Wiki contents


2019 Learning journals
2018 Learning journals
2015 Learning journals
2014 Learning journals
2013 Learning journals

Smartsims Support Centre

Blog updates

Recently Updated

Recent updates

Recently Updated

All updates

Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

This week was the first full week of working in groups. It proved to be a great opportunity to get to know the members of the team and start figuring out strategies for the semester of mikes bikes, and also making decisions for the first practice rollover next week. In terms of learning, I really enjoyed and found value in this week’s reading in praise of followers (Kelley, 1988) as I personally identify myself as a natural follower within any team situation. Overall it reinforced the idea that followers are equally as important as leaders as they are essentially the army of the team, and was a nice change to read about leadership with a strong focus on followers as opposed to the leaders themselves. Even in my team situation at work, this reading gave me theoretical validity for the work I do as a contribution to a shared goal. I think many managers, especially those who are in charge of people working in low skill jobs are only extrinsically motivated by work, which is not always the case. From this reading I learnt the behavioural dimensions scale which measures the type of worker’s tendencies at work and in a team. These most likely predict which motivators will relate to them the most. These were the independence/critical thinking scale and the passive/active scale. If a worker is passive and scores low on the critical thinking scale, they are more likely to do a task and then stop and less likely to use their initiatives. If they are critical thinkers who actively do work and use initiative, they should be treated accordingly. My one question from this is how is it measured?  Ineffective leaders are mentioned in this text and no real method of measurement except plain judgement is noted. If a leader or manager is deemed inefficient, how can they effectively judge the character of workers, let alone find successful means of motivation.


Kelley, R. E. (1988). In praise of followers. Harvard Business Review, 66(6), 142--148


  1. Hello Lauren,

    I too studied the Kelley reading this week but took an opposite approach to you as I said that why do we need to follow people who assume the 'Leadership' role and why can't we be who we are. From what I gathered you are in a low skill working environment, if that is true then I myself are in the same position as you but I feel that if you are a follower then you could move up into a leadership position taking the role of a manager, and use your university courses to help develop yourself into a leader.

    It was interesting to read about the behavioural dimensions scale you talk about and how they relate to independence and passive. If you had more time then you could have spoken about how these motives affect you and if they didn't affect you then why not. It would build up for a stronger learning journal. I know that you were taking the point from a followers angle, however to build on different theorist is a good way to analyse the greater issue when it comes to following so relating the leadership journals may have been helpful

    Some question you may want to think about if you do in fact want to become a leader: how can I move myself from a follower into a leader? will there be followers like myself so do I need to lead from the front? do you feel there is a way to measure leadership?

    All the best!


  2. This reading reflection was a good summary of what you learnt from the readings this week but I felt as if it could have done with a lot more depth. In terms of Bloom's taxonomy I felt as if this reading only covered the first few levels of knowledge, comprehension, and application. For example, you said "I think many managers, especially those who are in charge of people working in low skill jobs are only extrinsically motivated by work, which is not always the case". To elaborate on this you should be writing why you think many managers are only extrinsically motivated by work.

    Additionally, I think we're supposed to follow the structure for reflection given by Daudelin in the first weeks readings. That is the problem articulation, analysis, formulation and testing of a tentative theory to solve it, and action/decision. The point given in that reading is that true learning only occurs if something had changed the way you approach a problem or situation. You should definitely be following this structure as it will help a lot more when it comes to writing the 80% assignment (yikes) at the end of the semester.