Compare and contrast essay of Followership and Servant Leadership
Need a outline Essay of 5 paragraph including the conclusion.
Sentences must be in active voice also cannot exceed 20 words per sentence.
I’ve provided where to pull the information from
must be in Arial 12. Microsoft word
must be two pages
I need it turned in tomorrow august 16 2020
AU/ACSC/CORROTHERS/AY09
AIR COMMAND AND STAFF COLLEGE
AIR UNIVERSITY
SAY NO TO YES MEN:
FOLLOWERSHIP IN THE MODERN MILITARY
by
Eve M. Corrothers, Major, USAF
A Research Report Submitted to the Faculty
In Partial Fulfillment of the Graduation Requirements
Advisor: LtCol Brian W. Landry
Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama
April 2009
cassandra.hailes
Text Box
Distribution A: Approved for public release; distribution unlimited.
Report Documentation Page Form ApprovedOMB No. 0704-0188
Public reporting burden for the collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and
maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information,
including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington
VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to a penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it
does not display a currently valid OMB control number.
1. REPORT DATE
APR 2009
2. REPORT TYPE
N/A
3. DATES COVERED
–
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Say No To Yes Men: Followership In The Modern Military
5a. CONTRACT NUMBER
5b. GRANT NUMBER
5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER
6. AUTHOR(S) 5d. PROJECT NUMBER
5e. TASK NUMBER
5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER
7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)
Air Command And Staff College Air University Maxwell Air Force Base,
Alabama
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION
REPORT NUMBER
9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSOR/MONITORS ACRONYM(S)
11. SPONSOR/MONITORS REPORT
NUMBER(S)
12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT
Approved for public release, distribution unlimited
13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
14. ABSTRACT
he Air Force can greatly benefit by increasing the role of followership in professional military education at
all ranks, officer and enlisted, to help create more effective leaders. It is important to understand that
leadership and followership are complementary competencies and military leaders must work to master
both of them. Regardless of rank, every member of the United States Military is a subordinate to someone,
whether it is to the Secretary of Defense or a newly commissioned Lieutenant. In the military community,
every officer is both a leader and follower simultaneously in every position they hold. Therefore, it is vital
for officers to hone their followership skills in addition to leadership skills to improve their overall
effectiveness. Just as followers are expected to learn from leaders, the converse should also hold true.
Leaders that learn from followers become more effective leaders. Understanding this, effective followership
requires both dissent and flexibility these essential elements must be part of the development of 21st
century Air Force senior leaders. This paper draws from the current body of knowledge on followership
focusing on the foundational works and the followership styles they identify. It includes in-depth analysis of
two traits recommended for effective leaders. This paper uses the problem/solution research methodology.
The idea is not to provide a cookie-cutter follower checklist. Rather, the goal of this work is to initiate
discussion of both the importance of followership and how the development and improvement of
followership skills can improve the effectiveness of Air Force leaders.
15. SUBJECT TERMS
16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF: 17. LIMITATION OF
ABSTRACT
SAR
18. NUMBER
OF PAGES
41
19a. NAME OF
RESPONSIBLE PERSON
a. REPORT
unclassified
b. ABSTRACT
unclassified
c. THIS PAGE
unclassified
Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8-98)
Prescribed by ANSI Std Z39-18
AU/ACSC/CORROTHERS/AY09
Disclaimer
The views expressed in this academic research paper are those of the author(s) and do not
reflect the official policy or position of the US government or the Department of Defense. In
accordance with Air Force Instruction 51-303, it is not copyrighted, but is the property of the
United States government.
