CHAPTER 6

Servant Leadership and School Crisis Management

Greg Geer
Coastal Carolina University, USA
Howard V. Coleman
Coastal Carolina University, USA

ABSTRACT
In todays world, public school leaders are often called upon to deal with tragedies
that include suicides, homicides, and accidental deaths. When these incidents occur
in small school districts, the roles and responsibilities of school personnel become
those of counselors and civic leaders. This chapter presents a case study about the
experiences of a school superintendent practicing servant leadership to help heal a
small community when dealing with the accidental deaths of a local family. The
superintendents responses to the tragedy are based upon the foundations of
servant leadership that include empathy, mental models, reflection, self-awareness,
emotional healing, listening, commitment, and community building (Goen, 2009;
Spears, 2004; Greenleaf, 1977). Servant leadership practices help guide educational
leaders in providing support for students, teachers, and parents in school crises.

INTRODUCTION
This chapter illustrates how a public school superintendent applied servant
leadership practices to respond to a tragedy in his school district. The
superintendent served both his school and the community by dealing with the heart
wrenching aftermath of a multiple victim house fire that claimed the lives of a local
mother, her two daughters who were recent graduates of the local high school and
her son, a well-known and well-liked high school junior. School leaders, and
particularly superintendents, must be well-prepared in advance to ensure that
reactions and decisions in crisis situations are thoughtful and considerate of all
stakeholders. Communications must be accurate and clearly understood by the
community and the media. Most importantly, superintendents must be aware of the
impact of the crisis on students, family members and staff.
Servant leadership characteristics are useful in guiding school leaders interactions,
behaviors and decisions in crisis situations. The servant leadership characteristics

are: (a) listening; (b) empathy; (c) healing; (d) awareness; (e) persuasion; (f)
foresight; (g) stewardship; (h) commitment to the growth of people; and (i) building
community (Spears, 2004). These characteristics assist school leaders in supporting
followers and in building a caring community.
Superintendents in small, rural communities serve in roles and functions that are
different from their counterparts in the suburbs and urban areas. Superintendents in
smaller districts are considered to be community leaders who work closely with
agencies, churches and businesses. They understand that the school systems
buildings and facilities serve as cultural, social and emergency centers for the
community. These superintendents know that they will be called upon to serve their
educational and community stakeholders in a crisis. A servant leadership approach
is an effective way to ensure that superintendents meet the needs of their students
and community members in these situations.The chapter presents a literature
review on the pros and cons of servant leadership. The effectiveness of the servant
leadership practices of foresight, empathy, reflection, self-awareness and caring to
promote emotional healing and to move a community forward following a crisis are
presented. The importance of school leaders developing relationships and focusing
on the needs of others to gain commitment and followership is emphasized. Guiding
principles for preparing and implementing a servant leadership crisis management
model included in the Appendix.

BACKGROUND
Superintendents who practice servant leadership combine their motivation to lead
with a strong desire to serve (Dierendonck, 2011) and focus on the needs of their
stakeholders (Schneider & George, 2011; Williamson, 2008). Servant leadership
begins with a philosophy, belief and attitude to serve others and then implements
caring practices, actions and structures to make it happen (Page, 2004). A key
component of servant leadership is an emotional healing dimension that is
operationally defined as showing sensitivity and understanding for others concerns
(Liden et.al, 2008).
Servant leaderships emotional healing dimension is considered to be a powerful
and effective force in supporting people through crisis and tragedy. Greenleaf
emphasizes the importance of establishing a caring compact between the servant
leader and those he or she is leading (1970, p. 7). This emotional influence
dimension has an ethical component relative to the leaders role in helping followers
deal with trauma and difficult situations (Heifetz, 1994; Burns, 1978).
The emotional, caring dimension of servant leadership is supported by needs
theorists who state that basic needs must be met before individuals can move
forward to higher levels of awareness and self-control (McClelland, 1987; Murray, H.

A. & Kluckhohn, 1953; Maslow, 1943). Servant leaders are attentive to the needs of
their followers and committed to helping them to succeed. Servant leaders realize
the importance of developing relationships with their followers and the impact of
aligning these relationships with the goals and objectives of the organization
(Depree, 1989).
Spears has identified ten characteristics that are central to guiding the interactions,
behaviors and decisions of servant leaders: (a) listening; (b) empathy; (c) healing;
(d) awareness; (e) persuasion; (f) foresight; (g) stewardship; (h) commitment to the
growth of people; and (i) building community (2004). The characteristics guide
leaders in being attentive to others, empathizing with them, nurturing them,
empowering them and helping them maximize their personal and professional
development. This is accomplished by continuingly supporting followers safety,
security and emotional needs and encouraging them to overcome adversity. This
commitment to others growth helps the servant leader to build a positive and
nurturing community in which the participants care about one another (Greenleaf,
1977).
The servant leadership approach values people and promotes their development
through positive relationships rather than positional authority, tasks or leadership
styles (Waterman, 2011). This is in contrast to traditional trait (Stogdill, 1974),
situational (Hershey & Blanchard, 1993) and contingency leadership theories
(Fiedler 1993). Servant leaders place the emphasis on people and relationships
rather than roles and tasks. This emphasis on followers needs and developing
positive relationships to promote their personal development rather than using
followers as a means to achieve organizational goals is intended to optimize their
potential. Servant leadership is operationally defined as respecting and valuing
people rather than trying to direct and control them (McCrimmon, 2010). This style
of leadership seeks to accomplish things by serving followers who in turn become
motivated to achieve organizational goals and objectives via collaborative group
efforts (Wilson, Van Vgut & OGorman, 2008; Greenleaf, 2002).
Servant leaders are willing to be the last and the least in their organizations. This
characteristic of servant leaders is sometimes described as cultivating humility
(Maxwell, 2005; Spears & Lawrence, 2004). The focus is on the people and the
organization rather than the leader. Servant leaders understand that they must
place their egos on the shelf and strive to promote the development and well-being
of their followers. This first to serve and then to lead approach begins with a deep
commitment to listening to others (Crippen, 2004). Listening to others requires the
leader be receptive to hearing what is said, as well as what is not being said when
interacting with followers. The leader as listener must be emphatic and willing to
understand his or her followers to truly hear what they are thinking, what they are
feeling and what they need.

