Literature Review- Leadership and Authenticity

Chapter 3 Leadership and the Movement towards

Servitization
Since leadership is the primal facilitator for shifting both employees and customers
towards service based behaviours, in order to support the movement towards servitization,
then it is important to choose the right style of leadership for the study. The intended
leadership style for the study, has to include the aspect of service within it, as the
movement towards servitization cannot be led by force, and has to be initiated through
positive influence from leaders towards service.

3.1 The Role of Leadership in the Organisation

Since leaders are responsible for creating the organisational environment at the workplace,
the organisation could only be as good, as its leaders. When leaders are proactively acting
with care and empowerment towards employees, then the organisational environment is
more likely to be advancing towards the wellbeing, and greater service for customers
(Walumbwa et al., 2010).

Leaders have a high impact on the employees, not just due to their hierarchal advancement,
but also according to their influence, as role models in the organisation. When employees
feel a certain quality from the leader, such as encouragement or commitment, they tend to
reciprocate that quality towards other employees (Johnson, 2008). Thus, leaders can
significantly alter the emotions and behaviours of employees, depending on their emotional
state. This is known as emotional contagion (NO REFRENCE). One research on emotional
contagion shows that leaders can affect the emotional state of a whole organisational group,
both positively and negatively. This depends on the leader’s state of mind. Meaning, that
the general feelings and behaviours of the leader rub-off on employees. So, when
employees are not cared for by the leader, or even worst, constantly experiencing a sense of
injustice at work, they tend to project that on other employees, and even on customers
through careless service (Sy and Choi, 2013).

Therefore, when monitoring the behaviour of employees in one organisation, it was seen
that there was a high level of similarities between that and the attitudes of the leaders. For
example, employees who worked for ethical leader constantly defend an ethical conviction,
while other employees who worked for leaders that focus only on generating results, seem
to lack the sense of empathy and care (Xu et al., 2014). Thus, employees tend to get
influenced by the most consistent behaviours of the leader, especially when those
behaviours exhibit a sense of nobility. That is why different types of leadership, have
different impacts on the attitudes of the employees. For example, the transformational
leadership style showed an effect on the level of motivation, image, and self-belief amongst
 Literature Review- Leadership and Authenticity

employees. A transactional leadership style showed a positive effect on the levels of

performance amongst employees (Asrar-ul-Haq and Kuchinke, 2016).

Taly, Kass, and Sahamir (2004) concluded that leadership also has an impact on the level of
commitment amongst employees. Taly, Kass, and Sahami explain that there are two types
of commitment, one is cognitive, and the other is emotional. Cognitive commitment is
where the employees in the organisations are driven by delivering tasks before the
deadlines, due to the operational focus of the leadership there. While the emotional type of
commitment indicates the willingness of employees to better serve customers, beyond the
operational task. They do so due to their internal sense of belonging at work, and the
positive feelings towards the leader.

With that clarification showing the high impact of the leadership on the organisation as a
whole and the behaviours of employees, the researcher examines the role of leadership in
terms of the movement towards servitization, as it is the main focus of the study.
After investigating the different styles of leadership, the researcher could not find any style
that is specifically oriented towards servitization. Yet, the researcher noticed that there is
one style of leadership that seems most suitable for the movement towards servitization,
known as the Servant Leadership Style. This conclusion was made due to its similarity to
the core motivation and value of servant leadership and servitization, as both driven by
service.

3.2 Servant Leadership

The major difference between the well-known styles of leadership, from transformational
leadership which focuses on connecting people with a united vision, to transactional
leadership which focuses on the organisational objective, and servant leadership, the last
one brings more emphasis on people over objectives. The primary objective of servant
leaders is to serve people, and that is how the servant leaders keep themselves motivated,
through the drive to help people grow and thrive (Gregory Stone et al., 2004). Thus, the
researcher will use this to build the module of leadership in the movement towards
servitization.
It is important to note, that the researcher will not use the inputs of servant leadership and
the outcomes that will be researched here as the final leadership style to be used for the
study, but instead will build on this knowledge to create a novel style of leadership
designed specifically for the movement towards servitization
The module of servant leadership was first proposed by Greenleaf, defining the leader as a
servant for the people. That can practically be attained when the motivation to lead
transcends any personal gains into a true desire to serve others (Walumbwa et al., 2010).
A study showed that servant leadership is not just a moral issue, but has a tangible impact
on the levels of performance at organisations. When Numbers of CEOs practiced the
 Literature Review- Leadership and Authenticity

servant leadership style, the results showed an enhancement in the overall performance.
This was achieved due to an increase in engagement and loyalty amongst employees
(Peterson et al., 2012).

Since the servant leadership style is different in its nature than any other style of leadership,
then its influence on employees has to be different as well, although there are limited
empirical results between servant leaders, and their impact on employees in terms of
service and growth, a study between 393 office employees in six hospitals in Turkey,
showed that servant leadership attitudes from the leader can positively impact the level
employees' innovation, as a by-product of being empowered and trusted as decision makers
(Erkutlu and Chafra, 2015).

Another study between 325 managers, who embodied the servant leaders style, showed a
positive effect on the service chain, by effecting the service related behaviours between
employees and customers, as shown in figure 8 (Ling et al., 2016)

Figure 8: The Impact of Servant Leadership Identity on the Service Chain

The effect of the servant behaviours of the leader seems not only to affect the employees
but also the customers, as they become more open to employees. This shows that the
behaviours of leaders have a contagion effect on the whole human chain, especially if it's
positively oriented towards service and empowerment (Hunter et al., 2013).
 Literature Review- Leadership and Authenticity

