University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Keeping virtual team members engaged in their roles: an impossible task or a paramount necessity for an increasingly globalized world

(USC Thesis Other)

Keeping virtual team members engaged in their roles: an impossible task or a paramount necessity for an increasingly globalized world

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

Keeping Virtual Team Members Engaged in Their Roles:
An Impossible Task or a Paramount Necessity for an Increasingly Globalized World
by
Adam Jackson-Boothby

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
A dissertation submitted to the faculty
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education

August 2021

© Copyright by Adam Jackson-Boothby 2021
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Adam Jackson-Boothby certifies the approval of this Dissertation

Adrian Donato
Cathy Krop
Alexandra Wilcox, Committee Chair

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2021

iv
Abstract
As the world economy and ways of working move in the direction of globalization (Ebrahim et
al., 2009), organizations continue to look at ways to move employees into a virtual space
(Malhorta et al., 2017). However, overall levels of engagement and job satisfaction tend to be
lower in virtual teams (Gurtner et al., 2007), due to a number of factors (Cordey & Soo, 2008).
Virtual teams have grown in prominence at such a fast pace, yet there is rather limited
knowledge about the appropriate best practices, policies, and procedures that work within this
group (De Bruyn, 2017). In addition, with the increases in technology and other platforms of
virtual communication, virtual teams will continue to grow in prominence in future years
(Dulebohn & Hoch, 2017). This speed has been seen first-hand throughout 2020 and 2021, due
to the Covid-19 pandemic and the conversion of many traditional office roles into virtual, work-
from-home, environments (Waizenegger et al., 2020). Therefore, the problem of practice being
addressed in this study is the poor employee engagement experiences of individuals working in
virtual teams. As these teams become staples in organizations, it is important that organizations
understand as much as possible about this population. For this particular study, Employee Tech
(ET) served as the organizational foundation, and virtual team members (not managers) served as
the group of focus. In order to address this problem of practice, this study relied on the gap
analysis framework created by Clark and Estes (2008). In this framework, the assumed needs
along the knowledge, motivation, and organizational spheres were hypothesized and tested.
Using qualitative methods (interviews primarily, supplemented by document analysis of
employee engagement data), this study uncovered the salient components needed for virtual team
members to be engaged in their roles. Based on these findings, a set of recommendations was
provided and the creation of a new employee engagement plan was outlined. This study served

as a first step for the organization to better understand the experiences of virtual team members
and create salient and structured actions to improve these experiences, as well as overall
employee engagement.

vi
Dedication
To my parents, Michael and Noga Boothby, this dissertation is dedicated to you. Throughout my
whole life, you have always been there for me, believing that I could push myself farther
forward, and helping to catch me if I fell backwards. Thank you for the unwavering love and
support. I hope that I can continue to make you proud as your son.

vii
Acknowledgements
If someone would have asked me about five years ago if I would ever want to complete a
doctoral degree, the answer would have easily been no. There were many reasons to not start
such a rigorous program three weeks before relocating across the world from California to
London and staying up late into the night to partake in classes. But now, here I am at the end of
this journey, and there is no way I would have ever made it to this point without the support and
encouragement of so many people.
To my dissertation chair, Dr. Alexandra Wilcox, words cannot begin to express the
appreciation I have for you. From conversations where we have exchanged ideas, to direction
you have provided, to the numerous reads and re-reads of my drafts, you have fully supported me
throughout this process. I truly feel I got the best dissertation advisor to lead me on this journey.
Thank you for helping me see what true scholarship research and writing truly looks like, and
continuing to push me, draft after draft after draft.
To my additional committee members, Dr. Adrian Donato and Dr. Cathy Krop, thank you
for your guidance and suggestions throughout this process. You have both challenged me to
think differently and that guidance has been invaluable towards the crafting of this final
manuscript. And to Dr. Don Murphy, thank you for the plentiful and astute feedback you have
provided throughout this process and for your direction is writing style, clarity, and always
making sure I keep abreast of APA guidelines and regulations.
To my in-laws and wonderful extended family, Harry, Heidrun, Adrian, and Terissa
Jackson, thank you for always making me feel warm, welcomed, and loved by you. I still cannot
fully believe how lucky I was to join such an amazing family, and I truly am thankful for all of
your support over the past 15 years of being in your lives.

viii
To all the leaders, mentors, and colleagues I have met and had the pleasure to work with
over my many professional years (and there are too many to name here), thank you for showing
me, constantly and consistently, what true leadership looks like. It has been an absolute honor
and privilege to work with, and more importantly learn from, you throughout all these years.
To my colleagues who agreed to take part in this study, thank you for giving me your
unyielding time and dedication. This manuscript would never have happened without you
allowing me to learn from your experiences directly, which shaped the entirety of this study. I
am forever grateful for that support.
To my USC family, Brianne, Todd, Patrick, Ken, Jennie, Nathan, and Tyler, thank you
for making this whole process worthwhile and bearable. Out group chats throughout this
program kept me going and laughing more than you know. While we only actually saw each in
person once way back in January 2019, there are no other people I would have rather gone on
this journey with. You will always be more than classmates and colleagues—you will be life-
long friends and people I am so happy to have in my life.
And finally, to my beautiful wife, Dr. Chantelle Jackson-Boothby, words cannot begin to
describe the love and appreciation I have for you. Seeing you go through this doctoral process
years ago and witnessing how successful you were at being able to juggle school, work, and life
priorities kept me motivated more than I ever let on. Thank you for keeping me focused,
encouraging me throughout the process, and supporting me in too many ways to name. You are
the strongest person I know, my best friend, and I am so grateful to call you my wife. I love you.

ix
Table of Contents
Abstract ........................................................................................................................................... iv
Dedication ....................................................................................................................................... vi
Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................................... vii
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................ xii
List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... xiv
Chapter One: Overview of the Study .............................................................................................. 1
Background of the Problem ................................................................................................. 2
Importance of Addressing the Problem ............................................................................... 6
Organizational Context and Mission ................................................................................... 7
Organizational Performance Goal ....................................................................................... 8
Description of Stakeholder Groups ................................................................................... 10
Stakeholder Group of Focus for the Study ........................................................................ 10
Stakeholders’ Performance Goals ..................................................................................... 11
Purpose of the Project and Questions ................................................................................ 13
Conceptual and Methodological Framework .................................................................... 13
Definitions ......................................................................................................................... 14
Organization of the Project ................................................................................................ 14
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature ......................................................................................... 16
Literature on Virtual Teams .............................................................................................. 16
Literature on Employee Engagement ................................................................................ 30
Virtual Team Engagement Best Practices ......................................................................... 45
Literature Review Summary .............................................................................................. 46
Clark and Estes (2008) Gap Analysis Framework ............................................................ 47
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences ............................... 47

x
Conceptual Framework ..................................................................................................... 70
Summary ............................................................................................................................ 71
Chapter Three: Methodology ........................................................................................................ 72
Research Questions ........................................................................................................... 72
Overview of Methodology ................................................................................................ 72
Data Collection, Instrumentation, and Analysis Plan ........................................................ 74
Validity and Reliability ..................................................................................................... 89
Ethics and Role of the Researcher ..................................................................................... 90
Chapter Four: Results and Findings .............................................................................................. 92
Participating Stakeholders ................................................................................................. 92
Findings ............................................................................................................................. 95
Summary and Conclusion ................................................................................................ 148
Chapter Five: Discussion and Recommendations ....................................................................... 151
Discussion of Findings and Results ................................................................................. 151
Recommendations for Practice ........................................................................................ 155
Bringing it All Together: A Comprehensive Engagement Initiative ............................... 181
Recommendations for Future Research ........................................................................... 193
Conclusion ....................................................................................................................... 195
References ................................................................................................................................... 198
Appendix A: Initial E-Mail to Participate in Interview ............................................................... 230
Appendix B: Interview Protocol .................................................................................................. 232
Appendix C: Data Collection Crosswalk .................................................................................... 235
Appendix D: Information Sheet for Exempt Research ................................................................ 240
Appendix E: Follow-up E-Mail to Confirm Intent to Interview ................................................. 244
Appendix F: E-Mail to Confirm Intent to Interview ................................................................... 246

xi
Appendix G: Final Confirmation E-Mail .................................................................................... 248
Appendix H: Thank You E-Mail ................................................................................................. 250
Appendix I: Interview Note Sheet ............................................................................................... 251
Appendix J: One-on-One Meeting Agenda ................................................................................. 254

xii
List of Tables
Table 1: Stakeholders’ Performance Goals 12
Table 2: Virtual Team Themes 23
Table 3: Assumed Knowledge Influences, Knowledge Type, and
Knowledge Influence Assessment
55
Table 4: Assumed Motivation Influence, Motivation Theory, and
Motivation Influence Assessment
60
Table 5: Assumed Organizational Influence, Organizational Influence
Type, and Organizational Influence Assessment
69
Table 6: Data Sources 73
Table 7: ET Employee Engagement Feedback Questions 78
Table 8: Engagement Level Scales 79
Table 9: Mapping of Presumed Knowledge Influences and Data Collection
Method Used in the Evaluation
85
Table 10: Mapping of Presumed Motivation Influences and Data Collection
Method Used in the Evaluation
86
Table 11: Mapping of Presumed Organizational Influences and Data
Collection Method Used in the Evaluation
87
Table 12: Interview Participants 94
Table 13: Validation Thresholds for Assumed Influences 96
Table 14: Techniques Used to Validate Each Assumed Need 97
Table 15: Findings of Assumed Knowledge Needs 99
Table 16: Key Activities of a Normal Day for Virtual Team Members 100
Table 17: Forms of Virtual Interaction 103
Table 18: Virtual Team Members’ Connections to the Wider Organization 106
Table 19: Different Virtual Platforms Leveraged by Virtual Team Members 110
Table 20: Respondent Themes of Employee Engagement 112

xiii
Table 21: Findings of Assumed Motivation Needs 115
Table 22: Resources Available to Foster Improvements in Employee Success 118
Table 23: Factors Contributing to Employee Motivation 123
Table 24: Findings of Assumed Organizational Needs 132
Table 25: Definitions of Trust Among Virtual Team Members 134
Table 26: Levels of Psychological Safety Among Respondents 139
Table 27: Virtual Tools Used by Respondents 143
Table 28: Respondent Views of Organization’s Annual Performance Review
(APR) Tool
145
Table 29: Summary of Findings Across Knowledge, Motivation, and
Organizational Dimensions
149
Table 30: Summary of Key Findings Spanning Various Knowledge,
Motivation, and Organizational Needs
152
Table 31: Summary of Knowledge Needs and Recommendations 157
Table 32: Summary of Motivation Needs and Recommendations 164
Table 33: Summary of Organizational Needs and Recommendations 169
Table 34: Summary of All Recommendations for Practice 180
Table 35: VETEP Action Plan 185
Table 36: VETEP Evaluation Focus Group Questions 187
Table 37: Current and Desired State of Employee Engagement Data 190
Table 38: Comparison of ET Current and Proposed Engagement Evaluation
Tools
191
Appendix C: Data Collection Crosswalk 235
Appendix I: Interview Note Sheet 251

xiv
List of Figures
Figure 1: The HUDSON Research and Consulting Model for Global Virtual
Team Success
26
Figure 2: Conceptual Framework Guiding the Study 71
Figure 3: ET Human Resources Organization 76
Figure 4: Model for Qualitative Data Analysis 84
Figure 5: Data Collection and Analysis Framework 88
Figure 6: Scores for Question “Does Your Work Give You a Feeling of
Accomplishment?”
120
Figure 7: Scores for Question “How Often do You Feel Excited When You
Accomplish Something at Work?”
121
Figure 8: Scores for Question “Do You Feel Valued at ET?” 122
Figure 9: Scores for Question “Do You Feel Motivated at Work?” 125
Figure 10: Scores for Question “Are You Inspired by the Work You Do at
ET?”
126
Figure 11: Scores for Question “Are You Interested in the Work You Do?” 127
Figure 12: Scores for Question “Is Your Job a Good Fit for Your Skills?” 128
Figure 13: Scores for Question “Do You Find Your Job Challenging in a Good
Way?”
129
Figure 14: Scores for Question “Do You Find Your Work to be a Positive
Challenge?”
130
Figure 15: Psychological Safety and the Hierarchy of Needs 136
Figure 16: Scores for Question “Is Your Work Valued at ET?” 140
Figure 17: One-to-One Meeting Agenda Template 178
Figure 18: Overview of VETEP 184

1

Chapter One: Overview of the Study
The “traditional” workplace as was once known has drastically changed over the past
several years. More and more, organizations are looking at ways to move more employees into a
virtual space (Malhotra et al., 2017). In fact, virtual teams are now viewed as the norm rather
than the exception, with 69% of companies offering some form of telecommuting option to their
employees (Society for Human Resource Management [SHRM], 2019). Another study revealed
that approximately 80% of teams worked in geographically dispersed areas (Schulze & Krumm,
2016), which is yet another condition for virtual teams (Malhotra et al., 2007). Roughly 60% of
large companies use virtual teams to some extent (Breuer et al., 2016; Liao, 2017), and this
number has risen drastically since the onslaught of the Covid-19 pandemic. In addition, some
estimate that there are currently over 1.3 billion employees that work in a virtual environment at
least part-time (Guinalíu & Jordán, 2016). This fact becomes more prevalent as the world
economy and ways of working move in the direction of globalization (Ebrahim et al.,2009).
Research posits that virtual teams are growing in prominence due to increases in globalization,
reliance on new communication technologies, and companies allowing flexible working
schedules (Jimenez et al., 2017). To this end, employee engagement in virtual teams is
important.
However, overall levels of engagement and job satisfaction tend to be lower in virtual
teams (Gurtner et al., 2007). Various attributes of virtual teams have a direct impact on lower
employee engagement. According to Cordey and Soo (2008), various aspects contribute to lower
levels of employee engagement in virtual teams, including (a) geographic and physical
separation of work areas; (b) over-dependence on electronic communication; (c) loosely
structured organizational structure; and (d) diversity based on a number of factors including age,
2

nationality, and education levels. As these facets underpin the core of virtual teams, correcting
them becomes a challenge. Notably, virtual teams rely heavily on different forms of interactions,
leading to lower levels of trust and poorer relationships with colleagues (Panteli et al., 2019),
which have been shown to contribute to positive overall employee engagement (Bedarker &
Pandita, 2014). Thus, employee engagement levels for these virtual team members tend to be
impacted.
Therefore, the problem of practice being addressed in this study is the poor employee
engagement experiences of individuals working in virtual teams. Virtual teams can benefit the
organization, employer, and employee in a number of ways, including adding geographic and
other forms of diversity (Ford et al., 2017), and creating flexibility for both employee and
employer (Liao, 2017). Although all organizational environments are exposed to certain
challenges, virtual teams face additional barriers to employee engagement in that they are
geographically dispersed, have limited face-to-face contact, and leverage employee interaction
through the use of online and electronic mediums (Dulebohn & Hoch, 2017). As more and more
teams explore the option of utilizing this working style (Charlier et al. 2016), having a solid
understanding of these teams and their engagement preferences will be pertinent in
understanding organizational behavior and health.
Background of the Problem
Work done by organizations today no longer needs to take place between 8:00 a.m. and
5:00 p.m., nor do interactions only take place around the communal water cooler in the office
(Mandzuk, 2014). More and more, organizations are leveraging methods to allow (and perhaps
advocate) their staff to work in non-traditional environments. Virtual teams can benefit the
3

organization by accomplishing work output and goals while not needing to occupy the same
physical space (White, 2014).
There are a number of different working definitions of virtual teams that exist throughout
the literature. The term initially and conceptually grew in network organizations based on
advances in information and technology (Jarvenpaa & Leidner, 1999). Gassmann and Von
Zedtwitz (2003) described virtual teams as a group of people who work towards common goals
while utilizing communication to strengthen output. Lee-Kelley (2006) expanded on this
definition to specify that virtual teams must work on projects. Martins et al. (2004) used the
phrase virtual team to refer to any team where members use technology in any degree. Perhaps
the most salient understanding of virtual teams came from Ebrahim et al. (2009), who defined
this concept as “groups of geographically, organizationally, and/or time dispersed knowledge
workers who coordinate their work predominantly with electronic information and
communication technologies in order to accomplish one or more organization tasks” (p. 2655).
As organizations become nimbler and more fluid in order to address and solve challenges
and problems, they must also be flexible in the ways in which their employees work. Virtual
teams, therefore, becomes an umbrella term to capture a number of different working spaces.
Instead of thinking of teams dichotomously as either in-person or virtual, organizations must
look to these working contexts on a spectrum (Hosseini et al., 2015). Phrased differently,
organizations must not look at working environments in black or white. Due to the dynamic
nature of organizations, the conception of virtual teams also becomes blurry.
Benefits of Virtual Teams
Within virtual teams, there are benefits that are actualized for both the organization as
well as the employee.
4

Organizational Benefits
Organizations that implement virtual teams have been able to see large returns on their
investment. For instance, organizations are able to dip into new markets worldwide and can
employ the top talent for a particular position, regardless of where that individual resides
(Schulze & Krumm, 2017). There can be an immense cost savings to organizations who leverage
virtual teams, in that travel and accommodation for employees can be minimized based on
geographical location (de Pillis & Furumo, 2007). By limiting fringe costs such as travel,
organizations can focus financial spend on more value-added services to its employees and
customers. Furthermore, the concept of time to market has been cited in the literature as a benefit
of virtual teams. Wieland and Wolf (2016) define this concept as being able to quickly
implement ideas into practice. Therefore, by having employees working in virtual teams in
geographically dispersed locations throughout the world, organizations are able to quickly and
more efficiently influence the marketplace, thereby increasing productivity and accelerating
innovation (Derven, 2016).
Employee Benefits
In addition to the organization, employees of virtual teams can reap a number of benefits.
For some employees, commitments outside of work (such as family or travel constraints) can
hamper an individual’s ability to produce quality work. Virtual teams bridge this gap and
employees can enjoy the freedom and flexibility from conducting their work anywhere, such as a
physical office, a home office, a hotel, or a number of other locations (Liao, 2017). As evidenced
by Liao (2017), “such flexibility may facilitate the balance of employees’ work and life and
potentially increase their satisfaction with the job” (p. 648). Further, by not needing to commute
daily to a work location (and in some large metropolitan areas, one-way commutes can take
5

upwards of an hour or more), employees can maximize their work day and spend that additional
time on value-added tasks (Persson & Nilsson, 2019). In addition, employees are able to learn
more from colleagues who bring diverse thought and background to everyday situations and
large complex problems (Alsharo et al., 2017). As can be seen, there are a number of personal
and organizational benefits associated with a virtual team environment.
Challenges to Virtual Teams
While there are benefits to both the individual and the organization performing work in
this virtual space, there are also challenges.
Communication
Having employees vastly spread out can place additional strain on the leader of that team,
especially as the team expands across a number of different time zones (Liao, 2017). By relying
almost solely on virtual mediums (such as phone calls, e-mails, and online chat groups) to
communicate, virtual team communication can be misunderstood, resulting in disconnectedness
amongst employees (Staples & Webster, 2007). Additionally, while proper and effective
communication strategies are needed for all teams, these must be more acutely scrutinized within
virtual teams.
Virtual communication channels replace almost all face-to-face interactions within these
teams. In many instances, non-verbal methods of communication are absent in virtual spaces,
which impacts the transmission and reception of the overall message (Zigurs, 2003). Many
organizations believe that communication automatically improves as technological platforms
become more sophisticated when in fact, unfortunately, the opposite is true (Hill & Bartol,
2018). Marlow et al. (2017) found that there are a number of different dimensions of
communication that must be understood in order for teams to thrive and prosper. Some of these
6

dimensions included the frequency of communication, the quality of the communication, and the
timeliness of the communication (Marlow et al., 2017). In addition to the message itself, the
manner in which the communication is delivered is important. Virtual team members need to
find the appropriate mechanism for communication, whether that be online (platforms such as
Zoom or Skype), phone calls, or e-mails, and determine the frequency of such communication.
Trust
In addition to challenges in communication, trust is also a concept that has been
repeatedly identified in the literature as lacking more often in virtual teams as compared to
traditional teams (Bisbe & Sivabalan, 2017). In their meta-analysis of 124 different articles and
pieces of scholarship, Hacker et al. (2019) found that there were a number of factors related to
trust in organizations leveraging virtual teams. These included physical and cultural distance,
team leadership through virtual channels, lack of well-defined goals for the team, and difficulties
related to solving contention amongst colleagues. Based on their review of the literature, these
scholars created a model that organizations can use to improve trust within their own virtual
teams based on understanding the psychological and sociological underpinnings of virtual teams.
This model helps organizations to identify antecedents, consequences, and compounding
constructs that arise within virtual teams (Hacker et al., 2019).
Importance of Addressing the Problem
There is a vast literature base that points to the need to better understand virtual teams.
Virtual teams have grown in prominence at such a fast pace, yet there is rather limited
knowledge about the appropriate best practices, policies, and procedures to work with this group
(De Bruyn, 2017). In addition, with the increases in technology and other platforms of virtual
communication, virtual teams will continue to grow in prominence in future years (Dulebohn &
7

Hoch, 2017). This speed has been seen first-hand since 2020, due to the Covid-19 pandemic and
the conversion of many traditional office roles into virtual, work-from-home, environments
(Waizenegger et al., 2020). As these teams become staples in organizations, it is important that
organizations understand as much as possible about this population.
However, while research has sought to better understand virtual teams in a contextual
manner, very little research is available to examine the engagement levels of employees working
in virtual teams. Employee engagement has time and again been demonstrated in the literature as
being vital towards organizational performance, innovation, and effectiveness (Bedarkar &
Pandita, 2014). While no standard definition exists, most understandings are rooted within the
realm of human resource management (Markos & Sridevi, 2010) and focus on constructs such as
behavior, commitment, and overall involvement (Bedarkar & Pandita, 2014). Since the
experience of virtual teams is quintessentially different to traditional teams, lifting and shifting
best practices is not acceptable. Instead, best practices and ways of working must be identified in
order to best support these employees. This study will help to bridge the gap that currently exists.
Organizational Context and Mission
Employee Tech (pseudonym; hereafter referred to as ET) will serve as the focus for this
study. Employee Tech is an e-commerce organization that currently operates in a number of
different countries around the world and is expanding. This organization believes in exceeding
customer needs, and this, along with other underlying leadership principles, guide the day-to-day
decisions made within the organization.
In terms of the day-to-day operations, ET operates with different levels of leadership,
with everyone reporting to someone else. In other words, it is a true hierarchical organization. A
level is assigned to each role. As the levels increase in number, so too does the responsibility,
8

scope, and scale of the position. The levels of leadership are similar regardless of the broader
umbrella of that organization (such as operations, human resources, retail, and others). Each
division is led by a Senior Vice President who reports directly into the President of the company.
Employee Tech currently employs over 700,000 full-time employees worldwide within a number
of different operations and support roles. In addition, ET works directly with a growing number
of additional members who support the work of ET, albeit indirectly and not through direct
employment. These include temporary workers, third party suppliers and vendors, and
independent contractors among many others. Within a number of these divisions, some
individuals work within brick and mortar locations, whereas others may support virtually. During
the time of this research, a larger proportion of ET employees were working virtually due to
Covid-19.
Organizational Performance Goal
Almost all companies worldwide participate in some form of an employee opinion survey
(Prayogo et al., 2017) in order to assess and pulse check the sentiments of its team. While there
is a deluge of different types of surveys that organizations can use to get a “feel” for their
employees (Saltzman et al., 2020), employee opinion surveys tend to be the most widely used.
Not only do these surveys tend to tell a very real story within the organization, they can also help
to pinpoint the individual causes and stressors of employee disengagement, such as work
overload, role ambiguity, lack of connectedness to the organization, and low levels of employee
value (Tushman et al., 2017). Almost all companies put out this type of survey to their
employees once a year. However, what makes ET different is that employee opinion questions
are asked to employees on a daily basis and feedback is compiled, analyzed, shared, and acted
upon.
9

Still, while questions seek daily feedback, only a small handful of these questions exist to
specifically help define gaps in employee engagement. In order to assess employee engagement,
an additional mechanism is needed. There are a number of third-party engagement companies
and platforms (such as Qualtrics) that can be used to gather a deeper level of data. A quick online
search produces over 75 different companies that can be contracted to develop, administer, and
analyze this type of employee engagement data.
Employee Tech relies on a similar mechanism in order to collect employee feedback
related not only to engagement, but also to a number of other organizational variables such as
management style, working conditions, and the like. However, what separates ET’s feedback
system is that it is collected daily. All employees (direct employees, not those supporting the
organization) receive questions daily to collect feedback on their experiences. Supporting
employees receive some of the same questions, yet some are different due to legal and ethical
considerations. One of the main categories of this feedback system is related to engagement and
consists of certain questions surrounding trust, belonging, and other engagement conditions. The
vast majority of these questions are scored on a five-point Likert scale with five being the best.
There are a total of 10 questions that can be asked, but not all questions are asked with the same
frequency. Regardless of frequency, the aim of these questions is to glean a better understanding
of employee engagement and then put actions in place to increase that overall level of employee
engagement. Currently, looking at the entire organization, engagement scores vary slightly
month to month, but average around 3.8 (out of 5.0). These scores are similar when
disaggregating the data into different teams as well. Therefore, the goal is to increase the score
tied to employee engagement by 5%, which would equate to an absolute score of almost 4.0,
which would be a significant increase. In other words, there is a gap in engagement to get to the
10

targeted threshold of 4.0 from where it currently sits at 3.8, which can also be understood as a
gap of 5%.
Description of Stakeholder Groups
As previously stated, ET is a true hierarchical organization in that everyone reports to
someone else. Regardless of the umbrella each team works within, the hierarchy is peculiarly
similar. Each virtual team director reports to either another director-level position, or to one of
ET’s Vice Presidents. These directors are in charge of broad goals and deliverables and have
fiscal responsibility for multi-million-dollar operating budgets annually. These directors typically
have between three to twelve direct reports themselves, which are the virtual team managers.
These managers, in turn, focus on a particular aspect of the director’s scope and tend to have
financial responsibility for budgets up to and including one million dollars.
Finally, reporting into these virtual team managers are the virtual team members. These
employees are the individual contributors and do not have any direct reports themselves. Their
roles are the most varied of all three levels of the hierarchy and they do not have any direct
financial responsibility. However, their scope and support towards a number of other key
branches of the organization nonetheless reinforce the importance to the wider organization.
Stakeholder Group of Focus for the Study
For the purposes of this research, the primary stakeholder group that was examined were
the actual virtual team members. These individuals work in a number of different capacities
within ET and provide support and guidance to the larger organization. There are currently over
8,500 employees who work within virtual teams. It is important to note that this research was
focused on those employees that worked in virtual environments prior to the Covid-19 pandemic.
Due to this crisis, a number of employees at ET who worked in corporate offices throughout the
11

world were allowed to continue working from their homes for the health and safety of everyone.
However, these employees were excluded from this research as their virtual nature was mandated
due to the current climate. The rationale behind this is that the experiences of traditional virtual
team members and those who have been acting in a virtual capacity will be starkly different and
to provide clearer focus into scope, this study sought to better understand the experiences of only
the true virtual employees.
These true virtual team members’ roles can be housed within a number of larger
organizational umbrellas of the company, such as Human Resources (HR), Finance, Learning
and Development, and other supporting departments. There is great variance in the make-up of
these virtual teams, including size, scope, tenure, and even geographical difference. Some virtual
teams work “virtually” close together whereas others are dispersed throughout the world and
must work across a number of time zones. Based on the hierarchical nature of ET, some of these
virtual employees are managers who directly supervise personnel, whereas others are classified
as individual contributors and do not directly lead a team. It is these front-line individual
contributors (not managers) whose experiences and employee engagements levels are important
to understand. For that reason, it was this group who served as the key stakeholder group for this
research.
Stakeholders’ Performance Goals
Being able to understand virtual team members and their engagement is still quite high
level; therefore, it is important to dive even deeper to understand particular goals. Setting and
achieving goals has long been connected to employee engagement as well as other key
performance indicators such as productivity, job performance, and attendance (Albrecht et al.,
12

2018). For the purposes of this study, goals were determined for each broader stakeholder group.
Table 1 provides an overview of these goals.

Table 1
Stakeholders’ Performance Goals

Organizational mission
The mission of ET is to be the most customer obsessed company in the world.

Organizational goal
By December 2023, Employee Tech will increase their engagement of virtual team members
within their virtual teams by 5% through the design and implementation of an engagement
initiative.

Virtual team members
By December 2022, 100% of
virtual team members will
be engaged in the business
by leveraging best practices
in a standardized manner.

Virtual team managers
By September 2021, virtual
team managers will analyze
engagement data, identify
themes, make
recommendations, and
develop best practices for
VTMs regarding the new
engagement initiative.

Virtual team directors
By May 2022, VT directors
will launch pilot engagement
initiative based upon
recommendations from VTM
managers.

13

Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this project was to understand the ways in which the employee
engagement of virtual team members can be improved. Front-line virtual team members served
as the stakeholder group for this project. This research focused on the knowledge, motivation,
and organizational factors that influence employee engagement in virtual teams.
In order to better understand the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences of
employee engagement in virtual teams, the following research questions guided this study:
1. What are the knowledge and motivation influences affecting employee
engagement of virtual team members within their virtual teams?
2. What is the interaction between organizational culture and context and virtual
team member’s knowledge and motivation as it relates to increasing engagement
among them?
3. What are the recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of
knowledge, motivation, and organizational resources to favorably impact virtual
team member’s engagement?
Conceptual and Methodological Framework
The conceptual framework that guided this study was the Clark and Estes (2008) gap
analysis framework. In broad terms, this model uses a step-by-step systematic and logistic
approach that identifies organizational performance goals (which flow from larger business
goals), current organizational performance, and the gaps that differentiate those two rationales.
In order to close the gap, Clark and Estes (2008) assert that gaps in organizational performance
can be due to gaps in the knowledge of the individuals in the group, the motivation of the
members of the group, and/or the organizational processes and procedures. These individual
14

components will be discussed further, as well as the assumed influences within each, in Chapter
two.
Definitions
In order to properly understand this problem of practice, the following key concepts must
be properly defined.
Employee engagement refers to the extent to which employees feel passionate about their
job, are committed to the organization, and put discretionary effort into their work. Shuck and
Wollard (2010) define employee engagement as “an individual employee’s cognitive, emotional,
and behavioral state directed toward desired organizational outcomes” (p. 103).
Virtual teams have a rich and varied breadth of definitions within the literature, which
makes finding a consistent definition challenging. However, for the purposes of this research,
virtual teams will be defined as “teams whose members use technology to varying degrees in
working across locational, temporal, and relationship boundaries to accomplish an
interdependent task (Martins et al., 2004, p. 808).
Combining both of the definitions above, the concept of virtual team member
engagement will be based in concepts of collaboration, communication, coordination, and
connectedness. Or, as Marlow et al. (2017) confirm, this idea of virtual team engagement is
based in “technological capabilities that have facilitated communication across distance and time
and have allowed organizations to frequently utilize virtual teams for working” (p. 576)
Organization of the Project
This study consists of five chapters. Chapter one has provided the reader with the
overarching context of the problem and stakeholder group under study. Chapter two will delve
into the scholarly literature on virtual teams and employee engagement, as well as address
15

assumed influences and the conceptual framework guiding the study. The methodology,
including the data collection and analysis, will be discussed in Chapter three, and the data will be
presented and analyzed in Chapter four. Chapter five concludes this study, with suggestions for
improvement, recommended actions for the organization, as well as implications for both policy
and practice.

16

Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
This chapter will provide a review of the relevant literature. Broadly, this chapter will
review literature on the both virtual teams and employee engagement. Clark and Estes’ (2008)
gap analysis framework will also be discussed, paying particular attention to the various
knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences of the key stakeholder groups that guide
this study. In addition, the conceptual framework of this study will also be discussed. This
chapter will end with a brief summary before transitioning to the study methodology in the next
chapter.
Literature on Virtual Teams
The first strand of literature that will be discussed surrounds virtual teams. The concept
of virtual teams is not new. This model of work has grown in prominence over the past several
years and is expected to continue expanding in the near and distant future (Dulebohn & Hoch,
2017). Teams in general, and virtual teams specifically, utilize collaboration to support the goals
of the organization through partnership and knowledge sharing (Alsharo et al., 2017). However,
the challenge to scholars and practitioners alike is that the concept of virtual teams is broad in
nature, and varied definitions within the literature exist. This section will review virtual teams
with focus on (a) the history of virtual teams; (b) the different types of working conditions that
exist; and (c) the benefits and challenges to both the employer and the employee.
History of Virtual Teams
The world has been dramatically affected due to the onslaught of the novel coronavirus
(Covid-19). Over 168 million people worldwide have tested positive for this virus and, with
vaccines not fully implemented everywhere, more than three million people have died
(Worldometer, 2021). Social distancing, face masks, and hand sanitation are standard practices,
17

and more people than ever have found solace in being able to work virtually. However, this
remote way of working with teams is far from new.
While there is some debate as to when the idea of virtual teams first came into the
lexicon, most literature seems to point to the Total Quality Management (TQM) movement of
the early 1960s, which massively aided in the proliferation of speed and efficiency (Ebrahim et
al., 2009). As more companies began to actualize the benefits of speed and, coupled with the fact
that globalization was beginning to take off in the early 1980s, more companies began exploring
the concept of virtual teamwork environments (Ebrahim et al., 2009). Many employees were able
to work from home (at least part-time) due to advances in information technology and
telecommunications equipment (Douglas et al., 2013). Regardless of the true origin, the
definition of virtual teams lacks consensus.
Definition of Virtual Teams
One of the challenges with understanding the concept of virtual teams is that there are a
plethora of different definitions in the literature. As researchers have sought to encapsulate the
various aspects of virtual teams, different definitions have emerged. For example, Chang et al.
(2014) defined virtual teams as individuals with diverse backgrounds working from different
geographical locations using information technology tools. Pangil and Chan (2014) expand on
this definition to add an aspect of working towards a common goal. A further layer of debate
within the literature concerns the degree of reliance on electronic communication channels
(Jarvenpaa & Leidner, 1999; Maznevski & Chudoba, 2000), as well as the complexity of work
the team performs (Griffith & Neale, 2001).
For the purposes of this study, as mentioned in Chapter one, the definition that will frame
the study will be taken from Martins et al. (2004). This definition, stemming from their meta-
18

analysis, defines virtual teams as “teams whose members use technology to varying degrees in
working across locational, temporal, and relational boundaries to accomplish an interdependent
task” (Martins et al., 2004, p. 808). This particular definition works well to summarize the idea
of virtual teams in that it fully encapsulates the key components to which most literature points.
Much of the literature in this space defines virtual teams across these aspects of technology,
dispersion, and task completion (Liao, 2017).
Different Types of Working Conditions
There are many different ways for work to be completed within today’s landscape, many
of which are flexible and can be suited to fit both the needs of the employer and employee. In
order to fully understand the breadth involved, it is important to conceptualize the varying ways
in which work can be completed. The following sections describe some of the ways in which
work is accomplished outside of a traditional office space, from broad-based team working to
remote and flexible working environments, that some companies have employed.
Hot Desking
In addition to various types of remote working, there are other types of flexible working
environments that can be undertaken by employees. For example, hot desking has rapidly grown
in prevalence in many office spaces, especially within large corporate environments (Edwards &
Wilson, 2004). To accommodate the fact that most employees utilize laptops in lieu of desktop
computers, there is no longer a need to have a dedicated desk space per employee. Rather, hot
desking can be utilized wherein employees can dock a laptop into a workspace, work for a
specified amount of time, and then undock their laptop and move somewhere else in order to
allow another employee access to that space (Edwards & Wilson, 2004). Not only does this
method allow for more flexible work to be done by employees, but it also allows employees to
19

work in different locations of an office, thereby increasing their professional and personal
networks (Edwards & Wilson, 2004).
However, there are also challenges associated with hot desking within organizations.
First, there is research that draws from the sociology of space that posits that employees can feel
less connected to their organization if they do not have structure in aspects such as working
space (Hirst, 2011). This research found that certain social structures can emerge organically,
some of which can have an unintended consequence of ostracizing some employees. Other
scholars have found that by using hot desking in organizations, some employees experience a
decrease in identity, both personal (not being able to keep pictures of family and friends on a
central desk location) and organizational (different desk locations impacted the overall
connectedness to the organization) (Milward et al., 2007). Still, hot desking can be used in
organizations in order to better leverage space with flexible teams.
Satellite Offices
In addition to hot desking within offices, satellite offices can also be leveraged. Satellite
offices can be used as a short-term solution if offices need to complete construction work or as a
long-term solution in order to accommodate more employees (Edwards & Wilson, 2004). When
needed for a longer-term solution, companies can also set up these offices close to housing that
can also be used to accommodate employees (Edwards & Wilson, 2004). Some scholars
advocate utilizing satellite offices in densely populated locations such as London, Los Angeles,
and New York in order to maximize the space available and also be able to recruit and retain top
talent (Miller, 2016).
Telecommuting
20

Telecommuting (also known as working from home) can and is used within many
organizations. It is important to note the main difference between telecommuting and remote
working (as mentioned above). Remote working is utilized more randomly wherein an employee
can work from home one or two days here and there, while telecommuting is more fixed in
nature (Edwards & Wilson, 2004). Telecommuting is a flexible working method that can allow
employees to complete work from places other than the traditional office (Picu & Dinu, 2016).
As with other forms of flexible working, there are a number of associated advantages, including
increased productivity and performance (Soenato et al., 2016), greater job satisfaction (Picu &
Dinu, 2016), as well as higher employee retention and engagement (Masuda et al., 2016).
There are opportunities with telecommuting, but also costs. Gajendran and Harrison
(2007), in their meta-analysis of 46 different studies encapsulating almost 13,000 global
employees found that there were positive outcomes similar to those mentioned above, as well as
higher perceived levels of autonomy for employees and greater psychological benefits. However,
based on the intensity of the telecommuting (i.e. – how many days hours per week the employee
telecommuted), there was an increased likelihood in loss of social ties with co-workers, which
had a direct impact with the level of engagement these employees felt to their overall
environment.
Consequences of Flexible Working Environments
Work-Life Balance. Remote working has grown in prominence due to advances in the
infrastructure and technology used as well as research elucidating the numerous benefits of this
type of work. Also known as flexible working arrangements (Hunter, 2019), anecdotal and
scholarly research has confirmed numerous times that the benefits outweigh the potential risks.
In the review of Open University (OU) work in the United Kingdom, Hunter (2019) found that
21

the main objective of remote working was to improve the overall work/life balance of the
employees. Similar results were found by Frater and Sullivan (2018) who also stated that in order
to achieve the largest return on investment from remote working, employers and employees alike
should focus on (a) setting realistic goals; (b) being consistent; (c) reducing distractions; (d)
creating a discrete workspace; (e) rewarding productivity; and (f) seeking out human interaction.
The last point is one of broader concern with virtual working environments and will be revisited
later in this review. In addition, Felstead and Henseke (2017) found that while remote working
was positively correlated to increased commitment to the organization and improved job
satisfaction and well-being, there was also a higher difficulty for employees to “switch off” at the
end of the workday.
Additional research has corroborated the findings regarding the importance of work/life
balance within the context of remote working. Scholars have discovered the benefit and
importance of this balance in different regions around the world including Europe (Anttilla et al.,
2015; Ojala & Pyoria, 2018; Sullivan, 2012), Australia (Baker et al. 2007; Wilkinson, 2008), and
the United States (Hobson et al., 2001; Munn & Chaudhuri, 2015; Smith, 2010). When looking
at different organizations, similar results were also found. Wu et al. (2013) found that child
welfare workers needed flexibility in their work environments in order to properly “unwind”
from the day. In addition, studies have shown that in order to minimize burnout within the
medical field, attention should be paid to ensure that working conditions can be amended
(Hawker, 2016). For corporate employees, due to the demands placed on them by their families,
women tend to need to be given more freedom to work remotely, thereby influencing human
resources policy development and implementation (Takeuchi, 2018).
22

Gender Disparity. Sherman (2020) conducted a study looking at almost 200 women in
corporate environments in order to better understand well-being and productivity. Through this
analysis, some women were able to work two days at home per week whereas others needed to
work within the office for the traditional five days a week. In this mixed methods study using
both quantitative (regression analysis) and qualitative (interviews) methods, this research found
that those women who were able to work from home two days per week reported better job
performance, reduced family conflict, and a reduction in costs related to coordination of work
and family (child care costs, etc.). This research underscores the onus for organizations to
examine a combination of home/work site engagement if possible.
Conditions of Effective Virtual Teams
Flexible working environments tend to be the first step towards creation of actual virtual
teams (Edwards & Wilson, 2004). Once a team can operate efficiently through one of the
channels mentioned above, inroads can begin to be laid to transform into an actual virtual team.
However, in order to deliver effective work within a virtual team, certain conditions must be met.
Gilson and her colleagues (Gilson et al., 2015) examined a broad literature base over the course
of 10 years in order to better understand this concept. Their research examined literature from
2005-2015 to understand the prevalent themes and came up with 10 themes that highlight the
conditions of virtual teams. These conditions range from in scope from inputs to outputs,
foundational conditions such as technology, and non-tangible conditions such as leadership and
trust. Table 2 presents these 10 themes and findings from this meta-analysis. This meta-analysis
provides a plethora of applicable findings that can be applied towards the study of virtual teams;
therefore, a detailed description of each theme as well as some of the salient literature associated
with it is provided.
23

Table 2
Virtual Team Themes
Theme Findings from studies
Research Design Research studies began to shift from a controlled setting into
real-world examples by leveraging technology (Martinez-
Moreno et al., 2009), conducting qualitative studies
(Capece & Costa, 2009), and examining a number of
different fields including information technology (Baruch
& Lin, 2012), consulting (Suh et al., 2011), and engineering
(Forester et al., 2007).
Team Inputs Research looking at the various inputs as drivers of virtual
team effectiveness, including willingness to participate in
virtual environments (Luse et al., 2013), being extroverted
(Berg, 2012), the amount of time a team spends working
together (Bierly et al., 2009), and task interdependence (Chi
et al., 2012).
Team Virtuality There is some debate over the ideal amount of virtual work
that should be done within teams focusing on geographical
dispersion (Cohen & Gibson, 2003), standard work
practices (Chudoba et al., 2005), team structure (Harvey et
al., 2005), and member roles and relationships (Gibson &
Gibbs, 2006).
Technology Technology positively influences communication and
performance (Hertel et al., 2005) but can also create delays
in exchange of information (Andres, 2012). In addition,
traditional communication channels such as e-mails may
not be as effective as more robust and creative
technological communication channels (Lin et al., 2010).
Globalization Virtual teams allow organizations to employ individuals in
almost any country (Martins et al., 2004) or culture
(Zakaria et al., 2004), which also adds cultural diversity to
the team dynamics (Hoch & Kozlowski, 2012) and
positively creates team identification (Au & Marks, 2012).
Leadership The more inspirational (Joshi et al., 2009) or transformational
Huang et al., 2010) a leader is in a virtual space, the more
likely virtual team members will excel and receive better
communication (Balthazard et al., 2009), increase
performance and satisfaction (Purvanova & Bono, 2009),
and be more motivated (Anderssen et al., 2012).
Mediator and Moderators A number of processes are critical in team effectiveness,
including conflict resolution and relationships (Kock &
Lynn, 2012), communication, (Hsu & Chou, 2009), task
knowledge and task orientation (Kanawattanachai & Yoo,
24

Theme Findings from studies
2007), team coordination (Penarroja et al., 2013)., and
frequency of interaction (Suh & Shin, 2010).
Trust Attention needs to be paid and channels created to promote
trust amongst a virtual team which has been linked to
success in teams (Furumo, 2009), not only between leader
and employee (Crisp & Jarvenpaa, 2013), but also between
employees (Clark et al., 2010). This trust inadvertently
leads to knowledge sharing to add to team camaraderie
(Golden & Raghuram, 2010; Liu & Li, 2012; Quigley et al.,
2007).
Outcomes Most research tends to focus on the outcomes of team and
member effectiveness (Kock & Lynn, 2012, Maynard et al.,
2012), but there has also been research that focuses on
other positive outcomes such as satisfaction (Huang et al.,
2010), goal commitment (Pazos, 2012), organizational
commitment (Horwitz et al., 2006), , and team confidence
(Turel & Connelly, 2012).
Ways to Enhance Success Creating a positive social atmosphere (Coppola et al, 2004),
cultivating proper training (Gay, 2007), and having team
connectedness (Cummings & Haas, 2012) all appear to be
the most salient avenues in which to create success within
virtual teams.

