Verdorfer, 2016). This
approach may mean Christian learners could be ‘mindful’ without practicing spiritual
mindfulness. The opposite may also be true–mindfulness practitioners may not (yet)
be mindful. Servant leader development would benefit from ‘mindfulness’ being
defined in non-spiritual language, so the concept is universally accessible for all
aspiring servant leaders.

80
 Despite featuring prominently in the study by Kaldor, Hughes and Black
(Kaldor et al., 2010) where approximately half of those identifying as ‘spiritual but not
religious’ had an environmental, ecological or land-based dimension dominating their
spirituality, ecological spirituality appeared largely absent in learner spirituality. The
exception was Victor who initially identified sustainability as an important component
of his spirituality (16/2/18, 13) and noted he increased the communication of his
beliefs with others through his teaching and writing (3/9/18, 14, 26-28). The relatively
high proportion of religious participants compared to the New Zealand population
(Vaccarino et al., 2011) reflects that most learners perceived spirituality through a
religious lens.

While learners were open to spiritual practices consistent with their faith or
beliefs, learners were often unaware of what spiritual practices were. Christian
learners identified prayer and the study of Scripture as spiritual practices but also
practiced aspects of simplicity, solitude, service and submission (R. J. Foster, 2018)
without identifying these as a spiritual practice. Applying Foster as a framework to
define spiritual practices in Christian learners has limitations as his spiritual practices
derive from a Quaker tradition (like Greenleaf) and may not capture the various
spiritual practices of the represented Christian and non-Christian traditions. While
spiritual-but-not-religious learners could draw from other spiritual practices, they also
were limited by the few practices they knew (typically meditation and mindfulness).
All learners, including those who were not religious, may benefit by broadening their
spiritual practices consistent with or supportive of their personal religion or spirituality.
As spiritual practices strongly influenced spiritual development, this may in turn
strengthen servant leader development.

The study reflects how unclear the concept of universal spirituality is. While
some argue spirituality is universal (Benson & Roehlkepartain, 2008; Clayton-Jones
et al., 2019; Piedmont, 2007; Piedmont & Leach, 2002; Zinnbauer et al., 1999),
without an agreed definition of spirituality, this is difficult to conceptualise or validate.
Lauren reflected learner beliefs about the universality of spirituality by sharing:

Nathan: “Can someone be a servant leader if they do not perceive

themselves as being spiritual?”

Lauren: “Yeah… what is spiritual?”

Nathan: “You posed this question in class. Is everyone spiritual?”

81
 Lauren: “That’s right!... My issue with ‘spiritual’ is when people say they
are really ‘spiritual’ - it really turns me off them because if you are, you
don’t need to say - just be it. You just are” (6/9/18, 65-70).

Despite some learners believing spirituality could be universal, around one third of
New Zealanders do not perceive themselves as spiritual (Vaccarino et al., 2011)—a
factor that may influence how spirituality is perceived in servant leader development
in New Zealand and more broadly.

Opinions are also mixed on the importance of spirituality in servant leader

development. Eva (2009) and Sendjaya (2013) argued for adolescent servant leader
development to downplay transcendental spirituality. They believe learner differences
make development of transcendental spiritual difficult and recommend educators
promote responsible morality and voluntary subordination. In contrast, the SDF
emphasised adolescent spiritual development. The differing perspectives reflect how
spirituality is perceived differently in the US (the context of Benson et al.) versus
Australia (the context of Eva and Sendjaya) due to different contexts, cultures,
narratives, practices, communities and sense of identity. A reason religion or
spirituality may be neglected in servant leadership—and more broadly—is because
of the ambivalence many may have towards it (Robin & Sendjaya, 2018). Others may
avoid spirituality because of its controversial truth-claims (Robin & Sendjaya, 2018)
or reduce spirituality to psychological, social and physiological functions (Pargament
& Mahoney, 2005). However, there is a growing awareness for leadership to
encourage mindfulness, inclusiveness, sustainability and social justice (Robin &
Sendjaya, 2018). While aspiring servant leaders may endorse spiritual development
or may inadvertently develop spiritually, some aspiring servant leaders may also
reject this aspect of development.

5.2.3. Sense of purpose and calling

In the Comprehensive Theory of Spiritual Development, Benson et al. (2005)

broadly defined awareness as the meaning, purpose and obligation that shapes the
moral duty and ‘contribution’ that knows and affirms why one matters. They argued
these forces collectively pull a learner into spiritual development and provide the
motivational push for growth. While learners had a sense of purpose and obligation,
motivational drivers for undertaking this present course were a desire of self-
actualisation (Aimee, 28/8/18, 30), personal development (Leon, 20/2/18, 24),
professional development (Tina, 27/2/18, 25), building personal confidence (Yvette,
28/8/18, 194) or for personal ministry (Jennifer, 14/2/18, 14-17). Spiritual

82
development occurred as a secondary rather than primary goal for learners in their
servant leader development.

Spirituality often shaped a sense of meaning or purpose. Victor shared how:

moments that created my worldview… [include] seeing the destruction

of my village… [as it converted] from a green landscape [with ponds] to
being dominated by petrol tankers and… rubbish dumps… [Then],
coming [to Auckland] and seeing a very different world at a young age…
it makes you very sensitive to… developed and undeveloped countries
(28/8/18, 10).

These reflections, a connection with Jiddu Krishnamurti and an association with

Indian culture were strong factors shaping Victor’s perspective as a servant leader.
Similarly, Yvette found her faith and the experience of her mother escaping poverty
through education were driving factors in her service to poor children through her
scholarship programme (28/8/18, 84-86). Some religious learners also perceived
servant leader development as a broader avenue to engage spiritually with God and
their peers (Aimee, 28/8/18, 124, Jennifer, 28/8/18, 192). While learners perceived
purpose differently, a sense of spirituality was often embedded in learners purpose
and servant leader development (Barbuto & Wheeler, 2006; B. Winston & Fields,
2015).

A sense of purpose was expressed in practical ways such as Leon and Tina’s
social justice work, Aimee and Jennifer’s involvement in ministry and Valerie’s
teaching. The language of purpose or calling has similarities to a religious calling,
reminiscent of Weber’s Protestant Work Ethic (1958) and Fry’s spiritual leadership
(2003) in aligning vocation with spirituality. As with previous studies, some learners
expressed a sense of purpose irrespective of religion (C. D. Beck, 2014; van Kuik,
1998), but it was predominantly religious learners who articulated a purpose or
calling. Evidence reflects earlier research that found a higher sense of purpose
among religious learners than non-religious in Australian school students and the
broader Australian population (J. L. Furrow et al., 2004; P. J. Hughes, 2017; Kaldor
et al., 2010). A similar study in Northern Ireland found Christian youth had a stronger
sense of purpose the more frequently they prayed (Robbins & Francis, 2005). While
the small sample size restricts broad conclusions, spirituality appears to positively
influence a sense of purpose in servant leader development.

83
5.2.4. Spiritual and personal identity

The concept and development of identity within servant leader development

differed to what Benson et al. (2012) described. Identity development in the study
focused on understanding and expressing servanthood rather than religion or
spirituality. Learners were shaped through development of individual, interpersonal
(e.g. learner-mentor) and collective identity (e.g. learner-class) (Derue & Ashford,
2010; Gecas, 1982; Miscenko & Day, 2016). While Benson (2012) argued that
identity, as an engagement influence, shaped the spiritual developmental processes
of awareness, connection and a way of life, identity in this study shaped a sense of
personal calling and purpose.

Kegan (1982) identified five stages of development, of which the final four
may occur as adulthood development where learners progress from being self-
focused to having identity shaped by social expectations, then authored by personal
values and finally through self-transformation. Thus, identity develops through dyadic
and group interactions, and reflection on, their perceived meaning over time. Victor
developed in his individual identity through reflective introspection and spiritual
practice—development best aligned to the fourth stage of constructive development
when learners develop independently from others and their environment (Kegan,
1982). However, Victor continued to display stage three attributes by having his
personal identity reinforced by interpersonal and collective elements in peer and
classroom interactions. Similar processes are evident with Aimee, Jennifer, Rick and
Yvette. While evidence showed learners developed a sense of identity, this was
inconsistent with Kegan’s stages of identity development.

The depth of analysis and identity between students varied. Benson et al.
(2005) initially associated religious or spiritual identity with myths, narratives or
interpretative frameworks (Kapuscinski & Masters, 2010) in the Comprehensive
Theory of Spiritual Development. Most learners used myths or narratives based on
stories or experiences to analyse aspects of servant leadership—examples being
Plato’s sea captains or Leo’s Journey to the East. Learners also constructed
interpretative frameworks of varying complexity. Some interpretative frameworks
were rudimentary such as George believing he applied the virtues of all the major
religions (20/3/18, 3) without analysing how these may contradict. Other interpretive
frameworks like those created by Aimee, Valerie and Yvette challenged some
orthodox aspects of their religion. The use of these frameworks reflect how learner
spirituality was not ‘blind faith’ as learners inherited aspects of their religion and

84
appended or developed it by analysing beliefs of self, religion, the ‘universe’ and life
to inform their sense of transcendental spirituality, sense of ‘being’ and guide their
development of authentic self.

5.2.5. Summary

Spiritual development occurred in learners who identified as both religious

and spiritual-but-not-religious through developing their religiousness or spirituality.
Development synthesised earlier religious or spiritual beliefs with personal and
cultural beliefs through myths, narratives and interpretive frameworks; at times
challenging inherited beliefs when their personal beliefs differed. Many learners
found spirituality informed their sense of purpose and identity although this appeared
to more strongly occur in religious learners. Servant leader development may be
strengthened through providing learners with a broader awareness of applicable
spiritual practices. It is also possible some learners may reject spirituality and
spiritual development.

5.3. Covenantal relationship

Learners found the term ‘covenantal relationship’ ambiguous and believed it

to be based on deep promises (Aimee, 27/6/18, 80/13) or unbreakable trust
(Jennifer, 10/8/18, 80/10) between the leader and their team (Lauren, 26/8/18, 19/8).
Learners also surmised the concept was related to Christianity based on a covenant
between God and humanity (Lauren, 26/8/18, 19/8). The characteristics identified by
learners differ to the sub-dimensions Sendjaya et al. (2008) proposed of acceptance,
availability, equality and collaboration. Learners believed there to be a mismatch
between ‘covenantal’ which emphasises a strong commitment with possible spiritual
implications, and the clustered meaning of the sub-dimensions that point to an
egalitarian and participative leader-follower relationship. Finding a term for these
collective sub-dimensions is difficult, but learners and other servant leader
professionals would benefit from a clearer term than ‘covenantal’.

Although learners were confused by the term ‘covenantal relationship’, they

reported developing aspects of covenantal relationship by improving their listening
and empathy skills. This occurred predominantly inside the classroom with peers,
guest speakers and the facilitator, but to a lesser degree with social influencers
outside the classroom such as family, friends, social commentators and academics.

85
Reciprocal learning enabled learners to indirectly introduce their social influencers to
the class—such as Jennifer sharing the advice of her church elder or Victor sharing
Jiddu Krishnamurti teachings. Through this process, learners engaged directly with
peers and indirectly with their broader social network. Learners also observed
engagement between their peers, their external social influencers and academics. At
times, this dialogue was confusing, as Leon noted after listening to peers and
considering different servant leadership academics:

I still find [servant leadership] difficult to define… because it is a very

broad concept and the boundaries are not clear… [and] can be defined
in so many different ways… (28/8/18, 2).

Leon echoed the need for an agreed definition of servant leader and servant
leadership so there can be clarity in servant leader development (Berger, 2014; M.
M. Chemers, 2000; van Dierendonck, 2011). He also emphasises the need for
consistent reproduction and reinforcement in the classroom (Bandura, 1971).

An important relationship to emerge in the evidence was the teacher-learner

relationship in the form of the ‘servant teacher’ (Hays, 2008). While reciprocal
learning downplayed the prominence of the teacher as the source of knowledge in
the classroom, all teachers recognised how influential the teacher was in shaping the
classroom environment and sought to apply aspects in their professional practice. As
with the concept of the ‘servant leader’, the ‘servant teacher’ lacks a clear definition
and measures (Noland & Richards, 2015) and requires support and training (J. M.
Furrow, 2015; Robinson, 2009). Evidence suggests that servant leader development
in a different context may be strengthened by the servant teacher building positive
class relationships, climate and culture building (D. V. Herman & Marlowe, 2005),
trust and classroom leadership and fellowship (English, 2011).

Another important relationship in the course was peer-peer relationships

which formed a learning community that provided some social, emotional and
spiritual support as Lauren summarised:

[the] servant leadership [course]… creates caring, humanity, openness

and trust which was secure, safe and powerful [in class] (6/9/18,114).

Other research also found benefits in learning communities for leader development
(Eich, 2008) and spiritual development in schools in Aotearoa-New Zealand (Sewell,
2011) where there was positive intellectual, social, emotional outcomes.

86
 Some religious learners benefited from relationships with a religious
community through emotional, practical and spiritual support, access to mentors and
models and opportunities for volunteering. There is a dearth of research exploring the
causal relationship of religious or spiritual communities in developing servant leaders
despite evidence showing servant leader development occurs in the context of
religious schools, universities and churches (A. R. Anderson, 2009; Ashley, 2016;
Griffin, 2012; Hoskins, 2014; Ingram, 2003; Meinecke, 2014; Rohm, 2013). As
servant leadership was envisioned by Greenleaf (1970) to create and occur within
community (Spears, 1995), this is surprising. As other studies on servant leader
development were often conducted in a collective environment, community may be
an implicit variable in the research. However, these spiritual or religious communities
may offer further benefits through shared construction of meaning and identity,
connection or interpretation of cultural influences which occurred within the class
learning community but was not captured within religious or spiritual communities.

Although several learners were confused by ‘covenantal’ relationships, there

is some evidence that their spiritual development encouraged development of
covenantal teacher-learner, peer-peer and learner-community relationships that
supported their servant leader development.

