In the opening chapter of The Art of Followership (2008), essayist, Robert Kelley, suggests seven topical areas where additional research is needed and may benefit the continued exploration of the field of followership: “(a) world events; (b) culture; (c) leader (ship); (d) follower qualities; (e) role of the follower; (f) language of followership; (g) courageous conscience” (Riggio, Chaleff, & Lipman-Blumen, 2008, p. 9). In the United States, the average individual’s access to media and information has changed significantly in the past twenty-five years. Followership research might prove useful for “global issues such as suicide bombings “ (p. 10). Culture has an impact on who qualifies as a leader and which individuals are sought for leadership roles thus it would seem logical that the inverse relationship may hold true with culture being an influential factor for followership and who is expected to hold followership roles.
In the book Followership, Kellerman (2008) devotes significant thought to followers and followership. Like Kelley (1988), Kellerman (2008) poses thoughtful questions regarding the role followers play, especially related to follower-to-follower influence. Kellerman presents questions about leaders and types of followers attracted to various types of leadership.
One may find it perplexing why leadership has served to capture the overwhelming majority of attention for researchers and media. The focus tends to be on a leader and either credits or faults the leader for success or failure. Kelley (1988) writes, “organizations stand or fall partly on the basis of how well their leaders lead, but partly also on the basis of how well followers follow” (p. 142). Kelley clearly suggests that the leader-follower equation is not weighted at 100% leader and 0% follower contribution. Obviously some sort of ratio exists but the weights for leader and for follower are an area where research is needed. Over the last two decades, the role of followers seems to have grown as followers have asserted accountability on leadership in various situations. Riggio, et al. note the changing role of followership in writing, “Instead of viewing followers as the good soldiers who carry out commands dutifully, we need to view followers as the primary defenders against toxic leaders or dysfunctional organizations” (Riggio, Chaleff, & Lipman-Blumen, 2008, p. 14).
Porth, McCall, & Bausch (1999) propose a significant percentage of responsibility from followers by writing “the only source of sustainable competitive advantage for any organization over the long term is the commitment of qualified employees to the mission and vision of the organization” (p. 212). Riggio, Chaleff, & Lipman-Blumen (2008) write that followers in their ethical and legal oversight rules must “learn how to blow the whistle effectively, how to combat groupthink, how to avoid the dispersion of responsibility, and how to advance institutional integrity” (p. 15).
These challenges for followers are a tall order in a society that has not communicated great value for followers. Leaders and leadership have traditionally received attention and accolades. A change in psychological perspective may be needed in order for individuals to learn how to grow as excellent followers. Three suggestions for individual growth are:
(a) Teaching people that the followership role includes the courageous conscience, thus not only legitimating but mandating it, (b) helping followers find the personal courage to stand up, and providing the societal supports that encourage people to exercise their courageous conscience, (c) preparing followers so that when they do stand up, they are successful. (Riggio, Chaleff, & Lipman-Blumen, 2008, p. 15)
Relationship
While considering the emerging filed of followership it is worthy to note the role of relationship. Relationship is a two-pronged path for examination of followership covering both a systemic perspective and a personal engagement. With a systemic analysis, one may examine how followership functions within the larger organizational system while personal engagement research one may analyze how leader-to-follower relationships hinder or help the organization or how follower-to-follower influence developments or impacts (Popper, 2005, p. 35; Kellerman, 2008). Writing about the personal engagement area, Popper (2005) proposes “Relationships are dynamic interactions forming a psychological essence that may change in response to circumstances or to changes occurring in the leader’s or among the followers” (p. 35). Kezar (2006) underscores the important role personal relationships and networks hold, writing “the creation of networks is one of the most important contributions made by leaders in complex environment” (p. 42). One may deduct that the networks consists of followers. Kezar highlights follower-to-leader relational dynamics. Kelley (1988) observes that as organizations alter their structure, relationships will grow in importance, “As organizational structures flatten, the quality of those who follow will become more and more important” (p. 144).
Responsibilities of Followers
Chaleff proposes three responsibilities of followers: “(a) recognize his or her own power as a follower, (b) have the courage to stand with integrity, (c) reflect to the leader the consequences of the leader’s choices” (Chaleff, 1998, p. 3). Chaleff (2001) emphasized the importance of a full understanding of both the systemic and personal relationship in noting “It is the quality of the relationship of leaders and followers, all the way up and down the organization chart, that makes or breaks organizations” (p. 1).
Conclusion
Through exploring courage and followership in this paper, a primary outcome is that much additional research and exploration is needed in the areas of courage and followership. A leader’s moral code becomes a public matter and thus, so too does, a follower’s. Adhering to rigidity and denying the complexity of humans, organizations, and the interactions and relationships would be an excuse to escape responsibility and ultimately a lack of courage. In seeking to gain competitive advantage, or simply survive, organizations must grow in their understanding of the impact followers have and the important role courage may play in creating and developing excellent followers. As organizations continue to reshape themselves to meet the demands of the evolving world, the leader-centric model may become less important as a follower-centric model is developed.
No comments:
Post a Comment