Servant leadership and the level 5 leader in police organizations

Introduction Great leaders are few and far between. Characteristics of effective leaders often entail the ability to have and carry out a clear vision and mission statement, ability to motivate others, excellent oral and written communication, excellent strategic thinking, strong ethics and values, a self-awareness, along with other key traits. The effective leader is hands above the ordinary person in the sense that he or she has a formed identity and possesses the ability to inspire, motivate, and cultivate positive change and progress in others. The servant leader is a positive form of leader that may not have all the attributes of the effective leader, but always wants to serve first with conscious choice bringing forth aspirations to lead. This makes a key difference in a leader versus servant leader. Leaders want to lead first; servant leaders want to serve first (Wankhade & Weir, 2015) . While there are many similarities between the servant leader and leader, this key difference shows why servant leadership is growing in popularity and seeing application within Police Departments. This essay hopes to illuminate what it takes to be great leader and/or servant leader and how servant leadership would fare within a Police organization.

Collins, Meese & Ortmeier, Wexler et al. Leadership and servant leadership can co-exist together. However, servant leadership is typically associated with selflessness. The servant leader as Collins describes is the ‘Level 5’ leader because the idea of categorizing a servant leader as a meek or weak person does not ring true to the capabilities of the servant leader. “Level 5 leaders are fanatically driven, infected with an incurable need to produce results. They will sell the mills or fire their brother, if that’s what it takes to make the company great” (Collins, 2011, p. 30). Servant leaders do put the needs of the organization first, but not in the sense of complete selflessness and sacrifice. They do so because they feel they must, in order to assist in fulfilling aims. The effective leader may prioritize his or her own objectives first, and then perhaps lean towards completing company/organization objectives. By the servant leader choosing the company before him or herself, it gives off that impression of selflessness and places them in a separate category from the leader. Collins continues with the level 5 leader as being the kind of leader that is diligent and able to handle large problems. Such a mentality puts servant leaders a step up from regular leaders in the sense that they are the ones called to complete a task as their determination sets them apart from other, regular leaders. “The quiet, dogged nature of Level 5 leaders showed up not only in big decisions, like selling off-the food-service operations or fighting corporate raiders, but also in personal style of sheer workmanlike diligence” (Collins, 2011, p. 33). Level 5 leaders are also mentioned in Good to Great Policing. The authors credit Collins and note that the Level 5s are able to get the work done of the other tiers, especially the Level 4 effective leader, but also goes a step beyond that by directing his or her energy towards company goals not simply personal goals. Collins coined the term ‘Level 5 leader’ to describe the highest level of executive capabilities identified in his research. The Level 5 executives who led the 11 companies to greatness were ambitious, but their ambition was directed first and foremost toward the company and its success, not to personal renown” (Wexler, Wycoff, & Fischer, 2007, p. 5). Servant leaders according to Wexler, Wycoff, & Fischer and Collins, are leaders that feel the need to produce results. They feel that they must get the job done. That doggedness makes servant leaders the highest form of leader, even above the effective leader from sheer determination and willingness to dedicate his or herself fully towards the goals and needs of the company or organization. This is the main contrast between leader and servant leader. Servant leaders are the ones that allow for the completion of goals when no other leader can or wants to complete them. Wexler, Wycoff, & Fischer continue discussing Level 5 leaders and refer again to Collins and the servant leader’s place in law enforcement. Unlike in private organizations where CEOs have concentrated decision power, leaders in law enforcement agencies must answer to the public. They must also answer to other authoritative powers like the mayor and so forth. They add, a police union as well as civil service systems can have the capability of further inhibiting a leader’s power within the police organization leading to a change in leadership style that may not entirely favor servant leadership. “Level 5 leadership in policing may involve a greater degree of ‘legislative’ types of skills, rather than ‘executive’ skills. Legislative leadership relies more upon persuasion, political currency, and shared interests to create the conditions for the right decisions to happen” (Wexler, Wycoff, & Fischer, 2007, p. 5). Persuasion, political currency, and shared interests are the reasons why leaders may fare better than the servant leader in this scenario. Unless the servant leader adapts and learns the skills needed to further him or herself amongst subordinates and those in the organization, he or she will have a more difficult time fulfilling organization objectives. Essentially, what is needed is more thought on the self and less on the organization. This deviates greatly from a servant leader. However, such changes are necessary for the overall progress of the organization to take shape. In Leadership, Ethics and Policing: Challenges for the 21st Century, police organizations take center stage and help provide more context on why someone like a servant leader would need to adapt to fulfill organization objectives. The book covers nine Principles of Policing as proclaimed by Sir Robert Peel. The 7th principle explains that police must at all times, maintain a public relationship that allots reality to the meaning