leadership in the retail sector

paper3.pdf

Home >Business & Finance homework help >Management homework help >leadership in the retail sector

A Leadership Transition: An Examination of the Transition from Face-to-face Leadership to Remote Leadership in a Retail Sales Context

by Sean D. Ramage

B.S. in Management, March 2001, National Louis University M.A. in Adult Education, June 2003, National Louis University

A Dissertation submitted to

The Faculty of The Graduate School of Education and Human Development

of The George Washington University in partial fulfillment of the requirements

for the degree of Doctor of Education

May 21st, 2017

Dissertation directed by

Neal E. Chalofsky

Associate Professor of Human and Organizational Learning

ProQuest Number:

INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.

In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,

a note will indicate the deletion.

ProQuest

Published by ProQuest LLC ( ). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author.

Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.

ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway

P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, MI 48106 - 1346

10255018

2017

The Graduate School of Education and Human Development of The George Washington

University certifies that Sean D. Ramage has passed the Final Examination for the degree

of Doctor of Education as of December 19, 2016. This is the final and approved form of

the dissertation.

A Leadership Transition: An Examination of the Transition from Face-to-face Leadership to Remote Leadership in a Retail Sales Context

Sean D. Ramage Dissertation Research Committee

Neal E. Chalofsky, Associate Professor of Human and Organizational Learning, Dissertation Director Donna Dennis, Faculty, Gestalt International Study Center, Committee Member Michael J. Marquardt, Professor of Human and Organizational Learning and International Affairs, Committee Member

iii

Dedication

To my wife, Megan, who was a source of endless support and guidance during my

doctoral studies, as she has been for all things throughout our marriage; to my four

daughters, Kathleen, Kelly, Megan, and Anna, who inspire me to try to be better every

day and make them proud; and to my parents, Benjamin and Susan Bonales, who were

phenomenal role models for love of family, importance of hard work, and the value of

education. Thank you all so much. I love you all more than I could ever express.

Acknowledgments

So many people deserve my most sincere thanks for their support during my

doctoral program. I first thank my committee chair, Dr. Neal Chalofsky, one of the

world’s pre-eminent voices in the field of meaningful work. Dr. Chalofsky’s counsel was

invaluable, as he helped me to focus numerous disparate ideas into one focused research

study. Second, I thank Dr. Michael Marquardt. From my very first interview with Dr.

Marquardt during the application process for George Washington University’s Executive

Leadership Program (ELP), through the entirety of the program, to his guidance with my

dissertation, he has been a voice of reason and support. I also thank Dr. Donna Dennis. I

was excited when Dr. Dennis agreed to add her expertise to my dissertation committee.

Dr. Dennis’ input into my research has made it so much better than it would have been

without her.

I thank my family – my lovely wife of twelve years Megan, and my four

daughters, Kathleen, Kelly, Megan, and Anna. They were patient and understanding

when I needed to miss soccer games, field hockey games, school events, prom pictures,

and other important moments. I know this was often hard for each of them. I appreciate

their support and understanding more than words can adequately express.

I thank all of my ELP Cohort 24 mates, working adults dedicating themselves to

the often crushing load of doctoral research. I especially wish to thank a few key cohort

mates; I am not entirely sure I could have made it through without them. Dr. Angie

Hinzey’s friendship and support was a gift I did not deserve. Doug Swanson was the

perfect teammate and friend for the comprehensive exam and all along the way. Dr.

Angie Fuessel was perhaps the ultimate role model for the rest of us to follow; she is the

adult we all aspire to be. Dr. Nancy Coleman was the friend I knew I could always go to

for guidance—or a laugh!

Finally, I wish to acknowledge the dedicated staff of George Washington

University’s Executive Leadership Program. Their dedication to the students is truly

impressive. I can say with absolute certainty that I am a better, more fully-rounded

human being today than I was when I began this program four years ago.

Abstract of Dissertation

A Leadership Transition: An Examination of the Transition from Face-to-face Leadership to Remote Leadership in a Retail Sales Context

This exploratory interpretive study investigated the lived experience of ten leaders

that had recently transitioned from a face-to-face leadership role to a remote leadership

role. The main research question was, “What is the lived experience of the leader who

has transitioned from face-to-face leadership to remote leadership in a retail sales

context?”

Study participants met the following criteria: (1) work for an organization that

utilizes a “remote supervision” structure, whether this goes by the term district, region,

area, territory, or similar; (2) have supervisory responsibility for at least six separate and

distinct locations, but fewer than 25 locations; (3) have supervisory responsibility for

locations with a minimum of 10 employees, but a maximum of 100 employees; (4) have

transitioned from a face-to-face leadership context to a remote leadership context; and (5)

have been in the new remote leadership role for at least six months but no longer than 39

months. These criteria are important and were selected specifically for their alignment

with the conceptual frame.

Interviews were conducted with the leaders to learn how they experienced the

transition from one role to another. These interviews were conducted using the Seidman

(2013) method. The process for representing the data and interpreting the data consisted

of five main parts in alignment with an interpretive phenomenological approach, or IPA

(Smith, Flowers, & Larkin, 2009).

vii

There were four key conclusions from this study: (1) the leaders were able to

adapt to their new leadership context as a result of their transition experience; (2) there

were common leadership style balances for leaders in this study; (3) the leaders realized

that there were subtle, but important communication differences in the remote context;

and, (4) trust plays a unique role in remote, transactional leadership. Implications for

theory include a new understanding of the balance of transformational and transactional

leadership in the remote context. Recommendations for practice include potential new

approaches for human resource practitioners.

viii

Table of Contents Page

Dedication ..........................................................................................................................iii

Acknowledgments............................................................................................................. iv

Abstract of Dissertation .....................................................................................................vi

Table of Contents .............................................................................................................viii

List of Figures....................................................................................................................xii

List of Tables ...................................................................................................................xiii

Chapter 1: Introduction .......................................................................................................1

Overview of the Study ......................................................................................................1

Statement of the Problem ..................................................................................................2

Purpose and Research Questions ......................................................................................6

Statement of Potential Significance ..................................................................................6

Conceptual Frame and Theoretical Perspective ................................................................7

Summary of Methodology ..............................................................................................11

Limitations and Delimitations .........................................................................................14

Definitions of Key Terms ...............................................................................................15

Chapter 2: Literature Review ............................................................................................17

Introduction .....................................................................................................................17

A Leadership Transition .................................................................................................17

Description and Critique of the Scholarly Literature ......................................................18

Work Role Transitions ..........................................................................................18

Leadership…..........................................................................................................20

Remote Work….....................................................................................................31

Leadership in a Remote Work Context..................................................................37

Trust…………………...........................................................................................40

The Nicholson Adaptive Cycle..............................................................................41

Conceptual Framework..........................................................................................44

Chapter 3: Methods ...........................................................................................................45

Ontology, Epistemology, and Theoretical Perspective ...................................................45

Methodology......................................................................................................................46

Research Design ..............................................................................................................47

Sampling: Participant Criteria and Selection ..................................................................49

Data Collection ...............................................................................................................52

Data Analysis ..................................................................................................................53

Trustworthiness ...............................................................................................................55

Human Participants and Ethics Considerations ..............................................................56

Chapter 4: Results .............................................................................................................58

Review of Analysis Method.............................................................................................59

Profile of the Participants.................................................................................................60

Coding and Thematic Analysis .......................................................................................62

Sub-Theme 1: Direction and Follow-up……………………………....................64

Sub-Theme 2: Routines………………..……………………................................67

Sub-Theme 3: Personal Operational Impact ……………………….....................72

Sub-Theme 4: Preparation and Planning …………………………......................76

Sub-Theme 5: Connections and Relationships………………..……....................81

Sub-Theme 6: Motivation and Engagement………………………......................85

Sub-Theme 7: People Development……………………………..........................89

Sub-Theme 8: Trust Empowerment…...……………………………....................92

Chapter Four Summary ...................................................................................................94

Chapter 5: Conclusions......................................................................................................96

Overview .........................................................................................................................97

Overview of Relevant Themes ........................................................................................99

Theme One and Two: Task-Orientation and Relational-Orientation………..................99

Sub-Theme 1: Direction and Follow-up……………………………..................102

Sub-Theme 2: Routines………………..……………………………..................103

Sub-Theme 3: Personal Operational Impact ………………………...................104

Sub-Theme 4: Preparation and Planning …………………………....................106

Sub-Theme 5: Connections and Relationships………………..……..................106

Sub-Theme 6: Motivation and Engagement………………………....................108

Sub-Theme 7: People Development……………………………........................109

Sub-Theme 8: Trust Empowerment…...……………………………..................111

Conclusions…...……………………………...................................................................111

Conclusion 1:……………………………...........................................................112

Conclusion 2:……………………………...........................................................113

Conclusion 3:……………………………...........................................................120

Conclusion 4:……………………………...........................................................126

Implications for Theory and Recommendations for Practice .........................................127

Implications for Theory ................................................................................................128

Recommendations for Practice .....................................................................................134

Concluding Remarks .......................................................................................................136

References........................................................................................................................137

Appendices.......................................................................................................................151

Appendix A: Subject Interview 1 Questions…………………………………………151

Appendix B: Subject Interview 2 Questions…………………………………………152

xii

List of Figures Page

Figure 1.1. Conceptual Frame ............................................................................................9

Figure 1.2. Nicholson Adaptive Cycle Model .................................................................10

Figure 1.3. Six Paths of the Nicholson Adaptive Model .................................................11

Figure 2.1. Nicholson Adaptive Cycle Model..................................................................41

Figure 2.2. Conceptual Frame.......................................................................................... 43

Figure 3.1. Six Paths of the Nicholson Adaptive Model..................................................48

Figure 5.1. Balance of Leadership Styles in the Face-to-Face Leadership Role ...........114

Figure 5.2. Balance of Leadership Styles in the Remote Leadership Role ....................117

Figure 5.3. Balance of Leadership Styles When Remote Leader Is Face-to-Face ........119

xiii

List of Tables Page

Table 4.1. Contextual Information About Study Participants ..........................................62

Table 4.2. Articulation of Two Themes and Eight Sub-themes ......................................64

Table 5.1. Conclusions of Study ....................................................................................111

Chapter One

Introduction

Mary had always been an extremely successful retail store manager. She loved

the day-to-day interaction with her people, the sense of team that came from working

shoulder-to-shoulder with them when the store was busy. During her years as manager,

she proved she could build and lead a team that was engaged and efficient, and could

deliver outstanding business results. No one was surprised when Mary was promoted to

district manager.

Mary, however, struggled to transition into her new role. She had always been

proud of her store’s ability to hit its numbers, but the performance metrics by which her

district would be judged were bad—and trending downward. For the first time in her

career, Mary’s direct reports seemed less than satisfied with their jobs and with her

leadership. She often wondered why she could successfully manage people she saw every

day but struggled to motivate, inspire, connect, and communicate effectively with those

she saw only once every few weeks.

Overview

As technology becomes better, cheaper, and more ubiquitous, the workplace

continues to change. Gone are the days when every worker needed to travel to a central

workplace; technology has enabled some workers to do their job from an entirely

different location. These “workers at a distance” come in many forms, including sales

professionals who spend their time on the road or working from a home office; retail

store managers who may see their regional vice president once per month or less; and

professional or clerical workers who have a telecommuting arrangement and work almost

exclusively from their homes (WorldatWork, 2007).

Scholars agree that there are more “remote” workers than ever before. How many

more—how many there are—is a topic of considerable debate. One reason is because

there is no agreement on a common definition for these workers (Mokhtarian et al.,

2005). The terms teleworker, remote worker, e-worker, and distance worker are all used

to describe a similar phenomenon (Mokhtarian et al., 2005). The lack of consensus makes

it hard to gauge a firm number; the United States Census estimates that the number of

workers who meet their definition of “telecommuting” has increased 77% since 2005.

Another study noted that that the U.S. “mobile” workforce will see an expected increase

from 96.2 million workers in 2015 to 105.4 million in 2020 (International Data

Corporation, 2015).

In the future, there will be more “workers from a distance” and fewer proximal

workers (International Data Corporation, 2015; WorldatWork, 2007). When millions of

workers work from their homes or from locations that are different from their

supervisors’ primary work locations (Lojeski, 2006), future leaders must be adept at

leading not only proximal workers but distance workers as well (Wang & Hagerty, 2011).

More research is needed on how to best lead these workers.

Statement of the Problem

This research is intended to uncover more about the experience of the leader

making the transition from a proximal leadership role to a remote leadership role. Why is

this specific problem worthy of study? There are three key reasons: (1) there is a

(comparative) lack of remote worker leadership research, (2) research that has been done

in the remote space shows remote leadership is different than proximal leadership, and,

perhaps most importantly, (3) leaders of remote workers are struggling with the transition

from proximal leadership (Busch, Nash, & Bell, 2011).

Comparative Lack of Remote Leadership Research

The context of remote work—and, by extension, remote worker leadership—is in

its infancy. Traditional leadership research has shown a link between effective leadership

and proximity (Bass, 1990b). One could ask if this link between leader effectiveness and

proximity could be extended to when the leader is never (or infrequently) actually

proximal.

Research Done in the Remote Space Indicates Remote Leadership is Different from

Proximal Leadership

While there is significantly less research about remote work leadership

arrangements, some of the research that has been done shows links between distance,

leadership behaviors, and worker performance. This research shows where leadership is

different for the remote worker (Howell, Neufeld, & Avolio, 2005). There is a positive

link between frequency of leader/follower face-to-face interaction and leader

effectiveness (Uhl-Bien & Graen, 1998). Some studies have shown that leading from a

distance makes it harder to impact follower performance (Avolio, Bass, & Jung, 1999;

Hoyt & Blascovich, 2003); still other conflicting studies have shown no link between

leader distance and effectiveness (Howell, Neufeld, & Avolio, 2005).

The potential differences in leadership of the proximal and remote follower can be

viewed through the lens of transactional leadership and transformational leadership

(Burns, 1978). Transactional leadership has a task-completion focus (Bass, 1997). The

follower is told what needs to be done, when it needs to be done, and how it needs to be

done in order to receive rewards (Deluga, 1988). The typical manager has a transactional

focus (Zaleznik, 1983).

Transformational leadership focuses on the full emotional engagement of the

associate in the completion of the work. There are four factors that are key to

transformational leadership, including (1) charisma, (2) inspiration, (3) individual

consideration, and (4) intellectual stimulation. Transformational leaders motivate

employees beyond fundamental transactional needs and appeal to higher-level needs

(Bass, 1997).

In the proximal context, transformational leadership often leads to better

performance outcomes than transactional leadership (Bass, 1985; Madlock, 2012). Bass

(1990b) noted that leader effectiveness was positively related to proximity. For example,

there is a link between proximity and relational leadership (Howell, Neufeld, & Avolio,

2005). It is easier to motivate and inspire those with whom you come into direct face-to-

face contact (Kelloway, 2003; Yagil, 2002). There are influence tactics that are aligned

with a transformational style (Kipnis, Schmidt, & Wilkinson, 1980). These include

friendliness, reason, and coalition. Proximity may impact all three of these influence

tactics; thus, these tactics may be more aligned with a proximal context.

While there is clearly a need for more research on leadership of the remote

worker, research to date has shown that transactional leader behaviors are more effective

for the remote worker. Multiple studies have shown a positive link between transactional

leadership and remote worker performance. Relational leadership is harder from a

distance than task leadership; leaders who rely on a relational leadership style may

struggle with remote workers more than they do with proximal workers (Madlock, 2013).

Leadership presence also looks very different for the distance worker (Zigurs, 2003). At a

minimum, motivation and inspiration may need to happen differently for the remote

worker (Kelloway, 2003), as proximity impacts the perceived quality and quantity of

communication from the leader (Kelley & Kelloway, 2012). There are influence tactics

that are aligned with a transactional style (Kipnis, Schmidt, & Wilkinson, 1980). These

include bargaining, assertiveness, and higher authority. These direction-giving influence

tactics are less impacted by proximity and, thus, may be more aligned with a remote

context (Madlock, 2013).

The leader of remote workers must overcome these distance challenges through

other means, including style of communication adaptations and communication medium

considerations (Hambley, O’Neill, & Klein, 2007; Kelley & Kelloway, 2012; Stanton &

Steinbrenner, 2002). For example, multiple studies have shown that remote workers

require a different type of communication from their supervisor (Busch, Nash, & Bell,

2011; Grensing-Prophal, 2002). There is much more that needs to be known to help

understand specifically how leadership is different for the leader of remote workers.

Remote Leaders Are Struggling to Adapt

Research has shown that the leaders of remote workers are struggling to lead

(Busch, Nash, & Bell, 2011; Grensing-Prophal, 2002; Madlock, 2012; Meister &

Willyerd, 2010). A better understanding of why is warranted: what are the leaders doing

wrong? The research that has been done on remote worker leadership has shown that

leaders may not be able to lead remote workers and face-to-face workers in exactly the

same manner (Hambley, O’Neill, & Klein, 2007; Kelley & Calloway, 2012; Stanton &

Steinbrenner, 2002). The remote worker research shows that the language the remote

leader uses when trying to adapt a more transformational style may have a very different

impact for the remote worker. Additional ways that the leadership of the remote worker is

different are less clear and worthy of further research (Madlock, 2013).

