Developing Wisdom and Reducing Emotional Labor ...

Developing Wisdom and Reducing Emotional Labor

Developing Wisdom and Reducing Emotional Labor in the Workplace: Testing the Impact of Servant Leadership

John E. Barbuto, Jr. University of Nebraska-Lincoln [email protected]

Michele L. Millard University of Nebraska-Lincoln [email protected]

1


2

Developing Wisdom and Reducing Emotional Labor in the Workplace: Testing the Impact of Servant Leadership

Abstract This study examined the impact of servant leadership on followers‟ wisdom development and emotional labor. A field sample of 176 leaders-member dyads working in regional offices of a large international charity and humanitarian organization completed the Servant Leadership Questionnaire, The Emotional Labour Scale and the Wisdom Development Scale. Significant relationships between servant leadership and both wisdom development and emotional labor were found. Regression analyses indicated that servant leadership explained 29.3% of the variance in wisdom development and 5.0% of the variance in emotional labor. These findings taken together support prior claims that servant leadership fosters growth and development of followers.

Developing Wisdom and Reducing Emotional Labor in the Workplace: Testing the Impact of Servant Leadership Introduction Servant leadership has garnered increased momentum in the leader and organizational behavior fields since it was first introduced (Greenleaf, 1970). Recent work has operationalized servant leadership with a refined construct (Barbuto & Wheeler, 2006). With the availability of an operational definition and measure of servant leadership, empirical tests of its impact are necessary to continue the dialogue. To date, servant leadership has been related to positive outcomes, such as perceived effectiveness, satisfaction and extra effort (Barbuto & Wheeler, 2006). In addition, Liden (2008) found that servant leadership increased individuals‟ citizenship behaviors, in-role performance and organizational commitment. While the recognition of these outcomes has added to the field, the impact of servant leadership on other salient outcomes requires considerable additional empiricism. Although the main tenant of servant leadership is primarily the development of followers,


3

there is no research to support this claim. In order to advance the field of leadership development, there is a need to develop empirical studies to explore the impact of servant leadership on individual and organizational development. In particular, the connection between servant leadership as an antecedent to an increase in wisdom development and emotional wellbeing needs additional attention. Greenleaf‟s (1977) original conceptualization described servant leadership as contributing to the development of followers‟ health and wisdom. While the health described by Greenleaf was more in the affective or emotional context than the biological frame of reference, no studies have tested the servant leader‟s ability to bring about better emotional health. For this study, emotional labor experienced by followers was used to assess the servant leader‟s ability to bring about emotional health. Additionally, Greenleaf described the servant leader‟s ability to bring about wisdom in followers. Tests of this premise are necessary to support or refute this claim. Followers‟ wisdom development is used in this study to test the relationship between servant leaders and wisdom. Although servant leadership has gained recognition and credibility as a leadership style, there is a lack of formal theory and research design to test the claimed strengths of a servant leader paradigm. This study tests two fundamental aspects of servant leadership within one research design. This is timely as it has become a high priority to test the impact of servant leadership on followers which is the most fundamental characteristic of this leadership paradigm. Servant Leadership Servant leadership was first described as a leadership philosophy that posited leaders must first serve the needs of others rather than personal or organization‟s interests (Greenleaf, 2007). Servant leaders consciously choose to lead through service to others, has a natural proclivity to put the needs of others first and advocates the growth and development of those being served (Taylor, 2007). The ultimate test for servant leadership, according to Greenleaf (2002), is “Do those served grow as persons; do they, while being served, become healthier, wiser, freer, more autonomous, more likely themselves to become servants?” Others have compared servant leadership to transformational leadership, noting this altruistic or developmental notion as servant leaders‟ fundamental niche (Bass, 1997; Barbuto & Wheeler, 2006; Liden, 2008). Traditionally, leaders have been positioned at the top of a hierarchal pyramid, providing guidance and direction to subordinates whose roles were to primarily satisfy the needs and objectives set by the leaders. Servant leadership differs from the traditional roles by inverting the hierarchy with the leaders‟ primary objectives being to serve the developmental needs of the others and empowering those who are followers to participate in leadership (Sherman, 2002). Servant leadership impacts both leaders and followers within the context of the relationship. This intrapersonal and interpersonal leadership style is an evolving process in which both leader and followers are mutually influencing one another toward growth and development (Taylor, 2007). The role of the leader in the development of the followers is critical; as followers reach their potential, the organization in turn maximizes its effectiveness (Liden, 2008). Servant leaders see themselves as stewards of those they lead and feel responsible to develop and empower them to reach higher levels of potential in moral and ethical development (Sendjaya, 2008). A servant leader develops the follower through personal knowledge of the followers‟ characteristics, gifts and interests, thereby encouraging growth of the follower through serving as a role model, inspiring trust and providing information, feedback and resources (Liden, 2008).