Leaders that are oriented towards service and empowerment can assist the employees in the
organisation to become healthier and wiser, which makes them likely to become servant
leaders themselves. With that in mind, servant leaders must practice how to manage their
behaviours well, in order to make sure that they are positively influencing employees,
customers, and the society in general (van Dierendonck, 2010).
Through the work of Greenleaf, the focus is more towards the definitions of servant
leadership, rather than assigning rigid and specific qualities to servant leaders. Greenleaf
defined the servant leader as the person who is willing to go beyond self-interests, into
serving others to grow, by paying close attention to the leader’s behaviours. Although
Greenleaf did not assign specific qualities for servant leaders, the former director of
Greenleaf’s centre for servant leadership, claims that the writing of Greenleaf included
some attributes to servant leaders, ranging from listening, empathy, healing, awareness,
persuasion, conceptualisation, foresight, stewardship, commitment to growth of people, and
building a community (Russell and Gregory Stone, 2002).
Since there are no set qualities for servant leadership, this leaves the door open for many
researchers to suggest different qualities for the term. That interest in discovering the
qualities for servant leaders has increased recently, mainly due to the organisational shift
towards holistic understanding for performance, which supports employees to reach the
intended results, while enhancing their sense of wellbeing (Russell and Gregory Stone,
2002).
Many models were developed to discuss the qualities of servant leaders, although there is
no consensus about those qualities. One of the most known modules for servant leadership
are the ones created by Laub, and Sendjaya, Sarros and Santora's, Patterson, and Liden (van
Dierendonck, 2010).
Laub (1999) attributed servant leaders with six qualities. The first quality states that a
servant leader is a person who empowers employees, by encouraging them to make
decisions, and equipping them with self-knowledge so they can deal with any challenge
with confidence and ease. The second quality is humility, which refers to the ability of the
leader to receive new inputs from employees, regarding their educational level or position,
and also refers to the ability of the leader to step back when needed in order to allow the
employees to lead, thus meaning that servant leaders understand leadership as a two-way
path. The third quality is authenticity, which is usually related to the ability of the leaders to
express their thoughts and feeling with complete openness, by stating their inner intentions,
challenges, and fears, thus allowing the human side of the leader to show up first before the
managerial side. The fourth quality is interpersonal acceptance, referring to the
connectedness of the leader with the emotional side of employees, which then allows them
to better understand the employees and to experience a greater sense of empathy and
forgiveness while working with others. The fifth quality is to provide direction for
employees, based on the strategic vision of the organisation, and by creating tailor-made
 Literature Review- Leadership and Authenticity

tasks for each employee to maintain the sense of progress and justice in the organisation.
The last quality of the servant leaders is stewardship, which is a quality attributed to taking
responsibility for the organisation as a whole, and to direct it towards higher service for
customers and society (Pilkiene, 2017). Although this module is clear and concise, yet it
lacks any empirical evidences, for the validity of those qualities (van Dierendonck, 2010).
Sendjaya, Sarros and Santora (2008) developed another module for servant leadership
consisting of five qualities, from transforming, influence, authenticity, maintaining long
lasting relationship, to self-awareness, thus referring to a deep connection with higher
wisdom and higher morality. On the other hand, Liden developed a scale of seven qualities
for servant leaders, including empowering, helping followers to grow, enhancing the
follower’s success at a personal level, putting followers first, emotional healing, behaving
ethically, and adding value for the community, (Liden et al., 2008). Patterson built a
module for servant leadership that focuses more on the idea of virtues, which is based on
the work of the Greek philosopher Aristotle. Patterson considers the servant leader as
someone who embodies higher virtues such as honesty, modesty, and wisdom (Dennis and
Bocarnea, 2005) .

Ehrhart’s also built a widely used module for servant leaders, containing 14 traits, which
was refined later to include only seven traits for servant leaders. The first trait in the scale is
the ability of the leader to create a deep bond with followers. The second refers to the
ability of the leader to empower employees in terms of allowing them to take managerial
decisions. The third focuses on how much the leader is allowing employees to grow, and
fourth focuses on the leader's ability to act with ethical values, by having a strong and
authentic value system. The fifth quality refers to the leader's skills to maintain the growth
on daily basis and a long-term vision, and the final trait is the ability of the leader to
provide value to customers and society on both operational and humanitarian level
(Ehrhart, 2004)

Figure 9: Major Modules for the Qualities of Servant Leadership

Using those qualities and other qualities for servant leadership, or leadership styles related
to service and empowerment, the researcher found that the most repetitive themes for
servant leadership reflect a higher purpose for work, humility, empowerment, empowered
self-concepts, authenticity, masterful communication, awareness, charisma.
The researcher investigates those themes more deeply below

Figure 10: Repetitive Themes for the Qualities of Servant Leadership

 Literature Review- Leadership and Authenticity

Those qualities will be investigated through the different research studies on servant
leadership and other styles of leadership, which are already touched on. Many other
leadership styles have qualities that overlap with servant leadership (Van Dierendonck,
2010). To elaborate on those qualities, the researcher looks at different sources that mention
those qualities such as: authentic leadership, mindful leadership, transformational
leadership, and 5 level leadership which can enrich the understanding of the qualities of
servant leadership. For example 5 level leadership, which was proposed by Collins (2001),
claims that the main attribute of great leaders is humility, and humility is considered one of
the main traits for servant leaders, and a natural results of being inclined towards a higher
purpose rather than self-gain (Caldwell, 2011)
At the same time, there are some distinct differences between servant leadership and those
other styles of leadership. For example in one empirical study about the difference between
transactional leadership and servant leadership, it was stated that transactional leaders
focus more on the organisational goals, in comparison to servant leaders who focus primary
on people including: employees, customers and suppliers (Parolini et al., 2009). Therefore,
the former style of leadership will only be included here to deepen the understanding of the
qualities of servant leadership.

3.2.1 Leadership and Purpose

Servant leaders are aware of the motivations behind their actions, in a way that may be
described more as a spiritual awareness, rather than an operational one. Actually both
servant leadership and spiritual leadership, embrace at the core the idea of purpose or
higher calling as the driver behind leadership behaviours (Marques, 2008). Jukiewicz and
Giacalone (2004) explained the term spirituality at work, with the feeling of connectedness
during the working hour, which results from approaching work from higher motivations
and spiritual values such as service, beauty, and growth. In that state, the leader is less
driven with extrinsic motivators summarised by money and recognition, and more driven
by the joy of creation and empowerment, towards a higher service.

In order for organisations to create that shift towards wholeness at work, a genuine Win-
Win mindset has to be adopted. Win-Win is the real the core of servant leadership, which is
accomplished by helping employees to grow and expand and thus allowing the leaders to
grow and expand. That empowering attitude towards employees will naturally result in
better service for the customers. This mindset of Win-Win is not relatively new, but
applying it into practice is a challenge, and it is the role of servant leaders to fill the gap
between knowledge and practice (Pfrimmer et al., 2015).
 Literature Review- Leadership and Authenticity

Starbucks is a good example of an organisation that applied the philosophy of Win-Win,

through their core philosophy of ‘’enlightened self-interest’’. Enlightened Self-Interest,
means that the organisation is still aware of the importance of generating profit, yet the
profit is seen as a result, and not the means. It connects the employees with a higher
purpose. The origin of the enlightened self-interest concept is not clear, yet it is clear that
an enlightened self-interest organisation focuses more on empowering employees to feel
nurtured and joyful at work, thus translating that sense into greater service for the
customers (Rippin, 2007). The results of the enlightened self-interest philosophy can be
seen clearly, through the Forbes reports on Starbucks in (2007), the year when Starbucks
adopted seriously the practice of enlightened self-interest. The results showed a growth in
the net revenue for the first quarter of Sawbucks to reach USD 2.4$ billion.

