One common misconception about follower is that leaders are intrinsically better, more qualified, stronger, more valuable to an organization, than followers. It’s a myth. In successful organizations Followers are no less valuable – treated that way – than Leaders. Yes; valuable in different ways but just as valuable as leaders.
“We have good corporals and good sergeants and some good lieutenants and captains….and those are far more important than good generals.” ~
Gen. William T. Sherman.
Another misconception is the sheep comparison. Followers are often compared to sheep, but it is usually based on a misconception and mischaracterization of sheep. The most common comparison is that followers are or should be or are treated like docile dumb sheep who cannot or should not think for themselves.
Nothing could be further from reality.
Here are some of the characteristics of sheep that followers should emulate and should be compared to:
Sheep vs follower comparison
Some good things about sheep followers should emulate
- Sheep are clever animals. …
- Sheep can self-medicate. …
- Sheep are emotionally complex with distinct personalities. …
- Sheep are highly social animals.
Followers are not docile sheep. This is a mischaracterization of sheep from biblical literature; especially when it is applied to followers. The biblical “sheep – follower” paradigm fails to capture the “active” nature of followers as team members actively involved and participating in leading the team to achieve vision and execute on mission
Followership is not for the meek and passive. Followership means being responsible, participating and challenging when it comes to what you do in life and work.
Here are six paradigms of how and where the concept of followership is illustrated.
- Biblical / religious – we follow God. What does that look like?
- Follow God’s word, the Bible, teachings and example of Christ
- Requires a close relationship between follower & leader
- The follower is driven by either reward, i.e. heaven, blessings or driven by fear of punishment or by both reward and fear.
- Work – boss/manager vs employee/staff
- Follow’s instructions, policies & procedures prescribed by boss
- Does not need a “loving” relationship. A relationship does exist but it’s merely existential.
- The Follower is driven by an existential need to earn money for survival.
- In volunteer organizations (nonprofit organizations, churches, etc)
- Followers follow precepts, guiding principles, values, doctrine
- A relationship to the principles and precepts rather than a person. An exampleis “I really like this church because they care about the community”. Caring for the community is the “principle”.
- Thought follower
- There is no physical connection between leader and follower, but the follower gives mental assent and connects on a philosophical level to the leader.
- This is where “movements”, like the Civil Rights Movement, begin and thrive
- In social media context
- For example, Facebook followers etc
- None of the qualifiers above apply, maybe closest to thought follower.
- Hybrids- In real life, there is significant overlap of these followership paradigms.
The common thread– In all the paradigms we just looked at, there is a common theme that connects them, The theme is that in each of these paradigms, a person’s (the follower) thinking, perspectives, actions or behaviorsare directed either directly or indirectly, by someone or something other than themselves.
How does “directed by” look?Directed can be in very direct ways or in less direct, more indirect ways. Here are some of the definitions of the word directed:
The next critical question is “who or what are followers directed by”?. I have categorized all the “who or whats” into these four main groups of “directors”:
The directors:
- Personality
- Principle
- Purpose
- Profit – monetary or non-monetary
What does directed behavior look like? What does a follower do that is evidence that they are being directed?
Work in support or pursuit of the “directors”.Someone who is directed by a director will work or act in support of one or more of these four directors.