Lecture 1: Leadership-followership dynamic

Leadership is the capacity to exercise influence over the actions of others such that the others behave in the manner the
leader desires. Leading is the self-conscious actions of an individual vested with the capacity and/or responsibility to
exercise leadership. Followership represents the conscious and unconscious behaviors of persons and groups in support
of the goals and desires of a leader which have been expressed in words or conduct.

Leadership as command
The central understanding of leadership was based on the notion that the leaders actively lead and the followers or
subordinates, passively and obediently, follow. The basic premise of this style of leadership is that leaders give orders
(commands) to homogeneous followers. Leadership can be characterized as the exercise of power.

All generate a kind of control and power from the top down, and the subordinates in these organizations were
practically under the submission of the leader

Cooperative leadership
Follett firmly believed that orders, like control, involved a reciprocal, integrative activity. Compliance with orders was
not simply the product of the authority of the issuer of the orders (Follett, 1996). Barnard’s The Functions of the
Executive (1968) has influenced generations of organization theorists. His emphasis on cooperation, leadership, and the
informal group represents a major departure from the structural and authoritarian assumptions characteristic of classical
organization theory.

Leadership of groups
The basic premise of this “group-based” style of leadership is that leaders must work with followers who are
heterogeneous and respond to quite different internal and external “stimuli”. A dissatisfied or unmotivated worker will
make little use of a well-structured facility, and a motivated employee will be able to do better under adverse physical
conditions

Organizational leadership:
McGregor postulates that these management styles are the result of a manager’s beliefs about basic human nature. In
contrast, the manager who has a more positive view of human nature will adapt a management style to maximize those
positive attributes.

The Theory X manager, who has little faith in human nature, is driven to develop a management style that emphasizes
control and accountability. The worker cannot be trusted; he must be watched and bullied and bribed into doing any
work. The Theory Y manager defines the task of management as being that of unleashing human potential so that the
worker can get the job done.
management would solve most problems of motivation and performance. Human nature bears directly on trust and the
extent to which certain organizational methods can be used to control employee behavior.

Weber’s (1946) early work on the bases of authority becomes available in translation for US researchers in the 1940s.
This critical work suggests three forms of organizational authority: traditional, charismatic and legal-rational. This is
not the place to explore the full effect of these classifications. One critical point is that authority is not the same as
leadership. Based upon this and other works by Weber, for the first time the simplistic notion that leaders are the boss
is challenged. This distinction will be critical for a future generation of researchers.

New public managment:

strongly analytic and applies techniques in which the appropriate “real world” behavior is based upon statistical and
mathematical modeling that begin with assumptions (all people are egotistical and self-interested) and outlooks
(altruism leads to bad outcomes) that are derived from economics

These perspectives also yield the same result. Public decisions are to be left to the expert. Decisions cannot be left to
amateurs. The criterion for “right decisions” is in who decides, not in the quality of the process
NPM offers a vision of leadership that is quite like that of scientific management. The worker, the subordinate, and the
citizen/customer are simply situational factors to be considered in decision-making.

The leader-follower dynamic

Gulick would assert that the motivation of workers and their affinity for the goals of the organization are critical
Human beings are compounded of cogitation and emotion and do not function well when treated as though they were
merely cogs in motion. Their capacity for great and productive labor, creative co-operative work, and loyal self-
sacrifice knows no limits provided the whole man, body-mind-and-spirit, is thrown into the program. . . .

It becomes increasingly clear, therefore, that the task of the administrator must be accomplished less and less by
coercion and discipline and more and more by persuasion. In other words, management of the future must look more to
leadership and less to authority as the primary means of co-ordination. (1937, p. 37, p. 39)

Burns (1978) introduced transformational leadership as a reminder that “cogitation and emotion,” when directed
toward a shared mission, can transform an organizational culture

Hollander (1955, 1992, 1997, 2004), who argued that leaders and followers are interdependent and must work together
in order to improve the organization’s performance. Julian and Hollander (1969, cited in Baker, 2007), concluded that
leadership encompassed a “two way influence relationship” (p.390) that contained an “implicit exchange relationship”
(p.395) between the leaders and the followers over time

The leader cannot see himself or herself as someone who is holding an office with high authority or someone who is
always up to giving orders and or making all the decisions in the organization. Leadership means understanding how to
promote excellence and protect values in the workplace (Locke, 2001, but also Arendt, 2003).

Leadership emerges through a stance of flexibility and adaptability, trust from the followers, and accommodation to
inevitable changes. This creates a partnership instead of a hierarchical relationship (Baker, 2007).

Transformational leadership, in contrast with the traditional views of leadership, generates more collaboration between
leader and follower, and this collaboration is, in general, based on trust of the leader or leadership in the organization.