Servant leaders develop their listening skills by first listening to themselves,

assessing themselves and then reflecting on what they have heard and learned
about their personalities, beliefs and behaviors (Purkey & Siegal, 2003). Servant
leaders are adept at recognizing their strengths and weaknesses and continually
strive to modify their thinking and their behaviors to become more effective
listeners. The servant leadership philosophical framework is based on empathy,
collaboration and cooperation. The core of this framework centers on humility which
requires the leader to surrender self-centered motives and to develop humble
relationships with others that consider their needs above ones own (Sandage &
Wien, 2001).
A major criticism of servant leadership is that it is unsuited for competitive
organizational environments in business and industry (McCrimmon, 2010). This is
related to organizational structures and accountability issues. Business
organizations are typically designed to represent and protect the interests of the
owners, not the employees. While part of the leaders role is to support and
promote good employee performance and productive work behaviors, the concept
of service to and for the employees is diametrically opposed to the mission, value
and goals of for-profit organizations.
Servant leadership may lead to a lack of control, authority and supervision of overall
management functions in organizations (Dierendonck, (2011). If leaders are
continually focusing on serving the needs of their followers, then the followers are
less likely to view the leader as an authority figure. This may diminish the ability of
the leader to hold followers accountable for achieving goals and objectives. When
followers believe their leader will always step in to take care of their need and
support them regardless of their work efforts, they may see no reason to change
their behaviors (McCrimmon, 2010).
The emphasis on control, authority and supervision of overall management
functions in organizations has a long history in leadership theory and practice. This
leadership model is sometimes called a top/down model of leadership which views
leaders as implementers of externally imposed reform efforts. This approach is
based on the traditional management concepts from Taylors (1911) scientific
management theory, Fayols (1916) administrative principles, and Webers (1920)
bureaucratic principles. The classical model of leadership defines the leaders role
as one which is limited to implementing externally created solutions to problems.
The leaders positional authority creates a hierarchical chain of command which
promotes safety, order, control and compliance with policies and procedures. The
benefits of this model are consistent, efficient, and standard guidelines for decision
making, activities, and processes. The downsides of the classical leadership model
are rigid rules, slow responses to changing technology, and incompatibility with
employees personal values.

Some leadership theorists consider the concept of management to be separate and

distinct from leadership. Bennis and Nanus (1985) define managing as a means to
establish routines and accomplish tasks through recurring activities. They define
leading as a means for leaders to influence others by creating visions for change.
Burns (1978) describes managers as transactors and leaders as transformers.
Managerial models focus on the routinization of tasks and responsibilities to ensure
efficiency and effectiveness. The positional authority of the leader is utilized to
develop standardized procedures for implementing instruction, enforcing policies,
managing resources, and supervising employees.
Kotter (1990) has identified several order, consistency, and task functions
emphasized by traditional managerial models: (a) planning and budgeting by
establishing agendas, setting timetables, and allocating resources; (b) organizing
and staffing within established rules and procedures; and (c) controlling and
problem solving through direct, autocratic action. The primary function of
managerial models is to maintain safe, rational, and predictable organizations. In
contrast, leadership models are more about meeting new challenges by positively
adapting to change.
Nayab (2011) has identified four situations that he considers to be unsuitable for
servant leadership characteristics: a) having to discard persuasion, a servant
leadership core characteristic, and recommend correction or appropriate discipline;
b) having to discard the characteristic of openness to maintain confidentiality to
protect others and for legal reason; c) having to suspend the listening processes
and issue specific orders during crisis situations; and d) having to forgo supporting
human development when market conditions force the organization to downsize.
Johnson (2001) considers servant leadership to be idealistic and problematic in the
American culture where many followers will take advantage of a servant leader that
they would consider to be emotional and weak. Bowie (2000) views servant leaders
as being unrealistic and impractical in situations such as the military and prison
systems. Whetstone (2002) states that some critics believe servant leadership
encourages passivity and is not always suitable in crisis situations.
These criticisms consider the command and control functions of the leader in
organizations to be critical for managing, guiding and modifying followers
behaviors based on the situation. Whetstone (2005) states that servant leaders are
able to accomplish these functions by persuasion and example rather than by
positional power and authority. Sergiovanni (2001) has suggested the traditional
management models overemphasize bureaucratic authority and equate leadership
with a series of administrative transactions. This bureaucratic form of leadership
focuses on the management of systems and processes rather than the
management of people.These criticisms of servant leadership represent the
conflicting beliefs, values and philosophies related to the two components of
organizations: tasks and people. The first belief is that the management of tasks

should be the primary focus in organizations and that this managerial focus is the
key role for the leader. The second belief is that followers needs and the quality of
their work lives are the most important variables and that if these needs are met in
a positive, supportive and healthy climate then the followers will achieve the goals
and objectives of the organization (Johnson, 2001).
Servant leadership has been controversial due to minimal research on its
effectiveness in decision making and management (Washington, Sutton & Field,
2006). There are few empirical studies on how servant leaders can lead and control
when always placing followers needs above organizational goals (Graham, 1991).
Many leaders have only a general understanding of servant leadership and usually
are unable to apply the philosophy, concepts and practices in their roles (Block,
2005).
Research on the effectiveness and impact of servant leadership in organizations is
limited. A recent study on the effects of leadership trust variables on team
performance among 191 financial service teams with 999 participants discovered
that servant leadership explained an additional 10 percent of the variance in
improved team performance (Schaubroeck, Lam, Simon & Peng, 2011). Irivings
study on the relationship between servant leadership and team effectiveness, job
satisfaction and other variables found a statistically significant positive correlation
for each variable associated with servant leadership (2005). Melchar and Bosco
(2010) investigated whether a servant leader in business can develop a culture that
can attract and develop other servant leaders. The results revealed that servant
leaders in for-profit, high demanding organizations can create servant leader
cultures that are successful in promoting team effectiveness, supporting high job
satisfaction and achieving corporate goals and objectives.
In recent years servant leadership has been gaining support in leadership,
organizational development and management theories (Anderson, 2010; Blanchard,
2010; Cassel & Holt, 2008; Hesselbein & Goldsmith, 2006; Blanchard & Miller, 2004;
Kahl, 2004). Educational organizations are increasingly utilizing servant leadership
principles to create collaborative and trusting learning environments to promote the
development of all students and to provide support for teachers (Grant, 2013;
Culver, 2009; Hoy and Miskel, 2008; Goddard, 2003). Superintendents who practice
servant leadership are usually highly regarded by their administrators, teachers and
parents, feel better about their work efforts at the end of the day, and are typically
more productive (Adams, 2013).
The listening, trusting, empathy, healing and commitment to building people
servant leadership characteristics are a good fit for educational leaders who are
charged with providing support for students, teachers and parents (Spears, 2004).
Servant leaderships focus on meeting followers needs to help them become
motivated to achieve higher job satisfaction, more positive interpersonal behaviors
and professional goal attainment is supported by modern and traditional needs

