Complete the following four self-assessments:The Leadership Traits Questionnaire in the course text

Followership13

DESCRIPTION

You cannot have leaders without followers. In the previous chapter, "Inclusive Leadership" (Chapter 12), we focused on inclusive leadership and how leaders can ensure that followers feel a part of the group. In this chapter, we shift the focus to followers and the central role followers play in the leadership process. The process of leading requires the process of following. Leaders and followers together create the leadership relationship, and without an understanding of the process of following, our understanding of leadership is incomplete (Shamir, 2007; Uhl-Bien, Riggio, Lowe, & Carsten, 2014).

For many people, being a follower and the process offollowership have negative connotations. One reason is that people do not find followership as compelling as leadership. Leaders, rather than followers, have always taken center stage. For example, in school, children are taught early that it is better to be a leader than a follower. In athletics and sports, the praise for performance consistently goes to the leaders, not the team players. When people apply for jobs, they are asked to describe their leadership abilities, not their followership activities. Clearly, it is leadership skills that are applauded by society, not followership skills. It is just simply more intriguing to talk about how leaders use power than to talk about how followers respond to power.

While the interest in examining the active role offollowers was first approached in the 1930s by Follett (1949), groundwork on follower research wasn't estab­ lished until several decades later through the initial works of scholars such as Zaleznik (1965), Kelley (1988), Meindl (1990), and Chaleff (1995). Still, until recently, only a minimal number ofstudies have been published on followership. Traditionally, leadership research has focused on leaders' traits, roles, and behav­ iors because leaders are viewed as the causal agents for organizational change. At the same time, the impact of followers on organizational outcomes has not been generally addressed. Researchers often conceptualize leadership as a leader­ centric process, emphasizing the role of the leader rather than the role of the

352

follower. Furthermore, little research has conceptualized leadership as a shared process involving the interdependence between leaders and followers in a shared relationship. Even though followers share in the overall leadership process, the nature of their role has not been scrutinized. In effect, followership has rarely been studied as a central variable in the leadership process.

There are indications that this is beginning to change. In a 2017 New York Times article, Susan Cain (author of Quiet: The Power ofIntroverts in a World That Can't Stop Talking [2012]) decries the glorification of leadership skills in college admissions and curricula and argues that the world needs more followers. It needs team players, people called to service, and individuals committed to something outside of themselves. Followership is also receiv­ ing more attention now because of three major works devoted exclusively to the process of following: The Art ofFollowers hip: How Great Followers Create Great Leaders and Organizations by Riggio, Chaleff, and Lipman-Blumen (2008), Followership: How Followers Are Creating Change and Changing Leaders by Kellerman (2008); and Followership: What Is It and Why Do People Follow? by Lapierre and Carsten (2014). Collectively, these books have put the spotlight on followership and helped to establish it as a legitimate and significant area of study.

In this chapter, we examine followership and how it is related to the leadership process. First, we define followers and followership and discuss the implications of these definitions. Second, we discuss selected typologies offollowership that illus­ trate different styles used by followers. Next, we explore a formal theory of fol­ lowership that has been set forth by Uhl-Bien et al. (2014) and new perspectives on followership suggested by Carsten, Harms, and Uhl-Bien (2014). Last, we explore types ofineffective followership that contribute to destructive leadership.

Followership Defined

It is challenging to define fallowership because the term conjures up different meanings for people, and the idea of being a follower is positive for some and negative for others. For example, followership is seen as valuable in military situ­ ations when soldiers follow orders from a platoon leader to complete a mission, or when passengers boarding a plane follow the boarding agent's instructions. In contrast, however, followership is thought of negatively in such situations as when people follow a cult leader such as David Koresh of the Branch Davidians, or when members of a college fraternity take it upon themselves to conduct life-threatening hazing rituals with new members. Clearly, followership can be positive or negative, and it plays out differently in different settings.