Usually such a radical shift towards more generous and caring organisation is a result of a
shift in the attitude of the leader towards a higher purpose. For example, in the case of
Starbucks, Howard Schultz the past CEO and inspiring figure behind the enlightened self-
interest philosophy, reached the realisation of the importance of working with purpose
before profit early. When Schultz’s dad got fired suddenly from work, and did not have any
money or medical benefits, that left the family to struggle to survive. Schultz decided then,
that when running any organisation in the future, the employees will be granted security
(CHECK THE SPACE) at work, and they can even go the extra mile to flourish. He did
this to make sure that no one would go through the same struggle his family had been
through (Marques, 2008).
With that attitude, Starbucks constantly surprises their employees with extraordinary care,
such as using the 70/20/10 approach. Meaning that 70% of the learning curve of the
employees comes from practical experience, 20% comes from personal development
training and mentoring ,and 10% from free development material online that employee
have free access to. Therefore the employees of Starbucks report much more loyalty and
connection to the purpose of the organization, which is to “inspire and nurture human
spirit’’(CHECK THE QOUTES), resulting in higher performance, and a better customer
experience. That sense of connection is usually described in a feeling of warmth within
Starbucks, allowing the customers to happily pay high prices for a coffee (startbucks,
2016).
Apple is a good example as well, of an organisation that has a strong sense of purpose. It
achieves this by maintaining the purpose at the core of its leadership principle. Steve Jobs
the former CEO of Apple had a very keen drive to challenging the statues-que, and helping
people to unlock their creativity. Apple also held the purpose of empowerment by creating
simple and innovative technologies, and making them accessible to everyone at the
convenience of their home, which was not the case back in the 80s, when Jobs first became
the CEO of Apple. With that compelling purpose, Jobs succeeded to connect the employees
 Literature Review- Leadership and Authenticity

with higher purpose, resulting in a deep loyalty to the brand, and better service to customers
(sinek, 2014).
Others might argue that Apple and Startbucks are still accused with unfair rated and tax
issues, which is another valid discussion but this goes beyond the scope of the research.
Through the observation of the research for many purposeful organisations, the story seems
to be similar. The key leader of the organisation seems to go through certain events, that
cause them to feel a sense of injustice, and when reframed through emotional maturity, that
pain gets transformed into desire for goodness and change, which are the core qualities
behind the idea of purpose.
Simply, the idea of purpose in servant leadership can be summed-up by the idea of having a
strong reason behind the work, which transcends profit and success. This reason may
include the drive to create better conditions for employees, customers, and the society.
(Stead and Stead, 2014).

Sinek (2009) in the book ’Start with Why" (CHECK THE QOUTES), argues that having a
purpose for work, is the essential back bone for the long-term success of any organisation.
Sink argues that every organisation in the world knows (what) they are doing, and less
know (how) they doing it, and a rare few know (why) they are doing it. According to the
author, the priority should go back to the why, because the why, is what charges the people
in the organization, and helps them to perform with a deeper motivation. Sinek adds that
purpose is essential for the survival of future organisations, as customers are more inclined
now, to buy from people they trust and feel connected to through a higher purpose for the
work.

3.2.2 Leadership and Humility

Jim Collins spent more than 25 years, trying to understand what makes an organisation
great, using Collins’s term. Therefore, Collin investigated different organisations that made
a huge leap in performance in a relatively short period of time, depending mainly on the
metrics of market growth, and net profit. Eventually, Collins focused the research on 11
organisations, as a sample for (great) organisations. For example, General Electric was one
of the case studies. When it was under the leadership of Jack Welch, it reached 2.8 more in
the stocks, than before. (Bowers, 2008).

The results through the 11 organisations, showed a very dominant pattern, regarding the
transitional time needed to make the leap from good to great, and it was related to the
leadership style in them. Collins described that leadership style in these organisations as
being very humble, calling it, the level 5 of leadership. At the level 5 of leadership, the
motivations of the leader, had completely transcended any self-interest, into true desire to
progress and serve others, which can be reflected as an attitude of humility. This level of
 Literature Review- Leadership and Authenticity

humility differs from the social understanding of humility, which is associated usually with
a sense of tameness. The humility in the level 5 of leadership is more of a mix of being
fearless to grow, and a deep compassion for people and society. That combination is not a
result of personal will, but more of a purposeful power, that is generated from following a
higher purpose (Collins and Powel, 2004). With that, the researcher found an initial
connection between the idea of purpose and humility, without a clear differentiation for
which is the cause, and which is the effect.

Darwin Smith, the leading CEO of Kimberly between the years 1971 to 1991, demonstrated
a clear example of courageous humility in leadership. Smith was able to transform the
organisation shortly from mediocrity into an excellent competitor, while maintaining a very
humble and balanced attitude with employees. That attitude enabled Smith to gain the
internal support from the employees, when changing the core business of Kimberly-Clark
from selling mills into paper products. Back then; this was considered the core prestige of
the organisation. The decision by Smith, was against the norms of the organisation, and was
even considered in the media as a silly move. This shows that leaders who reached high
levels of humility in leadership are not timid, nor do they take uncalculated risk. Instead,
those leaders seem to care less about opinion, prestige, fear of failure, or social status, due
to their keen desire for progress and higher purpose, while maintaining a genuine care for
others (Goffee and Jones, 2006). That level of humility, is usually found between leaders
exuding a real sense of self-worth, which is independent from external opinions or
recognition, (Verdorfer, 2016).
Such leaders with humility can be found more in the realm of spirituality and social justice.
Examples include; Gandhi, and Dr. Martin Luther King, who were both leaders who
displayed, true humility. Those kinds of leaders did not seek fame, or personal gain, but
focused more on growth and higher purpose, not allowing their Egos or the Egos of others,
to get in the way of their fearless strive. That enabled them to transform the lives of
millions of people, with their message and courage (Roberts, 2008)., Leaders with humility
seem to also have a fine balance between masculine and feminine qualities, holding a
paradoxical combination of an extreme strength with a very gentle compassion. Followers
can see leaders at that level as shy and fearless at the same time (Collins, 2005).
One of the measures for humility in leadership is the measure of Hexaco, which is known
as the honesty-humility measure. The Hexaco's measure demonstrated a strong
relationship between the level of self–esteem of the leaders and their level of humility
(Žiaran, 2015). That stresses the idea mentioned before, that when the leader embodies a
higher sense of self-worthiness, the leader naturally seeks to serve. On the other hand,
when the sense of self-worthiness in the leader is not fulfilled, that can be manifested
through an attachment to a title and hierarchy. This makes the leader more self-focused,
and less interested in serving others towards higher purpose (Kempster, et al., 2011).