theorists (Maslow, 1954; Herzberg, 1959; McGregor, 1960; Kenrick, Griskevicius,

Neuberg & Schaller, 2010; Melchar & Bosco, 2010; Tay & Diener, 2011; and Alderfer,
2011). Among all leadership theories, servant leaderships framework represents
the best fit for developing trust and for meeting organizational participants needs
(Page, & Wong, 2000).

ISSUES, CONTROVERSIES AND PROBLEMS

While the theories and management principles are important for leaders to know,
learn and understand, the development of their leadership skills must first begin
with understanding how their individual mental models affect their perceptions,
behaviors and actions. Mental models are the internal images and beliefs of the
world that limit leaders to familiar ways of thinking and acting (Senge, 1990).
Spillane et. al. (2002) describe these images and beliefs as mental knowledge
structures that link together related concepts used to make sense of the world and
to make predictions. They include the individuals prior knowledge, experiences,
expectations and beliefs about how the world works. As a result, the process of
developing effective leadership skills and practices is more about taking away from
rather than adding to these internal images and beliefs. Argyris (1994; 1996) refers
to this as slowing down the thinking processes to examine the unspoken
assumptions buried within the individual. This does not mean that a leaders work
and life experiences are to be diminished or disregarded. It does mean that a leader
needs to understand how life experiences and beliefs continue to impact and affect
behaviors and decision making. This self-awareness may assist leaders in
overcoming ego-driven beliefs that can limit their effectiveness and their success.
Leaders who focus on the needs of their followers increase the likelihood that they
will gain the followership from their organizational participants and achieve desired
goals and objectives (Drucker, 1999). Servant leaders are committed to establishing
high quality, trusting personal relationships with their followers to promote
achievement of goals and objectives. This is accomplished by establishing
relationships based on openness, expertise and a willingness to listen to the views,
opinions, and priorities of others. Servant leaders maintain an even-handed and
controlled approach relative to emotions, feelings and communication in all
interactions with their followers. Servant leaders guide their followers by spending
time assessing their needs via active listening, caring, and using persuasion rather
than positional authority to support participatory decision making (Spears &
Lawrence, 2004).
Servant leaders understand their followers needs, their values and how they prefer
to do things (Drucker, 1999). In addition, servant leaders also take responsibility for
encouraging all followers to work together to build a culture of trust, respect,
understanding and positive intent. Furthermore, effective servant leaders model,

reinforce and promote this approach in all interactions with followers in the
organizations.
Some theorists consider servant leadership to be too vague, unproven and more
about devaluing traditional, autocratic leadership rather than offering a new
approach to guide followers to accomplish goals and objectives (Hall & Fields, 2007;
Irving & McIntosh, 2010). Smith, Montagno & Kuzmenko (2004) consider servant
leadership to be better suited for nonprofits and volunteer organizations than for
businesses. Other theorists consider servant leadership to be a paradox relative to
leading through serving (Wong, 2004; Rinehart, 1998).
Servant leadership may present a paradox for superintendents and other school
leaders given the increasing pressure to meet student achievement standards at
the state and federal levels. If school districts are to be evaluated based on test
scores and value-added measures, then servant leaderships emphasis on the
individual needs, flexibility and collaboration would seem to be a poor fit for
meeting accountability standards. Critics of servant leadership practices in public
schools believe the lack of control, supervision and monitoring makes it difficult to
ensure that teachers will teach the required curriculum and that students will be
well-prepared for continuing their education and beginning their careers (Hunter,
2004; Whetstone, 2002; and DiStefani, 1995).
Blanchard believes that servant leadership will work in public schools as long as
school leaders focus on engaging and empowering teachers and parents to support
student learning and student development (2010). Servant leadership is all about
getting people to a higher level by supporting and empowering them to a higher
level. Furthermore, the school leaders influence on student achievement is second
only to the quality of teaching (Louis, Leithwood, Wahlstrom & Anderson, 2010). This
influence is a key factor in improving test scores and student achievement
(Lambert, 2004). Servant leadership theory emphasizes the importance of leaders
in supporting and nurturing their followers (Spears & Lawrence, 2004). In this way,
the servant leader helps followers become more knowledgeable and able to deal
with difficulties. This is referred to as an ethic of caring that begins with the
development of trusting interpersonal relationships (Gilligan, 1982). The ethic of
caring promotes followers development and helps them to become servants for
others in the organization.

CASE STUDY
The following case study presents the decisions and actions of a school
superintendent/servant leader to help a small community deal with the accidental
deaths of a local single mother, her high school son and his two collegeaged sisters

in a tragic house fire. This case study focuses on the nexus of servant leadership
theory and its application in practice.
The Monday began like others in late May. As the superintendent drove into the
school parking lot news of the fire was already hitting the local air waves, but
details were sketchy. In a small town news like this travels fast. The location of the
fire was just down the main road to the local schools, the superintendent decided to
drive to the area to find out more information. As the superintendent of the school
district, he was known to the local fire departments and law enforcement from
frequent meetings to discuss emergency preparedness and coordinate emergency
drills. Since the firemen knew him, he was ushered through roadblocks towards the
scene. As he walked down the road towards the flashing lights, smoke, and sound,
the fire chief met him. The news could not have been worse. The firefighters were
dealing with fatalities and as the superintendent came closer to the scene he saw
them fighting a blaze fully engulfing an apartment building he recognized. To his
horror he realized that the most damaged area was once the apartment of one of
his sons best friends, his mother and two sisters. In confidence, the fire chief told
the superintendent that the victims were, indeed, this family. The superintendent
walked back to his car in a daze.

