The Remote Work Leadership Report Card– Have We Improved?

Due to the pandemic, the past few years have ushered in the past century’s most significant shifts in working environments. According to data projections at Ladders, 25% of all professional jobs in North America will be remote by the end of 2022, and remote opportunities will continue to increase through 2023. There is a growing concern that remote workers are becoming less engaged over time.

We have had a couple of years to work the kinks out of this new way of work, but is it really going as well as we think it is?

We looked through our leadership database to issue a remote work leadership report card on how well leaders are managing remote/hybrid workers.

The Current State of Remote Work

The opportunities for obtaining talent outside of geographical boundaries are now endless. Many organizations have been experimenting with 4-day work weeks. One manager of Chick-Fil-A designed a 3-day work week with 14-hour shifts and had over 400 applicants apply for the job; it was so popular. There have been various innovative approaches to giving employees flexibility while maintaining productivity. A survey from HR Drive found that fully remote workers reported a happiness level roughly 20% higher than those who worked in the office 100% of the time.

But, What’s Missing for Remote Workers?

We know that remote work has some downsides. Collaboration is more difficult, and company culture may suffer. In addition, working remotely may make it easier for a person to quit a job because of fewer close relationships with coworkers. Younger employees may have significantly diminished opportunities for an active social life with peers. Onboarding and assimilating new employees is lengthier and more complex. Connecting with the mission and cause of the organization is also greatly hampered.

What is the Impact of a Leader’s Location on Their Perceived Effectiveness?

We know that many organizations are struggling with decisions related to remote work. Early in 2022, we began a study in which we identified leaders who worked remotely from their direct reports and compared them to leaders working in the same location, where they had frequent face-to-face interaction.

In our dataset, we had 261 leaders working in offices and co-located with their direct reports and 207 working remotely. Each leader received a 360-degree evaluation with feedback from managers, peers, direct reports, and others. On average, each leader was evaluated by 13 raters.  Direct reports were also asked six additional employee engagement items to assess their satisfaction and willingness to give additional effort.

The data presented in the graph below shows that managers and peers of remote leaders rated their effectiveness LESS positively. These differences are not statistically significant.

Surprisingly, direct reports of leaders that worked remotely rated their leaders significantly MORE positively (e.g., t-value 2.30, sig. 0.02) in contrast to those who were co-located in the same office!

This was a surprising finding, given that the remote leaders had less in-person contact and fewer face-to-face interactions.

What is the explanation of this finding? Is this a case of “absence makes the heart grow fonder?” Is a leader’s general impact negative, so less interaction produces a positive outcome? Do employees relish greater autonomy, and having a remote boss provides that elevated independence? Whatever the cause(s), we were surprised at this outcome.

To read Zenger Folkman’s latest leadership research, sign up for our monthly newsletter.

What is the Impact of Remote Work on Employee Engagement?

We measured the engagement of direct reports by asking them six questions regarding the following:

• their confidence that goals will be achieved
• discretionary effort
• willingness to recommend the organization
• intention to leave
• their satisfaction with the organization
• being treated with dignity and respect

The overall engagement measure did not show a statistical difference between office and remote employees; however, the discretionary effort item was significantly more positive for those employees who worked for a leader who was remote (e.g., t-value 2.494, sig. 0.013). This difference may provide a clue as to why remote workers may have greater productivity.

More Data Needed for Remote Work Leaders

These are early results, and obviously, more data is needed. However, given that many organizations are struggling with decisions regarding allowing employees and managers to work remotely, we felt that sharing this data would be useful. This is what we observed in our analysis of this data:

1. There do not appear to be huge downsides for leaders working remotely from their team members. In fact, working remotely may motivate leaders to try harder to connect with employees or to do it more effectively.
2. Motivation and engagement of employees who work for remote leaders appear slightly higher, and discretionary effort significantly higher. This study supports the assumption that remote workers may be—certainly have been—more productive.
3. There are still some undeniable advantages associated with those who work in offices, such as stronger interpersonal connections and more collaboration—and better mental health.

Committing To A Digital Mindset/SkillSet

Leaders have managed organizations through physical proximity for hundreds of years. We have written about the benefits of “management by walking around.” It is in our human nature to gather and have face-to-face interactions. Remote work goes against that and is a drastic change, especially for managers. Our environment has shifted, and every leader needs to adapt to this new digital mindset and skillset regardless of the proximity to direct reports.

While there is still much debate about leaders working remotely versus in-office, we believe those who take advantage of this hybrid way of working experience the advantages of both.

So, What Grade Would We Give to Leaders This Year? B+.

Despite the logistical hurdles, we’ve seen great amounts of energy and effort to make remote and hybrid work possible. We still have more data to gather on the best practices for making sustainable working practices to avoid professional burnout. We’ll see what innovations and progress next year has in store.

-Jack Zenger and Joe Folkman

Learn more about ZENGER FOLKMAN’s approach to leadership development.

Other Articles on Remote Work

• Maximizing Productivity with a Hybrid Work Schedule 
• Feedback: The Leadership Practice That Needs Elevating for the Remote Workforce