4

Followers are also encouraged to be autonomous with a sense of ownership in decision-making and a subsequent commitment to others (Taylor, 2008) as well as opportunities for creative and innovative behavior (Neubert, 2008). The transformation of the follower within servant leadership is demonstrated in multiple dimensions, including the emotional, intellectual, social and spiritual arenas, resulting in the follower becoming servant leaders themselves (Sendjaya, 2008). Barbuto and Wheeler (2006) proposed five dimensions of servant leadership through the scale development of the Servant Leadership Questionnaire. The first is Altruistic Calling described as making a conscious choice to primarily serve others in selfless and sacrificial ways with the goal of making a positive contribution to society. The second is Emotional Healing, described as the ability to initiate a healing process through emotional support, nurturing compassion and caring for members of the organization by creating safe environments to voice professional and personal concerns. The third element is Persuasive Mapping, described as the ability to conceptualize mental frameworks that map issues for greater opportunities for the organization, to encourage others to share in this vision and persuade them to share in the responsibilities needed to enact the vision. The fourth is Wisdom, described as the ability to sense cues from the environment and to conceptualize their implications on the members and the organization. Finally, the fifth is Organizational Stewardship, described as the effort of the leader to create a community spirit and foster the sense of „giving back‟ to the greater community and society through cooperation, camaraderie and team spirit within the organization. The behaviors of leaders, both implicit and explicit, will influence the mindset and behavior of the followers. As leaders model ethics, consideration, inclusiveness, fairness, employee development and service to the community, followers will be influenced in positive ways (Neubert, 2008). The goal of the servant leader is the transformation of those being served to grow healthier, wiser, freer, more autonomous and the subsequent development into servants leaders themselves (Greenleaf, 1970). While the many connections between servant leadership, wisdom and emotional health seem intuitive, there is a lack of empiricism that directly links these concepts. Wisdom Wisdom has been described as a complex phenomenon of constructs working together in a synergistic way (Webster, 2007). Wise people were seen as those who were able to integrate dual extremes and think dialectically as the mind integrated multiple dimensions, and increased in developmental complexities and adaptation abilities (Takahashi, 2000; Yang, 2008b). As leaders begin to think in more complex ways with the ability to reflect on experiences, they create a wider angle and integrated perspectives of self and others (Yang, 2008b). In addition, by engaging in self-examination, self-awareness and self-insight, leaders were gradually able to overcome subjectivity and gained a more thorough and sympathetic understanding of themselves and others (Ardelt, 2004). Wisdom was seen as having self-knowledge that entailed in-depth insight into self, strategies for self-management, incorporation of different self-domains, the ability to balance the values of others with those personally held and management of life uncertainties (Mickler & Staudinger, 2008). Other-knowledge, also described as essential, included understanding a wide variety of people in varying contexts, engaging them and having a willingness to help them (Green & Brown, 2009). Wisdom growth and development was seen as a process that unfolded through relationships and interpersonal dynamics, resulting in self-transcendence and the ability


5

to see human nature and problems with increased awareness and complexity (Le, 2005). As an altruistic real-life process, the consequence was positive for self and others and required a vision beyond self, immediate family or social identity (Sternberg, 2005). Leaders who are wise, according to Barbuto & Wheeler (2006), are those that have awareness of themselves, others and the environment with the emotional intelligence essential for self-growth and relationship-development; conceptualization with the use of mental models, creative processes and visioning experiences to enhance individual and organizational effectiveness; foresight with the ability to anticipate future challenges and consequences guided by purposeful and effective action; and growth mindset with a commitment to the development of potential within followers through identification of others‟ needs and creation of opportunities to enhance outcomes for both the individual and the organization. The Servant Leader is described as categorically wise and through the decision-making process, develops a sense of organizational wisdom through applied knowledge and informed experience (Barbuto & Wheeler, 2006). As servant leaders focus on the development of the follower through role modeling and creation of opportunities for growth, an expected increase in followers‟ wisdom is expected. Hypothesis 1: Servant leadership will result in increased wisdom development in followers. Emotional Labor Emotional labor refers to the level of emotional investment necessary to accomplish a job. As first described by Hochschild (1983), emotional labor is the management of emotion to create an observable display of emotion in exchange for a wage. There are three critical issues involved; “the emotional labor interaction, the experience of emotional labor and the personal consequences of performing emotional labor” (Sass, 2000). When there is a match between displayed emotion and felt emotion known as emotional harmony, little energy is expended by the emotional work. However, when there is a difference between the two, a greater expenditure of energy is required due to the resulting emotional dissonance (Mann, 2004). The worker expends energy to realign their feelings, resulting in a drain of emotional resources and a sense of loss of emotional control with the result of strain and exhaustion and may be resolved in one of two ways. The worker may alter the displayed feelings, known as surface acting or creating an emotional shift to the appropriate feelings within themselves known as deep acting (Brotheridge & Lee, 2003). The emotional expression used to achieve the desired organizational outcome may differ from the actual experienced emotion and may be perceived as inauthentic even as it is seen as contributing to organizational goals (Miller, 2008). Thus, this emotional labor expended by workers may cause them to experience burnout, described as a chronic response pattern to stressful work conditions involving high levels of interpersonal contact. It encompasses three dimensions: emotional exhaustion (loss of feeling, trust, interest and spirit), depersonalization (emotional detachment from service recipients) and diminished personal accomplishment (depression, low morale, withdrawal). Burnout results in substantial costs for individuals as well as organizations, including deteriorating physical and mental health, deterioration of social and family relationships, decreased job performance, increased intention to leave, absenteeism and turnover (Mikolajczak, 2007). Brotheridge and Lee (2003) identified duration, intensity, variety and surface or deep acting as critical elements in emotional labor contributing to burnout and job dissatisfaction. In occupations with high emotional labor, the expectation exists that there will be an


