Followership as a Role

� c h a p t e r

17

Leadership: A Partnership in Reciprocal Following

James Maroosis

There is a conception of leadership gaining ground to-day very different from our old notion. . . . It is a conception very far removed from the leader-follower relation. With that conception you had to be either a

leader or a leaner. To-day our thinking is tending less and less to be confi ned within the boundaries of those two alternatives. There is the

idea of a reciprocal leadership. There is also the idea of a partnership of following, of following the invisible leader—the common purpose. The

relation of the rest of the group to the leader is not a passive one.

Mary Parker Follett 1

Leadership, in the words of Mary Parker Follett, is a partnership in reciprocal following. This partnership follows what she calls the invisible leader, the common purpose, the law of the situation. Thus

leadership as responding to a call is a type of following, and follow-

ing because it needs to hear the call is a type of leading.

T W O

c02.indd 17c02.indd 17 10/20/07 1:47:14 AM10/20/07 1:47:14 AM

C o p y r i g h t 2 0 0 8 . J o s s e y - B a s s .

A l l r i g h t s r e s e r v e d . M a y n o t b e r e p r o d u c e d i n a n y f o r m w i t h o u t p e r m i s s i o n f r o m t h e p u b l i s h e r , e x c e p t f a i r u s e s p e r m i t t e d u n d e r U . S . o r a p p l i c a b l e c o p y r i g h t l a w .

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 3/4/2022 9:48 AM via INDIANA WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY AN: 218521 ; Ronald E. Riggio, Ira Chaleff, Jean Lipman-Blumen.; The Art of Followership : How Great Followers Create Great Leaders and Organizations Account: s8876267.main.relall

The Art of Followership18

Followership, like leadership, requires discrimination. Both need to be able to

pick who and what to follow. Followership and leadership are two necessary com-

ponents of what it means to be either a good leader or a good follower. In other

words, there are no leaders who are not followers, nor followers who are not lead-

ers; both need to learn what and how to follow—that is, to lead themselves and

others to heed, recognize, and respond in a humane manner to what is being

called for in a given situation.

It is the situation that calls for action, by dictating the need for leadership, and

it is a partnership of reciprocal following that enacts a response.

This notion of leading and following as responding to a calling, centers the

whole notion of leadership and followership around something outside the lead-

ers and followers themselves. It requires that they turn their attention “outward.”

They need to use all their senses to scrutinize and pick up what and how some-

thing needs to be done.

Hence followership, like leadership, is a discipline of competencies and

“response-abilities.” The difference between response-able and responsible is

the difference between something you can do and something you should do.

Response-ability is readiness. Responsibility is abstract duty or job description.

Leadership and followership are competencies that work in tandem as a shared

discipline of reciprocal response-abilities.

The words discipline and disciple have the same root. A disciple is someone

who learns by following. Disciplined disciples take nothing for granted. They

learn to express their ignorance, whenever and however it appears. This is always

a sign of a good follower. They are so interested in learning how to do things that

they are willing to express their every doubt, misgiving, confusion, apprehension,

or fear.

Followership and feedback go hand in hand.

What followership needs is leadership. There is something the follower does

not know, that the follower cannot or will not see, that leadership brings to the

relationship. The disciple-follower needs what the leader reveals, manifests, points

outs, or sets as a course. In this regard the leader is like a teacher leading students

to draw their own conclusions by training their sensibilities and allowing them to

learn what they need in order to accomplish their tasks.

In this sense, followership is essentially a learning function. The leader teaches

what followers need to learn and understand. The leader speaks the law of the

c02.indd 18c02.indd 18 10/20/07 1:47:14 AM10/20/07 1:47:14 AM

EBSCOhost - printed on 3/4/2022 9:48 AM via INDIANA WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

Leadership: A Partnership in Reciprocal Following 19

situation in a way that the followers can hear what is being said. The leader helps

the followers see or achieve their shared goals.

Neither leader nor follower is a sycophant; neither is on an ego trip (on the

contrary, this an anti–ego trip relationship). Both are learning how to follow what

is being called for in a given situation. Both are defi ned by their ability to make

responsible decisions and take actions in a responsible manner.

So described, this selfl ess or ego-less approach to leadership and followership

points to a medieval model of learning as a discovery process in which the teacher

leads students to learn for themselves, not by themselves. Thomas Aquinas, for

example, describes teaching as a discovery process in which the teacher leads stu-

dents to make their own discoveries. For Aquinas, the teacher-leader expresses

learning in such a way that students learn how to learn by learning things for

themselves:

For the teacher leads the pupils to knowledge of things they do not

know in the same way that someone directs himself through the pro-

cess of discovering something they do not know. . . . One person is

said to teach another inasmuch as . . . he manifests to that other the

reasoning process which he himself goes through by his own natural

reason. . . . Therefore, just as the doctor is said to heal a patient

through the activity of nature, so a man is said to cause the knowl-

edge in another through the activity of the learners own natural rea-

son, and this is teaching. 2

Please note that in this notion of teaching, the leader lets learning happen in the

classroom by sharing with his or her followers (the students) how the leader

arrived at his or her own conclusions.

This is what makes leadership so much more diffi cult than followership. The

leader is forging the trail and laying it out for others to follow.

Martin Heidegger reiterates this theme by taking us right to the heart of lead-

ership or learning as being a partnership of reciprocal following. Here again, one

need only substitute “follower” for “student” and “leader” for “teacher” to see the

way this process works.

