Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Leader Development Deconstructed pp 143–161Cite as

Followership Development: A Behavioral Approach

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Annals of Theoretical Psychology ((AOTP,volume 15))

Abstract

Leadership development programs have traditionally focused on building a leader’s skills, identities, and behavioral styles with little attention paid to followers. Yet we know that followers are an integral part of the leadership process, and effective followership can positively influence both leaders and organizations. The purpose of this chapter is to define and present a model for followership development in organizations. Using followership theory and research as a foundation, this chapter discusses two forms of followership behavior (i.e., active and passive), and examines the ways in which different followership styles can affect leaders and the leadership process. In doing so, I make a case for why organizations should invest in followership development for both leaders and followers in organizations, and present a general model for followership development programs. As organizations continue to rely on effective followership to support and enhance leadership, it is imperative that we begin bringing followers into the leadership development equation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   89.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Agho, A. O. (2009). Perspectives of senior-level executives on effective followership and leadership. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 16(2), 159–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ashford, S. J., & Tsui, A. S. (1991). Self-regulation for managerial effectiveness: The role of active feedback seeking. Academy of Management Journal, 34, 251–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker, S. D., Sites-Doe, S. A., Mathis, C. J., & Rosenback, W. E. (2014). The fluid nature of follower and leader roles. In L. Lapierre & M. K. Carsten (Eds.), Followership: What is it and why do people follow? Bingley, UK: Emerald.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bass, B. M., & Stogdill, R. M. (1990). Bass & Stogdill’s handbook of leadership: Theory, research, and managerial applications. New York: Simon and Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bedeian, A. G., & Hunt, J. G. (2006). Academic amnesia and vestigial assumptions of our forefathers. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(2), 190–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belk, R. W. (1988). Possessions and the extended self. Journal of Consumer Research, 15, 139–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, J. B. (1988). Power and influence as distinct personality traits: Development and validation of a psychometric measure. Journal of Research in Personality, 22(3), 361–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennis, W. G. (2000). The end of leadership: Exemplary leadership is impossible without the full inclusion, initiatives, and cooperation of followers. Organizational Dynamics, 28(1), 71–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, D. J. (2000). The proactive employee: Managing workplace initiative. The Academy of Management Executive, 14(3), 52–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlyle, T. (1888). On heroes, hero-worship and the heroic in history. New York: Fredrick A. Stokes & Brother.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carsten, M.K. & Lapierre, L. (2016). Follower role orientation as predictors of conflict management style. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the academy of management, Anaheim, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carsten, M. K., & Uhl-Bien, M. (2013). Ethical followership: An examination of followership beliefs and crimes of obedience. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 20(1), 45–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carsten, M. K., Uhl-Bien, M., & Griggs, T. L. (2016). Do you believe what i believe? A theoretical model of congruence in follower role orientation and its effects on manager and subordinate outcomes. In W. A. Gentry, C. Clerkin, P. L. Perrewé, J. R. B. Halbesleben, & C. C. Rosen (Eds.), The role of leadership in occupational stress (Research in occupational stress and well-being, Volume 14) (pp. 91–114). Bingley, UK: Emerald.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carsten, M. K., Uhl-Bien, M., & Harms, P. D. (2014). Exploring historical perspectives of followership: The need for an expanded view of followers and the follower role. In L. Lapierre & M. K. Carsten (Eds.), Followership: What is it and why do people follow? Bingley, UK: Emerald.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carsten, M. K., Uhl-Bien, M., & Huang, L. (2017). Leader perceptions and motivation as outcomes of followership role orientation and behavior. Leadership. doi:10.1177/1367549417708437

  • Carsten, M.K., Uhl-Bien, M. & Jayawickrema, A. (2013). Reversing the lens in leadership research: Investigating follower role orientation and leader outcomes. Paper presented at the 2013 annual meeting of the Southern Management Association, New Orleans, LA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carsten, M. K., Uhl-Bien, M., West, B. J., Patera, J. L., & McGregor, R. (2010). Exploring social constructions of followership: A qualitative study. The Leadership Quarterly, 21(3), 543–562.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chaleff, I. (2003). The courageous follower: Standing up to and for our leaders (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collinson, D. (2006). Rethinking followership: A post-structuralist analysis of follower identities. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(2), 179–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conger, J. A., & Kanungo, R. N. (1987). Toward a behavioral theory of charismatic leadership in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 12(4), 637–647.

