The Links between Followership and the Experiential Learning Model: Followership Coming of Age

Densten, Iain L.; Gray, Judy H

doi:10.1177/107179190100800106

Cited by 15 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The integration of leadership and negotiation literatures enables a more comprehensive understanding of contingent reward to be developed. For example, the negotiation literature more clearly recognises the interdependence between parties that is sometimes ignored in the leadership literature, as demonstrated by the lack of followership research (see Densten and Gray, 2001). Further, negotiation researchers (e.g.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Negotiating extra effort through contingent rewards

Densten

2006

Leadership &Amp; Organization Development Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThis paper aims to examine the validity of contingent reward and its relationship to extra effort and to further advance understanding of the leader/follower performance reward relationship.Design/methodology/approachThe concept of contingent reward has largely remained unchanged since 1985. Consequently, the items of contingent reward were examined in terms of their content validity that was guided by transactional leadership theory, re‐formulated path‐goal theory of leadership, and negotiation theory. Three new contingent reward factors were identified (i.e. framing, clarifying, and rewarding). These were examined using one‐factor congeneric measurement models. Valid factors were identified using a high‐order confirmatory factor analysis to further confirm the structural validity of the three new factors of contingent reward. Finally, structural equation models were calculated to examine the relationships among contingent reward factors and extra effort.FindingsThree distinct factors of contingent reward were identified and their relationships with extra effort was consistent with the integrative negotiation strategies where each factor formed part of a negotiation process. Contingent reward (framing) initiates the negotiation process and directly loads on contingent reward (rewarding and clarifying); contingent reward (framing) did not directly load on to extra effort. Contingent reward (rewarding) supports the negotiation process by loading directly on contingent reward (clarifying). The negotiation process is completed with contingent reward (clarifying) directly loading on extra effort. These three contingent reward factors form a simple negotiation process that highlights several important aspect of the leader/follower reward performance relationship.Research limitations/implicationsThis study uses a cross‐sectional design that means that its findings may not be generalisable to other populations. However, the findings of this study should encourage researchers to appreciate that common leadership behaviour, like contingent reward, may have more complex interrelationships with outcome factors such as extra effort than previously expected.Practical implicationsLeaders should view their use of contingent reward behaviours in terms of a process rather than simply exhibiting a single clarifying contingent reward type behaviour. In other words, leaders need to establish the boundaries (i.e. framing), acknowledge involvement (i.e. rewarding), and then elucidate mutual outcomes (i.e. clarifying). This process should enable leaders to negotiate greater flexibilities and create more momentum within their leader/follower performance reward relationships.Originality/valueThis paper challenges the foundation ideas and empirical pedigree of contingent reward and incorporates advances in theories such as the reformulated path‐goal theory and interpret the behaviours in a broader multi‐disciplinary context, i.e. integrative negotiation strategies.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Negotiating extra effort through contingent rewards

Densten

2006

Leadership &Amp; Organization Development Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, issues such as, who might lead at any one time, of what form that leadership might take and the nature of this leadership in healthcare settings are less frequently addressed. Leadership literature reminds us also that effective leaders need followers (Densten and Gray 2001;Grint 1999). However, no-one leads all the time, and followers are very rarely passive, especially where they are professionals for whom autonomy is a desired attribute.…”

Section: Teams and Teamworkmentioning

confidence: 97%

The policy and the practice: early-career doctors and nurses as leaders and followers in the delivery of health care

Barrow

McKimm

Gasquoine

2010

Adv in Health Sci Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There are increasing calls, from a range of stakeholders in the health sector, for healthcare professionals to work more collaboratively to provide health care. In response, education institutions are adopting an interprofessional education agenda in an attempt to provide health professionals ready to meet such calls. This article considers the nature of and interaction between professional and personal identity, power relations and leadership and followership in relation to the work practices of junior doctors and novice nurses and suggests ways in which understandings from these considerations might influence the educational preparation of students for these professions.

show abstract

“…Because of this, followers have greater knowledge and input on leadership, voicing their opinions, and choosing which leader to follow (Brown, 2003). Densten and Gray (2001) defined followership by examining the follower as a learner. Focusing on a group that they consider neglected, they provided insight into the parallel relationship between teacher-student and leader-follower.…”

Section: Review Of Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Texas FFA Officer Perceptions of Good Followership

Ferrell¹,

Boyd²,

Rayfield³

2013

Journal of Leadership Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines Texas FFA officers' perceptions regarding the traits and characteristics that good followers possess. A content analysis of officer responses to an open-ended question found that these young leaders have a limited level of understanding of what constitutes a good follower. Furthermore, female respondents placed a greater emphasis on supporting the leader and being respectful, whereas male respondents emphasized being a team player. Males also emphasized being involved in the chapter as a desirable trait more often than females. This suggests that females are more focused on ideas that are leadersupportive and males are more action driven. Males focused more on being a team and achievement. The study demonstrates a need to emphasize followership in leader development and education curricula. Youth organizations with similar leadership development programs can better equip their future leaders with the knowledge needed to be a follower-focused leader by teaching them how to identify good followership. As youth organizations become more follower- Journal of Leadership EducationVolume 12, Issue 1 -Winter 2013 175 focused, failure to introduce followership instruction into the leadership classroom is a disservice to students.

show abstract

The Links between Followership and the Experiential Learning Model: Followership Coming of Age

Cited by 15 publications

References 27 publications

Negotiating extra effort through contingent rewards

Negotiating extra effort through contingent rewards

The policy and the practice: early-career doctors and nurses as leaders and followers in the delivery of health care

Texas FFA Officer Perceptions of Good Followership

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About