Getting tired of working from home? : A case study of management practices to motivate employees in a virtual environment

(1)

Getting tired of working

from home?

A case study of management practices to motivate employees in a virtual environment

Master thesis within: Business Administration

Credits: 30 ECTS

Authors: Marcus Andersson

Simon Holmqvist

Tutor: Johan Karlsson

(2)

Acknowledgments

With great appreciation, we would like to thank all people involved in making this thesis possible. After almost four years of studying at Jönköping International Business School, we would like to express our gratitude towards the university itself and all professors and teachers who have provided us with lifelong knowledge, which has helped us write this thesis.

Furthermore, we want to thank our tutor, Johan Karlsson, and all our seminar group members. With great engagement, these people contributed with continuous inputs, feedback, and comments that have increased the quality, and enabled the finalization of the thesis.

Additionally, we would express our deepest gratitude to our participants who took the time to engage in interviews during these special times. Without you, this thesis would not be possible.

Marcus Andersson Simon Holmqvist

(3)

Abstract

The use of virtual teams has increased during recent years due to technological development, and the current Covid-19 pandemic has driven the pace of this growing phenomenon to the next level. This study has looked in-depth at a single company within the Swedish insurance industry, how managerial practices differ between a virtual environment and a co-located environment regarding motivating employees. It has been identified that the managers have adjusted their way of working and employed several new practices to motivate their employees. Motivation is a complex topic, and many potential practices could influence motivation. The managers have carefully taken actions that enables the employees to execute their work tasks. Further, the findings show that the managers, in this case, have employed a lower degree of virtuality, and actively employed solutions that facilitate interactions and structure. Additionally, the employees have been empowered and given the authority to engage in decisions to a greater extent than when they were working co-located. While most employed practices aim to motivate the employees, other practices aim to fulfill other purposes. Hence, these practices could still influence the employees' motivation.

(4)

3.1 Research Philosophy ... 17 3.2. Research approach ... 19 3.3. Research Design... 19 3.4. Data collection ... 20 3.4.1. Primary data ... 20 3.4.2. Secondary data ... 22 3.4.3. Case ... 23 3.4.4. Data analysis... 23 3.4.5. Ethical consideration ... 25 4. Findings ... 27 4.1. Virtuality ... 27 4.1.1. Degree of virtuality... 27

4.1.2. Division of team members ... 28

(5)

4.2. Communication ... 30

4.2.1. Increased attention to team members ... 30

4.2.2. Lack of responsiveness in virtual communication ... 31

4.2.3. Spontaneous communication ... 32

4.3. Meetings ... 33

4.3.1. Meeting structure ... 33

4.3.2. Meeting forms ... 35

4.4. Leading a virtual team ... 36

4.4.1. Responsibilities within the team ... 36

4.4.2. Workplace climate ... 37 4.4.3. Extra activities ... 39 5. Analysis ... 41 5.1. Virtuality ... 41 5.2. Communication ... 43 5.3. Meetings ... 45

5.4. Leading a virtual team ... 47

6. Discussion and conclusion ... 49

6.1 Discussion ... 49 6.1.1. Managerial implications ... 49 6.1.2. Theoretical implications ... 49 6.2 Conclusion ... 50 6.3 Limitations ... 53 6.4. Future research ... 54 Appendices ... 61 Appendix 1 - Questionnaire ... 61

Appendix 2 - Ethical considerations ... 62

Table 1 ... 63

(6)

1. Introduction

1.1 Background

Virtual teams have become increasingly common in recent years (Dulebohn & Hoch, 2017), and the development of technology has made it possible to conduct work from different locations and enabled the use of this work form (Hill et al., 2014; Staples, et al., 1999). Virtual teams are referred to as a team that use electronic technologies to communicate and execute work tasks where the team members are geographically dispersed and working together and toward common goals (Dulebohn & Hoch, 2017). However, Handke et al. (2020) argue that even co-located team members can be defined as virtual teams if they rely heavily on electronic communication. Virtual teams can be differentiated by the degree of virtuality. The virtuality is characterized by distance, time spent on virtual communication, and how synchronized the information flow is. The degree of virtuality is of importance because it determines how the team members will interact (Schmidtke & Cummings, 2017).

