The extent, to which a theory of leadership is focused on either the leader or the followers, Yukl (2002: 16) states, can be a useful way to classify leadership theories. Today’s research methodologies allow for insight into leadership understanding due to the appearance of more fieldwork (for example, Globe Research cited by Ryback, 1998). As Hunt (1999) states, the new leadership paradigm can be compared and contrasted with earlier approaches to leadership understanding. Hunt (1999) states that modern methods of research have been more qualitatively orientated than earlier approaches to leadership research, primarily looking at leadership of organisations as opposed to the earlier research where the predominant interest was lower level. As Yukl (2002: 341) states "attention of many leadership theorists has shifted to executives and top management teams. The shift in focus parallels a rapid growth in the management literature about corporate executives who are transforming their companies to cope with growing international competition." Within leadership research it could be stated there is not much concern for followers' characteristics.

Although the follower is part of the information flow throughout an organisation, it would seem that, on the threshold of 21st century, the studies into the receivers of the organisation communication flow have not been prioritised as worthy of a research topic. Yukl (2000) states that theories that offer a balanced explanation looking at within the process of leader follower interaction could be more informative. With work teams becoming more prevalent (Ryback, 1998) the followers’ contribution on an individual basis to the leadership process seems to be omitted. This would appear an oversight in leadership research.

Research into what constitutes effective leadership does not seem to have any definite answers. There again the challenges faced by leaders in and around effectiveness skills would seem greatly different than the previous century as far as structure of the communication channel is concerned. On the other hand if the structure of the organisation calls for change, would it not follow that the type of communication style would have to duly adapt or change. The 21st century globalisation of business communication flow within companies would have to be to very clear in case of misunderstanding. Goleman (1998) states a case in point: he recalled a minuet about an American businessman. The businessman did not think the Japanese businessmen were going to take up his business offer as they walked out the room. Had he been self-and-other aware he would have known this is customary within Japanese leadership processes and did not affect their decision to accept. Globalisation makes clear communication in the 21st century even more imperative.

For an organisation to communicate with clarity both leaders and followers have to face challenges due to restructuring. Dess and Picken (2000) state that on the threshold of the 21st century, leaders of organisations face a whole new set of management challenges. The globalization of markets and the rapid diffusion of information and communication technologies have transformed the economics of the developed countries of the world. The focus of wealth creation has shifted from capital intensive industries like steel and automobiles to information intensive industries like information services. Dess and Picken (2000) go on to say that the strategic emphasis shifts from the efficient management of mass markets and tangible assets to innovation and the effective utilization of knowledge and human capital resources. They argue that organisations and their leaders must change. That is, Dess and Picken (2000) state that to compete in the information age, firms must increasingly rely on the knowledge, skills, experience and judgement of all their people. The entire organization, collectively, must create and assimilate new knowledge, encourage innovation, and learn to compete in new ways in an ever-changing competitive environment.

Organizational leaders must place less reliance on traditional structures and controls, and focus their efforts on areas such as 'Accumulating and sharing internal knowledge' and 'Gathering and integrating external information'. This type of change in the workforce, as Bass (1998) states, promotes changes in the mix of transformational and transactional needed, with implications for changes in selection, training, and development. Thomas (2002) says that when discussing business leadership the distinction between good management and good leadership is often made. Managers are thought to be the budgeters, the organizers, the controllers - while leaders are the charismatic big-picture visionaries. On the one hand, some great managers struggle with change and fail to be great leaders, while, on the other hand, a great leader might fail to create a sense of stability in an organization and not measure up as a manager.

Thomas (2002) points out that, increasingly, the people who are the most effective are those who are essentially both managers and leaders. Neither can operate successfully without followers. Therefore, it could be argued, theorists who advocate effective leadership in the form of charismatic and transformational characteristics only, now have to take into account, as part of the leadership process, the follower’s part when measuring effectiveness.

While these leadership processes may encompass followers from many different backgrounds, working with diverse and more numerous numbers of colleagues, communication would need to be very clear. This would call upon an individual’s level of self-and-other awareness and active listening skills to prove successful, along with the awareness of the need to adapt to the new work groups. This in itself could cause challenges to understanding effective leadership process, due to the diversified work group. As Wong and Law (2002) state, more research on the role of both leader and follower emotional intelligence in the workplace is called for.

Emotional Intelligence is a construct that could help the leadership and follower communication process. Nevertheless, Emotional Intelligence as a competency within the 21st century organization is still fairly unrecognized, even though organizations, due to globalization, are now seeing the need to improve communication clarity. If the competency goes unnoticed it may be the employee does not give his best. Wong and Law (2002) state those employees with high levels of Emotional Intelligence who do not have the opportunity to use these skills in their jobs may be less committed. They argue that having employees with a high level of EI may be advantageous to the organization. Therefore, the importance of understanding followers within understanding effective leadership processes appears to become even more justified.

The leaders of the twenty fist century organizations have followers who seek autonomy and more challenging work. Bass (1998) states this is done by moving more responsibility downwards. Within this structural shift in organizations the flattening organizational hierarchy is increasingly composed of educated professionals. These educated professionals see themselves as colleagues rather than in strict superior-subordinate relationships. Further Bass (1998) states, increasingly, leaders are being encouraged to empower their followers by developing them into high-involvement teams focused on quality and cost-effectiveness as well as quantity of output of production and service. Therefore, the communication structure within the organization has dramatically changed.

Nonetheless, the decisions still seem to stay with the higher echelons. Tourish and Pinnington (2002: 167) suggest "a new ethic of managerial leadership, in which both sides recognize the need to cross the line frequently between leadership and followership." Again this sounds easy in theory, but it may be not so easy for leaders to adapt to this suggestion and possibly presents a challenge to twentieth century leadership that they should take on board. This would allow the organization to develop these talents from within, in preference to the costly business of new staff recruitment. Similarly, Kotter and Heskett’s (1992; cited by Bryman,A. et al, 1996) research led them to conclude that adaptive cultures are an important factor in commercial success and that leaders play a key role in fostering them, and without followers the leader would be redundant.

'No man is an island', and, as Biggart and Hamilton (cited by Bryman 1996: 437) have argued, if leadership is embedded in social and cultural beliefs and values, then leadership cannot be fully understood apart from the context in which it exists. Within the domain of the leader culture, researching a modus operandi of the internal organization's subjects communication with each other may be helpful in trying to understand effective leadership processes. It would seem imperative to understanding and achieving effective leadership that tools that aid in communication are utilized, as communication is a two-way operation and a Charismatic/ Transformational leader has to be able to communicate the vision. For effective communication both sender and receiver of the communication have to have clarity of the content of the communication. It would seem prudent if both were open to each other.