How to keep virtual work working (Nov 2020)

In conversations with leaders and managers in September 2020 I noticed a sense of entering “the next phase” of the impact of covid-19 on our working world, particularly with those who manage workforces that were mostly office-based pre-lockdown. 

First was a phase of what felt like crisis management just before and during lockdown, as rapid decisions were made to make compulsory virtual working work, and care of colleagues was high on the agenda. By the summer many felt new and effective ways of working were established and some were relishing the agility of quickly changing systems and processes that they had previously been stuck with. However, many also commented that virtual meetings were now more business focused and checking in with one another had become less of a priority. 

And now with another six months of predominantly working from home planned in the UK and other countries, I’ve noticed leaders and managers reflecting on the effort needed by themselves and others to keep virtual working going. They were also noting challenges such as “we’re losing the ideas from coffee and corridor conversations”, “we’re struggling to generate a real sense of what we’re about with new recruits”, and “we’re seeing resentment of staff who had been furloughed from those who worked long hours to keep things going”. 

A couple of weeks ago I attended Pearn Kandola’s Psychology of Remote Working Series  (https://pearnkandola.com), which highlighted other challenges and research that may help as virtual working continues. With some further reading and reflecting here’s my summary:

Assessing performance

As noted in my previous “Feedback Fumbles” blog (https://www.catherineshepherd.consulting/blog) , as much as we try to give objective feedback and design fair appraisal systems, subjectivity and bias creeps in  e.g. Cecchi-Dimeglio (2017) in a content analysis of individual annual performance reviews found women are 1.4 times more likely to receive critical subjective feedback, rather than critical objective or positive feedback (1). Whenever assessing performance and giving feedback we need to remind ourselves of these risks to objectivity. One risk that is particularly pertinent to our current situation is that we are affected by how visible we feel that performance is to us e.g.  Pearn Kandola in joint research with and Cisco Systems, 2006-2008, found workers who were present in the office (‘passive face time’) were judged as more dedicated, responsible, dependable, and committed compared to those working remotely. So, if you are line managing a team some of whom you see face-to-face and some of whom you see virtually, remind yourself you are more likely to make favourable judgements of the former. 

If you’re line managing a team where all contact is currently virtual I wonder whether there is a similar risk – that people who you see more frequently on video calls will be judged more favourably compared to those who are not, although I haven’t found any research on this. But of course our ability to be present, focused, and in a work-conducive surrounding on a call is very variable, with the huge variations in home environments and caring responsibilities. I also wonder whether the interruptions and credit taking that are part of face to face meetings are better or worse on virtual meetings e.g. McKinsey’s 2019 Women in the Workplace survey of 68,000+ employees in 329 companies found half of the women surveyed and 34% of the men experienced being interrupted, and 38% of women / 27% of men experienced others taking credit for their ideas. So, it’s worth keeping a rough note of the frequency with which you're seeing others on calls, the dynamics of interruptions and credit taking, and recognising that even with the best of intentions these may have an unintended impact on your assessments. 

Setting goals

As well as difficulties looking back, there are also difficulties in looking forward and setting goals for the short and longer-term future, when it is so uncertain - a word that does not do justice to the impact of covid, Brexit, US-China trade war, AI, climate change etc. etc. As well as struggling to set realistic business objectives, people may also struggle with personal and career development goals. In organisations where all or most of the workforce is now working at home people may feel that their opportunities to develop have been dramatically reduced, when informal development such as bouncing around ideas before and after meetings, bumping into people unexpectedly for a brief corridor conversation, or observing others in meeting are less available. With pay rises and promotions on hold in many businesses people may also feel the extra effort needed to develop is not worth it, or in contrast they may be very keen to develop to try to protect against job insecurity and frustrated if opportunities are not available. 

My suggestion is that for now goals need to be short term (3 to 6 months at most) with regular review to check if they are still appropriate. For longer term projects perhaps guiding principles will be more useful, relating to the key priorities of the organisation, and the values and purpose of both the organisation and individual. And for informal development discuss with teams how to create opportunities virtually, such as peer forums to exchange ideas and get advice, shadowing of video-calls, on-line ‘lunch and learn lessons’, and regular self-assessment of skills developed in this different world of work. 

Monitoring engagement

Many of us working at home have experienced a boost in engagement and job satisfaction from increased flexibility and a non-existent commute. However prolonged working at home with no face to face connection in the office may negate this boost, or even have a negative impact e.g., Gallup’s January 2020 State of the American Workplace survey found the optimal engagement boost occurs when employees spend 60% to 80% of their time working off-site, or three to four days in a five-day workweek. For these employees 41% were engaged, 48% were disengaged and 11% were actively disengaged. Still depressingly low levels of engagement, but better than those spending less than 20% of their time off-site, who were 36% engaged, 53% disengaged, and 11% actively disengaged. Interestingly in 2012 this much lower level of remote working gave the optimal engagement boost (2). 

There has been much reporting of the fact that in households with under 18s women did more daily childcare than men during lockdown (e.g. https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/jul/22/women-took-on-bulk-of-childcare-during-british-lockdown-study-finds). There is tentative evidence that this increased burden had a negative impact on engagement e.g. Feng & Savani (2020) in a study of 268 US dual career couples who reported similar levels of productivity and job satisfaction pre-covid, found that both were lower for women in lockdown but unchanged for men (3). As enforced virtual working persists, and schools have to send pupils home who have been exposed to covid, it is likely women with under 18s at home, and anyone with caring responsibilities in the home, may experience such dips. 

It is a statement of the obvious that leaders and managers need to keep checking in about people’s wellbeing and motivation as working at home continues, to keep being understanding when home circumstances are not conducive to best work, and to help people come up with ideas to address problems. And to not be surprised if there are drops in satisfaction and engagement as working at home continues. The good news is most leaders and managers seem to be doing this e.g. the CIPD’s Good Work Index monthly surveys found around ¾ of employees found managers supportive if they had a problem in June 2020, a similar level to Jan 2020, and 70% of managers had checked in about wellbeing since lockdown (82% if employees working at home c.f. 56% going into work). Sadly, that leaves around 20% not feeling adequately supported (4).

Maintaining connections

The CIPD’s Good Work Index monthly surveys found 44% of employees agreeing that social connections had worsened since lockdown, with 50% agreeing if they work at home c.f. 29% agreeing if they go into work (4). As connections worsen trust will also worsen, particularly the emotional trust we need in others so we can be open, seek support when we need it, and be empathetic with others’ circumstances. Although being locked down at home working virtually is not as isolated, confined, and dangerous as a space station, the research on prolonged space missions may be relevant. In particular researchers have found as the months go by there is decreased communication between mission members, filtering of negative information, and displacement of anxiety onto others, resulting in communication difficulties and conflicts between astronauts and ground-crew (5). So do not be surprised as virtual work continues if a team with some people working at home and some in the office fragments along those lines, or your team ends up in conflict with another, or people do not raise problems in the timely manner you would expect. 

As fatigued as we may be by video calls, they are next best to face-to-face in maintaining connections, both individually and as a team, particularly a regular non-work chat over a virtual lunch or end of day drink. Check that you’re not overly relying on e-mail or text, which are convenient with multiple demands on time but won’t maintain connection and trust as virtual work continues. 

In conclusion, as much as we face many challenges in continuing to work in a different way over the next six months, perhaps we can take heart from interviews with astronauts after long missions that find all take positives from their experience (5).  

(1)    Cecchi-Dimeglio, P. (2017). How gender bias corrupts performance reviews, and what to do about it. Harvard Business Review, April.

(2)    https://www.gallup.com/workplace/283985/working-remotely-effective-gallup-research-says-yes.aspx 24.1.20

(3)    Feng, Z., & Savani, K. (2020). Covid-19 created a gender gap in perceived work productivity and job satisfaction: implications for dual-career parents working from home. Gender in Management: An International Journal.

(4)    https://www.cipd.co.uk/knowledge/work/trends/goodwork/covid-impact 3.9.20

(5)    https://thepsychologist.bps.org.uk/volume-28/october-2015/psychology-deep-space