Empathy
The superintendent tried to process this situation which seemed surreal. He grew
weak at the knees and felt like someone had punched him in the stomach. His mind
whirled as he was simultaneously shocked and felt grief, and began to think about
his own son who was friends with the boy and they knew the girls and their mother
well. He thought back on when years earlier when he was appointed to the position
of superintendent and his son transferred to the school district and the boy who had
died in the fire was the first person to befriend his son. Now, they were both juniors
at the local high school and they had spent many hours together on school projects,
in classes, playing on the high school baseball team, and enjoying the life of boys in
a small town. The superintendent thought about how the boy had recently stayed
overnight at his home.
As he drove back to school the superintendent began to think about all of the
people this was going to affect and what the role of the school would be in the
response. He thought about a recent tragedy in the district where two elementary
school-age youngsters were killed in a car accident. That had been a heart
wrenching experience for the school and community but this would, most likely, be
even more difficult and challenging. The mother had been a lifelong resident of the
town, the sisters had been good students, athletes, and musicians. The teen aged
boy was well liked and popular with adults and students. The resources of the family
were limited. The boys father lived in another state and was estranged from the
family, recently released from prison, and remarried with other children. The
mothers elderly parents lived in the community and were of modest means.

Considering all of these factors the superintendent felt compelled to assist the
entire family and realized that his responsibilities to the school community would
also serve the community-at-large.

Mental Models
He thought about the boys sisters, both recent graduates of the high school and
their involvement in a myriad of extracurricular activities and athletics. Their
mother and their grandparents were natives and well known in the two towns the
district served. This was going to be difficult and painful on many levels and would
touch many people. While driving back to the school district the superintendent
began to form a response to the situation. Fortunately, he was experienced in
dealing with crises. In his career as school administrator he had dealt with many
different crisis situations. Having dealt with student suicides, a homicide on campus
with the killer and victim both students, deaths of staff members, natural gas leaks
in a building, gun fire at school dance, and student unrest were among the
situations that gave him confidence that he could deal with this tragedy. He had
been trained, and had trained others in crisis response and management. He had
led several mock disaster drills in the district. The response to this situation called
upon all of that background as he began building a mental model to respond to
situations confronting the students, staff, the victims family, and the community.
The superintendents training and experience began to frame what would need to
occur. In the short term, actions to assist the school community through the
immediate shock and grief were needed. And he also knew a more generalized, long
term response to meet the communitys needs would be needed. The
superintendent used his training and experiences to build structures aimed at
fostering the talents and the caring nature of his staff and the community members
to help deal with the tragedy.

Reflection
As the morning unfolded, the superintendents mind whirled as he began to
consider the tragedy, the school operations, the needs of the students and staff and
the implications of the event on the community. He knew that the upcoming week
would be challenging for him as a father and as a school leader. Memorial Day
weekend would begin on the upcoming Friday and he realized this weekend would
not be a restful break. His familys trip to Pittsburgh to watch major league baseball
would have to wait. From experience, the superintendent knew that sometimes he
was excitable, authoritative and directive in his leadership style. He knew in this
crisis he would have to be calm and rely on his emotional intelligence to sense the
needs of the surviving family members, his followers and the community. He also
knew that he had a reputation as someone who could skillfully handle a crisis by
using different leadership styles. The superintendent recognized that to care for the
emotions of the many people involved in this situation, he would have to develop
responses aimed at fostering appropriate grieving that would begin the healing

process. After dealing with his own emotional responses he relied on his training
and experiences to formulate a plan to deal with the crisis.

Care
This situation was going to be painful and difficult on so many levels. The
superintendent knew that this would be challenging both as a school leader and as
a father. As he entered the high school students were beginning to react to the
news as it spread through their cell phones. The superintendent contacted his own
son at school and confirmed that his sons friend was dead and was personally torn
between the needs of his son and those of the school community. The
superintendents son knew that everyone was going to need his father in this
situation and courageously went back to class after a few minutes.
Grief was becoming public and quickly spreading throughout the school and
community. The superintendent had trained his faculty and staff members in crisis
management and initiated the plan. Counselors set up their offices as centers to
support students and adults who were upset and needed someone to talk to about
their grief. The superintendent and the administrative staff were available to assist
and serve students and adults in any way they could. Sometimes they provided a
shoulder to cry on or just listened as caring role models and counselors for
bewildered, anxious, and stunned students.

Foresight
Training and experience informed the superintendents thinking and his approach in
dealing with what was to come following the house fire. He had established plans to
be proactive in these types of situations. For instance, he had championed the
purchase of an automatic call system to communicate with different groups in the
community. Initially, he used this system to inform the board of education of the
tragedy and explain the crisis management plan, actions and next steps that were
already in motion. The automatic call system was used several times to inform
faculty of early morning meetings where information and training on aspects of
dealing with the crisis were delivered.
Other initiatives from the superintendent had prepared district personnel for crises.
The districts highly-trained Crisis Management Team, formed when his tenure
began, was activated using the response plans processes and procedures. Annual
drills and table top exercises were held with the communitys first responders
simulating various emergencies, e.g., bus accident, bleacher collapse, and earlier in
the year the team had dealt with the deaths of two young students in a car
accident. As a result, district personnel were experienced in crisis management and
understood their roles in providing support and emotional healing for the school
population and the community at-large. As the week unfolded, the compassion and
support offered by administrators, faculty, staff, the board of education, and the

community were remarkable and revealed the power of servant leadership to help
people in of small towns and communities.
However, the role of the leader in crisis situations should not be underemphasized.
Many people become ramped up emotionally and while their actions are wellintentioned, they may be incapable of handling the myriad of things that have to be
done. A key role for the servant leader in these situations is to demonstrate highly
developed emotional intelligence relative to balancing the needs of people with the
tasks at hand. This was one of the many roles the superintendent played during the
crisis which required him to control and to sublimate his own emotions.
The ability to apply this preparation, training, and experience to crisis situations is
important. For example, the superintendent called for a meeting that included the
board of education, first-responders, and community leaders to plan the continued
response to the tragedy and to plan the memorial service. The superintendent came
to the meeting with a comprehensive plan that facilitated a coordinated, efficient,
and effective crisis response. The superintendents plan provided a framework that
was open to alteration as needed, was adaptable to the different groups of people
working through the crisis and revealed his concern for others.

