Exploring the relationship between Servant leadership behaviors and the type of higher education institutions in the USA using a structural equation model

Abstract:

Background: Servant leadership (SL) is a multifaceted leadership approach in which leaders begin with the desire to help others before setting out to lead and develop them. It has been broadly accepted by organizations in the business, academic, social, healthcare, governmental, non-governmental, and political spheres. Higher education institutions (HEIs) play a key role in economic growth since they help a nation improve its sociocultural and developmental needs by producing the next generation of brilliant scholars, scientists, engineers, professionals, and technicians. The focus on the advancement of their followers sets servant leaders apart from other styles of leaders. The ultimate objective is to fulfill a greater purpose for the advantage of people, groups, and societies. Altruistic calling (AC), emotional healing (EH), wisdom (W), persuasive mapping (PM), and organizational stewardship (OS) were the five servant leadership qualities that were taken into account. Prior research mostly focused on the practices of servant leadership at institutions of higher learning without taking institution type into account.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to explore the relationship between the community colleges, minority-serving institutions, and mainstream higher education officials’ servant leadership behaviors and their demographic profiles using a structural equation model.

Methods: A cross-sectional study design and a quantitative methodology were used in this study. The information was gathered from community colleges, minority-serving institutions, and mainstream higher education institutions. The study's participants included 348 presidents or high-ranking officials. Male participants made up 58.9% of the participants. The participants were divided into the following age groups: 50.6% (age group 55–64), 28.2% (age group 35–54), and 17% (65 years and older). 52.6% of those with experience had one to ten years under their belts; the remaining 36.5% and 10.9%, however, had eleven to twenty-one and more years of academic experience and position, respectively. In terms of educational attainment, 92.5% of the participants had Ph.D. Two-part surveys were sent out via email to gather the data. Demographic questions, such as gender, age, experience, and level of education, were asked in the first section of the questionnaire. Items to measure servant leadership were included in the survey's second section. The frequency with which a person believes they display servant-leader attributes AC, EH, W, PM, and OS was assessed using the servant leadership questionnaire (SLQ) developed by Barbuto and Wheeler. By using demographic profiles as latent variables, structural equation modeling (SEM) with maximum likelihood estimation was used to investigate the association between the type of higher education institution officials' servant leadership practices. The data are assumed to be regularly distributed in covariance-based structural equation modeling (SEM). Statistical analysis was performed using STATA software package version 16, and we determined the skewness and kurtosis of each item.

Results: All mean servant leadership behavior dimensions are higher in mainstream higher education institutions followed by community college or technical institutions and minority-serving institutions. But, the servant leadership behaviors in all types of institutions are non-significant (p>0.05). Results of the structural equation model used to explore the relationship between the type of higher education institution officials and servant leadership behaviors by using demographic profiles as latent variables were reported. All paths in the model were significant (p < 0.001). The model had a satisfactory fit (χ2 = 26.98, comparative fit index (CFI) = .83, Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI) = 0.83, and root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.009). The model explained 63.5% of the variance in the type of institutions. The standardized path coefficient from servant leadership to the type of institution was 0.70 was significant (p < 0 .001). For servant leadership, 45.3% of the variance was explained by the five attributes.
Research Limitations/Implication: Although this research has theoretical and empirical implications, there are some limitations that should be taken into account when evaluating the findings. First off, the limitations of our research methodologies prevent us from creating a cause-and-effect relationship between the factors we looked at. As a result, longitudinal research should be considered in future studies. Since we conducted our research in the higher education sector in the USA, outcomes may be influenced by cultural factors. Future research may therefore think about gathering information from other contexts. For many years, practitioners have concentrated on strategies and interventions for leadership development; nevertheless, the importance of these interventions is now at the forefront of leadership practice, particularly at higher education institutions. Further research is required to further understand how servant leaders use their compassion, wisdom, and emotional healing as leadership qualities to foster a supportive atmosphere for their followers.