5.4. Authentic self

In developing as servant leaders, learners sought authenticity by creating

congruency between a sense of personal identity, values and behaviours. For many
learners, this meant exploring their personal sense of ‘being’ while some Christian
learners also used Christ as a point of comparison. This led to learners like Victor,
Leon and Rick experiencing cognitive dissonance when discovering their ideals and
behaviours were incongruent. Yet for many learners, the journey to seek authenticity
led to an experience Gibbs (2007) calls a sense of “awe and wonderment” where
learners experienced a sense of wholeness by bringing together their segmented
worldviews and reperceiving these in the light of life’s mysteries. Erika shared how:

I [now] believe knowledge [of leadership] is not enough… [Many things]

I knew about before, but in the course, it became deeply ingrained… I
feel people will follow me now because they believe [in me as a leader]
(28/8/18, 104).

A key factor in developing authenticity within the classroom was the reciprocal
learning between classmates and social influencers that calibrated learner self-views.

87
Harter (2011) argued validation has two aspects—open support through respectful
and inquisitive listening, and voice to state opinions, thoughts and feelings. This
process enabled learners to move to found authenticity through intra-personal
relationships where learners built deep connections with self and others (Gibbs,
2007) that shaped their collective identities. This process enabled Rick, Victor and
Yvette to discover their internal, negative self-views were inconsistent with external
opinions; finding others positively perceived their value, strengths and weaknesses.
These dynamics illustrate how reciprocal learning within a community may provide
emotional support in servant leader development, but how well it facilitates servant
leader development is unclear.

Development of authenticity also occurred outside the classroom. Kiersch and

Peters (2017), in their authentic and servant leadership competency model, aligned
servant leader development to an inward-focus and outward-focus. They posit that
learners should become more aware of their own values and competencies (inward)
and aware of how external forces influence their leadership—a process that occurs
through reflecting on experiences. Kolb (2014) likewise captured an inward-outward
construct in his experiential learning model which includes reflective observation and
abstract conceptualisation (i.e. inward-focus) and concrete experience and active
experimentation (i.e. outward-focus). While Kolb did not anchor his model to leader
development, his model has relevance in showing how learning is a cyclical process
of action and reflection to create meaning.

Gibbs (2007) best better captured the internal quest for authenticity through
his concept of trans-connectedness as people connect their spirituality and identity to
explore their ‘beingness’. For learners like Aimee, Jennifer, Valerie and Yvette, their
journey of authenticity was deeply religious or spiritual as they sought to discover the
will, purpose or calling of God—and align to this. Echoing Sendjaya (2015) that
authentic self is a key component of servant leader development, this research found
authentic self to be an essential component in their servant leader development
which was supported by learners spiritual development.

5.5. Transforming influence

Despite all learners sharing an initial motivation to develop as a servant

leader, many learners struggled with their perceived imperfections and inadequacies.
As Lad and Luechauer (1998) predicted, learners fixated on doing it ‘right’ or their
rumination led to anger, frustration, vulnerability and despondency. This rumination

88
echoed concerns by Jones, Papadakis, Hogan and Strauman (2009) that
introspection may cause neuroticism or physical distress and result in a downward
cyclical pattern of self-deprecating thoughts fed by fears, threats or perceived losses.
While this may have been true for some learners during the course, all learners
reported improvement in their self-efficacy as they developed as servant leader; often
as a partial result of spiritual practice.

The influence of parents on learner development is described by

Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Theory of Development (2009). Bronfenbrenner
positioned the person at the centre of development but argued their development
occurred through proximal and distal social interactions. Proximal interactions create
a symbiotic relationship with microsystems such as family, school, peers and church;
distant macrosystems include cultural values and ideologies. Interactions between
these microsystems create a mesosystem. Family is the first and potentially the most
important influence in childhood spiritual development (Boyatzis et al., 2005), with
one study finding conversations with parents accounting for over 75% of
development (Boyatzis, 2012) and being critical in the formative moral development
between the ages of two to four (Schulman, 2005). Other studies affirm the
importance of parental influence in leader and servant leader development (C. D.
Beck, 2014, 2014; D. V. Day & Dragoni, 2015; S. L. Norris, 2015; Rude, 2005). As
Bronfenbrenner predicted, parents were most influential in formative spiritual and
servant leader development but less relevant during the course where the ideas of
other models, peers and academics were more prominent. This suggests the age of
aspiring servant leaders may have bearing on the relevance of a mentor.

Benson et al. (2005) also linked spiritual development to Elder’s Life-course

Theory (2006) which argued early socially defined events and roles are enacted in
future decisions (Giele, 2000); providing an underlying theory for how mentoring and
modelling influences moral and relational development (Schulman, 2005),
authenticity (Harter, 2011) and potentially service. As most religious learners
experienced formative spiritual development through parents and religious leaders,
their development as a servant leader extended from these experiences and
relationships. If Elder (2006) is correct, future servant leadership behaviour should
continue to reflect the influence of these formative mentors and models—while
potentially integrating some of their present development.

The nature of the mentoring relationship was an important factor in shaping

servant leader development. Ghosh, Haynes and Kram (2013) argued mentors must

89
be of a higher developmental order to model required attitudes and behaviours and
demonstrate high-quality relationships and emotional intelligence—attributes often
demonstrated by teachers (D. V. Herman & Marlowe, 2005) and religious authorities
(Brodie, 2016). In reciprocal learning the influence of peer learning was often
predicated by the perceived knowledge and authority of the speaker–whether this be
a peer, teacher or guest speaker. While most learners valued peer-input (Frank,
28/8/18, 156), the difference in age, management and leadership experience and
culture meant the class could be “very interesting... with everyone contributing”
(George, 3/3/18, 2) and enjoyable (George, 19/4/18, 83), but not always
developmental (George, 28/8/18, 2). Despite the benefits of reciprocal learning,
learners may still benefit in their servant leader development from guidance by a
respected authority–particularly in aspects such as spiritual development.

Academics also recognise how mentoring may occur through developmental

networks where a network actively supports a mentees advancement by providing
developmental assistance (Higgins & Kram, 2001). This network may include
mentors in different roles or with different expertise who collectively cooperate,
collaborate or disseminate information (D. V. Day, 2000). While developmental
networks differ to reciprocal learning, both constructs recognise the benefits of
diverse sources and discursive interactions over time. Aspiring servant leaders may
benefit from these networks in and out of the classroom.

The importance of mentoring and modelling in servant leader development is

unsurprising, given its influence in Greenleaf’s development:

Five ideas seem to me to have shaped the course of my life work. They
were the servant model of my father in my early years; the advice of my
professor to get into a large institution, stay there, and become a
meliorative force; at age twenty-five, beginning to read E.B. White,
sensing his great art of seeing things whole, and learning to practice
that art; the advice of Elmer Davis at age forty to begin to prepare for a
useful old age; at age sixty-five reading Hermann Hesse’s Journey to
the East and seeing the vivid dramatization of the servant as leader.
These ideas sustained me in my work from youth onward and have had
increasing force as I have grown older”(Greenleaf et al., 1996, p. 46).

In his statement, Greenleaf noted how his father, professor and Elmer Davis directly
influenced his development through a dyadic relationship while E. B. White and
Herman Hesse indirectly influenced him through their works—including in the
fictitious Leo. Similar indirect mentoring occurred in the characters of Leo and
Alpharius. As with Greenleaf, learners such as Aimee, Jennifer and Valerie had

90
parental mentoring supplemented or surpassed by peers—a process noted in other
studies (Schwartz, 2006). Like Greenleaf, learners aspired to mentor or transform
others–consistent with research by Day and Dragoni (2015) who found former
mentees had a higher likelihood of becoming mentors.

While most development was positive, the expectations imposed by religious

or spiritual communities may have a ‘dark’ side. Scales, Syvertson, Benson,
Roehlkepartain and Sesma (2014) found in their study of approximately 7,000 youth
that high levels of religiosity also correlated with higher levels of depression and
noted similar previous findings by Cotton, Larkin, Hoopes, Cromer and Rosenthal
(2005). While the size of this study meant comparisons were not possible, it is
consistent with earlier studies that noted spiritual learners—particularly those in a
community—often had more supportive emotional tools and strategies to deal with
disruptive emotional events (Friedman et al., 2012). While there may be occasional
detrimental impacts caused by faith communities, learners noted only benefits in
having mentors, communities and peers support their servant leader development.

5.6. Responsible morality

It was difficult to assess learner development in responsible morality as the

sub-dimensions require moral reasoning and action and the course design gave
limited opportunities for learner application. Learners believed they exhibited
responsible morality in class discussions and in a class activity where they completed
the Servant Leadership Profile - Revised (SLP-R) (Page & Wong, 2000) survey.
Despite differences between sub-dimensions of the SLP-R and SLBS measures,
survey results for nine learners showed higher results than a comparable study by
Rohm (2013). Yet, subsequent learner reflections and interviews showed moral
conflicts in Leon and Victor and further feelings of inauthenticity in Jennifer and
Victor, suggesting learners have moral blindness or self-rated higher in the SLP-R.

Consistent with previous research (Schulman, 2005), learners often

experienced poor self-esteem by not living consistently with their ideals of
sustainability, leadership, social justice or the presence of God. Schulman (2005)
noted three emotions when living false-self behaviour; a failure in empathy-based
morality (experienced by Leon, Tina and Yvette) that created guilt, failure in moral
affiliation that created shame (evident in Aimee, Jennifer and Valerie) and failure to
live your principles that created self-loathing (Leon, Rick and Victor). While Harter
(2011) suggested true-self behaviour should result in higher self-esteem, Rick and

91
Yvette largely believed they were expressing true-self behaviour despite
experiencing low self-esteem while Aimee, Erika, Leon and Victor had much higher
self-esteem yet believed they displayed false-self behaviour. All learners who noted
gaps in their responsible morality experienced an emotional roller-coaster in realising
the gap followed by expressions of guilt, remorse or shame, then an improvement in
mental well-being as they perceived they were being authentic. Harter (2011)
predicted feelings of incongruency linked to authenticity gaps, but these dynamics
were more complex than Harter predicted.

A difference between spiritual and servant leader development may be the

perception of morality. Spiritual development in the SDF includes a ‘way of living’
which presumably for Christian learners includes an aspect of avoiding sin or
purposing to live ‘holy’. Yet, in this study, ‘sin’ was only referred to once; references
to morality instead focused on addressing incongruent or inauthentic servant leader
behaviour. This was particularly evident in non-religious learners like Victor who had
no definitive external source of morality and Erika who drew from the Golden Rule.
Tina also reflected this sense of moral relativity in relating to her work in Brazil:

I think crimes are a social response. [Favela communities] do not feel

protected by [police]. They do not feel part of society… So, crime is
something for them that is almost natural (3/4/18, 53).

Schulman (2005) suggests three forms of moral motivation: the head (principles of or
cognitive standards of morality based on personal perception), heart (empathetic
reactions to others feelings) and moral community (identification with moral
exemplars). Most learners–religious or non-religious, demonstrated elements of both
moral reasoning and empathy in their spiritual development. Tina illustrated how
community is also an important influence. For many religious learners, their religious
community was one of several exemplars they drew from. While this does not make
religious learners more ‘moral’, it reflects they may have more and potentially
stronger moral anchor points on which to reason—particularly when separated from
friends in family through international education.

A surprising omission in the evidence was a connection to the concept of

stewardship despite one course module being dedicated to stewardship. A potential
reason was that there was no clear opportunity to ‘steward’ resources or people.
Future courses may consider developing stewardship through a different approach—
including on-the-job training or focus on developing values to support stewardship.

92
Alternatively, stewardship may be treated as a sub-set of responsible morality and
taught using class debates as Eva (2009) recommends.

Most learners believed they developed responsible morality. This morality

differed was personal rather than transcendent or religious and reflected a spiritual
journey in authenticity where the learner aligned their beliefs with their behaviours.

5.7. Voluntary subordination

How servant leaders live and serve has been defined differently. Spears
(1995, 2004), Lenz and Bottum (1998) and Barbuto and Wheeler (2006) defined
service primarily within the leader-follower context in their servant leader dimensions.
Liden, Wayne, Zhao and Henderson (2008) instead argued service should result in
social impact. Greenleaf (1970) also took a broader perspective by asking in his
servant leadership litmus test by asking ‘what is the effect on the least privileged in
society? Will they benefit or at least not be further deprived?’ In the study, most
learner perceived service to refer to volunteering. Some learners—particularly
teachers, also saw service as part of their vocation.

One apparent difference between religious and non-religious learners was the
proportionately higher level of volunteering by those who identified as religious. This
does not mean religious learners were more altruistic, but reflects that religious
learners had more opportunities for service and volunteering within religious
organisations while learners such as Leon and Tina found NGO’s through which they
volunteered, and Victor formed his own initiatives. The findings align with previous
research that found volunteering among religious Australians was greater than by
those who were not religious or spiritual (P. Hughes, 2007). Unlike the study by
Hughes (2007) which could not distinguish between volunteering focused within the
religious community and volunteering focused on general society, this study found
religious volunteering often occurred in religious communities although there were
exceptions. Spiritual development within a religious community may support servant
leader development by providing opportunities for service-learning or volunteering.

How learners individually and collectively perceived voluntary subordination

was shaped by their religion/spirituality and context. Most Christian learners
perceived developing others in their faith as a form of service—either within the home
or the church (Aimee, 28/8/18, 94; Jennifer, 28/8/18, 82; Valerie, 28/8/18, 222). In
turn, Valerie shared similarities in her aspirations with George, Lauren and Victor to

93
be a ‘servant teacher’ (George, 28/8/18, 54; Lauren, 6/9/18, 104; Valerie, 28/8/18, 4;
Victor, 28/8/18, 27). Similarities between religions and vocations reflect how service
is contextual to an aspiring servant leader but may be shared by learners with similar
contexts.

5.8. Chapter summary

This chapter analysed the spiritual development in 12 diverse and aspiring

servant leaders through The Servant as Leader course using the framework of the
SLBS dimensions. Key findings were:

• All learners were significantly influenced by parents in their formative servant

leader development and aspects of their spiritual development.

• Other formative influences included religious mentors, models or communities

who at times were figureheads such as Christ, Buddha or the Pope.

