Monthly Archives: July 2014

Treadstone Climbing of Columbus


13469004414_ac8d3f3ea0_c

I am both proud and humbled (I’ve never before understood the use of those two terms together, but now I get it) to be associated with this gym, these people, and the name Treadstone Climbing:

http://www.wtvm.com/clip/10356367/business-break-treadstone-climbing-gym

 

Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under Phil's Philosophy

Weapon of Mass Destruction!?


managementdocandpoet

Boston Marathon bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev has been charged with using a weapon of mass destruction.

I’m HIGHLY UNCOMFORTABLE with this. I’m NOT COMFORTABLE AT ALL with it, and here’s why:

The term “weapon of mass destruction” has typically been reserved for:
“Chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear weapons capable of a high order of destruction or causing mass casualties.” 

This traditional definition of Weapons of Mass Destruction sets them apart from what is known as Conventional Weapons. “The terms conventional weapons generally refer to weapons that are in relatively wide use that are not weapons of mass destruction (e.g. nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons). Conventional weapons include small arms and light weapons, sea and land mines, as well as (non-nuclear) bombs, shells, rockets, missiles and cluster munitions.”

Many may remember George W.’s justification for invading Iraq was because of evidence that they had “Weapons of Mass Destruction.” (“Prior…

View original post 141 more words

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

A Quote From a Student & a Huge Thanks to YOU for Considering my Work!


“Kudos on your Google ranking… For you to be number one with vague keywords, Google must consider you to be a legitimate authority.  It’s something to be proud of. You were number one… I didn’t even have to use your last name or CSU… I even found some of your poetry.”

Thanks for the kudos, Randall!

 

4 Comments

Filed under Phil's Philosophy

Can You Really Measure Servant Leadership?


As a field of study, servant leadership is in its infancy. I see this in teaching servant leadership courses at the graduate level and I see it in co-editing servant leadership’s newest academic journal, Servant Leadership: Theory & Practice.

On the Practice side, I get excited when students so authentically drip servant leadership from their very DNA that I know, “Hey, There is a servant leader who is changing lives and making the world a better place.”

On the Theory side, I get giddy-like-a-school-child when epiphanies of new angles for scientifically examining servant leadership dance in my head.

As an example from last night’s graduate class conversation, we realized an academically legitimate and relatively simple manner in which organizational-level servant leadership outcomes can be measured.

It starts with Robert Greenleaf’s well renowned “best test” of servant leadership:

“Do those served grow as persons? Do they, while being served, become healthier, wiser,  freer, more autonomous, more likely themselves to become servants?…” (R. Greenleaf, 1970)

If, indeed those served by a servant leader grow as persons and become wiser, freer, more autonomous and more likely themselves to serve, then at least the following 3 propositions can be made.

Proposition 1) Servant leadership rolls downhill. That is… if I do my job as a servant leader then I will develop servant leaders who will, in turn, develop servant leaders.

Proposition 2) Given Greenleaf’s “best test” and assuming Proposition 1 is true, then it follows that leadership succession will be more effective in organizations with a culture of servant leadership than in organizations without a culture of servant leadership. &,

Proposition 3) Given Greenleaf’s “best test” and assuming Proposition 1 is true, then it follows that leadership succession will be more effective in organizations with servant leaders in the top management team than in organizations without servant leaders in the top management team.

Difficult to administer? Absolutely. Impossible to administer? Not nearly. It would not be a difficult task for an academic to set up a study and borrow or build instruments to test the foregoing 3 propositions. Sounds publishable. Even more exciting, though…

Sounds like a small step forward in the growth of servant leadership as a field of study!

© 2014, Dr. Phil Bryant, SPHR

Dr. Bryant is an Assistant Professor of Management at Columbus State University, co-editor of Servant Leadership: Theory & Practice, and co-author of Managing Employee Turnover.

Leave a comment

Filed under Management Musings