A qualitative study on the experience of leaders transitioning from a proximal

context to a remote context would be a critical addition to the remote leadership

literature. There may be no better way to understand how remote leadership and proximal

leadership differ than to study the experiences of those who have recently made the

transition. For example, understanding the experience of leaders who transitioned from a

face-to-face leadership role to a remote leadership role would be an important addition to

remote leadership literature and transitions literature as well (Ashforth & Saks, 1995).

More specifically, it would be worthy of study to understand how the new situation the

leaders encounter changes their behavior (if at all). It would also be valuable to

understand how their previous role helped or hindered their transition to the new role.

Purpose and Research Question

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to understand how a leader experiences the transition

from a face-to-face leadership context to a remote leadership context.

Research Question

The main research question is, “What is the lived experience of the leader who

has transitioned from face-to-face leadership to remote leadership in a retail sales

context?” The research will also examine how application of the Nicholson adaptive

cycle model (Nicholson, 2013) helps to illustrate how a leader experiences the transition

from a face-to-face leadership context to remote leadership.

Statement of Potential Significance

Contributions to Literature

The goal of this research is to further the remote leadership literature by viewing

remote leadership through the lens of transitions. One of the ways the remote leadership

literature can be augmented is to understand the transition experience from face-to-face to

remote leadership. A greater understanding can be realized through an examination of the

experience of those who have recently made this transition in this specific context.

Contributions to Practice

As the rate of remote work increases, there is a need to ensure that leaders

understand best practices for leading these workers (Madlock, 2013). The literature to

date has shown that the remote worker cannot be led in the same manner as proximal

workers (Wang & Hagerty, 2011). Specific direction and best practices in remote worker

leadership would have a great deal of significance in the talent management practitioner

community. For example, key discoveries illustrating how the remote context changes the

communication between leader and follower can be used for remote leader selection.

Similarly, learning how planning and organization are different for the remote leader can

inform better training and development programs. The significance of this research is

substantial to the talent management practitioner community.

Conceptual Framework

The context for the conceptual framework is leadership—specifically leadership

in retail sales organizations. The transition literature provides one portion of the

foundation for the conceptual frame. This research will use the transition literature

(Ashforth, 2001; Bridges, 1986; Bridges, 2010; Nicholson, 1984; Nicholson, 2013;

Nicholson & West, 1988) as the foundation for investigating the transition from a face-to-

face leadership context to a remote context.

The classic leadership literature provides another portion of the literature

foundation. The transactional and transformational leadership literature (Bass, 1997;

Yukl, 2012) will be used, as some key differences between remote leadership and

proximal leadership (e.g., communication, motivation, and performance management) are

best illustrated through the use of transactional and transformational lenses.

The remote leadership literature provides another portion of the foundation.

Specifically, the remote work literature that examines how leadership style may differ in

remote leadership context versus a proximal leadership context (Hambley, O’Neill, &

Klein, 2007; Kelley & Kelloway, 2012; Stanton & Steinbrenner, 2002) will be utilized.

For example, the remote leadership literature that examines how leaders communicate

and motivate the remote worker will be used (Kelloway, 2003; Madlock, 2012; Madlock,

2013).

Figure 1. Conceptual Framework

Research Question: What is the lived experience of the leader who has transitioned from

face-to-face leadership to remote leadership in a retail sales context?

The transition from leadership of the proximal worker to leadership of the remote

worker—and the potential struggles in making this transition—may be best understood

when viewed through the lens of the Nicholson adaptive cycle model (Nicholson, 2013).

The Nicholson adaptive cycle model (Figure 2) illustrates the relationship between

situation, qualities, and process in relation to leadership.

Transitions Leadership Style

Ashforth, 2001; Bridges, 1986; Nicholson, 2013; Nicholson, 1984;

Bass, 1997; Madlock, 2012; Madlock, 2013; Yukl, 2012;

Figure 2. The Nicholson Adaptive Cycle Model.

Source. Nicholson (2013).

Nicholson (2013) notes the interplay between situation and process. In

Nicholson’s adaptive cycle, process impacts situation. The leader needs to analyze and

understand what behaviors might be most effective in the particular situation. Nicholson

calls this “Path 3—Shot Selection.” One goal of this research is to understand how the

new leader’s behaviors and styles impacted the situation.

In Nicholson’s adaptive cycle, situation also impacts process; the leader needs to

analyze and understand the situation to know the effect of his or her behaviors. Nicholson

calls this “Path 4—Situational Insight.” Put simply, one goal of this research is to

understand how the new leader’s insight into this new situation affected his or her

behaviors and styles.

S Q

Situation What is the leadership challenge? How do leadership situations differ from one another?

Process How should leaders behave? What do leaders do to be effective?

Qualities Who should

lead? What are the leadership

qualities? The Adaptive

Cycle

Figure 3. Six Paths of the Adaptive Cycle.

Source. Nicholson (2013).

Summary of the Methodology

This research takes a qualitative look at how the new remote leader experiences

the transition to their new role. The intent was to perform an exploratory interpretive

study of at least 10 remote leaders to understand how they experienced the transition

from a face-to-face leadership context to a remote context.

Leaders met the following criteria: (1) work for an organization that utilizes a

“remote supervision” structure, whether this goes by the term district, region, area,

territory, or similar; (2) have supervisory responsibility for at least six separate and

distinct locations, but fewer than 25 locations; (3) have supervisory responsibility for

locations with a minimum of 10 employees, but a maximum of 100 employees; (4) have

transitioned from a face-to-face leadership context to a remote leadership context; and (5)

have been in the new remote leadership role for at least six months but no longer than 39

months. These criteria are important and selected specifically for their alignment with the

S Q

P3 P5 P4 P6

The Six Paths of the Adaptive Cycle P1– Shaping P2– Discovery P3– Shot Selection P4– Situational Insight P5– Instinct P6– Self-Development

conceptual frame. Some of these reasons may be obvious, like criterion one (organization

uses remote structure) and four (leader transition from face-to-face to remote). Other

criteria may be subtler and should be explained. Criterion two (responsibility for at least

six separate locations, but fewer than 25) is significant because having fewer than six

separate locations might increase chances that the leader is able to see each location and

the leader’s direct reports at that location weekly (previous remote work literature has

shown that frequency of contact can affect remote leadership outcomes) (Gajendran &

Harrison, 2007). Criterion three (locations having more than 10 employees, but a

maximum of 100 employees) is important for leadership and role complexity reasons, as

a link has been shown between number of employees and role complexity (Kahya, 2006).

Criterion five (in role more than six months but less than 39 months) is important

for transition reasons: the leader needs enough time to have fully transitioned into the role

without being in the role so long that he or she has forgotten what the transition was truly

like. Arriving at a time frame for this is tricky: when has a leader been in a role long

enough to no longer be transitioning? Research suggests that the transition cycle is

affected by the expected duration in the role (Ashforth, 2001). Knowing an expected

duration in roles similar to the one in question is important. Studies noting the average

tenure for remote leaders show wildly varying tenure results. For purposes of this study,

three studies were used in an attempt to determine average tenure for leaders in the retail

sales context. These studies noted remote leadership tenure of 6.3 years, 10.7 years, and

22 years (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2012; Kirsche, 2004; O’Connor et al., 1984). Thus,

an average tenure of 13 years is used for this study. The transition literature notes that the

amount of time needed to fully transition can vary by numerous factors, including

chronological age, career age, level of self-reflection, as well as many others (Ashforth,

2001; Hall & Mirvis, 1995). Because the literature does not provide a standard time

frame to reach stabilization in role (Ashforth, 2001; Nicholson, 1984), this study used six

months as a minimum for the transition and 39 months as a maximum (the 39-month

timeframe was chosen because it is 25% of the expected ultimate role tenure of 13 years).

Interviews were conducted with the leaders to learn how they experienced the

transition from one role to another. Structured interview guides are used to aid in the

consistency of experience for each person being interviewed, as well as to aid the

accuracy of the data. As part of these interviews, special attention was paid to gauge the

leaders’ perception of the situational aspects of the new role; structured interview guides

and specific interview questions are tailored to uncover this perception of situation.

Special attention was also paid to gauge the leaders’ perception of their process, and

interview questions are used in that manner. To increase trustworthiness and accuracy of

the data, member checks were conducted.

It is worthy to note that this research focused exclusively on two of Nicholson’s

six paths: Path 3—Shot Selection and Path 4—Insight. The other four paths were not

examined as a part of this research. This is because the inclusion of Nicholson’s qualities

and the impacted paths (the other four paths) dramatically increases the scope of this

research in a way that would take it afield from the desired goal: to understand how new

leaders are transitioning from an insight and behavior change perspective. The research

was not intended to advance understanding of who should be selected for these remote

leadership roles (as qualities would need to be examined) but simply to understand the

experience of those in these roles.

The process of data analysis involves preparing the data for analysis, representing

the data, and interpreting the data (Creswell, 1998). As part of the process to prepare the

data for analysis, the researcher used an external firm to transcribe the interviews. The

process for representing the data and interpreting the data consisted of five main parts in

alignment with an interpretive phenomenological approach, or IPA (Smith, Flowers, &

Larkin, 2009): (1) read-through of the first transcript; (2) development of notes into

concise themes; (3) use of themes from the first transcript to guide analysis of subsequent

transcripts; (4) development of a table of themes; and, (5) development of narrative with

specific supporting quotes.

Limitations and Delimitations

Several limitations for this research should be noted. First, this research was

conducted in a retail sales environment; care should be taken when applying results to

environments that are very different in nature to retail. Second, this research relies on the

self-reporting of the transition experience by the leaders themselves. This could

potentially limit the accuracy of the data (the accuracy of this data is dependent on the

self-awareness of the leader). Third, the data relies on the perception of the leader in

terms of situational insight and behavior change. This perception may differ materially

from the reality of these things.

Finally, the transition “state” of the leader could serve as a limitation. As

transitions can be nebulous, without an obvious beginning and end, the transition state of

the leader could affect the perception and reality of the leader upon their transition

experience.

Definition of Key Terms

The following are definitions of key terms that will be used throughout this study:

Co-located or proximal leader: The manager who leads subordinates working in

the same location. Manager and subordinate generally interact directly with each

other on a daily basis, though daily interaction is not required (Zimmerman et al.,

2008).

Leadership: “The behavior of an individual . . . directing the activities of a group

toward a shared goal” (Hemphill & Coons, 1957). It “is the influential increment

over and above mechanical compliance with routine directives of the

organization” (Katz & Khan, 1978).

Macro role transitions: The psychological and (if relevant) physical movement

between sequentially held roles. The most common macro-transitions are entry or

reentry into an organization, intraorganizational transitions (e.g., promotion,

transfer, demotion, short-term assignment), interorganizational transitions,

interoccupation transitions, and exit from an organization (Ashforth, 2001).

Nicholson adaptive cycle model: A leadership model illustrating the interplay of

situation, process, and qualities created by Nigel Nicholson (2013).

Remote leadership: Because the nature of the relationship is different due to

physical distance and lack of consistent face-to-face interaction, the remote

worker requires a different style of leadership (Hambley, O’Neill, & Klein, 2007;

Kelley & Kelloway, 2012; Zigurs, 2003).

Remote work environment: Characterized by physical distance and reduced

face-to-face interaction (Kelley & Kelloway, 2012).

Transition: In work contexts, generally defined by the sequential nature of the

work roles (Ashforth & Saks, 1995). With each sequence, there is a process of

transition from the old role to the new (Allen & van de Vliert, 1984). This

transition involves a disengagement from the old role and engagement in the new

role (Ashforth & Saks, 1995).

Chapter Two

Introduction: Overview of the Research

The number of employees working from their homes or a location not shared by

their supervisor is expected to grow exponentially in the coming decades (Wang &

Hagerty, 2011). There is much to learn about this work context, as this employment

arrangement is relatively new. This research aims to improve the understanding of

potential leadership differences in both face-to-face and remote contexts. Specifically, the

research question is: “What is the lived experience of the leader who has transitioned

from face-to-face leadership to remote leadership in a retail sales context?”

The research design for this study would be qualitative. An exploratory

interpretive approach is the ideal approach for this study, as the goal is to understand the

lived experience of the leader transitioning from a proximal leadership context to a

remote context.

A Leadership Transition

Leadership, work role transitions, and remote work literature all provide theories

on how an individual might experience the transition from a proximal leadership role to a

remote leadership role. The theoretical framework for this research is grounded in the

leadership, work role transitions, and remote work literature; a review of the leadership,

work role transitions, and remote work literature was completed. This review used the

following main search terms: leadership, transactional leadership, transformational

leadership, transitions, job transitions, role transitions, work role transitions, promotions,

job promotions, remote work, telework, teleworker, remote leader, remote leadership, and

leadership of teleworkers. This chapter provides a review of the scholarly literature in

four main areas: (1) work role transitions, (2) leadership, (3) remote work, and, (4)

leadership in a remote work context.

Description and Critique of the Scholarly Literature

Work Role Transitions

Work role transitions are defined as any change in employment status in concert

with significant change in the nature of the work (Nicholson, 1984); the change in status

and nature of work includes the passage from one role or type of work to another

(Ashforth & Saks, 1995; Nicholson, 1984). Work role transitions generally require the

learning of new tasks, duties, rules, and norms (Ashforth & Saks, 1995). It is important to

note that the term transition is used and not the word change. Change occurs when

something has a clear beginning and end, whereas transition happens in phases that may

be far less clear (Bridges, 1986).

Process and Phases. While people experience work role transitions differently

and are difficult to predict how each may experience the impact of the transition

(Ashforth & Saks, 1995; Nicholson, 1984) or how the overall organization may be

impacted, research has indicated that there are generally distinct and common phases of

work role transitions. The overall process of a work role transition can be broken down

into three phases (Bridges, 1986): the ending, the neutral zone, and the vision (new

reality). Again, it is important to note that the length and nature of these phases can be

different for each transitioner (Ashforth & Saks, 1995), and some may not make the

transition successfully at all (Bridges, 1986; Nicholson, 1984).

Phase 1: The Ending. The first phase of work role transitions requires

disengaging from the old role. For many individuals, this is the most difficult phase of the

process; they must let go of a past where they were likely successful and embrace an

unknown future (Bridges, 1986). It is not overstating the point or engaging in hyperbole

to state that there are psychological consequences to work role transitions (Nicholson,

1984). Researchers have found that individuals making this transition can liken the early

phases to divorce, the loss of home, or even death (Bridges, 1986).

Phase 2: Neutral Zone. The second phase requires the individual making the

transition to go through a neutral zone between the old and new reality that may still be

very unclear (Bridges, 1986). This transition from a past that was clear to a future that is

far less clear can have a profound effect on the leader, follower, and organization as a

whole (Bridges, 1986; Nicholson, 1984). In this phase, the transitioner may undertake

various tasks relating to adaptation. The transitioner may study role models for strategies

or cues and then experiment with these strategies and cues (Ibarra et al., 2014). For

example, the transitioner may imitate the communication style or dress of a role model,

experimenting to find a style that seems both effective for the new role and authentic for

oneself (Hill, 1992). The movement through this neutral zone can include both personal

development outcomes, where the individual experiences growth as a result of the

transition, and role development outcomes, where the individual adapts the role to meet

personal strengths, deficiencies, and needs (Ibarra et al., 2014; Nicholson, 1984).

Phase 3: The Vision (New Beginning). The final phase, the vision, sees the

transitioner reach a new reality or sense of equilibrium in the new role (Bridges, 1986).

When an individual has successfully moved into this phase, it is likely that personal

development has occurred as well (Nicholson, 1984). This personal development may be

smaller (e.g., daily habits and routines) in scope or larger (e.g., personal relationships,

philosophical changes) in scope (Nicholson & West, 1988).

Outcomes of Work Role Transitions. The work done in the field of work role

transitions generally points to three outcome types (Nicholson, 1984) in line with the new

reality: (1) changes in the individual’s emotional state and accompanying coping

responses (Frese, 1984 Nicholson, 1984); (2) identity changes in which values, skills, and

dispositions have been altered due to the new situation (Hall, 1971; Ibarra et al., 2014;

Nicholson, 1984); and (3) behavior changes that either change or reinforce the existing

organizational culture (Ibarra et al., 2014; Van Maanen & Schein, 1979). These three

outcome types illustrate that there are outcomes of transition that can be recognized at

both the individual and organizational level.

Leadership

Leadership has been defined as “the ability of an individual to influence,

motivate, and enable others to contribute toward the effectiveness and success of the

organization” (House et al., 1999, p. 184). Leadership is a critical component to the

performance of teams (Bass, 1999).

Dominant Theories. There are innumerable theories and research studies in the

arena of leadership. Should leadership be defined and studied from the perspective of the

leader or the follower? Is leadership primarily formal or informal? Is leadership

designated, or does it emerge? Should leadership be studied at the individual, group, or

organizational level?

The glut of leadership research—much of it conflicting—can make the topic

harder to understand. This research uses the classification provided by Yukl (2012) as a

means to provide clarity. Yukl classifies leadership into five main approaches: (1) traits,

(2) behaviors and skills, (3) power-influence, (4) situational, and (5) integrative.

The Traits Approach. One of the earliest approaches to leadership research

focused on the traits of the leader. The traits approach was most prevalent in the early

1900s (Weisbord, 1987). It is worthy to note that at the time, the great man theory

prevailed (Schwandt & Szabla, 2007). The primary motive of leadership at the time was

to get others to do the leader’s bidding (Weisbord, 1987). It was a time of leader-centered

theory rather than follower-centered theory with the goal of the research to understand

which traits make for a great leader.

