Followership is as important as Leadership

Abstract  

Leadership is a relatively traditional notion which was somewhat overtaken by events in the advent of the styles of entrepreneurship that came with the industrial revolution. This entailed management which looked at projects from a holistic perspective with the human resource corps forming just one of the cogs on the large gear of the entire project. Contemporary concepts of entrepreneurship have however rediscovered the value of leadership and the unique and invariable contributions of individual members of the team working on any project. This research paper delves into contemporary studies of leadership both from a traditional and current perspective. The main focus herein however is looking at leadership from the perspective of followership and how without proper followership, even the best leadership would fail. Among the areas delved into therefore include how leadership relates to followership and the expectation of both leadership and followership. How to assess leadership and followership and develop a good plan for the two is also canvassed. The findings enable the conclusion that followership is extremely crucial to any effective leadership. 

Introduction  

Every dispensation sees major changes in the concept of leadership each of them being unique but neither perfect. A study of each and every of these concepts of leadership however, can enable the development of a system of leadership that capitalizes on all the positive aspects of all the concepts and avoids all the downfall thus resulting in an ideal system of leadership (Ryan & Currie, 2014). It is however impossible to accurately look at leadership without equally focusing on the concept of followership. This is premised on the philosophy that any leader who does not have followers is simply talking a walk. Leadership is the act or process of being in charge or in command of a group of people or an organization. Followership on the other hand refers to the capacity of a group or team to follow the leader (Alvesson & Blom, 2015; Craig, n.d). 

In the ancient times, leadership was earned through merit and all leaders would begin as followers then rise to the position of leadership. This would make them combined experts in both leadership and followership. With the advent of monarchies and aristocracies, a brand of leaders who have never been followers was born. This trend petered out with the advent of industrialization and leadership by merit resulted. However with increased focus on academic qualification, a new form of aristocracy has been created (Alvesson & Blom, 2015; Craig, n.d). Through academic qualification, it is currently possible for someone for example with an MBA to move straight from school to a position of leadership. This is among the reasons that necessitated the study of followership contemporaneously with leadership within academic courses. The instant research paper therefore looks at leadership and followership together as well as how they correlate to result in effective leadership. 

Relationship between Followership and Leadership Styles and their Traits 

In most practical cases, the leader is also a manager in most organizations. The major distinction between leadership and management however is relationship. The manager develops plans, concept, and ideologies to be implemented in the organization with human resource management being only a segment of this development. However, leadership entails having an actual relationship between the leader and the followers. It is through this relationship that the leader inspires and guides the followers to implement the plans, concepts, and ideologies as aforesaid. Management may, therefore, be judged by how well the plans and concepts have been developed and even how implementable they are (Yung & Tsai, 2013; Dike, 2015). However, the true measure of leadership is in the results of how well the programs have been implemented from the perspective of the success of the plans themselves, the leader, and of the followers. 

Every relationship is made up of several components key among them being the parties, a common agenda and communication (Shindler & Schindler, 2014). In the concept of leadership and followership, the parties are the leader and the followers. The common agenda is the success of the company and organization with communication being among the key means of maintaining the relationship. For people to walk together, they must have a form of understanding. Traditionally, the leader-follower understanding was that the leader is supreme, always right and always to be followed (Ryan & Currie, 2014). This relegated the followers to a passive and submissive position akin to robots who only wait to be fed with instructions from the all-knowing leader. According to Grayson and Speckhart (2006), this from of leadership follows the saying that if one is not the lead dog, all sceneries remain the same. The exact opposite of this concept is the contemporary situation where the followers have all the power and the leader becomes just another member of the team. Jerry (2013) refers to this form of leadership as “vetocracy” and cites Thomas Friedman’s definition of a government where no one has any power to achieve anything. With both extremes outlined above being ineffective in forming a proper leadership-followership relationship, there arises a need to develop styles and traits that create a middle ground between the two extremes. 

