기업의 성공을 위해서는 조직 구성원들의 리더십과 함께 팔로워십도 중요한 요인이다. 그러나 팔로워십에 대한 관심과 연구는 리더십 대비 크게 부진한 상황이다. 특히, 국내의 팔로워십 연구는 고유의 관점을 제안하는 연구가 많지 않은 가운데 미국기업을 기반으로 개발된 Kelley(1992)의 척도를 활용하는 연구가 주를 이루어 왔다. 본 연구는 국내 기업의 구성원을 기반으로 신규 팔로워십 척도를 개발함으로써 팔로워십에 대한 보다 다양한 관점과 논의의 기반을 마련하고자 수행되었다. 팔로워십 측정문항들을 개발한 후 설문을 통해 측정한 373부의 표본을 대상으로 탐색적·확인적 요인분석을 실시했다. 분석 결과 주도적 책임수행, 상생, 진정성, 직무열의, 조직제도 순응, 업무능력, 성실성 등의 7개 팔로워십 역량을 측정하는 38개 문항이 확정되었다. 개발된 척도에 대해 측정동일성 검증을 시행한 결과 형태동일성, 메트릭동일성, 절편동일성 등이 수용됨으로써 기업 구성원의 팔로워십 측정에 활용될 수 있는 척도의 안정성이 확인되었다. 척도에 대한 수렴 및 변별타당도를 검증한 결과 기존 팔로워십 척도와 유의한 수렴타당도가 나타났고, 과업수행, 맥락수행, 변혁적 리더십 등과는 유의한 변별타당도가 나타났다. 이어서 팔로워십 연구들이 준거변인으로서 검증해온 대표적 변인인 정서적 조직몰입과 직무만족을 대상으로 법칙 및 증분타당도를 검증한 결과가 유의하게 나타남으로써, 개발된 척도가 주요 조직 변인을 설명 및 예측할 수 있음이 확인되었다. 이러한 연구결과를 바탕으로 연구의 의의와 제한점, 연구과제 등에 대하여 논하였다.
Both leadership and followership are important for the success of the enterprises. However followership studies have been relatively weak compared to leadership studies. Furthermore, many followership studies in Korea have been dependent on Kelley’s followership scale which was developed and validated in the United States. The purpose of this study is to facilitate diverse viewpoints and research discussions for followership studies in Korea by developing new followership scale based on Korean employees. The study is composed of literature review and two stages of empirical analysis.
The literature reviews cover followership definition, proposed followership competencies and core concepts of major followership studies. In many leadership studies, follower has been granted as same concept of subordinate and followership as a concept which is related with specific position in the hierarchical structure. Recently, however, follower and followership are granted as concepts which are based on the relative role in the each interpersonal interaction. According to this viewpoint, leadership and followership are flexible role-based concepts which are both important to create organizational performance. Considering both leadership and followership are important for organizational performance, current sluggish study of followership is not desirable. By followership scale development, this study intends to promote more active research about followership and contribute more balanced approaches to organizational studies considering both leadership and followership.
Empirical studies are composed of panel study by Delphi method and quantitative study by survey method. Delphi method was carried out for the purpose of selecting major followership competencies which were put into quantitative scale development afterward. Through repeated assessment by the panel, 9 major competencies were selected.
For quantitative study, 44 items for 9 competencies were developed and measured by web-based survey. The data was collected from 389 employees in several companies based in Korea. Furthermore, 373 responses were put into analysis after filtering out inappropriate responses. Through exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, 38 items for 7 core followership competencies were identified. The new followership scale was found to be stable by verification of measurement equivalence including configural invariance, metric invariance and scalar invariance. Construct validity was also supported by verification of convergent validity, discriminant validity, nomological validity and incremental validity.
Followings are theoretical contributions through the empirical analysis. First, the new followership scale was developed based on Korean employees working with local enterprises while many followership studies have been dependent on Kelley’s scale which was developed and validated in the United States. Through incremental validity analysis, the new followership scale proved to have significant incremental ability to predict some important organizational effectiveness variables after statistically controlling Kelley’s scale. Second, new followership scale encompasses a wide range of competencies. Viewpoints and discussions of previous studies which used Kelley’s scale had some limitations due to simple dimensions of the scale. Although usefulness of the scale cannot be determined by the range of the scale, this new scale at least expand the base for the followership research and discussions. Third, new scale tried to focus on unique followership competencies while many previous studies didn’t care much about differentiation between followership and leadership competencies. This is important to strengthen base for followership study considering that organizational studies by leadership viewpoints have been more vigorous than by followership viewpoints.
The limitation of this study is as follows. First, the survey data was collected by convenience sampling method. So some demographic characteristics of the sample like gender and academic background didn’t well proportioned. Second, independent/critical thinking, which is one of the core dimensions of Kelley’s scale, was not selected as one of major followership competencies in Delphi method study. This could be resulted from overlap as a leadership competency in spite of substantial importance as a followership competency. Third, communication skill was selected as one of major competencies in Delphi study but dropped out during exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. This was partly due to methodological characteristics of factor analysis. So followership study including communication skill should be carried out with various statistical methodology.