Kelley’s In Praise of Followers focuses on the redefining of the relationship of leaders and followers, and the advantageous results that can come from it. Instead of viewing the two groups differently, Kelley calls for a reimagining of leaders and followers as equals, but with different roles. One of the most interesting points to me was when Kelley pointed out that effective followers have “initiative, self-control, commitment, talent, honesty, credibility, and courage” (Kelley). However, these are traits commonly associated with leaders. I liked that Kelley was calling for the development of followership, because his ideas work to raise the agency or potential of everyone in the group, and that in turn will allow the organization to grow.
This reading reminded me of Gardner’s because he was also talking about how groups do not fall into easy divisions of leaders and passive followers. Rather, there is a dynamic between the leaders and followers that affects both in shaping the group. While the idea of a dynamic interaction between follower and leader is attractive, Kelley raised the point that “in practice, followers who challenge their bosses run the risk of getting fired” (Kelley). This is problematic, because it creates sort of catch 22, where the followers cannot be effective if they don’t challenge the leader, but if they do, there is always the potential they will be fired, at least in the corporate world.
I also thought the overlap between the ideal follower and leader characteristics was really interesting. It reminded me of the reading earlier in the semester on citizen leaders, which talked about how people tend to be overly reliant on a leader to accomplish things.