In 1961, the leader of our country, President John F. Kennedy, and his advisors, or followers, failed to accomplish their goal of stopping the spread of communism in Cuba (Coget, 2016). Soon after John F. Kennedy (JFK) took office, he, his advisors, and the CIA (Coget, 2016) planned a “counterrevolution” (Coget, 2016) to cease the communist power controlling Cuba and take back the power of the people in Cuba. However, their attack on Cuba was very unsuccessful, as the troops that attempted to invade Cuba and overthrow its ruler were captured and arrested and their mission, termed the Bay of Pigs, had been deemed as a failure. The mission to save Cuba from the communist party failed largely due to what has been termed “groupthink” (Dixit, 2019), by Irving Janis (Dixit, 2019), which refers to “A mode of thinking that individuals engage in when pressures toward conformity become so dominant in a team that they override appraisal of alternative course of action” (Coget, 2016). Although the failure of the Bay of Pigs can also be attributed to the composition of JFK’s advisors, or followers, as they all exhibited a lack of “courage to challenge” (Northouse, 2021, p.359) their leader, JFK, and their team’s decision-making processes. The Bay of Pigs incident in 1961 highlights the importance of followership in the leadership process, as it highlights the need for followers “to be courageous” (Northouse, 2021, p.358) and challenge their leader when necessary.
Followership highlights the role of followers in the leadership process, as followers are an essential component of leadership, and is specifically defined as a “process whereby an individual or individuals accept the influence of others to accomplish a common goal” (Northouse, 2021, p.353). The role of JFK’s advisors, or followers, was highlighted in the Bay of Pigs incident as they engaged in “groupthink” (Dixit, 2019) with JFK. Although, the role of JFK’s followers in the Bay of Pigs incident is emphasized so heavily because JFK’s advisors appeared to “blindly” (Northouse, 2021, p.367) “accept the influence of others to accomplish a common goal” (Northouse, 2021, p.353). In other words, JFK’s advisors failed to “constructively challenge” (Northouse, 2021, p.358) their leader, JFK, and their decisions on the mission. Or in other words, JFK and his advisors did not deliberate their decisions on the mission of the Bay of pigs. This may seem odd considering the fact that JFK’s advisors were all regarded as “famously brilliant” (Dixit, 2019) individuals, although this could have occurred not because his followers were uneducated but rather because his advisors all adhered to the same followership style.
Chaleff “developed a typology” (Northouse, 2021, p.357) of followers and outlined “four styles of followership” (Northouse, 2021, p.359) and differentiated them according to followers “courage to support the leader … and the courage to challenge the leader’s behavior and policies” (Northouse, 2021, p.359). JFK’s advisors may have adhered to what Chaleff described as an “Implementer” (Northouse, 2021, p.359) followership style, which is characterized by followers having a high “courage to support the leader” (Northouse, 2021, p.359) and a low “courage to challenge the” (Northouse, 2021, p.359) leader. Specifically, “Implementers” (Northouse, 2021, p.359) were described as being “valued by the leader … but, on the downside, fail to challenge the leader’s goals and values” (Northouse, 2021, p.359). JFK’s advisors may be seen as adhering to the “Implementer” (Northouse, 2021, p.359) followership style because they engaged in strict conformity in their decision-making process and failed to speak up, challenge, and raise concerns about the soundness of the decision. JFK’s advisors thus failed to “champion the need for change” (Northouse, 2021, p.358) in their decision-making processes. Therefore, JFK’s advisors’ leadership styles could have possibly contributed to the “groupthink” (Dixit, 2019) of the group, as those who don’t have “the courage to challenge the” (Northouse, 2021, p.359) leader, like implementer’s (Northouse, 2021, p.359), may be more likely to conform with others in the team and thus engage in “groupthink” (Dixit, 2019).
Although it is also worth mentioning a destructive leadership trait, “controlling others” (Northouse, 2021, p.369), that JFK’s brother, “the attorney-general” (Coget, 2016), exhibited that helped to lead his advisors to assume “Implementer” (Northouse, 2021, p.359) followership styles. Specifically, it was stated that his brother would accuse those advisors who “disagreed with his brother” (Coget, 2016) as being “disloyal” (Coget, 2016) to his brother, the president of the United States of America. This may have served to deter JFK’s advisors from challenging him and what he thought was best the best course of action in the Bay of Pigs. In addition, JFK received a large amount of public support, and disagreeing or challenging him and his ideas may have been difficult, as this may have been considered as “against group norms” (Northouse, 2021, p.372). This factor combined with the influences of JFK’s brother made challenging or disagreeing with JFK difficult, as advisors who did this ran a “risk of becoming ostracized and isolated from the group” (Northouse, 2021, p.372).
It is an important characteristic for followers to have “the courage to challenge the”(Northouse, 2021, p.359) leader, when deemed necessary, appropriate, and in “the best interest of the”(Northouse, 2021, p.366) group because it may serve “as a check and balance on”(Northouse, 2021, p.367) leaders decisions to ensure that are effective, successful (Northouse, 2021, p.367), and lead to “Goal accomplishment”(PSU WC, L.3, p.4). Having “the courage to challenge the” (Northouse, 2021, p.359) leader is also an important characteristic for followers to exhibit when they have special “knowledge about a process or procedure of which the leader is unaware” (Northouse, 2021, p.367) which can give the leader more perspective on a situation and aid them in making the best decision. It should be noted that in the Bay of Pigs, appropriate external expert knowledge was not sought after due to the secrecy of the mission (Coget, 2016), which may have helped lead JFK and his advisors to make a poor decision, as external knowledge could have helped to provide valuable insight into the mission, which could have prevented its downfall.
As we have observed, followers play a critical role in the leadership process and can make or break the effectiveness of leadership/”Followership Outcomes” (PSU WC, L.3, p.4) depending on the “social interactions and dynamics” (PSU WC, L.3, p.4) in “the leader-follower relationship” (PSU WC, L.3, p.4). The Bay of Pigs incident highlights the importance of followership in the leadership process, as it highlights the need for followers “to be courageous” (Northouse, 2021, p.358) and challenge their leader when necessary. Furthermore, the failure of this mission is largely attributed to “groupthink” (Dixit, 2019), although the “Implementer” (Northouse, 2021, p.359) followership style exhibited by his advisors could have been another factor contributing to the “groupthink” (Dixit, 2019) of the team and the failure of the Bay of Pigs. However, the destructive group norms that were established by JFK’s brother may have also contributed to the conformity and followership style of the followers or advisors in the team. Nevertheless, having “the courage to” (Northouse, 2021, p.359) constructively “challenge the” (Northouse, 2021, p.359) leader is an important characteristic because it can provide important insights to leaders when followers have knowledge that leaders do not have and can help to ensure that group decisions are sound, have been critically evaluated, are in the best interest of the goals of the team, and lead to the best leadership/”Followership Outcomes” (PSU WC, L.3, p.4).
References:
Coget, J. [Organizational Behavior]. (2016). Lecture 38 the Bay of Pigs & groupthink [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHwKc5lzLY4&t=667s
Dixit, J. (2019, February 20). How JFK inspired the term ‘groupthink’. Neroleadership. https://neuroleadership.com/your-brain-at-work/jfk-inspired-term-groupthink/
Northouse, P. G. (2022). Chapter 13: Followership. Leadership theory & practice (9th ed.). Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publishing, Inc.
Pennsylvania State University World Campus. PSYCH 485 – Lesson 3: Followership. Theoretical approaches to followership (p.4). Canvas. https://psu.instructure.com/courses/2283258/modules/items/38927134
Your post made an excellent start by discussing in 1961, President John F. Kennedy failed to halt the spread of communism in Cuba after facing a major obstacle. As tensions escalated between the United States and Soviet Union in the early 1960s, (The National Archives and Records Administration) the world was on the brink of nuclear disaster. Cuba, a key ally of the Soviet Union, became the epicenter of this conflict.
While the Soviet Union became more aggressive in its efforts to spread communism, the unsuccessful invasion of the Bay of Pigs dealt a severe blow to both the Kennedy administration and the CIA. Despite acknowledging the potential for nuclear war, Kennedy accepted responsibility. A valuable lesson from the Bay of Pigs invasion demonstrated the limitations of American power and the risks associated with brinksmanship during the Cold War. However, the hostilities that had been ongoing for years were not ignored by Kennedy and the Soviet Union, who both took steps to find diplomatic solutions. Kennedy sought to reduce tensions through the signing of the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty in 1963 (The Office of the Historian)
The Cuban Missile Crisis, as you previously mentioned, underscored the significance of followership in history. Kennedy received crucial support from a variety of advisors and diplomats during this Crisis. As a result of his followership, he was able to take control of the situation and plan. Before making any major decisions, it is important to listen to and collaborate with others.
