310233-Text de L'article-438334-1-10-20160620

1
SERVANT LEADERSHIP,
EMPOWERMENT CLIMATE,
AND GROUP CREATIVITY:
A CASE STUDY IN THE
HOSPITALITY INDUSTRY
Jorge Linuesa-Langreo, Pablo Ruiz-Palomino & Dioni Elche
Abstract: Leadership, due to its power to influence, is one of the most

important tools available to organisation in order to become competitive,
and as such it is one of the recurring themes in social sciences. Today,
new leadership strategies have emerged as new drivers of effectiveness in
workplace relationships based on the leader–follower relationship. One
of these leadership strategies is servant leadership, whose motto is ‘put
and promote followers’ interests and needs first’, which makes this
leadership style strongly linked to exercising high ethics. As agapao love
and service to others are important distinctive features of these leaders’
decisions and behaviours, the ethical influence relationship with their
collaborators is thought to reach high levels. It is no surprise then that
this ethical influence relationship makes followers to serve others and
inculcates in followers values such as acceptance, tolerance, empathy, love,
or forgiveness. More importantly, these leaders might make followers to
grow in matureness, intelligence, creativity, and self-management, among
other aspects. However, despite findings in recent literature of positive
effects of servant leadership on valuable employee outcomes, research is
still lacking on the results of this phenomenon on collective organisa-
tional variables and its influence in work groups. A case study analysis of
a historic and emblematic hotel situated in a small Spanish city declared
Ramon Llull Journal_07.indd 9 30/05/16 11:56

10 ramon llull journal of applied ethics 2016. issue 7 pp. 9-36
by UNESCO as a World Heritage Site provides evidence of the relation-

ship between servant leadership and valuable work-group outcomes such
as empowerment climate and group creativity.
Keywords: ethical leadership, servant leadership, empowerment

climate, group creativity, work group, hospitality industry.
1. INTRODUCTION
Bandura’s (1986) social cognitive theory indicates that individuals learn

and change their behaviour not only by direct experience, but also through
models to follow in their immediate work environment. Leaders are
usually considered role models in work environments and represent an
essential element for achieving the objectives of work groups (Kark &
Van Dijk, 2007) through building adequate climates and inspiring correct
behavioural and attitudinal models. Increasingly, new effective leadership
theories stress the importance of listening, appreciating, valuing, and
empowering employees (Van Dierendonck, Stam, Boersma, de Windt
& Alkema, 2013), to get the maximum performance in the work group.
That is the case of servant leadership (Greenleaf, 1977; Greenleaf &
Spears, 2002), which emphasises service to others –the continuous and
friendly attention to the needs of followers– and promote followers to
build a more humane future. Because this leadership strategy concerns
the interests of their fellow workers over self-interest (Patterson, 2004),
and makes these leaders be servants in their relationships with others
(Russell & Stone, 2002), unethical implications are less probable to occur.
Rather, these leaders, who base their relationships with followers on the
agapao love dimension (Patterson, 2004), are probable to keep up a
logic of giving cognitive schema that according to Torralba (2012) gener-
ates communion, cohesion, emotional bonds and sense of belonging in
their fellow workers. Moreover, these leaders are likely to build an ethi-
cal work climate that frees employees from the need to guard self-interest
and elevates them to a high level of moral reasoning, as well as inform
about the own needs and inquire about the needs and interests of oth-
ers to serve them. This is the seed promoting a type of functioning in
work groups governed by empowerment (Russell & Stone, 2002), that
fosters opportunities for wide participation in discussions about policies
and practices (Graham, 1995). Thus, it is no surprise that this leadership

Linuesa 11
SERVANT LEADERSHIP, EMPOWERMENT CLIMATE, AND GROUP
CREATIVITY: A CASE STUDY IN THE HOSPITALITY INDUSTRY
strategy, when authentically performed, exerts positive effects on follow-

ers and work groups (Van Dierendonck & Nuijten, 2011).
Increasingly today, the pressure to find new business models in dy-
namic and uncertain environments requires managers to adapt the labour
structure that has traditionally been configured around employees by, for
example, introducing new change-oriented and group-based work designs
(Lawler & Worley, 2006). In fact, the use of work groups in some or-
ganisations and sectors is essential for the development of objectives and
for raising competitiveness. Thus, in this article the unit of analysis is the
work group which provides a better understanding of group creativity
(Shalley & Gilson, 2004) and empowerment climate (Seibert, Silver &
Randolph, 2004; Seibert, Wang, & Courtright, 2011) as valuable or-
ganisational outcomes raised thanks to performing servant leadership in
work groups.
Empowerment has been seen as a powerful mechanism for increasing
employee involvement and commitment (Lawler, 1986) and allowing
organisations to be more competitive and responsive (Kirkman & Rosen,
1999). Typically, empowered work groups have greater authority and
responsibility for their work than more traditional work groups do, and
their effectiveness is determined, in part, by the receptiveness or power
to organize them within which they operate (Hyatt & Ruddy, 1997).
This is easy to occur in those organisations where servant leaders are
present since these leaders, through their dimension of service to follow-
ers, make the development of intrinsic motivation and empowerment a
priority (Ehrhart, 2004) in order to achieve autonomous and motivated
followers in the work group.
Creativity, at the group level, is a function of group processes that
include the development of shared information and knowledge, participa-
tion in decision-making, conflict management in an effective manner, and
the development of members’ integration skills (West, 2002). This aspect
is easily promoted by servant leadership since this leadership is usually
labelled as participative, encouraging followers to grow intelligently and
be creative and serve people (Barbuto & Wheeler, 2006). Thus, creativ-
ity is fostered when employees have a relatively high autonomy and have
a sense of ownership and control over their own work and their own
ideas (Amabile, Conti, Coon, Lazenby, & Herron, 1996), which is more
probable in the presence of servant leaders who usually articulate empow-
ering policies to create psychologically empowered subordinates. In such
work contexts, the followers see themselves as more capable of shaping

work roles and work contexts, and therefore more motivated to try creative
approaches to solving problems and performing tasks (Spreitzer, 1995).
In this article, we analyse the importance of servant leadership within
an organisation and its positive effects within a group. Specifically, we
investigate whether servant leadership generates a greater empowerment
climate and whether servant leadership increases group creativity. Also,
as there is some literature suggesting a potential positive relationship
between these output organisational variables (Moulang, 2013), we will
examine that in work contexts where empowerment climate is present
group creativity appears to a high extent. Although servant leadership is
applicable to the management role regardless of the hierarchical level, in
this study we focus on leaders who work in groups and closely with
group members on a daily basis. Leaders at the intermediate level who
tend to work closely with subordinates are likely to exert greater influ-
ences on their behaviour (Mayer, Bardes & Piccolo, 2008; Walumbwa,
Hartnell, & Oke, 2010). Thus, the following research questions will be
examined. Servant leadership increases within work group both 1) em-
powerment climate, 2) group creativity, and 3) there is a positive relation-
ship between empowerment climate and group creativity. In order to
answer these questions, we use the case study methodology to better
understand the mechanisms involved in the development of servant
leadership. Because in the hospitality industry service is one principal axis
of its operative and success, one representative firm in the tourism sector
–a landmark hotel with a long tradition in Cuenca, a small city in Spain
declared by UNESCO as a World Heritage Site– was selected to test our
research questions.
The structure of this paper is as follows: In the next section, we discuss
the concept of servant leadership, the central topic of this work. Then,
we explain in more detail the relationship between servant leadership and
the empowerment climate and group creativity. Next, we present the
methodology and provide the results of the case study. In the last section,
we discuss the main conclusions drawn from the study, the practical
implications, limitations and possibilities for future research.
2. SERVANT LEADERSHIP: CONCEPT AND DIMENSIONS
Leadership is one of the most important instruments available to or-

ganisations to become competitive. As such, one of the recurring themes

Linuesa 13
in management science is to search the key features of effective leadership