ii
AU/ACSC/CORROTHERS/AY09
Contents
Disclaimer ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ii
Figures………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. iv
Preface…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… v
Abstract ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… vi
Why Followership?…………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 1
Foundations of Followership ……………………………………………………………………………………………. 5
Followership Styles……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 6
The Five Dimensions of a Courageous Follower …………………………………………………………… 10
Followers are to Leaders as Water is to Fish …………………………………………………………………. 14
Dissent: Yes Men Need Not Apply………………………………………………………………………………. 16
Flexibility is Not Just for Airpower …………………………………………………………………………………. 21
Leadership Requires Followership ………………………………………………………………………………….. 25
Appendix A Followership Top Ten Lists……………………………………………………………………. 27
Endnotes………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 30
Bibliography ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 34
iii
AU/ACSC/CORROTHERS/AY09
Figures
Figure 1: Kelleys Followership Styles. …………………………………………………………………………….. 7
Figure 2: Chaleffs Followership Styles …………………………………………………………………………….. 9
iv
AU/ACSC/CORROTHERS/AY09
Preface
This paper is an attempt to raise awareness of how truly essential effective followership
skills are, on their own and more importantly, as a complement to leadership skills. It may strike
some as perverse to take a leadership course and choose to focus primarily on followership.
However, during the course of my leadership studies, I couldnt help but notice a gap in this
particular field of research. It is necessary to understand that in the military, even when in
leadership positions, we are all followers. As such, leaders must not forget about using the
characteristics and skills they learned as good followers. Followership may not be seen as
glamorous kids want to grow up to be the president, not a member of the presidential staff.
This work hopes to convey how much Air Force officers can benefit as leaders from developing
and improving followership skills throughout the span of their military careers.
First and foremost, huge thanks go to my advisor LtCol Coach Landry for introducing
the leadership theories and ideas that really helped me make connections and take directions in
my research I never would have come up with on my own. I would also like to thank LtCol
Dowty for helping me formulate my topic and focus my ideas. Most importantly, I could not
have survived any of this without the encouragement and support of my husband and fellow
student Jason, the time we spent discussing ideas while driving to and from school made all the
difference.
v
AU/ACSC/CORROTHERS/AY09
Abstract
The Air Force can greatly benefit by increasing the role of followership in professional
military education at all ranks, officer and enlisted, to help create more effective leaders. It is
important to understand that leadership and followership are complementary competencies and
military leaders must work to master both of them. Regardless of rank, every member of the
United States Military is a subordinate to someone, whether it is to the Secretary of Defense or a
newly commissioned Lieutenant. In the military community, every officer is both a leader and
follower simultaneously in every position they hold. Therefore, it is vital for officers to hone
their followership skills in addition to leadership skills to improve their overall effectiveness.
Just as followers are expected to learn from leaders, the converse should also hold true. Leaders
that learn from followers become more effective leaders. Understanding this, effective
followership requires both dissent and flexibility these essential elements must be part of the
development of 21st century Air Force senior leaders. This paper draws from the current body of
knowledge on followership focusing on the foundational works and the followership styles they
identify. It includes in-depth analysis of two traits recommended for effective leaders. This paper
uses the problem/solution research methodology. The idea is not to provide a cookie-cutter
follower checklist. Rather, the goal of this work is to initiate discussion of both the importance of
followership and how the development and improvement of followership skills can improve the
effectiveness of Air Force leaders.
vi
AU/ACSC/CORROTHERS/AY09
Why Followership?
The first page of Air Force Doctrine Document (AFDD) 1-1, Leadership and Force
Development, defines leadership; the following quote is an excerpt of that definition:
Leadership does not equal command, but all commanders should be leaders. Any
Air Force member can be a leader and can positively influence those around him
or her to accomplish the mission.
The vast majority of Air Force leaders are not commanders. These individuals,
who have stepped forward to lead others in accomplishing the mission,
simultaneously serve as both leaders and followers at every level of the Air
Force.1
Regardless of rank, every member of the United States Military is a subordinate to
someone whether it is to the Secretary of Defense or a newly commissioned Lieutenant. In the
military community, every officer should be considered a leader and follower simultaneously in
every position they hold but as is evident in the Air Forces definition, the focus is on leadership.
The Air Force professional military education concentrates on developing every officer as if he
or she will one day become the Chief of Staff. However, a leader cannot lead without followers.