True teaching is even more diffi cult than learning. We know that;

but we rarely think about it. And why is teaching more diffi cult than

c02.indd 19c02.indd 19 10/20/07 1:47:14 AM10/20/07 1:47:14 AM

EBSCOhost - printed on 3/4/2022 9:48 AM via INDIANA WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

The Art of Followership20

learning? Not because the teacher must have a larger store of

information, and have it always ready. Teaching is more diffi cult than

learning because what teaching calls for is this: to let learning. The

real teacher, in fact, lets nothing else be learned than—learning. His

conduct, therefore, often produces the impression that we properly

learn nothing from him, if by “learning” we now suddenly under-

stand merely the procurement of useful information. The teacher is

ahead of his apprentices in this alone, that he still has far more to

learn than they—he has to learn to let them learn. The teacher must

be capable of being more teachable than the apprentices. The teacher

is far less assured of his ground than those who learn are of theirs. If

the relation between the teacher and the taught is genuine, therefore,

there is never a place in it for the authority of the know it all or the

authoritative sway of the offi cial. 3

Here we see that leadership is a learning process that is not only centered in what

needs to be said but also in learning how to say it in ways that others can under-

stand and follow. Both leader and follower (teacher and student) are learning to

follow what is called for; what needs to be said, learned, taught as dictated by the

situation; the one pointing out to the other where the learning or teaching needs

to go. This is a dynamic, educational relationship of give and take.

The follower’s job is to let the leader know what he or she needs to learn—what

the follower does and does not see—and this is done by both of them acting hon-

estly, working together with mutual respect, honoring their respective roles and

responsibilities as leader and follower.

This relationship of mutual response-abilities is the leader-follower relation.

Both create it so that both can do the right things, thus creating new situations

that dictate anew what is most needed. This is an ongoing process in which lead-

ers and followers may change their roles, but leadership and followership always

function the same way.

THE ETHICS OF FOLLOWERSHIP: FOLLOWERSHIP IS MORE THAN AN ART This learning process is neither abstract nor academic in nature. What is being

learned is how to comport oneself in the world. Followership is about saying and

c02.indd 20c02.indd 20 10/20/07 1:47:15 AM10/20/07 1:47:15 AM

EBSCOhost - printed on 3/4/2022 9:48 AM via INDIANA WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

Leadership: A Partnership in Reciprocal Following 21

doing the right things. Followership is acting properly and well in a given situation.

It is doing and saying what the situation dictates. This is what the ancients called

eloquence and decorum, saying and doing the right things. What we might call

walking the talk. As such, followership is an ethical and moral discipline and must

be taught and learned as such.

The point is that what is most needed in any human situation is a humane

response, what Peter Drucker calls “doing fi rst things fi rst.” And fi rst things, in the

context of leadership, are always the moral things—that is, the right things to do.

The reason for this is that a fi rst thing always requires a sense of purpose or end,

so that fi rst things and last things always go hand in hand.

This means that to live in a world of fi rst things is simultaneously to live in

a world of last things. What makes something a fi rst thing is the reason why

you are doing it. It is your goal or purpose that tells you what to do fi rst. The

next right thing to do is the thing that will most effectively lead you to achieve

your goal.

The “fi rst thing” is always a function of the fi nal product or effect one has in

mind. Not to think from effect to cause is not to think effectively. Here is where

Stephen Covey’s and Peter Drucker’s distinction between doing the right things

(effectiveness) and doing things right (effi ciency) is so helpful.

Leadership and followership are about doing the right things. They are about

saying the right words and hearing them in the right ways.

The difference between the right word and the almost-right word can be immense.

Mark Twain once described this difference as being the difference between lightning

and the lightning bug. Or as Isocrates put it over twenty-fi ve hundred years ago,

“The right word is a sure sign of right thinking.”

Leadership and followership are all about walking the talk, saying the right

things, and doing them in the right way. Response-able action means having

a sense of purpose and acting with propriety. This is an ancient meaning of

decorum—not as maintaining the status quo but renewing identity through

change. Response-able followership is transformative precisely in the way it

responds to changing situations. Followership is a habit of responsive effective-

ness. What needs to be internalized and learned as a habit is externalized and

brought into existence through our day-to-day actions.

Habits are actualized through doing, and doing develops the type of “right”

habits that get things done. This is pure Aristotle. It embodies and animates the

c02.indd 21c02.indd 21 10/20/07 1:47:15 AM10/20/07 1:47:15 AM

EBSCOhost - printed on 3/4/2022 9:48 AM via INDIANA WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

The Art of Followership22

ancient tradition of virtue ethics that once was taught and understood as a

commonplace.

A quick snapshot of the four cardinal virtues will show how habits need to be

ethical if they are to be effective. Doing the right thing (prudence), for the right

reasons (justice), often requires courage, and always requires not acting out (tem-

perance, soundness of mind).

These virtues are not a product of wishful thinking. On the contrary, they have

been studied and applied throughout the ages because, and only because, of their

“rightness,” their effi cacy and their track record as best practices.

The virtues integrate doing things right with doing the right things. The vir-

tues let us do the right things right, which means doing things the right way for

the right reasons. In short, the virtues constitute best practices for living a highly

effective human life.

A life of virtue is a life that distinguishes itself as human in its personhood,

its freedom, its creativity, its truthfulness, its beauty, its integrity, its happiness,

and its ability to manifest “response-able” competencies of leadership and follow-

ership on a fairly regular basis.

As disciplines of response-ability, leadership and followership depend on these

virtues to stay in reality. To be virtuous, powerful, and competent consists in large

part in knowing what and who to follow and how to lead and comport oneself

response-ably in a given situation.

Again, the virtues are not ideas. They are practices that must be learned. As

practices they can be developed only through practicing them. The virtues consti-

tute the basis for rock-solid practical thinking that is driven by a desire to achieve

bottom-line practical results.

The practicality of the virtues manifests itself everywhere on earth; wherever

they are put to use, they have been shown to work. It is in no way restricted to the

West. One need only look at the great tales, myths, and teachings of the great cul-

tures, traditions that have survived and fl ourished with dignity all over the

planet.

Learning to practice followership through the virtues is fundamental to our

safety and sanity as human beings.

To follow is to do the next right thing. This often requires distinguishing

doing what is called for (doing the right things) from doing what you are told

(doing things right).

c02.indd 22c02.indd 22 10/20/07 1:47:15 AM10/20/07 1:47:15 AM

EBSCOhost - printed on 3/4/2022 9:48 AM via INDIANA WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

Leadership: A Partnership in Reciprocal Following 23

The virtue of followership always requires learning to “do fi rst things fi rst and

second things not at all,” the point being that to do second things fi rst is to lose

sight of the goal. To do second things fi rst is the essence of what it means to be

misled. It is for followership to degenerate into followership, that is, to diminish

itself and languish in a type of living that simply leads elsewhere.

Hence following, like leading, is a free act of surrendering and acting in accord

with what is being called for in a given situation. This requires insight, fore-

thought, physical and mental discipline, and the ability to put that understanding

into action.

Thus, followership tends to be a mentoring or mimetic situation in which the

followers learn to think like the leader—who does not think for them but lets their

thinking and learning manifest itself in and through the way they respond to situ-

ations. Followers manifest leadership the way the dancers manifest the dance.

Hence, the leadership-followership relation is a partnership of reciprocal fol-

lowing. It is like a conversation where leader and follower both are learning about

the law of the situation. And like any conversation, leadership and followership

can move from person to person as the dialogue twists and turns.

Followership, like leadership, needs to stay fresh, and open to the newness of

things. It needs to dwell in and manifest the novelty of a situation as a moral

imperative. It does this through its responses. This is a world brought forth through

response-able action of doing fi rst things fi rst and second things not at all.

In this sense, followership, like leadership, points us to the essence of what it

means to be human. It points out our need to follow things by taking responsible-

able attitudes toward them. Depending on the situation, and what is being called

for, a response-able attitude could be one of prayer, speculation, wonder, sympa-

thy, planning, implementing, laughing, sharing, and so on.

The difference between followers and leaders is that followers need leaders to

help them follow what leaders themselves are following. This relationship takes

the form of a shared response-ability to a shared calling. Both fi nd each other in a

true fellowship to create the world responsibly.

Followership, like leadership, is a vocation. Leadership teaches the way by shar-

ing and co-creating a path for both to follow.

All of this implies that the human situation is more than a cipher. On the

contrary, the world calls us to response-able action. It calls us to develop highly

creative deeply moral solutions to our most pressing needs.

c02.indd 23c02.indd 23 10/20/07 1:47:15 AM10/20/07 1:47:15 AM

EBSCOhost - printed on 3/4/2022 9:48 AM via INDIANA WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

The Art of Followership24

The authority to do this comes from the situations in which we fi nd ourselves.

The author is the leader who co-authors our response with followership. At the

core of all of this is a prerequisite of sanity, soundness of mind—what the ancients

called Sophrosyne or Temperance.

The heart of followership is the call for a sane, imaginative, normal, and

humane response to “do fi rst things fi rst and second things not at all.” True fol-

lowership enacts a form of practical wisdom; false followership and the leader-

ship it engenders act out bias, ignorance, and error, to the detriment of all.

Followership is a basic mode of human existence. It is a moral practice

Requiring discipline and discrimination

Using the same thinking as leadership

Needing guidance to develop a response-able attitude to things

It is an ongoing process of learning to do fi rst things fi rst by

Questioning leadership

Giving leadership a sense of traction and tools for discovery

Keeping leaders on purpose by sharing their ignorance with them

Continually training in the virtues to avoid devolving into fallowness

Fallowness leads to a form of intemperate, toxic leadership that disempowers

our ability to act and think in a humane manner. It is everything followership

is not.

Followership is a reciprocal partnership of ethical response-abilities. This part-

nership is as ancient as it is new. Examples of it abound in the great literatures

and wisdom traditions of China and India, and the aboriginal myths of Africa,

Australia and the Native Peoples of North and South America.

As it is written in the I Ching, “To lead others, a person must fi rst know what it

is to follow and then seek willing agreement rather than coercion or trickery. The

cause must be just, both when we lead and when we follow others, if the outcome

is to be successful.”

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

c02.indd 24c02.indd 24 10/20/07 1:47:16 AM10/20/07 1:47:16 AM

EBSCOhost - printed on 3/4/2022 9:48 AM via INDIANA WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

� c h a p t e r

25

Three Perspectives on Followership

Jon P. Howell María J. Méndez

Several important forces are operating in organizations today that cause people to assume a followership role. These forces can be viewed as responses to an implied exchange with the leader (for exam-

ple, exchanging loyalty for security or performance for rewards) or to

a lack of willingness or capability to assume a leadership role. 1 In this

chapter, we hope to contribute to the understanding of this impor-

tant role by offering three perspectives on followership. Each perspec-

tive refl ects a somewhat different role orientation on the part of the

follower. We believe that the three perspectives offer value to research-

ers and organizational practitioners in several ways. First, they may

help organize the gradually expanding research literature on follow-

ership by clarifying the different roles followers play in organizations.

Followers may work closely or at a distance from their leaders, with

varying amounts of interaction and independence in determining

their own actions. The perspectives described here refl ect different

T H R E E

c03.indd 25c03.indd 25 10/20/07 1:47:38 AM10/20/07 1:47:38 AM

EBSCOhost - printed on 3/4/2022 9:48 AM via INDIANA WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

The Art of Followership26

leader-follower relationships found in the literature and in organiza-

tions. Second, the three perspectives described here may clarify why

some followers have trouble adjusting to new leaders and may help

followers prepare for their roles vis-à-vis specifi c leaders. A leader’s

expectations for a follower may not match the follower’s initial per-

ceptions of his or her role, creating dissonance and possible confl ict.