(Bass, 1990). Thus, current studies have demonstrated that the moral
dimension is an essential ingredient to obtain this effectiveness (Ciulla,
2004), and new approaches focused on the leader–follower relationship
have consequently emerged to improve understanding of the leadership
concept (Avolio & Gardner, 2005; Bass, 1985; Fry, 2003; Greenleaf,
1977). In fact, recent literature indicates that only when the leader-fol-
lower relationship is a right process of influence that contributes to human
development of the follower, the leadership can be effective (Guillén,
2006). Thus, some important ethical-based perspectives of relational
leadership have emerged in the past decades: transformational leadership
(Bass, 1985), authentic leadership (Avolio & Gardner, 2005), spiritual
leadership (Fry, 2003), and servant leadership (Greenleaf, 1977).
Although unlike traditional leadership styles, relational leadership
approaches, focused on the leader-follower relationship, incorporates the
role of followers and their needs to lead in an effective manner, a com-
parative analysis of these leadership styles enables us to identify that eth-
ics is a convergent theme (Farling, Stone, & Winston, 1999; Van Dier-
endonck et al., 2013). Also, this comparison enables us to conclude that
servant leadership is the crucible where all these approaches merge in
ethical terms. In particular, servant leadership is the leadership style that
encompasses the highest levels of morality and human kindness (Ehrhart,
2004; Mayer et al., 2008).
Greenleaf (1970, p. 4) coined the concept of servant leadership, though
he failed to give a formal definition, and described the phenomenon of
servant leadership as:
It [servant leadership] begins with the natural feeling that one wants to
serve. Then conscious choice brings one to aspire to lead. The difference
manifests itself in the care the servant takes – first to ensure that other peo-
ple’s highest priority needs are served. The best test is: Do those served grow
as persons; do they, while being served, become healthier, wiser, freer, more
autonomous, and more likely themselves to become servants?
In order to understand its essence, we learn from this definition that

servant leadership puts and promotes followers’ interests first (Barbuto
& Wheeler, 2006; Greenleaf, 1977). Servant leaders encourage followers
to grow intelligently, be creative, self-manage, and serve people. This leads
to the betterment of society and advocates acceptance, tolerance, empathy,

love, forgiveness, and adherence to the Ethical Golden Rule of ‘do unto
others as you shall have them do unto you’. Therefore, Greenleaf (1977)
conceptualized servant leadership as a lifestyle rather than a technique of
management. Perhaps this notion complicated the recognition of this
leadership theory and drove scholars to question how it could be em-
pirically tested (Parris & Peachey, 2013), bringing about a proliferation
of theoretical frameworks and measurement instruments which define
this concept in a more academic manner. Thus, recently, Ehrhart (2004)
conducted a thorough review of the literature and identified seven dimen-
sions of servant leadership. The first dimension involves forming relation-
ships with followers, such as when servant leaders spend quality time and
develops interpersonal ties with their followers. Second, servant leaders
empower followers, giving them more strength and autonomy. Third,
servant leaders also help followers grow and succeed through serving
them: they provide opportunities for followers to develop their skills.
Fourth, servant leaders behave ethically; thus, servant leadership fosters
greater ethical values in followers. Fifth, these leaders have conceptual
skills, manifested in their daily work. Sixth, this leadership put followers
first, by promoting followers success. Finally, servant leaders create
value for those outside the organisation, by encouraging followers to
give back to the community all material and immaterial gifts they have
previously received.
Although abundant literature has been dedicated to capture the essence
of servant leadership (Spears, 1998; Liden, Wayne, Zhao, & Henderson,
2008; Van Dierendonck & Nuijten, 2001), there are many studies that
have dedicated their efforts to study the effects of servant leadership (Jo-
seph & Winston, 2005; Walumbwa et al., 2010; Hu & Liden, 2011),
showing positive effects on the organisation and the leader-follower rela-
tionship. For example, Walumbwa, Hartnell and Oke (2010) carried out
a research in seven Kenyan multinational companies with 815 employees
and 123 work groups. This study showed that the presence of servant
leadership in the work group creates a greater commitment to the super-
visor. This relationship is justified because servant leaders are strongly
concerned with developing their followers, which imbues positive psy-
chological and affective benefits in them (e.g. gratitude and trust). An-
other study which merits being highlighted is Hu and Liden (2011) re-
search in five banks of China with 304 employees in 71 work groups.
Hu and Liden (2011) revealed that servant leadership functions at both
individual and group levels. At the group level, servant leadership served

Linuesa 15
as a type of “ambient stimulus” around inspiring servant attitudes to all

members of the work group. At the individual level, work group members
reciprocate this servant attitude by exerting extra job effort, thus improv-
ing their work group effectiveness.
In general, these studies have shown the positive effects of servant
leadership on the organisation and especially on the leader–follower re-
lationship. Thus, according to the social learning theory, individuals learn
by “paying attention to and emulating the attitudes, values and behaviours
of attractive and credible models” (Brown & Treviño, 2006: 597). Fol-
lowers perceive servant leaders as attractive because servant leaders em-
phasize the development of others and place the good of those led over
their own interests (Hale & Fields, 2007). It is of no surprise then that
leaders who satisfy the needs of their followers are likely to generate at-
titudes and desires among followers to put forth their best for the benefit
of the organisation, resulting in a greater job satisfaction (Mayer et al.,
2008) and lower employee turnover (Jaramillo, Grisaffe, Chonko, &
Roberts, 2009), among other positive outcomes. However, the effects of
servant leadership are not only orientated to improve the leader-follower
relationship, but also to develop an organisational work climate that in-
spires a greater sense of community upon its human members (Han,
Kakabadse, & Kakabadse, 2010).
3. BENEFITS OF SERVANT LEADERSHIP WITH THE WORK

GROUP
Although literature suggests positive relationships between servant

leadership and individual and organisational valuable outcomes, these
relationships still need better understanding in work groups. Thus, on
a group level basis, we will discuss below that along with higher pres-
ence of servant leadership in work groups, empowerment climate and
group creativity will reach high levels. Also, group creativity will be
addressed here to be higher in presence of servant leadership because
empowerment climate is high at the same time. This thesis is outlined
as a theoretical model in Figure 1, which helps to understand better our
research purposes and serves as a guide for our theoretical arguments
provided below.

