What Leaders Need to Know About Followers

A leader’s goal is to efficiently and effectively accomplish the primary objectives of the organization. Unfortunately, barriers hinder the achievement of goals, such as the need to operate with a minimal level of resources. One way to overcome this problem is to influence subordinates to exceed the minimum requirements of their job. That is, the leader hopes to persuade workers to adopt organizational citizenship behaviors. Citizenship behaviors include the willingness to (1) volunteer extra time to help a colleague, (2) sacrifice for the benefit of the organization, and/or (3) substitute for a needy associate.¹

As described in a previous post, workers are the decision makers in the types of behaviors they put into action. Therefore, leaders must consider influence options to guide the worker’s behavior. A first step is to assess the worker on two scales.² The first looks at the worker’s ability and willingness to autonomously apply critical thinking to their work. The second looks at their level of engagement and effort. The ideal worker exhibits a strong level of engagement, is diligent about thinking through challenges, and displays a willingness to take intelligent risks.² If the leader knows where a given follower is positioned on these scales, he/she can then create an individualized influence strategy. 

The leader needs to adapt to the individual worker and create the conditions for achieving the required objectives. It may be easier to start with the ability problem. For example, the worker's critical thinking skills can be assessed during the hiring process and used to avoid mistakes. Alternatively, critical thinking skills can be developed for existing employees through training interventions.

However, a worker’s eagerness to critically think is tempered by his or her level of engagement. There are several motivational techniques and processes that can be used by the leader to persuade workers to increase their level of effort. However, in my view, before a leader should focus on the global issue of motivation, I think it is best that he/she first address the climate for motivation. Climate is the atmosphere in which work is achieved. Below I have outlined several ideas that can assist in the creation of a positive climate for motivation.

The first comes from the counseling psychology field and Carl Roger’s reasoning that a counselor should always have "positive regard" for a client.³ While leaders are not counselors, I believe this advice is universal to anyone who is in a position to mentor and coach. The positive vibes that are received by the recipient when there are genuine feelings of acceptance can set in motion a valuable dialogue and increase motivation toward meeting goals. The only exception to the positive regard rule may occur when a target individual falters morally or ethically.

A related approach is found in the teamwork literature and describes the need for groups and teams to establish a climate of "psychological safety."⁴ When this exists, the person feels free to express his or her views and believes that he or she can operate freely and without fear of reprisal for actions. When a worker feels freedom to navigate in his or her position (psychological safety), learning increases and effectiveness is enhanced.⁴ The alternative condition of fear can diminish a person’s willingness to take risks.  

Another model called Leadership Member Exchange straddles the motivational literature. This concept suggests that workers are more motivated when they have a high-quality relationship with the leader.⁵ Research has demonstrated that high-quality relationships lead to more motivated and effective workers. Leaders also need to avoid the trap of segregating workers into “in-groups” and “out-groups.” It is common for a leader to develop closer relationships with some and not others. However, from a worker perspective, no one wants to be found in the out-group because it can lead toward less exciting projects and feelings of being an outcast. I have found myself in both groups during my career and it is not fun to be "out of favor."

A final model prescribes the need for the leader to individually consider the needs and desires of the worker.⁶ This model is a foundational dimension of the Transformational Leadership style, which is the dominant leadership theory today. This dimension calls for the leader to understand and respond to the follower's strengths, weaknesses, needs and desires.⁶ The leader would know the worker personally and be able to relate to him or her on a personal level.  It is very positive when a leader genuinely appears interested. Alternatively, it can be very negative if the leader fails to consider the worker. I witnessed one leader who avoided a worker by not responding to emails or returning messages. The leader's contention was "the worker was not getting it done so why should I bother?" This ultimately became a self-fulfilling prophecy.

In summary, leaders need to pay attention to the environment that they create or allow in their units. Workers respond with willingness and interest when they sense they are accepted and it is safe to operate. In addition, when a leader equally puts out effort to create positive relationships with all, the followers respond with appreciation and greater levels of effort. Finally, general consideration for the worker can create the conditions for workers and leaders to "slay the dragons together." Once the conditions are present, then true motivation can take place.

Your comments are welcome.

References

¹ Hughes, R.L., Ginnett, R.C., & Curphy, G.J. (2009). Leadership: Enhancing the Lessons of Experience (6th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw Hill Irwin.

² Daft, R.L. (2008). The Leadership Experience (4th ed.). Mason, Ohio: Thomson Southwestern. Styles of followership were created by Robert E. Kelley and written about in this Daft text. For a complete description of the "Styles of Followership," see pages 194-198.

³ Corey, G. (2001). Theory and Practice of Counseling and Psychotherapy. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

⁴  Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 350-383.

⁵  Yukl, G. (2002). Leadership in Organizations (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

⁶ Avolio, B.J., & Bass, B.M. (2004). Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire: Manual and Sample Set (3rd ed.). Menlo Park, CA: Mind Garden, Inc.