virtual leadership case study

Advertisement

Leading Remotely: Competencies Required for Virtual Leadership

• Original Paper
• Published: 04 March 2022
• Volume 66 , pages 327–337, ( 2022 )

Cite this article

• M. Elizabeth Azukas   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-9511-7986 1  

5674 Accesses

5 Citations

Explore all metrics

The COVID-19 pandemic caused the largest education system disruption in history, resulting in many districts abruptly, and often ineptly, implementing remote learning to maintain the continuity of instruction. The majority of educational leaders were unprepared for working and delivering instruction in virtual environments. Research indicates that few educational leadership programs provide preparation for leading in virtual learning environments but the COVID crisis made clear that it is imperative for all school leaders have an understanding of virtual leadership. The purpose of this study was to develop an understanding of the competencies required for virtual school leadership as they relate to the Professional Standards for Educational Leaders(P-SEL). Interviews were conducted with 28 virtual leaders using a semi-structured interview protocol. Results indicated that while the P-SEL Standards were categorically aligned to their work, there were distinctive differences in the ways in which virtual school leaders engaged their work across various leadership domains that required unique competencies. These findings are important to our understanding of how to better prepare educational leaders to maintain the effective continuity of instruction in future emergencies as well as to continue to implement and improve upon promising practices that developed during remote instruction.

Similar content being viewed by others

Leadership development in virtual communities of practice: The case of school principals from the GCC Region

Leadership in Rural Texas During COVID-19: Testimonios from the Field

The role of video-based discussion in model for preparing professional development leaders.

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Concerns about virtual leadership quality and preparation existed before the pandemic. Prior to 2020, opportunities for K-12 students to participate in online learning experiences were continuing to expand (Gemin et al., 2015 ; Molnar et al., 2019 ), yet research indicated that few educational leadership programs provide any administrator preparation for leading in virtual learning environments (La France & Beck, 2014 ). Further, concerns were raised about poor performance on accountability measures in comparison to brick-and-mortar schools (Molnar et al., 2014 ). Effective leadership is essential, because research has established a link between effective leadership and student achievement, particularly for low income and black students (Andrews & Soder, 1987 ; Leithwood & Jantzi, 2008 ; Waters & Marzano, 2007 ). An understanding of effective leadership is considered particularly critical for online education given that they often serve at-risk students (Abrego & Pankake, 2010 ; Quilici & Joki, 2011–12 ). Richardson et al. ( 2015 ) research found that, while virtual school leaders face many of the same categorical challenges as leaders in brick-and-mortar schools, the nuances of these challenges were distinct and they recommended additional research into the specific competencies required for virtual leadership as well as additional pre-service training for leaders.

Amid these developing concerns, the COVID-19 pandemic emerged causing the largest education system disruption in history, impacting 1.6 billion learners in more than 200 countries (Pokhrel & Chhetri, 2021 ) resulting in many districts abruptly, and often ineptly, implementing remote learning to maintain the continuity of instruction (Barbour et al., 2020 ; Hobbs & Hawkins, 2020 ; Pokhrel & Chhetri, 2021 ). While many have made a point to differentiate emergency remote learning from a more deliberate approach to online learning (Barbour et al., 2020 ; Hodges et al., 2020 ) it has become clear that the majority of school principals had to shift their roles from instructional leaders to virtual instructional leaders (Pollock, 2020 ). Preliminary research has reported that school leaders did not feel adequately prepared to deliver curriculum and instruction online and that many struggled with hardware, software, and infrastructure challenges, preparing teachers to design and facilitate online learning, online communication strategies, and managing the physical distance and relationships among school members and constituents (Barbour et al., 2020 ; Beauchamp et al., 2021 ; NAESP, 2020 ; Pollack, 2020 ; Varela & Fedynich, 2020 ). The COVID-19 crisis has made clear that it is imperative for all school leaders have an understanding of the competencies required for virtual leadership. However, to improve virtual leadership, we must have an understanding of the competencies needed for leading virtual schools and how they differ from traditional brick-and-mortar leadership skills so that we can more adequately prepare and support all school leaders. This purpose of this study was to develop a better understanding of the competencies required for virtual school leadership and the extent to which the revised Professional Standards for Educational Leaders (P-SEL) adequately represent these required competencies.

Conceptual Frameworks

Two conceptual frameworks were used to frame this virtual leadership study. The first is the theory of contextual leadership. Contextual leadership brings the unique situational realities of the environment in which the leader exists to the forefront (Bossert et al., 1982 ; Day & Leithwood, 2007 ; Day & Gurr, 2014 ; Gurr & Day, 2014 ; Jacobson, et al.,  2005 ; Moos et al., 2011 ; Noman & Gurr, 2020 ). Too often, leadership theories and preparation focus on the individual characteristics of the leaders, with little regard for the contextual factors (Hallinger, 2018 ), yet the behaviors that are traditionally considered to be effective for leadership may be constrained by the contextual environment (Lord et al., 2001 ). In virtual schools, the context is a driving factor in the competencies required for effective leadership. During the pandemic, many brick-and-mortar school leaders had to change their behaviors to try to fit the pandemic context. This is consistent with recent studies that have found that leadership is highly contextual and that the most effective leaders are able to adapt their practices to the immediate contextual factors and requirements (Johnson & Dempster, 2016 ; Noman & Gurr, 2020 ).

The second conceptual framework applied in this study are the Professional Standards for Education Leadership (P-SEL). These standards were developed in the United States in 2015 after a review of empirical research, input from researchers and more than 1000 school and district leaders, and the support of the National Association for Elementary School Principals (NAESP), the National Association for Secondary School Principals (NASSP), and the American Association for School Administrators (AASA) (Professional Standards for Education leaders, 2015 ). The standards focus on student success and well-being and include the following leadership domains:

Mission, Vision, and Core Values

Ethics and Professional Norms

Equity and Cultural Responsiveness

Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment

Community of Care and Support for Students

Professional Capacity of School Personnel

Professional Community for Teachers and Staff

Meaningful Engagement of Families and Community

Operations and Management

School Improvement

The standards attempt to provide a strong, clear, emphasis on students and learning outcomes, outlining fundamental principles to ensure that every student is well educated and prepared for the twenty-first century (Professional Standards for School Leaders, 2015 ). The new standards recognize the importance of human relationships both in leadership and in teaching and student learning and reflect a positive, asset-based approach to promote human development. While grounded in the present, the standards adopt a “future-oriented approach” and they challenge the profession and institutions of higher education to “move beyond established practices and systems and strive for a better future” (Professional Standards for School Leaders, 2015 , p. 3). It is important to view virtual leadership competencies through the lens of the P-SEL standards because these standards have influenced education leadership preparation around the country as the National Educational Leadership Preparation (NELP) Program Standards are aligned to the P-SEL standards. The NELP standards are designed for advanced programs at the masters, specialist, or doctoral levels that prepare program directors, supervisors, building level or district level education leaders undergoing accreditation by the Council for the Accreditation of Education Preparation (Professional Standards for School Leaders).

The purpose of this study was to better understand the competencies required for virtual leadership and whether these aligned to the P-SEL standards. This was accomplished through 28, 60-min interviews with virtual leaders using a semi-structured interview protocol. Interviews were used because they facilitate rich descriptions and detailed accounts of the participants’ lived experiences and perspectives on a phenomenon (DiCicco-Bloom & Crabtree, 2006 ). Nineteen of the participants were interviewed prior to March of 2020. Nine of the participants were interviewed after March of 2020, during the pandemic.

Participants

The population for this study consisted of the National Education Policy Center’s 2019 inventory of all full-time virtual schools in the nation, the most recent census of full-time virtual schools (Molnar et al., 2019 ). Molnar et al. ( 2019 ) identified 528 full-time virtual schools in 2015–2016. Schools were categorized based on location, grade levels served, enrollment, student ethnicity, and type of school (charter or district). These categories were then used to sort schools to create a random stratified sample. Internet research was used to obtain leader contact information and 4 cycles of emails were conducted. One hundred virtual school leaders were contacted in total and invited to participate in semi-structured 60-min interviews. Eight of these schools were closed and two were listed as separate schools but had the same leader, bringing the total number of leaders contacted to 88. Twenty-eight leaders responded and agreed to be interviewed, which is a 32% response rate. This response rate is adequate for this type of research because participants were viewed as “key informants,” (Patton, 1990 , p. 173) given their knowledge and experience with virtual leadership. Additionally, at the conclusion of the 4th round of interviews, it became apparent that a saturation point was reached where no new data was emerging (Bernard, 2012 ; Guest et al., 2006 ; Mason, 2010 ). Table  1 details the demographic information of the participants.

Data Collection

Semi-structured interviews (SSIs) were chosen because they fall between structured and unstructured interview processes (Adams, 2015 ). They are guided, focused, and open-ended communication events co-created by the researcher and the interviewee (Crabtree & Miller, 1999 ). This process facilitated the collection of data that would address the study’s purpose and objectives, yet allow for a broad understanding of the participant’s lived experience. An interview guide was developed using the P-SEL Standards as the basis for questions designed to understand virtual leadership competencies, which was key to obtaining data that addressed the study’s research questions (Baumbusch, 2010 ; Ryan et al., 2009 ). Questions began at the standard level. For example, “Tell me about your role with regard to developing, advocating, and enacting a shared mission and vision for the school?” and “To what extent are you involved in establishing the core values for the school?” Guiding questions were supported by additional prompts or probes such as, “Can you tell me more?” The interview guide was subject to change to facilitate conversation and to capture any data pertinent to understanding virtual leadership competencies that may not have been directly related to the P-SEL standards (Galleta, 2013 ). Interviews were conducted and recorded using Zoom.

Data Analysis

Interviews were transcribed and then analyzed using a hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development (Fereday & Muir-Cochrane., 2006 ). This allowed me to apply the P-SEL leadership domains as codes as well as to capture any relevant information that did not align with the P-SEL codes. I implemented Fereday and Muir-Cochrane.’s ( 2006 ) 6 stages of coding in this hybrid approach. First, I developed the code book using the P-SEL standards. Next, I tested the robustness of the codes against the literature. I then summarized the data and identified initial themes. I applied the P-SEL codebook and then conducted additional coding to identify any themes that may not have been captured by the codebook. Finally, I legitimated and corroborated the coded themes, employing member checking to help improve accuracy, credibility, validity, and transferability (Creswell, 2003 ; Mertler, 2014 ).

The virtual leaders interviewed conveyed that the P-SEL Standards were categorically aligned to their work. Most asserted that they did much of the same work as a brick-and-mortar leader, but that there were distinctive differences in the ways in which virtual school leaders engaged their work across various leadership domains. It was clear that the context, particularly the online context, played a role in the types of skills required of effective leaders. One hundred percent of those interviewed who had completed a traditional education leadership program for certification felt that their program did not adequately prepare them for the demands of virtual school leadership. The results are categorized by P-SEL standards, with an emphasis placed on the skills that many brick-and-mortar school leaders had to employ during the pandemic. Table  2 provides a summary of the findings.

Communication and engagement are different in the virtual environment. Jaime, for example, indicated that one of her main roles was developing and enacting a shared mission and vision, for the organization but that it was more challenging in a virtual organization. She stated:

I guess one of the primary differences is obviously you're not seeing everyone every day. And so that means that your approach to how you might deliver and support the vision, mission and the values every day might be a little bit different. As a virtual leader, you really have to be more deliberate about knowing how people are feeling what people are really spending their time on and whether or not the goals that they have as an individual really do line up with your values and goals as an organization.

Communication and engagement challenges also surfaced with regard to the ways in which virtual leaders develop a sense of professional community for teachers and staff. Emily spoke of the need for frequent “pulse checks” and described her tradition of “Text me Tuesdays” in which faculty and staff would send their thoughts, feelings, and questions via text every Tuesday. Mandy instituted “coffee chats” in which teachers and staff could take a coffee break and chat virtually. Chris also expressed the need for connection in the virtual environment so he instituted weekly virtual department meetings and monthly full-day virtual professional learning communities.

Connecting with students and their families presented similar challenges. Virtual school leaders implemented a variety of strategies to help students feel connected in the virtual environment. Holly required teachers to conference individually with students once a month. Joseph invested in school counselors, employing three times the state requirement to reduce the counselor to student ratio. Several of the virtual leaders employed student advisors or coaches that regularly reached out to students to set goals and keep them engaged. Allison has a Student Success Manager that oversees student advisors. She stated, “It is easy for the kids to disengage when they are not required to attend physically and we do not see them, but the Success Manager and advisors have really helped.” John hired a Parent Support Coordinator who oversees Parent Ambassadors who run virtual or face to face events every Friday because “if the parents are engaged, the kids do better.” The virtual leaders that serve elementary students have to enlist parents as partners because the children are too young to be at home alone and those that are still learning to read, need support with instructions. Ned reported, “I actually have to run professional development for parents because they have to know how to use the technology and support their kids.”

Leaders also employed virtual clubs and activities as well as face to face events to promote a community of care and support for students as well as to meaningfully engage with families and communities. Several of the virtual schools served students from across the state. “One of the biggest challenges I have is that my community is spread across the entire state,” Kelly stated. Chris reported that he has an Activities Director and 15 regional event coordinators to address this. Scott stated:

I never realized that I would be expected to be an event coordinator and handle all of the logistics associated with bringing in students and families from across the state. We bring them in for testing and we also do a face-to-face prom and graduation. I am renting facilities, managing travel and hotel arrangements…it was not what I expected.

Virtual leaders had to develop strategies to promote virtual connections and relationships as well as have the ability to leverage technology tools to do so. These connection and engagement challenges also required virtual leaders to take on new roles, adjust job descriptions, create new positions, and develop professional development related to the coaching of students and the engagement of their families.

Instructional support and supervision in virtual schools also require different skill sets. The reliance on a “home mentor,” often a parent or guardian, is required in many of the virtual schools that serve younger children who are still developing the ability to read and comprehend information as well as to work independently. “We have specially designed trainings for parents and guardians so they know how to access and turn in assignments, monitor progress, and support students, without doing the work for them” Susan reported. Ned concurred stating, “We not only have to provide specialized training for instructors, but for parents, too.” Several of the leaders reported that their teachers were surprised by how much more frequently they interacted with parents than in a traditional school. Jamie noted that at the high school level the teachers are speaking to every parent at least once a month.

Many of the virtual leaders reported that the initial training and professional development for online teachers must be different than for those teaching face-to-face. Almost all leaders reported that additional training is required for the technology systems that they use to support students such as a learning management systems (LMS) and other types of Web 2.0 communication tools. Diane noted that most teachers, “are not familiar with terms like synchronous and asynchronous instruction because they are only familiar with the face-face modality.” Vicki noted, “We have to teach them about online pedagogy and aspects of instructional design.” Many virtual leaders noted that they have to implement their teacher trainings online because of the regional diversity of their teaching staff.

Several of the virtual leaders expressed that teaching the technology components to new virtual teachers was the easiest part of their onboarding process. Many thought that helping teachers to see themselves as facilitators of instruction and to understand the flexibility required for online learning was much more difficult. Allison noted multiple conversations with teachers about students working at their own pace where teachers expressed frustration that “We’re not preparing them for the real world.” She explained that she has to coach them to think differently:

If you fail your driving test, you’re not just done forever, you go back, you study some more, and you just take it again. The point is that you learn to drive. I mean people are late in paying their bills all of the time. There may be a late fee, but they still get to pay them. I also have to remind them that sometimes they are late in doing paperwork at school and we don’t fire them. It’s weird though because a lot of teachers think it is their job to be punitive and that this is in some way teaching kids a life lesson. I have to undo a lot of that thinking.”

Several leaders expressed similar challenges since many of these schools have flexible pacing and mastery-based learning that requires flexibility on the part of the instructor. Additionally, some of the schools offer rolling enrollment, which means teachers have to be prepared to accept students year-round and there are no traditional marking periods or semesters.

Many virtual leaders viewed the teachers as facilitators of instruction and as instructional support interventionists. Jamie reported:

We have incredible fidelity and accountability with regard to standards alignment. In our case the curriculum is already developed with standards, content, and assessments. Then, we’re teaching the teachers how to facilitate that content and guide students.

Holly relayed a similar experience:

Our curriculum is already developed so my teachers don’t have to create lesson plans every day. However, they do have to understand curriculum, provide gap instruction, promote instructional intervention and monitor students to be sure that they are moving through the curriculum at an acceptable pace.

While many virtual schools do use pre-prepared course curriculum, others adapt pre-prepared curriculum, or develop their own online curriculum. Joseph noted:

We purchased a curriculum, but it can be customized so that teachers can make it stronger and make it their own. We collect feedback from students on every course to continue to improve them. We also use data to monitor student performance and if one lesson is taking everyone a particularly long time, we’ll look at that.

For those schools that develop their own curriculum, leaders reported that academic integrity is a big area of concern for online schools. “The kids are right on the computer. They can Google anything, but that begs the question, then, if they can Google it, why are we asking them about it?” Lena questioned. A few of the other principals echoed similar concerns. Bobbie noted, “academic integrity used to be a much bigger issue but we have learned to create better assignments and assessments that are not easily copied or Googled and require more application of knowledge and skills.” A few of the schools use oral assessments in addition to online assessments to ensure that the student is doing the work and understanding the concepts.

Observations can look very different in online schools. Gabe noted, “I can’t just walk up and down the halls or do classroom walk-throughs exactly like I did in the traditional environment.” Instead, virtual school leaders reported conducting data walk-throughs where they monitor teacher and student online activity. Some schools have systems that notify leaders if teachers have not recorded regular contact with students. Vicki reported, “I look for students who have not logged in or students that are not making sufficient progress in the data and then I connect with the teacher.” Virtual observations can be synchronous or asynchronous depending on how the schools structure instruction. A few of the schools require some synchronous instruction and that teacher record all sessions with students so they are available for viewing by school leaders. Leaders reported looking for and assessing teacher online presence, rapport with students, student engagement and participation, the quality of questioning, and the accuracy of content in synchronous sessions. In asynchronous sessions, leaders reported looking for and assessing the turn-around time on assignments, feedback provided to students, motivational weekly updates, regular contact/communication, and instructional intervention.

Virtual leaders also reported being unprepared for some aspects of their work and indicated that they felt some business or non-profit leadership training would have helped them. The funding models for virtual schools differ greatly. Some are performance based, others earn only a portion of the state’s FTE per student, some are FTE dependent but have high transient populations making budget predictions challenging. Others need to navigate partnerships with traditional districts or with education management organizations (EMO’s). Joseph stated, “The biggest thing that I had to just basically learn on my own is the finance piece. I think I took one finance course, but as a charter school leader, in a lot of ways, you’re the head of a nonprofit.” John concurred, “Educational leadership programs for leaders of online schools, need to focus more on being a nonprofit leader than an education school leader. Of course, there is the academic piece, which is very important. But what you don’t learn is finance, what you don’t learn is marketing, what you don’t learn are all the other things that go into running online school.” Since virtual learning is a choice, several of the leaders mentioned the importance of having some background in sales and marketing. Additionally, several of the virtual schools develop their own online courses and felt that this required product development skills. “I’ve got project managers, instructional designers, content experts. It is a long and arduous process that is a lot more like developing a textbook for publication than a traditional district curriculum. I could have used some business skills.” Scott stated. Leadership preparation programs need to strive for better alignment of coursework with the competencies required for virtual leadership.

Discussion and Conclusions

Virtual school leaders noted that the P-SEL standards categorically aligned with their work, but that there were very specific nuances that were unique to the online environment, such as communicating virtually with faculty, students, and parents, and delivering curriculum and instruction in the online environment. Further, all 23 of the school leaders who had participated in a traditional education leadership program for licensure communicated that these programs did not adequately prepare them for the work they do as virtual leaders. While little research has been done on the competencies required for effective virtual school leadership (McLeod & Richardson, 2011 ; Richardson et al., 2015 ), it has become clear with the current pandemic that all school leaders need some competencies associated with virtual leadership as schools across the globe grappled with delivering content remotely.

The work of traditional school leaders changed considerably and possibly irreversibly during the pandemic (Francisco & Nuqui, 2020 ; Harris & Jones, 2020 ; Pollack, 2020 . Leaders had to support teachers, students, and families to transition to remote learning, they needed to become experts in technology and online curriculum and instruction, they had to become chief communicators and policy interpreters as rules and regulations were being released without warning (Harris & Jones, 2020 ; Pollack, 2020 ). They also had to manage the distance between school members working to engage students, motivate staff, communicate with families, and establish trust (Harris & Jones; Pollack, 2020 ). These findings are consistent with the competencies virtual leaders identified as being important in their contexts.

Leadership continued to play an important role in student achievement during the pandemic. The biggest factor impacting teacher self-efficacy during the pandemic was effective school leadership (Kraft et al., 2020 ). Self-efficacy has been consistently recognized as an important attribute of effective teaching and has been positively correlated to teacher and student outcomes (Tschannan-Moran et al., 1998 ). Kraft et al. ( 2020 ) reported that teachers experienced challenges during the pandemic which included engaging students in the online remote environment and balancing professional and personal responsibilities working from home, resulting in on overall decline in teacher self-efficacy. Teachers in high-poverty and high minority schools perceived these challenges to be more severe (Kraft et al., 2020 ). Teachers who experienced strong school-based leadership that provided clear communication, meaningful collaboration, targeted training, fair expectations, and recognition of teacher effort, were least likely to experience declines in self-efficacy during the pandemic (Kraft et al., 2020 ).

Education leadership programs must be accountable for adequately preparing school leaders to effectively perform their responsibilities, especially those that serve our most vulnerable students. More attention must be paid to adequate school leader preparation with regard to virtual school leadership both for those who may lead virtual schools and those who may lead in brick-and-mortar schools but are running supplemental online programs or are implementing remote instruction because of an emergency. Francisco & Nuqui ( 2020 ), Harris and Jones ( 2020 ), and Pollack ( 2020 ) found that school leadership preparation programs are out of alignment with the challenges leaders are facing today and that substantial revision is required to address the leadership skills relevant to the ongoing pandemic. Key competencies that need to be addressed were identified as knowledge of technology used for online learning, an understanding of online curriculum and pedagogy, the need to be able to operate and communicate in the online environment, crisis management, and an understanding of situational/contextual leadership Francisco & Nuqui, 2020 ; Harris & Jones, 2020 ; Pollack, 2020 ). It has also been recommended that leaders learn from one another’s successes during the pandemic (Francisco & Nuqui, 2020 ). Leaders were eager to learn from other leaders during the pandemic. Nine of the 28 school leaders who participated in this study were interviewed after March of 2020. During my interviews, 7 of the 9 virtual school leaders interviewed (78%) indicated that they had been contacted by local brick and mortar school leaders requesting assistance with a variety of virtual leadership competencies.

While this study is not generalizable, it makes a valuable contribution to the scholarship to better understand the competencies required for virtual leadership. It is recommended that additional research be conducted to continue to examine the competencies required for virtual leadership, the competencies required for leading in blended school districts and the challenges faced by brick-and-mortar leaders during the pandemic.

Virtual school enrollment increased dramatically as a result of COVID-19 accounting for 40% of the decline in traditional schools and with most of this growth occurring in the elementary grades (Molnar et al., 2021 ). Even as the dangers of the COVID-19 pandemic diminish, Schwartz et al. ( 2020 ) reported that 20% of brick-and-mortar schools now plan to establish and expand online learning for the families who have enjoyed the flexibility provided by online learning. Every leader is now a virtual leader. Leadership preparations programs must effectually prepare all future leaders for the competencies required for virtual leadership.

Abrego, J., & Pankake, A. (2010). PK-12 virtual schools: The challenges and roles of school leaders. Educational Considerations, 37 (2), 7–13.

Article   Google Scholar  

Adams, W. C. (2015). Conducting semi-structured interviews. In K. E. Newcomer, H. P. Hatry, & J. C. Wholey (Eds.), Handbook of practical program evaluation (pp. 492–505). Jossey-Bass.

Google Scholar  

Andrews, R. L., & Soder, R. (1987). Principal leadership and student achievement. Education Leader, 44 (2), 9–11.

Barbour, M. K., LaBonte, R., Kelly, K., Hodges, C., Moore, S., Lockee, B., Trust, T., Bond, A., & Hill, P. (2020). Understanding pandemic pedagogy: Differences between emergency remote, remote, and online teaching. Canadian eLearning Network.  https://k12sotn.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/understanding-pandemic-pedagogy.pdf

Baumbusch, J. (2010). Semi-structured interviewing in practice – Close research. Journal for Specialists in Pediatric Medicine, 15 (3), 255–258.

Beauchamp, G., Hulme, M., Clarke, L., Hamilton, L., & Harvey, J. A. (2021). ‘People miss people:’ A study of school leadership and management in the four nations of the United Kingdom in the early stage of the pandemic. Educational Management Administration and Leadership, 49 (3), 375–392.

Bernard, R. H. (2012). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches (2nd ed.). Sage.

Bossert, S.T., Dwyer, D.C., Rowan, B., & Lee, G.V. (1982). The instructional management role of the principal. Education Administration Quarterly, 18 (3), 34–64.

Crabtree, B. F., & Miller, W. L. (1999). Clinical research: A multimethod typology. In B. F. Crabtree & W. C. Miller (Eds.), Doing qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 3–32). Sage Publications, Inc.

Creswell, J. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches . Sage.

Day, C., & Gurr, D. (Eds) (2014). Leading schools successfully: Stories from the field . Routledge.

Day, C., & Leithwood, K. (2007). Successful principal leadership in times of change. Springer.

DiCicco-Bloom, B., & Crabtree, B. F. (2006). The qualitative research interview. Medical Education, 40 , 314–321.

Francisco, C.D.C., Nuqui, A.V. (2020) Emergence of a situational leadership during COVID-19 pandemic called new normal leadership. International Journal of Interdisciplinary Research, 4 (10), 15–19. 

Fereday, J., & Muir-Cochrane. (2006). Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: A hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5 (1), 80–92.

Galleta, A. M. (2013). Mastering the semi-structured interview and beyond . NYU Press.

Book   Google Scholar  

Gemin, B., Pape L., Vashaw, L., & Watson, J. (2015). Keeping pace with K–12 digital learning: An annual review of policy and practice. Evergreen Education Group.  https://static1.squarespace.com/static/59381b9a17bffc68bf625df4/t/5949b64bb11be1ad7855fb51/1498003034517/KeepingPace+2015.pdf

Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18 (1), 59–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X05279903

Gurr, D. & Day, C. (2014). Thinking about leading schools. In C. Day & D. Gurr (Eds.),  Leading schools successfully: Stories from the field. (pp. 194–208). Routledge.