The development, supply, and availability of communication and information sharing technologies have influenced how people work and driven virtual teams' growth (Hill et al., 2014). Without communication technologies and the internet, virtual teams would not be able to communicate nor exist and execute work tasks (Daim et al., 2012; Ford et al., 2017). Due to technological development, the use of virtual teams is expected to increase even more in the future (Dulebohn & Hoch, 2017), which highlights the need for further research within the area (Jimenez et al., 2017).

The Covid-19 pandemic has affected most companies and industries and forced adaptation and change (Guazzini et al., 2020). Companies have created virtual job environments where the employees work from different locations and communicate with each other through technological communication tools (Bartsch et al., 2020). As a result of this sudden transition, the Covid-19 pandemic has also forced many people with no previous experience or who do not want to work virtually to work from home, which creates unique challenges (Wang et al., 2020). According to Statistics Sweden (2020), almost one-third of Swedes worked from home at some point during October 2020. The increased use of virtual teams has highlighted the challenges involved in team-based work in virtual environments (Guazzini et al., 2020), as

(7)

working virtually challenges the traditional managerial skills and forces managers to re-think certain aspects of their role to be successful managers (Staples et al., 1999).

The work form of virtual teams comes with several potential advantages. First, communication can be conducted regardless of geographical location, which can facilitate a firm's ability to exploit knowledge-resources that otherwise are geographically dispersed and requires traveling costs (Dulebohn & Hoch, 2017; Jimenez et al., 2017). Second, the geographically dispersed nature of virtual teams will also enable more efficient and quicker completion of work tasks by combining knowledge resources from different physical locations (Zander et al., 2012). Third, global virtual teams can also contribute to time-zone advantages, such as scheduling work for 24-hours a day (Dulebohn & Hoch, 2017).

While virtual teams can provide opportunities, they can also bring challenges. Further, it is argued that managers in virtual teams often are challenged by how to influence and motivate team members when working virtually (Bartsch et al., 2020). Motivation is an important part that influences performance as teams with low motivation tend to perform worse compared to teams with high motivation (Hoch & Kozlowski, 2014; Massenberg et al., 2015). Moreover, compared to co-located teams, virtual teams are harder to lead and motivate due to geographical dispersion, communication challenges, and lack of physical and face-to-face contact (Hoch & Kozlowski, 2014). The physical dispersion makes it more difficult to collaborate and create trust and shared responsibility among the team members compared to co-located teams (Dabbish & Kraut, 2008; Dulebohn & Hoch, 2017). Working virtual with no or little physical contact with other team members can negatively influence the employee's motivation (Hoch & Kozlowski, 2014). In addition to motivation, a lack of physical presence also has a negative effect on the establishing of commitment and trust (Joshi et al., 2009). It is also argued that the virtual environment is unified with challenges in creating team cohesion, work satisfaction, and work commitment (Hoch & Kozlowski, 2014). When virtual teams interact through electronic communication solutions such as e-mail, phone calls, group chats, and video calls, they miss out on the richness of interactions compared to face-to-face interaction (Schaubroeck & Yu, 2017). In addition to these general challenges, global virtual team managers also have to manage cultural- and time-zone differences, which can harm coordination, limit face-to-face contact and increase the reliance on technological communication tools (Zander et al., 2012).

