追随者和领导者一样重要，它理解追随者的情绪，领导者成为变革的催化剂，是好的领导者。这种优秀领导的一个例子是在印度反殖民斗争中发挥关键作用的甘地(Majumdar & Mukand, 2010)。协调一致的非暴力反抗行动之所以成为可能，是因为甘地对那些将成为他追随者的人的精神状态的理解，因为他们为摆脱殖民政权而进行了长达数年的自由斗争。领导是有效的，因为方式;甘地能够吸引忠实的追随者。这里的优秀领导是领导特质和追随者理解的结合。在政治领导的背景下，好的领导是通过这种方式获得追随者的支持，从而带来制度的变革。因此，一个好的领导者将能够吸引追随者，同时分配的努力，确定变革管理的领导。追随者会被一个有活力的领导者所吸引，但领导者自己却被追随者赋予了权力。以甘地为例，他的领导风格当然是有远见的和变革的，并且确实符合当时国家的变革议程。然而，更重要的是追随者的力量，这些追随者的目标和理想与甘地一致，他们从甘地那里获得灵感，但为运动购买了同样多的力量，这应该是定义好领导力的原因。因此，好的领导力从来不是一组具体的特质，而更多的是领导特质与良好的追随能力的结合。与甘地的例子类似，美国前总统奥巴马的政治领袖也可以被纳入其中。奥巴马在他的选举中成功的竞选是一个要求改变(Majumdar & Mukand, 2010)。当时人们想要改变，而奥巴马的领导理念在当时是可以接受的。奥巴马和民众之间形成了一种近乎共生的关系。然而，甘地的领导价值观被认为是一种更大的动力，因为它发生在那个时代，大众媒体还没有发挥那么大的作用，当时是领袖的魅力和灵感，以及高效的追随者的理解和狡猾，引领了印度的自由运动。
Gandhi is a textbook example for transformational leadership. Transformational leadership is all about value and ethics exercised in the context of transformation. Transformational leaders have a strong set of internal values and with these values they are effective in motivating followers to act towards a greater good (Kuhnert, 1994). Idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation and individualized consideration are at the core of transformational motivation, and this work considers these aspects as well as leadership-followership theories to identify how Gandhi is a transformational leader and a very effective one at that.
Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi born and rising in India which fell under British rule in his times was one of the pioneering activists who spearheaded an anti-colonial struggle or the freedom movement for his country. A lawyer by profession, he pursued his degree in law in England. He was known for his diplomatic skills and his ways of reaching out to mass populace. His understanding of the need for change of rule, from colonial to self-rule within his country, and his understanding of people sentiments aided him in bringing out the transformation that made the country one of the largest democracies of free world.
Followers are as important as leaders and it understands the sentiments of followers that leaders become catalysts of change, and good leaders. An example of such good leadership is M.K. Gandhi who played a pivotal role in the anti-colonial struggle in India (Majumdar & Mukand, 2010). Coordinated acts of civil disobedience were possible because how Gandhi understood the mental state of the people who were to become his followers as the struggle for freedom from colonial regime continued over a span of years. The leadership was effective because of the way; Gandhi was able to draw committed followers. The good leadership here was a combination of leadership traits and follower understanding as well. In the context of political leadership, good leadership is about rallying support from followers in such a way so as to bring institutional change. A good leader hence would be able to attract followers and at the same time allocate efforts in identifying change management in leadership. Followers would be attracted to a dynamic leader, but the leader himself is empowered by the followers. In the case of Gandhi, his leadership style was certainly visionary and transformational and did fit the agenda of change for the country at that time. However, more than that it is was the strength through followers whose likeminded goals and ideals being cohesive with Gandhi, and who drew inspiration from Gandhi, but bought just as much strength to the movement should be accounted for when defining good leadership. Good leadership hence is never a set of specific traits, but is more of leadership traits combined with good followership. Similar to the example of Gandhi, the political leadership of ex-President of the United States, Barack Obama could be brought into the picture. Obama’s successful campaign during his elections was one asking for change (Majumdar & Mukand, 2010). People wanted change at that time and the leadership vision of Obama was something they could accept at that time. An almost symbiotic relationship was created between Barack Obama and the people. Leadership values in the case of Gandhi however were considered a much larger momentum because of the time period in which it happened, when mass media did not have that big a role to play, and when it was both the charisma and inspiration of the leader, and the understanding and wiliness of efficient followers that spearheaded the Indian freedom movement.