Lkr Phdl73 Found-Follower Focus

Front 1

Follower

Back 1

Front 2

Followership - Definition

Back 2

An active, participative role in which a person willingly supports the teachings or views of a leader and consciously and deliberately works towards goals held in common with the leader and/or organization (Baker and Gerlowski, 2007).

Front 3

Five reasons followers follow

Back 3

1) Fear of retribution: "If I do not follow, I may lose my job!"
2) Blind hope: "We must do something. I hope this works!"
3) Faith in leader: "What a great person. If anyone knows the answer, they do!"
4) Intellectual agreement: "What a good idea. That makes real sense."
5) Buying the vision: "What a brilliant idea. I don't care who thought of it."

Front 4

Effective Follower main qualities

(Kelley, 1988)

Back 4

1. Self-management
2. Commitment
3. Competence
4. Courage

Front 5

Effective Follower main qualities

(Kelley, 1988): Self-Management

Back 5

The ability to think critically, to be in control of one's actions, and work independently.

It is important that followers manage themselves well as leaders are able to delegate tasks to these individuals.

Front 6

Effective Follower main qualities

(Kelley, 1988): Commitment

Back 6

An individual being committed to the goal, vision, or cause of a group, team, or organization.

This is an important quality of followers as it help keep one's (and other member's) morale and energy levels high.

Front 7

Effective Follower main qualities

(Kelley, 1988): Competence

Back 7

It is essential that individuals possess the skills and aptitudes necessary to complete the goal or task for the group, team, or organization. Individuals high on this quality often hold skills higher than their average co-worker (or team member). Further, these individuals continue their pursuit of knowledge by upgrading their skills through classes and seminars.

Front 8

Effective Follower main qualities

(Kelley, 1988): Courage

Back 8

Effective followers hold true to their beliefs and maintain and uphold ethical standards, even in the face of dishonest or corrupt superiors (leaders). These individuals are loyal, honest, and importantly, candid with their superiors.

Front 9

Motivation, satisfaction and performance - Key Idea

Back 9

Leaders who know about different motivational theories are more likely to choose the right theory for a particular follower and situation, and often have higher-performing and more satisfied employees as a result.

Front 10

Motivation, satisfaction and performance - Introduction

Back 10

(a) Leadership behaviors, such as building relationships or consideration result in more satisfied followers.
(b) Other leadership behaviors, such as goal setting, planning, providing feedback, and rewarding good performance (initiating structure) appear to more directly influence followers to exert higher levels of effort toward the accomplishment of group goals.

Front 11

Definition - Motivation

Back 11

Anything that provides direction, intensity, and persistence to behavior (Kanter, 1990). Motivation is not directly observable; it must be inferred from behavior.

Motivation does not always ensure good performance. See "effectiveness."

Front 12

Definition - Performance

Back 12

Concerns behaviors directed toward the organization's mission or goals, or the products and services resulting from those behaviors.

Front 13

Definition - Effectiveness

Back 13

Involves making judgments about the adequacy of behavior with respect to certain criteria such as work group or organizational goals.

Intelligence, skills and the availability of key resources can affect a follower's behavior in accomplishing organizational goals independent of motivation.

Thus motivation is a necessary but not sufficient condition of effective performance.

Front 14

Definition - Job satisfaction

Back 14

Not how hard one works or how well one works, but rather how much one likes a specific kind of job or work activity (Judge et al., 2001)

Front 15

Definition - Citizenship behavior

Back 15

Creating a supportive workplace - followers supporting followers (Ilies, Scott & Judge, 2006).

Front 16

Definition - Needs

Back 16

The internal states of tension or arousal, or uncomfortable states of deficiency people are motivated to change.

Front 17

Definition - Empowerment

Back 17

1. Leaders delegate leadership and decision making down to the lowest level possible.
2. Followers are equipped with the resources, knowledge, and skills necessary to make good decisions.
3. Without delegation without development is perceived as abandonment, development without delegation is perceived as micromanagement.
4. There are four micro-components of empowerment:

1. self-determination (choices),

2. meaning (importance),

3. competence (confidence in ability), and
4. influence.