(8)

1.2 Problem

With the increasing number of virtual teams following the onset of Covid-19, there are ongoing public debates if virtual working is the new norm or if we are going back to the offices after the pandemic (Ahmadi, 2021; Lindsten, 2020). Before the pandemic working remotely was typically voluntary, and managers could evaluate which employees and work tasks that were suitable for virtual work (Wang et al., 2020). According to Iorio and Taylor (2015), managers with experience of traditional leadership do not necessarily have to be successful managers in virtual contexts. The existing literature argues that being an efficient and successful manager in virtual teams requires certain skills and characteristics that are not necessarily the same as for a co-located context. Besides challenging the managerial skills, the virtual context also imposes challenges regarding motivation. Motivation is identified as a major challenge in a virtual context because it is more difficult to create and sustain in relation to a co-located context. Additionally, a virtual work environment could also reduce motivation among employees.

Since the nature of virtual teams impose obstacles for motivation to flourish, it can be assumed that the topic “motivation in virtual teams” should already be widely researched. This is not the case, and therefore this important and timely topic deserves even more attention and further research. We have identified a lack of literature on how managers work in practice to motivate their employees. There is a need for literature on the topic since there is not the same to lead and motivate employees in a virtual context compared to co-located context. The existing literature discusses what traits, characteristics, and skills that are preferable for managers to possess when working virtually but leaves a gap in how managers could work practically to motivate team members in virtual environments.

1.3 Purpose

This study will investigate how managers work in virtual teams. The study aims to identify managerial practices that facilitate motivation among the team members. In contrast to current literature, which is mainly theoretical, our contribution aims to be more "hands-on" and explore what managers do more concretely to stimulate and increase motivation among the virtual team members. In this regard, our contribution is oriented towards providing practitioners with guidance to motivate their employees in a virtual context.

(9)

1.4 Research Question

How do managers motivate their employees in a virtual work environment compared to in a co-located setting?

1.5 Delimitations

To answer the research question and fulfill the study's purpose, we will conduct interviews with managers from an insurance company. This means that our collected data is based on a managerial point of view. By focusing on the managerial perspective, we are missing out on the employee perspective. Hence, we do not know how employees experience managerial practices. However, the managerial perspective might enable us to get explanations why certain actions have been employed and the reasoning behind them.

The study is based on primary data from managers within the same region. The delimitation means that we do not include managerial practices from different geographical areas, potentially providing more diverse findings. However, by focusing on only one region, we can conduct a more accurate and in-depth study on the chosen case.

Our case company is active within the Swedish banking and insurance industry which is a heavily regulated industry. Regulations will most likely influence how managers are working. Managers from other industries with fewer or other regulations are in different situations than the managers in our case, which means that their way of working to motivate their employees could differ. At the same time, the company is in an interesting position in their transition of working virtually since there are so many regulations that have to be followed.

(10)

2. Literature Review

With the aim to give you as a reader a better understanding of virtual teams and motivation, this chapter provides a literature review. The literature review is divided into four emerging themes: interactions, relationships, leadership, and motivation. These are the four main themes that have been identified as dominating in the previously published literature on the subject. Moreover, this chapter forms a base of the study, and the brought-up literature is later used in the analysis.

2.1 Interaction

This section is divided into three main categories that have been identified as significant for interactions within virtual teams. The three categories are; degree of virtuality, interaction structure, and challenges and benefits of virtual interactions.

2.1.1. Degree of virtuality

Within virtual teams, there is a difference between highly virtual teams and less virtual teams. Virtuality is characterized by distance, time spent on virtual communication, and how synchronized the information flow is. The degree of virtuality is of importance because it determines how the team members will interact (Schmidtke & Cummings, 2017). Compared to co-located teams, virtual teams are more difficult to lead and motivate due to geographical dispersion, communication challenges, and lack of face-to-face contact (Hoch & Kozlowski, 2014). According to Wang et al. (2020), the lack of face-to-face interaction becomes a challenge in virtual environments because members will feel lonelier and more isolated.