The Air Force and the officer corps could greatly benefit by increasing the role of followership in
professional military education for officers to help them as they work toward becoming effective
leaders. The question is, how can officers best serve, using followership to make them better
leaders?
The quote above from AFDD 1-1 about leadership mentions that Airmen are leaders and
followers at the same time. The document goes on to claim, Desirable behavioral patterns of
these leaders and followers are identified in this doctrine and should be emulated in ways that
improve the performance of individuals and units.2 However, as you read further you never
quite find useful guidance or even a definition of followership. When discussing personal
leadership Air Force doctrine states that followership is an important skill to have and the tactical
1
AU/ACSC/CORROTHERS/AY09
level of force development is where one should focus on developing it. At the operational and
strategic level, the topic of Airmen as followers is briefly mentioned. The operational level
states, based on a thorough understanding of themselves as leaders and followers and how they
influence others, they apply an understanding of organizational and team dynamics.3 At the
strategic level it is not much different, based on a thorough understanding of themselves as
leaders and followers, and how to use organizational and team dynamics, they apply an in-depth
understanding of leadership at the institutional and interagency levels.4 Airmen are left to their
own devices to find out more information on followership.
When one delves further into Air Force publications, the term followership shows up in
only 14 documents out of over 2,500 documents posted on the official source site for Air Force
administrative publications.5 Of those 14, only two offer anything beyond a brief mention of the
word followership. Air Force Pamphlet (AFPAM) 36-2241, Professional Development Guide, is
the source for promotion exams for the enlisted force; officers do not take comparable tests for
promotion. Whereas leadership rates a whole chapter and extensive discussion, followership is
included as a subset of leadership and is boiled down to 10 qualities. The guide explains, There
are 10 points essential to good followership; however, the list is neither inflexible nor
exhaustive:6
Organizational Understanding
Decision-making
Communication Skills
Commitment
Problem Solving
Integrity
Adaptability
Self-employment
Courage
Credibility
2
AU/ACSC/CORROTHERS/AY09
This is a good start but followership is not a subset of leadership. Leadership and
followership are two sides of the same coin, thus followership deserves more thought. A
groundbreaking social scientist in the realm of followership, Robert E. Kelley, explains the
relationship between leadership and followership well. In reality, followership and leadership
are two separate concepts, two separate roles. They are complementary, not competitive, paths to
organizational contributionThe greatest successes require that people in both roles turn in top-
rate performances.7 It is encouraging to see that Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2014,
Commissioning Education Program (CEP) lists followership as an institutional sub-competency
under Embodying Air Force Culture.
Followership: Comprehends and values the essential role of followership in
mission accomplishment. Seeks command, guidance, and/or leadership while
providing unbiased advice. Aligns priorities and actions toward chain of
command guidance for mission accomplishment. Exercises flexibility and adapts
quickly to alternating role as leader/follower; follower first, leader at times.8
However, followership is not mentioned in professional military education (PME) or
most other instructions where leadership is mentioned. The Air Force Academy in its instructions
takes the time to recognize followership but even then the focus is only at the lowest level, on the
fourth class cadets (freshman).9 In the Air University Catalog for Academic Year 2008-2009,
followership is mentioned five times but only in the Squadron Officer School (SOS) curriculum,
whereas the word leadership appears 242 times.10 The bottom line is, significant searching is
required to find mention of followership in Air Force publications and literature. It would be
beneficial for officers to understand the continued importance of followership outside of the
enlisted ranks and beyond commissioning, but the resources and emphasis do not exist.
