The entire edifice of the concept of leadership is based upon the foundation of the presence of necessary followership. Without followers, there can be no leadership. Leadership and followership are not restricted to individuals but also encompass principles, norms, values, and societal standards. Both are expected to uphold these fine ideals without blemish or compromise.

We, as a nation, are an extraordinary lot; we have 240 million leaders, but no followers. There isn’t a crisis of leadership, but rather a wholesale bankruptcy of followership. As individuals, we pay scant respect to leadership or even the ideals associated with honourable standards of society. Regrettably, it is these millions of leaders who, for the last seventy-seven years, have been unable to lead and govern their own selves. If they had their way, we would have an equal number of political parties, each attempting to outwit the other. The quality of followers is the primary determinant of the quality of leadership. A follower today is a leader tomorrow. If the follower lacks quality, then the leadership to arise will be of less than the desired quality.

To lead others, it is a prerequisite that we first lead ourselves. By leading oneself, a base of followers can be created who are cognisant of the significance of adhering to values and principles. From such a pool of people, subsequent leadership can emerge that will truly represent the followers.

Where and when do leaders emerge? Leaders must rise from the stock of enlightened followers. This is true of both political and corporate leadership. All parliamentarians are “followers” who select from amongst themselves an individual to be the leader. The one leading today would necessarily have been a good follower in previous years. Through this process, the leader recognises his or her own strengths and weaknesses, while the followers are also aware of their inadequacies. This enables both the leader and the followers to know each other extremely well in terms of the skills they possess or lack.

It is this line of thought that has popularised the concept that the quality of people directly influences the type of leadership that will prevail. As the quality of people is, so shall the leadership be—a true reflection and representative of the quality of people and society.

The management of a nation or a business entity demands certain skills and attitudes that must be pronounced in leaders. However, there are some basic and fundamental traits that anyone claiming leadership must demonstrate in their actions; this is imperative.

Leaders, to create an aura around themselves, often indulge in deliberate distancing from the people they lead or wish to lead. This is the single most important trait that conveys an overflowing sense of insecurity in the leadership. Consequently, with limited knowledge of the true character of their leaders, followers often idealise them for mostly the wrong reasons and rarely for the right ones. This attitude is prevalent in both political and business sectors.

At a minimum, followers expect their leaders to be honest and truthful. Whether meeting a low-ranking officer or a five-star general, their attitude should not change. They expect to see a strong-willed individual with no blemishes on their character and integrity—a person with a vision and a dream, driven by inexhaustible passion to do good for others, not for personal or familial gain. Any leader who exercises authority to pursue personal benefits does so at the cost of their personal reputation.

A humble leader avoids the spotlight and centre stage and is always confident enough to take a step back. Lee Kuan Yew, the architect of today’s vibrant Singapore, is a famous and relevant case in point. From being Prime Minister, he stepped down to make way for the younger generation, while he chose for himself the honourable title of ‘Senior Minister’ in the cabinet, always willing and available to offer guidance and advice.

Leaders must remain conscious of the need to observe strict discipline and righteousness in their personal lives. No ordinary person in the West, particularly across the Atlantic, would find it odd that a compatriot should sunbathe on a friend’s yacht, nor would eyebrows be raised if a scantily-clad model is found sitting nearby. But if that person is a presidential candidate, the ordinary American is unyielding. The behaviour that is acceptable for an ordinary person becomes unsuitable for a candidate seeking the presidency. In the quest for such an extraordinary office, followers only applaud leaders who understand that they cannot survive with indiscretions. To achieve the extraordinary, the ordinary must be jettisoned. Senator Gary Hart, who had the talent and charisma to pave his way to the White House, had to abandon his quest for the presidency due to such behaviour.

Followers expect exceptional character traits in their leaders. So, if during the Covid era, the Prime Minister throws parties at 10 Downing Street, he is made to answer for violating the very orders issued under his signature. Leaders should be courageous and brave but must never indulge in adventurism.

Some political leaders have gotten away without punitive action for their indiscretions in the past. The Kennedy brothers’ involvement with the then-famous Hollywood star, Marilyn Monroe, is a prime example. In today’s world, dominated by uncontrollable social media, such behaviour would be exposed in no time. Reputations can now be destroyed under the relentless scrutiny of cameras and social media at the speed of light.

Followers place their faith and trust in their leaders. Every word spoken and every action taken by a leader is closely examined and remains under the floodlights of the followers. A leader who flaunts designer items while talking about poverty and malnutrition is either incredibly poor in judgement, or the followers are clever enough to stomach the hypocrisy. The gap between words and deeds renders the leader suspect and untrustworthy.

Followers trust their leaders because trust is akin to truth. However, discerning followers also realise that trust can be the mother of all deceits. To avoid falling victim to misplaced trust, Shakespeare’s words in All’s Well That Ends Well—‘love all, trust a few’—serve as a poignant reminder of human nature’s duplicity.

Corporate leaders, too, must demonstrate managerial skills. They must be visionary, provide clear direction, and have the tenacity to roll up their sleeves and join their followers as equals in the endeavour. Followers create leaders, and leaders provide direction to followers.

Sirajuddin Aziz
The writer is a senior banker and freelance contributor.