Amplifiers. Tom Finegan

By doing this, she is able to best understand the market that supports her decision-making, but more importantly, she scouts talent to find exemplary followers and future leaders of action and purpose.

      The definition of followership is broken into three levels:

       The capacity or willingness to follow a leader. This is the most common definition and applies in the broadest setting.

       An individual who possesses the attributes of positive, active, and independent thinking; who evaluates actions and decisions as opposed to blindly accepting them; and who can succeed and lead others to success without the presence of the leader. We see this level of followership in many settings, including professional, societal, political, and personal.¹

       An interactive role individuals play that complements the leadership role and is equivalent to it in importance for achieving group and organizational performance. If you look over your life in professional and nonprofessional settings, review some of the most effective leaders and consider who were in their inner circle, chances are there were a few highly trusted people who had the ear of the leader and made them better. They had the courage to speak up, course correct the leader's thinking, and help the organization achieve greater performance.²

      By definition, leaders need followers. But blind followers, those without the critical thinking required to independently assess what the leaders feed them, may lead to suboptimal outcomes. This is a far too common phenomenon in recent business, political, religious, and social settings. Great leaders grant their followers the right and obligation to challenge their point of view. This creates better outcomes, not the other way around. Poor or weak leaders demand compliance to their point of view. They reject outright differing points of view and publicly cast them and the people who profess them aside.

Some might argue that leaders create the vision, set the strategy, and arrange the resources in order for the organization to charge ahead. That is true in part, but I've found that in the most effective organizations, the leader themselves are in fact being led by a core group of trusted followers. This give-and-take dynamic between leader and follower creates the most enduring strategies. The leader needs the humility to accept the input, challenges, and critical adjustments necessary for them to refine the strategy and vision. It is precisely this input from followers that makes success possible.

      Organizational culture plays a critical role in understanding followership at a company. For many large global or multinational companies that have been around for decades, there is a whole class of employees that exists just to get by. They have long since discarded their aspirations to ascend the corporate ladder and they have settled into comfortable positions where they have the skills necessary to perform their jobs. Yet there are some companies that have the ability to consistently reinvent themselves and followers in this context may look entirely different.

Robert Kelley published the seminal work on followership in his book, The Power of Followership, in 1992. In it, he described five core followership styles based on a two-by-two matrix in which the vertical axis is dependent/independent thinking and the horizontal axis is passive/active participation: passive followers, pragmatist followers, conformist followers, alienated followers, and exemplary followers.³

      Passive followers do as they are told and rarely think critically. If they do, they generally keep it to themselves or share it with friends outside the work environment. Passive followers require consistent direction and oversight, yet they are able to effectively complete their tasks. Employees in this quadrant are commonly referred to as “sheep.” This group of followers are unlikely to resist change if the rest of the organization is already moving toward it because they see safety in masses.

The pragmatist followers are mediocre performers, somewhat stronger than the passive followers, but they are politically astute. This group of employees are considered “survivors” and they are primarily concerned with “what's in it for me.” They respond best to incremental improvements, incremental performance measurements, and incremental change. In most organizations, pragmatist followers represent a large proportion of the employee base. They will participate in change or transformation efforts after they know it is safe to do so. They generally hold key mid-level manager roles and are respected for their subject matter expertise. Pragmatist followers fully meet the expectations of leaders.

      Let's look at the conformist followers. Generally speaking, there are more employees in this quadrant than there are in the alienated follower's quadrant. They represent the largest opportunity for leaders to effectuate change. These followers participate but they don't provide healthy criticism. They can be viewed as “yes” people. In big companies that have been successful over the years, many generally have a “nice” culture. The people tend to be cordial and have kind words to say. However safe it may seem, confronting the brutal facts is necessary for organizations to be better. Conformist followers exemplify nice at the cost of being most effective.

      Regarding conformist followers, Calkins shared a story about one of his long-time mentees who was promoted behind him in many roles. Despite being a highly effective executive, his mentee was held back from reaching peak potential because they lacked the necessary follower trait of critical thinking. The mentee was an outstanding order taker, who would frequently say, “I'll do what you want me to do, just let me know.” Calkins emphasized that's not why they were promoted into the role. The mentee was encouraged to think independently so as to be able to present up what he felt was best for the function. If the leader constantly tells the follower what to do, the leader is not only doing his own job but the job of the follower. This follower always worried about what Calkins thought of him, not applying the critical thinking necessary to advocate for change in order to create greater business performance.

Alienated followers present particular challenges to leaders. They possess the independent and critical thinking necessary to be exemplary followers, but they do not channel this into active participation with the leadership. This group of employees are cynical but talented. One of the key challenges with this set of followers is that they generally have a following of their own due to their ability to think independently and their high level of capability. They may sit through a meeting in seeming agreement, then leave and assert that everything said in the meeting was off base and persuade the group to continue doing as they were. As such, there is a risk that alienated followers may lead others down the wrong path. Leaders need to either quickly convert alienated followers or remove them from the organization.

      Over the countless interactions I've had with leaders and Amplifiers across a wide variety of size and complexity of organizations, one common theme has been the disappointment of conformist followers and the anger generated from the alienated followers. Passive and pragmatist followers don't elicit the same level of reaction that ignites the passion of leaders. I think it is because followers offer the greatest potential to change the trajectory or influence the organization's culture.

      Alienated followers are critical and independent thinkers. They represent a smaller population within an organization because they have a tendency to self-select and leave the organization resulting in higher turnover. In my interactions with leaders across a wide variety of companies, I marvel at the optimism leaders have that they will be able to convert alienated followers into exemplary followers. Oftentimes, I wonder why the executives put up with alienated follower behavior. But because they are highly capable, and generally outperform the duties and responsibilities of their particular job role, their attitude is overlooked.

Being an exemplary follower is a prerequisite to becoming an Amplifier. These followers are a special breed of employee who seem to accomplish the impossible within organizations. They have a unique blend of independent and critical thinking combined with active participation to drive results. It is not difficult to spot an exemplary follower because they are often out front taking initiative, speaking or acting on behalf of leaders, are extremely competent in their job functions, and are adept at creatively