it is better to be a follower than a leader
i think it is better to be a follower because a leader has to come up with an imagination and have more responsibilities. they have to make up a plan and thus followers have less duties and they have to follow it.
follower
Side Score: 10
|
 |
leader
Side Score: 21
|
|
|
|
|
Being a leader is riskier than being a follower Not in every sense or in every case. Regarding leading and following, Some people are stuck thinking in terms of power and domination and have trouble thinking of the ways they are both influencable and influential. I think it's good if someone doesn't think of themselves in such limiting terms as "a leader" or "a follower" A leader's over-bloated esteem is largely caused by the "leaders are superior to followers" mentality. It's a way of thinking that is detrimental to broader human dignity. Side: flexible and adaptable
1
point
1
point
1
point
followers can make or break leaders by influencing how the goal of leaders will be achieved or accomplished and if they actually will be accomplished. A bad leader will receive no support from followers and this can lead to his downfall while a leader with good intentions will receive maximum support from his followers; meaning to say that leaders are nothing without followers Side: follower
1
point
being a leader is not for everyone. In fact, being a leader need especial hallmarks like being talent, skilled, knowledgeable, experienced and many more. Generally, there is certainly that groups have tribulations and different difficulties that might come up. So if people want to be a leader in a group, they should be responsible for any action. For instance, whatever, some group member do something wrong at works, which make a group into a huge problem and create tons of problems, assuredly, leaders should take the responsibilities of those mistakes. This trend shows that it is leaders’ liability to handle and resolve the problems, which is not an easy task to do. Side: follower
|
3
points
Anybody that follows, does not think. It takes a person with brains to lead and an even greater mind to lead others in the right direction. Anybody can follow Simon, but there is only one Simon. Simon says argue with this. While I agree, I think it's kind of ironic that you, a Christian, would complain about following (that's what religion is after all, followers following clergy). Side: Leader
Anybody that follows, does not think. Nonsense. As if everyone who follows does so in an uncritical and overly trusting manner. Rather than saying "Anybody that follows, does not think", I think the valid underlying sentiment could be expressed better with something like "People who follow too closely follow blindly" And how about a list of some these great leaders? My opinion is they invariably get esteemed too highly by the likes of people who like to get all up on their nuts calling them "greats" "giants" and other titles that set them above others in some elitist class. Side: flexible and adaptable
To answer the question 'is it better to be a follower or a leader' only sheeps can be sheeps and shephards be shephards. A leader might be more valuable, but that's not the question. Being a leader means you have actually have to be able to lead, not just sit with a crown on your head cough the queen cough. It also means making incredibly tough decisions and having to take responsibility for those actions. Having the respect and/or fear of your followers, and those of other leaders. Being a leader might make you bigger, but it also means bigger problems, responsibilities and downfalls, aswell as the glory etc. It's not as simple as you all think and it's not like TV where you always win. Side: Leader
I believe it is definitly good to have that self confidence and walk ahead of the line. Don't let others tell you where to go and what to do. But it's also not bad to ask for a little help, nobody is perfect, as long as your trust and respect the person that is showing you the way. Side: leader
2
points
2
points
|
