Scholarlink

Followership has long been overshadowed by leadership in organizational studies, often reduced to passive compliance within hierarchical structures. This chapter reclaims followership as a dynamic, participatory, and morally grounded practice essential for building resilient, ethical, and adaptive organizations. Drawing on Eaton, Bridgman, and Cummings’ (Leadership, https://doi.org/10.1177/17427150241232705 , 2024) intellectual history of transformational leadership, this chapter revisits James MacGregor Burns’ (Leadership. Harper & Row, New York, 1978) original democratic conception of leadership—where followers are moral agents with the right and responsibility to select, challenge, and hold leaders accountable. This vision is contrasted with Bernard Bass’s corporate reinterpretation, which reoriented transformational leadership toward leader-centric, performance-driven goals, creating a “democratic deficit” in contemporary leadership theory. Integrating insights from Role Theory and Social Exchange Theory, along with typologies by Kelley, Chaleff, and Kellerman, this chapter outlines the evolution of followership from passive subordination to empowered co-governance. It identifies key attributes of effective followers—critical thinking, active engagement, adaptability, and trustworthiness—and explores how organizational culture can either foster or suppress these capabilities. Through case studies from diverse sectors, including Google, Buurtzorg, John Lewis Partnership, and the U.S. Navy SEALs, practical strategies for cultivating constructive dissent, shared governance, and ethical accountability are illustrated. Ultimately, this chapter positions followership as a lever for democratizing work, operationalizing Burns’ ideals through participatory structures, mentorship, and institutional reforms. In doing so, it calls for a reimagining of organizational life where followers are recognized as co-authors of purpose, ensuring that leadership serves not only organizational performance but also broader social and ethical imperatives.

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Commitment, Loyalty, and Satisfaction of Followers of Transformational Leaders

  • 章节

  • 发表日期：

    2026年

查看全文
  • Filippo Ferrari

摘要

Followership has long been overshadowed by leadership in organizational studies, often reduced to passive compliance within hierarchical structures. This chapter reclaims followership as a dynamic, participatory, and morally grounded practice essential for building resilient, ethical, and adaptive organizations. Drawing on Eaton, Bridgman, and Cummings’ (Leadership, https://doi.org/10.1177/17427150241232705 , 2024) intellectual history of transformational leadership, this chapter revisits James MacGregor Burns’ (Leadership. Harper & Row, New York, 1978) original democratic conception of leadership—where followers are moral agents with the right and responsibility to select, challenge, and hold leaders accountable. This vision is contrasted with Bernard Bass’s corporate reinterpretation, which reoriented transformational leadership toward leader-centric, performance-driven goals, creating a “democratic deficit” in contemporary leadership theory. Integrating insights from Role Theory and Social Exchange Theory, along with typologies by Kelley, Chaleff, and Kellerman, this chapter outlines the evolution of followership from passive subordination to empowered co-governance. It identifies key attributes of effective followers—critical thinking, active engagement, adaptability, and trustworthiness—and explores how organizational culture can either foster or suppress these capabilities. Through case studies from diverse sectors, including Google, Buurtzorg, John Lewis Partnership, and the U.S. Navy SEALs, practical strategies for cultivating constructive dissent, shared governance, and ethical accountability are illustrated. Ultimately, this chapter positions followership as a lever for democratizing work, operationalizing Burns’ ideals through participatory structures, mentorship, and institutional reforms. In doing so, it calls for a reimagining of organizational life where followers are recognized as co-authors of purpose, ensuring that leadership serves not only organizational performance but also broader social and ethical imperatives.