Karen, this is pretty interesting.
I guess I have mixed notions about servant leadership. I have read about Kenneth Blanchard here, but have not ready his books or delved further. So what this means is I don't thoroughly know what "servant leadership" means. I can think of a plus and a minus side.
I learned about a person at an organization who matches your Tyrant archetype rather well. Everything I learned about the person was that they (do you like the unisex pronoun used creatively in the singular - ha ha) looked upon people at large in that organization as replaceable chattel. I do think there is something to be said about "Everyone Is Replaceable", but this person held that view to such an extreme that they made no one feel valuable at any moment, no one could feel valued in the present moment. People felt belittled, chided, toyed with. This person operated on "us vs them" distinctions and did not know how to make an effort a customer an event people can share together. Obviously, there was little good this leader did for the organization. So that person had their paddling part kicked out of the organization.
As soon as that person was removed, a different person appeared and they communicated to the organization that they would be taking time getting more closely acquainted with all areas of the company so that they (the leader) could learn from them how the company works.
I thought of the article I read - on this website - about servant leadership when I learned about this new leader emerging at that company. I immediately recognized a "servant" attitude. The leader wasn't saying they would go around and shine shoes or do their work for them, but the leader was demonstrating that they were not a higher being who had no need to know the jobs of others; the leader did need to know, and the leader needed the people in the company. And the people with less clout and responsibility would be empowered and energized by that person's request to be in a position that is not the teacher at the school, but the student. A behavior thing, indeed! I don't know if that is what I am supposed to take away from the article here about servant leadership or what K Blanchard would want, but that's how I connected to the topic. (I was also told that people's faces changed at that organization, by the way, and people would come in earlier and stay later and be present in general more often, after that change in leadership.) So that's all a good thing.
Your shepherd analogy helps me to flesh out some thoughts on the other end of the servant leader spectrum. I have taken part in company events and still do. I remember conducting myself in different ways at these functions that are meant to give people in the company a chance to feel like celebrating. One time I found myself wanting to literally be a servant and act like a waiter and make sure people had food and beverages. I put a decent amount of effort into it, telling myself I didn't need to relax, I could do this for the staff, a manager needs to "go without." But on a different occasion, I wasn't the same way, I didn't stand around with other managers and leaders in general and wait for staff in line at a buffet to go first, and I didn't do all kinds of waiter tasks. I got in the middle with everybody else and sat down and ate with people that were not leaders, and took an integrated approach. I remember seeing some managers clustered together while I had already sat down, begun eating, and integrating and getting on with the occasion. I briefly wondered to myself if I had used poor etiquette (very much like when you do something that is not the best in manners at the dining table) by not waiting and acting like I was "every other employee."
Well, I think I chose the better option on that occasion, because, when I think back and picture it, the managers clustered together (and waiting for the right moment to get in line for the buffet) looked like they were waiting for a HERD to pass. Almost like they would be able to tell when the last branded body would go by. The event was intended to bring people together and to enjoy (together) and not to find another opportunity to situate people according to an "us/them" model. But I did look for more napkins and help when somebody dropped their food (the least I could have done as a manage , I guess).
So, I think there is something to be said about not playing too many role games when you are talking about making the best situation for staff and leaders of staff to do well, all, together. I don't know that this speaks against the thrust of the "servant leadership" concept, but I think I make a point that a boss figure need not place him/herself at the very end of the line or be at the beck and call of the staff members to an extreme. People need to feel like they can make an impact of their own and don't need leaders to get in the way of that, whether it is a buffet/picnic environment or everyday work. And if you are playing the part of servant (to the point of fasting while others are lining up for plenty of food that is there for everybody), you are really only serving to point out that you are going without as a member on the "other" team, which is actually the boss team in disguise.
When I look over your points again on how you think of leadership, I can't find anything worth disagreement and not much to echo, except maybe for the one about leadership not fitting all sizes. I'm not trying to get into "situation management" or any publications on that phrase (unless I already did?? - I don't know), but I do believe you can get good results when different kinds of people are around and also from people that know to adapt to different situations. Once you have somebody with a mentality that one-size fits-all, then I think you have people that feel like they cannot get anywhere and may leave, and cliques instead of a larger togetherness. | 
