THE DUTY TO OBEY


If we have courageously but unsuccessfully challenged a leader’s policies, where do we stand in relation to implementing them?

The policies may be different from those we would have chosen; they may be fraught with risks with which we are uncomfortable; we may feel they have negligible chance of success. These are our views—they may or may not be right. The leader may be displaying brilliant prescience, which we do not share. Only time will reveal the outcome. What is our responsibility in this situation?

If we choose to continue being a follower of this leader and if the policies are not morally repugnant to us, we have the responsibility to implement the policies. It takes courage to follow leaders when we are not convinced they are right, courage to truly allow leaders to lead. It is our responsibility to give the policy a chance, to make it work through energetic and intelligent adaptation rather than allow it to fail through literal interpretation or lukewarm execution.

We have the right to challenge policies in the policy-making process; we do not have the right to sabotage them in the implementation phase. In the world of politics, we often hear of “leaks” intended to thwart a policy set by superiors or to forward the policies of a subgroup. Those who sabotage their leader’s efforts are no longer followers; they are opponents.

Each of us has the right to become an opponent. But if we do so covertly, without declaring our opposition, while still holding our position and demeanor as a follower, we create havoc within the organization. We drive trust below a level where the group can remain cohesive. We create the opposite of a groupthink situation. We create factions and internal warfare that can threaten to immobilize or fracture the group and undermine the common purpose.

If we follow too slavishly we contribute to blind groupthink. If we can’t follow at all we contribute to anarchy. If an organization is rife with leaks and acts of internal sabotage of the leader’s policies, a courageous follower needs to look for the underlying reasons:

Is the policy-making process unfriendly to honest, diverse input, encouraging disaffected players to circumvent the process?

Is there lack of sufficient respect in the organizational culture for the policy-making process, and an inclination to nullify its outputs?

Are there one or more players who are truly not willing to follow and unwilling to support team decisions?

If the process for input into decision making is so weak it breeds discontent, we may need to further challenge the leader to open it up. If it is already credible and open we may need to help the leader challenge individuals who are disregarding it or challenge the organizational culture itself to value it more.

Where serious disagreement exists, courageous followers may need to become courageous opponents. In all but the most repressive regimes, however, followers cannot become saboteurs and be called courageous.




The Courageous Follower. Standing Up to & for Our Leaders
The Courageous Follower: Standing Up to and for Our Leaders (2nd Edition)
ISBN: 157675247X
EAN: 2147483647
Year: 2003
Pages: 158
Authors: Ira Chaleff

flylib.com © 2008-2017.
If you may any questions please contact us: flylib@qtcs.net