Untangling what makes a good follower and a good leader
I’m busy, why do I care? You’ve probably been told to “lead from where you are” and that followership is its own form of leadership. Even senior leaders, though, are routinely caught between what they want to do and what their bosses and people want. This post looks at how good leading and good following are largely the same thing.
Main section: 1050 words (4-5 min read)
This post was inspired by reading a review of Colin Powell: Imperfect Patriot, by Jeffrey Matthews, written by Elizabeth Spaulding (here).
Powell has a dizzying resume: The son of West Indian immigrants, he became an Army officer and rose to become a four star general, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, National Security Advisor and Secretary of State. He may best known now for a speech he gave at the UN in 2003 laying out the flawed case for war against Saddam Hussein, an act he regards as a “blot” on his record.
A comment in the review immediately caught my eye (my bolding):
Matthews does not always elaborate on the tension arising from Powell’s attempt to be both a good leader and a good follower. He implies but never outright says that ultimately Powell may have been comfortable with his status as exalted follower.
It’s not hard to see how there could be tensions between the qualities of a good leader and a good follower. Spalding, though, doesn’t say much more than that.
Powell himself offers a clue, though. In 1989, a magazine published his “13 Rules” (reproduced below) which are still recommended reading for junior military members. In his 3rd rule there is this:
Loyalty is disagreeing strongly, and loyalty is executing faithfully.
At first, these seem like contradictions. Diving into it, I think it’s a subtle and powerful guide to effective behavior. The beauty of it is that it works for both leading and following.
In Practice
Powell was a major figure in the run up to the second Gulf War. The bare bones are that he participated vigorously both in the debate about whether to go to war and moving forward. From the review:
[I]f we take Powell at his word about what he knew and said at the time, then he rejected thin single-sourcing and arguments without facts...and relied instead on seemingly verifiable facts and logical inferences. For many...the question of going into Iraq to remove Saddam Hussein was a matter of when, not if, and broad bipartisan support followed Powell’s U.N. speech. With the information he had and the position he held, Powell can be judged accountable for an excessively narrow focus on weapons of mass destruction [but not systemic failures.]
These was a supremely difficult situation: high stakes, enormous pressure and ambiguous information. We can fault Powell for his role in the outcome of war, but not for failing to try to do the right thing: balancing disagreeing strongly but executing faithfully.
Is Powell’s advice about loyalty best suited to leading or following? Both. The difference between acting like a good leader and a good follower is in the situation, not the substance.
To see why, let’s probe a little more deeply into that line from Powell’s 3rd rule.
What does it mean to “disagree strongly” and when is it appropriate?
In the military an order must be lawful to be obeyed--officers are obligated to speak out when they think it isn’t. Effective officers also learn to clarify when orders are legal but unclear. The more important the issue, the stronger the questioning. Easier said than done sometimes.
“Disagree strongly” might be better understood as “communicate openly.” Most of us love the idea of speaking truth to our bosses’ power. This is something organizations celebrate in principle, if not always in practice.
But leadership runs both up and down. So healthy leadership means we also need to accept it when others speak their truth to our power. It can take just as much courage not to flinch when our ideas or acts are questioned as it does to raise problems with others.
This is very hard for most of us. We are often products of selection and promotion systems which flatter us, implicitly or explicitly, and create expectations of our present and future worth on past accomplishments--the things we’ve gotten right. Hearing you’re wrong, whether it’s from above or below, is not a comfortable thing.
But it’s necessary for us to embrace it. Incidentally, if you’re a leader and don’t get candid feedback from below you should be worried. To quote Powell again:
“The day [subordinates] stop bringing you their problems is the day you stopped leading them. They have either lost confidence that you can help them or concluded that you do not care. Either case is a failure of leadership.”
Confidence and trust work both up and down the chain of command. Knowing when to listen and when and how to speak is equally important going up and down.
How do we “execute faithfully?”
