I believe Gardner summed up both of the articles when he stated that leaders are almost never as in charge as they are pictured. He really grasps the idea that the separateness of the traditional leader, allowing for followers to have their own ideas and opinions, and the continuing development of citizen leaders, everyday people who use action and knowledge to contribute to the common good in different areas, gives way to the fact that a following must be earned and that most leaders aren’t as popular as they seem. I also agree with the second half of Gardner’s point when he writes that followers are almost never as submissive as they seem, because many people who listen to leaders and agree with their vision or mission probably don’t agree with all of their opinions and speeches, leading to a group who uses their voices to communicate their own ideals and values.
Leaders and Followers, Citizen Leader, Movie
In Mabey’s article, they listed five theories of leadership: trait, organizational, vision, power, and situational. I think that the most ideal and best way a leader should interact and act is through the situational theory because there is interaction amongst the leader and their followers and the leader has the ability to influence the group. This is an important trait to obtain as a leader, to influence, because without it, people won’t follow you or listen to you.
Published inUncategorized
I agree, I think that leaders usually do not have as much power as it seems and followers are not as submissive as it seems. I think that these stereotypes that we have about leaders and followers are causing there to be an even greater divide between the leaders and the followers. I think it is a hard line to draw between leader influence and leader manipulation as a group. I think that there still needs to be a lot of work done in trying to involve the followers more in the decision making process.