In 1972 Greenleaf shared his thesis with us. Greenleaf writes: This is my thesis, caring for persons, the more able and the less able serving each other, is the rock upon which a good society is built. Whereas, until recently, caring was largely person to person, now most of it is mediated through institutions – often large, complex, powerful, impersonal; not always competent; sometimes corrupt. If a better society is to be built, one that is more just and more loving, one that provides greater creative opportunity for its people, then the most open course is to raise both the capacity to serve and the very performance as servant of existing major institutions by new regenerative forces operating within them: servants.
In this brief statement, Greenleaf begins to engage important issues – issues that were important to him in 1970 and issues that continue to be important for us today. Included are the issues of power and authority, of trust, and creation (of the institutions and of the world we want to live in) and most importantly he reiterates his major theme: Servant Servants will provide the regenerative forces necessary to ensure that his thesis is transformed from concept to reality
What is our response today to his implied question: What is the rock upon which a good society is built? What is our societal ‘rock’ today? I am 72 years old and when I was young a major rock was the rock of relationship. Our family relationships (nuclear and extended) was supported and enhanced by our neighborhood relationships and by our many ‘community relationships (schools, volunteer organizations, places of worship, etc.). Today, many people experience more relationships with folks they work with than they do with their next door ‘neighbors.’
Today, more than ever before in recorded history, large, complex, powerful and impersonal institutions shape our lives and, as Greenleaf noted, ‘caring’ is often mediated through them. Actually, large, complex institutions are hybrids. They are living paradoxes (just as each of us is a living paradox). Institutions are BOTH organic and inorganic; they are personal and impersonal; folks working within them are treated as human beings and are treated as parts of a machine; people are viewed as human and are viewed as cyborgs, if not as non-organic entities.
Greenleaf makes an assumption that we desire a society that is more just and more loving. There are many signals afloat today that perhaps this is not what we want – at minimum this has not been a ‘center-stage’ topic for us (in our country the ‘center-stage topic’ for years has been using our vast resources to affect a change in the world). There are more voices crying out for justice and love as necessary if we are to thrive as a nation.
Greenleaf appears to have been correct when he noted that our society will continue to be shaped by large institutions. And that if a more just and loving society is to take root then they must become more just and more loving themselves and they must serve the society in ways that promote justice and love. His ‘gardener’ (to keep the garden metaphor) for this is the ‘servant.’
The individual chooses to be servant, first and chooses to seek ways of serving so that institutions themselves are transformed into servants (the human side of the paradoxical institution will trump the non-human side). If one believes that all institutions are organic – they are simply individuals and relationships writ large – then Greenleaf’s thesis becomes possible. The non-human part of the organization will not like this (the ‘machines’ in the movie ‘The Terminator’ are metaphors for the non-human part of life’s paradox). We, each of us, still has choice – that is what makes us fully human. The question remains: ‘What will each of us choose?’
Servant As Leader 