Note. Adapted from Gilson, L. L., Maynard, M. T., Young, N. C. J., Variainen, M., & Hakonen,
M. (2015). Virtual teams research: 10 years, 10 themes, and 10 opportunities. Journal of
Management, 41(5), 1313-1337.

By focusing on these core concepts as outlined in the literature, organizations leveraging
virtual teams will be setting themselves up to be the most successful. While this list is not
intended to serve as a one-size-fits-all approach, multiple other scholars have pointed to this
research as foundational to their approach for setting up virtual teams and best practices for
sustaining them (Colbert et al., 2016; Dulebohn & Hoch, 2017; Hoch & Dulebohn, 2017;
Jimenez et al., 2017; Schulze & Krumm, 2016).
25

Global Virtual Teams
A further delineation within virtual teams needs to be addressed in the context of this
study, as it pertains to global virtual teams. These teams, ideally, contribute to a multinational
knowledge base where individuals can share their ideas and experience in order to address
complex organizational problems (Killingsworth et al., 2016). These teams are now becoming
the new normal in organizations as a proliferation of companies extend beyond traditional
borders (Derven, 2016). However, just as conditions for success must be adhered to for virtual
teams in general, similar principles apply to global virtual teams. In order to better understand
the necessary conditions for success, Derven (2016) points out four key concepts that
organizations must understand to have a successful global virtual team.
The first component of this model for global virtual teams deals with diversity and
inclusion. Due to the fact that global virtual teams are inherently diverse, diversity should not
only be acknowledged but should also be celebrated. Diversity elements of all sorts should be
considered, such as those that can be seen (such as age, gender, race, etc.) as well as those that
are invisible (such as educational level, socioeconomic status, and value beliefs). Next, the
purpose of the team and the broader organizational ethos should also be considered. Third, the
people aspects of the team should be considered. This includes the relationships of all team
members, the style of leadership emanating from the leader, and the various developmental and
recognition programs the team undertakes. The last component of this model refers to process,
which includes the formal policies procedures and standards that govern the team, as well as a
measure of accountability within the team. Figure 1 provides a graphic depiction of this Hudson
model for success for global virtual teams, as described.

26

Figure 1
The HUDSON Research and Consulting Model for Global Virtual Team Success

Note. Model adapted from Derven, M. (2016). Four drivers to enhance global virtual teams.
Industrial and Commercial Training, 48(1), 1-8.

27

Benefits and Challenges Virtual Teams
As virtual teams continue to gain prevalence, organizations must weigh collectively and
objectively the pros and cons. Just because a virtual team makes sense does not mean that it is in
the best interest of the organization. What follows is a breakdown of the benefits and challenges
of virtual teams to both the individual and the organization.
For the Employee
There are a number of practical benefits for employees who work in virtual teams. For
example, due to their flexible nature, virtual team employees can complete their work anywhere,
thereby minimizing the time needed to commute to and from work (Liao, 2017). In addition,
reliance on technology serves as an additional benefit (Hacker et al., 2019), although this benefit
is only actualized if the organization invests resources into the correct technology for the team.
However, while the literature notes some benefits, there are challenges. In their study of
almost 200 employees in both virtual and face-to-face teams, de Pillis and Furumo (2007) found
that virtual team members exhibited lower levels of cohesion with colleagues and overall job
satisfaction. It must be noted, however, that this particular study should not be generalized too
broadly as it only focused on 20-25-year-old employees; therefore, older and younger employees
may exhibit different results (de Pillis & Furumo, 2007). In addition, Bailey (2013) found that
lack of daily communication with colleagues in virtual teams led to decreases in social
connection which eventually also led to overall reductions in team spirit. This lack of
communication has been shown to lead to overall lower levels of trust (Krumm et al., 2016),
which will be discussed in further detail next.
While many factors influence the overall effectiveness of teams in general, trust appears
to be the most salient (Lencioni, 2002). Members of any team (virtual or otherwise) need to be
28

able to trust their leaders, other colleagues, and the organization as a whole (Gilson et al, 2015).
This is especially true for virtual teams due to their uniqueness. The concept of interpersonal
trust relates to not only trust amongst individuals but also between the individual and the
organization (Guinot et al., 2014; Ward et al., 2014) and has been shown to be necessary for
overall team satisfaction (Cheng et al., 2016; Schiller et al., 2014). Building this level of trust is
painstaking and takes an inordinate amount of time if done well (Hakanen & Hakkinen, 2015;
Nilsson & Mattes, 2015).
In addition to interpersonal trust, another concept necessary for successful trust in virtual
teams is institutional trust. This form of trust, first conceptualized by McKnight et al. (1998)
ensures that supportive policies are in place, that employees have access to the correct pieces of
technology, that time is invested in training, and that roles and tasks are clearly defined. In their
analysis of trust in virtual teams, Ford et al. (2017) expanded on this list and found that not only
were these aspects necessary for trust to occur in organizations, but there also needed to be a
greater onus of importance placed on the leader of the team. As many of the cultural, symbolic,
and institutional complexities and standard ways of working are facilitated through the leader,
having this individual understand and codify these mechanisms resulted in higher levels of trust
within the organization (Ford et al, 2017). Higher levels of trust among all key stakeholders
within the organization has also been shown to lead to better communication and overall
knowledge sharing (Killingsworth et al., 2016).
For the Employer
Similarly, there are benefits and challenges for the employer (manager) as well as the
organization as a whole. One of the benefits relates to the fact that team members can work on
projects simultaneously without needing to be in the same physical location (Zuofa & Ochieng,
29

2017). This can lead to increased overall productivity and higher levels of customer satisfaction,
all while minimizing unnecessary travel costs (Zuofa & Ochieng, 2017). In addition, since team
members are able to work collaboratively with colleagues (Alsharo et al., 2017) leaders are able
to match team members to work on projects, expand ideas, and cultivate new and innovative
projects that can benefit the organization as a whole.
Still, while benefits exist, so too do challenges. Notably, virtual teams cannot work for all
sorts of problems that organizations may face. For example, virtual teams have been found to be
counter-productive for various aspects of project management, specifically when change
management has been considered (Hoegl & Muethel, 2016). In order to mitigate some of the
challenges, the research postulates that the focus needs to be on the leader. Liao (2017) found,
using hierarchical models, that leadership is more challenging in virtual teams than in face-to-
face teams. This was due, primarily, to the fact that most leaders indexed very high on either
task-oriented behaviors or leadership-oriented behaviors. Therefore, Liao (2017) created a model
that can be applied in most virtual team environments that allows leaders to index on both task
and leadership behaviors. Using slightly different methods, Serban et al. (2015) discovered
similar results and also found that for virtual teams, the leader serves in a more nuanced
facilitator role than in traditional work environments.
Summary
As is clear from the literature, the concept of virtual teams has deep roots within the
scholarship on organizations. While utilized in different ways, each manner in which virtual
teams operate can have both positive as well as negative repercussions for both the employer and
the employee. As previously stated, there is a growth in prominence in these teams, given the
move towards a more globalized society and the current pandemic the world is experiencing
30

right now. Being virtual in nature mandates that the interactions of these teams and team
members will be different than in traditional manners, with an almost complete reliance on
technology-mediated communication versus face-to-face (Panteli et al., 2019). However, just
because these employees’ ways of working are different does not mean that their engagement
should be ignored. On the contrary, engagement is just as important in these teams, considering
their unique challenges including technology usage (Panteli et al., 2019), modes of
communication (Shaik & Makhecha, 2019), concerns surrounding trust (Hacker et al., 2019),
leadership structures (Robert & You, 2019), and overall interaction amongst colleagues
(Malhotra et al., 2007). Furthermore, virtual teams and employee engagement are in fact deeply
connected topics. As employee engagement is a necessary condition towards overall team
effectiveness and success in virtual teams (Dulebohn & Hoch, 2017) as well as traditional teams,
this chapter will now turn to that literature base.
Literature on Employee Engagement
The next pillar of this literature review will focus on scholarship related to employee
engagement. Employee engagement has been at the forefront of organizational literature for
quite some time and has gained increased traction over the last two decades. While varying in
context, most understandings are rooted within the realm of human resource management
(Markos & Sridevi, 2010) and focus on constructs such as behavior, commitment, and overall
involvement (Bedarkar & Pandita, 2014). Employee engagement is now being examined within
other fields, including consulting, business professionals, and aspects of both the public and
private sectors (Shuck, 2011; Shuck & Wollard, 2010). This next section of the literature review
will examine scholarship regarding the history of employee engagement, the broad base of
31

definitions related to employee engagement, various models of engagement, and the benefits of
employee engagement and how to measure it.
History and Definitions of Employee Engagement
While there is some debate as to the true “beginning” of engagement, the general
consensus is that William Kahn (1990) is credited with its inception. Kahn (1990), using
ethnographic field methods with camp counselors in the West Indies, originally sought to
understand attachment as a construct within organizational behavior. However, what quickly
evolved was a framework to better understand the processes and behaviors employees use to
express themselves – a term he referred to as “engagement” (Kahn, 1990). Kahn (1990) further
espoused that there were certain psychological conditions (meaningfulness, safety, and
availability) that impacted engagement. This work by Kahn (1990) remained the cornerstone of
this area of research on engagement until the early 2000s.
It was at that time the concept grew in prominence exponentially with the publication of a
number of other seminal works on the topic, including Maslach et al. (2001), Schaufeli et al.
(2002), and others. Each of these scholars added complexity to the concept of employee
engagement by examining the phenomenon through a unique lens. For example, Maslach et al.
(2001) proffered that engagement was nothing more than the antithesis of burnout; therefore, as
long as employees avoided burnout they were engaged. Schaufeli et al. (2002), on the other
hand, used a sample of 314 Spanish university students and 619 Spanish employees from private
and public organizations in order to differentiate the concept of work engagement as a separate
construct to engagement. Johnson (2003) further elaborated on the engagement topic by
suggesting that Kahn’s (1990) model was inaccurate in that it did not include a cognitive aspect –
this cognitive dimension is needed as it also adds to overall burnout. At the same time, Shirom
32

(2003) posited engagement should be viewed as its own concept, and not as an antecedent on a
multi-scaled continuum of engaged to not engaged. These seminal pieces, coupled with the
prevalence of surveys looking at employee engagement from companies such as Gallup (Bridger,
2018), paved the way for the expanse of this phenomenon within the organizational and
psychological lexicons.
As the prominence of employee engagement grew, so too did the myriad of definitions on
the topic. One of the challenges of defining employee engagement is that it is highly subjective,
which has created challenges as scholars have attempted to untangle the myriad of words,
measurements, and frameworks that lie within the term (Shuck et al., 2017). While there is no
universal definition of the term (Schaufeli, 2013), there are some definitions that are more
pervasive in the literature than others. For example, most scholars agree that employee
engagement must be active in nature, with a focus on an inherent desire of the employee to be
engaged (Parker & Griffin, 2011). This concept of active does not necessarily mean that
engagement is increasing, but rather, that it is fluid rather than static (Biggs et al., 2014). The
notion of some form of emotion is also mutually agreed as important (Shuck & Wollard, 2010)
as is the focus on some aspect of work, either for personal or professional gains (Christian et al.,
2011).
While it is clear that numerous definitions exist for employee engagement, this study will
lean on the definition provided by Shuck and his colleagues (Shuck et al., 2017). This meta-
analysis attempted to parse through the breadth of literature on the topic of employee
engagement in order to propose a working definition. While still not exhaustive, this definition
does provide the necessary indices and foci of the components of employee engagement.
According to these scholars, employee engagement is defined as “a positive, active, work-related
33

psychological state operationalized by the maintenance, intensity, and direction of cognitive,
emotional, and behavioral energy” (Schuck et al, 2017, p. 269).
Also, some of the debate concerns the outcome of the engagement – in other words,
“engaged in what?” (Welbourne & Schramm, 2017, p. 19). Further contextualization of
employee engagement has rested on the lines of trying to answer this “engaged in what”
question. For example, one main line of research answers the preceding question in that engaged
employees attempt to produce positive work outcomes or outputs (Hartner et al., 2002; Saks,
2006; Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004). Wefald (2008), in his review of the research in the area, came
to the conclusion that there was a reciprocal and multi-dimensional relationship between
employee engagement, the resources available, and positive work outcomes.
In order to produce these desirable outcomes, some scholars posit whether an aspect of
discretionary effort is needed by the employee. This line of reasoning was explored by Lloyd
(2008) who sought to uncover how this effort was applied by university students in a business
administration course. Almost 500 students took part in this study. Using hierarchical modeling
to analyze the results, Lloyd (2008) found that the students who were more engaged in the course
material exhibited not only higher discretionary effort towards the course goals, but also
displayed a positive psychological mindset overall. More similarly aligned to the work of
Maslach et al. (2001) mentioned earlier, some studies examine the relationship between
engagement and turnover and/or attrition. As turnover and attrition are closely examined within
many organizations from a human resources perspective, work looking at this relationship
(Allen, 2008; Lockwood, 2007) has had important organizational implications. However,
employee engagement is a dynamic construct, and as such, different models for examining this
34

phenomenon are needed. The next section will describe some of the most prevalent models of
employee engagement that exist.
Models of Engagement
As employee engagement is such a broad topic among scholars and practitioners, it
stands to reason that there will be different models to apply to its understanding. While this
literature review cannot provide an exhaustive list of all models, the four primary ones that are
more often seen in the literature will be reviewed. From oldest to most recent these include (a)
Kahn’s (1990) Needs Satisfying Model of Engagement; (b) Maslach and Leiter’s (1997) Burnout
Model of Engagement; (c) Schaufeli et al.’s (2002) Three-Factor Model of Engagement; and (d)
Bakker and Demerouti’s (2007) Job Demands-Resource (JD-R) Model.
Needs Satisfying Model of Engagements
This first model, as proposed by Kahn (1990), is the most widely applied model within
the employee engagement literature. As previously stated, Kahn’s (1990) model was born out of
his own ethnographic research into camp counselors. At its premise, this model presumes that
employees are able to engage and put a large amount of effort into their work because they are
able to identify and become closely connected to it. In addition, Kahn (1990) suggested that there
are three psychological conditions that must be met in order for engagement to occur. These
three conditions are meaningfulness, safety, and availability.
The first condition is meaningfulness, in that employees need to know how meaningful
the work they are doing is in order to move closer to it. Employees need to find personal and
broader significance to the work that they are doing in order to feel connected to it. In addition, it
is important for employees to know that the work they are doing is contributing to the wider
goals of the organization (Lee et al., 2017). In their study of examining how various
35

organizational factors can influence employee behavior, Lee et al. (2017) studied 134 employees
from 28 different teams. They hypothesized, and confirmed through analysis, that while culture
did not have as large an impact on engagement, empowering leadership had a direct and
statistically significant impact on work engagement via meaningfulness (Lee et al., 2017). These
results demonstrate that leaders can serve as a direct link between employees and the value they
bring to their work by connecting tasks to the wider organizational goals.
The next condition is safety, as in employees need to feel confident that they work in a
safe environment and that their employer wants them to be safe. In this regard, Kahn (1990)
believed that safety was achieved by organizations being able to cultivate an environment that is
both welcoming and nonthreatening so that engagement can be fostered. Another component of
this safe environment was being able to create trusting and positive relationships, which has been
shown to make employees feel safe and welcomed within an environment (Crawford et al.,
2014). Once employees have a strong sense of this safety, they will be able to engage more fully
with their work.
The final condition is availability. For the purposes of this model, availability refers to
the amount of resources (physical, emotional, and psychological) that employees need in order to
be engaged and connected to the work (Kahn, 1990). Also, engagement further requires various
distractions to be mitigated so that one can focus wholly on the tasks involved (Kahn, 1990).
Finally, when employees feel as though they are being judged by others in the workplace
(colleagues or leaders), insecurities can arise which can lead employees to question their own
sense of belonging to the organization, thereby minimizing engagement.
Once these compulsory needs are met, employees, assuming they are provided with the
appropriate resources, will be more likely to complete their work from both a quality and
36

quantity standpoint (Kahn, 1990). While this model has been applied very broadly within the
field of employee engagement, one important study will be noted here. In a study examining how
applicable Kahn’s (1990) model was in practice, May et al. (2004) found not only that the
presence of all three of these needs were present, but also there was an even greater and more
significant relationship between an employee’s resources, rewards, and recognition, each of
which can be aligned to increased employee engagement.
Burnout Model of Engagement
As a slight build and more of a twist on Kahn’s (1990) model, Maslach and Leiter (1997)
examined engagement with a different lens. Rather than looking at engagement as a condition
where needs are met, these scholars defined engagement as the antithesis to burnout. According
to this model, engagement is a byproduct of involvement, energy, and efficacy and by protecting
the employee from burnout, they will feel more energetic and find their work more fulfilling
(Maslach & Leiter, 1997). In addition, this model also posits that the concepts of engagement
and burnout can be viewed as the two polar opposites of a spectrum and that employees will fall
somewhere in between these two poles, since true burnout and/or engagement is unlikely
(Maslach & Leiter, 1997). While seminal, this model has been replicated by these scholars since
this original research was published. For example, Maslach and Leiter (2008) also found that for
almost 500 employees across varying organizations, those individuals who were more engaged
in their roles were less likely to burnout.
In order to ensure that burnout does not occur, there are specific antecedents that are
needed in order to ensure engagement. According to Maslach et al. (2001) these antecedents
include a sustainable amount of work, choice and control in the work, some level of rewards and
recognition, a supportive community, fair and just practices and procedures, and work that is
37

both meaningful and valued. However, it should be noted that not all of these conditions must be
met, but the more that are (and the more frequent they are), the more likely engagement will
occur. Finally, Maslach and Leitner (1997) found that an employee’s manager has a direct
impact on overall employee engagement, a key finding that has been replicated in numerous
studies and has large implications for practice.
Three-Factor Model of Engagement
The next model to be discussed is Schaufeli et al.’s (2002) three-factor model. While
similar in scope to Maslach and Leiter’s (1997) model, this idea theorizes that engagement can
be viewed as a positive and fulfilling state where employees are highly dedicated to, and
absorbed into, their work (Schaufeli et al., 2002). In other words, the more fulfilled and
connected employees are to their work, the more engaged they will be, which will in turn create
more positive feelings of connectedness to the organization.
As described in the title of this model, there are three factors that are included. In this
model, the three factors of vigor, dedication, and absorption (Schaufeli et al., 2002) all interplay
and are inter-connected in a broader framework that helps predict levels of engagement among
employees. As the first concept in this model, vigor refers to a condition where employees are
full of energy and are willing and able to possess the mental and psychological fortitude
necessary to invest resources into one’s work regardless of potential difficulties (Schaufeli et al.,
2002). Dedication, on the other hand, is a sense of pride and enthusiasm one has towards the
work being performed, whereas absorption allows an employee to be completely engaged and
enthralled in the work he/she is doing (Schaufeli, 2002). As these concepts interplay, these
scholars defined engagement not as a momentary output, but rather as a “more persistent and
pervasive affective-cognitive state that is not focused on any particular object, event, individual,
38

or behavior” (Schaufeli et al., 2002, p. 74), but as a broad-based concept that can aid in an
employee’s overall sense of connectedness.
While this original research assumed that these three variables are interconnected in
nature, later research refuted this. Just two years later, Schaufeli and Bakker (2004) found that
these three factors were not as connected as initially thought and in order to properly understand
them in further detail, each should be studied independent of the other two. To accomplish this,
these scholars created the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES) in order to separate and test
each of these constructs independently. Initial findings from this instrument were incredibly
positive and as such, the UWES has become the standard at measuring employee engagement in
a myriad of different fields (Parakh et al., 2016). However, this instrument is not void of defects,
as was observed by Byrne et al. (2016) who proposed that the Job Engagement Scale (JES)
served as a better overall tool towards measuring employee engagement in certain situations,
such as measuring psychological meaningfulness. Still, the UWES is highly regarded as the
instrument of choice for this sort of measurement (Mills et al., 2012).
Job Demands-Resource (JD-R) Model
This last model is more recent than the previous ones discussed. Bakker and Demerouti’s
(2007) Job Demands-Resource (JD-R) model is different from the previous models in that it
centers the attention of engagement on stress. More specifically, the model assumes that stress
can be broken down into two distinct categories—job demands and job resources (Bakker &
Demerouti, 2007). Job demands are those which require sustained physical, cognitive, and
emotional commitment (and are therefore more likely to lead to burnout), whereas job resources
allow individuals to grow, learn, and develop in their roles (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007).
Examples of job demands would be time, role ambiguity or conflict, and challenging work
39

environments whereas examples of job resources include performance feedback, job security,
growth and development opportunities, and overall positive organizational culture and climate
(Bakker & Demerouti, 2007). Inconsistencies in either of these categories can lead to increased
stress.
The JD-R model recommends that organizations should over index and invest in job
resources in order to minimize and mitigate the potential consequences of job demands. Since
job resources can facilitate and increase motivation among employees, organizations should look
for avenues to create these if they do not exist. This model has been applied throughout a number
of different studies (Bakker et al., 2007; Bakker et al., 2008; Crawford et al., 2010) and has
consistently found that as companies create more job resources, the stressors stemming from job
demands diminish. In their meta-analysis examining the literature on this topic, Crawford et al.
(2010) reviewed over 70 different studies to test their hypotheses related to the relationships of
job demands, job resources, and engagement. Using a number of different types of statistical
analyses (confidence intervals, confidence variables, and weighted correlation), they found that
all of the various job resources – autonomy, feedback, development opportunities, positive
workplace climate, recognition, and fit – all had a positive impact on employee engagement
(Crawford et al. 2010). They also found that key organizational constraints (such as
administrative obstacles and burden, conflict, politics, and role conflict) also were negatively
correlated with positive engagement (Crawford et al., 2010). While these finds are not
necessarily surprising, the fact that they were found consistently throughout a broad number of
different studies does confirm how the JD-R model can be utilized within organizations.
Contemporary Models of Employee Engagement
40

The several models previously discussed are foundational in the study of employee
engagement but are nonetheless somewhat dated. For example, a team of researchers (Rana et
al., 2014) created a model of employee engagement that built heavily on a number of models
from past research. This model relied on a number of distinct steps towards achieving high
employee engagement. In the first step, the various units of employee engagement are mapped
out. These include job characteristics, relationships with both supervisors and colleagues, the
overall workplace environment, and practices, policies, and procedures (Rana et al., 2014). The
second step in this model is defined by different laws, as these scholars defined them, that lead to
employee engagement. These laws are categorical and sequential and better understand the
likelihood of interaction among these different variables. The final step in this model is being
able to have it bound within the context of a particular organization (Rana et al., 2014).
In addition, Eldor and Harpaz (2016) used their own model in their study of employee
engagement. This research focused more pointedly on the actual learning environment that takes
place within organizations and how this environment helps to shape the ways in which
employees create, acquire, and transfer knowledge. These scholars used 625 employees and their
supervisors in different fields within Israel over the course of nine months. These participants
were given two different surveys – one focused on the perception of the learning climate of the
organization, and the other focused on individuals’ attitudes towards work. Using multilevel
modeling, these scholars found that employee engagement helps to mediate some of the negative
consequences of a poor organizational learning environment (Eldor & Harpaz, 2016).
Finally, Jena and Pradhan (2017) undertook research to investigate how similar
organizations produced radically different levels of engagement among employees. Drawing on a
number of models previously summarized, these scholars posited a model that showed the
41

interconnectedness of three key variables. First, a compelling job assignment, in that employees
feel more engaged when the work they produce contributes to a higher order or organizational
purpose. Second, authority and accountability, in that both must exist in order for employees to
achieve maximum engagement. Too much authority leads to an abuse of power, whereas too
much accountability impairs employees’ ability to make critical judgement decisions. Third,
interpersonal harmony, in that employees must be taken care of, both inside and outside the
organization, in order for engagement to occur. These three dimensions interact in order to
produce highly engaged employees (Jena & Pradhan, 2017). This symbiotic interaction helps to
better understand what conditions are necessary in order for employees to either be engaged or
disengaged in their roles.
Benefits and Measurements of Employee Engagement
Based on the previous discussion, there are clearly a number of benefits for the employee
that can be attained with high employee engagement. However, another key benefactor of this
engagement is the organization itself. Kumar and Pansari (2015) found that employee
engagement is a broad term that can be further broken down into (a) employee satisfaction,
which is the overall positive reaction employees have to their work environment, including
colleagues, supervisors, working conditions, pay, and benefits; (b) employee identification,
which is the emotional connection that employees make to their organization; (c) employee
commitment, which allows employees to go above and beyond their “day jobs” and do more
work than what is in their job description for the organization; (d) employee loyalty, which
manifests not only in loyalty for employees but also in how loyal customers are to the
organization (vis-à-vis positive experiences with employees); and (e) employee performance,
which is the quality of goods, services, or work output that employees provide to the employer.
42

Regardless of the dimension, the more overall engaged the employee was with the organization,
the more positive attributes that were seen in each of these spaces (Kumar & Pansari, 2015).
In addition, there is an intrinsic zest that engaged employees have for their organizations.
When employees are engaged, they are more likely to want to go the extra mile to deliver results,
they enjoy performing the aspects of the job, they are more likely to solve problems when they
arise, they work more collaboratively with their peers and colleagues, and they speak more
pleasantly about their job and organization outside of work (Whitemeyer, 2013). Christian et al.,
(2011) found that engaged employees provided greater job and task performance outcomes,
whereas Rich et al. (2010) posited that engaged employees gave more discretionary effort and
higher levels of commitment to their roles. The more engaged employees were, the more
profitability that was experienced by the organization (Xanthopoulou et al., 2009).
Overall, there is a wealth of documented evidence that demonstrates that engaged
employees positively impact a number of business outcomes, including productivity, safety,
quality, and customer loyalty and experience (Ellis & Sorenson, 2007; Heintzman & Marson,
2005; Markos & Sridevi, 2010). One of the largest studies ever conducted on the benefits of
employee engagement was done by the Gallup organization (Gallup, 2013). This large-scale
meta-analytic study was conducted by surveying over 1.4 million employees across 192 different
organizations (in 49 different industries) throughout 35 different countries (Gallup, 2013).
Regardless of how the data was manipulated or which variables were controlled, the following
business outcomes were actualized, as it was found that engaged employees provided over 20%
more productivity and profitability, had almost 50% fewer safety incidents, saw 40% increases in
quality, and contributed to 50% less attrition compared to non-engaged employees (Gallup,
43

2013). These findings are significant and point to the sheer importance of providing atmospheres
to keep employees engaged.
As the preceding sections illustrate, employers and organizations place a hefty stock in
ensuring that their employees become and remain engaged. However, in order to know whether
particular interventions are effective, a system of measurement must also be enacted. There are a
number of different mechanisms that exist that can do just that (Riordan, 2017). Employee
surveys collect feedback on employee sentiment across a number of different dimensions. Some
of the more common employee surveys that exist include new hire surveys, onboarding surveys,
assimilation surveys, confidence surveys, and employee opinion surveys (Saltzman et al., 2020).
These surveys have long existed to identify employee concerns regarding morale and conditions
and feed this back to the leaders of the organization (Macey & Fink, 2020). Some of the more
frequent reasons employers survey their employees is to assess attitude towards work conditions,
monitor impacts of organizational changes that have been implemented, provide an outlet for
employees to solicit input on future decisions, and add an additional communication channel
(Kraut, 2020). Hoffman and Tadelis (2017) also add that these surveys serve as a conduit for
employees to provide direct or indirect feedback to their managers in hopes of increasing the
leadership capabilities of these individuals. There are other ways that employers can collect this
sort of feedback from their employees, but surveys have long been considered the primary
method (Lappalainen et al., 2019). Furthermore, surveys provide a large set of data that can
easily be analyzed and looked at in different manners in order to better understand organizational
problems
Almost all companies worldwide participate in some form of an employee opinion survey
(Prayogo et al., 2017) in order to assess and pulse check the sentiments of its team. While there
44

is a deluge of different types of surveys that organizations can use to get a “feel” for its
employees (Saltzman et al., 2020), employee opinion surveys tend to be the most widely used.
Not only do these surveys tend to tell a very real story within the organization, but they can also
help to pinpoint the individual causes and stressors of employee disengagement, such as work
overload, role ambiguity, lack of connectedness to the organization, and low levels of employee
value (Tushman et al., 2017). Almost all companies put out this type of survey to its employees
at least once a year in order to solicit and collect a number of different types of feedback. By
better understanding how employees feel, organizations can put systematic interventions in place
in a timely manner to increase retention and ideally prevent employee turnover (Bisht et al.,
2016).
Summary
Perhaps no other aspect of organizational culture has received more attention over the
past 30 years than employee engagement. While different models of engagement exist and have
been applied in different contexts, the benefits of having employees who are engaged cannot be
overstated. Furthermore, the literature has delineated the key components of employee
engagement, including commitment to the organization and the value of the work performed,
being positively present in the work, satisfaction and enthusiasm, sense of purpose, and the
extent to which employees are motivated to contribute to the overall success of the organization.
For the purposes of transparency, this study leaned on the definition of employee engagement
presented in chapter one, which is defined as “an individual employee’s cognitive, emotional,
and behavioral state directed toward desired organizational outcomes” (Shuck and Wollard,
2010, p. 103). As this study concerns engagement at ET, this literature base will help to set the
stage and unpack the particular aspects that are most salient in that organization.
45

Virtual Team Engagement Best Practices
Paramount to this study is the connection between these two dichotomous literature
bases, and to examine the best practices in virtual team engagement. Different scholars have
identified different types of best practices. Jones and Kober (2019) identified five such strategies
to keep virtual team members engaged, including (a) keeping connected to the central mission
and vision of the organization; (b) providing additional support to virtual team members; (c)
seeking feedback more frequently; (d) communicating more often with virtual team members,
especially in times of high stress and ambiguity; and (e) staying connected to how virtual
employees are feeling. Fan et al. (2020) suggested that in order to keep virtual team members
engaged, organizations must ensure the employees have a proper work setup at home, maintain
diligent routines, invest in social activities and fun events a team can do, consistently reinforce
mental, physical, and emotional well-being, and ensure that employees have the proper
technology to be successful and engaged in their roles.
Other scholars have identified other key components to ensure best practices for virtual
team member engagement. As an example, leadership in virtual teams has been cited as a key
contributor to employee engagement in virtual teams, and a number of scholars have looked to
identify the key components of quality leadership in virtual teams (Charlier et al., 2016; Hoegl &
Muethel, 2016; Liao, 2017; Serban et al., 2015). In addition, communication is often cited in the
literature, both the ways in which these employees communicate through technology platforms
versus face-to-face interaction as well as the frequency of such communication (Dunn et al.,
2015; Hill & Bartol, 2018; Lippert & Dulewicz, 2018; Marlow et al., 2017). Furthermore,
technology, tools, and infrastructure are additional components that must be understood within
virtual team engagement, as this is the primary vehicle of interaction with these employees
46

(Ebrahim et al., 2009; Felstead & Henseke, 2017). Ensuring that virtual team members create
and maintain positive professional, collegial, and social relationships within their team has also
been identified in the literature, particularly in creating time for appropriate team and
relationship building (Charlier et al., 2016; Ford et al., 2017; Liao, 2017). Finally, perhaps the
most salient variable for virtual team member engagement is trust. Trust is key in creating and
maintaining productive and successful teams in general, and this fact becomes even more
pronounced when considering virtual teams due to their unique conditions already mentioned
(Ford et al., 2019).
Therefore, there is evidence that a number of key factors and best practices that are
necessary for effective employee engagement of virtual team members. These include leadership
behavior, communication, technology, tools and infrastructure, forming and maintaining positive
relationships, and trust. These variables are key to consider as they were leveraged to frame and
better understand the employee engagement of virtual team members at ET.
Literature Review Summary
The preceding sections outlined the core concepts that frame this study. An initial review
was conducted to examine the concept of virtual teams, including their growth in a number of
different organizations due to globalization. Then, literature on employee engagement was
reviewed, examining the history, benefits and challenges, and measurement mechanisms. While
these strands have fairly robust literature bases, there is almost no literature which ties both of
these concepts together. This research will not only help to fill this void but will also further
connect these two components, as this will be necessary due to the expansion of virtual teams in
the coming years (Liao, 2017). Next, this chapter will turn to the conceptual framework that will
guide the remainder of this study.
47

Clark and Estes (2008) Gap Analysis Framework
This study leveraged the gap analysis framework proposed by Clark and Estes (2008),
which is a systematic method for understanding and solving complex organizational problems.
The premise of this model is that it is built on a six-step roadmap that begins with identifying key
business and individual goals, determining and analyzing the gaps, then identifying the various
knowledge, motivation, and organizational processes and solutions that can be used to
understand the performance gaps and evaluate results (Clark & Estes, 2008). For this study, the
gap analysis framework was used to better understand why employee engagement levels tend to
be lower in virtual teams, specifically those teams that have been virtual for quite some time.
Once the current state and the desired state are defined, the various knowledge, motivation, and
organizational factors can be examined and analyzed.
As knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors can all be used in some capacity to
understand and correct gaps within organizations, the following sections will explore each of
these components. This will be done by examining the assumed influences of these dimensions.
First, the factual, conceptual, and metacognitive aspects of virtual team members will be
examined. Then, through the theoretical frameworks of task value theory and self-efficacy
theory, the motivation factors will be analyzed. Finally, the organizational factors of lack of trust,
psychological safety, lack of resources, and lack of quality feedback will be examined. Within
each of these spheres, the assumed influence will be identified using relevant literature and the
methodological technique in which the influence will be identified will also be addressed.
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences
The following sections will detail various assumed influences, as well as the impact on
this study, across the knowledge, motivation, and organizational realms.
48

Knowledge Assumed Influences
In order to improve employee engagement, ET virtual team members need to have the
necessary knowledge and skills to do so. According to Clark and Estes (2008), knowledge and
skills are necessary for both job performance and to achieve stated goals. This knowledge is
needed when individuals do not know how to achieve their goals and need additional
information, training, and education to accomplish said goals (Clark & Estes, 2008). For the
purposes of this study, virtual team members need to have the necessary knowledge and skills to
perform their jobs well. Studies have shown that the more knowledge and information employees
have to be able to be successful in their roles, the more connected and engaged with the
organization they become (Juan et al., 2018; Karim & Mahid, 2017).
This study will examine conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive knowledge. While all
of these types of knowledge have roots in education, they can also be applied to other
organizations as well. Knowledge can be further delineated between four different types –
factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive. Factual knowledge refers to an understanding
of certain facts and information relating to any process, fact, or discipline (Rueda, 2011).
Conceptual knowledge refers to being able to compartmentalize and comprehend how various
pieces of knowledge fit together in a broader picture (Krathwohl, 2002). Procedural knowledge
is defined as the ability to explain or justify meanings and knowledge, without fully
understanding the underlying topics (Zuya, 2017). Put another way, procedural knowledge refers
to how knowledge is memorized and able to be recalled without fully needing to understand the
information. Finally, metacognitive knowledge refers to the extent to which an individual
possesses knowledge about a person, task, or strategy in cognitive processing (Lepola et al.,
2020). In other words, metacognitive knowledge is about the connections individuals can make.
49