and history behind police. The police are not merely paid to fulfill their duties (Ortmeier & Meese, 2010). They are also symbols of justice, representing stability and order in society. The servant leader cannot simply adhere to objectives and get things done, there is a lot of social finessing involved that keeps the public satisfied as well as the higher ups. That is not to say that an effective leader for example, or any type of leader other than the servant leader is right for the role of leader in a police organization. It is merely an understanding of what it takes to be a servant leader within a police organization and successfully implement change. What was observed from all three books is the consistent need to have servant leader qualities but also have the ego-centric traits of a leader. The leader may be able to carry out objectives, but there lies a foundation of self-driven achievement. Although the servant leader is the selfless person led by the drive to improve an organization/company and implement change, some of that priority must be shifted towards the self, to carry out the other necessary components that belong within a police organization. Such components do not require of complete reworking of priorities, but rather, a modification. Such a modification could prove use in the police organization setting. Major Traits of Servant Leadership

Servant leadership has been discussed as a Level 5 leader. However, researchers have expanded what the role servant leadership entails. In police administration, there are four police executive styles that may be examined to better serve the servant leader in a police organization. These four styles are: “…the administrator, the top cop, the politician, and the statements” (Cordner, 2014, p. 463). Such styles contribute to a situational style of leadership that relies heavily on emotional intelligence. Within the context of emotional intelligence, servant leadership seems less able to handle the kind of minute social nuances and actions that make up police administration and work. However, if one examines the contemporary themes of modern day police organizations, one can see that the theme of community engagement may act as a means of including a servant leadership style. “…a fundamental change in policing philosophy and strategy. Individual police departments may or may not support foot patrol, or citizen review boards, but it is now universally recognized that police and citizens need to work together to be successful” (Cordner, 2014, p. 465). If the servant leader is about fulfilling the objectives of the organization and taking care of people’s highest priority needs, the strategy would then be to cultivate a culture within the police organization that matches the needs of said organization, making it easier for the servant leader to fulfill goals. The servant leader’s main drive as literature suggests, is to fulfill the goals of the organization. However, the task then becomes making the main objective be to align the goals of the culture within the organization with the goals of the organization itself. For example, if police officers experience a culture of solidarity, it can be modified to include solidarity with the community so enhanced communication with the community takes place and the overall organization goals of keeping the public safe are more easily aligned. As Van & Patterson state, the goal of the servant leader is to “understand the lessons from the past, the realities of the present, and the likely consequence of a decision for the future. It is also deeply rooted in the intuitive mind” (Van & Patterson, 2010, p. 19). There are several changes underway in many police departments within the United States. These changes were made or are being made, because of the problems that arose from mistakes and misconduct. The servant leader must then take the place of the leader, but bring forth a new perspective and apply that endless drive towards a modified culture. One that offers solutions to the problems and gives a new direction for followers that may remain stuck following outdated traditions or ineffective strategies. The most important aspect to servant leadership, is there is no one way to be a servant leader. “…there is more than one way to be a servant leader. It is possible to emphasize different, yet complementary, aspects and remain faithful to its precepts. That is one of servant leadership’s inherent fascinations” (Van & Patterson, 2010, p. 38). Servant leaders can adapt to new situations and can modify how they lead by shifting their strategies and objectives. There is a versatility and adaptability to the servant leader that can still make it a worthwhile leadership style within a police organization. Servant leaders are the kind of leader that can be a step above the effective leader. By understanding the needs of both the organization and the people within the organization, and synthesizing those needs into a clear direction, the servant leader will be able to handle the various aspects of leadership and the understand and handle the culture and social processes within the organization. Benefits and Pitfalls of Servant Leadership in a Police Organization The previous section helped explain what are the major traits of the servant leader which lend to the possibility of servant leaders applying their strategies and energy towards change in a police organization. Now it is necessary to discuss the various benefits and pitfalls of servant leadership within such a setting. Although the benefits are many and there is a current trend towards adopting a servant leadership mentality for police organizations, there are still some inherent problems with the servant leadership model. The main benefit of a servant leader is their ability to understand the significance of development in several key areas. …the servant leader as someone who understands the importance of employee development not only for the benefit of the organization but also for their own benefit and the wider social benefit. Such a leader is also someone who knows how to listen, be emphatic and is able to