• Development within the course was predominantly through experiential and

reciprocal learning and spiritual practices which included meditation,
mindfulness, prayer and the study of religious or spiritual texts.

• Almost all learners experienced spiritual and servant leader development.

This may result in distal development or significant life experiences.

• Servant leader development was personal, communal and multi-dimensional.

While Sendjaya et al. (2008) separated ‘transcendental spirituality’ from other
servant leader dimensions, this study found aspects of spirituality also
developed within the other five servant leader dimensions.

• Servant leader development synthesised personal beliefs based on religious

or spiritual experiences, spiritual practices and acquired personal beliefs.

• Spiritual development within servant leader development may be

strengthened through spiritual guidance and emotional and spiritual support.
Spiritual practices may be a form of support for learners facing disruptive
experiences.

94
 • Reciprocal learning encouraged the development of a learning community
where learners created strong interpersonal relationships and adopted the
opinions of credible peers consistent with their religion or spirituality.

• All religious learners believed their faith was consistent with servant
leadership and sought congruency and authenticity between their moral
beliefs and altruistic behaviours.

• Religion also shaped learner openness to spiritual practices—particularly

mindfulness, which was not practiced by Christian learners but was adopted
by their peers. However, having a religion meant Christian learners were
more likely to pray or study religious texts.

• There appeared to be a stronger sense of purpose or calling in religious

learners and more opportunity for volunteering—factors that largely reflect the
nature and support of religious communities.

Consistent with the etymology and definition of leadership as a journey, and symbolic
of Leo in the Journey to the East, learners believed their journey in developing as a
servant leadership had spiritual dimensions. Development of these spiritual
dimensions in turn supported their servant leader development.

95
Chapter 6. Conclusion

This study explored how spiritual development contributes to servant leader

development in a tertiary servant leadership course in Aotearoa-New Zealand. This
final chapter summarises the thesis, concludes findings and discussions, suggests
further research possibilities and highlights the study significance.

6.1. Thesis conclusion

This study answers Benson’s call (2005) for frameworks and hypotheses that
“position spiritual development as a core, central, and universal dimension of human
development”. The guiding research question was “how can spiritual development
contribute to servant leader development, as defined by the Servant Leadership
Behavioural Survey, in learners of diverse ethnic and religious backgrounds, as
demonstrated in a tertiary servant leader course in Aotearoa-New Zealand?” The
Spiritual Development Framework was selected as the framework for spiritual
development as it integrated previous models, incorporated feedback from two
preceding drafts (Benson, Scales, et al., 2012) and has been shown to be
methodologically and culturally appropriate (Clayton-Jones et al., 2019).

I sought to authentically include Māori in the creation and delivery of the

course to ensure leadership and culture were contextual to Aotearoa-New Zealand.
As part of this process, two advisory panels were created—one to consult with Māori,
and the other to seek advice on servant leader development. Feedback from these
panels was incorporated into course development and delivery. This process meant
the course and research is consistent with the cultural and political requirements of
Aotearoa-New Zealand and was contextualised to New Zealand society.

Applicants for the study were from various cultures, faiths, ages and
disciplines with a range of leadership and management experience. Applicants were
also selected because of their interest to be or become a servant leader by through
the course. Findings showed that almost all learners believed they developed as
servant leaders and experienced parallel spiritual development in most or all the
elements of the Spiritual Development Framework. This development primarily
occurred through personal reflection but was also socially constructed through class-
based reciprocal discussions, experiential learning, spiritual practice and social
learning through learner networks.

96
6.1.1. Spiritual development in aspiring servant leaders

Most learners perceived their development as a servant leader to be a

spiritual process that largely aligned with their religious or spiritual beliefs. Consistent
with the SDF, aspiring spiritual development occurs over time through a sense of
spiritual awareness and connection that is expressed in a way of living. The
engagement influences of apprehension of transcendence, religious/spiritual
practices and identity may further shape development. While this research suggests
that spiritual development may support servant leader, research is unclear whether
this is one-dimensional or a reciprocal relationship. Further research may explore if
servant leader development may also facilitate spiritual development.

The study found that learners largely perceived spiritual and servant leader
development as separate, but many believed their spiritual development supported
their servant leader development. Learner development was often shaped and
motivated be a perceived relationship between their religion or spirituality and servant
leadership. Learners sought congruency between their religious or spiritual beliefs
and behaviours which often led to development of authenticity. At times, the personal
beliefs of learners differed from the religious institutions with which they were
associated as a result of personal experiences, spiritual practices or other beliefs.

Spiritual development was facilitated predominantly through spiritual practices

which included prayer, mediation, mindfulness and the reading of spiritual literature.
To a lesser degree, spiritual development was also facilitated through reciprocal and
experiential learning that encouraged reflection and respectful cross-cultural and
interfaith discussions. While mentoring and modelling through parents, religious
leaders and religious communities was influential in formative servant leader
development – and potentially spiritual development – the course context limited their
influence in the spiritual development of learners during the course. It is unclear the
degree to which the class community influenced servant leader development by
acting in an emotionally supportive role or in a mentoring or modelling capacity.

6.1.2. Servant leader development in an Aotearoa-New Zealand

tertiary education context

Despite the cultural and spiritual diversity within learners in this study, aspects
of servant leader development were cross-culturally consistent. Mentoring and
modelling offer opportunities for educators to support or facilitate spiritual and servant

97
leader development. As formative development of spirituality and servant leaders
often begins through informal mentoring and modelling, educators should encourage
multiple active partnerships with parents and religious leaders—and potentially
others. This may occur within the classroom through reciprocal learning or outside
the classroom through mentoring and modelling by religious leaders and
communities. These partnerships may also provide support to aspiring servant
leaders if they face disruptive experiences.

Spiritual development within The Servant as Leader course was facilitated

through experiential and reciprocal learning. Experiential learning reflected on past
and present professional experiences and educational experiences such as
volunteering, project-based learning or service-learning contexts. Reciprocal learning
supported an egalitarian learning community within the class. Educators who apply
reciprocal learning should also encourage learners to introduce their social
influencers to the class in the form of mentors, models or external communities.

As servant leader development involves emotional and spiritual development,

consideration should be given to additional learner support. This is particularly
important for learners who face, or are likely to face, disruptive experiences. While
learners in this study reported positive outcomes despite their disruptive experiences,
other studies suggest this may not always be the case and learner outcomes may be
mediated by the quality of support offered to learners (Kashy‑Rosenbaum et al.,
2018). Spiritual support may include guidance in applying spiritual practices,
understanding religious texts, discerning the voice of ‘God’ or discovering a sense of
purpose which may help ‘chart a course’ as a servant leader. Emotional support may
include the use of a coach or counsellor. Educators should consider individual
learner requirements as evidence suggests a proportion of learners in New Zealand
classroom may not consider themselves spiritual or seek spiritual development.

6.1.3. Relevance of the SDF model to servant leader development

While the SDF has limitations, it is a marked improvement over the

Comprehensive Theory of Spiritual Development, which omitted religious or spiritual
practices. Victor noted how spiritual practices:

give us very good measures of… our progress on the path towards
being virtuous. All religious traditions do this quite well… Buddhist
tradition gives us the eight-fold path. Christianity has its own set of

98
 commandments. Hinduism, although very different, has its own stories
to guide you in moral love and virtues (3/9/18, 41).

The earlier omission likely reflects the broader debate about how to anchor religion
and God within a spiritual framework. Some authors emphasise engagement of the
holy, divine, or beyond the material world (W. R. Miller & Thoresen, 2003) and others
emphasise development of human qualities with or without religion (U. Beck, 1992).
The SDF is ambiguous on whether mindfulness is a religious practice, spiritual
practice or a component of awareness—or all of these, and if so, how to differentiate
these concepts. A similar challenge persists in academic literature and was evident in
learner evidence in this study. A related issue was delineating unstructured and
personal prayers from structured liturgical prayer. If spirituality is “individually
constructed and religion is more socially constructed” (Hill & Pargament, 2003), then
are personal prayers a ‘spiritual’ or ‘religious’ practice? The SDF remains ambiguous
in defining spiritual and religious practices.

A common trait among Christian learners was the belief they interacted with
and were led by a personal and communicative God. This type of relationship was
akin to mentoring. But, mentoring inadequately described this relationship which was
not a ‘social’ or ‘cultural’ force and was broader in scope than psychosocial or career
mentoring. The Comprehensive Theory of Spiritual Development insufficiently
positioned God as a potential ‘myth’, ‘narrative’ or an internal interpretative
framework while the later SDF better articulated the relationship as the apprehension
of transcendence. This description remains problematic as it does not express how
the relationship was often God-initiated and bi-directional and provided learners with
emotional and spiritual support. It also fails to consider spirituality that is based on
immanent rather than transcendent relationships (e.g. with the earth). While the SDF
better captures the essence of belief in God for many people, it cannot capture the
essence of all faiths and forms of spirituality.

Benson et al. (2012) angled spiritual experiences towards major events such
as conversion, baptism and similar. While no ‘significant life experiences’ of this
nature, Rick’s vivid vision of Christ holding his hand was “gospel [even] more than
gospel” (28/8/18, 199). Experiences of this nature were ‘spiritual’, supported religious
and spiritual development and are likely to continue influencing spiritual development
over an extended period. However, there is no evidence of how these experiences or
spiritual development influenced the long-term spirituality and spiritual development
of learners.

99
6.2. Study scope

Consideration must be given to how findings and recommendations are

applied because of the unique context of the study. Most of the 12 learners were in
ternational students with few service-learning or project-based development
opportunities and a limit of an 18-week development period. One distinct study
characteristic was higher representation of learners from a Judeo-Christian
background than would be expected in most Aotearoa-New Zealand classrooms.
These learners believed they developed as servant leaders, but most evidence is
subjective with no external, third-party or longitudinal validation. Findings are also
limited to several development methods based on the study context and other forms
of development such as coaching may also support spiritual development of aspiring
servant leaders. A final consideration is that while the influence of culture and society
on spiritual development was included in the SDF, this study had limited exploration
of how these factors influenced spiritual and servant leader development.

6.3. Recommendations and further research

This study centred on international aspiring servant leaders within a tertiary

education context and found that spiritual development contributed to their servant
leader development. Our understanding of servant leader development would benefit
from a comprehensive post-course longitudinal study exploring long-term spiritual
development and how this was expressed in servant leader behaviours by learners
outside the classroom—and with third-party validation. Conversely, further research
could explore how servant leader—and potentially leader development more broadly,
benefits spiritual development.

The study provides some basis for future study of servant leadership in the
New Zealand home, workplace and classroom. This study suggests important, and
possibly the most important, servant leader development occurs through parents.
Evidence also showed some servant leader development occurred through the
influence of workplace mentors and in professional settings. Servant leader
development literature would benefit from further research exploring the nature and
strength of development in both the workplace and home. As reciprocal learning in
Aotearoa-New Zealand is often associated with the concept of āko—as applied in the
Te Kotahitanga programme to New Zealand school students (Bishop et al., 2014),

100
New Zealand tertiary education may benefit from research in how āko may facilitate
servant leader development for non-Maori tertiary learners.

Given the potential for international students to face disruptive experiences

and the multi-dimensional nature of development, the College should carefully
consider what teaching skills are required to facilitate servant leader development.
While student support has often been facilitated through student counselling, this
study showed learners may develop as servant leader and in their spirituality through
these experiences. Potential solutions the College may consider include coaching,
which has been found to be effective in leader development (Dippenaar & Schaap,
2017; Grant, 2003) and servant leader development (Robin & Sendjaya, 2018), and
further integration with external mentors and spiritual or religious communities.

6.4. Concluding statement

At the beginning of this thesis, I presented Greenleaf’s servant leadership

litmus test that queries if one’s leadership impacts followers and society. Most
learners journeyed far enough to aspire to change others and showed evidence of
developing multiple servant leader dimensions. They also discovered their journey
was spiritual – connecting them more deeply with themselves, others and a
transcendent being. Greenleaf did not write for a New Zealand audience, designate
servant leader dimensions or prescribe a spiritual journey, but his prophetic vision to
improve society is a legacy that shaped these aspiring servant leaders and will
continue to inspire future servant leader development.

101
Reference List

Ahmad, K., & Abdul Kadir, M. A. B. (2012). Servant leadership from the Muslim

perspective. Malaysian Management Review, 47, 77.

Al-Haqqani, S. M. N. A., & Kabbani, S. M. H. (2002). Muhammad, the Messenger of

Islam: His life & prophecy. ISCA.

Amaral, A. (2007). A servant leadership model for the church of Brazil [Doctoral

Thesis]. Asbury Theological Seminary.

American Camp Association. (2005). Directions: Youth development outcomes of the

camp experience.

Andersen, J. A. (2018). Servant leadership and transformational leadership: From

comparisons to farewells. Leadership & Organization Development Journal,

39(6), 762–774.

Anderson, A. R. (2009). Servant-leader development in an adult accelerated degree

completion program: A mixed-methods study [Ed.D.]. Regent University.

Anderson, K. R., & Reese, R. D. (1999). Spiritual mentoring: A guide for seeking

giving direction. InterVarsity Press.

April, K., Kukard, J., & Peters, K. (2013). Steward leadership: A maturational

perspective. UCT Press.

Argandona, A. (2015). Humility in management. Journal of Business Ethics, 132(1),

63–71.

Aristotle, & Press, A. (2015). Rhetoric. Aeterna Press.

Aristotle, Ross, W. D., Ackrill, J. L., & Urmson, J. O. (1998). The Nicomachean

ethics. Oxford University Press.

Ashley, M. J. (2016). Designing and implementing a seminar for training shepherd

leaders at Northfield Baptist Church, Northfield, Ohio [D.Min., The Southern

Baptist Theological Seminary].

102
Atran, S. (2006). In Gods we trust: The evolutionary landscape of religion. Oxford

University Press.

Bagacean, M. A. (2016). An empirical test of servant leadership theory in an Eastern

European ethnic academic context [Ed.D., Dallas Baptist University].

Bai, X., & Roberts, W. (2011). Taoism and its model of traits of successful leaders.

Journal of Management Development, 30(7), 724–739.

Balk, D. (1983). Effects of sibling death on teenagers. Journal of School Health,

53(1), 14–18.

Bandura, A. (1971). Social learning theory. General Learning Corporation.

Bandura, A., & Walters, R. H. (1976). Social learning and personality development.

Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Barbuto, J. E., & Wheeler, D. W. (2006). Scale development and construct

clarification of servant leadership. Group & Organization Management, 31(3),

300–326.

Batchelder, T. H., & Root, S. (1994). Effects of an undergraduate program to

integrate academic learning and service: Cognitive, prosocial cognitive, and

identity outcomes. Journal of Adolescence, 17(4), 341–355.

Batten, J. (1998). Servant leadership: A passion to serve. In L. C. Spears (Ed.),

Insights on leadership: Service, stewardship, spirit, and servant-leadership.

Wiley.

Beck, C. D. (2010). Antecedents of servant leadership: A mixed methods study

[Ph.D., The University of Nebraska - Lincoln].

Beck, C. D. (2014). Antecedents of servant leadership: A mixed methods study.

Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 21(3), 299–314.

Beck, U. (1992). Risk society: Towards a new modernity (S. Lash & B. Wynne,

Trans.). SAGE Publications.

Benson, P. L. (2005). The science of child and adolescent spiritual development:

Definitional, theortical and field-building challenges. In E. C. Roehlkepartain,

103
 P. E. King, L. M. Wagener, & P. L. Benson, The Handbook of Spiritual

Development in Childhood and Adolescence. SAGE Publications.

Benson, P. L., & King, P. E. (2006). Adolescence. In H. R. Ebaugh (Ed.), Handbook

of Religion and Social Institutions. Springer US.

Benson, P. L., & Roehlkepartain, E. C. (2008). Spiritual development: A missing

priority in youth development. New Directions for Youth Development,

2008(118), 13–28.

Benson, P. L., Roehlkepartain, E. C., & Rude, S. P. (2003). Spiritual development in

childhood and adolescence: Toward a field of inquiry. Applied Developmental

Science, 7(3), 205–213.

Benson, P. L., Roehlkepartain, E. C., & Scales, P. C. (2012). Spirituality and positive

youth development. In L. J. Miller (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Psychology

and Spirituality. Oxford University Press.

Benson, P. L., Scales, P. C., Syvertson, A. K., & Roehlkepartain, E. C. (2012). Is

youth spiritual development a universal developmental process? An

international exploration. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 7(6), 453–470.

Berger, T. A. (2014). Servant leadership 2.0: A call for strong theory. Sociological

Viewpoints; Coatesville, 30(1), 146–167.

Biggs, J. (2014). Constructive alignment in university teaching. HERDSA Review of

Higher Education, 1(July), 106.

Bishop, R. (2008). Culturally responsive pedagogy of relations. In C. McGee & D.

Fraser (Eds.), The professional practice of teachers (pp. 154–171). Cengage

Learning.

Bishop, R., & Berryman, M. (2010). Te Kotahitanga: Culturally responsive

professional development for teachers. 14(2), 173–187.

Bishop, R., Berryman, M., & Wearmouth, J. (2014). Te Kotahitanga: Effective

education reform for indigenous and minoritised students.

104
Bishop, R., & Glynn, T. (2003). Culture counts: Changing power relations in

education. Zed Books.

Black, G. L. (2010). Correlational analysis of servant leadership and school climate.

Catholic Education: A Journal of Inquiry & Practice, 13(4), 437–466.

Blackburn, S. (2003). Ethics: A very short introduction. Oxford University Press.

Blanchard, K. (2003). Servant leader. Thomas Nelson Publishers.

Block, P. (1993). Stewardship: Choosing service over self-interest. Berrett-Koehler

Publishers.

Bohanek, R. G. (2007). A phenomenological study of superintendents of high -

performing, high-poverty school districts as servant leaders [Ed.D., Northern

Illinois University].

Bommarito, M. S. (2012). Leadership development in higher education: Exploring

model impact among students and alumni [Ph.D., The University of North

Dakota].

Boorom, R. (2009). Spiritual leadership: A study of the relationship between spiritual

leadership theory and transformational leadership [Ph.D., Regent University].

Bowen, G. A., Burke, D. D., Little, B. L., & Jacques, P. H. (2009). A comparison of

service-learning and employee volunteering programs. Academy of

Educational Leadership Journal, 13(3), 1.

Boyatzis, C. J. (2012). Spiritual development during childhood and adolescence. In L.

J. Miller (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Psychology and Spirituality. Oxford

University Press.

Boyatzis, C. J., Dollahite, D. C., & Marks. (2005). The family as a context for religious

and spiritual development in children and youth. In E. C. Roehlkepartain, P.

Ebstyne King, L. M. Wagener, & P. L. Benson, The Handbook of Spiritual

Development in Childhood and Adolescence. SAGE Publications.

Boyum, V. S. (2012). A Model of servant leadership in higher education [Ph.D.,

University of Minnesota].

105
Bregman, L. (2006). Spirituality: A glowing and useful term in search of a meaning.

OMEGA - Journal of Death and Dying, 53(1), 5–26.

Brodie, E. F. (2016). The Leader as a shepherd: A case study of ecclesiastic,

business, and education leaders [Ed.D., Grand Canyon University].

Bronfenbrenner, U. (2009). Ecology of human development: Experiments by nature

and design. Harvard University Press.

Brown, A. L., & Campione, J. C. (1998). Guided discovery in a community of

learners. In Kate McGilly, Classroom lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and

classroom practice. MIT Press.

Brown, J. M., & Schmidt, N. A. (2016). Service–learning in undergraduate nursing

education: Where is the reflection? Journal of Professional Nursing, 32(1),

48–53.

Brown, K. W., & Ryan, R. M. (2012). Fostering healthy self-regulation from within and

without: A self-determination theory perspective. In Positive Psychology in

Practice (pp. 105–124). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Browning, D. S., & Cooper, T. D. (2004). Religious thought and the modern

psychologies. Fortress Press.

Buchen, I. H. (1998). Servant leadership: A model for future faculty and future

institutions. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 5(1), 125–134.

Burch, M. J., Swails, P., & Mills, R. (2015). Perceptions of administrators’ servant

leadership qualities at a Christian university: A descriptive study. Education,

135(4), 399–404.

Caldwell, C., & Karri, R. (2005). Organizational governance and ethical systems: A

covenantal approach to building trust. Journal of Business Ethics, 58(1/3),

249.

Cambridge University Press. (2018). Integrity. In Cambridge Advanced Learner’s

Dictionary & Thesaurus. Cambridge University Press.

106
Campbell, C. M., Smith, M., Dugan, J. P., & Komives, S. R. (2012). Mentors and

college student leadership outcomes: The importance of position and

process. The Review of Higher Education, 35(4), 595–625.

Carroll, B. (2013). Servant leadership theory cross-culturally: A comparative study

between India and the United States [Doctoral Thesis, Regent University].

Cerff, K., & Winston, B. E. (2006, August). The inclusion of hope in the servant

leadership model. An extension of Patterson and Winston’s models. Servant

Leadership Research Roundtable, Regent University.

Cerit, Y. (2009). The effects of servant leadership behaviours of school principals on

Teachers’ Job Satisfaction. Educational Management Administration &

Leadership, 37(5), 600–623.

Charbonneau, J., Brennan, M., & Hercus, M. (2016). New Zealand volunteers: A

snapshot. Community Research.

Charmaz, K. (1980). The social reality of death: Death in contemporary America.

Addison-Wesley.

Charmaz, K. (2005). Grounded theory in the 21st century. Applications for advancing

social justice studies. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln, The SAGE handbook of

qualitative research. SAGE.

Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing grounded theory. Sage Publications.

Charmaz, K. (2015). Grounded theory. In J. A. Smith, Qualitative Psychology: A

Practical Guide to Research Methods (Third Edition). Sage Publications.

Charon, J. M. (2010). Symbolic interactionism an introduction, an interpretation, an

integration. Prentice Hall.

Chase, S. (2019). Christian mindfulness: Theology and practice by Peter Tyler, and:

Living with the mind of Christ: Mindfulness in Christian spirituality by Stefan

Gillow Reynolds, and: Mindfulness and Christian Spirituality: Making a space

for God by Tim Stead, and: Right here right now: The practice of Christian

mindfulness by Amy G. Oden. Spiritus; Baltimore, 19(2), 356–362.

107
Chemers, M. (2014). An Integrative Theory of Leadership. Taylor and Francis.

Chemers, M. M. (2000). Leadership theory and research: Perspectives and

directions. Academic Press.

Christian Theological and Ministries Education Society (CTMES). (2015a). New

Zealand Diploma in Christian Studies (Level 5) with strands in Chaplaincy,

Christian Leadership, Intercultural, Performing Arts, Te Minita Taha Māori,

and Theological Studies. New Zealand Qualifications Authority (NZQA).

Christian Theological and Ministries Education Society (CTMES). (2015b). New

Zealand Diploma in Christian Studies (Level 6) with strands in Biblical

Studies, Christian Leadership, Intercultural Studies, Pastoral Ministry,

Religious Education, Te Minita Taha Māori, and Theological Studies. New

Zealand Qualifications New Zealand Qualifications Authority (NZQA).

Clark, M. C. (1993). Transformational learning. New Directions for Adult and

Continuing Education, 1993(57), 47–56.

Clayton-Jones, D., Haglund, K. A., Schaefer, J., Koenig, H. G., & George Dalmida, S.

(2019). Use of the Spiritual Development Framework in conducting spirituality

and health research with adolescents. Journal of Religion and Health, 58(4),

1259–1271.

Coetzer, M. F., Bussin, M., & Geldenhuys, M. (2017). The functions of a servant

leader. Administrative Sciences; Basel, 7(1), 5.

Cotton, S., Larkin, E., Hoopes, A., Cromer, B. A., & Rosenthal, S. L. (2005). The

impact of adolescent spirituality on depressive symptoms and health risk

behaviors. The Journal of Adolescent Health: Official Publication of the

Society for Adolescent Medicine, 36(6), 529.

Covey, S. R. (1994). Serving the one. Executive Excellence, 11(9), 3.

Covey, S. R. (1997). The habits of effective organizations. Leader to Leader,

1997(3), 22–28.

108
Cranton, P. (2006). Understanding and promoting transformative learning: A guide

for educators of adults. Jossey-Bass.

Cress, C. M., Astin, H. S., Zimmerman-Oster, K., & Burkhardt, J. C. (2001).

Developmental outcomes of college students’ involvement in leadership

activities. Journal of College Student Development; Baltimore, 42 (1), 15.

Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five

traditions. Sage Publications.

Cyril, L. A. (2006). Nurturing servant leaders in religious education: A case study of

the church educational system of the Church of Jesus Christ and Latter-day

Saints in Aotearoa/New Zealand [Masters Dissertation]. Auckland University

of Technology.

Day, D. V. (2000). Leadership development: A review in context. Leadership

Quarterly, 11(4), 581–614.

Day, D. V. (2018). The Leadership Quarterly Yearly Review: Pushing the frontiers of

leadership scholarship. The Leadership Quarterly, 29(1), 1.

Day, D. V., & Dragoni, L. (2015). Leadership development: An outcome-oriented

review based on time and levels of analyses. Annual Review of

Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 2(1), 133–156.

Day, D. V., Fleenor, J. W., Atwater, L. E., Sturm, R. E., & McKee, R. A. (2014).

Advances in leader and leadership development: A review of 25 years of

research and theory. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(1), 63–82.

Day, D. V., & Halpin, S. M. (2004). Growing leaders for tomorrow: An introduction. In

D. V. Day, S. J. Zaccaro, & S. M. Halpin, Leader Development for

Transforming Organizations: Growing Leaders for Tomorrow. Psychology

Press.

Day, J. M. (2011). Religious, spiritual, and moral development and learning in the

adult years. The Oxford Handbook of Reciprocal Adult Development and

Learning.

109
De Pree, M. (1997). Leading without power: Finding hope in serving community.

Jossey-Bass.

De Pree, M. (2009). Leadership jazz: The essential elements of a great leader. Dell

Publishing.

De Young, R. (2000). New ways to promote pro-environmental behavior: Expanding

and evaluating motives for environmentally responsible behavior. Journal of

Social Issues, 56(3), 509–526.

DePree, M. (1989). Leadership is an art. Doubleday.

Derue, D., & Ashford, S. (2010). Who will lead and who will follow? A social process

of leadership identity construction in organizations. Academy of Management

Review, 35(4), 627–647.

DeVillis, R. F. (2016). Scale development: Theory and applications (Fourth). SAGE

Publications.

Dhammika, Ś. (2005). The Buddha and his disciples. Buddhist Publication Society.

Diehl, S. (2015). A gendered view of servant leadership [Ph.D., Indiana University of

Pennsylvania].

Dillman, S. W. (2004). Leading in the Land of Oz: Cross-cultural study of servant

leadership in Australia [Ph.D., Regent University].

Dimitrova, M. (2008). An empirical test of the servant leadership theory in a Bulgarian

context [Ph.D., Regent University].

Dippenaar, M., & Schaap, P. (2017). The impact of coaching on the emotional and

social intelligence competencies of leaders. South African Journal of

Economic and Management Sciences, 20(1), 16.

Dixon, D. L. (2013). Relationships among servant leadership, organizational

citizenship behavior, and school climate in Alabama high schools [Ph.D., The

University of Alabama].

Drarth, W. H., & Palus, C. J. (1994). Making common sense: Leadership as meaning-

making in a community of practice. Center for Creative Leadership.

110
Durie, M. (1998). Whaiora: Māori health development. Oxford University Press.

Ebener, D. R., & O’Connell, D. J. (2010). How might servant leadership work?

Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 20(3), 315–335.

Egan, R., & Johnson-Bogaerts, H. (2020). Where is spirituality on New Zealands

national health agenda? Super Seniors.

Eich, D. (2008). A grounded theory of high-quality leadership programs: Perspectives

from student leadership development programs in higher education. Journal

of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 15(2), 176-187. Academic OneFile.

