Under the premise that followers define the leader, ever heard the old complaint: "I would be a great leader were it not for these idiots that I have to lead"
You can argue that he led his followers to do crap,
while at the same time he was not living for his followers, but for God and these jokers were assuming they're following a great leader, defining religion according to what they think is right instead of putting the facts out on the table.
As for you, it is easy to define what leadership characteristics and behaviours, and consequent actions of followers, might be in an ideal universe (flawlessly executed strategy, truly stratospheric satisfaction levels, boundless enthusiasm and so forth). Ding dong...we don't live in an ideal universe - leaders regularly fall short of expectations and followers do anything but follow.
Hence, to conclude that the followers are really following Muhammad would be dismissing the fact that they all are driven by their respective personalities and approach to life and religion - can't always pin it on a man that had lived over 1400 years' ago and in my opinion, lived for his present moment and not intuitively. If his primary mode of living was Intuitive and Thinking, it would certainly produce a healthy, stable and efficient society in the long-run - that I concur with.