What Is It Based On?

[evmori]

What your definition is is irrelevant since the training, resources and program elements of the BSA are not based on your opinions. If we are to have a reasonable discussion we need to be using the BSA's view and not each individual opinion of 1.2 million volunteers. (typos corrected)

 

What is the servant leadership model the BSA uses based on? If I'm not mistaken, it is based on a book a person wrote on the subject.

 

Thoughts???????

[emb021]

Servant Leadership was thought up by Robert Greenleaf back in 1970.

 

He wrote extensively on the concept, and founded an institute now bearing his name (The Robert Greenleaf Center for Servant-Leadership).

 

In the past decade Servant Leadership has become much better known. Many non-profit groups have latched on to the concept, especially those of a religious basis. Many companies have also adopted the concept and have been very success because of it. Several leaders in leadership development (Blanchard, Bennis, Covey, et al) have incorporated SL into their teachings.

 

If I have one issue with the BSA's use of servant leadership is that they 1) do not cite their source for the concept or make it clear the many works one can read to learn more about it and 2) frankly do a poor job of clearly stating what servant leadership is. I hear the term used a lot in the OA, but never an explaination of what it means. In contrast, my Fraternity incorporated servant leadership into its leadership development program at the same time the OA started to toss the term around. However, we clearly stated were the term came from, quote Greenleaf, AND clearly teach what the concept is all about. In our basic leadership course we spend a good 40 minutes (of a 3 hour course) going into what is servant leadership and the elements that make it up. Something I have yet to see in any BSA training program.

 

If you want to learn more about servant leadership, I recommend the following works:

 

"Servant Leadership" by Greenleaf (collection of Greenleaf's classic essays on servant leadership, including the first one, "Servant as Leader").

 

"The Power of Servant Leadership" by Greenleaf

 

"Reflections on Leadership", "Focus on Leadership", "Insights on Leadership" ed by Larry Spears. Collections of essays on servant leadership by many writers on leadership.

 

"Practicing Servant Leadership" ed by Larry Spears. Collection of the first 11 "Voices of Servant Leadership" series.

 

"Case for Servant Leadership" by Kent Keith. New book from the Greenlead Center. I expect it to be good.

 

"Leadership Jazz" and "Leadership is an Art" by Max DePree.

 

"The Servant" and "The World's Most Powerful Leadership Principle" by James C. Hunter.

 

 

The website for the Greenleaf Center is: www.greenleaf.org

The former Exec Director of the center now has is own org- the Spears Center for Servant-Leadership: spearscenter.org/

 

 

[Kudu]

In 1972 "Leadership Development" was introduced as a "Method of Scouting" equal to the other Methods.

 

The basic idea is that if you dumb the Patrol Method down enough, then you can use Patrols as little classrooms to teach "servant leadership."

 

Before 1972, the BSA defined a "Real Patrol" as one held Patrol Meetings without adult supervision, to plan Hikes without adult supervision, on which they worked on Advancement without adult supervision, all with the goal to Camp overnight without adult supervision. Baden-Powell's Patrols had many additional adult responsibilities, with the additional standard that Patrols camp at least 300 feet apart on Troop Campouts.

 

The first thing that these "leadership" gurus did in 1972 was kill "Patrol Leader Training" based on hiking and camping leadership and offer in its place generic "Junior Leader Training."

 

The bread and butter of servant leadership is that the two greatest minds in the history of Scouting (Baden-Powell and Green Bar Bill) are "old-fashioned" (they dug trenches around their tents, didn't they?) and therefore their training techniques must be replaced with the theory of leadership "experts."

 

My problem with servant leadership is that its gurus seldom talk about objective accomplishments in terms that the followers of B-P and Green Bar Bill can understand.

 

Except for Stosh:

 

I never hear how training Patrol Leaders how to be servant leaders increased the distance between Patrols on Troop campouts from 10 feet to 50 or 100 feet.

 

I never hear how training Patrol Leaders how to be servant leaders increased the distance a Patrol was allowed to hike without adult supervision on a Troop Campout.

 

I never hear how training Patrol Leaders how to servant leaders increased a Troop's desire to go to summer camps with Patrol Cooking.

 

Kudu

 

[Gunny2862]

Kudu, without regard to what BSA says about it.

 

Servant Leadership is often more related to the motivation of a Leader's interactions with his charges than the methods he uses to lead them. It's much more esoteric than the way in which you appear to have been exposed to it.

 

As an example, I would say that a PL who took his Scouts in the woods to show he could do it, to have some aspect of praise that would reflect on him and his skills was not practicing Servant Leadership because although his accomplishments during the trek may BE praiseworthy, he's doing it for his own gain.

A PL who wanted to lead his Patrol into the woods; so the Scouts could, be in the woods, have fun, learn skills, etc. would be the one who would appear to be practicing Servant Leadership.

 

In truth, the same activities could have taken place, with similar results on both of the example campouts above. But in one case the trip is about the Leader and in the other it's about the led.

 

I'm doing a poor job because of the philosophical implications of the style, not method, of leadership in question. Read the texts suggested above, especially Greenleafs.

 

Last thing, a Troop or Patrols led by Servant Leaders (who understood the concept) would have greatly enhanced opportunities to be further from me,(be it 10, 100, or a 1000 yards away), IF I were their Scoutmaster.

 

YIS

(This message has been edited by Gunny2862)

[Bob White]

Greenleaf wrote a book on servant leadership a mere 2000 years or longer after it was originated. Servant leadership is based on the Golden Rule and on identical philosophies found in numerous cultures, religions and philosophies.

 

How far away from a patrol another patrol camps has nothing to do with how a scout leads or learns to lead, nor is a troop's decision whether or not to do patrol cooking, nor is how far you hike. To suggest they are related is pure silliness.

 

(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[Gunny2862]

BW,

I concur in total with your remarks.

 

But, my remarks about linking them are related to the context of: being able to trust that a Leader is serving his constituency is going to buy him more leeway from my supervision than one I have to watch to make sure he isn't abusing his position.

 

If your comments are for posters prior to me then I think they aren't thinking of what Servant Leadership really is and are conflating the idea with other changes that may have occurred in the same time frame.

[Bob White]

Gunny

My post was in response to the original question and to the obtuse comments by another poster.

BW

[emb021]

Gunny's posting is a decent overview of servant leadership.

 

Servant Leadership is a principle or philosophy of leadership. Its a way of looking at leadership, and isn't a concept that should be seen as a replacement of other leadership concepts that can and should be used.

 

Greenleaf is created with coining the term and defining it. Yes, the concept has probably been around for hundreds of years before hand, but he was the first person to put it down in a concrete way. Others try to tie it into the ideas of empowerment and stewardship as well.

 

I think one of the best overviews of SL is the introduction to the book "Practicing Servant Leadership" written by Larry Spears that I've also seen on-line. Tho reading Greenleaf's essay "The Servant as Leader" is one that should also be read.

 

In my Fraternity when we teach servant leadership, we touch on 10 characteristics of SL: Persuasion, Conceptualization, Foresight, Stewardship, Listening, Empathy, Building Community, Healing, Awareness, Committement to the Growth of People.

 

 

"The bread and butter of servant leadership is that the two greatest minds in the history of Scouting (Baden-Powell and Green Bar Bill) are "old-fashioned" (they dug trenches around their tents, didn't they?) and therefore their training techniques must be replaced with the theory of leadership "experts." "

 

I have no idea where you're coming up with cr*p like this. I know of no one who really understands servant leadership would speak of BP or GBB as 'old fashioned'. What does servant leadership have to do with trenching tents??? (tho am sure LNT would have an issue with that).

 

"My problem with servant leadership is that its gurus seldom talk about objective accomplishments in terms that the followers of B-P and Green Bar Bill can understand."

 

And what gurus of servant leadership do you know?

 

Anyone who understands and teaches servant leadership could talk of objective accomplishments such that people who understand leadership could grasp. Many of the excellent books on SL speak of its real world use and value, in both the non-profit and the for profit worlds.

 

 

Your repeated posts show a grave lack of understanding current thoughts in leadership development. Ever new idea is to be used to insult people. White Stag is evil. Later its the One Minute Manager, later on its Situational Leadership. Now its servant leadership. It seems clear to me that if it wasn't invented by B-P &/or GBB, as far as you're concerned, its of no value. There doesn't seem to be any idea that current leadership development might not be a total change in leadership concepts of B-P et al, but prehaps a refinement and extension.

 

 

 

[Kudu]

emb021 writes:

 

Anyone who understands and teaches servant leadership could talk of objective accomplishments such that people who understand leadership could grasp. Many of the excellent books on SL speak of its real world use and value, in both the non-profit and the for profit worlds.

 

That is precisely the point. You talk about "objective accomplishments," but never any specifics. Before Leadership Development was invented, it was common at PLC meetings for Patrol Leaders to report exactly how long their last Patrol Meeting had lasted and exactly what they had accomplished, exactly what distance their Patrol Hikes had covered, what they ate, and exactly what Advancement requirements had been signed off along the way.

 

The only thing that Leadership Development has accomplished is the complete destruction of Patrol Meetings, Patrol Hikes, Patrol Overnights, and Patrol-based Advancement. Leadership Development is a parasite upon the Patrol Method.

 

emb021 writes:

 

Your repeated posts show a grave lack of understanding current thoughts in leadership development. Ever new idea is to be used to insult people.

 

I am against stupid ideas, not stupid individuals. You are trying to pick a personal fight to distract from the fact that servant leadership can never talk about objective accomplishments.

 

emb021 writes:

 

White Stag is evil. Later its the One Minute Manager, later on its Situational Leadership. Now its servant leadership.

 

You forgot "Fluffy-Bunny Critter-Fetish Wood Badge."

 

If the 1972 "Leadership Development Method" was more like the 1972 "Personal Growth Method" where the Fuzzy-Kitten stuff does not require you to destroy practical outdoor Patrol Leader Training, I would not care.

 

emb021 writes:

 

It seems clear to me that if it wasn't invented by B-P &/or GBB, as far as you're concerned, its of no value.

 

My Website features at least 1,500 pages of content by authors other than Baden-Powell and Green Bar Bill.

 

emb021 writes:

 

There doesn't seem to be any idea that current leadership development might not be a total change in leadership concepts of B-P et al, but prehaps a refinement and extension.

 

"Refinement and extension" means that you actually "refine and extend" their "real world use and value," not dumb it down and call it modern.

 

Baden-Powell's standard was 300 feet between Patrols, can you demonstrate that any of your techniques extend that to 330 feet? Or that Patrols hold more Patrol Meetings away from the Troop, or more Patrol Hikes away from the Troop, or more Patrol Overnights away from the Troop, or Patrol Advancement away from the "Troop Guide" and "Troop Instructor," or that Patrols do more Patrol Cooking at summer camp?

 

If so, then sign me up!

 

Kudu

 

[evmori]

The Golden Rule? Treat others as you would like to be treated? Not sure how that relates to servant leadership.

[Gunny2862]

Ev,

in relation to the golden rule...

 

I could be wrong but my reading of the application would be that I would rather be led by someone who had my interests at heart rather than someone who was using me to build their empire.

And that being the case, that I should lead others with their interests in mind first, rather than running it to benefit me, or to cause me the least discomfort in leadership.

[John-in-KC]

Ed,

 

Actually, Matt 23:11-12 is a better verse:

 

The greatest among you will be your servant. For whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted.

 

A parallel set of verses is Mark 10: 41-45:

When the ten heard about this, they became indignant with James and John. Jesus called them together and said, "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. 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."

[evmori]

I like yours better than the Golden Rule. Thanks John.

[Gold Winger]

" I would rather be led by someone who had my interests at heart rather than someone who was using me to build their empire."

 

What if building their empire is in your best interest?

[Gunny2862]

GW

 

?

 

Argumentative or just being weird?

 

If the two coincide then that's all well and good, if you are looking at the discussion that way.

 

But Servant Leadership is as much about the motivation of the Leader as it is anything else. And by introducing this you are dragging Occam's razor into it by having to parse ends with means. This discussion, in my opinion, lends itself towards the means - including the Leaders motivations.

Why complicate the issue, especially that way?