While the trait approach has been used more as a way to gauge managerial

effectiveness than leadership effectiveness (Yukl, 2012), it is not precluded as a means

for understanding effective leadership. We use the word trait as defined by Yukl: “a

variety of individual attributes, including aspect of personality, temperament, needs,

motives, and values; personality traits are relatively stable dispositions to behave in a

particular way.” While traits can be learned, there is also strong evidence that many are

inherent (Zhang, Ilies, & Arvey, 2009). Some traits have shown a high level of linkage to

managerial and leadership effectiveness (Hogan, Curphy, & Hogan, 1994).

One of the ways researchers have chosen to understand traits is through the use of

personality analysis. In essence, how people act is a function of their inherent personality

(Strang & Kuhnert, 2009). The “Big Five” model (Hogan, Curphy, & Hogan, 1994) is

one example of an analytical structure for understanding the trait approach and for

facilitating research. The model notes that there are five main traits, and that each of

these traits has three sub-traits. These five traits and their sub-traits are as follows (Yukl,

2012): (1) surgency, which includes extraversion, energy/activity level, and need for

power; (2) conscientiousness, which includes dependability, personal integrity, and need

for achievement; (3) agreeableness, which includes cheerfulness, optimism, nurturance,

and need for affiliation; (4) adjustment, which includes emotional stability, self-esteem,

and self-control; and, (5) intellectance, which includes curious and inquisitive, open-

minded, and learning oriented.

Behaviors and Skills. The next major phase of the leadership research was the

study of behaviors. It was no longer enough to understand what traits a leader had. Now,

it was important to understand what they did. Leadership research has noted that there are

behaviors and skills that any leader needs to be successful in his or her role (Hunt, 1991).

Numerous models have identified many different behaviors and skills that can be used to

research leader effectiveness. There is enough agreement between the various models to

classify skills into three broad categories: technical skills, interpersonal skills, and

conceptual skills (Yukl, 2012).

Technical skills and behaviors focuses on the different tasks, processes, and

duties that the leader needs to master to be optimally successful in his or her role. There

is strong evidence that the leader of workers needs to have a deep understanding of the

work that workers do (Bass, 1999). The leader needs a requisite amount of technical skill

if he or she is going to plan the team’s work, assign it appropriately, provide feedback on

the quality of the work, coach as necessary, and secure resources for the team (Jaques &

Clement, 1991). The leader also needs the technical knowledge of the organization itself.

What is the structure? What are the major processes? How do things get done? This

knowledge is critical if the leader is to match the task work of the team to the overall

goals of the organization (Clawson, 2006).

The various models note that there are interpersonal skills needed for leadership.

It is not enough for the leader to be the technical expert on the role. A leader with

outstanding technical skills but poor interpersonal skills will most likely fail, as both are

important: “leadership . . . has to do with direction setting for others, and getting them all

effectively working and moving together in the right direction” (Jaques & Clement, 1991,

p. 21). In fact, research has noted that technical knowledge and skill becomes less

important at higher levels of leadership (McCall & Lombardo, 1983a) and interpersonal

skills become more important. Interpersonal skills generally include the understanding of

people and, more specifically, include things like empathy, feelings, motives,

cooperation, communication, emotion, emotional control, and motivation (Gardner, 1992;

Yukl, 2012). These skills also include personal reflection and the ability to adapt one’s

outlook or behavior based on the takeaways from that personal reflection (Clawson,

2006; Gardner, 1992).

The third skill type is the conceptual skills necessary for leadership. Yukl (2012)

defined these as the conceptual or cognitive skills that involve “good judgment, foresight,

intuition, creativity, and the ability to find meaning in ambiguity” (p. 156). Research has

shown that individuals have different levels and capabilities in terms of complexity of

mental processing skills that affect their ultimate ability to be successful in a leadership

role. These influence and conceptual skills can even be used in a predictive manner, as a

low level of conceptual skills can be a “career-limiter” (Jacques & Cason, 1994).

Power-Influence. As leadership theory continued to evolve, the perspective of the

follower began to play a larger role. Specifically, the power-influence perspective

examined how power and influence impacted leadership; “the concept of power is useful

for understanding how people are able to influence each other in organizations” (Yukl,

2012, p. 189).

There are different types of power used by leaders to influence, including

legitimate power, reward power, and referent power. Legitimate power refers to the

leader’s formal authority of work activities (Raven & French, 1958); followers who do

not comply are subject to potential disciplinary action. Reward power, on the other hand,

offers an incentive for compliance; the exercise is more of an exchange between leader

and follower. Referent power entails the desire of the follower to please the leader;

punishment or incentive are not needed to gain compliance and potentially full

commitment (Yukl, 2012). “Referent power is derived from the desire of others to please

an agent toward whom they have strong feelings of affection, admiration, or loyalty . . .

referent power is a strong source of influence over subordinates, peers, and superiors”

(Yukl, 2012, pp. 193–194).

The power-influence perspective highlights the exchange nature of many leader-

follower relationships. One of the theories most prominent in this area is Leader-Member

Exchange Theory, or LMX (Cashman et al., 1976), in which the leader and follower

negotiate an exchange to define the role. The leader uses his or her power to exercise

control in a way that is agreeable to the follower; the follower trades his or her

commitment for this agreeable condition (Yukl, 2012). “The basic premise of the theory

is that leaders develop an exchange relationship with each subordinate as the two parties

mutually define the subordinate’s role. The exchange relationships are formed on the

basis of personal compatibility and subordinate competence and dependability.” Power

and influence are both in play in leader-member exchange. It is important to note the dual

nature of the exchange. Note how different this approach is than the more “classic”

definition of leadership, which is directive and simply aims for compliance, not

commitment. It is a further evolution from person/role as well.

The influence perspective—more specifically, the tools of influence perspective—

helps lend insight into the follower. For example, this influence perspective emphasizes

the effectiveness of follower empowerment. “Benefits include (1) stronger task

commitment, (2) greater initiative in carrying out role responsibilities, (3) greater

persistence in the face of obstacles and temporary setbacks, (4) more innovation and

learning” (Yukl, 2012, p. 138).

The influence perspective also emphasizes the importance of the vision or the mission as

a means to influence and gain commitment. For optimal results, all members of the team

must know, understand, and embrace the vision or mission. “Followers embrace the

leader’s mission or objectives as something that is worthy of their commitment” (Yukl,

2012, p. 304).

The ability of a leader to influence through the development and nurture of

relationships is important when considering the vision as well. “The challenge for the

leader is to develop differentiated relationships with some subordinates to facilitate

achievement of the mission, while maintaining a relationship of mutual trust, respect, and

loyalty with other subordinates” (Yukl, 2012, p. 225). A charismatic leader is more likely

to involve an emotional contagion, which can lead the followers to believe that the vision

is valuable and attainable.

Situational Leadership and Contingency Theory. As defined by Yukl (2012),

situational and contingency leadership theories “describe how aspects of the leadership

situation can alter a leader’s influence and effectiveness” (p. 169). (Note: for purposes of

this research, the consideration of contingency theory is especially applicable in the

research of remote leadership, as there is a need to understand how the remote situation

changes the work outcomes.) For example, one of the contingency theory models is

situational leadership. Situational leadership dictates that the manager’s approach should

change based on the situation; the primary variable to consider is subordinate maturity

(Blanchard, Zigami, & Nelson, 1993). This situational approach is an evolution from a

classic, top-down, power-based style of leadership. In a power-based style, the leader

may not be inclined to change his or her approach based on subordinate need. The

hierarchical leader would be more inclined to use a directive style and less inclined to

delegate and empower. For experienced subordinates, the leader should delegate and only

use a limited amount of directive behavior (Blanchard, Zigami, & Nelson, 1993).

Contingency theories generally contain one predictor/independent variable, at

least one dependent variable, and one or more situational variables (Howell, Dorfman, &

Kerr, 1986). There are three main situational variables: (1) situation’s effect on outcomes

or mediators; (2) situation’s direct influence on leader behaviors; and, (3) the situation’s

moderation effects on leader behaviors (Howell, Dorfman, & Kerr, 1986).

1. The effect on outcomes or mediators variable is when a situational

variable has a direct effect on an outcome or mediating variable (Yukl,

2012). For example, the independent variable for a remote work context

may be the process for completing the work; the dependent variable could

be performance or the attainment of performance goal outcome; and the

situational variable could be the location of the employee (co-located or

remote). In essence, we would want to know if the location of the

employee changes the ultimate work being performed and performance

outcome achieved.

2. The directly influences leader behavior variable is when a situational

variable(s) can have a direct effect on the behavior of the leader. It is

important to note that this can only indirectly influence the dependent

variable. (Yukl, 2012). Again, the independent variable for a remote work

context may be the process for completing the work; the dependent

variable could be performance or the attainment of performance goal

outcome; and the situational variable could be the leader behavior. For

example, we would want to know if the location of the employee and the

corresponding behavior of the manager changes the work being performed

and indirectly affects the performance outcome achieved.

3. The moderation effects of leader behavior variable can either be an

enhancer or a moderator. A situational variable is an enhancer when it

increases the effects of leader behavior on the dependent variable but does

not directly influence the dependent variable. A situational variable is a

moderator when it decreases the effects of leader behavior on the

dependent variable (Yukl, 2012). Again, the independent variable for a

remote work context may be the process for completing the work; the

dependent variable could be performance or the attainment of performance

goal outcome; and the situational variable could be the leader behavior. If

the leader behavior indirectly improves performance, that behavior could

be considered an enhancing situational variable. If the leader behavior

actually negatively affects performance, that behavior could be considered

a moderating situational variable.

Integrative. The integrative approach to leadership entails the examination of at least two

variables (i.e., traits, behaviors and skills, etc.) (Yukl, 2012). Examples of this include

charismatic leadership, change leadership, and transformational leadership. Two

approaches that are potentially meaningful for this research are transformational

leadership and transactional leadership.

Transactional and Transformational Leadership. The

transactional/transformational approach to leadership theory was first defined by Burns

(1978) and advanced by Bass (1985). There has been a significant amount of research

done on the transactional/transformational model. Bass discussed the extensive research

that has been done on transformational/transactional leadership and noted that research

has been done on all continents except Antarctica (Bass, 1997). The

transformational/transactional model allows for the dissection of leadership into more

specific factors (Avolio, Bass, & Jung, 1999) that aid in the analysis and

recommendations from research (Kelloway & Barling, 2000; Hambley, O’Neill, & Klein,

2007).

Specific to the nature of this study, the transactional/transformational framework

has also been used in numerous studies on the leadership of remote teams (Hoyt &

Blascovich, 2003; Madlock, 2013; Neufeld, Wan, & Fang, 2008). Transactional leaders

motivate followers by appealing to their self-interests and through the exchange of

different types of favors or benefits (Burns, 1978). More specifically, the transactional

leader’s means of motivation is through use of power, contingent reward, and

management by exception (Bass & Avolio, 1990b). Management by exception can be

broken into two parts: active management by exception and passive management by

exception.

By contrast, transformational leaders motivate followers by appealing to their

desire to be “part of something bigger” (den Hartog, Shippers, & Koopman, 2002). The

goal of the transformational leader is to influence, motivate, and inspire the follower to

increase performance. At times, this performance may be increased in a way that may not

always be in the follower’s best interest (Bass, 1985). There are four main factors of

transformational leadership: (1) idealized influence or charisma, (2) inspirational

motivation, (3) intellectual stimulation, and (4) individualized consideration (Bass &

Avolio, 1990b).

Bass (1997) observed that transformational leadership relies on trust, loyalty, and

motivation to drive performance. Transactional leadership involves gaining compliance

for the completion of business tasks as a means of driving performance. Bass noted that

leaders may use both of these in different contexts; no leader is always transformational

or always transactional. Transactional and transformational cannot exist in a vacuum.

There is a balance or blend of styles that leaders must maintain. Bass (1997) saw a

compelling link between transactional and transformational leadership. He points to the

work of Graen and Uhl-Bien (1995), showing that leader-member exchange may begin as

transactional but must evolve into transformational for long-term effectiveness.

Throughout the leadership literature, the relative effectiveness of transactional

leadership and transformational leadership has been debated. The blunt question, “which

style is better?” might best be answered with “it depends.” Different studies have reached

seemingly opposite conclusions based on various variables, including setting, nature of

the work, company culture, etc. Different studies might answer which style is better with

another question: “How does one define better?” Does better refer to employee output

from a quantity perspective? Output quality? Employee engagement? Something else?

There is evidence in the literature that transformational leadership is more

effective. Numerous studies have indicated that transformational leadership is effective in

driving team performance (Bass, 1997). Other research has shown that purely

transformational leadership behaviors can be more effective than purely transactional

behaviors (Kelley & Kelloway, 2012). The relationship between transformational

leadership and performance has been shown to be greater than the relationship between

transactional leadership and performance (Lowe, Kroeck, & Sivasubramaniam, 1996).

The link between transformational leadership and perceived leader performance has been

shown to be stronger than that between transactional leadership and perceived leader

performance (Neufeld, Wan, & Fang, 2008).

Specific to the purposes of this study, transformational leadership has been shown

to lead to stronger outcomes in numerous work contexts, including sales environments

(Sparks & Schenk, 2006). Mackenzie and colleagues (2001) conducted research to

understand the effect of transformational and transactional behavior on salesperson

performance in a proximal environment. Transformational leadership behaviors were

shown to have a stronger effect on performance than transactional leadership behaviors.

The authors were able to show that certain transformational leadership behaviors (e.g.,

articulating a vision) can lead to stronger sales performance.

This is not to say that transformational leadership has “won,” however. Studies

have shown that the contingent reward element of transactional leadership can drive job

performance outcomes (Judge & Piccolo, 2004). Other studies have shown that

transactional leadership can lead to stronger quantitative performance outcomes (Hoyt &

Blascovich, 2003).

If the leadership literature concludes that transformational leadership is

(generally) more effective than transactional (Hambley et al., 2007), it would be

reasonable to expect that this would hold true in the remote context. Yet, the remote

leadership literature often points to transactional behaviors being more effective than

transformational behaviors (Madlock, 2012; Madlock, 2013; Judge & Piccolo, 2004).

Madlock (2013) found that teleworkers preferred a task-oriented leadership style to a

relational-oriented leadership style. The literature also showed that a task-oriented style

led to higher worker commitment (Ocker et al., 2009). Again, there is no absolute

consensus; research by Neufeld, Wan, and Fang (2008) showed that transformational

behaviors were more often associated with remote leader performance.

Remote Work

With the rapid advancement of technology, the employee who works from a

different location than his or her supervisor has changed a great deal since Nilles first

defined the term “telecommuting” (Nilles, 1975). While this worker is referred to by

many different names, the universal assumption is that there will be more of them with

each passing year. This worker is expected to play a larger role in the workforce of

tomorrow as the use of technology becomes even more ubiquitous (Wang & Hagerty,

2011); the United States Census estimates that the number of workers who meet their

definition of “telecommuting” has increased 77% since 2005.

Another study noted that that the U.S. “mobile” workforce will see an expected increase

from 96.2 million workers in 2015 to 105.4 million in 2020 (International Data

Corporation, 2015).

The remote work arrangement can be attractive for the employer. Advances in

technology have made the jobs of more workers technology based, whether in a co-

located arrangement or in a remote arrangement (Lojeski, 2006). In many cases, the

worker is working on the phone or at a computer eight hours per day, regardless of

location. This can lead to an assumption that nothing is “lost” by the worker working

from home. This is important because of the large costs incurred by employers in creating

the work location, including real estate, construction, utilities, insurance, and personnel to

maintain the physical plant; the spatial distance is one of the variables that actually

defines this type of “remote” worker (Ebrahim, et al, 2009). An important side benefit of

the employer not having to create a large work location is that it reduces barriers to entry

for new entrepreneurs.

Research has also pointed to performance increases in “remote” worker

populations, as measured by quality of output (Maynard, 2006). These workers

experience fewer disruptions common to an office environment (Bailey & Kurland,

2002). Interestingly, one of the most common assumptions about remote work—workers

would be more productive in part due to additional time gained through no commute and,

thus, more workable minutes in the day—has been the subject or considerable debate and

disagreement in the literature. Some studies have shown that remote work leads to

productivity increases (Madlock, 2012). Other studies have openly questioned whether it

actually does lead to increases in productivity (Neufeld, Wan, & Fang, 2008), while still

other studies have refuted the productivity increase altogether (Bailey & Kurland, 2002).

Many of the studies show that productivity increases in a remote work relationship are

based on worker self-reported data, which may be biased (Bailey & Kurland, 2002). The

relationship between remote work and productivity would seem to be an open question

and area where significant further research is warranted.

The “Remote,” “Cyber,” or “Virtual” Worker

Defined. These workers come in many forms, including workers who have a

telecommuting arrangement and work almost exclusively from their home; sales

professionals who spend their time on the road or working from a home office; and brand

retail managers who may see their regional vice president once per month or less. This

worker is referred to in research literature by various other names, including: virtual team

member (Fiol & O’Connor, 2005; Webster & Wong, 2008), cyber worker (Varma &

Rogers, 2004), and remote worker (Kelley & Kelloway, 2012). For purposes of this

research, we generally use the term remote worker as defined as an “employee who

works in a location physically separate from their manager” (Staples, 2001) and one in

which “the worker and supervisor see each other rarely” (Zimmerman et al., 2008). This

definition is more all-encompassing than teleworker, as traditionally defined teleworkers

make up only a portion of the population that works remotely.