Knowledge Assumed Influence 1: Virtual Team Members Need to Understand What Is
Communicated and Expected of Them to Be Successful in Their Virtual Roles
From a conceptual knowledge standpoint, virtual team members need to know what is
expected of them in order to be successful. As much of the training within organizations involves
knowledge understanding and application (Donovan, 2012), organizations must make concerted
efforts to engage their employees in this space. Conceptual knowledge, based on its central
location in a knowledge-based economy (Arunprasad, 2015), has been linked to overall team and
task engagement. In their study of team-based learning, Emke et al. (2016) found that when team
members were aware of engagement prior to completing tasks, more overall commitment to the
activity and higher engagement was actualized. In this study, 122 second-year medical students
engaged in a pre-clinical pediatrics course to see how much information they would retain.
Engagement was explained to the students at the beginning of the course. Students were then
able to select the learning method they would prefer to work in (individual, self-study, group-
study, or lecture). The findings of the study, based on MANOVA statistical analysis, found that
the students who engaged in the material using group-study were able to retain and apply the
information more easily months after course completion (Emke et al., 2016). Therefore,
engagement increased knowledge retention.
In addition to engagement increasing knowledge retention, being aware of employee
engagement overall helps to increase its capacity. Conceptual knowledge has been connected to
underlying meaning and purpose within the organization broadly as well as individual employee
roles (Yao & Juan, 2017). Since employees actively seek meaning in their work, the onus is on
the organization to provide it. Having an understanding of the meaning of their roles and what
success looks like in their roles is necessary in this regard. Holbeche and Springett (2003) found
50

that when employees were not aware of the meaning of their work and the broader purposes of
the organization, engagement drastically declined. This was due to the fact that employees
needed to have work meaning explicitly spelled out which is different than how meaning is
contrived in other settings (e.g. personal). By not understanding these aspects of meaning within
the organizations, team members are not able to become properly engaged.
Knowledge Assumed Influence 2: Virtual Team Members Need to Understand the
Connections and Relationships Between Themselves and the Organization As Well as to Their
Virtual Team Colleagues
Also from a conceptual knowledge standpoint, virtual team members also need to
understand the connections between their roles and the broader organizational mission. By being
able to connect to the broader organization, employees can find purpose in their roles. Rozgus
(2018) found that employees who were able to find purpose in their roles and to the greatest
aspects of the organization were not only happier, but also more productive. While technology is
changing the way work is done and employees are becoming more disconnected than ever
before, companies who focus on connecting with their employees are more successful than those
that do not (Rozgus, 2018). In addition, George (2020) found that an even broader connection
was important to employee well-being. This research found that the organization must serve as
the conduit in order to connect the people, process, and plan, both long-term as well as short-
term. Using survey techniques and structural equation modeling, George (2020) found that the
more that organizations shared with their employees, the more engaged these employees became.
These findings are important to consider, since the onus of connection between employee and
organization should not solely lie with employees; rather, employers should make efforts to
bridge this information to their employees.
51

Additional research has found similar results. In their study examining the
meaningfulness of work, Michaelson and his colleagues found that employees who had a firmer
understanding of their organizations’ missions and goals were more likely to be more invested in
their work (Michaelson et al., 2014). Additionally, this research found that, while employees
should not be required to find meaning in their roles and work, the more they can connect the
purpose of what they are doing to the organizational ethos, the more likely they will be
committed to their jobs and be able to put in more discretionary effort (Michaelson et al., 2014).
In addition, organizations are better served when they are able to connect different aspects of the
organization to all employees, not just those in management positions (Carter et al., 2013). By
helping all employees make these connections to the broader goals of the organization,
employees will be more likely to produce higher quality work in a more productive manner.
In addition to connecting to the organization, virtual team members must also be able to
make connections with their colleagues. This has been cited a number of times in the research
(Charlier et al., 2016; Ford et al., 2017; Liao, 2017) as a key best practice towards the
engagement of virtual team members. Working in a virtual environment can be a lonely and
isolating experience (Krawczyk-Brylka, 2017) and virtual team members need to be able to
communicate and connect with their colleagues. However, there is not necessarily a one-size-
fits-all approach to these connections and, as evidenced by Krawczyk-Brylka (2017), virtual
teams need to find the right proportion of team connectedness that works for their organization.
In this model, virtual connections and in-person connections sit on a spectrum and this research
posits that team members must decipher where on the spectrum they sit. Furthermore, this
connection to colleagues is instrumental with building not only collegial connections, but also
52

trust (Breuer et al., 2019). These collegial connections and trust are also important towards
building effective teams.
Knowledge Assumed Influence 3: Virtual Team Members Need to Know How to Leverage
Tools and Resources Available to Them in a Virtual Environment for Effective Team Building
In addition, from a procedural standpoint, virtual team members need to know how to use
and leverage the tools available for proper team building. Part of being able to build teams in a
virtual environment rests on being able to make use of the virtual platforms and technologies.
There are a number of different tools and platforms that virtual team members can leverage,
some of which vary in the amount of audio and/or visual connections between the various team
members (Laitinen & Valo, 2018). The amount of connection (in terms of both audio and visual)
that is used within the communication itself has a direct impact on the overall connections and
in-group dynamic made within the team (Plotnick et al., 2016). Therefore, the actual platforms
and infrastructure, as well as the level to which they are utilized, are both necessary conditions
for effective team-building in virtual organizations.
However, this is often easier said than done, especially due to the fact that not all
members of virtual teams have the same level of comfort (Davidson, 2006). This comfort level,
according to Fuller et al. (2016), can have a direct impact on not only a virtual team member’s
organizational performance, but also on their overall feelings of anxiety and stress. While
utilizing technology is paramount to successful virtual team effectiveness, it is often noted as one
of the primary impediments towards effective communication and subsequent team building
(Hacker et al., 2018). In their study of the effectiveness of different software platforms for global
virtual team effectiveness, Gheni et al. (2016) found that after surveying 103 different team
53

members, both technical problems and lack of technical proficiency were found to be the largest
problems affecting virtual team members.
In addition, Shameen et al. (2017) conducted an extensive literature review to examine
some of the common challenges faced by virtual team members. In their review, they examined
85 different scholarly articles from a number of different countries and periodicals and found that
29 of them (34%) cited lack of appropriate communication technologies as the largest
determinant to success. Since virtual team members rely on electronic communication almost
extensively (and definitely more than their traditional counterparts in non-virtual environments),
it is imperative that virtual team members know how to properly access and use these tools and
platforms. If not, virtual team members will not be able to effectively communicate and
coordinate amongst themselves effectively, thereby impacting overall performance.
Knowledge Assumed Influence 4: Virtual Team Members Need to Be Able to Reflect and
Communicate Times in Which They Felt Engaged/Disengaged in Their Virtual Teams
Finally, from a metacognitive standpoint, virtual team members need to be able to reflect
on times that they felt both engaged as well as disengaged within organizations. By being able to
reflect on past experiences, virtual team members will be able to conceptualize what good looks
like (or does not look like). In her study examining trust in virtual teams, Holton (2001) found
that the more they asked virtual team members to reflect on their experiences, the more engaged
they felt to the organization. Research by Alsharo et al. (2017) resulted in similar findings. As
well, in their exploratory study of learning processes for global teams, Soule and Applegate
(2009) posited that, due to their physical distance from one another, virtual team members must
be able to reflect on their feelings and challenges in order to stay positively engaged. This aspect
of self-reflection is key to individual growth and development.
54

From a sociological standpoint, Santuzzi and Zoeckler (2019) used quasi-experimental
research design of over 40 different virtual teams and discovered that those teams that were able
to reflect more frequently on their experiences were more effective in their roles. These scholars
also found that the more employees were able to reflect on their experiences in the workplace,
the more engaged they became with the overall organization. Finally, Liao (2017) concluded that
weekly reflection creates an engaging atmosphere in which virtual team members can thrive.
Therefore, if virtual team members are able to reflect on times when they felt engaged within
their team (and inversely, times where they did not), organizations will be better prepared to put
in place the systemic structures and practices to garner this type of positive environment. This
form of best practice sharing can be invaluable towards making both the individual employee
and the broader organization more successful.
Knowledge Assumed Influences Summary
This study sought to uncover the following assumed knowledge influences: conceptual,
procedural, and metacognitive. A synopsis of the above-mentioned components can be found in
Table 3, along with both the type of knowledge component this influence is mapped to, and the
ways in which this information was gleaned from participants for this study. Each assumed
influence is assigned a coding scheme that will be utilized and referenced in the data collection
and analysis phase of this research.

55

Table 3
Assumed Knowledge Influences, Knowledge Type, and Knowledge Influence Assessment
Organizational mission
The mission of ET is to be the most customer obsessed company in the world.
Organizational goal
By December 2023, Employee Tech will increase its virtual team engagement by 5% through
the design and implementation of an engagement initiative.
Stakeholder goal
By December 2022, 100% of virtual team members will be engaged in the business and
leverage best practices in a standardized manner.
Knowledge influence Knowledge type
Knowledge influence
assessment
Virtual team members need
to understand what is
expected of them to be
successful in their virtual
roles (K-C-1)
Conceptual Interviews
Virtual team members need
to understand the
connections and
relationships between
themselves and the
organization as well to their
virtual team colleagues (K-
C-2)
Conceptual Interviews
Virtual team members need
to know how to leverage
tools and resources
available to them in a
virtual environment for
effective team building (K-
P-3)
Procedural Interviews
Virtual team members need
to be able to reflect and
communicate times in
which they felt
engaged/disengaged in
their virtual teams (K-M-4)
Metacognitive Interviews

56

Motivational Assumed Influences
In order to improve employee engagement, ET virtual team members need to have strong
motivation. Whereas knowledge informs how individuals do things, motivation informs why
individuals do things. Clark and Estes (2008) detail that most of the motivation research describe
three different motivational processes in work environments. First, active choice occurs when
individuals actively work to pursue a goal. Second, persistence involves staying committed to a
goal once started and not allowing other competing priorities to detract. Finally, mental effort
refers to the amount of work that individuals need to put into place in order to accomplish the
stated goal. Furthermore, motivation can be viewed as the interaction between people and their
respective work environment (Clark & Estes, 2008). Having high levels of motivation can
positively impact both the individuals as well as the work they conduct for their organization
(Coccia, 2019). Motivation influences within the Clark and Estes (2008) model have direct
connections to motivation theories.
Motivation Assumed Influence 1: Virtual Team Members Need to Believe in Their Ability to
Be Successful in Their Tasks and Roles in Order to Be More Connected and Engaged in Their
Virtual Teams
Virtual team members need to believe they can be successful. This assumed influence has
deep roots in self-efficacy theory. Self-efficacy theory was brought into the lexicon by Bandura
(1977) and refers to the judgment an individual makes about his/her ability to perform a task; the
higher the self-efficacy, the more confidence the person will have and the more likely the task
will be completed. Bandura’s (1977) concept has been a cornerstone of the psychological
literature base and has been applied extensively within the scholarship of not only education, but
also private and non-profit industries as well (Latham, 2019). As virtual team members face
57

unique challenges (Liao, 2017), the need for them to feel efficacious about their work is even
more pronounced.
As an example, Schepers et al. (2011) endeavored to examine the self-efficacy of virtual
team members specifically in service teams. More specifically, these scholars wanted to know
about these team members’ beliefs and perceptions in themselves with their abilities to produce
quality work, both as individuals and in the team collective. This study developed a conceptual
model that looked at both individual and group antecedents, and then further examined how
these antecedents impacted self and team efficacy, which ultimately contributed to positive
performance outcomes. Both the individual and group antecedents consisted of internal factors
such as peer and supervisor encouragement, as well as external factors such as customer
appreciation (Schepers et al., 2011). The researchers then sought to collect data from an
international technology company that operates in over 80 countries and employs roughly 24,000
people. Questionnaires, consisting of seven-point Liker-type scale questions, were handed out to
327 field service employees, and of these, 192 (spread out over 28 different teams) were returned
for a response rate of 58.7%. Once data was received, confirmatory factor analysis was
performed and the results demonstrated that while both individual and group antecedents
impacted overall efficacy, the most salient variable was supervisor and peer encouragement
(Schepers et al., 2011). These findings point to the fact that virtual team members need just as
much, if not more, encouragement from colleagues and leaders so that they can be successful in
their roles due to the solidarity feelings in the field.
Motivation Assumed Influence 2: Virtual Team Members Need to Find Aspects and Tasks in
Their Roles and Interactions They Value and Find Enjoyable to Increase Motivation
58

The next motivational assumed influence relates to task value theory. While more known
in the educational literature, task value theory can be applied to a number of different
organizations and the impact on the motivation to learn any task. This theory is composed of four
different tasks, including (a) attainment value, which refers to the importance of the task; (b)
intrinsic value, which refers to the enjoyment one gets from doing a task; (c) utility value, which
refers to the usefulness of the task being completed; and (d) cost value, which refers to the cost
of various resources, not only financial (Chipangura & Aldridge, 2019). Each of these variables
has some impact on the motivation of a person to perform the task (Eccles, 2005) and whether or
not the task will be completed.
In order to complete the myriad of tasks on a daily basis, virtual team members need to
be engaged. In their study examining task completion among both virtual teams and traditional
teams, Grozinger et al. (2020) placed different people in front of a computer in order to complete
an assignment through that medium. This experimental study was carried out at the University of
Cologne in Germany and consisted of 276 different participants from virtual and traditional
teams. Results confirmed that members from traditional teams were able to perform equally to
their virtual team peers, but when tasks consisted of creative components, virtual team members
performed slightly better (Grozinger et al., 2020). These findings reveal that these tasks could be
completed more easily by virtual team members since they were used to the electronic medium
being used in the experiment. However, while performance was slightly higher, engagement in
the experiment was slightly lower for the virtual team members compared to the traditional team
members (Grozinger et al., 2020). Therefore, task completion and engagement are correlated,
albeit not significantly.
59

In another study, task completion differed based on the various phases of the overall life
cycle of the teams. In their qualitative study that relied primarily on document analysis as well as
participant observation, Panteli et al. (2019) found differences in task completion during the
overall tenure of the team. In the formative weeks of making the team, tasks were less likely to
be completed as the directions were more ambiguous and managers did not mandate completion
of the task. However, as the team moved from forming to performing (Egolf & Chester, 2013),
tasks were completed more often. As relationships formed among the various team members,
trust and overall engagement increased, and the likelihood to complete the task increased
exponentially (Panteli et al., 2019). This study confirms that the more that employees are
engaged within the organization, the more likely they are able to complete tasks, regardless of
the level of complexity.
Motivation Assumed Influences Summary
This study understood the assumed motivational influences, housed in task value theory
and self-efficacy theory, on virtual team members within ET. A synopsis of the above-mentioned
components can be found in Table 4, along with the overarching motivation theory that guides it
and the manner in which this information will be gleaned from participants for this study.

60

Table 4
Assumed Motivation Influences, Motivation Theory, and Motivation Influence Assessment
Organizational mission
The mission of ET is to be the most customer obsessed company in the world.
Organizational goal
By December 2023, Employee Tech will increase its virtual team engagement by 5% through
the design and implementation of an engagement initiative.
Stakeholder goal
By December 2022, 100% of virtual team members will be engaged in the business and
leverage best practices in a standardized manner.
Assumed motivation
influence
Motivation theory
Motivation influence
assessment
Virtual team members need
to believe in their ability to
be successful in their tasks
and roles in order to be
more connected and
engaged in their virtual
teams (M-1)
Self-efficacy
Interviews,
document analysis
Virtual team members need
to find aspects and tasks in
their roles and interactions
they value and find
enjoyable to increase
motivation (M-2)
Task value theory
Interviews,
document analysis

Organizational Assumed Influences
The final set of assumed influences that will be discussed will be organizational. As it
relates to these organizational impacts, Clark and Estes (2008) makes two implicit statements.
First, if performance gaps cannot be subscribed to the individual’s knowledge or motivation
factors, there must be an organizational gap. Second, even if individuals index high on
knowledge and motivation, inadequate or missing process, tools, or materials will have a
negative impact on the performance goals. In order to understand the organization fully, one
61

must have a keen understanding of the organization’s culture. While culture is a rather broad
term, this study will lean on the Clark and Estes (2008) definition of culture, consisting of
beliefs, core values, processes, and goals of an organization. Clark and Estes (2008) further posit
that culture in organizations can be viewed through three different approaches – culture in the
environment, culture in groups, and culture in individuals.
There are a number of organizational components that exist when, taken together, make
up the culture of an organization. These include behaviors, formal rituals and celebrations,
values, philosophies, norms, expectations, and language as well as many others (Schein, 2017).
Therefore, by examining an organization’s culture, one can get a valuable glimpse into the inner
workings of that organization. Furthermore, culture can be understood through either cultural
models or settings. Cultural models subsist of the shared values and beliefs within an
organization (Schein, 2017). In other words, what are some of the taken-for-granted assumptions
that undergird that organization’s ethos. Cultural settings on the other hand, are the visible and
tangible aspects of the organization and the actual routines that makeup the organization. Stated
differently, cultural settings are the physical components and processes of an organization that
separate it from others (Rueda, 2011).
Organizational Assumed Influence 1: The Organization Needs to Foster a Culture Where
Virtual Team Members Can Build Relationships and Trust With Each Other in Their Virtual
Environments
There is an abundance of literature that points to the idea that trust is a central tenet
needed especially within virtual teams (Gilson et al., 2015; Lencioni, 2002). Teams that have
high levels of trust are likely to be more productive and outcome-driven, engage in and have
better interpersonal relationships, and provide feedback that is more qualitatively sound (Clark et
62

al., 2010). However, while it is clear that trust is important, virtual teams tend to not invest the
time and necessary resources into building it, assuming it will form organically on its own
(Jarvenpaa & Leidner, 1999). Trust is not a catch-all construct and can be viewed in a number of
different ways. Hacker et al. (2019) provided an extensive review of this concept of trust in
virtual teams in their meta-analysis. In their review, they uncovered six different dimensions of
trust that are pointed to in the literature, which are (a) swift trust that is built easily that is based
on cursory information about the other; (b) generalized trust that is characterized by a
willingness to accept risks and vulnerabilities; (c) time-based trust which can be either static or
dynamic based on the amount of time afforded; (d) multi-faceted trust that states that individuals
can be trusted for one or more different reasons based on behaviors and traits; (e) dispositional
trust, based on pre-existing knowledge of the other person where the trust is already mostly
formed; and (f) institution-based trust that is based on rules and norms of an organization and is
tied closely to the inherent culture of the organization.
In addition, Ford et al. (2017) yielded different results in their own meta-analysis, this
one putting more of the onus of responsibility on the leader of the virtual. In their review, they
noted that, far too often, the responsibility for gaining trust is put on the employee in a virtual
team. While the employee definitely has a part to play, the leader should have even more
responsibility which can be more challenging to establish given the nuances of virtual
environments. Also, Ford et al. (2017) noted that leaders in virtual teams send cues relating to
trust to their teams both explicitly and implicitly and these cues have a strong impact on the
employee’s overall feelings of trust. Based on this review of the literature with a focus on the
leader, Ford et al. (2017) summarized a few key recommendations that all leaders could apply in
their own virtual environment to increase trust, such as (a) leaders should focus on goal setting,
63

team building, and conflict resolution activities; (b) leaders should be trained in how to better
work in virtual environments and learn how to best interact based on geographical, temporal, and
cultural differences in the team; (c) leaders should make sure to maintain some in-person face-to-
face meetings at least annually, but as often as possible to instill camaraderie; (d) leaders should
invest in virtual celebrations to highlight the team’s milestones and achievements; and (e) leaders
should find ways to counter and mitigate the potential feelings of isolation and loneliness that
may be felt by their team members. By investing in at least some of these strategies, virtual
teams will more likely increase knowledge sharing (Alsharo et al., 2017) which also leads to
increases in trust.
Organizational Assumed Influence 2: The Organization Needs to Create an Environment
Where Virtual Team Members Can Feel Psychologically Safe in Their Virtual Teams
In addition to creating a culture of trust within the team, the virtual team environment
needs to ensure that team members feel safe. Safety, in this sense, does not refer to the condition
Maslow (1943) noted as the second-most foundational on his hierarchy of needs. Rather, safety
here is more akin to the notion of psychological safety. Here, psychological safety refers to the
concept in teams where team members feel safe for taking risks in their work (Edmondson,
1999) and is tied closely to the concept of self-efficacy mentioned previously. Kahn (1990) has
defined psychological safety as “feeling able to show and employ one’s self without fear of
negative consequences of self-image, status, or career” (p. 708). Research has shown that when
individuals ask for help, seek feedback, share information, and experiment, vulnerabilities and
self-doubt can arise where organizational members do not feel psychologically safe. It is inherent
on the organization to create an environment where this vulnerability is celebrated and not
chastised (Balderson, 2016).
64

Zhang et al. (2010) created a research model to examine how psychological safety plays
out in virtual environments. Their model showed that both trust and self-consciousness impact
psychological safety which also facilitated an environment where team members were more
likely to share knowledge without fear of negative perceptions. These scholars then went to test
the applicability of this model by distributing questionnaires to 173 virtual team members, most
of which (55%) had worked in a virtual environment for at least five years. Using Partial Least
Squares (PLS) analysis, they found that not only was their model correct in its prediction, but
also that trust was directly correlational towards knowledge sharing when psychological safety
was controlled (Zhang et al., 2010). In a more recent study, Dibble et al. (2019) found that
creating an environment of psychological safety aided in students’ abilities to increase their
cultural intelligence. 56 students in this study participated in a working group of students from
both the United States and Peru. This study found that those students who worked
collaboratively over the course of a month with students from another country not only increased
psychological safety, knowledge sharing, and received a higher grade on the final paper, but they
also saw increases in various aspects of cultural intelligence, including cross-cultural awareness
and understanding, cross-cultural skills, and cross-cultural partnering and teamwork (Dibble et
al., 2019). Therefore, by creating an environment where virtual team members feel
psychologically safe to be their authentic self, positive business outcomes can be actualized for
the betterment of the organization.
Organizational Assumed Influence 3: The Organization Needs to Provide the Necessary
Tools, Resources, and Virtual Platforms for Virtual Team Members to Be Successful and
Engaged
65

In order for organizations to be successful and achieve goals, they need to ensure that
they not only identify the salient tools and resources that are needed (Clark & Estes, 2008), but
that they also supply these to their teams. These include not only tools and resources for
employees to do their jobs well, but also by providing opportunities for professional
development, as well as various rewards and recognition programs. These, along with other tools
and resources, have been demonstrated in the literature to positively correlate to increased
performance outcomes as well as employee success and overall engagement (Singh, 2016).
Furthermore, Dulebohn and Hoch (2017) provide a comprehensive model that examines
the various components necessary in this input-process-outcome (IPO) framework. The largest
portion of this model includes the inputs and these scholars argue that the more of these that are
met and provided to virtual team members, the more likely they will be able effectively perform
individually and contribute to the goals of the team. While not exhaustive, there are a number of
key resources that these scholars indicate, and they are broken down into three key types. First,
there are organizational inputs, including providing employees with the right technology to do
their jobs, providing training (through both onboarding and continual professional development),
and creating a rewards and recognition system. Second, there are team leadership inputs, which
aid in empowering employees and creating a system of two-way communication and feedback
channels. Finally, there are team composition inputs that examine the demographic make-up of
the team (geographically, culturally, experientially, etc.) with providing a deep investment in
diversity awareness. Dulebohn and Hoch (2017) also state that there are other resources that may
be needed for success in virtual teams and teams should engage in conversations (both employers
and employees) to discover what other tools and resources may be necessary to increase
engagement and performance.
66

Organizational Assumed Influence 4: The Organization Needs to Provide Quality Feedback
on Performance to Virtual Team Members
Finally, the organization needs to be able to provide timely and actionable feedback to its
employees in order to keep them engaged and motivated. This can be achieved through a number
of different channels but ensuring that these employees ask for and receive timely and specific
feedback related to their performance is key. When this feedback is conducted in a 360-degree
format, it allows employees to both receive feedback on their performance as well as provide
feedback to their leaders, both conditions which have been shown to aid in increasing employee
engagement (Xu & Thomas, 2011). Therefore, allowing and encouraging employees to leverage
resources to seek out positive and constructive feedback on their performance can serve to
positively impact employee engagement.
Feedback is one of several competencies that are necessary for the success of virtual
teams in the broader organizational sense. In their case study of a manufacturing organization,
Maduka et al. (2018) were able to identify and name a number of these competencies. These
scholars conducted semi-structured interviews in a face-to-face manner with 14 virtual team
members of two different organizations. While other conditions were mentioned as necessary in
order for the success in virtual team environments, communication and constructive (both
positive and improvement) feedback were identified by the participants as the two most
important components. Furthermore, these scholars found that feedback needed to be consistent,
clear, action-oriented, and honest and virtual team members enjoyed being able to hear areas
where they were doing well and more importantly, areas identified as needing improvement
(Maduka et al., 2018). The importance of feedback should therefore not be understated in virtual
67

teams and their effectiveness. Employees need to be aware of and leverage the resources
available to solicit such feedback.
Feedback can be more challenging in virtual environments, both at the peer-to-peer as
well as from manager to employee levels (Peñarroja et al., 2015), but is nonetheless a necessary
condition for the success in virtual teams (Gilson et al., 2015). In their experimental study with
54 different teams assigned to either an experimental or control group, Peñarroja et al. (2015)
had each group go to a laboratory for three different work sessions. Teams in the experimental
group received feedback on their performance after the first working session, whereas the control
teams did not. The findings of this research showed that those teams in the experimental group
who received feedback (both individual and as a group from the researchers) were able to learn
more and produce more desired project outcomes as compared to their control group peers
(Peñarroja et al., 2015), a finding that substantiates the positive performance outcomes
associated with providing feedback to employees.
Similarly, feedback that is received from peers has also been shown to positively impact
overall performance in virtual teams. And while peer feedback has been shown to aid in overall
goal mutuality and team connectedness (Geister et al., 2006), it has also been demonstrated to
impact overall communication and development of team members (Lacerenza et al., 2015), both
of which have been noted to struggle more often in virtual teams (Liao, 2017). Using data from
over 13,000 respondents in the X-culture international consulting competition, which uses
students from over 100 universities in 40 different countries, McLarnon et al. (2019) sought to
understand how their collaborative activities mirrored those of virtual teams. From this sample,
McLarnon et al. (2019) selected a smaller population of teams, divided them into a feedback and
a non-feedback group, had them produce weekly deliverables and complete a survey on their
68

perceptions of the team. They found that the students in the peer feedback group (who provided
each other with frequent feedback on performance) had better communication, were more likely
to have deliverables of the project met, and self-reported better feelings and attitudes overall
compared to the non-feedback group (McLarnon et al., 2019).
While it is clear that feedback is an effective tool in promoting employee engagement,
this is often more difficult for virtual team employees due to some of the physical impediments
mentioned previously. Broad geographic dispersion and reliance on various electronic platforms
for communication can have a negative impact on both the quantity and quality of these
performance conversations (Merriman et al., 2007). The communication channels and feedback
tools that are utilized within traditional face-to-face environments may not be applicable in the
same manner for virtual environments (Daim et al., 2012). This lack of feedback can lead to
virtual team members feeling insecure (Geister et al., 2006). Kohntopp and McCann (2019)
reviewed some of the most salient literature on this topic and found that while it is challenging, it
is nonetheless inherent that leaders in these organizations offer more frequent communication
and feedback in order to foster better relationships between the leader, the employee, and the
broader team.
Organizational Assumed Influences Summary
Therefore, as demonstrated in the literature, there are a number of organizational
influences that are necessary for goals to be met. These include trust, psychological safety,
providing the right tools and resources, and creating feedback channels. A synopsis of these
components can be found in Table 5, along with the organizational type and the manner in which
this information was gleaned from participants for this study.

69

Table 5
Assumed Organizational Influences, Organizational Type, and Organizational Influence
Assessment
Organizational mission
The mission of ET is to be the most customer obsessed company in the world.
Organizational goal
By December 2023, Employee Tech will increase its virtual team engagement by 5% through
the design and implementation of an engagement initiative.
Stakeholder goal
By December 2022, 100% of virtual team members will be engaged in the business and
leverage best practices in a standardized manner.
Assumed organizational
influence
Organizational influence type
Organizational influence
assessment
The organization needs to
foster a culture where
virtual team members can
build relationships and trust
with each other in their
virtual environments (O-1)
Cultural model Interviews
The organization needs to
create an environment
where virtual team
members can feel
psychologically safe in
their virtual teams (O-2)
Cultural model
Interviews,
document analysis
The organization needs to
provide the necessary tools,
resources, and virtual
platforms for virtual team
members to be successful
and engaged (O-3)
Cultural setting Interviews
The organization needs to
provide quality feedback
on performance to virtual
team members (O-4)
Cultural setting Interviews

70

Conceptual Framework
Within the Clark and Estes (2008) model, the various knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences are presented in silos. However, there is an interconnectedness between
them in that they do not exist within a vacuum. The conceptual framework guiding this study
will help to explain this connection. While the Clark and Estes (2008) model aids in
understanding the assumed influences across the knowledge, motivation, and organization
prisms, a conceptual framework helps to frame and guide the research questions and methods of
a study (Cresswell & Cresswell, 2018). For this research, it is important to understand how these
factors relate to one another. Within ET, there are a number of different teams, and a subset of
this population is referred to as virtual teams. Within that sphere, there are virtual team members,
and this research aimed to better understand that particular population. By uncovering the
various knowledge, motivation, and organizational components of these virtual team members, it
will be easier to understand their overall experiences. These various knowledge, motivation, and
organizational factors influence the experiences of virtual team members and ultimately impact
their engagement with the organization. This model is complex but necessary to understand in
order to uncover the dynamic nature and experiences of these individuals. In addition, having
this understanding will allow the organization to make the necessary changes that will eventually
improve the employee engagement of these team members. Figure 2 provides a representation of
this model.

71

Figure 2
Conceptual Framework Guiding the Study

Summary
This chapter served three main purposes. First, this chapter provided and discussed some
of the salient literature that formed both the pillars of scholarship that framed this review—
virtual teams, and employee engagement. Second, this chapter examined the Clark and Estes
(2008) gap analysis framework and highlighted the assumed influences across the strands of
knowledge, motivation, and organization. Lastly, this chapter presented the conceptual
framework that will guide the remainder of this study. Next, Chapter three will discuss the
methodology, including the data collection and analysis techniques, of this study.
72

Chapter Three: Methodology
This chapter provides an overview of the methodology used for the data collection and
data analysis components of this study. This study examines the aspects of employee
engagement within various virtual teams of ET. This chapter will begin with a review of the
research questions guiding this study. Then, the methodological techniques will be reviewed,
examining how the data was collected, the instrumentation that was used, and how the data was
analyzed. Then, the chapter will discuss the role of the researcher in this study and discuss some
of the ethical concerns of this research.
Research Questions
Research questions help to focus and frame the context of a study. As such, this study
was guided by the following three research questions:
1. What are the knowledge and motivation influences affecting employee
engagement of virtual team members within their virtual teams?
2. What is the interaction between organizational culture and context and virtual
team member’s knowledge and motivation as it relates to increasing engagement
among them?
3. What are recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational resources to favorably impact virtual team
member’s engagement?
Overview of Methodology
Qualitative methods were used to conduct this study. This study centered around
understanding how virtual team members themselves are making meaning, which is a key
component of qualitative methodology (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). In addition to making
73

meaning, this study was concerned with how individuals interpret their own experiences and
construct their worldviews (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). As an inductive approach, qualitative
methods allow the researcher to start from the bottom and build up themes from the findings
(Creswell & Creswell, 2018). This study was carried out as a case study, which, according to
Merriam and Tisdell (2016) is the appropriate qualitative technique to leverage when trying to
study a particular group or event. For the purposes of this study, that group is virtual team
members. Table 6 gives an overview of how each research question will be aligned to one or
more qualitative research techniques.

Table 6
Data Sources
Research question
Method 1
interviews
Method 2
document analysis
What are the knowledge and
motivation factors related
to improving the employee
engagement of virtual team
members within their
virtual teams?
X X
How does the organizational
culture and context impact
virtual team members
capacity to improve
employee engagement?
X X
What are recommended
knowledge, motivation, and
organizational solutions to
improve employee
engagement within virtual
team members?
X X

74

Data Collection, Instrumentation, and Analysis Plan
This study included two different qualitative methods. While interviews were the primary
source of both data collection and analysis, document analysis was also leveraged but to a lesser
extent. As this study concerned the improvement of employee engagement levels for virtual team
members, a baseline understanding of employee engagement is needed, which was gleaned from
employee engagement data and will serve as the document analysis aspect of this research. In
addition, in-depth interviews with a selection of virtual team members were conducted. Although
qualitative research is regarded as an approach where data collection and analysis can occur
simultaneously (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016), the majority of the analysis of the data occurred after
the data collection phase.
Method 1—Document Analysis
The first step in the data collection phase of this study was document analysis. As a
technique, document analysis is a staple within qualitative methodology. Document analysis
typically involves examining specific items within the research setting, including visual, written,
or physical material, as well as organizational symbols (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Other forms
of documents that can be used include corporate memos, government documents, diaries, blog
posts, and others (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). In addition, document analysis has been shown to
be less obtrusive than other qualitative means such as interviews and observations (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016).
Studies have been conducted that use document analysis to examine employee
engagement. For example, Daniels (2016) used document analysis, in addition to interviews with
53 individuals, to interpret findings of culture and engagement levels in faith-based universities.
In addition, Shuck et al. (2011) used document analysis in order to gain a broad-based
75

understanding of employee engagement by looking for themes across a number of company
documents such as briefings and meeting minutes. Finally, Runhaar et al. (2013) used document
analysis in their study by examining one specific policy document to gain insights into specific
Human Resources practices that were being carried out in an educational setting.
For this research, document analysis of employee engagement data was used in order to
better understand the current state of engagement. As the stakeholder goal for this study is
concerned with increasing engagement, it is important to understand where engagement levels
currently stand for these individuals. In other words, the data will be used to get a baseline
comprehension of employee engagement levels. While this is already done within the
organization from a metrics standpoint, more in-depth analysis does not occur. This will help the
organization to understand where opportunities may exist and will help to craft plans to improve
engagement levels for these virtual team members.
Participating Stakeholders
Gathering data on all virtual team members would be too expansive as there are
thousands of these employees who work at the organization. Therefore, a more focused approach
is preferred. While ET collects engagement data for all employees, only those employees
categorized as virtual were included – all other locations were filtered out. While data is
aggregated for the company as a whole, the data can be further split out into different sub-
categories, such as Human Resources, Finance, Operations, and others, each led by a Senior Vice
President. For this research, engagement data for those virtual team members within Human
Resources (HR) was reviewed and all other departments will be excluded. HR is an appropriate
division to examine as it has a larger proportion of virtual team members (15%) than other
76

departments such as Finance (less than 10%) and Operations (less than 5%). Figure 3 provides a
graphic representation of this branch of the organization.

Figure 3
ET Human Resources Organization

77

Instrumentation
Every day, all employees of ET are able to answer questions to provide feedback on their
overall experience. These questions range in scope, but for the purposes of this research, only
those questions relating to employee engagement were considered. This engagement data is
separated across five different categories, each consisting of two questions, for a total of 10
questions. However, not all questions are asked with the same frequency. In normal
circumstances, a minimum of seven engagement questions would be asked to each individual
each month, but due to Covid-19 there were several months when fewer questions were asked.
Currently, between two to eight questions are asked each month, so understanding engagement
can still be measured, albeit in a slightly different manner than previously. Each one of the
questions maps to a particular area of employee engagement that has been shown to be salient.
These areas include accomplishment, challenge, fit, motivation, and value and each area can be
considered an effective condition towards effective employee engagement (Albdour &
Altarawneh, 2014). Table 7 provides a comprehensive review of each of the employee
engagement questions.

78

Table 7
ET Employee Engagement Feedback Questions
Employee engagement area
of focus
Question 1 Question 2
Accomplishment
Does your work give you a
feeling of accomplishment?
(A1)
How often do you feel
excited when you accomplish
something at work? (A2)
Challenge
Do you find your job
challenging in a good way?
(C1)
Do you find your work to be
a positive challenge? (C2)
Fit
Are you interested in the
work you do? (F1)
Is your job a good fit for your
skills? (F2)
Motivation
Do you feel motivated at
work? (M1)
Are you inspired by the work
you do at [ET]? (M2)
Value
Is your work valued at [ET]?
(V1)
Do you feel valued at [ET]?
(V2)

Data Collection and Analysis
Once IRB approval was gained, the researcher began pulling individual question data.
This was a timely process as each question needs to be pulled from the online portal
independently. In order to provide proper comparison, scores for each question were pulled and
presented for the entire team (inclusive of all employees in all locations) and also pulled
specifically for virtual team members. In order to get an initial benchmark of employee
engagement data, a 12-month analysis of this data was conducted and presented to include the
categories of questions, the question themselves, the number of times the question was asked, the
number of responses, and the average score (on a scale of one to five, with one being the lowest
score and five being the highest score) for each question. Organizational norms dictate that any
79

score above a 4.0 (on a five-point scale) is considered favorable and any score less than a 4.0 is
considered unfavorable. The other scores and corresponding engagement level can be found in
Table 8.

Table 8
Engagement Level Scales
Score Employee engagement definition
4.0 – 5.0 Actively engaged
3.5 – 3.9 Mildly engaged
3.0 – 3.4 Mildly disengaged
2.0 – 2.9 disengaged
0.0 – 1.9 Actively disengaged

80

Method 2—Interviews
Interviews served as the primary method of data collection for this research and were
conducted after initial engagement data was reviewed. Interviews are a powerful technique to
leverage within qualitative research, especially since this technique can garner thick and rich data
(Creswell & Creswell, 2018). In addition, Merriam and Tisdell (2016) note that interviews are
not only preferred, but are necessary when participant behavior cannot be observed. As a
technique with this particular population, there have been a number of studies of virtual team
members using interviews. In their case study, Maduka et al. (2018) used interviews with 14
virtual team members in two different organizations to better understand the specific
competencies necessary for success in this role. In addition, Bosch-Sijtsema (2007) used semi-
structured interviews of 25 employees, in partnership with observations, in an exploratory study
to understand the various types of expectations that are imposed on virtual team members.
Finally, using interviews to understand the competencies of virtual team leadership, Ghiringhelli
and Lazazzara (2016) found that the platforms and mediums of communication in virtual teams
were the most important aspect to allow virtual team members to be successful in their roles.
Therefore, past literature demonstrates that interviews are a plausible technique to use in
qualitative studies of virtual teams.
Participating Stakeholders
A sample of virtual team members were selected to participate in an in-depth interview
with the researcher. The aim of this research was to interview between 12 to 15 virtual team
members. All of these participants were in roles that were traditionally conducted in a virtual
environment, thereby excluding those current members who were working virtually due to the
Covid-19 landscape. Given the current climate with the global pandemic and coupled with the
81

fact that these participants will be spread across a vast geography, the interviews took place
online through the Zoom meeting platform. The researcher interviewed virtual team members in
different roles and scopes in order to get a more broad-based understanding of their experiences
as virtual team members.
Since the researcher is employed at the same organization as the participants, the
researcher was able to gather a list of all virtual employees. An initial e-mail (see Appendix A)
was sent by the researcher to approximately 20 employees who met the study criteria in the next
section and invited them to participate in an interview with the researcher. This e-mail was blind,
in that participant e-mail addresses were hidden from others to see. Of these 20, only 12 (60%)
agreed to take part in an interview. (The interviews lasted approximately between 45 and 60
minutes in total. This study used purposeful sampling (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The
interviewer aimed to interview between 12 to 15 virtual team members, and in the end, 12 were
eventually interviewed.
Sampling Criterion
In order to properly select the correct participants for this study, a tiered approach to
sampling criterion was used. The different layers of this selection are outlined below in an effort
to get to the desired 12 to 15 virtual team members. There was no need to expand the sampling
criteria as the goal of 12 interviews was met based on the three different sampling criteria.
Criterion 1. Employees who are currently working in a virtual team within the Human
Resources organization. Excluded from this list are those employees who have been working
virtually from home due to Covid-19 and at the direction of the organization.
Criterion 2. Virtual team members who have been working in a virtual role for more
than six months but less than three years. This timeframe has been identified in the literature as a
82

good measure of engagement related to tenure, since it allows enough time for employees to
understand the culture and context of their organization, but not too long to where they get
overly dissatisfied (Ananthram et al., 2018).
Criterion 3. Virtual team members who do not supervise other employees. This study is
not concerned with the leadership capabilities of virtual team members. Therefore, in order to
control for those experiences, only virtual team members who work in individual contributor
roles were included.
Instrumentation
The interviews were semi-structured in nature, following a general protocol with probing
and follow-up questions laden throughout, a process that has been well documented in the
literature (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016) as appropriate. Semi-structured
interviews have certain characteristics in common, including that they contain different degrees
of structure (not all structured nor unstructured), there is flexibility and changes in the questions,
and that the protocol guides the conversation but not in a firmly prescriptive manner (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). The interview protocol followed from the research questions, in order to
understand the specific knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences that impact
employee engagement in these virtual team members. All interview questions were open-ended
in nature, in order to elicit broad description from the participants’ points of view. The full
interview protocol can be found in Appendix B.
Data Collection and Analysis
The Zoom platform was used to conduct these interviews. One of the benefits of using
Zoom is that transcripts (almost verbatim) can be exported from the platform. This allowed for a
very strong transcript which was used for the data analysis portion of the research. In addition,
83

the researcher did take some notes during the interview, but these were seldom so that the
researcher could focus and actively listen to what the participants were saying.
It is important to note that in qualitative research, data collection and data analysis often
occur simultaneously (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Once the interviews were completed, all
interview transcripts were downloaded from the online platform, cleaned up to correct for any
recording abnormalities, and saved onto the researcher’s password-protected personal laptop.
The researcher read through each interview twice initially in order to better understand the data
holistically and develop initial themes. Initial themes were developed and followed from aspects
of the research questions that the researcher was answering. Themes such as employee
engagement, trust, connectedness, and others were identified once all interviews were completed.
According to Gibbs (2018), coding themes is a way of indexing or categorizing data to
establish a framework. Furthermore, coding allows the researcher to develop a hierarchy of
codes, which has a number of benefits including keeping the data organized and preventing the
duplication of codes. For this study, Gibbs’ (2018) recommendation for a case by case coding
scheme was used. An Excel spreadsheet was created that had each assumed influence and
corresponding interview question on the side and each participant name on the top. This method
allowed the researcher to not only organize the data in a logical way, but also created a central
repository where all interview data was housed.
Data Methods Summary
As previously discussed, both document analysis and interviews were used to collect and
analyze the data for this research. While all assumed influences were answered using interview
data, not all used document analysis – only certain influences were analyzed through this means.
Each assumed influence was understood through at least one technique, either through an
84

interview question or via analysis of one of the companies’ employee engagement questions.
Once baseline data through employee engagement surveys and detailed interviews of virtual
team members was completed, the research moved into the data analysis phase. This phase of the
study sought to uncover and understand findings and followed the multi-step model for
qualitative data analysis presented by Creswell (2014) and shown in Figure 4.