Listening and Trust Building

One important component of being an effective servant leader in crisis situations is
dealing appropriately with external media interactions. Superintendents need to
build relationships with media representatives in advance to be well-prepared for
answering questions and for gaining assistance from media representatives in
communicating information to the general public. Superintendents practicing
servant leadership continuously strive to develop positive, trusting and authentic
relationships with the media to try and promote honest and, in this case, caring
messages to all stakeholders. Superintendents as servant leaders use relational
power to reach out to media representatives to let them know that the community
is counting on them to help communicate accurate messages and announcements
that will be respectful of families and loved ones (Pekerti & Sendjaya, 2010).
In this case study, the superintendent had led crisis management planning and
implemented crisis management in several districts. His understanding of
leadership in a crisis was well grounded in experiences and training. After serving
twenty years in administration, the superintendent had dealt with a wide range of
crises involving and sought out training for dealing with crisis situations. For
example, understanding the complexity of his role early in his tenure as
superintendent he attended specialized training in crisis communication techniques.
This training had proved valuable in previous crisis situations and he used the
trainings techniques following the fire tragedy. These trainings led to actions that
others recognized as competence and as a result, others trusted his leadership in
these types of situations.

Procedures and processes from trainings helped manage the myriad of

circumstances of this tragedy For instance, within minutes of arriving at his office
after visiting the fire scene, the superintendent received continuous calls from
school personnel, community leaders, the media and local residents. In an effort to
efficiently and effectively manage the volume of inquiries and to gather the facts
about the tragedy, the superintendent scheduled a press conference for that
afternoon. He delegated the dissemination of this information to his secretary who
was handling the incoming calls from the media. His administrative staff members
worked together to collect information about the family members that could be
shared with the media and to address others questions as they called the school.
As the morning unfolded, facts began to emerge from the chaos of the tragedy.
Through the local funeral director, the superintendent connected with the familys
clergyman and together they visited the deceased mothers parents. During the
visit it was apparent to the superintendent that the elderly couple would be
overwhelmed with media inquiries and would be unable to manage this stress while
grieving for their daughter and their grandchildren. The superintendent volunteered
to serve as the familys spokesperson. The family quickly agreed to this, seemed
relieved of this responsibility and the superintendent told them to route all media
inquiries to him.
Over the next several days the superintendent held several press conferences and
interviews. He developed prepared statements that served as press releases to
provide facts to the media about the tragedy conveying information in a caring and
respectful way. The press conferences were held outside of the school districts bus
garage to minimize distractions in the schools and channeled the medias energy
preventing misinformation and the sensationalizing of the tragedy.
The role of the servant leader evolves through the process of listening and gaining
the trust of followers. Illustrating this point, the superintendent visited the victims
family several times and had many telephone conversations with family members
and other concerned people. In these discussions with various family members and
their pastor, it became apparent that the presence of the familys estranged father
was a stressor. With a history of instability and separated from the family for many
years, the family was uncomfortable interacting with him. In the spirit of a servant
leader, the superintendent agreed to serve as the liaison between the family and
the divorced father and husband of the victims. During the days immediately
following the tragedy and through the memorial service, the superintendent served
as a counselor for this troubled person.

Emotional Healing
The superintendent began the emotional healing through timely communication he
shared with students and the school community regarding the tragedy. This was
accomplished via announcements, meetings of administrators and faculty, and

opening the high school library evenings for people to meet and grieve together.
The press conferences and school announcements helped control rumors and made
the emotional environment more stable.
The family asked the superintendent if the school would be willing to host the
memorial service and he agreed to the use of the high school gymnasium for the
service. The next several days presented many challenges as the superintendent,
the crisis team and volunteers worked to get the high school gym ready for the
memorial service. The superintendent scheduled a meeting with local agencies and
community leaders to plan the logistics required for the service. The plan included
considerations such as parking, a designated media area and the physical layout of
the gymnasium. An overflow area with a video feed for attendees was set up in the
auditorium in case the crowd became too large for the gym. A reception following
the service was scheduled in the middle school gym.
Leadership fostered action. The fire department provided tables and chairs. A local
store was approached to provide flowers for the front entrance of the school. In
addition to the flowers, the store donated cases of water and snacks for the
attendees and sent employees to plant the flowers. A local golf cart company
provided carts to transport people from the parking areas to the service. Local law
enforcement agreed to be on hand to direct traffic. The board of education
president arranged flowers and a beautiful backdrop for the stage. Student
volunteers swept parking lots and policed the school grounds until it was spotless.
The custodians scrubbed and waxed the floors of the gymnasium and other areas of
the school. Alumni and student musicians agreed to provide music and perform in
the memorial service.
Once the memorial service plan was in place and all the logistics were confirmed,
the superintendent monitored the emotional climate of the people to ensure a
supportive and caring tribute for the family members. Staff and community
members, working with students, were encouraged to make adjustments to plans
and activities to be sure everything was handled in a positive and respectful
manner.
These were difficult times for the victims families, the community and the school
district. Emotions were raw and very close to the surface. The superintendent held
meetings before each school day to set the tone for the schools response, to solicit
feedback from the staff, and to answer questions. During the school days he
encouraged faculty members to be sensitive to the students needs. As the
superintendent walked the halls of the high school, it was apparent that teachers
were leading students through the grieving process while dealing with their own
emotions. For many students, this was the first time they had experienced the
death of a peer. Support came in many forms, including a neighboring school district
that offered one of its counselors, a well-known district resident and mother, to
provide additional assistance for the local school.

During several evenings before the memorial service, the high school library was a
gathering place for students and adults. Stories were told, memories were shared,
signs made, and tears were shed. When school officials heard reports of an informal
gathering of students at the site of the fire, they decided to attend the gathering to
give a supportive presence to the students. Although these became long, stressful,
and tiring days for the superintendent and his staff members, they knew it was
important to be a resource for the family members, the students and for the
community.
Servant leaders must also be capable of healing themselves. A few quiet minutes
away from the situation can help leaders cope with their own emotions during a
crisis. This can rejuvenate their strength and keep their emotions from becoming
overloaded. Throughout this situation various clergy consistently monitored the
superintendents well-being. Once in the privacy of his office the superintendent
broke down into tears and expressed to one of the clergy his distress about the pain
the victims must have felt. The pastor counseled him that it was unlikely that the
victims felt pain since they were most likely unconscious when they died. This
comforted the superintendent and helped him continue to provide support for the
surviving family members and the community.