A shared understanding of different perspectives of followership may

provide grounds for early discussions to help address these potential

problems. Third, the different perspectives are the basis for research

questions and issues that can be subjected to empirical research to

add to our knowledge of followership in organizations. The issues of

person-job and person-organization fi t, change in organizations,

career mobility, and individual and group effectiveness are all affected

by the different followership perspectives described here and are

important for organizations and employees today.

Individuals’ role orientations refer to how they conceptualize their duties and

responsibilities in their organizational positions. This role orientation is infl u-

enced by communications and expectations from others and by the individual’s

self-expectations. Most adults in developed societies have experienced an

extended period of training and socialization in assuming organizational roles,

resulting in specifi c perceptions and cognitions regarding their position. 2 Stud-

ies of employees in a variety of occupations show that how people defi ne their

role importantly affects how they spend their time and effort as well as the form

of their interactions with others. 3 Most of the literature on followership rejects

a subservient role for followers as inappropriate for organizations today,

although it is likely that some leaders still tacitly reward this behavior in

followers. 4 Most experts view followership as an active role that complements

the leader’s role in achieving results. The role orientations described here address

this active role in different ways, and each has the potential to produce effective

or ineffective leader-follower interactions and successful or unsuccessful

performance.

c03.indd 26c03.indd 26 10/20/07 1:47:38 AM10/20/07 1:47:38 AM

EBSCOhost - printed on 3/4/2022 9:48 AM via INDIANA WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

Three Perspectives on Followership 27

In this chapter, we fi rst describe each type of follower role orientation and

how it can contribute to effectiveness or ineffectiveness in the leader-follower

relationship. We then describe antecedents of each role orientation, including

the follower’s self-concept or identity (how the follower views himself or her-

self ), the leader’s expectations (which signifi cantly shape the follower’s role

behavior), and the organizational context (including structural and interpersonal

factors that encourage or constrain the follower’s behavior). Our general model

is shown in Figure 3.1 . The chapter concludes with a discussion of several research

questions and organizational issues for future research on followership.

FOLLOWERSHIP AS AN INTERACTIVE ROLE The fi rst role orientation views followership as an interactive role that may

complement and support the leadership role. In its most effective form, this

role orientation is equivalent to leadership in importance for achieving group

and organizational goals. We know that leaders cannot exist without followers and

that most of the work in organizations is done by followers. 5 Effective followers

often forgo rewards like money, status, and fame that accrue to leaders and instead

fi nd meaning in working with their leader to achieve worthwhile goals. Howell

Figure 3.1 Antecedents and Outcome

of Follower Role Orientation .

Follower Self- Concept

Leader Expectations

Follower Role Orientation

Leader-Follower Relationship Effectiveness

Organizational Factors

c03.indd 27c03.indd 27 10/20/07 1:47:39 AM10/20/07 1:47:39 AM

EBSCOhost - printed on 3/4/2022 9:48 AM via INDIANA WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

The Art of Followership28

and Shamir recently noted that followers often fulfi ll an “active role in construct-

ing the leadership relationship, empowering the leader and infl uencing his or her

behavior, and ultimately determining the consequences of the leadership rela-

tionship.” 6 This type of interaction between leaders and followers is based on

cooperation and mutual infl uence rather than obedience. 7 Both parties have

responsibilities to exercise their power for the benefi t of their relationship and

their group’s or organization’s performance.

The following are effective followership behaviors that fi t this role orientation:

(1) demonstrating job knowledge and competence at work tasks; (2) building

collaborative and supportive relationships with coworkers and the leader;

(3) defending and supporting the leader in front of others; (4) exerting infl uence

on the leader in a confi dent and unemotional manner to help the leader avoid

costly mistakes; (5) demonstrating proper comportment for the organization

(including proper speech, dress, etiquette); (6) showing a concern for perfor-

mance as well as a supportive friendly atmosphere; and (7) showing a willingness

to participate in necessary organizational changes. 8 These behaviors describe fol-

lowers who are engaged with their leaders to actively cooperate in achieving orga-

nizational goals and are represented in much of the existing literature on

followership. 9

Other forms of followership as an interactive role are often less effective. Kelley

described one type of ineffective follower who interacts frequently with his leader.

He labeled these followers “sheep” or “yes-people” who rely on the leader to do

their thinking. They attach themselves to their leader and go along with whatever

the leader decides. Their motivation is often calculative, to secure desired rewards

from the leader or to satisfy their need for safety or security in a threatening envi-

ronment. They yield to the leader’s judgment and “know their place.” They tend

to say what the leader wants to hear and withhold important information that the

leader may dislike. In some cultures and organizations, this style of followership

is encouraged and rewarded, although it can have dire consequences when impor-

tant risks, obstacles, and alternatives are overlooked by the leader. 10

Another type of interactive follower who is ineffective is the political games-

man, who spends his time and effort interacting with leaders to monitor organi-

zational trends and adjusting his behavior and communication to fi t in with the

dominant fl ow of events. These individuals carry out orders exactly, even if they

are aware of improvements that could be made, and maintain a paper trail to

c03.indd 28c03.indd 28 10/20/07 1:47:39 AM10/20/07 1:47:39 AM

EBSCOhost - printed on 3/4/2022 9:48 AM via INDIANA WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

Three Perspectives on Followership 29

protect themselves if things go wrong. They judiciously avoid disagreeing with

powerful individuals and constantly try to manipulate the system for their own

benefi t. 11 Collinson described a similar type of interactive follower as the

“upwardly mobile knowledge worker” who treats every interaction as a means to

further his or her own career. 12 These followers offer little to the leader-follower

relationship, and they often consume organizational resources in their political

maneuvering and ingratiating behaviors toward powerful persons.

Shamir described a third type of interactive follower who may be ineffective.