It is argued that when virtual teams interact mainly through technological solutions such as email, phone calls, group chats, and video calls, they miss out on the richness of face-to-face interaction, such as body language (Schaubroeck & Yu, 2017). Further, Breuer et al. (2016) add that the level of virtuality will impact both trust and team performance due to less interaction and fewer opportunities to socialize with other team members. Because virtual teams rely heavily on technological solutions for their interactions, they will also struggle with fostering inclusion and cohesiveness within the team, compared to co-located teams (Jimenez et al., 2017; Lauring & Jonasson, 2018).

(11)

For the communication to be efficient, Lauring and Jonasson (2018) argue that team members need to be open and inclusive to other members, which influences both communication and establishing a feeling of collectivism within the team. Internal communication is crucial for the team's performance, which refers to the ability to meet goals, as it allows team members to share knowledge through explaining or clarifying certain tasks or to communicate shared goals. To cope with non-physical communication issues, managers need to possess strong communication skills to lead teams efficiently (Zander et al., 2012).

2.1.2. Interaction structure

To facilitate virtual communication and interactions, both managers and team members need to possess knowledge about how to use the information and communication technology (Ford et al., 2017). To mitigate the effects of reduced face-to-face contact and other challenges related to virtual work, frequent and continuous communication is preferable (Gajendran & Joshi, 2011; Hoch & Kozlowski, 2014). Creating a climate that allows continuous interactions enables team members to contribute to decisions, while team members can exchange and express knowledge (Gajendran & Joshi, 2011). While frequent communication and knowledge sharing could be advantageous, team members should evaluate when to communicate and avoid interrupting co-workers since interruptions could decrease work- efficiency and performance (Dabbish & Kraut, 2008). Additionally, Hoch and Kozlowski (2014) highlight that managers should implement routines and structures to reduce uncertainty and ambiguity.

Virtual teams often lack feedback processes both on a team and individual level (Geister et al., 2006). However, feedback is an essential part of communication, and it can increase motivation and job satisfaction, improve team awareness, and lead to better performance and results (Geister et al., 2006; Maruping & Agarwal, 2004). Feedback can act as a platform to not only increase team performance, but also to build interpersonal trust (Bisbe & Sivabalan, 2017; Geister et al., 2006). Feedback is therefore not only crucial for the work tasks, but it also contributes to a sense of belonging in the team (Orsini & Rodrigues, 2020).

How teams are composed influences how the team interacts and communicates. Virtual teams that consist of a smaller number of members tend to communicate more frequently and informally. In contrast, virtual teams with many team members require more formal and structured communication (Algesheimer et al., 2011). The nature of the job has also been

(12)

identified to influence how teams interact. Work tasks that are dependent on each other require more coordination and communication compared to interdependent work tasks. The higher complexity of a work task, the higher need for interaction and coordination. Highly complex jobs that are non-interdependent are more challenging to conduct in highly virtual environments, mainly due to difficulties in communication (Handke et al., 2020).

2.1.3. Challenges and benefits of virtual interactions

For virtual teams to take advantage of knowledge within the team, team members need to both interact with each other and share knowledge (Alsharo et al., 2017). Communication and interaction are important for virtual teams as they can ease and enable coordination, collaboration, and establishing shared goals (Algesheimer et al., 2011). Therefore, sharing information could be essential to enable team members to complete work tasks (Wadsworth & Blanchard, 2015). To enable information- and knowledge sharing, team members need to interact and trust each other. Successful information and knowledge sharing can, in turn, facilitate trust and collaboration within the team (Alsharo et al., 2017).

Virtual interaction and communication within teams come with several challenges that can have a direct and indirect impact on the individual- and team-level performance and productivity (Bisbe & Sivabalan, 2017; Breuer et al., 2016; Daim et al., 2012; Jimenez et al., 2017; Schaubroeck & Yu, 2017; Wang et al., 2020). An identified challenge that often occurs regarding virtual interaction is a misunderstanding of information and communication. Misunderstandings have been shown to lower the team's efficiency due to collaboration and coordination issues (Breuer et al., 2016; Daim et al., 2012; Schaubroeck & Yu, 2017). Further, Daim et al. (2012) have identified that body language and tone of voice can be important factors to avoid misunderstandings. Further, written communication can also be used to reduce ambiguity and uncertainty (Wadsworth & Blanchard, 2015).