What is followership? Followership is aprocess whereby an individual or individu­ als accept the influence efothers to accomplish a common goal. F ollowership involves a power differential between the follower and the leader. Typically, followers comply with the directions and wishes ofleaders-they defer to leaders' power.

CHAPTER13 FOLLOWERSHIP 353

Followership also has an ethical dimension. Like leadership, followership is not amoral; that is, it is not a process that is morally neutral. Followership carries with it a responsibility to consider the morality of one's actions and the rightness or wrongness of the outcomes of what one does as a follower. Followers and lead­ ers work together to achieve common goals, and both share a moral obligation regarding those goals. There are ethical consequences to followership and to what followers do because the character and behavior of followers has an impact on leaders and on organizational outcomes.

Role-Based and Relational-Based Perspectives

Followership can be divided into two broad categories: role-based and relational­ based (Uhl-Bien et al.,2014).

The role-based perspective focuses on followers in regard to the typical roles or behaviors they exhibit while occupying a formal or informal position within a hierarchical system. For example, in a staff planning meeting, some people are very helpful to the group because they bring energy and offer insightful sugges­ tions regarding how the group might proceed. Their role as engaged followers, in this case, has a positive impact on the meeting and its outcomes. Emphasis in the role-based approach is on the roles and styles of followers and how their behaviors affect the leader and organizational outcomes.

The relational-based approach to followership is quite different from the role­ based approach. To understand the relational-based approach it is helpful to understand social constructivism. Social constructivism is a sociological theory that argues that people create meaning about their reality as they interact with each other. For example, a fitness instructor and an individual in an exercise class negotiate with each other about the kind of influence the instructor will have and the amount of influence the individual will accept. From a social constructivist perspective, followership is co-created by the leader and follower in a given situ­ ation. The meaning of followership emerges from the communication between leaders and followers and stresses the interplay between following and leading. Rather than focusing on roles, it focuses on the interpersonal process and one person's attempt to influence and the other person's response to these influence attempts. Leadership occurs within the interpersonal context ofpeople exerting influence and responding to those influence attempts. In the relational-based approach, followership is tied to interpersonal behaviors rather than to specific roles (Carsten, Uhl-Bien, West, Patera, &McGregor, 2010; DeRue &Ashford, 2010; Fairhurst & Uhl-Bien, 2012; Uhl-Bien et al., 2014).

Typologies of Followership

How can we describe followers' roles? Trying to do just that has been the primary focus of much of the existing followership research. As there are many types

354 LEADERSHIP

TABLE 1:s.1 Typologies of Followership

I I

I Zaleznik (1965) I Kelley (1992)

Kellerman I

I Chaleff (1995) (2008) I

Withdrawn Alienated Resource Isolate

Masochistic Passive Individualist Bystander

Compulsive Conformist Implementer Participant

Impulsive Pragmatist · Partner Activist

Exemplary Diehard

Source: Adapted from "Conceptualizing followership: A review of the literature," by B. Crossman and J. Crossman, 2011, Leadership, 7(4), 481-497.

of leaders, so, too, are there many types of followers (Table 13.1). Grouping followers' roles into distinguishable categories to create an accurate classifica­ tion system, or typology, of follower behaviors has been undertaken by several researchers. A typology enhances our understanding of the broader area of fol­ lowership by breaking it down into smaller pieces. In this case, these pieces are different types of follower roles observed in various settings.

The Zaleznik Typology ·

The first typology offollowers was provided by Zaleznik ( 1965) and was intended to help leaders understand followers and also to help followers understand and become leaders. In an article published in the Harvard Business Review, Zaleznik created a matrix that displayed followers' behaviors along two axes: dominance-­ submission and activity-passivity (Figure 13.1). The vertical axis represents a range of followers from those who want to control their leaders (i.e., be domi­ nant) to those who want to be controlled by their leaders (i.e., be submissive). The horizontal axis represents a range of followers from those who want to initiate and be involved to those who sit back and withdraw. Based on the two axes, the model identifies four types of followers: withdrawn (submissive/pas­ sive), masochistic (submissive/active), compulsive (highly dominant/passive), and impulsive (highly dominant/active). Because Zaleznik was trained in psychoana­ lytic theory, these follower types are based on psychological concepts. Zaleznik was interested in explaining the communication breakdowns between authority figures and subordinates, in particular the dynamics ofsubordinacy conflicts. The follower types illustrated in Figure 13.1 exist as a result offollowers' responses to inner tensions regarding authority. These tensions may be unconscious but can often come to the surface and influence the communication in leader-follower relationships.