This individual lacks a sense of personal identity and seeks to establish an identity

in a close relationship with another person (often a leader) or a group, organiza-

tion, or social movement. Much as children identify with their parents or sports

fans identify with a star athlete, individuals build a sense of esteem and power

through interactions with powerful individuals or groups. 13 These individuals

may follow a leader who represents a group they identify with, as is true of the

followers of Osama bin Laden. The leader and the group provide order and

meaning for followers, who often actively defend the leader because he or she rep-

resents their image of an ideal person. This type of followership can become inef-

fective when followers overlook unethical behavior by the leader or the

organization to preserve their self-image. In an extreme form, these individuals

may become fanatics and completely suspend their own judgment. In this case,

followers may carry out horrible acts to preserve their relationship with the leader

and group, as occurred with the followers of Charles Manson or Jim Jones.

Antecedents of an Interactive Role Orientation Many factors can be important antecedents of an interactive role orientation

by followers. One follower characteristic that likely encourages an interactive

supportive role orientation is what Brewer and Gardner refer to as a relational

self-concept by followers. 14 A relational self-concept implies that followers see

themselves primarily as acting out roles in relation to signifi cant others. Their

self-worth is often heavily dependent on their behavior in these roles and is

directly related to appraisals of them by the other person in the relationship. 15 In

the most effective form of this interactive role orientation, followers are moti-

vated to enhance their relationship partner’s well-being and both parties derive

mutual benefi ts from the relationship. 16 We expect that followers with a healthy

relational self-concept will tend to view their followership role as strongly

c03.indd 29c03.indd 29 10/20/07 1:47:39 AM10/20/07 1:47:39 AM

EBSCOhost - printed on 3/4/2022 9:48 AM via INDIANA WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

The Art of Followership30

interactive and supportive of the leader, and they will be especially effective at

these interactive followership roles.

However, followers who seek personal benefi ts or safety or who lack a strong

personal identity may adopt an interactive role orientation with the leader with

other motives in mind. If followers view the interactive relationship as solely

instrumental for obtaining personal benefi ts, then their interaction with the

leader is designed to exploit the organization and its constituents. We do not view

this type of relationship as truly refl ective of a relational self-concept, even though

these individuals may actively support and defend the leader. Their underlying

self-concept is probably highly individualized (described in the following section),

and their support for the leader will likely last only until another relationship

promises higher personal rewards. If followers view the interactive relationship as

providing safety, security, or personal identity, then they likely do have a true rela-

tional self-concept. However, these motives may result in highly dependent fol-

lowers who become unquestioning disciples of the leader or even fanatics who

will do anything the leader asks of them. Tragic consequences can result when

followers suspend their own ethical judgment.

Research by Eden and his colleagues clearly shows the importance of leader

expectations for follower role performance and behavior. 17 Leaders who have a

relational self-concept will likely expect and appreciate followers who share the

same identity. Shared relational identities will facilitate frequent interaction as

well as shared understandings and sense making. Leaders with relational self-

concepts tend to be supportive and participative with followers, and expect the

same from the follower. 18 Leaders who have an interactive supportive role orien-

tation with their own superiors will model these behaviors for their followers to

emulate. 19 Each of these leadership factors will tend to shape the followers’ role

orientation toward an interactive and supportive perspective with the leader.

Some leaders may view their relationship with followers and others as a source

for personal benefi t, and they will likely model and encourage a relational orien-

tation in their followers. They may interact with followers to conspire and maxi-

mize their joint personal gains, as occurred with Enron. These relationships can

clearly damage people and organizations.

Contextual factors such as task requirements that necessitate a high degree

of leader-follower interaction will likely elicit an interactive role orientation in

both leaders and followers. Reward systems that encourage cooperative efforts

between leaders and individual followers will also facilitate an interactive role.

c03.indd 30c03.indd 30 10/20/07 1:47:39 AM10/20/07 1:47:39 AM

EBSCOhost - printed on 3/4/2022 9:48 AM via INDIANA WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

Three Perspectives on Followership 31

Mentoring programs are also likely to encourage mutually supportive behaviors

between leaders and followers. These contextual factors encourage interactive and

supportive follower role orientations to ensure the accomplishment of tasks, the

receipt of adequate rewards, and the continued development of followers. How-

ever, if reward systems encourage adventuring for personal gain with little or no

concern for others outside the leader-follower relationship, an interactive role

orientation may be detrimental to the organization. Both leader and follower

motives and reward systems must be consistent with legitimate organizational

goals for an interactive role orientation between leaders and followers to benefi t

the organization and its people.

FOLLOWERSHIP AS AN INDEPENDENT ROLE A second role orientation refl ects a trend for followers to act more independently

of their leaders than in the past. This trend probably results from increases in the

education and training of the workforce, employees’ desire to be more self-

determining in their work, and leaner organizations with fewer middle managers.

These factors can create constructive and nonconstructive situations for organi-

zations. A constructive result has been the creation of follower substitutes for

leadership that actually take the place of specifi c behaviors previously carried out

by hierarchical leaders. 20 When leadership substitutes exist, leaders can focus on

other tasks that often go unattended, such as follower development, advocacy,

and obtaining resources. Several follower-based substitutes for leadership are

described here.

One example of a follower substitute for leadership is a high degree of fol-

lower ability, experience, training, and job knowledge. When employees have

extensive training and experience, they can provide their own self-direction and

solve work problems on their own without reliance on their formal leader. This

is evident in employees in high-stress occupations, such as pilots who land jet

fi ghters on nuclear aircraft carriers, and air traffi c controllers at international

airports. Researchers found that directive leadership was relatively unimportant

compared to the extensive experience and continuous training required in these

occupations. They noted that “in the white heat of danger, when the whole sys-

tem threatens to collapse,” it is the individual’s competence and cooperation

among colleagues that is essential. 21 These individuals are trained extensively and

c03.indd 31c03.indd 31 10/20/07 1:47:40 AM10/20/07 1:47:40 AM

EBSCOhost - printed on 3/4/2022 9:48 AM via INDIANA WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

The Art of Followership32

daily to redirect operations or bring them to an abrupt halt. This may involve

ignoring directions from managers who are not on the front line of action.

