The Difference Between "Leading" and "Servant Leading"—And Why It Matters
Which path do you aspire to?
There is no shortage of documentation on bold leaders who have made a dent in the world.
Napoleon, Alexander the Great, Leonides, and Churchill on the military front…
Jobs, Musk, Rockefeller, Gates, Buffett, Carnegie, and Bezos in business…
Edison and Einstein in science…
Washington, Lincoln, and Kennedy in government…
And a whole host more.
These names are each famous for what they accomplished.
All were leaders. This can't be argued. Each had a bold vision.
And each had (or still have) many people under them who worked to achieve this mission.
But not all of these people were SERVANT leaders. It's well-documented that many of them succeeded in spite of their treatment of their people, not because of it.
Here is the difference:
Leaders have a bold vision and know how to execute...
While servant leaders know how to activate others through encouragement, coaching, and shoulder-to-shoulder support. All with patience.
I want to quickly break down each of these before making a (quick) argument on why I think servant leadership is worth focusing on and growing in.
1) Servant leaders are encouragers.
There are always two ways to see things: positive and negative.
Servant leaders bend toward the positive—including how they see their people.
They assume the best, and know that their people can grow and improve when managed the right way.
They know how to expand the good that they see their people doing, and have an artful way of minimizing the weight of their struggles.
Their people look forward to 1x1s with them. And always walk away feeling more "filled up" from even short conversations together.
2) Servant leaders are coaches.
Servant leaders are also coaches.
They know how to see the whole field. They think long-term. They are experts in helping others get better, both tactically and strategically.
Where "superstars" get fired up by their own performance and improvement, coaches get fired up by their people performing and improving!
You can even find the best ones sometimes reading a book or two about HOW to coach.
That's how much they love this craft.
3) Servant leaders provide shoulder-to-shoulder support.
Whereas many leaders might see "getting their hands dirty" as "beneath them"…
Servant leaders have no problem jumping in, shoulder-to-shoulder with their people.
They'll do whatever it takes to alleviate bottlenecks that their team is dealing with…
Even when this sometimes means doing "unscalable" short-term things like working a late night, making a call, or picking up a shift.
4) Servant leaders are patient.
Lastly, servant leaders are super patient.
They realize that things take time and they don't let their own desire for "immediate results" skew their decisions or impact their treatment of others.
This one might be the most "contrary" to how the best leaders are often perceived today: as bulldogs that will do anything to generate short-term wins.
My two cents:
Not every winning leader is a servant leader who embodies these qualities.
And to the point above, plenty of leaders win without being servant leaders.
But, from a legacy perspective? I think we're going to be happier that we did right by others by servant leading.
And at least from where I sit, it makes a lot of sense why success is generally correlated to leading in this way.
The outliers often succeed despite not servant-leading, not because they did.
What's your take? I'd love to hear your thoughts.