CHAPTER13 FOLLOWERSHIP 355

FIGURE 13 .1 Za leznik Follower Typology

Dominance (Con trolling)

Compulsive Impulsive

Passivity ——-+——– Activity

Withdrawn Masochistic

Submission (Being Controlled)

,. u .E Zaleznik, A. (1965). The dynam ics of subordinacy, Harvard Business Review, May-Jun.

The Kelley Typology

Kelley's (1992) typology (Figure 13.2) is currently the most recognized follow­ ership typology. Kelley believes followers are enormously valuable to organiza­ tions and that the power of followers often goes unrecognized. He stresses the importance of studying followers in the leadership process and gave impetus to the development of the field of followership. While Zaleznik ( 1965) focused on the personal aspects of followers, Kelley emphasizes the motivations of fol­ lowers and follower behaviors. In his efforts to give followership equal billing to leadership, Kelley examined those aspects offollowers that account for exemplary followers hip.

Kelley sorted followers' styles on two axes: independent critical thinking­ dependent uncritical thinking and active-passive. These dimensions resulted in five follower role types:

• passive followers (sometimes pejoratively called "sheep"), who look to the leader for direction and motivation,

• conformist followers, who are "yes people"-always on the leader's side but still looking to the leader for direction and guidance,

• alienated followers, who think for themselves and exhibit a lot of negative energy,

356 LEADERSHIP

FIGURE 13.2 Kelley Follower Typology

Independent, Critical Thinking

Alienated Exemplary Followers Followers

Passive —- – PragmatiSt – -===- Active Followers

Passive Conformist FollowersFollowers

Dependent, Uncritical Thinking

Source: Based on excerpts from Kelley, Robert. E. (1992). The Power of Followership: How to Create Leaders People Want to Follow and Followers Who Lead Themselves. New York: Doubleday.

• pragmatist followers, who are "fence-sitters" who support the status quo but do not get on board until others do, and

• exemplary followers (sometimes called "star"followers), who are active and positive and offer independent constructive criticism.

Based on his observations, Kelley (1988, 2008) asserts that effective follow­ ers share the same indispensible qualities: (1) They self-manage and think for themselves, exercise control and independence, and work without supervision; (2) they show strong commitment to organizational goals (i.e., something outside themselves) as well as their own personal goals; (3) they build their competence and master job skills; and (4) they are credible, ethical, and coura­ geous. Rather than framing followership in a negative light, Kelley underscores the positive dimensions offollowing.

The Chaleff Typology

Chaleff (1995, 2008, 2009) developed a typology to amplify the significance of the role of followers in the leadership process (Table 13 .1). He developed his typology as a result of a defining moment in his formative years when he became aware of the horrors of the World War II Holocaust that killed more than 6 million European Jews. Chaleff felt a moral imperative to seek answers

CHA PTER 13 FOLLOWERSHIP 357

FIGURE 13.3 Leader- Follower Interaction

r Common

Source.· Adapted from "Creating new ways of following" by I. Chaleff, in RE. Riggio, I. Chaleff, and J. Lipman-Blumen (Eds.), The Art of Fo!!owership· How Great Followers Create Great Leaders and Organizations (p. 71), 2008. Permission conveyed through Copyright Clearance Center, Inc. Republished with permission of John Wiley & Sons.

as to why people followed German leader Adolf Hitler, a purveyor of hate and death. What could be done to prevent this from happening again? How could followers be emboldened to help leaders use their power appropriately and act to keep leaders from abusing their power?

