What are the pros and cons of technological leader versus technological follower as a functional strategy? Do you believe a follower can become a leader? Why or why not? Explain your answer Solution Technological leaders are the people who predict the changes in techology in early, who fosters technological innovation, who understands the technology life cycle clearly, and use all these for benefit of the business. These people takes initiation for commercialization of these technological advances, they link all these with business, manage research & development in technology area and understand technological revolutions. Some of the times, due to early predictions, these people may not able to concentrate on the running technologies and may focus on next trends of technologies. It does not help them to achieve the present and current goals. This kind of attitude will be become a burden to the organization in many ways. If every one be like this and do like this, the regular activities of the business entity may not go further. The followers may not always go with the leaders in this area because of many limitations. Leaders have a freedome to select their activities and to plan their actions, where the followers have some duties and obligations to deliver and perform. In my openion, a follower never becomes a leader. Leadership is a seperate category of peole and they have some raw heridity from their birth only. Leadership is not a skill where can be learned from others or by experience. It is a characteristic which should be inculcate from their innersense. These people have some unique, special, and different ideology than others, and make them to become leaders. Some of the people says that leaders can be made but not born. It is completely wrong, a simple example: Martin Luther King is the first person who fought against the racism in US. But before him and after him many lakhs of people born in the community, why not all these people raise their voice in a strategic and purposeful way? Similarly Mahatma Gandhi, Nelson Mandela, Mother Theressa, all these people born with some special characteristics, when the time comes they show the abilities. But no others done this. What i mean to say is, leaders born with some raw heridity related to leadership, when the time comes they only react and stand first, the remaining, who trust the leaders, become followers. And a follower never becomes a leader..

1. What are the pros and cons of technological leader versus technological follower as a functional
strategy? Do you believe a follower can become a leader? Why or why not? Explain your
answer
Solution
Technological leaders are the people who predict the changes in techology in early, who fosters
technological innovation, who understands the technology life cycle clearly, and use all these for
benefit of the business. These people takes initiation for commercialization of these
technological advances, they link all these with business, manage research & development in
technology area and understand technological revolutions.
Some of the times, due to early predictions, these people may not able to concentrate on the
running technologies and may focus on next trends of technologies. It does not help them to
achieve the present and current goals. This kind of attitude will be become a burden to the
organization in many ways. If every one be like this and do like this, the regular activities of the
business entity may not go further.
The followers may not always go with the leaders in this area because of many limitations.
Leaders have a freedome to select their activities and to plan their actions, where the followers
have some duties and obligations to deliver and perform.
In my openion, a follower never becomes a leader. Leadership is a seperate category of peole and
they have some raw heridity from their birth only. Leadership is not a skill where can be learned
from others or by experience. It is a characteristic which should be inculcate from their
innersense. These people have some unique, special, and different ideology than others, and
make them to become leaders.
Some of the people says that leaders can be made but not born. It is completely wrong, a simple
example: Martin Luther King is the first person who fought against the racism in US. But before
him and after him many lakhs of people born in the community, why not all these people raise
their voice in a strategic and purposeful way? Similarly Mahatma Gandhi, Nelson Mandela,
Mother Theressa, all these people born with some special characteristics, when the time comes
they show the abilities. But no others done this. What i mean to say is, leaders born with some
raw heridity related to leadership, when the time comes they only react and stand first, the
remaining, who trust the leaders, become followers. And a follower never becomes a leader.