The Hexaco measure also showed that leaders with a higher level of humility, tend to
embrace their imperfections and insecurities, instead of covering them up. That is why
 Literature Review- Leadership and Authenticity

humility and honesty are connected to each other. Therefore, leaders that lack humility,
tend to be inauthentic, and can use manipulative tactics to bring the credit to themselves.
Such leader can go far, to induce the sense of littleness and guilt between employees in
order to maintain the credit for themselves. They are usually known as business savvies
(Ashton and Lee, 2008).

That is why employees tend to support leaders, who embody a true sense of humility and
honesty. The teams working with such leaders seem to have a more cooperative spirit, and
higher tendencies to be inspired by the purpose of the leader (Ogunfowora and Bourdage,
2014).

3.1.3 Leadership and Empowerment

Unlike other kinds of leadership, servant leadership is not a top down style of leadership,
but more of a horizontal style, where the leader perceives the followers as equal co-
operators in the process of service. One of the main attributes of horizontal leadership is the
ability to enable employees to think, behave, and decide in a constructive ways. This can
then foster the process of growth and the desire to serve others. That process is best defined
as empowerment (Krog and Govender, 2015)

Empowerment is the key factor of leadership, and for leaders to become a source of
empowerment, they have to experience a radical shift in their understanding of the term
power, from forcing authority on others, into supporting employees to choose freely and
wisely, and thus allowing them to grow into their own sense of wisdom and confidence.
(Micheal, 2015).

Practicing empowerment as a management style must also include the willingness of the
leader to share their criteria for making decisions. Thus, employees can understand the
inner thinking and emotional drive for the leader. By sharing that, leaders can set
themselves as a thinking model to be imitated, especially when their decisions are driven by
higher purpose (Krog and Govender, 2015).

The motivation to empower others usually results from the inner work done by the leaders,
thus allowing them to get in touch with their inner sense of power and value, as separated
from title or achievements. When tapping into that inner sense of power, the leader
experiences an evolution in their perspective about life, only to realise that every human
holds a similar power, potential, and creative force within them. This understanding; which
can be referred to as a spiritual understanding, can then turn into a keen motivation to
empower others (Fry, 2003). Thus, the basis of empowerment is the psychological
advancement for the leader, in order to lead with an inner sense of power and an empathy to
transform the emotional and mental state for employees, into higher potential. (Krog and
Govender, 2015)
 Literature Review- Leadership and Authenticity

Empowerment usually consists of four psychological components; self-esteem, self-

efficacy, emotional stability, and internal locus of control; referring to the ability of the
person to control their state of being, regardless of what is happening on the external
level. When employees rank high on those components, they report a higher sense of
satisfaction and meaning at the work place, and they also tend to be more committed
towards the organisational vision (Prussia, et al., 1998). A study conducted between 230
nurses in a facility at the South of the United States, supported those results. The study
demonstrated that when nurses feel more empowered, they tend to work with more care
and excellence towards the patients. The empowered nurses, owed their sense of
empowerment mainly to the empowering style of the leadership adopted at the hospital
(Spence et al., 2009).

It is not just the leadership style that plays a major role in the employees’ empowerment,
but also the environment of the organisation, has a distinct role on that context. (Micheal,
2016). The research of Murari and Gupta (2016) showed that employees working in
empowering work environments that allow them take impactful decisions, reported a
higher sense of autonomy, satisfaction, and productivity. The enhancement in the altruistic
behaviours between employees, towards help and generosity can also be added to these
attributes.

A study conducted by Bryman, Dainty, Price and Soetanto, Greasley, King (2004) revealed
that employees consider themselves more empowered, when feeling capable to make
critical decisions that impact the strategies and vision of the organisation. The researcher
expects that when employees become a co-creator in the servitization movement this might
result in more engagement and motivation during the process of the transition. The
researcher also believes that the exact goal of servant leadership is to empower employees
and to make them feel more capable of leading the service towards customers and society.

3.1.4 Leadership and Self-concepts

Self-concept plays a major role in the effectiveness of the leader. Self-concepts can be
defined as the major concepts held in the minds of the people about themselves. Those
concepts dictate the dominant behaviours of each person (Criswell and Campbell, 2008).

Dr. Maxwell Maltz (1960), was one of the first to introduce the term of self-concept, to the
world of psychology, through the book Psycho-cybernetics. Maltz coined this term as self-
image. After 25 years of working with different patients on issues related to plastic
surgeries, Maltz started to detect a certain pattern. Some patients keep coming back to ask
for more surgeries after the first one, while other patients, who reached almost the same
results, never come back. After investigating that pattern, Maltz realised that in the first
group, patients experienced a change in the physical level, but not on the psychological
level. Therefore, the self-concept, about themselves stayed the same. They still believed
 Literature Review- Leadership and Authenticity

they were ugly or something similar. The second group that never came back saw a change
in their self-concept, seeing themselves as beautiful. Maltz then concluded that every
person has certain concepts about themselves, or self-image, which then, defines their
behaviours, and the repetitive results they are capable of reaching (Morselli, 2007).

The research of Maltz then expanded into sport, education, and business, proving that
people, who are at the top on their field, hold very empowering concepts about themselves.
For example, high performers hold powerful concepts of themselves. A study between 150
senior executives, showed a positive correlation between the concepts the managers hold
about themselves, and the way they lead employees, and how they are perceived by others
(Criswell and Campbell, 2008).

Burchard (2012) argues that self-concept is a very powerful emotional drive for humans, as
people think and behave, in congruence with the dominant concepts they hold about
themselves. Therefore, if someone thinks they are smart, kind, creative, a cause for pity, a
victim etc, that person will think and behave, similar to the concepts they hold. That person
will also project that concept onto others, which will then influences the way people treat
them.

Leaders with high levels of influence and effectiveness seem to hold certain concepts about
themselves. They hold self concepts of being strong, charismatic, and capable of doing
anything when deciding to. Probably the last one is the most important concept for an
effective leadership (Shamir et al., 1993). The idea that the leader is capable to succeed in
anything they decided to do is known as self-efficacy. It serves in impacting the leader’s
ability to guide employees into an unknown territory. Great leaders tend to have higher
levels of self-efficacy than the average person, regardless of their personal skills in
planning, strategic vision, or persuasion (Schyns and Sczesny, 2010).

Effective leaders also hold certain concept about other people, such as people are generally
interesting and hold great potential. This allows them to communicate with people at an
empowering level (Shamir et al., 1993). The researcher thinks this attitude is very important
for servant leadership, because genuine service comes from being interested in the views of
other people and their needs. Therefore, the concept the leaders hold about others, is as
important to servant leadership, as the concept leaders hold about themselves.

Self-concept does not only affect the behaviours of the leader, but it also affects the self-
concepts of the employees. In a study about the effect of transformational leadership on the
concepts of employees, the results showed a strong relationship of more than 60 % between
how the employees perceive themselves, and how the leader perceives them. Meaning, that
the more leaders perceive the employees through the eyes of greatness and potential, the
more the employees hold empowering concepts about themselves (Luo et al., 2016).
 Literature Review- Leadership and Authenticity

When coaching people to become leaders, it is important to embody the idea of the self-
concept of being a leader, and not just mentally but also emotionally, which takes longer to
happen, due to the nature of emotions. The idea of creating a more empowering self-
concept is not an excuse to feed the Ego of the leader, but to create empowering and
authentic ideals that would allow the leader to stand out, and lead employees in an authentic
and courageous way (Ehrhart, 2012).

When examining the main cause of why people hold certain self-concepts about
themselves, especially in the leadership area, the key factor tends to revolve about the
stereo types of the society. For example, women do not prefer to generally hold the concept
of being leading women, especially when it comes to business. Therefore the percentage of
women CEO’s in fortune 500 in the year 2016, was less than 4.4 %. While when looking at
other areas, where women leaders are found in higher percentage, such as the area of
athletes, the women tend to have more acceptance to the idea of leading, as it is considered
more acceptable by the society (Simon and Hoyt, 2012). The researcher believes that this
might bring another challenge for leaders in terms of bettering their self-concepts, by trying
to break the social disempowering patterns, and moving towards the path of servant leaders.

With that that being said, the researcher could not find, a research study that describes the
common concepts servant leaders hold about themselves, to be then used as a model for
others. Thus, the research intends to bring more clarity on this area through observations
and interviews. Yet, even with the ambiguity of the self-concepts of servant leader, Green
leaf mentioned briefly, through essential writings, what we might consider as some self-
concepts about servant leadership: (please check the quotes) ‘’ servant leadership begins
with natural feeling that one wants to serve, to serve first. Then conscious choice brings
one to aspire and lead. That person is different from one who is leader first, perhaps
because of the need to assuage an unusual power drive or to acquire material
possessions… The best test, and difficult to administer, is do those served grow as persons?
Do they while being served become healthier, wiser, freer, more autonomous, more likely
themselves to become servants… A servant leader focuses primarily on the growth and
well-being of people and the communities to which they belong’’ (Greenleaf Center, 2016).

That definition might include some of the self-concepts related to the servant leader, which
can be inspiring, passionate for empowerment, and caring for the growth and wellbeing of
others. The good news is that the modern research in neuroscience demonstrated that self-
concepts are malleable to change, mainly through focused intention and repetitive practice
of affirming, and feeling the adopted concepts. This ability to change concepts, by rewiring
the neural paths in the brain, is known as neuron-plasticity (Dispenza, 2007).

3.1.5 Leadership and Authenticity

 Literature Review- Leadership and Authenticity

Values play a major role in the field of servant leadership. Leaders who derive their power
from their authentic values are less likely to seek power from title, and tend to focus more
on the idea of serving others. To identify the authentic values of the leader, that requires an
honest process of self-discovery, independent from any cultural or organisational morality.
This will allow the authentic character for the leader to unfold naturally. When values are
identified and practiced, leaders can then guide employees from a selfless motivation,
which then induces a sense of safety and trust between employees. That is why the concept
of servant leadership, promotes a deeper understanding of the authentic values of the leader
(Russell, 2001).
Values effect the leader’s decision, perception, and the quality of communication with
people around. When integrating the authentic values of the leader with the idea of service,
that can create more consistency to behave with higher motivation and to lead through
serving others.

Seligman and Peterson (2003) were the first to propose with explicit evidence, that
everybody has certain values connected to their authentic self, referring to them as core
signature strengths. The signature strengths are considered the foundations of the modern
branch in psychology; called positive psychology. The overall number of those core
signature strengths is 24, and everyone has at least five dominant strengths out of them.
According to Seligman and Peterson, living in alignment with those strengths generates
higher levels of happiness and fulfilment. Also, practicing those core signature strengths,
yields better results when leading others. For example, if fairness is one of the values of the
leader, practicing the value of fairness from a place of free chosen discipline will increase
the leader’s ability to express his/her self and serve more authentically (Shek and Yu,
2015). While keeping in mind, those values differ from leader to leader, yet some values
are still common between most of the servant leaders. These are mainly the values that
promote connection and sense of safety between people, such as caring, empowerment,,
and honesty (Russell, 2001).

The power of authenticity has been discussed long before the merger of psychological
studies. They were discussed mainly through the wisdom of ancient cultures, especially at
the period of the Stoic philosophers. The discussions revolved around the idea of knowing
one's self, or as referred to then: know thyself. This is considered as an indicator of the
importance of understanding one’s authentic values and character. Thus, the search of the
essence of the self, is not merely a self-cantered process, it is more of an active process to
find the most benevolent and value driven self, in order to be able to serve better (Duignan
and Bhindi, 1997).

Actually the term authenticity is rooted in Greek philosophy; to be your true self.
Therefore, authenticity can be defined, as the ability to act in congruence with one’s values
and feelings. When leaders build proper awareness of their values, with the emotional
 Literature Review- Leadership and Authenticity

desire to act upon them, they become more consistent in the eyes of the employees,
especially if those values concern the general wellbeing and service for others (Weichun
Zhu et al., 2004). No matter how intelligent the leaders can become, they still need to be
consistent and to act in their most authentic values towards followers. For example, if a
leader admires people, but does not consistently act on that, by showing a genuine
appreciation to employees, the value of admiration will stay as a non-active one, as
illustrated in figure 11. (Michie and Gooty, 2005).

Figure 11: Relationship Between Emotional State and Clarity of Values (Michie and Gooty,
2005).

Figure 11: Predicted Consistency Between Leader Authentic Values and Behaviours.
Source: (Michie and Gooty, 2005)

The highest level of authenticity in leadership, can only be achieved through proper self-
awareness, which is a direct results of reflecting on the leaders' identity, motivation and
 Literature Review- Leadership and Authenticity

values, that best represents their true self (Gardner et al., 2005). As William James, the
American psychologist described : "Thought that the best way to define a man's character
would be to seek out the particular mental or moral attitude in which, when it came upon
him, he felt himself most deeply and intensively active and alive. At such moments, there is
a voice inside which speaks and says, this is the real me" (Flint and Ritchotte, 2012, pp.
168).

The proposed study by Weischer (2013), claimed a positive relation between the level of
authenticity between leaders, and how influential and service oriented they are perceived to
be by employees. That is why the concept servant leadership is linked with the idea of
authenticity, as servant leaders demonstrate a real interest in serving and helping
employees, to embody more of their authentic self, rather than seeking power over people
(Greenleaf, 1977). That is why authentic leaders, are more inclined to perceive leadership
as a spiritual practice, rather than a position, due to their interest in bringing more goodness
to people and the organisation by doing what is right without attaching the consequences
(Bhindi and Duignan, 1997).

Despite the importance of embodying authenticity as a major leadership principle, there is

still an ongoing criticism for leaders in organisations, due to their lack of authenticity, and
their focus on performance over values (Fredrickson et al., 2003). The reason behind
dismissing authenticity from the leadership practice can be attributed to many reasons. For
example, Diddams and Chang (2012) argue that when leaders develop a better
understanding of their authentic self, they tend to feel, that they were deceiving themselves
before instead of changing the concepts about the self, they hold tight to the old self, which
do not primarily represent them. That case is known as the entity theory, where the leaders
see themselves as a fixed entity, not capable of growing and changing (Nussbaum and
Dweck, 2008).
 Literature Review- Leadership and Communication

Other challenges the leaders might face, when practicing authenticity, is dealing with the
fixed set of values established by the organisation, which might violate the core values of
the leader. That is why organisations have to work more efficiently to connect the values of
their leaders, with the overall values and vision of the organisation (Duignan and Bhindi,
1997).

3.1.6 Leadership and Communication

Leadership is usually associated with the ability to communicate, in order guide teams
towards a higher vision. Moreover, in servant leadership it takes consistent communication
with teams, to understand the emotional side of the performance, including the motivations
and fears of the team members (Henderson, 2015).

The main attribute of leadership in the context of servant leadership, is the ability to
communicate clearly and compassionately with employees. That requires the ability to
listen deeply to the point of views of others (Stanford-Blair and Dickmann, 2009). Through
the practice of deep listening, leaders can build the capacity to listen not just to the words,
but to an emotional level, by separating themselves from the preconceived judgments about
other people, and to bring more warmth to the conversations. With that ability, leaders can
convert any negative conflicts and challenges, into opportunities for development (Nash,
2015). Through the attitude of attention listening, leaders can better relate to employees on
both the analytical and emotional level, by satisfying the latter's primary emotional need to
be seen and acknowledged (Reed, 2009).

Deep listening not only enhances the leader’s sense of influence, but also the awareness of
others and their motivations to act. By bringing full attention to the employees thorough
communication, the leader not only enhances the experience of sharing and understanding,
but also the ability to inspire employees to become agents for service (Krasner, 2009).
 Literature Review- Leadership and Mindfulness

Deep listening for leaders differs from regular listening. The deep listening refers to this
distinct quality, of maintaining heightened and non-judgmental attention to the other
person. This can be learned and developed by any leader, who can then facilitate for higher
abilities to read subtle expressions, (Walker and Mann, 2016). Leaders who lack the ability
to maintain directed attention through listening can fall a prey for distracting thinking, and
usually lack of understanding for the emotional pain, and real motivations for employees
(Lewis and Ebbeck, 2014).

Through examining servant leaders in different organisations, it's found that they seem to
attain an excellent level of listening and communication. Servant leaders reached mastery
in attentive listening, while conveying their message clearly, and with a powerful presence.
That occurs due to the ability of the leader to master the art of attention listening through
any interaction, which is then reflected through their body language and tonality. Therefore,
servant leaders are described by the employees as caring and competent at the same time
(Grant and Taylor, 2014).

Practicing this primary dimension of servant leadership; deep listening, has shown a
positive impact on the quality of communication between leaders and employees, with the
leader showing a genuine sense of empathy for the challenges the employees face, instead
of losing the humanitarian side of communication, to the need for achievement (Leary et
al., 2007). Sinek (2014), a leadership trainer, claims that genuine empathy from the leader
to the employees is as important for the survival of the organisation, as financial growth.
According to Goleman (1998) the founder of the concept emotional intelligence,
individuals who scored higher on their levels of empathy can better relate to others, which
is essential for inspiring and leading people. Empathy is a learnable skill, but it has to come
from a genuine place of care, where the leader desires to understand the challenges of
employees, and to have an emotional sense of what the employees are going through.
Usually leaders cannot access that emotional level, if they did not access the emotional
level within themselves. Therefore, leaders who lack an emotional intelligence for
communication, tend to perceive employees as numbers rather than humans. This can be
sensed by employees and often described as a sense of coldness from the leader (Bakar et
al., 2014).

While there is no exact definition for empathy, yet within the context of leadership, it is
associated with the ability of the leader, to understand the emotions of others, whether
said verbally, or expressed through nonverbal gestures. When leadership started to merge
as a main topic in organisational management, in the 80s and 90s,empathy used to be
considered as a soft skill of leadership, and thus there was no real interest in researching
empathy. Yet, the understanding for the importance of empathy in leadership has
increased, to recognise it as major part of the success of leadership communication (Holt
and Marques, 2011)
 Literature Review- Leadership and Mindfulness

Greenleaf pointed out in the essential writing of servant leadership, the importance of
empathy as a major aspect of servant leadership, especially in Leaf’s writing about
emotional healing. Greenleaf described the importance of empathy in the emotional healing
process, whether it is used to enhance the ability of leaders, to regulate emotions such as
frustration, tiredness, or anger, or at a deeper level; to heal the pains and past traumas.
When leaders deepen the ability to connect with employees at an emotional level, leaders
can help employees to reach higher potential through emotional and mental advancement
(Fong and Snape, 2013).

3.1.7 Leadership and Awareness

The term awareness is usually acquainted with the term mindfulness. Mindfulness is an old
technique, related to the eastern cultures, although the origins of that technique cannot be
predicted precisely (Williams and Kabat-Zinn, 2013). The eastern monks perceived the
practice of mindfulness, as a way to reduce suffering, which is caused according to their
beliefs, by the individual, mental, and emotional dysfunctions. Through the cultivation of
mindfulness, the person can transcend those psychological dysfunctions, and become the
observer of them, with the hopes of reaching a calmer and clearer state of being (Tagini and
Raffone, 2009).

The modern form of mindfulness, as a sort of behavioural development, has only started to
sprout in the early 80s. The number of published papers back then was relatively small, and
it only started to rise at the end of the 90s. After that, the research studies on therapeutic
mindfulness have grown exponentially (Williams and Penman, 2011). Then, quickly the
interest in mindfulness has extended from the field of psychology, into many other areas,
such as education, sport performance, and organisational leadership due to the practical use
of mindfulness, in enhancing emotional balance, empathy, and behavioural regulation
(Keng et al., 2011). Pieces of evidence from neuroscience have shown the power of
mindfulness in changing the structure of the brain, resulting in higher cognitive abilities,
concerning focus and innovation (Tang et al., 2015).

