There are different strategies for exercising leadership in the Army department. However, leaders cannot generate practical leadership skills without incorporating the subordinate soldiers. Whatever type of leadership the army leaders opt to use, it must involve the soldiers. The most inherent leadership strategy in the army involves followership and servant leadership. Followership depicts that every leader in the army has a senior person acting as his leader. Therefore, the ideologies advocate for subordinate soldiers to be good followers. On the other hand, servant leadership advocates for a leader to act more of a servant to both his seniors and subordinates. This paper will outline the differences and similarities between Followership and Servant leadership.
Followership leadership aims at shaping the soldiers' characters into becoming better subordinates because this ideology argues that every person in the army has a leader. Therefore, if every leader takes up a follower position and acts based on the terms and standards established by his/her leader, the army will execute its operations effectively. This model of leadership requires the subordinates to trust their commanders for guidance (Disque, 2018). On the other hand, Servant leaders advocate for transforming leaders onto servants so that their concerns are mainly projected toward the subordinates and senior's welfare. They ensure that all soldiers are taken care of; thus, driving the subordinates to emulate them, and when they are leaders themselves, they possess profound knowledge on how to act (Wesson, 2017). This form of leadership argues that a leader's active involvement with his subordinates helps in creating unit cohesion.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Additionally, followership leadership requires subordinate soldiers to respect their seniors. Therefore, before making any decision or responding to any activity, they should inform their leaders. Although it does not necessarily mean that soldiers cannot make decisions, they must act in respect and acknowledge authority. Furthermore, the model encourages them to help their leaders in solving problems. In contrast, in servant leadership, the leaders are expected to respect their subordinates (Gain & Bryant, 2020). They should not take advantage of the people below them and exploit subordinates for their selfish interests.
Furthermore, obedience is paramount in followership leadership. The followers are expected to act based on the leaders' command. Followers understand that leaders should be responsible for giving guidelines by outlining what he should and should not do (Disque, 2018). Therefore, followers' roles involve acting based on the leader's guidelines and providing immediate feedback. In contrast, Servant leaders act more of influencers and trainers than commanders. They offer their services to ensure that every soldier is well taken care of; therefore, the subordinates learn ways of taking care of other people's interests. Therefore, they practice these leadership traits when they become leaders.
The two models of leadership exhibit similarities based on adhering to the army's values. Servant leaders are guided by specific principles when executing their leadership roles. The principles include agape love, humility, altruism, trust, vision, empowerment, and service (Wesson, 2017). These principles are closely related to the army's values of conduct. Similarly, in followership, both the leaders and followers are expected to be loyal, respectful, and perform their duties diligently.
In conclusion, followership and servant leadership shares similarities and differences. Followership aims to shape soldiers to become better subordinates, while in servant leadership, leaders exercise servant traits. Additionally, followership requires followers to respect their leaders. In contrast, in servant leadership, leaders are expected to respect their subordinates and refrain from taking advantage of their senior positions to exploit them. Obedience is paramount in followership, and followers are expected to execute the leaders' command. In contrast, leaders under servant leadership act more as influencers and trainers. Lastly, the two shares similarity because they exercise the army's values.
References
Disque, B. M. (2018). Followership: Avoid being a toxic subordinate. NCO Journal .
Gain, D., & Bryant, P. C. (2020). The Men of the Mission: Can an Army of Servants become an Army of Servant Leaders?. Servant Leadership: Theory & Practice , 7 (1), 5.
Wesson, C. (2017). THE NCO: ARMY LEADER, SERVANT LEADER. Retrieved 25 November 2020, from https://www.armyupress.army.mil/Journals/NCO-Journal/Archives/2017/March/THE-NCO-ARMY-LEADER/