The leader in the middle ground is strong, knowledgeable, and effective yet humble and open to the ideas of the team. This leader does not talk down to members of the team but talks with them. This is in line with the philosophy that team members are also human beings who deserve dignity. Further, the ideal leaders connect with members of the team and are able to assure them that the interests of the leader and the follower are intertwined (Aquilani et al, 2017). The leader also understands all the components of communication including the right way to address issues and what can be addressed in public as well as in private. Another important aspect of good leadership is the attainment of success. The aforesaid form of leadership will attain the proper form of followership. The followers will both be willing to listen to the leader and also think innovatively knowing that their ideas will be entertained and considered by the leader. Further, they will trust the leader since they know that their interests are also factored in decision making. The propensity for success will also inspire the followers even when they do not actually understand the overall plan of the leader (Yung & Tsai, 2013). 

There are however, styles and traits of followership that are absolutely independent from leadership. According to Ryan and Currie (2014) even the best possible leadership requires proper followership for the business to thrive. Followership entails the relationship with the organization, relationship with the leader and relationship with the colleagues. A good follower must have the interests of the organization internalized. This means that the focus of the follower rises beyond just the reward for labor; wages. A good follower also supports the leader (Kilburn, 2010). Support in this manner does not necessarily mean acquiescence but rather utmost good faith at all times even when the leader is wrong and in need of correction. Finally, teams working in harmony achieve exponentially more than individual members would act independently. This creates an obligation to the ideal follower to ensure harmony by treating fellow team members with respect and avoiding personal disputes at the place of work. It is the combination between the good styles and traits of the leader and those of the follower that result in the ideal leadership-followership relationship (Kilburn, 2010). 

Followership and Leadership Expectations in Business Quality Management 

Among the major areas that leadership and by extension followership comes into play in any business is quality management (O’Neill et al, 2016; Aquilani et al, 2017). The underlying intent of any business is earning a profit and this can only be achieved through income from customers. Quality management relates to always seeking to ensure that the expectations of the customer are met through provision and maintenance of optimum quality of goods and services. As per the principles of quality management set by International Standard for Quality management, a lot rests on leadership and followership in quality management (O’Neill et al, 2016; Aquilani et al, 2017). A careful perusal of all these principles key among them customer focus, engagement of the people, and process approach will show the need for oneness in the team running the business. The message passed out by the business must be one and the products given to the customer’s uniform on their perfection. Oneness can only be achieved when the team operates in near perfect harmony. To achieve this harmony, it is expected that both the leader and the followers adhere to all ideal styles and traits. Indeed, neither of the two parties can achieve these three principles without the other (Alipour et al, 2017). 

Leadership and evidence based decision-making and relationship management are also key principles of quality management. At a casual glance, these three principles seem to place all expectation on leadership for their achievement. However, followership is an integral part of leadership and both cannot be considered as mutually exclusive (Shindler & Schindler, 2014). For proper leadership to be achieved there is an expectation that both the leader and the follower will work together and play their respective roles correctly. Evidence based decision-making also creates an expectation that the followers will work closely with the leader, providing their insight and input in the making of decisions. Ordinarily, it is the followers who are in direct contact with the customers thus their obligation to correct synthesize evidence for onward transmission to the leader (Alipour et al, 2017). The leader will then guide the team to arrive at the right decisions. All these will be made possible by the existence of healthy relationship management. 

The existence of the principle of improvement heightens the expectations of leadership and followership in quality management for any business. Improvement in any context means that even when a business considers itself to be operating at its very best, there is still room for improvement. This calls for a holistic approach towards improvement that involves each and every member of the team and their singular and several contributions. It also calls for a heightened level of coordination to establish the areas where improvement is possible and how this will be achieved. The above can only be achieved through an extended form of oneness in the team members thus raising the expectation upon the leaders and followers within the business (Aquilani et al, 2017). 

