Project Management

Project Management Central

Please login or join to subscribe to this thread

Topics: Agile, Leadership, Scrum
Is it Servant Leader or a True Leader?
What's the Good Word?
Remember the English Word Power game which used to come on Television in the Good Old Days of Indian Television??

Wondering based on the latest #Scrum Guide where they have replaced the word #servantleader with a #TrueLeader?
What's The the Good Word ?

Looking for Views, Thoughts and Perspectives here
Sort By:
Page: 1 2 next>
Ashutosh, good question, my thoughts:

the change in the Scrum Guide indicates another escalation in partisan thinking, a dichotomy, by the agilistas.
Do they really think they define what truth or 'true leadership' is? What hubris.

They could define that servant leadership as a somehow defined technical term is the type of leadership they want have applied in their belief system.

Leadership for me is defined by the results, i.e. having followers, influencing others, being on a joint journey toward a vision.

How leadership is achieved, looking at human history, is primarily by power, politics, wars (conflicts) - read Macchiavelli, Sun Tsu, von Clausewitz, even Michel Porter. Our whole western mindset is based on competition and winning.

Recently (in the past 20-30 years or so), more people are given orders (project charters) without having the means (authority, power). Techniques have been developed to 'lead without authority' and 'servant leadership'. Good, helpful, but not even a trend outside the agile bubble.
...
1 reply by KWIYUH MICHAEL WEPNGONG
Jan 22, 2021 6:56 AM
KWIYUH MICHAEL WEPNGONG
...
Thanks Thomas
Jan 22, 2021 4:34 AM
Replying to Thomas Walenta
...
Ashutosh, good question, my thoughts:

the change in the Scrum Guide indicates another escalation in partisan thinking, a dichotomy, by the agilistas.
Do they really think they define what truth or 'true leadership' is? What hubris.

They could define that servant leadership as a somehow defined technical term is the type of leadership they want have applied in their belief system.

Leadership for me is defined by the results, i.e. having followers, influencing others, being on a joint journey toward a vision.

How leadership is achieved, looking at human history, is primarily by power, politics, wars (conflicts) - read Macchiavelli, Sun Tsu, von Clausewitz, even Michel Porter. Our whole western mindset is based on competition and winning.

Recently (in the past 20-30 years or so), more people are given orders (project charters) without having the means (authority, power). Techniques have been developed to 'lead without authority' and 'servant leadership'. Good, helpful, but not even a trend outside the agile bubble.
Thanks Thomas
It has no sense to debate about leadership style inside a framework. Is totally contradictory because a framework is something you have to fill it up with tools and techniques that best fit for the current situation thinking in the future desire situatation to achieve. That´s the power of a framework. Scrum authors fall in the trap from the first versions not matter if you take the first versions of Scrum you will surprise on the difference with the current versions. In first versions there was a reason to talk about leadership. No more. I can say that because I talked with them a lot on the matter mainly with Ken Schwaber a person I have the pleasure to work with from 1995 up to date, on times where both authors were not cellebrities (hehehe) and we met at OOSPLA from more than 10 years each year to debate about new methods/frameworks too.
A rose by any other name...

Servant-leadership is one aspect of overall leadership. I'd argue that a leader who is ONLY a servant-leader may not be sufficient to lead complex initiatives which might explain why they are modifying the terminology.

The concept of host leadership is also becoming popular - it builds on the principles of servant-leadership.

Kiron
I believe the significance of the change from servant leader to "true" leader is only that the SM is deemed to be accountable for the performance of the team in the 2020 version of Scrum. Previously the Guide stated that the team should be collectively accountable.

Controversial maybe, but it seems OK in principle to include accountability as part of a framework (PRINCE2 has plenty to say about accountability for example). The "true leader" pleonasm is a bit unfortunate though.
A true leader includes being a servant leader, but in addition, a director, counselor, and inspirator. Giving direction and orientation to a team means you are serving them to attain common visions and ideals.
As per my understanding a true-leader is the one who always balance his Supporting and Directive behavior in proper scale (High/Med/low) and with desired style(Telling, Selling, Participating and Delegating) while dealing with different individuals and team.
I seem to think that terminology is perhaps not what we need to focus on to practice better or understand our practice. Should discussions about leadership perhaps focus more on outcomes, instead of labels?
...
1 reply by Paphatpisit Klinklan
Mar 05, 2021 3:28 AM
Paphatpisit Klinklan
...
I'm totally agree with Oliver Schneidemann comment.
https://www.scrum.org/resources/blog/words...ide-2020-update

"The 2017 guide used the term “Servant Leadership” to describe the style of leadership that serves Scrum Teams well. This idea is still valid, however, the 2020 Scrum Guide places more emphasis on leadership, removing the potential misinterpretation that Scrum Masters are servants first and leaders second. Understanding the idea of servant leadership is still valuable when using Scrum. "
Page: 1 2 next>  

Please login or join to reply

Content ID:
ADVERTISEMENTS

Whenever you are asked if you can do a job, tell 'em, "Certainly, I can!" Then get busy and find out how to do it.

- Theodore Roosevelt

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsors