Identifying oneself as a follower is not as popular as choosing to be a leader. The term leadership, for most people, depicts an influencing role, which is responsible for the accomplishment of the pursued goals. But how is it that leaders produce such good results, if not with the support and effort of their followers. That realization led to new researches, which focus on the concept of followership as a directly affecting and affected by leadership role.
After the definition of some basic concepts mentioned in the article, there are presented the three more influential models in the theory of followership, Kelley's,Chaleff's and Kellerman's, and styles of followers that they determine. A comparison of these models is then made to show the focus areas of each one of them and the differentiation in their approaches.
Having distinguished various types of followers, the characteristics of the effective follower are being described as they are mentioned in relevant bibliography, containing independent and critical thinking, the level of engagement, self-reliance and courage to participate in transformations.
Next, there are presented the influences of followership and its qualities on management and the significance they have in achieving high standards.
Subsequently using tools from general management that apply to project management, an attempt is made to provide managers with techniques that can develop effective followership within a project and allow them to reap the fruits of high performing groups.
Finally, a few limitations are mentioned that are related to the fairly theoretical nature of followership, the short period and changing form of a project’s implementation, as well as the unavailability, for different reasons, of the wanted workforce.
A few basic definitions are being given in this section, to introduce terms used throughout the article.
There are displayed two definitions for followership, among the various that can be found in bibliography.
- Followership is the willingness to cooperate in working toward the accomplishment of the mission, to demonstrate a high degree of teamwork and to build cohesion among the organization members. .
- Followership can be defined as “the characteristics, behaviors, and processes of individuals acting in relation to leaders 
Leadership is the process by which a person exerts influence over other people and inspires, motivates, and directs their activities to help achieve group or organizational goals..
Leader-Member relations is the extent to which followers like, trust, and are loyal to their leader; a determinant of how favorable a situation is for leading. 
Project management is the application of knowledge, skills, tools, and techniques to project activities to meet the project requirements. 
The accomplishment of the desired outcomes both at an organizational but also at a multi-company level has often been, at a great extent, attributed to the leadership skills of managers. Thus, since the beginnings of the 20th century a lot of studies have focused on the various leadership styles and the effect they have on the efficiency and effectiveness of different groups. The last decades, though, there is a stream of scholars who choose to shift the attention from leaders to followers and research their characteristics and contribution to the performance of the teams of which they are members. They justify this choice by highlighting that Leadership and Followership are two fundamental roles that individuals shift into and out under various conditions.In fact, although followership has been overlooked and generally considered a role with no particular demands for specialized skills or power to increase organizational performance, it is more common for people to find themselves following than leading. . It is therefore equally important for any project’s, programme’s or organization’s success to include people that have the skills and will to lead, as well as others that have the skills and will to follow. Furthermore, learning how to effectively follow can give a person valuable experience in understanding the perception of coworkers and eventually make them better leaders with high effectiveness.
Styles and Models of Followership
Kelley’s model enables organizations to distinguish the different perceptions and negative notions of followers. Through the identification of the different types of followership it is possible for managers to value the diversity and take advantage of the positive aspects.
In order to define the different types of followership, Robert Kelley uses two parameters that are relevant to the behavior and personality traits of followers. The one measures the degree of independent and critical thinking and the other assesses the level of active participation in the organization, otherwise stated as engagement.  The five styles of followers that result from this distinction, show variability in the extent of independent thinking as well as organizational engagement. Also, their motivation does not originate from the same sources. The types identified by Kelley, along with their main qualities are: 
- The sheep or passives, whose thinking and engagement is passive and their motivation derives from their leader rather than themselves.
- The yes-people or conformists, who in most cases allow their leader to think and act for them, but are generally positive and always on the leader's side. They have settled with the role of the subordinate as obedient employees.
- On the other hand, there are the alienated, who have more independent thinking, but are predominantly negative. Although they think for themselves, their contributions are not towards the positive direction of the organization.
- The pragmatists or pragmatics, who show a minimal level of both independent thinking and engagement. They do not engage in behaviors that are not essential nor do they perform other than basic tasks of their position. They are more willing to exert energy and get involved only when they see where the direction of the situation is headed. The pragmatics demonstrate poor critical thinking and are motivated by maintaining the status quo.