Figure 4
Model for Qualitative Data Analysis

85

In summary, each assumed influence across the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational categories was mapped to a specific concept, and had at least one tool that will be
used to collect and assess the data. This method allowed a seamless integration between the
research questions, the assumed influence, and the technique to understand the data. Table 9
provides the connection and mapping of the concept, assumed influence, and assessment tool for
the knowledge influences.

Table 9
Mapping of Presumed Knowledge Influences and Data Collection Method Used in the
Evaluation
Concept Assumed influence Assessment tool
Conceptual
Virtual team members need
to understand what is
expected of them to be
successful in their roles (K-
C-1)
Interviews
Conceptual
Virtual team members need
to understand the
connections between their
roles and the broader
organizational mission (K-
C-2)
Interviews
Procedural
Virtual team members need
to know how to leverage
resources available to them
to seek and monitor
feedback regarding their
performance (K-P-3)
Interviews
Metacognitive
Virtual team members need
to be able to identify and
reflect on times in which
they felt
engaged/disengaged (K-M-
4)
Interviews

86

Table 10 provides the connection and mapping of the concept, assumed influence, and
assessment tool for the motivation influences.

Table 10
Mapping of Presumed Motivation Influences and Data Collection Method Used in the
Evaluation
Concept Assumed influence Assessment tool
Self-efficacy
Virtual team members need
to believe in their ability to be
successful in their tasks and
roles in order to be more
engaged (M-1)
Interviews,
Document analysis
Task value
Virtual team members need
to find aspects and tasks in
their roles they find enjoyable
to increase motivation (M-2)
Interviews,
Document analysis

87

Table 11 provides the connection and mapping of the concept, assumed influence, and
assessment tool for the organizational influences.

Table 11
Mapping of Presumed Organizational Influences and Data Collection Method Used in the
Evaluation
Concept Assumed influence Assessment tool
Cultural model
The organization needs to
foster a culture where virtual
team members can build trust
with each other (O-1)
Interviews
Cultural model
The organization needs to
create an environment where
virtual team members can
feel psychologically safe (O-
2)
Interviews,
Document analysis
Cultural setting
The organization needs to
provide the necessary tools
and resources for virtual team
members to be successful and
engaged (O-3)
Interviews
Cultural setting
The organization needs to
provide quality feedback on
performance to virtual team
members (O-4)
Interviews

88

The full crosswalk and overview that ties the assumed influences, method, technique, and
overarching research question together are presented in Appendix C. The full data collection and
analysis framework and phases are outlined in Figure 5.

Figure 5
Data Collection and Analysis Framework

89

Validity and Reliability
Validity and reliability are important in all research. As qualitative research centers
around how people construct their own realities, factors such as how individuals experience
phenomena, make meanings in their lives, and how they understand the ways in which practices
work all impact the validity of the study (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). However, validity is relative
and must be assessed within the context of the present research (Maxwell, 2013). In qualitative
research, validity is concerned with whether or not the study is measuring what it is supposed to
measure (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Put another way, qualitative validity implies that the
researcher finds accuracy in the data (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).
There are a number of different ways to ensure validity in qualitative research. The first,
and often most likely, manner is to triangulate the data. Triangulating the data allows the
researcher to use multiple data collection techniques to ensure that similar findings are
uncovered (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). This allows the researcher to ensure that themes are
common amongst different techniques and are not presenting themselves due to only one
technique. This research used both document analysis as well as interviews to uncover themes
across different techniques of qualitative research. In addition, data relied on heavily on
interviews, which use thick, rich description which, according to Creswell and Creswell (2018),
allow the findings to become more realistic and adds further validity. Finally, as the researcher is
central to the data collection, researcher bias needed to be understood which is explained in
further detail below.
Reliability, on the other hand, differs from validity. Reliability refers to the extent to
which the findings that emerge from the data can be replicated (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). In
qualitative research this is more challenging since the focus is on human behavior which changes
90

over time. In order to secure reliability, there are steps that can be taken. One option is for the
researcher to keep an audit trail (Merriam & Tisdell), which involves keeping a detailed history
of how the data were collected and analyzed. This was done for this research and all steps of the
process were recorded and disclosed in this study. In addition, the researcher has retained all
records (interview transcripts, engagement data, disclosure statements, etc.) and will produce
them if required. The researcher will keep all these records for the entirety of the project and for
one year after the completion of the research should the need arise to reproduce them for any
reason. These are stored on the researcher’s personal laptop which is password protected.
Ethics and Role of the Researcher
As this research does involve human subjects, some risk is expected. In both phases of
the data collection, the researcher ensured that the data was being collected, stored, and analyzed
in an ethical manner, which according to the literature is paramount (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
For the document analysis component of the research, all data is already anonymous, and no
employee information can be seen. All interview participants were given an information sheet
(see Appendix D) that explained the purpose of the study, how the data will be used, the ways
that their names (as well as the organization) will be anonymous, and other ethical concerns.
Since these interviews were done online (through Zoom), the researcher e-mailed this
information sheet to the participants prior to the interview. Before the start of the interview, the
researcher reviewed this document with the participants again and asked if there were any
questions prior to the interview starting. Finally, all participation was voluntary, and participants
were allowed to drop out of the research at any time for any reason – this was in the information
sheet and was reviewed with the participants prior to the start of the interview.
91

As an additional form of protection, the researcher had previously reached out to the
organization’s legal team and, due to the nature of this research, the organization did have a
process to follow in order for this research to be conducted. The committee reading the
manuscript has agreed to sign the organization’s non-disclosure agreement (NDA) in order to
protect the company should any information be gleaned from the data (even though it will be
anonymous).
As with all research, the researcher brings implicit biases during the study. This is
especially salient in this research as the researcher works for the organization in which the
research was conducted. While the researcher does not directly supervise any of the participants
in either stage of the data collection process, there was an inherent trust in the researcher to
portray the participants in a positive light. In addition, as the researcher himself works in a
virtual team, it was necessary to leave out any personal assumptions of that working experience
and let the participants elicit their perceptions of their roles. This was accomplished using the
established interview protocol and not asking any questions in a leading manner. Finally, the
researcher, who is highly engaged as an employee of the organization, ensured that he did not
allow his own views of engagement or the organization cloud those of the participants.

92

Chapter Four: Results and Findings
The purpose of this study was to understand the overall engagement levels of virtual team
members at ET. This study leveraged the gap analysis framework introduced by Clark and Estes
(2008) to understand the knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors that contribute to the
employee engagement levels of virtual team members. Three research questions guided this
study:
1. What are the knowledge and motivation influences affecting employee engagement of
virtual team members within their virtual teams?
2. What is the interaction between organizational culture and context and virtual team
member’s knowledge and motivation as it relates to increasing engagement among
them?
3. What are recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational resources to favorably impact virtual team member’s
engagement?
Participating Stakeholders
As described in Chapter three, purposeful sampling was used to collect participants for
interviews. E-mail invitations (see Appendix A) were sent to 16 virtual team members who met
the following sampling criterion:
• Virtual team members who are currently working in a virtual team within the Human
Resources organization.
• Virtual team members who have been working in a virtual role for more than six months
but less than three years.
93

• Virtual team members who do not supervise other employees. Furthermore, employees
who are currently working from home due to the Covid-19 pandemic were excluded as
those employees are not virtual during normal circumstances.
Out of the original 16 identified employees, six (37.5%) responded back with their interest in
participating in an interview. The other eight (50%) were sent a follow-up e-mail (see Appendix
E) and out of these, six more responded with their interest to participate bringing the total
participation to 12 out of 16 virtual team employees (75%). Each of these 12 received an
additional confirmation e-mail (see Appendix F). Participants were also asked to identify times
that would work for an interview. Finally, the researcher sent a confirmation e-mail to all
confirmed participants (see Appendix G) with final confirmation of date and time of the
interview as well as a copy of the informed consent form (see Appendix D). All participants also
received a thank you e-mail (see Appendix H) after the interview took place.
In the total population, the participants consisted of two males (16%) and 10 females
(84%), which was fairly close to the gender distribution in the broader Human Resources
organization of 25% male compared to 75% female. All but two of the interview participants
have been employed with ET for more than two years, with the average tenure of five years and
six months (66.5 months). Tenure in current virtual role varied from 10 months to almost three
years, with an average tenure of one year and eight months (20 months), or 45.9% of total
employment time with ET. With the exception of Josiah (who even with more probing questions
did not give the most robust of answers), all interviews lasted somewhere between 45 to 60
minutes, with the total average for all interviews at 48 minutes. In total, all interviews combined
accounted for nine hours and 40 minutes. After each interview, the transcript was downloaded
from Zoom and cleaned up by the researcher in order to make the transcripts easier to understand
94

and analyze. All interview transcripts ranged from nine pages to 14 pages, with an average
transcript length of 11.25 pages, and a total of 135 total pages of interview transcripts. Table 12
provides a summary of interview participants (each one was assigned a pseudonym to protect
anonymity), tenure in current role and with current organization, and length of interview
including total number of pages of final interview transcript.

Table 12
Interview Participants
Name
(pseudonym)
Gender
Tenure at
ET
(months)
Tenure
within
virtual role
(months)
% Time
in
virtual
role
Interview
length (min)
Transcript
length
(pages)
Alyssa Female 83 14 16.9% 46 12
Josiah Male 69 26 37.7% 35 9
Sonia Female 69 27 39.1% 52 11
Leah Female 76 17 22.4% 42 10
Maria Female 20 20 100.0% 48 11
Piper Female 27 19 70.4% 52 10
Ophelia Female 13 13 100.0% 48 12
Julian Male 54 26 48.1% 50 14
Eva Female 89 34 38.2% 59 14
Talia Female 87 26 29.9% 51 10
Sophia Female 184 10 5.4% 47 11
Charlene Female 28 12 42.9% 50 11

95

Findings
The following sections address the findings of this study and how they map to the relevant
research questions. The first research question deals with the various knowledge and motivation
assumed influences presented in chapter two, whereas the second research question pertains to
the organizational assumed influences. Both research questions one and two were informed by
the data presented in this chapter, whereas the final research question regarding
recommendations for practice will be discussed in Chapter five.
In order to test whether the various knowledge, motivation, or organizational assumed
influences were validated, operational thresholds and definitions must be defined. For the
interview data, an influence was fully validated if 10 or more out of 12 (83%) participants
supported the need and partially validated if eight to nine (66%) participants supported the need.
If fewer than eight participants supported the need, it was not validated. In addition, for those
influences that also have engagement score data tied to them, scores above 4.0 (out of a scale of
1.0-5.0) were considered not validated, scores between 3.0-3.9 were considered partially
validated, and scores below 3.0 were considered validated. For influences with both interviews
and document analysis of engagement data, both factors needed to be validated in order for the
need to be met. In the case where both methods differ in validation, the need was considered to
be partially validated. See Table 13 for an overview of this criteria.

96

Table 13
Validation Thresholds for Assumed Influences
Validation Interview threshold
Engagement data
threshold
Validated
More than 10 out of 12 interview (83%) participants
displayed evidence supporting the need
Less than 3.0
Partially
validated
8-9 out of 12 interview (66%) participants displayed
evidence supporting the need
3.0 – 3.9
Not validated
Less than 8 participants displayed evidence supporting
the need
Greater than 4.0

Furthermore, not every assumed need was validated by both methods of data collection.
While all needs were assessed using interview data, only certain needs were analyzed with
document analysis. Table 14 provides a breakdown of each assumed need and the technique or
techniques used to validate.

97

Table 14
Techniques Used to Validate Each Assumed Need
Need Category Interviews
Document
analysis
Virtual team members need to understand
what is expected of them to be successful
in their virtual roles (K-C-1)
Knowledge X
Virtual team members need to understand
the connections and relationships between
themselves and the organization as well to
their virtual team colleagues (K-C-2)
Knowledge X
Virtual team members need to know how to
leverage tools and resources available to
them in a virtual environment for effective
team building (K-P-3)
Knowledge X
Virtual team members need to be able to
reflect and communicate times in which
they felt engaged/disengaged in their
virtual teams (K-M-4)
Knowledge X
Virtual team members need to believe in
their ability to be successful in their tasks
and roles in order to be more connected
and engaged in their virtual teams (M-1)
Motivation X X
Virtual team members need to find aspects
and tasks in their roles and interactions
they value and find enjoyable to increase
motivation (M-2)
Motivation X X
The organization needs to foster a culture
where virtual team members can build
relationships and trust with each other in
their virtual environments (O-1)
Organization X
The organization needs to create an
environment where virtual team members
can feel psychologically safe in their
virtual teams (O-2)
Organization X X
The organization needs to provide the
necessary tools, resources, and virtual
platforms for virtual team members to be
successful and engaged (O-3)
Organization X
The organization needs to provide quality
feedback on performance to virtual team
members (O-4)
Organization X

98

Knowledge Assumed Needs
There were four assumed knowledge influences within this study. First, virtual team
members need to understand what is expected of them to be successful in their virtual roles.
Second, virtual team members need to understand the connections and relationships between
themselves and the organization as well as to their virtual team colleagues. Third, virtual team
members need to know how to leverage tools and resources available to them in a virtual
environment for effective team building. And fourth, virtual team members need to be able to
reflect and communicate times in which they felt engaged or disengaged in their virtual teams.
Table 15 presents each assumed influence, the corresponding type of knowledge within that
influence, and finally, whether the influence was validated, partially validated, or not validated at
all.

99

Table 15
Findings of Assumed Knowledge Needs
Knowledge influence
Knowledge
type
Validated
Partially
validated
Not
validated
Virtual team members need to
understand what is expected
of them to be successful in
their virtual roles (K-C-1)
Conceptual X
Virtual team members need to
understand the connections
and relationships between
themselves and the
organization as well to their
virtual team colleagues (K-C-
2)
Conceptual X
Virtual team members need to
know how to leverage tools
and resources available to
them in a virtual environment
for effective team building
(K-P-3)
Procedural X
Virtual team members need to
be able to reflect and
communicate times in which
they felt engaged/disengaged
in their virtual teams (K-M-4)
Metacognitive X

Assumed Knowledge Need 1: Virtual Team Members Need to Understand What is Expected of
Them to Be Successful in Their Virtual Roles (Not Validated)
From a conceptual knowledge standpoint, virtual team members need to both understand
the concepts of their roles as well as define what success looks like. Three different interview
questions were used to validate this need. Two of these questions related to virtual team
members being able to describe what a typical day and week looked like to them. In addition,
virtual team members were also asked to define what success looked like in their roles. All
100

participants were able to understand the expectations and measures of success for their roles and
therefore, this need was not validated.
All participants could explain what a standard day and week looked like, even though
some were more structured than others. For most virtual team members, the first thing they
would do is “log on, and check and see if [they] had any urgent topics or critical escalations for
the day” (Eva). And while “it does vary depending on the day of the week, and also what’s kind
of in your inbox when you come in” (Leah), most interview participants agreed meetings tended
to underpin most of the experiences of the virtual team members. According to Alyssa, “the
normal day would be a combination of sort of structured, recurring meetings…and then, in
conjunction with that, I have…team meetings... [or] one to one meetings”. While meetings were
mentioned by all respondents, there were other components of daily work that were also
mentioned, as shown in Table 16.

Table 16
Key Activities of a Normal Day for Virtual Team Members
Respondent
Routine
meetings
Ad hoc
meetings
E-mail
maintenance
Data
analysis
Project
work
Document
writing
Alyssa X X X X
Josiah X X X X X
Sonia X X X X X
Leah X X X X
Maria X X X X X X
Piper X X X
Ophelia X X X X
Julian X X X X
Eva X X X X X
Talia X X X X X
Sophia X X X X
Charlene X X X X
Total 12 7 8 9 10 7

101

So, as previously mentioned, virtual team members had some loose structure to their
days; however, it was challenging to fully anticipate what each day would entail, leading to a
heightened level of ambiguity to navigate the role. Still, with multiple and sometime conflicting
priorities, it is challenging for virtual team members to feel as though they are doing their best in
their roles. This role ambiguity creates a negative feedback loop internally, wherein these team
members do not have a way to assess if they are completing their duties properly and therefore
cannot know if they are being successful or not (Ebbers & Minjberg, 2017).
Based on responses from the majority of the virtual team members, they were able to
understand their roles and how to be successful, but this was a moving target that was shifted
between proactive and reactive measures. On one hand, Talia felt this more proactively with
respect to when “you’re seen as a trusted partner and people are reaching out to get advice and
help”. On the other hand, Sonia saw this more reactively by needing to quickly “skill the teams
to be able to lead their own engagement plans and routines themselves”. While this fluidity
between proactive and reactive work can be beneficial in terms of helping the business quickly
solve problems, this also creates a sense of insecurity to virtual team members since they may or
may not be sure they are focusing on the right components to be successful in their roles. These
insecure feelings have a negative impact on not only employee engagement for the individual,
but lower team morale overall (Akbari et al., 2020). This need was not measured by any of the
engagement data metrics.
Assumed Knowledge Need 2: Virtual Team Members Need to Understand the Connections
and Relationships Between Themselves and the Organization As Well as Their Virtual Team
Colleagues (Partially Validated)
102

Another way to assess conceptual knowledge of virtual team members is to understand
the various connections made. This was done by asking virtual team members to think about the
business and social interactions in which they partake with their peers and colleagues. In
addition, virtual team members were asked to think about how their roles contributed to the
larger mission of the organization. Finally, document analysis of engagement data about interest
and fit was also analyzed to further confirm results. As there was a wide amount of variance to
different methods of data collection, this need was partially validated.
In terms of virtual interactions with colleagues, participants noted that it was something
they have been used to for quite some time, since this was something they took part in before the
pandemic. As Leah stated, “ordinarily outside of Covid, while we would still do the majority of
touch points in a virtual setting, we would also expect to see each other face to face several times
a year”. Similarly, Sophia noted that, “even before Covid kicked off, we were able to see each
other at least once every couple of months”. Even though these individuals were virtual in
nature, there was still a sense of being able to meet in person, which, according to Dulebohn and
Hoch (2017) is a necessary condition towards maintaining some semblance of engagement
within virtual teams. Having that time to build team camaraderie was important in order to “have
a drink, have dinner, and get to have some fun outside of work” (Piper). While being able to see
each other outside of a virtual environment is important, only five participants (41%) specifically
mentioned this component. However, all participants mentioned the necessity of using
technology to interact on a daily basis, as detailed in Table 17.

103

Table 17
Forms of Virtual Interaction
Respondent
Direct
messaging
Chat rooms Video calls
Informal
chats
Formal
meetings
Alyssa X X X X
Josiah X X X
Sonia X X X
Leah X X X
Maria X X X X X
Piper X X X X
Ophelia X X X X X
Julian X X X
Eva X X X X X
Talia X X X
Sophia X X X X
Charlene X X X X
Total 12 12 6 9 7

However, while all respondents relied heavily on both chat rooms and direct messages
(using a platform akin to Skype), other forms of interaction were rather sporadic. It is important
to note, however, that video calls were used by only half of the respondents. This is significant,
since communication is reliant on both verbal and non-verbal messaging (Darics, 2017) and if
some of the aspects of non-verbal communication are missing, virtual communication can be
misunderstood (Staples & Webster, 2007).
While all respondents noted the importance of needing to form solid bonds and
relationships with peers and colleagues, seven respondents (58%) also noted that as workload
increases, personal relationships and rapport tend to suffer first. Maria stated, “there are some
days when it’s super busy and there are some days when it’s super quiet and we tend to engage
more on the quiet days”. As explained by Leah, “we always used to religiously say good
morning to each other in our chat room…[but then] our workloads kind of increased so maybe
104

there’s no time for that…less time for pleasantries”. A key part of forming such relationships is
being able to build rapport and meaningful connections with other members of the team.
However, if the demands of the role are too large, there is less available time to spend on
fostering such relationships with colleagues. Part of forming these relationships with colleagues
is about being able to learn about team members as people, not just employees (Dalton et al.,
2019). As Sonia noted, “just that little bit of banter I guess and just remembering those
fascinating facts you learn about someone can help with that connection”. Eva continued, “it’s
human to human…and having that personal connection with people really helps”. Alyssa noted,
“I try to get to know them as individuals…to tell me about who they are, as people outside of
work”. Here, all three of these respondents yearned for being able to learn about the person first
and properly balance work talk with personal talk, which, as Piper stated, “I think keeping a real
balance in your dialogue between chit chat and office talk is important”. Even though these
employees are constantly barraged with large amounts of work with competing priorities, being
able to strike a balance and make time for personal conversations is necessary.
Still, being able to make these personal connections can be challenging and daunting at
first, especially in a virtual space. Josiah notes, “I think it is extremely difficult to build that level
of rapport with people that you have only ever met in a virtual environment”. For new joiners to
the team, this can be even more challenging, which Charlene notes, “for new joiners in a virtual
space that’s a bit more intimidating…as more of a veteran team member, the onus is on you to
reach out to that new team member versus the other way around”. While it is ideal that team
members who are more tenured take the time to foster proper relationships with new joiners, this
is not always feasible.
105

One of the key avenues to help build these relationships, as confirmed by interviewees, is
to have social and fun events as a team. Virtual happy hours, virtual games, virtual quizzes, and
the like, were noted by 100% of respondents. The challenge, though, is sustainability of these
events, especially due to the nature of the virtual space. Being able to change the type of event is
one way to ensure the team does not get bored. As described by Julian, “around significant times
of the year, like International Women’s Day which is coming up, we’re getting a session together
to talk about the women who inspire us”. Similarly, Piper commented, “we do a ‘get to know
someone’ event where one member of the team will tell us all about their life”. The other avenue
is to try to have more social interactions in a one to one space, which, according to Eva “I find
that a lot more satisfying than big group chats because you can actually have a good chat with
people”. As can be seen from these responses, there is no one-size-fits-all approach to this sort of
engagement. However, having to conduct all one’s work virtually and then spend more time in
front of a computer can be draining, as summarized by Sophia:
Because we’re working virtually, we’re already on our computers 8-10 hours a day.
And…if I’ve been on calls and video all day every day of the week, the last thing I want
to do on a Friday at like 5:30pm is get back on screen and have a couple of drinks with
people. So, the intention is good…[but] it’s really challenging to find that balance
between having social events…but also respecting people’s time.
Sophia notes the main challenge that is faced by a number of virtual team members – the balance
between wanting to foster an environment with some fun but also protecting individuals’
personal time. This is extremely challenging for all employees and while intent is always
positive, it does not necessarily translate to positive practice. However, this is further
106

exacerbated for virtual team members where separating work life from personal life is even more
challenging (Stadtlander et al., 2017).
In addition to forming relationships with other team members, being able to connect
one’s job to the wider mission of the organization is also necessary, as confirmed in a study by
Michaelson et al. (2014). While there was some variability in the direct connections these
respondents made, they all were able to see a bigger purpose to their work. By making these
connections, employees are not only more engaged, but also happier overall, which is
increasingly more important in a growingly virtualized and globalized world (Rozgus, 2018). In
addition, there are direct and indirect benefits to the business when this work is completed, as
shown in Table 18.

Table 18
Virtual Team Members’ Connections to the Wider Organization
Respondent Respondent connections to wider organization
Leah
Just making sure that the people that you’re advocating for kind of
have a metaphorical seat at the table in terms of decision making.
Maria
We are growing so fast that we can’t afford to make it a poor
experience, otherwise we’ll run out of people to recruit.
Piper
My role is really about relationship building so my influence is in my
ability to kind of manage that internally and them amongst my
clients.
Julian
Making sure [my customers] have a positive experience at work and
that they’re safe and that they feel listened to and respected.
Talia
The purpose of the role is to mitigate risk and make sure people are
engaged and that people’s voices are heard.
Sophia
So, we need to make sure that that voice is being heard as loudly as
possible and if people feel as though they have a voice, they’re more
likely to be engaged.

107

While these respondents all had subjective and personal views of how their roles
connected to the broader organization, it is important that they were still able to make that
connection. Therefore, it is not about what the connection is to the organization, but rather, that
such a connection is made overall. This is substantiated in the literature which correlates that as
connection to the organization increases, employee engagement also increases (Michaelson et al.,
2014). This need was not measured by any of the engagement data metrics.
Assumed Knowledge Need 3: Virtual Team Members Need to Know How to Leverage Tools
and Resources Available to Them in a Virtual Environment for Effective Team Building
(Validated)
In terms of procedural knowledge, a reliance on resources for completing one’s job is
necessary. Three different questions were used to validate this need, all of which related to being
able to use resources effectively. Responses indicated that there were, in actuality, too many
resources available and having this cornucopia was more confusing for virtual team members.
Most respondents knew about the tools but only five (41%) knew how to properly utilize them to
assist in their roles. To that end, this need was validated.
When asked about resources, respondents had a number of different things that came to
mind. For some, it was about physical resources in order to properly work remotely. According
to Charlene, “obviously, in a virtual environment, you need to have the right hardware…a bigger
monitor, a webcam, and a nice headset to conduct calls”. Others took this question in a much
different direction. Leah noted that one of the key resources was “just to be able to pick
someone’s brain, someone you can reach out to”. Similar sentiment was expressed by Eva who
noted “having a good supportive team, you know, a team you can trust”. In these responses, it
108

can be seen that resources in and of itself is too broad a concept for employees to understand.
And, if employees cannot identify resources, how then can they be expected to leverage them.
However, if the tools and resources are there, that is only half the battle. Virtual team
members need to be able to use them. According to Julian, “I need access to lots of different
sharepoints or shared drives because…[otherwise] you’ll struggle…but access can sometimes be
a bit difficult at [ET] to get”. So, while tools exist, they are useless if employees either cannot
access them or if they have to overcome obstacles to gain such access. And, even if the tools are
there, they may not be as fit for purpose as expressed by Piper:
I think the tools are not as innovative as they should be for the organization…I think it’s
fine to manage when you’re spending, you know, 20% or 30% of your time on it. But
when it suddenly becomes like 80% or 90% of your day…that can become like a real
challenge and a real roadblock. So, I definitely think they are there, they exist, but they
could definitely be more efficient.
Virtual employees do not have the luxury of being able to be in face-to-face interactions all the
time. So, while some tools may work for some employees who use them sparingly, the same
tools that are necessary for success in virtual teams need to be better suited for purpose.
Furthermore, traveling and not needing to be fully virtual was also mentioned. As Alyssa
noted, “it’s very hard for me to do my job properly if I can’t see the operation…and there’s
nothing that can be done about that now”. Josiah felt similar frustrations and noted that, “I think
it makes a huge difference not being able to travel…I think we’re about 30-40% effective now”.
Again, just being able to travel to conduct the duties of their jobs is essential. While this inability
to travel has been exacerbated by the current pandemic, other avenues need to be sought out to
replicate travel as much as possible. While nothing can fully replace the ability to be in a
109

physical location to accomplish the work of their roles, there should be ways that certain aspects
of travel and physicality can be properly utilized for these virtual employees.
Also, being able to properly get information in a straight-forward manner was brought
up. According to Leah, “we have a lot of information, but it’s all over the place and it still takes
quite a lot of data mining to get what you need”. Piper noted this also, and stated, “I think I
would like to make things more streamlined and in terms of tools, like a direct hub where data is
stored…why is this not in one place”. Again, virtual team members agree that the tools for
success are out there; however, they need to invest a large amount of time in both finding where
they are and how to use them. The organization should be aware of this fact as this time can be
better served for value-added tasks and productivity towards achieving organizational goals and
outputs.
In addition, virtual team members need to be able to use virtual platforms and interfaces
to be able to execute the tasks of their roles. Interestingly, e-mail was only cited by Josiah who
said, “we use e-mail but to a lesser extent…I think people are just tired of e-mail”. This concept
of e-mail fatigue has been well documented in the literature as the prevalence of e-mail has had
the unintended consequence of undermining senses of urgency (Bye & Hobbins, 2015) and
resulting in poor communication of important messages (Potter & Parkinson, 2010). To this end,
other platforms are needed in order to facilitate the communication and coordination of virtual
team members. Respondents mentioned a plethora of different platforms such as screen sharing,
document sharing, sharepoints, shared drives, and virtual whiteboards. A selection of quotes
from respondents on this topic is presented in Table 19.

110

Table 19
Different Virtual Platforms Leveraged by Virtual Team Members
Respondent Platforms leveraged by virtual team members
Sonia
Where possible, I think it makes a big difference to screen
share…when you can see exactly what someone is talking about and
referencing.
Leah
We have stuff that we can share documents and multiple people can
actually work on those documents at the same time.
Maria
I’ve taken part in Adobe connect as a participant. Overall, it is a really
cool, but you’ve got to have someone facilitating who knows their
way around it perfectly.
Piper
I guess ones I frequent are like sharepoints, where lots of people are
going for the same information. I use those a lot as a personal portal
where like all of my information is housed and I can get to it super
quickly.
Ophelia
I really like Adobe connect which is more, I think, for when you’re
doing bigger meetings and it allows for kind of like breakout groups
and things like that.
Julian
I use sharepoints and shared drives as well…they are similar in that
you can store things in a central, like, place.
Eva
We just started using slack and I am trying to get used to that…but
also, like, still being able to sharepoint sites where we can just put all
our things in one place.
Charlene
We’ve used sharepoints, shared drives on the computer, work
docs…all kind of file sharing where multiple people can be working
on documents simultaneously. We also have, like, a virtual
whiteboard…like you would have in a conference room.

Here, the challenge is the vast array of different platforms and a lack of uniformity
amongst virtual team members as to the ones that are most practical for use. If virtual team
members do not use the same platforms to communicate, not only will they not be able to
effectively work with one another, but their connectedness as a team and group unit will also
suffer (Plotnick et al., 2016). This need was not measured by any of the engagement data
metrics.
111

Assumed Knowledge Need 4: Virtual Team Members Need to be Able to Reflect and
Communicate Times in Which They Felt Engaged/Disengaged in Their Virtual Teams
(Partially Validated)
Finally, from a metacognitive standpoint, respondents need to be able to not only
understand and explain what engagement is, but also be able to reflect on times that they have or
have not properly engaged as employees. In order to assess this need, four different interview
questions were asked to respondents. When asked to define employee engagement, respondents
had varying definitions and components of what that looked like. As well, some participants
were able to think back to times they have been both engaged and disengaged, and they were
able to offer some suggestions for improvements in this space. For these reasons, this need was
partially validated.
To begin, respondents were asked to define what employee engagement looks like to
them. All answers were slightly different but there were a number of specific themes that
underpinned all the responses. These themes can be summarized as (a) feeling valued from the
organization (41%); (b) putting forth the necessary discretionary effort (41%); and (c) feeling
connected to both the team and the organization as a whole (50%). An overview of which
aspects of these themes respondents noted can be found in Table 20.

112

Table 20
Respondent Themes of Employee Engagement
Respondent Feeling valued Discretionary effort Connectedness
Alyssa X X
Josiah X
Sonia X
Leah X
Maria X X
Piper X
Ophelia X
Julian X
Eva X X
Talia X
Sophia X X
Charlene X
Total 5 5 6

Interestingly, these themes mirror very closely to the operational definition of
engagement as presented by Shuck and Wollard (2010). Therefore, ET is no different than any
other organization when it comes to understanding the engagement of their employees and
should ensure that they are providing the support and resources to ensure such engagement of
their teams.
In addition, respondents were asked to reflect on times they felt engaged in their roles.
Similar themes were discussed by the respondents. As Josiah noted, “when we have all been
together…delivering a course or training at a conference…there’s a lot of positivity and it feels
really good”. Similarly, according to Leah, “when we were running our courses and you could
see people grow and learn, that gave you a real sense of accomplishment”. And according to
Talia, “when the team, not just our local team, but the wider team has been working together, it
was during those times I felt most engaged”. Therefore, it is not just about being physically in
113

the same space as colleagues, but also being able to work closely together on work outputs that
most likely resulted in feelings of being engaged. When employees can work on projects that are
meaningful to them and do so in a way that fosters positivity, engagement is likely to follow.
On the flip side, respondents were also asked to share times in their roles in which they
did not feel engaged. Again, there were some commonalities found by the respondents’ quotes
relating specifically to output and performance. For example, Sonia noted that “at times, I
haven’t really understood where my skill set fits in and no one told me where I was adding
value”. Alyssa reflected when, “we failed in delivering a piece of work, and there was a lot of
blaming and pointing going on, which was just creating a toxic environment”. As well, Leah
noted, “there were days when it kind of felt like what am I doing here, I’m just doing the same
thing every day”. In all these examples, there is a disconnect between performance and
engagement, a fact that has been noted in the literature as well (Marrelli, 2011). Leaders of
virtual team members should be aware of this connection in order to foster a supportive and
engaging culture within their teams.
Also, in addition to a break between performance and engagement, some virtual team
members noted that their engagement stemmed from a place of loneliness. For example, Maria
felt more disengaged when “it just felt like I had not had much communication and interaction
from anyone in a long time”. Piper echoed this sentiment and noted that, “without the visibility
of seeing each other or checking in, it became challenging to stay close and I just felt like the
team forgot about each other”. It has been noted in the literature that there is a negative
correlation between team cohesion and engagement and when one decreases the other does as
well (de Pillis & Furumo, 2007). The question, then, becomes how to solve this problem.
Charlene noted a poignant message in her interview:
114

We were a virtual team by nature and so we were used to working this way, but we
always had the opportunity to see each other every couple of months through a team
summit or something like that. But we all just got so busy and it felt like we forgot about
each other…on our team calls, people would just stop being on video…it was tough
and…I think, it really solidified the fact that even being in a virtual team it’s so important
to have those in-person interactions every once in a while, because otherwise, you’re just
seeing these people through a screen and that can be really hard.
Here, Charlene notes a key component with virtual teams. While their composition, by nature,
starkly contrasts the make-up of in-person teams, human interaction is still paramount, which can
be done either through virtual mediums or face-to-face meetings. However, it is accomplished,
the pivotal point is that communication is still (and some may argue even more) salient to
maintain positive levels of social connectedness and team engagement (Bailey, 2013). This need
was not measured by any of the engagement data metrics.
Summary of Knowledge Assumed Needs
This study examined four assumed knowledge needs of virtual team members in regards
to employee engagement, using both interviews and document analysis as different methods of
data collection. Findings substantiated and validated one need, partially validated two needs, and
left one need not validated. While virtual team members interviewed overwhelmingly had the
conceptual knowledge to understand the components and expectations of their roles, there was
some disconnect in terms of the connections made to the larger organization. In addition, having
the knowledge of tools, resources, and platforms for effective team building and working
relationships was revealed as a core need. Finally, there were also mixed results from
respondents being able to demonstrate the metacognitive ability to reflect on times they did or
115

did not feel engaged. This study will next turn to the assumed motivation influences and needs
that were examined.
Motivation Assumed Needs
There were two motivation assumed influences within this study. First, relating closely to
self-efficacy theory, virtual team members need to believe in their ability to be successful in their
tasks and roles in order to be more connected and engaged in their virtual teams. And second,
with task value theory, virtual team members need to find aspects and tasks in their roles and
interactions they value and find enjoyable to increase motivation. Table 21 presents each
assumed influence, the corresponding motivational theory within that influence, and finally,
whether the influence was validated, partially validated, or not validated at all.

Table 21
Findings of Assumed Motivation Needs
Motivation influence
Motivation
theory
Validated
Partially
validated
Not
validated
Virtual team members need to
believe in their ability to be
successful in their tasks and
roles in order to be more
connected and engaged in their
virtual teams (M-1)
Self-efficacy
theory
X
Virtual team members need to
find aspects and tasks in their
roles and interactions they
value and find enjoyable to
increase motivation (M-2)
Task value
theory
X

116

Assumed Motivation Need 1: Virtual Team Members Need to Believe in Their Ability to Be
Successful in Their Tasks and Roles in Order to Be More Connected and Engaged in Their
Virtual Teams (Validated)
Interview Data. Self-efficacy theory is a widely studied phenomenon referring to the
judgement one makes about the perceived ability to perform a task and demonstrate success
(Bandura, 1977). In order to assess this need, two different interview questions were asked. First,
respondents were asked to reflect on whether or not they have been successful or unsuccessful in
their role. Then, for areas of feeling unsuccessful, respondents were also asked to think about
resources that they could leverage to help make them more successful. More than half (58%) of
the respondents demonstrated feeling more unsuccessful than successful and therefore, this need
is validated.
In terms of feeling unsuccessful, aspects of feeling that their full potential was not
reached was mentioned by respondents. For example, Josiah felt that “I should have been
promoted within six months, but here I am almost two years later with no promotion. I guess I
did some things wrong”. Similar thoughts were mentioned by Sophia: “I would have liked to
have been picked for large-scale projects…and I thought I was showing that I was up to the
challenge, but I guess those above me saw it differently”. In addition, Alyssa stated, “I always
feel like there’s more to do…I don’t ever feel successful really, and I feel like there’s always
more that I could have done”. This negative self-talk, especially in a constant manner, can be
incredibly damning to employees since it directly affects thought patterns, emotional reactions,
work-life balance, and overall employee engagement (Chan et al., 2017). In addition, poor self-
efficacy can also stem from feeling as though you have made irreparable mistakes, as was
evidenced by Talia who noted, “there have been a few times that I have damaged key
117

relationships with stakeholders and while I wish I could go back, I just can’t, and that
relationship is what it is now”. Negative views and poor self-efficacy of oneself can create an
unremitting cycle, as evidenced by Piper when she mentioned, “there’s definitely been times
when I’ve, you know, stuck my head above the trench and I’ve been like swatted back a bit…and
it makes me feel even worse about myself…why would I even bother next time”. This quote
speaks to the impact that feeling successful and positive self-efficacy can have on a person; and
if that is lacking, there are long-standing repercussions. As a personal and professional resource,
having strong levels of self-efficacy directly relates to how much effort employees will spend on
challenging tasks, professional development, and working against large and complex barriers and
problems (Ibrahim et al., 2019).
If virtual team members feel as though they have not been as successful as they may have
liked, the question then becomes are they able to leverage resources to improve in this space.
Respondents were asked this question with some stark contrast in their answers. Resources
identified included personal development, speaking up, and coaching, just to name a few.
Various quotes from respondents can be found in Table 22.

