This study presents a simple yet informative bibliometric analysis of servant leadership literature, aiming to provide a basic overview of its scholarly landscape and identify general trends. We conducted this analysis in September 2023. We focused solely on the Scopus database to understand the current state of servant leadership research. Despite extensive search efforts, we found no similar bibliometric analyses within the servant leadership domain during our study period. Therefore, our focus is to present a brief and straightforward analysis of current research in this field based on identification trends over time, connection between co-occurrence of author keywords, most and less discussed keyword, and areas of high and low concentration. Our findings show an increase in scholarly publications, reflecting a growing acknowledgment of servant leadership’s relevance in management practices. Interconnected keywords and themes such as leadership, transformational leadership, job satisfaction, work engagement, authentic leadership, ethical leadership, organizational citizenship behavior, trust, and leadership development emerge prominently. Additionally, less-discussed keywords such as accountability, core self-evaluations, educational leadership, stewardship, customer orientation, and psychological well-being provide alternative perspectives on these research results. While acknowledging limitations inherent in our bibliometric research, such as potential publication bias and language restrictions, our study offers valuable insights for scholars and practitioners interested in this area.

Latin America is increasingly contributing to scientific research on leadership, although less than other regions. What are the predominant paradigms on leadership within the scientific community in Mexico? The article reviews doctoral dissertations on leadership from the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM) and the Anahuac University of Mexico (UA) defended before 2021. The findings highlight that 1) the number of doctoral dissertations has grown from 2016 onwards, especially in educational leadership. 2) In both universities a “functionalist” paradigm prevails, based on the transformational leadership model. 3) Two other leadership paradigms are present, referred to in this article as ‘political’ and ‘humanistic’. 4) These three paradigms have their characteristics and preferences in terms of research methodology, language, and reference authors. 5) The use of a paradigm is associated with the type of faculty rather than the type of university (public or private): in business faculties the functionalist paradigm predominates, in education faculties the humanist paradigm, and in political science or communication faculties the political paradigm. In conclusion, it is recommended to confirm the exploratory result obtained and to promote the dialogue between leadership paradigms.