- Last, the exemplary or star followers, who think for themselves, have positive energy and are actively engaged. They agree with and challenge their leaders. Their ability to evaluate their results and to provide self-management, allows leaders to focus on other topics that need to be dealt with.
Ira Chaleff’s Model
Chaleff notes different aspects of followers’ attitudes and behaviors and defines the power that they exhibit in their expressions as courage. In his model named “Courageous Follower” he distinguishes five different dimensions of attitudes and behaviors:
1. The courage to support the leader
2. The courage to assume responsibility for common purpose
3. The courage to constructively challenge the leader's behaviors
4. The courage to participate in any transformation needed
5. And the courage to take a moral stand when warranted to prevent ethical abuses.(Chaleff 2008,p.87)
Based on the above Chaleff describes four types of followership depending on the level of support or challenge followers show towards their leader.
- The resource type of followership demonstrates low support and low challenge.
- The individualist type shows low support, but high challenge. The ones belonging to this style will usually oppose themselves to the majority but will speak up.
- The implementer type exhibits high support and low challenge.
- Last, the partner type presents both high support and high challenge, assumes full responsibility for their actions and acts accordingly.(Chaleff 2008,p.82)
(Table with the types- one axis support other axis challenge)
Barbara Kellerman's Model
Kellerman with her model connects the different groups of followers with each other but also with their leaders. She uses a hierarchy that includes a range of various styles of followership, from one displaying low engagement to one presenting absolute devotion to the leader. The five followership styles that she distinguishes are the following:
- The isolates, who are completely separated and either do not know their leaders or have no interest in them.
- The bystanders, who do not participate but stand as plain observers.
- The participant followers that are slightly more engaged and either support their leaders or clearly oppose to them.
- The activists that feel strongly and act accordingly.
- Finally, the diehards, who are deeply commited to their leaders. Their actions and existence in an organization is defined by this commitment and the followership the exhibit.
(Image of Kellerman’s continuum of followers)
Comparison of the three models
The first two models, Kelley’s and Chaleff’s, concentrate more in the concept of followership when it comes to organizations. With their approach they aim to define the concept of followership, referring to certain characteristics and mentalities. In this way, it is possible to identify which types of followers are more beneficial for an organization and based on that, cultivate corresponding attitudes and form a framework for the development of effective subordinates.
Kelley’s research ultimately resulted in the composition of the “Followership Questionnaire”. With this tool researchers could distinguish the followership styles more methodically, in comparison to plain observation they were previously using. Chaleff, though, has attracted more empirical attention, probably because he extended his approach to include specific practical examples or situational dimensions that required the follower to act. (Putting Followership On The Map: ExaminingFollowership Styles and Their Relationship WithJob Satisfaction and Job PerformanceLeonard F. Favara Jr.Central Christian College of Kansas). As he mentions once people have a sense of the range of follower styles and of their own tendency, they need to connect these to situations they encounter in organizational settings.( Chaleff)
In Chaleff’s approach leaders and followers are presented as satellites of the goal they are pursuing, without overlapping each other, rather circling it from different orbits. Kelley, furthermore, considers followers to be essential in limiting toxic leaders (source), something that Chaleff further develops into a belief that they are capable of even transforming the organizational culture when they are effective.
Barbara Kellerman, on the other hand, stretches the concept out of organizations and offers a more broad view that could be met in various situations and everyday life. Compared to the other two theories, Kellerman really focuses on the level of engagement more than on the other assets of followers, claiming it to be the most definitive element in the distinction of various followership styles. Part of this more worldly viewpoint is the suggestion that followers may not only change organizational culture or influence leaders, but could gradually actually make a change in society. While Barbara Kellerman attributes this potential for change and influence to the degree of engagement, Chaleff states that it is courage expressed in diverse ways that leads to possible transformation. (see Chaleff’s model)
It should be highlighted that all three theories acknowledge the differentiation between different types of followership, the importance of effective followers compared to ineffective ones and the power and responsibility they have to promote transformations and affect the leadership. The incorporation of any of them into a mindset and management of an organization, or project etc. could similarly favor group performance. Thus, having an understanding of the principles of these methods and identifying a way to combine them, could prove valuable for managers. Attention should be drawn towards the fact that the identified types are highly theoretical and in need of empirical support to prove their value in organizational psychology.
Having said that, there are more statistical data supporting the validity and reliability of Kelley’s model. This is because it is the oldest between the described methodologies providing time and opportunity to researchers to study, analyze it and examine its practicality.
