Leader-Follower Alignment

Let me tell you a quick story to start us off.

A few thousand years ago, the land of Egypt had a bunch of slaves. In fact, there were over 600,000 men, not including women and children. One day, a guy named Moses, walked into the presence of the Pharaoh and demanded that he, the Pharaoh, release the slaves so they could leave Egypt and find somewhere to live freely. Believe it or not, after some incredible events – that included the death of the Pharaoh’s oldest son – this murderer, shepherd, fugitive, slave-born stepson of Pharaoh’s daughter became the leader of these slaves and one of the most celebrated leaders of all time.

So what enabled this non-descript son-of-a-slave to generate the leader-follower alignment needed to get a nation of well over one-million people released from slavery and get them to follow him to a new home-land?

Before we address this question and apply it today, let me ask, “Is it really that important to have alignment between the leadership and the followers?” And, just as importantly, “Why?”

Let’s start by defining a couple of terms. First, we need to understand alignment. It is “a state, condition or position of agreement or cooperation among persons or groups or nations, etc., with a common cause or viewpoint.”

With that term clearly understood, we need to have a definition for a leader. There are a number of definitions used by academes and others to describe leadership, but for our purpose today, we’ll employ the one used by Peter Northouse (2004) from his book Leadership Theory and Practice. He says, “Leadership is a process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal” (p. 3).

First, leadership is a process, which means it is not a trait or characteristic inherent in an individual but a transactional event that occurs between the leader and his/her followers. It implies that the leader affects and is affected by followers. It further emphasizes that leadership is an interactive event; it isn’t a linear, one-way occurrence.

Second, leadership involves influence; without it, leadership does not exist. It is the sine qua non of leadership; it is the main thing.

Third, leadership does not happen in a vacuum; it occurs in groups. This is the context in which leadership takes place and it involves influencing a group of individuals who have a common purpose.

Finally, leadership includes attention to goals – outcome. This simply means leaders focus their energies on directing a group of individuals towards achieving a common task or goal (Northouse, 2004). There must be vision.  Hackett and company (1998) call it the ‘vision thing.’

As the definition states, there is an interaction that occurs between the leaders and the followers that is necessary for accomplishing the goals, the vision of the organization. Without people working with you – the leaders – towards a common purpose, your organization will not accomplish its purposes. As such, you can understand that leadership is clearly a process that is centered on the interactions that take place between leaders and followers.

In leadership study, there is a theory that describes this relationship; it is known as the Leader-Member Exchange Theory. This theory makes the dyadic relationship (simply meaning a relationship between a group of two) between leaders and followers the focal point of the leadership process (Northouse, 2004).

In this theory, the leader forms an individualized, special working relationship with each of his/her subordinates. Besides providing followers the opportunity to take on new roles and responsibilities that enhance the ability of the organization to attain its goals, the leader should nurture high-quality exchanges with the followers. Instead of looking for and focusing on any differences, this model suggests that the leader should look for ways to build trust and respect with all followers, even with those individuals/followers from a different work unit within the organization (Northouse, 2004).

Reading the first four books of the New Testament, we see how Jesus implemented this special dyadic relationship with the Twelve. Although Jesus had many disciples, the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke) specifically delineate the difference between Jesus disciples (all who followed his teachings) and the twelve he chose to follow him. For example, Matthew 26:14, Mark 14:43 and Luke 22:47 describe Judas (the one who betrayed Jesus) as one of the Twelve. John, however, in chapter 18, does not make this distinction.

There was clearly a special relationship Jesus intentionally created and worked at maintaining with The Twelve. And, even within these, Jesus formed yet another level of relationship with three – Peter, James and John – as evidenced in Matthew 17 and other instances where Jesus spent specific time with these three. We also see Jesus spending special time with Peter, i.e. during Peter’s denial of Jesus and specifically when Jesus challenged Peter to “feed my sheep . . . feed my lambs” in John 21. Furthermore, we see evidence of this special dyadic relationship resulting in the formation of the first-century Christian church following Peter’s preaching on the day of Pentecost.