Eicher-Catt, D. (2005). The myth of servant-leadership: A feminist perspective.

Women and Language, 1, 17.

Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of

Management Review, 14(4), 532–550.

Eisenhardt, K. M., & Graebner, M. E. (2007). Theory building from cases:

Opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 25–

32.

Elder, G. H. (2006). The emergence and development of life course theory. In J. T.

Mortimer & M. J. Shanahan, Handbook of the life course (First edition).

Springer.

Elizondo, D. W. (2011). Servant leadership: An effective leadership model for

achieving optimal financial performance and quality assurance excellence

[M.S., California State University, Dominguez Hills]. /10

Elliott, J. (2010). Humility: Development and analysis of a scale [Doctoral Thesis,

University of Tennessee].

Elmer, L. D., MacDonald, D. A., & Friedman, H. L. (2003). Transpersonal psychology,

physical health, and mental health: Theory, research, and practice. The

Humanistic Psychologist, 31(2–3), 159–181.

English, E. M. (2011). Principals’ servant leadership and teachers’ job satisfaction

[Ed.D., University of La Verne].

111
Eva, N. (2009). Out of the Boardroom and into the classroom: Servant leadership in

youth leadership development [Masters Dissertation]. Monash University.

Eva, N., Robin, M., Sendjaya, S., van Dierendonck, D., & Liden, R. C. (2018).

Servant Leadership: A systematic review and call for future research. The

Leadership Quarterly.

Everhart, R. s. (2016). Teaching tools to improve the development of empathy in

service-learning students. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and

Engagement, 20(2), 129–154.

Fairholm, G. W. (1997). Capturing the heart of leadership: Spirituality and community

in the new American workplace. Praeger.

Farmer, S. W. (2010). Servant leadership attributes in senior military officers: A

quantitative study examining demographic factors [North Central University].

Fields, J. W., Thompson, K. C., & Hawkins, J. R. (2015). Servant leadership:

Teaching the helping professional. Journal of Leadership Education, 14(4),

92–105.

Flynn, C. B., Smither, J. W., & Walker, A. G. (2016). Exploring the relationship

between leaders’ core self-evaluations and subordinates’ perceptions of

servant leadership: A field study. Journal of Leadership & Organizational

Studies, 23(3), 260–271.

Focht, A. (2011). Identifying primary characteristics of servant leadership: A Delphi

study [Ed.D., Regent University].

Forbes. (2011). Best Companies 2011—FORTUNE Magazine’s Top 100 Employers

to Work For. 100 Best Companies to Work For.

Ford, L. (1991). Transforming leadership: Jesus’ way of creating vision, shaping

values & empowering change. InterVarsity Press.

Foster, B. A. (2000). Barriers to servant leadership: Perceived organizational

elements that impede servant leader effectiveness [Ph.D., The Fielding

Institute].

112
Foster, L. C. (2014). Servant Leadership and its role in preparation of clergy: A

phenomenological study of apostolic Pentecostal leadership [Ph.D., Capella

University].

Foster, R. J. (2018). Celebration of discipline: The path to spiritual growth.

HarperOne.

Fowler, J. W., & Dell, M. L. (2006). Stages of faith from infancy through adolescence:

Reflections on three decades of faith development theory. In The handbook of

spiritual development in childhood and adolescence (pp. 34–45). Sage

Publications, Inc.

Freeman, G. T. (2011). Spirituality and servant leadership: A conceptual model and

research proposal. Emerging Leadership Journeys, 4(1), 120–140.

Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Bloomsbury Academic.

Frick, D. M., Spears, L. C., & Senge, P. M. (2004). Robert K. Greenleaf: A Life of

servant leadership. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

Fridell, M., Belcher, R. N., & Messner, P. E. (2009). Discriminate analysis gender

public school principal servant leadership differences. Leadership &

Organization Development Journal, 30(8), 722–736.

Friedman, H., Kripner, S., Riebel, L., & Johnson, C. (2012). Models of spiritual

development. In L. J. Miller (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Psychology and

Spirituality. Oxford University Press.

Frisk, L. (2009). Globalization: An important key factor in contemporary religious

change. Journal of Alternative Spiritualities and New Age Studies, 5, 8–24.

Fry, L. W. (2003). Toward a theory of spiritual leadership. The Leadership Quarterly,

14(6), 693–727.

Furrow, J. L., King, P. E., & White, K. (2004). Religion and positive youth

development: Identity, meaning, and prosocial concerns. Applied

Developmental Science, 8(1), 17–26.

113
Furrow, J. M. (2015). Servant leadership in Christian schools: Servant

administration’s influence on classroom teachers [Ed.D., Columbia

International University].

Garber, J. S., Madigan, E. A., Click, E. R., & Fitzpatrick, J. J. (2009). Attitudes

towards collaboration and servant leadership among nurses, physicians and

residents. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 23(4), 331–340.

Gardner, W. L., Cogliser, C. C., Davis, K. M., & Dickens, M. P. (2011). Authentic

leadership: A review of the literature and research agenda. The Leadership

Quarterly, 22(6), 1120–1145.

Gazula, S., McKenna, L., Cooper, S., & Paliadelis, P. (2017). A systematic review of

reciprocal peer tutoring within tertiary health profession educational programs.

Health Professions Education, 3(2), 64–78.

Gecas, V. (1982). The self-concept. Annual Review of Sociology, 8(1), 1–33.

Ghosh, R., Haynes, R. K., & Kram, K. E. (2013). Developmental networks at work:

Holding environments for leader development. Career Development

International.

Gibbs, C. (2007, September). Teaching and learning: The heart of relational

connectedness. Annual Conference of the British Educational Research

Association.

Giele, J. Z. (2000). Methods of life course research: Qualitative and quantitative

approaches. SAGE Publications.

Glaser, B. G. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity: Advances in the methodology of

grounded theory. The Sociology Press.

Glaser, B. G. (1992). Emergence vs forcing: Basics of grounded theory analysis.

Sociology Press.

Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (2017). Discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for

qualitative research.

114
Goldenberg, D., & Iwasiw, C. (1992). Reciprocal learning among students in the

clinical area. Nurse Educator, 17(5), 27–29.

Graham, J. W. (1991). Servant-leadership in organizations: Inspirational and moral.

The Leadership Quarterly, 2(2), 105–119.

Grant, A. M. (2003). The impact of life coaching on goal attainment, metacognition

and mental health. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal,

31(3), 253–264.

Greenleaf, R. K. (1970). The servant as leader. Center for Applied Studies.

Greenleaf, R. K. (1972). The institution as servant. Center for Applied Studies.

Greenleaf, R. K. (1975). Trustees as servants. Center for Applied Studies.

Greenleaf, R. K. (1977). Servant leadership: A journey into the nature of legitimate

power and greatness. Paulist Press.

Greenleaf, R. K., Fraker, A. T., & Spears, L. C. (1996). Seeker and servant:

Reflections on religious leadership. Jossey-Bass.

Griffin, M. L. (2012). The development of servant leaders at Harvest Christian

Fellowship in Wilmington, Delaware [D.Min., Regent University].

Grigorenko, E. L. (2012). Closeness of all kinds: The role of oxytocin and

vasopressin in the physiology of spiritual and religious behavior. In Thriving

and spirituality among youth: Research perspectives and future possibilities

(pp. 33–60). John Wiley & Sons Inc.

Grunwell, S. G. (2015). Leading our world forward: An examination of student

leadership development. Journal of Leadership Education, 14(2), 82–99.

Hale, J. R., & Fields, D. L. (2007). Exploring servant leadership across cultures: A

study of followers in Ghana and the USA. Leadership, 3(4), 397–417.

Hall, H. H. (2016). An exploration of the relationship between servant leadership

characteristics of nurse leaders and the perception of empowerment among

their followers [Ed.D., Indiana Wesleyan University].

115
Hamilton, F., & Bean, C. J. (2005). The importance of context, beliefs and values in

leadership development. Business Ethics: A European Review, 14(4), 336–

347.

Harter, S. (2011). Authenticity. In S. J. Lopez & C. R. Snyder, Handbook of positive

psychology. Oxford University Press.

Hay, D., Reich, K. H., & Utsch, M. (2006). Spiritual development: Intersections and

divergence with religious development. In P. E. King, P. L. Benson, & L. M.

Wagener (Eds.), The Handbook of Spiritual Development in Childhood and

Adolescence. SAGE Publications.

Hays, J. M. (2008). Teacher as servant applications of Greenleaf’s servant

leadership in higher education. Journal of Global Business Issues, 2(1), 113–

134.

Herman, D. V., & Marlowe, M. (2005). Modeling meaning in life: The teacher as

servant leader. Reclaiming Children & Youth, 14(3), 175–178.

Herman, R. L. (2008). Servant leadership: A model for organizations desiring a

workplace spirituality culture [Ph.D., Capella University].

Herndon, B. C. (2007). An analysis of the relationships between servant leadership,

school culture, and student achievement [Ph.D., University of Missouri -

Columbia].

Hess, E. D. (2013, April 28). Servant leadership: A path to high performance.

Washington Post.

Hesse, H. (1933). The Journey to the East. Peter Owen Vision Press.

Higgins, M. C., & Kram, K. E. (2001). Reconceptualizing mentoring at work: A

developmental network perspective. The Academy of Management Review,

26(2), 264.

Hill, P. C., & Pargament, K. I. (2003). Advances in the conceptualization and

measurement of religion and spirituality. Implications for physical and mental

health research. The American Psychologist, 58(1), 64–74.

116
Hinkin, T. (1995). A review of scale development practices in the study of

organizations. Journal of Management, 21(5), 967–988.

Hinkin, T. (1998). A brief tutorial on the development of measures for use in survey

questionnaires. Articles and Chapters.

Hirschinger-Blank, N., & Markowitz, M. W. (2006). An evaluation of a pilot service-

learning course for criminal justice undergraduate students. Journal of

Criminal Justice Education, Issue 1, 69.

Hoch, J. E., Bommer, W. H., Dulebohn, J. H., & Wu, D. (2018). Do ethical, authentic,

and servant leadership explain variance above and beyond transformational

leadership? A meta-analysis. Journal of Management, 44(2), 501–529.

Holmes, G., & Abington-Cooper, M. (2000). Pedagogy vs. andragogy: A false

dichotomy? The Journal of Technology Studies, 26(2), 50–55.

Hoover, J. (2018). Can Christians practice mindfulness without compromising their

convictions? Journal of Psychology and Christianity; Batavia, 37(3), 247–255.

Hoskins, J. R. (2014). Story, presence, community: A servant-leadership model for

Rocky Bayou Christian School [D.Min., Assemblies of God Theological

Seminary].

House, R. J. (2005). Culture, leadership, and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62

societies. SAGE.

Hughes, P. (2007). Building stronger communities. University of New South Wales

Press.

Hughes, P. (2013). Spirituality and religious tolerance. Equinox Publishing Ltd.

Hughes, P. J. (2017). Educating for purposeful living in a post-traditional age.

Christian Research Association.

Hunter, E. M., Neubert, M. J., Perry, S. J., Witt, L. A., Penney, L. M., & Weinberger,

E. (2013). Servant leaders inspire servant followers: Antecedents and

outcomes for employees and the organization. The Leadership Quarterly,

24(2), 316–331.

117
Ingman, B. C. (2011). Henry David Thoreau: Spirituality and experiential education.

Curriculum and Teaching Dialogue, 13(1/2), 143-129A.

Ingram, O. C. (2003). The conceptualization and perception of servant leadership in

Christian higher education [Ed.D., The Southern Baptist Theological

Seminary].

Irving, J. A. (2005). Servant leadership and the effectiveness of teams [Ph.D., Regent

University].

Irving, J. A. (2014). Cross-cultural perspectives on servant leadership. In K.

Patterson & D. Van Dierendonck, Servant leadership: Developments in theory

and research. Macmillan.

Irving, J. A., & Berndt, J. (2017). Leader purposefulness within servant leadership:

Examining the effect of servant leadership, leader follower-focus, leader goal-

orientation, and leader purposefulness in a large U.S. healthcare

organization. Administrative Sciences; Basel, 7(2), 10.

Iserbyt, P. (2012). Reciprocal learning. In N. M. Seel (Ed.), Encyclopedia of the

Sciences of Learning (pp. 2785–2786). Springer US.

Issa, T., & Pick, D. (2011). An interpretive mixed-methods analysis of ethics,

spirituality and aesthetics in the Australian services sector. Business Ethics: A

European Review, 20(1), 45–58.

Jacobs, K. (2011). Assessing the Relationship between servant leadership and

effective teaching in a private university setting [Ph.D., Northcentral

University].

Jenkins, D. M. (2013). Exploring instructional strategies in student leadership

development programming. Journal of Leadership Studies, 6(4), 48–62.

Jenkins, M., & Stewart, A. C. (2010). The importance of a servant leader orientation.

Health Care Management Review, 35(1), 46–54.

Jonassen, D. H. (1994). Thinking technology: Toward a constructivist design model.

Educational Technology, 34(4), 34–37. JSTOR.

118
Jones, D. C. (2011). The Role of servant leadership in establishing a participative

business culture focused on profitability, employee satisfaction, and

empowerment [Ph.D., Walden University].

Jones, N. P., Papadakis, A. A., Hogan, C. M., & Strauman, T. J. (2009). Over and

over again: Rumination, reflection, and promotion goal failure and their

interactive effects on depressive symptoms. Behaviour Research and

Therapy, 47(3), 254–259.

Jones, S. L. (1994). A constructive relationship for religion with the science and

profession of psychology: Perhaps the boldest model yet. American

Psychologist, 49(3), 184–199.

Joseph, E. E., & Winston, B. E. (2005). A correlation of servant leadership, leader

trust, and organizational trust. Leadership & Organization Development

Journal, 26(1), 6–22.

Jumaat, N. F., Halim, N. D. A., Ashari, Z. M., & Tasir, Z. (2017). Project-based

learning from constructivism point of view. Advanced Science Letters, 23(8),

7904–7906.