The most common characteristics of these workers can be different based on

gender. Men and women make up nearly equal parts of the remote work population

(Mokhtarian, Salomon, & Choo, 2005). Men who work remotely tend to be full-time

workers in professional occupations (Swink, 2001), whereas women who telecommute

tend to be part-time workers in clerical positions. Men often cite reasons of job suitability

and fit for choosing remote work; women cite family reasons more often than men do

(Bailey & Kurland, 2002).

It is important to note that not all of these workers work remotely one hundred

percent of the time (Berry, 2011). Some workers work remotely for a portion of their

time, but in a proximal or co-located arrangement for another portion of their time (Berry,

2011). The work experience can be significantly different based on frequency of days

spent working remotely (Berry, 2011; McCloskey & Igbaria, 2003). The worker who

never experiences the co-located environment may have a very different experience than

the worker who goes into the office twice per week. This is an important point for

researchers to consider.

“Remote” Worker Identity and Identification. As defined by Webster and

Wong (2008), identification is the “sense of oneness” that a person feels to a group.

Identity can look very different for these workers. They can experience a great sense of

control and autonomy. They may have greater job satisfaction (Lojeski, 2006). They have

greater flexibility in determining their work hours and have the ability to adjust their

work time to a schedule more conducive to their personal flexibility (Griffith, Sawyer, &

Neale, 2003). In many cases, they can choose to dress the way they wish and not have to

conform to a company dress policy or norms (Fiol & O’Connor, 2005).

Remote work also brings numerous identity challenges for these workers. They

can experience a sense of isolation (Berry, 2011). The significantly reduced amount of

face-to-face interaction with peers and supervisor can lead to a feeling of

disconnectedness from the team and, ultimately, hurt identification. Numerous studies

have shown the negative effects of isolation (Berry, 2011; Belanger et al., 2001). Other

studies have approached this topic from the opposite perspective, showing that a sense of

group belonging can lead to performance and productivity increases (Fiol & O’Connor,

2005). Informal communication that is common among co-located team members (e.g.,

over coffee during a break, lunches in the cafeteria) can aid in the development of and a

sense of identification with the team (Zeffane, Tipu, & Ryan, 2011). These workers will

have few if any of these informal communication opportunities. Again, not all virtual

teams consist of entirely “remote” members (some hybrid teams can be a combination of

co-located and remote workers), and the purely remote worker can feel especially

disconnected in the hybrid scenario (Pearlson & Saunders, 2001).

Part of the identity of workers is driven by how their supervisor sees them. The

worker who performs well and receives praise from his or her supervisor sees self-esteem

impacted as a result (Lewis & Sherman, 2010); “I am a good worker. My supervisor

values me.” Remote work can hinder the development of a good worker-supervisor

relationship because it significantly reduces opportunity for feedback (Hambley et al.,

2007) and especially limits organic opportunities for positive feedback. The lack of face-

to-face communication prevents the distance worker from receiving communication

context cues like smiles, nods, and other forms of positive body language. The “real

world” effect of this is that this type of worker may receive a positive message from the

leader less positively than the leader intended (Fiol & O’Connor, 2005); it can be difficult

to communicate and receive an enthusiastic smile via email.

There is evidence that certain personality types experience feelings of

disconnection and isolation more often, which may make them less fit to be a successful

remote worker. For example, workers with a high need for affiliation may be unhappy

with the relatively disconnected nature of the remote work relationship (Yukl, 2012), and

a worker who is more extroverted or group-oriented may ultimately be unhappy in a

remote work scenario. Some of these workers may self-select out of a remote work

relationship as a result (Bailey & Kurland, 2002).

Impact of Technology. The “remote” worker sees his or her supervisor in a face-

to-face context for a fraction of the time than that of a co-located worker. While the

amount of time spent directly interacting is important for a variety of reasons, it is

especially important to communication. Interpersonal communication, both through

formal and informal settings, is important for relationship building; there is proven

linkage between strong relationships, job satisfaction, and ultimate employee retention

(Piccolo & Colquitt, 2006). Face-to-face communication aids in relationship building, yet

the remote leader must primarily rely on electronic forms of communication.

Communication in electronic form is less effective than face-to-face communication

(Purvanova & Bono, 2009). Workers are more likely to receive negative messages in an

electronic form than they are face-to-face (Berry, 2006), which can ultimately hurt

relationship building, worker identity, and worker/team identification.

Leadership in a Remote Work Context

The existing remote worker literature does seem to indicate that they require a

different type of leadership from their supervisor (Busch, Nash, & Bell, 2011; Madlock,

2013; Madlock, 2012; Meister & Willyerd, 2010). This seems to assume that the leader is

not remote as well. Research has shown that a common problem for leaders of remote

workers is that they are less effective because they use the same leadership style/skills for

the non-co-located employees as they do for face-to-face workers (Kelley & Kelloway,

2012).

The literature illustrates some of the specific ways remote worker leadership

differs from proximal worker leadership. For example, the distance ramifications that

must be overcome make motivation and influence more difficult in a remote context; it is

easier to motivate and inspire those with who you come directly into face-to-face contact

(Berry, 2011; Ebrahim, et al, 2009). The perceived quality and quantity of

communication from the leader is impacted by proximity (Kelley & Kelloway, 2012).

“Leadership presence” looks very different for the remote worker (Zigurs, 2003).

Another study (Farmer, 2005) explored whether situational leadership methods

that have proved to be effective in a face-to-face or co-located environment can work as

effectively in a telecommuting environment. The research explored whether situational

leadership concepts originally advanced by Blanchard and colleagues (1993) are effective

in a remote work environment. It found that these concepts are still applicable in the

remote context, but that the manager must be diligent in the application and willing to

flex accordingly.

The remote work context can make relationship building more difficult, hindering

the ability of the leader to use a transformational style effectively. Gajedran and Harrison

(2007) found that there were negatives related to remote worker relationships with

leaders and coworkers. For example, distance proved to negatively impact the forming of

relationships with both the supervisor and coworkers. It is important to note, however,

that there is no consensus on this issue in the context of remote work. Bailey and Kurland

(2002) conducted a meta-analysis of the telecommuting literature and noted that

workplace telecommuting had little or no effect on the quality of relationships.

What happens, however, if the manager is unwilling to lead differently? Because

the proliferation of remote work arrangements is a relatively new phenomenon, one

should not assume that all leaders are in favor of these arrangements. For example, Bailey

and Kurland (2002) found that many experienced managers were opposed to the concept

of remote work. This opposition changed their behaviors and, ultimately, the success of

the remote work scenario. Bailey and Kurland discussed this “manager willingness” and

used it as a variable in their research. This is potentially another area where more

research is needed: to what extent does supervisor acceptance or resistance of remote

work change the outcomes of that remote work? As the recruiting, selection, training, and

integration of employees can be time-consuming for a leader, this “opposition to remote

work” stance may be terribly self-defeating. Research has shown that remote workers are

less likely to leave their current job due to the attractiveness of the remote work

arrangement (Berry, 2011), a trend that is expected to continue.

Madlock (2013) explained that there is a gap in the remote work/leadership style

research that could be filled via qualitative study. This research is necessary to

understand the nuance that can exist in the remote leadership context.

Frequency of Face-to-Face Interaction and Leadership Style Impact

One of the gaps in the remote work research is that it tends to view the remote

worker as either always remote or always proximal (Madlock, 2013). Yet, the leadership

experience for followers is impacted by the frequency with which they see their leader.

The leadership experience may be very different for followers who see their leader

weekly than for the followers who see their leader monthly, annually, or never. Madlock

(2013) pointed out the frequency of interaction gap as an area where further research is

warranted: “Another limitation involves a level of uncertainty about the time

telecommuters spend in the office. This information may indicate whether telecommuters

who frequented the office felt more connected and satisfied than telecommuters who

rarely visited the office” (p. 12). Gajedran and Harrison (2007) discussed frequency of

telecommuting and used it as a variable in their meta-analysis. Nieminen and colleagues

(2011) also offered a meta-analysis that references the frequency of telecommuting.

These are two of the only studies that reference telecommuting frequency or intensity as a

variable that needs to be considered.

The frequency of face-to-face interaction is important. Leaders need to understand

what their followers need and react accordingly. Communicating effectively can be far

more difficult from a distance (Bailey & Kurland, 2002). Building relationships can be

more difficult at a distance (Ocker et al., 2009); this research underscored the need for the

leader of the remote worker to continually assess—and reassess—the leadership style

needs of the remote worker. This approach is directly aligned with Blanchard and

colleagues’ model and philosophy (Farmer, 2005). This assessment and flex are difficult

from a distance, as physical cues cannot be observed. The frequency with which leaders

interact with followers—both face-to-face and at a distance—can change the behaviors

they should use to influence them (Gajendran & Harrison, 2007).

Trust

Trust has been noted as a critical component of leadership in innumerable studies.

While a sense of trust is important for the individual and individual performance

(Zeffane, Tipu, & Ryan, 2011). Studies have shown a clear link between trust and

achievement of group goals (Daim, et al, 2012). Clear linkages between communication,

communication frequency, and trust have been noted (DeRidder, 2006; Harry, 2006).

Because of the unique challenges created by communication from a distance, trust may

be expected to be harder to achieve in the remote leadership context.

More specifically, a sense of trust is also more challenging for the worker to

achieve when they see their supervisor infrequently (Daim, et al, 2012; Fiol & O’Connor,

2005). Trust is built through interaction (Daim, et al, 2012) and reinforced with repeated

interaction. This interaction is less rich in a virtual setting, causing trust to develop more

slowly (Daim, et al, 2012; Berry, 2011).

The vagaries of the remote leadership context also provide other trust challenges

for the leader to overcome. Studies have shown that co-located workers may feel they

must do additional work that teleworkers are unable to do (e.g., meet face-to-face with

customers or clients, attend meetings with other departments, etc.) and that this hurts trust

and teamwork (Bailey & Kurland, 2002). Essentially, co-located workers may feel that

they must “fight fires” and deal with emergencies that come up far more often than the

worker that is not in the office (or workspace), detracting from the overall sense of trust

the team feels.

The Nicholson Adaptive Cycle Model

Nigel Nicholson speaks to the need for leaders to adapt (2013); adaptation is a key

to the ultimate success or failure of the manager in their leadership role. Specifically,

Nicholson notes that leaders need to note the interplay of three key things: situation,

qualities, and process (Figure 2.1). The successful leader analyzes the interplay of the

three elements and reacts accordingly.

In Nicholson’s model, situation would include all the things that are inherent in

the leadership context that the leader needs to consider. Examples of this include

organizational structure, culture, position, and so on. Qualities includes things like

personality, experiences, identity, and the like that are specific and personal to the leader.

Process includes all of the strategies, methods, behaviors and the like that the leader

utilizes to lead the team. Again, it is the leader’s analysis of the interplay of these three

factors and their adaptation to that analysis that can ultimately determine leadership

success or failure.

Figure 2.1. The Adaptive Cycle

S Q

Situation What is the leadership challenge? How do leadership situations differ from one another?

Process How should leaders behave? What do leaders do to be effective?

Qualities Who should lead?

What are the leadership qualities? The Adaptive

Cycle

Nicholson takes the Adaptive Cycle a step further. Nicholson breaks the

Adaptive Cycle down into six specific paths that the leader can take. (Figure 2.2).

Figure 2.2. Paths of the Adaptive Cycle

Source. Nicholson (2013).

• Path One—Shaping: In this path, the interplay is from leader qualities to

situation to impact on the situation. Questions that illustrate this for the leader

are: “Are you in the kind of situation that suits you? What could you do to shape

the situation to suit you better?”

• Path Two—Discovery: In this path, the interplay is from situation to leader

qualities. Nicholson notes that leaders learn and change due to experience.

Questions that illustrate this for the leader are: “Are you exposing yourself to

enough challenges to deepen your understanding of yourself as a leader?”

• Path Three—Shot Selection: In this path, the interplay is from process to

situation. Nicholson notes that the leader needs to utilize the appropriate process

to have the desired impact on the situation. Questions that illustrate this for the

S Q

P3 P5 P4 P6

The Six Paths of the Adaptive Cycle P1– Shaping P2– Discovery P3– Shot Selection P4– Situational Insight P5– Instinct P6– Self-Development

leader are: “What behaviors or tactics might you need to be generating to be more

effective in neglected or current areas of the leadership role?”

• Path Four—Situational Impact: In this path, the interplay is from situation to

process. Nicholson notes that leaders need to gather information from the process

and determine what process changes to make (or not). Questions that illustrate

this for the leader are: “Are you getting enough of the right information to enable

you to analyze the situation deeply enough, and to be aware of the effects of your

own strategies?”

• Path Five—Instinct: In this path, the interplay is from qualities to process.

Nicholson notes that leaders need to be aware of their own strengths and

weaknesses as a means of knowing the appropriate actions to take. Questions that

illustrate this for the leader are: “How aware are you of your leadership

weaknesses that may be risk factors for you?”

• Path Six—Self-control: In this path, the interplay is from process to qualities.

Nicholson notes that leaders need to “do the right things” as a means to grow.

Questions that illustrate this for the leader are: “Are you learning new tactics and

practicing new behaviors that will enhance your leadership capability?”

Conceptual Framework for Study

The conceptual framework for this research integrates leadership, work role

transitions, and remote leadership in the context of retail sales (Figure 2.2).

Figure 2.2. Conceptual Framework in Retail Sales Organizations

The research proceeded in a qualitative fashion, with leaders being interviewed to

gain insight into their lived experience transitioning from a face-to-face leadership role to

a remote leadership role. The Nicholson adaptive cycle model (Figure 2) would be used

as one basis for interview questions and to gain structured insight from the new remote

leaders. Specifically, some interview questions would be asked to gain insight into the

leader’s lived experience with paths three and four of Nicholson’s adaptive cycle model

(Figure 2.2).

Summary

After a study of the work-role transitions literature, the leadership literature, the

remote work literature, as well as the remote leadership literature, there is still a gap. To

date, no one has studied remote leaders, and specifically how these leaders have

transitioned from a face-to-face context to a remote context using qualitative means; this

transition specifically studied in the context of retail sales leadership would make this

even more unique, worthy of study, and valuable to the literature.

Transitions Leadership Style

Ashforth, 2001; Bridges, 1986; Nicholson, 2013; Nicholson, 1984;

Bass, 1997; Madlock, 2012; Madlock, 2013; Yukl, 2012;

Chapter Three

Overview

The research question for this study was: “What is the lived experience of the

leader who has transitioned from face-to-face leadership to remote leadership in a retail

sales context?” This chapter opens with an introduction to the ontology, epistemology,

and theoretical perspective for the research. It continues with an overview of the research

methodology, followed by a section on the role of theory. This chapter concludes with an

outline of the research design, which will include: (1) participant criteria and selection,

(2) research procedures and protocols, (3) the trustworthiness of this study, and (4)

human participants and ethics considerations.

Ontology, Epistemology, and Theoretical Perspective

This study was grounded in a subjective ontology. As noted by Burrell and

Morgan, “It has been suggested that the assumptions about the nature of science can be

brought to terms in what we call the subjective-objective dimension, and assumptions

about the nature of society in terms of the regulation-radical change dimension” (1979, p.

21). In the subjective dimension, “the principle concern is with an understanding of the

way in which the individual creates, modifies, and interprets the world in which he or she

finds himself” (Burrell & Morgan, 1979, p. 3). This approach was well aligned with the

goal of the research and the main research question: “What is the lived experience of the

leader that has transitioned from face-to-face leadership to remote leadership in the

context of retail sales?” This subjective approach (with the goal of further understanding

of the individual’s interpretation) also helps fill the gap in the research that Madlock

noted (2013).

The guiding epistemology for this research was anti-positivist. This approach is

appropriate for a few different reasons. As noted by Burrell and Morgan (1979): “For the

anti-positivist, the social world is essentially relativistic and can only be understood from

the point of view of the individuals who are directly involved in the activities to be

studied.” This aligns well with the main research question. While the interpretation of the

individual is critical to understanding the lived experience, different individuals may live

the same experience but interpret it differently (Weick, 1995). The goal of this research

was not hard generalizability, but rather to understand the themes and essence of the

experience of the leader in this new context; the goal is to understand whether the

individual felt that there were causal relationships that existed as interpreted through his

or her own frame of reference.

The theoretical perspective for this research was interpretivism. The interpretive

paradigm seeks to understand the world as it exists. The interpretive perspective is

concerned with a greater understanding of the world from the experience of the

individual living in that world rather than the perspective of the observer of that world

(Burrell & Morgan, 1979). This aligns with the research question and the goal of the

research. If the goal was to better understand the experience of individuals who made the

transition from one leadership context to another, it would be most appropriate to

consider this from the perspective of the transitioner, not the observer.