There are a number of worthwhile characteristics of effective followership. However, this
study focuses on two primary traits that directly contribute to the growth of effective leaders. The
first one is dissent, examined in the context of its importance to critical thinking. In the article
3
AU/ACSC/CORROTHERS/AY09
Dynamic Followership, Lt Col Sharon Latour and Lt Col Vicki Rast, have come up with five
plausible follower competencies, one of them is, thinks independently and critically (dissents
courageously).11 The definition of followership in the CEP instruction above says, Seeks
command, guidance, and/or leadership while providing unbiased advice.12 The act of providing
unbiased advice will at times be dissent; all military professionals should be taught how to
dissent properly. This does not mean just teaching the proper channels and the mechanics of
dissent. Rather, it refers to the critical thinking required to formulate a dissenting opinion, the
communication skills required to present it and the situational awareness and understanding of
when to press on or back down. Note that dissent is not on the list above of followership qualities
from the Professional Development Guide; however, almost all of those qualities, especially
integrity and courage, are required for dissent to be possible. It is important to be able to
distinguish between knowing when to salute smartly and move on versus telling the boss what he
or she wants to hear i.e., being a yes man. We serve our bosses best by presenting opinions that
do not always match their own. There is a time and a place to disagree with the boss and good
followers get this right. Dissent is an area where one must tread carefully it can turn into
insubordination if not done correctly.
The other trait to be discussed is flexibility. Flexibility was also highlighted in the
definition of followership in the CEP instruction. Flexibility refers to ones ability to deal with or
adapt to change. Another one of five plausible follower competencies from the article Dynamic
Followership, is, functions well in change-oriented environments (serves as a change agent,
demonstrates agility, moves fluidly between leading and following).13 This is especially
relevant due to changes due to the new presidential administration as well as recent changes in
Air Force leadership and organizations to deal with cyberspace and nuclear issues. It also affects
4
AU/ACSC/CORROTHERS/AY09
military units on a more personal level due to the nature of the system; it is not unusual for an
officer to spend only two years in a job, which means the organization must constantly deal with
the changes wrought by personnel and personality changeovers. As a general rule, people are
resistant to change. Much like dissent, it usually requires stepping out of ones comfort zone and
potentially taking risk. A good follower works with the leader to be an agent of change and help
the organization evolve and grow as required to deal with external environments and pressures.
Before exploring these traits of followership, one must delve into the origins of it to help
understand why followership is so important.
Foundations of Followership
Follower is not a term of weakness, but the condition that permits leadership to
exist and gives it strength.
– Ira Chaleff14
The study of leadership and leaders dates back to the beginning of time. A Google search
on the word leadership turns up 237 million results whereas a search on the word followership
only has 144 thousand results.15 When one does the math, it comes out to over 1,600 times more
mentions of leadership than followership. The statistics in the Muir S. Fairchild Research
Information Center (Air University Library) are similar; a key word search of leadership reveals
7,061 references and followership only 30.16 The modern leadership industry, now a quarter of
a century old, is built on the proposition that all leaders matter a great deal and followers hardly
matter at all.17 A few people have dedicated a significant amount of time and attention to
understanding followers and the dynamics involved in the relationship between followers and
leaders. This section will begin by focusing on two of those intellectuals and their foundational
theories on followership and follower styles. Most modern writings on followership reference at
5
AU/ACSC/CORROTHERS/AY09
least one of the two the models to be discussed. There is even an empirical study substantiating
the existence of followership based on one of the proposed models. Using the followership
models of Robert Kelley and Ira Chaleff as a baseline, some leadership scholars have also turned
their interests towards followership. One of the most useful aspects to come from these studies is
the importance of relationships. This is highlighted by Barbara Kellerman as a key finding in her
recently published book about followership. The significance of relationships is worth looking
into further which takes one to Margaret Wheatley and the study of leadership using chaos
theory and quantum physics.18 There are new and different ways to look at building leadership
potential but to truly understand the importance of leadership one must understand the recipients
of leadership, the followers.
Followership Styles
To discuss followership one needs to first explore the dominant theories. Social scientist
Robert E. Kelley was not necessarily the first to write about followership, but he was one of the
first to write about it as its own subject not as a subset of leadership. His breakthrough text, The
Power of Followership, published in 1991 highlighted a model for follower types that he has
continued to refine in follow up essays and articles and is very much in use today. Kelley
developed his follower styles to complement the existing models for leadership styles. In his
research and consulting with both leaders and followers, two dimensions rose to the surface as
the primary characteristics of followership, independent critical thinking and active
participation.19 Kelley uses these in a two-dimensional model to illustrate five follower types
ranging the two scales of critical thinking and activity level.