Stewardship
Servant leaders must be stewards for all the caregivers and responders in crisis
situations. People work long hours in a crisis and will often neglect their own needs.
The superintendent hired several substitute teachers to provide breaks and take
over classes for faculty members in emotional distress. He contacted the local
health care organizations to provide additional resources to help people through the
post-trauma period. The superintendent continuously monitored the needs his
faculty and staff members to make sure they were addressed.
In this case, stewardship took the form of preparing and organizing the building that
hosted the memorial service. Numerous details concerning public property were
considered. School personnel and community residents participated in making the
school aesthetically pleasing and appropriate for a memorial service. The efforts
included setting up and directing the press to a briefing area that was a respectful
distance from the building. The superintendent made sure that the memorial
service and the reception were well organized. Suggestions from participants were
considered and often incorporated into the memorial service. For example, small
touches such as the board of education tastefully decorating the dais and lilacs
being picked and placed on the tables at the reception were included. All of this was
a function of the superintendent as servant leader.

Commitment to Growth and Building Community

Such events touch lives long after the initial event. Servant leaders must
understand this and facilitate activities that help people cope with loss. By
authorizing and leading efforts pertaining to the memorial service, the
superintendent facilitated the healing and grieving process for the family members
and the community. The superintendent provided opportunities for students to
become closer to school staff members and for the community to the view the
school as a safe haven. During and throughout the aftermath of the tragedy, he
supported counselors and teachers as they helped students understand the grieving
process. It is important to note how the small gestures from the servant leader
helped people work through the situation. For example, the superintendent
authorized the use of the deceased boys locker which became a message board for
his friends. The baseball team hung the boys jersey in the dugout for the rest of the
season. The following fall, the superintendent delivered a remembrance of the two
sisters at the beginning of the schools cross-country invitational that was
permanently named for them since they had been participants for several years. All
of these things helped people through the tragedy and in the longer term, provided
opportunities for new relationships to form and flourish.

CONCLUSION
The school superintendent practicing servant leadership in this case illustrates the
effectiveness of this leadership model in school administration. Servant leaders
understand the importance of establishing trusting relationships with their followers,
listening to them and providing emotional healing in crisis situations. When
tragedies occur in schools, servant leaders know that taking care of people and
helping them to deal with stress, loss and grief are their most important roles.
Servant leaders emphasize service over management and support over control.
They understand that all aspects of successful leadership are embedded in the
relationships with their followers (Culver, 2009).
Servant leaderships theoretical framework emphasizes meeting the needs of
followers and the community. This case study reveals how a public school
superintendent applied the servant leadership characteristics of empathy, listening,
caring, and stewardship to building of trusting relationships and to effectively meet
the needs of his followers. The case study underscores how servant leaders must
also be proactive in anticipating the needs of all those they serve. A framework with
guiding principles for school leaders to use in crisis situations is provided in the
Appendix.
The situation described in the case study illustrates the importance of applying
servant leadership even when the leader is connected personally and emotionally

with his or her followers. The victims family members repeatedly expressed their
appreciation for the superintendents support and the feedback from the community
was very positive. This enhanced the perception of the superintendents
competency as a leader and the school districts reputation as a caring and
compassionate organization. Servant leadership practices can help guide
educational leaders in providing support for students, teachers and parents in
school crisis situations and assist them in gaining followership from their
communities.

REFERENCES
Alderfer, C. P. (2011). The practice of organizational diagnosis theory and methods .
Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Anderson, B. (2010). Project leadership and the art of managing relationship.
American Society for Training and Development , 64(3), 5868.
Argyris, C. (1994). Overcoming organizational defenses . Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
Bennis, W., & Nanus, B. (1997). Leaders: The strategies for taking charge . New
York: HarperCollins.
Blanchard, K. (2007). A focus on leadership: Servant leadership for the 21st
century . New York, NY: Wiley.
Blanchard, K. (2010). Leading at a higher level: Expanded and revised . Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Blanchard Management Company.
Blanchard, K., & Miller, M. (2004). The secret: What great leaders know and do . San
Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Block, P. (2005). Servant-leadership: Creating an alternative future. International
Journal of Servant Leadership , 2, 5579.
Bowie, N. (2000). Business ethics, philosophy, and the next 25 years. Business
Ethics Quarterly , 10(1), 720. doi:10.2307/3857690
Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership . New York: Harper & Row.
Cassel, J., & Holt, T. (2008). The servant leader. The American School Board Journal ,
196(10), 3435.
Crippen, C. (2004). Service-leadership as an effective model for educational
leadership and management: First to serve, then to lead. Management in Education
, 18, 11. doi:10.1177/089202060501800503

Culver, M. (2009). Applying servant leadership in todays schools . Larchmont, NY:

Eye on Education, Inc.
Depree, M. (1989). Leadership is an art . New York: Bantam Doubleday Publishing
Group, Inc.
Dess, G., & Picken, J. (2000). Changing roles: Leadership in the 21st century . Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Dierendonck, D. (2011). Servant leadership: A review and synthesis. Journal of
Management , 37(4), 12281261. doi:10.1177/0149206310380462
DiStefani, J. (1995). Tracing the vision and the impact of Robert K. Greenleaf . New
York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Drucker, P. (1999). Management challenges for the 21st century . New York: Harper
Collins Publishers, Inc.
Fayol, H. (1916). Administration industrielle et generale. Retrieved from
http://www.bola.biz/competence/fayol.html
Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice: Psychological theory and womens
development . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Goddard, R. (2003). Relational networks, social trust, and norms: A social capital
perspective on students chance of academic success. Educational Evaluation and
Policy Analysis , 25(1), 5974. doi:10.3102/01623737025001059
Goen, G. A. (2009, March). Evaluating the superintendent. The American School
Board Journal , 2426.
Graham, J. W. (1991). Servant leadership in organizations: Inspirational and moral.
The Leadership Quarterly , 2(2), 105119. doi:10.1016/1048-9843(91)90025-W
Grant, A. (2013). Give and take: A revolutionary approach to success . New York:
Viking Press.
Greenleaf, R. (1970). The servant as leader . Westfield, IN: Greenleaf Center for
Servant Leadership Publisher.
Greenleaf, R. K. (1977). Servant leadership: A journey into the nature of legitimate
power and greatness . New York, NY: Paulist Press.
Greenleaf, R. K. (2002). Servant leadership: A journey into the nature of legitimate
power and greatness (25th anniversary ed.). New York: Paulist Press.
Hale, J., & Fields, D. (2007). Exploring servant leadership across cultures: A study of
followers in Ghana and the USA. Leadership , (3): 397417.
doi:10.1177/1742715007082964

