Transformational versus servant
leadership: a difference in leader
focus
A. Gregory Stone
Graduate School of Business, Regent University, Virginia Beach, Virginia, USA
Robert F. Russell
Department of Business Administration, Emory and Henry College, Emory,
Virginia, USA, and
Kathleen Patterson
School of Leadership Studies, Regent University, Virginia Beach, Virginia, USA
Keywords Leadership, Transformational leadership, Influence
Abstract This article examines transformational leadership and servant leadership to determine
what similarities and differences exist between the two leadership concepts. The authors posit that
the primary difference between transformational leadership and servant leadership is the focus of
the leader. The transformational leader’s focus is directed toward the organization, and his or her
behavior builds follower commitment toward organizational objectives, while the servant leader’s
focus is on the followers, and the achievement of organizational objectives is a subordinate
outcome. The extent to which the leader is able to shift the primary focus of leadership from the
organization to the follower is the distinguishing factor in classifying leaders as either
transformational or servant leaders. This article also looks at the next stage of developmental
issues in servant leadership, such as the challenges facing empirical investigation and
measurement, and the changes that are occurring in current thinking about the servant leadership
approach. Ultimately, the case is made that although different, both transformational leadership
and servant leadership offer the conceptual framework for dynamic leadership.
Transformational versus servant leadership – a difference in leader focus
Transformational leadership, initiated by James MacGregor Burns (1978) and Bernard
M. Bass (1985a), has become a very popular concept in recent years. Both researchers
and practitioners have gravitated to the theory and have employed it in a variety of
organizational settings. Similarly, the concept of servant leadership, which Robert
Greenleaf (1977) formulated in the modern era, has received substantial attention in the
contemporary leadership field. A cursory glimpse of transformational leadership and
servant leadership leaves the perception that the concepts are rather similar. In fact,
some individuals question whether there is any real difference between the concepts.
This article first examines the theoretical framework, characteristics, and focus of
both transformational leadership and servant leadership to determine what similarities
and differences exist between the two leadership concepts. Thereafter, the article
differentiates the concepts along the dimension of leader focus. The primary premise of
the article is that transformational leaders tend to focus more on organizational
objectives while servant leaders focus more on the people who are their followers. This
tendency of the servant leader to focus on followers appears to be the primary factor
that distinguishes servant leadership from transformational leadership. Otherwise,
The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister www.emeraldinsight.com/0143-7739.htm
Transformational
versus servant
leadership
349
Received March 2003
Revised June 2003
Accepted November 2003
The Leadership & Organization
Development Journal
Vol. 25 No. 4, 2004
pp. 349-361
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0143-7739
DOI 10.1108/01437730410538671

there are many similarities between the two leadership concepts. A clear
understanding of both frameworks helps to reveal the many similarities and the
aforementioned distinction.
Transformational leadership
Bass and Avolio (Bass, 1985a; Bass and Avolio, 1990) developed Burns’ (1978) ideas and
posited the formal concept of transformational leadership. Their work built not only
upon the contribution of Burns but also those made by Bennis and Nanus (1985), Tichy
and Devanna (1986), and others. Bass (1990b) specified that transformational leadership:
“occurs when leaders broaden and elevate the interests of their employees, when they
generate awareness and acceptance of the purposes and mission of the group, and when
they stir their employees to look beyond their own self-interest for the good of the group”
(p. 21). Bass (1990a) stipulates that this transcending beyond self-interest is for the
“group, organization, or society” (p. 53). In essence, transformational leadership is a
process of building commitment to organizational objectives and then empowering
followers to accomplish those objectives (Yukl, 1998). The result, at least in theory, is
enhanced follower performance (Burns, 1998; Yukl, 1998).
Burns (1978) considered leaders to be either transformational or transactional, while
others view leadership as a continuum with transactional leadership at one end and
transformational leadership at the other. Bass (1990a) said that transactional
leadership occurs when leaders “exchange promises of rewards and benefits to
subordinates for the subordinates’ fulfillment of agreements with the leader” (p. 53).
The transactional leader, according to Daft (2002), recognizes followers’ needs and then
defines the exchange process for meeting those needs. Both the leader and the follower
benefit from the exchange transaction. Transactional leadership is based on
bureaucratic authority, focuses on task completion, and relies on rewards and
punishments (Tracey and Hinkin, 1998).
Transformational leadership differs substantially from transactional leadership. It
is concerned more about progress and development. Furthermore, transformational
leadership enhances the effects of transactional leadership on followers (Bass, 1985b,
1990a).
Transformational leaders transform the personal values of followers to support the
vision and goals of the organization by fostering an environment where relationships
can be formed and by establishing a climate of trust in which visions can be shared
(Bass, 1985a). Avolio et al. (1991) established four primary behaviors that constitute
transformational leadership:
(1) Idealized influence (or charismatic influence).
(2) Inspirational motivation.
(3) Intellectual stimulation.
(4) Individualized consideration.
The following discussion summarizes these areas and identifies the characteristics that
accompany each of them.
Idealized influence
Idealized influence is the charismatic element of transformational leadership in which
leaders become role models who are admired, respected, and emulated by followers
LODJ
25,4
350