Front 18

Motivation Theories

Back 18

1) Maslow's hierarchy of needs
2) Three need (achievement) theory
3) Theory X/ Theory Y
4) Participative
5) Herzberg's two-factory theory

Front 19

Maslow's hierarchy of needs - Key Idea

Back 19

People are motivated to achieve certain needs.

Front 20

Maslow's hierarchy of needs - Description

Back 20

1. This five stage model can be divided into basic (or deficiency) needs (e.g. physiological, safety, love, and esteem) and growth needs (self-actualization).
2. The deficiency of basic needs are said to motivate people when they are unmet.
3. The need to fulfill such needs will become stronger the longer the duration they are denied. For example, the longer a person goes without food the more hungry they will become.
4. One must satisfy lower level basic needs before progressing on to meet higher level growth needs. Once these needs have been reasonably satisfied, one may be able to reach the highest level called self-actualization.
5. Every person is capable and has the desire to move up the hierarchy toward a level of self-actualization. Unfortunately, progress is often disrupted by failure to meet lower level needs.

Front 21

Maslow's hierarchy of needs - Model

Back 21

Front 22

Maslow's hierarchy of needs - Explanation

Back 22

1. Biological and Physiological needs - air, food, drink, shelter, warmth, sex, sleep.
2. Safety needs - protection from elements, security, order, law, stability, freedom from fear.
3. Social Needs - belongingness, affection and love, - from work group, family, friends, and romantic relationships.
4. Esteem needs - achievement, mastery, independence, status, dominance, prestige, self-respect from others.

5. Self-Actualization needs - realizing personal potential, self-fulfillment, seeking personal growth and peak experiences.

Front 23

Maslow's hierarchy of needs -

Strengths

Back 23

1. Has had a significant influence on psychology as well as pop culture.
2. When it comes to personality, people's subjective experiences have more weight than objective reality.
3. Focus on healthy people makes it more applicable and a useful contribution, rather than troubled people.

Front 24

Maslow's hierarchy of needs -

Criticisms

Back 24

1. Theory does not make specific predictions about what an individual will do to satisfy a particular need.
2. Lower level needs do not always need to be satisfied before a person moves up the hierarchy.
3. There is little evidence that supports the hierarchical aspect.
4. Too naïvely optimistic and fails to provide insight into the evil side of human nature.
5. Cannot be easily tested.
6. There are many vague and subjective concepts, like that of self-actualization. Some critics argue that this concept may reflect Maslow's own values and ideals.
7. Biased toward individualistic values
8. The order in which the hierarchy is arranged (with self-actualization described as the highest need) has been criticized as being ethnocentric, applying mainly to white, western males.
9. Fails to illustrate and expand upon the difference between the social and intellectual needs of those raised in individualistic societies and those raised in collectivist societies.

Front 25

Three need theory

(McClelland, 1985) - Key Idea

Back 25

States that every person has one of three main driving motivators: the needs for achievement, affiliation, or power.

These motivators are not inherent; we develop them through our culture and life experiences.

Front 26

Three need theory (McClelland, 1985) - Achievement

Back 26

* Seek to excel and tend to avoid both low-risk and high-risk situations.
* Need regular feedback in order to monitor the progress of their achievements.

* Prefer to work alone or with other high achievers.

Front 27

Three need theory

(McClelland, 1985) - Power

Back 27

Two types: personal and institutional.
Personal: want to direct others, and this is often perceived as undesirable.
Institutional: want to organize the efforts of others to further the goals of the organization. this is typically more effective.

Front 28

Three need theory

(McClelland, 1985) - Affiliation

Back 28

* Need harmonious relationship with other people

* Need to feel accepted by other people.

* Tend to conform to the norms of their work group.

* Prefer work that provides significant personal interaction.

Front 29

Three need theory - S/C

Back 29

OPEN

Front 30

Theory X/ Theory Y

(MacGregor, 1961) - Key Idea

Back 30

1. There are two theories by which to view employee motivation. Both assume that the leader's role is to assemble the factors of production, including people, for the economic benefit of the firm. It also suggests leaders have styles that result in self-fulfilling prophecies.
2. The theories look at how a manager's perceptions of what motivates his or her team members affects the way he or she behaves. By understanding how your assumptions about employees' motivation can influence your management style, you can adapt your approach appropriately, and so manage people more effectively

Front 31

Theory X/ Theory Y

(MacGregor, 1961) - Explanation

Back 31

1. Theory "X" assumes that followers cannot achieve their own goals and must be controlled and directed through the exercise of authority.
- The "hard" approach relies on coercion, implicit threats, close supervision and tight controls.
- The "soft" approach is to be permissive and seek harmony in the hope that employees will cooperate.
- Neither extreme is optimal.
2. Theory "Y" assumes that followers can achieve their own goals best by directing their efforts toward the success of the enterprise. Ideally, a manager can use parts of each theory and shift back and forth from one to another depending on the situation and the follower(s) involved.
Self-fulfilling prophecy.
1. Pygmalion effect. Occurs when leaders articulate high expectations for followers and in many cases these expectations alone will lead to higher performance followers and teams.
2. Golem effect. Leaders express little faith in their followers' ability to accomplish a goal and they are rarely disappointed.

Front 32

Theory X/ Theory Y -

Strengths

Back 32

1. Theory Y provides an opportunity to create an environment that would facilitate a high level of motivation as employees work to satisfy their higher level personal needs through their jobs.

Front 33

Theory X/ Theory Y -

Criticisms

Back 33

1. Theory X relies on extrinsic motivators, which can become less effective.
2. Theory X management styles may hinder the satisfaction of higher-level (Maslow) needs.

Both need to be mindful of the self-fulfilling prophesy.

Front 34

Participative Decision-making - Key Idea

Back 34

A decision-making style in which members of the group take a more participative role in the decision-making process. This general leadership style is the most effective and leads to higher productivity, better contributions from group members, and increased group morale.

Front 35

Participative Decision-making -

Model

Back 35

In 1939, a group of researchers led by psychologist Kurt Lewin identified three major leadership styles.
1. Autocratic. The leader makes a decision alone; people have no direct influence on the decision; there is no participation. Researchers found that decision-making was less creative under authoritarian leadership.
2. Democratic (Participative). Democratic leaders offer guidance to group members, but they also participate in the group and allow input from other group members. Participative leaders encourage group members to participate, but retain the final say over the decision-making process. Group members feel engaged in the process and are more motivated and creative.
3. Delegative (laissez-faire). The leader gives an individual or group the authority and responsibility for making a decision. Delegative leaders offer little or no guidance to group members and leave decision-making up to group members. While this style can be effective in situations where group members are highly qualified in an area of expertise, it often leads to poorly defined roles and a lack of motivation.

Front 36

Casual Model of Participative Leadership (Yukl, 2013).

Back 36

Front 37

Casual Model of Participative Leadership - Explanation

Back 37

Democratic leadership works best in situations where group members are skilled and eager to share their knowledge. It is also important to have plenty of time to allow people to contribute, develop a plan and then vote on the best course of action.

Front 38

Participative Decision-making -

Strengths

Back 38

1. Because group members are encouraged to share their thoughts, democratic leadership can leader to better ideas and more creative solutions to problems.
2. Group members also feel more involved and committed to projects, making them more likely to care about the results. Research on leadership styles has also shown that democratic leadership leads to higher productivity among group members.

Front 39

Participative Decision-making -

Criticisms

Back 39

1. In situations where roles are unclear or time isof the essence, democratic leadership can lead to communication failures anduncompleted projects.
2. In some cases, group members may not have the necessaryknowledge or expertise to make quality contributions to the decision-makingprocess.

Front 40

Herzberg's (1966) two-factory theory -

Key Idea

Back 40

Also known as, the motivation-hygiene theory or intrinsic/extrinsic motivation concludes that while there are certain factors in the workplace that cause job satisfaction, a separate set of factors can cause dissatisfaction.

Front 41

Herzberg's (1966) two-factory theory - Description

Back 41

A two-factor model of motivation, based on the notion that the presence of one set of job characteristics or incentives leads to worker satisfaction at work, while another and separate set of job characteristics leads to dissatisfaction at work.
1. Satisfaction and dissatisfaction are not on a continuum with one increasing as the other diminishes, but are independent phenomena.
2. This theory suggests that to improve job attitudes and productivity, administrators must recognize and attend to both sets of characteristics and not assume that an increase in satisfaction leads to decrease in unpleasurable dissatisfaction.

Front 42

Herzberg's two-factory theory -

Model

Back 42

Front 43

Herzberg's two-factory theory -

Factors

Back 43

Herzberg's findings revealed that certain characteristics of a job are consistently related to job satisfaction, while different factors are associated with job dissatisfaction.
1. Hygiene factors are based on the need to for a business to avoid unpleasantness at work. If these factors are considered inadequate by employees, then they can cause dissatisfaction with work.
2. Motivator factors are based on an individual's need for personal growth. When they exist, motivator factors actively create job satisfaction. If they are effective, then they can motivate an individual to achieve above-average performance and effort.

Front 44

Herzberg's two-factory theory - Explanation

Back 44

1. The opposite of satisfaction is no satisfaction; the opposite of dissatisfaction is no dissatisfaction.
2. Remedying the causes of dissatisfaction will not create satisfaction. Nor will adding the factors of job satisfaction eliminate job dissatisfaction. If you have a hostile work environment, giving someone a promotion will not make him or her satisfied. If you create a healthy work environment but do not provide members of your team with any of the satisfaction factors, the work they are doing will still not be satisfying.
3. According to Herzberg, the factors leading to job satisfaction are "separate and distinct from those that lead to job dissatisfaction."

Front 45

Herzberg's two-factory theory -

Strengths

Back 45

1. The theory recognizes that true motivation comes from within a person (intrinsic).

Front 46

Herzberg's two-factory theory -

Criticisms

Back 46

1. Job satisfaction does not necessarily imply a high level of motivation or productivity.
2. The original data was based on interviewing only accountants and engineers, two groups who are not representative of workers in other lines of work or activity.

Front 47

Group/ Team Theories

Back 47

1) Team perspective history
2) Nature of groups
3) Team effectiveness
4) Hills model of team leadership

Front 48

Groups and Teams - Key Ideas

Back 48

A follower's behavior may be due:

1. individual perspective: values, traits, or experience

2. group perspective: the follower's roles, the group norms, the groups stage of development, or the groups level of cohesiveness.

Front 49

Definition (Hughes, 2015)

Back 49

1. Group. Two or more persons who are interacting with one another in such a manner that each person influences and is influenced by each other person (Gibbard, Hartman & Mann, 1974).
2. Team. Stronger identification, share common goals/ tasks, and have higher task interdependence than is typically seen with groups.

Front 50

Nature of Groups

Back 50

1. Group size.
2. Development Stages.
3. Group Roles.
4. Group Norms.
5. Group Cohesion.

Front 51

Nature of Groups - Size

Back 51

Leader emergence is partly a function of group size. In addition, sub groups (cliques) are likely to form as size increases (Yukl, 1981).

Span of control also becomes an issues as group size increases.

Finally, as the size gets relatively large, social loafing can occur where there is a reduced effort by people when they do not feel individually accountable for their work.

Front 52

Nature of Groups -

Development Stages (Tuckman, 1965)

Back 52

1. Forming. Polite conversation, initial information gathering and low trust.
2. Storming. Intragroup conflict due to status differentiation as leaders contenders struggle to build alliances and fulfill the group's leadership role.
3. Norming. A leader(s) emerge and group norms and cohesiveness develops.
4. Performing. Group members play functional, interdependent roles that focus on performance of group tasks.

Front 53

Nature of Groups -

Roles (Benne & Sheats, 1948)

Back 53

1. Task roles. Initiating tasks, information seeking, information sharing, summarizing, evaluating and guiding.
2. Relationship roles. Harmonizing, encouraging, and gatekeeping.

Front 54

Nature of Groups - Norms (Feldman, 1984)

Back 54

The informal rules groups adopt to regulate and regularize group member "behaviors." Most effective if they (Feldman, 1984):
1. Facilitate group survival;
2. Simplify or make more predictable what behavior is expected of group members;
3. Help group avoid embarrassing interpersonal problems;
4. Express the central values of the group and clarify what is distinctive about the group's identity.

Front 55

Nature of Groups - Cohesion

Back 55

The sum of the forces that attract members to a group, provide resistance to leaving it, and motivate them to be active in it.
1. Overbounding (34, 35). Blocking the use of outside resources that could make them more effective.
2. Groupthink (Janis, 1982). People in a highly cohesive group often become more concerned with striving for unanimity than objectively appraising different courses of action. E.g., Pearl Harbor and the Bay of Pigs.

Front 56

Team effectiveness determinants (Yukl, 2013)

Back 56

1. Commitment to task objectives and strategies. (clear vision, importance, clear/ challenging objectives, empowerment)
2. Member skills and role clarity.
3. Internal organization and coordination. Efficient use of resources, contingency plans, management activities.
4. External coordination.
5. Resources and political support.
6. Mutual trust, cohesiveness and cooperation.
7. Collective efficacy and potency.
8. Accurate, shared mental models. Common beliefs and implicit assumptions about the cause of performance and the best way to improve it (Senge, 1990).
9. Collective learning.
10.Member diversity.

Front 57

Hill's Team Leadership Model

(Northouse, 2012)

Back 57

Front 58

Hills Team Leadership Model - Explanation

Back 58

(a) Claim: the leader's job is to monitor the team and then take whatever action is necessary to ensure team effectiveness.
(b) effective team performance began with the leader's mental model of the situation
(c) to respond appropriately to the problem envisioned in the mental model, a good leader needs to be behaviorally flexible and have a wide repertoire of actions or skills to meet the team's diverse needs.
(d) within this perspective, leadership behavior is seen as team-based problem-solving.

Front 59

Hill Team Model - leadership decisions

Back 59

1. Should I monitor the team or take action?
2. Should I intervene to meet task or relational needs?
3. Should I intervene internally or externally?

Front 60

Hill Team Model - leadership decisions

Back 60

Front 61

Hill Team Model - Effectiveness Measures

Back 61

Front 62

Hill Team Model -

Strengths

Back 62

1. Provides the criteria as to what constitutes excellent teams.
2. Provides a cognitive guide that assists leaders in designing and maintaining effective teams.
3. Recognizes the changing role of leaders and followers in organizations.
4. Can be used as a tool in group leader selection.

Front 63

Hill Team Model -

Criticisms

Back 63

1. As a conceptual framework, it lists only some of the many skills needed. It lacks skills for coaching and training, environmental scanning, and preplanning and timing.
2. Does not provide on-the-spot answers to specific problems facing the team leader. It assumes the leader is skilled in group processes, decision-making, interpersonal communications, and conflict resolution.
3. Does not specifically address the change roles of leaders and followers.

Front 64

Followership Theories

Back 64

1) Graen (1976): Leader-member exchange
2) Kelley (1992): Followership typology
3) Kellerman (2007): Followership typology
4) Potter & Rosenbach (2009): Followership model
5) Chaleff (2009): Courageous Followership model.

Front 65

Leader-member exchange (LMX) - Key Idea

Back 65

Leader member exchange theory conceptualizes leadership as a process that is centered on the interactions between leaders and followers (called a "dyadic relationship")

Front 66

Leader-member exchange (LMX) - Key Point

Back 66

LMX theory challenges the assumption that leaders treat followers in a collective way, as a group.

LMX - Directed attention to the differences that might exist between the leader and each of his/her follower

Front 67

Leader-member exchange (LMX) - Key Authors

Back 67

Key Author(s): First described by Dansereau, Graen, & Haga (1975), Graen & Cashman (1975), and Graen (1976)

Front 68

Leader-member exchange (LMX) - Explanation.

Back 68

• First studies: Vertical Dyad Linkage focus on the vertical linkages leaders formed with each of their followers
• Leader's work unit as a whole was viewed as a series of vertical dyads; leader forms unique relationship with each subordinate

Front 69

Leader-member exchange (LMX) -

Model

Back 69

• Researchers found two general types of linkages (or relationships) - based on:
1. In-group: Expanded/negotiated role responsibilities (extra-roles)
• Relationships marked by mutual trust, respect, liking, and reciprocal influence
• Receive more information, influence, confidence, and concern than out-group members
• more dependable, highly involved & communicative than out-group
2. Out-group: Formal employment contract (defined-roles)
• Relationships marked by formal communication based on job descriptions
• less compatible with Leader
• usually just come to work, do their job & go home.

Front 70

Leader-member exchange (LMX) - Leadership Making (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995.

Back 70

• Initial research addressed differences between in-groups and out-groups;
• later research addressed how LMX theory was related to organizational effectiveness in regard to Leaders, Followers, Groups and Organizations in general
• Higher quality leader-member exchanges produced Leadership Making

A prescriptive approach to leadership that emphasizes that a leader should develop high-quality exchanges with all of her or his subordinates, rather than just a few.

Front 71

Leader-member exchange (LMX) -

Leadership Making Phases

Back 71

Front 72

Leader-member exchange (LMX) -

How it works

Back 72

• It suggests that it is important to recognize the existence of in-groups & out-groups within an organization
• Significant differences in how goals are accomplished using in-groups vs. out-groups
• Relevant differences in in-group vs. out-group behaviors
Prescriptively:
• Best understood within the Leadership Making Model (Graen & Uhl-Bien)
• Leader forms special relationships with all subordinates
• Leader should offer each subordinate an opportunity for new roles/responsibilities
• Leader should nurture high-quality exchanges with all subordinates
• Rather than concentrating on differences, leader focuses on ways to build trust & respect with all subordinates - resulting in entire work group becoming an in-group

Front 73

Leader-member exchange (LMX) -

Strengths

Back 73

1. Intuitively, it makes sense.
2. LMX theory validates our experience of how people within organizations relate to each other and the leader
3. LMX theory is the only leadership approach that makes the dyadic relationship the centerpiece of the leadership process
4. LMX theory directs our attention to the importance of communication in leadership
5. Solid research foundation on how the practice of LMX theory is related to positive organizational outcomes

Front 74

Leader-member exchange (LMX) -

Criticisms

Back 74

1. Inadvertently supports the development of privileged groups in the workplace; appears unfair and discriminatory
2. The basic theoretical ideas of LMX are not fully developed
3. How are high-quality leader-member exchanges created?
4. What are the means to achieve building trust, respect, and obligation? What are the guidelines?
5. Because of various scales and levels of analysis, measurement of leader-member exchanges is being questioned
6. Questions have been raised about the measurement of leader member exchange LMX theory.

Front 75

Kelley (1992) Followership Typology - Key Idea

Back 75

What distinguishes an effective from an ineffective follower is enthusiastic, intelligent, and self-reliant participation—without star billing—in the pursuit of an organizational goal.

Front 76

Kelley (1992) Followership Typology - Description

Back 76

Two dimensions of thinking/ acting and ownership.
1. Categorized followers according to the dimensions of thinking and acting.
• Followers who are independent, critical thinkers consider the impact of their actions, are willing to be creative and innovative, and may offer criticism.
• Dependent, uncritical thinkers only do what they are told and accept the leader's thinking.
2. The second dimension, acting, is used to determine what sense of ownership the follower demonstrates.
• An active follower takes initiative in decision making.
• A passive follower's involvement is limited to being told what to do. .
Kelley Followership Typology - Model

Front 77

Kelley Followership Typology -

Model

Back 77

Front 78

Kelley Followership Typology -

5 Types

Back 78

1. Alienated followers habitually point out all the negative aspects of the organization to others. While they may view themselves as mavericks who have a healthy skepticism of the organization, leaders view them as capable but cynical, negative, and adversarial.
2. Conformist followers are the "yes people" of the organizations. They are very active at doing the organization's work and will actively follow orders. Often this style is the result of either the demanding and authoritarian style or leader or the overly rigid structure of the organization.
3. Passive followers rely on leaders to do the thinking for them. They also require constant direction. They lack initiative and a sense of responsibility and require constant direction.
4. Pragmatic followers are rarely committed to their group's work goals, but they have learned not to make waves. They tend to be mediocre performance who can slow down progress. They present an ambiguous image with both positive and negative characteristics. They may become experts in mastering the bureaucratic rules which can be used to protect them
5. Exemplary followers are independent, innovative, and willing to question leadership. This type of follower is critical to organizational success. Exemplary followers know how to work well with other cohorts and present themselves consistently to all who come into contact with them.

Front 79

Kelley Followership Typology -

Strengths

Back 79

1. Provided a new focus on followership

Front 80

Kelley Followership Typology -

Criticisms

Back 80

????

Front 81

Kellerman(2007) Followership Typology -

Key Idea

Back 81

A typology of followership based on the level of engagement. She sees good followers as actively supporting effective and ethical leaders and responding appropriately to bad leaders. Bad followers are seen as making no contribution and supporting the wrong types of leader.

Front 82

Kellerman Followership Typology -

Model

Back 82

1. Isolates. Care little for their leaders and do not particularly respond to them. These are often found in large companies, where they are do their jobs and keep their heads below the parapet.
2. Bystanders. Disengage from the organization, watching from the sidelines almost as an observer. They go along passively but they offer little active support.
3. Participants. Care about the organization and try to make an impact. If they agree with the leader they will support them. If they disagree, they will oppose them.
4. Activists. Feel more strongly about their organizations and leaders and act accordingly. When supportive, they are eager, energetic, and engaged.
5. Diehards. Are passionate about an idea a person or both and will give all for them. When they consider something worthy, they becomes dedicated.

Front 83

Kellerman Followership Typology -

Strengths

Back 83

1. a call for new paradigms.

Front 84

Kellerman Followership Typology -

Criticisms

Back 84

1. Unfortunately, she herself set forth a single scale five point classification of followers. Therefore while Kellerman examined what each type of followers do, she did not look into how followers can change.

Front 85

Potter and Rosenbach (2009) Followership - Key Idea

Back 85

Follower inputs are vital to team performance because followers are closest to the action and have the best solutions to problems.

Front 86

Potter and Rosenbach (2009) Followership - Description

Back 86

Two independent dimensions: follower performance levels and the strength of leader-follower relationships.
1. Performance initiative dimension: the extent to which an individual follower can do his or her job, work effectively with other members of the team, embrace change, and view self as an important asset in team performance.
2. Relationship initiative dimension: degree a follower acts to improve working relationships with leader. High scores on this dimension suggest loyalty and follower identity with their leaders' vision but will raise objections and negotiate differences as needed.

Front 87

Potter and Rosenbach Followership -

Model

Back 87

Front 88

Potter and Rosenbach Followership - Types

Back 88

1. Subordinates: do what they are told, follow the rules, are low to medium performers, and do not have particularly good relationship with their leaders. Often rise in more bureaucratic, hierarchical organizations.
2. Contributors: are hard workers and often are motivated to be subject matter experts. They typically have no interest in interpersonal dynamics or building stronger relationships with their leaders. They rarely seek out their leaders' perspectives, generally wait for direction, and work best in jobs where they can be independent.
3. Politicians: put more emphasis on getting along well with their boss than getting things done. They are loyal and sensitive to interpersonal dynamics. Some delight in playing the political game. Others are more manipulative, selfish, and have unhealthy needs to be the center of attention.
4. Partners: committed to high performance and building good relationships with their leaders. They take time to understand their leaders' perspectives and buy into their vision for the team. Are strongly motivated to make an impact. Have are more likely to raise uncomfortable issues and hold leaders accountable for decisions. .

Front 89

Potter and Rosenbach Followership - Strengths

Back 89

1. Leaders can use this to understand all of their followers and/ or to plot the life cycle of a specific follower.

Front 90

Potter and Rosenbach Followership - Criticisms

Back 90

1. The model puts much of the onus of effective followership on followers. Sometimes it is difficult for followers to take actions if their leaders have not articulated a compelling vision, encouraged constructive feedback, or provided needed resources.
2. Model does not work well if the leader is incompetent, unethical or evil. More than half of the people occupying positions of authority are unable to build teams or get results through others.

Front 91

Chaleff (2009) Courageous Followership -

Key Idea

Back 91

Arguedthat in order to be effective and perform at the highest levels, followers mustexercise five behaviors to become what he calls "courageousfollowers."

Front 92

Chaleff (2009) Courageous Followership - Description

Back 92

Followers displaying these behaviors are consistent with Kelley's "exemplary followers," and demonstrate the courage to:
1. assume responsibility

2. serve

3. challenge

4. participate in transformation

5. take moral action.

