Early in December, Time produced a special report, its "leadership issue," and began its cover story by writing, "As the November elections stressed anew, America has become vastly suspicious of leaders."
As with most discussions of leadership, Time focused almost entirely on the qualities and challenges facing the individuals who will inspire and lead us. There is very little reflection on what may be at least as important a consideration in the complex social algebra we call leadership. I call it followership.
By this I mean the commitment and ability of people to intelligently, productively, and effectively follow their chosen leaders in ways that balance the leadership equation. Followership is not a second-class grade for those who will never make it to the top. It is a fundamental skill that should be a part of any effective leader's training.
Some of the current cynicism about leadership emanates from a valuable wellspring: in the past two decades, we've become smarter consumers, more wary readers, and more aware about public issues, especially in fields such as education. We have applied higher standards to our leaders with disappointing results; few human beings are flawless.
Leadership in education, especially for those of us involved with public schools, is a much criticized profession—one in which few people can distinguish themselves for long, particularly as they move away from direct service with children and into administration. Urban superintendents are reportedly experiencing average tenures of no longer than three years. This is an extraordinary fact, especially given the reality that educational institutions are slow to change.
The pattern is increasingly familiar in most cities: after a lot of fanfare a new person comes to town, touted as a tutelary saint, who is expected in short order to turn around a complex bureaucracy and change fundamental approaches of teachers, parents, students, media, and community partnership advocates. After a brief honeymoon, the questions begin to gurgle up, first from the most strident advocates and then from the local media: when is everything going to get fixed? Soon the savior becomes the scapegoat, and is ridden out of town on a rail of public frustration.
Superintendents learn to be cautious. Early in their tenures they endorse or even create ambitious plans for systemic improvement, and then they hold their breath and hope to survive while claiming a few victories. The more reasonable course—setting a few well-chosen goals and then having the time and resources to achieve them—is rarely allowed, by internal or external constituencies. There are just too many groups with their own self-interests at stake. As a result, leadership becomes measured more by how much you promise down the road than by the quality of a few well-chosen targets for success. The letdown is inevitable.
In the face of strong community pressure and growing impatience surrounding public schools, more and more communities resemble the revolving doors of a crowded department store with people pushing and shoving to fit into the leadership line, only to be whisked quickly back out onto the street. Superintendents are increasingly required to defend their performance in all aspects of public education, while learning the skills of public relations and media strategy just to stand up against the enormous cynicism surrounding public schooling.
What else do we need to accomplish the job of running schools and school systems?
Both leaders and followers have to expect things to take some time. Staying the course is a phrase that has become politicized of late, but there is still wisdom in it. Patience is a skill of leadership. It is also a virtue for us as followers.
There are organic problems besetting many of our public school systems. They cannot be fixed overnight, and they will require very hard choices if there is going to be any lasting benefit. These challenges will require leaders with thick skins and followers who play their roles well.
We have to put followership on its own pedestal, perhaps not quite as tall as the one for leadership, but with a broader, sturdier base. We need to encourage people to study followership, write books about it, discuss it at workshops, and pay as much attention to it as we currently do to leadership.
James MacGregor Burns wrote an excellent book more than a decade ago with the title Leadership. He espoused the concept of transformational leadership—a style of leading in which ideas are encouraged and developed from all levels—and contrasted it with transactional leadership, or the classic "do it my way, do it yesterday" approach that no follower can deal with effectively for long. We need a treatise on transformational followership as a companion piece.
ASCD is uniquely positioned to help redefine our ideas of leadership in education, and to encourage every professional in our field to recognize the intrinsic value of followership in all of our operations. Every effective leader must possess the skill of followership. Not everyone needs to be a leader.
We have to get beyond the cynical, suspicious, passive-aggressive resistance among people who watch but are reluctant to be actively engaged—the stale remnant of our question authority mantra from the wild '60s. We all have to lead, and follow, or get out of the way.