Mindfulness can simply be defined, as the capacity to maintain full awareness of the
present moment, with a non-judgmental attitude to what is happening around (Sauer et al.,
2012). It allows the experiences to unfold by itself, with less mental resistance to what is
going on, which naturally induces a very proactive and flexible state of mind, rather than a
reactive one (Davidson and Kabat-Zinn, 2004). Therefore, through the practice of
mindfulness, individuals can reach a more objective point of view for their inner world of
thoughts, emotions, motivations and perceptions., thus, creating a supreme level of self-
awareness, and more ease to enter the state of "flow" as coined out by Prof. Mihaly
Csikszentmihalyi. The state of flow is where the individual experiences less mental
activities, and more sense of ease through performance. The people feel their best, and
perform at their best (Moore, 2013). While in the mindlessness states the individual goes
 Literature Review- Leadership and Mindfulness

into an autopilot mode of repetitive thoughts and conditioned responses, and is stuck in a
survival mode (Brown and Ryan, 2003).

The good news is that mindfulness can be acquired and strengthened by anyone with a
healthy brain, and with no previous experience. The brain has the ability to change itself
through deliberate and repetitive practice, and when the practice of mindfulness is repeated
enough, it soon becomes like second nature for the practitioner (Sethi, 2009).

In the context of this study, the researcher is more interested in the use of mindfulness in
terms of leadership. The relationship between leadership and mindfulness, was discussed
early at the time of the stoic philosophers s Socrates and Plato, based idea of developing the
level of awareness. That includes an honest awareness of the leader's purpose, strengths,
unique talents, story, values, motivations, and perspectives (Avolio et al., 2004). Eevn
Greenleaf mentioned the power of mindfulness in servant leadership, by referring to the
word mindfulness in awareness, or being awake (Fong and Snape, 2013).

Since modern leadership has entered the world of organisations, the tasks of managers have
shifted drastically from the operational excellence as in transactional leadership, into
psychological and social excellence (Wallo et al., 2013). That means that leadership, is
becoming a whole practice for higher awareness, honesty, trust, compassion, humility and
service. That also includes the awareness for the employee’s intrinsic motivations, to fire
up their intrinsic motivators to work, by connecting them to the meaning behind the work
again (Sharma, 2010).

That could be a challenging task for leaders, especially with the need to satisfy other
operational tasks. Knowing that when shifting from one task to another, a series of complex
processes takes place in the brain, the first is dropping all the rules related to the task on
hand, and creating a new cognitive frame for the second task. In between the tasks, the
brain needs a pause to prepare for that change, or it will create fatigue. That is why the
average manager can easily get overwhelmed when dealing with all that information, and
find it challenging to balance between tasks, and the ability stay aware to lead others
(Misner, 2014).

Orgnisational leaders unlike others, have to deal with maximized amounts of information
from the ever-growing systems, sudden changes, employees, to the customised needs of
their customers. Therefore, organisational leaders have to build a real sense of calmness
now, regardless of what is happening on the external level (Waters, 2010). With that level
of calmness, leaders would have a better ability to lead, and discern between what is
valuable or not, known as the intuitive sense of judgment (Judge et al., 2001)

Actually, the reason mindfulness has become a major interest in the studies of
organisational leadership, is due to the premise it holds for solving the issue of maximized
mental inputs for leading managers. Mindfulness can help leaders to process the enormous
amount of information, with a real sense of ease, while maintaining an open awareness on
 Literature Review- Leadership and Mindfulness

the strategic vision and mission of the organisation (Khan and Mirchandan, 2013). This is
more specifically, to be able to stay in the quadrant of the mindful, as referred to in the
matrix of mental effectiveness, as shown in figure 12 (Hougaard et al., 2015).

Figure 12: Matrix of Mental Effectiveness (Hougaard et al., 2015).

Sharp focus

Absorbed Mindful

Open
Autopilot awareness

Mindless Autopilot

Distracted

Figure 2: Matrix of Mental Effectiveness. Source: (Hougaard et al., 2015)

Being in the mindful area is a very flexible state, and is highly needed for leaders to
maintain calmness and space for novelty, while actively staying engaged in the moment.
Instead of being governed with an old and automated patterns of thinking (Hougaard et al.,
2015

Once the leader reaches higher levels of calmness, the leader can better lead employees
towards the organisational purpose. (Yeganeh, 2012). That can be accomplished through
the repetitive practice of mindfulness, by maintaining the attention on the here and now
and, allowing the leader to reach calmer state of mind (Knudson, 2012).
 Literature Review- Leadership and Mindfulness

When leaders are in a calmer state of mind that allows them to be clearer about the right
steps to take, and less attached to egoistic motivation. This empowers the service based
behaviours. While the self-cantered motivations gets weaker in the state of mindfulness.
(Langer, 2000). Leaders reported that when they practiced mindfulness they become more
caring for the wellbeing of others and standing back when necessary, to allow others to lead
as well (Verdorfer, 2016).

Leaders also reported through practicing mindfulness, a higher ability to monitor their
thoughts and emotions, allowing them to reach a higher level of self-mastery, therefore
better leading others while dealing with uncertainty (Wasylkiw et al., 2015). Keeping in
mind, that dealing with the uncertainty has become an essential quality to become an
organisational leader (Dargan and Shucksmith, 2008).

Embracing the sense of uncertainty, is a must in these changing time of information, and
the best way to deal with those changes, is not from the ordinary level of readiness, but the
kind of readiness that comes from flexibility to respond in a much more intuitive way
(Dargan and Shucksmith, 2008). The researchers concluded that the flexibility in leadership
to deal with the upcoming global challenges is highly related to mindfulness.

Langer (1992) claims in her studies, about the difference of mindful and mindless leaders,
those mindful leaders are more attentive to the moment, therefore, more intuitive and less
inclined to repeat the same thinking patterns, in which she referred to as the flexible
cognitive state. That state of flexible cognitively is one of openness and complete
innovation, without turning to memory to find old solutions for recent challenges. Mindless
leaders mostly followed a habitual way for approaching new challenges.

Mindlessness states can also be debilitating to the energy of the individual, as most of the
autopilot thinking is a reactive ones, and focuses more on self-interested motivation. While
through mindful state, individuals can experience a higher levels of energy, instead of being
dragged into a stressful states of mind. From there, the individual can easily challenge old
assumptions, and allow a new pattern of thinking to merge. (Oswald and Grosjean, 2004).
 Literature Review- Leadership and Mindfulness

Marturano (2015) the founder of the Mindful Leadership Institution, argues that there are
four qualities for mindful leaders these are: focus, clarity, creativity and compassion.
Maturano, goes further to claim that those qualities are the by-products of leaders who
are attentive to the present moment, while either performing activities or communicating
with others. Now that presence has to be re-cultivated whenever the mind goes back into
confusion, using what Marturano called; the purposeful pause.

That is why Grint (2002) considered mindful leadership more like an art rather than a
science, as it includes the art of dealing with one’s mind and others, in order to manage
the mind into clarity with more conscious and intuitive ways. (Ladkin, 2008), When
consciously practicing mindfulness of the moment, the leader can hit another level of
intuition, trust, and influence between employees (Avolio and Gardner, 2005).

