Verified by 
Leadership
Challenges for Leaders in the Digital Age
Why remote leadership is not working
Posted June 14, 2015
International leadership surveys show that 74 percent of managers view effective communication as very important to their leadership. Yet only 29 percent of leaders feel that they communicate effectively. This is not surprising as more and more leadership is done remotely. Taking an evolutionary perspective this seems not so smart as the human mind has evolved to respond to face-to-face interactions. So how do remote leaders overcome these challenges to be more effective and persuasive in the modern digital age?
Every manager has had the experience of sending an e-mail to a staff member that was taken completely the wrong way. A long series of emails followed in which a non-existing problem suddenly became real. Such misunderstandings are exacerbated when leaders and followers do no longer work share the same work place – remote leadership – and communicate almost exclusively through digital means -- digital leadership.
Remote leadership is increasingly common in the workplace today. In almost all large companies, managers and their staff operate from different locations.
As an evolutionary-minded psychologist I am puzzled by the popularity of remote leadership arrangements. In the world of our ancestors leadership was a face-to-face affair. There was no physical distance between leaders and followers, and leaders and followers developed an intimate, personal relationship in which they could see, hear, and even smell one other. Leading by example was the norm and the personalized influence of a leader, which was often based on competence and charisma, played an important role in the effectiveness of leadership (see the service-for-prestige theory of leadership).
Psychological research shows that the nonverbal behaviors of leaders - a nod of the head or a smiling face – are indeed key predictors of leadership influence. Some psychologists argue that more than 70% of a leader’s impact depends on factors that have nothing to do with verbal communication. Viewing remote leadership from an evolutionary psychology perspective, this innovation has few long-term prospects. The human mind is constrained by the physical presence of leaders.
In a recent survey from the VU University Amsterdam we asked the employees from various organizations in the Netherlands how satisfied they were with communications of their immediate supervisor. Guess what? Face-to-face leadership was most appreciated, followed by videoconferencing (Skype) and - at some distance – telephone communications. Emails, SMS, Whatsapp and Facebook were the least appreciated ways of interactions with bosses.
These first results are entirely consistent with the evolutionary leadership theory. As the kind of leadership interaction more strongly resembles that of the past, subordinates are more satisfied as followers. We are currently looking at the effectiveness of remote leadership by comparing how effective a leader’s message is when it is conveyed face-to-face versus by videoconference or email. Initial findings suggest the latter is far less effective.*
What do we further know about remote leadership? International research among Shell employees shows that subordinates set higher standards for remote managers than for “face-to-face” managers. They believe that both task and relational aspects are more important in remote settings. For instance, in a remote relationship employees want their leader to set clearer goals and disseminate information more rapidly. Also they expect the remote leaders to make an extra effort in strengthening team cohesion. The issue is whether such expectations are realistic. How do you inspire employees and build trust between workers in a physically distant setting? Organizational scientists have no answer to this question yet. Most leadership development programs simply ignore the challenges of remote leadership.
There seem to be at least four factors that limit effective leadership in remote settings, according to research by Elizabeth Kelley and Kevin Kelloway of Canada's Dalhousie University. First, both leaders and employees experience a lack of control in remote settings. Manager and worker have a hard time figuring out what to expect of each other. As a result, trust is often fragile and this increases the risk of a misunderstanding after an email exchange. Another issue is the absence of unscheduled communications and meetings. Such encounters strengthen the bonds between managers and subordinates as they can chat about other things than work. Finally, the X-factor of leadership, charisma, is lacking in remote settings and it is exceedingly difficult to motivate and inspire employees from a distance.
So how can we make remote leadership work given the constraints of our ancient social brain? First, we should appreciate that remote leadership relies on other skills than face-to-face leadership. It may well be that the personalities of effective remote leaders differ importantly. One might expect that extraverted managers may do less well in remote settings, whereas conscientious managers may do better.
Leadership development programs should consider training managers in remote leadership. More emphasis could be given how do conduct video conferencing, how to write a decent, persuasive email and use emoticons in text messages. Managers could be trained specifically on how to deliver an inspirational message through digital means. Finally, organizations should be made aware of the costs as well as opportunities of different means of communication. They must realize that a telephone call is often better than e-mail, and video-conferencing is better than a phone call. Yet a personal meeting is still best as it is ultimately more aligned with how the mind appreciates leadership.
*If you believe your organization could benefit from studying remote leadership, please send me a note.
Follow me on Twitter: @markvanvugt1
