The power of followers: how follower behavior influences the leadership process

Leadership has traditionally been viewed as a top-down process, with an emphasis on leader traits, behaviors, and influence. This dissertation challenges that paradigm by placing followers—specifically their resistance behaviors—at the center of the leadership process. Through three empirical studies, the research explores how subordinate resistance shapes leadership dynamics, how leaders cope with such resistance, and what psychological mechanisms drive leaders’ functional or dysfunctional reactions to challenging follower behavior. In doing so, the dissertation advances a follower-centric perspective on leadership and contributes to a more balanced and dynamic understanding of leader–follower interactions. Paper I introduces a novel typology of subordinate resistance as perceived by leaders. Drawing from two complementary studies—a qualitative topic modeling analysis of leader narratives and a quantitative survey on the prevalence and antecedents of resistance—the paper identifies multiple resistance types ranging from subtle noncompliance to open defiance. These types differ in intentionality, visibility, and disruptiveness, offering a granular view of follower behavior beyond passive dissent. Findings show that resistance is a frequent and multifaceted phenomenon and is often shaped by contextual, relational, and personal factors. Paper II investigates how leaders cope with subordinate resistance. Employing three studies—a qualitative interview-based exploration, a scale development effort, and a scenario-based experiment—this paper develops and validates a framework of leader-specific coping strategies. Leaders deploy a range of emotion-focused and problem-focused strategies, including proactive communication, distancing, reframing, and confrontational responses. The results reveal that the effectiveness and adaptiveness of coping mechanisms depend on the type of resistance encountered and the leader’s dispositional coping style. This paper contributes to leadership and occupational stress research by highlighting coping as a dynamic, situation-specific process. Paper III extends the focus to entitled employee behavior, examining how leaders’ cognitive appraisals mediate their responses. Drawing from challenge–hindrance stressor theory, this paper proposes and tests a model wherein leaders’ appraisal of entitlement as a challenge (rather than a hindrance) predicts more constructive reactions, such as coaching or boundary-setting. Across three experimental studies, the findings confirm that leaders who frame entitled behavior as an opportunity for growth are more likely to respond functionally. Conversely, threat or hindrance appraisals increase the likelihood of avoidance or retaliation. The paper offers novel insights into how cognitive framing can enable leaders to transform difficult follower behavior into developmental moments. Together, these three papers provide a theoretically rich and empirically grounded account of how followers actively shape leadership processes. The dissertation makes several key contributions. First, it conceptualizes subordinate resistance as a form of follower agency rather than mere dysfunction. Second, it introduces a structured understanding of how leaders interpret and manage resistance, with implications for leadership training and organizational support. Third, it advances appraisal theory within leadership research by showing how subjective interpretations of follower behavior can override objective behavior characteristics in driving leader response. This work closes with practical recommendations for leaders and organizations. Leaders are encouraged to develop flexible, context-sensitive coping strategies and to engage in reflective appraisal processes. Organizations are urged to support leader development programs that include training in follower interaction, emotion regulation, and cognitive reframing. Ultimately, this dissertation repositions followers as powerful agents in the leadership process and invites a reexamination of what it means to lead in the face of resistance.