Rather than serving leaders, Chaleff argues that followers serve a common pur­ pose along with leaders (Figure 13.3) and that both leaders and followers work to achieve common outcomes. Chaleff states that followers need to take a more proactive role that brings it into parity with the leader's role. He sought to make followers more responsible, to change their own internal estimates of their abilities to influence others, and to help followers feel a greater sense of agency.

To achieve equal influence with leaders, Chaleff emphasizes that followers need to be courageous. His approach is a prescriptive one; that is, it advocates how followers ought to behave. According to Chaleff, followers need the courage to

a. assume responsibility for the common purpose,

b. support the leader and the organization,

c. constructively challenge the leader if the common purpose or integrity of the group is being threatened,

d. champion the need for change when necessary, and

e. take a moral stand that is different from the leader's to prevent ethical abuses.

358 LEADERSHIP

FIGURE 13.4 Chaleff Follower Typology

High Support

PartnerImplementer

Low ___::,_____…i..:::==-=====— High Challenge Challenge

Resource Individualist

Low Support

Source: Adapted from "Creating new ways of following" by I. Chaleff, in R. E. Riggio, I. Chaleff, and J. Lipman-Blurnen (Eds.), The Art of Followership: How Great Followers Create Great Leaders and Organizations (p. 71), 2008; permission conveyed through Copyright Clearance Center, Inc. Republished with permission of John Wiley & Sons.

In short, Chaleff proposes that followers should be morally strong and work to do the right thing when facing the multiplicity of challenges that leaders place upon them.

Chaleff created a follower typology (Figure 13.4), which is constructed using two characteristics of courageous followership: the courage to support the leader (vertical axis) and the courage to challenge the leader's behavior and policies (horizontal axis). This typology differentiates four styles of followership:

1. R esource (lower left quadrant), which exhibits low support and low challenge. This describes those followers who do just enough to get by.

2. Indiv idualist (lower right quadrant) , which demonstrates low support and high challenge. Often marginalized by others, i~dividualists speak up and let the leader know where they stand.

3. Implementer (upper left quadrant) , which acts with high support and low challenge. Often valued by the leader, implementers are supportive and get the work done but, on the downside, fail to challenge the leader's goals and values.

4. Partner (upper right quadrant), which shows high support and high challenge. Followers who exhibit this style take responsibility for themselves and for the leader and fully support the leader but are always willing to challenge the leader when necessary.

CHAPTER 13 . FOLLOWERSHIP 359

The Kellerman Typology

Kellerman's (2008) typology of followers was developed from her experience as a political scientist and her observations about followers in different historical contexts. Kellerman argues that the importance ofleaders tends to be overesti­ mated because they generally have more power, authority, and influence, while the importance iffollowers is underestimated. From her perspective, followers are subordinates who are "unleaders," by which she means they have little power, no position of authority, and no special influence.

Kellerman designed a typology that differentiates followers in regard to a single attribute: level efengagement. She suggests a continuum (Figure 13.5), which describes followers on one end as being detached and doing nothing for the leader or the group's goals and followers on the opposite end as being very dedicated and deeply involved with the leader and the group's goals. As shown in the figure, Kellerman's typology identifies five levels of follower engagement and behaviors:

l Isolates are completely unengaged. They are detached and do not care about their leaders. Isolates who do nothing actually strengthen the influence potential of a leader. For example, when an individual feels alienated from the political system and never votes, elected officials end up having more power and freedom to exert their will.

2 Bystanders are observers who do not participate. They are aware of the leader's intentions and actions but deliberately choose to not become involved. In a group situation, a bystander is one who listens to the discussion but, when it is time to make a decision, disengages and declares neutrality .