Followers gain relevant ability and job knowledge from formal training and

informal experiences, and these follower characteristics can substitute for a lead-

er’s directive leadership. 22

Another example, which is becoming increasingly common in developed

countries, occurs with employees who have extensive professional education.

These employees can often perform their work assignments without relying on

technical guidance from their hierarchical superiors. Their education often

includes a strong socialization component, instilling in them a desire for autono-

mous, self-controlling behavior and the tendency to look to their professional

colleagues for support and recognition. This often occurs with university profes-

sors who are highly educated and tenured. These individuals often view their

university as a place to practice their teaching and research skills with little inter-

ference by administrators. They work with and obtain feedback from colleagues,

they read academic journals for up-to-date information on their fi eld, and they

derive intrinsic satisfaction from their publications and recognition at academic

conferences. Similar tendencies exist in fi rms that provide consulting and account-

ing services. In these instances, professional education and socialization can

replace or substitute for a leader’s direction and supportive behavior. 23

Employee self-management programs may also develop follower substitutes

for leadership. These programs encourage followers to set challenging but realis-

tic work goals on their own, to control their work environment, and to self-

evaluate and reinforce their own performance. They may also include developing

collegial and mentoring relationships that can increase their potential to be self-

regulating for high performance and create supportive relationships that help fol-

lowers through rough times. Follower self-management may therefore substitute

for hierarchical leaders’ directive and supportive behaviors. 24

A fi nal example of a follower substitute occurred in a study of engineering per-

sonnel and the number of years the followers had worked for their leader. A large

number of years with the leader allowed followers to share the same mental maps

as their leader and resulted in their taking the same decisions and actions that the

leader would have taken. Years with the supervisor may simply be a useful way of

measuring a follower’s ability, confi dence, or simply “job savvy,” which substi-

tuted for the leader’s directive leadership. 25

c03.indd 32c03.indd 32 10/20/07 1:47:40 AM10/20/07 1:47:40 AM

EBSCOhost - printed on 3/4/2022 9:48 AM via INDIANA WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

Three Perspectives on Followership 33

A nonconstructive form of the independent role orientation can occur when

follower-based neutralizers of leadership develop in organizations. Neutralizers

interfere with a leader’s attempts to infl uence followers. Unlike substitutes, how-

ever, neutralizers do not provide an alternate source of guidance or good feelings

to replace the leader’s infl uence. Followers may possess certain characteristics or

create situations that essentially neutralize a leader’s infl uence, resulting in an

“infl uence vacuum” that may have serious negative consequences for the organi-

zation. This can occur when followers’ personalities refl ect a high need for inde-

pendence, and they believe (erroneously) that they are more capable than the

leader to make job-related decisions. This situation may also occur if the follower

has become alienated from the leader or the organization due to unfair treatment

in the follower’s eyes. Followers may belong to unions or work under civil service

policies that remove the leader’s control over important organizational rewards

such as salary level or promotions. Several of these situations can be exacerbated

when followers work at a physical distance from the leader, such as telecommut-

ers or service workers. In these situations, leaders’ attempts to infl uence followers

are easily frustrated, and if followers do not possess the needed abilities to work

effectively on their own, the organization and its clients suffer.

Antecedents of an Independent Role Orientation Follower-based substitutes for leadership imply a predominantly individualized

orientation in the follower’s self-concept. 26 An individualized self-concept empha-

sizes personal characteristics that distinguish the individual from other individu-

als. Follower-based substitutes, such as a high level of ability, experience, training

and knowledge, extensive professional education, skills at self-management, or

years with the leader, imply personal attributes and learning by followers that

may signifi cantly differentiate them from other followers or the leader. These per-

sonal factors also are likely to make followers more effective at working on their

own. Comparisons with others and with possible future selves (what one hopes to

become or fears to become) represent important internal motivators for a person

with an individualized self-concept. We expect that followers who have predomi-

nantly individualized self-concepts will tend to adopt a relatively independent

role orientation in dealing with their leader. If they also possess the skills and abil-

ities described earlier, they will likely enact leadership substitutes that contribute

to effective organizational performance. However, many followers do not possess

c03.indd 33c03.indd 33 10/20/07 1:47:40 AM10/20/07 1:47:40 AM

EBSCOhost - printed on 3/4/2022 9:48 AM via INDIANA WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

The Art of Followership34

these skills and abilities, but they may view themselves as independent operators

or even as rebels who are alienated from the organization. For these followers, an

independent role orientation may result in leadership neutralizers that can have

deleterious consequences for the organization.

Leader expectations that followers will act independently and competently

without regular guidance from the leader are common among professionals and

highly trained service workers. Further, the increasing importance of leaders’

boundary spanning duties means they are less available to supervise and guide

follower behavior on a regular basis. 27 Leaders in these situations likely have an

independent role orientation themselves and expect their followers to have the

same. Conversely, if a leader does not enact an independent role orientation with

his or her own leader, then that individual is unlikely to expect it from his or her

followers. Here followers are more likely to fulfi ll an interactive and perhaps

dependent role with the leader.

Organizational programs for self-management, job enrichment, emergency

training, and computer-based guidance and feedback are all contextual factors that

encourage followers to act independently and competently without regular super-

vision by the leader. Organizational strategies that include reducing the number

of middle managers result in wide spans of control that necessitate more indepen-

dent action by followers. These contextual factors promote an independent role

orientation by followers to guide their own behavior and to seek advice and sup-

port from colleagues and coworkers rather than the hierarchical leader. These

programs thus enact substitutes for leadership in organizations. 28 However, if the

organizational context includes simple jobs, close control by hierarchical superi-

ors, and operating information that is available only to management, it will not

encourage an independent role orientation by followers. This may result in either

a highly subservient interactive role orientation, or resentment and a possible

independent rebellious orientation that can have major negative consequences.