In theory when we have concerns we speak up, our input is considered, and if the outcome isn’t morally or legally putrid we get in line and move out. In practice, this can be super hard--a built-in source of tension between the leader and follower roles.
I bet Powell picked “faithfully” on purpose. Keeping faith with someone or something implies doing what’s needed, not easy. We rarely have the luxury of “executing-only-what-I-100%-agree-with.” Try that out and watch things break down quickly.
The right outcome is that we’re always listened to, not that we always get our way. There are larger causes, perspectives that are valid and important even though they aren’t ours. This is as true for leadership as it is for followership.
This does not mean accepting everything. At some point, the burden of going against our instincts, ethics or morality gets overwhelming. The best course at that point for most people will be to look for an exit--preferably an honest and honorable one. But that should be rare, and a last resort.
When do we lead and when do we follow?
Both, always. No one has a span of responsibility so small they can’t set a good example for someone else. And no one has a job so big that they answer to no one. We lead and follow all the time.
The behavior that is good for us as a follower prepares and strengthens us as leaders. Good leaders, in turn, reflect and apply the same principles they want applied to them as followers. One hand, as it were, truly washes the other.
In both roles, we have to get outside ourselves and our desires, but if we can we can do that--act humbly and responsibly--we have a set of powerful, principled tools.
“Powell’s Rules:
1.It ain’t as bad as you think. It will look better in the morning. This rule reflects an attitude and not a prediction. I have always tried to keep my confidence and optimism up, no matter how difficult the situation. Things will get better. You will make them better.
2.Get mad, then get over it. I’ve worked hard over the years to make sure that when I get mad, I get over it quickly and never lose control of myself.
3.Avoid having your ego so close to your position that when your position falls, your ego goes with it. Accept that your position was faulty, not your ego. Loyalty is disagreeing strongly, and loyalty is executing faithfully.
4. It can be done! Don’t surround yourself with instant skeptics. At the same time, don’t shut out skeptics and colleagues who give you solid counterviews.
5. Be careful what you choose. You may get it. Don’t rush into things.
6. Don’t let adverse facts stand in the way of a good decision. Superior leadership is often a matter of superb instinct. Often, the factual analysis alone will indicate the right choice. More often, your judgment will be needed to select from the best courses of action.
7. You can’t make someone else’s choices. You shouldn’t let someone else make yours. Since ultimate responsibility is yours, make sure the choice is yours and you are not responding to the pressure and desire of others.
8. Check small things. Success ultimately rests on small things, lots of small things. Leaders have to have a feel for small things—a feel for what is going on in the depths of an organization where small things reside. The followers, the troops, live in a world of small things. Leaders must find ways, formal and informal, to get visibility into that world.
9. Share credit. People need recognition and a sense of worth as much as they need food and water. Share the credit, take the blame, and quietly find out and fix things that went wrong. Whenever you place the cause of one of your actions outside yourself, it’s an excuse and not a reason.
10. Remain calm. Be kind. In the “heat of the battle”—whether military or corporate—kindness, like calmness, reassures followers and holds their confidence. Kindness connects you with other human beings in a bond of mutual respect. If you care for your followers and show them kindness, they will recognize and care for you.
11. Have a vision. Be demanding. Purpose is the destination of a vision. It energizes that vision, gives it force and drive. It should be positive and powerful, and serve the better angels of an organization.
12. Don’t take counsel of your fears or naysayers. Fear is a normal human emotion. It is not in itself a killer. We can learn to be aware when fear grips us, and can train to operate through and in spite of our fear. If, on the other hand, we don’t understand that fear is normal and has to be controlled and overcome, it will paralyze us and stop us in our tracks. We will no longer think clearly or analyze rationally. We prepare for it and control it; we never let it control us. If it does, we cannot lead.
13. Perpetual optimism is a force multiplier. Perpetual optimism, believing in yourself, believing in your purpose, believing you will prevail, and demonstrating passion and confidence is a force multiplier. If you believe and have prepared your followers, the followers will believe.
”