6

increase in burnout and stress. Those in management who espouse a servant leadership philosophy have a requirement of emotional labor in the leader-follower relationship in the form of “worker care”. As the focus of the servant leader is on the well-being and development of the follower, there is a “commitment to serve” that may provide motivation for emotional care in order to decrease experienced emotional labor. Supporting an emotionally overworked workforce in the form of servant leadership has a positive impact on job satisfaction. Emotional care may come in many forms, one of which may be role inversion in which the hierarchical structure between the leader and follower is inverted. At the bottom of the hierarchy, the leader empowers the follower to take more ownership within the organization, thereby increasing the satisfaction of the follower. As the servant leader models the consistency of role inversion behaviors along with the commitment to serve, a level of trust within the leader/follower relationship develops, resulting in a positive impact on job satisfaction (Jenkins & Stewart, 2008). It is expected that as the leader supports and empowers the follower, emotional labor experienced by the follower will be decreased; thereby, reducing burnout and increasing job satisfaction. Hypothesis 2: Servant leadership will decrease the emotional labor experienced by followers. Servant Leadership

Outcomes

Altruism Emotional Healing

+ Wisdom Development

Wisdom

____________________

Persuasive Mapping Organizational Stewardship

- Emotional labor

Methods Sample: Data for this study was obtained from 194 participants working in a large international volunteer and service organization. The company provides service, resources, disaster relief and/or epidemic interventions worldwide. Participants’ average age was 41 and 35% had earned their B.A./B.S., 18% had earned their M.A./M.S., and 4% had earned a Ph.D. Approximately 65% of participants were white, 11% were Hispanic and the remaining 24% represented other ethnicities.

Procedures Participants were recruited to participate in the study as part of a larger leadership


7

development initiative. A total of 1212 participants were contacted via e-mail and were directed to complete the on-line survey maintained by SurveyMonkey. SurveyMonkey is an on-line survey tool that provides structure, support, and downloadable databases for researchers (SurveyMonkey, 2010). Follow-up e-mails were sent after two- and four-week intervals to all participants to encourage maximum response. From a total 194 responses, 18 were unusable due to missing data, producing a useable sample of 176. Estimated response rate was 16% which is slightly higher than industry norms for on-line surveys. All procedures were approved and monitored by the Institutional Review Board. Instruments Servant Leadership.-Servant leadership was measured by using The Servant Leadership Questionnaire (SLQ) (Barbuto and Wheeler, 2006). The SLQ consists of 30 items measured on a 5-point Likert-type scale, ranging from 1 (“strongly disagree”) to 4 (“strongly agree”) (see appendix). The SLQ has been used to predict organizational effectiveness, satisfaction and extra effort and has demonstrated internal consistency (Barbuto & Wheeler, 2006). In this study, reliabilities were as follows: altruistic calling (α = .81), emotional healing (α =.84), wisdom (α = .87), persuasive mapping (α =.88), stewardship (α = .85). Wisdom Development.- Wisdom development was measured by using 6 follower-based items generated for this study. An initial pool of 15 questions were developed and presented to faculty engaged in research in this area. The four items that scored the highest in the item scaling procedure (0=”This item does not address wisdom” and 4=”This item measures wisdom well”) were retained. Each of the four items received the maximum score attainable. In this study, the wisdom development indicator achieved an acceptable internal reliability (α = .85). This scale, measuring followers‟ perceptions of leaders includes measuring four items, including an increased awareness of conflict, increased anticipation of consequences, development of wisdom and increase in critical thinking (see appendix). Emotional Labor.-Emotional labor was measured with the Emotional Labor Scale (ELS) (Brotheridge and Lee, 2003). The ELS consists of 14 items that measure four subscales in a 5 point Likert-type scale. The ELS has been used to study the impact of interpersonal and informational injustice on emotional labor (Rupp, et. al., 2008), the impact of emotional labor on work-family outcomes (Yanchus, et. al., 2009) and the impact of emotional intelligence on emotional labor (Brotheridge, 2006). It has generally performed well and has reported reliability estimates ranging from .7 to .85. The individual subscales each scored below .60 and were combined into one (14-item) scale of emotional labor, which achieved an acceptable reliability estimate ( ). Analysis The analysis was converted from a Microsoft Excel sheet (from Survey Monkey) to SPSS 17, a statistical software program. Simple statistics, correlations and step-wise hierarchical regressions were selected as the most appropriate analytic statistics because the single method data represents one level of analysis. Results Simple statistics and correlations were calculated of the variables used in the study (see Table 1). Results indicated significant relationships between servant leadership and wisdom development ( =.54; p ), altruistic calling and (wisdom development ( =.47; p ),


