The more I learn about leadership; I find myself thinking it is not for everyone and is that considered okay in today’s world. There is an extreme amount of responsibility when it comes to being a leader. As a leader you are influencing the decisions people make; in addition, you are driving towards organizational goals and guiding others. There have been countless studies conducted regarding who is a leader, what is a leader made of, what traits and strengths do they have, etc., but has there been any done in-depth on why someone would not want to be a leader but a follower instead.
My initial thought would classify those that did not want to be leaders as lackadaisical or non-engaged. However, after taking many leadership courses, what I have found is for there to be great leaders, there has to be situations and followers. Each item is equally vital in the leadership process. During our studies we learned about the leader-member exchange (LMX), the definition of LMX is “LMX says that leadership is a process that is centered on the interactions between leaders and follows. The relationship between leaders and followers is at the heart of the leadership process” (PSU WC, L8, 2019).
In LMX, we learned about in-groups and out-groups, also how these remind of us popular kids and not popular kids in school. All of this reminded me of a family friend that was in the same position for twenty-five years. Our friend worked in the correctional division for the state. He started when he was eighteen and retired when he was forty-three with twenty-five years of service. During this time, he was hired as a correctional officer, and when he retired, he was still a correctional officer. It slayed us that he never moved up the ladder; he never changed titles. He worked in the same prison doing the same job for so long. When we would ask him why not, he would always reply with why would he want do.
Thinking back to his responses and the stories that he had told of his time working the state, he most definitely was part of the out-group. The in-group were given the better assignments, they were given perks, whereas the out-group was given the duties nobody wanted or the problem prisoners. After years of being in the out-group, his opinion was he never wanted to be part of the in-group; he wanted to come to work do what he was required to do, and then go home. He wanted no additional responsibilities and that is what he envisioned the in-group was given. He developed no personal relationships with his leaders, as well his leaders never thought he had the potential to be a leader because of his interactions with them.
With the later studies of LMX, they found that leaders who developed relationships with their followers, often leading the employees to do well in advancements, they were supported and promoted more often and liked by other individuals (PSU WC, W8, 2019). LMX also found that those in the in-group were more committed and take on more work than what was in their job descriptions, the same being for out-groups only willing to do what was required (PSU WC, W8, 2019). What we have learned from both types of groups is that there will be people that only want to do what is required and will always be part of an out-group. It should be relevant to leaders to try and pull people from an out-group into an in-group, but you cannot force anyone to be more than what they want. Lastly, as a leader it is essential to realize that it is okay if they don’t want to be more than a follower; however, it does not give a leader the right to mistreat them.
Reference:
Pennsylvania State University World Campus (2019). PSYCH 485, Lesson 08: leader-member exchange theory (LMX). Retrieved from https://psu.instructure.com/courses/2008237/modules/items/27074707
pfo5014 says
I agree with you in your statement that leadership is not for everyone. From Northouse (2019) leadership occurs in groups, leadership involves influencing a group of individuals who have a common purpose. There would be no leaders if there were no followers to guide to accomplish a common purpose. I have been in situations where I have been a leader in situations and within the same month I am asked to be a follower to give someone else a chance at trying to lead effectively. Though I agreed that leadership is not for everyone I do believe the characteristics for being an effective leader can be learned by the majority of these individuals.
With the In and out group it should take an effective leader to know their people they are responsible for and put them in positions that they will be most effective in. Why do you think your friend was stuck in the out group for his entire career? I have heard plenty of stories of individuals at my agency in which they did not want to promote due to the fact they would have more work for a little more pay. Do you think your friend was a leader without the title? Northouse (2019) describes and emergent leader as someone who is not appointed but is supported by coworkers and is well respected. From your situation in which you described I think your friend had poor leadership. Effective leaders need to realize that the individuals in which work for them are their greatest assets. If the correction facility cared enough about their workers they would have known the traits of your friend and could have possibly found a position for him that bests suits him. If he needed help in characteristics of a leader the correction facility could have introduced him slowly into an assistant management position that shadowed someone so he could learn how to be a leader.
Antonio Araiza says
Jamie,
You bring up a great point and asked the one-million dollar question – is leadership for everyone? First, I would suggest that given the right conditions (leader, follower and situation), everyone has the potential to be a leader in one way, shape, or form. Your friend, for example, never got promoted nor changed jobs in 25 years. However, this doesn’t meant that he wasn’t a leader throughout his career. I don’t know much about correctional facilities but I imagine that his duties as an officer included monitoring, guiding and even directing inmates to comply with standards and norms. Albeit non-standard, this is an example that makes him a leader, whereas the inmates are the followers, and accomplishing their tasks in the correctional facility is the situation.
Even though he may have been a leader in situations such as the one I suggested above, he clearly avoided promotions and had no interest in taking on higher responsibilities. Evidently, he was very comfortable with what he did and had no aspirations to do anything different. Even though this makes some of us scratch our heads in disbelief, we have to realize that these people are as important to our teams as everyone else. They clearly help with organizational tasks and also set the bar for others; they can either meet it (the minimum) or exceed it, which we now know as indicators of effective followership.