Characteristics of effective followers
Over the years the profile of a good subordinate has changed and has come to adapt to the current social and cultural conditions and the attitude of modern employees. In the past, good was considered to be an employee who would take orders from the managers and passively act according to them. Nowadays, people entering the workforce expect to be treated with respect and be assigned with tasks that are meaningful and creative. This is partly due to their generally higher educational background, which provides them with confidence and willingness to change companies, jobs and the way procedures are followed.
Based on this shift, there has been proposed a variety of characteristics that effective followers should possess. Many of these are shared with qualities leaders should present, demonstrating the close connection of the two roles and the importance of a healthy leader-member relation.
As it can be derived from the models in section 3, engagement in the project’s or company’s purpose is a significant behavior required in order to be an effective follower. (Kellerman)Although a project can be completed without the involved subordinates to be fully committed, the result in the last case will demand more time, effort and most probably will not be optimal. The influence of engagement on management, along with its variations, are further looked into through the next chapter.
Enthusiasm is also thought as a positive characteristic, which could provide motivation to coworkers and forward optimism. This in its turn improves the working environment as the levels of stress could be reduced.
Another necessary quality is versatility. Effective employees should not be afraid to face and manage change, on the contrary they should promote transformation when it serves the pursued goals. 
Furthermore, followers should demonstrate honesty, reliability and credibility. Keeping their integrity under all circumstances is a virtue highly praised by superiors and coworkers and promotes morality and ethics in every group.
Indispensable assets are, moreover, independent and critical thinking as well as the courage to challenge the leader. This means not always depending on the leader’s notion to proceed with a new task, refusing to comply with orders that one recognizes as ineffective, speaking up when they need to be heard, being able to evaluate own results and so on. The intention to achieve high performance is linked to these traits, too.
In addition, effective followership includes taking initiatives and assuming responsibility. This involves following a new path, being willing to be held accountable for this choice and taking ownership.
Of course, it is necessary to possess all the skills required for the position occupied and to present proficiency in performing one’s job. Relevant to that is also the ability to resolve emerging crises. 
A good follower’s virtue is the desire to actively serve the purposes of the programme or the organization. They can, thus, support the supervisor by performing complementary tasks.
Some other characteristics mentioned in bibliography are intelligence, good communicative and social skills, the courage to withdraw when the job does not align with personal aspirations or when a leader is unwilling to proceed to necessary changes etc.
It is apparent from the aforementioned that not all types of subordinates as defined in the models in section 3 are effective. Although all of them should be given attention when managing, it is the ultimate goal to transform the neutral or inactive ones to energetic members and ideally turn them into exemplary-effective followers.
Importance and influence of followership on management
New studies are systematically being published, focusing on new techniques, policies or leadership theories that could boost performance within groups, projects, companies etc. Despite the fact that all these elements favor the enhancement of productivity, the truth is that the primary means of achieving high performance is by utilizing the available workforce, the followers. This suggests that managerial performance might be reflective of the followers’ behavior more than that of the leaders’ or processes followed. There are a lot of parameters that complement the importance and the effects followership has on management
In the article “The Followership Continuum: A model for increasing organizational productivity”, there is proposed an alternative approach, which provides a system to monitor, register and adjust given output according to desired outcome measures. Its goal is to enable management to take corrective actions to improve performance. In this article the concept of engagement is used, classified in five stages, each expressing different levels of commitment and effectiveness. Throughout the reading it is constantly highlighted that followership and its variations, is dynamic, ever-changing and affected by many variables. These variables could be either external sources such as the manager-leader, the nature of the job, the working environment, as well as internal sources that relate to the characteristics of followers themselves. The five stages of engagement are the following:
(image) The 1st stage-Employee starts with simply being employed to perform a job and receiving a form of pay in return. The 2nd stage-Committed begins as soon as the employee gets more involved with the mission, project, organization or develops an inner connection to a motion or person. At the 3rd stage-Engaged the committed follower is willing to stess out of the main routine, become more participative and is actively supporting the chosen purpose. By the 4th stage-Effective the follower is competent and reliable, while at the 5th and final stage-Exemplary the follower demonstrates leadership qualities and self-management capabilities without seeking to overshadow the leader, instead expresses support towards them.
