Followership: How Followers Are Creating Change and Changing Leaders

Kellerman makes the claim that followers are important, every bit as important as leaders (xviii). She defines followers as "subordinates who have less power, authority, and influence than do their superiors and who therefore usually, but not invariably, fall into line" (xix). Followership "implies a relationship (rank), between subordinates and superiors, and a response (behavior), of the former to the latter" (xx). Kellerman observes that followers are "less likely now than they were in the past" to follow orders without questions, never voice opinions, and know their place, and leaders make a mistake when they do not pay attention to and take seriously their followers (xxi). The book is divided into three parts. In part I Kellerman explores the nature of followership: separating fact from fiction, the relationship between leaders and followers, and the various types of followers. Part II contains descriptions of the five types of followers Kellerman identifies: isolates, bystanders, participants, activists, and diehards. In part III the author turns her attention to the future and theorizes that followers will have more influence than ever before. Over the course of the book Kellerman surveys the existing literature on followership and traces the historical development of the topic, and addresses why individuals and groups follow leaders, the influence that followers have on one another, how followers follow leaders, what makes followers "good" or "bad," and how followers can take on bad leaders. Barbara Kellerman makes a significant contribution to the practice of leadership through her compelling argument that leaders must pay attention to and take seriously their followers. This is true now more than ever before and will be essential in the future as the line between leaders and followers becomes increasingly blurred. Kellerman methodically explains why this is an important topic for leaders and gives relevant and helpful illustrations of the different types of followers and why these followers matter. The author leans too heavily on political points of discussion, but she is honest about her bias as a political scientist. That said, leaders from all walks of life, whether politics, business, education, or any other organization, would be wise to read Followership and consider the implications of the material for their particular leadership setting. More importantly, those who are followers would reap enormous benefits from Kellerman's work in order to understand how important they are to the organization and to learn what separates bad followers from good ones. There are many reasons why Followership is an important book for pastoral leaders and those who work with congregations. Too often pastors and other ministerial leaders receive both the blame and the praise for the ebb and flow of congregational life. Kellerman is clear that leaders are important, but perhaps not as important as followers to the overall life of t

In recent years, especially in the business world, relationships between "leaders" and "followers" have changed significantly. Throughout most of human history, leaders at the highest level (e.g. tribal chiefs, war lords, monarchs, and tyrants) were almost always those who seized or inherited positions of authority. Business leaders were owners. Over time, the concept of self-determination evolved to a point when political authority began to shift to elected representatives. Stock companies with shared ownership emerged in the business world. Still later, labor unions were formed to secure and protect workers' rights. Throughout this lengthy process, the respective roles of the leader and follower reflected various social, political, and economic changes. Today, it is often difficult to answer a rather simple question, "Who leads whom?" According to Barbara Kellerman, "followership is the response of those in subordinate positions (followers) to those in superior ones (leaders). Followership implies a relationship (rank), between subordinates and superiors, and a response (behavior), of the former to the latter." Her book departs from the leader-centric approach that dominates much of the current consideration of leadership and management. "Focusing on followers enables us to see the parts they play, even when they do little or nothing. And it empowers them, which is to say that it empowers us." Kellerman duly acknowledges that the line that separates superiors from their subordinates is often "blurred." Also, "the line between them tends to shift. Some of us are followers most of the time and leaders some f the time. Others are the opposite." Finally, that many people are superiors and subordinates simultaneously. Moreso now than at any prior time that I recall, our roles are determined within a context and, as Kellerman correctly suggests, "followers are creating change and changing leaders." These are among the questions to which she responds: 1. What does George Orwell's essay, "Shooting an Elephant," reveal about leadership and followership? 2. What are some of the most common misconceptions about followership? 3. How and why are leaders and followers "inextricably enmeshed"? 4. Why do people follow their leaders, even those whom Jean Lipman-Blumen has characterized as "toxic"? 5. How do they follow them? 6. What are the different types of followers, "all in some way engaged"? 7. Why does synthesizing leadership and followership, leaders and followers, involve "no more than a natural progression"? And why is it beneficial to do so? 8. What can (and should) followers do when tempted to "resign their own sentiments and passions to those of their leaders"? 9. "Standing up and speaking out is not, of itself, good enough." Why not? Note: James O'Toole also has much of value to say about this in an essay ("Speaking Truth to Power") included in recently published book, Transparency, co-authored with Warren Bennis and Daniel Goleman

Barbara Kellerman's "Bad Leadership" is a fabulous prologue to readers of "Followership". Read them sequentially. The former is better written and better organized. Each has value as you assemble your management armamentarium. Although followership and leadership may be coincidental, one is either a follower or a leader. Neither is really culturally superior, but each is different. Of course, followers may transmogrify into leaders. Let's not be naive enough to believe that followers, while following, are leaders.