Kabat-Zinn, J. (2016). Coming to our senses: Healing ourselves and the world

through mindfulness.

Kaldor, P., Hughes, P. J., & Black, A. W. (2010). Spirit matters: How making sense of

life affects wellbeing. Mosaic Press.

Kaplan, S. (2000). Human nature and environmentally responsible behavior. Journal

of Social Issues, 56(3), 491–508.

Kapuscinski, A. N., & Masters, K. S. (2010). The current status of measures of

spirituality: A critical review of scale development. Psychology of Religion and

Spirituality, 2(4), 191–205.

Kashy‑Rosenbaum, G., Kaplan, O., & Israel‑Cohen, Y. (2018). Predicting academic

achievement by class-level emotions and perceived homeroom teachers’

emotional support. Psychology in the Schools, 55(7), 770–782.

119
Keen, C., & Hall, K. (2009). Engaging with difference matters: Longitudinal student

outcomes of co-curricular service-learning programs. The Journal of Higher

Education, 80(1), 59.

Kegan, R. (1982). The evolving self: Problem and process in human development

(Reprint edition). Harvard University Press.

Kernis, M. H., & Goldman, B. M. (2006). A multicomponent conceptualization of

authenticity: Theory and research. In M. P. Zanna, Advances in experimental

social psychology. Vol. 38 Vol. 38 (pp. 283–357). Academic Press.

Khiatani, P. V., & Liu, J. K. K. (2019). Reciprocal learning in service-learning?

Measuring bidirectional outcomes of college students and service recipients

in tutor-based services in Hong Kong. Innovations in Education and Teaching

International, 1–10.

Kiersch, C., & Peters, J. (2017). Leadership from the inside out: Student leadership

development within authentic leadership and servant leadership frameworks.

Journal of Leadership Education, 16(1), 148–168.

Kimotho, S. G. (2019). Is servant leadership a ‘Christian theory’? A critical

examination of Greenleaf’s servant leadership concept. International Journal

of Research in Humanities and Social Studies, 6(3), 71–78.

Kinsler, L. (2014). Born to be me who am I again? The development of authentic

leadership using evidence-based leadership coaching and mindfulness.

International Coaching Psychology Review, 9(1), 92–105.

Kirkpatrick, J. W. (1988). A theology of servant leadership. Fuller Theological

Seminary, School of World Mission.

Kolb, D. A. (2014). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and

development (ACCESS ONLINE; Second edition.). Pearson Education LTD.

Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (1993). Credibility: How leaders gain and lose it, why

people demand it (The Jossey-Bass management series). Jossey Bass Inc.

120
Kurth, K. (2010). Spiritually renewing ourselves at work: Finding meaning through

serving. In R. A. Giacalone & C. L. Jurkiewicz, Handbook of workplace

spirituality and organizational performance. M.E. Sharpe.

Lad, L. J., & Luechauer, D. (1998). On the path to servant leadership. In L. C.

Spears, Insights on leadership: Service, stewardship, spirit, and servant-

leadership. Wiley.

Laub, J. A. (1999). Assessing the servant organization [Florida Atlantic University].

Lenz, D., & Bottum, B. (1998). Within our reach: Servant-leadership for the twenty-

first century. In L. C. Spears (Ed.), Insights on leadership: Service,

stewardship, spirit, and servant-leadership. Wiley.

Lichtenwalner, B. (2011, March 1). Fortune’s best companies to work for with servant

leadership. Modern Servant Leader.

Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., Chenwei Liao, & Meuser, J. D. (2014). Servant leadership

and serving culture: Influence on individual and unit performance. Academy of

Management Journal, 57(5), 1434–1452.

Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., Meuser, J. D., Hu, J., Wu, J., & Liao, C. (2015). Servant

leadership: Validation of a short form of the SL-28. The Leadership Quarterly,

26(2), 254–269.

Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., Zhao, H., & Henderson, D. (2008). Servant leadership:

Development of a multidimensional measure and multi-level assessment.

LEAQUA The Leadership Quarterly, 19(2), 161–177.

Lord, R. G., & Hall, R. J. (2005). Identity, deep structure and the development of

leadership skill. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(4), 591–615.

Loughlin, K. A. (1993). Women’s perceptions of transformative learning experiences

within consciousness-raising. Mellen Research University Press.

Marinho, R. (2005). Servant-leadership in a changing culture: Reflections on the

Brazilian context. International Journal of Servant Leadership, 115–122.

121
Marshall, J. C. (2008). Servant-leadership and service-learning: A model for teaching

community engagement to undergraduate students [Ed.D., East Carolina

University].

McCall, M. W. (2004). Leadership development through experience. Academy of

Management Executive, 18(3), 127–130.

McCauley, Cynthia D., & Van Velsor, E. (2004). The Center for Creative Leadership

Handbook of Leadership Development. John Wiley & Sons.

McMinn, T. F. (2001). The conceptualization and perception of biblical servant

leadership in the Southern Baptist Convention [Ed.D.]. Southern Baptist

Theological Seminary.

Meinecke, D. B. (2014). Developing servant-leaders through service-learning at a

southwest Christian university: A quasi-experimental study [Ph.D., Dallas

Baptist University].

Mertel, T., & Brill, C. (2015). What every leader ought to know about becoming a

servant leader. Industrial & Commercial Training, 47(5), 228.

Mika, C. T. H. (2015). ‘Thereness’: Implications of Heidegger’s ‘presence’ for Māori.

Ngā Pae O Te Māramatanga, 11(1), 3–13.

Miller, D. (2012). National responsibility and global justice. Oxford University Press.

Miller, W. R., & Thoresen, C. E. (2003). Spirituality, religion, and health. An emerging

research field. The American Psychologist, 58(1), 24–35.

Miscenko, D., & Day, D. V. (2016). Identity and identification at work. Organizational

Psychology Review, 6(3), 215–247.

Molnar, D. R. (2007). Serving the World: A Cross-Cultural Study of National Culture

Dimensions and Servant Leadership [Doctoral Thesis]. Capella University.

Moon, S. M. (1999). A study of servant leadership in Korea. [Masters Dissertation,

Fuller Theological Seminary].

122
Mumford, M. D., Zaccaro, S. J., Fleishman, E. A., Harding, F. D., & Jacobs, T. O.

(2000). Leadership skills for a changing world: Solving complex social

problems. Leadership Quarterly, 11(1), 11–35.

Nair, K. (1997). A higher standard of leadership: Lessons from the life of Gandhi.

Berrett-Koehler.

Negron, M. (2012). Analysis of servant leadership: An interpretive biography of a

prominent leader in proprietary higher education [Ph.D., Northcentral

University].

Nepe, T. M. (1991). Te toi huarewa tipuna: Kaupapa Māori, an educational

intervention system [Thesis, ResearchSpace@Auckland].

Neubert, M. J., Kacmar, K. M., Carlson, D. S., Chonko, L. B., & Roberts, J. A. (2008).

Regulatory focus as a mediator of the influence of initiating structure and

servant leadership on employee behavior. The Journal of Applied

Psychology, 93(6), 1220–1233.

Niewold, J. W. (2006). Incarnational leadership: Towards a distinctly Christian theory

of leadership [Ph.D., Regent University].

Noland, A., & Richards, K. (2015). Servant teaching: An exploration of teacher

servant leadership on student outcomes. Journal of the Scholarship of

Teaching and Learning, 15(6), 16–38.

Noll, C. A. (2012). An alternative spring break of leadership and service: Interpreting

the servant leadership, motivations, and service participation of millennials

who participated in Project LEAD between the years 2008–2010 [Ed.D.,

Pepperdine University].

Norris, P., & Inglehart, R. (2011). Sacred and secular: Religion and politics worldwide

(2nd Edition). Cambridge University Press.

Norris, S. L. (2015). Mentorship and servant leadership: Perceptions of first-semester

college students [M.S., Oklahoma State University].

123
Novak, J. M., Markey, V., & Allen, M. (2007). Evaluating cognitive outcomes of

service learning in higher education: A meta-analysis. Communication

Research Reports, 24(2), 149–157.

Padron, J. (2012). Higher education leadership: Servant leadership and the effects

on student satisfaction [Ed.D., Argosy University/Sarasota].

Page, D., & Wong, P. (2000). A conceptual framework for measuring servant

leadership. In S. B.-S. K. Adjibolosoo, The human factor in shaping the

course of history and development. University Press of America.

Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-

fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction,

1(2), 117–175. JSTOR.

Pargament, K. I., & Mahoney, A. (2005). Spirituality: Discovering and conserving the

sacred. In Handbook of Positive Psychology (2nd ed.). Oxford University

Press.

Parke, H. W., & Wormell, D. E. W. (2004). The Delphic oracle. Ares Publishers.

Parolini, J., Patterson, K., & Winston, B. (2009). Distinguishing between

transformational and servant leadership. Leadership & Organization

Development Journal, 30(3), 274–291.

Parris, D. L., Peachey, J. W., & Welty, J. (2013). A systematic literature review of

servant leadership theory in organizational contexts. Journal of Business

Ethics, 113(3), 377–393.

Patrick, F. (2011). Handbook of research on improving learning and motivation

through educational games: Multidisciplinary approaches: Multidisciplinary

approaches. IGI Global.

Patterson, K. (2003). Servant leadership: A theoretical model [Doctoral Thesis].

Regent University.

124
Pattison, T. R. (2010). The difference between secondary school principals’ servant

leadership in lower achieving and higher achieving secondary schools [Ed.D.,

University of Missouri - Columbia].

Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Sage

Publications, Inc.

Pere, R. R. (1982). Āko: Concepts and learning in the Māori tradition. Dept. of

Sociology, University of Waikato.

Peterson, S. J., Galvin, B. M., & Lange, D. (2012). CEO servant leadership: Exploring

executive characteristics and firm performance. Personnel Psychology, 3,

565.

Pfeifer, D. M. (2005). Leadership in Aotearoa New Zealand: Māori and Pākehā

perceptions of outstanding leadership.

Piedmont, R. L. (2007). Cross-cultural generalizability of the spiritual transcendence

scale to the Philippines: Spirituality as a human universal. Mental Health,

Religion & Culture, 10(2), 89–107.

Piedmont, R. L., & Leach, M. M. (2002). Cross-cultural generalizability of the spiritual

transcendence scale in India: Spirituality as a universal aspect of human

experience. American Behavioral Scientist, 45(12), 1888–1901.

Pihama, L., Smith, K., Taki, M., & Lee, J. (2004). A literature review on Kaupapa

Māori and Māori education pedagogy. VOCEDplus, the International Tertiary

Education and Research Database.

Piker, S. (1987). The Buddhist saints of the forest and the cult of amulets: A study in

charisma, hagiography, sectarianism, and millennial Buddhism. Stanley

Jeyaraja Tambiah. American Anthropologist, 89(1), 168–169.

Politis, J. D., & Politis, D. J. (2018). Examination of the relationship between servant

leadership and agency problems: Gender matters. Leadership & Organization

Development Journal, 39(2), 170–185.

125
Powles, J. M. (2016). Teacher leaders’ utilization of servant leadership and the

impact on school climate [Ed.D., College of Saint Elizabeth].

Razali, W. M. F. A. W. (2012). The concept of servant leadership and Islamic

leadership: A comparative analysis. International Conference on Islamic

Leadership.

Reinke, S. J. (2004). Service before self: Towards a theory of servant-leadership.

Global Virtue Ethics Review, 5(3), 30–57.

Rennaker, M. A. (2008). Listening and persuasion: Examining the communicative

patterns of servant leadership [Ph.D., Regent University].

Rest, J. R., Narvez, D., Thoma, S. J., & Bebeau, M. J. (2014). Postconventional

Moral Thinking A Neo-kohlbergian Approach. Psychology Press.

Ridder, H.-G. (2017). The theory contribution of case study research designs.

Business Research, 10(2), 281–305.

Roane, T., & Newcomb, W. (2013). Experiences of young African American women

principals. Leading and Managing, 19(1), 1.

Robbins, M., & Francis, L. J. (2005). Purpose in Life and Prayer Among Catholic and

Protestant Adolescents in Northern Ireland. Journal of Research on Christian

Education, 14(1), 73–93.

Robert F. Russell, & A. Gregory Stone. (2002). A review of servant leadership

attributes: Developing a practical model. Leadership & Organization

Development Journal, 23(3), 145–157.

Robert K. Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership. (2016). What is servant

leadership? Servant Leadership.

Robin, M., & Sendjaya, S. (2018). Looking back to look forward: Lessons for

leadership development.

Robinson, C. (2009). Lessons on learning. The Journal for Quality and Participation,

32(1), 25–27. ProQuest Central.

126
Rock, A. D. (2006). Developing a spiritually-formative leadership mentoring ministry

at Southwood Community Church [D.Min.]. Liberty Baptist Theological

Seminary.

Rohm, F. W. (2013). Servant leader development at Southeastern University [Ph.D.,

Regent University].

Rost, Joseph C. (1991). Leadership for the twenty-first century. Praeger.

Rost, Joseph Clarence. (1993). Leadership for the twenty-first century. Greenwood

Publishing Group.

Rude, C. L. (2005). Connections: A multi-case study of the life-shaping influences of

persons who hold positions of leadership in healthcare, the Christian church,

and higher education [Ph.D., Union Institute and University].

Russell, J. R. (2008). An analysis of the efficacy of Leadership Southern Indiana by

selected alumni [Ed.D., Spalding University].

Russell, R. F., & Stone, G. A. (2002). A review of servant leadership attributes:

Developing a practical model. Leadership & Organization Development

Journal, 23(3), 145–157.

Russell, Robert F. (2003a). A practical theology of servant leadership. August.

Russell, Robert F. (2003b, August). A practical theology of servant leadership.

Servant Leadership. Servant Leadership Research Roundtable, Regent

University.

Sallquist, J., Eisenberg, N., French, D. C., Purwono, U., & Suryanti, T. A. (2010).

Indonesian adolescents’ spiritual and religious experiences and their

longitudinal relations with socioemotional functioning. Developmental

Psychology, 46(3), 699–716.

Sawyer, R. K. (2006). The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences.

Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006.

Scales, P. C., Syvertson, A. K., Benson, P. L., Roehlkepartain, E. C., & Sesma Jr., A.

(2014). Relation of spiritual development to youth health and well-being:

127
 Evidence from a global study. In A. Ben-Arieh, F. Casas, I. Frønes, & J. E.

Korbin (Eds.), Handbook of child well-being (pp. 1101–1135). Springer

Netherlands.

Schneider, S. K., & George. (2011). Servant leadership versus transformational

leadership in voluntary service organizations. Leadership & Organization

Development Journal, 32(1), 60–77.

Schulman, M. (2005). How we become moral. In Handbook of Positive Psychology

(2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.

Schwartz, K. D. (2006). Transformations in parent and friend faith support predicting

adolescents’ religious faith. International Journal for the Psychology of

Religion, 16(4), 311–326.

Scuderi, N. F. (2014). Servant leadership and transformational leadership in church

organizations. The Journal of Applied Christian Leadership, 8(1), 119–119.

Sendjaya, S. (2005). Morality and leadership: Examining the ethics of

transformational leadership. Journal of Academic Ethics, 3(1), 75–86.

Sendjaya, S., & Eva, N. (2013). Creating future leaders: An examination of youth

leadership development in Australia. Education + Training, 55(6), 584–598.

Sendjaya, S., Eva, N., Butar Butar, I., Robin, M., & Castles, S. (2017). SLBS-6:

Validation of a short form of the Servant Leadership Behavior Scale. Journal

of Business Ethics, 941–956.

Sendjaya, S., & Sarros, J. C. (2002). Servant leadership: It’s origin, development,

and application in organizations. Journal of Leadership & Organizational

Studies, 9(2), 57–64.

Sendjaya, S., Sarros, J. C., & Santora, J. (2008). Defining and measuring servant

leadership behaviour in organizations. Journal of Management Studies, 45(2),

402–424.

Senge, P. (2004). Creating communities—create a group of learning leaders.

Executive Excellence, 21(9), 4.

128
Sewell, A. (2011). Exploring the development of a community of learners in four

primary classrooms. New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies;

Heidelberg, 46(2), 61–74.

Shapiro, S. L., Carlson, L. E., Astin, J. A., & Freedman, B. S. (2006). Mechanisms of

mindfulness. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 62(3), 373–386.

Shek, D. T., Chung, P. P., & Leung, H. (2015). How unique is the service leadership

model? A comparison with contemporary leadership approaches.

International Journal on Disability and Human Development; Berlin, 14(3),

217–231.

Shuell, T. J. (1986). Cognitive conceptions of learning. Review of Educational

Research, 56(4), 411–436.

Sipe, J. W., & Frick, D. M. (2009). Seven pillars of servant leadership: Practicing the

wisdom of leading by Serving. Paulist Press.

Snell, R. S., Chan, M. Y. L., Ma, C. H. K., & Chan, C. K. M. (2015). A road map for

empowering undergraduates to practice service leadership through service-

learning in teams. Journal of Management Education, 39(3), 372–399.

Song, J. (2018). Leading through awareness and healing: A servant-leadership

model. The International Journal of Servant-Leadership; Spokane, 12(1),

245–284.

Spackman, B. T. (1988, June). Is it proper to pray to Jesus Christ? [Official site]. The

Church of Jesus Christ and Latter-Day Saints.

Spears, L. C. (1995). Reflections on leadership: How Robert K. Greenleaf’s theory of

servant-leadership influenced today’s top management thinkers. J. Wiley.

Spears, L. C. (2004). Practicing servant-leadership. Leader to Leader, 34(Fall), 7–11.

Spears, L. C. (2010). Character and servant leadership: Ten characteristics of

effective, caring leaders. The Journal of Virtues & Leadership, 1(1), 25–30.

Spears, L. C., & Lawrence, M. (2002). Focus on leadership: Servant-Leadership for

the twenty-first century. John Wiley & Sons.

129
Stats NZ Tatauranga Aotearoa. (2019, March 10). Religion. Religion.

Steele, A. R., & Day, D. V. (2018). The role of self-attention in leader development.

Journal of Leadership Studies, 12(2), 17–32.

Strickland, S. A. (2006). Not for profit organizational leaders’ self -perception of

servant leadership characteristics [Ph.D., Capella University].

Sundram, F., Corattur, T., Dong, C., & Zhong, K. (2018). motivations, expectations

and experiences in being a mental health helplines volunteer. International

Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 15(10).

Symington, S. H., & Symington, M. F. (2012). A Christian model of mindfulness:

Using mindfulness principles to support psychological well-being, value-based

behavior, and the Christian spiritual journey. Journal of Psychology and

Christianity; Batavia, 31(1), 71–77.

Tarling, M. K. (2014). Investigating the relationship between the demonstration of

servant leadership and intellectual development [Ph.D., Cardinal Stritch

University].

Taylor, E. W. (1998). The theory and practice of transformative learning: A critical

review. ERIC Clearinghouse on Adult, Career, and Vocational Education,

Center on Education and Training for Employment, College of Education, The

Ohio State University.

Taylor, T. A. (2002). Examination of leadership practices of principals identified as

servant leaders [Ed.D., University of Missouri - Columbia].

Thompson, A. (2014). Fostering growth and development of recovering students in

higher education through servant leadership. Peabody Journal of Education,

89(2), 244–257.

Trammel, R. C. (2016). Christian-informed mindfulness: A theoretical and empirical

exploration [Ph.D., Baylor University].

130
Trompenaars, F., & Voerman, E. (2009). Servant leadership across cultures:

Harnessing the strength of the world’s most powerful leadership philosophy.

Infinite Ideas.

Tyler, R. W. (2013). Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. University of

Chicago Press.

Vaccarino, F., Kavan, H., & Gendall, P. (2011). Spirituality and religion in the lives of

New Zealanders. The International Journal of Religion and Spirituality in

Society, 1(2), 85–96.

Valeri, D. P. (2007). The origins of servant leadership [Doctoral Thesis, Greenleaf

University].

van Dierendonck, D., & Nuijten, I. (2011). The Servant Leadership Survey:

Development and validation of a multidimensional measure. Journal of

Business & Psychology, 26(3), 249–267.

Van Dierendonck, D., Sousa, M., Gunnarsdóttir, S., Bobbio, A., Hakanen, J., Pircher

Verdorfer, A., Cihan Duyan, E., & Rodriguez-Carvajal, R. (2017). The cross-

cultural invariance of the Servant Leadership Survey: A comparative study

across eight countries. Administrative Sciences, 7(2), 8.

van Dierendonck, D. van. (2011). Servant leadership: A review and synthesis.

Journal of Management, 37(4), 1228–1261.

van Kuik, A. (1998). The meaning of servant leadership [Ph.D., University of

Manitoba (Canada)].

Van Winkle, B. J. (2013). The relationship of the servant leadership behaviors of

immediate supervisors and followers’ perceptions of being empowered: In the

context of small business [Ed.D., University of La Verne].

Vanderpyl, T. H. (2012). Servant leadership: A case study of a Canadian health care

innovator. Journal of Healthcare Leadership, 2012(4), 9–16.

Varney, J. (2017). The impact of servant leadership on the engagement of adjunct

higher education online faculty [Ph.D., Concordia University Chicago].

131
Verdorfer, A. P. (2016). Examining mindfulness and its relations to humility,

motivation to lead, and actual servant leadership behaviors. Mindfulness, 4,

950.

Veselský, P., Poslt, J., Majewská, P., & Bolcková, M. (2013). Addressing spirituality

in experiential learning. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 106, 328–

337.

Vries, M. F. R. K. de, Vrignaud, P., & Florent-Treacy, E. (2004). The global

leadership life inventory: Development and psychometric properties of a 360-

degree feedback instrument. The International Journal of Human Resource

Management, 15(3), 475–492.

Walker, L. A. (2003). Phenomenological profiles of selected Illinois public -school

superintendents as servant leaders [Ed.D., Northern Illinois University].

Wallace, J. R. (2007). Servant leadership: A worldview perspective. International

Journal of Leadership Studies, 2(2).

Walumbwa, F. O., Hartnell, C. A., & Oke, A. (2010). Servant leadership, procedural

justice climate, service climate, employee attitudes, and organizational

citizenship behavior: A cross-level investigation. The Journal of Applied

Psychology, 95(3), 517–529.

Ward, W. C. (2017). Demonstrated servant leadership in Collegiate Athletics at

Lincoln Memorial University [D.B.A., Northcentral University].

Warren, R. (2013). The purpose driven life: What on earth am I here for? (10th

Anniversary edition). Zondervan.

Wayne, M. A. (2009). Identifying a relationship between servant-leadership and

church climate [Ed.D., Northcentral University].

Weber, M. (1958). The Protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism. Scribner.

Welch, M., & Koth, K. (2009). Spirituality and service-learning: Parallel frameworks

for understanding students’ spiritual development. Spirituality in Higher

Education, 5(1), 9.

132
Whorton, K. P. (2014). Does servant leadership positively influence employee

engagement? [Ed.D., Grand Canyon University].

Winston, B. (2003). Extending Patterson’s servant leadership model: Explaining how

leaders and followers interact in a circular model. Servant Leadership

Research Roundtable, August.

Winston, B. E. (2002). Be a leader for God’s sake: From values to behaviors. Regent

University, School of Leadership Studies.

Winston, B., & Fields, D. (2015). Seeking and measuring the essential behaviors of

servant leadership. Leadership & Organization Development Journal;

Bradford, 36(4), 413–434.

Wulff, D. M. (1997). Psychology of religion: Classic and contemporary. John Wiley.

Xu, L., Stewart, T., & Haber-Curran, P. (2015). Measurement invariance of the

Servant Leadership Questionnaire across K-12 principal gender. School

Leadership & Management, 35(2), 202–214.

Yin, R. K. (2011). Applications of case study research. SAGE.

Yorio, P. L., & Ye, F. (2012). A meta-analysis on the effects of service-learning on the

social, personal, and cognitive outcomes of learning. Academy of

Management Learning & Education, 11(1), 9.

Yukl, G. A. (2013). Leadership in organizations. Pearson.

Zentner, A. (2016). Applied servant leadership strategies: A case study on SAS.

SSRN Electronic Journal, 8(7).

Zimmerman-Oster, K., & Burkhardt, J. C. (1999). Leadership in the making: A

comprehensive examination of the impact of leadership development

programs on students. Journal of Leadership Studies, 6(3–4), 50–66.

Zinnbauer, B. J., & Pargament, K. I. (2005). Religiousness and spirituality. In

Handbook of the psychology of religion and spirituality (pp. 21–42). Guilford

Press.

133
Zinnbauer, B. J., Pargament, K. I., & Scott, A. B. (1999). The emerging meanings of

religiousness and spirituality: Problems and prospects. J Personality Journal

of Personality, 67(6), 889–919.

134
Appendix A: Course Descriptor

Course details

Course title The Servant as Leader

Directed hours: 32 Self-directed learning hours: 64 Total learning hours: 96

Duration and format

The course is comprised of 16 sessions held over an 18-week period of two hours for
class time and an additional four hours per session of reading, reflection and
assessment work.

Course aim

This course will facilitate the development of authentic servant leader competencies
using Māori culture and pedagogies.

Graduate and Learning Outcomes

Graduate Outcomes
Learning Evaluate personal Examine Critically review Integrate
Outcomes (LO) decision-making conditions, servant leadership theory into a
processes from structures, and theory and practice holistic and
personal contexts impacting to inform personal personal
experiences and Māori to contribute servant leadership model of
contexts to make positively to a development. servant
leadership bicultural and leadership.
decisions. multicultural
society.
LO1. Critically
evaluate servant
leadership and
associated
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
theories to
propose a
personal
framework.
LO2. Critically
reflect on servant
leadership in an
✓ ✓ ✓
authentic context
to inform personal
application.

135
 LO3. Compare
Māori leadership
and servant
leadership to
✓
inform personal
application in a
Aotearoa-New
Zealand context.

Assessments

Assessments* are structured as follows:

Learning Outcome(s) Reflective Presentation of a Servant Total

Journal Leadership Framework
LO1. Critically evaluate servant leadership 20% 20% 40%
and associated theories to propose a
personal framework.
LO2. Critically reflect on servant leadership 10% 10% 20%
in an authentic context to inform personal
application.
KM1. Compare Māori leadership and servant 10% 10% 20%
leadership to inform personal application.
Total 50% 50% 100%
*Note – As assessments became formative, no formal feedback or grade was provided to learners.

Reflections

In this assessment, learners are required to create a weekly journal entry

reflecting on learning and application of servant leadership principles. The
assessment structure will be discussed in week one, where learners will be taught
how to frame and record reflections. Reflections can be written, audio or video record
but should be 200-300 words or 4 to 5 minutes of recording. Indicative weekly
reflection questions are listed below; these are a guide only and learners are
encouraged to extend reflections beyond these questions to personal interests,
observations or thoughts.

Session Theme Topics and presenters Weekly reflection questions

1 Authentic self Introduction What personal areas do you want to

develop by doing this course, and how
Dr Gary Leaf and Nathan do you intend to develop in these areas?
Polley What are your personal beliefs about
leaders and leadership, their
effectiveness, role and responsibility?

136
2 Authentic self What is leadership; what What perceived obstacles limit you
is servant leadership becoming even more of a servant leader
than you currently are?
Dr Gary Leaf and Nathan What are the key concepts in servant
Polley leadership that make this differ from
alternative models or theories?

3 Transcendental The essence of servant What are your personal leadership

spirituality leadership - 'being' and virtues that you believe and espouse to
virtues followers?
Authentic self How can you and others develop virtues
Dr Gary Leaf and Nathan and values consistent with servant
Polley leadership?

4 Covenantal The servant leader as a How can servant leadership be applied

relationship cultural leader personally complementary to your
culture(s)?
Dr Gary Leaf and Nathan How do servant leaders adapt to culture
Polley and change culture?