.1 Participants are partially engaged individuals who are willing to take a stand on issues, either supporting or opposing the leader. For example,

FIGURE 13.s Kellerman Follower Typology

Low High Level LEVELS OF ENGAGEMENT Level

Isolate Bystander Participant Activist Diehard

)Urce From Foilowership: How Followers Are Creating Change and Changing Leaders, by Barbara Kellerman. 2008, Br ig hton, MA: Harvard Business Rev iew Press.

360 LEADERSHIP

participants would be the employees who challenge or support their leader regarding the fairness of their company's new overtime policy.

4. Activists feel strongly about the leader and the leader's policies and are determined to act on their own beliefs. They are change agents. For example, in 2020 after the death of George Floyd, an African American man, at the hands of a white Minneapolis, Minnesota, police officer, antiracism activists took to the streets in protest to demand change in police practices. Their protests inspired similar protests across the United States and abroad.

5. Diehards are engaged to the extreme. They are deeply committed to supporting the leader or opposing the leader. Diehards are totally dedicated to their cause, even willing to risk their lives for it. In a small-group setting, diehards are followers who are all-consumed with their own position within the group to the point of forcing the group members to do what they want them to do or forcing the group process to implode. For example, there have been U.S. representatives willing to force the government into economic calamity by refusing to vote to raise the country's debt ceiling in order to force their will on a particular issue, such as increased defense spending or funding for a roads project in their district.

What do these four typologies (i.e., Zaleznik, Kelley, Chaleff, and Kellerman) tell us about followers? What insights or conclusions are suggested by the typologies?

First, these typologies provide a starting point for research. The first step in building theory is to define the phenomenon under observation, and these typologies are that first step to identifying key followership variables. Second, these typologies highlight the multitude of different ways followers have been characterized, from alienated or masochistic to activist or individualist. Third, while the typologies do not differentiate a definitive list of follower types, there are some commonalities among them. Generally, the major followership types are active-engaged, independent-assertive, submissive-compliant, and supportive­ conforming-or, as suggested by Carsten et al. (2014), passive followers, antiau­ thoritarian followers, and proactive followers.

Fourth, the typologies are important because they label individuals engaged in the leadership process. This labeling brings followers to the forefront and gives them more credence for their role in the leadership process. These descriptions can also assist leaders in effectively communicating with followers. By knowing that a follower adheres to a certain type of behavior, the leaders can adapt their style to optimally relate to the role the follower is playing.

Collectively, the typologies of followership provide a beginning point for theory building about followership. Building on these typologies, the next section discusses some of the first attempts to create a theory of followership.

CHAPTER13 FOLLOWERSHIP 361

THEORETICAL APPROACHES TO FOLLOWERSHIP

What is the phenomenon of followership? Is there a theory that explains it? Uhl-Bien and her colleagues (2014) set out to answer those questions by systematically analyzing the existing followership literature and introducing a broad theory offollowership. They state that followership comprises "character­ istics, behaviors and processes of individuals acting in relation to leaders" (p. 96). In addition, they describe followership as a relationally basedprocess that includes how followers and leaders interact to construct leadership and its outcomes (Uhl-Bien et al., 2014, p. 99).

Based on these definitions, Uhl-Bien et al. proposed a formal theory of fol­ lowership. They first identified four constructs (i.e., components or attributes) and variables that comprise the process of followership as shown in Table 13.2.

Followership characteristics refer to the attributes of followers, such as the fol­ lower's traits (e.g., confidence), motivations, and the way an individual perceives what it means to be a follower.

Leadership characteristics refer to the attributes of the leader, such as the leader's power and/or willingness to empower others, the leader's perceptions of follow­ ers, and the leader's affect (i.e., the leader's positive or negative feelings toward

TABLE 13.2 Theoretical Constructs and Variables of Followership

I Followe,sMp Followe,sh;p · I Leade,sMp and Leadership Characteristics Characteristics Behaviors

Followership Outcomes

Follower Traits Leader Power Followership Behaviors

Individual Follower Outcomes

Follower Motivation

Perceptions and Constructions

Leadership Behaviors

Individual Leader Outcomes

Follower Perceptions and Constructions

Leader Affect Relationship Outcomes

Leadership Process Outcomes

Source: From "Followeiship Theory: A Review and Research Agenda," by M. Uhl-Bien, R. R. Riggio, R. B. Lowe, and M. K. Carsten, The Leadership Quarterly, 25, p. 98. Copyright 2014 by Elsevier. Reprinted with permission.

