Liderança de Serviço no Setor Público Chileno: Validação com Perspectiva de Gênero
Liderazgo de Servicio en el Sector Público Chileno: Validación con Perspectiva de Género
Servant Leadership in the Chilean Public Sector: Validation with a Gender Perspective
Resumo (pt_BR)
Este estudo valida a Servant Leadership Survey (SLS) de van Dierendonck e Nuijten (2011) na administração pública chilena com perspectiva de gênero. Participaram 1.229 pessoas de 43 instituições. A análise fatorial confirmatória confirmou os oito fatores do modelo, com melhores índices de ajuste e confiabilidade para trabalhadores (ω = 0,956) do que para supervisores (ω = 0,747). O fator responsabilização apresentou cargas baixas em ambos os grupos. A invariância fatorial por gênero foi confirmada nos níveis configural, métrico e escalar, mas não no residual. Diferenças significativas por gênero foram encontradas entre trabalhadores nos fatores “atribuir méritos”, “humildade” e “responsabilização”. A validade concorrente foi evidenciada por correlações significativas com a liderança transformacional, e a validade discriminante por correlações baixas com a motivação para o serviço público. Os achados apoiam a aplicabilidade da SLS no setor público chileno como modelo relacional e pró-social, embora indiquem a necessidade de ajustes em seu uso como ferramenta de autoavaliação em supervisores.
Resumo (es)
Este estudio valida la escala Servant Leadership Survey (SLS) de van Dierendonck y Nuijten (2011) en la administración pública chilena con perspectiva de género. Participaron 1.229 personas de 43 instituciones. El análisis factorial confirmatorio confirmó los ocho factores del modelo, con mejores índices de ajuste y fiabilidad para personas trabajadoras (ω = 0,956) que para personas supervisoras (ω = 0,747). El factor “responsabilizar” presentó cargas factoriales bajas en ambos grupos. Se comprobó la invarianza factorial por género en los niveles configural, métrico y escalar, sin alcanzarse en el nivel residual. Se hallaron diferencias significativas por género entre las personas trabajadoras en los factores “ceder méritos”, “humildad” y “responsabilizar”. La validez concurrente se evidenció con el constructo liderazgo transformacional, y la validez discriminante con el constructo motivación de servicio público. Los hallazgos respaldan la aplicabilidad de la escala SLS en el sector público chileno como modelo relacional y prosocial, aunque advierten la necesidad de ajustes en su uso como herramienta de autoevaluación de las personas supervisoras.
Resumo (en)
This study validates the Servant Leadership Survey (SLS) by van Dierendonck and Nuijten (2011) in the Chilean public administration with a gender perspective. A total of 1.229 individuals from 43 institutions participated. Confirmatory factor analysis supported the eight-factor model, showing better fit and reliability indices for employees (ω = 0,956) than for supervisors (ω = 0,747). The “accountability” factor presented low factor loadings in both groups. Measurement invariance across gender was confirmed at the configural, metric, and scalar levels, but not at the residual level. Significant gender differences were found among employees in the factors of “standing back,” “humility,” and “accountability.” Concurrent validity was confirmed with the construct of transformational leadership, and discriminant validity with public service motivation. The findings support the applicability of the SLS in the Chilean public sector as a relational and prosocial model, while also highlighting the need for adjustments when used as a self-assessment tool for supervisors.
Referências
Barbuto, J. E., & Gifford, G. T. (2010). Examining gender differences of servant leadership: an analysis of the agentic and communal properties of the servant leadership questionnaire. Journal of Leadership Education, 9(2), 4-22. https://doi.org/10.12806/V9/I2/RF1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.12806/V9/I2/RF1
Bass, B. M., & Riggio, R. E. (2006). Transformational leadership (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410617095 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410617095
Brown, M. E., & Treviño, L. K. (2006). Ethical leadership: A review and future directions. The leadership quarterly, 17(6), 595-616. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2006.10.004 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2006.10.004
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136-162). Sage Publications.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203771587 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203771587
Conger, J. A. (1989). The charismatic leader: Behind the mystique of exceptional leadership. Jossey-Bass.