Heifetz, R. A. (1994). Leadership without easy answers . Cambridge, MA: Harvard

University Press.
Hershey, P., & Blanchard, K. H. (1993). Management of organizational behavior:
Utilizing human resources (6th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Herzberg, F. (1959). The motivation to work . New York: John Wiley and Sons.
Hesselbein, F., & Goldsmith, M. (2006). The leader of the future 2: Visions,
strategies, and practices for the new era . San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Hoy, W., & Miskel, C. (2008). Educational administration: Theory, research and
practice (8th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Hunter, J. C. (2004). The worlds most powerful leadership principle: How to become
a servant leader . New York, NY: Crown Publishing
.Irving, J. (2005). Servant leadership and the effectiveness of teams. (Unpublished
doctoral dissertation). Regent University, Virginia Beach, VA.
Irving, J., & McIntosh, T. (2010). Investigating the value of and hindrances to servant
leadership in Latin American context: Initial findings from Peruvian leaders. Journal
of International Business and Cultural Studies, (2), 1-16.
Johnson, C. E. (2001). Meeting the ethical challenges of leadership . Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Kahl, J. (2004). Leading from the heart . Westlake, OH: Jack Kahl & Associates.
Kenrick, D. T., Griskevicius, V., Neuberg, S. L., & Schaller, M. (2010). Renovating the
pyramid of needs: Contemporary extensions built upon ancient foundations.
Perspectives on Psychological Science , 5, 292. doi:10.1177/1745691610369469
Kotter, J. P. (1990). A force for change: How leadership differs from management .
New York: Free Press.
Lambert, W.E. (2004). Servant leadership qualities of principals, organizational
climate, and student achievement: A correlational study. (Dissertation). Dissertation
Abstracts International (Publication No. AAT 3165799).
Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., Zhao, H., & Henderson, D. (2008). Servant leadership:
Development of a multidimensional measure and multi-level assessment. The
Leadership Quarterly , 19, 161177. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2008.01.006
Louis, K. S., Leithwood, K., Wahlstrom, K. L., & Anderson, S. E. (2010). Investigating
the links to improved student learning: Final report of research findings . Center for
Applied Research and Educational Improvement, University of Minnesota.
Maslow, A. (1954). Motivation and personality . New York, NY: Harper.

Maxwell, J. C. (2005). The 360 degree leader: Developing your influence from
anywhere in the organization . Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson.
McClelland, D. (1987). Human motivation . Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University
Press.
McCrimmon, M. (2010). Servant leadership. Retrieved from
www.leadersdirect.com/servant-leadership
McGregor, D. (1960). The human side of enterprise . New York: McGraw Hill.
Melchar, D., & Bosco, S. (2010). Achieving high organization performance through
servant leadership. The Journal of Business Inquiry , 9(1), 7488.
Murray, H. A., & Kluckhohn, C. (1953). Personality in nature, society, and culture .
New York: Knopf.
Nayab, N. (2011). Servant leadership: Strengths and weaknesses. Bright Hub: The
Hub for Bright Minds. Retrieved from http://www.brighthub.com
Page, D. (2004). Experiential learning for servant leadership. Servant Leadership
Research Roundtable. Virginia Beach, VA: Regent University School of Leadership
Studies.
Page & Wong. (2000). A conceptual framework for measuring servant leadership . In
Adjibolooso, S. (Ed.), The human factor in shaping the course of history and
development . American University Press.Pekerti, A. A., & Sendjaya, S. (2010).
Exploring servant leadership across cultures: Comparative study in Australia and
Indonesia. International Journal of Human Resource Management , 21(5), 754780.
doi:10.1080/09585191003658920Purkey, W. W., & Siegel, B. (2003). Becoming an
invitational leader: A new approach to professionalism and success . Atlanta, GA:
Humanics Trade Group.Rinehart, S. T. (1998). Upside down: The paradox of servant
leadership . Colorado Springs, CO: NavPress.Sandage, S. J., & Wiens, T. W. (2001).
Contextualizing humility and forgiveness: A reply to Gassin. Journal of Psychology
and Theology , 29(3), 201211.Schaubroeck, J., Lam, S. K., & Peng, A. C. (2011).
Cognition-based and affect-based trust as mediators of leader behavior influences
on team performance. The Journal of Applied Psychology , 96(4), 863871.
doi:10.1037/a0022625Schneider, S. K., & George, W. M. (2011). Servant leadership
versus transformational leadership in voluntary service organizations. Leadership
and Organization Development Journal , 32(1), 6077.
doi:10.1108/01437731111099283Sergiovanni, T. (2001). Leadership: Whats in it for
schools? London: Routledge.Smith, B., Montagno, R., & Kuzmenko, T. (2004).
Transformational and servant leadership: Content and contextual comparisons.
Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies .
doi:10.1177/107179190401000406Spears, L. C. (2004, Fall). Practicing servant
leadership. Leader to Leader , 711. doi:10.1002/ltl.94Spears, L. C., & Lawrence, M.