Hallinger, P. (2018). Bringing context out of the shadows of leadership. Educational Management, Administration and Leadership. 46 (1), 5–24

Harris, A., & Jones, M. (2020). COVID-19-school leadership in disruptive times. School Leadership and Management, 40 (4), 243–247.

Hobbs, T.D., & Hawkins, L. (2020). The results are in for remote learning: It didn’t work. The Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/articles/schools-coronavirus-remote-learning-lockdown-tech-11591375078 .

Hodges, C., Moore, S., Locke, B., Trust, T. & Bonda, A. (2020). The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning. Educause Review. https://er.educause.edu/articles/2020/3/the-difference-between-emergency-remote-teaching-and-online-learning

Jacobson S., Day C., & Leithwood K. (Eds.). (2005). The international successful school principalship project. Journal of Educational Administration, 43, 532–629.

Johnson, G. & Dempster, N. (2016) Leadership in diverse learning contexts. Springer.

Kraft, M.A., Simon, N.S., & Lyon, M. A. (2020). Sustaining a sense of success: The importance of teacher working conditions during the COVID-19 pandemic . (EdWorkingPaper: 20-279). Annenberg Institute at Brown University. https://doi.org/10.26300/35nj-v890

La France, J. A., & Beck, D. (2014). Mapping the terrain: Education leadership field experiences in K-12 virtual schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 50 (11), 160–189.

Leithwood, K. A., & Jantzi, D. (2008). Linking leadership to student learning: The contributions of leader efficacy. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44 (4), 496–528.

Lord, R.G., Brown, D.J., Harvey, J.L., & Hall, R.J. ( 2001). Contextual constraints on prototype generation and their multilevel consequences for leadership perceptions. Leadership Quarterly, 12, 311–338.

Mason, M. (2010). Sample size and saturation in PhD studies using qualitative interviews. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 11 (3). https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-11.3.1428

McLeod, S., & Richardson, J. W. (2011). The dearth of technology coverage. Journal of School Leadership, 21 (2), 216–240.

Mertler, C. (2014). Action research: Improving schools and empowering educators . SAGE Publishers, Inc.

Molnar, A. (Ed.) (Ed.), Rice, J. K., Huerta, L., Shafer, S. R., Barbour, M. K., Miron, G., Gulosino, C, Horvitz, B. (2014). Virtual schools in the U.S. 2014: Politics, performance, policy, and research evidence . National Education Policy Center. https://nepc.colorado.edu/publication/virtual-schools-annual-2014

Molnar, A., Miron, G., Elgeberi, N., Barbour, M. K., Huerta, L., Shafer, S. R., & Rice, J. K. (2019). Virtual schools in the U.S. 2019 . National Education Policy Center. http://nepc.colorado.edu/publication/virtual-schools-annual-2019 .

Molnar, A. (Ed.) (Ed.), Miron, G., Barbour, M.K., Huerta, L., Shafer, S.R., Rice, J.K., Glover, A., Browning, N., Hagle, S., & Boninger, F. (2021). Virtual schools in the U.S. 2021. National Education Policy Center. http://nepc.colorado.edu/publication/virtual-schools-annual-2021

Moos, L., Johansson, O., & Day, C. (Eds.). (2011). How school principals. sustain success over time: International perspectives . Springer.

National Association of Elementary School Principals. (2020). NAESP releases results of National Survey of principals regarding COVID-19, march 31. https://www.naesp.org/content/naesp-releases-results-national-survey-principals-regarding-covid-19

Noman, M. & Gurr, D. (2020) Contextual leadership and culture in education, In G.W. Nobit (Ed.),  Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education ( pp. 20). Oxford University Press.  https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.595

Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods . Sage.

Pokhrel, S., & Chhetri, R. (2021). A literature review on impact of COVID-19 pandemic on teaching and learning. Higher Education for the Future, 8 (1), 133–141.

Pollack, K. (2020). School leaders’ work during the COVID-19 pandemic: A two-pronged approach. International Studies in Education, 48 (3), 38–44.

Professional Standards for Educational Leaders. (2015). National policy board for educational administration. https://www.npbea.org/psel/

Quillici, S.B., & Joki, R. (2011–2012). Investigating roles of online school principals. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 44 (2), 141–160.

Richardson, J. W., LaFrance, J., & Beck, D. (2015). Challenges of virtual school leadership. American Journal of Distance Education, 29 (1), 18–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2015.992647

Ryan, F., Coughlan, M., & Cronin, P. (2009). Interviewing in qualitative research: The one-to-one interview. International Journal of Therapy and Rehabilitation, 16 (6), 309–314.

Schwartz, H. L., Grant, D., Diliberti, M., Hunter, G. P., & Setodji, C. M. (2020). Remote learning is here to stay: Results from the first American school district panel survey . Rand Corporation. https://doi.org/10.7249/RRA956-1

Tschannan-Moran, M., Hoy, A. W., & Hoy, W. K. (1998). Teacher efficacy: Its meaning and measure. Review of Educational Research, 68 (2), 202–248.

Varela, D. G., & Fedynich, L. (2020). Leading schools from a social distance: Surveying South Texas school district leadership during the COVID-19 pandemic. National Forum of Educational Administration and Supervision Journal, 38 (4), 1–10.

Waters, T. J., & Marzano, R. J. (2007). School leadership that works: The effect of superintendent leadership on student achievement. ERS Spectrum, 25 (2), 1–12.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

East Stroudsburg University of Pennsylvania, East Stroudsburg, PA, USA

M. Elizabeth Azukas

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. Elizabeth Azukas .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interests/competing interests.

No funding was received to assist with the preparation of this manuscript.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Azukas, M.E. Leading Remotely: Competencies Required for Virtual Leadership. TechTrends 66 , 327–337 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-022-00708-x

Download citation

Accepted : 02 February 2022

Published : 04 March 2022

Issue Date : March 2022

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-022-00708-x

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Virtual leadership
• Remote leadership
• Virtual leadership competencies
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

More From Forbes

The ultimate guide to effective virtual leadership.

• Share to Facebook
• Share to Twitter
• Share to Linkedin

The Ultimate Guide to Effective Virtual Leadership

Navigating the aftermath of the Covid-19 pandemic is still a challenge for many leaders who are now working with virtual teams. Company culture isn’t the same, nor is how we communicate, manage and set expectations for virtual workers.

Leaders who may have always worked in person might approach the hybrid workplace with uncertainty where as new leaders who have become accustomed to working remotely might not be used to the challenges of leading a remote or hybrid team.

Before questioning everything, consider that hybrid and remote work has been around long before the Covid-19 pandemic . In fact, the U.S. Census reported on remote work as early as 2013.

In other words, the resources and tools you need for effective virtual leadership are already at your fingertips.

Benefits of Working with Virtual Teams

Suppose you’re currently leading virtual or hybrid teams. In that case, you already know how life-changing flexibility in the workplace can be. Both workers and alike can benefit from comfortable settings and schedules that work around other priorities, like family.

Best Travel Insurance Companies

Best covid-19 travel insurance plans.

But with the normalization of hybrid workplaces, it’s time to review how remote work can be a great tool from a leadership standpoint:

Productivity

A study from before the pandemic conducted by Stanford shows that remote employees tend to be 13% more productive. This is due to a 9% increase in productivity from working more minutes during a shift due to fewer breaks and sick days and 4% more calls per minute due to a quieter working environment. Workers in this 16K employee study also reported improved satisfaction and the company experienced less turnover. Consider the time lost when workers experience in-office interruptions and distractions and the increased engagement employees feel with they have autonomy over their schedules and tasks.

Overhead Costs

Companies are still feeling the economic impacts of the Covid-19 pandemic, now made more complicated by looming anxieties about recession . Virtual work minimizes the burden of office space leasing, furniture upkeep, and utilities. Even if you keep a few in-office employees present, the difference reflects in the overhead costs of running a fully operational office every day.

Scalability

Every business dreams of growth. But growth is also costly: bigger teams need bigger office spaces. Even if a central location is kept, you can think about expanding around the globe without worrying about moving an entire organization to another physical site.

Problem Solving

Work-life balance is still necessary for the health of every organization and its culture. It’s even more important for remote workers already faced with the challenge of keeping distinct and healthy boundaries between work and home life. When problems arise, however, we can’t always dictate the timing. The flexibility of virtual work makes it possible for teams to feel they have more agency when responding to unexpected problems. Remote workers are also more accessible in emergent situations, especially in different time zones.

Sourcing Top Talent

Lastly, always keep in mind the availability of talent when you can extend your recruitment strategy beyond the local pool. Retention also becomes less challenging when remote workers are satisfied with the quality of their work experience.

Virtual Leadership 101: Problems and Answers

Determine the biggest challenges facing your team. What are the roadblocks getting in the way of virtual collaboration?

Problem: Written Communication

There can be a vast difference between how a colleague comes across over email and their face-to-face interactions. With virtual work, written dialogue becomes the primary communication mode and one of the biggest challenges to virtual leadership.

The Answer: Keep the channels of communication centralized and uniform. Choose one platform, like Slack, and stick to it. Too many messaging platforms equals too many cooks in the kitchen. Keep email threads and comment sections as singular as possible. The same goes for data keeping and other administrative record-keeping. Now more than ever, streamlining is of the utmost importance.

Problem: Verbal Communication

Asking for clarity was much easier when you were in the same room or building as your team. You’re now dealing with technical difficulties like power and internet outages, video conferencing awkwardness or screen-time burnout that impacts engagement.

The Answer: Don’t assume the issue at hand is as apparent to everyone else as it is to you. It doesn’t always go without saying, and going without saying creates blindspots. When leaders address issues or “elephants” in the virtual room, people are often relieved to hear what’s already on their minds.

Take the implicit and make it explicit. Document and make every expectation clear, so there is little room for misinterpretation. Clarity and documentation also help the streamlining process. Establish norms and make sure they are regularly practiced, followed, and updated when necessary.

Problem: Unbalanced or Inconsistent Performance

Despite the clear advantages of virtual work, you’ll still find team members having trouble with focus and productivity. Some employees need the rigor of office life to stay motivated. And not everyone has the same technical ability as others.

The Answer: Address the problem sooner rather than later. If technological literacy gets in the way of employees meeting potential, offer professional development courses and training modules. You can also implement peer mentorship to help struggling workers thrive in the digital age.

If your company is hybrid, you might need to implement more in-office time for team members struggling to stay motivated at home. If they remain unproductive yet resistant to solutions, it’s time to consider performance improvement plans before heading to the last option of letting people go. It’s a worst-case scenario that no one wants, but the key here is to deal with problems swiftly. Lingering issues worsen over time, piling on even more complications for everyone involved.

Strategies for Leading Virtual Teams Effectively

Trust, transparency, and inclusion are vital for achieving success in the workplace. Here are other tools and strategies for maintaining those fundamental qualities when you’re leading a virtual team:

Visualization Tools

Kanban boards and other flow charts or tools like Miro are beneficial when you can screen-share over video collaborations. Visual workflow charts help everyone stay on the same page about the specific tasks it takes to achieve specific goals. More importantly, charts and Kanban boards clarify who the project manager is and which contributors are responsible for outcomes. Team members should always know to whom they should field questions and requests.

Daily Tone-Setting

You want to minimize conference calls and virtual meetings to reduce burnout. Still, you also want to make sure your meetings are necessary and meaningful. One way to do that is to set the tone for your team at the start of each day. Take just a few minutes to ask your team:

• What is one reasonable goal for today?
• What are the steps to achieving this goal?
• What, if any, help is needed to accomplish this goal?

Leading with Research

Successful corporations are research-informed. Top decision-makers and executives are industry leaders who share knowledge. The same should apply in a top-down model to ensure transparency and foster trust in leadership decisions.

Knowledge sharing is also a tool for inclusivity. For example, if your team meets weekly, rotate collaborators so that one person has a turn to share the knowledge they found helpful each week. Whether through formal presentations or informal roundtable discussions, research collaboration draws the spotlight positively on individual team members. Everyone comes to the table with unique assets and interests, keeping the work diverse and encouraging innovative solutions.

• Editorial Standards
• Reprints & Permissions

Join The Conversation

One Community. Many Voices. Create a free account to share your thoughts. 

Forbes Community Guidelines

Our community is about connecting people through open and thoughtful conversations. We want our readers to share their views and exchange ideas and facts in a safe space.

In order to do so, please follow the posting rules in our site's  Terms of Service.   We've summarized some of those key rules below. Simply put, keep it civil.

Your post will be rejected if we notice that it seems to contain:

• False or intentionally out-of-context or misleading information
• Insults, profanity, incoherent, obscene or inflammatory language or threats of any kind
• Attacks on the identity of other commenters or the article's author
• Content that otherwise violates our site's  terms.

User accounts will be blocked if we notice or believe that users are engaged in:

• Continuous attempts to re-post comments that have been previously moderated/rejected
• Racist, sexist, homophobic or other discriminatory comments
• Attempts or tactics that put the site security at risk
• Actions that otherwise violate our site's  terms.

So, how can you be a power user?

• Stay on topic and share your insights
• Feel free to be clear and thoughtful to get your point across
• ‘Like’ or ‘Dislike’ to show your point of view.
• Protect your community.
• Use the report tool to alert us when someone breaks the rules.

Thanks for reading our community guidelines. Please read the full list of posting rules found in our site's  Terms of Service.

Impactful Leadership Traits of Virtual Leaders in Higher Education

• Erin Alward University of Phoenix
• Yvonne Phelps University of Phoenix

Universities are increasingly leveraging virtual teams into the organizational structure and strategic framework for many functions including academic administration and faculty leadership. One benefit of a virtual workforce is the ability to hire the most qualified individuals regardless of where they are physically located. As the virtual workforce expands, leaders may intuitively rely on traditional face-to-face approaches and strategies for employee oversight and motivation. These techniques may be ineffective or challenging to use in the virtual environment necessitating new approaches. Leaders of virtual teams need to understand the intricacies associated with these groups and be cognizant of factors that assist in creating cohesiveness, trust, and communication amongst virtual teams. 

This qualitative phenomenological study explores leaders’ perceptions surrounding competencies needed to effectively lead virtual teams in online education. A decisive sampling method was used to identify 10 experienced academic leaders who supervise virtual teams. As a result of the interviews, seven major themes emerged: (a) training and development; (b) trust; (c) emotional intelligence; (d) communication/team building/technology; (e) employee recognition and motivation; (f) leadership styles; and (g) virtual leadership competencies unique to higher education. Based on these themes and further evaluation the need for specific soft skills and robust technology emerged. Specifically, organizational success partially hinges on comprehensive training for virtual leaders, the significance of trust, emotional intelligence, and effective, respectful communication.  

Author Biographies

Erin alward, university of phoenix.

University of Phoenix, Central Florida Campus

Director of Academic Affairs

Yvonne Phelps, University of Phoenix

University of Phoenix 

Vice President of Academic Affairs

Allen, I. E. & Seaman, J. (2017). Digital learning compass: Distance education enrollment report 2017. Retrieved from the Digital Learning Compass website at https://onlinelearningsurvey.com/reports/digtiallearningcompassenrollment2017.pdf

Avolio, B. J., Sosik, J. J., Kahai, S. S., & Baker, B. (2014). E-leadership: Re-examining transformations in leadership source and transmission. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(1), 105-131. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.11.003

Azderska, T. & Jerman-Blazic, B. (2013). A holistic approach for designing humancentric trust systems. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 26(5), 417-450. doi:10.1007/s11213-012-9259-3

Bergold J., Thomas S. (2012). Participatory research methods: A methodological approach in motion. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 13(1), 1–35.

Berry, G. R. (2011a). A Cross-Disciplinary Literature Review: Examining Trust on Virtual Teams. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 24(3), 9-28.

Berry, G. R. (2011b). Enhancing effectiveness on virtual teams. Journal of Business Communications, 48(2), 186-206. doi:10.1177/0021943610397270

Bjorn, P. & Ngwenyama, O. K. (2009). Virtual team collaboration: Building shared meaning, resolving breakdowns, and creating translucence. Information Systems Journal, 19, 227-253.

Bonatti, A. & Horner, J. (2011). Collaborating. American Economic Review, 101. 632-663. http://dx.doi.org/10.1257/aer.101.2.632

Booth, B. (2011). Examining the critical factors of success in virtual team performance (Order No. 3442987). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (855031361). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/855031361?accountid=35812

Bryant, N. (2013). Leadership development as a relational process: A grounded theory investigation of leader experiences (Order No. 3558719). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (1352008659). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.proxy1.ncu.edu/docview/1352008659?accountid=28180

Caillier, J. G. (2014). Toward a better understanding of the relationship between transformational leadership, public service motivation, mission valence, and employee performance: A preliminary study. Public Personnel Management, 43(2), 218-239. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/1665117205?accountid=35812

Carmeli, A., Sheaffer, Z., Binyamin, G., Reiter-Palmon, R., & Shimoni, T. (2014). Transformational leadership and creative problem-solving: The mediating role of psychological safety and reflexivity. Journal of Creative Behavior, 48(2), 115–135. doi:10.1002/jocb.43

Casebier, M. W. (2014). Exploring leadership styles involved in preventing deviant behaviors that affect the sustainability of virtual teams (Order No. 3618654). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (1531330494). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.proxy1.ncu.edu/docview/1531330494?accountid=28180Consortium Journal of Hospitality & Tourism, 14(1), 89-97.

Chen, C. C., Wu, J., Ma, M., & Knight, M. B. (2011). Enhancing virtual learning team performance: A leadership perspective. Human Systems Management, 30(4), 215-228.

Cho, Y. J. & Lee, J. W. (2012). Performance management and trust in supervisors. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 32(3), 236-259.doi:10.1177/0734371X114214960

Creswell, J. W. (2009) Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. ISBN: 9781412965576

Crisp, G. & Cruz, I. (2009). Mentoring college students: A critical review of the literature between1990 and 2007. Research in Higher Education, 50(6), 525-545. doi: 10.1007/s11162-009-9130-2

Crisp, C. & Jarvenpaa, S. (2013). Swift trust in global virtual teams. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 12(1), 45-56. doi:10.1027/1866-5888-a000075

Curry, S. P. (2016). Effects of the virtual environment on online faculty perceptions of

leadership: A grounded theory study (Order No. 10110291). Available from ProQuest Central; ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (1797424474). Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/1797424474?accountid=35812

Eubanks, D., Eubanks. D.L., Palanski, M., Olabisi, J., Joinson, A., & Dove, J. (2016). Team

dynamics in virtual, partially distributed teams: Optimal role fulfillment. Computers in Human Behavior, 61, 556-568. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.03.035

Feldman, M. S., Sködberg, K., Brown, R. N., & Homer, D. (2004). Making sense of stories: A rhetorical approach to narrative analysis. Journal of Public Administration Research & Theory, 14(2), 147-170. doi:10.1 093/jopart/muh010

Fincham, D. (2013). Introducing online learning in higher education: An evaluation. Creative Education, 4(9), 540-548. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.proxy1.ncu.edu/docview/1448244965?accountid=28180

Fraenkel, J.R. & Wallen, N.E. (2007). How to design and evaluate research in education. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Goudy, K. (2015). A qualitative case study of manager trustworthiness of employees in the virtual workplace (Order No. 3685661). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (1666453299). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.proxy1.ncu.edu/docview/1666453299?accountid=28180

Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(59), 59-81.

Hill, N., Kang, J., & Seo, M. (2014). The interactive effect of leader–member exchange and electronic communication on employee psychological empowerment and work outcomes. Leadership Quarterly, 25(4), 772-783

Hirschy, M. (2011). Virtual Team Leadership: A Case Study in Christian Higher Education.

Christian Higher Education, 10(2), 97-111.

Jackson, M. R. (2015). Resistance to qual/quant parity: Why the ‘paradigm’ discussion can’t be avoided. Qualitative Psychology, 2, 181–198. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/qup0000031

Jang, C. (2013). Facilitating trust in virtual teams: The role of awareness. Advances in Competitiveness Research, 21(1/2), 61-77. Retrieved from http://www.eberly.iup.edu/ASCWeb/journals_acr.html

Kirkman, B., Rosen, B., Gibson, C. B., Tesluk, P. E., & McPherson, S. O. (2002). Five challenges to virtual team success: Lessons from saber, inc. Academy of Management Executive, 16(3), 67-79.

Krause, S. F. (2017). Leadership: Underrepresentation of women in higher education (Order No. 10259477). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (1882307015). Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.contentproxy.phoenix.edu/docview/1882307015?accountid=35812

Martin, F., Budhrani, K., Kumar, S., & Ritzhaupt, A. (2019). Award-winning faculty online teaching practices: Roles and competencies. Online Learning, 23(1), 184-205. doi:10.24059/olj.v23i1.1329.

McFarlane, D. A. (2011). Are there differences in the organizational structure and pedagogical approach of virtual and brick-and-mortar schools? Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 3(2), 83-98. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.proxy1.ncu.edu/docview/876712912?accountid=28180

McInnis, C., Ramsden, P., & Maconachie, D. (2012). A handbook for executive

leadership of learning and teaching in higher education. HERSDA News, 34(2), 26-27. Retrieved from https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?directe=true&AuthType=shib&db=eue&AN=79790385&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Mohr, S., & Shelton, K. (2017). Best practices framework for online faculty professional

development: A Delphi study. Online Learning, 21(4), 123-140. doi:10.24059/olj.v21i4.1273

Morgan, L., Paucar-Caceres, A., & Wright, G. (2014). Leading effective global virtual teams: the consequences of methods of communication. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 27(5), 607-624. doi:10.1007/s11213-014-9315-2

Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. ISBN: 978-0-8039-5798-5.

Mukherjee, D., Hanlon, S. C., Kedia, B. L., & Srivastava, P. (2012). Organizational identification among global virtual team members: The role of individualism collectivism and uncertainty avoidance. Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal, 19(4), 526-545. doi:10.1108/13527601211270002

Mukherjee, Debmalya., Lahiri, S., Mukherjee, Deepraj., & Billing, T. K., (2012). Leading virtual teams: how do social, cognitive, and behavioral capabilities matter? Management Decision, 50(2). 273-290. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/00251741211203560

Nydegger, R. & Nydegger, L. (2010). Challenges in managing virtual teams. Journal of Business

& Economics Research, 8(3), 69-82.

Ogren, T. A. (2016). A qualitative multi-case study of leadership and inter-team collaboration among higher education distributed employees (Order No. 10111447). Available from Dissertations & Theses @ Northcentral University. (1798489537). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.proxy1.ncu.edu/docview/1798489537?accountid=28180

Orcutt, J.M. & Dringus, L.P. (2017). Beyond being there: Practices that establish presence,

engage students and influence intellectual curiosity in a structured online learning environment. Online Learning 21(3), 15-35. doi: 10.24059/olj.v%vi%i.1231

Peart, D. (2014). The relationship between emotional intelligence and transformational leadership behavior in virtual academic leaders (Order No. 3617865). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (1528557765). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.proxy1.ncu.edu/docview/1528557765?accountid=28180

Peñarroja, V., Orengo, V., Zornoza, A., & Hernández, A. (2013). The effects of virtuality level on task-related collaborative behaviors: The mediating role of team trust. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 967-974. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2012.12.020

Roussin, C. J. & Webber, S. S. (2012). Impact of organizational identification and psychological safety on initial perceptions of coworker trustworthiness. Journal of Business and Psychology, 27(3), 317-329. doi:10.1007/s10869-011-9245-2

Saafein, O. (2013). Exploring the relationship between mode of operation and performance of support teams in telecommunication companies (Order No. 3572889). Available from Dissertations & Theses @ University of Phoenix. (1434107386). Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/1434107386?accountid=35812

Schilke, O. & Cook, K. S. (2013). A cross-level process theory of trust development in interorganizational relationships. Strategic Organization, 11(3), 281-303. doi:10.1177/1476127012472096

Silvas, S. (2016). Leader-follower attachment, psychological safety, transformational leadership practices: Adjunct faculty (Order No. 10169564). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (1848277155). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.proxy1.ncu.edu/docview/1848277155?accountid=28180

Sorsa, M. A., Kiikkala, I., & Åstedt-Kurki, P. (2015). Bracketing as a skill in conducting unstructured qualitative interviews. Nurse Researcher, 22(4), 8-12. doi: 10.7748/nr.22.4.8.e1317

Thaly, P. & Sinha, V. (2013). To Prevent Attrition in Business Process Outsourcing, Focus on People. Global Business & Organizational Excellence, 32(3), 35-43. doi:10.1002/joe.21483

Vega, R. P., Anderson, A. J., & Kaplan, S. A. (2015). A within-person examination of the effects of telework. Journal of Business and Psychology, 30(2), 313-323. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10869-014-9359-4

Weichun, Z., Sosik, J. J., Riggio, R. E., & Baiyin, Y. (2012). Relationships between transformational and active transactional leadership and followers’ organizational identification: The role of psychological empowerment. Journal of Behavioral &Applied Management, 13(3), 186–212. Retrieved from http://connection.ebscohost.com/c/articles/76581079/relationships- betweentransformational-active-transactional-leadership- followersorganizationalidentification-role-psychological-empowerment

Williams, T., Layne, M., & Ice, P. (2014). Online faculty perceptions on effective faculty

mentoring: A qualitative study. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration,

(2), 1-19. Retrieved from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/summer172/Williams_Layne_Ice172.html

Ziek, P. & Smulowitz, S. (2014). The impact of emergent virtual leadership competencies on team effectiveness. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 35(2), 106-120

As a condition of publication, the author agrees to apply the Creative Commons – Attribution International 4.0 (CC-BY) License to OLJ articles. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

This licence allows anyone to reproduce OLJ articles at no cost and without further permission as long as they attribute the author and the journal. This permission includes printing, sharing and other forms of distribution.

Author(s) hold copyright in their work, and retain publishing rights without restrictions

The DOAJ Seal is awarded to journals that demonstrate best practice in open access publishing

OLC Membership

OLC Research Center

Information

• For Readers
• For Authors
• For Librarians

Virtual leadership: A complete guide for remote leaders to crush it in 2024

The physical workplace is evolving. Remote and hybrid work models are becoming increasingly common, presenting exciting opportunities for flexibility and global collaboration.

But with distance comes a new challenge: leading effectively in a virtual environment. This is where virtual leadership steps in.

Virtual leadership is the art of guiding and inspiring individuals and teams who are geographically dispersed. It demands a unique blend of skills and strategies, different from traditional leadership approaches.

In this blog, we'll delve into the core of virtual leadership, exploring its impact on employee engagement and equipping you with the top best practices to thrive in this evolving landscape.

First, we'll unpack the definition of virtual leadership, highlighting its key characteristics and the distinct challenges it presents. We'll then shed light on the virtual leader and its crucial role in fostering employee engagement , a vital metric for productivity, satisfaction, and overall organizational success.

By understanding the connection between virtual leadership and employee engagement, you'll gain valuable insights into why mastering this leadership style is more important than ever.

What is virtual leadership?

Virtual leadership refers to the practice of leading and managing teams or individuals in a remote or virtual work environment.

With advancements in technology, many organizations are embracing remote work arrangements, and virtual leadership has become a crucial aspect of managing dispersed teams .

This type of virtual leadership focuses heavily on guiding, coordinating, and motivating team members who may be located in different geographical locations or working remotely.

It also involves navigating the challenges of leading teams in a digital and dispersed environment. Successful virtual leaders combine strong communication skills, technological proficiency, adaptability, and a results-oriented mindset to ensure the success of their own virtual environments and teams.

What are the components of virtual leadership?

Virtual leadership has a lot of different aspects to it. Here are its key components.

• Communication: Effective communication is essential in virtual leadership. Leaders must leverage various communication tools such as video conferencing, emails, instant messaging, and collaboration platforms to keep the team connected and informed.
• Trust building: Building trust becomes challenging in virtual teams due to the physical distance between team members. Virtual leaders need to establish trust through transparent communication, consistent follow-ups , and demonstrating reliability.
• Technology utilization: Virtual leaders must be proficient in using technology to facilitate collaboration and productivity . This includes being familiar with project management tools, video conferencing platforms, and other communication technologies.
• Flexibility: Virtual leaders need to be adaptable and flexible in their approach. They should understand the unique challenges of remote work and be willing to adjust their leadership style to meet the needs of a virtual team.
• Goal setting and monitoring: Clear goal-setting is crucial in virtual leadership. Leaders should set specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART) goals and regularly monitor progress. This helps keep the team aligned and focused on common objectives.
• Cultural sensitivity: Virtual teams often comprise members from diverse cultural backgrounds . Virtual leaders should be aware of cultural differences and adapt their leadership style to accommodate and respect various cultural norms.
• Team building: Building a sense of camaraderie and team spirit is important for virtual leaders. Engaging in team-building activities, virtual social events, and recognizing individual and team achievements contribute to a positive team culture.
• Results-oriented approach: Since virtual work emphasizes outcomes over presence, virtual leaders often adopt a results-oriented approach. Focusing on the achievement of goals and delivering quality work becomes paramount.

Impact of virtual leadership in employee engagement

Virtual leadership has a profound impact on employee engagement as organizations increasingly embrace remote work structures. The shift to virtual leadership alters the dynamics of traditional workplace engagement, requiring leaders to adapt their strategies to foster a sense of connection and motivation among remote team members.

Effective communication lies at the core of this impact. Virtual leaders must leverage various communication tools to ensure transparent and regular interactions, creating a virtual environment where employees feel informed and connected.

The physical distance inherent in remote work often challenges trust and team cohesion. Virtual leaders play a crucial role in building and maintaining trust through consistent and reliable communication, thereby enhancing employee engagement.

Additionally, the utilization of technology becomes a key driver. Leaders who adeptly leverage collaboration platforms and project management tools facilitate smoother workflows, contributing to a positive engagement experience for employees.

Furthermore, virtual leadership influences the way goals are set and monitored. Clear, measurable objectives, when communicated effectively, keep remote teams aligned and motivated, positively impacting employee engagement.

Recognizing the unique challenges of remote work, virtual leaders also need to prioritize flexibility and adaptability in their approach, fostering a supportive work culture.

What is the significance of virtual leadership activities in sustaining employee morale?

Virtual leadership training and activities hold significant importance in sustaining employee morale in the context of remote work. The shift to virtual work environments requires leaders to develop specific leadership skills and strategies to effectively manage and motivate their teams.

Virtual leadership training emphasizes effective communication methods for remote collaboration, helping leaders convey expectations, provide feedback , and maintain a supportive team culture.

Improved communication leading remote teams contributes to a sense of connection and understanding, bolstering employee morale.

Additionally, virtual leadership training addresses the use of technology. Proficiency in digital tools and platforms is crucial for efficient leadership.

Training programs enable leaders to harness technology for team collaboration, project management, and overall productivity, positively impacting morale by streamlining workflows and minimizing technical hurdles.

Team-building activities designed for virtual settings are equally essential. These activities foster a sense of camaraderie and community among remote team members, combating feelings of isolation and boosting morale.

Virtual leaders learn to create engaging and inclusive virtual events, enhancing team cohesion and employee satisfaction.

Moreover, training programs often cover strategies for recognizing and celebrating achievements in remote teams. Acknowledging individual and other team members' accomplishments through virtual platforms helps sustain morale by fostering a positive and rewarding work environment.

7 Virtual leadership challenges that lead to employee attrition

Addressing the following challenges through effective virtual leadership strategies can help organizations reduce employee attrition rates and create a more positive and sustainable remote work environment.

1. Communication barriers

In a virtual work environment, communication challenges can arise due to reliance on digital channels. Lack of face-to-face interaction and non-verbal cues may lead to misunderstandings, misinterpretations, and feelings of isolation, which can contribute to employee dissatisfaction and ultimately, attrition.

2. Limited relationship building

Building strong interpersonal relationships is challenging in virtual teams. The absence of casual interactions and water-cooler conversations can hinder the development of a sense of camaraderie among virtual team members. This lack of connection may lead to decreased job satisfaction and, in turn, higher employee turnover.

3. Lack of clear expectations

Virtual leaders may struggle to set clear expectations for their remote teams, leading to ambiguity regarding roles, responsibilities, and performance expectations. This uncertainty can result in frustration and dissatisfaction among employees, ultimately contributing to attrition.

4. Limited career development opportunities

Remote employees may perceive a lack of career development opportunities compared to their in-office counterparts. Virtual leaders must actively address this challenge by providing virtual training, mentorship programs, and advancement opportunities to retain talent and discourage attrition.

5. Difficulty in monitoring performance

Virtual leadership often faces challenges in effectively monitoring employee performance . The absence of direct supervision of virtual workers may create concerns about accountability and may lead to decreased motivation and engagement, potentially contributing to higher attrition rates.

6. Technology issues

Technical glitches and challenges associated with virtual tools can impede productivity and frustrate employees. Virtual leaders need to address and mitigate these issues promptly to prevent dissatisfaction and the potential desire to seek alternative employment.

7. Isolation and burnout

The lack of physical presence and clear boundaries between work and personal life in virtual settings can also lead employees to feelings of isolation and burnout . Virtual leaders must proactively address employee well-being, promoting work-life balance and mental health support to prevent burnout and attrition.

10 Virtual leadership best practices to manage your hybrid workforce

By implementing these virtual leadership best practices, organizations can effectively manage a hybrid workforce, promoting collaboration, inclusivity, and employee satisfaction across diverse remote working arrangements.

• Clear communication channels: Establish clear and open communication channels to keep everyone connected. Leverage a mix of communication tools, including video conferencing, instant messaging, and collaboration platforms, to ensure seamless interaction between virtual and in-person team members.
• Define expectations and guidelines: Clearly define expectations , guidelines, and policies for both virtual and in-office work. Establish transparent guidelines regarding work hours, availability, and communication norms to promote consistency and fairness across the hybrid workforce.
• Flexibility in work arrangements: Embrace flexibility in work arrangements to accommodate the diverse needs of your hybrid workforce. Consider offering flexible work hours, remote work options, and the ability to choose between virtual and in-person collaboration, when feasible.
• Technology training: Provide comprehensive training on the use of collaboration tools and technology platforms. Ensure that all team members, whether working virtually or in the office, are proficient in using the necessary digital tools to facilitate smooth communication and collaboration.
• Inclusive decision-making: Foster an inclusive decision-making process that considers input from both virtual and in-office team members. Use inclusive platforms for discussions and decision-making to ensure that all voices are heard, regardless of physical location.
• Regular check-ins and feedback: Conduct regular check-ins with team members to monitor progress, address concerns, and provide feedback. Regular feedback sessions help maintain a sense of connection and keep virtual employees engaged in the team's goals and objectives.
• Team-building activities: Organize virtual team-building activities to strengthen bonds among team members. These activities can include virtual social events, online games, and collaborative projects to promote a positive team culture and camaraderie.
• Recognize and celebrate achievements: Acknowledge and celebrate individual and team achievements, regardless of whether employees are working virtually or in the office. Recognition boosts morale and reinforces a sense of accomplishment among team members.
• Professional development opportunities: Provide virtual access to professional development opportunities , training programs, and mentorship initiatives. Ensuring that all employees have equal access to career advancement resources helps maintain a level playing field in a hybrid work environment.
• Emphasize work-life balance: Encourage a healthy work-life balance by setting boundaries and respecting non-working hours. Promote the importance of well-being, mental health, and self-care to prevent burnout among both virtual and in-office team members.

5 Virtual leadership examples to get inspiration form in 2024

These virtual leadership examples highlight diverse approaches and strategies adopted by leaders in 2024, showcasing how they successfully navigate the challenges of remote and hybrid work while prioritizing employee well-being , innovation, and organizational culture.

1. Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella: Leading remote transformation

Satya Nadella has been a prominent figure in virtual leadership, particularly for steering Microsoft through a transformative period toward a more virtual and collaborative future.

Under his leadership, Microsoft embraced remote work, emphasizing the importance of empathy, flexibility, and innovation to navigate the challenges of a rapidly changing work landscape.

2. Zoom CEO Eric Yuan: Pioneering virtual communication

Eric Yuan, the founder and CEO of Zoom, played a crucial role in the surge of virtual meetings and communication during the global shift to remote work.

His leadership not only involves the successful scaling of the Zoom platform but also emphasizes continuous improvement and innovation to enhance the virtual meeting experience, setting an example for effective virtual leadership in the technology sector.

3. Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff: Prioritizing employee well-being

Marc Benioff, the CEO of Salesforce, has been a vocal advocate for prioritizing employee well-being in the virtual work era. His leadership approach includes providing mental health resources, flexible work options, and emphasizing a culture of trust and transparency.

Benioff's commitment to employee success and happiness serves as an inspiration for leaders navigating the challenges of remote work.

4. IBM CEO Arvind Krishna: Redefining the hybrid workplace

Arvind Krishna has been instrumental in redefining IBM's approach to the hybrid workplace. His leadership involves a strategic blend of remote and in-person work, focusing on outcomes and employee experiences.

Krishna's efforts to create a flexible work environment that combines the benefits of a virtual workforce and physical collaboration serve as an example for leaders navigating the complexities of a hybrid workforce.

5. Airbnb CEO Brian Chesky: Nurturing company culture virtually

Brian Chesky, the CEO of Airbnb, has demonstrated effective virtual leadership skills in maintaining and nurturing company culture during times of remote work.

His emphasis on virtual team-building activities, regular communication, and fostering a sense of belonging among remote employees showcases a commitment to sustaining a positive organizational culture in a virtual environment.

17 Virtual leadership impact survey questions to ask your employees in 2024

• On a scale of 1 to 10, how well do you feel the leadership team communicates in this virtual work environment?
• How satisfied are you with the virtual tools and technology provided to support remote collaboration and productivity?
• To what extent do you feel included in decision-making processes while working virtually?
• How would you rate the effectiveness of virtual team-building activities in fostering a sense of camaraderie among team members?
• On a scale from 1 to 10, how well do you believe your immediate supervisor understands and addresses your unique challenges as a virtual team member?
• To what extent do you feel there are clear expectations regarding your role, responsibilities, and performance standards in the virtual work setting?
• How satisfied are you with the opportunities for professional development and training provided in the virtual work environment?
• How well do you think the leadership team recognizes and celebrates individual and team achievements in the virtual workplace?
• On a scale of 1 to 10, how would you rate the organization's efforts in promoting work-life balance for virtual employees?
• To what extent do you feel your well-being and mental health are prioritized by the organization while working remotely?
• How effective do you find virtual communication in fostering collaboration and information sharing within the team?
• How satisfied are you with the flexibility offered in terms of work hours and remote work arrangements?
• To what extent do you feel that the leadership team has successfully adapted to the challenges of managing a virtual and hybrid workforce?
• How well do you think the organization has addressed concerns related to virtual leadership, such as trust, accountability, and transparency?
• On a scale from 1 to 10, how connected do you feel to your colleagues and the organization's mission while working remotely?
• How would you rate the organization's efforts in providing resources and support for addressing technical challenges associated with virtual work?
• To what extent do you believe the organization's leadership is proactive in creating a positive and inclusive virtual work culture?

In the evolving landscape of remote and hybrid work, virtual leadership emerges as a pivotal force shaping organizational success. Leaders who prioritize effective communication, technological proficiency, key skills, and a people-centric approach foster engaged and motivated teams.

Striking a balance between virtual and in-person dynamics, exemplary leaders navigate challenges such as trust-building, career development, and well-being. Drawing inspiration from key figures and adapting best practices ensures sustainable leadership in 2024.

As organizations continue to redefine their structures, the impact of virtual leadership on employee engagement , satisfaction, and retention remains paramount for achieving a harmonious blend of flexibility, innovation, and thriving workplace culture.

Karthik Ganesan

Karthik is a passionate Product Marketer with 3+ years of experience and enjoys in conveying complex ideas through simple narratives. A film and tech enthusiast who loves to explore places.

You might also like

What is a hostile work environment: 25+ tips to tackle them in 2024.

A hostile work environment is an uncomfortable situation where employees face harassment or discrimination, impacting their well-being and productivity. Creating a respectful and inclusive workplace is vital for everyone's success and happiness.

50+ Must-ask questions for your next workplace culture survey in 2024

Discover the 50+ must-ask questions for your next workplace culture survey in 2023. Uncover valuable insights, assess employee satisfaction, and drive positive change in your organization's culture. Take the pulse of your workplace and unlock the keys to a thriving and engaging work environment.

Book a free, no-obligation product demo call with our experts.

Business Email is a required field*

Too many attempts, please try again later!

A call to action for virtual team leaders: practitioner perspectives on trust, conflict and the need for organizational support

Organization Management Journal

ISSN : 2753-8567

Article publication date: 23 October 2020

Issue publication date: 17 December 2020

The purpose of this study is to investigate the leadership behaviors of managers of virtual teams (VTs), particularly in the areas of trust building and conflict management. This study aims to expand the research of VT performance by offering first-person accounts from VT leaders on the strategies implemented to drive VT performance.

Design/methodology/approach

This study used a grounded theory approach to examine the leadership behaviors through in-depth interviews with eight field managers of VTs employed by different technology companies. Interview questions focused on trust-building and conflict management techniques. This structured qualitative study incorporates elements of narrative inquiry interwoven in the findings.

Building a high-trust environment was found to be critical to VT performance. VT managers indicated that effective conflict resolution skills were also important.

Research limitations/implications

Although the sample size is within the suggested range for a valid phenomenological study, the results may lack generalizability. Participants were limited to the technology industry; leaders of high-performing VTs in other industries could offer differing results.

Practical implications

This study’s contribution is the exploration and identification of innovative techniques that VT managers implemented to build trust and resolve conflict. A lack of holistic training programs for the VT leader is also considered along with suggestions for future research and implications for the VT managers.

Originality/value

This study’s contribution is the exploration and identification of innovative techniques that VT managers implemented that drive VT performance, particularly related to building high levels of trust and managing conflict effectively. Practices are suggested whereby both the VT leader and the organization take an active role in ensuring that the VT has the opportunity to perform optimally.

• Conflict management
• Virtual leadership
• Coaching and development
• Virtual team performance

Turesky, E.F. , Smith, C.D. and Turesky, T.K. (2020), "A call to action for virtual team leaders: practitioner perspectives on trust, conflict and the need for organizational support", Organization Management Journal , Vol. 17 No. 4/5, pp. 185-206. https://doi.org/10.1108/OMJ-09-2019-0798

Emerald Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2020, Elizabeth Fisher Turesky, Coby D. Smith and Ted K. Turesky.

Published in Organization Management Journal . Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode

Introduction

It is the year 2020 and we are in the midst of a worldwide public health pandemic because of the rapid explosion of the COVID-19. The pandemic has made its rapid and implacable advance around the world, forcing sweeping changes including the emergence of remote video conferencing as a professional lifeline. A Massachusetts Institute of Technology report found that 34.1% of Americans who previously commuted to work report that they were working from home by the first week of April 2020 because of the coronavirus ( Brynjolfsson & Horton, 2020 ). There is little doubt that many organizations will have greater remote work after the pandemic has subsided compared with before the outbreak because of continued health concerns and operational efficiencies. The current numbers of people working from home suggest that this response to the virus may have hastened a trend toward remote work already in progress. As Kate Lister (2020) , President of Global Workplace Analytics has noted, “the genie is out of the bottle and it’s not likely to go back in.” This will significantly impact organizational culture and the leadership required for virtual teams (VTs). This new reality spurs many important questions for organizational leaders including, how is trust and effective conflict management remotely fostered by VT managers and supported by organizations? The present study focuses on this question.

Even before the pandemic, working virtually away from the organization’s brick and mortar has been on the rise for many years. A survey from the Society for Human Resources Management (2016) reported that 60% of US companies offered their employees telecommuting opportunities. Bell and Kozlowski (2002) were some of the first researchers to define the concept of VTs, noting their special characteristics of being distributed in nature and having a spatial distance between members. They also found that VT members predominantly interact through technologically mediated communication (e.g. videoconferencing and email) vs conventional teams who operate in a traditional in-person environment. VTs can also be distinguished from proximal teams, where members co-locate, through variables of geographic location, organizational function or temporal distance between team members ( Kimble, 2011 ; Martínez-Moreno, Zornoza, González-Navarro & Thompson, 2012 ; Verburg, Bosch-Sijtsema & Vartiainen, 2013 ; Szewc, 2014 ). Importantly, it has been proposed that “virtuality” exists on a continuum ( Kirkman & Mathieu, 2005 ), the degree of which is based on physical distance among team members, ratio of proximal to VT members, the use of electronic communication technology and relative time worked proximally to time worked virtually ( Ortiz de Guinea, Webster & Staples, 2012 ; Gilson, Maynard, Jones Young, Vartiainen & Hakonen, 2014 ). For instance, one team member might exhibit greater virtuality working 100% of the time away from the physical space of the organization compared with another team member who works only 50% of the time away from the brick and mortar of headquarters.

Virtual and proximal teams also differ in the leadership skills needed to effectively drive team performance ( Bell & Kozlowski, 2002 ; Purvanova & Bono, 2009 ; Hoch & Kozlowski, 2014 ; Ford, Ford & Piccolo, 2017 ). A sampling of measures examining performance in VTs include the degree of virtuality ( Schweitzer & Duxbury, 2010 ), use of communication technology ( Kankanhalli, Bernard, Tan & Wei, 2006 ) and team identity ( Kimble, 2011 ). In addition, recent literature also points to concepts of trust building ( Brahm & Kunze, 2012 ; Breuer, Hüffmeier & Hertel; Crisp & Jarvenpaa, 2013 ; Pierce & Hansen, 2008 ; Gilson et al. , 2014 ) and effective conflict resolution ( Chang & Lee, 2013 ; Kankanhalli et al. , 2006 ; Montoya-Weiss et al. , 2001 ) as two of the most fundamental predictors of overall VT performance.

While the unique challenges of managing VTs have been established, research focusing on the tactics, behaviors and leadership techniques VT managers use to drive overall team performance in the modern-day organization is limited. Further, a clear understanding of the exact practices that leaders use to build trust between leader and member and resolve conflict at the individual and team levels has not yet emerged ( Liao, 2017 ). With the continued proliferation of VTs, it is imperative for practitioners and managers to understand optimal strategies to drive performance of their VTs.

The purpose of this qualitative study was to acquire distinctive and disparate perspectives from VT leaders on the implementation of those strategies that support performance of VTs, particularly related to building high levels of trust and managing conflict effectively. By obtaining first-hand accounts from VT managers via interviews, the findings of the present study can assist VT managers, practitioners and organizational leaders to maximize overall VT performance.

Theoretical background

Trust and performance.

Trust is one of the most studied variables in the context of VTs ( Gilson et al. , 2014 ). In fact, in a recent multidisciplinary literature review on the topic, the authors identified 124 articles that focused on concepts of trust in VTs ( Hacker, Johnson, Saunders & Thayer, 2019 ). In one of the first studies focusing on the impact of trust on VT performance, Pierce and Hansen (2008) found that team member trust had a positive effect on perceived (i.e. self-rated) VT effectiveness. Three unique styles of trust were examined, including institutional-based trust, defined as a function of the individual’s belief in institutional norms; personality-based trust, defined as a person’s propensity to trust others; and cognitive-based trust, which develops through the use of social cues, impressions and interactive tasks that an individual can receive or deliver to or from another ( Pierce & Hansen, 2008 ). A survey of 873 responses indicated that all 3 elements of trust were associated with self-rated team effectiveness. Interestingly, the association between trust and performance may be reciprocal. In a case study, employees reported that one of the drivers of building trust levels among VT members was consistent levels of performance (rather than social bonds as in traditional, in-person teams) ( Kirkman, Rosen, Gibson, Tesluk & McPherson, 2002 ).

In a more recent study, researchers noted the importance of building trust at the earliest stages of team development for VTs ( Crisp & Jarvenpaa, 2013 ). In their study of 68 temporary VTs, Crisp and Jarvenpaa (2013) found a positive link between developing early trusting environments, a concept they define as “swift trust” and overall team performance. Though the study examined student VTs rather than employees in an organizational setting, the study has merit due its longitudinal nature, taking place over a period of eight weeks, a rarity in the study of VTs ( Gilson et al. , 2014 ). In addition, the results relied on independent, unbiased third parties to rate team performance, rather than self-assessments, which could introduce bias. Importantly, the link between trust and performance of VTs is not limited to organizations in the USA, but present in organizations in other countries as well ( Brahm & Kunze, 2012 ; Verburg et al. , 2013 ). Finally, a recent meta-analysis examining 52 studies representing 1,850 VTs reported stronger associations between team trust and team performance in virtual compared with traditional face-to-face teams ( Breuer et al. , 2016 ). Altogether, these findings suggest that trust is a foundational element in work performance for the VT.

Conflict management and performance

lack immediate feedback, which leads to conflict avoidance and declines in performance ( Kankanhalli, Bernard, Tan & Wei, 2006 ); or

escalate conflict ( Ayoko et al. , 2012 ).

Managing disagreements may also be more difficult virtually than in-person ( Wakefield et al. , 2008 ).

A recent study of 141 engineering students organized into 4 VTs found that conflict management mediated the relationship between goal commitment and performance ( Pazos, 2012 ). The study highlighted that when conflicts were successfully managed and resolved, goals were successfully achieved, which resulted in either higher levels or nullified declines in VT performance.

The investigators further suggested that conflict management training in organizations leads to better performance outcomes.

Virtual team leadership and performance

The VT environment is accompanied by challenges that differ from those in a proximal team environment. Consequently, different leadership approaches are required for VTs ( Bell & Kozlowski, 2002 ). For instance, complex tasks require a higher degree of integration and collaboration among team members. As tasks became more complex in virtual environments, managers need to anticipate problems and provide clear direction for each team member to regulate individual performance to help increase performance for the overall team. In addition, conflict management in a virtual environment may depend upon whether the VT manager extends communication opportunities to the VT ( Bergiel et al. , 2008 , p. 105) to productively work through conflicts.

After Bell and Kozlowski’s (2002) seminal study was published, investigators sought to identify the leadership styles that were needed for the virtual environment. Altogether, trust and conflict management skills were found to be consistent and essential elements for managers in driving overall VT performance ( Szewc, 2014 ; Liao, 2017 ), in addition to other elements that may have been specific to organizational environment ( Gibbs et al. , 2017 ) or other factors intrinsic to the study design ( Hoch & Kozlowski, 2014 ; Hoyt & Blascovich, 2003 ; Chang & Lee, 2013 ; Purvanova & Bono, 2009 ). Liao (2017) further proposed that managers need to guide VTs in a multilevel way, exhibiting different behaviors to drive individual team member and overall team performance.

A study examining the learning performance of students in a VT setting in Taiwan found an interaction between leadership style and conflict management, whereby transformational leadership was shown to be more effective than transactional leadership when dealing with conflict. In other words, transformational leaders using a collaborative conflict management style, comprising active listening and creative problem-solving, was found to be the best approach to resolve conflict and drive higher levels of performance as scored on a quantitative scale ( Chang & Lee, 2013 ). However, in both of these studies, subjects were students in a university setting and the results cannot necessarily be translated to the organizational construct. These studies illustrate that transformational leadership in managing VT member conflicts is an effective style to achieve successful team performance, where close relationships need to be nurtured and maintained over a relatively long period of time. However, the specific tactics and behaviors that VT leaders use to build trust and manage conflict for their teams have not been examined in recent literature. As such, more examination of the work of VT leaders is needed to better understand how they guide their VTs to maximize levels of team performance.

A phenomenological research approach ( Creswell & Poth, 2017 ) was selected for this study to distill individual experiences of leadership behavior used to drive performance for the VT, specifically focusing on the areas of trust building, conflict management and conflict resolution. The fundamental goal, as Creswell (2013) explains, is to arrive at a description of the nature of the particular phenomenon. Following essential guidelines for phenomenological data analysis by Creswell and Poth (2017) , the researchers highlighted significant quotes and statements in the transcripts to provide a better understanding of how the subjects experienced the phenomenon being studied.

VT managers in tech companies, the industry with the greatest percentage of VTs ( Society for Human Resources Management, 2016 ), were targeted for the research. A total of 25 human resource managers from 25 different companies were contacted by email with requests to identify and interview company VT managers with reputations of high performance. Specifically, performance was specified to human resource managers as follows: the VT managers received consistent high-performance evaluations; they received promotions in the past and positive performance scores from their direct reports; and they had grown their team base over time with responsibilities that had been expanded within their tenure with their company. Although not specified, the VT managers selected most likely had a strong positive reputation from their co-workers as well. In total, eight VT managers agreed to participate in the study and each of them gave their informed consent.