Conger, J. A., & Kanungo, R. N. (1998). Charismatic leadership in organizations. Sage Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452204932 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452204932
Dambe, M., & Moorad, F. (2008). From power to empowerment: A paradigm shift in leadership. South African Journal of Higher Education, 22(3), 575–587. https://doi.org/10.4314/sajhe.v22i3.25803 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4314/sajhe.v22i3.25803
Demeke, G. W., van Engen, M. L., & Markos, S. (2024). Servant Leadership in the Healthcare Literature: A Systematic Review. Journal of Healthcare Leadership, 16, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.2147/JHL.S440160 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/JHL.S440160
Dinh, J., Lord, R., Gardner, W., Meuser, J., Liden, R., & Hu, J. (2014). Leadership theory and research in the new millennium: Current theoretical trends and changing perspectives. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(1), 36-62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.11.005 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.11.005
Eagly, A. H., & Karau, S. J. (2002). Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders. Psychological Review, 109(3), 573–598. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295x.109.3.573 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.109.3.573
Eva, N., Robin, M., Sendjaya, S., van Dierendonck, D., & Liden, R.C. (2019), “Servant leadership: a systematic review and call for future research”. Leadership Quarterly, 30(1), pp. 111-132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2018.07.004 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2018.07.004
Gardner, W. L., Cogliser, C. C., Davis, K. M., & Dickens, M. P. (2011). Authentic leadership: A review of the literature and research agenda. The Leadership Quarterly, 22(6), 1120-1145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.09.007 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.09.007
George, D., & Mallery, M. (2010). SPSS for windows step by step: A simple guide and reference, 17.0 Update. Allyn & Bacon.
Getha-Taylor, H., Holmes, M. H., Jacobson, W. S., Morse, R. S., & Sowa, J. E. (2011). Focusing the public leadership lens: Research propositions and questions in the Minnowbrook tradition. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21(1),183-197. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muq069 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muq069
Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Relationship-based approach to leadership: Development of leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years: Applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective. The Leadership Quarterly, 6(2), 219-247. https://doi.org/10.1016/1048-9843(95)90036-5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/1048-9843(95)90036-5
Greenleaf, R. K. (1970). The servant as leader. Robert K. Greenleaf Publishing Center.
Gregory Stone, A., Russell, R.F. and Patterson, K. (2004), Transformational versus servant leadership: a difference in leader focus, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 25 (4), pp. 349-361. https://doi.org/10.1108/01437730410538671 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/01437730410538671
Heilman, M. E., & Haynes, M. C. (2005). No credit where credit is due: Attributional rationalization of women’s success in male–female teams. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(5), 905-916. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.5.905 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.5.905
Hernández Sampieri, R., Fernández Collado, C., & Baptista Lucio, M. del P. (2014). Metodología de la investigación (6.ª ed.). McGraw-Hill / Interamericana Editores.
Hoch, J. E., Bommer, W. H., Dulebohn, J. H., & Wu, D. (2018). Do ethical, authentic, and servant leadership explain variance above and beyond transformational leadership? A meta-analysis. Journal of Management, 44(2), 501–529. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206316665461 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206316665461
Hogue, M. (2016). Gender bias in communal leadership: Examining servant leadership.Journal of Managerial Psychology, 31(4), 837-849. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-10-2014-0292 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-10-2014-0292
Johns, G. (2024). The context deficit in leadership research. The Leadership Quarterly, 35(1), 101755. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2023.101755 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2023.101755
Kim, S., Vandenabeele, W., Wright, B. E., Andersen, L. B., Cerase, F. P., Christensen, R. K., ... & De Vivo, P. (2013). Investigating the structure and meaning of public service motivation across populations: Developing an international instrument and addressing issues of measurement invariance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 23(1), 79-102. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mus027 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mus027
Lee, A., Lyubovnikova, J., Tian, A. W., & Knight, C. (2019). Servant leadership: A meta‐analytic examination of incremental contribution, moderation, and mediation. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 93(1), 1- 44. https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12265 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12265
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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2008.01.006 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2008.01.006
Love, J., Selker, R., Marsman, M., Jamil, T., Dropmann, D., Verhagen, J., Ly, A., Gronau, Q. F., M., Epskamp, S., Matzke, D., Wild, A., Knight, P., J. N., Morey, R. D., & Wagenmakers, E.-J. (2019). JASP: Graphical statistical software for common statistical designs. Journal of Statistical Software, 88(2), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v088.i02 DOI: https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v088.i02
McDonald, R. P. (1999). Test theory: A unified treatment. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Meyer-Sahling, J.-H., Mikkelsen, K. S., & Schuster, C. (2019). The causal effect of public service motivation on ethical behavior in the public sector: Evidence from a large-scale survey experiment. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 29(3), 445-459. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muy071 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muy071
Montecinos, C., González, Á., & Ehren, M. (2020). From hierarchy and market to hierarchy and network governance in Chile: Enhancing accountability, capacity and trust in public education. In M. Ehren, & J. Baxter (Eds.), Trust, Accountability and Capacity in Education System Reform: Global Perspectives in Comparative Education (201-221). Taylor and Francis Inc. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429344855-10 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429344855-10
Neubert, M. J., Sully de Luque, M., Quade, M. J., & Hunter, E. M. (2022). Servant leadership across the globe: Assessing universal and culturally contingent relevance in organizational contexts. Journal of World Business, 57(2). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2021.101268 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2021.101268
Nguyen, N. T. H., Nguyen, D., Vo, N., & Tuan, L. T. (2022). Fostering public sector employees’ innovative behavior: The roles of servant leadership, public service motivation, and learning goal orientation. Administration & Society, 55(1), 30–63. https://doi.org/10.1177/00953997221100623 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00953997221100623
Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1995). Teoría psicométrica (J. A. Velázquez Arellano & M. Terán Guillén, trads., 3.ª ed., en español). McGraw-Hill.