Front 93

Chaleff (2009) Courageous Followership - Courage Types

Back 93

1. Assume Responsibility: Followers don't expect leaders to give them direction or permission to act. They feel as though they have been given the authority to act from their own understanding of the groups common purpose
2. To Serve: Followers are not afraid of hard work. They are willing to stand up for the leader and the tough decisions that this person has to make.
3. To Challenge: Followers are willing to speak up when they are uncomfortable with a leader's behavior or policies. They are willing to take a stand, when appropriate.
4. To Participate in Transformation: When behavior that jeopardizes the common purpose remains unchanged, courageous followers recognize the need for transformation.
5. Take Moral Action: Know when it is time to take a stand that is different than that of the leader's. They answer to a higher set of values.

Front 94

Chaleff (2009) Courageous Followership - Assume Responsibility

Back 94

• Do not presume that a leader or an organization will provide them with security, permission to act or personal growth.
• Initiate opportunities for personal fulfillment, growth and the fullest use of their capabilities.

Front 95

Chaleff (2009) Courageous Followership - To Serve

Back 95

• Discern the needs of the organization and actively seek to serve those needs.
• Support the leader's decision, providing strength, complementing the leader's position and serving others' display of follower's courage.

Front 96

Chaleff (2009) Courageous Followership - To Challenge

Back 96

• Do not sacrifice the purpose of the organization or their personal ethics in order to maintain harmony and minimize conflict.
• They stand up against leaders and decisions when that behavior contradicts the best interest of the organization or their own integrity

Front 97

Chaleff (2009) Courageous Followership - ToParticipate in Transformation

Back 97

• View the struggle of corporate change and transformation as a mutual experience.
• Support the leader and the organization during a difficult transformation.
• Are not afraid to confront change and work toward reshaping the organization.

Front 98

Chaleff (2009) Courageous Followership -

To Take Moral Action

Back 98

Willing to speak to anyone above in the hierarchy.

Front 99

Chaleff (2009) Courageous Followership - To Leave

Back 99

• Often organizational change creates a situation in which a follower must withdraw from a leader-follower relationship.
• Followers are not afraid to depart because they do not rely on leaders or organizations for their self-worth.

Front 100

Chaleff Courageous Followership - Model

Back 100

Front 101

Chaleff Courageous Followership - Explanation

Back 101

1.Resource: the type of employee who displays low support and low challenge. In general this type of follower-subordinate show up to work and does just enough to retain his position and no more. His only interest is in receiving a paycheck.
2. Individualist: The individualist type follower demonstrates low support and high challenge. He is similar to Kelley's alienated follower. This type of subordinate will speak up when others are silent, but is often marginalized due to being habitually antagonistic.
3. Implementer: The implementer is like Kelley's yes-men. He or she demonstrates high support but low challenge. Often the leader loves this follower more than others because they have a yes sir, can-do attitude. However, the implementor will not speak up when he sees that the direction is less than worthy of the leader's ideals or corporate vision.
4. Partner: displays both high support and high challenge. These types of followers take full responsibility for their own as well as the leader's behaviors and act accordingly. They give their whole heart to the corporate vision and the initiatives of the leader, but are open and honest enough to speak up when something doesn't mesh with the best interests of the organization.

Front 102

Chaleff Courageous Followership -

Strengths

Back 102

1. Helps leaders assess follower types and determine the best way to motivate direct reports
2. Helps leaders understand that followership types are not static; they change depending on the situation.
2. Not unusual for followers to start careers or new jobs as brown-nosers to then "learn the ropes."
3. Leaders need to understand how their own followership type affects how they lead others.

Front 103

Chaleff Courageous Followership -

Criticisms

Back 103

??????

Front 104

Seven Habits (Covey, 1989) - Maturity Contuum

Back 104

Covey (1989) defined a habit as the intersection of knowledge, skill and desire. He arranged seven habits along a continuum:
• Dependent people expect someone to take care of them and blame others when things go wrong.
• Independent people have developed a sense of self-worth and an attitude of self-reliance.
• Interdependent people realize that it is best to work cooperatively with others.