    Google Scholar 

  • Courpasson, D., & Dany, F. (2003). Indifference or obedience? Business firms as democratic hybrids. Organization Studies, 24(8), 1231–1260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Day, D. V., Fleenor, J. W., Atwater, L. E., Sturm, R. E., & McKee, R. A. (2014). Advances in leader and leadership development: A review of 25 years of research and theory. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(1), 63–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Vries, R. E., & van Gelder, J.-L. (2005). Leadership and the need for leadership: Testing an implicit followership theory. In B. Schyns & J. R. Meindl (Eds.), Implicit leadership theories: Essays and explorations (pp. 277–304). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeRue, D. S., & Ashford, S. J. (2010). Who will lead and who will follow? A social process of leadership identity construction in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 35(4), 627–647.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frese, M., Fay, D., Hilburger, T., Leng, K., & Tag, A. (1997). The concept of personal initiative: Operationalization, reliability and validity in two German samples. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 70(2), 139–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gregory, W. E. (1955). “Authoritarianism” and authority. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51(3), 641–643.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Groscurth, C. (2014). Why your company must be mission-driven. Business Journal, March 6, 2014. Retrieved February 2, 2016, from http://www.gallup.com/businessjournal/167633/why-company-mission-driven.aspx.

  • Heckscher, C. (1994). Defining the post-bureaucratic type. In C. Heckscher & A. Donnellon (Eds.), The post-bureaucratic organization: New perspectives on organizational change (pp. 14–62). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hollander, E. P. (1993). Legitimacy, power, and influence: A perspective on relational features of leadership. In M. M. Chemers & A. Roya (Eds.), Leadership theory and practice: Perspectives and directions. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoption, C. (2014). Learning and developing followership. Journal of Leadership Education, 2014, 129–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoption, C., Barling, J., & Turner, N. (2013). “It’s not you, it’s me”: Transformational leadership and self-deprecating humor. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 34(1), 4–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howell, J., & Mendez, M. (2008). Three perspectives on followership. In R. Riggio, I. Chaleff, & J. Lipman-Blumen (Eds.), The art of followership: How great followers create great leaders and organizations (pp. 25–40). San Francisco: Joessey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kark, R., Shamir, B., & Chen, G. (2003). The two faces of transformational leadership: Empowerment and dependency. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(2), 246.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. (1978). The social psychology of organizations (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kellerman, B. (2008). Followership: How followers are creating change and changing leaders. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelley, R. (1992). The power of followership: How to create leaders people want to follow, and followers who lead themselves. New York: Broadway Business.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, E. S., & Laird, R. D. (2011). Individual differences in early adolescents’ beliefs in the legitimacy of parental authority. Developmental Psychology, 47(5), 1353–1365.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Latour, S. M., & Rast, V. J. (2004). Dynamic followership: The prerequisite for effective leadership. Air & Space Power Journal, 18(4), 102–111.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawler, E. E., & Galbraith, J. R. (1994). Avoiding the corporate dinosaur syndrome. Organizational Dynamics, 23(2), 5–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCallum, J.S. (2013). Followership: The other side of leadership. Ivey Business Journal, September/October issue. Retrieved September 23, 2016, from http://Iveybusinessjournal.Com/Publication/Followership-the-other-side-of-leadership/.