During his inaugural address, Kennedy stated that the torch had been passed on to a new generation of Americans (The National Archives and Records Administration). Kennedy is regarded as one of the few leaders who have captured the world’s attention with charisma and youthful energy. The Bay of Pigs marked a turning point for the Kennedy administration, even though it was a failure. Following the unsuccessful attempt, Kennedy took a more active stance on foreign policy, which resulted in an increase in American involvement in Vietnam. Kennedy also emphasized intelligence gathering and covert operations in the wake of the Bay of Pigs ( Bureau of Public Affairs, 2001). As a result of Kennedy’s increased involvement in foreign policy, the Cuban Missile Crisis was peacefully resolved. He also launched the Peace Corps, a volunteer program that helped developing countries. Diplomacy and intelligence gathering were hallmarks of his presidency and remain vital components of successful foreign policy ( Bureau of Public Affairs, 2001). On November 22, 1963, Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas, which tragically ended his presidency. In addition to his passion for civil rights, inspirational speeches, and commitment to the space program, he left a legacy of public service and social justice that endures to this day.
References
Bureau of Public Affairs. (2001). The Bay of Pigs and the Cuban Missile Crisis, 1961-1962. Retrieved from U.S. Department of State : https://2001-2009.state.gov/r/pa/ho/time/ea/17739.htm#:~:text=The%20brigade%20hit%20the%20beach,to%20rid%20Cuba%20of%20Castro.
National Archives. (2002, Fall). Forty Years Ago: The Cuban Missile Crisis. Prologue, 34(3). Retrieved from https://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/2002/fall/cuban-missiles.html#:~:text=The%20Cuban%20missile%20crisis%20was,of%20far%2Dreaching%20historical%20consequences.
The National Archives and Records Administration. (n.d.). History of JOHN F. KENNEDY. Retrieved from jfklibrary.org: https://www.jfklibrary.org/learn/about-jfk/jfk-in-history/cuban-missile-crisis#:~:text=In%20October%201962%2C%20an%20American,days%20to%20discuss%20the%20problem.
The Office of the Historian. (n.d.). 1961–1968: The Presidencies of John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson. Retrieved from The Office of the Historian: https://history.state.gov/milestones/1961-1968/foreword#:~:text=Relying%20on%20faulty%20intelligence%2C%20the,he%20became%20determined%20to%20overcome.
You presented a very well thought out example and support of the negative consequences that can result from group think and implementer followership. Group or teams enthrall us with the ability to amplify achievements that individuals alone would not be able to efficiently accomplish. Implementers are one of four styles of leadership proposed by the Chaleff typlogy. Implementers act in high support and low challenge of leaders (Northouse, 2022). Implementer followership fails to challenge the goals, values, or actions of the leader that can cause groups. Under directed leadership followers make highly cohesive decisions that are insulated from expert option and fail to consider statistical reseach and appraisal (Turner & Pratkanis, 1998). JFK, in his position of ultimate power, abused his authority and intentionally placed people in followership roles that would not challenge his vision and mission. Turner and Pratkanis suggest group think supercedes reasoning and decision making produced by scientific research and evaluation. Four conditions, including cohesiveness, group isolation/insulation, leader intimidation, and a lack of a decision making procedure predispose groupthink. To avoid groupthink leaders need to diversify their team, collaborate in open space, take the time for independent evaluation, encourage personal/professional development, and celebrate diverse perspectives (Impact, n.d.) Your example of JFK and the Bay of Pigs exemplefies how JFK not only avoided team diversity, but place followers in positions to avoid challenge and unique perspectives.
Reference:
Impact, L. (n.d.) How to prevent and overcome groupthink in 5 steps. Lean Startup Co. Retrieved from https://leanstartup.co/resources/articles/5-ways-to-overcome-groupthink/
Northouse, P.G. (2022). Leadership theory & practice (9th ed.). Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publishing, Inc.
Turner, M.E, Pratkanis, A.R., (1998, February/March). Twenty-five years of groupthink theory and research: lessons from the evaluation of a theory. Vol. 73, Nos. 2/3. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1998.2756