Otzen, T., & Manterola, C. (2017). Técnicas de Muestreo sobre una Población a Estudio. International Journal of Morphology, 35(1), 227-232. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0717-95022017000100037 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4067/S0717-95022017000100037
Perry, J. L., & Wise, L. R. (1990). The motivational bases of public service. Public Administration Review, 50(3), 367-373. https://doi.org/10.2307/976618 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/976618
Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Desarrollo [PNUD]. (2024). Informe sobre desarrollo humano en Chile 2024: ¿Por qué nos cuesta cambiar? Conducir los cambios para un desarrollo humano sostenible. Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Desarrollo.
Putnick, D. L., & Bornstein, M. H. (2016). Measurement invariance conventions and reporting: The state of the art and future directions for psychological research. Developmental Review, 41, 71-90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2016.06.004 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2016.06.004
Rafferty, A. E., & Griffin, M. A. (2004). Dimensions of transformational leadership: Conceptual and empirical extensions. The Leadership Quarterly, 15, 329–354. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2004.02.009 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2004.02.009
Revelle, W., & Zinbarg, R. E. (2009). Coefficients alpha, beta, omega, and the glb: comments on sijtsma. Psychometrika, 74(1), 145-154. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-008-9102-z DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-008-9102-z
Reynolds, K. (2014). Servant-leadership: A feminist perspective. The International Journal of Servant-Leadership, 10(1), 35-63. https://doi.org/10.33972/ijsl.110 DOI: https://doi.org/10.33972/ijsl.110
Rodríguez-Carvajal, R., de Rivas, S., Herrero, M., Moreno-Jiménez, B., & van Dierendonck, D. (2014). Leading people positively: Cross-cultural validation of the Servant Leadership Survey (SLS). The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 17, E63. https://doi.org/10.1017/sjp.2014.73 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/sjp.2014.73
Ruiz, M. A., Pardo, A., & San Martín, R. (2010). Modelos de ecuaciones estructurales. Papeles del Psicólogo, 31(1), 34-45.
Salanova, M., Llorens, S., Cifre, E., & Martínez, I. M. (2012). We need a hero! Toward a validation of the Healthy and Resilient Organization (HERO) model. Group & Organization Management, 37, 785-822. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601112470405 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601112470405
Salgado, J. F. (2005). Personality and social desirability in organizational settings: practical implications for work and organizational psychology. Papeles del Psicólogo, 26(92),115-128. https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=77809207
Schwarz, G., Newman, A., Cooper, B., & Eva, N. (2016). Servant leadership and follower job performance: The mediating effect of public service motivation. Public Administration, 94(4), 1025–1041. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12266 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12266
Scicluna Lehrke, A., Sowden, K. (2017). Servant leadership and gender. In: Davis, C. (eds). Servant leadership and followership. Examining the impact on workplace behavior. (pp. 25-50). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-59366-1_2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-59366-1_2
Shim, D. C., Park, H. H., & Eom, T. H. (2016). Public servant leadership: Myth or powerful reality? International Review of Public Administration, 21(1), 3-20. https://doi.org/10.1080/12294659.2016.1147753 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/12294659.2016.1147753
Uluturk, B. (2023). How servant leadership influences street-level bureaucrats’ work engagement: The mediating roles of motivating language and perceived organizational support. Management Communication Quarterly, 38(3), 562-594. https://doi.org/10.1177/08933189231219708 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/08933189231219708
van Dierendonck, D., & Nuijten, I. (2011). The servant leadership survey: development and validation of a multidimensional measure. Journal of Business & Psychology 26, 249–267. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-010-9194-1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-010-9194-1
van Dierendonck, D., Sousa, M., Gunnarsdóttir, S., Bobbio, A., Hakanen, J., Armin, P. V., Emin, C. D., & Rodriguez-Carvajal, R. (2017). The cross-cultural invariance of the servant leadership survey: A comparative study across eight countries. Administrative Sciences, 7(2), 8. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci7020008 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci7020008
Zhu, J., Song, J., Zhu, L., & Johnson, R. E. (2019). Visualizing the landscape and evolution of leadership research. The Leadership Quarterly, 30(2), 215–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2018.06.003 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2018.06.003
Como Citar
Licença
Direitos autorais (c) 2026 Dinka Villarroel-Núñez, Hedy Acosta-Antognoni, Marisa Salanova Soria, César Villacura-Herrera
Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
O conteúdo da revista é distribuído sob a licença Creative Commons Atribuição Não Comercial 4.0 Internacional (CC BY-NC-4.0), que permite aos usuários copiar, usar, difundir, transmitir e exibir publicamente o conteúdo, desde que a autoria seja citada (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0).