FOLLOWERSHIP AS A SHIFTING ROLE A third followership role orientation refl ects the need to alternate between the

leadership and followership roles that many individuals face in current organiza-

tions. Virtually all individuals spend some time as followers. Indeed, leaders in

hierarchical organizations need to report to someone. However, shifting roles is

c03.indd 34c03.indd 34 10/20/07 1:47:41 AM10/20/07 1:47:41 AM

EBSCOhost - printed on 3/4/2022 9:48 AM via INDIANA WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

Three Perspectives on Followership 35

especially common and challenging in current fl exible organizations that rely on

team-based work structures. 29 Members within these teams usually have comple-

mentary knowledge and professional experience. Through the integration of

these diverse capacities, teams can often achieve higher performance. 30 Leader-

ship in this type of organization is explained by Rost as a complex infl uence pro-

cess in which all team members interact toward the attainment of a common

goal. 31 Leadership tends to be distributed among the team members and is more

fl exible and dynamic. Individuals are expected to adapt themselves to the team

leadership structure by leading or following, and their role is often temporal and

dependent on the requirements of a particular project or task. 32 Burke, Fiore, and

Salas described this as a situation in which people enact “fl uid leadership roles.” 33

Not only are team members challenged to enact followership and leadership roles

effectively, but they also must be able to switch between the roles. In such an envi-

ronment, team members with a high tolerance for ambiguity are well fi t to accept

leadership from different people and enact this fl uid role effectively.

Close coordination among team members is extremely challenging and impor-

tant in these dynamic organizations. Clearly defi ned roles and extensive commu-

nication are essential to this coordination within the fl uid leadership structure.

A curious example is that of the Orpheus Chamber Orchestra, in which musi-

cians hold the leadership roles, as there is no permanent conductor. They rotate

through leadership and followership roles at different points as required by the

musical piece. A clear division of the tasks ensures that all musicians understand

their own and others’ responsibilities for a particular performance, resulting in

overall coordination. 34

Different followership behaviors that are consistent with this role include

(1) monitoring and interpreting the environment to identify needed changes in

the team; (2) actively participating in the group’s decision making while taking

responsibility for achieving its goals; (3) challenging the team when necessary

and maintaining a critical perspective on the group’s decisions; (4) role-modeling

the team member prototype by observing and adhering to the norms of the

group; and (5) maintaining an empathic relationship with rich communication

among teammates. 35

The shifting follower role orientation may be ineffective when the follower

fails to challenge the group. Often highly cohesive groups exert high pressure

toward conformity in individuals who challenge the collective norms or decisions.

c03.indd 35c03.indd 35 10/20/07 1:47:41 AM10/20/07 1:47:41 AM

EBSCOhost - printed on 3/4/2022 9:48 AM via INDIANA WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

The Art of Followership36

This pressure leads to self-censorship, thus decreasing critical thinking. When

group members yield to this pressure, they may jeopardize the common objec-

tives. This group dynamic, termed groupthink, has been responsible for major

failures both in the corporate world and in government. 36 Such was the case in the

tragedies of Columbia and Challenger, both NASA space shuttles that ended in

disaster. A main factor for failure in both of these cases resulted from the

self- censorship of both managers and engineers involved in the project. Fear of

separation and a generalized illusion of invulnerability led to interpreting signals

of danger as “acceptable risks.” 37 Constructive confl ict through team members’

mutual challenge is an element essential to performing a richer analysis of the dif-

ferent alternatives and making more effective decisions. However, these natural

disagreements may easily turn into interpersonal confl ict leading to dysfunctional

team dynamics. Handling confl ict effectively requires active effort from all team

members to communicate, to listen with empathy, and to clearly allocate tasks

and accountability among team members. 38

In their analysis of collaboration in teamwork, LaFasto and Larson describe

another ineffective form of the shifting role orientation. 39 It occurs with people

who engage in teamwork because they seek in the relationship a personal benefi t,

but do not have a real interest in collaborating with other team members to attain

common goals. This is also the case of social loafers, who obtain their proportion

of benefi ts from the team without contributing their proportional share of the

work. 40 These individuals prioritize their personal interests over the interests of

the team and therefore decrease the effectiveness of the team.

Antecedents of a Shifting Role Orientation A shifting followership role orientation corresponds to individuals who prioritize

the goals of the group over their own interests and accept the leadership or fol-

lowership role the group needs them to play. Individuals who internalize the

achievements of their team and derive their self-worth from these achievements

are motivated to take actions that benefi t the team, and to accept an evolving

team leadership model. This role orientation corresponds to an individual’s social

identity or collective self-concept. This social identity refl ects an individual’s

self-perception that involves identifying with the group member prototype. We

believe that these individuals will value a dynamic and fl exible leadership struc-

ture as long as it increases the effectiveness of the team. They will tend to perceive

c03.indd 36c03.indd 36 10/20/07 1:47:41 AM10/20/07 1:47:41 AM

EBSCOhost - printed on 3/4/2022 9:48 AM via INDIANA WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

Three Perspectives on Followership 37

their role in the team as dynamic and fl exible—a shifting role. However, a capable

individual with a strong collective orientation may refrain from playing a leader-

ship role if there are countervailing external norms (for example, if external

norms discourage attracting attention to oneself ). 41 In this situation, the individ-

ual’s reticence may jeopardize the group’s effectiveness.