  • Meindl, J. R. (1995). The romance of leadership as a follower-centric theory: A social constructionist approach. The Leadership Quarterly, 6(3), 329–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milliken, F. J., Morrison, E. W., & Hewlin, P. F. (2003). An exploratory study of employee silence: Issues that employees don’t communicate upward and why. Journal of Management Studies, 40(6), 1453–1476.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morand, D. A. (1996). Dominance, deference, and egalitarianism in organizational interaction: A sociolinguistic analysis of power and politeness. Organization Science, 7(5), 544–556.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parker, S. K. (2007). That is my job: How employees’ role orientation affects their job performance. Human Relations, 60(3), 403–434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parker, S. K., Wall, T. D., & Jackson, P. R. (1997). “That’s not my job”: Developing flexible employee work orientations. Academy of Management Journal, 40(4), 899–929.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parker, S. K., Williams, H. M., & Turner, N. (2006). Modeling the antecedents of proactive behavior at work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(3), 636–652.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pierce, J. L., Kostova, T., & Dirks, K. T. (2001). Toward a theory of psychological ownership in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 26(2), 298–310.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ravlin, E. C., & Thomas, D. C. (2005). Status and stratification processes in organizational life. Journal of Management, 31(6), 966–987.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scott, D., Bishop, J. W., & Chen, X. (2003). An examination of the relationship of employee involvement with job satisfaction, employee cooperation, and intention to quit in US invested enterprise in China. The International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 11(1), 3–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Selznick, P. (1957). Leadership in administration. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shamir, B. (2007). From passive recipients to active co-producers: Followers’ roles in the leadership process. In B. Shamir, R. Pillai, M. C. Bligh, & M. Uhl-Bien (Eds.), Follower-centered perspectives on leadership. A tribute to the memory of James R. Meindl (pp. Ix–xxxix). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, R. M. (1997). Defining leadership through followership: Concepts for approaching leadership development. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Communication Association (83rd, Chicago, IL, November 19-23, 1997).

    Google Scholar 

  • Stogdill, R. M. (1948). Personal factors associated with leadership: A survey of the literature. Journal of Psychology, 25, 35–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sy, T. (2010). What do you think of followers? Examining the content, structure, and consequences of implicit followership theories. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 113(2), 73–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sy, T., & McCoy, T. (2014). Being both leaders and followers: Advancing a model of leader and follower role switching. In L. Lapierre & M. K. Carsten (Eds.), Followership: What is it and Why do People Follow? Bingley, UK: Emerald.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, J. A. (2005). Proactive personality and job performance: A social capital perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(5), 1011.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R. (1997). The psychology of Legitmiacy: A relational perspective on vluntary deference to authorities. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 1(4), 323–345.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Uhl-Bien, M., & Pillai, R. (2007). The romance of leadership and the social construction of followership. In B. Shamir, R. Pillai, M. C. Bligh, & M. Uhl-Bien (Eds.), Followercentered perspectives on leadership: A tribute to the memory of James R. Meindl (pp. 187–210). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uhl-Bien, M., Riggio, R. E., Lowe, K. B., & Carsten, M. K. (2014). Followership theory: A review and research agenda. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(1), 83–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weitman, M. (1962). More than one kind of authoritarian. Journal of Personality, 30, 193–208.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Yukl, G. (1989). Managerial leadership: A review of theory and research. Journal of Management, 15(2), 251–289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Management and Marketing, College of Business Administration, Winthrop University, 113 Thurmond Building, Rock Hill, SC, 29733, USA

    Melissa K. Carsten Ph.D.

Authors
  1. Melissa K. Carsten Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Melissa K. Carsten Ph.D. .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Northeastern University, Boston, Massachusetts, USA

    Matthew G. Clark

  2. College of Professional Studies, Northeastern University, Boston, Massachusetts, USA

    Craig W. Gruber

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Carsten, M.K. (2017). Followership Development: A Behavioral Approach. In: Clark, M., Gruber, C. (eds) Leader Development Deconstructed . Annals of Theoretical Psychology, vol 15. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-64740-1_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation