Paradoxes of Engagement: Remote Isn’t

Do remote workers make their managers better?

Stowe Boyd
Jan 15, 2020 · 4 min read
Image for post
Image for post
Photo by Daria Nepriakhina on Unsplash

I admit when I read the Gallup State of the American Workplace 2017 I was surprised by one finding in particular. Gallup had been tracking the engagement of remote workers starting in 2012, and discovered that those who worked remotely reported higher levels of engagement than those who never work remotely, but only up to a point. There seemed to be some limiting factor, so that those working remotely less than 20% of the time gained this higher level of engagement, but if that percentage went up, the results regressed to the mean.

That seemed reasonable. I imagined a worker who regularly worked a day a week at home, with predictable positive results. Less commuting. A day with fewer meetings, perhaps, with a less crowded calendar to dedicate time to important work. Perhaps more time with the kids and the significant other.

But that homey view was upended in 2018 when I read the Gallup report, when the authors reported,

all employees who spend at least some (but not all) of their time working remotely have higher engagement than those who don’t ever work remotely.

And those that work remotely 60%-80% of the time say they are more likely to strongly agree that working remotely makes them more productive.

These remote workers gain something other than time out of the office. What could it be, I wondered. One obvious candidate is autonomy: a worker out of the office more than 50% of the time clearly must operate more autonomously. We know that greater autonomy leads to greater engagement and higher job satisfaction. But couldn’t they gain that autonomy in the office, just as well?

At some point, I realized that I was looking through the wrong end of the telescope. I was thinking about what the remote workers did differently to gain that engagement and productivity boost. The difference may be in how their direct managers act differently with remote workers.

Image for post
Image for post

Of course, we know that the relationship between a worker and manager is a major factor in engagement. In fact, many studies show that workers consider it the most important factor. Then it hit me: Maybe working with remote workers makes managers better managers.

Scott Edinger offered four insights about this, which neatly explains at least some of the apparent paradox.

  1. Proximity breeds complacency — Just because a manager can walk over and check in with a direct report doesn’t mean they do. Note: ‘managing by walking around’ is widely disliked by workers, anyway, but the good habits demonstrated by smart managers of remote workers are often not deployed for in-office workers. Just because it’s possible to communicate doesn’t mean managers will.

Of course, remote workers — especially those with enlightened leadership who acknowledge the link between remote work and engagement — are also doing their part. They learn to use remote tools, and act more deliberately when engaging with teammates and managers both remotely and in the office. Workers’ activities may be just as big a factor for their managers’ success with remote work as the efforts that managers take.

And when remote work doesn’t work, it is a failure on one side or both, where something is taken for granted, some factor ignored, or communication stunted. Frederic Laloux once wrote,

When people have little emotional investment in the organization and in its purpose, when employees consider work as a burden to be minimized, then don’t be surprised that given freedom, they take the freedom but not the responsibility.

In some ways, Laloux raises larger issues, but there is no issue larger, really, than engagement.

The paradox is that remote isn’t, at least not when the remote worker and the remote manager both take responsibility to shrink the divide between them, and to help the other build engagement, reciprocally.

Work Futures

The ecology of work, and the anthropology of the future

Sign up for Work Futures Update

By Work Futures

The ecology of work, and the anthropology of the future Take a look

By signing up, you will create a Medium account if you don’t already have one. Review our Privacy Policy for more information about our privacy practices.

Check your inbox
Medium sent you an email at to complete your subscription.

Stowe Boyd

Written by

Work ecologist. Founder, Work Futures. The ecology of work and the anthropology of the future.

Work Futures

The ecology of work, and the anthropology of the future

Stowe Boyd

Written by

Work ecologist. Founder, Work Futures. The ecology of work and the anthropology of the future.

Work Futures

The ecology of work, and the anthropology of the future

Medium is an open platform where 170 million readers come to find insightful and dynamic thinking. Here, expert and undiscovered voices alike dive into the heart of any topic and bring new ideas to the surface. Learn more

Follow the writers, publications, and topics that matter to you, and you’ll see them on your homepage and in your inbox. Explore

If you have a story to tell, knowledge to share, or a perspective to offer — welcome home. It’s easy and free to post your thinking on any topic. Write on Medium

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store