362 LEADERSHIP

followers). Followership behav iors are the behaviors of individuals who are in the follower role-that is, the extent to which they obey, defer, or resist the leader .. Leadership behaviors are the behaviors of the individuals in the leadership role, such as how the leader influences followers to respond. Finally,followership out­ comes are the results that occur based on the followership process. The outcomes can influence the individual follower, the leader, the relationship between the leader and the follower, and the leadership process. For example, how a leader reacts to a follower, whether a follower receives positive or negative reinforce­ ment from a leader, and whether a follower advances the organizational goals all contribute to followership outcomes.

To explain the possible relationships between the variables and constructs identi­ fied in Table 13.2, the authors proposed two theoretical frameworks: reversing the lens (Figure 13.6) and the leadership co-createdprocess (Figure 13. 7).

Reversing the Lens

Reversing the lens is an approach to followership that addresses followers in a manner opposite ofthe way they have been studied in most prior leadership research. Rather than focusing on how followers areaffectedby leaders, it focuses on howfollowers affect leaders and organizational outcomes. Reversing the lens emphasizes that followers can be change agents. As illustrated in Figure 13.6, this approach addresses (1) the impact offollowers' characteristics on followers'behavior, (2) the impact offollowers' behavior on leaders' perceptions and behavior and the impact ofthe leaders' percep­ tions and behavior on followers'behaviors, and (3) the impact of both followers' behavior and leaders'. perceptions and behavior on followership outcomes.

FIGURE 13.6 Reversing the Lens

Leader Perceptions

and Behavior

Source: From "Followership Theory: A Review and Research Agenda," by M. Uhl-Bien, R. R. Riggio, R. B. Lowe, and M. K. Carsten, The Leadership Quarterly, 25, p. 98. Copyright 2014 by Elsevier. Reprinted with permission.

CHAPTER 13 FOLLOWERSHIP 363

A hypothetical example of how reversing the lens might work is the research a team is doing on employees and followership in a small, nonprofit organization. In this situation, researchers might be interested in how followers' personal­ ity traits (e.g., introversion-extraversion, dogmatism) relate to how they act at work-that is, their style and work behavior. Researchers might also examine how employees' behavior affects their supervisors' leadership behavior or how the follower- leader relationship affects organizational outcomes. These are just a sample of the research questions that could be addressed. However, notice that the overriding purpose and theme of the study is the impact offollowers on the followership process.

The Leadership Co-Created Process

A second theoretical approach, the leadership co-created process, is shown in Figure 13.7. The name of this approach is almost a misnomer because it implies that it is about leadership rather than followership. However, that is not the case. The leadership co-created process conceptualizes followership as a give-and­ take process where one individual's following behaviors interact with another individual's leading behaviors to create leadership and its resulting outcomes. This approach does not frame followership as role-based or as a lowe

Collepals.com Plagiarism Free Papers

Are you looking for custom essay writing service or even dissertation writing services? Just request for our write my paper service, and we'll match you with the best essay writer in your subject! With an exceptional team of professional academic experts in a wide range of subjects, we can guarantee you an unrivaled quality of custom-written papers.

Get ZERO PLAGIARISM, HUMAN WRITTEN ESSAYS

Why Hire Collepals.com writers to do your paper?

Quality- We are experienced and have access to ample research materials.

We write plagiarism Free Content

Confidential- We never share or sell your personal information to third parties.

Support-Chat with us today! We are always waiting to answer all your questions.