The COVID-19 pandemic triggered a global experiment in 

. While this shift has brought about various logistical challenges for many employees, it’s also made leaders question how they can best manage their teams when face-to-face communication is replaced by online tools. As suggested by the 

 number of Google searches for ‘virtual leadership’ since lockdown measures were implemented in the first quarter of 2020, there’s seemingly a lack of clarity over what makes a good remote boss. London-based talent consultancy Ascend has sought to address this problem by introducing a 

 that helps ‘build strong remote teams’ through a mini-series of workshops focusing on topics like enhancing team resilience and successful remote conversations. But what makes a good leader in digital environments?

 has found that leaders of virtual teams have different behaviours to leaders of in-person teams. “We tend to think of leadership as a very human and a very one-on-one in-person process,” says Dr. Ina Purvanova, Professor of Leadership and Management at Drake University’s College of Business, and co-author of ‘

Who Emerges into Virtual Team Leadership Roles?

’ “But research shows that technology simply provides a different context, and if you figure out what you need to do in this new environment, then you can still be a very effective leader.” Canvas8 spoke to Dr. Purvanova to find out which personality traits are essential to lead in online environments.

Why is this topic important to understand?

My interest in virtual leadership dates back to my master’s thesis over two decades ago. Back then, knowledge of virtual leadership was not prevalent in the work environment, but it was clear that technology was going to play more of a role in our working lives. Many people held a traditional assumption of leadership, thinking that it should take a very human, in-person approach and that technology disables the social interactions necessary for those relationships, making it harder – or even impossible – to lead a group. My interest in the topic peaked when I discovered the opposite.

However, there isn’t much research specifically on how people emerge as leaders in a virtual context. A few studies have explored basic ideas, looking into very specific behaviours in a virtual environment that people perceive as leadership qualities – for example, focusing on communication techniques. Meanwhile, other studies have looked into extreme virtuality – what leadership looks like when each team member is in a different physical setting, maybe one in China, one in the UK, and one in the US, all trying to work together. But that doesn't connect very well with what's going on in industries because virtual teams are generally not that dispersed. Yes, people might be in different locations, but there tend to be pockets of individuals in the same location.

In these remote working times, we do have the privilege of video conferencing, which even until last year wasn't as popular as it is now. So you still get some of that face-to-face interaction even virtually. But a virtual meeting is sort of supposed to be on a timer. You might only have half an hour with your manager, so what you need to do in that small window of opportunity to build that relationship is almost on steroids. You both need to be personable and friendly, but also use that time to demonstrate that you know what you're talking about. If you want people to see you as an emergent leader within an organisation, you have to demonstrate to them that you have the competencies in place and that these competencies are going to increase your ability to perform your job better.

Lockdown life has strained team communications

We were interested in finding out whether different types of leaders emerge in teams of differing virtuality levels. What kind of profile do you need to have to become a leader in a predominately face-to-face environment, a virtual environment, or a mixed one? And how should individuals present themselves in different contexts so that they can be seen as a future leader?

Another topic that we really wanted to address is that a lot of the research out there had looked at single types of predictors for leadership. For example, if you have better communication skills, are you more likely to emerge as a leader or not? Or if you are more intelligent, might you be more able to emerge as a leader or not? But we know that leaders emerge based on a combination of characteristics, behaviours, and skills, not a singular one_that's the other gap that our study was trying to address. We looked at both personality traits and how those traits then allow you, or perhaps not allow you, to emerge as a leader depending on the level of virtuality of your team. Simultaneously with that we also looked at leadership skills, such as monitoring team efforts and engaging in other task-related and goal-related sorts of behaviours. In sum, we wanted to look at a number of task-related and goal-oriented behaviours, along with a number of personality traits and characteristics.

Unless an individual is able to switch to a different set of leadership behaviours in a virtual context, they may not be the most effective person to be assigned to lead a team

How did you go about conducting your study?

We replicated the study in two different types of settings and conducted several studies to make it more representative of current virtuality conditions. In study one, we wanted to explore virtuality defined as geographical distance. In study two, we wanted to explore virtuality defined through the perspective of communication through technology. We were trying to see if the results of our studies would replicate across different types of virtual settings. In both of these, we looked specifically at emergent leadership, which is about who is likely to be seen as a leader – it’s slightly different to effective leadership.

In both studies, we asked the members of each team who they felt was the best leader. We then measured personality traits and characteristics with different personality scales – specifically conscientiousness and extroversion, which we know are important from prior literature on leadership emergence. In addition to those traits, we measured intelligence and specific task-related and goal-oriented leadership behaviours. We measured who was more likely to monitor the team's progress towards their end goal, who was the most likely to offer help to team members who might be struggling with executing their tasks, and who was more likely to motivate the team.

People are craving additional support while working at home

We found that there are very, very significant differences between teams in low virtual contexts and high virtual contexts in terms of the qualities of emergent leaders. In a more traditional in-person setting, people seem to be drawn to the power of your personality, so the best predictors of your ability to be seen as a leader are showcasing who you are as an individual and the personality traits and characteristics that define you – how extroverted you are, how smart you are, how conscientious you are.

But as you move from teams that are less virtual to more virtual, we found that leaders need to emphasise task-oriented and goal-oriented behaviours more than personality characteristics. People may not necessarily care so much about who you are as a person, or they may not be able to assess that well. Instead, they really care about your ability to help them with tasks, to make sure that somebody is monitoring their performance and the progress of the team towards their goals, to tell people who needs to do what, and to coordinate the team's activities.

Flexible leadership is set to be vital in a post-pandemic world

With lockdown measures easing in many countries, some workforces are being given the choice of working from home or at the office. Purvanova explains that this flux presents a challenge for leaders: “Different contexts require you to present yourself in a different sort of way. So, unless an individual is able to switch to a different set of leadership behaviours in a virtual context, they may not be the most effective person to be assigned to lead a team.” With research finding that 

 think that one of the biggest challenges for companies is a lack of training on best practices for leading remote teams, there’s an opportunity for businesses to better support leaders in understanding the most effective styles to ‘switch on’ in different contexts. Tapping into this, strategist Dan Pontefract is offering a 

Purvanova’s research suggests that certain personality traits may correlate with more effective leadership styles in different working environments, so team structures may benefit from a shake-up. For example, leaders who are more extroverted may be effective in face-to-face environments, whereas those with more empathetic or supportive traits may lead better in online environments. Some businesses already match employees to roles based on personality traits – 

 use psychometric tests to support recruitment – so quantifying these traits for both current and emergent leaders could be a logical next step to ensure teams work better in-person and virtually.

In some respects, the demands placed on virtual leaders are higher than those on in-person leaders. With a lack of physical visibility around team collaboration or even body language, leaders may need to work harder to build strong relationships to support employees. Indeed, 

 from the Advanced Workplace Institute, remote working may be damaging trust and social bonds between team members. Navigating these additional pressures presents another potential pitfall – work burnout. With managers spending 

 watching LinkedIn Learning courses in March and April 2020 than in January and February – with the top classes revolving around stress management techniques – it’s important for businesses to be mindful of helping leaders. 

 are apps aimed at teaching people to develop mental fitness in the workplace.

Remote working may have been a necessity during lockdown, but many workers would like to have similar flexibility going forward. Take those with childcare responsibilities as an example. 

 has shown that women with children are more likely than other employees to rate working from home as a priority in a job. Yet while they’re just as likely as men to be interested in promotions and leadership opportunities, 

 globally think that taking advantage of flexibility programmes at work has negative career consequences. With Purvanova’s research illustrating that success can come from remote leadership – it’s just dependent on adjusting styles to suit virtual contexts – there’s an opportunity for businesses to utilise these learnings to make leadership opportunities accessible to all.

Dr. Radostina (Ina) Purvanova is professor of leadership and management at Drake University’s College of Business. Her research interests lie in the area of leadership, with a specific focus on employee motivation, high-quality work relationships, and women in the workplace. Her research has been published in prestigious management journals including the Academy of Management Journal,Personnel Psychology, The Leadership Quarterly, and the Journal of Vocational Behavior.

Global

Behavioural Sciences

Work

Leading a team can be difficult at the best of times, and amid a mass uptake of remote working due to COVID-19, fresh challenges have emerged. Canvas8 spoke to Ina Purvanova, professor of leadership and management at Drake University, to learn the traits of a great virtual leader.

What's the future of remote work in America?

Why don’t women self-promote in the workplace?

WFH flexibility makes locked-down workers happier

Anxious Britons happy to wait for return to the office