GoKawiilThe best way to think about the question is to stop treating leadership and followership as opposite ends of a hierarchy. Although leadership is often portrayed as a glamorous career destination, being put in a position of power or responsibility is by no means an indicator of your ability to actually lead effectively. In fact, decades of research highlight an uncomfortable and pervasive gap between the leaders we have, and those we actually need. Indeed, some of the traits that help people emerge as leaders appear far less useful once they actually have to lead: narcissism, for example, predicts leadership emergence but not leadership effectiveness.
Is it better to be a good follower or a bad leader?
Why This Matters
The piece challenges the common career assumption that climbing into a leadership role is inherently better than being an excellent contributor, noting that the traits that get people promoted aren't the ones that make them effective once in charge. For an industry that routinely rewards visibility and self-promotion with management titles, it's a useful reminder that leadership potential and leadership performance are different things.
Key Takeaways
- Holding a position of power is not evidence of the ability to lead well.
- Research shows a persistent gap between the leaders organizations have and the ones they need — narcissism, for instance, predicts emergence but not effectiveness.
- Leadership and followership are better treated as complementary skills than as rungs on a hierarchy.
Get alerts for these topics