Jung and Avolio (2000) link increased performance in an organization with trust in the leader. They assert that the
followers’ commitment to the leader’s vision depends on the leader’s capability to build trust with followers. High trust
among followers is what enables a transformational leader and his or her followers to persist in their efforts and to
overcome obstacles. Leading by showing concern for their needs, honoring agreements, demonstrating the capability
and persistence to achieve the vision, and possibly through their own willingness to sacrifice for the good of their group
forms the basis for the bond between the leader and the follower (Jung and Avolio, 2000, pp.952).

Redefinir liderazgo en términos de followership

The interaction is simply a feedback loop, but in a different medium. Thus one person speaks to another and both
observe and hear the response. Based upon the twin response, the initiator of the conversation determines if he/she was
understood, triggering either new communication or a modification of the initial communication (in an attempt to be
understood).

Leading by following
As suggested earlier the foundational perspective of such networks is trust. If organizations are to be successful, both
the formal and the informal aspects of the organization must be predicated on the following understandings of trust:
Trust should affirm the organizational-interpersonal link;
Trust should promote cultural values such as respect, vision, diversity, and empowerment
Trust should be built through the application of the skills of: talent searching, communicating, deciding, self-assessing,
enabling, culture creating, and culture affirming.

leaders and followers both must have the ability to interchange their role. Meaning that the leader must be decisive and
desirous of becoming the follower, and the follower must be capable as well as desirous of leading. In addition,
leadership is not only a behavioral attitude but it also includes ethics and intention. An ethical leader is someone who
harmonizes beliefs and behaviors in his or her relations with followers

This follower/leader dynamic reveals the importance of the followers and the acceptance of the leader to not use power
or authority over the followers. This dynamic further leads to understanding the effects of this duality at the
organizational and interpersonal levels

Leadership as talent search

It is in this way that both parties to the discussion exercise leadership; the person takes responsibility for resolving the
problem by gaining understanding. The talented person chooses to help create understanding (an act of leadership).
Then the originator of the process decides when he/she has sufficient understanding to act (also the exercise of
leadership). In other words the leader chooses to become a follower, allowing the follower to lead which in turn permits
the leader to again lead.

General theory of leadership

leadership is an activity; it is goal oriented (strategic perspective, decisiveness and problem solving
to be a follower requires one to exhibit the organizational attribute of a willingness to be lead, but the interpersonal
attribute of the capability to respond (knowledge, experience). Similarly, to be a leader requires the organizational
attributes of decisiveness, problem recognition and the capacity to prioritize, but the interpersonal attribute of the
willingness to conduct a talent search (finding someone to follow).

Conclusion
The follower is no longer a mere subordinate who accepts and obeys the dictates of the leader. The leader or leadership
also is transformed due to the complexity and the necessity of collaboration. Understanding each other’s role and
values is essential in this transformation of the traditional view in organizations.

This complicity in the workplace is the new face of any dynamic organizational setting, private or public. Their
collaboration creates a consensual basis for less conflict, and it generates empowerment for the organization and for its
personnel. It has also been observed that the leadership/followership dynamic leads to ethical progress in the
organization.
At the interpersonal level, the relationship is based on influence, courage and comprehension from both sides. The
leader must know how to become a follower, and the follower must take responsibility and voice his or her concerns
about the organization
Lecture 3: In Praise of followers

Introduction
To encourage this kind of effective following in other organizations, we need to understand the nature of the follower’s
role. To cultivate good followers, we need to understand the human qualities that allow effective followership to occur.

The role of the follower

What distinguishes an effective from an ineffective follower is enthusiastic, intelligent, and self- reliant participation –
without star billing – in the pursuit of an organizational goal. Effective followers differ in their motivations for
following and in their perceptions of the role. Some choose followership as their primary role at work and serve as
team players who take satisfaction in helping to further a cause, an idea, a product, a service, or, more rarely, a person.

Others are leaders in some situations but choose the follower role in a particular context. Both these groups view the
role of follower as legitimate, inherently valuable, even virtuous

potentially effective followers derive motivation from ambition. By proving themselves in the follower’s role, they
hope to win the confidence of peers and superiors and move up the corporate ladder. These people do not see
followership as attractive in itself. All the same, they can become good followers if they accept the value of learning
the role, studying leaders from a subordinate’s perspective, and polishing the followership skills that will always stand
them in good stead.

I examined the behavior that leads to effective and less effective following among people committed to the
organization and came up with two underlying behavioral dimensions that help to explain the difference.
One dimension measures to what degree followers exercise independent, critical thinking. The other ranks them on a
passive/active scale. The resulting diagram identifies five followership patterns.

