Francis identifies the violence inherent in human nature as primal impulse in human and natural depredation (Laudato Sí, 2). A s much as we would prefer to see ourselves otherwise, a long history of human genocide and environmental destruct gives sad testimony to the violence in our being. The nonviolent movement, the legacy of leaders like Martin Luther King or Mahatma Ghandi, provides today, as it has over generations now, a compelling alternative. The late Marshall Rosenberg, Ph.D., pioneered the practice of nonviolent communication to help us learn to internalize nonviolence through changing our communication style.
Violence in society, in a large part, is conditioned by a violence by the most basic of societal building blocks: the family. In violent families, violence had been the “default” reaction to painful circumstances: stress, the need for intimacy, anger, confusion and boredom – all normal experiences for which other families have learned more healthy coping mechanisms. More often than not, parents who are addicted to violence themselves came from families where a system of violence was already firmly established. When this is the case, the time has come to put an end to that vicious circle that has become their unwelcome heritage!
The leadership dyad of the parents models nonviolence in the family by their own relationships and trains children to nonviolence through an enlightened discipline. Removing violence from the equation, when violence had been the default replacement for family intimacy, leaves the family off balance, without the resource that had proven, on some level, successful. Defensiveness, the effort to maintain the status quo, may help the family regain balance, but it will avoid the opportunity for genuine healing.
The violent environments we live in require families to take a countercultural stance of nonviolence. Families provide the basic building blocks of a society; urgent nonviolent change calls on families to embrace the courage and dedication to themselves be the change they seek!
Almost any leadership that serves others may be considered Servant Leadership:
Extreme autocratic leadership demands immediate, unquestioning compliance, suitable for situations of war or emergency. After World War II, as the United States had to gear up for a peacetime economy, voids of leadership were filled by proven military leaders. This oriented many American businesses toward a style which had well served these executives in battle. Many organizations have been patterned after this, including manufacturing plants, religious bodies, human services, social clubs, schools and even some families.
Self-serving leadership may be servant leadership if the outcome is the well-being of those served. Self-serving leadership always is self-centered.
A self-serving leader is narcissistic in intent and style. Accomplishment is not designed to, in some way, make a better world, but, rather, to garner praise and recognition for the self. Enquiry is not employed to achieve healthy consultation but more to demonstrate the skill and brilliance of the leader. Mistakes are minimized or hidden to defend the leader from criticism rather than to be examined for learning and improvement. Things that may seem, to others, petty or less important are underscored because of their role in maintaining the leader's fragile ego. The need for change may be stubbornly resisted rather the creatively embraced. Morale of others around the leader (unless they are invested in the leader's self-importance) is usually low and lacking in enthusiasm and energy.
A servant leadership that sustains conviviality as a mental model for social change is a leadership that empowers.
In October of 2019, Pope Francis convened a Synod of Bishops from the Amazon region.
A synod is formally defined as a meeting of a religious body under an ecclesiastical leader.
The Second Vatican Council began to implement a more democratic style, engaging and enjoying the efforts of the participants. When Pope Francis gathered the bishops of the Amazon to address the ongoing pillaging of one of the most important and ecologically diverse areas of the world, he chose a synodal process in the style of Vatican II. 
A consensus process, often employed in the exercise of shared leadership, invests others in a project or action.
Elements of consensus:
Inclusion: Everyone who has an investment in an action is invited to be part of the process, if practical. Others may provide important insights and information.
Voice: Hearing, attending to and listening to others' Voices. The considered opinion of participants is recognized and valued.
Dialogue: Exchange of ideas that clarifies and prioritizes. Inclusive of all participants.
A decision process that values Inclusion, Voice and Dialogue invests everyone in the outcome. If it meets difficulties or initial failure, members are less apt to give up or find fault. If it succeeds, they can celebrate and own a share in in having created an effective action (shared empowerment).
In an exhortation in preparation for the summary document of the Amazon Synod, Pope Francis acknowledged the "participation of many people who know better than myself or the Roman Curia the problems and the issues of the Amazon region, since they live there, they experience its sufferings, and they love it passionately."
The opportunity for participant Servant Leadership is possible in daily lives. In the theory of parallel process, what takes place on one level of experience tends to replicate itself as another. For instance, when I worked as a clinical supervisor, if I modeled nonjudgmental listening with my supervisees, they, in turn, would be more inclined to exercise those same skills with those whom they serve. A servant leadership that exercises justice in the workplace, the family, the community, the church group ... leads to a more just world.
 Regretfully, when it came to discussing an issue of married priests and women deacons, particularly meaningful to the bishops of a region of underserved Catholics due to the shortage of priests, the Pope fell back to an autocratic style of leadership to sidestep the issue.