8

emotional healing and wisdom development ( =.52; p ), wisdom and wisdom development ( =.51; p ), persuasive mapping and wisdom development ( =.52; p ), organizational stewardship and wisdom development ( =.52; p ), servant leadership and emotional labor ( =-.18; p ), emotional healing and emotional labor ( =-.19; p ), wisdom and emotional labor ( =--.18; p ), persuasive mapping and emotional labor ( =-.23; p ). There was not a significant relationship with altruistic calling and emotional labor ( =-.10) or emotional labor and organizational stewardship ( =-.12). ________________________ Insert Table 1 here _________________________ To determine the best predictive model for each of the two dependent variables, wisdom development and emotional labor, stepwise regressions were calculated. In the first, five subscales of servant leadership were entered in a hierarchal regression with wisdom development as the dependent variable. The hierarchical model showed that emotional healing and organizational stewardship were the best predictors of wisdom development. Emotional healing accounted for 26.9% of the variance in wisdom development and when combined with organizational stewardship, the best predictive model accounted for 29.3% of the variance in the data. The hierarchical model showed that persuasive mapping alone was the best predictor for emotional labor, accounting for 5% of the variance in the data (See Tables 2 and 3). _____________________________ Insert Table 2 _____________________________ _____________________________ Insert Table 3 _____________________________ Discussion This study was designed to examine the impact of servant leadership on wisdom development and emotional labor. A major tenet of the servant leadership paradigm is the growth and development of followers; consequently it is important to empirically test this claim. The litmus test of servant leadership, according to Greenleaf (2002), is to ask “Do those served grow as person; do they, while being served, become healthier, wiser, freer, more autonomous, more likely themselves to become servants?” Those that embrace the role of servant leader participate in the transformation of the follower in multiple dimensions through role modeling, inspiring trust, providing resources and sharing feedback (Liden, 2008). The results from this study support this claim and as anticipated, found significant relationships between servant leadership, wisdom development and emotional labor.


9

There was a significant relationship between servant leadership and wisdom development. This means that as leaders increase their use of servant leadership characteristics, the likelihood of followers developing in wisdom increases concurrently. As wisdom is a major component of those who are servant leaders, followers may be influenced through observing the thinking and actions of a servant leader. As a servant leader demonstrates wisdom through critical thinking, complex problem solving, and adaptability, a follower may learn how to approach problems and situations from multiple perspectives and be challenged to thinking more critically (Yang, 2008b). A leader may also demonstrate an increased awareness of understanding of self and others through the use and development of emotional intelligence (Barbuto & Wheeler, 2006). Followers may be challenged by servant leaders to development foresight to anticipate future challenges as well as a growth mindset toward the development of self and others (Barbuto & Wheeler, 2006). By emulating the wisdom seen in servant leaders, followers are likely to experience development in these arenas as well. Specifically, there was a strong relationship between altruistic calling and wisdom development. This means that as leaders demonstrate a willingness to place the needs of others before their own, this will increase the development of wisdom within followers. There was also a strong relationship between emotional healing and wisdom development. This means that as leaders mend emotional hurts and navigate the recovery from emotional trauma, the likelihood of developing wisdom within followers increases. There was also a strong relationship between persuasive mapping and wisdom development. This means that as leaders demonstrate the ability to conceptualize frameworks for issues and opportunities and to encourage others to share in that vision, the likelihood of developing wisdom within followers increases. There was a strong relationship between leader wisdom and wisdom development. This means that as leaders demonstrate the ability to sense cues from the environment and to communicate the implications to followers, the likelihood of developing wisdom within followers increases. There was a strong relationship between organizational stewardship and wisdom development. This means that as leaders create a community spirit and foster a sense of cooperation, camaraderie and team spirit, the likelihood of developing wisdom within followers increases. Emotional labor is also critical to the growth and development of followers. Emotional labor is described as the emotional investment necessary to accomplish a job. When there is a difference between a displayed and experienced emotion, there is an increase in emotional dissonance, resulting in a drain of emotional resources, exhaustion and burnout (Brotheridge and Lee, 2003). Followers who experience high levels of emotional labor will experience decreasing job satisfaction, a deterioration of emotional and physical health, a deterioration of family and social relationships, decreased job performance and increased job turnover (Mikolajczek, 2007). There was a strong relationship between servant leadership and emotional labor. This means that leaders who espouse a servant leadership paradigm are likely to provide emotional support, encouragement and healing to workers on both personal and professional levels, with a moderating effect on emotional labor. In the context of the relationship of leader and follower, the emotional support provided will likely decrease the negative effects of emotional labor. There was a strong relationship between emotional healing and emotional labor. This means that as leaders provide support, encouragement and compassion to followers, there will be a decrease in experienced emotional labor. There was a strong relationship between wisdom and emotional labor. This means that as leaders sense cues from the environment and shares insights with followers, there is likely to be a decrease in experienced emotional labor. There was also a strong relationship between persuasive mapping and emotional labor. This means that as leaders