118

Table 22
Resources Available to Foster Improvements in Employee Success
Respondent Resources to foster employee success
Maria
So, I’m not a program manager, and I don’t want to be a project
manager…but I’m turning into having to do things like that…
because right now we’re not working in line with the job description
that I applied for and it’s always really, really helpful to know what
the expectations are and what you should be doing.
Piper
There’s a lot of online stuff and there’s a lot of webinars, fireside chats,
things like that...different sorts of opportunities to network and meet
new people. But…you have to have the time to attend it, and if, you
don’t have two hours on a Wednesday afternoon to go a webinar
about female leadership and learn about new careers, well that’s a
shame.
Ophelia
It’s hard to think how you can get some of that exposure. And if you
don’t have time to explore, that could be a blocker and it’s hard to
see, you know, what is that next role…and if you can’t see it, it starts
to feel like a lot of the work becomes very transactional.
Julian
I would like to see the business put a bit more resources and money
into that…I think the bones are there and it’s a really good tool. And
it will be helpful for when you move roles because that story, that
narrative about you, already exists.
Talia
I think it’s simple and it comes down to mentoring…because of the
time limits we’re on it becomes here’s the answer rather than having
a coaching conversation and helping someone along that journey of
self-discovery. And I think the buddy or mentor can help give you a
steer in the right direction… you don’t have to spoon feed people but
you can help give them a little nudge in the right direction.

Even with varying responses, a number of respondents pointed to aspects of development
from looking for new roles, to personal plans, to better coaching and mentorship. There was a
pervading message that ET relies heavily on a sink or swim mentality and since it has done that
before it should do it again. However, building a supportive and caring environment for
employees not only leads to better engagement, but also to other positive outcomes such as job
enrichment, retention, quality, and reduced turnover (Barik & Kochar, 2017). And, as identified
119

in the interviews, some of this infrastructure already exists and it just needs to be properly
inoculated into the fabric and culture of the organization.
Document Analysis Data. Finally, the researcher analyzed of a number of different
employee engagement data questions. First, data for questions relating to accomplishment were
examined. The first question asked virtual team members if their work gives them a feeling of
accomplishment. This question was asked eight times between April 2020 and February 2021,
with a total of 1,301 responses and an average score of 4.1. The second question asked virtual
team members how often they feel excited when they accomplish something at work. This
question was asked 10 times between March 2020 and February 2021, with a total of 1,450
responses and an average score of 4.3. Figures 6 and 7 give a graphical representation for this
data.

120

Figure 6
Scores for Question “Does Your Work Give You a Feeling of Accomplishment?

4.0 4.0
4.3
4.5
4.0
3.9
3.8
4.3
3.7
3.8
3.9
4.0
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
Apr-20 May-20 Jun-20 Jul-20 Aug-20 Sep-20 Oct-20 Nov-20 Dec-20 Jan-21 Feb-21
Score Average
121

Figure 7
Scores for Question “How often do you feel excited when you accomplish something at work?”

Furthermore, data for one of the questions relating to value was examined. This question
asked virtual team members if they feel valued at ET. This question was asked 10 times between
March 2020 and February 2021, with a total of 1,392 responses and an average score of 4.1.
Figures 8 gives a graphical representation for this data.

122

Figure 8
Scores for Question “Do You Feel Valued at ET?”

Assumed Motivation Need 2: Virtual Team Members Need to Find Aspects and Tasks in Their
Roles and Interactions They Value and Find Enjoyable to Increase Motivation (Not
Validated)
Interview Data. In order to feel successful in their roles, virtual team members need to
identify aspects in their roles that increase motivation. Here, the underlying theory is task value
theory which posits that various types of value can drive motivation in a particular task. In order
to assess this need, respondents were first asked how they stay motivated to complete their roles
on a daily basis. Also, engagement data relating to motivation was also analyzed. Every
respondent (100%) was able to identify what motivates them, both intrinsically and extrinsically,
in their roles. Therefore, this need is not validated.
123

Respondents were asked about how they stay motivated and responses varied greatly.
Whereas some answers were more intrinsic (doing the right thing for others), other answers were
more extrinsic (being able to produce and deliver something of value, getting paid). As well,
some respondents noted that they were motivated by being able to achieve a greater work/life
balance, such as spending quality time with loved ones or even being able to step away from the
work, even during busy times. Table 23 provides an overview of respondent’s motivating factors.

Table 23
Factors Contributing to Employee Motivation
Respondent
Seeing bigger
value
Producing
output
Impacting
others
Work/life
balance
Fair pay and
benefits
Alyssa X X X X
Josiah X X
Sonia X X X X
Leah X X X
Maria X X
Piper X X X
Ophelia X X X X
Julian X X
Eva X X X X
Talia X X X
Sophia X X X
Charlene X X
Total 9 6 7 10 4

124

In this table, it can be seen that there is variance in responses and difference between both
intrinsic and extrinsic factors of motivation. And, as evidenced by Eccles (2005), different
components of motivation impact individuals differently. However, there were two factors which
were highlighted by the most respondents. Being able to see value in the work being delivered
was mentioned by nine (75%) respondents. This ability to see the bigger picture of where
someone is adding value has been demonstrated as a key component in the motivation literature
(Oyserman et al., 2017). And, having a positive balance between work and personal time not
only increases motivation, but also performance and happiness in both aspects of one’s life
(Wolor et al., 2020). This factor is more pronounced in the current pandemic as more and more
employees are having to work from home and juggle work and personal commitments.
Therefore, organizations should be intentional in helping employees individually find purpose
and motivation in their roles.
Document Analysis Data. Finally, analysis of engagement data for questions relating to
motivation, fit, and challenge were all examined. In terms of motivation, the first question asked
virtual team members if they feel motivated at work. This question was asked six times between
May 2020 and February 2021, with a total of 860 responses and an average score of 4.3. The
second question asked virtual team members if they are inspired by the work they do at ET. This
question was asked five times between March 2020 and January 2021, with a total of 690
responses and an average score of 4.0. Figures 9 and 10 give a graphical representation for this
data.

125

Figure 9
Scores for Question “Do You Feel Motivated at Work?”

126

Figure 10
Scores for Question “Are You Inspired by the Work You do at ET?”

Furthermore, analysis of engagement data for two questions relating to fit were also
examined. The first question asked virtual team members if they were interested in the work that
they do. This question was asked six times between June 2020 and February 2021, with a total of
848 responses and an average score of 4.3. The second question asked virtual team members if
their job was a good fit for their skills. This question was asked five times between March 2020
and February 2021, with a total of 792 responses and an average score of 4.2. Figures 11 and 12
give a graphical representation for this data.

127

Figure 11
Scores for Question “Are You Interested in the Work You Do?”

128

Figure 12
Scores for Question “Is Your Job a Good Fit for Your Skills?”

Finally, analysis of engagement data for questions relating to challenge were examined,
as feeling challenged is a core facet of both feedback and engagement (Khan et al., 2016). The
first question asked virtual team members if they find their job challenging in a positive way.
This question was asked three times between June 2020 and January 2021, with a total of 287
responses and an average score of 3.9. The second question asked virtual team members if they
found their work to be a positive challenge. This question was asked five times between April
2020 and February 2021, with a total of 732 responses and an average score of 4.1. Figures 13
and 14 give a graphical representation for this data.

129

Figure 13
Scores for Question “Do You Find Your Job Challenging in a Good Way?”

130

Figure 14
Scores for Question “Do You Find Your Work to be a Positive Challenge?”

Summary of Motivation Assumed Needs
This study examined two assumed motivation needs of virtual team members in regards
to employee engagement, using both interviews and document analysis as different methods of
data collection. Findings validated that virtual team members needed to have strong self-efficacy
and believe in their ability to be successful in their roles. However, findings did not validate the
need, based in task value theory, that virtual team members need to find the valuable and
enjoyable aspects of their roles. This chapter will now turn to the assumed organizational
influences and needs that were examined.
Organizational Assumed Needs
131

There were four assumed organizational influences within this study. First, the
organization needs to foster a culture where virtual team members can build relationships and
trust with each other in their virtual environments. Second, the organization needs to create an
environment where virtual team members can feel psychologically safe in their virtual teams.
Third, the organization needs to provide the necessary tools, resources, and virtual platforms for
virtual team members to be successful and engaged. And fourth, the organization needs to
provide quality feedback on performance to virtual team members. Furthermore, since culture is
such a broad term, each organizational influence will be broken down into either a cultural model
or cultural setting. Table 24 presents each assumed influence, the corresponding type of
organizational influence (either cultural model or cultural setting), and finally, whether the
influence was validated, partially validated, or not validated at all.

132

Table 24
Findings of Assumed Organizational Needs
Organizational influence
Organizational
influence type
Validated
Partially
validated
Not
validated
The organization needs to foster
a culture where virtual team
members can build
relationships and trust with
each other in their virtual
environments (O-1)
Cultural model X
The organization needs to
create an environment where
virtual team members can
feel psychologically safe in
their virtual teams (O-2)
Cultural model X
The organization needs to
provide the necessary tools,
resources, and virtual
platforms for virtual team
members to be successful and
engaged (O-3)
Cultural setting X
The organization needs to
provide quality feedback on
performance to virtual team
members (O-4)
Cultural setting X

Cultural Models
Cultural models can be better understood as those aspects of the organization that cannot
be seen or touched directly. Included within this are the taken-for-granted assumptions, values,
and beliefs of the organization (Schein, 2017).
Assumed Organizational Need 1: The Organization Needs to Foster a Culture Where Virtual
Team Members Can Build Relationships and Trust With Each Other in Their Virtual
Environments (Validated)
133

While having strong relationships and trust within all teams is crucial, this need is
magnified even further in virtual teams due to the nature of their structure (Gilson et al., 2015).
However, the onus is often on either the employee or the leader of the virtual team to
accomplish, thereby absolving the organization of any responsibility. In order to assess this need,
respondents were asked about the types of resources the organization can provide and to describe
what trust looks like and how it is built. There was variation in the way trust was defined and
described for each of the respondents, and only five (41%) were able to point to specific
resources that the organization provides, thereby validating this need.
First, respondents were asked about not only what trust looks like but how do they
maintain it. While there was much variance in the responses, there was a central theme of being
open and honest with colleagues, two-way communication, and transparency. Further detailed
responses can be found in Table 25.

134

Table 25
Definitions of Trust Among Virtual Team Members
Respondent Definition of trust
Josiah
Trust is about being open and honest and having the courage and the
robustness in order to tell people the truth and the facts. If I have an
underperforming team member, I want to be able to speak to them
openly and look for ways to help them improve.
Leah
It’s about feedback and feeling comfortable asking for feedback and
sharing feedback with others…it’s about not being too guarded and
remaining open to other ways of working or ways to improve.
Piper
Building trust like has to come from being open and then…talking
about it, if something’s going to impact you, having that open
communication.
Ophelia
To me, it’s about not having people checking in on what you’re doing
all the time, I mean, really, like trusting that I am working on what
I’m supposed to be doing.
Julian
Being open and honest with each other about your workload, what’s on
your plate, things like that…and I think that builds trust when, you
know, like people just get to understand you.
Eva
Trust for me is honesty, transparency, and it’s being able to have those
difficult conversations and listening to other people’s views.
Sophia
For our team, we trust each other, and we’re lucky in that we’re able to,
like, nobody feels stupid asking for help or support…we’re a small
team…we have to have each other’s backs.

There is a clear theme that emerges from these quotes about the connection between trust
and communication. This is supported in the literature as well, in that those teams that talk more
freely, provide feedback candidly, and engage truthfully have overall higher levels of trust than
those teams that do not (Clark et al., 2010). Therefore, being able to communicate and trust each
other is pivotal for virtual team member engagement.
However, these trusting relationships need to be supported, in part, by the organization so
that virtual team members have the capability to capitalize in this space. When asked about what
specific resources the organization provides to foster positive relationships, some definitive
135

examples emerged. Charlene, for example, noted that “the organization hosts a lot of virtual
gathering, different leadership development things…there’s always something going on”.
Similar sentiment was felt by Piper who stated, “I think the organization does a good job about
having different interest groups, and channels to connect”. It can be seen here that the
organization is providing ample amounts of these possibilities for its virtual team members.
Still, while there were a small handful of examples given by respondents in terms of what
the organization provides, there was also a strong feeling from many that more could be done.
Ophelia stated, “I get all these e-mails about these things and virtual meet-ups but I don’t ever
have the time to attend…they always seem to be around the same time and that doesn’t work for
me”. Leah expands on this notion by stating, “I think we try and encourage people to do that fun
extracurricular stuff outside of the work hours but…people might have personal
commitments…and you’re reluctant to give up that time”. While the organization does offer
avenues to connect virtual team members, it must be noted that there is not a one-size-fits-all
approach. Rather than offer more of the same, new and innovative options should be presented,
similar to what Leah has recommended, in order to properly engage as many virtual team
members as possible. This need was not measured by any of the engagement data metrics.
Assumed Organizational Need 2: The Organization Needs to Create an Environment Where
Virtual Team Members Can Feel Psychologically Safe in Their Virtual Teams (Partially
Validated)
Interview Data. Feeling safe within an organization goes deeper than just physical
safety—there is also a need for emotional safety as well. This is where the concept of
psychological safety stems from and, at its core, is about individuals feeling safe about taking
risks. As defined by Clark (2020), “Psychological safety is a condition in which you feel (1)
136

included, (2) safe to learn, (3) safe to contribute, and (4) safe to challenge the status quo—all
without fear of being embarrassed, marginalized, or punished in some way” (p. 2). Said
differently, psychological safety is akin to all levels of Maslow’s (1943) hierarchy with the
exception of the physical needs, a concept that can be visualized in Figure 15.

Figure 15
Psychological Safety and the Hierarchy of Needs

Note. Model taken from Clark, T. R. (2020). The 4 Stages of Psychological Safety. Berrett-
Koehler Publishers.
137

In order to assess this need, respondents were asked if they felt as though they could be
their authentic selves on their teams. For this question, six (50%) of respondents unequivocally
agreed that they could be their authentic self, whereas the other six (50%) were not so sure. Also,
engagement data was fairly strong for these questions. Due to this disconnect, this need was
partially validated.
In their interviews, respondents were asked if they felt as though they could be their
authentic selves on their teams. Some respondents answered immediately that they could, such as
Sonia who said, “Of course, I’ve never known how to be anything else”. In addition, Piper
exclaimed “Yeah, one hundred percent…we are a mixed bunch of people and everyone is really
open-minded and we lift each other up”. While Leah stated that she has not always felt authentic
in other companies, at ET she “feels that no one is going to judge me if I say I don’t know the
answer to something, or I’m not skilled in that area”. Having this strong sense of psychological
safety allows these virtual team members to live authentic lives in both their work and personal
spaces.
Other respondents were slightly more nuanced in their answer. For example, Josiah
tended to stay a bit more guarded with some aspects of his authentic self and noted, “there are
things like hobbies, interests, things like that that I always share with people. But some things
like personal issues…I kind of keep that to myself…I rarely ever share my emotions and
feelings”. Similarly, Alyssa noted, “I feel like I can be myself, but sometimes, depending on the
audience, I have to dial it back…I like to laugh and have fun and I can’t always do that”. When
people need to change themselves based on the situation, this is not allowing them to be their
authentic selves. Still, one respondent (Eva) answered loud and clear that she could not be her
authentic self:
138

No, I don’t, because I am always fearful of getting it wrong…and so I always am sort of
unsure about myself and thinking I’m going to make these huge mistakes…I constantly
feel like this and it is horrible…I used to feel very confident but not anymore…the worst
part is that I don’t really have someone to talk to about this as I don’t have the best trust
in my manager and some of my colleagues.
Here, Eva recounts a crushing example of the pain that is felt by not being authentic. And, by not
having the proper support, she does not know how to prevent this vicious cycle from continuing.
Role ambiguity, constant fear, self-doubt, and feelings of loneliness all run counter to the
principles of strong psychological safety (Kahn, 1990) and the organization must be tasked with
doing more to prevent this.
Therefore, the level of psychological safety is quite dynamic with these respondents.
Table 26 provides an overview of where each respondent falls on the psychological safety
spectrum.

139

Table 26
Levels of Psychological Safety Among Respondents
Respondent
Fully feeling
psychologically safe
Partially feeling
psychologically safe
Not feeling
psychologically safe
Alyssa X
Josiah X
Sonia X
Leah X
Maria X
Piper X
Ophelia X
Julian X
Eva X
Talia X
Sophia X
Charlene X
Total 6 5 1

Document Analysis Data. Finally, analysis of one of the engagement data questions
relating to value was examined. While this engagement data question is still an aspect of
motivation, it is analyzed here as organizational. This question is salient, as research has
demonstrated a positive correlation between value and psychological safety, wherein the more
employees feel valued, the more likely they are to showcase authentic components of themselves
(Akan et al., 2020). This question asked virtual team members if their work was valued at ET.
This question was asked seven times between March 2020 and February 2021, with a total of
1,074 responses and an average score of 4.1. Figure 16 gives a graphical representation for this
data.

140

Figure 16
Scores for Question “Is Your Work Valued at ET?”

Cultural Settings
In addition to cultural models, cultural settings of the organization were also examined.
Unlike cultural models, cultural settings are the visible and tangible aspects of the organization,
such as routines, processes, components, and mechanisms (Rueda, 2011).
Assumed Organizational Need 3: The Organization Needs to Provide the Necessary Tools,
Resources, and Virtual Platforms for Virtual Team Members to Be Successful and Engaged
(Validated)
In order for virtual team members to work effectively, the organization must ensure that
they provide the proper tools and resources for these employees to be successful. Three different
questions were used to validate this need, all of which related to being able to use resources
141

effectively. Responses indicated that there were, in actuality, too many resources available and
having this cornucopia was more confusing for virtual team members. While all respondents
knew about the tools and resources, only three (25%) felt as though these were the right tools for
their roles, and therefore, the need is validated.
One area of contention in relation to some of the tools or resources was a feeling that not
all virtual team members had access to the same tools. As Sonia noted, “it seems like we just
don’t get the same things as others. Everyone else has a cool tool and we just get pieces of
tools”. Further, Alyssa declared, “I’ve worked on a lot of teams in the years I’ve been here and
the one I’m on now just doesn’t have the best technology”. According to Leah, “we’re starting to
produce the right tools but we’re still a long way away”. By creating different tools for different
populations, some employees may feel as though there is an inequality in roles.
In addition, a feeling pervading the virtual team members is that tools, resources, and
information are available, but the onus is on the individual to go find it. Maria sums this up very
well:
I probably do have the resources, but I have to seek them out. But what would be the
problem of just helping and spoon feeding sometimes and saying here are all these
amazing resources and they’re open to you if you want to give them a try. And I know I
could do that and I could go and find a review a bunch of different stuff…But I guess it’s
up to being inquisitive enough and having enough time to start digging around and all
that stuff to see what you want to do, as opposed to, here are some things that can help.
In this sense, Maria points to a specific challenge when it comes to resources of whether the onus
is on the employee to find them or the organization to provide them. While both paths could
142

work, Medlin and Green (2014) found that having the organization provide the necessary
resources to employees, employees became more engaged overall.
Furthermore, virtual team members need to be able to interact through more unorthodox
channels as compared to their in-person colleagues, which is due to the nature of being virtual.
When asked which resources these individuals engage with, some platforms were used more
frequently than others. For example, Chatter (pseudonym used in order to protect anonymity of
organization) is relied on so heavily that almost every respondent mentioned it in some capacity.
Alyssa sums up this reliance eloquently when she states, “I couldn’t do my job without [Chatter]
and honestly that’s the way I do everything at the moment…it’s the integration that makes it so
important”. Due to the nature of their work, virtual team members need one central
communication platform in order to engage, interact, and collaborate with other virtual team
members. Still, while this primary tool can be used to interact, it is not the only platform or
resource that is used. Different virtual team members use different channels to interact,
communicate, and complete their work as evidenced in Table 27.

143

Table 27
Virtual Tools Used by Respondents
Respondent Chatter E-Mail
Document
sharing tools
Collaborative
platforms
Alyssa X X
Josiah X
Sonia X X
Leah X X X X
Maria X X
Piper X X
Ophelia X X
Julian X X X
Eva X
Talia X X
Sophia X X X
Charlene X X X
Total 10 8 5 4

Interestingly, while virtual team members need document sharing tools and platforms to
collaborate, these resources were mentioned less frequently. While everyone (virtual and non-
virtual teams) use Chatter and e-mail, other resources were surprisingly mentioned less
frequently, which then has an unintended consequence of not only damaging productivity, but
also overall communication which can impact team engagement (Laitinen & Valo, 2018).
However, just because these platforms are available does not necessarily mean that they
are leveraged. As well, the predominant ones that are supplied by the organization may not be fit
for purpose. While this was acknowledged by a small number of respondents, Talia shared this
concern quite vocally, who stated, “having a collaborative work space is always challenging, and
when you’re working virtually…it’s just hard…we’ve tried what seems like something new
every other week but we still have the same problems”. While different sorts of tools have been
used, so far the correct one has not been identified for meeting the unique demands of virtual
144

team members. This creates an additional barrier for virtual team members, since they need to
have the proper tools to do their jobs and engage via the correct platforms (Unsworth, 2020).
This need was not measured by any of the engagement data metrics.
Assumed Organizational Need 4: The Organization Needs to Provide Quality Feedback on
Performance to Virtual Team Members (Partially Validated)
Finally, feedback is a critical component in all teams in order to drive positive
performance and engagement. While this is true for all teams, this component is more critical in
virtual teams, both between colleagues as well as from one’s leader (Gilson et al., 2015). In order
to assess this need, respondents were asked questions about the various channels to provide
feedback as well as describe one-to-one meetings with their manager. While all respondents were
able to describe multiple forms of feedback, nine (75%) respondents mentioned that one-to-one
meetings were more one-sided. Because of these facts, this need was partially validated.
Respondents revealed that ET has a strong feedback culture, with both formal and ad hoc
feedback mechanisms. This was appealing to respondents such as Leah who stated, “I think I’m
really fortunate that I work for an organization where feedback is seen as such a gift”. This
positive view of feedback helps to drive a culture of openness and support within the
organization. While some respondents spoke of smaller mechanisms of feedback, one that stood
out was the organization’s annual feedback and performance tool known as the Annual
Performance Review (APR), which received very positive reviews. Table 28 provides a sample
of quotes from respondents in regards to this tool.

145

Table 28
Respondent Views on Organization’s Annual Performance Review (APR) Tool
Respondent Views on APR tool
Alyssa
The main sort of like formal feedback mechanism we have is called
[APR]…once a year, you request feedback from stakeholders…it’s
limited to 60 words so it’s quite clever.
Josiah
Every year, we do the [APR] process and we have the opportunity to
share feedback on others and get feedback on our own performance.
Leah
Our process happens every year and you are actively encouraged to
seek the feedback of your peers and stakeholders which I think it just
fantastic, because the focus is meant to be very positive.
Ophelia
What I like about it is the focus is on sort of helping people identify
their strengths so they can focus on that…and then equally kind of
what areas that they can improve on as well.
Julian
It’s sort of like a progress report with general observations about what
has gone well, what can be improved, and things like that. I look
forward to it every year.
Sophia
It’s actually a really cool process because it’s based in feedback to
where you reach out to people to ask them for feedback about
you…but you’re limited to 60 words or something like that so it’s
good because it allows you to be really concise and really specific.

However, not all respondents were as pleased with the feedback culture. Eva, for
example, was callous in her response when she stated, “I feel as though nothing is ever done
about it and then it’s like well what’s the point…it only works if people are open to the feedback
and it can drive actions”. While it is true that feedback is positive, if dealt with in a non-
constructive manner it can also create a poor experience for employees. Research has shown that
rather than look at feedback in only one direction, employees and leaders should engage
consistently in a back and forth conversation and that leaders must demonstrate they are open to
feedback for it to be successful (Lee et al., 2019).
One of the key avenues to also give and receive feedback around performance can
happen during formal one-to-one meetings. These meetings serve as an opportunity to properly
146

align and agree on what needs to be done next. However, the structure of them can be vastly
different. For example, Josiah noted that, “It’s basically me telling my line manager what I’m
doing…and how I’m spending my time”. Similarly, Eva explained, “they look like me sharing
what I am working on and providing a brief list of actions”. Sonia viewed these meetings as
“very kind of operational in nature”. While there is nothing inherently wrong with this approach,
the tone from the respondents came off as very transactional. Oftentimes, these conversations
can be about more than just the workplace. This was felt by Julian who stated, “it’s a time where
I can surface anything I want and sometimes I use it as a time to talk about work, vent about
frustrations, challenges in my personal life, things like that”. Here, more personal connections
are made, which can lead to better trust between both individuals. As well, many of the
respondents felt as though these meetings were informal such as Maria who declared, “they’re
fairly chatty, very informal, we just talk about whatever”. These meetings should be structured in
a way where both parties get something out of them.
However, while some virtual team members appreciate the loose structure, others wanted
more formal feedback processes. This was felt by Piper when she said, “I like structure. I want to
chit chat a little bit, but then I want to talk about the important things I’m doing or want to do”.
Here, there is a disconnect between what the manager thinks the team member wants to talk
about and what she actually wants to talk about. Similarly, Charlene noted, “I think sometimes
they’re almost too informal where if we don’t come with an agenda it kind of feels like we’re
just wasting time”. In order to be successful, there are certain aspects of these meetings that
should have attention paid to them. Knight (2016) posits that having a clear agenda with
discussion points is a best practice to make use of the time together. Other suggestions from
Knight (2016) to maximize these meetings include having leaders set-up and not cancel these
147

meetings, express gratitude, starting each meeting with something positive, and make time to talk
about career plans.
While research notes the importance of these career conversations for personal
development, this was not identified as often with respondents. For instance, Leah said that
development would be spoken about sometimes, in the sense of “what are your future
aspirations, where do you want to be in 12 months,” with no tangible actions coming from it.
Further, this was an area of extreme contention for Talia:
I feel like the intention is good and we were asked to create our own development plans
and we’re told this was going to be discussed in these meetings with your manager…but
that hardly ever happened and very quickly you end up just talking about operational
stuff…sometimes development is talked about…but more often it gets tossed aside. I’m
all for owning your own development, but it would be nice to feel as though someone
was there to help me with it.
This poignant example highlights not only the importance of one-to-ones, but how virtual team
members (and employees in general) can quickly become disengaged if they do not feel as
though they have a solid plan for the future. This response indicates the organization is therefore
lacking a mechanism to ensure that this aspect is embedded within employee one-to-ones. This
need was not measured by any of the engagement data metrics.
Summary of Organizational Assumed Needs
This study examined four assumed organizational needs of virtual team members in
regards to employee engagement, using both interviews and document analysis as different
methods of data collection. All four needs were validated to some extent. Needs relating to
building relationships and trust within virtual environments and having the correct tools are
148

resources for success were fully validated, whereas needs surrounding psychological safety and
providing feedback were partially validated. As all needs were validated to some extent, it is
clear that there are opportunities where the organization can improve in order to better the
engagement levels of their virtual team members.
Summary and Conclusion
This study explored 10 different assumed influences impacting the employee engagement
of virtual team members. From a knowledge standpoint, three influences were identified, at least
partially, as a need. In addition, from a motivation standpoint, one influence was identified as a
need. Finally, from an organizational standpoint, all four influences were identified, at least
partially, as a need. Table 29 summarizes these findings.

149

Table 29
Summary of Findings Across Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Dimensions
Category Need Category Sub-category
Validation
of need
Knowledge
Virtual team members need
to understand what is
expected of them to be
successful in their virtual
roles (K-C-1)
Knowledge Conceptual
Not
validated
Virtual team members need
to understand the
connections and
relationships between
themselves and the
organization as well to
their virtual team
colleagues (K-C-2)
Knowledge Conceptual
Partially
validated
Virtual team members need
to know how to leverage
tools and resources
available to them in a
virtual environment for
effective team building (K-
P-3)
Knowledge Procedural validated
Virtual team members need
to be able to reflect and
communicate times in
which they felt
engaged/disengaged in
their virtual teams (K-M-4)
Knowledge Metacognitive
Partially
validated
Motivation
Virtual team members need
to believe in their ability to
be successful in their tasks
and roles in order to be
more connected and
engaged in their virtual
teams (M-1)
Motivation Self-efficacy Validated
Virtual team members need
to find aspects and tasks in
their roles and interactions
they value and find
enjoyable to increase
motivation (M-2)
Motivation Task value
Not
validated
150

Category Need Category Sub-category
Validation
of need
Organization
The organization needs to
foster a culture where
virtual team members can
build relationships and
trust with each other in
their virtual environments
(O-1)
Organization
Cultural
model
Validated
The organization needs to
create an environment
where virtual team
members can feel
psychologically safe in
their virtual teams (O-2)
Organization
Cultural
model
Partially
validated
The organization needs to
provide the necessary
tools, resources, and virtual
platforms for virtual team
members to be successful
and engaged (O-3)
Organization
Cultural
setting
Validated
The organization needs to
provide quality feedback
on performance to virtual
team members (O-4)
Organization
Cultural
setting
Partially
validated

Based on these findings, recommendations for improvement in practice are needed in
order to address the current needs, according to the gap analysis framework. These
recommendations will be discussed next, in Chapter five.

151

Chapter Five: Discussion and Recommendations
Based on the findings presented in the previous chapter, this chapter will provide a
further analysis and how those results can be used to better organizational practice. This chapter
will begin with an overall review of the findings that arose from the preceding chapter. Next,
individual recommendations stemming from the knowledge, motivation, and organizational
findings will be discussed. Then, this chapter will turn to overarching recommendations that span
across all three aspects of the gap analysis framework, followed by a brief recommendation for a
comprehensive engagement initiative for ET. Finally, the limitations and delimitations of this
study will be addressed followed by recommendations for future research.
Discussion of Findings and Results
Over the past year, the Covid-19 pandemic has forced a large number of employees who
used to work in traditional office environments towards now working virtually. While many are
now forced into this new way of working, this study specifically looked at those employees who
were virtual before the pandemic, and the specific components that either aided or abated the
employee engagement of these individuals. This study, guided by the gap analysis framework
proposed by Clark and Estes (2008) aimed to answer three total research questions, but only the
first two were explored in the preceding chapter:
1. What are the knowledge and motivation influences affecting employee
engagement of virtual team members within their virtual teams?
2. What is the interaction between organizational culture and context and virtual
team member’s knowledge and motivation as it relates to increasing engagement
among them?
152

Through semi-structured interviews with 12 virtual team members, as well as document analysis
of employee engagement data, a number of key concepts emerged spanning multiple need areas,
which will be discussed next and are summarized in Table 30.

Table 30
Summary of Key Findings Spanning Various Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Needs
Theme Knowledge Motivation Organization
Use of tools and resources X X
Building trusting and
meaningful relationships
X X X
Maintaining trust and
psychological safety
X X

153

First, the use of tools and resources emerged as a key theme that stemmed across both the
knowledge and organizational indices and was validated by the data. Virtual team members, by
their very nature, must use a variety of systems, platforms, tools, and resources in order to carry
out the duties of their roles. While this concept is applicable to almost all employees in all fields,
this is more salient to virtual team members who need to rely on virtual means and
communications for all of their work. This is made possible through the use of technological
advances such as telecommunication devices and advanced use of the internet (Douglas et al.,
2013). Still, while this infrastructure exists, it was made clear through this study that various
such tools are cumbersome, difficult to find and use, and not fit for purpose for many of the
virtual team members at ET. Furthermore, it was found that there are almost too many different
means and channels to work virtually; but, since different teams use different solutions for their
own purposes, synergy across the organization is difficult to come by. By not being able to
effectively collaborate and work, connectedness with others suffers which has a direct impact on
decreasing overall employee engagement (Plotnick et al., 2016). Since these individuals only
interact through virtual environments and are unable to have those “more informal and personal
water cooler conversations” (Lees-Marshment & Hendricks, 2018, p. 24), they must find
additional avenues to connect with one another.
An additional overarching concept that emerged from this research relates to the concepts
of building trusting and meaningful relationships with other virtual team members. For this
study, the participants were all virtual team members before the Covid-19 pandemic hit, so they
were used to working in silos from one another. However, even though they were virtual, they
were still able to see each other a few times throughout the year, which is one of the most
necessary conditions of effective virtual teams (Dulebohn & Hoch, 2017). However, travel
154

restrictions changed this ability and these individuals needed to rely solely on building these
relationships in a virtual space. Relationship building in teams is key and needing to do this only
virtually can put a strain on forming and maintaining these relationships (Ferrell & Kline, 2018).
Also, relationships are dependent on communication and since communication is comprised of
both verbal and non-verbal components, virtual communication can be misunderstood (Staples &
Webster, 2007), causing a break in the relationship between team members. This personal
connection also helps in building and sustaining these relationships, which can lead to increased
employee engagement (Rozgus, 2018). However, work demands oftentimes supersede the ability
to connect and form relationships as a team. Social and fun interactions can help with these
relationships and this is one of the benefits of being able to meet sporadically in person as a
team. Again, within the current climate this has not been possible so virtual social events have
been used to bridge this gap. However, while positive in intent, these virtual events also create
undue friction and the need to prioritize and balance between work and personal commitments
(Stadtlander et al., 2017).
A final key theme that arose from this study related to the concept of trust and
psychological safety. Trust (both between and among colleagues as well as with one’s manager)
is a key condition for effective virtual teams’ success in that it leads to not only knowledge
sharing but also team camaraderie (Gilson et al., 2015). When teams have high levels of trust, a
number of key performance indicators can be achieved, such as being more productive overall,
engaging in deep and meaningful conversations, and providing quality feedback highlighting
both strengths and opportunities (Clark et al., 2010). However, in order for trust to occur, virtual
team members must get to know one another, not just as colleagues but as individuals (Dalton et
al., 2019). As well, there are a number of different types of trust (Hacker et al., 2019) and
155

respondents tended to define trust in slightly different ways. However, all of these definitions
and types of trust point to individuals feeling they can be open, honest, truthful, and even
vulnerable in some cases, traits that clearly point to psychological safety. While a necessary
condition for all teams, due to the nature of virtual teams, this concept is even more salient and
necessary not only for team effectiveness, but also to aid in the overall increase in virtual team
member engagement (Lechner & Mortlock, in press). However, findings revealed that not all
virtual team members could be their authentic and honest selves and due to the culture of the
organization, were not able to demonstrate full psychological safety.
Now that the individual needs and overarching themes have been presented, this chapter will
turn to address the third research question guiding this study, which is What are
recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of knowledge, motivation, and
organizational resources to favorably impact virtual team member’s engagement?
Individual recommendations for practice for each of the validated or partially validated
knowledge, motivation, and organizational needs will now be reviewed.
Recommendations for Practice
Based on the findings that emerged from the previous chapter, this chapter will now turn
to provide recommendations for practice. These recommendations will be provided for each of
the various knowledge, motivation, and organizational categories, as well as recommendations
for these factors in the aggregate. These findings will be supported by the literature and couched
in data and themes stemming from respondent interviews as well as the document analysis of the
engagement data. The overall aim of these recommendations is to provide the organization with
tangible actions that can be leveraged in order to increase the overall employee engagement
levels of virtual team members.
156

Recommendations for Knowledge Influences
This study addressed four different assumed knowledge influences. While the first
influence relating to virtual team members needing to understand the expectations of their roles
was not substantiated through the data, the other three influences were validated as needs the
organization should address. Influences relating to virtual team members making connections to
the wider organization, their ability to know how to leverage tools and resources, and their
ability to reflect on times they felt engaged will all be explored. When employees have the
knowledge to both understand how to be successful in their roles and how to make connections
with the broader organization, engagement can increase (Karim & Mahid, 2017). The various
knowledge recommendations are summarized in Table 31, then followed by an in-depth
explanation of each.

157

Table 31
Summary of Knowledge Needs and Recommendations
Validated knowledge need Principle and citation
Context-specific
recommendation
Virtual team members need
to understand the
connections and
relationships between
themselves and the
organization as well to their
virtual team colleagues (K-
C-2)
As virtual working can be a
lonely activity already
(Krawczyk-Brylka, 2017),
being able to connect with
colleagues is even more
necessary than other work
environments (Liao, 2017).
Allow virtual team members
specific time within their
days to connect with one
another personally (ideally
through video), in order to
build and sustain team
camaraderie (Breuer et al.,
2019).
Employees who are able to
find purpose in how their
roles connect to the broader
organization have been
shown to be more engaged
(Rozgus, 2018) as well as
produce more positive
business results and
outcomes (Kavale, 2012).
Create avenues for employees
to learn more about the
broader aspects of the
organization, not just their
particular roles and teams
(Reissner & Pagan, 2013).
Virtual team members need
to know how to leverage
tools and resources
available to them in a
virtual environment for
effective team building (K-
P-3)
In order to effectively work
apart from one another,
virtual team members need
to have access to tools to
enable them to work and
collaborate (Srivastava,
2020).
Provide the necessary
hardware and software
needed for virtual team
members to be successful
in their roles (Jeyalakshmi
& Rani, 2019).
To properly utilize and
leverage these tools
effectively, virtual team
members need to be trained
and feel comfortable using
these platforms to work
effectively (Davidson,
2016; Fuller et al., 2016).
Provide training opportunities
to ensure that virtual team
members can adequately
learn and use virtual tools
and platforms (Shuck &
Rocco, 2013).
Virtual team members need
to be able to reflect and
communicate times in
which they felt
engaged/disengaged in
their virtual teams (K-M-4)
Due to the large distances in
physical interaction, it is
important for virtual team
members to reflect in order
to build resiliency in their
roles (De Bruyn, 2020;
Degbey & Einola, 2020)
Leaders to advise virtual team
members to speak up and
share about both their
engaging and disengaging
experiences (Latif & Arif,
2018).