Methodology

The methodology for this study was qualitative in nature. There are five

intellectual goals for which a qualitative approach is well-suited (Maxwell, 2013): (1)

understanding the meaning for participants of the events or experience; (2) appreciating

the contexts in which participants act; (3) recognizing the process by which events and

actions take place; (4) identifying unanticipated phenomena and influences and

generating new, grounded theories; and (5) developing causal explanations. These

intellectual goals aligned well with the specific goals and research question of this study.

More specifically in the realm of qualitative research, an exploratory interpretive

approach was appropriate for this study. The researcher sought to understand the

transition experience of leaders from the proximal leadership context to the remote

context (an exploratory interpretive approach was appropriate for this research because a

deep understanding of a common experience is needed). The exploratory interpretive

approach proceeded using leaders to understand how they experienced the transition.

Research Design

The research structure employed a series of interviews with subjects that had

recently transitioned from face-to-face leadership roles to remote leadership roles. The

structure for this interview-based research primarily relied on the structure and methods

recommended by Seidman (2013). This structure called for interviews with ten to twelve

subjects that met the selection criteria—or interviews with subjects until saturation was

reached. The researcher also employed a participant selection strategy via use of a

criterion sample (Creswell, 1998). The use of a criterion sample requires an intentional

approach when choosing research subjects, not a random sampling approach (Miles &

Huberman, 1994). The inclusion of ten to twelve participants (or inclusion of participants

until saturation is reached) is appropriate for this approach; an inclusion of a minimum of

five individuals who have experienced the phenomenon is recommended for this type of

research (Polkinghorne, 1989). Interviews were conducted with the leaders to learn how

they experienced the transition from one role to another.

As part of this research, and using the Nicholson structure of situation-process-

qualities (SPQ), special attention was paid to the interplay between “situation” (S) and

“process” (P). It is important to note that the “qualities” (Q) of the SPQ model were

intentionally excluded from the research, as this research did not focus explicitly on Q.

Figure 3.1. Paths of the Adaptive Cycle.

Source. Nicholson (2013).

Because Q was excluded from the research, the other four paths of the Nicholson model

were excluded as well. There are multiple reasons for this decision, including perspective

and scope.

In terms of perspective, the research sought to understand the lived experience of

the individual making the transition; the interplay between S and P was meaningful, as

the transitioner would have deep insight into the situational variables that affected the

transition. The transitioner would have a deep understanding of his or her decisions and

S Q

P3 P5 P4 P6

The Six Paths of the Adaptive Cycle P1– Shaping P2– Discovery P3– Shot Selection P4– Situational Insight P5– Instinct P6– Self-Development

behaviors during the transition. Perhaps no one can answer the “how did the leadership

situations differ from one another?” like the transitioner. Conversely, the transitioner

would have less insight into Q. “Who should lead?” is one of the “qualities” questions.

The objective insight into this question might be answered far better by the leader’s

supervisor—or even by the leader’s followers.

Inclusion of Q would have fundamentally and exponentially changed the scope of

the research. “What are the leadership qualities?” is one of the foundational questions for

Q. To truly answer this question, a quantitative approach might have been required. The

use of a psychometric assessment like the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator or the Goldberg

Big Five Personality Inventory would lend insight but exponentially increase the scope of

this research in a way that does not advance the original research question.

Sampling

Participant Criteria and Selection.

A purposeful sampling method was utilized for this study. Participants selected

for interviews were leaders who met the following criteria: (1) work for a retail sales

organization that utilizes a remote supervision structure (e.g., district, region, area,

territory), (2) have supervisory responsibility for at least six separate and distinct

locations but fewer than 25 locations, (3) have supervisory responsibility for locations

with a minimum of 10 employees but fewer than 100, (4) have transitioned from a face-

to-face leadership context to a remote leadership context, and (5) have been in the new

remote leadership role for at least six months but no longer than 39 months. In addition,

all participation was expressly voluntary. All participants would work within the United

States and supervise locations within the United States. These criteria were important

and selected specifically for their alignment with the conceptual frame.

Criterion 1

As stated previously, the criteria that participants work for a retail sales

organization was significant because there is currently a gap in the literature. A boundary

condition of retail sales organizations utilizing a remote supervision structure was also

intended to help normalize industry culture considerations.

Criterion 2

The intent of criterion 2 (responsibility for at least six separate locations, but

fewer than 25) was to control for two separate variables: (1) the ability and frequency of

the leader to actually be on-site and (2) scope of the role. The number of locations is

significant in terms of leadership. Previous remote work literature has shown that

frequency of face-to-face contact can affect remote leadership outcomes (Gajendran &

Harrison, 2007). Leaders with six or more separate and distinct locations would be hard-

pressed to be on-site at each location (and interact in a proximal manner with each

location’s employees) more frequently than weekly. The leader who is on-site at least

weekly may be tempted to perform his or her new role using the same style as his or her

old role.

Another reason the number of locations was meaningful is due to scope. With

each additional location under the leader’s purview, the role’s scope may increase

incrementally. The intent was to control for scope using the previously discussed

boundary conditions: a minimum of six and maximum of 25 separate and distinct

locations. Research notes that in retail organizational structures, more than approximately

25 locations would generally bring another layer of organizational structure. For

example, rather than location managers reporting directly to the remote leader, they might

report to a district manager who would then report to the remote leader.

Criterion 3

Criterion 3 (locations having more than 10 employees but fewer than 100) is

important for leadership and role complexity reasons, as a link has been shown between

the number of employees and role complexity (Kahya, 2006). Pragmatically, the number

of employees at each location is important to consider for many of the same reasons that

the number of locations is meaningful. The new remote leader can almost certainly not

have the same amount of face-to-face interaction—in terms of both frequency and time—

as the number of employees under their supervision grows exponentially.

Criterion 4

Criterion four (transitioned from face-to-face leadership role to a remote

leadership role) is self-explanatory.

Criterion 5

Criterion five (in role more than six months but less than 39 months) is important

for transition reasons: the leader needs enough time to fully transition into the role

without being in the role so long that he or she forgets what the transition was truly like.

Arriving at a time frame for this is tricky: when has a leader been in a role long enough to

no longer be in transition? The transition literature notes that the amount of time needed

to fully transition can vary by numerous factors, including chronological age, career age,

level of self-reflection, as well as many others (Ashforth, 2001; Hall & Mirvis, 1995).

Research also suggests that the transition cycle is affected by the expected

duration in the role (Ashforth, 2001). Knowing the expected duration in the role is

important. Studies noting the average tenure for remote leaders show wildly varying

tenure results. For purposes of this study, three studies were used in an attempt to

determine average tenure. These studies note remote leadership tenure of 6.3 years, 10.7

years, and 22 years (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2011; O’Connor et al., 1984). Thus, an

average tenure of 13 years was used for this study. Because the literature does not

provide a standard time frame to reach stabilization in a role (Ashforth, 2001; Nicholson,

1984), this study used six months as a minimum for the transition and 39 months as a

maximum (the time frame was chosen because it is 25% of the expected ultimate role

tenure).

Data Collection

To collect data, the researcher utilized a semi-structured, long interview technique

(Seidman, 2013). This data collection method may be best understood as a “modified

Seidman” technique. While the Seidman method of interviewing generally calls for three

separate interviews, the researcher conducted two interviews with each subject.

According to Seidman, “Researchers will have reasons for exploring alternatives to the

structure and procedures described . . . alternatives to the three-interview structure and

the duration and spacing can be explored . . . there are no absolutes in the world of

interviewing.”

The Seidman method calls for the three interviews to focus on the following three

themes: (1) the participant’s life experience (interview one), (2) details of the experience

under study (interview two), and (3) reflections on the meaning of the experience

(interview three). In this case, the researcher combined the first two themes into one

interview and followed with reflections on meaning in the second interview. The majority

of these interviews (whether they were the first interview or the second interview) were

approximately 60 to 90 minutes long and conducted via videoconference (Skype). The

remainder of the interviews were conducted via telephone.

At the outset of the interview, the researcher read a written statement detailing the

purpose for the research and describing the objective and format for the interview. The

researcher then secured permission to record the interview for subsequent transcription

purposes. The researcher utilized the semi-structured interview guide throughout all of

the interviews for consistency purposes. Follow-up probing questions were used at the

researcher’s discretion.

Data Analysis

The process of data analysis involves bracketing, preparing the data for analysis,

representing the data, and interpreting the data (Creswell, 1998). As part of the process to

prepare the data for analysis, the researcher used an external firm to transcribe the

interviews (i.e., the researcher turned over a recording of each interview to the

transcription firm and the firm returned written interview transcripts).

Bracketing.

As exploratory interpretive research focuses on the lived experiences of the

participants—not the researcher—it is important for the researcher to consciously set

aside his or her potential biases (Creswell, 1998). This conscious effort to consider and

set aside one’s biases is called epoche, or bracketing (Moustakas, 1994). The researcher

has experience in the world of remote leadership as well as with retail sales

organizations, so the process of bracketing was necessary and a critical component of the

research procedure.

Preparing, representing, and interpreting the data

The process for representing the data and interpreting the data consisted of five

main parts in alignment with an interpretive phenomenological approach, or IPA (Smith,

Flowers, & Larkin, 2009):

1. Read-through of the first transcript. The researcher read the transcript for the

first time in one sitting without taking notes or capturing reflections. The intent of

this first read-through was simply to gain a general sense of the information and

content. The researcher then read the transcript again—this time highlighting key

statements and making notes in the margins of the transcript.

2. Development of notes into concise themes. The researcher reduced the data into

meaningful themes using a coding process. This coding process sought statements

or phrases that were revealing in terms of the overall research question (van

Manen, 1990).

3. Use of themes from the first transcript to guide analysis of subsequent

transcripts. The researcher repeated the process used for the first transcript, but

this time with the specific themes in mind that were identified in step two. When a

new potential theme was identified, it was used in the analysis of subsequent

transcripts.

4. Development of a table of themes. After all transcripts were analyzed, an overall

table of themes that emerged from the interviews was developed. This table of

themes helped structure and aid understanding of the essence of the experience.

5. Development of narrative with specific supporting quotes. After the table of

themes was identified, a narrative was developed to more fully describe these

themes. Direct quotes from the research subjects were used in the narrative to

support the themes.

Trustworthiness

In qualitative research, the use of concepts such as validity, credibility, or

trustworthiness can be controversial (Seidman, 2013). Some researchers have attempted

to combat this with a use of one specific, preferred term (Creswell, 1998), while others

have attempted to better define the term (Lincoln, Lynham, & Guba, 2011). This

research used the term trustworthiness. If the question of trustworthiness is intended to

recognize research that is credible from that which is not, a common sense approach may

be best: “I use [Seidman’s preferred term] in what I think is a straight-forward, common

sense way to refer to the correctness or credibility of a description, conclusion,

explanation, determination, or some other account” (Seidman, 2013, p. 122).

According to Seidman, establishing trustworthiness requires taking a very

proactive, intentional approach to guard against two specific threats: researcher bias and

reactivity. Researcher bias includes selection of data—or drawing conclusions from that

data—that fit the researcher’s conclusions or preconceptions. Seidman notes that

researchers can never be expected to eliminate their biases; researchers are human beings,

after all. Rather, researchers should note their biases, then take steps to explain them and

how they will mitigate them. Reactivity refers to the effect that the researcher can have

on the subject. This reactivity can be especially strong in interview-based research:

“What the informant says is always influenced by the interviewer and interview

situation” (p. 125).

For the purposes of this study, several trustworthiness methods were employed,

including:

1. Use of rich description. Rich, thick description provides the reader with the

opportunity to take the subject’s experience and compare and contrast that

experience with others to determine the trustworthiness of the conclusions.

2. Use of a field journal. The researcher kept a field journal to record thoughts

during the process of data collection and analysis.

3. Member checks. The researcher provided drafts of narratives to the participants

and gave them an opportunity to express whether they felt that the interpretations

were an accurate reflection of their experiences.

4. Third-party inter-reliability checks (peer checks). The researcher would provide

drafts of the data and analysis to peer researchers for peer checks as an additional

method of increasing trustworthiness.

Human Participants and Ethics Considerations

The research presented only minimal risk to the subjects, primarily those typical

to interview-based research; these include the intellectual or emotional risks related to

discussing the topic. Because the leader-follower (or manager-subordinate) dynamic can

be sensitive, no interviews with followers were conducted. All participants were

voluntary. The interview structure, format, and process also reminded participants that

their participation was voluntary. Additionally, general job titles and/or roles were used

in place of real names during the data analysis and reporting processes. To protect

confidentiality, no “reporting back” of themes or results from interviews to the site

organization was conducted during the research.

Chapter 4: Results

This exploratory interpretive study investigated the experience of retail leaders

that had recently transitioned from a face-to-face leadership context to a remote

leadership context. The specific question guiding this research is: “What is the lived

experience of the leader who has transitioned from face-to-face leadership to remote

leadership in a retail sales context?”

This chapter will review the analysis of the qualitative data derived from

interviews done with these leaders. The interviews were done over a five-month period

beginning in December 2015. The interviews used a modified Seidman (2013) method;

the interviews were done in two parts, with part one focused on the work history and

details of the experience, and part two focused on the individuals’ sense-making of the

transition. Each interview was audio-recorded; the audio recordings of these interviews

were converted to written transcript. The data analysis, consisting of the coding of the

transcripts and reduction into sub-themes and ultimately themes, spanned a period of

three months, concluding in July 2016.

This chapter will be divided into six sections. The first section will provide a

review of the analysis used in the study. The process for representing the data and

interpreting the data consisted of five main parts in alignment with an interpretive

phenomenological approach, or IPA (Smith, Flowers, & Larkin, 2009).

The second section will provide an overview of the participants in this study. The

study applied a purposeful sampling approach; each of the participants had to meet five

specific criteria to be eligible to participate in this study. While the criteria for

participation in this study was fairly “tight,” each of the participant’s experience with

leadership was unique; a brief overview of the individual’s leadership experience is

intended to provide insight for the reader while still protecting participant anonymity.

The third section will review the method of coding and thematic analysis. The two

themes, task-orientation and relational-orientation, each contained four main sub-

themes. Each of the eight sub-themes will be illuminated using the words of the

participants themselves. The fourth and fifth sections will review the two main themes

(task-orientation and relational-orientation respectively) and eight sub-themes that

surfaced from data analysis using the interpretive phenomenological approach (Smith,

Flowers, & Larkin, 2009). The sixth and final section will provide a chapter summary.

Review of the Analysis Method

The process for representing the data and interpreting the data consisted of five

main parts in alignment with an interpretive phenomenological approach, or IPA (Smith,

Flowers, & Larkin, 2009): (1) read-through of the first transcript, (2) development of

notes into concise themes using a coding process (van Manen, 1990), (3) use of themes

from the first transcript to guide analysis of subsequent transcripts, (4) development of a

table of themes, (5) development of narrative with specific supporting quotes. IPA was

chosen because it provides a means for understanding the lived experience of the research

subjects in a way that allows the researcher to make sense of it (Glenn, McFayden, &

Rafique, 2013) and, ultimately, answer the research question.

The first reading of each transcript was done without coding or the taking of

notes; the intent was for the researcher to become immersed in the data (Smith, Flowers,

Larkin, 2009) and to ensure that the research subject was the focus. The multi-phase

coding process began with the second reading of each transcript. During this phase and

reading, eclectic coding (Saldana, 2014) was employed; these “first impression phrases”

(Saldana, 2014, p. 5) were used as codes that were logged into the qualitative data

analysis system MaxQDA. The second round of coding used process coding (Saldana,

2014) during which the transcripts were read again looking for examples of Nicholson’s

(2013) Path Three—Shot Selection, and Path Four—Situational Insight. The process

codes were also logged into MaxQDA.

After all interview transcripts were coded using both eclectic coding and process

coding, emergent themes were explored. The goal of this phase of the process was “to

reduce the volume of detail while maintaining complexity” (Smith, Flowers, & Larkin,

2009). This was done using the codes that had been generated and looking for emergent

themes (Smith, Flowers, & Larkin, 2009). Once emergent themes were identified,

analysis proceeded to the abstraction phase, which “involves putting like with like and

developing a new name for the cluster” (Smith, Flowers, & Larkin, 2009, p. 96). This

abstraction phase would yield larger themes for the emergent themes; the emergent

themes now become sub-themes of the larger themes.

Profile of the Participants

Ten leaders from the retail industry participated in this research; all participation

was expressly voluntary. In many ways, this group was very diverse. They live and

work all over the United States. They are employed by nine different companies. Only

two of the leaders work for the same company, though four of the participants did work

for that same organization at one time or another. While all of the leaders work in the

retail industry, they come from a fairly diverse set of business-types: automotive, jewelry,

large goods, toys and games, financial goods and services, to name a few. They come

from varying levels of academic experience.

On the other hand—and for specific research study purposes—each of these

leaders met the following “tight” criteria: (1) work for a retail sales organization that

utilizes a remote supervision structure (e.g., district, region, area, territory), (2) have

supervisory responsibility for at least six separate and distinct locations but fewer than 25

locations, (3) have supervisory responsibility for locations with a minimum of 10

employees but fewer than 100, (4) have transitioned from a face-to-face leadership

context to a remote leadership context, and (5) have been in the new remote leadership

role for at least six months but no longer than 39 months. All participants work within the

United States and supervise locations within the United States.

The following table (4.1) presents additional contextual information about each

participant.

Table 4.1

PARTICIPANT GENDER

TOTAL LEADERSHIP EXPERIENCE

(FACE-TO- FACE OR REMOTE)

INDUSTRY REGION EDUCATION

1 M 20 years + Large

Equipment Sales

Midwest Bachelor's Degree

2 M 10-15 years Automotive Sales Southeast Some College

3 M 20 years + Automotive Sales Southwest Some College

4 M 5-10 years Toy and Games Sales Mid-South Some College

5 M 10-15 years Automotive Sales West Bachelor's

Degree

6 M 20 years + Financial Product Sales

Southeast Bachelor's Degree

7 F 20 years + Financial Product Sales

Southeast Bachelor's Degree

8 F 10-15 years Food, Drink,

Small Products

West Some College

9 M 10-15 years Jewelry Sales Southeast Bachelor's

Degree

10 M 10-15 years Automotive Sales Northeast Some College

Coding and Thematic Analysis

This section will review the methods and results of the coding and reduction into

themes. The first round of eclectic coding produced 64 different codes; examples of

these include terms like “trust”, “productivity”, and “follow-up”. The second round of

process coding, specifically looking for examples of Nicholson’s (1) shot selection and

(2) situational insight, yielded two more codes.

The next phase of analysis developed emergent themes (Smith, Flowers, &

Larkin, 2009). The 66 codes were studied to see which could be grouped together in a

meaningful way; “there are methods for synthesizing the collective, not to arrive at a

reduced answer but to move towards consolidated meaning” (Smith, Flowers, and Larkin,

2009, p. 30). The 66 codes were able to be reduced to eight dominant, meaningful

themes: (1) direction and follow-up, (2) routines, (3) personal operational impact, (4)

planning and preparation, (5) connection and relationships, (6) motivation and

engagement, (7) people development, and (8) trust and empowerment.

Once the sub-themes were identified, the analysis proceeded to the abstraction

phase (Smith, Flowers, & Larkin, 2009, p. 97). Four of the eight themes combine to form

the larger theme of task-orientation: (1) direction and follow-up, (2) routines, (3)

personal operational impact, (4) planning and preparation. Additionally, the other four

(of eight) other themes combine to form the larger theme of relational-orientation: (5)

connection and relationships, (6) motivation and engagement, (7) people development,

and (8) trust and empowerment. Thus, these four themes now become sub-themes for the

larger theme of relational-orientation.

At this point in the analysis, each transcript was recoded using only the new eight

sub-themes. The intent here was to “pressure test” the eight sub-themes: “Recoding can

occur with a more attuned perspective using first cycle methods again… As you code and

recode, expect—or, rather, strive for—your codes and categories to become more refined

and…more conceptual and abstract” (Smith, Flowers, and Larkin, 2009, p. 12). The

following table (Table 4.2) presents the results of this recoding effort.

________________________________________________________________________

Table 4.2

Articulation of the Two Themes and Eight Sub-themes (a)

PARTICIPANT 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

TASK-ORIENTATION

Direction and Follow-up M M M M S S S S S

Routines S M S S S M S S S S Personal Operational Impact S S S M S S S S S

Planning and Preparation M S S S S S S

RELATIONAL-ORIENTATION Connection and Relationships S M M S M M M M M

Motivation and Engagement S S S S S S S M S

People Development S S M S S M S S

Trust and Empowerment S M S S S S S

(a) Legend: M = Maximal (a dominant area of discussion for this participant); S =

Strong (a recurring area of discussion for this participant).

________________________________________________________________________

Sub-theme One: Direction and Follow-up

In the hectic world of the retail leader, there is much to do and rarely enough time

to do it. The retail leader has to concern herself with product inventory, sales execution,

the physical plant of the location itself, the many facets of managing employees, the

vagaries of dealing with customers, to name just a few things that take her time. “The

time that you're in that store is divided because there's guests, there's tasks. There's so

many things going on. You don't have undivided attention. [You] are always being pulled

away for something else,” said Participant 4. The ability of the leader to give direction

and follow-up on that direction is a key component to their success; each of the

participants, save one, spoke to this as at least a recurring area of discussion, and for

some it was a dominant theme in their interview.

Direction and follow-up in the face-to-face leadership role

The leaders spoke to the large role that giving direction plays in the success of a

face-to-face leader in a retail context. The retail leader must set the initial plan and

expectations, then communicate those effectively to the employees that will be executing

the plan. Most often, those expectations are communicated to the employees directly, not

via email or other non-face-to-face means. Examples of the leaders speaking to this point

in their own words are included here:

I was really good at communicating my expectations to my team. I

don't think there was every someone who worked for me who didn't

know what I wanted at all times. I'm really big on following policy,

following procedure. [Participant 1]

I would say one thing that I've done is I've tried to be consistent in my

communication and consistent in the things that I ask from my team…

‘This is what I expect from you the moment you walk in the door’.

[Participant 2]

If you want to be a successful store manager…you want [the

employees] to know what the expectations are. I can communicate an

expectation to my associates directly…and impact them on a day-to-

day basis. [Participant 3]

Once the face-to-face leader has given the initial direction and expectations, she

needs to periodically follow-up to ensure that the expectations are being met. In the face-

to-face role, the leaders spoke to this being a critical part of their day-to-day activity.

Their method of follow-up was most often a direct conversation with the employee, often

using a coaching style.

…All day long… just constantly walking up to you, just to get a feel

for how you're doing, what you’re working on, what do you have going

on right now, what do you need for me? ‘Hey, great job with the last

customer,’…giving feedback, coaching. It's constant communication

throughout the day... I can't do that from the office and I can't do that

via email. I need to be on the floor with my team. [Participant 1]

You can see where maybe somebody is struggling a little bit in a given

role, whether it's sales-related… maybe it is operationally-based… or

so many different things that need to be coached on, and making sure

you take that time to (1) recognize it, and then (2) you sit down with

that team member and help them overcome that obstacle as opposed to

just continue to send out orders and seeing them fail and just thinking,

‘Well, they are not cutting it’. [Participant 4]

I get together with my department leaders… and talk about what's

going on in their individual departments and, you know, just for

example, it could be a teller supervisor telling me what's going on… or

it could be an assistant manager telling me what's going on with the

sales side, and kind of just getting a gauge. [Participant 6]

Direction and follow-up in the remote leadership role

When the leader was working face-to-face with his or her direct reports,

directions and subsequent follow-up were predominantly given verbally, face-to-face,

and repeatedly throughout the day. This style was no longer feasible with the transition

to remote work; the remote leaders interviewed saw their employees face-to-face only

once or twice per month. The leaders spoke about their adjustment from a face-to-face

context to a remote context, specific to giving direction and following-up:

One of the toughest things is—that I had a bit of a hard time adjusting

from!—being that day-to-day person to the one that doesn't see

[employees daily] has been how to hold my people accountable. That is

probably the toughest thing you can do, because you're not there every

day to confirm or not confirm what is truly happening. You kind of

have to let the numbers do the talking a little bit for you and see the

actions during your visit… You’ve got to figure, ‘Well if something is

not happening during my visit, it's certainly not happening on a day-to-

day basis.’ So truly being able to hold people accountable was probably

the toughest adjustment that I had.” [Participant 6]

When you’re in a day-to-day store face-to-face, you’re there again the

next day. [In the remote role] you don’t have as many touches.

You’ve got to be very purposeful and planned, and make sure your

communication in the end captures that. [Participant 5]

Sub-theme Two: Routines Routines in the face-to-face leadership role

When the retail leaders spoke of their day-to-day experiences in the face-to-face

leadership context, they described what can best be categorized as routines. The leaders

developed routines that they felt were key to their success as face-to-face leaders. One

of the most common was the use of a morning meeting or “huddle” as a means of

motivating their team and starting the day on a positive note.

I kick-off my day with my team in a huddle. We went over what was

successful from the previous day. We talked about where we were

from a production standpoint, identifying our ‘operating rhythm’ for

the day, what hours for people to settle the work shift, what type of

customers we’ll be wanting to focus on… [Participant 7]

I think first and foremost, starting every day with— I think everybody

calls it something different—the equivalent of a huddle first thing in the

morning. Get the team together, kind of have a quick rah-rah session,

recap what the previous day was all about, share some successes and,

you know, share the wins. [Participant 6]

You need to know the employees and their true essence. Forget about

the numbers. The numbers will come when the actions are there. Ask

questions in the morning meeting rather than orate to them. ‘How do

we be better?’ What are their ideas? Don’t orate to them. [Participant

Another routine that the leaders referenced was the “store walk”; the leaders

would walk around the entire store and visit with their employees. The leaders felt that

this was a valuable activity because it gave them an opportunity to focus on employee

engagement. While the goal here was in many ways similar to the morning huddle—

motivating the team—the leaders felt that it gave them an opportunity to bond with each

team member even more deeply, to connect with them as individuals.

In that day-to-day direct management…where it's somebody that I am

seeing every day… I’m a huge believer that when I walk in the door –

whether I’m the first one to walk in or the last one to walk in—I

literally go and greet every single person on my team, one on one, by

saying ‘Good morning.’ I can have that eye-to-eye contact with each

one of them. And they know that I’m taking the time to say hello

because they are all individuals and not just, you know, somebody that

I’m saying hello to because I’m required to. So it starts there and then

as the day goes on if there is any type of casual conversation going on,

you ask about… ‘How are your kids doing?’ [Participant 6]

A typical day for me is walking around [the store]… We do that at

kick-off meetings, but to me that is kind of impersonal, so afterwards

we'll do a [store] walk. I try to make it a point to go to every person on

the team… and shake their hand; ‘How was your weekend? Did you

get to do anything good?’ [Participant 10]

I connect with my team. There is a sheet that I have my team fill out.

It's kind of a ‘get-to-know-you form’ and it tells me a little bit of their

likes and dislikes… such as their favorite movie, their favorite candy...

little things like that that I can get to know them… are they married, do

they have kids, what are the names of their kids, that type of thing…

that just gets me to know them. [Participant 6]

The leaders also described a similar, but different type of store walk. In this

version, the leader walked around the store not with the intention of motivating the team

or bonding with the team, but to assess the operational “current state”. They described

this as a best practice; good leaders would walk the store and assess the operation,

whereas poor leaders would be reticent to stray from their office.

And so from a routine perspective, it’s… just walking your entire

facility. What do you have as your customer looks at the cleanliness of

the store? Is there garbage in the parking lot? What do the customers

see? Then walking back and talking to [employees] about what needs

to be done. [Participant 5]

I could go into three stores in my region and those managers—if I were

to allow them— would have the entire two-and-a-half day visit [with

the remote leader] from their office; we would have never left their

office. They were more comfortable looking at reports and data than

actually validating what the reports and data had to say by going on the

sales floor. They were uncomfortable talking to their people and going

out in the shop…. Part of it was probably that they weren't performing

well—but they weren't performing well because they never left their

office! [Participant 10]

Routines in the remote leadership role

Once the leaders had transitioned into a remote role, they described their routines

quite differently. Whereas in the face-to-face role the start of the day or week had a

motivational focus, in the remote role the start of the week contained a routine that was

more goal and task-focused. For example, many of the leaders described a routine where

Monday was used to determine and communicate the goals for the week.

Monday is kind of my administrative day. I’m calling [direct reports].

I’m looking at our performance for the previous week to see what

happened. I put together a presentation—sort of a power point

presentation—for us. It gets into our performance and areas of

opportunity. I put this together for…the conference call on Monday.

Monday is when I set my week; I’ll plan out the next three days.

[Participant 2]

I hold a weekly call with all my managers every Monday morning. I let

them do their kick-off huddle with their teams and set the stage for the

week, then usually—on average 10 or 11 a.m.—we have a call with my

team. We all get together and I kind of set more of a higher-level stage

for the week for the team. I ask them what are some of their focuses

that they are working on based on their individual needs and their goals

that they have for their teams based on plans… and then in addition to

that kind of share what my vision for the entire region is and what I feel

we need to focus on. [Participant 6]

[On a typical Monday] The first thing I tried to do is call them and see

how they're doing, what was going on... Number two is to try to

determine what they need help with, what challenges they're seeing,

how engaged are they in the business by asking general questions about

what's going in that business. From there, typically I'll look at some

reporting, kind of a wider range to see… some of the trends... what do

we need help with? What are some of the misses that could be

probably overlooked, and really try to hold onto them. Then a lot of

communicating, whether via email or telephone, just to kind of help

remind the employees what strategies that we want to use on a

particular day. So it's really a lot of ... it's more communication about

our processes, our metrics. [Participant 3]

In the face-to-face role, the leaders described a more “reactive” style, often based

upon what they had observed on store walks or what situations occurred in the midst of

the hectic store day. The leaders did not discuss intentionally planning ahead as one of

their key routines in the face-to-face context. In the remote role, though, the leaders

developed a more forward-looking routine of using agendas. The use of agendas for days

where they would be visiting the store allowed them to maximize this valuable time.

You need to make a difference when you’re there. You need to be

available but you also need to make sure it’s productive… and so

setting the agenda, not only was it my agenda, it was also the leader's

agenda within that store. That way we could come in and we can,

hopefully, make a difference… At the end of a visit, we would go back

through the list and say, “Were we able to accomplish this?” And then

come out of there with, “Where are going to focus on the next visit?”

with an action plan. That’s served me well. [Participant 5]

Before I go on store visits, I always send in agendas… so my team

knows the intent of my visit. So nothing is an “I got you” moment… its

“these are the things that we're going to work on today” and these are

the things I need you to speak to, to tell me you know what you've done

since my last visit, show me… whatever action items we have

identified previously. [Participant 7]

One of the best practice routines that many of the leaders learned during

their transition was the use of electronic notes or “recaps” of their day visiting a

store. When they would see a store only every few weeks—and thus generally

lacked visual context cue reminders—the use of these recap notes often helped

to serve as a “memory jogging” device. It is worthy of note that the leaders

described these recap devices as a best practice for task and goal

accomplishment far more than as a motivational device.

Basically, our other communication with the store manager, we have

the ability to go into [an electronic talent management system] and put

in feedback. Each and every conversation I have with an employee,

there's documented feedback saying, ‘Hey, we talked on the phone

today. This is what we talked about. This is what we agreed on. This is

the expectation.’ [Participant 4]

It’s hard to remember… ‘Which store did I see that at?” or, “The

manager said what?’ For me at least, you have to be very disciplined

and carve out time to capture very detailed notes from your visit. What

I found is… you have to carve out time at the end of the visit not to

take away from any other time in the building. [Participant 5]

Sub-theme Three: Personal Operational Impact

Regardless of context, the leaders spoke of the impact they were able to make on

the business as a “worker” as much as a “leader.” One way to think of it is this; the

leader indirectly impacts the business with their leadership, but is also expected at times

to directly impact the business through personal, tactical action. Said slightly differently,

in the hectic world of retail sales, there will be times when it is “all hands on deck” and

the cultural expectation is that the leader is one of those “hands.”

Personal Operational Impact in the face-to-face leadership role

In their face-to-face leadership role, the retail leaders spoke of their ability to

personally make an immediate impact on the operation. Participant Six spoke of this

with a measure of pride: “When you are leading a single store, you are the direct leader of

the success of that team.” Often the means of making an impact was done by “rolling up

their sleeves” and filling in where needed. They also described this as a leadership best

practice as it gave them credibility and loyalty from their employees.

I am the type of leader that would roll up the sleeves and wouldn't ask

my team to do anything that I wouldn't want to do myself, and I think

that's got a lot of buy-in from my team and allowed me to be successful

because at that point it was easy to ask them to do certain things and

ask my team may be to go above and beyond because they knew I was

willing to do it. [Participant 6]

We're all focused on the same goal… it's up to me to go coach and talk

to that person who either did or didn't follow through on the piece of

the plan. Being able to impact things immediately—that was one of

my favorite parts being in the stores—you can literally change numbers

or you can change the customer perception quickly. [Participant 1]

I viewed that my role [in the first part of the day] was get the store up

and running… not necessarily just in terms of ‘were all the registers

opened… and was the UPS received’ and what not… but more in terms

of, ‘Let me assess what needs to happen in a day’ and make sure that

my team can start off on the right foot. [Participant 9]

I was out there selling right along with them. I was a pretty good sales

guy, too! Getting out there… I would cashier if I needed to cashier. I

would stock if I needed to stock… you know, modeling the behaviors I

thought were good. [Participant 1]

We had day-to-day operations for the store that needed to be done.

Scheduling, of course…guest relations… selling. That was the primary

focus in between customers we have. It's my job to ensure that the

deadlines were met and it was done accurately the first time.

[Participant 4]

The face-to-face retail leader’s ability to make an immediate impact was often

done through direct coaching of their employees, looking for instant behavior changes.

The leaders described a shoulder-to-shoulder leadership style that worked well for them.

You are the direct leader of the success of that team. So, it could be

from motivating the team… doing things with them that could drive

results for the team. You know… I did what needed to be done, from

that perspective. But in addition to that, you can have a personal impact

as far as coaching as well. [Participant 6]

So it's really... shoulder to shoulder, you know? Seeing all of the store,

working with the same people day after day. You get to know the

operation a lot easier. So you know you'll be … answering phones up in

customer service, and then the next minute you’ve got down time.”

[Participant 2]

We all have to work together. We all had a common goal. I just never

really -- I think at some point most people have had that boss that puts

the ‘boss hat’ on and goes around telling everybody he's the boss and I

never really had that mentality. I was always the guy that wasn't afraid

to help -- you sweep the floor or hold something for you if you needed

to get your hands dirty especially in the field of work that we are in. I

put my pants on the same way as they do. [Participant 10]

Personal Operational Impact in the remote leadership role

The leaders described the personal operational impact they made in the remote

context very differently. Rather than being a “doer” or having an immediate personal

impact on the operation by going and doing tactical work, they described themselves

more as a guide or a teacher in the remote context. Their success was predicated on their

ability to work through others from a distance. At times, they found themselves falling

back into their old “doer” ways but recognized that this style would be a mistake in their

new leadership context.

Now you’re dealing with the store manager of that store and for them to

have buy-in and get to what this process is, you really have them show

that light and for them to take all this their own… So it was more of

being the guider rather than the doer… That was kind of my number

one, I did it a little bit as a single store, but it was to a much greater

degree as a multi-unit. [Participant 9]

I’m up every morning at the crack of dawn. I’m on email. I’m looking

at the numbers. I’m preparing for the day. I’m typically looking at

emails and preparing for meetings or branch visits so that…in every

interaction I have it’s all about coaching, teaching, and seeing what I

can do to help employees be better. [Participant 7]

Those ‘a-ha moments’… this role is completely different… and I’ve

found myself slipping back into store manager mode—which is what

we call it. I mean, it happens so frequently we have a jargon for it. It's

called ‘super store manager.’ I caught myself on several occasions

falling into that trap! [Participant 4]

One of the behaviors the leaders discussed in the remote role was the use of

questions. Whereas in the face-to-face role the leader would immerse herself in the

operation to problem solve, in the remote context the leader would rely on probing

questions. The ability to ask and answer questions well is a key component to their

remote leadership success.

I’m relying on the data and digital reports stuff like that. So because

you are kind of relying on the data that you received, when it doesn't

look right, the ownership falls on you to make a call or send an e-mail

to ask them [questions]. ‘Hey, does this look right to you?’ If so, ‘What

are you seeing? What do you think is causing this?’ A lot of times you

probably, know what's causing that from past experience, but you can't

assume anything. Sometimes you can get the answer you need from

asking those questions. Sometimes you don't get the answer that you're

comfortable with and you have to schedule a visit. [Participant 10]

[I would be] answering the hands-on questions they have. I compare

myself to the [remote leader] they had before me. He was from outside

the company… and had no [industry] experience. So when they were

talking to him about a technical issue, he wasn’t much of a help. I had

lots of times where I was able to say, ‘Hey, listen. I’ve been in your

shoes. Go do this, do that.’ Or, ‘Email this person. This is the person

who can answer your question at corporate’ [Participant 2].

Sub-theme Four: Preparation and Planning

The retail leaders compared and contrasted their planning and preparation in both

the face-to-face roles and remote roles. For example, one leader said, “When I was in

that face-to-face role, I was very reactionary” [Participant 1]. Another shared this

tendency, while also emphasizing the danger of this style: “If you are kind of…‘winging

it,’ you can't have sustainability…all you are doing is being kind of that hamster running

on a wheel and not getting anywhere.” [Participant 6]

The retail leaders described the philosophy and approach to planning and

preparation as being different in the two leadership contexts. In the face-to-face role,

their planning and preparation tended to be for a more immediate impact and/or a shorter

time frame. By contrast, in the remote role, the leaders described their planning and

preparation as more deliberate and a longer time frame. While they agreed that

preparation and planning was important in both roles, they generally spoke to a much

higher level of importance in the remote role.

Preparation and planning in the face-to-face leadership role

The leaders discussed their planning and preparation in their single-store role as

being a bit laissez-faire. They were far less likely to talk about the use of tools or

collaboration with others in the planning or preparation process; when they did discuss

the inclusion of others, it was more in the execution phase. The leaders emphasized the

short-term, tactical importance of planning and preparation. In essence, their planning

and preparation was generally done to positively impact the business over the next week

or so—or to react to a problem that had recently surfaced.

You may have some vacations coming up and some of your team

members are going to be out of town and you are going to be a little

short-handed. Well, how do you start preparing yourself to not have an

impact to your customers because all of a sudden, you don't have as

many people there to service customers. Just that constant planning,

that constant looking ahead, I used to always try to be at least a couple

of weeks ahead of what's going on. So, we are not always, you know,

stuck in a reactive mode. [Participant 6]

I'm trying to change the culture within the team to be really focused on

winning every week. I bring that leadership group together every

Monday morning so it's really a planning day to really look at or how

did, what are we going to do about going forward, what are we going to

do this week to win this week? [Participant 1]

Some of the leaders discussed their planning and preparation tactics in concert

with terms that speak to charisma or emotional connection with their people. The

inclusion of charisma and emotional appeal was more unique to the face-to-face context.

I can impact change today. I'm more of a ‘Let's go!’ kind of guy. I’ve

got to make sure that I’ve got some good plans in place… a big part of

that need is the communication and how we do it, what’s it look like,

who do we need to get involved? [Participant 1]

That was one time that I realized that the roles were different…. [I had

a plan] and I forced it down their throats, and they complied because I

was the district manager, not because they saw the value in it. As a

single-store manager, you have that ability to gain buy-in. It's a lot

easier, to say the least. I mean, if it's important to you, it's important to

them. [Participant 4].

Preparation and planning in the remote leadership role

The leaders described a significantly different kind of planning and preparation in

their remote role. For example, their planning and preparation occurred using a longer

time frame; whereas in the face-to-face role planning may have occurred for a weekly

timeframe, in the remote role it was generally focused on the month or quarter. The

ramifications of distance and context required stronger planning and preparation skills;

the increased complexity caused by distance and context required that they plan and

prepare further into the future.

So, I will plan -- I'll do my planning a quarter out that they know if I'm

going to do a [store] visit, a business visit, it will be on [the store’s]

calendar at least a quarter out. Now, not to say that there something else

comes up and they need me on their calendar, they can always ask that

of me. That they will know when I want time for them it's completely

its one quarter in advance. [Participant 8]

I have very little room for error. So I've always been over-organized

and this role has taken my level of organization to a whole new level. I

have my calendar planned in a month in advance so I know what

meetings that I have… I can find to see if I have any conference calls…

that's how I plan my agenda. [Participant 7]

In addition to the general importance of planning and preparation and the longer

time frame they considered for planning, the leaders also concluded that the remote role

required greater use of specific planning and preparation tools. While there are numerous

reasons for this, one important reason is that they needed to ensure that they were

capitalizing on their limited touch-points with their employees.

You have to be able to go in with a clear agenda. You have to ensure

your visits are purposeful. You do not have as many touches. You have

to go back to very purposeful, meaningful visits that were very well

planned. [Participant 6]

You have already put into your mind exactly it is you're looking for

when you go into that particular store… Before I go into a store, I'll

pull the information that I need. I look at their [performance reports]. If

I found out that they don't have that ready, I’ll be ready when I go in to

talk to the store manager. We don't have to waste time in printing it out

or get into a register to print it out. Cutting down the time…that's the

type of planning you do. The documents that you need, the information

that you need as far as performance, results, things like that.

[Participant 4]

The leaders also described a level of collaboration and working through others

that was important in the remote role. They discussed collaboration much more

prominently in the remote context than in the face-to-face context. For example,

Participant 4 said: “As a district manager, just because it's an amazing plan, if you don't

include the people in helping you come up with that plan, then it's your plan. It's not our

plan. They'll not buy in.”

[In the remote role, I] have a call with my team and we all get together

and I kind of set more of a higher-level stage. I ask them what some of

their focus areas… that they are working on based on their individual

needs and their individual goals… what they have for their team based

on their plans… and then in addition to that kind of share what my

vision for the entire region is and what I feel we need to focus on.

[Participant 6]

You have to have a good plan…the planning piece of that really is just

that, you have to come in with your plan. I talked a little bit earlier

about getting the associates impacted by the plan involved. [Participant

When I wanted to change something in the store [as a face-to-face

leader] it was… it was simple, because it didn't require as much

communication. It didn't require as much buy-in… [employees] either

got on board or didn't… whereas in this [remote] role I need to be

extremely clear. How I view something maybe completely different

from how [one of my employees] may view it. [Participant 1]

Sub-theme Five: Connection and Relationships

A strong theme amongst the retail leaders was the importance of connection with

their employees and the value of strong relationships. The value of connection was not

exclusive to either the face-to-face or remote leadership contexts. That said, there were

subtle differences in connection and relationship between the two leadership contexts.

Connection and relationships in the face-to-face leadership role

When the leaders were in their face-to-face leadership roles, they considered the

establishment of relationships with their employees, as well as their ability to connect

with them on a personal level, as a key component of their role and their ultimate success

in that role. In many ways, this occurred organically as they went about their day. For

example, Participant One noted, “The most important piece… is just talking to people

finding out, ‘What's bugging you, how can I help? Help me help you,’ that's one of my

favorite lines. ‘Help me help you’.” The goal was casual conversation to build the

connection. Other leaders noted the importance of connection and relationships in the

face-to-face context as well.

Part of the interaction that I have with my team is I’m not just going to

know them [based upon] what their career aspirations are, but I get to

know them a little bit personally as well and treat them as a human

being and not just… someone on my team that I am trying to get results

from. [Participant 6]

I had conversations that were non-business with every single person

there, and they were able to see me as a human person and as

somebody that could really… just ‘be real’… and we had a really good

time with that… talking about nothing but personal and not necessarily

like, ‘Tell me about your wife and kids’… normal conversation that

didn't ever go back to business… I think that was my first stepping

stone there and how it set me up for success. [Participant 9]

Often, the face-to-face leaders chose not to rely on happenstance to develop these

relationships; they built connection routines or habits into their daily or weekly plan. For

example, some of these leaders chose to sit down with each employee weekly. Others

chose different habits, like coffee meetings or off-site lunches, as a means of connection

with their employees.

In the face-to-face role, I would generally [strive to] connect. I would

usually tell them, ‘Let me invite you for a cup of coffee, let's leave the

store environment.’ I would ask about who they are—who they really,

really are, not about what's on their résumé—but just really get to know

about their family… what are they passionate about, whether it's sports,

whether it's a hobby… that's how I would break down the barriers.

[Participant 8]

For me, it was about, start off the day, set the tone for the day with the

daily team. Although it can be a quick 10-15 minutes... just to kick off

the day and celebrate successes. Then at least once a week, have a sit-

down—a formal sit-down. I could use that one-on-time to build that

personal relationship. [Participant 6]

If I brought someone new into my role as that store manager… number

one is to sit down one-on-one with every employee and just get a feel

for how are things been up to this point, what would you like to see

change if anything at all… just getting a feel for what's the lay of the

land from this person's perspective. You’re creating a relationship.

You're understanding where they're at today. [Participant 1]

Connection and relationships in the remote leadership role

The leaders felt that connection and relationships were every bit as important in

the remote leadership context. How they developed them was in some ways similar, but

in other ways very different. Whereas the face-to-face leaders had both (1) natural or

organic opportunities that would occur throughout the day—short conversations in

passing on the sales floor, for instance—and (2) planned or intentional methods of

relationship development, the remote leader had to rely almost exclusively on planned or

intentional means. A common theme for the remote leaders was using the telephone with

intentionality as a means of connecting and relationship-building.

The first thing I try to do is make sure I speak via telephone if I'm not

in that particular city. Call them and see, number one, how they're

going, what was going on in their day. Really building that relationship.

I think number two is to try to determine what they need help with,

what challenges they're seeing, how engaged are they in the business by

asking general questions about what's going in that business.

[Participant 3]

I would recommend scheduling individual [telephone] calls with them.

Ask them some connecting questions about their history, their

background, their hobbies, their interests. What they like to do, that

kind of stuff to break the ice and then for this kind of role, what do you

feel like your strengths are and what do you feel like your opportunities

are? [Participant 10]

I don't see them every day. So, [our interaction is] just a lot more

electronic. I have found that one of the things I am known for is being

the District Manager who will pick up the phone. I understand if they

are calling my cellphone—especially if they're calling me from their

cellphone—that they need me right then and there. So I will pick it up,

I will pick up the phone. [Participant 8]

I would say [connection is] probably more important [in the remote

context]. So, I would think that you’ve got to make those calls but then

you got to say, ‘Hey, do you have a minute?’ And you kind of play

catch-up for a couple minutes. Talk about, ‘How's your family doing?

What'd you guys get into this weekend? How's that associate at the

store doing?’ Whatever it is, you find a way to connect with those guys

and then you get to the meat and potatoes or the purpose of the call.

[Participant 4]

The remote leaders do see their employees face-to-face periodically. When they

visit their locations and see their employees, the leaders spoke of the primary importance

of relationship-building and connection. Participant Three explained, “I think that's the

biggest thing you could do when you go to locations is really get engaged with

employees. How are your employees doing? What's the culture like?” The conclusion

for some of them was that many things, like following up on operational tasks, can

happen from a distance; connection and relationship-building are easier and more

effective face-to-face:

I think that it goes back to some of the similar roots as to the single

store… you have to have that personal connection with them. I don’t

think you can just kind of command and control or run rough-shod and

say, ‘Hey, you’ve got to increase these results… and where is this and

that?’ I think each person is very different. [Participant 9]

The person you're talking to needs to feel and know that... you know

what's important to them… that you're hearing them, that not only are

you listening and nodding your head, but you're actively engaged in the

conversation. [Participant 7]

Sub-theme Six: Motivation and Engagement

Throughout the interviews, the theme of motivation and engagement was a

recurring theme with the ten leaders. This importance of motivation and engagement to

leadership was true regardless of leadership context. For example, one leader noted the

following:

What can you do to help and what can you do to inspire and show your

[employees] what it looks like? There’s a lot of teachable moments that

I learned from throughout my career. I found that the leaders that I

have followed were just that involved and engaged. You want to be a

part of the conversation at the dinner table; when the [employee] goes

home, they’re talking about, ‘The leader of our store came and sat

down with me, taught me something or talked to me’ or whatever it

may be. For me, those are the things that I think are motivating and

inspiring. It makes you want to come back. Instead of driving home

fast, you want them to drive to work fast because they’re excited to be

there and they enjoy what they do. [Participant 5]

While the leaders felt that motivation and engagement were important in both contexts,

they did point-out important contextual differences in the approaches or behaviors that

ultimately led to strong motivation or engagement from their employees.

Motivation and engagement in the face-to-face leadership role

The leaders discussed appealing to their employees’ emotion as a means of

driving motivation and engagement in their face-to-face role. This approach is more

closely linked to a transformational style than a transactional style (Bass, 1995). For

example, Participant One noted that leaders should, “Focus on the hard parts of running a

retail store which is making sales the customers want. Doing, offering items in a way

that's so enticing that you're an idiot for not buying it. How do I get the whole team to do

that?” Throughout the interviews, the leaders used emotion-laden words and phrases like

“heart and soul,” “pride,” and “had their backs.”

I was able to share my vision and include my team on that vision and

design so that we're all working for a common goal. They knew that I

‘had their backs’, and they knew that I wouldn't take any crap. I don't

accept excuses. I will hold you accountable— and I was respected for

that— and that's what made me successful. [Participant 7]

As a leader, you have to be invested in the success, do whatever it is

that it takes to be successful. It's really putting your heart and soul into

the business, treating it as if it's your own business. That's one of the

things I always tell any type of leader that works for me—even if you

are [an employee] up to a [manager]—you have to look at this as if it

was your own business; every decision you make has to be based on,

‘How does it affect me if I were running this business?’ And if we get

everybody thinking from that mentality, it usually helps us get to that

next level. [Participant 6]

The leaders discussed the behaviors and tactics that they would use to in an

attempt to raise the employees’ level of motivation and engagement. For example, one of

the leaders spoke of tailoring her motivational approach to the individual. Participant 8

said, “[I was good at] motivation and individual motivation. I would never ‘blanket’ a

way to motivate. It took a little bit longer to figure out what each individual’s motivation

was. That was key for me.” Another leader spoke of consciously trying to make the

workplace fun—and taking actions to make the workplace fun—as a means of driving

motivation and engagement.

You’ve got to have a great energy with your team to make sure that

they're not feeling run down or selling the same thing over and over.

You got to make it fun, you’ve got to make it something that you're

excited about coming to work for every day. If it's important to me, it

was going to be important to my team… making sure my team knew

‘Here's what we're going to do.’ [Participant 1]

Multiple leaders spoke (once again, as they had in previous sub-themes) about

working shoulder-to-shoulder with the employee; this time, the goal was motivation and

engagement. Participant Ten declared that leaders should “Engage them through

conversation… don't be afraid to jump in there and actually help them do their work.” It

is important to note that this tactic or behavior is not one that the remote leader has at

their disposal very often.

The other part of it [being good at employee motivation] was

willingness to… I don't want to say work shoulder-to-shoulder, but it

was kind a working shoulder-to-shoulder… because sometimes I

needed to figure out what the gap was. Being willing to go out there,

and say, ‘Let me see how you do this’… that would be advantageous

in that environment. [Participant 8]

Motivation and engagement in the remote leadership role

The leaders agreed that motivation and engagement were also important in the

remote context. Whereas the leaders had numerous thoughts about how to motivate in

the face-to-face context, they struggled to provide specific examples of successful

motivation or motivational tactics in the remote context. A more common occurrence in

the interviews was the leader discussing the importance of motivation and engagement in

the remote context, but then reverting back to a discussion of motivation that referenced

their experience in the face-to-face context. For example, Participant One harkened back

to the face-to-face days when he felt that motivation and engagement were easier to

accomplish.