Sheep are passive and uncritical, lacking in initiative and sense of responsibility. They perform the tasks given them
and stop. Yes People are a livelier but equally unenterprising group. Dependent on a leader for inspiration, they can be
aggressively deferential, even servile. Bosses weak in judgment and self-confidence tend to like them and to form
alliances with them that can stultify the organization

Effective Followers, who think for themselves and carry out their duties and assignments with energy and
assertiveness. Because they are risk takers, self- starters, and independent problem solvers, they get consistently high
ratings from peers and many superiors. Followership of this kind can be a positive and acceptable choice for parts or all
of our lives – a source of pride and fulfillment.

Effective followers are well-balanced and responsible adults who can succeed without strong leadership. Many
followers believe they offer as much value to the organization as leaders do, especially in project or task-force
situations.

The Qualities of Followers

Effective followers share a number of essential qualities:
1. They manage themselves well.
2. They are committed to the organization and to a purpose, principle, or person outside themselves.
3. They build their competence and focus their
efforts for maximum impact.
4. They are courageous, honest, and credible.

Self-Management.
Paradoxically, the key to being an effective follower is the ability to think for one- self – to exercise control and
independence and to work without close supervision. Good followers are people to whom a leader can safely delegate
responsibility, people who anticipate needs at their own level of competence and authority.
Ineffective followers, on the other hand, buy into the hierarchy and, seeing themselves as subservient, vacillate between
despair over their seeming powerlessness and attempts to manipulate leaders for their own purposes. Either their fear of
powerlessness becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy – for themselves and often for their work units as well – or their
resentment leads them to undermine the team’s goals

Self-managed followers give their organizations a significant cost advantage because they eliminate much of the need
for elaborate supervisory control systems that, in any case, often lower morale.
At the executive level, role playing was introduced into the interview process: how you disagree with your boss, how
you prioritize your in-basket after a vacation. In the three years since, employee turnover has dropped dramatically, the
need for supervisors has decreased, and administrative costs have gone down

Commitment.
Effective followers are committed to something – a cause, a product, an organization, an idea – in addition to the care
of their own lives and careers. Some leaders misinterpret this commitment. Seeing their authority acknowledged, they
mistake loyalty to a goal for loyalty to them- selves. But the fact is that many effective followers see leaders merely as
co adventurers on a worthy crusade, and if they suspect their leader of flagging commitment or conflicting motives they
may just withdraw their support, either by changing jobs or by contriving to change leaders.

The opportunities and the dangers posed by this kind of commitment are not hard to see. On the one hand, commitment
is contagious. Most people like working with colleagues whose hearts are in their work. Morale stays high. Workers
who begin to wander from their purpose are jostled back into line. Projects stay on track and on time. In addition, an
appreciation of commitment and the way it works can give managers an extra tool with which to understand and
channel the energies and loyalties of their subordinates.

On the other hand, followers who are strongly committed to goals not consistent with the goals of their companies can
produce destructive results. Leaders having such followers can even lose control of their organizations.
Effective followers temper their loyalties to satisfy organizational needs – or they find new organizations. Effective
leaders know how to channel the energies of strong commitment in ways that will satisfy corporate goals as well as a
follower’s personal needs.

Competence and Focus.

On the grounds that committed incompetence is still incompetence, effective followers master skills that will be useful
to their organizations. They generally hold higher performance standards than the work environment requires, and
continuing education is second nature to them, a staple in their professional development. Less effective followers
expect training and development to come to them. The only education they acquire is force-fed. If not sent to a seminar,
they don’t go. Their competence deteriorates unless some leader gives them parental care and attention. Good followers
take on extra work gladly, but first they do a superb job on their core responsibilities. They are good judges of their
own strengths and weaknesses, and they contribute well to teams.

Asked to perform in areas where they are poorly qualified, they speak up. Like athletes stretching their capacities, they
don’t mind chancing failure if they know they can succeed, but they are careful to spare the company wasted energy,
lost time, and poor performance by accepting challenges that coworkers are better prepared to meet. Good followers
see coworkers as colleagues rather than competitors.

At the same time, effective followers often search for overlooked problems. A woman on a new product development
team discovered that no one was responsible for coordinating engineering, marketing, and manufacturing. She worked
out an interdepartmental review schedule that identified the people who should be involved at each stage of
development. Instead of burdening her boss with yet another problem, this woman took the initiative to present the
issue along with a solution.

Courage.
Effective followers are credible, honest, and courageous. They establish themselves as independent, critical thinkers
whose knowledge and judgment can be trusted. They give credit where credit is due, admitting mistakes and sharing
successes. They form their own views and ethical standards and stand up for what they believe in. Insightful, candid,
and fearless, they can keep leaders and colleagues honest and informed. The other side of the coin of course is that they
can also cause great trouble for a leader with questionable ethics.