JENNIFER C. BUNGUBUNG, CPA, MBA
Schools Division of the City of Batac
Divine World College of Laoag
Abstract:
Most studies on school leadership only look at
the leader or the person in charge, not at how followers matter. Because of this, the focus shifts to what followers do and why it matters. What stands out is how thoughtfulness, getting involved, and taking ownership affect how well leaders work.
These actions quietly change the outcomes more than many assume. Effective
leadership rarely happens without steady support from below. Behind every
strong education leader sits a group acting in ways that make success possible.
What stands out is how
well a leader does isn’t just about their traits, it is about the building from
give-and-take between those leading and those following. Evidence shows education
institutions need to grow a mindset where being a thoughtful follower matters.
When people follow well,
teamwork grows along with honesty and common purpose, helping organizations do
better in both performance and learning results. Yet strong leaders can still
struggle if those around them stay quiet or get in the way. Looking at how
teachers, students, and staff shape leadership shows that influence goes both
ways inside education settings, using a blend of data types to uncover
patterns. Results show progress depends less on top figures alone but more on
having engaged, accountable, and driven participants behind the scenes. Consequently,
the concept of outcome orientation highlights the importance of education
leadership fostering engagement that increases commitment, ownership, and focus
within the team. The true effect will be seen when day-to-day activities
demonstrate that there is joint responsibility instead of control by one party.
Keywords: Followership, Leadership Effectiveness, Educational Organizations, Institutions, Effective Followership, Organizational Excellence, Followership Styles and Behaviors
Introduction
Followership
plays a crucial role in determining how effective leadership is within
educational organizations, as it shifts followers from merely complying to
actively partnering with leaders. This collaboration helps principals and
administrators reach goals such as better student performance and a more
positive school culture. In institutions like the Department of Education
(DepEd) in the Philippines, where hierarchical systems are common,
followers—especially teachers and staff—contribute as co-creators of success
through their active involvement, critical thinking, and strong sense of
ethics.
For
a long time, the influence of the education's top roles has shaped outcomes across
schools, systems, and students. Not so much about individual traits now, like
the focus shifted from bosses like principals toward shared effort and motion
between people involved. Once rooted in personal qualities and actions of those
officially in charge (Northouse, 2022), the idea grows wider today, built less
on titles and more on interaction.
Working
alongside leaders means playing a part in reaching shared goals; the idea sits
at the heart of followership (Kelley, 1992; Chaleff, 2009). Inside schools and
educational institutions, it isn’t just staff who follow; students do too,
shaping choices and rules through their involvement. Because teachers speak up,
step forward, or join group work, they help schools run better (Uhl-Bien et
al., 2014). When those following struggle, though, trust weakens, teamwork
shrinks, and progress slows down.
Even
so, followership gets little attention in most leadership theories, especially
within school management. Because of this, looking closer at how followers
shape leader performance makes sense. Their dynamic matters more than is often
acknowledged. With that in mind, this study turns toward understanding
followership's role in shaping effective leadership inside education settings.
Social Exchange and
Leader-Member Relations Theory.
According
to the Social Exchange Theory (Hollander, 1978), leadership is an interaction where
leaders and followers constantly exchange different resources such as support,
obligations, trust, and other factors. According to the notion, the quality of
the relationship between school leaders and followers is always improving as a
result of the cooperative effort on both sides. Leaders who offer advice,
encouragement, and acknowledgment are more likely to motivate followers to
devote themselves to their schoolwork.
Furthermore,
the concept of leader-follower interaction is the Leader-Member Exchange Theory
(LMX), proposed by Graen & Scandura in 1987. The LMX approach centers on
the relationship between leaders and followers based on the nature of their
one-to-one interactions. As the theory says, there exists a range of different
leader-member exchanges, and these are classified into either high or
low-quality exchanges. The high-quality LMX relations involve trust, mutual
respect, open communication, and obligation that lead to better follower
performance and increased organizational commitment.
Such
theories are highly relevant in studying the notion of educational leadership
because they emphasize that the investigation should focus on the interaction
between two parties in an organization rather than the characteristics of a
leader. The application of Social Exchange Theory and LMX Theory demonstrates
that excellent school leadership is achieved by consistent involvement,
trust-building, and influence between the leader and the followers.
Followership Styles and
Behaviors
The
success of leadership in education settings depends not only on the visions and
methods used by leaders but also on the personality types and behavior of the
followers. According to Kelley (1992), depending on how independently one
thinks and actively participates in the process, there are five follower types:
passive, conformist, alienated, pragmatic, and exemplary. These five types
demonstrate that there is no homogeneous category of followers who all relate
to the leadership in the same way.
Research
has found that qualities of good followers, such as critical thinking and active
participation, correlate positively with self-efficacy, organizational
commitment, and job satisfaction (Blanchard et al., 2009). In contrast, passive
followers may interfere with creative efforts and the progress of the organization. As
Kastle and Kniffin (2021) argue, followers are important to organizational
success and often the ones responsible for most organizational outcomes. It
therefore follows that research on followership should extend to educational
organizations, as this would enhance the discourse on leadership by recognizing
the contributions of followers in organizational development and leadership
effectiveness.