Team expectations are refl ected in the team’s norms and objectives. When team

norms include a shifting role orientation for members, team members tend to

adopt this orientation as a part of their collective identity. The team’s assignation

of leadership roles is usually infl uenced by the team’s transactive memory, which

involves a shared notion of who in the team is an expert on what area. 42 A team

with inaccurate transactive memory may expect a member to perform a particu-

lar leadership role when another member is more capable. In this case, team

expectations may damage the team’s performance. A hierarchical leader’s expecta-

tions are shown in the leader’s training activities for team members and use of

social reinforcement when different team members effectively shift roles. Admin-

istering team-based rewards for effective performance also reinforces the team’s

leadership-followership role structure.

A rapid and constantly changing environment and a high reliance on team-

work are contextual factors that we believe will infl uence the tendency of the

followers to adopt a shifting role orientation. For instance, current fast-paced

markets that depend on frequent decision making tend to require fl exible organi-

zational structures and teamwork that are adapted to the situation. In this type of

environment, professionals are expected to adapt to new leadership structures

frequently and to effectively shift projects and roles. In addition, tasks that are

highly interdependent and complex and that require high levels of creativity will

benefi t from the use of teamwork with shared and distributed leadership struc-

tures that require followers to shift roles as needed. 43

CONCLUSION AND ISSUES FOR FURTHER RESEARCH The different follower role orientations described in this chapter imply different

patterns of behavior by leaders and followers. These behavior patterns defi ne

the leader-follower relationship and suggest an association between followers’

self-concepts, role orientations, and effective followership behavior. Viewing fol-

lowership from an interactive role orientation that supports the leader is currently

c03.indd 37c03.indd 37 10/20/07 1:47:41 AM10/20/07 1:47:41 AM

EBSCOhost - printed on 3/4/2022 9:48 AM via INDIANA WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

The Art of Followership38

a major research perspective. We have suggested that under certain conditions,

this type of role orientation may be counterproductive, depending on the organi-

zational rewards and motives of the leaders and followers involved. Viewing

followership from an independent role orientation that can substitute for (or

neutralize) leadership has received little attention in the literature. This is in spite

of numerous organizational trends, which indicate that followers are expected to

enact various types of substitutes on the job. In addition, every practicing man-

ager is aware of some followers who have resisted leader efforts to infl uence them,

which can at least partially neutralize their leadership effectiveness. Enacting

follower-based leadership substitutes and addressing neutralizers warrant atten-

tion by followership scholars, as recent researchers have concluded that they are

important for effective organizational functioning. 44 Viewing followership from a

shifting role orientation has also received little attention by followership research-

ers, in spite of the increased popularity of self-managed and empowered teams

in organizations. The defi nitions of leader and follower are especially blurred in

these team situations, and effective rotation between leader and follower roles

deserves more efforts by leadership and followership scholars. We believe that

mutually agreeable and effective working relationships require role orientations

that fi t leaders’ expectations, followers’ identities, and the situational context.

Regarding the self-concepts or identities of leaders and followers, we expect

that when these identities are aligned (that is, both are predominantly relational,

individualized, or collective), they should facilitate better communication, tacit

understanding, and shared expectations. Although Lord and Brown imply

that leaders can change or infl uence followers’ self-concepts, Collinson argues that

because self-concepts are “socially constructed, multiple, and shifting” in charac-

ter, the impact of leaders is highly uncertain. 45 Because self-concepts of leaders

and followers are important determinants of follower role orientations, an impor-

tant question for future research is how alignment between leaders’ and followers’

self-concepts can be facilitated.

A related issue is whether followers can adapt their self-concepts to elicit a

proper role orientation that fi ts the situation. Can a follower with an individualized

orientation shift to a collective orientation when assigned to a self-managed team?

Can a follower with a relational orientation shift to an individualized orientation

and enact an individualized substitute for leadership (such as self- management)

c03.indd 38c03.indd 38 10/20/07 1:47:42 AM10/20/07 1:47:42 AM

EBSCOhost - printed on 3/4/2022 9:48 AM via INDIANA WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

Three Perspectives on Followership 39

when needed? Another question is whether the “best fi tting” role orientation is

necessarily the most effective role orientation.

A leader’s expectations and behaviors are one set of factors affecting followers’

role orientation, but the followers’ self-concepts and motives and the organiza-

tional context are also likely to infl uence how followers view their role. Follower-

ship researchers must address themselves to increasing our understanding of these

role orientations, the factors that affect them, the behaviors they imply, and how

they interact with organizational situations to produce effective leader and fol-

lower performance.

c03.indd 39c03.indd 39 10/20/07 1:47:42 AM10/20/07 1:47:42 AM

EBSCOhost - printed on 3/4/2022 9:48 AM via INDIANA WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

c03.indd 40c03.indd 40 10/20/07 1:47:42 AM10/20/07 1:47:42 AM

EBSCOhost - printed on 3/4/2022 9:48 AM via INDIANA WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

� c h a p t e r

41

A New Leadership- Followership Paradigm

Ernest L. Stech

The usual ways of looking at leaders and followers are no longer useful. In a world of instant communication, rapid technological advance, and globalization, the traditional view of the leader as com-

mander, chief, director, or boss simply does not permit organizations,

nations, communities, or associations to adapt to their ever-changing

environments. The time has come to embrace a different and more

effective way of dealing with leadership and followership. Two para-

digms have dominated the ways in which practitioners, scholars,

writers, and trainers have looked at leaders and leadership. They were

appropriate to a world in which communication was via surface mail

or telephone, the pace of innovation was slower, and organizations

operated on a national scale. A new paradigm is available.

A paradigm is a way of thinking and operating. It is a system of concepts, assump-

tions, values, and methods or techniques and is the way in which members of

the community who share the paradigm view reality. Persons operating within the

paradigm may be and usually are unaware of the concepts, assumptions, values,

F O U R

c04.indd 41c04.indd 41 10/20/07 1:48:05 AM10/20/07 1:48:05 AM

EBSCOhost - printed on 3/4/2022 9:48 AM via INDIANA WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use