Having said that, I would ask, what makes an effective follower? Significant research exists on leadership and a quick google search on the word “leadership” brings over 6 billion hits in less than one second! In contrast, the same search on the word “followership” brings just a little over 1 million results! Your friend and the situation you described inspired me to look into followership a little further. You suggested leadership was not for him, and I was curious to figure out if followership was.
Followers can have an impact on leaders and on other followers. Evidently, followers who exhibit qualities such as self-sacrifice and who hold high standards for themselves are “looked up to” by not only other followers, but also by their leaders (Hernandez, M. & Sitkin, B., 2011). Furthermore, according to Kelley (1988), effective followers manage themselves, commit to the organizational goals, purposes, and principles. They build personal competence and focus their efforts on success and are also courageous, honest, and credible. Through these qualities, effective followers positively influence leaders in ways that make them better and more admirable. Kelley (1988) also suggests that enthusiasm, intelligence and self-reliant participation in the pursuit of organizational goals are the things that differentiate effective from ineffective followers. Based on what you described, your friend met the minimum standards and wanted nothing more than to do his work and go home.
Research indicated that effective followers generally held higher performance standards than the work environment required (Kelly, R., 1988). Thus, even though your friend may have been effective in leadership positions throughout his career (such as in leading inmates), he may have chosen to not be effective in following others within the same organization. If that was the case, that may explain why he ended up as part of the out-group, like you suggested. Out-group members do nothing more than what is required of them (PSU WC, 2019, L. 8). This led me to another question and made me wonder why out-groups form.
I ran into another book by Northouse in which he explains this specific component of leadership. Evidently, out-groups often include people such as minorities who feel as if their voice is not being heard, others who think their ideas are not appreciated, and workers considered to be social loafers who accomplish work below their actual capacity (Northouse, 2012). Although your friend may fall into one or more of these categories, there are certainly other reasons why he and others become part of the out-groups. For example, out-groups may also form when team members lack communication skills or the social skills to relate to the larger group. Even though these people may actually want to join the in-group, they simply may not know how to get there if their actions and comments are perceived as “different” (Northouse, 2012). Your friend may have also been in one of these categories but it would certainly be difficult to figure that out at this point.
What we did figure out based on your blog is that he was not interested in doing more and that leaders in his organization were likely not interested in offering increased responsibilities. According to Northouse (2016), leaders look for followers who participate, and those who are extroverts and enthusiastic. On the other hand, followers look for trust, agreeableness and cooperation in their leaders (Northouse, 2016). We may suggest that your friend or the leaders in his correctional facility were missing some of these qualities; perhaps they all were missing one or all of the qualities of good leaders and effective followers.
Your friend and his situation made one thing clear for me, and that is that effective teams are made of good followers and good leaders. Both of them must work on gaining and maintaining trust, as well as on their commitment to the organizational goals. On one hand, we learned that leaders who work with in-groups are more effective (PSU WC, 2019, L. 8). On the other hand, we concluded that out-groups will inevitably form and therefore, leaders must try to pull some of the members of the out-group into an in-group so as to maximize their team’s effectiveness.
Like you mentioned, you cannot force someone to do more than what they’ll want to do, nor to be more than what they want to be. At a minimum, I hope that someone gave your friend a fair opportunity throughout his 25 years and that if he ultimately ended up in the same position because he chose to be there, and not because someone led him to stay there.
I really appreciate you sharing your story, as well as your thought-provoking post!
References
Hernandez, M., & Sitkin, S. B. (2011). Who is leading the leader? Follower influence of leader ethicality. In D. De Cremer & A. Tenbrunsel (Eds.), Behavioral business ethics: Shaping an emerging field. New York: Taylor & Francis.
Kelley, R. (1988). In praise of followers. Harvard Business Review, 66(6), 142-148.
Northouse, P. G. (2012). Introduction to leadership: Concepts and practice (2nd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.
Northouse, P.G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice (7th ed). Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.
Pennsylvania State University World Campus (2019). PSYCH 485 Lesson 8: Leader-Member Exchange Theory (LMX). Retrieved October 18, 2019, from: https://psu.instructure.com/courses/2008237/modules
Brianna Strohmeyer says
Interesting post! While I agree with you that not everyone is leader material, I had never really considered it until now. I think it can be difficult for some people to assume a leadership position due to personality traits and behaviors that someone engages in. For instance, your family friend never wanted to become a leader due to the responsibilities that come with leadership. I think this can be related to the trait theories that we discussed earlier in the semester. Leaders tend to have high levels of self-confidence and determination that help them flourish as leaders (Northouse, 2016). I feel as if your family friend was probably low on these traits, meaning that he neither thought he could succeed with more responsibilities, nor did he have the desire to do so.
Northouse, P. (2016). Leadership Theory and Practice (7th ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.