In
educational institutions, the nature and characteristics of followership become
important in influencing the effectiveness of leadership since they determine
how followers interact with their leaders’ vision. The exemplary style of
followership can be distinguished by its level of engagement and proactiveness,
where competent people make efforts to improve the curriculum to achieve better
results among students.
Task-oriented
and autonomous followers ensure continuous achievement in daily processes;
however, alienated followers, despite their expertise, stay detached from
organizational activities since they had previously experienced some
difficulties. Conformist followers show a high degree of loyalty and harmony
within organizations, although sometimes they lack an independent approach to
work. In addition, passive followers make little contribution to the success of
an organization, requiring continuous control by leaders. On the other hand,
proactive behavior based on idea-sharing, ethical criticism of instructions,
commitment, adaptability, and teamwork can serve as essential practices to
translate leadership objectives into tangible achievements.
Followers as Individuals.
The
education level and experience of the followers, as well as their performance
and personality qualities, all have an impact on the connection between leaders
and followers. First and foremost, followers' educational background has an impact
on their knowledge of communication strategies and compliance with the leader’s
directions. An increase in education levels results in improved critical thinking
skills, decision-making participation, and interaction with the school
administration. Second, employment experience influences followership because
it promotes self-confidence and competence.
Furthermore,
job performance is an important factor in leader and follower interactions.
High-performing employees are frequently given extra tasks and increased independence,
which improves respect, trust, and communication between leaders and followers
(Podsakoff et al., 2000). On the other hand, regular bad performance can lead
to tension and limited involvement in the partnership. Furthermore, the power
among followers, whether formal or informal, can affect an organization's
relationships because individuals with expertise, leadership skills, or strong
social networks can shape collective decisions and influence how leaders use
the authority.
Finally,
there is a significant effect of personality characteristics on working
relationships. The personality traits of openness, conscientiousness,
agreeableness, and emotional stability contribute to followers' relations with
the leader in solving conflicts and addressing any problems. The Differences in
individual qualities like education, experience, productivity, authority, and
personality affect the effectiveness of interaction within the organization or
group. Understanding these factors will help leaders change their style and
improve their effectiveness.
Conclusion
In conclusion, followership behaviors and styles play an
important role in determining how successful the leaders will be in the
learning organizations. The nature of the followership, whether passive,
conformist, or excellent, plays an important role in the impact of the
effectiveness of the leaders in visions and innovations in the organization,
even though the focus has always been on leadership.
In
education organizations, followership is what makes leaders work well. Teachers
and staff take the leader's ideas and turn them into real results, like better
student success or stronger teams. They don't just follow orders. They think,
change, and improve the plans every day in teaching or office work. This turns
big goals, like new programs, into wins like higher performance scores or
better group outcomes.
Followers who do well help create a sense
of responsibility, which is important in learning. These followers stand out
because they are involved and think critically on their own. On the other hand,
followers who are not involved or who do not participate may actually destroy
any form of leadership and affect its growth. Learning centers can ensure that
leaders and followers work together to accomplish common goals by acknowledging
followership as a determinant in leadership effectiveness. Ultimately, good,
caring, and dedicated followers mean ensuring that leadership is a group
process, and not an individual one.
In educational organizations such as the Department of Education in the Philippines, it is vital to foster good relationships between leaders and followers, given the current
hierarchies. It becomes easier for schools to attain success when educators and
employees are encouraged to engage actively and make significant contributions
to the school’s growth.
Recognizing followership as a
determinant of leadership effectiveness changes how one sees a group success,
placing the follower at the center as someone who participates in the process
rather than just being acted upon by the leader. In educational institutions
striving for excellence, the development of followership is essential for effective
leadership.
References:
Blanchard, A. L., Welbourne, J., Gilmore, D., & Bullock, A. (2009).
Followership styles and employee attachment to the organization. The Psychologist-Manager Journal.
Chaleff, I. (2009). The courageous follower: Standing up to and for our leaders (3rd ed.). Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Graen, G. B., & Scandura, T. A. (1987). Toward a psychology of dyadic organizing. In L. L. Cummings & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 9, pp. 175–208). JAI Press.
Hollander, E. P. (1978). Leadership dynamics: A practical guide to effective relationships. Free Press.
Kastle, S., & Kniffin, L. (2021). Chapter 3: Followership. In the Introduction to Leadership Concepts Handbook.
FHSU Digital Press.
Kelley, R. E. (1992). The
power of followership: How to create leaders people want to follow and
followers who lead themselves. Doubleday.
Northouse, P. G. (2022). Leadership:
Theory and practice (9th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Podsakoff, P.
M., MacKenzie, S. B., Paine, J. B., & Bachrach, D. G. (2000).
Organizational citizenship behaviors: A critical review of the theoretical and
empirical literature and suggestions for future research.
Uhl-Bien, M., Riggio, R. E., Lowe, K. B., & Carsten, M. K. (2014).
Followership theory: A review and research agenda. The Leadership Quarterly.
https://maddenwiped.com/q9h97sj5?key=23b279e99ed6a529a30f577cdce2aeb9 https://maddenwiped.com/q9h97sj5?key=23b279e99ed6a529a30f577cdce2aeb9