In both of these articles, Spears and Greenleaf discuss the concept of a “servant leader.” This is someone who has a natural inclination to serve first, and then because of their inclination to serve, leadership is bestowed upon them. Spears notes that this concept can be quite contradictory, but Greenlead argues nonetheless that our country is in a leadership crisis and needs more servant leaders. I think Greenleaf brings up a great point about education and the impact it can have on cultivating the servant leader. Educating students about world politics and problems, and what they can actually do to make a difference will equip young people with the tools to serve first and then lead. As discussed in class, these two positions are not often used together, as we tend to think of leaders as decisive, strong, and unwavering. Often times, emerging as a leader can require great confidence and ambition, making it unlikely that a leader remains humble and chooses to serve the people.
Both Spears’ and Greenleaf’s arguments made me think of the statement released by The Business Roundtable, some of the most powerful business CEOs and chairmen in the world, who believe corporations have a different purpose than their lifelong promise to answer to shareholders and shareholders first. CEOs like Tim Cook and Jeff Bezos are redefining the purpose of a corporation, arguing that more attention must be given to the quality of life of employees, environmental impacts of the business, and addressing the needs of the customer. This is a huge shift in the way CEOs have thought and is a contradiction of fundamental principles of capitalism that stress maximizing profits and keeping shareholders happy above all else. It is possible to argue that as the wonders of globalization and technology reduce our conceptions of time and distance, and climate change becomes an increasingly important issue, powerful business leaders must see themselves as stewards of the world’s environment, its people, and its resources. These are very big ethical implications, implications that are traditionally left out of economics. However, judging from the wealth inequality in the US and realizing how much money and influence companies like Apple, Google, and Amazon have, it would be nice to believe that future business leaders will follow the model of servant leadership. Hopefully that’s not too idealistic.
I actually really enjoyed reading this post, comparing the two readings. I think your questions surrounding the role of business CEOs in society, particularly in reference to climate change, very interesting. If they are given that responsibility, would their roles become almost entirely political? It’s intriguing to think about just how much power these business executives have in the world.
I think that the whole idea of servant to leadership is interesting, because I don’t believe there is a huge transition. This idea really came to me reading you first couple sentences of the transition from serving to leadership. This is because I would argue that the best leaders are ultimately servants to their followers, and are serving to put the best situation in place for their given environment. For example, I think that if someone is serving for an Anti-Abortion Non for Profit, then they are already leaders, because by acting in service, they are taking a stand, and the people who don’t do anything are the ones who are the followers, because they neither serve nor lead.