RQ1 + Empowerment
Climate
Servant RQ3 +
Leadership
RQ2 +
Group
Creativity
Figure 1. The Servant Leadership effects on Empowerment Climate

and Group Creativity.
3.1. Servant leadership and empowerment climate
Two major perspectives on the empowerment phenomenon have

emerged to develop a fuller understanding of the nature of empowerment.
On the one side, psychological empowerment –at the individual level– is
defined as intrinsic task motivation reflecting a sense of control in relation
to one’s work and an active orientation to one’s work role (Thomas &
Velthouse, 1990). On the other side, early socio-structural approaches
regarded the empowerment climate –at the group level– as a set of shared
perceptions regarding the structures, policies, and practices designed to
decentralise power and authority throughout the organisation, enabling
employees to take and make appropriate actions and decisions (Kirkman,
Rosen, Tesluk, & Gibson, 2004). Thus, at the group level, three key
organisational practices can be identified in empowerment climates (Ran-
dolph, 1995; Seibert et al., 2004): a) information sharing, involving that
sensitive information is provided to employees, b) autonomy through
boundaries, entailing organisational structures and practices that encour-
age autonomous action in the work group, and c) team accountability,
involving that work groups are accountable for their own group perfor-
mance.
Based on self-determination theory (Gagne & Deci, 2005), servant
leadership might be a good strategy to promote all these organisational
practices in the work group context. According to this theoretical frame-
work, an autonomy-supportive leader fosters job designs incorporating
motivational job core characteristics (i.e. skill variety, task identity, task
significance, autonomy, and feedback), thus enhancing intrinsic motiva-
tion and providing empowerment within the work group (Menon, 2001).
It is of no surprise then that servant leaders might be very useful in foster-
ing an empowerment climate. Servant leaders characterize for believing

Linuesa 17
in the intrinsic value of their followers, respecting their capabilities and

enabling them to exercise their own abilities as well as to share power and
information (Hannay, 2009). Core features of this leadership strategy
are, for example, helping followers achieve a high level of accomplishment
(Russell, 2001) as well as design structures to foster a proactive, self-
confident attitude and a sense of power within the work group (Winston,
2003; Ehrhart, 2004; Sendjaya, Sarros, & Santora, 2008). Moreover,
servant leaders are conceptualized to value people for what they are, en-
couraging their personal and professional development (Laub, 1999). In
fact, paradoxically though, a servant leader increases his/her power because
followers know that meeting their interests and needs is always in the
leader’s mind. Thus,
Research Question 1: Servant leadership increases empowerment

climate within work group
3.2. Servant leadership and group creativity
To maintain or enhance effectiveness within rapidly changing and

extremely competitive environments, corporations must be creative at
the individual, group, and organisational levels (Mumford, Scott, Gaddis,
& Strange, 2002). Most of the research on creativity has focused on in-
dividual traits, abilities, and cognitive styles (Shalley, Zhou, & Oldham,
2004) that allow for the development of novel and useful ideas concern-
ing products, services, processes and procedures (Amabile et al., 1996).
However, both group and organisational features are also important in
promoting creativity in organisations. Thus, creativity is usually consid-
ered as a function of group processes, structure and characteristics (Jung,
2001; Shalley & Gilson, 2004) which fosters, among other aspects, in-
formation and knowledge sharing, decision-making involvement, and
members integration and social skills development (West, 2002).
Leadership, according to the input–process–output model (Shalley et
al., 2004), is one important element to develop the above mentioned
aspects. In fact, leaders contribute actively to the production of creative
ideas through their leader expertise, creative problem solving and social
skills (Mumford et al., 2002), and servant leaders might serve as good
creativity boosters within the work group. O’Hara & Sternberg (2001)
found that participative leadership, a typical servant leadership feature,

improved group creativity through promoting group members’ engage-

ment and through reducing interpersonal conflict within the work group.
This is so because, based on Bandura’s social cognitive theory (Bandura,
1986), the stronger, closer, and narrower relationship between leaders
and followers, which seems to be encouraged when servant leadership is
present, the easier it is for employees to learn the values and norms lived
and practiced by the leader (Melé, 2003; Ruiz, Martínez, & Rodrigo,
2010). As such, given that servant leadership provides for vision, motiva-
tion, intellectual curiosity, constructive attitudes to problems, information
searching, and assumptions questioning (Mumford et al., 2002; Zhang,
Tsui, & Wang, 2011), this leadership style seems useful to build a creative
climate within the work group. Thus,
Research Question 2: Servant leadership increases group creativity

within the work group
3.3. Empowerment climate and group creativity
Creativity is a process of destroying established rules to develop new

ones, a process of breaking through and reforming the various limited
conditions, and a process which indicates the reform of elements which
are already in existence (Si & Wei, 2012). This process is easily performed
by empowered people because they see the meaning of their jobs, which
serves as the ‘engine’ that energises them to achieve something of signifi-
cance. They are further energised if they see that their work will have an
impact and contribute to the achievement of collective goals (Spreitzer,
Kizilos, & Nason, 1997). Thus, given that a work group produces more
creative work when its members perceive themselves as having interper-
sonal control over how to accomplish their own tasks (Jung & Sosik,
2002), self-determination and empowerment climate are important de-
terminants of group creativity. In other words, conditions that allow a
group to work in accordance with their own creative process encourage
and nurture creative performance.
Self-determination theory, which favours to boost inter-connected
relationships and autonomy to realize employees’ inherent growth
tendencies to self-motivate at work (e.g. Gagne & Deci, 2005; Deci &
Ryan, 2002) provides the theoretical underpinning for group creativ-
ity to occur. Thus, group creativity is fostered when work group

Linuesa 19
members have high autonomy in their daily work and a sense of own-
ership and control over their own work and ideas (Sun, Zhang, Qi, &
Chen, 2012). The shared perception of empowering policies and prac-
tices leads to changes in subordinates’ psychological states of empower-
ment, which in turn influences their work group creativity (Moulang,
2013; Wei, Yuan, & Di, 2010). In fact, the degree to which an empow-
erment culture is established may lead to employees’ perceptions of
increased creative requirement for the work group (Unsworth, Wall,
& Carter, 2005).
Employees who decide on day-to-day issues are more likely to come
across situations that require ideas generation. More importantly, when
work group members perceive that their job requirements are meaning-
ful, creative activities might increase strongly. For example, they are more
likely to put more effort into understanding a problem and generate a
significant number of alternatives through connecting various sources of
information within the work group (Gilson & Shalley, 2004). Thus,
when people within the work group possess autonomy, a sense of ac-
countability and the ability to perform a task freely, that is, self-determi-
nation over job execution, they are more oriented to explore new cogni-
tive pathways, and feel comfortable providing new ideas (Amabile et al.,
1996; Zhang & Bartol, 2010). Thus,
Research Question 3: Empowerment climate increases group crea-

tivity within the work group
4. RESEARCH FRAMEWORK
4.1. The case study: A landmark hotel in a historical

city in Spain
Culture has become an innovative and coherent platform of develop-

ment for the current knowledge society (Sacco, Blessi, & Nuccio, 2009).
Over the last decades, urban cultural tourism has become a means of
social and economic regeneration because of its potential for sustainable
local development, especially in historic small and medium-sized cities
(Richards & Wilson, 2006). In this context, Cuenca is a good example
of these cities, as it offers visitors the possibility of enjoying their natural
and cultural attractives. The tourism resources of Cuenca are based on a

