Followership

Leadership: Theory and Practice

Case 12.3 - Penn State Abuse Scandal

 I can describe the followership at Penn State as ineffective. First, it is important to understand that the leader at Penn State is Mr. Paterno. He was the head coach, and he did an outstanding job of creating a football program and brought national recognition. He had a unique role, and the fans, students, and community trusted him (Northouse, 2009). The followers were Sandusky, Curley, Schultz, and McQueary. The followership was ineffective in that they did not accomplish their goals. Note that followership is not like leadership.  Leadership involves leading a team in a positive direction. However, followership involves being led and also supporting the leader for a good job (Northouse, 2009). An important point to note is that followers do not only follow a leader, but they also observe and also develop leadership ability. For example, in the case study, followers did not consider the leader's role, and they did not care. They did not utilize their thoughts and became accountable to benefit the organization. Note that for leaders to function effectively, followers should open their eyes, and mind to observe how the leader is doing the organization roles (Northouse, 2009). In general, all followers were ineffective since they did not speak up, and they concealed problems.

Using Kelly's typology, both Curly and Shultz have a conformist followership style. This because they very well knew that Sandusky was abusing boys, but they failed to report. They continued to follow the leader's direction and guidance (Northouse, 2009). They failed to disclose child abuse. On the other hand, McQueary has a passive followership style. This is because he did a very good in reporting the suspected child abuse to his immediate supervisor. However,  he could go beyond the law and report the incident to the police. Even though he fulfilled the legal obligation, he did not consider the moral requirement (Northouse, 2009).    Since he knew child abuse is taking place, he could inform the police. He lacked a sense of responsibility, and therefore, he is not an effective follower.

  Regarding the failure of Paterno's program, the leader carries the burden of responsibility. This is because he very well knew about the Sandusky scandal, but he failed to unfold the news to the police (Northouse, 2009). He only did what the law required, but he did not go beyond the law and notify the police. He could follow up, yet this is an issue that needs serious attention. Thus, he failed in his leadership role, and since he was a senior position, he could apply leadership ethics (Northouse, 2009). However, his leadership action was insufficient, yet he was in a position to lead the followers.

 

 

Reference

 Northouse, P. G. (2009). Leadership: Theory and Practice. SAGE Publications Ltd.