158

Knowledge Recommendation 1: Allow Virtual Team Members Specific Time Within Their
Days to Connect With One Another
Findings from this study reveal that it is challenging for virtual team members to find the
time available to maintain relationships with one another. While these virtual team members
were used to working virtually even before the Covid pandemic, the solitary environment
became more pronounced throughout this past year as they were not able to see each other at all.
This is challenging in that ensuring that these connections remain fostered is a critical component
of successful virtual team engagement (Bailey & Breslin, 2021). And, as was evidenced by
respondents, when the workload increased, the personal time decreased.
However, even with increased workload, these personal interactions are a necessary
condition and to that end, the organization ought to mandate that virtual team members take time
out of their days to interact with another, which has been shown in the literature to have a
positive connection with employee engagement (Breaugh, 2021). This can be easily
implemented by asking virtual team members to spend 15 to 30 minutes each day connecting
with colleagues. And, these connections do not need to reside in the virtual team member’s
primary team; rather, it should be encouraged to seek out others and make these professional
connections. Furthermore, employees should be urged to use their webcams to try to replicate an
in-person experience more fully, which further adds to more personal connections (Meluso et al.,
2020). This recommendation therefore serves two distinct purposes of (a) building team morale
and camaraderie on virtual teams and (b) broadening one’s professional network. While this first
point will help to increase the overall engagement of virtual team members with their immediate
colleagues (Dulebohn & Hoch, 2017), there has also been documented evidence of many
benefits within broadening one’s own professional circle and network (Schinoff et al., 2020).
159

Knowledge Recommendation 2: Create Avenues for Virtual Team Members to Learn More
About the Broader Aspects of the Organization, Not Just Their Particular Roles and Teams
In addition to forming connections with colleagues, it is also important to understand the
bigger picture guiding the overarching direction of the organization. Almost all respondents were
able to make connections and see how their role fit into the bigger picture of the organization,
which Michaelson et al. (2014) note as immensely important to engagement. Still, findings
revealed that there was still a gap in understanding some broader aspects of the organization
mission and purpose overall. With the fast-moving nature of the company, some virtual team
members did not know how to keep up with all the information about the wider purpose of the
organization.
As an organization, ET should communicate more to virtual team members and aiding
them in understanding the wider aspects of the business. By providing (proactively) this
information to virtual team members rather than placing the onus on them to seek it out, the
organization will be bringing these virtual team members along the journey, which can help to
increase employee engagement (Brosseau et al., 2019; Plaskoff, 2017). With the multitude of
channels that already exist (social media, e-mail newsletters, podcasts, etc.), there are a number
of different channels the organization can leverage to relay this information to its employees.
These multitude of avenues can ensure that virtual team members are receiving the correct
communication about the larger organization as a whole, thereby creating more connection and
engagement (Markarius & Larson, 2017).
Knowledge Recommendation 3: Provide the Necessary Hardware and Software Needed for
Virtual Team Members to be Successful in Their Roles
160

Another layer of knowledge relates to procedural knowledge such as skills, resources,
and techniques individuals need to perform tasks (Krathwohl, 2002). One such resource would
be the technological needs to operate in a virtual team. A primary function of virtual working is
being able to attempt (as much as possible) to replicate the environment of in-person working
(Laitinen & Valo, 2018) and to this end, investment in technology and innovation is key
(Bataresh et al.,2017). Furthermore, it is not just the systems themselves that are necessary for
investment, but also the collaborative suites and products to allow virtual team members to work
together in an electronic space (Gelston et al., 2018).
To this end, it is recommended that the organization take two actions. First, ensure that
all virtual team members are set up with the proper equipment needed to execute the duties of
their roles. This includes hardware requirements such as a computer or laptop, monitor(s),
keyboard, mouse and headset, which are the basic necessities needed to work outside of an office
environment. In addition to these resources, the organization should also create a full list of all
the software requirements (computer programs, platforms, etc.) that virtual team members would
need to conduct the duties of their roles. Then, audit for effectiveness by sending out this list to
all virtual team members and ask them to check to make sure they have all these programs. If
they do not have them, partner quickly to get this software onto their computers, as having the
right software and hardware have been shown to aid in overall job performance and engagement
(Garro-Abarca et al., 2021).
Knowledge Recommendation 4: Provide Training Opportunities to Ensure That Virtual Team
Members Can Adequately Learn and Use Virtual Tools and Platforms
While having the right tools and platforms to start is positive, it may not be fully
sufficient; rather, virtual team members must also be trained and know how to use these tools.
161

This concept of training is pivotal to the gap analysis framework, with Clark and Estes (2008)
noting that training is comprised of a combination of information, practice, and feedback. A
number of respondents noted that the tools and platforms were there, but because new tools are
constantly being introduced, it is challenging to learn about some of these platforms in such a
quick manner. Still, the organization must provide training opportunities to ensure that virtual
team members become fluent with these elaborate systems.
Since training is such a broad topic in and of itself, a one-size-fits-all approach is again
not conducive. Also, not all virtual team members will come with the same comfort level in
technology. Pacheco (2020) noted that millennials (those born between 1981 and 1994) are the
most fluent when it comes to utilizing different technological systems on a daily basis. However,
those outside the millennial age tend to struggle with technology adoption (Alexandrakis et al.,
2020). Therefore, virtual team members who are not millennials will need more help and support
in order to learn these systems and this is where the organization will need to invest more time.
Also, training is not a one-time-only recommendation. Instead, the organization should ensure
that continuous training opportunities are provided in order to ensure that virtual team members
keep abreast and comfortable with the changing technology systems the organization leverages.
This ability to continually train and upskill virtual team members in these spaces has been cited
in the literature as crucial towards success (Ahuja, 2017), which can lead to increased
engagement within the organization.
Knowledge Recommendation 5: Leaders to Advise Virtual Team Members to Speak Up and
Share About Both Their Engaging and Disengaging Experiences
Findings revealed that virtual team members were able to reflect and share times in which
they have been at both sides of the engagement spectrum – both actively engaged and actively
162

disengaged. This ability to reflect and operationally define what those times looked like is
important, both as a means to stop and just think, and as a way to self-regulate. Having self-
regulation allows individuals to identify and be more aware and attuned to themselves, which
both correlate towards increased engagement (Muenks et al., 2017). In addition, this self-
regulation is tied very closely to the concept of reflection, which has also been demonstrated to
have positive impacts on employee engagement (Matsuo, 2019). Furthermore, by encouraging
virtual team members to speak candidly about how they are feeling, and demonstrate openness
and transparency in their authentic self, the organization is more likely to gather appropriate
feedback from these team members (Mengel et al., 2013).
Therefore, the recommendation of practice here is two-fold. First, the organization should
make it a cultural expectation that virtual team members should spend 15 to 20 minutes in total
each week journaling about their engaging and disengaging interactions of that week. It is up to
the employee how he/she wants to allocate that time throughout the week, but at the end of the
week that total amount of time should be observed. Journaling has been used in the field of
academia and results have shown that when students journal, they are more engaged in their
academic journey overall (Fritson et al., 2013; Halm, 2017). However, much less is known about
the impact of this practice in the professional world. Once virtual team members complete their
journaling weekly, they will meet with their leader and share some of these thoughts and
experiences. Then, the employee’s leader will have a better understanding of what engagement
looks like to that individual and can work to continue engaging practices and mitigate
disengaging ones.
Recommendations for Motivation Influences
163

This study addressed two different assumed motivation influences. Data revealed that the
need surrounding virtual team members finding aspects of their roles they valued and enjoyed
was not validated. However, the finding surrounding virtual team members self-efficacy and
views of how confident they are in their ability to succeed was corroborated by the data and
therefore validated. While this concept of self-efficacy may assume the onus is on the individual,
the counter is true. Motivation, in the gap analysis framework, subsists of the multi-layered
interaction between individuals and their work environment (Clark & Estes, 2008). And, as
motivation increases, so too do a number of positive business outcomes (Sabbaghi et al., 2016).
The various motivation recommendations are summarized in Table 32, then followed by an in-
depth explanation of each.

164

Table 32
Summary of Motivation Needs and Recommendations
Validated motivation need Principle and citation
Context-specific
recommendation
Virtual team members need
to believe in their ability to
be successful in their tasks
and roles in order to be
more connected and
engaged in their virtual
teams (M-1)
Clear processes surrounding
duties of the role,
opportunities for
development, and
promotion pathways create
a fair and transparent
workplace (Awamleh,
2013) and ensure
employees understand what
is expected of them in their
roles.
Create and share of job-
leveling and promotion
guides for transparency and
clarity (White, 2005) so
virtual team members
know what steps need to be
taken to advance their
careers.
Employees who are able to
create and maintain a
personal development plan
are more motivated (Eisele
et al., 2013) and engaged
with the organization
(Passmore & Sinclair,
2020) and are able to
increase their own self-
efficacy (McKenna et al.,
2017).
Ensure that all virtual team
members create and update
a personal development
plan and visit in 1:1
meetings, which is
sometimes more
challenging to follow due
to the geographical and
physical distance within
virtual teams (Lizier &
Reich, 2020).
Building a supportive and
caring environment for
employees not only leads to
better engagement, but also
to other positive outcomes
such as job enrichment,
retention, quality, and
reduced turnover (Barik &
Kochar, 2017).
Incorporate mentorship
programs into the
organization which can still
be done, even in a virtual
environment, from
anywhere (Iqbal, 2020).

165

Motivation Recommendation 1: Creation and Sharing of Job-Leveling and Promotion Guides
for Transparency and Clarity
During interviews, some respondents noted that they were unclear of some of the duties
and components of their roles, which created a diluted sense of clarity as to what their roles
actually entailed. As well, some respondents also felt as though it was unclear as to why certain
members of the team were provided with different opportunities, sometimes being able to take
on projects with more scope and visibility. Still other virtual team members perceived a sense of
inequity in terms of why certain team members were put up for promotion while others were not.
All of these situations created a sense of negative self-talk within virtual team members that they
were not as good as their colleagues, which drastically decreased their self-efficacy (Ibrahim et
al., 2019). Whether real or imagined, virtual team members believe in this reality that points to a
working environment that is not fair to all, which can negatively impact their engagement
(Newman et al., 2020). By not having clear roles and operational guidelines, virtual team
members do not know whether they are being successful which makes it difficult to improve
performance.
To mitigate this situation and improve the engagement of virtual team members, it is
recommended that the organization create and share extensive guides with virtual team members.
First, every employee should receive and review a copy of their job description, to understand if
the duties they are performing are aligned with their roles. Next, the organization can create job-
leveling guides. These guides illuminate what these professionals should be doing based on their
roles and how they can work to further develop their careers and promote. Further, these guides
help to make it very clear and transparent (White, 2005) what virtual team members should be
doing and what aspects and deliverables they must complete before promotion within the
166

company can occur. Every employee should receive a copy of these guides and they can be re-
visited a number of times for proper alignment and to ensure a fair and transparent process for
everyone involved.
Motivation Recommendation 2: Ensure All Virtual Team Members Create and Update a
Personal Development Plan and Discuss During 1:1 Meetings
A number of respondents identified that they do meet often with their line manager for
one-to-one meetings, which is a positive finding. However, some did share that while these
meetings took place, they were either very unstructured and/or lacked aspects of personal
development, focusing mostly on recent performance and operational goals. While this
information is indeed necessary to discuss, virtual team members need to be able to also leverage
this tool in order to stay connected and motivated to the organization (Eisele et al., 2013). There
are a number of different templates of these plans that can be found online through a simple
search and many can be used for different purposes (Beausaert et al., 2015). Regardless of type,
the important concept for the organization is to ensure these are being used in developmental
meetings to add structure and focus during these conversations.
Therefore, this recommendation is also broken into two parts. The first part is for the
organization to ensure that when virtual team members meet with their line managers for these
conversations they use a personal development plan template. Luckily, the organization already
has such a system in place but is not effectively utilized at this time. This tool, known as the
Employee Tech Development Portal (ETDP, a pseudonym) is an online platform where
employees can upload their goals, projects, and opportunities to discuss during meetings with
line managers. This tool is also preferred as it is web-based and can be accessed even if the
employee changes teams or roles. The second part of this recommendation is to mandate that an
167

agenda be used for these meetings in order to keep the conversation on track and to make the
best use of everyone’s time and can also be stored in the ETDP. This agenda also has the added
benefit of being able to produce action items for each member to go away from the meeting.
Finally, as development conversations should be owned by both employee and leader, both
individuals will have access to this tool and can make updates accordingly. If virtual team
members know that their development is of pivotal importance to their leader and the
organization, they will feel more motivated and connected to the organization, which will result
in not only engagement but also performance (Beausaert el a., 2011).
Motivation Recommendation 3: Incorporate Mentorship Programs Into the Organization
The last motivation recommendation centers around creating and maintaining mentorship
programs within the organization. Mentorship has been well documented in the literature to not
only improve employee engagement, but also create an overall more positive experience for
employees in terms of well-being and retention (Barik & Kochar, 2017; Bergelson, 2014; Kumar
& Pansari, 2015; McCray et al., 2014; Osborne & Hammoud, 2017). This aspect of having
someone lend a hand and help out virtual team members was touched on briefly by a number of
respondents. However, because the role of the mentor is key in this relationship, care must be
taken to ensure the correct individuals are placed in this position. In fact, Jung and Bozeman
(2020) found that having a poor mentor causes even less employee engagement than having no
mentor at all. Therefore, in order for a mentorship program to succeed, the organization must
ensure that the mentors possess certain traits such as experience, openness, active listening, and
commitment to development (Chopra & Saint, 2017). In addition, a selection and training
program for potential mentors should also be established to ensure that the correct individuals are
being placed into those roles (Jung & Bozeman, 2020).
168

To this end, it is recommended that the organization not only establish a mentorship
program (specifically geared towards virtual team members) but that they also actively
encourage the employees to join. This mentorship program can be mediated online just like the
regular day-to-day interactions of these team members. As well, an added benefit of this
mentorship program is that it creates a cycle of mentors. Mentees (those being mentored) will
engage with mentors (those doing the mentoring) and after some time, these mentees could
become mentors themselves and be able to provide similar guidance and support to the next
generation of mentees. Such a mentorship program can help virtual team members who are
lacking some of the necessary self-efficacy and capability and ensure that they can continue to be
successful and motivated in their roles.
Recommendations for Organizational Influences
This study addressed four different assumed organizational needs. Findings from
interviews and employee engagement data revealed that all four of these needs were validated to
some extent. Needs relating to fostering an environment of trust and providing the necessary
tools and resources were both fully validated. Needs relating to needing to feel psychologically
safe and providing feedback were partially validated. These needs were spread amongst cultural
models (hidden and taken for granted assumptions) of the organization as well as cultural
settings (visible and tangible aspects of the culture of the organization). These organizational
needs are extremely pivotal to the success of individuals within the organization. According to
Clark and Estes (2008), even with knowledge and motivation skills and needs being consistently
met, if the organization does not have the proper systems, tools, processes, and resources it will
be incredibly challenging to meet performance goals. The various organizational
recommendations are summarized in Table 33, then followed by an in-depth explanation of each.
169

Table 33
Summary of Organizational Needs and Recommendations
Validated organizational need Principle and citation
Context-specific
recommendation
The organization needs to
foster a culture where
virtual team members can
build relationships and trust
with each other in their
virtual environments (O-1)
Teams that talk more freely,
provide feedback candidly,
and engagement truthfully
have overall higher levels
of trust than those teams
that do not (Clark et al.,
2010).
Allow open time in team
meetings for candid
conversations that are not
specifically tied to an
agenda topic (Jones &
Jones, 2011).
Relationships with other
members of the
organization are necessary
conditions for effective
workplace relationships
and engaged employees
(Nandhakumar &
Baskerville, 2006).
Create and share a year-long
calendar of networking and
socialization events hosted
by the organization so
virtual team members can
plan accordingly. This will
help to foster networking
opportunities and building
relationships with others
(Coleman & Stern, 2018).
The organization needs to
create an environment
where virtual team
members can feel
psychologically safe in
their virtual teams (O-2)
Psychological safety is a term
that refers to individuals
within organizations
feeling bot included and
safe to contribute, learn,
and challenge norms, all
without fear of being
marginalized or
embarrassed (Clark, 2020).
Leaders of virtual teams need
to lead by example by
demonstrating humility and
vulnerability, responding
productively to team
suggestions, and thanking
everyone for their
contributions (Edmondson,
2018).
Increased employee
engagement occurs when
employees are able to learn
for the sake of learning and
take part in educational and
fun events (Parker & du
Plooy, 2021).
Creation of a voluntary book
of the month club, where
virtual team members can
come together to learn,
socialize, and network
(Casis-Woidlya, 2020).
The organization needs to
provide the necessary tools,
resources, and virtual
platforms for virtual team
members to be successful
and engaged (O-3)
When the organization places
the onus on itself to
provide the correct tools
and resources for virtual
team members, virtual team
members became more
engaged overall (Medlin &
Green, 2014)
The organization should
provide a comprehensive
list of resources (websites,
portals, etc.) to all virtual
team members which will
allow them to know exactly
what they need to be
successful in their roles and
170

Validated organizational need Principle and citation
Context-specific
recommendation
engaged in the organization
(Kerdpitak &
Jermsittiparset, 2020).
The organization needs to
provide quality feedback
on performance to virtual
team members (O-4)
Due to geographical
distances, feedback is even
more important in virtual
teams both from leader to
virtual team members and
between team members and
their peers (Gilson et al.,
2015).
Use an agenda to embed two-
way feedback into 1:1
meeting agendas so that
both leader and employee
can be engaged and learn
from the feedback (Sharma
& Kothari, 2017).

Organizational Recommendation 1: Allow Free Time in Team Meetings for Candid
Conversations
Many virtual team members in this study mentioned that their team is able to engage in
candid and loosely-structured conversations. However, this is not always the case and research
shows that not only is trust very difficult to build in virtual teams, but it often takes far longer
than building that same level of trust in traditional teams (Grossman & Feitosa, 2018). Being
virtual means, inherently, that these team members do not see each other as frequently as other
teams; however, this does not automatically mean that their voices and opinions are not as valid.
By allowing for these conversations to take place more organically, virtual teams will be able to
more adequately build and sustain trust. And, as eloquently stated by Siakas et al. (2006), if
virtual teams lack trust, they will quickly and surely “turn into detached groups of uninvolved
strangers” (p. 3).
It is recommended that the organization create cultural norms that make these candid
conversations the norm rather than the exception in order to help build trust in virtual teams.
While time is always a valuable and rarely plentiful resource, it may be hard to find that time to
171

embed in to normal team members. At ET, close to 100% of all meetings last in multiples of 30
minutes (30 minutes, 60 minutes, 90 minutes, etc.). To mitigate this problem and allow for this
time, virtual teams should plan meetings for an extra 10 minutes each (40 minutes, 70 minutes,
100 minutes, etc.). This recommendation has an added benefit of not only being able to provide
the necessary time to have these candid conversations, but also it gives virtual team members
some extra time in their days, rather than being in back-to-back meetings constantly throughout
the day.
Organizational Recommendation 2: Create and Publicize a Year-Long Calendar of
Networking and Social Events So Virtual Team Members Can Plan to Attend and Grow Their
Professional Network
Data from interviews demonstrated that virtual team members are aware and appreciative
of the various sorts of events put on by ET in order to engage employees in a virtual space. These
events are not only fun to attend, but have the added benefit of getting to meet and connect with
others around shared interests, which helps lead to increased employee engagement and
happiness (Ghosh et al., 2019). However, respondents also pointed to the challenge that certain
events or activities tend to either take place at the same date and time or are publicized with too
short notice. This challenge creates a situation wherein virtual team members need to prioritize
and flex their schedules in order to attend. Yet, this is often easier said than done as personal
responsibilities such as family accountabilities, hobbies, and prior commitments may take
precedent, especially without sufficient notice given.
In order to mitigate this situation, it is recommended that the organization create a
calendar of networking and social events. This calendar can be shared with virtual team members
well before evenst take place and can be updated if need be. This will allow virtual team
172

members to see what events are available and, if there is one that suits their needs, they can move
around priorities appropriately in order to attend. This calendar can be posted online through
ET’s website and can even be publicized in a way that allows employees to search specifically
for events that interest them, such as social events, networking events, or educational talks to
name just a few. And, with the added functionality of online mediums, virtual team members can
still attend events from anywhere, and do not need to be physically located in any particular area
in order to attend. As ET is a world-wide organization, attention should also be paid to the fact
that individuals work in varying time zones in a global environment. This is an important caveat
for the organization to be mindful or for two reasons. First, events should be scheduled at
varying times throughout a day in order to be attended by as many different employees as
possible. And second, with these events online in a virtual space, they can also be recorded and
shared following the event so that if someone was unable to attend at the specified time, they can
still watch a recording of the event at a time that better suits his/her needs.
Organizational Recommendation 3: Leaders of Virtual Teams Need to Lead by Example and
Demonstrate Humility and Vulnerability to Create a Psychologically Safe Environment
One component of psychological safety that emerged from interviews was around virtual
team members feeling as though they can be their authentic selves. Respondents were mixed in
their feelings on this matter and some were very adamant that they could not be their authentic
selves, stemming from perceptions of how they would appear to colleagues and managers. These
feeling of self-doubt and anguish can become amplified over time and can lead to virtual team
members not only lacking efficacy in their roles, but can also create, over time, an aura of
organizational silencing. And, if this happens, employees feel as though they cannot speak
candidly, which stagnates the organization towards growing and moving forward (Pacheco et al.,
173

2015). While there are a number of confounding variables that can contribute to this, the
prevailing one stems from leadership setting a tone and modeling behavior that this is acceptable
within the organization (Newman et al., 2017).
As this starts and ends with leadership, the recommendation is to have leaders lead by
example and demonstrate a space that values psychological safety. This can be done in a number
of ways but the easiest would be to have leaders exhibit humility and share examples of
vulnerability. This can include having leaders share such experiences with virtual team members
during team meetings, sharing highlights and lowlights on a monthly basis as a lessons learned
process, or through two-way communication and feedback in one-to-one meetings with team
members. Regardless of the process leveraged, this will be beneficial as these leaders will be
able to model behavior indicative of creating a space of psychological safety for their virtual
team members.
Organizational Recommendation 4: Creation of a Book of the Month Club Where Virtual
Team Members Can Come Together to Learn, Socialize, and Network
An additional component of psychological safety relates to allowing virtual team
members to learn for the sake of learning. Too often, employees become inundated with the day-
to-day duties and expectations of their roles and this creates limited time for professional
development opportunities, which have been shown to be a primary condition towards increased
employee engagement (Singh, 2016). However, professional development in this context is a
broad concept. Furthermore, Parker and du Plooy (2021) found that employee engagement also
increased when employees were able to learn a multitude of different topics. And this learning
did not need to be tied to a specific business outcome or objective; rather, just by allowing
employees the freedom to learn and explore was sufficient to increase employee engagement.
174

Furthermore, simply reading and expanding one’s mind has also been linked to increases in
learning overall and professional development for employees (Veelen et al., 2017.
Therefore, knowing that reading can lead to professional development which can lead to
increased engagement, the recommendation is for the organization to establish a book of the
month club. While anyone in the organization can participate, this can be especially beneficial
for virtual team members who can come together to learn, socialize, and network with one
another (Casis-Woidlya, 2020). In addition, book clubs specifically have been shown to have a
direct correlation on professional development, with the majority of participants claiming that
the experience was beneficial to both their professional and personal lives (Blanton et al., 2020).
While these should not be made mandatory (in order to protect individuals’ personal time),
attention should be paid to publicize these events and make them welcoming and inclusive to all.
Finally, the organization should invest the monetary resources for employees to participate by
buying the various books and supplies needed for the members. In this way, financial hardship
will not be a barrier towards some individuals who still want to attend.
Organizational Recommendation 5: Provide a Comprehensive List of Resources to All Virtual
Team Members
As was evidenced in chapter four, tools and resources were frequent subjects of
contention for many of the respondents. While there were mixed views on the tools themselves
as well as some of the accessibility of these tools, many respondents also felt that they needed to
go find these resources themselves. This creates a challenge for these virtual team members as
there is no clear direction of what is needed for them to be successful, and this creates not only a
negative culture overall, but a drastic decrease in employee engagement (Gomoll, 2018). By
taking the pressure off of these individuals and providing clear guidance and direction, the
175

organization will be assisting these employees in being successful. And, according to Medlin and
Green (2014), by having the organization take accountability for this action by providing the
right tools and resources, virtual team members will become more engaged overall.
Along this line, it is recommended that the organization should provide all virtual team
members a comprehensive list of tools and resources they will need to be successful in their
virtual roles. Not only will this allow them to be successful, it will also help them to become
more engaged within the organization, as has been evidenced in the literature (Kerdpitak &
Jermsittiparset, 2020). This does not need to be difficult as these resources already exist and do
not need to be created; rather, they just need to be stored and shared accordingly. This can
further be implemented easily as the organization already uses an onboarding tool when
employees come into the organization and/or change roles. This tool, known as Employee Tech
Onboarding (ETO, pseudonym used to protect anonymity of the organization) provides key
information for one’s role, including reading to learn about the business, recommendations of
key stakeholders to meet, videos to watch explaining organizational culture, as well as many
other resources. When an individual becomes virtual (either entering the organization or when
changing roles), a flag can be generated in the system to also provide onboarding tools and
resources for these virtual team members. This will provide a resource portal for all the various
tools, systems, platforms, and resources these individuals need to be successful in their roles.
Organizational Recommendation 6: Use an Agenda to Embed Structure, Two-Way Feedback,
and Actions Into 1:1 Meetings
Feedback is not only an important tool within development, but it is also one of the key
drivers of overall employee production output and quality (Mone et al., 2018) as well as
employee engagements (Waghmare, 2017). This is even more pivotal within virtual teams, as
176

geographical and physical distance create more challenges for feedback between peers as well as
from managers (Gilson et al., 2015). The majority of respondents agreed that while feedback is
discussed within one-to-one meetings with managers, this is more often than not one-sided and
two-way feedback is often ignored. While respondents appreciated receiving feedback on their
own performance, they also desired to have a safe space to provide feedback (both positive and
negative) towards their line manager. Not only is this indicative or proper two-way
communication, this can also help create a safe space where individuals can be their authentic
selves and feel psychologically safe. Furthermore, in order for feedback to be the most effective,
there must be actions tied to it that can allow the person receiving the feedback to grow, develop,
and learn (Lee et al., 2019).
However, this is often more challenging without proper structure of one-to-one meetings.
Therefore, it is recommended that an agenda be created for one-to-one meetings in order to
accomplish a number of main objectives. First, this agenda will provide structure to the meeting
to ensure that key points and topics are discussed within the given timeframe. Second, this
agenda will have a structured section where leader feedback can be given. And finally, this
agenda will feature a section for next steps and actions that will stem from this meeting. These
actions not only create ownership and proper follow-up and follow-through for key takeaways,
but it also provides clarity and transparency for both individuals, which is necessary for all team
members but even more pronounced for virtual team members (Pinisetti et al., 2017).
While there are many templates that could be used, an example agenda could consist of
five different sections. Section one uses active language to understand what the virtual team
member is working on, such as (a) I am productive – here is my focus now; (b) I am focused –
here is my progress on past topics; and (c) I need help – here is my request for support. The key
177

with each of these is that it is limited to only three topics per section, in order to keep the
conversation focused. Section two is a review of various projects the employee is working on,
whereas section three is reserved for any additional ad hoc items. Section four contains the two-
way feedback mentioned above, where the employee can provide feedback to his or her leaders.
Finally, in order to track progress and ensure that proper follow-up and follow-through is
achieved, section five provides a list of actions and next steps, with applicable due dates and
owners. Furthermore, this document can build upon itself and can be re-visited during each one-
to-one in order to ensure consistency. Finally, each section is given a time limit to make sure that
the conversation can stay focused and both individuals can make best use of their time together.
It is recommended that the entire meeting be scheduled for 45 minutes in order to allow natural
time if the meeting goes over so as to not interrupt the flow for another meeting on one’s
calendar. A snapshot of this agenda can be found in Figure 17 and a larger version can be found
in Appendix J.

178

Figure 17
One-to-One Meeting Agenda Template

179

Recommendations Summary
Findings from this study resulted in three broad and overarching themes presented at the
beginning of this chapter, including the use of tools and resources, building trusting and
meaningful relationships, and maintaining trust and psychological safety. Furthermore, in order
to create more tangible actions, 14 different recommendations for practice were also presented.
Within the knowledge category, there were a total of five recommendations spread throughout
three validated needs. Within the motivation category, there were a total of three
recommendations tied to only one validated need. Within the organization category, there were a
total of six recommendations spread across four validated needs. A summary of this information
is presented in Table 34.

180

Table 34
Summary of All Recommendations for Practice
KMO
category
Validated need Number Recommendation
Knowledge
Virtual team members
need to understand
the connections and
relationships
between themselves
and the
organization as well
to their virtual team
colleagues (K-C-2)
1
Allow virtual team members specific time
within their days to connect with one
another
2
Create avenues for virtual team members to
learn more about the broader aspects of
the organization, not just their particular
roles
Virtual team members
need to know how
to leverage tools
and resources
available to them in
a virtual
environment for
effective team
building (K-P-3)
3
Provide the necessary hardware and
software needed for virtual team
members to be successful in their roles
4
Provide training opportunities to ensure that
virtual team members can adequately
learn and use virtual tools and platforms
Virtual team members
need to be able to
reflect and
communicate times
in which they felt
engaged/disengaged
in their virtual
teams (K-M-4)
5
Advise virtual team members to speak up
and share about both their engaging and
disengaging experiences
Motivation
Virtual team members
need to believe in
their ability to be
successful in their
tasks and roles in
order to be more
connected and
engaged in their
virtual teams (M-1)
6
Creation and sharing of job-leveling and
promotion guides for transparency and
clarity
7
Ensure all virtual team members crate and
update a personal development plan and
discuss during 1:1 meetings
8
Incorporate mentorship into the
organization
Organization
The organization
needs to foster a
culture where
virtual team
members can build
9
Allow free time in meetings for candid
conversations
10
Publicize a year-long calendar of
networking and social events so virtual
181

KMO
category
Validated need Number Recommendation
relationships and
trust with each
other in their virtual
environments (O-1)
team members can plan to attend and
grow their professional network
The organization
needs to create an
environment where
virtual team
members can feel
psychologically
safe in their virtual
teams (O-2)
11
Leaders of virtual teams need to lead by
example and demonstrate humility and
vulnerability to create a psychologically
safe environment
12
Creation of a book of the month club where
virtual team members can come together
to learn, socialize, and network
The organization
needs to provide the
necessary tools,
resources, and
virtual platforms
for virtual team
members to be
successful and
engaged (O-3)
13
Provide a comprehensive list of resources to
all virtual team members
The organization
needs to provide
quality feedback on
performance to
virtual team
members (O-4)
14
Use an agenda to embed structure, two-way
feedback, and actions into 1:1 meetings

Bringing it All Together: A Comprehensive Engagement Initiative
This study was concerned with the employee engagement of virtual team members.
While these recommendations do add some value to the organization, they nonetheless do not
provide the full solution. Overall, in order for virtual team members to be properly engaged,
certain conditions must be met. In order to properly increase the engagement levels of these
virtual team members, a comprehensive solution is needed that will leverage virtual team
members and members of leadership in order to improve organizational performance (Clark &
182

Estes, 2008). This solution will be known as the Virtual Employee Tech Engagement Plan
(VETEP). This plan will enable virtual team members to become more engaged in their roles
through specific actions owned by both individual employees, their managers, and the wider
organization. In addition, VETEP will be reflective in nature and the organization will need to
seek constant feedback from virtual team members in order to assess if the plan is working as
intended.
Description and Explanation of VETEP
VETEP will be broken into a number of key components, stemming from the actions
addressed above (reference made to the number in the third column). The first step involves
making sure that virtual team members have the tools and training to do their jobs and that they
are properly set-up from a hardware and software standpoint to not only do their jobs, but to also
be successful in them. This step will involve recommendation numbers three, four, and 13 and
will be known as the Foundation Phase. The second step involves ensuring that virtual team
members communicate and engage, in some capacity, with their colleagues at least every other
day, but every day is more preferred. Daily communication and interaction is advised, as it has
been found that when daily communication is lacking in virtual teams, this decreases the overall
social connection and feelings of team camaraderie (Bailey, 20133). Furthermore, this step will
leverage proper two-way communication in order to foster an environment of psychological
safety. This step will involve recommendations number one, nine, and 11 and will be known as
the Communication Phase. The third step involves using the various aspects of the organization
to create and advocate the use of networking opportunities. Networking has been shown to be
beneficial in all organizations and this is becoming more pronounced in virtual teams as they
have grown in prominence (Johnston, 2019). These events, which can be hosted online and
183

attended by anyone, will have different focuses – some will be focused on learning about the
organization, some will be fun and social in nature, and some will be focused more specifically
on mentoring. This step will involve recommendation numbers two, eight, 10, and 12 and will be
known as the Networking Phase. The fourth step involves ensuring that virtual team member
development is focused on acutely. This will be demonstrated by virtual team members engaging
in frequent one-to-one conversations (focused on past performance and future desires), using
personal development plans to track goals and objectives, and having clear job-leveling guides
outlining duties, responsibilities, and promotional opportunities. This step will involve
recommendation numbers six, seven, and 14 and will be known as the Development Phase. The
fifth and final step involves having virtual team members reflect and feedback on what actions
and parts of this plan are adding to their engagement, thereby allowing the organization to be
able to refine and improve the plan. This step will involve recommendation number five and will
be known as the Reflection Phase. Figure 18 provides a graphical representation of the various
steps of VETEP.

184

Figure 18
Overview of VETEP

Implementation Plan for VETEP
Due to the complex nature of VETEP, and the fact that a number of stakeholders must be
involved, the implementation plan should be rolled out in stages. Phased plans such as these are
commonly used, especially in large organizations with high numbers of employees and multiple
levels of leadership (Nugroho, 2017). As well, a structured approach is recommended in order to
ensure that the plan is understood and delivers the intended results. In order to accomplish this, a
beta test will be first used with a smaller sample of virtual team members. Potentially, this group
could include the participants from this study, since they are already familiar and appreciative of
this focus, but should also include a larger sample in order to gain more robust data. Using this
185

group of virtual team members, each phase of the plan will be rolled out over the course of
several months. At the conclusion, focus groups will be used to understand what aspects of the
first version of VETEP went well and which need to be improved. This feedback will be
incorporated into version two of VETEP. Table 35 below gives a roadmap of additional action
steps that will be taken in order to achieve the final organization goal by December 2023.

Table 35
VETEP Action Plan
Action Due date
Present overview of VETEP to senior organizational stakeholders for
sign-off
August 2021
Recruit members for initial testing of VETEP October 2021
Introduction and orientation of VETEP to initial testing team December 2021
Foundation Phase January 2022
Communication Phase March 2022
Networking Phase May 2022
Development Phase July 2022
Reflection Phase September 2022
Begin feedback sessions November 2022
End feedback sessions February 2023
Iterate and roll-out version two of VETEP to full group of virtual team
members
April 2023
Begin analysis of engagement data October 2023
Overview of effectiveness of VETEP with a write-up of program
analysis and findings
December 2023

186

Evaluation and Measure of Success for VETEP
Evaluation and success of this plan will be measured in two ways, both qualitatively and
quantitatively. From a qualitative standpoint, a sample of virtual team members will be asked to
take part in a focus group to get rich data as to whether or not they feel the plan has improved
their overall levels of engagement. These focus groups questions will be broad-reaching so as to
allow participants to provide as candid of answers as possible. Also, this focus group will be able
to pinpoint specific facets of the plan to ensure that the recommendations and actions provided
are improving the overall engagement levels of these virtual team members. This feedback can
then also be used to re-iterate towards later versions of VETEP, by being able to change all or
parts of the engagement plan. Each phase of the plan, as previously mentioned, is tied to one or
more of the recommendations within each of the influences. Therefore, by using focus group
data with questions to assess each step and each need, the organization will be able to better
understand what components are or are not working in the plan. Table 36 provides a listing of
those various focus groups questions.

187

Table 36
VETEP Evaluation Focus Group Questions
VETEP phase Validated need Number Recommendation
Focus group
question
Foundation
Virtual team members
need to know how to
leverage tools and
resources available to
them in a virtual
environment for
effective team
building (K-P-3)
3
Provide the
necessary
hardware and
software
needed for
virtual team
members to be
successful in
their roles
What types of
tools and
resources do you
now have
available to you
now and do they
help you be
more successful
in your virtual
role?
4
Provide training
opportunities to
ensure that
virtual team
members can
adequately
learn and use
virtual tools
and platforms
Do you feel as
though you get
adequate
training in how
to use virtual
tools?
The organization needs
to provide the
necessary tools,
resources, and virtual
platforms for virtual
team members to be
successful and
engaged (O-3)
13
Provide a
comprehensive
list of resources
to all virtual
team members
Where do you go
to find a list of
all the resources
you need as a
virtual team
member?
Communication
Virtual team members
need to understand
the connections and
relationships between
themselves and the
organization as well
to their virtual team
colleagues (K-C-2)
1
Allow virtual
team members
specific time
within their
days to connect
with one
another
What sorts of
interactions do
you have with
your colleagues?
The organization needs
to foster a culture
where virtual team
members can build
relationships and
9
Allow free time
in meetings for
candid
conversations
When you’re in
virtual meetings,
how much time
is set aside for
casual (non
188

VETEP phase Validated need Number Recommendation
Focus group
question
trust with each other
in their virtual
environments (O-1)
work-related)
conversations?
The organization needs
to create an
environment where
virtual team members
can feel
psychologically safe
in their virtual teams
(O-2)
11
Leaders of virtual
teams need to
lead by
example and
demonstrate
humility and
vulnerability to
create a
psychologically
safe
environment
How
psychologically
safe do you feel
in your current
virtual role and
has this changed
recently?
Networking
Virtual team members
need to understand
the connections and
relationships between
themselves and the
organization as well
to their virtual team
colleagues (K-C-2)
2
Create avenues
for virtual team
members to
learn more
about the
broader aspects
of the
organization,
not just their
particular roles
What sorts of
interactions do
you have with
your colleagues?
Virtual team members
need to believe in
their ability to be
successful in their
tasks and roles in
order to be more
connected and
engaged in their
virtual teams (M-1)
8
Incorporate
mentorship into
the
organization
Describe the
organization’s
mentorship
program.
The organization needs
to foster a culture
where virtual team
members can build
relationships and
trust with each other
in their virtual
environments (O-1)
10
Publicize a year-
long calendar
of networking
and social
events so
virtual team
members can
plan to attend
and grow their
professional
network
What kinds of
social and
networking
events does the
organization
sponsor and are
they beneficial
to you in your
development?
189

VETEP phase Validated need Number Recommendation
Focus group
question
The organization needs
to create an
environment where
virtual team members
can feel
psychologically safe
in their virtual teams
(O-2)
12
Creation of a
book of the
month club
where virtual
team members
can come
together to
learn, socialize,
and network
Describe what you
know about
ET’s book of the
month club?
Development
Virtual team members
need to believe in
their ability to be
successful in their
tasks and roles in
order to be more
connected and
engaged in their
virtual teams (M-1)
6
Creation and
sharing of job-
leveling and
promotion
guides for
transparency
and clarity
Describe what is
expected of your
current role and
what you need to
do to promote up
within the
company.
Virtual team members
need to believe in
their ability to be
successful in their
tasks and roles in
order to be more
connected and
engaged in their
virtual teams (M-1)
7
Ensure all virtual
team members
crate and
update a
personal
development
plan and
discuss during
1:1 meetings
Describe what a
1:1 conversation
now looks like
with your
manager (what
is the structure,
cadence, etc.)
The organization needs
to provide quality
feedback on
performance to
virtual team members
(O-4)
14
Use an agenda to
embed
structure, two-
way feedback,
and actions into
1:1 meetings
What sort of
agenda is used to
guide and
structure these
1:1 meetings?
Reflection
Virtual team members
need to be able to
reflect and
communicate times
in which they felt
engaged/disengaged
in their virtual teams
(K-M-4)
5
Advise virtual
team members
to speak up and
share about
both their
engaging and
disengaging
experiences
In what ways do
you share how
engaged or
disengaged you
are feeling with
others?

190

From a quantitative standpoint, employee engagement data analyzed for this study will be
reviewed again to see if improvements have been made. The goal is a 5% increase in
engagement scores, and based on the averages presented in chapter four, new targets will be
identified in order to determine if the 5% increase was met. Current and target scores for each
engagement question can be found in Table 37.

Table 37
Current and Desired State of Employee Engagement Data
Employee
engagement area of
focus
Question Current state Desired state
Accomplishment
Does your work give
you a feeling of
accomplishment?
4.1 4.3
How often do you feel
excited when you
accomplish
something at work?
4.1

4.3
Challenge
Do you find your job
challenging in a good
way?
3.9 4.1
Do you find your work
to be a positive
challenge?
4.1 4.3
Fit
Are you interested in
the work you do?
4.3 4.5
Is your job a good fit
for your skills?
4.1 4.3
Motivation
Do you feel motivated
at work?
4.3 4.5
Are you inspired by the
work you do at [ET]?
4.0 4.2
Value
If your work valued at
[ET]?
4.1 4.3
Do you feel valued at
[ET]?
4.1 4.3

191

Not only will VETEP be able to be evaluated for its effectiveness, it will also be able to
better understand a wider breadth of organizational indices. Currently, the organization uses its
own questions to examine the engagement levels of its employees. There is a total of 10
employee engagement questions asked across 5 different engagement categories. The challenge
with this method is that, as was made evident in this study, ET is only measuring engagement
through a mostly motivational lens, with the exception of one question which maps to
organizational influences. With VETEP, ET will be better able to understand employee
engagement, as each phase maps to one or more need. Table 38 displays the difference between
these two evaluation tools and how the proposed VETEP will illuminate more understanding of
employee engagement across all three needs, thereby creating a broader understanding of this
concept within ET.