Fragmented communication, knowledge, and information is challenging for virtual teams (Bisbe & Sivabalan, 2017). Hence, some technologies can save shared information and knowledge online and make it available for team members (Daim et al., 2012). Sharing screen, where team members can show each other what they mean, is another tool that helps make the communication more precise and reduce ambiguity (Wadsworth & Blanchard, 2015).

(13)

Since Global Virtual Team (GVT) members might speak different native languages, the team interactions and knowledge sharing could be negatively affected due to language barriers. Language is, however, not the only factor that impacts the communication within GVTs. Team members that are working different hours may slow down the interactions and lead to asynchronous communication due to timezone challenges (Jimenez et al., 2017). In general, sharing information and knowledge virtually is perceived to be both time-consuming and demanding (Daim et al., 2012) and tends to be slower and less efficient compared to physical interactions at the office (Wang et al., 2020). Besides, slow- and asynchronous communication increase the risk of misunderstandings and loss of shared team identity (Schaubroeck & Yu, 2017).

2.2. Relationship

Another identified important factor for virtual teams, which is also correlated with interactions, is relationships. This section will present a review of previously published literature on relationships in a virtual work context. The review is divided into four categories: trust, shared identity, social support, and recognition.

2.2.1. Trust

Trust can be referred to as the glue that keeps the team together. While it has the ability to strengthen collaboration, it can also lower the risk of potential conflicts within the team (Ford et al., 2017). Additionally, Breuer et al. (2016) define trust as the willingness to adopt risk-taking behavior that makes it easier to coordinate tasks and collaborate among the virtual team members. Examples of risk-taking behavior are sharing sensitive information, asking for help, and sharing ideas and feedback (Breuer et al., 2016). Compared to co-located teams, virtual teams that lack face-to-face contact often struggle to establish trust (Bisbe & Sivabalan, 2017; Daim et al., 2012; Dulebohn & Hoch, 2017; Hoch & Kozlowski, 2014; Jimenez et al., 2017; Joshi et al., 2009; Zander et al., 2012).

Trust plays an essential role in successful team collaboration and coordination (Breuer et al., 2016; Daim et al., 2012; Ford et al., 2017). To strengthen the trust, managers could implement formal management control systems. In addition to trust, this could also contribute with advantages, such as better team awareness, coordination, and other synergetic effects that could

(14)

improve interpersonal trust, which positively influences motivational aspects (Bisbe & Sivabalan, 2017). Wang et al. (2020) argue that being monitored could have positive effects on procrastinated workers. On the other hand, monitoring could, in combination with a high workload, influence personal well-being negatively (Wang et al., 2020).

To what extent trust affects team performance has not reached a consensus. However, Alsharo et al. (2017) found that trust positively impacts collaboration, but there is no clear evidence that trust impacts the team's success. On the contrary, Breuer et al. (2016) argue that trust is more correlated with team performance when teams are virtual. The level of virtuality is considered relevant for the impact of trust on team performance. Why trust is even more critical in virtual contexts could be explained by that virtuality is unified with less interaction and opportunities to socialize.

2.2.2. Shared identity

Shared identity can compensate for the lack of togetherness caused by the physical dispersion in virtual team settings (Joshi et al., 2009). Virtual teams with a sense of collectivism form stronger team cohesion and team commitment, facilitating communication and, in extension, increasing the team's overall performance (Algesheimer et al., 2011). According to Gajendran and Joshi (2011), virtual team members' identity can be induced by managers communicating shared goals and beliefs. Establishing common beliefs, shared identity, and shared goals is essential for virtual teams since it can increase both commitment and trust between the team members. This can be achieved by nurturing socialized relationships between team members and managers (Joshi et al., 2009).