‘Here’s what we’re gonna get done today, here’s what I need you guys

to do, here’s how much sales we have to do, let’s go get it’; now, that’s

the kind of stuff I loved doing, and I don’t do that anymore. Again, it’s

on a different level… how do I keep them motivated, excited about

what they’re doing, it’s a very different approach. But that’s probably

the part that I loved doing before [in the face-to-face role] -- working

one-on-one and seeing somebody go from being a poor performer to

one of my best performers on the floor just by me communicating to

them what I'm seeing, what I want them to start doing. This is very

different today, you can’t flip the switch nearly as quickly as I could in

that [face-to-face] role. [Participant 1]

Another leader discussed the use of questions in concert with a more interactive

communication style to successfully assess the remote employee’s level of engagement.

What I've tried to do with my communication style over the phone is I

try to make sure that it's more of a fifty-fifty. I try to get them talking

on the conference calls or on the phone calls because I don't have the

[ability to see their] body language. What I have to [interpret] off of is

how they're speaking. So, if I'm speaking ninety percent of the time, I

have no idea; if they're speaking more, then I can pick up on a little bit

more. So instead of me reading their performance, I have them tell me

what they're proud of… what they fell short on… and what they're

going to do about it. I can see who's engaged. If I’ve got a guy on the

phone and he's telling me about his performance… he's got no

energy… he's got no real-life, specific examples of what he's seeing or

what he's observed… then I'm picking up on that. If I’m talking to a

guy… he's full of energy… he's excited… you can tell just the

elevation in his voice. You can just hear him kind of full of great stories

and specific observations. He gives me a lot of specific examples that I

know I'm getting body language—but it's not body language. It's like a

tone of the voice different. So, I found that trying to get them to talk

more gives me what I'm lacking to see in body language. [Participant

Sub-theme Seven: People Development

Regardless of whether the context was face-to-face or remote, the leaders spoke

of the need to develop their people. People development was critically important for both

present operational needs as well as future business growth. The behaviors and tactics

used to develop people, though, did change based upon the context.

People development in the face-to-face leadership role

The leaders spoke of the omnipresent need to develop people. The development

style they typically chose was very relational or motivational in nature. Similar to

previous sub-themes, the leaders highlighted the importance of working shoulder-to-

shoulder and making the personal connection with the employee.

[Development is] constant communication... Removing road blocks,

constantly putting them in situations that will stretch them. You want to

stretch them beyond their normal day-to-day work. You want to stretch

them and let them grow. [How much of that people development

would be face-to-face or shoulder-to-shoulder?] I would say 90

percent of it [is] probably one-on-one, face-to-face, shoulder-to-

shoulder. That was the best way for me to do it. [Participant 4]

It's the whole concept of developing your folks. Know your people

and celebrate them and show them off. I would never walk a

department and not bring that manager. I don't take credit for their

work; it's their work. Always showcase them [as a means of career

development]. [Participant 8]

It is important to note that many of the tactics chosen by the leaders for people

development in the face-to-face context would simply not be possible in the remote

context. For example, when “executing” people development, the leader’s time was

predominantly spent shoulder-to-shoulder with the employee. The concept of coaching or

physically “modeling” the thing being taught was a recurring theme; modeling a behavior

is difficult—if not impossible—from a distance.

When I was in that [face-to-face] role, my job was to model a behavior

all the time… On the floor, all the time… working with my guys,

showing that I’m out there, right alongside them, doing exactly what I

expect them to do. That’s very different than what I'm doing today [in

the remote context]; I'm not modelling as much. [Participant 1]

[In the face-to-face context] My day is really just filled to every

second… but every afternoon I have... it's all about coaching, teaching,

you know just making sure that everyone is clear… seeing what I can

do, to help give them the full reinforcement that they need to be

better. [Participant 7]

You can have personal impact as far as coaching as well. You can see

where maybe somebody is struggling a little bit in a given role… and

making sure you take that time to 1) recognize it and then 2) you sit

down with that team member and help them overcome that obstacle…

as opposed to just continue to send out orders and seeing them fail and

just thinking, ‘Well, they are not cutting it.’ Many times there is a

reason why they are not cutting it, and getting down to the bottom of

that and truly figuring out where the pain point is and helping them

overcome that leads you to have a better... a bigger impact. It also

leads to higher employee loyalty and retention because you are working

with them. [Participant 6]

People development in the remote leadership role

In the remote context, the leaders also felt that people development was

important. One of the keys to their success in this role was the development of their

employees. If a key tactic or behavior in people development in the face-to-face role is

modeling, in the remote role a key tactic was emphasizing the importance of people

development. They developed people through the use of questions and follow-up.

I think the best way you can get good sales and results in stores… is

developing associates, getting them to their next level… the only way

it’s going to be successful is through the people…what’s their road

map, what do they need to do to get better? My biggest achievement

that I would hang my hat on is…both of the [other remote leaders] of

the market were an assistant or a sales manager that came through my

stores. [Participant 5]

The one thing I proud of [in] my two-and-a-half years there -- we

promoted 10 people to the next level. Just me asking, ‘What are your

goals?’… ‘What do you want to do with this company?’ and

they would tell me, and then we would both work together try to get

them there. I got a reputation real quick, and they would come to me,

‘Hey, listen. I saw you get X promoted.’ You know, I liked that.

[Participant 2]

The mechanics of people development did change with the context. When in the

remote role, the leaders discussed the important role that intention played in their people

development. People development needed to be an intentional act, both for leader and

employees.

You have to... as a multi-unit leader, when you wake up in the morning

and you crack on to that laptop, you have to have clarity of thought

immediately, "What am I going to teach my people today? When I go

into their store, what am I going to teach them?" [Participant 5]

You know that development is probably not their [the face-to-face

employee’s] first thought. You hone in on that, especially me because

that's my priority. So, I want to make that important to my people, just

as it is to me. So if that feedback isn't taking place, then you know that

development isn't a priority. You want to change that. [Participant 7]

I'm still [focused on] development. That's still my number one thing,

developing [employees]. Then those…trips to the store, it's all about

development, business acumen, and observing behaviors, correcting

behaviors. [Participant 4]

Sub-theme Eight: Trust and empowerment

The theme of trust was one that arose repeatedly during the interviews. While the

theme of trust is not new or unusual to leadership, the way the leaders spoke of trust was

unique. While they felt that trust and empowerment were important in both leadership

contexts, their description of trust and empowerment did vary fairly significantly based

on the context.

Trust and empowerment in the face-to-face leadership role

When discussing their face-to-face roles, the leaders’ spoke of trust in a way that

connected to motivation and inspiration. Numerous leaders used different iterations of

the word “believe” when talking about trust and empowerment. For example, Participant

Three spoke of the trust that his team had in him: “They had a leader that truly believed

in them… they knew that they could trust me to make the best decisions for their long

term.” It is also worthy of note that, for Participant Three in this quote, trust is a “two-

way street”; this duality in trust was not unique or specific to Participant Three.

Participant Five spoke of the dual nature of empowerment in the face-to-face leadership

context; “Make your employees [know] that they are empowered, they're not just a

number…they're more. So you look at them for ideas… and you believe in ideas that

they bring you.”

Trust and empowerment in the remote leadership role

The remote leaders also spoke of the need for trust and empowerment: “It

definitely counts, having people trust you… know that they can count on you”

[Participant 10]. In contrast to the face-to-face context’s focus on motivation or

inspiration, trust and empowerment took on an element of pragmatism for the remote

leader. Numerous participants spoke of trust and empowerment as a means of bridging

the reality of distance.

I think the number one thing is that you need to have trust in those that

you are leading, because you are not seeing them every day. Trust is a

huge component of this, you need to be able to trust them that they're

going to do what they need to be doing because you are not there.

[Participant 6]

It is interesting to note the subtle but important change in perspective from

Participant Five. When discussing leadership in the face-to-face context previously,

Participant Five used aspirational terms like “believe”; employees were “not just a

number.” When Participant Five was discussing the remote leadership context, trust was

a type of “necessary evil” because the leader could not be there to view things with their

own eyes; the description was far less aspirational.

You have to have a sense of trust and connection because you’re not in

there every day managing or seeing what could happen. You have to

have an environment where your [employees] are able to speak to you

openly and candidly, and if they don’t agree with something … then

they would be honest enough to raise their hand and say, ‘I don’t get it,

I don’t understand why we do it this way’ versus hiding it. [Participant

Chapter Four Summary

This exploratory interpretive study investigated the experience of retail leaders

that had recently transitioned from a face-to-face leadership context to a remote

leadership context. The specific question guiding this research is: “What is the lived

experience of the leader who has transitioned from face-to-face leadership to remote

leadership in a retail sales context?” This chapter presented the results of the analysis of

interview data collected by the researcher from ten retail leaders; these leaders had

recently made the transition from a face-to-face leadership context to a remote leadership

context.

The leaders in this study learned throughout the transition that their leadership

style needed to change with the new context. Some of these changes were significant,

while others were more subtle. Generally—but importantly—the leaders learned that

their leadership style needed to change from a charismatic transformational style to one

that was more transactional in nature.

More specifically, through this analysis two themes emerged: (1) task-orientation,

and (2) relational orientation. The first theme, task-orientation, was able to be reduced

into four sub-themes: (1) direction and follow-up, (2) routines, (3) personal operational

impact, (4) planning and preparation. The second theme, relational-orientation, was

reduced to four sub-themes: (1) connection and relationships, (2) motivation and

engagement, (3) people development, and (4) trust and empowerment.

The next chapter will present conclusions from this study. Additionally, the next

chapter will present implications to theory and practice.

Chapter 5: Conclusions, Interpretations, and Recommendations

This final chapter discusses the conclusions, interpretations, and

recommendations that emerged from the exploratory interpretive study of the experience

of retail leaders that had recently transitioned from a face-to-face leadership context to a

remote leadership context. The specific question guiding this research is: “What is the

lived experience of the leader who has transitioned from face-to-face leadership to remote

leadership in a retail sales context?”

This chapter links the results described in Chapter 4 to the primary theoretical

lenses in the conceptual frame, which were transitions, leadership style, and remote

leadership. This chapter is divided into five sections. The first section contains a brief

overview of the study. The second section presents an overview of the themes, whereby

the two themes and the eight sub-themes from Chapter 4 will be synthesized with

relevant literature.

The third section provides the conclusions drawn from the study. Four

conclusions will be presented: (1) the leaders were able to adapt to their new leadership

context as a result of their transition experience; (2) there were common leadership style

balances for leaders in this study; (3) the leaders realized that there were subtle, but

important communication differences in the remote context; and (4) trust plays a unique

role in remote, transactional leadership.

The fourth section will provide the implications and recommendations for theory,

practice, and research. There are numerous implications for theory: (1) this research

furthers the remote work literature, providing supporting evidence using a qualitative

approach; (2) this research furthers the remote work literature, providing supporting

qualitative evidence using a specific, unique context (retail sales); (3) this research

expands theory to note the primary importance of relational activities when the leader is

proximal with predominantly remote subordinates (the vast minority of the leaders’ total

time); (4) this research furthers the remote leadership literature, providing the unique

context of those that were recently remote employees, but are now remote leaders, all

viewed through a qualitative lens; and, (5) this research adds to theory, showing how the

Nicholson Adaptive Cycle model helps illuminate this transition of the leaders, as well as

what they learned during the transition.

There are four implications for practice: (1) The conclusions of this study should

be used by practitioners in the selection process for remote leaders; (2) The conclusions

of this research should be used by practitioners in the training and development processes

for remote leaders; (3) the conclusions of this study should be used by the remote leaders

themselves to maximize performance of both themselves and others; and, (4) the

conclusions of this study should be used by the managers of remote leaders to assess

performance and provide feedback.

The fifth and final section will provide concluding remarks for this study.

Overview of the Study

The purpose of this study was the creation of a greater degree of understanding of

the experience of those that had transitioned from a face-to-face leadership context to a

remote leadership context. This research specifically sought to understand how those that

were familiar with—and successful in—a face-to-face leadership context would

experience the change to a remote leadership context. This study aspires to contribute to

the existing literature in both the remote work and leadership fields.

The transition experience studied was for leaders that had recently

transitioned from one leadership context to another. Five criteria for participation were

used: (1) work for a retail sales organization that utilizes a remote supervision structure

(e.g., district, region, area, territory), (2) have supervisory responsibility for at least six

separate and distinct locations but fewer than 25 locations, (3) have supervisory

responsibility for locations with a minimum of 10 employees but fewer than 100, (4)

have transitioned from a face-to-face leadership context to a remote leadership context,

and (5) have been in the new remote leadership role for at least six months but no longer

than 39 months. The researcher chose these criteria intentionally; the goal was a pool of

participants with similar roles and a similar scope of responsibility.

This research used a qualitative approach; data was gathered through one-on-one

interviews. The interviews were done over a five-month period beginning in December

2015. The interviews used a modified Seidman (2013) method and were done in two

parts, with part one focused on the work history and details of the experience, and part

two focused on the individuals’ sense-making of the transition. Each interview was

audio-recorded and converted to written transcript. The data analysis, consisting of the

coding of the transcripts and reduction into sub-themes and ultimately themes, spanned a

period of three months, concluding in July 2016.

The process for representing the data and interpreting the data consisted of five

main parts in alignment with an interpretive phenomenological approach, or IPA (Smith,

Flowers, & Larkin, 2009). IPA was chosen because it provides a means for understanding

the lived experience of the research subjects in a way that allows the researcher to make

100

sense of it (Glenn, McFayden, & Rafique, 2013) and, ultimately, answer the research

question.

A multi-phase coding process was used to reduce the data. During the first round

of data processing, eclectic coding (Saldana, 2014) was employed. During the second

round of data processing, process coding (Saldana, 2014) was used. During both rounds,

the codes were logged into a qualitative coding software suite, MaxQDA, for subsequent

analysis.

Overview of Relevant Themes

The IPA data analysis process (Smith, Flowers, & Larkin, 2009) revealed several

emergent themes. The codes were reduced to eight dominant, meaningful themes: (1)

direction and follow-up, (2) routines, (3) personal operational impact, (4) planning and

preparation, (5) connection and relationships, (6) motivation and engagement, (7) people

development, and (8) trust and empowerment.

Four of the eight themes combine to form the larger theme of task-orientation: (1)

direction and follow-up, (2) routines, (3) personal operational impact, (4) planning and

preparation. Additionally, the other four (of eight) other themes combine to form the

larger theme of relational-orientation: (5) connection and relationships, (6) motivation

and engagement, (7) people development, and (8) trust and empowerment. Thus, these

four themes now become sub-themes for the larger theme of relational-orientation.

Themes One and Two: Task Orientation and Relational Orientation

The themes that emerged from the data analysis process, task orientation and

relational orientation, align well with the leadership literature. Pfeffer and Salancik

(1975) noted that leaders tend to engage in two discrete types of communication -- task

101

communication and relational communication. Madlock’s research (2008, 2012) also

uses a task oriented/relational prism for viewing leadership.

Considering the body of leadership literature and all of the sundry philosophies,

approaches, and models contained therein, the concepts of task orientation and relational

orientation align best with the larger transformational and transactional theories of

leadership. The transactional/transformational approach to leadership theory was first

defined by Burns (1978) and advanced by Bass (1985). The

transformational/transactional model allows for the dissection of leadership into more

specific factors (Avolio, Bass, & Jung, 1993) that aid in the analysis and

recommendations from research (Kelloway & Barling, 2000; Hambley, O’Neill, & Klein,

2007). Specific to the nature of this study, the transactional/transformational framework

has also been used in numerous studies on the leadership of remote teams (Hambley,

O’Neill, & Klein, 2007; Hoyt & Blascovich, 2003; Madlock, 2013; Neufeld, Wan, &

Fang, 2008).

Transactional leadership involves gaining compliance for the completion of

business tasks as a means of driving performance (Bass, 1999). Transactional leaders

motivate followers by appealing to their self-interests and through the exchange of

different types of favors or benefits (Burns, 1978; Yukl, 2012). The four task-oriented

sub-themes—(1) direction and follow-up, (2) routines, (3) personal operational impact,

and (4) planning and preparation—align neatly with a transactional approach.

By contrast, transformational leaders motivate followers by appealing to their

desire to be “part of something bigger” (den Hartog, Shippers, & Koopman, 2002). The

goal of the transformational leader is to influence, motivate, and inspire the follower to

102

increase performance. Bass (1999) observed that transformational leadership relies on

trust, loyalty, and motivation to drive performance. The four relational sub-themes—(5)

connection and relationships, (6) motivation and engagement, (7) people development,

and (8) trust and empowerment—align well with a transformational leadership approach.

Bass noted that leaders may use both of these in different contexts: no leader is

always transformational or always transactional. Transactional and transformational

leadership cannot exist in a vacuum. There is a balance or blend of the two styles that

leaders must maintain (Judge & Piccolo, 2004). Bass (1999) saw a compelling link

between transactional and transformational leadership. He points to the work of Graen

and Uhl-Bien (1995), showing that leader-member exchange may begin as transactional

but must evolve into transformational for long-term effectiveness.