Followership and Leadership Assessment 

There are three basic components of leadership and followership. These are the leadership itself, the followership, and the relationship between the two (Shindler & Schindler, 2014). Assessment of leadership and followership must therefore involve all the three components but mainly focus on the third component in order to be properly accomplished. Assessment of leadership varies from assessment of management in that leadership is relative to the nature of the team being led. Over and above testing the basic attributes of leadership as defined above, the assessment of leadership also entails having an understanding of the specific nature of the team and also the organization being led. A good example is the two extremes of followers defined above, one where the followers extremely follow the leader submissively and passively. This type of followers includes those dubbed the sheep and the yes-people (Kilburn, 2010). Proper leadership does not seek to exploit these forms of followers but instead to transform them into a form of followers that albeit more challenging to lead, ensure better results. The assessment of leadership in this dimension is, therefore, closely tied to the nature of followership. 

Similarly, there are several basic traits of followers as outlined above but the ideal followership cannot be established without a direct reference to both the nature of the organization and the nature of leadership available. For example, Clarence Leonard "Kelly" Johnson the celebrated leader of the Lockheed Skunk Works team would always be engaged to do pioneering work. The basic quality expected of Kelly and his team was invention and innovation. His team would, therefore, be encouraged to be extremely creative and experimental in nature (Rich & Janos, 2013). However, pharmacological manufacturers in the USA provide a sample for approval by the FDA for their products and upon approval, the product must match the exact specifications as approved. It would, therefore, not be feasible to use the same parameters to judge members of the two teams indicated above over and above the basic elements of followership. The totality of the above confirms that a careful well researched assessment regimen must be developed for each and every category and nature of leadership and followership premised on the type or organization, the type of the leader, and the nature of the team. 

Followership and Leadership Development Plan 

To this point, the instant study has developed three basic bearing factors to proper followership and leadership which are all pertinent to the development of a development plan thereof. These are the type of organization, the type of leadership, and the type of followership. The first step on the creation of the instant development plan is having a critical understanding of the three components indicated above (Epitropaki et al, 2016). Understanding of the organization, in this instance the business is determined by several attributes. Key among these attributes is the product and the customer. As indicated above, some products are well established and ought to be made under very acute specifications. Others are broad and allows for a lot of innovation. Similarly, the expectations and nature of the customer vary from business to business. Some customers are contractual thus have a close relationship with the business such as corporate customers yet others are individuals who have no direct contact with the business. Understanding all these variables is pertinent to the development of the instant plan (Epitropaki et al, 2016). 

The type of leadership available is also extremely pertinent (Cruz, 2014). Some businesses are commenced by individuals and follow a certain leadership philosophy as held by the aforesaid individuals. Other cases involve huge global corporation with well-established leadership theories. This particular factor needs to be analyzed and factored in developing the plan. Further, leaders are also individuals with their particular traits, strengths, and weaknesses which should also be factored (Cruz, 2014; Carsten & Lapierre, 2014). The final component is the followership that also varies from individual to individual and also from organization to organization. A garment processing factory will have followers of all types from engineers to manual laborers. An invention team at Apple Inc. on the other part may comprise of only some of the best brains in the world. These teams vary exponentially in nature. Further, as with leaders, followers have individual personalities that must also be factored (Cruz, 2014; Carsten & Lapierre, 2014; Yung & Tsai, 2013). 

The actual development plan should also factor in the fact that teams will not achieve optimum operating capacity immediately no matter how well established and led. Largent (2016) outlines team development according to the four phases developed by Bruce Tuckman in 1965. The development plan must, therefore, factor in the different aspects necessary to see the plan through the several phases, which include the forming phase, the storming phase, the norming phase and finally performing. Seeking to achieve optimum status at the beginning will only delay if not derail the achievement thereof. The plan should, therefore, encompass all the aforesaid information about the organization, leader, and team as well as the mandatory processes towards the achievement of optimum relationship thus optimum production. After this, in line with the quality management concept of improvement, the plan should then incorporate fine-tuning measures to constantly better its best (Epitropaki et al, 2016).   

