The concept of followership in higher education has been given limited attention despite the fact that followers are key players in the follower/leader equation and that leadership is increasingly seen as vital to improving the student learning experience. This paper explores this concept, reporting on the findings of a qualitative study underpinned by a socioconstructivist framework. Thirty-eight narratives describing the experience of being a follower and interacting with a formal leader were collected from academic teachers in seven institutions worldwide and analysed using inductive content analysis. The richness of the narratives collected illustrates the intricate relationship formed by the followership/leadership interaction. The results affirm the premise that just as teachers are defined by their students' learning, leaders are defined by their followers' engagement. However, some teachers also display a strong reluctance towards the very idea of being a follower in academia where critical and independent thinking form the backbone of all practices. Negotiation, responsibility and mutual respect appear essential aspects of any form of followership/leadership interaction as it directly or indirectly influences student learning and
This document is the author's post-print version, incorporating any revisions agreed during the peer-review process. Some differences between the published version and this version may remain and you are advised to consult the published version if you wish to cite from it.
Within the changing tertiary environment, research activity and performance are coming under greater pressure and scrutiny. External policy and funding directives are resulting in revised institutional objectives, requiring variations to organizational structures and processes. These changes impact on the relationship between the institution and the individual. Institutional executive provide benchmarks for revised activity and performance, while academic staff respond to new internal directives and accountabilities by reprioritising their responsibilities. At the same time, there will inevitably be an informal evaluation of the resourcing and support provided for staff as they experience the institutional push to attain greater research outputs. Within this dynamic environment there is the potential for tensions and negative outcomes if interactions are not carefully directed. The implications for leadership are obvious. What is less evident is whether the strategic intent of the institution resonates through the institution in alignment with the development of a supportive research culture.
This article explores the experiences of a group of established academic staff in New Zealand and the United Kingdom, as they undertake a doctorate in their home institutions. Our interest is in how individuals negotiate this dual status from a cultural historical activity theory (CHAT) stance which explores how rules, tools, community and divisions of labour, and interacting activity systems, shape doctoral experiences. The focus in this article, having analysed their detailed narrative accounts, is on how academics experience three interdependent activity systems: those surrounding the thesis, the institutional context, and the home-life spheres. Issues related to time, workload and supervision issues, variability in collegial support and impact on personal priorities and time emerged. There is a range of particularitiesfrom easy access to resources/supervisors, to inflexible institutional regulationsapplicable to this group of doctoral candidates. Negotiating life as an academic with concurrent doctoral candidature provides positive outcomes in terms of teaching, research confidence and general personal and professional development. However, a range of difficulties can also be encountered, particularly in relation to personal and professional relationships, and workload management.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.