Six men and two women were interviewed for the phenomenological study. Seven of the eight were based in the USA, with one individual based in Canada. Each of these team managers led teams with ten or fewer direct reports. The duration of experience with their current employers varied from 13 months to 35 years. Interviewees were employed in technology firms, which ranged in annual revenue from $2bn to over $150bn. Sample titles included vice president of market development, vertical lead for financial services, vice president of analyst relations and vice president of product marketing. Five of the eight interviewees had master’s degrees while the three others had undergraduate degrees. Two of the eight interviewees had domestic direct reports, while the remaining six had domestic and international direct reports. Though the exact composition of each VT varied, VT managers had representative direct reports based in China, the UK, Australia, Mexico, Singapore, Germany and France. All of the interviewees were based in a different physical location from the majority of their employees at least 50% of the time.

Interviewing

A total of eight interviews were conducted by the lead researcher over a three-month period from December, 2017 to February, 2018. Six of the interviews were conducted by recorded telephone conversation, while two were completed in-person. The names of the interviewees were changed to protect their privacy. The length of the semi-structured interviews ranged from 60 to 90 min. After introductory and key demographic questions were answered, the interviewer asked the subject what they believed to be the key behavior they had undertaken to drive performance for their VT. Subjects were then asked if they believed that building trust with team members was important to overall VT performance. The definition of trust used for the interviews was the commonly cited version by Mayer et al. (1995) as “the willingness of a party to be vulnerable to the actions of another party based on the expectation that the other will perform a particular action important to the trustor, irrespective of the ability to monitor or control that other party.” Finally, interviewees were asked how they had worked to resolve conflict among team members and how conflict and conflict resolution related to their overall VT performance. For the study, conflict was defined as task-oriented or relationship-oriented conflict. Jehn (1995) , a leading researcher on organizational conflict defines task-oriented conflict as taking place when there are disagreements among group members about the content of the tasks being performed while relationship conflict exists when there are interpersonal incompatibilities among group members, which includes negative emotions such as animosity and annoyance. When delving into both trust and conflict, interviewees were probed for additional details, specific examples or more contexts through additional questions to best understand the behavior taken to successfully lead high-performing VTs. If the interview was completed in-person, it was digitally recorded via a personal voice recorder. If the interview was completed via teleconference, the call was recorded via the software application TapeACall®. Field notes were taken during the interview. After the interview, the audio recording was professionally transcribed using transcriptionhub.com ® . The transcription of the audio file was then returned to the interviewee and reviewed for accuracy. As “… the time spent with tape recordings and transcriptions is an important part of the immersion phase of heuristic research…” ( Etherington, 2007 , pp. 79–80), many hours were spent listening to and making notes from the tapes and transcriptions to help identify emergent themes. The researchers scrutinized the transcripts to reach agreement on significant themes displayed in the interview transcripts.

Data representation and analysis

While rooted in a grounded theory approach ( Glaser & Strauss, 1967 ), this structured qualitative study incorporates elements of narrative inquiry. In the discussion of data analysis, we follow Polkinghorne’ (1995) approach by melding the text into thematic groupings, yet also sharing components of what he terms “narrative analysis,” that is, representing on the page a storied account of people’s lives. The transcripts were grouped, as Clandinin and Murphy (2007 , p. 632) suggest, around “topical threads,” with patterned themes derived from analysis of the transcripts, presenting an ongoing dialogue between the general and the specific to provide illustration and context. The bricolage of instances, events and resulting themes that emerge from the interviews is brought together in a unifying interpretation.

Following Miles and Huberman (1994) , analysis of the interviews unfolded in a continuous, iterative process. Transcript content was analyzed for emergent themes, which were sorted into relevant categories. The notes taken during the interviews and from transcriptions were then organized and integrated, and the themes further refined. Finally, a conceptual framework was created within which the interview data could be interpreted.

To aid in theme identification and analysis, the qualitative study software Nvivo11 ® MAC, by QSR International was used to categorize themes from the interview transcripts, in the following sequence of steps:

Initial coding.

First, transcripts were read and reread by two of the three researchers, and initial content codes developed and assigned to each substantive statement made in response to a given structured interview question, for each participant/interviewee. Content codes were revised (renamed/refined) as necessary through the systematic coding process of the transcripts. Codes were compared across researchers and revised as needed. The researchers also analyzed the field notes taken from each interview not directly captured in the transcriptions and cross-referenced them against key statements from the transcriptions. Next, textural and structural descriptions of how the participants experienced the phenomenon were derived from the statements and themes. By identifying core themes and elements that were derived from the interviews with the assistance of the software application, the “essence” of the phenomenon was identified.

Identification of emergent themes.

As initial content coding continued, consistent themes began to emerge and were created as “parent nodes” within NVivo, with content codes becoming “child nodes” in a hierarchical organization. NVivo allows multiple coding at single and multiple levels, combination and revision of codes without loss of more fine-grained designations, as well as searches within and across participants. After the interviews were completed, transcribed and analyzed, four core themes from the discussions were identified. These themes included trust building with team members, conflict resolution techniques, leadership principles for the virtual and non-virtual setting and coaching and organizational support opportunities specific to the VT manager.

Trust in virtual teams

interviewees recognized that a high-trust climate with direct line team members was foundational for overall team performance;

interviewees used innovative techniques to develop a high level of personal trust with their direct reports; and

interviewees noted the importance of building trust with direct reports quickly, defined in the literature as “swift trust” by Crisp and Jarvenpaa (2013) .

These sub-themes are detailed below.

Early in the interviews, it was apparent that the managers of these VTs made a strong, positive association between building trust with individual team members and high levels of team performance. Trust that team members have for their managers may include speaking up on their behalf when necessary, availability to answer questions or resolve concerns and understanding that sporadic personal challenges can hamper delivery of consistent results; whereas trust that managers have for their team members may include overcoming roadblocks to successful project completion. Dan provides an example when he stated:

And I think trust also goes to knowing that no matter what happens your team members and your boss is going to have your back…What people tell me and the people on the team have repeatedly told me this that I always have their backs and even if they do something wrong I will support them to the rest of the company and then work through what needs to get fixed just between me and them. So, I placed big emphasis on never throwing someone under the bus on the team and backing them a 1,000 per cent. So, I think that over time really, really builds up trust.

Also, Mike stated, “I can’t imagine having a highly performing organization team without trust being a core. Trust a value, a core value and a core reality which it is.” Nathan remarked of his team, “In general they are a highly effective team. The reason why they’ve gotten there is because that there is a high level of trust…” David outlined the criticality of trust for his VT, “Trust is one of the most important things that any manager or any team has to have. Trust is massively important to success of any high-powered and well-functioning team…” Being able to build a strong level of trust extended beyond the current team to as early as the hiring practice. As Charles mentioned:

My number one criteria is to earn trust. When I hire it’s the number one item I focus on. I’m a firm believer in if you're really good at what you do and you're not a trust owner, it doesn’t matter.

For Charles, the trust element was so critical that if he questioned the trust capacity of potential new members to the team he would not hire them. Nonetheless, as David said:

Sometimes obviously I need to push them in terms of timelines or the approach because one of the negatives of getting people to work together is that sometimes you get into Groupthink mode… So you get to breakup Groupthink mode. But in general they are a highly effective team and the reason why they’ve gotten there is because that there is a high level of trust and there is that high level of autonomy that they feel like they can do anything, they don’t need me there to help them and I don’t need to micromanage them. So that becomes, that makes my job is a virtual manager much easier.

Though interviewees highlighted additional areas contributing to the team’s performance, having a high-trust level with direct reports was consistently reported. Importantly, the emphasis was placed on trust despite the acknowledgement that high levels of trust were much more difficult to achieve in a virtual setting than in a co-located setting. As Nathan stated, “Building trust as a leader, a virtual leader, you cannot just take someone out for lunch or for a drink after work.” To respond to the reality of the virtual world, managers of the teams consistently mentioned the need to work very hard to find innovative ways to build personal levels of trust with their direct reports.

Personal trust innovations in the virtual world.

When asked about the specific skills needed to build personal levels of trust with their reports, the interviewees all admitted it was easier to do so in an in-person environment. Rick noted:

One of the most important things about in-person is that it can build the relationship so much easier. You gain the benefit of the various elements of communication that go far beyond simply the words that are exchanged – all the body language, all the tones and facial gestures.

Mary expressed similar sentiment stating, “You can’t see each other and you're not in the room with each other all the time. Email and phone conversations don’t pick up on some of the nuances that in-person or person-to-person contact does.” Because of the virtual setting, those interviewed expressed that they made a consistent and strong effort to find innovative ways in which to build a high level of personal trust, with many taking advantage of advanced technology tools to do so.

Rick derived a novel idea first introduced as an exploratory project, formulating a weekly video blog that was distributed to team members. It quickly became a must-have for his group, providing a lens into his personal life. He explained:

I do the video as another element of communication. It’s my personality: They often have some level of an edge to them, either a humorist edge or a topical edge. They have ranged from my hobbies and my interests like skiing to interviews with team members to interviews with people who are not directly team members…It became a demand, like we want a video every week […]

Rachel uses a social networking application to personally connect with her team members and build trust among the team. She stated, “The kind of trust application we use for the management team is WhatsApp…We use it to share a picture of the kids…pictures of the Thanksgiving turkey and where one is going for Christmas…” Many of those interviewed expressed how in the co-located world they could easily take their team members out to lunch, buy them coffee or sponsor a team-building happy hour event. However, they could not easily replicate a similar act to build personal trust in the virtual context. James compensated by setting up virtual lunches, turning on his video conference system while his colleagues in London ate the lunch he ordered for them. He remarked:

They’ll set up a Skype call in a conference room. I’ll order in lunch and say I’m going to call in for a couple minutes to see how you guys are doing. How are the Olympics or how’s your soccer team doing? I think that builds trust and they recognize that.

On the rare opportunities, Mary interacts in-person with all members of her remote team. She will also frequently meet with her team members’ families over a meal. She noted, “Really creating personal connection points is important to deepen the relationships and has an element to building trust.” These managers continually looked for ways to strengthen the personal levels of trust with their team members as they did not have the advantage of proximity to build close relationships with them on a daily basis. As Rachel stated, “In a virtual environment, it’s really, really hard because you don’t see the person. You are engaged on a weekly basis but then if you don’t meet up regularly, things become more distant. Building trust is really the constant connection.”

Swift trust and the virtual team.

The interviewees realized as they gained more experience in working with VTs they needed to find ways to build trust quickly with new team members. The majority cited the importance of partnering new hires with current team members in their location for a shadowing and mentoring experience as they could not be on-site themselves. Nathan remarked:

When a new employee comes in, I buddy them up…In the process of shadowing, those people get to know each other. You kind of get a kick start in relationship building. I'll follow up with both the buddy and the new employee a week later. I want them to feel like, I'm not hiring this person to do more work for me. I'm hiring this person to be part of the team so that we can all succeed.

James operates in a similar way stating, “I’ll set up shadowing sessions where there’ll be a one-on-one or a small group, where this individual can sit with, shadow, view the day-to-day, ask questions, and start to build those relationships…” Charles does the same, remarking, “I assign to the new person a mentor who can help them with whatever they need.” In the virtual context, team managers provided a proxy for the support they individually could traditionally provide in an on-site setting by using other team members who may be co-located with the new hires.

VT managers also leverage socialization into the company to build trust quickly. Rachel’s policy was to get the new hire ingrained with the company culture from the first day. She commented, “In the virtual world, a hiring manager often never sees the person that they’re hiring. We see them often from the first day (at the company)…We get them to headquarters…They get to know their manager, boss, their peers and the other managers.” James had a similar strategy in place working very hard to embrace new hires in the company at the early stages which built trust. He stated, “I work to have their calendar booked up with meetings with me, meetings with others and the organization. They feel immediately ingrained in what they’re doing, immediately ingrained in the organization.” Though none of the interviewees admitted they had a perfect system for building swift trust at the early stages of employment with new team members, the majority realized its importance in the virtual setting.

Conflict and conflict resolution in virtual teams

Managers used various styles of conflict management techniques to resolve conflicts among the team rather than favoring one (i.e. adaptive conflict management).

Managers emphasized team members resolving conflicts independently without management involvement.

All managers stressed the importance of coming together to resume team goals following conflict resolution.

Adaptive conflict management.

Managers referring to style, structure and technique described multiple approaches to resolving conflict, whether by phone, a virtual platform, email or in person. For instance, Nathan stated, “It really depends on not my style but the team member style. And I try to adapt based on what their style is.” Rick had a similar view remarking, “I could use any and all…You use different techniques for different structures, different folks.” Though the resolution style varied from conflict to conflict, several of those interviewed mentioned their preference to deliver difficult information in an in-person or telephone format rather than via email communication. As David remarked, “I just pick up the phone and call people…It’s simple to get into rising conflicts just over email…I use the telephone as the conflict resolution tool.”

Managers also noted a strong inclination to ensure that conflicts are prevented from worsening. Charles mentioned, “I definitely do not avoid…” while Rachel stated, “It’s definitely not avoiding…It’s talking it through.” James agreed, “You have got to talk about it, you have got to work together, you have got to communicate. It’s the only way you’re going to work through it. To let something sit to fester, it’s just going to end poorly.”

Conflict resolution independence.

Without being able to mediate conflicts in person because of their proximity, VT managers leaned heavily on their team members to resolve conflicts without their involvement. Rachel put it bluntly, “The only two people that can solve this problem are the two people that have the problem. So, can you please call each other? If you can’t resolve it I'm happy to get on a call with you.” Mary used similar tactics when she discussed two members in conflict, “It was forcing them to pair together, have individual conversations to ask the questions and get under the hood of the car as to what the real problem was.” Nathan had a similar method:

I’ll try to have them resolve it first. If it’s a business-related conflict I’ll expose it. If they can’t solve it themselves we are getting in a room and I’m calling attention to the elephant. And I’m going to put them in a position where they need to resolve it.

David took it a step further, forcing individuals in conflict to work together on projects. He explained:

If they have to learn how to work together to achieve something, invariably they will learn more about each other. Both people will realize that the person that they’re collaborating with is actually a really good person and they may just see the world a little bit differently or have a different communication style. The collaboration just helps people to see other people as human beings working through a project together.

In leading a VT, without the benefit of face-to-face interaction, the managers found in many cases that the best way to resolve a team member conflict was by asking the team members to resolve their differences on their own, only stepping in when a common resolution could not be found independently.

Team alignment following resolution.

The majority of those interviewed stressed the importance of all team members aligning with the decisions made after the conflict was resolved. If this did not occur, there was a likelihood overall team performance could be impacted negatively. Mike stated:

You are on a team and you need to make a decision. You should disagree; you should argue. You should have diverse thoughts and share diverse experiences so people can bring their particular expertise and insights to the table…Once the decision has been made then everybody needs to get behind that decision.

Mary shared a similar sentiment, “If somebody vehemently disagrees, that person has to come along for the ride even though they may disagree.” The VT managers stressed how vital it was for the team to move forward aligned as a unit. Without the benefit of sitting next to their colleagues in an in-person setting, VT managers emphasized the need to communicate in forms outside of email, in which messages could be easily misinterpreted. For instance, James relied heavily on video conferencing to make sure everyone is in alignment. He remarked:

At this point, 75-85% of the calls I make are videoconference calls. There’s a mandate I have that they do the same, that if they’re on a call with another group through their machine, turn on your camera. The more in-person time you have, the more you get to know them, their expressions, their little nuances, as it’s easy to send an aggressive email because in theory, no one’s on the other side.

Overall, team managers did not leave conflicts unresolved, used various strategies to resolve them and made sure team members were fully aligned with decisions.

Leadership in virtual teams

leadership practices in any setting; and

leadership practices in a virtual setting. Both practices deserve closer attention.

Transparency, recognition, mentoring and coaching: leadership in any setting.

Interviewees demonstrated transparency in myriad ways. For instance, Rachel was transparent about her priorities that “There are a few times of the year where you cannot count on me. If there is a soccer world championship, I’m not there for you if the German team is playing.” Charles was transparent about his virtual work environment:

I’ve told [people] that I work in my basement. I’ve told them that my wife, the kids are upstairs…Not shying away from being transparent with what your work life is proposing…The more you can do that, the more people can identify with what you’re going through.

Another common theme among the interviewees was recognition of individual team member achievements contributing to overall team success. Mike mentioned, “I’m a huge believer that it’s my job to get every penny that I can for the people on my team for their compensation. I fight tooth and nail for that and I try to make sure that my team understands that.” In contrast, other managers sought ways to recognize their top performers in non-financial ways when additional resources may not be available. It could be as simple as calling out the achievements of his team members to his superiors as David noted:

I really love to give credit where credit is due. When people do a great job on the team and they (upper management) say hey David, you've done an awesome job, I will say yes, but it was because of this person. It’s because of Erin, it’s because of Cindy, it’s because of John, and they’re the guys who really got this work done. I do that overtly via email or through verbal communications.

James gives his individual team members corporate awards for performance whenever possible, explaining that it builds comradery. Though each had their own way of accomplishing it, the majority of VT managers interviewed made sure to reward team members that contributed to team performance as frequently as possible.

Finally, the interviewees realized they needed to consistently coach and mentor their team members in various ways depending on their individual needs and talents. Charles encouraged a high-performing individual contributor on his team to expand her ownership and influence, potentially outside of her day job, to make a strong impact on the organization. Mary and David both frequently coached individual team members on conflict management, trying to ensure that individuals understand that there are different approaches to solving problems. David confronted two team members on a recent disagreement: “Let me tell you what I observe is happening. I see you two as the two strongest people with the strongest opinions and you're not listening to one another. You're a mirror image of yourself and you're not listening to one another.” With a more seasoned team, the coaching for Rick had the role of a feedback loop for him to make sure he was on track with his messaging. He commented, “I tend to get some reverse mentoring from the managers on my team. I ask, tell me how you think the team is receiving these messages? That’s very helpful.” All managers engaged in coaching, though their particular approaches varied.

Goal communication, presence and sharing leadership: leading virtually.

In addition to developing trust and healthy conflict management practices within their teams, interviewees discussed additional management and leadership practices they believed contributed to overall VT performance. For example, when leading the team in a virtual context, interviewees stressed the importance of having clear, consistent goals for individual team members and the overall team. Progress toward these goals needed to be communicated to the team frequently, as Rick noted. Nathan agreed, stating that his main indicator of performance for his VT was clarity on mission and measures of success. Rachel also stressed clarity for goals in her communication to the VT, “People need to understand the goal they are moving towards, why they are moving towards something, what does success look like? Objective setting, making clear how people are getting measured.” Overall, interviewees repeatedly remarked on the importance of communicating consistent goals and progress toward those goals.

Transparency also helped team members to see how their work contributed to overall team performance. Mary explained that transparency is especially important when delivering difficult messages to team members on progress toward goals. James commented:

I look at it at the team and individual level. I then report on how much time they’re spending in various projects against the amount of work that I’m able to measure and report on. And from there, it’s transparent to the whole team. I share that during a huddle, three times a week. We track it. We trend it. And at the end of the month that dashboard is escalated up to senior management.

David operated in a similar fashion for his monthly calls with his team. He remarked:

We do weekly team meetings where everybody talks about the projects they’re working on. They give us the top three things that they did for the last week and the top three things that they’re going to do in the coming week. It helps people focus on the things that are important for the week and the things that are not important. For the folks who are not performing, they are either going to have to step up or they’re going to show that they’re not really doing a whole lot…

As the virtual manager has limited exposure in-person with his direct reports, those interviewed also described how they communicated with their team members. For instance, Charles noted:

I’m always focused on my tone. Managers need to focus on tone, tone of emails, and tone of calls. I am really cognizant of making sure this person can see me through the phone or see me through email in how I write or how I talk. It is not necessarily the what, but the how, how you position, how you are framing things.

David preferred to use the telephone to connect with his team members noting, “I just pick up the phone and call people…” and indicating that conflicts are more likely to emerge over email. Those interviewed had mixed feelings on preferred communication style for the remote environment, be it video conference, text, instant message or other form. However, the majority emphasized how important it was to pay attention to how messages were communicated versus simply what was communicated.

Many interviewees also mentioned the importance of frequent communication and maintaining presence. Mary noted that strong communication was her number one indicator of team performance, remarking, “I think it is communication. It is talking to each other on a continuous basis, to make sure we’re not missing anything and that we are continuing to or continuously sort of refreshing and energizing the relationship.” Nathan went further in describing maintaining presence:

The key to any sort of virtual environment or virtual matrix teams is over communication. Sometimes a lot of people don’t do it because it requires more time to do that. But to me it has been the single most important lesson of managing remote or across time zones or locations because it accomplishes…clarity of what it is that you are, that you want to get done. It also creates presence. You are not out of sight, out of mind if you are always talking to those people.

Charles agreed that “being present is really important as a remote manager…Being overly present, actually. If you are remote you need to be online. That’s why being on instant messenger is really important, they feel like you’re right there, being receptive and responsive in a timely fashion.” James, as a manager of a global VT, also underscored the importance of being consistently available for his team members, who are located in various time zones around the world, even though they fell in non-traditional working hours for him. For the virtual managers interviewed, being available to team members, being careful in how messages were delivered and being cognizant of how timely they were delivered all minimized confusion and contributed to greater performance for the group.

Finally, several interviewees described sharing leadership duties with team members who were located elsewhere. Importantly, Charles indicated the need to enlist team members whom the manager trusts to bridge remoteness. Overall, the virtual managers interviewed learned that they needed to distribute leadership duties to trusted team members to aid in overall team performance. For James and Mike, who lead a technology firm’s analyst relations department, sharing leadership responsibilities meant growth and exposure for some of the members on their teams.

Coaching and organizational support in leading virtual teams

Interviewees also pointed out a lack of coaching for successful leadership practices for VTs. Nathan noted he was “self-taught, self-developed.” James dove a bit deeper on the topic:

Organizations, and mine included, don’t know what they’re doing to train virtual teams. We have asked this, for this, specifically for years. They just haven’t committed to it yet unfortunately. I was part of a team leader program and through the program, we kept asking for coursework for virtual management and we haven’t gotten that.

Mike similarly noted, “The total amount of time that I have had to train on how to work remotely or virtually or with a virtual team would probably be less than an hour total in my entire career…” Even Rick, who has guided a VT for over 10 years stated: “We don’t typically train people, just because that’s kind of the way it’s done. So, you learn it as part of coming here. You’re always evolving it.” Rick concentrated on the technology that can enable virtual work but not a holistic view on best practices for the virtual manager. Mary offered that “It would be nice if there were a support group or training around working virtually, shared work processes and things. We sort of made our own way…” David said: “In both of my management training classes that I attended in 2017, almost all the managers had remote employees, but yet it was not addressed overtly in the training that we did.” The majority of those interviewed view the lack of coaching for VT managers as a gap that has not been addressed by their current employer. Consequently, they have had to individually develop core skills in leading a VT, primarily by trial and error and experiential learning.

For a summary of successful practices that VT leaders have implemented to build trust and manage conflict, please see Table 1 .

Prior research has indicated that building high levels of trust is essential to improving overall team performance for the VT ( Brahm & Kunze, 2012 ; Breuer et al. , 2016 ; Gilson et al. , 2014 ) and building swift trust as defined by Crisp and Jarvenpaa (2013) can aid in overall team performance. In this study, the VT managers interviewed explained that trust building is indeed foundational to team functioning and the most important element of overall VT performance. These VT managers found innovative ways to achieve high levels of personal trust with their team members to optimize performance.

The study respondents also confirmed current literature noting that unresolved team conflicts were likely to negatively impact performance ( Ayoko et al. , 2012 ; Ortiz de Guinea et al. , 2012 ; Wakefield et al. , 2008 ). In fact, VT leaders encouraged the expression of disagreements among team members, justifying conflict as essential for development and innovation. They characterized most of the disagreements among team members as task-oriented rather than relationship-oriented ( Jehn, 1995 ). Nevertheless, the VT leaders describe resolving conflicts by adapting the manner in which they addressed the conflict to the needs of team members and the unique conflict situation. Finally, they noted the importance of all team members resuming their pursuit of team goals after the conflict had been resolved.

When it came to leadership skills, those interviewed practiced many techniques that have been shown to be associated with overall team performance in a traditional, co-located setting, including transparency with actions and behaviors ( Vogelgesang, Leroy & Avolio, 2013 ). Recent literature in the leadership field has shown that managers who demonstrate high levels of communication transparency have higher ratings of leadership effectiveness from their team members ( Norman, Avolio & Luthans, 2010 ). A positive relationship has also been shown between leadership behavioral integrity transparency and follower work engagement and performance ( Vogelgesang et al. , 2013 ). Sharing of leadership responsibilities ( Srivastava, Bartol & Locke, 2006 ) and recognition of individual achievement ( Luthans, 2000 ) are also important. Delivering recognition to followers has been shown in the field to be an effective leadership tool that can drive organizational performance ( Luthans, 2000 ). With regards to sharing leadership responsibilities, previous research in the area of empowering leadership, which includes coaching, has been positively related to knowledge sharing and team efficacy, which both positively relate to team performance ( Srivastava et al. , 2006 ). However, those interviewed also used and stressed behaviors that they believed were uniquely tied or more critical to team performance in the virtual setting. The behaviors were not revolutionary, cutting-edge new techniques but rather the mode in which the behavior was used, focusing on manager’s tone, communication frequency with and presence among their team members. These managers understood that it was essential to be readily available to their team members, replicating a traditional work environment. They indicated that frequent and clear communication was critical as it reduced uncertainty and maintained team trust, leading to consistent high levels of VT performance.

Lastly, those interviewed indicated that their organization and senior management had failed to acknowledge and support their unique needs as VT leaders. This manifested itself through the lack of company-sponsored VT coaching programs, peer support groups, mentorship opportunities for team leaders and company manuals or documentation on how to lead VTs to drive overall team performance.

Call to action for the virtual team leader and the organization

VT leaders in this study indicated that building high levels of trust and effectively managing task and relationship conflict among their team members were essential to VT performance: they are interdependent practices ensuring that trust is maintained and developed. VT leaders noted that the strategies used were either self-taught or learned by trial and error during their time spent working in a virtual environment. They further indicated that their organizations and executive leaders had failed to acknowledge and support their unique needs as VT leaders. Altogether, the research findings of this study suggest a need for both the VT leader and the executive leadership of organizations that employ VT leaders to undertake certain measures to support the virtual team leader. These actions for both parties are summarized here:

Organizational support to drive virtual team performance

Understand the unique needs of VT leaders to use core elements in driving VT performance.

Provide organizational support for VT leaders and members to develop and apply skills and abilities to build trust and healthy conflict management strategies.

Implement best in class coaching programs for leading VTs and fostering VT leader skills and abilities.

Hire VT leaders and members with strong communication and conflict management skills.

Initiate VT leader peer support groups within the organization.