(Eds.). (2004). Practicing servant-leadership: Succeeding through trust, bravery and

forgiveness . San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Tay, L., & Diener, E. (2011). Needs and
subjective well-being around the world. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
, 101(2), 354365. doi:10.1037/a0023779Taylor, F. W. (1911). Scientific
management. Retrieved from http://www.netmba.com/mgmt/scientificWashington,
R. R., Sutton, C. D., & Field, H. S. (2006). Individual differences in servant leadership:
The roles of values and personality. Leadership and Organization Development
Journal , 27(8), 700716. doi:10.1108/01437730610709309Waterman, H. (2011).
Principles of servant leadership and how they can enhance practice. Nursing
Management , 17(9).Weber, M. (1920). Characteristics of the bureaucracy. Retrieved
from http://www.bola.biz/competence/fayol.htmlWhetstone, T. (2002). Personalism
and moral leadership: The servant leader with a transforming vision. Business
Ethics: A European View, 11 (4), 385-390.Whetstone, T. (2005). A framework for
organizational virtue: The interrelationship of mission, culture and leaderships.
Business Ethics (Oxford, England) , 14(4), 367378. doi:10.1111/j.14678608.2005.00418.xWilliamson, T. (2008). The good society and the good soul:
Platos Republic on leadership. The Leadership Quarterly , 19, 397408.
doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2008.05.006Wilson, D. S., Van Vugt, M., & OGorman, R.
(2008). Multilevel selection theory and major evolutionary transitions: Implications
for psychological science. Current Directions in Psychological Science , 17, 69.
doi:10.1111/j.1467-8721.2008.00538.xADDITIONAL READINGArkin, A. (2004). Serve
the servants. People Management , 10(25), 3033.Autry, J. (2001). The servant
leader (pp. 5056). Roseville, California: Prima Publishing.Bass, B. (2000). The
future of leadership in learning organizations. The Journal of Leadership Studies , 7,
1840. doi:10.1177/107179190000700302Bennis, W. (1990). Why leaders cant lead
. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Bennis, W., Spreitzer, G., & Cummings, T. (Eds.).
(2001). The future of leadership . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Bird, J., Wang, C.,
Watson, J., & Murray, L. (2012). Teacher and principal perceptions of authentic
leadership: Implications for trust, engagement, and intention to return. Journal of
School Leadership , 22(3), 425461.Blanchard, K. (1995). Servant leadership.
Executive Excellence , 12(10), 12.Blanchard, K., & Hodges, P. (2003). The servant
leader: Transforming your hear, head, hands & habits . Nashville, TN: J.
Countryman.Boin, A. (2005). The politics of crisis management: Public leadership
under pressure . Cambridge University Press.
doi:10.1017/CBO9780511490880Brock, S. E., Sandoval, J., & Lewis, S. (2001).
Preparing for crises in the schools: A manual for building school crisis response
teams . Somerset, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.Bryk, A. S., & Schneider, B. (2003).
Trust in schools: A core resource for school reform. Educational Leadership , 60(6),
4044.DePree, M. (1992). Leadership jazz . New York, NY: Bantam Doubleday Dell
Publishing Group, Inc.DePree, M. (2001). Called to serve . Grand Rapids, Michigan:
William B. Eerdamns Publishing.Farazmand, A. (2001). Handbook of crisis and
emergency management (Vol. 93). CRC Press.Farling, M. L., & Stone, A.G. 7
Winston, B.E. (1999). Servant leadership: Setting the stage for empirical research.
The Journal of Leadership Studies , 6, 4972.

doi:10.1177/107179199900600104Frick, D., & Spears, L. (Eds.). (1996). The private

writings of Robert K. Greenleaf: On becoming a servant leader. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass. 139-140 211-217, 290.George, B., Sims, P., McLean, A., & Mayer, D.
(2007). Discovering your authentic leadership. Harvard Business Review , 85, 129
138.Goddard, R. (2003). Relational networks, social trust, and norms: A social
capital perspective on students chance of academic success. Educational
Evaluation and Policy Analysis , 25(1), 5974.
doi:10.3102/01623737025001059Hesselbien, F., & Goldsmith, M. (2006). The leader
of the future 2: Visions, strategies, and practices for the new era . San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass.Hunter, J. C. (2004). The worlds most powerful leadership principle:
How to become a servant leader . New York: Crown Business.Johnson, C. (2001).
Meeting the ethical challenges of leadership . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.Joseph, E.
E., & Winston, B. E. (2005). A correlation of servant leadership, leader trust, and
organizational trust. Leadership and Organization Development Journal , 26(1), 6
22. doi:10.1108/01437730510575552Leithwood, K., & Beatty, B. (2007). Leading
with teacher emotions in mind . Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.Mayer, D. M., Bardes,
M., & Piccolo, R. F. (2008). Do servant-leaders help satisfy follower needs? An
organizational justice perspective. European Journal of Work and Organizational
Psychology , 17(2), 180197. doi:10.1080/13594320701743558Militello, L. G.,
Patterson, E. S., Bowman, L., & Wears, R. (2007). Information flow during crisis
management: challenges to coordination in the emergency Miller, C. (1995). The
empowered leader: 10 Keys to servant leadership . Nashville: Broadman &
Holman.Northouse, P. G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and practice (6th ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.Parolini, J. L. (2005). Investigating the relationships
among emotional intelligence, servant leadership behaviors and servant leadership
culture. In Proceedings of the 2005 Servant Leadership Research
Roundtable.Russell, R. F., & Stone, A. G. (2002). A review of servant leadership
attributes: Developing a practical model. Leadership and Organization
Development Journal , 23, 145157. doi:10.1108/01437730210424Russell, R. R.
(2001). The role of values in servant leadership. Leadership and Organization
Development Journal , 22(2), 7683. doi:10.1108/01437730110382631Sendjaya, S.,
& Sarros, J. C. (2002). Servant leadership: Its origin, development, and application in
organizations. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies , 9, 5764.
doi:10.1177/107179190200900205Sergiovanni, T. (1992). Moral leadership . San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Sergiovanni, T. (1994). Building community in schools . San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Spears, L. (Ed.). (1998). The power of servant-leadership .
San Francisco: Berrett-Kochler Publishers, Inc.Spritzer, G. (2006). Leading to grow
and growing to lead: Leadership development lessons from positive organizational
studies. Organizational Dynamics , 35(4), 305315.
doi:10.1016/j.orgdyn.2006.08.005Sweetser, K. D., & Metzgar, E. (2007).
Communicating during crisis: Use of blogs as a relationship management tool.
Public Relations Review , 33(3), 340342. doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2007.05.016Tate, T.
F. (2003). Servant leadership for schools and youth programs. Reclaiming Children
and Youth , 12(1), 3339.Valle, M. (1999). Crisis, culture and charisma: The new

leader's work in public organizations. Public Personnel Management , 28, 245

258.Wong, P. T. P. (2004). The paradox of servant leadership. Leadership Link,
Spring, 2004, 3-5. Leadership Research Center. Ohio State University.Yukl, G. (1994).
Leadership in organizations (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.