Page 63 - Harnessing the Strengths

46 ■ Servant-Leadership in the Intercultural Practice

The Dilemma

The dilemma of “serving” versus “leading” comes closest
to the original meaning of the concept of servant-leader.
The question of what makes someone a leader is answered
differently by different cultures. Is a strong leader someone
who shows his or her power and employs top-down man-
agement? Or is it someone who listens and is in favor of a
bottom-up style of management?
In terms of defi ning leadership, cultures divide into
two broad groups: the one side thinks in terms of perfor-
mance and the other side thinks in terms of attributes.
In performance-oriented cultures, leaders get their sta-
tus in terms of what they have achieved, what they accom-
plish. Even though people achieve a certain status, it is still
necessary for them to prove themselves again and again. In
these cultures, the subservient are seen as those who should
make an effort to make the performances successful. The
Netherlands has a culture that is a good example of people
being encouraged to achieve results, whereas family back-
ground is less important. Deeds of the individual, leader or
servant, are what count. In this culture, status is not guar-
anteed. In this case, it is also quite normal to ask a leader
for the reasons for doing something in a certain way.
In Western cultures, there is talk of “depersonaliza-
tion” of leadership, referring to the idea that achieving
team or organizational goals is more important than under
whose leadership that happens. Management by objectives
is what management guru Peter Drucker calls it. 1
“Ascribed” status is something entirely different. This
is a refl ection of who the person is and the relationship that
he or she has with others, with the organization, or with the
society at large. In this case, there are clearly defi ned mas-