Encourage and reward participation in, application of and results from VT best practices.

Assign existing VT leaders as mentors to new VT managers.

Virtual team leader/practitioner initiatives

Participate in best in class coaching programs to learn VT core leadership practices that drive VT performance.

Upon creation of the VT, bring all members together in face-to-face fashion to initiate “swift trust” concepts.

Address conflict with time urgency and a direct, honest and transparent approach.

Recognize, encourage and reward VT member participation in, application of and results from VT best practices.

Limitations

There are several limitations to the findings of this study. First, though the sample size of eight participants is within the suggested range of three to ten participants for a phenomenological study ( Creswell, 2014 ), the findings require further testing with larger sample sizes to make decisive conclusions. Second, the findings here were qualitative in nature. Future studies would benefit from investigating VT leadership using quantitative methods. Third, participants, though employed by different companies, were also limited to the technology industry. Leaders of high-performing VTs in other industries could offer differing results. Fourth, participants were nominated to participate in the study by human resource professionals and not by a scientific, quantitative method to judge performance. Finally, there is still no consensus on which metrics define a VT leader/manager.

Implications for research

This paper also suggests several research possibilities. First, as a general implication, more can be done to incorporate even broader literature on trust theory. Perhaps additional practices in virtual trust building can be identified beyond those that we have examined in this study. The fact that our results showed so much influence on the importance of building trust suggests the value of using such a lens in theory, practice and research on virtual leadership. Second, in this study, we have examined the importance and result of leadership practices in trust building and conflict management among team members from team leaders’ perspectives. Adding perspectives from team members about trust building and conflict management would further our understanding of how VTs can effectively drive performance. Team member perspective would also provide insight into the power dynamics inherent within the team when conflict resolution was sought. Third, VT leaders through their team-building efforts achieved team and organizational loyalty, candor in communication, positive relationships and high employee performance. Although specific measurements were not collected, these characteristics were inferred based on the VT leader’s reputation with their human resource department and through the accounts of the VT leaders themselves. Nonetheless, future studies using quantitative measurements for performance and larger sample sizes would bolster the findings of this study. Finally, although this study has addressed building trust and conflict management as two factors that VT leaders use to drive performance, there are very likely other factors that merit further investigation.

The purpose of this study was to acquire first-person perspectives from VT leaders on the strategies implemented to drive VT performance, particularly related to building high levels of trust and managing conflict effectively. Those interviewed offered unique and varying perspectives on the strategies they use to drive performance. Our review of the literature suggested that altogether a high-trust climate with direct line team members along with successful conflict management is foundational for overall team performance. Our study supports these findings. In sum, this paper and studies reviewed in the literature suggest that trust-building and conflict management training in organizations leads to better performance outcomes. However, an equally important finding was that those interviewed received little formal support, including tools for guiding the VT toward positive performance outcomes, from their executive management and organization as a whole. This study proposes an active role that the virtual leader and the organization must take in ensuring that the VT has the opportunity to perform optimally. Adopting and executing on this call to action for VT leaders and their organizations has the potential to optimize performance of VTs in the future.

VT leadership practices that build trust and manage conflict to drive team performance

Ayoko , O.B. , Konrad , A.M. , & Boyle , M.V. ( 2012 ). Online work: managing conflict and emotions for performance in virtual teams ”. European Management Journal , 30 ( 2 ), 156 – 174 . doi: 10.1016/j.emj.2011.10.001 .

Bass , B.M. ( 1985 ). Leadership and performance beyond expectation , New York, NY : Free Press .

Bass , B.M. ( 1999 ). “ Two decades of research and development in transformational leadership ”. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology , 8 ( 1 ), 9 – 32 . doi: 10.1080/135943299398410 .

Bell , B.S. & Kozlowski , S.W.J. ( 2002 ). “ A typology of virtual teams: Implications for effective leadership ”. Group & Organization Management , 27 ( 1 ), 14 – 49 .

Bergiel , B.J. , Bergiel , E.B. , & Balsmeier , P.W. ( 2008 ). “ Nature of virtual teams: a summary of their advantages and disadvantages ”. Management Research News , 31 ( 2 ), 99 – 110 . doi: 10.1108/01409170810846821 .

Brahm , T. & Kunze , F. ( 2012 ). “ The role of trust climate in virtual teams ”. Journal of Managerial Psychology , 27 ( 6 ), 595 – 614 . doi: 10.1108/02683941211252446 .

Breuer , C. , Hüffmeier , J. , & Hertel , G. ( 2016 ). “ Does trust matter more in virtual teams? A Meta-analysis of trust and team effectiveness considering virtuality and documentation as moderators ”. Journal of Applied Psychology , 101 ( 8 ), 1151 – 1177 . doi: 10.1037/apl0000113 .

Brynjolfsson , E. & Horton , J. ( 2020 ). COVID-19 and remote work: an early look at US data , National Bureau of Economic Research .

Chang , W. & Lee , C. ( 2013 ). “ Virtual team e-leadership: the effects of leadership style and conflict management mode on the online learning performance of students in a business-planning course: Virtual team e-leadership ”. British Journal of Educational Technology , 44 ( 6 ), 986 – 999 . doi: 10.1111/bjet.12037 .

Clandinin , D. J. & Murphy , M. S. ( 2009 ). Relational ontological commitments in narrative research . Educational Researcher , 38 ( 8 ), 598 - 602 , doi: 10.3102/0013189X09353940 .

Creswell , J.W. ( 2013 ). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches , 3rd ed. , Thousand Oaks, CA : SAGE Publications .

Creswell , J.W. ( 2014 ). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches , 4th ed. , Thousand Oaks : SAGE Publications .

Creswell , J.W. & Poth , C. ( 2017 ). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches , 4th ed. , Los Angeles : SAGE Publications .

Crisp , C.B. & Jarvenpaa , S.L. ( 2013 ). “ Swift trust in global virtual teams: Trusting beliefs and normative actions ”. Journal of Personnel Psychology , 12 ( 1 ), 45 – 56 . doi: 10.1027/1866-5888/a000075 .

Dingel , J. & Neiman , B. ( 2020 ). “ How many jobs can be done at home? Working paper 26948. National Bureau of Economic Research ”. Retrieved from www.nber.org/papers/w26948

Etherington , K. ( 2007 ). “ Ethical research in reflexive relationships ”. Qualitative Inquiry , 13 ( 5 ), 599 – 616 . doi: 10.1177/1077800407301175 .

Ford , R.C. , Ford , L.R. , & Piccolo , R.F. ( 2017 ). “ Strategies for building effective virtual teams: Trust is key ”. Business Horizons , 60 ( 1 ), 25 – 34 . doi: 10.1016/j.bushor.2016.08.009 .

Gallup. ( 2017 ). “ State of the American workplace ”. Retrieved from www.gallup.com/reports/199961/state-american-workplace-report-2017.aspx?utm_source=SOAW&utm_campaign=StateofAmericanWorkplace&utm_medium=2013SOAWreport

Gibbs , J.L. , Sivunen , A. , & Boyraz , M. ( 2017 ). “ Investigating the impacts of team type and design on virtual team processes ”. Human Resource Management Review , 27 ( 4 ), 590 – 603 . doi: 10.1016/j.hrmr.2016.12.006 .

Gilson , L.L. , Maynard , M.T. , Jones Young , N.C. , Vartiainen , M. , & Hakonen , M. ( 2014 ). “ Virtual teams research: 10 years, 10 themes, and 10 opportunities ”. Journal of Management , 41 ( 5 ), 1313 – 1337 . doi: 10.1177/0149206314559946 .

Glaser , B. & Strauss , F. ( 1999 ). The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research , Chicago : Aldine Publishing .

Hacker , J.V. , Johnson , M. , Saunders , C. , & Thayer , A.L. ( 2019 ). “ Trust in virtual teams: a multidisciplinary review and integration ”. Australasian Journal of Information Systems , 23 . doi: 10.3127/ajis.v23i0.1757 .

Hoch , J.E. & Kozlowski , S.W.J. ( 2014 ). Leading virtual teams: Hierarchical leadership, structural supports, and shared team leadership ”. Journal of Applied Psychology , 99 ( 3 ), 390 – 403 . doi: 10.1037/a0030264 .

Hoyt , C.L. & Blascovich , J. ( 2003 ). “ Transformational and transactional leadership in virtual and physical environments ”. Small Group Research , 34 ( 6 ), 678 – 715 . doi: 10.1177/1046496403257527 .

Jehn , K.A. ( 1995 ). A multimethod examination of the benefits and detriments of intragroup conflict ”. Administrative Science Quarterly , 40 ( 2 ), 256 – 282 . doi: 10.2307/2393638 .

Kankanhalli , A. , Bernard , C.Y. , Tan ., & Wei , K. ( 2006 ). “ Conflict and performance in global virtual teams ”. Journal of Management Information Systems , 23 ( 3 ), 237 – 274 . doi: 10.2753/MIS0742-1222230309 .

Kimble , C. ( 2011 ). “ Building effective virtual teams: How to overcome the problems of trust and identity in virtual teams ”. Global Business and Organizational Excellence , 30 ( 2 ), 6 – 15 . doi: 10.1002/joe.20364 .

Kirkman , B.L. & Mathieu , J.E. ( 2005 ). “ The dimensions and antecedents of team virtuality ”. Journal of Management , 31 ( 5 ), 700 - 718 . doi: 10.1177/0149206305279113 .

Kirkman , B.L. , Rosen , B. , Gibson , C.B. , Tesluk , P.E. , & McPherson , S.O. ( 2002 ). Five challenges to virtual team success: lessons from Sabre, Inc ”. The Academy of Management Executive (1993-2005) , 16 ( 3 ), 67 – 79 .

Liao , C. ( 2017 ). “ Leadership in virtual teams: a multilevel perspective ”. Human Resource Management Review , 27 ( 4 ), 648 – 657 . doi: 10.1016/j.hrmr.2016.12.010 .

Lister , K. ( 2020 ). “ Work-at-Home after COVID-19—our forecast ”. Global Workplace Analytics , Retrieved from https://globalworkplaceanalytics.com/work-at-home-after-covid-19-our-forecast

Luthans , K. ( 2000 ). “ Recognition: a powerful, but often overlooked, leadership tool to improve employee performance ”. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies , 7 ( 1 ), 31 – 39 .

Martínez-Moreno , E. , Zornoza , A. , González-Navarro , P. , & Thompson , L.F. ( 2012 ). “ Investigating in-person and virtual teamwork over time ”. When Does Early Task Conflict Trigger Relationship Conflict? Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice , 16 ( 3 ), 159 – 171 .

Mayer , R.C. , Davis , J.H. , & Schoorman , F.D. ( 1995 ). “ An integrative model of organizational trust ”. Academy of Management Review , 20 ( 3 ), 709 – 734 . doi: 10.5465/amr.1995.9508080335 .

Miles , M. B. & Huberman , A. M. ( 1994 ). Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook ( 2nd ed. ). Sage Publications .

Montoya-Weiss , M. M. , Massey , A. P. , & Song , M. ( 2001 ). “ Getting it together: Temporal coordination and conflict management in global virtual teams ”. The Academy of Management Journal , 44 ( 6 ), 1251 – 1262 . doi: 10.2307/3069399

Norman , S. M. , Avolio , B. J. , & Luthans , F. ( 2010 ). “ The impact of positivity and transparency on trust in leaders and their perceived effectiveness ”. The Leadership Quarterly , 21 ( 3 ), 350 – 364 . doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2010.03.002 .

Ortiz de Guinea , A. , Webster , J. , & Staples , D.S. ( 2012 ). “ A Meta-analysis of the consequences of virtualness on team functioning ”. Information & Management , 49 ( 6 ), 301 – 308 .

Pazos , P. ( 2012 ). “ Conflict management and effectiveness in virtual teams ”. Team Performance Management: An International Journal , 18 ( 7/8 ), 401 – 417 . doi: 10.1108/13527591211281138 .

Pierce , E. A. & Hansen , S. W. ( 2008 ). “ Leadership, trust, and effectiveness in virtual teams ”. ICIS 2008 Proceedings , p 43 .

Polkinghorne , ( 1995 ). Narrative configuration in qualitative analysis . International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education , 8 ( 1 ), 5 - 23 , doi: 10.1080/0951839950080103 .

Purvanova , R. K. & Bono , J. E. ( 2009 ). Transformational leadership in context: Face-to-face and virtual teams . The Leadership Quarterly , 20 ( 3 ), 343 - 357 , doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2009.03.004 .

Schweitzer , L. & Duxbury , L. ( 2010 ). “ Conceptualizing and measuring the virtuality of teams ”. Information Systems Journal , 20 ( 3 ), 267 – 295 . doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2575.2009.00326.x .

Society for Human Resources Management ( 2016 ). “ SHRM’s 2016 employee benefits – 20th anniversary edition ”. Retrieved from www.shrm.org/hr-today/trends-and-forecasting/research-and-surveys/pages/2016-employee-benefits.aspx

Srivastava , A. , Bartol , K.M. , & Locke , E.A. ( 2006 ). “ Empowering leadership in management teams: Effects on knowledge sharing, efficacy, and performance ”. Academy of Management Journal , 49 ( 6 ), 1239 – 1251 . doi: 10.5465/amj.2006.23478718 .

Szewc , J. ( 2014 ). “ Selected success factors of virtual teams: Literature review and suggestions for future research ”. International Journal of Management and Economics , 38 ( 1 ), 67 – 83 . doi: 10.2478/ijme-2014-0015 .

Verburg , R.M. , Bosch-Sijtsema , P. , & Vartiainen , M. ( 2013 ). “ Getting it done: Critical success factors for project managers in virtual work settings ”. International Journal of Project Management , 31 ( 1 ), 68 doi: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2012.04.005 .

Vogelgesang , G.R. , Leroy , H. , & Avolio , B.J. ( 2013 ). “ The mediating effects of leader integrity with transparency in communication and work engagement/performance ”. The Leadership Quarterly , 24 ( 3 ), 405 – 413 . doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.01.004 .

Wakefield , R.L. , Leidner , D.E. , & Garrison , G. ( 2008 ). “ A model of conflict, leadership, and performance in virtual teams ”. Information Systems Research , 19 ( 4 ), 434 – 449 . doi: 10.1287/isre.1070.0149 .

Corresponding author

About the authors.

Elizabeth Fisher Turesky is a Professor in the Leadership and Organizational Studies Department at the University of Southern Maine. She received her PhD in Organizational Behavior at Case Western Reserve University, her MPA at the University of Colorado School of Public Affairs and her BA in Psychology from Wheaton College, Massachusetts. She has held Visiting Faculty positions at The University of New Hampshire and Colby College. Her scholarship focuses on organizational change and the nexus of experiential learning and leadership development.

Coby D. Smith is an Associate Vice President of a market research firm International Data Corporation (IDC) in Framingham, Massachusetts. He received his MA in Leadership Studies from University of Southern Maine and BA in Economics from Swarthmore College.

Ted K. Turesky is a Post-doctoral Fellow in Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience at Boston Children’s Hospital/Harvard Medical School. He received his PhD in Neuroscience from Georgetown University and his BA in Physics from Colorado College.

Related articles

All feedback is valuable.

Please share your general feedback

Report an issue or find answers to frequently asked questions

Contact Customer Support

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Springer Nature - PMC COVID-19 Collection

Leading Remotely: Competencies Required for Virtual Leadership

M. elizabeth azukas.

East Stroudsburg University of Pennsylvania, East Stroudsburg, PA USA

The COVID-19 pandemic caused the largest education system disruption in history, resulting in many districts abruptly, and often ineptly, implementing remote learning to maintain the continuity of instruction. The majority of educational leaders were unprepared for working and delivering instruction in virtual environments. Research indicates that few educational leadership programs provide preparation for leading in virtual learning environments but the COVID crisis made clear that it is imperative for all school leaders have an understanding of virtual leadership. The purpose of this study was to develop an understanding of the competencies required for virtual school leadership as they relate to the Professional Standards for Educational Leaders(P-SEL). Interviews were conducted with 28 virtual leaders using a semi-structured interview protocol. Results indicated that while the P-SEL Standards were categorically aligned to their work, there were distinctive differences in the ways in which virtual school leaders engaged their work across various leadership domains that required unique competencies. These findings are important to our understanding of how to better prepare educational leaders to maintain the effective continuity of instruction in future emergencies as well as to continue to implement and improve upon promising practices that developed during remote instruction.

Concerns about virtual leadership quality and preparation existed before the pandemic. Prior to 2020, opportunities for K-12 students to participate in online learning experiences were continuing to expand (Gemin et al., 2015 ; Molnar et al., 2019 ), yet research indicated that few educational leadership programs provide any administrator preparation for leading in virtual learning environments (La France & Beck, 2014 ). Further, concerns were raised about poor performance on accountability measures in comparison to brick-and-mortar schools (Molnar et al., 2014 ). Effective leadership is essential, because research has established a link between effective leadership and student achievement, particularly for low income and black students (Andrews & Soder, 1987 ; Leithwood & Jantzi, 2008 ; Waters & Marzano, 2007 ). An understanding of effective leadership is considered particularly critical for online education given that they often serve at-risk students (Abrego & Pankake, 2010 ; Quilici & Joki, 2011–12 ). Richardson et al. ( 2015 ) research found that, while virtual school leaders face many of the same categorical challenges as leaders in brick-and-mortar schools, the nuances of these challenges were distinct and they recommended additional research into the specific competencies required for virtual leadership as well as additional pre-service training for leaders.

Amid these developing concerns, the COVID-19 pandemic emerged causing the largest education system disruption in history, impacting 1.6 billion learners in more than 200 countries (Pokhrel & Chhetri, 2021 ) resulting in many districts abruptly, and often ineptly, implementing remote learning to maintain the continuity of instruction (Barbour et al., 2020 ; Hobbs & Hawkins, 2020 ; Pokhrel & Chhetri, 2021 ). While many have made a point to differentiate emergency remote learning from a more deliberate approach to online learning (Barbour et al., 2020 ; Hodges et al., 2020 ) it has become clear that the majority of school principals had to shift their roles from instructional leaders to virtual instructional leaders (Pollock, 2020 ). Preliminary research has reported that school leaders did not feel adequately prepared to deliver curriculum and instruction online and that many struggled with hardware, software, and infrastructure challenges, preparing teachers to design and facilitate online learning, online communication strategies, and managing the physical distance and relationships among school members and constituents (Barbour et al., 2020 ; Beauchamp et al., 2021 ; NAESP, 2020 ; Pollack, 2020 ; Varela & Fedynich, 2020 ). The COVID-19 crisis has made clear that it is imperative for all school leaders have an understanding of the competencies required for virtual leadership. However, to improve virtual leadership, we must have an understanding of the competencies needed for leading virtual schools and how they differ from traditional brick-and-mortar leadership skills so that we can more adequately prepare and support all school leaders. This purpose of this study was to develop a better understanding of the competencies required for virtual school leadership and the extent to which the revised Professional Standards for Educational Leaders (P-SEL) adequately represent these required competencies.

Conceptual Frameworks

Two conceptual frameworks were used to frame this virtual leadership study. The first is the theory of contextual leadership. Contextual leadership brings the unique situational realities of the environment in which the leader exists to the forefront (Bossert et al., 1982 ; Day & Leithwood, 2007 ; Day & Gurr, 2014 ; Gurr & Day, 2014 ; Jacobson, et al.,  2005 ; Moos et al., 2011 ; Noman & Gurr, 2020 ). Too often, leadership theories and preparation focus on the individual characteristics of the leaders, with little regard for the contextual factors (Hallinger, 2018 ), yet the behaviors that are traditionally considered to be effective for leadership may be constrained by the contextual environment (Lord et al., 2001 ). In virtual schools, the context is a driving factor in the competencies required for effective leadership. During the pandemic, many brick-and-mortar school leaders had to change their behaviors to try to fit the pandemic context. This is consistent with recent studies that have found that leadership is highly contextual and that the most effective leaders are able to adapt their practices to the immediate contextual factors and requirements (Johnson & Dempster, 2016 ; Noman & Gurr, 2020 ).

The second conceptual framework applied in this study are the Professional Standards for Education Leadership (P-SEL). These standards were developed in the United States in 2015 after a review of empirical research, input from researchers and more than 1000 school and district leaders, and the support of the National Association for Elementary School Principals (NAESP), the National Association for Secondary School Principals (NASSP), and the American Association for School Administrators (AASA) (Professional Standards for Education leaders, 2015 ). The standards focus on student success and well-being and include the following leadership domains:

• Mission, Vision, and Core Values
• Ethics and Professional Norms
• Equity and Cultural Responsiveness
• Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment
• Community of Care and Support for Students
• Professional Capacity of School Personnel
• Professional Community for Teachers and Staff
• Meaningful Engagement of Families and Community
• Operations and Management
• School Improvement

The standards attempt to provide a strong, clear, emphasis on students and learning outcomes, outlining fundamental principles to ensure that every student is well educated and prepared for the twenty-first century (Professional Standards for School Leaders, 2015 ). The new standards recognize the importance of human relationships both in leadership and in teaching and student learning and reflect a positive, asset-based approach to promote human development. While grounded in the present, the standards adopt a “future-oriented approach” and they challenge the profession and institutions of higher education to “move beyond established practices and systems and strive for a better future” (Professional Standards for School Leaders, 2015 , p. 3). It is important to view virtual leadership competencies through the lens of the P-SEL standards because these standards have influenced education leadership preparation around the country as the National Educational Leadership Preparation (NELP) Program Standards are aligned to the P-SEL standards. The NELP standards are designed for advanced programs at the masters, specialist, or doctoral levels that prepare program directors, supervisors, building level or district level education leaders undergoing accreditation by the Council for the Accreditation of Education Preparation (Professional Standards for School Leaders).

The purpose of this study was to better understand the competencies required for virtual leadership and whether these aligned to the P-SEL standards. This was accomplished through 28, 60-min interviews with virtual leaders using a semi-structured interview protocol. Interviews were used because they facilitate rich descriptions and detailed accounts of the participants’ lived experiences and perspectives on a phenomenon (DiCicco-Bloom & Crabtree, 2006 ). Nineteen of the participants were interviewed prior to March of 2020. Nine of the participants were interviewed after March of 2020, during the pandemic.

Participants

The population for this study consisted of the National Education Policy Center’s 2019 inventory of all full-time virtual schools in the nation, the most recent census of full-time virtual schools (Molnar et al., 2019 ). Molnar et al. ( 2019 ) identified 528 full-time virtual schools in 2015–2016. Schools were categorized based on location, grade levels served, enrollment, student ethnicity, and type of school (charter or district). These categories were then used to sort schools to create a random stratified sample. Internet research was used to obtain leader contact information and 4 cycles of emails were conducted. One hundred virtual school leaders were contacted in total and invited to participate in semi-structured 60-min interviews. Eight of these schools were closed and two were listed as separate schools but had the same leader, bringing the total number of leaders contacted to 88. Twenty-eight leaders responded and agreed to be interviewed, which is a 32% response rate. This response rate is adequate for this type of research because participants were viewed as “key informants,” (Patton, 1990 , p. 173) given their knowledge and experience with virtual leadership. Additionally, at the conclusion of the 4th round of interviews, it became apparent that a saturation point was reached where no new data was emerging (Bernard, 2012 ; Guest et al., 2006 ; Mason, 2010 ). Table  1 details the demographic information of the participants.

Virtual school leader participants

• Private was not a category included in the NEPC listing, however, the original contact listed as a charter school, now works for a private online school

Data Collection

Semi-structured interviews (SSIs) were chosen because they fall between structured and unstructured interview processes (Adams, 2015 ). They are guided, focused, and open-ended communication events co-created by the researcher and the interviewee (Crabtree & Miller, 1999 ). This process facilitated the collection of data that would address the study’s purpose and objectives, yet allow for a broad understanding of the participant’s lived experience. An interview guide was developed using the P-SEL Standards as the basis for questions designed to understand virtual leadership competencies, which was key to obtaining data that addressed the study’s research questions (Baumbusch, 2010 ; Ryan et al., 2009 ). Questions began at the standard level. For example, “Tell me about your role with regard to developing, advocating, and enacting a shared mission and vision for the school?” and “To what extent are you involved in establishing the core values for the school?” Guiding questions were supported by additional prompts or probes such as, “Can you tell me more?” The interview guide was subject to change to facilitate conversation and to capture any data pertinent to understanding virtual leadership competencies that may not have been directly related to the P-SEL standards (Galleta, 2013 ). Interviews were conducted and recorded using Zoom.

Data Analysis

Interviews were transcribed and then analyzed using a hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development (Fereday & Muir-Cochrane., 2006 ). This allowed me to apply the P-SEL leadership domains as codes as well as to capture any relevant information that did not align with the P-SEL codes. I implemented Fereday and Muir-Cochrane.’s ( 2006 ) 6 stages of coding in this hybrid approach. First, I developed the code book using the P-SEL standards. Next, I tested the robustness of the codes against the literature. I then summarized the data and identified initial themes. I applied the P-SEL codebook and then conducted additional coding to identify any themes that may not have been captured by the codebook. Finally, I legitimated and corroborated the coded themes, employing member checking to help improve accuracy, credibility, validity, and transferability (Creswell, 2003 ; Mertler, 2014 ).

The virtual leaders interviewed conveyed that the P-SEL Standards were categorically aligned to their work. Most asserted that they did much of the same work as a brick-and-mortar leader, but that there were distinctive differences in the ways in which virtual school leaders engaged their work across various leadership domains. It was clear that the context, particularly the online context, played a role in the types of skills required of effective leaders. One hundred percent of those interviewed who had completed a traditional education leadership program for certification felt that their program did not adequately prepare them for the demands of virtual school leadership. The results are categorized by P-SEL standards, with an emphasis placed on the skills that many brick-and-mortar school leaders had to employ during the pandemic. Table  2 provides a summary of the findings.

Virtual competencies summary

Communication and engagement are different in the virtual environment. Jaime, for example, indicated that one of her main roles was developing and enacting a shared mission and vision, for the organization but that it was more challenging in a virtual organization. She stated:

I guess one of the primary differences is obviously you're not seeing everyone every day. And so that means that your approach to how you might deliver and support the vision, mission and the values every day might be a little bit different. As a virtual leader, you really have to be more deliberate about knowing how people are feeling what people are really spending their time on and whether or not the goals that they have as an individual really do line up with your values and goals as an organization.