Team cohesion and commitment to the team facilitate motivation and confidence (Maruping & Agarwal, 2004). Virtual teams that collaborate efficiently achieve better performance (Alsharo et al., 2017; Guazzini et al., 2020). According to Algesheimer et al. (2011), teams that have been working together before will have a better understanding and knowledge about each other, and that previous experience of team members influences both trust and communication. Shared Mental Models (SMM) take time to develop, and once an SMM is established, team members can achieve communication without dealing with it explicitly (Rapp et al., 2010). It is also argued that members in teams characterized by temporal stability, which is defined as team history and the expectations of continued collaboration, get to know each other better than team

(15)

members in temporally unstable teams. They will establish shared mental models and invest more time in developing shared goals. As such, temporal stability is argued to be essential for virtual teams because it can increase the commitment to team obligations and lead to a shared identity to a more considerable extent (Schaubroeck & Yu, 2017).

2.2.3. Social support

Social support from managers and coworkers may mitigate the effects of loneliness, procrastination, and home interference, which is likely to result in better well-being and higher work performance (Massenberget al., 2015; Wang et al., 2020). Social support from both managers and team members can also be beneficial in terms of motivating team members and making them more prone to apply new skills and knowledge (Massenberg et al., 2015). A supportive and open climate facilitates group dynamics and bonding, which is an important aspect of creating group cohesiveness. Trustworthy relationships between team members and team leaders foster strong group cohesiveness, which is positive for group performance (Bartsch et al., 2020; Ford et al., 2017).

The feedback process is a driver that increases awareness of the other team members' situation and is found to result in better performance and to reinforce trust within the team. By engaging in regular feedback, the members will be exposed to more interaction, communication, and relationship-building, which increases the probability of developing trust. (Ayoko et al., 2012; Geister et al., 2006). The feedback process is not just important for better collaboration and to solve work tasks but also for team cohesion, as it contributes to a sense of belonging within the team. To utilize the feedback process's benefits, it is preferable to establish regular feedback processes, including both the team members and the team leader (Geister et al., 2006; Orsini & Rodrigues, 2020).

2.2.4. Recognition

Employees need to feel recognized and that others both see them as an individual and have a picture of their traits and characteristics. Working in virtual teams often leads to the feeling of being outside the team and anonymous. It can also lead to a loss of identity to a higher degree compared to co-located teams, which makes it even more important for virtual teams to create the sense of feeling recognized. In the light of the increase of virtual teams, Puranova (2013)

(16)

highlights the importance of feeling known since it has been identified as an important factor that influences the individual's motivation and job satisfaction, which indirectly impacts learning and trust. Team members and teams with previous experience working together have shown to communicate and trust each other more easily while they have a better understanding of each other (Algesheimer et al., 2011). When team members feel that the team understands their opinions and actions, trust, job satisfaction, and learning outcomes are more likely to increase (Puranova, 2013). Therefore, deeper relationships with understanding for each other can positively influence the motivation, communication, and collaboration in the team (Algesheimer et al., 2011; Puranova, 2013).

2.3. Leadership

After reviewing team dynamics in terms of interactions and relationships, it is important to look at leadership to be able to relate to the managerial perspective. This section presents preferable leadership traits and skills for a virtual context. Additionally, three common leadership styles in virtual team literature: shared leadership, empowering leadership, and transformational leadership, are presented.

