What is the difference between Followership and Servant Leadership?
At first glance, it may seem that there is not much difference between Followership and Servant Leadership. After all, both concepts focus on the leader-follower relationship. However, there are some key distinctions between these two approaches.
Followership generally refers to the role of the follower in supporting and assisting the leader. The follower provides assistance and advice to the leader, but ultimately the leader makes the decisions. In contrast, Servant Leadership focuses on the leader serving the needs of the followers. The leader works to meet the needs of followers and help them reach their potential. This approach puts more emphasis on developing people and creating a supportive environment for growth.
There are several key differences between Followership and Servant Leadership:
– Followership generally focuses on the follower assisting the leader, while Servant Leadership focuses on the leader serving the needs of the followers.
– Followership is typically more hierarchical, with the leader making decisions and the follower supporting those decisions. Servant Leadership is more collaborative, with the leader working to meet the needs of followers.
– Followership often involves giving advice and guidance to the leader, but ultimately the leader makes decisions. In contrast, Servant Leaders work to develop people and help them reach their potential.
– Followership can be more passive, with followers waiting for direction from the leader. Servant Leadership is more proactive, with leaders working to create a supportive environment for growth.
The phrase “all leaders are followers, but not all followers are leaders” is frequently used to demonstrate the distinction between servanthood and following. Leadership and following are two separate words, but neither can exist alone. Epitropaki et al. (2017) point out that leadership is an art and that it takes time for someone to gain experience and exercise authority. Followership, on the other hand, is the art of learning to lead by studying those in positions of power.
Followership is, therefore, a critical aspect in leadership since it is the foundation on which leadership is built (Epitropaki et al., 2017). Followership skills are also necessary for aspiring leaders to have so as to be able to make sound decisions and exercise authority when need be.
Servant leadership is based on the philosophy that the leader exists to serve the followers. The servant leader puts the needs of others first and strives to meet their needs while also working towards the common goal. This type of leadership can be seen as selfless since the leader’s main focus is on meeting the needs of others without expecting anything in return.
Servant leaders are usually humble and always ready to lend a helping hand whenever possible. On the other hand, followership is about giving the leader the support they need to be successful. Followers are expected to have faith in the leader and their ability to steer the team towards the right direction. Followers also play an important role in providing feedback to the leader so as to help them improve their leadership skills.
There are a few key differences between servant leadership and followership. Servant leadership is more focused on others while followership is more focused on the leader. Followership is also more task-oriented while servant leadership is more relationship-oriented. Lastly, servant leaders are usually more effective when it comes to leading change while followers are more effective when it comes to implementing change.
The two leadership styles, servant and followership, have significant distinctions and parallels. For example, in both cases, one must be patient, courteous, and aware of oneself and others around them. While followers are expected to respect those who are in command, servant leaders should respect those beneath them as well as not take advantage of their positions to achieve their own goals.
Patience is also essential for both servant leadership and followership. In the army, there are a lot of long days and nights with little or no sleep which can frustrate individuals and cause them to lash out. A good leader or follower needs to be able to keep calm under pressure and not let the environment get the best of them.
Lastly, self-awareness is a critical aspect for both servant leadership and followership. Followers need to be aware of their surroundings in order to know when their leader needs help and when they should step back. Servant leaders need to be aware of how their actions are being perceived by those around them in order to ensure that they are not crossing any lines.
While there are many similarities between servant leadership and followership, there are also a few key differences. One of the biggest differences is that servant leaders are more focused on the needs of those around them while followers are more concerned with their own needs. Servant leaders need to be able to put the needs of their team above their own in order to ensure that everyone is successful.
Followers, on the other hand, may be more likely to take shortcuts or cut corners in order to get ahead. Another key difference is that servant leaders are expected to take on more responsibility than followers. This is because servant leaders are responsible for not only their own actions but also the actions of those beneath them. Followers, on the other hand, are only responsible for their own actions and do not have the same level of accountability.
Overall, both servant leadership and followership are important roles in the army. Each one comes with its own set of responsibilities and challenges. However, the most important thing is that both servant leaders and followers are able to work together in order to achieve the common goal.
In the army, trust entails putting one’s faith in superior leadership and trusting that they will not maliciously and intentionally mislead others. More significantly, both servant leadership and followership imply acknowledging the fact that both leaders and followers are human. As a result, individuals have many difficulties on both good and bad days, therefore tolerance is necessary no matter what position one holds. Individuals interact with each other on a daily basis, therefore mutual respect is essential.
From the above definition, it is possible to identify some key similarities between followership and servant leadership. Firstly, both require individuals to trust those in positions of authority. Secondly, both approaches recognise that everyone has flaws and weaknesses – including leaders. As a result, both Followers and Servants must show tolerance towards others. Finally, both Followers and Servants need to respect one another in order to create a harmonious working or living environment.
While there are some clear similarities between Followership and Servant Leadership, there are also some important differences. Followership is typically seen as a passive role, while Servant Leadership is more proactive. Followers are generally expected to obey orders without question, while Servants are encouraged to challenge their leaders in order to help them become more effective. Followers are also typically less engaged with the overall vision and goals of an organisation than Servants, who are more likely to be actively involved in shaping the direction of the organisation.
Understanding that learning is a continuous process, with no one knowing everything, is essential to being an excellent leader. As a result, in the army, servant leadership necessitates utilizing a pleasant tone and being patient with followers. When they ask people questions, for example, they should not chastise them if they don’t know the response but should instead provide them time and assistance.
On the other hand, followership is all about being able to take orders and follow them strictly. It is a leadership style that is based on the leader having complete control over the followers. Followership in the army, therefore, means being able to take orders from the leader and following them without question.
Comparing these two leadership styles, it is evident that servant leadership is more effective in today’s army. This is because the army has become more complex and there is need for leaders who can be able to guide and teach their followers. Servant leadership provides this type of guidance which helps the follower to be able to understand what they are doing and why it is important. Followership, on the other hand, does not provide this type of guidance and simply relies on the leader having complete control. This can often lead to confusion amongst the followers and can eventually lead to them making mistakes.
Overall, it is clear that servant leadership is a more effective leadership style in today’s army. This is because it provides the necessary guidance and support that is needed in order for the followers to be able to understand their roles and responsibilities. Followership, while still important, does not provide this same level of support and guidance which can ultimately lead to problems within the army.