Communication and engagement challenges also surfaced with regard to the ways in which virtual leaders develop a sense of professional community for teachers and staff. Emily spoke of the need for frequent “pulse checks” and described her tradition of “Text me Tuesdays” in which faculty and staff would send their thoughts, feelings, and questions via text every Tuesday. Mandy instituted “coffee chats” in which teachers and staff could take a coffee break and chat virtually. Chris also expressed the need for connection in the virtual environment so he instituted weekly virtual department meetings and monthly full-day virtual professional learning communities.

Connecting with students and their families presented similar challenges. Virtual school leaders implemented a variety of strategies to help students feel connected in the virtual environment. Holly required teachers to conference individually with students once a month. Joseph invested in school counselors, employing three times the state requirement to reduce the counselor to student ratio. Several of the virtual leaders employed student advisors or coaches that regularly reached out to students to set goals and keep them engaged. Allison has a Student Success Manager that oversees student advisors. She stated, “It is easy for the kids to disengage when they are not required to attend physically and we do not see them, but the Success Manager and advisors have really helped.” John hired a Parent Support Coordinator who oversees Parent Ambassadors who run virtual or face to face events every Friday because “if the parents are engaged, the kids do better.” The virtual leaders that serve elementary students have to enlist parents as partners because the children are too young to be at home alone and those that are still learning to read, need support with instructions. Ned reported, “I actually have to run professional development for parents because they have to know how to use the technology and support their kids.”

Leaders also employed virtual clubs and activities as well as face to face events to promote a community of care and support for students as well as to meaningfully engage with families and communities. Several of the virtual schools served students from across the state. “One of the biggest challenges I have is that my community is spread across the entire state,” Kelly stated. Chris reported that he has an Activities Director and 15 regional event coordinators to address this. Scott stated:

I never realized that I would be expected to be an event coordinator and handle all of the logistics associated with bringing in students and families from across the state. We bring them in for testing and we also do a face-to-face prom and graduation. I am renting facilities, managing travel and hotel arrangements…it was not what I expected.

Virtual leaders had to develop strategies to promote virtual connections and relationships as well as have the ability to leverage technology tools to do so. These connection and engagement challenges also required virtual leaders to take on new roles, adjust job descriptions, create new positions, and develop professional development related to the coaching of students and the engagement of their families.

Instructional support and supervision in virtual schools also require different skill sets. The reliance on a “home mentor,” often a parent or guardian, is required in many of the virtual schools that serve younger children who are still developing the ability to read and comprehend information as well as to work independently. “We have specially designed trainings for parents and guardians so they know how to access and turn in assignments, monitor progress, and support students, without doing the work for them” Susan reported. Ned concurred stating, “We not only have to provide specialized training for instructors, but for parents, too.” Several of the leaders reported that their teachers were surprised by how much more frequently they interacted with parents than in a traditional school. Jamie noted that at the high school level the teachers are speaking to every parent at least once a month.

Many of the virtual leaders reported that the initial training and professional development for online teachers must be different than for those teaching face-to-face. Almost all leaders reported that additional training is required for the technology systems that they use to support students such as a learning management systems (LMS) and other types of Web 2.0 communication tools. Diane noted that most teachers, “are not familiar with terms like synchronous and asynchronous instruction because they are only familiar with the face-face modality.” Vicki noted, “We have to teach them about online pedagogy and aspects of instructional design.” Many virtual leaders noted that they have to implement their teacher trainings online because of the regional diversity of their teaching staff.

Several of the virtual leaders expressed that teaching the technology components to new virtual teachers was the easiest part of their onboarding process. Many thought that helping teachers to see themselves as facilitators of instruction and to understand the flexibility required for online learning was much more difficult. Allison noted multiple conversations with teachers about students working at their own pace where teachers expressed frustration that “We’re not preparing them for the real world.” She explained that she has to coach them to think differently:

If you fail your driving test, you’re not just done forever, you go back, you study some more, and you just take it again. The point is that you learn to drive. I mean people are late in paying their bills all of the time. There may be a late fee, but they still get to pay them. I also have to remind them that sometimes they are late in doing paperwork at school and we don’t fire them. It’s weird though because a lot of teachers think it is their job to be punitive and that this is in some way teaching kids a life lesson. I have to undo a lot of that thinking.”

Several leaders expressed similar challenges since many of these schools have flexible pacing and mastery-based learning that requires flexibility on the part of the instructor. Additionally, some of the schools offer rolling enrollment, which means teachers have to be prepared to accept students year-round and there are no traditional marking periods or semesters.

Many virtual leaders viewed the teachers as facilitators of instruction and as instructional support interventionists. Jamie reported:

We have incredible fidelity and accountability with regard to standards alignment. In our case the curriculum is already developed with standards, content, and assessments. Then, we’re teaching the teachers how to facilitate that content and guide students.

Holly relayed a similar experience:

Our curriculum is already developed so my teachers don’t have to create lesson plans every day. However, they do have to understand curriculum, provide gap instruction, promote instructional intervention and monitor students to be sure that they are moving through the curriculum at an acceptable pace.

While many virtual schools do use pre-prepared course curriculum, others adapt pre-prepared curriculum, or develop their own online curriculum. Joseph noted:

We purchased a curriculum, but it can be customized so that teachers can make it stronger and make it their own. We collect feedback from students on every course to continue to improve them. We also use data to monitor student performance and if one lesson is taking everyone a particularly long time, we’ll look at that.

For those schools that develop their own curriculum, leaders reported that academic integrity is a big area of concern for online schools. “The kids are right on the computer. They can Google anything, but that begs the question, then, if they can Google it, why are we asking them about it?” Lena questioned. A few of the other principals echoed similar concerns. Bobbie noted, “academic integrity used to be a much bigger issue but we have learned to create better assignments and assessments that are not easily copied or Googled and require more application of knowledge and skills.” A few of the schools use oral assessments in addition to online assessments to ensure that the student is doing the work and understanding the concepts.

Observations can look very different in online schools. Gabe noted, “I can’t just walk up and down the halls or do classroom walk-throughs exactly like I did in the traditional environment.” Instead, virtual school leaders reported conducting data walk-throughs where they monitor teacher and student online activity. Some schools have systems that notify leaders if teachers have not recorded regular contact with students. Vicki reported, “I look for students who have not logged in or students that are not making sufficient progress in the data and then I connect with the teacher.” Virtual observations can be synchronous or asynchronous depending on how the schools structure instruction. A few of the schools require some synchronous instruction and that teacher record all sessions with students so they are available for viewing by school leaders. Leaders reported looking for and assessing teacher online presence, rapport with students, student engagement and participation, the quality of questioning, and the accuracy of content in synchronous sessions. In asynchronous sessions, leaders reported looking for and assessing the turn-around time on assignments, feedback provided to students, motivational weekly updates, regular contact/communication, and instructional intervention.

Virtual leaders also reported being unprepared for some aspects of their work and indicated that they felt some business or non-profit leadership training would have helped them. The funding models for virtual schools differ greatly. Some are performance based, others earn only a portion of the state’s FTE per student, some are FTE dependent but have high transient populations making budget predictions challenging. Others need to navigate partnerships with traditional districts or with education management organizations (EMO’s). Joseph stated, “The biggest thing that I had to just basically learn on my own is the finance piece. I think I took one finance course, but as a charter school leader, in a lot of ways, you’re the head of a nonprofit.” John concurred, “Educational leadership programs for leaders of online schools, need to focus more on being a nonprofit leader than an education school leader. Of course, there is the academic piece, which is very important. But what you don’t learn is finance, what you don’t learn is marketing, what you don’t learn are all the other things that go into running online school.” Since virtual learning is a choice, several of the leaders mentioned the importance of having some background in sales and marketing. Additionally, several of the virtual schools develop their own online courses and felt that this required product development skills. “I’ve got project managers, instructional designers, content experts. It is a long and arduous process that is a lot more like developing a textbook for publication than a traditional district curriculum. I could have used some business skills.” Scott stated. Leadership preparation programs need to strive for better alignment of coursework with the competencies required for virtual leadership.

Discussion and Conclusions

Virtual school leaders noted that the P-SEL standards categorically aligned with their work, but that there were very specific nuances that were unique to the online environment, such as communicating virtually with faculty, students, and parents, and delivering curriculum and instruction in the online environment. Further, all 23 of the school leaders who had participated in a traditional education leadership program for licensure communicated that these programs did not adequately prepare them for the work they do as virtual leaders. While little research has been done on the competencies required for effective virtual school leadership (McLeod & Richardson, 2011 ; Richardson et al., 2015 ), it has become clear with the current pandemic that all school leaders need some competencies associated with virtual leadership as schools across the globe grappled with delivering content remotely.

The work of traditional school leaders changed considerably and possibly irreversibly during the pandemic (Francisco & Nuqui, 2020 ; Harris & Jones, 2020 ; Pollack, 2020 . Leaders had to support teachers, students, and families to transition to remote learning, they needed to become experts in technology and online curriculum and instruction, they had to become chief communicators and policy interpreters as rules and regulations were being released without warning (Harris & Jones, 2020 ; Pollack, 2020 ). They also had to manage the distance between school members working to engage students, motivate staff, communicate with families, and establish trust (Harris & Jones; Pollack, 2020 ). These findings are consistent with the competencies virtual leaders identified as being important in their contexts.

Leadership continued to play an important role in student achievement during the pandemic. The biggest factor impacting teacher self-efficacy during the pandemic was effective school leadership (Kraft et al., 2020 ). Self-efficacy has been consistently recognized as an important attribute of effective teaching and has been positively correlated to teacher and student outcomes (Tschannan-Moran et al., 1998 ). Kraft et al. ( 2020 ) reported that teachers experienced challenges during the pandemic which included engaging students in the online remote environment and balancing professional and personal responsibilities working from home, resulting in on overall decline in teacher self-efficacy. Teachers in high-poverty and high minority schools perceived these challenges to be more severe (Kraft et al., 2020 ). Teachers who experienced strong school-based leadership that provided clear communication, meaningful collaboration, targeted training, fair expectations, and recognition of teacher effort, were least likely to experience declines in self-efficacy during the pandemic (Kraft et al., 2020 ).

Education leadership programs must be accountable for adequately preparing school leaders to effectively perform their responsibilities, especially those that serve our most vulnerable students. More attention must be paid to adequate school leader preparation with regard to virtual school leadership both for those who may lead virtual schools and those who may lead in brick-and-mortar schools but are running supplemental online programs or are implementing remote instruction because of an emergency. Francisco & Nuqui ( 2020 ), Harris and Jones ( 2020 ), and Pollack ( 2020 ) found that school leadership preparation programs are out of alignment with the challenges leaders are facing today and that substantial revision is required to address the leadership skills relevant to the ongoing pandemic. Key competencies that need to be addressed were identified as knowledge of technology used for online learning, an understanding of online curriculum and pedagogy, the need to be able to operate and communicate in the online environment, crisis management, and an understanding of situational/contextual leadership Francisco & Nuqui, 2020 ; Harris & Jones, 2020 ; Pollack, 2020 ). It has also been recommended that leaders learn from one another’s successes during the pandemic (Francisco & Nuqui, 2020 ). Leaders were eager to learn from other leaders during the pandemic. Nine of the 28 school leaders who participated in this study were interviewed after March of 2020. During my interviews, 7 of the 9 virtual school leaders interviewed (78%) indicated that they had been contacted by local brick and mortar school leaders requesting assistance with a variety of virtual leadership competencies.

While this study is not generalizable, it makes a valuable contribution to the scholarship to better understand the competencies required for virtual leadership. It is recommended that additional research be conducted to continue to examine the competencies required for virtual leadership, the competencies required for leading in blended school districts and the challenges faced by brick-and-mortar leaders during the pandemic.

Virtual school enrollment increased dramatically as a result of COVID-19 accounting for 40% of the decline in traditional schools and with most of this growth occurring in the elementary grades (Molnar et al., 2021 ). Even as the dangers of the COVID-19 pandemic diminish, Schwartz et al. ( 2020 ) reported that 20% of brick-and-mortar schools now plan to establish and expand online learning for the families who have enjoyed the flexibility provided by online learning. Every leader is now a virtual leader. Leadership preparations programs must effectually prepare all future leaders for the competencies required for virtual leadership.

Declarations

No funding was received to assist with the preparation of this manuscript.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

• Abrego J, Pankake A. PK-12 virtual schools: The challenges and roles of school leaders. Educational Considerations. 2010; 37 (2):7–13. doi: 10.4148/0146-9282.1150. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Adams WC. Conducting semi-structured interviews. In: Newcomer KE, Hatry HP, Wholey JC, editors. Handbook of practical program evaluation. Jossey-Bass; 2015. pp. 492–505. [ Google Scholar ]
• Andrews RL, Soder R. Principal leadership and student achievement. Education Leader. 1987; 44 (2):9–11. [ Google Scholar ]
• Barbour, M. K., LaBonte, R., Kelly, K., Hodges, C., Moore, S., Lockee, B., Trust, T., Bond, A., & Hill, P. (2020). Understanding pandemic pedagogy: Differences between emergency remote, remote, and online teaching. Canadian eLearning Network.  https://k12sotn.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/understanding-pandemic-pedagogy.pdf
• Baumbusch J. Semi-structured interviewing in practice – Close research. Journal for Specialists in Pediatric Medicine. 2010; 15 (3):255–258. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Beauchamp G, Hulme M, Clarke L, Hamilton L, Harvey JA. ‘People miss people:’ A study of school leadership and management in the four nations of the United Kingdom in the early stage of the pandemic. Educational Management Administration and Leadership. 2021; 49 (3):375–392. doi: 10.1177/1741143220987841. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bernard RH. Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. 2. Sage; 2012. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bossert Steven T., Dwyer David C., Rowan Brian, Lee Ginny V. The Instructional Management Role of the Principal. Educational Administration Quarterly. 1982; 18 (3):34–64. doi: 10.1177/0013161X82018003004. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Crabtree BF, Miller WL. Clinical research: A multimethod typology. In: Crabtree BF, Miller WC, editors. Doing qualitative research. 2. Sage Publications, Inc; 1999. pp. 3–32. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cresswell J. Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage; 2003. [ Google Scholar ]
• Day, C., & Gurr, D. (Eds) (2014). Leading schools successfully: Stories from the field . Routledge.
• Day, C., & Leithwood, K. (2007). Successful principal leadership in times of change. Springer.
• DiCicco-Bloom B, Crabtree BF. The qualitative research interview. Medical Education. 2006; 40 :314–321. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02418.x. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Francisco, C.D.C., Nuqui, A.V. (2020) Emergence of a situational leadership during COVID-19 pandemic called new normal leadership. International Journal of Interdisciplinary Research, 4 (10), 15–19. 
• Fereday J, Muir-Cochrane. Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: A hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. International Journal of Qualitative Methods. 2006; 5 (1):80–92. doi: 10.1177/160940690600500107. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Galleta AM. Mastering the semi-structured interview and beyond. NYU Press; 2013. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gemin, B., Pape L., Vashaw, L., & Watson, J. (2015). Keeping pace with K–12 digital learning: An annual review of policy and practice. Evergreen Education Group.  https://static1.squarespace.com/static/59381b9a17bffc68bf625df4/t/5949b64bb11be1ad7855fb51/1498003034517/KeepingPace+2015.pdf
• Guest G, Bunce A, Johnson L. How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods. 2006; 18 (1):59–82. doi: 10.1177/1525822X05279903. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gurr, D. & Day, C. (2014). Thinking about leading schools. In C. Day & D. Gurr (Eds.),  Leading schools successfully: Stories from the field. (pp. 194–208). Routledge.
• Hallinger, P. (2018). Bringing context out of the shadows of leadership. Educational Management, Administration and Leadership. 46 (1), 5–24
• Harris A, Jones M. COVID-19-school leadership in disruptive times. School Leadership and Management. 2020; 40 (4):243–247. doi: 10.1080/13632434.2020.1811479. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hobbs, T.D., & Hawkins, L. (2020). The results are in for remote learning: It didn’t work. The Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/articles/schools-coronavirus-remote-learning-lockdown-tech-11591375078 .
• Hodges, C., Moore, S., Locke, B., Trust, T. & Bonda, A. (2020). The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning. Educause Review. https://er.educause.edu/articles/2020/3/the-difference-between-emergency-remote-teaching-and-online-learning
• Jacobson S., Day C., & Leithwood K. (Eds.). (2005). The international successful school principalship project. Journal of Educational Administration, 43, 532–629.
• Johnson, G. & Dempster, N. (2016) Leadership in diverse learning contexts. Springer.
• Kraft, M.A., Simon, N.S., & Lyon, M. A. (2020). Sustaining a sense of success: The importance of teacher working conditions during the COVID-19 pandemic . (EdWorkingPaper: 20-279). Annenberg Institute at Brown University. 10.26300/35nj-v890
• La France JA, Beck D. Mapping the terrain: Education leadership field experiences in K-12 virtual schools. Educational Administration Quarterly. 2014; 50 (11):160–189. doi: 10.1177/0013161X13484037. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Leithwood KA, Jantzi D. Linking leadership to student learning: The contributions of leader efficacy. Educational Administration Quarterly. 2008; 44 (4):496–528. doi: 10.1177/0013161X08321501. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lord Robert G, Brown Douglas J, Harvey Jennifer L, Hall Rosalie J. Contextual constraints on prototype generation and their multilevel consequences for leadership perceptions. The Leadership Quarterly. 2001; 12 (3):311–338. doi: 10.1016/S1048-9843(01)00081-9. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mason, M. (2010). Sample size and saturation in PhD studies using qualitative interviews. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 11 (3). 10.17169/fqs-11.3.1428
• McLeod S, Richardson JW. The dearth of technology coverage. Journal of School Leadership. 2011; 21 (2):216–240. doi: 10.1177/105268461102100204. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mertler C. Action research: Improving schools and empowering educators. SAGE Publishers, Inc; 2014. [ Google Scholar ]
• Molnar, A. (Ed.) (Ed.), Rice, J. K., Huerta, L., Shafer, S. R., Barbour, M. K., Miron, G., Gulosino, C, Horvitz, B. (2014). Virtual schools in the U.S. 2014: Politics, performance, policy, and research evidence . National Education Policy Center. https://nepc.colorado.edu/publication/virtual-schools-annual-2014
• Molnar, A., Miron, G., Elgeberi, N., Barbour, M. K., Huerta, L., Shafer, S. R., & Rice, J. K. (2019). Virtual schools in the U.S. 2019 . National Education Policy Center. http://nepc.colorado.edu/publication/virtual-schools-annual-2019 .
• Molnar, A. (Ed.) (Ed.), Miron, G., Barbour, M.K., Huerta, L., Shafer, S.R., Rice, J.K., Glover, A., Browning, N., Hagle, S., & Boninger, F. (2021). Virtual schools in the U.S. 2021. National Education Policy Center. http://nepc.colorado.edu/publication/virtual-schools-annual-2021
• Moos, L., Johansson, O., & Day, C. (Eds.). (2011). How school principals. sustain success over time: International perspectives . Springer.
• National Association of Elementary School Principals. (2020). NAESP releases results of National Survey of principals regarding COVID-19, march 31. https://www.naesp.org/content/naesp-releases-results-national-survey-principals-regarding-covid-19
• Noman, M. & Gurr, D. (2020) Contextual leadership and culture in education, In G.W. Nobit (Ed.),  Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education ( pp. 20). Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.595
• Patton MQ. Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Sage; 1990. [ Google Scholar ]
• Pokhrel S, Chhetri R. A literature review on impact of COVID-19 pandemic on teaching and learning. Higher Education for the Future. 2021; 8 (1):133–141. doi: 10.1177/2347631120983481. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pollack K. School leaders’ work during the COVID-19 pandemic: A two-pronged approach. International Studies in Education. 2020; 48 (3):38–44. [ Google Scholar ]
• Professional Standards for Educational Leaders. (2015). National policy board for educational administration. https://www.npbea.org/psel/
• Quillici, S.B., & Joki, R. (2011–2012). Investigating roles of online school principals. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 44 (2), 141–160.
• Richardson JW, LaFrance J, Beck D. Challenges of virtual school leadership. American Journal of Distance Education. 2015; 29 (1):18–29. doi: 10.1080/08923647.2015.992647. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ryan F, Coughlan M, Cronin P. Interviewing in qualitative research: The one-to-one interview. International Journal of Therapy and Rehabilitation. 2009; 16 (6):309–314. doi: 10.12968/ijtr.2009.16.6.42433. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Schwartz HL, Grant D, Diliberti M, Hunter GP, Setodji CM. Remote learning is here to stay: Results from the first American school district panel survey. Rand Corporation; 2020. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tshannan-Moran M, Hoy AW, Hoy WK. Teacher efficacy: Its meaning and measure. Review of Educational Research. 1998; 68 (2):202–248. doi: 10.3102/00346543068002202. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Varela DG, Fedynich L. Leading schools from a social distance: Surveying South Texas school district leadership during the COVID-19 pandemic. National Forum of Educational Administration and Supervision Journal. 2020; 38 (4):1–10. [ Google Scholar ]
• Waters TJ, Marzano RJ. School leadership that works: The effect of superintendent leadership on student achievement. ERS Spectrum. 2007; 25 (2):1–12. [ Google Scholar ]

Case Study: developing virtual leadership competencies

• Post published: 25th May 2019
• Post author: Con-TACT Information
• Post category: Case Study

A senior leader’s role and responsibilities expanded, resulting in a shift from a local leadership focus to leading his team virtually. Managing in a local context suited his directive leadership style. This became an issue in his new virtual context, as he was overstretched and his ability to lead became less effective.

In a global trading organisation with a European focus, an extraordinarily successful senior leader had his scope of responsibility increased when his direct reports tripled in numbers. This resulted in him leading a virtual leadership team. In the previous local responsibility he had developed close relationships with his team and was directly involved in operational details. He realised that his directive leadership style was hampering him in leading his virtual team effectively. He understood that he needed to develop a more participative and inspirational leadership style and develop a greater sense of responsibility in his virtual team.

The coaching programme we designed led him to explore his personal drivers and the issues which hampered his transformation, allowing him to develop and activate more effective beliefs and attitudes, resulting in a leadership style more appropriate for the virtual team.

He was able to reduce his hours at work to a normal level, significantly reducing his stress levels. The team felt more empowered and better motivated through his new participative style. This enabled the team members and site leaders to grow themselves and to respond better and more effectively to critical situations.

You Might Also Like

Case Study: managing emotions to be constructive

Case Study: purpose and vision as drivers for engagement and performance

Case Study: developing virtual team exclusively via online meetings

Privacy overview.

Javascript is currently disabled in your browser. Several features of this site will not function whilst javascript is disabled.

• Why Publish With Us?
• Editorial Policies
• Author Guidelines
• Peer Review Guidelines
• Open Outlook
• Submit New Manuscript

• Sustainability
• Press Center
• Testimonials
• Favored Author Program
• Permissions
• Pre-Submission

open access to scientific and medical research

Back to Journals » Journal of Healthcare Leadership » Volume 16

Immersive Leadership Training for Physicians: Comparing Retrospective Pre- and Post-Test Virtual vs in-Person 6-Month Follow-Up of Learning

• Get Permission
• Cite this article

Authors Fernandez CS   , Adatsi G , Hays CN   , Noble CC , Abel-Shoup M   , Connolly A  

Received 15 December 2023

Accepted for publication 7 June 2024

Published 24 June 2024 Volume 2024:16 Pages 235—254

DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/JHL.S455105

Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single anonymous peer review

Peer reviewer comments 2

Editor who approved publication: Professor Zhanming Liang

Claudia SP Fernandez, 1 Georgina Adatsi, 1 Caroline N Hays, 1 Cheryl C Noble, 2 Michelle Abel-Shoup, 1 AnnaMarie Connolly 3, 4 1 Department of Maternal and Child Health, UNC Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA; 2 Evaluation Consultant, CNoble Consulting, Scotts Valley, CA, USA; 3 American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Washington, DC, USA; 4 Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology (Emeritus), UNC School of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA Correspondence: Claudia SP Fernandez, 426 Rosenau Hall, Maternal and Child Health Department, Gillings School of Global Public Health, 134 Dauer Drive, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA, Tel +1 919-451-6231, Fax +1-919-966-0458, Email [email protected] Purpose: Little is known about the long-term efficacy of virtual leadership training for physicians. This study compares two highly similar groups of Obstetricians-Gynecologists’ (OB-GYN) 6-month post-program changes in competency and skills after experiencing equity-centered leadership training in a virtual or in-person format. Participants and Methods: Using a retrospective pre- and post-test method, we collected 6-month post-program data on 14 competencies for knowledge gains and skills use, comparing the virtual cohort (2021, n = 22) to the in-person cohort (2022, n = 33) in 55 total participants. Qualitative data from open-ended feedback questions informed on skills relevancy and professional impact since program participation. Results: Data indicate strong, statistically significant knowledge and skills retention in both cohorts, with 63% of the virtual and 85% of the in-person participants responding. Data indicate participants report the course having a positive impact on their healthcare provision and nearly all report they made changes to their communication and leadership approaches in the 6-months after the program. 59% of the virtual and 55% of the in-person cohorts report new leadership opportunities since their participation and that the course helped prepare them for those roles. Qualitative data support the need for the training, specific elements of the training these physicians found particularly helpful, and that the learning was “sticky”, in that it stayed with them in the months post-program. There was a clear stated preference for in-person experiences. Conclusion: Either virtual or in-person leadership training can result in long-term (6-month) significant retention and application of knowledge and skills in physicians. While limited in size, this study suggests that in-person experiences seem to foster more effective bonds and also greater willingness to participate in post-program follow-up. Physicians find equity-centered leadership training to impact their subsequent communication and leadership practices and they report career benefits even in 6-month follow-up. Plain Language Summary: While physicians serve in many leadership roles in healthcare, leadership training is generally not part of their medical training. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) Robert C. Cefalo Leadership Institute has provided an annual leadership training for obstetrician and gynecologist leaders since 2006. Our previous research has repeatedly shown the program is effective, with participants experiencing significant and impressive gains in leadership learning and skills development. The COVID-19 pandemic led to the 2021 program being held virtually with a return to an in-person format possible with the 2022 program. As such, the opportunity arose to compare the 6-month post-program learning and impact of these two formats, virtual versus in-person training, in two highly similar groups experiencing nearly identical program content. Both virtual and in-person participants rated their six-month post-program skill level/ability and skills use/implementation as significantly higher than pre-program and both groups noted the learning helped them be better physicians, communicators, and leaders. Additionally, many experienced new leadership opportunities in the 6-months post-program and most of those agreed that the program prepared them to take on those new roles. This study shows that our approach to physician leadership development is highly effective and that the learning demonstrated “stickiness” in that it persisted over time. While both virtual and in-person programs were highly effective, overwhelmingly the participants prefer in-person training to virtual training. Keywords: workforce development, physician leadership, learning retention, virtual vs in-person, equity-centered leadership

Introduction

as a learned skill, the topic of leadership is gathering momentum as a key curriculum area…. Leadership consists of a learnable set of practices and skills that can be developed by reading literature and attending leadership courses. 3

Yet gaps persist in the literature about program efficacy, longer-term impact, and adaptability to alternative formats as well as a depth of understanding of the wide variety of leadership skills important across a physician’s career. 1 , 2 , 4

Given the constraints of physician time, resources and the implications of events like the COVID-19 pandemic, understanding how to meet the leadership development needs of physicians despite the inability to convene in-person experiences also rises in importance. However, relatively little is known about the efficacy of virtual leadership training in healthcare professions, and more specifically for physicians, and in particular with respect to women’s healthcare doctors. In our exploration of the literature, we found no other papers examining the long-term impact and efficacy of virtual versus in-person leadership training for women’s health physicians beyond our own work. 11

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) Robert C. Cefalo Leadership Institute has been training women’s health physician leaders since 2006, with nearly 700 alumni from the program to date. We have previously reported on our work, showing clear impact on in-person learning and reported career growth opportunities in both the immediate short-term and longer term (6-month) follow-up on many of the key physician leadership competencies noted in the literature above. 8 Data reported here support the efficacy and effectiveness of the ACOG-Cefalo program approach 8 at the 6-month post-program timepoint, suggesting that the learning was “sticky”, with skills and tools imparted remaining effective and relevant to the physician leaders months after completing the program. In 2019, a systematic review of physician leadership programs by Geerts et al 6 identified the Cefalo program as one with strong learning outcomes as compared to other similar programs reported in the literature.