6
AU/ACSC/CORROTHERS/AY09
Independent, Critical Thinking
Passive
Alienated Followers Exemplary Followers
Active
Sheep Yes-People
Dependent, Uncritical Thinking
Pragmatist
Followers
C
rit
ic
al
T
hi
nk
in
g
Activity Level
Figure 1: Kelleys Followership Styles. (Adapted from Robert E. Kelley, The Power of
Followership. New York: Doubleday/Currency, 1992).
The sheep category has the least effective followers, because of their herd instinct, they
can be trained to perform necessary simple tasks and then wander around awaiting further
direction.20 Yes-People are also considered ineffective because while they are more enthusiastic
and involved than sheep, they need a leader to tell them exactly what to do. They can be
dangerous either because they do exactly what they are told and no more or because they tell
leaders what they want to hear, not what they need to know.21 The alienated followers are often
former exemplary followers, they are critical thinkers but they are passive in their role in the
organization.22 Some versions of Kelleys model leave out the pragmatic followers in the center
of the table. The pragmatic followers are capable workers who eschew their independence for
political expediency. Or they are system bureaucrats who carry out directives to the letter, even
though they might have valuable ideas for improving them.23 All of these types of followers
have some less than advantageous characteristics.
The last type of follower in the model is the exemplary follower. According to Kelley,
exemplary followers bring enthusiasm, intelligence, and self-reliance into implementing an
7
AU/ACSC/CORROTHERS/AY09
organizational goal.24 They exercise independent critical thinking, separate from and not
necessarily in line with the leadership, and balance it with being actively engaged for the benefit
of the organization, despite these two requirements seeming mutually exclusive at times.25 The
goal in developing skills for followership would be to help people move into the exemplary
follower sector. Kelley asserts that there are seven steps to becoming an exemplary follower: (1)
be proactive; (2) gather the facts; (3) seek wise counsel; (4) play by the rules; (5) persuade by
speaking the language of the organization; (6) prepare your courage to go over heads when
absolutely necessary; and (7) take collective action or plan well to stand alone.26 These seven
steps seem like common sense but they can take courage to enact. Kelleys recommendations are
essentially advice for how to offer a dissenting position to a leader.
The seven steps Kelley recommends are similar to those in another foundational work in
the study of followership, The Courageous Follower, by Ira Chaleff. Chaleffs study was first
published in 1995 and updated in 2003; it is extremely relevant to the officer corps in the U.S.
Military. In fact, his research was inspired by a book he read about the massacre at My Lai in
Vietnam.27 Chaleff contends that in order for leaders to use their power wisely or effectively
they need followers who take a proactive approach to their roles. He explores the ideas of how
followers can make their leaders lives easier while being a shaper who contributes to growth
and development of the organization.28 Chaleff also has a four-quadrant model for followership
similar to Kelleys model. In this version, the axes have been swapped to assist with the
comparison to Kellys model. Chaleffs willingness to challenge the leader can be likened to
Kelleys critical thinking dimension of followership. Additionally, where Kelley characterizes
followers based on levels of activity ranging from passive to active, Chaleff focuses on a
followers degree of support for the leader.
8
AU/ACSC/CORROTHERS/AY09
High Challenge
Low Support
Individualist Partner
High Support
Resource Implementer
Low Challenge
Figure 2: Chaleffs Followership Styles. (Adapted from Ira Chaleff, The Courageous
Follower, 2nd ed., San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc., 2003)
The key difference in Kelleys and Chaleffs models is that Chaleff recognizes positive
attributes across all categories. There is something to be said for the mental images provoked by
Kelleys category labels. Where Kelley has sheep, Chaleff considers them resources who may
put in an honest days pay but do not go beyond the minimum.29 Chaleffs implementers are
comparable to Kelleys yes-people and both say that this is where most leaders love to have their
followers. Chaleff points out that leaders can count heavily on implementers to do what is
needed to get the job done without much supervision but, as they are yes-people, they will not
tell the leader when he begins down the wrong path.30 The individualist gets a much better spin
from Chaleff than the alienated followers do from Kelley. According to Chaleff, these are
potentially important people to have in the group as they balance the tendency of the rest of the
group to go along with what seems acceptable while harboring reservations.31 Lastly are
Chaleffs partners, these are the exemplary followers in Kelleys model. A follower operating
from the first quadrant gives vigorous support to a leader but is also willing to question the
leaders behavior or policies.32 Chaleff reminds us that even followers operating in the partner
9
AU/ACSC/CORROTHERS/AY09
capacity have room for growth and should continue to develop their skills along the axes of the
model.
The Five Dimensions of a Courageous Follower
In order to develop followership, Chaleff first looks to explain the dynamics of the
leader-follower relationship. The importance of relationships is a theme that surfaces throughout
both leadership and followership literature. At the core of the relationship is a common purpose
pursued with decent values.33 Relationships are important but ultimately we are responsible for
ourselves and that is where any learning or change must begin. Ira Chaleff recommends
beginning with the five dimensions of a Courageous Follower, the courage to assume
responsibility, the courage to serve, the courage to challenge, the courage to participate in
transformation, and the courage to take moral action.34 These five dimensions are worth
exploring further to help lay the foundation for the study of followership.
The first dimension is the courage to assume responsibility for both oneself and the
organization. This is especially important in the military. Service members wear uniforms that
make their profession obvious to the world and their actions reflect on their branch of service and
shape public opinions of both the branch and the military as a whole. There can be risk involved
with assuming responsibility, which is why it takes courage. According to Chaleff, this
dimension is where use of his followership model begins with both self-assessment and eliciting
feedback from others. Courageous followers discover or create opportunities to fulfill their
potential and maximize their value to the organization.35 They do this through passion,
initiative, influencing the culture, breaking the rules, breaking the mindset, improving the
process, and testing new ideas. Passion springs from genuine connection to the common
purpose36 and passionate followers have a sense of stewardship. The Air Force Chief of Staff,
10
AU/ACSC/CORROTHERS/AY09
Gen Norton A. Schwartz, recently spoke on stewardship and adapted Peter Blocks definition,
stating, stewardship is a set of principlesconcerned with creating a way of governing
ourselves that creates a strong sense of ownership and responsibility at the bottom of the
organization.37 Chaleff stresses passion is essential, General Schwartz understands that and in
his speech, he appeals to the passion military members should have.
I suggest that the better stewards we are in the profession of arms, the better
prepared we will be to secure the victory and the less frequently we will be called
upon to prove our preparedness. This is true because the effects of stewardship
also serve to deter and dissuade those who would challenge us and serve to assure
those who serve alongside us. So the better stewards we are with the military
instrument, the more secure our Nation will be. We must not lose sight of this at
any level of our service. No outcome is too small, no deed is insignificant, and no
one who serves can escape these implications, no matter the task.38
General Schwartz could be answering Chaleffs first question to ask when trying to figure out
how to reignite passion in an organization, Does the organizations sense of purpose need
renewing? When passion is missing, whether from an individual or the organization, it is a
problem worth investigating. Assuming responsibility also requires being willing to take the
initiative. It is urging people to step outside of their stovepipes and breaking the mindset. Instead
of complaining about archaic ways of doing something, look for ways to improve processes and
test new ideas. The courage to assume responsibility is the first step a follower needs to take to
work towards becoming a better and more effective follower.
The second dimension of followership according to Chaleff is the courage to serve. For
military members by taking the oath of office they are exercising their courage to serve. Chaleff
explains that this dimension involves the hard work required to support a leader. Courageous
followers stand up for their leader and the tough decisions a leader must make if the organization
is to achieve its purpose.39 Much of what Chaleff has to say about this dimension can be
11
AU/ACSC/CORROTHERS/AY09
summed up as reducing stress and workload for the leader. The best way to be