The level of engagement is intertwined with the degree of participation and productivity of followers, as it is presented in the previous model. Management is bound to be affected once the situational nature of followership is realized, which has the potential to obstruct or facilitate high performance and the transission of a follower from one stage to another. Additionally, acknowledging the contribution of followers, particularly the exemplary ones, on behalf of the managers, annihilates the stereotypes against being a follower, that entail the misconception of an inferior post, with minor significance and gravity for the success. The development of exemplary followers is a tool that can be used to optimize procedures and results and to enable employees produce their best contributions.
These behaviors involve actions initiated by followers and aim to prevent unwanted future situations or promote change to achieve wanted outputs. Followers who exhibit proactivity often seek feedback and are ready to take charge and influence procedures. Although that aspect of followership is regularly associated with group success, managers may perceive it as disobedience, as it can influence the dynamics of the leader-member relation. In fact there are papers looking into the extent of influence proactive behaviors have, on the development of personalized or socialized charismatic leadership of managers. Therefore, understanding the motives of proactive subordinates and exploit their positive contributions can prove to be a useful tool of management
Employees commonly show two different kinds of resistance towards their leaders. Constructive resistance includes discussion and negotiations between managers and employees to reach a common understanding that will serve the common goals. Dysfunctional resistance, on the other hand, is typical of followers that choose to be passive-aggressive and not complete tasks assigned to them on time due to claimed busy schedule, or negligence. Both types of resistance affect effective management in different ways. (σχολεία) The first one provides leaders with ideas and approaches possibly not taken into account before, while it also helps the bonding of a team through the exchange of ideas and effort to cooperate with each other. The second one hinders group development and success and needs to be dealt with, so that high performance can be achieved.(putting)
The characteristics of exemplary followers have been described and it is understandable that their existence within a team is a decisive factor of prosperity. More precisely, as Kelley states “Their ability to provide self-management and assess their own work behavior in accordance with organizational values allows leaders to refocus their energies into other aspects of the organization”. In this way, there is the opportunity to concentrate on alternative strategies that may include increased benefits for the programme or organization. There is, consequently, a major advantage in developing followership and particularly the “ideal” type of it, the exemplary.
A research conducted to examine the link between effective followership and job satisfaction, as well as job performance, indicates that there is in fact a connection among them. The research using the model of Kelley, confirms that exemplary followers performed at much higher levels than the conformist and alienated ones. The same was deducted for the job satisfaction parameter. Evaluating the results, the authors suggest that analyzing the types of followers in relation to job performance and job satisfaction can inform management about the ways followership function within a project etc. Being capable to identify people within groups that are prone to high productivity, interest and support can lead to better coordination of the workforce, increased efficiency and effectiveness.(putting followership on the map…)
Followers as stakeholders
Employees are a group of the stakeholders of either a company or a project. Stakeholders supply a company with its productive resources; as a result, they have a claim on and a stake in the company. Considering, thus, that employees-followers, are not equally important and that their influence on management is of minimal importance undermines the potential and future success. Not consulting followers, when managing, equals to not keeping them engaged. This is a critical mistake that puts projects and whole organizations at risk. Not being included in the decision process and being treated as passive recipients, except for discomfort, causes stress, insecurity to followers and finally uncertainty for the total project. Once more that sets the ultimate goal at stake.
Most of the materials available in bibliography that are related to management of human resources and the formation of optimal teams, are applicable in project management. When following them, though, the more specific characteristics of project management should be taken into account. These constitute some of the limitations in the implementation of general managerial techniques. (A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide))
The required tasks and responsibilities included in a certain position, combined with the skills, traits and knowledge of the future employee are composing the job analysis. Especially in time limited concepts the proper analysis of a job is crucial, so that people involved know what they should expect and what is expected from them. To attract and help emerge effective followers, the tasks should be challenging and not limited to routine and should also provide opportunities for initiative taking and creative thinking.
During the formation of groups and while operating, managers should aim and foster diversity. Followers from different backgrounds, ages, genders, ethnicities and other minorities have different traits and could make unique and valuable contributions. Furthermore, one of the qualities of effective followers was found to be strength to challenge the leader and display critical thinking about norms and orders that they receive. In other words, to take advantage of followership in project management a certain level of deviance and conformity is required, so that employees do not fail to change dysfunctional norms nor control their members, something that would lead to poor performance.