In 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic caused workforce development and continuing education programs to pause and subsequently reformat to virtual delivery. Leadership development programs were no exception to that experience. 11 , 12 The 2020 Cefalo program paused, given that it was to be held just weeks into the national stay-at-home recommendations. While we had some experience with similar virtual adaptation through our work with the Clinical Scholars leadership development program (focused on small interprofessional teams working to close the gaps in health disparities in their local communities, 14 ), we had not previously faced the need to adapt our training for our work with ACOG Cefalo program, which focused solely on OB-GYNs. We recently reported on the success of virtual adaptation of our leadership training, by comparing the short-term immediate program outcomes on knowledge and skills development with practicing OB-GYN’s engaging in the program either virtually or in-person. 11 Subsequently, we were able to study the long-term (6-month) impact on learning in this same group and explore the career impacts of that training, which we report here, comparing the 2021 Cefalo program, which was held virtually, to the 2022 program, which returned to an in-person format.

The demands of the pandemic were particularly notable for healthcare providers and brought into focus the need to address and nurture psychological safety on the team 17 as well as physician resilience. 18–20 The effects of the pandemic also highlighted the need to support physician leaders with sophisticated communications skills 21 during “VUCA” (Volatile, Uncertain, Complex, Ambiguous) crises. 22 The pandemic heightened the focus on physician leaders to address equity concerns magnified by the crisis 9 , 23 , 24 and subsequent policy actions that impact the practice of obstetrics and gynecology. 25 Given the rapidly evolving context in which physicians work and the immense and multifaceted burdens they shoulder, 2 leadership training focused on healthcare providers needs to support the development of a sophisticated and broad array of practical skills. In multiple ways these contextual changes serve to reinforce the call for building physician leadership capacity that was so clearly sounded early in the millennium. 26 In addition, given the investment required to deliver such sophisticated development experiences, it is crucial to understand how leadership training is impactful and meaningful.

The objective of this analysis was to compare 6-month competency-based learning retention outcomes for the ACOG-Cefalo Leadership Institute 2021 (virtual) and 2022 (in-person) cohorts as relates to both physicians’ leadership skill development and leadership self-efficacy.

Program Description

Most of the synchronous curriculum topics were provided by the same speakers both years, regardless of whether the curriculum was virtual or in-person. A comparison between the session formats, including sessions offered, training hours provided, and number of attendees was performed and the immediate post-program learning outcomes between these delivery formats has been previously published. 11

In the six months following the intensive, synchronous program for both cohorts, four follow-on webinars addressed the topics of Imposter Syndrome, Sources of Power in Negotiation, Creating Effective Accountability Structures, and Making Cultural Change Real, with speakers and the formats for the follow-on webinars being identical in both years. Additionally, each Fellow was provided with unlimited and self-directed access to an online library of short (~30-minute) modules addressing leadership skills on a wide variety of topics, utilizing FastTrack Leadership 32 online at WeTrainLeaders.com. The FastTrack Leadership Library topics are closely aligned with the program curricula and previous research has found them to be useful, relevant, practical, and enjoyable by participants. 28 An identical selection of leadership books and other written materials were included in the program materials for both years. Fellows were encouraged to use those resources post-program.

Participants and Data Collection

Participants were asked to rate their skill level (as a measure of ability) and skill use (as a measure of implementation) of the competency for each of 14 leadership competencies using the retrospective pre-and post-test method. 34–38 Plain language definitions of the competencies were provided on the evaluation form. For skill level “six months ago” (before the training) and “now”, ratings were collected with a 5-point Likert scale, 36 where 1 = unskilled, 2 = low skills, 3 = moderate skills, 4 = good skills, and 5 = excellent skills. Similarly, for skill use (implementation) before the training and present day, participants rated their use of each competency on a 5-point Likert scale, where 1 = not at all, 2 = to a small degree, 3 = moderately, 4 = to a large extent, and 5 = extensively. Other survey questions included “How have the skills you acquired from the course impacted the healthcare you provide to your patients?” with responses given on a 5-point rating scale (1 = Negative impact, 2 = No impact; 3 = Little impact, 4 = Moderate impact, 5 = Strong impact); and “Have you made any changes in your communication and leadership approaches as a result of participating in this course?” with responses given on a 5-point rating scale (1 = No impact, 2 = I do not know; 3 = Yes, one or two, 4 = Yes, some, 5 = Yes, many). Participants were also asked whether they would recommend the course to their colleagues and whether they had received a promotion, had a change of job or taken on new leadership opportunities since the course (responses Yes/No); and: “and if so, to what extent did the course prepare you for the new leadership opportunities?”, (with ratings of 1 = Not at all; 2 = A little; 3 = Somewhat; 4 = Very much).

Additional qualitative feedback was collected: 1) Were there any skills or lessons you learned at the ACOG Leadership Institute that have proven to be particularly “sticky”? [“sticky” in that they stuck with you, strongly resonated with you, or moved you?] If so, please describe; 2) Reflecting on your response to the previous question, do you feel like the lessons you listed resonated even more so in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic? If so, why do you think that?; 3) What do you feel was the most valuable lesson or skill learned from the ACOG Leadership Institute?; and 4) Were there any skills you felt you did not learn enough about, or content that was not included in the training that you wish had been? If so, please let us know in the space below. Please feel free to provide any additional comments or suggestions for the program staff to consider.

Data Analysis

Quantitative data.

The survey data was exported from QualtricsXM 33 to a secure Microsoft Excel program for descriptive analyses, including counts and percentages of demographic data and means and standard deviations of skill level and skill use scores for each leadership competency. Mean differences between scores six months ago/before the program and scores now for skill level and skill use of each leadership competency were calculated in Microsoft Excel. Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-rank testing 39 , 40 was conducted in StataSE16 41 software to assess the statistical significance of the mean differences. This non-parametric testing approach was used 11 due to small sample sizes. Participants with missing responses to survey questions were excluded from analysis on a test-by-test basis.

Qualitative Data

The qualitative feedback from each cohort was analyzed by three graduate-level research assistants to highlight emergent themes. All feedback statements were coded independently to determine the frequency based on the respective year. Individual feedback submissions by participants sometimes covered multiple topics, so multiple qualitative codes may apply to each individual feedback response. It must be noted that survey data were evaluated without any personal identifiers, and thus it is possible that a participant could have left similar feedback to more than one open-ended question.

Descriptive Results

Table 2 provides a comparison between the session formats, including sessions offered, training hours provided, and number of attendees.

While the program is designed to accommodate up to 40 participants, the 2021 virtual program enrolled 32 participants, and the 2022 in-person program enrolled 39 participants. The 2021 follow-up survey was completed by 22 of 32 (69%) virtual institute participants and the 2022 follow-up survey was completed by 33 of 39 (85%) in-person institute participants. Fellows in both cohorts who participated in the 6-month follow-up study in 2021 and 2022 were highly similar with respect to age and areas of practice, but the virtual 2021 group skewed more female and more diverse ( Table 3 ).

Quantitative Results

For the 2022 in-person attending group, the pre-program (“six months ago”) scores for skill level (ability) ranged from a low of 2.63±0.83 (“Negotiation Skills”) to a high of 3.47±0.92 (“Practice of Multiculturalism”) and for pre-program skills use (implementation) scores ranged from a low of 2.61±1.27 (“Managing Media Communications”) to a high of 3.55±0.87 (“Practice of Multiculturalism”). Their post-program (“now”) scores for skill level (ability) ranged from a low of 3.66±0.70 (“Negotiation Skills”) to a high of 4.34±0.65 (“Diversity and Inclusion”) and for post-program skills use (implementation) scores ranged from a low of 3.36±1.45 (“Managing Media Communications”) to a high of 4.24±0.83 (“Diversity and Inclusion”) ( Figures 1 and 2 ).

Greater variance exists in the retrospective pre-training scores for competencies between the virtual and in-person groups. In the post training (“now”) scores, the only delta between the virtual and in-person cohorts that exceeds 0.5 is for the Applying Advocacy Skills Using a Science-Based Approach, where the 2022 in-person group’s ratings were 0.58 greater than the virtual cohort’s 6-month post-program rating.

Qualitative Results: Four (4) Open-Ended Questions

I want to thank all the individuals who have invested countless hours to create such a well-developed program. It astonishes me how much I still have to learn about myself and others. All those involved deserve awards for the energy and tenacity that they bring!

Thank you for all that you do. I appreciate the time and topics discussed. I enjoy the [post-program follow–on] zoom lectures when I am available to make it. This conference poured a lot into me and I am grateful for that.

Comments shared about both the 2021 virtual experience and the 2022 in-person experience were similar in that there were no negative comments shared about either leadership training experience.

Were there any skills or lessons you learned at the ACOG Leadership Institute that have proven to be particularly ‘sticky’? [‘sticky’ in that they stuck with you, strongly resonated with you, or moved you?] If so, please describe.

Negotiation and advocacy skills were the most foreign/unfamiliar to me - but were highly desirable skills. These sessions in particular, really grabbed my attention and provided me a knowledge and skills acquisition platform to grow from.

A prominent theme emerging from the 2022 in-person cohort’s responses was that communication was a “sticky” topic, given the fact that physicians often have to navigate working with different personalities amongst their teams and their patients. The ability to deliver good or bad news, while considering the personality of the individual being spoken with, is a skill for which participants described they desired more experience. In addition, a second theme emerged that the “upstander” and “bystander” concepts were experienced as “sticky”.

Reflecting on your response to the previous question, do you feel like the lessons you listed resonated even more so in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic? If so, why do you think that?

A prominent theme emerging from the 2021 virtual cohort’s responses indicated that participants found that the COVID-19 pandemic opened a new door for physician leadership, as leading an interdisciplinary team was critically important at the time. They noted that “old ways of leadership” were not applicable during the pandemic, which required successful physicians to make changes to the way they practice. Participants noted that collaborative efforts needed to occur so that care was still streamlined given the pandemic. A prominent theme emerging from the 2022 in-person cohort’s responses indicated that the skills learned resonated as they went from in-person to telehealth throughout the pandemic and then had to re-learn how to facilitate in-person interactions with their team. An additional theme emerged regarding participants’ heightened awareness of others’ views and looking out for areas where marginalization can be avoided in team dynamics.

There is no one way to lead. We have to constantly evolve as leaders and change how the common message is presented based on the audience. It is important to really get to know your team and how they communicate and what motivates them.

Leadership skills are impactful even on an individual level as a physician leader not only with the organizations I work with, but with the patients I care for individually each day.

Were there any skills you felt you did not learn enough about, or content that wasn’t included in the training that you wish had been? If so, please let us know in the space below. Please feel free to provide any additional comments or suggestions for the program staff to consider.

The majority of participants in 2021 virtual cohort expressed that they wanted more time with the executive coach (80 minutes was provided), to better understand how they can improve their leadership qualities. An additional theme emerged noting the challenges of Zoom sessions rather than in-person learning, describing that being in-person would have been more conducive to their learning.

In response to the same question, themes that emerged from the 2022 in-person cohort included their appreciation and enjoyment at having the opportunity to attend the program, with notations that the in-person instruction was beneficial to their learning as they were able to digest the information, ask follow-up questions and receive real time answers, having the ability to foster wholesome discussions and allowing for networking opportunities.

With regard to post-program self-directed use of the supplemental learning materials (modules, books), roughly half of the participants affirmed that they made use of at least some of the reading or other supplemental materials given at the course for post-program self-guided study with about one-third of participants reporting use of two or more of the materials (generally the online modules and one or two of the leadership books).

Certainly, it is important to know that workforce development programs are impactful in the short term, providing participants with frameworks and practical tools relevant to the day-to-day challenges they face. Other programs have shown that pivoting from in-person based training to virtual training does not sacrifice learning gains in the immediate sense. 14 This work echoes the recent work of Nilaad, et al, 42 who found no negative impacts on learning when a pharmacy curriculum was given as either live-virtual or in-person to medical and pharmacy students. Similarly, Reddy, et al, 43 examined the acceptability of virtual vs in-person grand rounds and found that each delivery format could be effective despite some personal preferences for one format over another. Similarly, we recently published that these same cohorts of physicians found the immediate learning experience of synchronous, intensive, equity-centered leadership training to be highly impactful to their knowledge acquisition and their self-efficacy, regardless of whether they participated in a virtual or an in-person cohort. 11

This study compares the 6-month follow-on evaluation of the “stickiness” of leadership skills learning and usage in two highly similar groups of physicians participating in a nearly identical, equity-centered leadership program, which was delivered either virtually (in 2021) or in-person (in 2022). Similar to our previous short-term focused work in evaluating this model of leadership training in interdisciplinary healthcare providers 12 and in groups of physician leaders, 8 , 11 these new data indicate that, regardless of the format of program delivery, equity-centered leadership training can strongly impact knowledge of such leadership skills, as well as reported subsequent implementation of those leadership skills, over longer periods of time in OB-GYN physicians. Our data here comparing competency-based learning between the two delivery formats indicates that while positive shifts in learning are sustained at six-months post-program in both formats, there is very little notable difference (delta of ≥0.5) between the virtual or in-person instruction. The data here indicate statistically significant—and similar—shifts in each of the 14 competencies under study in this investigation for both virtual and in-person equity-centered leadership training.

 Some variance between cohorts is seen with respect to retrospective pre-training ratings for both skill level (ability) and for skill use (implementation), while ratings for “current” (“now”) level of ability and implementation were far more similar, suggesting that the training itself helped to level out differences that existed amongst the groups, as would be expected.

Similar to our previous findings, 11 , 14 Abarghouie, et al, 44 found that when 40 surgical technology students were randomly assigned to virtual or traditional (lecture-based, in-person) teaching formats, the short-term learning outcomes were nearly identical for both formats. However, in contrast to our findings here, their longer-term examination scores illustrated significant differences in content retention and recall performance, favoring virtual instruction.

In examining the impact on the scores for knowledge/learning and skills/usage gains in our two cohorts of physicians, the data show strong shifts. While positive shifts in immediate knowledge and skills gain would and should be expected in any professional development training provided by an experienced and qualified faculty, our team was particularly pleased to discover how strongly the participants felt their skill level had grown, even so many months after the training. The shifts in skills use at the follow-up timepoint were also strong and help support the theory that these trainees did indeed “move the needle” of their knowledge and ability through participating in the program. The strong shifts in skills usage is of particular import, since that indicates that the competencies of focus were directly relevant to the actual, practical needs of the learners back in their medical offices and healthcare systems. One of the goals we talk about in the Cefalo program is the curricular focus on “WISDOM: What I Shall Do On Monday”, meaning that we want the content to be directly practical rather than merely theoretical. We believe that the program’s skills-and-practice-focus, as opposed to a concept- or theory-focus, is a likely explanation for the long-term strong shifts in both skills level and skills use seen in this analysis of learning.

It was interesting that the scores are relatively similar for both virtual and in-person instruction and thus from these data we cannot imply that one method was more effective than the other. Regardless of whether the program was provided in-person or virtually, we have some hypotheses for why the six-month follow-up data showed such dramatic learning. First, this program has been provided by the same core team for nearly two decades—a team which has always deeply included the stakeholders served in both planning and implementation and which has consistently applied the leadership concepts taught to its own functioning. Two decades provides considerable time for honing teamwork, content, and delivery. The same core team has been involved in several other leadership development programs with similar demonstrated impact for academic leaders, 27 , 45 interprofessional healthcare teams, 12–16 and public health workforce groups. 28 Prior to the 2021 virtual program reported on here, the team had experience with adapting multiple other nationally prominent leadership programs to the virtual environment, and those lessons learned 14 , 46 contributed to the extremely smooth transition of the Cefalo program to virtual in 2021 after the pause during the COVID year. Given the qualitative feedback from that virtual program, we were not surprised at the strength the immediate post-program learning reported 11 nor by the shift in skill levels and usage levels of the program competencies reported here more than six months later for either group.

For the virtual group, the largest shift for both learning and skills use was for the competency Leading Change Successfully, with score shifts of 1.20 and 1.26 respectively, which indicate very strong shifts in both understanding and the confidence to implement the skills. The qualitative comments from this group acknowledged the need to adapt to changes imposed by the pandemic (eg the “old ways of leadership” were not applicable during the pandemic), thus triangulating the quantitative data. For the in-person cohort of 2022, the largest shift for knowledge gain ( learning ) was 1.19 for Leading Others and Empowering Their Success, which echoes the qualitative theme of having to “re-learn how to facilitate in-person interactions with their team” and avoiding marginalization in team dynamics. For the in-person cohort, the largest shift for skills use was 1.03 for Negotiation Skills, which are commonly considered an important topic in physician and other healthcare-oriented leadership development programs. 1–3 , 8 , 10–14 These scores are corroborated in the separate answers to the open-ended questions, in which 100% of the 2021 cohort and 97% of the 2022 cohort agreed that they “made changes in my communication or leadership approach” based on their learning in the program. Furthermore, more than half of participants noted that they had new leadership opportunities since their training (62% for the virtual cohort and 55% for the in-person cohort), for which 100% of the responding participants in both cohorts agreed that the course prepared them for those opportunities. All (100%) of the responding virtual cohort and 100% of the responding in-person cohort responded affirmatively to the question “this course was beneficial to my practice as a physician leader”.

whether it could be appropriate for those who are more advanced in diversity, equity, and inclusion skills to be excused from such material as they enter a leadership development program?

We do not agree with this sentiment, as we view a) the understanding of self and others; b) the appreciation of the differences between people; and c) developing the skills to create a culture fostering belonging for everyone on the team, as a never-ending journey of enlightenment. The data from these highly equity-engaged participants entering the ACOG-Cefalo program in both cohorts visibly illustrates that significant learning and skills development continue to occur, even in those with broad previous exposure and passion for the content. Like leadership development in general, one should never stop growing one’s leadership skill set nor turn one’s back on opportunities to learn, engage, and grow. Leadership learning is intended to be a life-long endeavor, as it is a journey with no end.

Independent of delivery format, it is important to pursue understanding of the longer-term contribution of physician leadership development approaches to skills acquisition and use, particularly when it comes to the more nuanced skills involved in equity-centered leadership. 2 While there are several research publications providing evidence of efficacy, 2 such as the systemic reviews of leadership programs by Frich et al 5 in 2015 and later by Gerts 6 et al, in 2020, there is relatively less understanding of the continuing impact on knowledge and skills many months 8 or even years 27–45 after the training. While the findings of Abarghouie, et al, 44 reported that virtually delivered instruction had a stronger impact on longer-term content retention and recall performance, our own findings showed very similar outcomes between the two modalities. Admittedly, career leadership development approaches differ greatly from technical course instruction, as do the methods of evaluating impact on learning and subsequent behaviors.

Our previous work in small interprofessional teams engaging in equity-centered leadership training demonstrated statistically significant changes in immediate learning gains as measured by topic, rather than by over-arching competency, regardless of whether the delivery method was virtual or in-person. Our “lessons learned” working with these physician audiences echo and confirm those found with the Clinical Scholars program, 12 , 14 namely that virtual content delivery imposes time restraints (time zones, screen-time fatigue) and is far less efficient in terms of content delivery than traditional face-to-face formats, resulting in a slightly reduced content in order to fit the constraints. While the data reported here support the hypothesis that this virtual adaptation of the ACOG-Cefalo program was highly successful, translation of in-person programs to virtual ones can be challenging to program directors and faculty and require a great deal of careful thought and planning. In short, success is not guaranteed simply because the in-person format might have proved to be impactful and successful previously.

Given the value of physician time and the investment required for mounting a leadership development program, part of the “return on investment” consideration is the assurance that the endeavor offers “sticky” learning that will continue to benefit the participant long after the training has passed. This long-term impact is an important consideration regardless of whether that program is deployed virtually or in-person. These data support the efficacy of either delivery model, as demonstrated by the statistically significant differences in scores for both skills learning and skills implementation in the six months post-program, which gives us confidence that achieving this “stickiness of learning” is not only a realizable goal but should be an expected one. Other published research has found leadership learning to be “sticky” over time, both with previous cohorts of these physician leaders 8 and with academic leaders. 27–46 While those studies support the subsequent career impact on the participants, neither of those investigations compared the learning in virtual vs in-person contexts.

Interestingly, in this work we did notice a difference in willingness to participate in a virtual leadership development program both overall and across cohorts. Several participants who initially signed up for the 2021 program, with the hopes that it would be offered in-person, later deferred their participation to 2022 (data not shown). There was an overwhelming interest for the in-person format, which may partially account for the lower number of enrolled virtual participants in 2021. In the literature, the Clinical Scholars program 14 conducted a similar study, comparing similar leadership development programs implemented either virtually or in-person, however that program was much longer in duration (3 years) and provided project-based funding contingent upon participation. Not surprisingly, we did not observe similar hesitancy to participate virtually in the ongoing CS program as we found in our newly-enrolled physician participants in this single-meeting course.

Additionally, a greater percentage of females made up the virtual cohort of 2021, with 84% of attendees identifying as female, compared to 71% of the 2022 onsite program (data not shown). With respect to participation in this 6-month follow-up survey, 90% of those responding from the 2021 (virtual) program reported identifying as female, as compared to 70% of the 2022 onsite participants. There were no notable gender differences for the 2022 in-person cohort between those who attended or responded to the 6-month follow-up survey. It was also interesting to note that there was slightly greater participation of individuals from communities of color in the virtual session, with 48% of those participating in 2021 identifying as such, and 50% of the 2021 6-month follow-up respondents representing communities of color. For the 2022 in-person program, 38% of attending participants identified as representing various communities of color, as did 36% of the 6-month follow-up participants. This information is merely observational, and represents individuals voluntarily identifying as Asian, Black, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, or Other. We did not collect data for the present study as to why individuals selected a virtual or an onsite experience and whether that choice relates to preference, opportunity, or other reasons. It is important to note that despite several emails requesting participation in the 6-month follow-up survey, only 69% of those virtually attending responded, while 85% of their in-person counterparts responded. Our data collection window was also longer for our virtual participants as compared to that for our in-person ones. Our data fail to provide insight into explanations for this difference in survey response.

As reported elsewhere, 11 we also observed a difference in the degree of post-program connections between the virtual program participants and those who were convened in-person. The 2022 group connected dozens of times weekly for several months after the event while the virtual group rarely used any of the same systems provided to them to connect through group Email and the Whova meeting app platform. Given that topics of conversation focused on policy issues in healthcare, we hypothesize that issues-of-the-day could have driven this connection. However, we cannot discount the potential influence of cohort differences or differences in how group identity was formed in the in-person context. The qualitative data in this study shed some light on the benefits of having an in-person training program. Individuals who attended the in-person retreat reported increased connection between themselves and their executive coach as well as feeling more “fulfilled” after attending. Those who attended the virtual group reported that an in-person format would be more conducive to their learning and would help the material resonate with individuals more.

There were curricular sacrifices made in the virtual deployment of the program as compared to its in-person counterpart, including shorter days (to accommodate a variety of time zones), more time devoted to ensuring that the virtual format was conducted smoothly, and greater time devoted to creating interpersonal connections in the virtual space—which resulted in a more streamlined and less expansive/more focused curriculum. In the 2022 in-person format, the time not devoted to facilitating the program flow was spent on participants networking informally with colleagues and developing meaningful relationships. Despite the curricular adaptations, the outcome scores for both skill level and skill use were strikingly similar. In fact, there was only one post-training score—for Applying Advocacy Skills Using a Science-Based Approach—that rose above the 0.5 threshold, in which the in-person attendees reported a delta for skill level that was 0.6 greater than the virtually-attending ones. One hypothesis for this striking difference is the emergence of legislative threats to women’s healthcare which were more prevalent during the in-person (2022) program year. 25

Practical Implications

Physicians are leaders of their teams and across their organizations, however conventional medical training does not typically encompass the skills for nurturing diversity and inclusion, as those healthcare leaders create motivated team cultures which support psychological safety. Physicians often need to lead change both persuasively and successfully while they negotiate and innovate to improve services and patient outcomes, particularly given the political intrusion into healthcare and ever-leaner insurance reimbursement realities. Skills for managing media communications can become important as physicians rise in the ranks of leadership, and without effective training can lead to devastating impacts for both their organizations and careers. Through the ACOG-Cefalo program, our team has spent two decades focusing on and refining the leadership competencies most useful to medical leaders in women’s healthcare. The data presented here indicate that the competencies selected are well-suited to this audience. As educators of extremely busy, practicing healthcare professionals, we have a keen interest in developing strategies for efficiently building skills through intensive training sessions and demonstrating the effectiveness of those approaches. The results from our previously published examination of the immediate positive impact of training on physician’s skills and confidence in their competence 11 provides evidence that women’s healthcare physicians can “move the needle” of their learning for specific leadership skills in statistically significant and clinically meaningful ways. The data presented in this follow-up study support the hypothesis that those efforts are not only efficient and effective, but also produce longer-term impacts in broad competency areas, as evinced by the strong changes in competency scores for both knowledge and ability that we report. This study further confirms that the competencies focused on are relevant to the needs of physician leaders, are able to be taught in engaging and meaningful ways with practical applications, and that physicians report they subsequently use these skills frequently in their roles as healthcare providers and as healthcare leaders. Further, moving the needle in these competencies seems to be indicative of participant reports of positive career impacts for them as well. While we also provided robust post-program support that was individually oriented and self-directed, the intensity of a physician’s typical workload seems to hinder their ability to deeply engage in post-program reading or other types of ongoing leadership learning. Thus, an additional implication from our findings is that physician leadership training is best accomplished with structured approaches implemented in protected time, so that the physicians can focus on learning and skills acquisition without the pressing distractions of patient care and other daily duties.