Therefore, merging mindfulness with leadership is the natural progression of the

traditional image of a leader, into a much more holistic and evolved one. In traditional
leadership, the focus was solely on getting things accomplished, while using an
authoritative language when approaching employees. The mindful leaders bring less
attention to the authority and position, and more emphasis on brining full attention to the
moment, in order to connect with people at deeper level, and maintain the motivation to
serve a higher purpose (Dunoon and Langer, 2012).

3.1.8 Leadership and Charisma

Charisma is one of the qualities the researchers struggled to find an exact definition for,
because it deals more with the dimension of feelings, which can sometimes be described
as captivating presence (Friedman et al., 1980). When leaders exude a strong sense of
charisma, they tend to have a better ability to influence the choices of followers, due the
feelings of infatuation with the followers around them. That is known in psychological
term by cognitive influence, where the person has an ability to effect other people
thoughts and feelings, with their natural presence (Bono and Ilies, 2006).

When taking about charisma in the context of leadership, most people envision the idea
of someone who is exceptional, powerful, and is set apart from other humans, which was
the same idea presented by Max Weber in 1947, the founder of the concept charismatic
leader (Owen, 2015). Those ideas started to fade with time, and the recent studies on
charisma, more specifically after the year 2005, are proving that the idea that some
leaders have charisma and others do not is indeed not accurate. Charisma is a matter of
exuding the most authentic character, while embodying certain leadership traits, as such
as being inspired by a strong sense of purpose, which allows the leaders to influence and
guide others with their presence (Nohe and Michaelis, 2016).
 Literature Review- Leadership and Mindfulness

The studies on charisma and leadership have increased exponentially after the year 2010,
with the growing interest in the question, of what makes employees gravitate towards
certain leaders. These questions lead many researchers to focus on the emotional side of
leadership, which is considered the basis of charisma.
A study conducted amongst 33 leaders showed that the most important factors in
charisma, is the ability of the leader to commit to constant growth and change (Nohe et
al., 2013). On the other hand, a study conducted by Gallup institution for organisational
behavioural, showed a different result. The Gallup study was conducted on 10,000 adults,
by asking them about the one quality that makes the leader charismatic. The results
showed, that the adults voted highest for trust (Pate, 2013)
A study on 150 students in a business school reported different results. The students were
asked to fill a form about the qualities they acquainted with charisma, between three
chosen teachers in the school. The survey was conducted twice, after three minutes of the
introductory class, and again after fifteen weeks of the first survey. The results
demonstrated, that there are only two qualities, ranked highest in both surveys, and they
are: The sense of power shown by the teacher, and the competence of the teacher (Tkalac
Verčič, 2014). Therefore, the researcher concludes that competence and charisma are
correlated. The real questions, is this, when do people consider the leader to be
competent? It seems that competence, has a lot to do with the body language of the
leader, and their level of confidence in presenting, rather than the real knowledge they
have (Jan, 2011).

Therefore, the researcher suspects, that there is no agreement on major qualities for
attaining higher charisma for leaders. However, Olivia Cabane in her book "The
Charisma Myth (2012)", argues that there are three specific qualities that can enhance the
sense of charisma between leaders, including; warmth, power, and presence. When
leaders are exuding a sense of warmth, employees identify that as an emotional sign, that
leaders will use their power and knowledge in their favor. Because warmth is so tied the
body language, it is almost impossible to fabricate the bodily signs of warmth, as there
are far more subtle expressions for leaders to control, in order to craft a warm body
language. Meaning, that warmth has to come from a genuine place of care, which then
can be naturally translated through the body language of the leader (Cabane, 2012)..
Cabane also argues that when leaders try to fake warmth, that creates an incongruent
gestures in their body language, displaying them as not trust worthy, or in the language
reported by employees; that there is something not right here. The incongruence in the
body language of leaders and their inauthentic feelings can be the biggest enemy for
charisma and leadership, as it evokes the feeling of lack of trust (Cabane, 2012).
According to Cabane, The second quality for leader’s charisma, is the ability to display
true power, which can be enhanced with the commitment to higher purpose, and also by
 Literature Review- Leadership and Mindfulness

creating a powerful body language, that represents authority and respect (Cabane, 2012)..
Surprisingly, vulnerability also plays a major role in the sense of power between leaders.
When leaders share their insecurities, life story, and weaknesses in an unapologetic way,
employees usually perceive them to be more powerful. Vulnerability can create an instant
connection with others, by bringing the human side to the relationship (Glanz, 2007)

Cabane adds that the last quality to enhance the leaders’ charisma is presence. When
leaders master the ability to be present independent from what is happening around, they
can then shine more radiant charisma to others (Cabane, 2012). When it comes to the
instant reason why people report to feel the charisma around the person, seems to revolve
around the power of their presence. The psychological reason that presence matters, is
because it makes people feel important, when having all present attention on them (Grant
and Taylor, 2014).
This sense of presence is the opposite of the fight and flight mode. Therefore, it is
challenging for leaders to stay in calm presence, especially with a huge amount of inputs
and triggers every day, which can easily bring the leader out of presence into fight and
flight mode. This results in loss of the natural charisma (Cabane,2012).
HeartMath organisation, created an easy and quick way to get back into the state of
presence, which HearMath referred to as coherence. According to HeartMath the state of
coherence, is when the heart starts pumping regularly, allowing the brain to shift from the
fight and flight mode to the present moment, by activating the higher perceptual faculties
in the brain, which is the basis of the coherence state. The level of coherence for the
individual can be measured easily through a tool developed by HeartMath, called
emWave technology (Whited et al., 2014).

HeartMath created a simple technique named the Quick Coherence Technique, to help
the individual tap back into the coherent state quickly, which consists of three steps. The
process starts with bringing the attention to the heart area, then breathing three times
deeply in and out of the heart. The last step involves bringing to the mind a certain
memory that induces a heart based feeling such as care, gratitude, or enthusiasm. The
state of coherence is not only important for charisma but also for focus, clear intuition,
peak performance and deeper human connection (Chen and Wang, 2011).

Therefore, the researcher might use HearMath systems and technologies, as supporting
tools for the study.

With the detailed descriptions for the qualities mostly related to servant leadership, the
researcher is to use that knowledge and build upon it to create a novel branch for
leadership, one that suits the movement of servtization specifically.

3.3 Creating a Novel Branch of Leadership

 Literature Review- Leadership and Mindfulness

Through the study of the eight previous qualities for servant leadership, the research
found that it is not enough to use the knowledge about servant leadership in servitization,
due to the specificity of the movement towards servitization. Thus, the researcher will
create a novel branch of leadership specific for servitisation. The researcher will coin the
novel branch of leadership as service-based leadership.