In a study conducted on follower effectiveness, Miller and company (2003) looked at Fiedler’s contingency model and extended the model to include the prediction of follower effectiveness and leader-follower alignment. First, let me explain a little about the contingency model. Fiedler postulated, “Leader effectiveness is determined by the interaction of the leader’s motivational disposition with the situational favorability for leader influence. The model suggest that task-oriented leaders perform more effectively in situations classified as very favorable or very unfavorable, while relations-oriented leaders perform more effectively in situations of moderate favorability” (p. 363).

When Miller and company conducted their research, which again extended Fiedler’s model to include the prediction of follower effectiveness and leader-follower alignment, they concluded, “relations-oriented subordinates will perform better than task-oriented subordinates in situations in which they are either experienced or enjoy good leader-member relations” (p. 363).  This study also confirmed other research that found that the most powerful determinant of situational favorability is leader-member relations. This concept of relationship and alignment between leadership and followership is again emphasized.

Understanding the importance of relationship and alignment between leaders and followers is essential. The necessity of this has been established. How is this accomplished?

Communication, conversation, and dialogue have often been seen as tools for announcing and explaining issues to people and preparing them for eventual change, positive or negative (April, 1999). We tend to use communication as a one-way vehicle for disseminating information to others. Conversation and dialogue, however, allow for the interchange of honest exchanges of thought, ideas, questions and answers. It is during these exchanges that relationships are developed and alignment is reached between leader and follower. There is also a level of trust that is formed – the component vital to successful leadership.

So, back to Moses. Although identified as one of the most celebrated leaders of all time, he had his share of problems; he had to get rid of the army of a persistent Pharaoh, watched his sister be stricken with leprosy for challenging his choice of a wife and his leadership position, watched scores of Israelites die after being bitten by poisonous snakes and by being swallowed up by the earth because of their rebellion, and watched a whole generation die in the wilderness because of their lack of faith and their disobedience.

Did he communicate clearly the goal God set for his people? Yes. Did he have alignment, for the most part? Yes. Did he lead the people to the goal? Yes. Had there been alignment with the followers 100% of the time would the journey have taken less time and the goal attained with less difficulty? Yes. But he did lead the people to the Promised Land!

Remember when you were a kid; did you ever play the game follow the leader (Dalton et. al., 2005)? Your friends and other neighbor kids would all line up toe-to-heal and follow the leader everywhere he/she went; over fences, through bushes, around houses, and through barns and sheds. Everyone had a great time because they all were aligned in their purpose – follow the kid in the front wherever he/she led.

What happened if you were the one in the front of the line and no one followed you? Simply speaking, you weren’t a leader. The same is true in the real life. If a leader has no follows, he really isn’t leading, and thus, isn’t really a leader.

There must be congruent alignment between leaders and followers for the organization to accomplish its purposes. Furthermore, if the leader doesn’t know where he/she is taking the organization, they all will “fall into a pit” as Jesus described in Matthew.

Remember, the most powerful determinant is leader-follower relations and these relations generate leadership-followership alignment. It is this alignment that will enable you and your organization to accomplish its goals.

Bibliography

April, Kurt A. (1999); Leading through Communication, Conversation and Dialogue, The Leadership and Organization Development Journal. Vol. 20, No. 5, pp. 231-241.
Daft, Richard L. Organization Theory and Design, Ninth Edition, Mason; Thomson Corporation, 2007.
Dalton, Catherine M. and Dalton, Dan R. (2005); Corporate Governance: Follow the Leader, Journal of Business Strategy. Vol. 26, No. 1, pp. 8-9.
Ford, J.D. and Ford, L.W. (1995); The Role of Conversations in Producing Intentional Change in Organizations, Academy of Management Review. Vol. 20, No. 3, pp. 541-570.
Krishnan, Venkat R. (2004); Impact of Transformational Leadership on Followers’ Influence Strategies, The Leadership and Organization Development Journal, Vol. 25, No. 1, pp. 58-72.
Miller, R.L., Butler, J. and Cosentino, C.J. (2004); Followership Effectiveness: An Extension of Fiedler’s Contingency Model, The Leadership and Organization Development Journal, Vol. 25, No. 4, pp. 362-368.
Northouse, Peter G. Leadership Theory and Practice, Third Edition, Thousand Oaks; SAGE Publications, Inc., 2004.
Spinks, Nelda and Wells, Barron 1995; Quality Communication: A Key to Quality Leadership. Training for Quality. Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 14-19.