5 Transcendental The servant leader and How does your understanding of

spirituality spirituality spirituality align or not align with servant
leadership?
Authentic self Nathan Polley and How can servant leadership principles be
Dennis Yue integrated into your spiritual practices?

6 Covenantal The interactions of the What are some of the personal inhibitors
relationship servant leader you face or would face in applying your
emerging framework to your
Nathan Polley and David interactions?
McCurdy What guidelines, tools or strategies could
be provided to support servant leaders in
understanding appropriate behaviours?

7 Transforming In your experience, how has power,

influence politics and organisational structures
influenced the outcomes for followers?
How can servant leaders practically
balance power in leadership?

8 Responsible The servant leader as a What tensions have you experienced or

morality sustainable steward observed in stewarding resources and
people, and how have these been
Nathan Polley and addressed?
Huhana Forsyth How can servant leaders apply
stewardship principles in how they lead
and allocate people and resources?

9 Transforming The servant leader and What criteria would you use to rate
influence organisational servant leadership performance and
development and change what rating against these would you
award to servant leaders you know?
Nathan Polley How can the potential benefits of servant
leadership be realised in an
organisation?

137
 10 Transforming How can servant leadership principles be
influence applied to support your personal
learning?
How can servant leadership be applied
to support learning and development in
contexts you are familiar with?

11 Covenantal The servant leader as a How do you perceive and am perceived

relationship team player by your team?
What strategies can you apply to
Nathan Polley improve and develop teams in your
context?

12 Responsible The servant leader as a What internal and external forces or

morality strategic thinker influences have shaped your strategic
decisions?
Nathan Polley How can a servant leader approach
strategy, consistent with the servant
leadership principles?

13 Responsible The servant leader as a What are some of the factors that
morality decision-maker influence (positively or negatively)
decision-making in your experience?
Nathan Polley What aspects or perspectives does a
servant leader bring when making
decisions?

14 Voluntary The servant leader as a What elements do you believe are

subordination community leader essential to the building of a strong and
supportive community?
Nathan Polley How would/could a servant leader build a
community by integrating aspects of
servant leadership?

15 Voluntary Presentations What changes have I perceived in your

subordination leadership beliefs and practices as a
16 result of this course?
What are further areas of growth needed
or desired?

Presentation of a personal servant leader framework

In this assessment, learners are required to critically analyse and evaluate

servant leadership, propose a framework within an authentic context and present this
to peers. A framework is a holistic tool focusing on how and why things should work.
The personal framework will draw from personal experience and insight of servant
leadership based on activities, discussions, experience and reflections. The
assessment structure and process of formulating a framework will be periodically
discussed in class. The length of the presentation should be 15-20 minutes.

138
Appendix B: Development journey of aspiring
servant leaders

This section provides an overview of learners, their context and development

and highlights the diverse and individual nature of servant leader development and
learner outcomes. To preserve anonymity, all learner names are pseudonyms.

Aimee

Aimee is a 30-year-old Filipina with a background in corporate business,

having worked in multinational corporations in the Philippines for seven years
(15/2/18, 18, 44). Aimee converted from Catholicism to a ‘born-again’ Christian in
2015 after “a time in my life where I lost everything” (28/8/18, 38). Aimee saw servant
leadership modelled to her by the church (15/2/18, 14-16) but as a “Christian
concept” (15/2/18, 5) and associated with “Jesus Christ and… how He was more of a
mentor to his disciples… than a boss” (15/2/18, 5). She aimed to better understand
and develop servant leadership in her personal and professional practice outside of a
church context (15/2/18, 38). At the course conclusion, Aimee intended to work short-
term in corporate business in Aotearoa-New Zealand then return to the Philippines as
“there are more people who need me there” (28/8/18, 25-26) where she will coach
and better self-actualise (28/8/18, 28).

Erika

Erika is a Russian in her late 20’s with a background in retail sales, wedding
planning, tourism and hospitality management. Erika had mixed experiences in
leadership, having developed through an inspiring leader who championed,
empowered and guided her (5/4/18, 72) through on-the-job training (5/4/18, 54) and
other bosses who snubbed employee ideas, gave ultimatums and threatened to
replace staff (5/4/18, 58). Erika undertook The Servant as Leader course as
professional development (15/2/18, 2, 16) to re-evaluate and learn from her
hospitality leadership where she faced overwhelming stress, long hours (20/3/18,
1:37-1:47), poor self-confidence and challenges managing personal connection
between friends and followers (15/2/18, 2, 3-6; 5/4/18, 44, 72, 76). Despite improving
department systems and operations by introducing or updating policies and
procedures (5/4/18, 79, 90) and building a trust-based workplace community through
English communication classes (5/4/18, 15), Erika did not feel successful as a leader

139
(15/2/18, 8) as she did not adequately inspire her team and ‘heal’ staff (5/4/18, 3, 7,
9). The Servant as Leader course helped Erika interpret and evaluate her experience
and reposition herself as a servant leader (28/8/18, 72). Erika plans to become an
environmental planner where she aspires to be a servant leader (15/2/18, 16).

Frank

Frank is a Catholic Mexican engineer in his late 20’s. Despite completing a

mechatronics engineering degree, he started a French bistro in Mexico with a friend
which later acrimoniously dissolved (28/8/18, 110) and he left Mexico feeling
discontent and not challenged (28/8/18, 18). Frank found his high expectations make
him tough and uncompromising (25/5/18, 1:00-1:21) and was previously was
intolerant with people (10/4/18, 35), stubborn (25/5/18, 0:47-0:585) and arrogant
(19/5/18, 0:08-0:22); behaviours that offended others (10/4/18, 35). Frank’s
motivation in doing The Servant as Leader course was to consolidate and formalise
his experience (23/2/18, 21) and develop leadership skills. Frank believes he cannot
return to his previous life because he has become a different person (28/8/18, 12)
and is now pursuing mechatronic engineering positions in Aotearoa-New Zealand.
When his working visa expires, he will evaluate whether to stay in Aotearoa-New
Zealand long-term or return to Mexico (28/8/18, 14).

George

George has over 40 years of leadership, management and teaching

experience in Sri Lanka, Singapore, Australia and Aotearoa-New Zealand in
engineering and information technology. He currently manages and teaches in a
technology academy and oversees institutional research but finds motivating staff to
undertake research challenging (3/3/18, 8) as he lacks direct authority over staff
(9/4/18, 20). He is curious about people, leaders and servant leadership (16/2/18, 11,
13) and believes he is a servant leader but never completed a leadership or
management course (3/3/18, 4). He intended to use The Servant as Leader course
as a scaffold to help create a research culture. At the conclusion of the course,
George believed he failed to create a research culture (28/8/18, 12) as staff “had
their own problems” (28/8/18, 24) and the initiative to create an institute book on
teaching required so many corrections the project failed (28/8/18, 62-64). The
Servant as Leader course consolidated George’s leadership understanding,

140
philosophy (9/4/18, 53, 81), style and techniques (28/2/18, 29) and he intends to
share his thoughts of servant leadership in his memoir (2/11/18, 13).

Jennifer

Jennifer is an aspiring Filipina servant leader in her mid-30’s motivated to

build her confidence and enhance her worship ministry and leadership. Jennifer was
previously Muslim but married a Roman Catholic called Ernest and converted to
Christianity when their daughter Anna found it confusing praying to ‘God’, ‘Allah’ and
‘Jesus’ (20/3/18, 0:04-0:33; 20/3/18, 0:38-0:46). Jennifer’s world was turned upside
down in 2016 with the death of Ernest; making her both mother and father to Anna
(6/4/18, 23) and delaying her PR approval until 2018 after seven years of applying
(28/8/18, 70). Jennifer was processing the post-death grief during the course; feeling
she was going crazy thinking about Ernest (6/4/18, 31) and struggling with her dual-
parent identity to Anna. After Ernest’s death, Jennifer and Anna moved in with her
pastors (10/8/18, 34/35) for several years but had moved into a new flat by the
course end so she could “show my daughter how independent I am as a parent”
(28/8/18, 126). Jennifer found the course helped reconcile internal griefs and
disappointments, challenge her personal beliefs about life and ministry and build her
self-confidence so she is empowered to create further servant leaders by serving her
family and her church (10/8/18, 34/35, 21/35).

Lauren

Lauren has extensive teaching experience in her native United Kingdom and
Aotearoa-New Zealand. After being prompted by her granddaughter to visit a
Buddhist temple, she went ‘up there for tea’ (6/9/18, 16) and recognised ‘this is
where you belong’ (6/9/18, 16). Her Buddhist journey began learning Buddhist
disciplines and led her to undertake a Post-Graduate Certificate in Buddhist Studies
and intermittently teach mindfulness and meditation (6/9/18, 100). Lauren was
motivated to understand management and servant leadership to support her role as
education Quality and Compliance Manager and teacher trainer (5/9/18, 24-25). At
the conclusion of the course, Lauren sought to further integrate servant leadership
into her professional practice through further reflection and spiritual growth (5/9/18,
44).

141
Leon

Leon is a Brazilian in his late 20’s and studied The Servant as Leader course
to better understand leadership theory so he can apply new methods, tools and
techniques in his professional and personal life (20/2/18, 32). His capstone
engineering project was through TEDO

; a community development initiative in Latin and South America providing

housing to impoverished favela communities (2/6/18, 3:41-22:28). Leon’s purpose in
TEDO was to change poverty in Brazil (20/2/18, 28) but became disenchanted and
overwhelmed when he realised it takes 300 people to change the lives of 10 to 20
families – a massive and unsustainable investment.

At the conclusion of the course, Leon sought employment consistent with his
passion in people, environment, sustainability and technology. He considered
teaching; reflecting his identity as an ‘influencer’ but has also recently started thinking
about starting a small business (28/8/18, 147-150). He intends to pursue social
justice projects in Aotearoa-New Zealand when he is more established (28/8/18, 112-
118).

Rick

Rick is a Filipino-Chinese in his mid-30’s who never aspired to be a leader or

hold leadership positions because he felt leadership was ‘not for him’ (12/4/18, 30)
due to his perceived weaknesses (13/3/18, 1:42-1:51). He previously had self-serving
managers who created poor team performance and distrust (16/2/18, 22-24) but was
also inspired by a leader who cared about his team (16/2/18, 13) and developed
people (12/4/18, 67). His Catholic faith introduced him to the servant leadership
concept (6/3/18, 0:30-0:41) and led to God challenging him that if he ‘believes
anyone can be a leader, why not you?’ (12/4/18, 30); guiding him to take the course
(12/4/18, 30) as it may ‘make me a better person and potential leader’ (26/2/18, 4).
Rick’s servant leader journey made him more confident (8/8/18, 17) and willing to
lead (28/8/18, 181) and concludes that “I’m an aspiring servant leader and I’ve got a
servant heart” (28/8/18, 66).

142
Tina

Tina is a Brazilian in her late 20’s with economics and quantitative research
background. She began volunteering in a children’s hospital (28/8/18, 78) but later
joined TEDO to integrate community development and research to create macro-
level social change (3/4/18, 33), later project managing several construction
programmes of up to 132 people (3/4/18, 15). The Servant as Leader course aligned
with her intent to improve her leadership (27/2/18, 25) and create change in teachers
and students (27/2/18, 27) through servant leadership (27/2/18, 25).

At the course conclusion, Tina accepted a role with Oxfam as a Fundraiser.

She believes her passion and background in research, social advocacy, social justice
and community development are best-applied long-term in a government role
working in public policy in Wellington (3/4/18, 31) where she hopes to create change
through influencing public opinion and decision-making.

Valerie

Valerie is a Brazilian in her mid-30’s with a degree in education (27/2/18, 17)

and experience teaching students in early childhood (27/2/18, 15), corporate and
ESL contexts (27/2/18, 19). She is passionate about learners discovering their
passion and identity (27/2/18, 11) and received frequent positive reviews (12/5/18,
17:27-17:38) but left the teaching profession to pursue other interests. She joined
The Servant as Leader course because it aligned with her education background,
interest in Māori culture and faith as an LDS member which she groups as a
separate Christian group (27/2/18, 3-7). Valerie enjoyed the course (7/6/18, 0:05-
0:26; 28/8/18, 116, 234) and recommended the course be repeated (28/8/18, 232);
sharing that it influenced her intention to return to teaching through professional
training and development as a servant teacher - merging ministry, teaching and
leadership in a corporate environment.

Victor

Victor is an Indian academic leader in his early 30’s from a business and
sustainability background who migrated to Aotearoa-New Zealand at eight years old.
Victor is undertaking a doctorate in sustainability and responsible leadership and
discovered servant leadership through his literature review. Victor aims to apply
servant leadership in businesses and not-for-profit organisations to change

143
communities, create food security (16/2/18, 13) and develop knowledge and skills
(16/2/18, 3); something he hopes will impact thousands, millions (20/4/18, 63) or
even billions of people (20/4/18, 125). Victor found the course helped his personal
and professional leadership development (28/8/18, 12) and hopes to incorporate this
learning when his family to move and live in India in 2023 so he can be closer to his
work and study.

Yvette

Yvette has a banking and management background and history of applying

servant leadership. She believes servant leadership is driven by a greater purpose
for a better community and society (14/6/18, 4:14-4:54) and aims to improve her
leadership skills and personal confidence through the course. Yvette was inspired by
her mother who escaped poverty through education (28/8/18, 84); an example Yvette
aims to replicate by breaking her Filipino community’s poverty cycle through
scholarships she funds (14/6/18, 479). Yvette plans to reside in Aotearoa-New
Zealand long-term and positively impact people of different backgrounds and cultures
(16/2/18, 37); to create a legacy she can reflect on in her twilight years (28/7/18,
29/3). She believes God has a personal mission for her life and believes The Servant
as Leader course was important in discovering and unlocking her personal
leadership potential (28/8/18, 208).

144
 Appendix C: Copyright statement

I warrant that I have obtained, where necessary, permission from the copyright
owners to use any third-party copyright material reproduced in the thesis
(e.g. questionnaires, artwork, unpublished letters, photographs, data figures), or to
use any of my own published work (e.g. journal articles) in which the copyright is held
by another party (e.g. publisher, co-author).

145

View publication stats