Table 38
Comparison of ET Current and Proposed Engagement Evaluation Tools
Employee
engagement area of
focus
Current KMO needs
assessed with ET
questions
VETEP phases
New KMO needs
assessed with
VETEP
Accomplishment Motivation
Foundation,
Networking
Knowledge,
Motivation,
Organization
Challenge Motivation Development
Motivation,
Organization
Fit Motivation
Networking,
Communication
Knowledge,
Motivation,
Organization
Motivation Motivation
Reflection,
Development
Knowledge,
Motivation,
Organization
Value
Motivation,
Organization
Communication,
Development
Knowledge,
Motivation,
Organization

192

Limitations and Delimitations
Limitations are obstacles that present themselves within the researcher that the researcher
is not to account for or control (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). One of the main limitations of this
study was the time that was involved to gather the engagement data. Even though researcher did
have access to this information, the time involved to download and sort the data was lengthy. As
this step needed to be completed prior to the interviews themselves, this did push the data
collection phase slightly behind schedule of what the researcher would have ideally chosen. Also
from a time perspective, due to the short timeframe needed to complete this study, only 12
participants were chosen, and while this was within the plan of 12-15, findings could have been
more robust with further numbers of participants. A further limitation for this study was that,
since the study is qualitative and therefore the researcher is a methodological instrument
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016) researcher bias could always be present. In addition, while it is
unlikely, self-reporting bias could have also occurred wherein participants were not fully truthful
with their responses, although the researcher does not believe that to have been the case. Finally,
due to the limited time allowed to complete this study, member checking was not possible.
Conversely, delimitations are those criteria which limit the scope of the study. For this
particular study, virtual team members are the subject of focus. While many employees in the
organization have been working from home due to the Covid-19 pandemic, this study was bound
to examine just those virtual team members who worked from home and virtually even before
the pandemic. This was due to the fact that their experiences and engagement levels were similar
even when considering the current world climate and conditions. Furthermore, this study focused
specifically on virtual team members who all worked within a few hours commute time (via car,
plane, train, or other means of public transportation). Therefore, these experiences will not be
193

generalizable to other forms of virtual teams who may work in very distant locations and
different time zones.
Recommendations for Future Research
This study centered around the employee engagement levels and experiences of virtual
team members. This topic is not new to literature in general and research has been more active in
this area since the 1980s (Ebrahim et al., 2009). However, there is still much that is not known
about this topic and, as more and more companies and employers move towards this model,
more work still needs to be done. This fact is highlighted even more based on the last year and
how the Covid-19 pandemic have turned large handful or traditional office employees into
virtual team members themselves. To this end, five suggestions for future research are provided.
First, while this subject was concerned with examining employee engagement for
employees who were virtual pre-pandemic, more work can be done on virtual team members
who were forced into that way of working over the past year. These employees became virtual
by nature and this was not a working style for which they initially volunteered. Many of these
employees were not set up to work remotely, due to improper office space, personal matters, or
many other factors. Also, as tools and resources for successful virtual working have been
highlighted throughout this study, this may lead to questions whether these “traditionally non-
virtual” employees have the correct access to tools and resources. This topic becomes even more
salient as many believe that even as the world returns to normal, many employees will still be
working virtually for years to come (Lund et al., 2021).
In addition, work-life balance, while it was addressed slightly in this study, demands
further attention. Again, as virtual working becomes more of the exception rather than the norm,
it is imperative to understand the multitude of juggling one must endure to properly have work-
194

life balance. Questions such as how does someone deal with child care issues or constant
distractions at home, how can employees take time away from screens, and how to prevent
overworking and being able to “shut off” at the end of the day can all be explored. Even further,
with many communication platforms accessible both on a computer and on mobile devices, it
becomes even more pressing to understand how to coach these virtual team members towards not
overworking. Practical recommendations, based in theoretical research, should be more
adamantly explored.
Furthermore, issues of belonging and diversity warrant further research. This current
study focused mainly on a very homogenous sample size in terms of race (White) and gender
(Female). However, a number of other key variables are important to consider especially within
the ever-growing topic of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI). These factors of diversity add
complexity to the already ambiguous landscape of virtual team employee engagement. Being a
part of a virtual team, for many employees, creates feelings of loneliness and lack of sense of
belonging (Morrison-Smith & Ruiz, 2020). This fact is magnified with groups from historically
marginalized populations who tend to have such feelings regardless of type of role, company, or
location (Au & Marks, 2012). Therefore, understanding the diversity nuances that contribute to
varying employee engagement experiences for different groups of virtual team members is
needed (Shaik et al., 2021), considering the world looks different today than it did years ago.
Also, while briefly mentioned in this study, more work needs to be done with the concept
of psychological safety within virtual teams. There has been a wealth of documented research to
underscore the importance of individuals needing strong levels of psychological safety,
especially in team environments (Clark, 2020). However, much less is known about how to
create environments that foster psychological safety in virtual environments. A small number of
195

best practice studies have been completed to understand how teams should conduct themselves
to foster such an environment (Dixon, 2017), especially within the context of the current climate
(Feitosa & Salas, 2020); however, this literature base is minimal. Furthermore, with trust being a
central component of creating an environment conducive to psychological safety (Sumathipala,
2020), it is necessary to better understand these broader connections. By having more
information within this area both scholars and practitioners will be able to combat the challenges
in this realm, which will continue to grow as more and more organizations leverage online
environments to conduct business (Jimenez et al., 2017).
Finally, mental health is a concept that was not addressed in this study but is gaining
more prominence. Aspects of loneliness, lack of human interaction, only seeing people on-
screen, and poor routines – concepts that are inherent to virtual team standardized ways of
working – have all been cited as aspects that can lead to mental health concerns (Waizenegger et
al., 2020). However, not all companies are prepared to tackle these concerns since they are not
used to virtual working and interventions to mitigate these concerns are largely void. More work
needs to be done in order to better understand how mental health affects virtual employees. In
addition, such research could also lead to practical applications for senior leaders and Human
Resources personnel in order to train and upskill on detection warnings and how to better
mitigate these circumstances from having drastic consequences.
Conclusion
The purpose of this study was to explore employee engagement within virtual team
members at ET. While more and more employees are now working virtually due to the Covid-19
pandemic, this study was specifically concerned with those employees who worked virtually
before the world was forever changed in March 2020. While employee engagement has garnered
196

attention and focus within the literature for decades, much less is known about how employee
engagement is viewed and understood with virtual team members. As a qualitative case study,
this research used document analysis of employee engagement data, as well as interviews of 12
current virtual team members to answer three key research questions. Using the Clark and Estes
(2008) gap analysis framework, this study explored the various knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences and needs towards successful employee engagement of virtual team
members. With all data found and analyzed, recommendations for ET were provided and a
broad-based engagement plan was recommended for the organization. This research highlighted
the fact that the organization (ET) needs to do more to support and set up their virtual team
members for success to ensure they are properly engaged. And, as has been clearly documented
in much of the literature over the past several decades, employees who are highly engaged in the
organization produce much better performance and business outcomes such as productivity,
quality, attendance, and overall happier employees (Bailey et al., 2017).
Furthermore, this study is relevant to almost all organizations, not simply those that
offered some form of virtual working prior to Covid-19. However, given the way the world has
changed over the past 18 months, it is now more important than ever for organizations to
examine their virtual workforce. Many organizations who never thought virtual working was a
reality not only needed to make that accommodation during the pandemic,but have now shifted
to some model of virtual working for the long-term future. Still, while employee engagement is
such a robust concept within the organizational literature (Bedarkar & Pandita, 2014), there is
still much that is not known within this area. And, as employee engagement continues to gain
traction and virtual teams increase in scope, organizational leaders as well as scholars,
policymakers, and other practitioners will continue to need to learn about this population and
197

their experiences. The individual recommendations for practice, as well as the overarching
themes and findings, can serve as a starting point towards moving in the right direction.
However, for true and systemic change to occur, organizations need to put forth the necessary
time, dedication, resources, and action towards truly understanding virtual team members, their
experiences, and what tangible steps can be taken in order to make marked improvement within
this space for the short term and longer into the future. By investing in these systemic changes
now, organizations will be much more suited to better engage with their virtual team members
for years to come.

198

References
Ahuja, J. (2017). Modeling the success factors of virtual team. Indian Journal of Science and
Technology, 9(48), 1-9.
Akan, O. H., Jack, E. P., & Mehta, A. (2020). Concrescent conversation environment,
psychological safety, and team effectiveness: Examining a mediation model. Team
Performance Management, 26(1/2), 29-51.
Akbari, M., Esmaeilpour, R., Aletaha, H., & Ghavidel, A. (2020). The effect of inter-
organizational communication on employees’ extra-role behavior and engagement:
Mediating role of organizational commitment and role ambiguity. Journal of Human
Resource Studies, 10(2),125-150.
Albdour, A. A., & Altaratwneh, I. I. (2014). Employee engagement and organizational
commitment: Evidence from Jordan. International Journal of Business, 19(2), 192-212.
Albrecht, S., Breidahl, E., & Marty, M. (2018). Organizational resources, organizational
engagement climate, and employee engagement. Career Development International.
Alexandrakis, D., Chorianopolous,K., & Tselios, N. (2020). Older adults and web 2.0
storytelling technologies: Probing the technology acceptance model through an
age-related perspective. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 36(17),
1623-1635.
Allen, D. G. (2008). Retaining talent: A guide to analyzing and managing employee turnover.
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Retaining-talent
Alsharo, M., Gregg, D., & Ramirez, R. (2017). Virtual team effectiveness: The role of
knowledge sharing and trust. Information & Management, 54, 479-490.
Ananthram, S., Xerri, M., Teo, S., & Connell, J. (2018). High performance work systems and
199

employee outcomes in Indian call centres: A mediation approach. Personnel Review,
47(4), 931-950.
Anttilla, T., Oinas, T., Tammelin, M., & Natti, J. (2015). Working-time regimes and work-life
balance in Europe. European Sociological Review, 31(6), 713-724.
Arunprasad, P. (2015). Strategic fulcrum for a knowledge-based economy: A conceptual
knowledge-HR archetype. Middle East Journal of Management, 2(2), 97-120.
Au, Y., & Marks, A. (2012). Virtual teams are literally and metaphorically invisible: Forging
identity in culturally diverse virtual teams. Employee Relations, 34(3),271-287.
Awamleh, N. A. (2013). Enhancing employees’ performance via empowerment: A field survey.
Asian Journal of Business Management, 5(3), 313-319.
Bailey, S. (2013). How to beat the five killers of virtual working.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/sebastianbailey/2013/03/05/how-to-overcome-the-five-
major-disadvantages-of-virtual-working/#f0139be27346
Bailey, C., Madden, A., Alfes, K., & Fletcher, L. (2017). The meaning, antecedents and
outcomes of employee engagement: A narrative synthesis. International Journal of
Management Reviews, 19(10), 31-53.
Bailey, K., & Brelin, D. (2021). The Covid-19 pandemic: What we learn from past research in
organizations and management? International Journal of Management Reviews, 23(1),
3-6.
Baker, E., Avery, G. C., & Crawford, J. (2007). Satisfaction and perceived productivity when
professionals work from home. Research and Practice in Human Resource Management,
15(1), 37-62.
Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2007). The job-demands resource model: State of the art.
200

Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22(3), 309-328.
Bakker, A. B., Hakanen, J. J., Demerouti, E., & Xanthopoulou, D. (2007). Job resources boost
work engagement, particularly when job demands are high. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 99(2), 274-284.
Bakker, A. B., Schaufeli, W. B., Leiter, M. P., & Taris, T. W. (2008). Work engagement: An
emerging concept on occupational health psychology. Work & Stress, 22(3), 187-200.
Balderson, D. (2016). Safety defined: A means to provide a safe work environment.
Professional Safety, 61(5), 63-68.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Towards a unifying theory of behavioral change.
Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215.
Barik, S., & Kochar, A. (2017). Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement: A
literature review. International Journal of Latest Technology in Engineering,
Management & Applied Science, 6(4), 33-38.
Bataresh, F. S., Usher, J.M., & Daspit, J. J. (2017). Collaboration capacity in virtual teams:
Examining the influence on diversity and innovation. International Journal of Innovation
Management, 21(04), 1750034.
Beausaert, S., Segers, M., & Gijselaers, W. (2011). Using a personal development plan for
different purposes: Its influence on undertaking learning activities and job performance.
Vocations and Learning, 4(3), 231-252.
Beausaert, S., Segers, M., & Grohnert, T. (2015). Personal development plan, career
Development, and training. The Wiley Blackwell handbook of the psychology of
training, development, and performance improvement (pp. 336-353). Wiley Blackwell
handbooks in organizational psychology. John Wily & Sons.
201

Bedarkar, M., & Pandita, D. (2014). A study on the drivers of employee engagement impacting
employee performance. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 133, 106-115.
Bergelson, M. (2014). Developing tomorrow’s leaders: Innovative approaches to mentorship.
People and Strategy, 37(2), 18.
Biggs, A., Brough, P., & Barbour, J. P. (2014). Strategic alignment with organizational
priorities and work engagement: A multi-wave analysis. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 35, 301-317.
Bisbe, J., & Sivabalan, P. (2017). Management control and trust in virtual settings: A case study
of a virtual new product development team. Management Accounting Research, 37,
12-29.
Bisht, S., Chaubey, D. S., & Thapliyal, S. P. (2016). Analytical study of psychological contact
and its impact on employee retention. Pacific Business Review International, 8(11),
30-39.
Blanton, B. S., Broemmel, A. D., & Rigell, A. (2020). Speaking volumes: Professional
development through book studies. American Educational Research Journal, 57(3),
1014-1044.
Bosch-Sijtesma, P. (2007). The impact of individual expectations and expectation conflicts on
virtual teams. Group & Organization Management, 32(3), 358-388.
Breaugh, J. (2021). Too stressed to be engaged? The role of basic needs satisfaction in
understanding work stress and public sector engagement. Public Personnel
Management, 50(1), 84-108.
Breuer, C., Hüffmeier, J., & Hertel, G. (2016). Does trust matter more in virtual teams? A meta-
202

analysis of trust and team effectiveness considering virtuality and documentation as
moderators. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101, 1151-1177.
Breuer, C., Hüffmeier, J., Hibben, F., & Hertel, G. (2019). Trust in teams: A taxonomy of
perceived trustworthiness factors and risk-taking behaviors in face-to-face and virtual
teams. Human Relations, 00(0), 1-32.
Bridger, E. (2018). Employee engagement: A practical introduction, (2
nd
Edition). CIPD
Publications.
Brosseau, D., Ebrahim, S., Handscomb, C., & Thaker, S. (2019). The journey to an agile
organization. McKinsey & Company, 10.
Bye, L-A., & Hobbins, J. (2015). Thanks but no thanks: Factors affecting uptake of student
mentors. Student Transitions Achievement Retention and Success, 1(1), 1-10.
Byrne, Z. S., Peters, J. M., & Weston, J. W. (2016). The struggle with employee engagement:
Measures and construct clarification using five samples. Journal of Applied Psychology,
101(9), 1201-1227.
Carter, M. Z., Armenakis, A. A., Field, H. S., & Mossholder, K. W. (2013). Transformational
leadership, relationship quality, and employee performance during continuous
incremental organizational change. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34, 942-958.
Casis-Woidyla, R. (2020). Getting to the heart of professional development and employee
engagement among non-teaching personnel in higher education: An appreciative inquiry
into the influential role of a staff development center [Unpublished doctoral dissertation].
California State University, San Bernardino.
Chan, X. W., Kalliath, T., Brough, P, O’Driscoll, M., Sio, O., & Timms, C. (2017). Self-
efficacy and work engagement: Test of a chain model. International Journal of
203

Manpower, 38(6), 819-834.
Chang, H. H., Hung, C. & Hsieh, H. (2014). Virtual teams: Cultural adaptation, communication
quality, and interpersonal trust. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 25,
1318-1335.
Charlier, S. D., Stewart, G. L., Greco, L. M., & Reeves, C. J. (2016). Emergent leadership in
virtual teams: A multilevel investigation of individual communication and team
dispersion antecedents. The Leadership Quarterly, 27(5), 745-764.
Cheng, X., Yin, G., Azadegan, A., & Kolfschoten, G. (2016). Trust evolvement in hybrid team
collaboration: A longitudinal case study. Group Decision and Negotiation, 25, 267-288.
Chipangura, A., & Aldridge, J. (2019). Multimedia: A means of improving students’
engagement in mathematics classrooms? International Journal for Mathematics
Teaching and Learning, 20(2), 193-211.
Chopra, V., & Saint, S. (2017). Things every mentor should do. Harvard Business Review.
https://hbr.org/2017/03/6-things-every-mtnor-should-do
Christian, M. S., Garza, A. S., & Slaughter, J. E. (2011). Work engagement: A quantitative
review and test of its relations with task and contextual performance. Personnel
Psychology, 64, 89-136.s
Clark, T. R. (2020). The 4 Stages of Psychological Safety. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Clark, R. E. & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Information Age Publishing, Inc.
Clark, W. R., Clark, L. A., & Crossley, K. (2010). Developing multidimensional trust without
touch in virtual teams. Marketing Management Journal, 20(1), 177-193.
Coccia, M. (2019). Intrinsic and extrinsic incentives to support motivation and performance of
204

public organizations. Journal of Economics Bibliography, 6(1), 20-29.
Colbert, A., Yee, N., & George, G. (2016). The digital workforce and the workplace of the
future. Academy of Management Journal, 59(3), 731-739.
Coleman, K., & Stern, M. J. (2018). Exploring the functions of different forms of trust in
collaborative natural resource. Society &Natural Resources, 31(1), 21-38.
Cordery, J. L., & Soo, C. (2008). Overcoming impediments to virtual team effectiveness.
Human Factors and Ergonomic in Manufacturing, 18(5), 487-500.
Crawford, E. R., LePine, J. A., & Rich, B. L. (2010). Linking job demands and job resources to
employee engagement and burnout: A theoretical extension and meta-analytic test.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(5), 834-848.
Crawford, E. R., Rich, B. L., Buckman, B., & Bergeron, J. (2014). The antecedents and drivers
Of employee engagement. In C. Truss, R. Delbridge, K. Alfes, A. Shantz, & E. Soane
(Eds.), Employee engagement in theory and practice (pp. 57-81). New York:
Routledge.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). A concise introduction to mixed methods research. Sage Publications.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J.D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches (5
th
Ed.). Sage Publications.
Daim, T., Ha, A., Reutiman, S., Hughes, B., Pathak, U., Bynum, W., & Bhatla, A. (2012).
Exploring the communication breakdown in global virtual teams. International Journal
of Project Management, 30, 199-212.
Daniels, J. R. (2016). An exploratory comparative case study of employee engagement in
Christian higher education. Christian Higher Education, 15(3), 126-139.
Darics, E. (2017). E-leadership or how to be the boss in instant messaging?: The role of
205

nonverbal communication. International Journal of Business Communication, 57(1),
3-29.
Dalton, C. J., Thornton, A., Dinsmore, C., Beyer, W., Akiva, K., & King, B. (2019).
Multidisciplinary team-based model for faculty supports in online learning. Collected
Essays on Learning and Teaching, 12, 127-138.
Davidson, E. (2006). A technological frames perspective on information technology and
organizational change. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 42, 23-39.
De Bruyn, A. J. (2017). Exploring high-performance work processes in effective virtual teams.
African Journal of Economic and Management Studies, 8(4), 398-409.
De Bruyn, A. J. (2020). Harnessing HR governance in effective virtual teams. International
Journal of Social Sciences and Humanity Studies, 12(1), 1-17.
de Pilis, E., & Furumo, K. (2007). Counting the cost of virtual teams: Studying the
performance, satisfaction, and group dynamics of virtual and face-to-face teams.
Communications of the ACM, 50(12), 93-95.
Degby, W. Y., & Einola, K. (2020). Resilience in virtual teams: Developing the capacity to
bounce back. Applied Psychology, 69(4), 1301-1337.
Derven, M. (2016). Four drivers to enhance global virtual teams. Industrial and Commercial
Training, 48(1), 1-8.
Dibble, R., Henderson, L. S., & Burns, Z. C. (2019). The impact of students’ cultural
intelligence on their psychological safety in global virtual project teams. Journal of
Teaching in International Business, 30(1), 33-56.
Dixon, N. (2017). Learning together and working apart: Routines for organizational learning in
virtual teams. The Learning Organization, 24(3), 138-149.
206

Donovan, L., (2012). The use of serious games in the corporate sector: A state of the art report.
https://www.learnovatecentre.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/
Douglas, A., Lubbe, B., & Fabris-Rotelli, I. (2013). Travelling or technology? Business factors
influencing management decisions. South African Journal of Economic and Management
Sciences, 16, 279-297.
Dulebohn, J. H., & Hoch, J. E. (2017). Virtual teams in organizations. Human Resource
Management Review, 27, 568-574.
Dunn, S., Grannan, C., Raisinghani, M., & Stalling, H. (2015). Communication strategies for
successful virtual teams. Paper presented at the 48
th
Hawaii International Conference on
Systems Sciences, Hawaii.
Ebbers, J. J., & Mijnberg, N. M. (2017). Betwixt and between: Role conflict, role ambiguity,
and role definition in project-based dual-leadership structures. Human Relations, 70(11),
1342-1365.
Ebrahim, N. A., Ahmed, S., & Taha, Z. (2009). Virtual teams: A literature review. Australian
Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 3(3), 2653-2669.
Eccles, J. S. (2005). Subjective task values and the Eccles et al. model of achievement related
choices. In A. J. Elliot, & C. S. Dweck (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation
(pp. 105-121). Guilford Press.
Edmondson, A. C. (2018). The fearless organization: Creating psychological safety in the
workplace for learning, innovation, and growth. Wiley.
Edwards, A., & Wilson, J. R. (2004). Implementing virtual teams: A guide to organizational
and human factors. Gower Publishing Unlimited.
Egolf, D. B., & Chester, S. L. (2013). Forming, storming, norming, performing: Successful
207

communication in groups and teams (3
rd
edition). iUniverse.
Eisele, L., Grohnert, T., Beausaert, S., & Segers, M. (2013). Employee motivation for personal
development plan effectiveness. European Journal of Training and Development.
Eldor, L., & Harpaz, I. (2016). A process model of employee engagement: The learning climate
and its relationship with extra-role performance behaviors. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 37, 213-235.
Ellis, C. M., & Sorensen, A. (2007). Assessing employee engagement: The key to improving
productivity. Perspectives, 15(1), 15.
Emke, A. R., Butler, A. C., & Larsen, D.P. (2016). Effects of team-based learning on short-term
and long-term retention of factual knowledge. Medical Teacher, 38(3), 306-311.
Fan, W., Zhao, S., Bin, Y., Y.-M., Chen, Wang, W., Song, Z.-G., & Yi, H. (2020). A new
Coronavirus associated with human respiratory disease in Chine. Nature, 579, 265-269.
Feitosa, J., & Slas, E. (2020). Today’s virtual teams: Adapting lessons learned to the pandemic
context. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/311332
Felstead, A., & Henseke, G. (2017). Assessing the growth of remote working and its
consequences for effort, well-being, and work-life balance. New Technology, Work, and
Employment, 32(3), 195-212.
Ferrell, J., & Kline, K. (2018). Facilitating trust and communication in virtual teams. People &
Strategy, 41(2), 30-36.
Ford, R. C., Piccolo, R. F., & Ford, L. R. (2017). Strategies for building effective virtual teams:
Trust is key. Business Horizons, 60, 25-34.
Frater, P. N., & Sullivan, L. L. (2018). Six tips for happy, productive remote working.
208

https://www-sciencemag-org.libproxy1.usc.edu/careers/2018/12/six-tips-happy-
productive-remote-working
Fristson, K. K., Nelson, D. A., Vontz, H., & Forrest, K. D. (2012). Stedents’ perceptions of
journaling in undergraduate classes. Journal of Instructional Research, 2, 3-9.
Fuller, R, M., Vician, C. M., & Brown, S. A. (2016). Longitudinal effects of computer-
mediated communication anxiety on interaction in virtual teams. IEEE Transactions on
Professional Communication, 59, 166-185.
Gajendran, R. S., & Harrison, D. A. (2007). The good, the bad, and the unknown about
telecommuting: Meta-analysis of psychological mediators and individual consequences.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(6), 1524-1541.
Gallup. (2013). State of the global workplace: Employee engagement insight from business
Leaders. https://www.gallup.com/workplace/238079/state-global
Grro-Abarca, V., Palos-Sanchez, P., & Aguayo-Camacho, M. (2021). Virtual teams in times of
Pandemic: Factors that influence performance. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 232.
Gassmann, O., & Von Zedtwitz, Z. (2003). Trends and determinants of managing virtual R&D
teams. R&D, 33(3), 243-262.
Geister, S., Koradt, U., & Hertel, G. (2006). Effects of process feedback on motivation,
satisfaction and performance in virtual teams. Journal of Management, 37(5), 459-489.
Gelston, G. M., Wells, C., & Dalton, A. (2018). Virtual leadership in complex
multiorganizational research and development programs. In 2018 IEEE Conference on
Cognitive and Computational Aspects of Situation Management (CogSIMA), 97-102.
George, B. (2020). Successful strategic plan implementation in public organizations:
Connecting people, process, and plan (3Ps). Public Administration Review, 00(00), 1-6.
209

Gheni, A. Y., Jusoh, Y. Y., Jabar, M. A., & Ali, N. M. (2016). Factors affecting global virtual
teams’ performance in software projects. Journal of Theoretical and Applied
Information Technology, 92(1), 90-97.
Ghiringhelli, C., & Lazazzara, A. (2016). Blended learning for developing effective virtual
teams: A proposed intervention format. EAI Endorsed Transactions on e-Learning,
3(12), 1-13.
Gibbs, G. R. (2018). Analyzing Qualitative Data (Vol. 6). Sage Publications.
Gilson, L. L., Maynard, M. T., Young, N. C. J., Variainen, M., & Hakonen, M. (2015). Virtual
teams research: 10 years, 10 themes, and 10 opportunities. Journal of Management,
41(5), 1313-1337.
Gomoll, A. (2018). Job challenges and hindrances: Testing a differential model of job demands
and their relation to resources, burnout, and engagement [Unpublished doctoral
dissertation]. Alliant International University.
Griffith, T. L., & Neale, M. A. (2001). Information processing in traditional, hybrid, and virtual
teams: From nascent knowledge to transactive memory. Research in Organizational
Behavior, 23, 379-421.
Grossman, R., & Feitsa, J. (2018). Team trust over time: Modeling reciprocal and contextual
influences in action teams. Human Resource Management Review, 28(4), 395-410.
Grozinger, N., Irlenbusch, B., Laske, K., & Schroder, M. (2020). Innovation and
communication media in virtual teams: An experimental study. http://ftp.iza.org/dp132
Guinalíu, M., & Jordán, P. (2016). Building trust in the leader of virtual work teams. Spanish
Journal of Marketing, 20, 58-70.
Guinot, J., Chiva, R., & Roca-Puig, V. (2014). Interpersonal trust, stress, and satisfaction at
210

work: An empirical study. Personnel Review, 43, 96-115.
Gurtner, A., Kolbe, M., & Boos, M. (2007). Satisfaction in virtual teams in organizations. The
Electronic Journal for Virtual Organizations and Networks, 9, 9-29.
Hacker, J., Johnson, M., Saunders, C., & Thayer, A L. (2019). Trust in virtual teams: A
multidisciplinary review and integration. Australian Journal of Information Systems, 23,
1-36.
Hakanen, M., & Hakkinen, M. (2015). Management possibilities for interpersonal trust in a
business network case: Health, exercise and well-being markets. Nordic Journal of
Business, 64, 249-265.
Halm, D. S. (2017). The effect of e-journaling on student engagement. Journal of Research in
Humanities and Science, 5(7), 13-27.
Hartner, J. K., Schmidt, F. L., & Hayes, T. L. (2002). Business-unit-level relationship between
Employee satisfaction, employee engagement, and business outcomes: A meta-analysis.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 268-279.
Hawker, F. H. (2016). Female specialists in intensive care medicine: Job satisfaction,
challenges, and work-life balance. Critical Care and Resuscitation, 18(2), 125-131.
Heintzman, R., & Marson, B. (2005). People, service, and trust: Links in a public sector service
value chain. International Review of Administrative Studies, 7(4), 549-575.
Hill, S. N., & Bartol, K. M. (2018). Five ways to improve communication in virtual teams.
MIT Sloan Management Review, 60(1), 1-5.
Hirst, A. (2011). Settlers, vagrants, and mutual indifference: Unintended consequences of
hot-desking. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 24(6), 767-788.
Hobson, C. J., Delunas, L., & Kesie, D. (2001). Compelling evidence of the need for corporate
211

work/life balance initiatives: Results from a national survey of stressful life-events.
Journal of Employment Counseling, 38, 38-44.
Hoch, J. E., & Dulebohn, J. H. (2017). Team personality composition, emergent leadership and
shared leadership in virtual teams: A theoretical framework. Human Resource
Management Review, 27, 678-693.
Hoegl, M., & Muethel, M. (2016). Enabling shared leadership in virtual project teams: A
practitioner’s guide. Project Management Journal, 47(1), 7-12.
Hoffman, M., & Tadelis, S. (2017). How do managers matter? Evidence from performance
metrics and employee surveys in a firm. Mimeo.
Holbeche, L., & Springett, N. (2003). In search of meaning in the workplace. Sage Publications.
Holton, J. A. (2001). Building trust and collaboration in a virtual team. Team Performance
Management: An International Journal, 7(3/4), 36-47.
Hosseini, M. R., Zuo, J., Chileshe, N., & Baroudi, B. (2015). Evaluating virtuality in teams: A
conceptual model. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 27(4), 385-404.
Hunter, P. (2019). Remote working in research: An increasing usage of flexible work
arrangements can improve productivity and creativity. Science & Society, 20(1), 1-4.
Ibrahim, S. N. H., Suan, C. L., & Karatepe, O. M. (2019). The effects of supervisor support and
self-efficacy on call center employees’ work engagement and quitting intentions.
International Journal of Manpower, 40(4), 688-703.
Iqbal, H. (2002). E-mentoring: An effective platform for distance learning. e-mentor, 84(2),
54-61.
Jarvenpaa, S. L., & Leidner, D. E. (1999). Communication and trust in global virtual teams.
Organization Science, 10(6), 791-815.
212

Jena, L., & Pradhan, S. (2017). Research and recommendations for employee engagement:
Revisiting the employee-organization linkage. Development and Learning in
Organizations, 31(5), 17-19.
Jeyalakashmi, P. R., & Rani, A. L. (2019). The impact of digitalization on employee
performance in banking sector. Management Insight, 15(1), 59-66.
Jimenez, A., Boehe, D. M., Taras, V., & Caprar, D. V. (2017). Working across boundaries:
Current and future perspectives on global virtual teams. Journal of International
Management, 23(4), 341-349.
Johnson, J. W. (2003). Toward a better understanding of the relationship between personality
and individual job performance. In M. R. Barrick & A. M. Ryan (Eds.), Personality and
work: Reconsidering the role of personality in organizations (pp. 83-120). Josey-Bass.
Johnston, J. J. (2019). Building connected virtual teams: Identifying strategies and overcoming
barriers [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Brandman University.
Jones, M. D., & Kober, J. J. (2019). Employee engagement in difficult times. World Class
Benchmarking. http://worldclassbenchmarking.com
Juan, S. H., Ting, I. W. K., & Kweh, Q. L., & Yao, L. (2018). How does knowledge sharing
affect employee engagement? Institutions and Economics, 10(4), 49-67.
Jung, J., & Bozeman, B. (2020). Is a bad mentor better than no mentor? International Journal
of Learning and Change, 12(4), 444-475.
Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at
work. Academy of Management Journal, 33(4), 692-724.
Karim, D. N., & Mahid, A. H. A. (2017). The effect of high performance HR practices on
knowledge sharing behavior: The mediating role of employee engagement. International
213

Postgraduate Business Journal, 9(1), 74-88.
Kavale, S. (2012). The connection between strategy and structure. International Journal of
Business and Commerce, 1(6), 60-70.
Kerdpitak, C., & Jermsittiparsert, K. (2020). The impact of human resource management
practices on competitive advantage: Mediating role of employee engagement in Thailand.
Systematic Reviews in Pharmacy, 11(1), 443-452.
Khan, A. A., Abbasi, S. O. B. H., Waseem, R. M., Ayaz, M., & Ijaz, M. (2016). Impact of
training and development of employees on employee performance through job
satisfaction: A study of telecom sector of Pakistan. Business Management and Strategy,
7(1), 29-46.
Killingsworth, B., Xue, Y., & Liu, Y. (2016). Factors influencing knowledge sharing among
global virtual teams. Team Performance Management, 22(5/6), 284-300.
Knight, R. (2016). How to make your one-on-ones with your employees more productive.
Harvard Business Review, 1-6.
Kohntopp, T., & McCann, J. (2019). Virtual leadership in organizations: potential competitive
advantage? Advanced Management Journal, 84(3), 26-39.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice,
41(4), 212–218.
Kraut, A. I. (2020). Employee surveys move into the future: A tale of evolution, revolution, and
speed bumps. In W. H. Macey & A. A. Fink (Eds.), Employee surveys and sensing:
challenges and opportunities (pp. 443-460). Oxford University Press.
Krawczyk-Brylka, B. (2017). Comparative study of traditional and virtual teams. Task
Quarterly, 21(3), 233-245.
Krumm, K., Kanthak, K., Hartmann, K., & Hertel, G. (2016). What does it take to be a virtual
214

team player? The knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics required in virtual
teams. Human Performance, 29(2), 123-142.
Kumar, V., & Pansari, A. (2015). Measuring the benefits of employee engagement. MIT Sloan
Management Review, 56(4), 67-72.
Lacerenza, C. N., Zajac, S., Savage, N., & Salas, E. (2015). Team training for global virtual
teams: Strategies for success. In J. Wildman & R. Griffith (Eds.), Leading global teams
(pp. 91-121). Springer.
Laitinen, K., & Valo, M. (2018). Meanings of communication technology in virtual team
meetings: Framing technology-related interaction. International Journal of Human-
Computer Studies, 111, 12-22
Lappalainen, P., Saunila, M., Ukko, J., Rantala, T., & Rntanen, H. (2019). Managing
Performance through employee attributes: Implications for employee engagement.
International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management (in press).
Latham, G. P. (2019). Perspectives of a practitioner-scientist on organizational psychology/
organizational behavior. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and
Organizational Behavior, 6, 1-16.
Latif, N. Z. A., & Arif, L. S. M. (2018). Employee engagement and employee voice.
Development, 7, 508-515.
Lechner, A., & Mortlock, J. T. (in press). How to create psychological safety in virtual teams.
Organizational Dynamics. Advanced online publication.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orgdyn.2021.100849
Lee, M. C. C., Idris, M. A., & Delfabbro, P. H. (2017). The linkages between hierarchical
culture and empowering leadership and their effects on employees’ work engagement:
215

Work meaningfulness as a mediator. International Journal of Stress Management, 24(4),
392-415.
Lee, M. C. C., Idris, M. A., & Tiuckey, M. (2019). Supervisory coaching and performance
feedback as mediators of the relationships between leadership styles, work engagement,
and turnover intention. Human Resource Development International, 22(3), 257-282.
Lee, T. H., McGlynn, E. A., & Safran, D. G. (2019). A framework for increasing trust between
patients and the organizations that care for them. Jama, 321(6), 539-540.
Lee-Kelley, L. (2006). Locus of control and attitudes to working in virtual teams. International
Journal of Project Management, 24, 234-243.
Lees-Marshment, J., & Hendricks, C. (2018). Political leaders and public engagement: The
hidden world of information elite-citizen interaction.
https://researchsapce.auckland.ac.nz/handle/43583
Lencioni, P. (2002). The five dysfunctions of teams: A leadership fable. Josey-Bass.
Lepola, J., Kajamies, A., Laakkonen, E., & Niemi, P. (2020). Vocabulary, metacognitive
knowledge and task orientation as predictors of narrative picture book comprehension:
From preschool to grade 3. Reading and Writing, 33, 1351-1373.
Liao, C. (2017). Leadership in virtual teams: A multilevel perspective. Human Resource
Management Review, 27, 648-659.
Lippert, H., & Dulewicz, V. (2018). A profile of high-performing global virtual teams. Team
Performance Management: An International Journal, 24(3/4), 169-185.
Lizier, A. L., & Reich, A. (2020). Learning through work and structed learning and
development systems in complex adaptive organizations: Ongoing disconnections.
Studies in Continuing Education, 1, 1-16.
216

Lloyd, R. (2008). Discretionary effort and the performance domain. The Australian and New
Zealand Journal of Organizational Psychology, 1, 22-34.
Lockwood, N. R. (2007). Leveraging employee engagement for a competitive advantage. The
SHRM Foundation.
Lund, S., Madgavkar, A., Manyika, J., Smit, S., Ellingrud, K., Meaney, M., & Robinson, O.
(2021). The future of work after Covid-19.
https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/future-of-work#
Macey, W. H., & Fink, A. A. (2020). Surveys and sensing: realizing the promise of listening to
employees. In W. H. Macey & A. A. Fink (Eds.), Employee surveys and sensing:
challenges and opportunities (pp. 1-22). Oxford University Press.
Maduka, N. S., Edwards, H., Greenwood, D., Osborne, A., & Babtunde, S. (2018). Analysis
of competencies for effective virtual team leadership in building successful
organizations. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 25(2), 696-712.
Markarisu, E. E., & Larson, B. Z. (2017). Changing the perspective of virtual work: Building
virtual intelligence at the individual level. Academy of Management Perspectives, 31(2),
159-178.
Malhotra, A., Majchrak, A., & Rosen, B. (2007). Leading Virtual Teams. Academy of
Management Perspectives, 21(1), 60-70.
Mandzuk, C. (2014). Challenges of leading a virtual team: More than meets the eye. T&D,
68(1), 20.
Markos, S., & Sridevi, M. S. (2010). Employee engagement: The key to improving
performance. International Journal of Business and Management, 5(12), 89-96.
Marlow, S. L., Lacerenza, & Salas, E. (2017). Communication in virtual teams: A conceptual
framework and research agenda. Human Resource Management Review, 27(4), 575-589.
217

Marrelli, A. F. (2011). Employee engagement and performance management in the federal
sector. Performance Improvement, 50(5), 5-13.
Martins, L. L., Gilson, L. L., & Maynard, M. T. (2004). Virtual teams; What do we know and
where do we go from here? Journal of Management, 30(6), 805-835.
Maslach, C., & Leiter, M. P. (1997). The truth about burnout: How organizations cause
personal stress and what to do about it. Josey-Bass.
Maslach, C., & Leiter, M. P. (2008). Early predictors of job burnout and engagement. Journal
of Applied Psychology, 93(3), 498-512.
Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P. (2001). Job burnout. Annual Review of
Psychology, 52, 397-422.
Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 16, 318-319.
Masuda, A. D., Holtschlag, C., & Nicklin, J. M. (2016). Why the availability of telecommuting
matters: The effects of telecommuting on engagement via goal pursuit. Career
Development International, 22(2), 200-219.
Matsuo, M. (2019). Effect of learning goal orientation on work engagement through job
crafting. Personnel Review.
May, D. R., Gibson, R. L., & Harter, L. M. (2004). The psychological conditions of
meaningfulness, safety, and availability and the engagement of the human spirit at work.
Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 77, 11-37.
Maznevski, M. L., & Chudoba, K. M. (2000). Bridging space over time: Global virtual team
dynamics and effectiveness. Organization Science, 11, 473-492.
McCray, J., Turner, H., Hall, B., Price, M., & Constable, G. (2014). Social care mentorship and
employee engagement in the transformation of the social care workforce. Journal of
218

Workplace Learning, 26(3/4), 267-280.
McKenna, G., Baxter, G., & Hainey, T. (2017). Adopting a virtual learning environment
towards enhancing students’ self-efficacy. Journal of Applied Research in Higher
Education, 9(1), 54-69.
McKnight, D. H., Cummings, L. L., & Chervany, N. L. (1998). Initial trust formation in new
organizational relationships. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 473-490.
McLarnon, M. J. W., O’Neill, T. A., Taras, V., Law, D., Donia, M. B. L., & Steel, P. (2019).
Global virtual team communication, coordination, and performance across three peer
feedback strategies. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 51(4), 207-218.
Medlin, B., & Green, K. W. (2014). Impact of management basics on employee engagement.
Academy of Strategic Management Journal, 13(2), 21-36.
Meluso, J., Johsnon, S., & Bagrow, J. (2020). Making virtual teams work: Redesigning virtual
collaboration for the future. SocAirXiv, 15, 1-5.
Mengel, E., Smith, J., & Uzelac, E. (2013). After the data: Taking action on ClimateQUAL
results. Evidenced Based Library and Information Practice, 8(2), 48-29.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4
th
Ed.). Josey-Bass.
Merriman, K. K., Schmidt, S. M., & Dunlap-Hinkler, D. (2011). Profiling virtual employees:
The impact of managing virtually. Journal of Leadership & Organization Studies, 14(1),
6-15.
Michaelson, C., Pratt, M. G., Grant, A. M., & Dunn, C. P. (2014). Meaningful work: Connecting
business ethics and organization studies. Journal of Business Ethics, 121(1), 77-90.
Miller, C. J. (2016). Would opening a satellite office in or near a major metropolitan area be
219

