Followership is leadership.

It was the first follower that transformed a lone nut into a leader.  ~Derek Sivers

Throughout the study of leadership there’s a topic that’s not readily addressed:  followership.  And much of what has been written about followership tends to position it, or to at least imply that it’s secondary or even inferior to leadership.  I recently discovered someone who makes the argument that the opposite is true.

Derek Sivers, in a TED Talk, uses an amateur video to illustrate his theory that leadership is overrated and we should all be spending more time thinking about followership.  I’ll do my best to describe the events in the video. 

The “leader” is a young, shirtless man attending an outdoor concert.  He’s completely uninhibited and gleefully dancing on the grassy hill overlooking the stage.  He continues his very animated and free-flowing routine.  In comes the first follower.  He’s another young man who joins in the unrestrained physical movement that intimately connects them to the rhythm of the music.  This first follower is welcomed and embraced by the leader and now it becomes all about “them.”  Shortly after, a second follower joins the duo and a tipping point occurs.  Now people from the entire crowd are running to join and become a part of what is no longer perceived to be risky or even foolish.  As Sivers points out, these new followers aren’t following the leader.  They may not even know who the leader is.  They are following the other followers.  And a movement is born.

According to Sivers, “it was the first follower who transformed a lone nut into a leader.  There is no movement without the first follower.  The best way to make a movement, if you really care, is to courageously follow and show others how to follow.”

I was recently challenged by someone who proposed an organizational vision to be a follower.  I’ll admit, my first reaction was something like, “What!?  How can being a follower be a vision?!  A vision should state in what way you’re going to be a leader.”  Fortunately, that reaction stayed in my head and was never stated out loud.  After a second or two to process the idea, I changed my reaction to “Why not?!” 

Think about it for a moment.  If we really feel passionate about something, as Sivers says, if you want to create a movement, then be the follower who shows others how to follow.  It’s not about winning and losing; and we’ve probably made “leadership” a little bit too much about being the “best,” and being the “leader.”  If leadership is really about creating followers, then wouldn’t being a first follower exemplify effective leadership?

We could even make this argument biblical.  Jesus, the leader, had 12 disciples.  That’s it, just 12. So in a sense he had 12 first followers.  I certainly don’t claim to be a theologian, but I’ll suggest that without those 12 first followers, a movement would have never been born.  The disciples’ leadership role, as first followers, was critical.

So we have a choice.  We can be a lone nut (which is necessary).  Or, we can be a first follower.  But without both, leadership never happens.