A new form of aristocracy has developed in the contemporary times where businesses and/or sections thereof are being led by technocrats who have studied the science of leadership in school. Just as in the days of monarchies, well-educated cadets are today joining the army as officers without ever experiencing the lower echelons of power. This creates the risk of having a leadership that does not understand the concept of followership. The situation is exacerbated by the fact that ‘sheep’ and ‘yes-saying’ followers are dwindling with the advent and proliferation of the concept of ‘vetocracy’ where too much power is wielded by the followers for the leaders to rule with abandon. This is also the situation in the private sector where excellent management plans often fail because of disconnect between management and the human resource corps. 

It is on this premise that the subject of leadership and followership has gained increasing prominence. It is meant to enlighten both leaders and followers on how best to suit each other and work harmoniously towards the achievement of the goals of the business. Indeed, contemporary quality control focuses more on the customer. Customers only know about the products and will not differentiate the positive and/or negative contributions of the leadership or the followership. Albeit there are basic rules and concepts for ideal leadership and followership, the key lies in the relationship between the three factions involved. These are the organization itself, the leadership, and the followership but not necessarily in that order. All three are pertinent in the development of a proper development plan for ideal leadership and followership. 

References

Alipour, K. K., Mohammed, S., & Martinez, P. N. (2017). Incorporating temporality into implicit leadership and followership theories: Exploring inconsistencies between time-based expectations and actual behaviors.  The Leadership Quarterly . http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2016.11.006

Alvesson, M., & Blom, M. (2015). Less followership, less leadership? an inquiry into the basic but seemingly forgotten downsides of leadership. Management , 18 (3), 266-282. 

Aquilani, B., Aquilani, B., Silvestri, C., Silvestri, C., Ruggieri, A., Ruggieri, A., ... & Gatti, C. (2017). A systematic literature review on total quality management critical success factors and the identification of new avenues of research.  The TQM Journal ,  29 (1), 184-213. 

Carsten, M. K., & Lapierre, L. (2014).  Followership: What Is It and Why Do People Follow? Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited. 

Craig, J. L., Jr. (n.d.). A call for leadership (Editorial). Business Source Premier , 63 (7). 

Cruz, J. (2014). Great leaders inspire great followership. Leadership Excellence Essentials , 31 (8), 48 

Dike, V. E. (2015). Leadership and Management in the 21st Century Organizations: A Practical Approach.  World Journal of Social Science Research ,  2 (2), 139.

Epitropaki, O., Kark, R., Mainemelis, C., & Lord, R. G. (2016). Leadership and followership identity processes: A multilevel review.  The Leadership Quarterly . http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2016.10.003

Grayson, D., & Speckhart, R. (2006). The leader–follower relationship: Practitioner observations.  Leadership Advance Online ,  6 , 1-6. 

Jerry II, R. H. (2013). Leadership and followership.  University Of Toledo Law Review ,  44 (2), 345-354. 

Kilburn, B. R. (2010). Who are we leading? Identifying effective followers: A review of typologies.  International Journal of the Academic Business World ,  4 (1), 9-17. 

Largent, D. L. (2016). Measuring and Understanding Team Development by Capturing Self-assessed Enthusiasm and Skill Levels.  ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE) ,  16 (2), 6. 

O’Neill, P., Sohal, A., & Teng, C. W. (2016). Quality management approaches and their impact on firms׳ financial performance–An Australian study.  International Journal of Production Economics ,  171 , 381-393. 

Rich, B. R., & Janos, L. (2013).  Skunk works: A personal memoir of my years of Lockheed . Little, Brown. 

Ryan, M., & Currie, J. P. (2014). Complementing traditional leadership.  Reference & User Services Quarterly ,  54 (2), 15-18 

Shindler, J., & Schindler, J. (2014).  Followership: What it takes to lead . New York, United States: Business Expert Press 

Yung, C. T., & Tsai, K. C. (2013). Followership: An Important Partner of Leadership.  Business and Management Horizons ,  1 (2), 47.