This study demonstrates that all these goals can be achieved whether those training interventions are provided virtually or in-person. However, as we reported here, our experience suggests that stronger networks and connections are created with in-person programs and clearly participants prefer an in-person experience. Our work indicates that women’s healthcare physicians are ideal audiences for this leadership training, regardless of the platform of delivery. These physicians are eager learners, appreciate practical approaches, find relevance in the skills taught, subsequently use those skills, and relate the use of those expanded leadership skills to positive career impacts.

Limitations

Self-report measures do have the consideration of social desirability bias, however self-report measures have been used with a great deal of confidence for decades in situations when objective testing or personal observation is either not possible or practical. 6 , 8 , 11–14 , 27 , 34 , 36 , 37 In settings such as post graduate courses focusing on professional leadership development, self-report measures are quite appropriate. Identifying the factors that make virtual training more alluring to potential participants would provide useful insights, however that was not the focus of this study. While as program faculty we have an understanding of how to successfully convert in-person leadership training to virtual, such detailed exploration is beyond the scope of this report and our findings fail to give us insight into why physicians might choose one format over another. It would have been interesting to study the variety of ways the Whova App could have been useful post-program, however these two groups of physician participants engaged only minimally with the App functions both during and after the program. Our data fail to provide insight as to why the App was not engaging to them; however, the 2022 Cohort made extensive use of Email post-program, which seemed to be their method of choice for connecting with one another. In hindsight, we wish we had included physician resilience as a stand-alone competency so that we could now have greater insight into how leadership training can help support physicians in this way, however that data was not collected.

From examining these data, we conclude that physicians can successfully engage in leadership training in both virtual and in-person formats, gaining significant skills which result in implementation of those skills in the ensuing months post-program. The learning appears to be “sticky”, which suggests that the investment in the process offers a return on the effort, resulting in both practice- and career-dividends to the physician. Both the increased attendance in the 2022 cohort and the many qualitative comments from the 2021 group supported the preference of these physicians for in-person training experiences. Although in-person training did not result in widespread significantly greater learning, self-reported retention, or skills use when compared to virtual training, there was a notable difference in networking, benefits for leadership opportunities, and post-program professional connections, and perhaps even a belief in learning effectiveness. Future research could explore how to foster stronger interpersonal connections and improve the desirability of virtual leadership development programs. In addition, future investigations might explore if the virtual environment struggles with work-based distractions, such as inability to focus, inability to take off work, and disruption of learning by co-workers.

Physician leadership training can be effectively deployed in either virtual or in-person formats, although these physicians clearly preferred the in-person experience. Training in either format can continue to expand skills, even when the learner enters the program viewing themselves as having a high degree of knowledge around topics and a high use of related skills. Given the statistically significant shifts in knowledge and skills across all competencies, we conclude that physicians benefitted from this equity-centered leadership development approach and viewed themselves as retaining those skills and continuing to implement those skills even six months later, regardless of whether their participation took place virtually or in-person.

Acknowledgments

Emilie Mathura, Suzanne Singer, Caroline Martin, Maya Chevalier, Wendy Rouse Rohin.

This work was funded by the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology (ACOG).

Dr Claudia SP Fernandez reports that Mr. Ruben Fernandez, JD, is the co-author of It-FACTOR Leadership, a text used in the ACOG-Cefalo Leadership Institute and is related to the corresponding author. Mr. Fernandez also serves as an executive coach and faculty in the program. Dr. and Mr. Fernandez are related by marriage. The authors report no other conflicts of interest in this work.

1. Sadowski B, Cantrell S, Barelski A, O’Malley P, Hartzell JD. Leadership training in graduate medical education: a systematic review. J Grad Med Educ . 2018;10(2):134–148. doi:10.4300/JGME-D-17-00194.1

2. Angood PB, Falcone CM. Preparing physician leaders for the future. American Association for Physician Leadership/Korn-Ferry White Paper; 2023. doi: 10.55834/wp.3106435376.

3. van Diggele C, Burgess A, Roberts C, Mellis C. Leadership in healthcare education. BMC Medl Educ . 2020;20(Suppl 2):456. doi:10.1186/s12909-020-02288-x

4. Menaker R, Naumann KE, Reeve CE, Mellum KM, Rihal CS. The Importance of Physician Education . Engelwood, CO: Medical Group Management Association; 2022:1–13. Available from: https://www.mgma.com/articles/the-importance-of-physician-leadership-education . Accessed June 12 , 2024 .

5. Frich JC, Brewster AL, Cherlin EJ, Bradley EH. Leadership development programs for physicians: a systematic review. J Gen Int Med . 2015;30(5):656–674. doi:10.1007/s11606-014-3141-1

6. Geerts J, Goodall AH, Agius S. Evidence-based leadership development for physicians: a systematic literature review. Soc sci med . 2020;246:112709. 2019. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.112709

7. Gorrindo P, Powers AR, Tedeschi SK, Niswender K. Fulfilling our leadership responsibility.(leadership skills in physicians). JAMA . 2013;309(2):147. doi:10.1001/jama.2012.165720

8. Fernandez CSP, Noble CC, Jensen ET, Chapin J. Improving leadership skills in physicians: a 6-month retrospective study. J Leadersh Stud . 2016;9(4):6–19. doi:10.1002/jls.21420

9. Corbie G, Brandert K, Fernandez CSP, Noble CC. Leadership development to advance health equity. Acad Med . 2022a;97(12):1746–1752. doi:10.1097/ACM.0000000000004851

10. Hopkins J, Fassiotto M, Ku MC, Mammo D, Valantine H. Designing a physician leadership development program based on effective models of physician education. Health Care Management Rev . 2018;43(4):293–302. doi:10.1097/HMR.0000000000000146

11. Fernandez CSP, Hays CN, Adatsi G, Noble CC, Abel-Shoup M, Connolly A. Comparing virtual vs in-person immersive leadership training for physicians. J Healthc Leadersh . 2023;15:139–152. doi:10.2147/JHL.S411091

12. Fernandez CSP, Noble CC, Chandler C, et al. Equity-centered Leadership Training found to be both relevant and impactful by interprofessional teams of healthcare clinicians: recommendations for workforce development efforts to update leadership training. Consult Psychol J ; 2022. doi:10.1037/cpb0000239.

13. Fernandez CSP, Corbie-Smith G, Green M, Brandert K, Noble C, Guarav D. Clinical scholars: effective approaches to leadership development. In: Fernandez CSP, Corbie-Smith G, editors. Leading Community Based Changes in the Culture of Health in the US: Experiences in Developing the Team and Impacting the Community . London: InTech Publishers; 2021a:9–28.

14. Fernandez CSP, Green M, Noble CC, et al. Training “pivots” from the pandemic: a comparison of the clinical scholars leadership program in-person vs. virtual synchronous training. J Healthc Leadersh . 2021b;13:63–75. Volume 2021(b):13 Pages.doi:10.2147/JHL.S282881

15. Corbie G, Brandert K, Noble CC, et al. Advancing health equity through equity-centered leadership development with interprofessional healthcare. J Gen Internal Medicine . 2022b;37(16):4120–4129. doi:10.1007/s11606-022-07529-x

16. Henry E, Walker MR, Noble CC, Fernandez CSP, Corbie-Smith G, Dave G. Using a most significant change approach to evaluate learner-centric outcomes of clinical scholars leadership training program. Evaluat Prog Plann . 2022;Volume 94:102141. doi:10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2022.102141

17. Edmondson AC. The Fearless Organization . John Wiley & Sons; 2018.

18. Rangachari P, L Woods J. Preserving organizational resilience, patient safety, and staff retention during COVID-19 requires a holistic consideration of the psychological safety of healthcare workers. Int J Environ Res Public Health . 2020;17(12):4267. doi:10.3390/ijerph17124267

19. Shanafelt TD, Gorringe G, Menaker R, et al. Impact of organizational leadership on physician burnout and satisfaction. Mayo Clin Proc . 2015;90(4):432–440. doi:10.1016/j.mayocp.2015.01.012

20. Shanafelt TD, Makowski MS, Wang H, et al. Association of burnout, professional fulfillment, and self-care practices of physician leaders with their independently rated leadership effectiveness. JAMA Network Open . 2020;3(6):e207961. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.7961

21. Kain N, Jardine C. “Keep it short and sweet”: improving risk communication to family physicians during public health crises. Can Fam Physician . 2020;Vol 66:e99. MARCH | MARS 2020 |.

22. Nikseresht A, Hajipour B, Pishva N, Mohammadi HA. Using artificial intelligence to make sustainable development decisions considering VUCA: a systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis. Environ Sci Pollut Res . 2022;29(28):42509–42538. doi:10.1007/s11356-022-19863-y

23. Worley C, Jules C. COVID-19’s uncomfortable revelations about agile and sustainable organizations in a VUCA world. J Appl Behav Sci . 2020;56(3):002188632093626. doi:10.1177/0021886320936263

24. Pang EM, Sey R, de Beritto T, Lee HC, Powell CM. Advancing health equity by translating lessons learned from NICU family visitations during the COVID-19 pandemic. NeoReviews . 2021;22(1):e1–e6. doi:10.1542/NEO.22-1-E1

25. Coen-Sanchez K, Ebenso B, El-Mowafi IM, Berghs M, Idriss-Wheeler D, Yaya S. Repercussions of overturning Roe v. Wade for women across systems and beyond borders. Reprod Health . 2022;19(1):184. doi:10.1186/s12978-022-01490-y

26. D’Cruz JR. Is the graduate education model inappropriate for leadership development? HealthcarePapers . 2003;4(1):69–90. doi:10.12927/hcpap.16899

27. Fernandez CSP, Noble CC, Jensen ET, Martin L, Stewart M. A retrospective study of academic leadership skill development, retention and use: the experience of the Food Systems Leadership Institute. J Leadership Education . 2016;15(2 Research):150–171. doi:10.12806/V15/I2/R4

28. Fernandez CSP, Noble C, Jensen E. An examination of the self-directed online leadership learning choices of public health professionals: the MCH PHLI experience. 2017. J Public Health Manag Pract . 2017;23(5):454–460. doi:10.1097/PHH.0000000000000463

29. Henry E, Chandler C, Laux J, et al. Evaluating leadership development competencies of clinicians to build health equity in America. J Contin Educ Health Prof . 2023;44(2):90–96.Spring2024. doi:10.1097/CEH.0000000000000526

30. Zoom Video Communications, Inc. Zoom meetings; 2020. Available from: www.zoom.us . Accessed June 12 , 2024 .

31. Whova Event App; 2020. Available from: www.whova.com . Accessed June 12 , 2024 .

32. FastTrack Leadership Library. Fast Track Leadership. Available from: WeTrainLeaders.com . Accessed 12 June 2024 .

33. QualtricsXM. [software]. Provo, UT; 2020. Available from: www.qualtrics.com . Accessed June 12 , 2024 .

34. Lam TCM, Bengo P. A comparison of three retrospective self-reporting methods of measuring change in instructional practice. Am J Eval . 2003;24(1):65–80. doi:10.1016/S1098-2140(02)00273-4

35. Lozano LM, García-Cueto E, Muñiz J. Effect of the number of response categories on the reliability and validity of rating scales. Methodology . 2008;4(2):73–79. doi:10.1027/1614-2241.4.2.73

36. Pratt C, McGuigan WM, Katzev AR. Measuring program outcomes: using retrospective pretest methodology. Am J Eval . 2000;21(3):341–349. doi:10.1016/S1098-2140(00)00089-8

37. Sprangers M, Hoogstraten J. Pretesting effects in retrospective pretest-posttest designs. J Appl Psychol . 1989;74(2):265–272. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.74.2.265

38. Rohs FR. Response shift bias: a problem in evaluating leadership development with self-report pretest-posttest measures. J Agric Educ . 1999;40(4):28–37. doi:10.5032/jae.1999.04028

39. Altman DG, Gore SM, Gardner MJ, Pocock SJ. Statistical guidelines for contributors to medical journals. BMJ . 1983;286(6376):1489–1493. doi:10.1136/bmj.286.6376.1489

40. Dwivedi A, Mallawaarachchib I, Alvaradob LA. Analysis of small sample size studies using nonparametric bootstrap test with pooled resampling method. Stat Med . 2017;36(14):2187–2205. doi:10.1002/sim.7263

41. StataCorp. Stata Statistical Software: Release 16 . College Station, TX: StataCorp LLC; 2019.

42. Nilaad SD, Lin E, Bailey J, et al. Learning outcomes in a live virtual versus in-person curriculum for medical and pharmacy students. ATS Sch . 2022;3(3):399–412. PMID: 36312802; PMCID: PMC9585697. doi:10.34197/ats-scholar.2022-0001OC

e21.00308 . doi:10.5435/JAAOSGlobal-D-21-00308.

44. Abarghouie MHG, Omid A, Ghadami A. Effects of virtual and lecture-based instruction on learning, content retention, and satisfaction from these instruction methods among surgical technology students: a comparative study. J Educ Health Promot . 2020;9(1):296. doi:10.4103/jehp.jehp_634_19

45. Fernandez CSP, Esbenshade K, Reilly C, Martin LC. Career trajectory in academic leadership: experiences of graduates of the food systems leadership institute. J Leadership Educ . 2021;Vol 20(Issue 3):75–84. doi:10.12806/V20/I3/R4

46. Fernandez CSP, Lia Garman L, Noble CC, et al. Developing “Cohortness” in leadership programs operating in the virtual environment. Am J Distance Educ . 2022;36(2):135–149. doi:10.1080/08923647.2022.2057091

Contact Us   •   Privacy Policy   •   Associations & Partners   •   Testimonials   •   Terms & Conditions   •   Recommend this site •   Cookies •   Top

Contact Us   •   Privacy Policy

Training Industry

Setting clear expectations with competency modeling: case study.

Nesnah Ventures is a family-owned private equity firm that provides financial, administrative and strategic support to all of its operating companies. The organization owns six companies in the agriculture and/or service sectors: Burrachos Fresh Mexican Grill, Venture Fuels, Coda Bow, Unifide CST Scale Systems, Star Blends and Nesnah Properties. Since each company is unlike the next, the talent pool is diverse with a range of roles and specialties, from a caterer to an in-office employee and technician. Lisa Paulson, the learning and development (L&D) manager at Nesnah Ventures, oversees training and development for the entire firm.

Paulson is the sole L&D practitioner in the human resources (HR) department, which consists of seven HR professionals each tasked with different responsibilities in talent management. As the L&D leader of Nesnah, Paulson is tasked with aligning training to business strategy, ensuring the workforce has the skills needed to contribute toward achieving sustainable success. This is how she recognized the organization’s need to determine and define the specific skills and proficiencies needed to fulfill new roles and move internally within the company. In this case study, we’ll review a real-life example of how Nesnah Ventures built a competency model from scratch to provide clear career pathways within the company, promoting leadership development, higher employee retention and increased engagement for the business.

A Case Study of Nesnah Ventures

Competency models are frameworks that identify and define the skills and knowledge expected within a particular role. For an employee to move up the ladder, they must be proficient in these expected behaviors and skills. And many times, they are expected to go above and beyond. This was the case for some of the high-potential contributors at Nesnah Ventures. These employees were interested in being promoted and felt as if their performance aligned with their job description and the company’s expectations. However, this wasn’t the case.

They were completing the tasks and functions based on what they were assigned, however, despite these efforts, they weren’t able to move up a level. This misalignment in expectations caused a lot of confusion and frustration for both employees and their managers. This was especially the case during one on ones when conducting performance discussions. The lack of defined competencies also created confusion in C-suite. Leadership had different opinions on how many and what type of skills were relevant to certain roles, causing inconsistencies of expectations across the organization.

There also wasn’t an established method for identifying high-potential employees for succession planning. As a result, employees were beginning to leave the company to find growth and career development opportunities elsewhere. Nesnah Ventures hadn’t clearly defined what specific skills employees needed to fulfill more challenging roles. These expectations for career growth weren’t officially determined or documented, so for some employees, having a long-term future with Nesnah seemed unattainable.

The Solution: Building a Competency Model

Paulson recognized this dip in the talent pool, and that it was the same employees who were turned down for a promotion. As the solution, Paulson decided to build a competency model for her organization. The framework was called “expectations model” since the skills and behaviors listed in the model were company expectations of how to perform in each role. Within the model, there’d be “role cards,” which listed the specific skills required for that particular job role. The role cards would be accessible via Nesnah Ventures’s human resources information system (HRIS) self-serve portal, which employees would also be able to access via a mobile app.

Paulson’s objective for creating the model was to give employees and managers a tool to conduct better performance conversations, clarify role expectations and identify high-potential employees who could fulfill a leadership role with proper training and development. That way, employees could have a clear roadmap to moving up in the company, and leaders have a better way of explaining the steps to reaching those career goals.

Methodology and Implementation

When starting the process of building the role cards for the expectations model, Paulson says they didn’t officially define what success would look like because they weren’t sure where they were going with the project. It was the first time the company had created a competency model, so they were agile in their approach. However, the main indicator that Paulson was looking for were more candid and open conversations about performance. This impact could be seen through higher employee performance rates as well as a decrease in employee attrition as entry-level employees aspiring to move up receive a clear pathway to their career goals.

After evaluating the organization’s management levels, Paulson determined that the company had three different job levels. The first level included managers/supervisors, the second level included mid-level managers and executives fell into the third level. This categorization of managerial levels helped Nesnah Ventures determine competencies that should be consistent for each manager level across the organization.

Here’s an example of a role card that shows the job level, title and associated competencies:

Here are the steps Paulson took to develop their organization’s competency model:

• Planning : They researched existing competency models from other companies and adapted elements from existing frameworks to support the creation of their own unique model, tailored for their organization’s needs. A lot of meetings were held with executive level leaders and management to gain multiple viewpoints. They met with employee groups, too, to gather data on what they’d like to see and what would help them in having performance discussions and knowing what these role expectations are. This process helped create organization-wide expectations.
• Defining : “Leading self and others in the organization” is an established term for the company, meaning that everyone is a leader, it just depends on which kind at that moment. Paulson used this terminology to hone in on how the company identified and defined “leading self and others” and what that looks like. This was to unify everyone’s separate definition and perspective of what those words meant, connecting it to the business’s expectations. Paulson mentions that the process of defining was the longest step because it was foundational and set the tone for the program.
• Creating : From there they met with each leader of a functional area of business and talked about every single role and what the expectations were. The first couple of meetings weren’t as successful as Paulson hoped since leaders weren’t necessarily sure where to begin with describing each specific role. As a solution, Paulson did some pre-work by creating possible expectations to give leaders a starting point. This turned out to be very helpful, enabling them to clarify and articulate what these competencies and behaviors look like. During this process, there was a lot of debate between the word skills and competencies. Since a lot of these expectations could be either behavioral, skills or knowledge-based, they found it more appropriate to consider them as expectations. Employees were also hesitant to the term “competency model.” However, when they heard “role card” and “expectations” they felt much more at ease.
• Implementing : The project took approximately a year to complete, with six months dedicated to meeting with managers and executives to go through different iterations. Besides the collective perspectives sought from leadership, Paulson was the only one working on the project, so that also had a factor with completion time.
• Evaluation : To ensure program success, Paulson set up one-on-one meetings and group meetings with leadership to solicit feedback. In-person meetings are preferable to company managers, so they tend to avoid surveys for gathering data.

Challenges and Encounters

The vision for the role cards changed a few times after deployment after having conversations with different groups of stakeholders. The model had to be modified a few times, which was a challenge since it required constant pivoting to incorporate new information. Another issue was creating different definitions for the same competencies based on that particular team, role and industry. For example, the expectations for digital skills may look different for a team of accountants versus a sales team, and as a result, will need to be worded and defined accordingly.

Lastly, the library of competencies was becoming too long. As a solution, Paulson revisited the role card with leaders to see which competencies could be made into one. To ensure buy in throughout the process, Paulson kept leadership closely involved and informed, giving them a hand in the revisions. A maximum number of six competencies per card was also established to prevent leaders from going overboard.

Business Results and Outcomes

Thanks to the role cards, employees are more empowered to conduct performance discussions with their supervisors. They are also more confident in their future with the company with a clear road to success. Every role card is made accessible to Nesnah Ventures’s people, providing all employees with the opportunity to fulfill any of the roles within the firm, promoting continuous internal mobility and career development.

• #building impactful competency models
• #competency modeling
• #competency models

Danielle Johnson

Danielle Johnson is an editor at Training Industry, Inc. with 5+ years’ experience in writing/editing and the talent to curate compelling, creative content for a target audience. At Training Industry, Danielle connects with thought leaders to publish articles with actionable solutions.

This topic is proudly sponsored by

Related Content

Case study: how usaid engages learners around the globe, telling your l&d career story , busuu launches ai-powered ‘speaking practice’ to boost real-world conversation skills.

Stay up to date on the latest articles, webinars and resources for learning and development.

Privacy Overview

School of Graduate Studies

Virtual session: leverage your cwru employee tuition benefits with the mandel school’s nonprofit management, social work or data science part-time options.

Thursday, June 27, 2024 at 12:00 PM until 1:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time UTC -04:00

• Master on Nonprofit Organizations (MNO)
• Master of Social Work (MSW)
• Certificate in Nonprofit Management (CNM)
• Certificate in Data Science for Social Impact (DSSI)
• Operationalizing Anti-Racism for Everyday Impact (3 credits)
• Introduction to Neuroscience in Social Work Practice (1 credit)
• Nonprofit Strategic Planning (3 credits)

Registration is no longer available because the registration deadline has passed.

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

Research: Using AI at Work Makes Us Lonelier and Less Healthy

• David De Cremer
• Joel Koopman

Employees who use AI as a core part of their jobs report feeling more isolated, drinking more, and sleeping less than employees who don’t.

The promise of AI is alluring — optimized productivity, lightning-fast data analysis, and freedom from mundane tasks — and both companies and workers alike are fascinated (and more than a little dumbfounded) by how these tools allow them to do more and better work faster than ever before. Yet in fervor to keep pace with competitors and reap the efficiency gains associated with deploying AI, many organizations have lost sight of their most important asset: the humans whose jobs are being fragmented into tasks that are increasingly becoming automated. Across four studies, employees who use it as a core part of their jobs reported feeling lonelier, drinking more, and suffering from insomnia more than employees who don’t.

Imagine this: Jia, a marketing analyst, arrives at work, logs into her computer, and is greeted by an AI assistant that has already sorted through her emails, prioritized her tasks for the day, and generated first drafts of reports that used to take hours to write. Jia (like everyone who has spent time working with these tools) marvels at how much time she can save by using AI. Inspired by the efficiency-enhancing effects of AI, Jia feels that she can be so much more productive than before. As a result, she gets focused on completing as many tasks as possible in conjunction with her AI assistant.

• David De Cremer is a professor of management and technology at Northeastern University and the Dunton Family Dean of its D’Amore-McKim School of Business. His website is daviddecremer.com .
• JK Joel Koopman is the TJ Barlow Professor of Business Administration at the Mays Business School of Texas A&M University. His research interests include prosocial behavior, organizational justice, motivational processes, and research methodology. He has won multiple awards from Academy of Management’s HR Division (Early Career Achievement Award and David P. Lepak Service Award) along with the 2022 SIOP Distinguished Early Career Contributions award, and currently serves on the Leadership Committee for the HR Division of the Academy of Management .

Partner Center

Content Search

World + 42 more

IOM Cash-Based Interventions Annual Report and Case Studies 2023

Attachments.

In recent years, IOM has placed special attention on increasing the use and coordination of cash-based interventions (CBI) across the organization in line with the Grand Bargain commitments and the IOM CBI Strategy 2022–2026.

In 2023, IOM continued to increase the use of CBI modalities to empower aid recipients and strengthen the resilience of affected populations. CBI was utilized in 112 countries and territories, reaching close to 4 million people, a 49 per cent increase compared to 2022. The use of cash and voucher modalities increased across IOM and constituted approximately 14 per cent of the overall IOM assistance to aid recipients.

In 2023, IOM further expanded the use of CBI beyond emergency response and delivered assistance through CBI across different areas of work in all contexts of IOM operations. CBI was used in 51 countries in emergency settings and in 61 countries in other settings, including development, return, reintegration, transition and recovery. The largest programmes took place in emergency response contexts where 92 per cent of the aid recipients were located.

The IOM CBI Annual Report and Case Studies 2023 provides more details and statistics on IOM’s CBI throughout the year and features case studies from 41 IOM missions, shedding light on good practices and lessons learned in different contexts. It includes sections focused on disaster risk reduction and climate adaptation, livelihood, return and reintegration and multipurpose cash assistance. There is also a special focus on regional responses, including the regional Afghanistan and Ukraine responses and the regional responses to the Venezuelan refugee and migrant crisis, the Sudan crisis and the Syrian crisis.

• ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
• LIST OF ACRONYMS
• Burundi / Madagascar / Malawi / the Philippines / Somalia / South Africa
• Bangladesh / El Salvador / Iraq / Mexico / Nigeria
• Guatemala / Mali / Morocco
• Haiti / Indonesia / Türkiye / Yemen
• Afghanistan / Kazakhstan / Pakistan
• The Sudan / Ethiopia / Pakistan
• The north-west of the Syrian Arab Republic / Jordan / Lebanon
• Ukraine / Bulgaria / Belarus / Latvia / Lithuania / the Republic of Moldova / Poland
• Argentina / Colombia / the Dominican Republic / Ecuador / Guyana / Peru / Uruguay

Related Content

World + 25 more

Concern Worldwide Annual Report & Financial Statements 2023

Syria, mena | syria earthquakes operation update 12-months update (№ mdrsy009).

Türkiye + 1 more

Türkiye Crisis Response Plan 2024

Syria, mena | syria earthquakes operation update 9-months update (№ mdrsy009).