From my teenage years onward, I’ve consistently embraced the concept of servant leadership, a philosophy instilled in me during my high school years. My school actively encouraged its leaders to serve others and cultivate growth within the school community, aligning with the definition of servant leadership that emphasizes establishing a serving connection for the development of others (Secretan, 2004, p.152, as referenced in Workman & Cleveland-Innes, 2012).
I believe servanthood leadership also necessitates charisma, with leaders involving individuals in the team’s vision to secure genuine commitment. Liu et al. (2015) characterize such leaders as possessing the capacity to “convey positive emotions and a beautiful vision to their employees who will be unconsciously influenced” (p. 147). Although this may sound deceptive ,I think the key to good leadership is the leader’s capacity to inspire the team with a compelling story or vision that ignites the team and gives it direction. These servant leaders also monitor and reflect on themselves, gathering and evaluating constructive feedback to improve their effectiveness and general performance (McDaniel & Dibella-McCarthy, 2012, p. 669).
While working on our team activity, we agreed that the three paramount qualities crucial for an effective leader were the ability to inspire, competence, and a forward-looking perspective.I believe these qualities are also crucial for a “ digital leader,” where one has a competency and understanding of technology and the ability to use it to propel creativity, productivity, and constructive change inside a digital learning environment. Per Castelli (2016, p218), reflective leadership incorporates a forward-looking aspect involving the contemplation of past experiences and their consequences, with the objective of “improving future organizational performance.” An inspiring leader within the digital learning environment cultivates a shared vision, encourages creativity, and empowers individuals to reach their full potential. They create an environment where people are motivated to work towards common goals, and their energy and charisma leave a lasting impact on those they lead. Such leaders are also transparent and self-aware, with the ability to evaluate their strengths and stretches and also being able to be open of their shortcomings, making them more “ human” and accessible (Castelli, 2016. 219). I believe a digital leader should also possess an “ open door policy “ that makes them more approachable, thereby encouraging trust building, especially in an online environment where one cannot entirely rely on face-to-face interactions and non-verbal cues to build trust (Castelli, 2016, p222) .
As a student learning within an online digital environment, one thing I found surprising in the readings was the notion that the educational setting can be seen as a form of transactional leadership where a student gets rewarded for their work by getting a passing grade from the teacher (Khan, 2017). I had never thought of this before, but looking at it now, the educational setting does create a transactional leadership that may lead to a more centralized decision-making structure, limiting the autonomy of teachers and students by having set standards of teaching and assessment that must be adhered to. This lack of autonomy can hinder teacher’s ability to tailor their teaching methods to the unique needs of their students.
In my work setting, which is also an education setting, the continuous assessment of technology’s impact on students’ learning outcomes is necessary to improve our implementation. Our organizational leaders have started reflecting on this, evaluating and fine-tuning strategies, and identifying areas for improvement in technology integration for children with learning disabilities. With the constant rise of new technologies, forward-thinking approaches are necessary for the organization to “ plan for a changing world” and have a visionary approach to helping students (Khan, 2017) .
I believe digital leaders need to be visionary leaders who venture into uncharted territories, creating a different narrative and collaboratively providing innovative online environments that foster growth (Gardner,2011, p. 10, as cited by Workman & Cleveland-Innes, 2012).
References
Castelli, P. A. (2016). Reflective leadership review: a framework for improving organisational performance. Journal of Management Development, 35(2), 217–236. https://doi.org/10.1108/jmd-08-2015-0112
Khan, N. (2017). Adaptive or Transactional leadership in current Higher Education: A brief comparison. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 18(3). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v18i3.3294
Liu, Y., Jing, Y., & Gao, M. (2015). Transformational leadership: From the perspective of neurological leadership. Open Journal of Leadership, 04(04), 143–152. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojl.2015.44013
McDaniel, E., & Dibella-McCarthy, H. (2012). Reflective leaders become causal agents of change. Journal of Management Development, 31(7), 663–671. https://doi.org/10.1108/02621711211243863
Workman, T., & Cleveland-Innes, M. (2012). Leadership, personal transformation, and management. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 13(4), 313-323. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v13i4.1383
Thanks for your post and your exploration of the attributes that help underpin servant and reflective approaches to leadership. I was intrigued by your discussion of your current organizational context where “the continuous assessment of technology’s impact on students’ learning outcomes is necessary to improve our implementation. Our organizational leaders have started reflecting on this, evaluating and fine-tuning strategies, and identifying areas for improvement in technology integration for children with learning disabilities. Can you share some of your early thoughts and strategies? Technology can pose both supports for learning, but also can introduce new (often unintended) barriers, so I am always interested in how we as educators attend to both aspects. It often takes asking critical questions and listening to feedback – elements of a reflective leadership approach.
Hi Michelle
Thank you for your response. It is definitely a double-edged sword to introduce technology to students. The initial stages of introducing new technologies have involved surveying staff about their comfort with using technology. This would give the organization a better idea of the training that is needed because once staff are more comfortable with using the technologies, they are more willing to introduce the different tools to students .
I hope that is helpful.
I really enjoyed your blog post, Ano, and I can see your personal reflections coming through from our group discussion as well. One thing your post has made me think about is the specific qualities of a leader in the digital learning space versus more analogue learning spaces, such as traditional classroom settings. Do you think there are any leadership characteristics which are more effective in digital learning environments than analogue environments, and if so which skills do think leaders would need to acquire if they were to transition to digital learning?
Also, I’ve really enjoyed working with you in this course so far and I referenced something you said in our group meeting in my own blog! They were wise words.
Hi Andrea
Thank you for the feedback. I have really enjoyed working with you as well! I have learned a lot from you.
I think that some leadership characteristics apply more to digital environments than analogue, such as possessing an “open door ” policy. While this is important in analogue environments, it is imperative in digital environments. People cannot rely on other cues, such as body language and tone when interacting online with a leader. Having an open door policy as a leader allows room for clarification and can make communication more efficient, thereby avoiding misunderstandings.
I hope that answers your question!