Training of the workforce can have different forms, such as in classroom or on-the-job. The on-the-job training could be very useful in projects, as the follower can learn the tasks needed to be performed by supervisors or other coworkers and through the experience optimize his/her productivity. In very short projects, people with a relative background and experience could be more rapidly incorporated. That means that followers presenting low levels of engagement or high levels of passivity may not have time to evolve into a more committed and productive type of follower.
Empowerment, meaning the development of a follower’s knowledge and skills, is also an instrument of general management that can apply to projects and programmes. Again, the time limit could make this procedure more difficult, but would be very beneficial, especially for exemplary followers, that value self-improvement and intent to high performance.
Although an “ideal” follower does not depend on the leader for personal growth and is self-motivated, some additional motivational techniques could only have positive results. Providing further autonomy and ownership would favor the levels of engagement and independent thinking of the more active types of followers, transforming them in more efficient and effective subordinates. The passive styles that do not seek involvement in many demanding tasks and are content with accepting orders maybe extrinsic motivation, such as rewards could serve the purpose. In addition, a connection to a manager and his vision could also motivate such followers. When a leader expresses respect and belief in what followers can achieve, then they are internally motivated to succeed.
Whether it is a programmed formal meeting to provide feedback on performance, behaviors etc. or an informal discussion, the comments made need to be timely, accurate and as objective as possible. Subjective feedback could lead to negative expressions and attitudes that will obstruct the smooth continuance of the project. In the case of moderately committed followers, conformists, bystanders, alienated and others defined in the different models, instead of criticizing and accusing them directly for dissatisfying outcomes the leader should try to trace the cause of the poor results with the subordinate and together plan a course of action.
Rewards are a managerial mechanism for the enhancement of the employees’ output. Followers need to find fulfilment with the outcomes they receive. The pay level must be corresponding to the gravity of the job undertaken and the hours spent to complete it. The outcomes should be linked to the performance of the follower. Therefore, it should be noted that there should not be a reward for overtime making up for bad time management, only for extra hours that were needed due to the met conditions.(standard) Some types of followers, mostly the more independently thinking and challenging, apart from pay level and other benefits appreciate clear recognition of their contributions, as well as development of their skills.
1. Followership is a concept that is gaining attention with the passing of the years. A lot of new studies emerge to examine its significance in organizational culture and management. However, it is still at a relatively theoretical stage and a number of researches are needed to associate theory with actual impacts in different aspects of organizational environment and project management. The suggestions stated in this article have a theoretical support and in many cases have been confirmed by various researches. Despite that, a further examination of followership in the years to come, will help establish in depth foundation of this approach and surpass the limitations currently existing, due to unknown variables. (putting followership…)
2. Another restriction is the temporary nature and changing environment of a project. Throughout a project, the groups are not always consisted of the same people, because human resources either need to be relocated or are not needed for the whole life cycle of the project. This makes the maintenance of functional group dynamics more difficult, as new followers need to be incorporated in the groups. Moreover, there might not be enough time to correctly identify and manage the various styles of followers and follow corresponding managing techniques. In addition, according to the followership continuum followers may even fall into other stages of engagement and performance depending on the time period and group they are a part of. (followership continuum)
3. Finally, it is common that the selection of the workforce is not performed by the project management team and thus not the desired types of followers are always employed. This may happen because of restricted economic resources, limited available workforce at that specific timing, location restriction and others. When planning a project these restrictions should be considered and countermeasures should be taken so that there are no negative impacts and risks provoked.
1. Jones, Gareth R., and Jennifer M. George. Essentials of Contemporary Management. McGraw-Hill Education, 2015
2. Kelley, R. E. (1988). In Praise of Followers. Harvard Business Review, 66(6), 142–148
3. Putting followership on the map
4. Project Management Institute. (2004). A guide to the project management body of knowledge (PMBOK guide). Newtown Square, Pa: Project Management Institute
5. Suda, L. (2013). In praise of followers. Paper presented at PMI® Global Congress 2013—North America, New Orleans, LA. Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute.
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 Suda, L. (2013). In praise of followers. Paper presented at PMI® Global Congress 2013—North America, New Orleans, LA. Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute.
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2. Jones, Gareth R., and Jennifer M. George (2015). Essentials of Contemporary Management. McGraw-Hill Education.
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 Kelley, R. E. (1988). In Praise of Followers. Harvard Business Review, 66(6), (p.142–148).