George E. Richards, Ph.D. CPPAssociate Professor

Department of Political Science and Criminal JusticeEdinboro University of Pennsylvania

The literature pertaining to the Public Administration discipline is replete with theoretical models of leadership which supervisors may employ to meet agency demands. Public service agencies have been consistently viewed as prone to use authoritative models of leadership in obtaining desired results. Yet, other models of leadership may be more appropriate for the service orientation of a bureaucratic agency. Drawing upon a sample of police administrators in the United States, this paper will examine whether or not support for the values of servant leadership exists within the American law enforcement community.

2

Coined term Servant Leadership

The servant-leader is servant first… It begins with the natural feeling that one wants to serve, to serve first. Then conscious choice brings one to aspireto lead. That person is sharply different from one who is leader first, perhaps because of the need to assuage an unusual power drive or toacquire material possessions… (p. 13)

Greenleaf, R. K. (1977). Servant leadership: A journey into the nature oflegitimate power and greatness. New York: Paulist Press.

3

Do those served grow as persons? Do they, whilebeing served, become healthier, wiser, freer, more

autonomous, more likely themselves to becomeservants? And, what is the effect on the least

privileged in society? Will they benefit or at leastnot be further deprived? (pp. 13-14)

Greenleaf, R. K. (1977). Servant leadership: A journey into the nature of legitimate power and greatness. New York: Paulist Press.

4

The Ohio State Leadership Studies Seek to identify and describe categories of

leadership behavior The Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire

(LBDQ) was designed by the Personnel Research Board of The Ohio State University

Instrument directs respondents to describe the behaviors of leaders in any type of organization

OSU researchers compiled 1800 examples of leadership behavior and then selected 150 items that appeared to be the best examples.

5

Statistical analysis of the LBDQ with a sample of military and civilian personnel revealed two dimensions of leadership Consideration of follower’s feelings, opinions and ideas, and

maintaining an amiable working environment. The leader should nurture genial relationships between workers. The aim is to foster the growth of trust between the leader and the followers.

Initiating Structure which involves task related behaviors involved in the initiation of action, the organization and assignment of tasks, and the determination of clear-cut standards of performance. Here, the leader’s behavior is focused on defining and organizing work relationships and roles. The emphasis is upon establishing clear communication and effective ways of completing tasks.

6

Analysis is based on a survey of 128 police managers from 24 U.S. states and Turkey Administrative Officer’s

Course at the Southern Police Institute during the academic year 2007-2008 (N = 128)

Survey was conducted in the beginning of a course on Leadership at the AOC/SPI

Questionnaire used in this investigation includes reliable and valid measures from the Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire Form XII

Items on the scale were recoded: 0 – Never 1 – Seldom 2 – Occasionally 3 – Often 4 – Always

7

The main objective of this analysis was to identify the level of support among police managers for the tenets of Servant Leadership. Accordingly, we identified those scale items that corresponded with the theory of Servant Leadership.

A factor analysis was then conducted on the 100 scale items.

8

VARIABLE (%) VARIABLE (%)

AGE RACE

25-34 8.6 White 85.9

35-44 61.7 African-American

7.8

45-54 28.1 Asian 3.1

55-64 1.6 Hispanic .8

Other 2.3

GENDER

Male 88.3

Female 11.7

9

VARIABLE (%) VARIABLE (%)

EDUCATION AGENCY TYPE

High School Diploma

2.3 Very Large Municipal Force

32.0

Some College 27.3 Large Municipal Force

11.7

College Diploma

33.6 Medium Municipal Force

13.3

Some Professional/ Graduate School

21.1 Small Municipal Force

15.6

Professional/ Graduate School Diploma

15.6 State Police 7.0

Sheriff’s Office 17.2

Other 3.1

10

VARIABLE (%) VARIABLE (%)

CURRENT ASSIGNMENT CURRENT RANK

Patrol 58.6 Sergeant 45.3

Detective/Investigative

12.5 Lieutenant 35.2

Special Operations 12.5 Captain 14.1

Communications .8 Major 2.3

Other 15.6 Deputy Sheriff .8

Other 2.3

11

The analysis of the scale items revealed factor loadings on three components that correspond to three leadership styles: Servant Leadership: This style is people-oriented. The leader is

motivated to help subordinates achieve goals and objectives in the service of their clientele. The focus is upon the establishment of positive relationships based upon mutual respect and trust. Subordinates are consulted and their ideas are considered and drawn upon.

Autocratic Leadership: Obtaining and maintaining power is the foremost goal of the leader. They make the decisions and give orders rather than invite group participation.

Laissez-faire Leadership: A hands-off approach to organizational leadership. The leader abandons and abdicates their main function and serves largely as an information center, exercising little or no control. As a result, the organization runs itself with little or no input from management.

The mean values and other statistics for these subscales are presented in Table 1.

12

13

TYPE # OF ITEMS

EIGAN VALUE

CRONBACH’S ALPHA

GRAND MEAN

S.D.

Servant Leadership

35 10.17 .92 3.24 .37

Autocratic Leadership

12 3.47 .76 2.60 .41

Laissez-faire Leadership

8 2.79 .70 2.50 .47

Each of the subscales had acceptable values of Cronbach’s Alpha that attested to the validity of the factors.

The Grand Mean values clearly indicated that these police managers expressed strong beliefs in the value of Servant Leadership over those for Autocratic and Laissez-faire.

ANOVA revealed that the mean difference between the mean values for the Servant, Autocratic and Laissez-faire Leadership subscales were statistically significant.

These police leaders believe the ideal police leader should express and follow the values of Servant Leadership.

14

ITEM MEAN

Let group members know what is expected of them 3.62

Look out for the personal welfare of the group members 3.60

Maintain definite standards of performance 3.57

Encourage initiative in the group members 3.57

Make accurate decisions 3.56

Inspire enthusiasm for a project 3.52

Handle complex problems efficiently 3.46

Remain calm when uncertain about coming events 3.45

Anticipate problems and plan for them 3.44

Keep the group working together as a team 3.42

15

Table 3: Attributes of Autocratic Values

16

ITEM MEAN

Encourage the use of uniform procedures 3.02

Be easily recognized as the leader of the group

2.94

Speak as a representative of the group 2.82

Act as a spokesman for the group 2.81

Urge the group to beat its previous record 2.63

Push for increased production 2.55

Decide what shall be done and how 2.48

Keep work moving at rapid pace 2.42

Be working his way to the top 2.36

Be working hard for promotion 2.25

Ask members to work harder 2.21

Stress being ahead of other groups 2.19

ITEM MEAN

Assign a task, then let the members handle it 3.06

Be able to tolerate postponement and uncertainty 2.62

Turn the members loose on a job, and let them go to it

2.60

Allow the members complete freedom in their work. 2.56

Let the members do their work the way they think is best

2.49

Accept defeat in stride 2.40

Permit group to set your own pace 2.23

Accept delays without being upset 2.12

17

The results indicate these police managers believe leaders should follow the tenets of Servant Leadership as expressed under the items of the Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire.

Compared to these values, they rejected the creeds of both the autocratic, command and control method and the hands-off, detached style of Laissez-faire leadership.

18

19