introduce beneficial changes as part of realizing the organizational mission (S?umi & Mesner-Andols?ek, 2017, p. 109). Servant leaders have the mindset of accomplishing organization directive, but also know that to accomplish such directives, there must be effort put into the development of the employees, and the organizational culture. The direction of change must be applied across the board versus in one area. The servant leader recognizes this and thus becomes an important agent of change within a police organization (Northouse, 2013). Therefore, servant leadership is being used currently to try to tackle the many problems facing the American police department. There are inherent drawbacks to such a mentality however. The drive for change and goalsetting can keep a servant leader too busy to understand the needs of the employees for effective changes to take place. “…if a servant leader wants to find out how to cater to the employees’ needs in the best possible way, the leader must initially understand the employees. Therefore, the leader must get to know the employee’s needs and aspirations” (S?umi & Mesner-Andols?ek, 2017, p. 114). Servant leaders may be too focused on the organization’s needs and not have enough time or drive to cultivate the kind of social connections needed to understand how to change culture within the police organization. Such changes may need social cultivation on an individual basis, which can exhaust a servant leader trying to make major changes altogether. Servant Leadership in a Police Organization Servant leadership can really boost the morale of an entire department. In a study examining servant leadership in emergency response teams, followers noted the benefit of having a leader that cares for the needs of the organization and the individual. “Knowing that the community responder is made up of individuals, the servant leader will take the time needed for those individuals in need; that includes take time for self” (Russell, 2017, p. 49). By showing support and attention to the followers, as well as humility in leadership, the servant leader can increase loyalty and dedicate of employees in the organization. Cops operate with loyalty in mind, when they trust their leader and feel respected by the leader. Because servant leaders want their followers to ask questions and give advice, this puts servant leadership as advantageous towards better the organizational culture. As Russell also noted, followers want a servant leader because they know the servant leader will try to meet the needs of the organization and the people. “Followers desire a servant leader; they desire a command that meets the needs of its people. They see the benefits derived from developing people, meeting the needs of people, and listening to people” (Russell, 2017, p. 103). This can seem difficult if the servant leader has to worry about his or her own obligations, but it can be managed and so the trend of servant leadership has taken hold in the FBI and in some police organizations. The main drawback however, is the likelihood that not every leader in such a setting can adopt the servant leadership style. Most higher-ups in a police organization want an autocratic leader (Hurley & Hanley, 2010). They may not appreciate a leader that invites questions and advice from subordinates. A don’t-ask-questions kind of leadership may be what is needed because it produces instant results for those not wanting long-term organizational change. For there to be acceptance of a servant leadership style, there needs to be a cultural change. The two main cultural changes that must take place are as follows: desire for long-term change and assumptions of a humble leader. The reason for these changes is due in part to the nature of servant leadership and the lengthy time it takes to be a servant leader and complete objectives (Wankhade & Weir, 2015). There is more collaboration and communication needed for the servant leader to lead effectively. This takes time and can lead to impatient higher-ups wishing for faster results. Therefore, the expectations must be set for long-term change. Secondly, the perspective on humble leader must be altered. Some cops may see the nature of the servant leader as weakness. The autocratic style may be deeply embedded in police organizations and therefore must be counteracted with a new way of thinking (Wankhade & Weir, 2015). If police officers see a servant leader in a positive way and the humility and selfless attitude as benefits, there may be more respect given to such a leader. Respect is important to followers adhering to objectives set by servant leaders. Necessary Change Implementation The police organization would need to commit to a long-term plan as earlier mentioned, long-term change is the key part of servant leadership. Proper resources would need to be allocated for training and communication for those not aware of the new direction. The higher-ups including city council and mayor, would have to be accepting of the change. The political nature of the organization must be altered to permit positive changes by the Police chief. For example, the autocratic method of leadership must be removed. New rules for promotion and hiring must also be written and implemented and include standards of servant leadership to encourage servant leadership traits and awareness within the police organization. This kind of process could take years to actualize. Lastly, the change towards community policing and a department decentralization can empower people and instill in officers the confidence to ask questions and aim for bettering the department from within. Allowing communication to flow from all directions and having a central mission that is both direct and clear will help ease people into the changes. Conclusion Leaders must work towards a goal of empowering and growing for themselves and their followers. Although a police organization must deal with rules and regulations that may not favor the servant leader, there is a desire for servant leadership and the potential means to implement such a leadership. It just takes time and willingness.