10

becomes aware of challenges and create a vision for the organization, there will be a corresponding decrease in emotional labor as followers engage with this shared vision. There was not a relationship between altruistic calling and emotional labor or organizational stewardship and emotional labor. Implications for Practice The addition of empirical evidence supporting the positive impact of servant leadership on followers will contribute to an increased interest in this leadership paradigm. As leaders embrace a servant leadership paradigm, individuals as well as the organizations will benefit from increased wisdom development and decreased emotional labor. This study provides empirical evidence supporting the relationship between the servant leadership paradigm and the increase in followers‟ wisdom development. Servant leaders that demonstrate emotional healing will heal the emotional hurts and have the ability to heal the impact of emotional trauma. This means that leaders should be encouraged to engage in behaviors that impact emotional healing, those in organizational development will be encouraged to create training and development opportunities to help members increase their abilities to become aware of and heal emotional hurts and trauma in others and that organizations will recruit employees who demonstrate emotional healing behaviors. Servant leaders that practice organizational stewardship will have the ability to encourage members to leave a positive legacy and create a sense of community spirit. This means that leaders should be encouraged to foster a community spirit, those in organizational development will be encouraged to create training and development opportunities to help members create a sense of community and organizations will recruit employees who demonstrate the ability to create community spirit. This study provides empirical evidence supporting the relationship between the servant leadership paradigm and the decrease in emotional labor. Servant leaders that demonstrate persuasive mapping will have the ability to conceptualize mental frameworks, create vision and engage others to pursue this vision. This means that leaders should be encouraged to develop mental frameworks and create visions for the organization, those in organizational development will be encouraged to create training and development opportunities to help members create more complex ways of thinking and organizations will recruit employees who demonstrate the ability to think in more complex ways and to create vision within organizations. Organizations will see benefits from recruiting, training and developing personnel with the servant leadership paradigm. Leaders within organizations may be encouraged to demonstrate servant leadership characteristics. Training opportunities may be created to enhance servant leadership development within their employees knowing that individuals with this leadership orientation will experience greater emotional health and wisdom. Additionally, organizations may encourage this approach within their management and recruit individuals who possess servant leadership characteristics. Implications for Research: This study sampled workers in a charitable organization and thus was ideal for potentially studying servant leadership. Other industries may be useful to expand the generalizability of these results. The data collected was single method, which is vulnerable to collinearity and inflated correlations. However, the variables studied are best measured from the population and methods used. Future studies of different variables are encouraged to make use of multiple sources of data collection. The significant findings in this study encourage further research into the impact of


11

servant leadership on followers. While this study supports the claim that servant leadership increases the wisdom of followers and contributes to emotional health due to moderating emotional labor, more research is needed to empirically define and measure changes in wisdom and identify additional measures of emotional well-being, such as the use of emotional intelligence measures. In addition, research is needed to explore how these constructs contribute to organizational wisdom and self-determination. The relationship of other leadership constructs to wisdom development, such as political skills, authenticity, flexibility, motivations and situational variables such as education, childhood experiences, organizational culture and exposure to servant leaders are in need of empirical studies. In this study, emotional labor was significantly reduced in the presence of servant leadership attributes like persuasive mapping. Other leadership effects that can neutralize the emotional labor experienced by followers need continual study. Other antecedents of emotional labor must be tested to devise the optimal interactions necessary to promote healthy and stressfree environments. Future research should continue to examine the impact of servant leadership. As mentioned earlier, Greenleaf‟s (1977) premise that servant leaders make followers healthier, wiser, freer, more autonomous and more likely to become servant leaders necessitates that the highest priority be given to testing the actual impacts of servant leadership characteristics on these positive individual behaviors. As the servant leadership paradigm is embraced, the benefits among the members and to the organization will be evidenced.

References Avolio, B. J., & Gardner, W. L. (2005). Authentic leadership development: Getting to the root of positive forms of leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(3), 315-338. Barbuto, J. E., Jr., & Wheeler, D. W. (2006). Scale development and construct clarification of servant leadership. Group & Organization Management, 31(3), 300-326. Baltes, P. B., & Kunzmann, U. (2004). The two faces of wisdom: Wisdom as a general theory of knowledge and judgment about excellence in mind and virtue vs. wisdom as everyday realization in people and products. Human Development (0018716X), 47(5), 290-299


Bluck, S., & Glück, J. (2004). Making things better and learning a lesson: Experiencing wisdom across the lifespan. Journal of Personality, 72(3), 543-572 Brotherridge, C. (2006). The role of emotional intelligence and other individual difference variables in predicting emotional labor relative to situational demands. Psicothema. 18, 139-144. Brotheridge, C., & Lee, R. (2003). Development and validation of the emotional labour scale. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 76(3), 365-379. Cerit, Y. (2009). The effects of servant leader ship behaviours of school principals on teachers' job satisfaction. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 37(5), 600-623. Crippen, C. (2005). Servant-leadership as an effective model for educational leadership and management: First to serve, then to lead. Management in Education, 18(5), 11-16. Dennis, R. S., & Bocarnea, M. (2005). Development of the servant leadership assessment instrument. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 26(8), 600-615. Doyle, R. J. (2007). The case of a servant leader: John F. donnelly, sr. In R. P. Vecchio (Ed.), Leadership: Understanding the dynamics of power and influence in organizations (2nd ed.). (pp. 416-433). Notre Dame, IN US: University of Notre Dame Press. Farling, M. L., Stone, A. G., & Winston, B. E. (1999). Servant leadership: Setting the stage for empirical research. Journal of Leadership Studies, 6(1-2), 49-72. Garber, J. S., Madigan, E. A., Click, E. R., & Fitzpatrick, J. J. (2009). Attitudes towards collaboration and servant leadership among nurses, physicians and residents. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 23(4), 331-340 Greene, J. A., & Brown, S. C. (2009). The wisdom development scale: Further validity investigations. International Journal of Aging & Human Development, 68(4), 289-320. Greenleaf , R. K. (1970). The servant as a leader. Indianapolis: The Greenleaf Center. Greenleaf , R. K. (1977). Servant leadership: A journey into the nature of legitimate power and greatness. New York: Paulist Press. Greenleaf , R. K. (1996). On becoming a servant leader. San Francisco: Jossey BassGreenleaf, R. K. (2007). The servant as leader. In R. P. Vecchio (Ed.), Leadership: Understanding the dynamics of power and influence in organizations (2nd ed.). (pp. 407-415). Notre Dame, IN US: University of Notre Dame Press.

12


13

Greenleaf, R. K., & Spears, L. C. (. ). (2002). In Spears L. C. (Ed.), Servant leadership: A journey into the nature of legitimate power and greatness (25th anniversary edition). Mahwah, NJ US: Paulist Press. Hamilton, F & Bean, C. (2005). The importance of context, beliefs and values in leadership development. Business Ethics: A European Review 14 (4), 336-347. Joseph, E. E., & Winston, B. E. (2005). A correlation of servant leadership, leader trust, and organizational trust. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 26(1), 6-22. Kiel, L. D., & Watson, D. J. (2009). Affective leadership and emotional labor: A view from the local level. Public Administration Review, 69(1), 21-24. Kouzes, J. M. and Posner, B. Z. (2000) The Five Practices of Exemplary Leadership (San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Pfeiffer). Labouvie-Vief, G., & Diehl, M. (2000). Cognitive complexity and cognitive-affective integration: Related or separate domains of adult development? Psychology & Aging, 15(3), 490. Laub, J. A. (1999). Assessing the servant organization: Development of the Servant Organization Leadership Assessment (SOLA) instrument. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Florida Atlantic University Le, T. N. (2008). Cultural values, life experiences, and wisdom. International Journal of Aging & Human Development, 66(4), 259-281. Le, T. N., & Levenson, M. R. (2005). Wisdom as self-transcendence: What’s love (& individualism) got to do with it? Journal of Research in Personality, 39(4), 443-457. 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(2), 161-177 Lyons, N., Kini, V., & Chahal, P. (2009). Servants and leaders. Education for Primary Care, 20(5), 338-339. 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), 180-197. Mann, S. (2004). 'People-work': Emotion management, stress and coping. British Journal of Guidance and Counseling, 32(2), 205-218. McGee-Cooper, A., & Trammell, D. (2002). From hero-as-leader to


14

servant-as-leader. In L. C. Spears & M. Lawrence (Eds.), Focus on leadership (pp. 141-152). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Melrose, K. (2002). Putting servant-leadership into practice. In L. C. Spears (Ed.), Insights on leadership (pp. 279-296). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Mickler, C., & Staudinger, U. M. (2008). Personal wisdom: Validation and age-related differences of a performance measure. Psychology & Aging, 23(4), 787-799. Miller, K., & Koesten, J. (2008). Financial feeling: An investigation of emotion and communication in the workplace. Journal of Applied Communication Research 36(1)8-32 Mokolajczek, M., Menil, C., & Luminet, O. (2007). Explaining the protective effect of trait emotional intelligence regarding occupational stress: Exploration of emotional labour processes. Journal of Research in Personality, 41, 1107-1117. Montgomery, A., Barber, C., & McKee, P. (2002). A phenomenological study of wisdom in later life. International Journal of Aging & Human Development, 54(2), 139. Neill, M., Hayward, K. S., & Peterson, T. (2007). Students' perceptions of the interprofessional team in practice through the application of servant leadership principles. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 21(4), 425-432 Neubert, M., Carlson, D., Roberts, J., Kacmar, M., & Chonko, L. (2008) Regulatory Focus as a Mediator of the Influence of Initiating Structure and Servant Leadership on Employee Behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93 (6O) , 1220-1233. Newman, M. A., Guy, M. E., & Mastracci, S. H. (2009). Beyond cognition: Affective leadership and emotional labor. Public Administration Review, 69(1), 6-20. Pasupathi, M., & Staudinger, U. M. (2001). Do advanced moral reasoners also show wisdom? linking moral reasoning and wisdom-related knowledge and judgement. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 25(5), 401-415. Pascual-Leone, J. (2000). Mental attention, consciousness, and the progressive emergence of wisdom. Journal of Adult Development, 7(4), 241-254 Parolini, J., Patterson, K., & Winston, B. (2009). Distinguishing between transformational and servant leadership. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 30(3), 274-291. Pugliesi, K. (1999). The consequences of emotional labor: Effects on work stress, satisfaction, and well-being. Motivation and Emotion, 23(2), 125-154.

Developing Wisdom and Reducing Emotional Labor Rupp, D., McCance, A., Spencer, S., & Sonntag, K. (2008). Customer (In)Justice and Emotional Labor: The Role of Perspective Taking, Anger, and Emotional Regulation. Journal of Management OnlineFirst, 10, 903-915 Russell, R. F. (2001). The role of values in servant leadership. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 22(2), 76-84. Russell, C. J., & Stone, A. G. (2002). A review of servant leadership attributes: Developing a practical model. Leadership & Organizational Development Journal, 23(3/4), 145-157. Sass, J. (2000). Emotional labor as cultural performance: The communication of caregiving in a nonprofit nursing home. Western Journal of Communication, 64(3), 330-359. Schwartz, R.W. & Tumblin, T.F. (2002). The power of servant leadership to transform health care organizations for the 21st-century economy. Archives of Surgery 137(12), 1419-1427 Sendjaya, S., & Sarros, J. C. (2002). Servant leadership: Its origin, development, and application in organizations. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 9(2), 57-64. Sendjaya, S., Sarros, J. C., & Santora, J. C. (2008). Defining and measuring servant leadership behaviour in organizations. Journal of Management Studies, 45(2), 402-424 Spears, L. C. (2004). Practicing servant-leadership. Leader to Leader, 2004(34), 7-11. Spears, L. C. (1995). Reflections on leadership: How Robert K. Greenleaf's theory of servant-leadership influenced today's top management thinkers. New York: John Wiley. Stone, G. A., Russell, R. F., & Patterson, K. (2004). Transformational versus servant leadership: A difference in leader focus. Leadership & Organizational Development Journal, 25(3/4), 349-361. Sternberg, R. J. (2005). Older but not wiser? the relationship between age and wisdom. Ageing International, 30(1), 5-26 Sturm, B. A. (2009). Principles of servant-leadership in community health nursing. Home Health Care Management & Practice, 21(2), 82-89. SurveyMonkey (2010, March 24). Retrieved from the SurveyMonkey website: www.surveymonkey.com.

15

Developing Wisdom and Reducing Emotional Labor Takahashi, M. (2000). Toward a culturally inclusive understanding of wisdom: Historical roots in the east and west. International Journal of Aging & Human Development, 51(3), 217. Taylor, T., Martin, B. N., Hutchinson, S., & Jinks, M. (2007). Examination of leadership practices of principals identified as servant leaders. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 10(4), 401-419. Vargas, P. A., & Hanlon, J. (2007). Celebrating a profession: The servant leadership perspective. Journal of Research Administration, 38(2), 45-49. Vecchio, R. P. (. ). (2007). In Vecchio R. P. (Ed.), Leadership: Understanding the dynamics of power and influence in organizations (2nd ed.). Notre Dame, IN US: University of Notre Dame Press. Vidic, Z. (2008). Developing tomorrow's leaders: Examining relationships between servant, transformational, transactional, passive/avoidant leadership and emotional intelligence, motivation and leadership opportunities. ProQuest Information & Learning). Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences, 69 (1-) Washington, R. R., Sutton, C. D., & Feild, H. S. (2006). Individual differences in servant leadership: The roles of values and personality. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 27(8), 700-716. Webster, J. D. (2003). An exploratory analysis of a self-assessed wisdom scale. Journal of Adult Development, 10(1), 13. Whetstone, J. T. (2002). Personalism and moral leadership: The servant leader with a transforming vision. Business Ethics: A European Review, 11(4), 385-392. Yanchus, N., Eby, L., Lance, C & Drollinger, S. (2010). The impact of emotional labor on workfamily outcomes. Journal of Vocational Behavior. 76, 105-117. Yang, S. (2008). A process view of wisdom. Journal of Adult Development, 15(2), 62-75. Yang, S. (2008). Real-life contextual manifestations of wisdom. International Journal of Aging & Human Development, 67(4), 273-303.

16


Appendix A The Servant Leadership Questionnaire Items Altruistic calling This person puts my best interests ahead of his/her own. This person does everything he/she can to serve me. This person sacrifices his/her own interests to meet my needs. This person goes above and beyond the call of duty to meet my needs. Emotional healing

17

Developing Wisdom and Reducing Emotional Labor This person is one I would turn to if I had a personal trauma. This person is good at helping me with my emotional issues. This person is talented at helping me to heal emotionally. This person is one that could help me mend my hard feelings. Wisdom This person seems alert to what‟s happening. This person is good at anticipating the consequences of decisions. This person has great awareness of what is going on. This person seems in touch with what‟s happening. This person seems to know what is going to happen. Persuasive mapping This person offers compelling reasons to get me to do things. This person encourages me to dream “big dreams” about the organization. This person is very persuasive. This person is good at convincing me to do things. This person is gifted when it comes to persuading me. Organizational stewardship This person believes that the organization needs to play a moral role in society. This person believes that our organization needs to function as a community. This person sees the organization for its potential to contribute to society. This person encourages me to have a community spirit in the workplace. This person is preparing the organization to make a positive difference in the future.

18

Developing Wisdom and Reducing Emotional Labor Appendix B Wisdom Development Scale Please think about the person you are rating. Indicate your level of agreement with each of the following statements: Strongly agree, Agree, Neutral, Disagree, Strongly Disagree 1) Working with this person has heightened my awareness of potential opportunity or conflicts 2) Working with this person has improved my ability to anticipate consequences. 3) Working with this person has made me wiser. 4) Working with this person has given me a greater appreciation of critical thinking.

19


Appendix C Emotional Labor Scale Items (Brotheridge & Lee, 1998) Please circle the one number for each question that comes closest to reflecting your opinion. Never, Rarely, Sometimes, Often, Always Frequency Interact with customers. Adopt certain emotions as part of your job. Express particular emotions needed for your job. Intensity Express intense emotions. Show some strong emotions. Variety Display many different kinds of emotions. Express many different emotions. Display many different emotions when interacting with others. Deep Acting Make an effort to actually feel the emotions that I need to display to others. Try to actually experience the emotion that I must show. Really try to feel the emotions I have to show as part of my job. Surface Acting Resist expressing my true feelings Pretend to have emotions that I don‟t really have. Hide my true feelings about a situation.

.

20

21


Table 1: Servant Leadership, Wisdom Development and Emotional Labor Reliabilities, Correlations, and Co-variates M

SD

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

1. Servant Leadership 17.17

3.77

.92

2. Altruistic Calling

15.18

2.88

.92**

.80

3. Emotional Healing

14.20

3.33

.97**

.88**

.84

4. Wisdom

18.68

4.17

.97**

.85**

.94**

.87

5. Persuasive Mapping

17.4

4.67

.94**

.79**

.91**

.90**

.88

6. Organizational Stewardship

20.37

3.79

.92**

.87**

.84**

.87**

.79**

.85

7. Wisdom Development

43.63

6.3

.54**

.47**

.52**

.51**

.52**

52**

.90

8. Emotional Labor

8.88

3.25

-.18*

-.10

-.19*

-.18*

-.23**

-.12

-.1

Note: Reliability coefficients ( α) on diagonals. ρ **Correlation is significant at the .01 level *Correlation is significant at the .05 level

ρ

8

.78


Table 2. Hierarchical Regression Analysis for Servant Leadership Dimensions Predicting Wisdom Development _____________________________________________________________________________

Dimensions R R2 R2 ∆ SE F∆ ______________________________________________________________________________ Step 1 Emotional healing

.519

.269

.269

.700

60.74

.541

.293

.024

.691

5.61

Step 2 Emotional healing Organizational stewardship

Model explains approximately 29.3% of the variance in wisdom development.

Table 3. Hierarchical Regression Analysis for Servant Leadership Dimensions Predicting Emotional Labor

Dimensions R R2 R2 ∆ SE F ______________________________________________________________________________ Step 1 Persuasive Mapping

.231

.053

.053

Model explains approximately 5% of the variance in emotional labor.

.440

8.985

22