Beneficial in the successful recruitment and retention of high potential young employees?
https://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/
Mills, M. J., Culberston, S. S., & Fullagar, C. J. (2012). Conceptualizing and measuring
engagement: An analysis of the Utrecht work engagement scale. Journal of Happiness
Studies, 13, 519-545.
Milward, L. J., Haslam, S. A., & Postmes, T. (2007). Putting employees in their place: The
impact of hot desking on organizational and team identification. Organization Science,
18(4), 547-559.
Mone, E. M., London, M., & Mone, E. M. (2018). Employee engagement through effective
performance management: A practical guide for managers. Routledge.
Morrison-Smith, S., & Ruiz, J. (2020). Challenges and barriers in virtual teams: A literature
review. SN Applied Sciences, 2, 1-33.
Muenks, K., Wigfield, A., Yang, J. S., & O’Neal, C. R. (2017). How true is grit? Assessing its
relations to high school and college students’ personality characteristics, self-regulation,
engagement, and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 109(5), 599.
Munn, S. L., & Chaudhuri, S. (2015). Work-life balance: A cross-cultural review of dual-earner
couples in India and the United States. Advances in Developing Human Resources,
18(1), 54-68.
Nandhakumar, J., & Baskerville, R. (2006). Durability of online teamworking: Patterns of trust.
Information Technology & People, 19(4), 371-389.
Newman, A., Donohue, R., & Eva, N. (2017). Psychological safety: A systematic review of the
literature. Human Resource Management Review, 27(3), 521-535.
Newman, S. A., Ford, R. C., & Marshall, G. W. (2020). Virtual team leader communication:
220

Employee perception and organizational reality. International Journal of Business
Communication, 57(4), 452-473.
Nugroho, R. E. (2017). Analysis of talent management, employee engagement, and leadership.
International Journal of Economic Perspectives, 11(4), 590-601.
Nilsson, M., & Mattes, J. (2015). The spatiality of trust: Factors influencing the creation of trust
and the role of face-to-face contacts. European Management Journal, 33, 230-244.
Ojala, S., & Pyoria, P. (2017). Mobile knowledge and traditional mobile workers: Assessing the
prevalence of multi-locational work in Europe. Acta Sociologica, 61(4), 402-418.
Osborne, S., & Hammoud, M. S. (2017). Effective employee engagement in the workplace.
International Journal of Applied Management and Technology, 16(1), 4.
Oyserman, D., Lewis Jr., N. A., Yan, V. X., Fisher, O., O’Donnell, S. C., & Horowitz, E.
(2017). An identity-based motivation framework for self-regulation. Psychological
Inquiry, 28(2-3), 139-147.
Pacheco, D. C., Moniz, A. I. A., & Caldeira, S. N. (2015). Silence in organizations and
psychological safety: A literature review. European Scientific Review (Special Edition),
293-308.
Pacheco, E. (2020). Twelve tips for online live classes. MedEdPublish, 9.
Pangil, F., & Chan, J. M. (2014). The mediating effect of knowledge sharing on the relationship
between trust and virtual team effectiveness. Journal of Knowledge Management, 18,
92-106.
Panteli, N., Yalabik, Z. Y., & Rapti, A. (2019). Fostering work engagement in geographically-
dispersed and asynchronous virtual teams. Information Technology & People, 32, 2-17.
Parakh, D., Garla, B. K., Dagli, R., Bhateja, G. A., Vyas, D., & Pewa, P. (2016). Work
221

engagement among dental and medical professionals in Jodhpur city. International
Journal of Oral Health Dentistry, 2(2), 88-94.
Parker, H., & du Plooy, E. (2021). Team-based games: Catalysts for developing psychological
safety, learning, and performance. Journal of Business Research, 125(1), 45-51.
Parker, S. K., & Griffin, M. A. (2011). Understanding active psychological states: Embedding
engagement in a wider nomological net and closer attention to performance. European
Journal of Work & Organizational Psychology, 20, 60-67.
Passmore, J., & Sinclair, T. (2020). Personal Development Plans. In Becoming a Coach (pp.
203-207). Springer,
Peñarroja, V., Orengo, V., Zornoza, A., Sánchez, J., & Ripoll, P. (2015). How team feedback
and team trust influence information processing and learning in virtual teams: A
moderated mediation model. Computers in Human Behavior, 48, 9-16.
Picu, C. G., & Dinu, A. (2016). Research on the current telecommuting trends in the United
States and European Union markets. Management and Economics Review, 1, 194-202.
Pinisetti, N., Sharma, A., & Datta, P. (2017). Developing line managers as people managers:
HRD impact in DFPCL, India. International Journal of HRD Practice, Policy, and
Research, 2(2), 21-32.
Plaskoff, J. (2017). Employee experience: The new human resource management approach.
Strategic HR Review.
Plotnick, L., Hiltz, S. R., & Privman, R. (2016). Ingroup dynamics and perceived effectiveness
of partially distributed teams. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 59,
203-229.
Potter, A., & Parkinson, A. (2010). First year at risk intervention pilot project: An intervention
222

to support first year students experiencing early assessment failure. Paper presented at
The 13
th
Pacific Rim First Year in Higher Education Conference: Adelaide, Australia.
Prayogo, L., Pranoto, B. A. S., & Purba, H. H. (2017). Employee satisfaction analysis with
human resource index. Management Science Letters, 7, 233-240.
Persson, J., & Nilsson, R. (2019). Employee satisfaction in virtual teams. [Master’s thesis,
Halmstad University].
http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1336034/FULLTEXT02
Rana, S., Ardichvili, A., & Tkachenko, O. (2014). A theoretical model of the antecedents and
outcomes of employee engagement. Journal of Workplace Learning, 26(3/4), 249-266.
Reissner,S., & Pagan, V. (2013). Generating employee engagement in public-private
partnership: Management communication activities and employee experiences. The
International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(14), 2741-2759.
Rich, B. L., Lepine, J. A., & Crawford, E. R. (2010). Job engagement: Antecedents and effects
on job performance. The Academy of Management Journal, 53(3), 617-635.
Riordan, J. O. (2017). The practice of human resource management.
http://www.microlinkcolleges.net/elib/files/undergraduate/Management%20Information
Robert, L. P., & You, S. (2017). Are you satisfied yet? Shared leadership, individual trust,
autonomy, and satisfaction in virtual teams. Journal of the Association for Information
Science and Technology, 69, 503-513.
Rozgus, A. (2018). Finding purpose in a job. Consulting-Specifying Engineer, 55(10), 1-2.
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance. New York: Teachers
College Press.
Runhaar, P., Sanders, K., & Konermann, J. (2013). Teachers’ work engagement: Considering
223

interaction with pupils and human resources practices as job resources. Journal of
Applied Social Psychology, 43, 2017-2030.
Sabbaghi, M., Esmaelilian, B., Cade, W., Wines, K., & Behdad, S. (2016). Business outcomes
of product repairability: A survey-based study of consumer repair experiences.
Resources, Conservation, and Recycling, 109, 114-122.
Saks, A. M. (2006). Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal of
Managerial Psychology, 21, 600-619.
Santuzzi, A. M., & Zoeckler, J. (2019). Using social relations analysis to examine the impact of
role change on interpersonal perceptions in virtual teams. Paper presented at the
proceeding of the 52
nd
Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii.
Saltzman, J. M., Brooks, S. M., & Hendrickson, V. (2020). Lifecycle surveys: Individual and
Organizational journeys. In W. H. Macey & A. A. Fink (Eds.), Employee surveys and
sensing: Challenges and opportunities (pp. 68-85). Oxford University Press.
Schaufeli, W. B. (2013). What is engagement? In C. Truss, R. Delbridge, K. Alfes, A. Shantz,
& E. Soane (Eds.), Employee engagement in theory and practice (pp. 15-35). Routledge.
Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2004). Job demands, job resources, and their relationship
with burnout and engagement: A multi-sample study. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 25, 293-315.
Schaufeli, W. B., Martinez, I., Pinto, A. M., Salanova, M., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). Burnout
and engagement in university students: A cross-national study. Journal of Cross-
Cultural Psychology, 33, 464-481.
Schepers, J., de Jong, A., de Ruyter, K., & Wetzels, M. (2011). Fields of gold: Perceived
efficacy in virtual teams of field service employees. Journal of Service Research, 14(3),
224

372-389.
Schein, E. H. (2017). Organizational culture and leadership (5
th
edition). John Wiley & Sons.
Schiller, S. Z., Mennecke, B. E., Nah , F. F. H., & Luse, A. (2014). Institutional boundaries and
trust of virtual teams in collaborative design: An experimental study in a virtual world
environment. Computers in Human Behavior, 35, 565-577.
Schinoff, B. S., Ashforth, B. E., & Corley, K. G. (2020). Virtually in(separable): The centrality
of relationship cadence in the formation of virtual multiplex relationships. Academy of
Management Journal, 63(5), 1395-1424.
Schulze, J., & Krumm, S. 2016). The “virtual team player”: A review and initial model of
knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics for virtual collaboration.
Organizational Psychology Review, 7(1), 66-95.
Serban, A., Yammarino, F. J., Dionne, S. D., Kahai, S. S., Hao, C., McHugh, K. A., Sotak, K. L.,
Mushore, A. B. R., Friedrich, T. L., & Peterson, D. R. (2015). Leadership emergence in
face-to-face and virtual teams: A multi-level model with agent-based simulations,
quasi-experimental and experimental tests. The Leadership Quarterly, 26(3), 402-418.
Shaik, F. F., & Makhecha, U. P. (2019). Drivers of employee engagement in global virtual
teams. Australian Journal of Information Systems, 23, 1-45.
Shaik, F. F., Makhecha, U. P., & Gouda, S. K. (2021). Work and non-work identities in global
virtual teams: Role of cultural intelligence in employee engagement. International
Journal of Manpower, 42(1), 51-78.
Shameen, M., Kumar, C., & Chandra, B. (2017). Challenges of management in the operation of
virtual software development teams: A systematic literature review. Advanced
Computing and Communication Systems, 1-8.
225

Sharma, J., & Kothari, H. (2017). Work engagement interventions and their efficacy. Pacific
Business Review International, 9(9), 57-61.
Sherman, E. L. (2020). Discretionary remote working helps mothers without harming
non-mothers: Evidence from a field experiment. Management Science, 66(3), 1351-
1374.
Shirom, A. (2003). Feeling vigorous at work? The construct of vigor and the study of positive
affect in organizations. In D. Ganster & P. L. Perrewe (Eds.), Research in organizational
stress and well-being (pp. 135-165). JAI Press.
Shuck, B. (2011). Four emerging perspectives of employee engagement: An integrative
literature review. Human Resource Development Review, 10(3), 304-328.
Shuck, B., Osam, K., Zigarmi, D., & Nimon, K. (2017). Definitional and conceptual muddling:
Identifying the positionality of employee engagement and defining the construct. Human
Resource Development Review, 16(3), 263-293.
Shuck, B., & Rocco, T. S. (2013). Human resource development and employee engagement. In
Employee engagement in theory and practice (pp. 130-144). Routledge.
Shuck, M. B., Rocco, T. S., & Albornoz, A. (2011). Exploring employee engagement from the
employee perspective: Implication for HRD. Journal of European Industrial Training,
35(4), 300-325.
Shuck, M. B., & Wollard, K. (2010). Employee engagement and HRD: A seminal review of the
foundations. Human Resource Development Review, 9(1), 89-110.
Siakas, K. V., Nisioti, K. S., & Voutsa, E. A. (2006). Virtual teams: The notion of trust. Paper
presented at the 3
rd
International Conference on Enterprise Systems and Accounting.
ICEAScc: Greece.
226

Singh, R. (2016). The impact of intrinsic and extrinsic motivators on employee engagement in
information organizations. Journal of Education for Library and Information Science,
57(2), 197-206.
Smith, K. T. (2010). Work-life balance perspectives of marketing professionals in Generation
Y. Services Marketing Quarterly, 31(4), 434-447.
Society for Human Resource Management. (2019). 2019 challenges and benefits of global
teams – An HR perspective.
https://www.shrm.org/hr-today/trends-and-forecasting/research-surveys/Documents.pdf
Soenato, T. W., Hamzah, D., Muis, M., & Brasit, N. (2016). The influene of telecommuting
systems, self-efficacy and the quality of management on work productivity and the
competitiveness of organizational perspectives in multinational companies in Jakatra,
Indonesia. Scientific Research Journal, 4(3), 43-52.
Soule, D. L., & Applegate, L. M. (2009). Virtual team learning: Reflecting and acting, alone
And with others. Harvard Business School Working Paper #09-084.
Srivastava, P. R. (2020). Communication, collaboration, & trust: Interpersonal challenges in
virtual collaboration team. International Journal of English Literature and Social
Sciences, 5(4), 1273-1278.
Stadtlander, L., Sickel, A., La Civita, L., & Giles, M. Home as workplace: A qualitative case
study of online faculty using photovoice. Journal of Educational Research and Practice,
7(1), 45-59.
Staples, D. S., & Webster, J. (2007). Exploring traditional and virtual team members’ “best
practices”. Small Group Research 38(1), 60-97.
Sullivan, C. (2012). Remote working and work-life balance. In N. P. Reilly, M. J. Sirgy, and
227

C. A. Gorman (Eds.), Work and quality of life (pp. 275-290). Springer.
Sumathipala, S. (2020). Trust and psychological safety in a virtual healthcare team. Journal of
World Family Medicine, 18(9), 53-57.
Takeuchi, M. (2018). Effects of work-life balance policies on corporate performance and the
promotion of female employee. International Journal of Business and Management,
13(10), 9-19.
Tushman, M. L., Kahn, A., Porray, M. E., & Binns, A. (2017). Change management is
Becoming increasingly data driven: Companies aren’t ready. Harvard Business Review,
1-5.
Unsworth, K. (2020). Human relations virtual special issue: Virtual working. Human
Relations, 73(7), 1036-1040.
Veelen, R. V., Sleegers, P. J., & Endedijk, M. D. (2017). Professional learning among school
leaders in secondary education: The impact of personal and work context factors.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 53(3), 365-408.
Waghmare, S. (2017). A study of employee engagement and role of effective leadership.
International Journal of Research, 4(7), 1638-1649.
Waizenegger, L., McKenna, B., Cai, W., & Bendz, T. (2020). An affordance perspective of
team collaboration and enforced working from home during COVID-19. European
Journal of Information Systems, 1-14.
Ward, D., Kourti, N., Lazari, A., & Cofta, P. (2014). Trust building and the European reference
network for critical infrastructure protection community. Interpersonal Journal of
Critical Infrastructure Protection, 7, 193-210.
Wefald, A. (2008). An examination of job engagement, transformational leadership, and
228

related psychological constructs [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Kansas State
University, Manhattan.
Welbourne, T. M., & Schramm, P. (2017). The pains of employee engagement: Lessons from
Webasto to mediate and reverse the pain. Employee Relations Today, 44(3), 17-25.
White, M. (2014). The management of virtual teams and virtual meetings. Business
Information Review, 31(2), 111-117.
White, R. (2005). A strategic approach to building a consistent global rewards program.
Compensation & Benefits Review, 37(4), 23-40.
Whitemeyer, H. A. (2013). Employee engagement construct and instrument validation
[Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Georgia.
Wilkinson, S. J. (2008). Work-life balance in the Australian and New Zealand surveying
profession. Structural survey, 26(2), 120-130.
Wieland, S., & Wolf, J. (2016). Virtual teams. In T. Havar-Simonovich, and D. Simonovich
(Eds.), Contemporary theory and practice of organizations (pp. 193-208). Ibidem Press.
Wolor, C. W., Solikhah, S., Fidhyallah, N. F., & Lestari, D. P. (2020). Effectiveness of
e-training, e-learning, and work life balance on employee performance during
COVID-19. Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 7(10), 443-450.
Worldometer. (2021). Coronavirus cases. https://www.worldometers.info
Wu, L., Rusyidi, B., Claibrone, N., & McCarthy, M. L. (2013). Relationships between work-life
balance and job-related factors among child welfare workers. Children and Youth
Services Review, 35, 1447-1454.
Xanthopoulou, D., Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2009). Work engagement
and financial returns: A diary study on the role of job and personal resources. Journal of
229

Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 82(1), 183-200.
Xu, J., & Thomas, H. C. (2011). How can leaders achieve high employee engagement?
Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 32(4), 399-416.
Yao, L., & Juan, S. H. (2017). Linking knowledge creation with employee engagement: A
conceptual model. 4
th
International Conference on Education and Social Sciences,
Istanbul, Turkey.
Zhang, Y., Fang, Y., Wei, K., & Chen, H. (2010). Exploring the role of psychological safety in
promoting the intention to continue knowledge sharing in virtual communities.
International Journal of Information Management, 30, 425-436.
Zigurs, I. (2003). Leadership in virtual teams: Oxymoron or opportunity? Organizational
Dynamics, 31(4), 339-351.
Zuofa, T., & Ochieng, E. G. (2017). Working separately but together: Appraising virtual project
team challenges. Team Performance Management, 23(5/6), 227-242.
Zuya, H. E. (2017). Prospective teachers’ conceptual and procedural knowledge in
mathematics: The case of algebra. American Journal of Educational Research, 5(3),
310-315.

230

Appendix A: Initial E-Mail to Participate in Interview
Hello,

I hope this e-mail finds you well and safe. My name is Adam Jackson-Boothby and I am
currently a colleague of yours at [ET]. I am in the process of completing my doctoral studies at
the Rossier School of Education at the University of Southern California. My program of study is
in Organizational Change and Leadership. As part of this process, I am required to complete an
original piece of research (a dissertation). I have found your name through the company’s
directory and am reaching out to see if you would be interested in participating in an interview
with me.

My dissertation focuses on the employee engagement levels of virtual team members. According
to your profile, you currently work in a virtual environment and I am wondering if you would be
willing to participate. I am looking to better understand the ways in which virtual team members
are engaged with their work, and uncover ways to improve this engagement.

The interview will be online (through Zoom) and should last between 45-60 minutes in length.
All interviews will be recorded for record-keeping purposes and transcripts of our conversation
will be available. No one but me will see the video recording. For the publication of the findings,
your identity will remain confidential. I will be using pseudonyms for both the organization and
for yourself. This process is completely voluntary and before we begin the interview I will have
you review and sign a form understanding your rights in this research and the fact that you can
drop out at any time.
231

Thank you in advance for your consideration and your support with this project. Please reply
back to me at your earliest convenience and do let me know if you have any questions. I look
forward to hopefully working with you.

Regards,
Adam Jackson-Boothby

232

Appendix B: Interview Protocol
Before we begin, wanted to go over a few quick things:
1. As a reminder, this meeting will be recorded – are you ok with that?
2. This study is about the employee engagement within virtual teams.
3. I sent you the informed consent form – let’s review the highlights. Do you have any
questions/concerns and do you agree to the terms within that?
4. I will be taking some notes during our interview for my own analysis.
Now, we are going to get into the questions themselves…
1. Tell me a little about yourself – how long have you been with the company, how long
have you been in your current role, what do you do, etc.?
2. What does a normal day look like to you?
3. What does “good” look like in your role? How do you know when you are demonstrating
success?
4. How does your job connect to the larger mission of the organization?
5. What does employee engagement look like to you?
6. Describe the ways you engage with your colleagues in your virtual team?
a. PROBE: Does this engagement look different for different members?
7. How do your teammates in your virtual team interact with one another?
a. PROBE: Are there ways that these change from professional or fun interactions?
8. In what ways do you work to build and keep rapport with other members of your team?
a. PROBE: How does this differ from new joiners to the team in comparison to
colleagues you have worked with for a while?
233

9. What other avenues can the organization provide to allow you to build and maintain
relationships in a virtual environment?
10. Can you think back to a time you felt particularly disengaged from your team and
describe what was going on?
11. Can you think back to a time you felt particularly engaged from your team and describe
what was going on?
12. Can you describe what a one-to-one meeting looks like with your line manager?
13. Can you tell me about what types of channels are available in your organization to give
and receive feedback?
a. PROBE: Are there other channels you would like to see be utilized?
14. Tell me about some of the ways that you think that your team can improve the overall
level of employee engagement?
a. PROBE: Have you tried some ways in the past and are there ones that had worked
well and ones that did not work well?
15. What does trust look like within your team (between both other colleagues and your
manager) and how do you go about building and maintaining this?
a. PROBE: Are there other relationships in your work environment where trust is
important, and if so, what does that look like?
16. Do you feel as though you can be your authentic self on your team – why or why not?
17. What are some of the resources you need to effectively do your job?
18. Can you think about other types of resources you would like to have to make you more
successful in your role?
234

19. Describe the ways in which you leverage virtual environments and platforms to execute
the tasks of your role?
20. Describe what a typical week looks like on your team?
a. PROBE: Does this tend to change frequently or are weeks pretty standard?
21. What types of social interactions does your team take part in on a weekly basis?
a. PROBE: How do you decide on what events to do?
22. How do you stay motivated to complete your job to the best of your ability?
23. In what ways do you think you have been successful or unsuccessful in your current role?
24. If you feel as though you are not being successful in your role, are there resources
available that you can use to improve?
25. Is there anything else you would like to add at this time?

235

Appendix C: Data Collection Crosswalk
Assumed
influence
Assessment
type
Document
analysis
component
Interview
question
Research question
Virtual team
members
need to
understand
what is
communic
ated and
expected
of them to
be
successful
in their
roles (K-
C-1)
Interviews N/A
What does
“good” look
like in your
role? How do
you know when
you are
demonstrating
success? (IQ3)
Describe what a
typical week
looks like on
your team?
(IQ14)
How do you stay
motivated to
complete your
job to the best
of your ability?
(IQ16)
What are the knowledge and
motivation influences
affecting the increase or
decrease in employee
engagement of virtual team
members?
Virtual team
members
need to
understand
the
connection
s between
their roles
and the
broader
organizatio
nal
mission
(K-C-2)
Interviews

N/A
How does your
job connect to
the larger
mission of the
organization?
(IQ4)

What are the knowledge and
motivation influences
affecting the increase or
decrease in employee
engagement of virtual team
members?
Virtual team
members
need to
know how
to leverage
resources
available
to them to
Interviews N/A
What does
employee
engagement
look like to
you? (IQ5)

What are the knowledge and
motivation influences
affecting the increase or
decrease in employee
engagement of virtual team
members?
236

Assumed
influence
Assessment
type
Document
analysis
component
Interview
question
Research question
seek and
monitor
feedback
regarding
their
performan
ce (K-P-3
Virtual team
members
need to be
able to
identify,
reflect, and
communic
ate times
in which
they felt
engaged/di
sengaged
(K-M-4)
Interviews N/A
Describe the ways
you engage
with your
colleagues in
your virtual
team? (IQ6)
How do your
teammates in
your virtual
team interact
with one
another? (IQ7)
Can you think
back to a time
you felt
particularly
disengaged
from your team
and describe
what was going
on? (IQ8)
What are the knowledge and
motivation influences
affecting the increase or
decrease in employee
engagement of virtual team
members?
Virtual team
members
need to
believe in
their
ability to
be
successful
in their
tasks and
roles in
order to be
more
connected
and
Interviews
Document
Analysis
Does your
work
give you
a feeling
of
accompli
shment?
(A1)

How often
do you
feel
excited
when
you
In what ways do
you think you
have been
successful or
unsuccessful in
your current
role? (IQ17)

What are the knowledge and
motivation influences
affecting the increase or
decrease in employee
engagement of virtual team
members?
237

Assumed
influence
Assessment
type
Document
analysis
component
Interview
question
Research question
engaged
(M-1)
accompli
sh
somethin
g at
work?
(A2)

Do you feel
valued at
[ET]?
(V2)
Virtual team
members
need to
find
aspects
and tasks
in their
roles they
find
enjoyable
to increase
motivation
(M-2)
Interviews
Document
Analysis
Do you feel
motivate
d at
work?
(M1)
Are you
inspired
by the
work you
do at
[ET]?
(M2)
Are you
intereste
d in the
work you
do? (F1)
Is your job
a good
fit for
your
skills?
(F2)
Do you
find your
job
challengi
ng in a
good
way?
(C1)
How do you stay
motivated to
complete your
job to the best
of your ability?
(IQ16)
What are the knowledge and
motivation influences
affecting the increase or
decrease in employee
engagement of virtual team
members?
238

Assumed
influence
Assessment
type
Document
analysis
component
Interview
question
Research question
Do you
find your
work to
be a
positive
challeng
e? (C2)
The
organizatio
n needs to
foster a
culture
where
virtual
team
members
can build
relationshi
ps and
trust with
each other
(O-1)
Interviews N/A
What are some
ways that you
think that your
team can
improve the
overall level of
employee
engagement?
(IQ10)
What is the interaction
between organizational
culture and context and
virtual team member’s
knowledge and motivation
as it relates to increasing
engagement among them?

What are the
recommendations for
organizational practice in
the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational resources to
favorably impact virtual
team member’s
engagement?
The
organizatio
n needs to
create an
environme
nt where
virtual
team
members
can feel
psychologi
cally safe
(O-2)
Interviews
Document
Analysis
Is your
work
valued at
[ET]?
(V1)

What does trust
look like within
your team
(between peers
and amongst
your manager)?
(IQ11)

What is the interaction
between organizational
culture and context and
virtual team member’s
knowledge and motivation
as it relates to increasing
engagement among them?
What are the
recommendations for
organizational practice in
the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational resources to
favorably impact virtual
team member’s
engagement?
The
organizatio
n needs to
Interviews N/A
What are some of
the resources
you need to
What is the interaction
between organizational
culture and context and
239

Assumed
influence
Assessment
type
Document
analysis
component
Interview
question
Research question
provide the
necessary
tools and
resources
for virtual
team
members
to be
successful
and
engaged
(O-3)
effectively do
your job?
(IQ12)
Can you think
about other
types of
resources you
would like to
have to make
you more
successful in
your role?
(IQ13)
virtual team member’s
knowledge and motivation
as it relates to increasing
engagement among them?

What are the
recommendations for
organizational practice in
the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational resources to
favorably impact virtual
team member’s
engagement?
The
organizatio
n needs to
provide
quality
feedback
on
performan
ce to
virtual
team
members
(O-4)
Interviews N/A
Can you describe
what a one-to-
one meeting
looks like with
your line
manager? (IQ9)

What is the interaction
between organizational
culture and context and
virtual team member’s
knowledge and motivation
as it relates to increasing
engagement among them?

What are the
recommendations for
organizational practice in
the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational resources to
favorably impact virtual
team member’s
engagement?

240

Appendix D: Information Sheet for Exempt Research
The information sheet for exempt research will be provided to all individuals who partake
in an interview.

INFORMATION SHEET FOR EXEMPT RESEARCH
STUDY TITLE: Keeping Virtual Team Members Engaged in Their Roles
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR: Adam Jackson-Boothby
FACULTY ADVISOR: Alexandra Wilcox, JD, MFA, EdD
You are invited to participate in a research study. Your participation is voluntary. This document
explains information about this study. You should ask questions about anything that is unclear to
you.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this qualitative case study is to understand the experiences and engagement of
virtual team members. Research indicates that virtual teams are now viewed as the norm rather
than the exception, with 69% of companies offering some form of telecommuting option to their
employees (Society for Human Resource Management [SHRM], 2019). Another study revealed
that approximately 80% of teams worked in geographically dispersed areas (Schulze & Krumm,
2016), which is yet another condition for virtual teams (Malhotra et al., 2007). Roughly 60% of
large companies use virtual teams to some extent (Breuer et al., 2016; Liao, 2017), and some
estimate that there are currently over 1.3 billion employees that work in a virtual environment at
least part-time (Guinalíu & Jordán, 2016). This fact becomes more prevalent as the world
economy and ways of working move in the direction of globalization (Ebrahim et al.,2009).
Research posits that virtual teams are growing in prominence due to increases in globalization,
241

reliance on new communication technologies, and companies allowing flexible working
schedules (Jimenez et al., 2017).
PARTICIPANT INVOLVEMENT
Participation in this study is completely voluntary, and you have the right at any time and
for any purpose, to withdraw from the study. You will be interviewed as a part of this study. The
time of the interview will be arranged at a time that is convenient to you. As a participant, you
have been informed about the topics that will be discussed and have been encouraged to keep a
diary of events or thoughts you have on the topic. These diaries will remain as your notes unless
you decide to pass them along to the researcher. If you do pass them along, they will remain
confidential.
Interviews will take place via the Zoom video conferencing platform and will last
approximately one hour. With permission, each interview will be audio-recorded and transcribed
verbatim later. The Zoom software automatically includes the identifying credentials of the
person that is logged in to the interview. If you do not want to be identified by the credentials in
Zoom during the interview, please ensure that you have followed the instructions explaining how
to remove your name from the software. If you choose not to do that, it will be edited at the time
of transcription.
CONFIDENTIALITY
The members of the research team, Adam Jackson-Boothby and Dr. Alexandra Wilcox (faculty
advisor), and the University of Southern California Institutional Review Board (IRB) may access
the data. The IRB reviews and monitors research studies to protect the rights and welfare of
research subjects.
242

When the results of the research are published or discussed in conferences, no identifiable
information will be used.
Every effort will be made to protect your privacy and to preserve confidentiality. All
information about your participation, as well as the content of the conversation, will be
confidential. You will have the opportunity to strike anything from the record before the end of
the interview.
The Zoom software automatically includes the identifying credentials of the person that is
logged in to the interview. Please ensure that you have followed the instructions explaining how
to remove your name from the software. If you choose not to do that, it will be edited at the time
of interview transcription.
Transcription software will be used to transcribe the interview recorded via Zoom. All
identifying information will be removed at that time. As necessary, editing the transcript will
ensure that participant details are removed from the transcript, but that what remains are
identifiers that distinguish who said what. You have the right to review the transcript after the
interview to determine if there is anything that you wish to edit, or do not want to be included in
the data analysis.
All data from this interview will be stored on a secure hard drive. The data will be
destroyed at the end of the study.

INVESTIGATOR CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions about this study, please contact Adam Jackson-Boothby
(adamjack@usc.edu) or Dr. Alexandra Wilcox [faculty advisor] (amwilcox@usc.edu).

243

IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions about your rights as a research participant, please contact the
University of Southern California Institutional Review Board at 323-442-0114 or email
irb@usc.edu.

244

Appendix E: Follow-up E-Mail to Confirm Intent to Interview
Hello!

I hope this e-mail finds you well. I am following up from my initial e-mail a few days ago as I
have not heard back from you. I hope you are still interested in being a part of this study but if
you have changed your mind, please do let me know.

As previously communicated, this interview will last between 45-60 minutes. I am willing to
participate on a date and time that works for you. Due to personal and work commitments, I
would suggest we conduct this meeting on an evening or weekend (but am more than open to
your preferences). I will ask that you please e-mail me with 3 times that will work for you in the
next 2-3 weeks. Once we settle on a time, I will send you an additional confirmation e-mail with
further instructions.

In addition, this interview will take place via Zoom, in my unique zoom room. The web link to
get into my zoom room is listed here: https://zoom.us/j/9055960424. You do not need to have a
zoom account to join the meeting – simply click on this link. Depending on your operating
system, you may be prompted to download an installer. I would also ask that you use a computer
that has webcam so that we will be able to see each other during the interview.

Once again, thank you for your help with this project. Once I receive 2-3 times that may work for
you, I will send you a confirmation e-mail with all other information. Should you have any
questions, please do not hesitate to reach out.
245

Regards,
Adam
--
Adam Jackson-Boothby
Doctoral Candidate, Organizational Change and Leadership Program
Rossier School of Education, University of Southern California

246

Appendix F: E-Mail to Confirm Intent to Interview
Hello!

I hope this e-mail finds you well. Firstly, thank you for your interest in being a participant in this
study – I am excited to speak with you and gather your invaluable insights.

As previously communicated, this interview will last between 45-60 minutes. I am willing to
participate on a date and time that works for you. Due to personal and work commitments, I
would suggest we conduct this meeting on an evening or weekend (but am more than open to
your preferences). I will ask that you please e-mail me with 3 times that will work for you in the
next 2-3 weeks. Once we settle on a time, I will send you an additional confirmation e-mail with
further instructions.

In addition, this interview will take place via Zoom, in my unique zoom room. The web link to
get into my zoom room is listed here: https://zoom.us/j/9055960424. You do not need to have a
zoom account to join the meeting – simply click on this link. Depending on your operating
system, you may be prompted to download an installer. I would also ask that you use a computer
that has webcam so that we will be able to see each other during the interview.

Once again, thank you for your help with this project. Once I receive 2-3 times that may work for
you, I will send you a confirmation e-mail with all other information. Should you have any
questions, please do not hesitate to reach out.

247

Regards,
Adam
--
Adam Jackson-Boothby
Doctoral Candidate, Organizational Change and Leadership Program
Rossier School of Education, University of Southern California

248

Appendix G: Final Confirmation E-Mail
Hi [NAME],

Thank you so much for confirming a time that will work for our interview. I have looked at your
times and can confirm that we will meet at the following date and time:

Date:
Time:

As previously communicated, this interview will last between 45-60 minutes and will take place
via Zoom, in my unique zoom room. The web link to get into my zoom room is listed here:
https://zoom.us/j/9055960424. You do not need to have a zoom account to join the meeting –
simply click on this link. Depending on your operating system, you may be prompted to
download an installer. I would also ask that you use a computer that has webcam so that we will
be able to see each other during the interview.

If you encounter any problems logging into zoom, please phone me at 07546804597 and I will
troubleshoot.

In addition, I have attached a copy of the informed consent form. Please review this form prior to
our meeting. Prior to the interview beginning, I will ask if you have any questions and if you
agree to the consent form.

249

I look forward to our interview and again, should you have any questions, please do not hesitate
to reach out to me.

Regards,
Adam
--
Adam Jackson-Boothby
Doctoral Candidate, Organizational Change and Leadership Program
Rossier School of Education, University of Southern California
250

Appendix H: Thank You E-Mail
Hi [NAME],

Thank you again for the time you took to take part in an interview with me as I know you are
extremely busy.

It was a pleasure getting to speak to you and learn about your experiences regarding employee
engagement within virtual teams. This information will be invaluable as I continue with my
dissertation.

As was outlined in the informed consent document, if you do choose to withdraw your
participation from this study at any time, please contact me directly as your participation is
completely voluntary.

Should you need anything else from me, please don’t hesitate to reach out and once again, thank
you very much.

Regards,
Adam
--
Adam Jackson-Boothby
Doctoral Candidate, Organizational Change and Leadership Program
Rossier School of Education, University of Southern California
251

Appendix I: Interview Note Sheet

Interviewee Name: __________________________________
Interview Date: __________________
Interview Start Time: ____________
Interview End Time: _____________

Question Notes
Tell me a little about yourself – how long
have you been with the company, how long
have you been in your current role, what do
you do, etc.?

What does a normal day look like to you?
What does “good” look like in your role?
How do you know when you are
demonstrating success?

How does your job connect to the larger
mission of the organization?

What does employee engagement look like to
you?

Describe the ways you engage with your
colleagues in your virtual team?

PROBE: Does this engagement look different
for different members?

How do your teammates in your virtual team
interact with one another?

PROBE: Are there ways that these change
from professional or fun interactions?

In what ways do you work to build and keep
rapport with other members of your team?

PROBE: How does this differ from new
joiners to the team in comparison to
colleagues you have worked with for a
while?

What other avenues can the organization
provide to allow you to build and maintain
relationships in a virtual environment?

252

Can you think back to a time you felt
particularly disengaged from your team and
describe what was going on?

Can you think back to a time you felt
particularly engaged from your team and
describe what was going on?

Can you describe what a one-to-one meeting
looks like with your line manager?

Can you tell me about what types of channels
are available in your organization to give
and receive feedback?

PROBE: Are there other channels you would
like to see be utilized?

Tell me about some of the ways that you
think that your team can improve the
overall level of employee engagement?

PROBE: Have you tried some ways in the
past and are there ones that had worked
well and ones that did not work well?

What does trust look like within your team
(between both other colleagues and your
manager) and how do you go about
building and maintaining this?

PROBE: Are there other relationships in your
work environment where trust is important,
and if so, what does that look like?

Do you feel as though you can be your
authentic self on your team – why or why
not?

What are some of the resources you need to
effectively do your job?

Can you think about other types of resources
you would like to have to make you more
successful in your role?

Describe the ways in which you leverage
virtual environments and platforms to
execute the tasks of your role?

Describe what a typical week looks like on
your team?

PROBE: Does this tend to change frequently
or are weeks pretty standard?

What types of social interactions does your
team take part in on a weekly basis?

PROBE: How do you decide on what events
to do?

253

How do you stay motivated to complete your
job to the best of your ability?

In what ways do you think you have been
successful or unsuccessful in your current
role?

If you feel as though you are not being
successful in your role, are there resources
available that you can use to improve?

Is there anything else you would like to add at
this time?

Tell me a little about yourself – how long
have you been with the company, how long
have you been in your current role, what do
you do, etc.?

What does a normal day look like to you?
What does “good” look like in your role?
How do you know when you are
demonstrating success?

254

Appendix J: One-on-One Meeting Agenda

SECTION 1: What Am I Working On (20 minutes)
I am Productive (Here is My Focus Now)
1.
1.
1.

I am Focused (Here is My Progress on Past Topics)
1.
2.
3.

I Need Help (Here is My Request for Support)
1.
2.
3.

SECTION 2: Review of Projects (5 minutes)
Project Name Status Notes
1.
2.
3.

255

SECTION 3: Ad Hoc Items (5 minutes)
Topic Owner Due
Date
%
Complete
Notes
1.
2.
3.

SECTION 4: Feedback for Leader (10 minutes)
1.
1.
2.

SECTION 5: Next Steps (5 minutes)
Action Item Owner Due Date
1.
2.
3.

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

The path to satisfaction, connection, and persistence: implementing a strategic and structured employee onboarding program: an innovation study

PDF

Exploring the experience of acquired employees within an organization following acquisition

PDF

Increasing workplace civility in higher education: a field study

PDF

Management preconditions to mitigate virtual employee burnout

PDF

Mitigating low employee engagement through improved performance management: an evaluation study

PDF

Addressing employee retention in the technology industry: improving access to corporate social responsibility programs

PDF

Clearing the way: pathways to retention of women in engineering

PDF

Prescription for change: gender barriers impact on healthcare leadership equity

PDF

Managers’ roles in supporting employee engagement in Jewish nonprofit organizations

PDF

Development of employee well-being initiatives to improve engagement and performance: an innovative study

PDF

Success factors for global virtual team leaders: a qualitative study of leaders of global virtual teams in a global professional service firm employing grounded theory

PDF

Lean construction through craftspeople engagement: an evaluation study

PDF

Exploring mindfulness with employee engagement: an innovation study

PDF

The impact of toxic behaviors by queen bees and their in-group on national sorority member involvement

PDF

Effective engagement of minority alumni: an innovation study

PDF

Role understanding as a pillar of employee engagement: an evaluation gap analysis

PDF

Leadership and patient safety culture

PDF

Addressing physician burnout: is there a relationship with leadership behaviors?

PDF

Increasing entrepreneurial engagement and persistence through education and training in a virtual organization with global operations: an innovation study

PDF

Building capacity for equity, diversity, and inclusion in public library programs through community-led practices: an innovation model

Asset Metadata

Creator Jackson-Boothby, Adam (author)

Core Title Keeping virtual team members engaged in their roles: an impossible task or a paramount necessity for an increasingly globalized world

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Degree Conferral Date 2021-08

Publication Date 07/16/2021

Defense Date 06/09/2021

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag employee engagement,OAI-PMH Harvest,virtual team members,virtual teams

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Wilcox, Alexandra (committee chair), Donato, Adrian (committee member), Krop, Cathy (committee member)

Creator Email adamjack@usc.edu,ajboothby@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC13666738

Unique identifier UC13666738

Legacy Identifier etd-JacksonBoo-9751

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Jackson-Boothby, Adam

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright. The original signature page accompanying the original submission of the work to the USC Libraries is retained by the USC Libraries and a copy of it may be obtained by authorized requesters contacting the repository e-mail address given.

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu