A factor analysis of Page and Wong’s servant leadership instrument

Abstract

Page and Wong (2000) developed their servant leadership instrument but stopped short of conducting factor analysis and scale reliability tests, thus, we, in this present article, set out to extend Page and Wong's work and to see if their items would reduce to the factors that they originally intended. In this article we present a brief overview of servant leadership and we present the research procedures that we followed along with our analysis. Bennis and Nanus (1985), Block (1993), De Pree (1989, Greenleaf (1977), and Kouzes and Posner (1993) all contend that among the most important leadership requirements for leaders are those related to service and empowerment. This contention is supported by Russell and Stone (2002) who state that serving offers the potential to positively revolutionize interpersonal work relations and organizational life. This confirms the work of Farling et al. (1999) servant leadership model that was based on the variables of vision, influence, credibility, trust, and service. Page and Wong's (2000) work concurs with two factors of Farling et al.'s (1999) servant leadership model (a) vision, and (b) service.

The relationship between school principals and teachers servant leadership

“…Greenleaf expanded the field of leadership research, asking if the leader can exercise his/her power as a source to serve others, and as a possibility to create the serving organization. According to Russel (2001), this was a strong call to draw the attention of scholars to qualities and values of a servant leader (Russel, 2001), to suggest models of behavior (Buchen, 1998;Patterson, 2003;Winston, 2003;Wong & Page, 2003), to compare servant leadership with other leadership theories (Farling, Stone & Winston, 1999;Stone, Russell & Patterson, 2004;Winston & Hartsfield, 2004), to provide the typology of servant leadership (Laub, 1999), to explain it's practical implications (Greenleaf, 1997;Sendjaya & Sarros, 2002;Spears, 2010;Winston &Hartsfield, 2004), etc. The relevance of servant leadership theory was empasized by , who claimed, that paradigm of traditional hierarchical pyramid of power has changed.…”

The relationship between servant leadership behaviors and organizational citizenship behavior and work satisfaction in local governments

“…Hizmetkar lider, liderlik etme sürecinde hizmet etmeyi düşünür. Takipçilerinin neye ihtiyacı varsa bunu sağlamak liderin rolü olarak görülmektedir (Dennis ,Winston 2003). Fairholm (1997)'e göre lider, başarıya ulaşmak için takipçilerinin ihtiyaç duyduğu kaynakları temin ederek hizmet etme rolünü gerçekleştirmektedir.…”

Development of the School Principals’ Servant Leadership Behaviors Scale and Evaluation of Servant Leadership Behaviors According to Teachers’ Views

“…Elde edilen faktörlerin, özellikle okullarda yöneticilerin hizmetkâr liderlik davranışlarını belirlemede işlevsel olacağı düşünülmektedir. Hizmetkâr liderliğe ilişkin yapılan ölçek geliştirme çalışmalarında genel olarak faktör sayısının üç (Dennis ve Winston, 2003) ile oniki (Spears, 1998) arasında değiştiği gözlemlenmiştir. İlgili literatür incelendiğinde, hizmetkâr liderliğe ilişkin geliştirilen ölçekleme çalışmalarının oldukça genel ve farklı örgütsel yapılara uyarlanabilecek nitelikte olduğu tespit edilmiştir.…”

“…Greenleaf tarafından geliştirilmiş olan hizmetkâr liderlik yaklaşımı son on yılda örgüt ve liderlik literatüründe geniş bir ilgi uyandırmış ve birçok araştırmanın konusu olmuştur (Buchen, 1998;Collins, 2001;Dennis ve Winston, 2003;Page ve Wong, 2000;Patterson, 2003;Russell, 2001;Russell ve Stone, 2002;Spears, 1998). Greenleaf'e (1977) göre hizmetkâr liderlik sürecinde hizmet etmek içsel bir durum olarak kendini gösterir ve daha sonra bilinçli bir liderlik davranışı olarak anlam kazanır.…”