PurposeThe concept of “servant leadership” becomes increasingly relevant in organizations while the “authoritative leadership” style continues to be in place as one of the effective styles. The purpose of this paper is to explore which leadership style is perceived a preferred one in the public sector in Singapore. Empirical data come from a survey with school leaders in several school clusters in Singapore, with instruments designed by the researchers.Design/methodology/approachThe paper is written up on the data drawn from the authors' research project. Both quantitative and qualitative analysis approaches were applied to analyzing the preference between “Servant leadership” and “Authoritative leadership” styles.FindingsIt was found in the study that servant leadership is more acceptable than authoritative leadership and that servant leadership is more effective because it reflects a better use of leaders' power. The findings are displayed in this paper to demonstrate comparisons in the acceptability of servant and authoritative styles.Practical implicationsThe paper demonstrates the perceptions of organizational members towards the leadership styles with positive impact on their professional life. Drawing on the insights from the analyses, the paper provides organizational leaders with insights on the relevance and effectiveness of their leadership styles.Originality/valueThe paper is original and is the product of empirical research, with instruments designed by the researchers.

Purpose -Balanced leadership is attracting increasing attention from academia and practitioners. In this rapidly changing world, maintaining balance while moving ahead is becoming a challenge for organizational leaders concerned with effective leadership. The traditional concept of balancing, theoretically, has been frequently re-visited by researchers, while new concepts of balancing are being developed by researchers and practitioners, in order to effectively guide the practice in the real institutional settings. The purpose of this paper is to examine the classic Chinese perspectives from Wu Xing ( ), I Ching ( ), and Tao Te Ching ( ). Some western perspectives (e.g. Waters and Leithwood) on balanced leadership are also examined, to reach a hybrid model in an effort to decipher the meanings of balancing, and to address their applicability in modern organizational lives. Design/methodology/approach -This paper provides analyses of the perspectives in the Chinese classics Wu Xing, I Ching and Tao Te Ching, and presents insights on the principles for organizational leaders to apply in dealing with changes. Findings -There is a philosophical base for balanced leadership. It is becoming imperative for leaders to practice balanced leadership in the following aspects of organizational lives: Leaders' steady dispositions; Harmonious human relations; Categorization of the magnitudes of change for improvement; and a hybrid model integrating both eastern and western concepts of balanced leadership.Research limitations/implications -This paper focuses on one domain of leadership -balancing in the interactions between the leaders and their people. It is relevant for those who have interest in, and are concerned for, the vertical, lateral relations, organizational development and improvement. Originality/value -This paper reflects the researchers' deep insight into the Chinese classics, their expertise, and their empirical practices in organizational leadership. The paper will help those with similar interests in this area to better understand the implications of the Chinese perspectives.

No abstract