2.3.1. Leadership traits and skills in virtual teams

Being a manager in virtual teams challenges traditional leadership skills, and traditional managers may need to re-think certain aspects of how to lead and the role of being a manager in a virtual context (Staples et al., 1999). Additionally, Iorio and Taylor (2015) argue that it is important to have good leadership since it can mitigate many of the challenges that virtual teams often face. Meanwhile, previous experience of traditional leadership is no guarantee for successful leadership in virtual teams. Instead, technological knowledge and experience are more preferable skills to possess as a virtual team manager (Iorio & Taylor, 2015). Having technological knowledge could help managers to match the teams' needs and provide the right technological solutions to ease the work for the team members (Dulebohn & Hoch, 2017; Ford et al., 2017; Maruping & Agarwal, 2004; Zander et al., 2012). All virtual teams are not the same. In fact, virtual teams are different and require different communication and information technologies (Maruping & Agarwal, 2004). While new advanced information and communication technologies have influenced leadership and managers within virtual teams,

(17)

employees are also affected and need training and guidance on how technology works (Avolio et al., 2014).

Having clear structures, guidelines and routines have been identified to positively affect virtual teams and their team members (Hoch & Kozlowski, 2014; Orsini & Rodrigues, 2020; Zander et al., 2012). Managers could contribute to structure by establishing limits and set goals and timeframes on work tasks and projects. According to Orsini and Rodrigues (2020), unstructured work tasks can influence both structured- and unstructured workers negatively while increasing the risk of stress. For instance, structured workers could undertake too much work, while unstructured workers could undertake too little work if there are poor or no guidelines or structures (Orsini & Rodrigues, 2020). Uncertainty and ambiguity are challenging virtual teams due to the lack of face-to-face contact. In this regard, structuring continuous communication into routines could mitigate those challenges (Hoch & Kozlowski, 2014). Further, continuous communication from the managers can increase workgroup identification and facilitate the establishment of shared goals and beliefs (Gajendran & Joshi, 2011). In addition, to be a good communicator, other beneficial skills and competencies that virtual managers should possess are; inspirational, motivational, supportive, and being good at establishing and maintain; trust, relationships and create a sense of collectivism within the team (Dulebohn & Hoch, 2017; Zander et al., 2012). However, the preferred and required competencies to become a successful virtual manager can differ depending on the context (Zander et al., 2012).

2.3.2. Shared leadership

Shared leadership is described as a collective leadership style where team members engage in leadership functions such as decision making, supporting and motivational efforts, and responsibility of outcome (Hoch & Dulebohn, 2017). According to Hoch and Kozlowski (2014), shared leadership can be perceived as an environment where team members support each other. They further argue that a supportive environment can facilitate motivation, team cohesion, trust and mitigate several challenges associated with a lack of face-to-face interactions. When implementing shared leadership, Nordbäck and Espinosa (2019) stress the importance of the right level of coordination and suggest that poorly coordinated shared leadership can lead to decreased team performance, while too much coordination also leads to missing out on the benefits of the leadership style. Furthermore, shared leadership must be applied correctly to be successful, referring to the centrality of the right level of coordination.

(18)

Successfully implemented shared leadership has the benefit of increasing motivation (Hoch & Kozlowski, 2014), creating team cohesion, foster trust and commitment, and improve communication and knowledge sharing. However, there can also be downsides (Nordbäck & Espinosa, 2019). Besides uncoordinated shared leadership, the literature also finds that differences in cultural background can have a negative effect on performance because of different perceptions of how leadership should be exercised (Nordbäck & Espinosa, 2019).

2.3.3. Empowering leadership

The empowering leadership style includes delegating areas of responsibility to share the power with the virtual team members. The leader will also engage in creating a supportive environment for the empowered team members to thrive in (Hill & Bartol, 2016). According to Zhang and Bartol (2010), empowering leadership will induce psychological empowerment, which increases intrinsic motivation and creativity engagement among employees. The findings of Hill and Bartol (2016) and Zhang and Bartol (2010) also support the positive relationship between empowering leadership with both intrinsic motivation and work engagement. Leaders should take advantage of psychological empowerment to influence employees’ attitudes and performance.