natural and historical heritage that provides a wide range of creative,

cultural, and artistic activities; which makes this site to be a competitive
tourism destination in Spain. Cuenca is also included in the list of UN-
ESCO’s World Heritage Sites, which constitutes a benchmark in terms
of cultural and urban tourism.
In these cities the majority of firms are small and medium-sized, and
they manage to remain competitive due to the establishment of relations
and networks with internal and external agents (Martínez-Pérez, García-
Villaverde, & Elche, 2014). They collaborate with a great diversity of
organisations what allow them to supply high-quality customer-oriented
products and services. In these circumstances, the internal factors such as
servant leadership, empowerment climate and group creativity become
critical variables in order to maintain high effectiveness and competitive-
ness levels within the organisation.
The case study involves a hotel located in Cuenca. This hotel has more
than 50 years of history and is considered as a symbolic lodging firm. The
structure of hotel is formed by four work groups: kitchen, restaurant,
reception, and room service, each one led by a different supervisor. The
whole workforce is headed by a general manager and an economic-finan-
cial manager. The average age of the hotel employees is approximately
35 years, which is still a very young and dynamic workforce. Permanent
contracts account for more than 90%, which increases with temporary
contracts during peak periods. Importantly, 82% of the hotel employees
are women. Finally, in general, the educational level in the hotel staff (in
more than the 86% of cases) is vocational training.
4.2. Data collection and measurement variables
In order to study how the practices of servant leadership generate

empowerment climate and creativity within the work groups a case study
is used. Case study is a research methodology quite common in strategic
management which allows the investigation of complex and unexplained
phenomena in a multidimensional approach (Galli & Müller-Stewens,
2012). This exploratory method is suitable in the earliest stages of research
because it is a flexible method (Eisenhardt, 1989), which provides spe-
cific nuances about the facts due to a more direct perspective. Thus, the
experience of a landmark hotel with a long tradition in a Spanish city
declared a world heritage site seems sufficiently illustrative to extend our

Linuesa 21
findings to other firms in the hospitality industry in the geographic and

cultural area of the study.
According to the case study literature, multiple sources of information
are required concerning different levels of analysis such as interviews,
questionnaires, and direct observations (Eisenhardt, 1989; Eisenhardt &
Graebner, 2007; Yin, 2013). In this article the data was collected through
questionnaires in three levels. Specifically, we designed different question-
naire forms for the employees and the work groups’ supervisors. The
former assesses employees’ perceptions about the leadership of their su-
pervisor, as well as the empowerment climate and group creativity of
their work group. The latter only includes questions about the empower-
ment climate and creativity of the work group. Finally, an interview with
the hotel manager supplied additional comprehensive information about
the organisational structure and policies of the hotel.
In order to measure our study variables, existing seven-point Likert
scales were used. The measure for the different scales items ranged between
1 (totally disagree) to 7 (totally agree). To test our research questions, we
used a descriptive analysis in SPSS version 22. The individual scores for
each group were added and averaged for each work group to build our
three study variables: servant leadership, empowerment climate and group
creativity.
Servant leadership. According to Ehrhart (2004), we used a fourteen-item

scale where employees assessed to what extent their direct supervisor encom-
passes servant leadership features. Sample items include “My work group su-
pervisor spends the time to form quality relationships with employees” and
“My work group supervisor creates a sense of community among employees”.
This scale describe seven characteristic dimensions of servant leadership: 1)
forming relationships with followers, 2) empowering followers, 3) helping
followers grow and succeed, 4) behaving ethically, 5) having conceptual
skills, 6) putting followers first, and 7) creating value for those outside of
the hotel. This variable is included in the questionnaire of employees and
measures the servant leadership of their supervisor within each different work
group.
Empowerment climate. Following Seibert et al. (2004) we used a six-item
scale to measure this variable. Employees were asked about the empowerment
atmosphere they daily observe in their work group. Sample items include “We
have created structures and procedures that encourage and expect people to
take initiative in improving work group performance” and “My work group

recognizes individuals for taking initiative”. This scale includes three dimen-
sions of empowerment climate: 1) information sharing, 2) autonomy through
boundaries and 3) team accountability. Since literature suggests that the climate
is generated through bottom-up emergent processes (Gilson & Shalley, 2004),
we grouped individual scores of each group and obtained the measurement of
empowerment at the group level. This variable was measured by employees
and supervisors of each work group. No significant differences between both
evaluations were observed.
Group creativity. We used the three-item scale used by Valentine, Godkin,
Fleischman & Kidwell (2011) to measure this group aspect. Employees were
asked about the level of innovation in their work groups. Some sample items
are, for example, “As a whole, my work group and I welcome change”, and
“My work group and I encourage each other to try new things, even though
they might not work’’. Employees and supervisors of each work group answered
these questions and no significant differences were found between both re-
sponses.
In order to complete the information obtained through the question-

naires, we also carried out personal semi-structured interviews with the
hotel manager and four supervisors. The interviews were focused on
the three main variables of our research: 1) servant leadership practices,
2) policies and practices focused on developing empowerment within
the work group, and 3) creativity experiences of the work group. For
example, they included questions about the strategic orientation and hu-
man resources management policies of the hotel and work groups (e.g.
Describe the structures and procedures that encourage people to take
initiative in improving the work group performance), items regarding the
supervisor’s style of leadership (e.g. Has your supervisor spent enough
time to form quality relationships with the employees? Are his/her
decisions influenced by employee’s input?), and some items about the
work group creativity process (e.g. In the last year, describe three
stages where your work group have been willing to try creative solutions
to address difficult problems).
All these interviews were conducted over several weeks, and partici-
pants were asked not to share information about the interviews with their
colleagues. According to Galli & Müller-Stewens (2012), anonymity and
confidentiality were assured in the whole process. This information was
completed and enriched by observing directly how daily tasks are devel-
oped in each work group and by speaking informally with the employees.

Linuesa 23
Therefore, the use of multiple sources of evidence ensured the triangula-

tion principle (e.g. Yin, 2013) allowing us to check that the data from
different sources converge and are reliable for the purposes of our study.
5. RESULTS
Our descriptive analysis of the three study variables is displayed in

table 1, where the group-level data is observed. The mean score obtained
for empowerment climate (MEC = 5.27) and group creativity (MGC = 5.09)
is very similar, and proximal to the mean of servant leadership (MSL = 5.83).
Thus, servant leadership in this hotel is perfectly aligned with higher
perceptions of group creativity and empowerment climate within the
work group. Regarding data dispersion, we find that servant leadership
(SDSL = 0.80), group creativity (SDGC = 1.23), and empowerment climate
(SDEC = 1.31) all have a low standard deviation, indicating that there is
a great homogeneity in the assessments done by the respondents.
Table 1. Descriptive statistics of the study variables at the group-level
Variables Mean (M) Standard deviation (SD)

Servant Leadership (SL) 5.83 0.80
Group Creativity (GC) 5.09 1.23
Empowerment Climate (EC) 5.27 1.31
Notes. M and SD refer to mean and standard deviation, respectively.
Assessments were made on a seven-point Likert scale, where the mean value is 4.
Figure 2 shows graphically the average scores of servant leadership,

group creativity, and empowerment climate in the work group. The
graphic shows that if there are high levels of servant leadership in super-
visory roles, there will be high levels of empowerment climate and high
levels of group creativity. This is quite evident in the kitchen work group
as well as in the restaurant work group which have the highest ratings of
servant leadership (MSL = 6.04; MSL = 6.50, respectively) and also the
highest scores regarding empowerment climate (MEC = 5.92; MEC = 5.96,
respectively) and group creativity (MGC = 5.27; MGC = 5.67, respectively).
A similar behavioural pattern is noted in the reception and room service
work groups. In these cases, the lower ratings in servant leadership

1
Servant Leadership (SL) Group Creativity (GC) Empowerment Climate (EC)
Reception Kitchen Restaurant Room service
Figure 2. Average scores of the study variables at work group.
(MSL = 5.25; MSL = 5.55, respectively) correspond to lower scores in

empowerment climate (MEC = 4.71; MEC = 4.52, respectively) and group
creativity (MGC = 4.93; MGC = 4.52, respectively), though these ratings
always represent high levels in the scale (the mean of the scale is 4.00).
However, as observed in Figure 2, empowerment climate in both of these
two last work groups is strongly lower relative to ratings observed in the
kitchen and restaurant work groups.
In order to investigate more thoroughly into the relations studied in
this hotel, we analysed the behavioural pattern of the distinct dimensions
of servant leadership and empowerment climate (Table 2). Concerning
servant leadership, homogeneity in most dimensions was observed, spe-
cifically in forming relationships with subordinates (M = 6.04), empow-
ering subordinates (M = 5.94), helping subordinates grow and succeed
(M = 5.96), behaving ethically (M = 5.79), having conceptual skills
(M = 6.19), and putting subordinates first (M = 6.04). Despite some
discrepancies observed regarding the dimension of creating value for those
outside the hotel (M = 4.88), it represents a mean rating that is above the
mean of the scale. Concerning empowerment climate, there is no percep-
tible dispersion among the distinct dimensions of information sharing
(M = 5.15), autonomy through boundaries (M = 5.21), and team ac-
countability (M = 5.46).

Linuesa 25
Table 2. Dimensional analysis of the study variables

Servant Leadership M SD
Forming relationships with subordinates 6.04 0.80
Empowering subordinates 5.94 0.78
Helping subordinates grow and succeed 5.96 0.55
Behaving ethically 5.79 0.94
Having conceptual skills 6.19 0.46
Putting subordinates first 6.04 0.49
Creating value for those outside the hotel 4.88 0.92
Empowerment Climate M SD
Information sharing 5.15 0.97
Autonomy through boundaries 5.21 0.95
Team accountability 5.46 0.82
Notes. M and SD refer to mean and standard deviation, respectively.
Assessments were made on a seven-point Likert scale, where the mean value is 4
Based on the data of the dimensional analysis realized, Figure 3 shows

that the kitchen and restaurant work groups, except in the servant leader-
ship dimension of helping subordinates grow and succeed, generally
maintain the highest values in all dimensions of servant leadership and
empowerment climate. However, the reception and room service work
groups present lower scores in all dimensions analysed for both organi-
sational variables.
The direct observations and the interviews which we carried out with
the hotel manager and four supervisors aimed at collecting first-hand
information, were rather helpful to complete the survey quantitative data.
The interview with the hotel manager allowed us to understand the cul-
ture of the hotel. It is a culture where the employees represent a crucial
element when designing the organisational strategy. For years, this hotel
has maintained a strategy based on developing participative leadership,
creating a platform that promotes a culture of shared leadership. Also,
the hotel has implemented several successful human resources practices
that give value to employees such as coaching, mentoring, job assignment,
and training. In this sense, the manager explains:

1
Forming Empowering Helping Behaving Having Putting Creating value Information Autonomy Team
relationships subordinates subordinates ethically conceptual subordinates for those Sharing through accountability
with grow and skills first outside the boundaries
subordinates succeed organization
Servant Leadership Empowerment Climate

Reception Kitchen Restaurant Room service
Figure 3. Average scores per the servant leadership and empowerment

climate dimensions.
“I have experience in other hotels where the commitment to the employees

was absolutely different. In those hotels the leadership and the relations with
the employees were not so close. Everything was docketed, which meant a
greater distrust ot the group and the organisation which meant that the mo-
tivation and commitment to the hotel did not exist [...] I have been working
with this hotel for more than ten years and I have been a part of the establish-
ment of a more participative leadership aimed to satisfy the needs of employ-
ees, strengthening human resource practices to give them more autonomy,
and allowing the hotel to be more flexible and competitive.”
The interviews with supervisors also have allowed us to study the ef-
fects of the above mentioned hotel strategy in creating higher levels of
servant leadership, empowerment climate, and group creativity within
the work group. These effects are especially observed in the kitchen and
restaurant work groups, where the workforce is several years older than
the average. Thus, the supervisor of the restaurant work group explains:
“I have over 20 years’ experience in this hotel. Managers who have passed
through the hotel have always implemented a forward-worker, believing in
their ability and knowledge, leaving work to each of the political groups. This
same philosophy I try to convey to my workers, giving them a place to de-

Linuesa 27
velop and participate [...]In my case, this means working in coordination

with the small kitchen, where we have meetings between workers of the two
groups with the intention of looking for a plate or a way to serve that is
fully innovative. This allows us to be one of the most important restaurants
in the city.”
In summary, through direct observations, we could note the positive

effects of servant leadership within the work groups, particularly in the
kitchen and restaurant. In the rest of the work groups (reception and
room service) we observed less positive effects because in both groups the
supervisors had been working there for less than one year. In fact, we
could note that the emotional relationships, shared information, and
cohesion in these work groups were not as strong as in the kitchen and
restaurant work groups.
6. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
Through a case study of a historic and emblematic hotel in a world

heritage city in Spain, we address the effects of servant leadership on or-
ganisational variables of great business interest, such as the empowerment
climate and group creativity. Overall, our data offer support to the research
questions posed in the article, as the findings reveal that when servant
leadership exists in different work groups, high levels of group creativity
and an empowerment climate emerge. Also, findings reveal that when
empowerment climate is present in work groups, group creativity is also
high. However, we have observed that the degree to which these or-
ganisational variables appear in scene differs a little according the work
group that is analysed.
In order to explain these different findings between work groups,
Savage-Austin & Honeycut (2011) identify some limitations of the serv-
ant leadership practices. One of these is that the effects of servant leader-
ship in the work group are not visible in the short term; rather the
benefits of servant leadership are perceived in the long term. Another
limitation is related to the cultural system in which this leadership strat-
egy is implemented. The distinctive cultural differences among regions
might make servant leadership fit optimally with employees in one
country but cause imperfect fits with employees in other countries. This
study gives empirical evidence of both limitations. On the one side, su-

pervisors of reception and room service groups had not been long work-
ing with the hotel studied at the moment of the study, thus the full effect
of servant leadership practices on empowerment climate and group crea-
tivity has not yet set in. This explains the different results obtained in
these work groups in opposition to the other work groups analysed. On
the other side, whereas our descriptive analysis reveals strong consistency
between almost all the dimensions of servant leadership, the creating
value for those outside of the hotel dimension seems to be less related to
the others. Because the scale we utilized to measure servant leadership is
adapted from other cultural regions where giving value to the commu-
nity in which the firm operates is more strongly appreciated (i.e. United
States), the different findings we obtained between our work groups might
have been influenced in our Spanish cultural context.
This article helps affirm the important role that ethics plays in improv-
ing organisations and launching them to effectiveness. Because servant
leaders are focused on serving fellow workers with agapao love (Patterson,
2004), showing care and appreciation for them, put ethics as a cornerstone
in their daily decision making, and create in their work groups high
ethical climates (Graham, 1995). These leaders are strongly oriented to
use logic of giving mental schemes, and thus more open to relinquish
power to their fellow workers (Boyett & Boyett, 1998) to allow them
to grow in human and technical matureness. When employees are
granted power, they are actively listened and recognized as complete
entities to act freely and with self-determination; they are respected in
their personal dignity (Fernández, de Haro & Nieto, 2015). As a result,
seeds for attaining important organisational variables such as empower-
ment climate and group creativity are more easily sown in work groups
where these leaders operate. Our study gives support to this position
bringing to light additional knowledge about the nature of a possible lever
mechanism in work groups –namely, servant leadership in supervisor
roles– which might help activate better human relations in the workplace
and positive organisational outcomes.
For this reason, and according to our results, organisations should
consider servant leadership as an optimum style of leadership for building
and fostering effective work groups. In practice, leaders should stimulate
their fellow workers’ motivation by focusing on such things as identify-
ing ambitious goals, depicting an ideal vision, and personalizing the needs
of their fellow workers to make them feel that the leader and organisation
takes them into consideration. This will definitely have positive impacts

Linuesa 29
on work group outcomes: trusting leader-workers and workers-workers

relationships, fellow workers’ self-management initiatives through infor-
mation-sharing dynamics, and fellow workers’ self-determination attitudes
intimately linked to creativity spirals.
8. LIMITATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE

RESEARCH
Although our contributions to the literature are important, several

limitations need to be addressed. First, a major limitation of this article
is that our study relied on a single company in the hospitality industry,
where we performed a descriptive analysis on a limited number of work
groups. Second, our findings and interpretations may not be generalizable
and should be treated with caution until they have been replicated in a
variety of settings with other methods. Accordingly, it is important to
note that our data represent subjective perceptions and experiences,
rather than objective accounts of reality. Third, we did not consider the
possibility that servant leadership might not be easily accepted depending
on the characteristics of the national culture, the industry, the organisa-
tion, or the employees surveyed. If, for example, different leadership styles
are practiced (i.e. they are not in line with a servant leadership philosophy)
or the workforce refuses to change (i.e. it lacks achievement needs), serv-
ant leadership is likely to fail to create positive organisational outcomes
such as the ones studied here (i.e. empowerment climate, group creativity).
In general, opportunities still exist for deepening understanding around
servant leadership’s positive effects within the work group. For example,
research still needs to better comprehend the probable inter-relationships
among servant leadership, group creativity, and empowerment climate.
Also, further investigation of the variables and relationships studied here
is needed such that a broader context in terms of corporate culture, or-
ganisational structure, and number of hotels surveyed should be addressed
to test our research questions. Also, the ethical implications of practicing
servant leadership (Boyett & Boyett, 1998) intimately linked to the
practice of agapao love– should be addressed to offer managers interest-
ing leadership options that improve the ethical quality of their work
groups as well as other valuable work group outcomes. In fact, because
logic of giving-based work climates might be real in presence of servant
leaders, further research should thoroughly address this issue. Under work

climates imbued with this logic, people express what they are, feel, think
and hope freely, and good inter-communication and human coexistence
are fostered (Torralba, 2012). Hence, the extent to which both the logic
of giving and antecedents of group creativity (i.e. cohesion, openness to
the other and cooperation) are real in servant leadership-guided work
contexts represents an interesting area of research. In summary, many
empirical research opportunities around servant leadership and its benefits
on work groups remain alive.
funding
This work was funded by The Ministry of Economy and Competitiv-

ity (Spain), Research Project reference ECO2013-42387-P, Plan Estatal
de Investigación Científica y Técnica y de Innovación 2013-2016.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Amabile T. M., Conti R., Coon H., Lazenby J. & Herron M. (1996).
Assessing the workplace for creativity. Academy of Management
Journal, 39 (5), 1154-1184.
Avolio, B.J. & Gardner W.L. (2005). Authentic leadership development:
getting to the root of positive forms of leadership. The Leadership
Quarterly, 16 (3), 315-338.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social
cognitive view. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
Barbuto, J.E. & Wheeler, D.W. (2006). Scale development and construct
clarification of servant leadership. Group & Organization Manage-
ment, 31 (3), 300-326.
Bass, B.M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations.
London: Free Press.
Bass, B.M. (1990). Bass & Stodgill´s Handbook of leadership. New
York: Free Press.
Boyett, J. & Boyett, J. (1998). The Guru Guide: The Best Ideas of Top
Management Thinkers. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Brown, M.E. & Treviño, L.K. (2006). Ethical leadership: A review and
future directions. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(6), 595-616.

Linuesa 31
Ciulla, J.B. (2004). Ethics and leadership effectiveness. In Antonakis, J.

Cianciolo A.T. & Sternberg, R.J. (eds.), The nature of leadership.
Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Deci, E., & Ryan, R. (2002). Handbook of self-determination research.
New York: University of Rochester Press.
Ehrhart, M.G. (2004). Leadership and justice climate as antecedents of
unit-level organizational citizenship behaviour. Personnel Psychology,
57 (1), 61-94.
Eisenhardt, K.M. (1989). Building theories from case study research.
Academy of Management Review, 14 (4), 532-550.
Eisenhardt, K.M. & Graebner, M.E. (2007). Theory building from
cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Jour-
nal, 50 (1), 25-32.
Farling, M.L., Stone A.G. & Winston B.E. (1999). Servant leadership:
Setting the stage for empirical research. Journal of Leadership Stud-
ies, 6 (1-2), 49-72.
Fernández, J.L.F., de Haro, C.M. & Nieto, C.R. (2015). Ethics as a Key
Aspect to the survival of the company in times of crisis. Ramon Llull
Journal of Applied Ethics, 6, 81-109.
Fry, L.W. (2003). Toward a Theory of Spiritual Leadership. Leadership
Quarterly, 14 (1), 693-727.
Gagne, M. & Deci, E.L. (2005). Self-determination theory and work
motivation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26 (4), 331-362.
Galli, E.B. & Müller-Stewens, G. (2012). How to build social capital
with leadership development: Lessons from an explorative case
study of a multibusiness firm. The Leadership Quarterly, 23 (1),
176-201.
Gilson, L.L. & Shalley, C.E. (2004). A little creativity goes a long way:
An examination of teams’ engagement in creative processes. Journal
of Management, 30 (4), 453-470.
Graham, J.W. (1995). Leadership, moral development, and citizenship
behavior. Business Ethics Quarterly, 5 (1), 43-54.
Greenleaf, R.K. (1970).The Servant as Leader. Indianapolis: The Rob-
ert K. Greenleaf Center.
Greenleaf, R.K. (1977).Servant leadership: A journey into the nature of
legitimate power and greatness. New York: Paulist Press.
Greenleaf, R.K. & Spears, L.C. (2002). Servant leadership: A journey
into the nature of legitimate power and greatness. New York: Paulist
Press.

Guillén, M. (2006). Ética en las Organizaciones. Construyendo con

fianza. Madrid: Prentice Hall.
Hale, J.R. & Fields, D.L. (2007). Exploring servant leadership across
cultures: A study of followers in Ghana and the USA. Leadership, 3
(4), 397-417.
Han, Y., Kakabadse, N.K. & Kakabadse, A. (2010). Servant leadership
in the People’s Republic of China: A case study of the public sector.
Journal of Management Development, 29 (3), 265-281.
Hannay, M. (2009). The cross-cultural leader: The application of servant
leadership theory in the international context. Journal of Interna-
tional Business & Cultural Studies, 1 (7), 1-12.
Hyatt, D.E. & Ruddy, T.M. (1997). An examination of the relationship
between work group characteristics and performance: Once more into
the breech. Personnel Psychology, 50 (3), 553-585.
Hu, J. & Liden, R.C. (2011). Antecedents of team potency and team
effectiveness: An examination of goal and process clarity and servant
leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96 (4), 851-862.
Jaramillo, F., Grisaffe, D.B., Chonko, L.B. & Roberts, J.A. (2009).
Examining the impact of servant leadership on sales force perfor-
mance. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 29 (3),
257-275.
Joseph, E. & Winston, B.E. (2005). A correlation of servant leadership,
leader trust, and organizational trust. Leadership & Organization
Development Journal, 26 (1), 6-22.
Jung, D.I. (2001). Transformational and transactional leadership and
their effects on creativity in groups. Creativity Research Journal, 13
(2), 185-195.
Jung, D.I. & Sosik, J.J. (2002). Transformational leadership in work
groups; the role of empowerment, cohesiveness, and collective-effica-
cy on perceived group performance. Small Group Research, 33 (3),
313-336.
Kark, R. & Van Dijk, D. (2007). Motivation to lead, motivation to fol-
low: The role of the self-regulatory focus in leadership processes.
Kirkman, B.L. & Rosen, B. (1999). Beyond self-management: Anteced-
ents and consequences of team empowerment. Academy of Manage-
ment Journal, 42 (1), 58-74.
Kirkman, B.L., Rosen, B., Tesluk, P.E. & Gibson, C.B. (2004). The
impact of team empowerment on virtual team performance: The

Linuesa 33
moderating role of face-to-face interaction. Academy of Management

Journal, 47 (2), 175-192.
Laub, J.A. (1999). Assessing the servant organization: Development of
the organizational leadership assessment (OLA) instrument. Boca
Raton, Florida: Doctoral dissertation.
Lawler, E.E. (1986). High-Involvement Management. Participative
Strategies for Improving Organizational Performance. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Lawler, E.E. & Worley, C.G. (2006). Built to change. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Liden, R.C., Wayne, S.J., Zhao, H. & Henderson, D. (2008). Servant
leadership: Development of a multidimensional measure and multi-
level assessment. The Leadership Quarterly, 19 (2), 161-177.
Martínez-Pérez, A., García-Villaverde, P.M. & Elche, D. (2015). Eco-
innovation antecedents in cultural tourism clusters: External relation-
ships and explorative knowledge. Innovation, 17 (1), 41-57.
Mayer, D.M., Bardes, M. & Piccolo, R.F. (2008). Do servant – leaders
help satisfy follower needs? An organizational justice perspective.
European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 17 (2),
180-197.
Melé, D. (2003). Organizational Humanizing Cultures: Do They Gen-
erate Social Capital? Journal of Business Ethics, 45 (1-2), 3-14.
Menon, S.T. (2001). Employee empowerment: An integrative psycho-
logical approach. Applied Psychology, 50 (1), 153-180.
Moulang, C. (2013). Performance measurement system use in generating
psychological empowerment and individual creativity. Accounting &
Finance, 55 (2), 519-544.
Mumford, M.D., Scott, G.M., Gaddis, B. & Strange, J.M. (2002). Lead-
ing creative people: Orchestrating expertise and relationships. The
Leadership Quarterly, 13 (6), 705-750.
O’Hara, L.A. & Sternberg, R.J. (2001). It doesn’t hurt to ask: Effects
of instructions to be creative, practical, or analytical on essay-writing
performance and their interaction with students’ thinking styles.
Creativity Research Journal, 13 (2), 197-210.
Parris, D.L. & Peachey, J.W. (2013). A Systematic Literature Review
of Servant Leadership Theory in Organizational Contexts. Journal
of Business Ethics, 113 (3), 377-393.
Patterson, K. (2004). Servant Leadership: A Theoretical Model. Servant
Leadership. Virginia Beach: Research Roundtable.

Randolph, W.A. (1995). Navigating the journey to empowerment.

Organizational Dynamics, 24 (4), 19-32.
Richards, G. & Wilson, J. (2006). Developing Creativity in Tourist
Experiences: A Solution to the Serial Reproduction of Culture? Tour-
ism Management, 27 (6), 1209-1223.
Ruíz, P., Martínez, R. & Rodrigo, J. (2010). Intra-organizational social
capital in business organizations: A theoretical model with a focus on
servant leadership as antecedent. Ramon Llull Journal of Applied
Ethics, 1, 43-59.
Russell, R.F. (2001). The role of values in servant leadership. Leadership
and Organization Development Journal, 22 (2), 76-83.
Russell, R.F. & Stone, G.A. (2002). A review of servant leadership at-
tributes: Developing a practical model. Leadership & Organization
Development Journal, 23(3), 145-157.
Sacco, P., Blessi, G. & Nuccio, M. (2009). Cultural Policies and Local
Planning Strategies: What Is the Role of Culture in Local Sustainable
Development? The Journal of Arts Management, Law, and Society,
39 (1), 45-63.
Savage-Austin, A, & Honeycut A. (2011). Servant Leadership: A Phe-
nomenological study of practices, experiences, organizational effective-
ness, and barriers. Journal of Business & Economics Research, 9
(1), 49-54.
Seibert, S.E., Silver, S.R. & Randolph, W.A. (2004). Taking empowerment
to the next level: a multiple level model of empowerment, performance
and satisfaction. Academy of Management Journal, 47 (3), 332-350.
Seibert, S.E., Wang, G. & Courtright, S.H. (2011). Antecedents and
consequences of psychological and team empowerment in organiza-
tions: a meta-analytic review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96 (5),
981-1003.
Sendjaya, S., Sarros, J.C. & Santora, J.C. (2008). Defining and measur-
ing servant leadership behaviour in organizations. Journal of Manage-
ment Studies, 45 (2), 402-424.
Shalley, C. E., Zhou, J. & Oldham, G.R. (2004). The effects of per-
sonal and contextual characteristics on creativity: Where should we
go from here? Journal of Management, 30 (6), 933-958.
Shalley, C.E. & Gilson, L.L. (2004). What leaders need to know: A
review of social and contextual factors that can foster or hinder creativ-
ity. The Leadership Quarterly, 15 (1), 33-53.

Linuesa 35
Si, S. & Wei, F. (2012). Transformational and transactional leaderships,

empowerment climate, and innovation performance: A multilevel
analysis in the Chinese context. European Journal of Work & Or-
ganizational Psychology, 21 (2), 299-320.
Spears, L.C. (1998). Insights on leadership: Service, stewardship,
spirit, and servant-leadership. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Spreitzer, G.M. (1995). Psychological empowerment in the work place:
Construct definition, measurement, and validation, Academy of
Management Journal, 38 (5), 1442-1465.
Spreitzer, G.M., Kizilos, M.A. & Nason, S.W. (1997). A dimensional
analysis of the relationship between psychological empowerment and
effectiveness, satisfaction, and strain. Journal of Management, 23 (5),
679-704.
Sun, L.Y., Zhang, Z., Qi, J. & Chen, Z.X. (2012). Empowerment and
creativity: A cross-level investigation. The Leadership Quarterly, 23
(1), 55-65.
Thomas, K.W. & Velthouse, B.A. (1990). Cognitive elements of em-
powerment: An “interpretive” model of intrinsic task motivation.
Torralba, F. (2012). La lógica del don. Madrid: Khaf Collections, Luis
Vives.
Unsworth, K.L., Wall, T.D. & Carter, A. (2005). Creative Requirement
A Neglected Construct in the Study of Employee Creativity? Group
& Organization Management, 30 (5), 541-560.
Valentine, S., Godkin, L., Fleischman, G.M. & Kidwell, R. (2011).
Corporate ethical values, group creativity, job satisfaction and turno-
ver intention: The impact of work context on work response. Journal
of Business Ethics, 98 (3), 353-372.
Van Dierendonck, D. & Nuijten, I. (2011). The Servant-Leadership
Survey (SLS): Development and validation of a multidimensional
measure. Journal of Business & Psychology, 26 (3), 249-267.
Van Dierendonck, D., Stam, D., Boersma, P., De Windt, N. & Alkema,
J. (2013). Same difference? Exploring the differential mechanisms
linking servant leadership and transformational leadership to follower
outcomes. The Leadership Quarterly, 25 (3), 544-562.
Walumbwa, F.O., Hartnell, C.A. & Oke, A. (2010). Servant leadership,
procedural justice climate, service climate, employee attitudes, and
organizational citizenship behavior: A cross-level investigation. Jour-
nal of Applied Psychology, 95 (3), 517-529.

Wei, F., Yuan, X. & Di, Y. (2010). Effects of transactional leadership,

psychological empowerment and empowerment climate on creative
performance of subordinates: A cross-level study. Frontiers of Busi-
ness Research in China, 4 (1), 29-46.
West, M.A. (2002). Sparkling fountains or stagnant ponds: An integrative
model of creativity and innovation implementation in work groups.
Applied Psychology, 51 (3), 355-387.
Winston, B.E. (2003). Extending Patterson’s servant leadership model:
Explaining how leaders and followers inter-act in a circular model.
Virginia Beach: Servant Leadership Roundtable at Regent University.
Yin, R.K. (2013), Case study research. Design and methods. London:
Sage Publications.
Zhang, X. & Bartol, K. M. (2010). Linking empowering leadership and
employee creativity: The influence of psychological empowerment,
intrinsic motivation, and creative process engagement. Academy of
Management Journal, 53 (1), 107-128.
Zhang, A.Y., Tsui, A.S. & Wang, D.X. (2011). Leadership behaviors
and group creativity in Chinese organizations: The role of group
processes. The Leadership Quarterly, 22 (5), 851-862.
Jorge Linuesa-Langreo, Pablo Ruiz-Palomino, Dioni Elche

University of Castilla-La Mancha
jorge.linuesa@uclm.es
This paper was received on July 31st, and was approved on December
14th 2015.

310233-Text de L'article-438334-1-10-20160620

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

310233-Text de L'article-438334-1-10-20160620

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1

Abstract: Leadership, due to its power to influence, is one of the most

Ramon Llull Journal_07.indd 9 30/05/16 11:56

by UNESCO as a World Heritage Site provides evidence of the relation-

Keywords: ethical leadership, servant leadership, empowerment

Bandura’s (1986) social cognitive theory indicates that individuals learn

Ramon Llull Journal_07.indd 10 30/05/16 11:56

strategy, when authentically performed, exerts positive effects on follow-

Ramon Llull Journal_07.indd 11 30/05/16 11:56

2. SERVANT LEADERSHIP: CONCEPT AND DIMENSIONS

Leadership is one of the most important instruments available to or-

Ramon Llull Journal_07.indd 12 30/05/16 11:56

in management science is to search the key features of effective leadership

In order to understand its essence, we learn from this definition that

Ramon Llull Journal_07.indd 13 30/05/16 11:56

Ramon Llull Journal_07.indd 14 30/05/16 11:56

as a type of “ambient stimulus” around inspiring servant attitudes to all

3. BENEFITS OF SERVANT LEADERSHIP WITH THE WORK

Although literature suggests positive relationships between servant

Ramon Llull Journal_07.indd 15 30/05/16 11:56

Figure 1. The Servant Leadership effects on Empowerment Climate

3.1. Servant leadership and empowerment climate

Two major perspectives on the empowerment phenomenon have

Ramon Llull Journal_07.indd 16 30/05/16 11:56

in the intrinsic value of their followers, respecting their capabilities and

Research Question 1: Servant leadership increases empowerment

3.2. Servant leadership and group creativity

To maintain or enhance effectiveness within rapidly changing and

Ramon Llull Journal_07.indd 17 30/05/16 11:56

improved group creativity through promoting group members’ engage-

Research Question 2: Servant leadership increases group creativity

3.3. Empowerment climate and group creativity

Creativity is a process of destroying established rules to develop new

Ramon Llull Journal_07.indd 18 30/05/16 11:56

Research Question 3: Empowerment climate increases group crea-

4.1. The case study: A landmark hotel in a historical

Culture has become an innovative and coherent platform of develop-

Ramon Llull Journal_07.indd 19 30/05/16 11:56

natural and historical heritage that provides a wide range of creative,

4.2. Data collection and measurement variables

In order to study how the practices of servant leadership generate

Ramon Llull Journal_07.indd 20 30/05/16 11:56

findings to other firms in the hospitality industry in the geographic and

Servant leadership. According to Ehrhart (2004), we used a fourteen-item

Ramon Llull Journal_07.indd 21 30/05/16 11:56

In order to complete the information obtained through the question-

Ramon Llull Journal_07.indd 22 30/05/16 11:56

Therefore, the use of multiple sources of evidence ensured the triangula-

Our descriptive analysis of the three study variables is displayed in

Table 1. Descriptive statistics of the study variables at the group-level

Variables Mean (M) Standard deviation (SD)

Figure 2 shows graphically the average scores of servant leadership,

Ramon Llull Journal_07.indd 23 30/05/16 11:56

Reception Kitchen Restaurant Room service

Figure 2. Average scores of the study variables at work group.

(MSL = 5.25; MSL = 5.55, respectively) correspond to lower scores in

Ramon Llull Journal_07.indd 24 30/05/16 11:56

Table 2. Dimensional analysis of the study variables

Based on the data of the dimensional analysis realized, Figure 3 shows

Ramon Llull Journal_07.indd 25 30/05/16 11:56

Servant Leadership Empowerment Climate

Figure 3. Average scores per the servant leadership and empowerment

“I have experience in other hotels where the commitment to the employees

3. BENEFITS OF SERVANT LEADERSHIP WITH THE WORK

4.1. The case study: A landmark hotel in a historical

8. LIMITATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE

Guillén, M. (2006). Ética en las Organizaciones. Construyendo con