According to Rapp et al. (2010), empowering leadership becomes more powerful in virtual teams with experience of working together for a longer time, compared to virtual teams with less common history. Virtual teams with high levels of empowering leadership and situational judgment are more likely to use the right skills and methods to solve problems as a team (Hill & Bartol, 2016), suggesting that experience and high situational judgment/team awareness provide beneficial conditions for empowering leadership. Orsini and Rodrigues (2020) emphasize that work autonomy is important to keep virtual team members motivated to work and to achieve higher work autonomy, managers must be less controlling and more empowering.

2.3.4. Transformational leadership

The transformational leadership style refers to when a leader enables their followers to feel trust, loyalty, and motivation through a particular way of leading. This can be achieved when the leader uses their self-interest to inspire the team and when the inspiration aims at increasing

(19)

the team's consciousness about team outcome and achieving goals (Yukl, 2013). A transformational leader is often associated with having a strong set of beliefs and values and has the ability to use them to motivate followers (Northouse, 2018).

Studies have shown that transformational leadership can have positive effects on the performance of virtual teams (Dulebohn & Hoch, 2017; Iorio & Taylor, 2015; Zander et al., 2012). Leaders' engagement has been identified as important for the performance of the team. The transformational leadership style possesses certain characteristics which are preferable when establishing and maintaining engagement (Iorio & Taylor, 2015). One of the most critical roles of the leader in a virtual and geographically dispersed setting is establishing shared values and beliefs (Joshi et al., 2009). Inspirational leadership has, for that reason, become increasingly important for virtual teams due to the challenges that come with virtual working (Joshi et al., 2009). By establishing and maintaining social relationships with and between team members and convey inspirational messages, inspirational leaders facilitate team- cohesion, identity, and the establishment of common goals, which is a challenge of geographically dispersed work (Joshi et al., 2009; Lauring & Jonasson, 2018).

2.4. Motivation

In addition to interactions, relationships, and leadership, it is also essential to review motivation as the topic is central to this study. In this section, the reader will encounter central literature on motivation. The section will deal with intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation.

2.4.1. Intrinsic motivation

Intrinsic motivation is defined as when people are motivated to carry out a task without other incentives acting as motivating factors (Zhang & Bartol, 2010). Strong intrinsic motivation is often commonly found among successful people within different fields, and according to Amabile (1997), these people share the attribute of loving what they do. To explain important mediators of intrinsic motivation, Geister et al. (2006) identify four contributing components; team goals, sense of contributing with important work, sense of capability to fulfill assignments, and trust, and similar components are also identified by Zhang and Bartol (2010). In connection to these identified components, autonomy is seen as crucial for motivation, as it facilitates both self-efficacy and personal well-being (Orsini & Rodrigues, 2020).

(20)

The previously mentioned components can also be connected to psychological empowerment, which is defined as a state of mind that is linked to intrinsic motivation (Hill et al., 2014). Empowerment has been given significant attention in the motivation literature, and it is an important area because it increases engagement and motivation among team members and performance (Hill & Bartol, 2016; Hill et al., 2014; Zhang & Bartol, 2010). The dimensions of psychological empowerment are similar to prior mentioned components. The dimensions consist of meaning, competence, self-determination, and impact, and they all contribute to an increased sense of psychological empowerment (Zhang & Bartol, 2010).

2.4.2 Extrinsic Motivation

Extrinsic motivation refers to an individual's willingness and engagement to execute and perform tasks to avoid or gain material, social, or other external compensations/consequences (Clear & Kassabova, 2005; Gerhart & Fang, 2015; Orsini & Rodrigues, 2020). Extrinsic motivating factors such as monetary and or non-monetary incentives to achieve common goals and work tasks have been identified to have a positive relationship with performance.

Comparing individual- with collective rewards, evidence suggests that collective rewards are preferable (Handke et al., 2020). Depending on what sort of extrinsic motivation there is and how well it harmonizes with intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation can have positive influences on both creativity and intrinsic motivation. Self-determination theory views extrinsic motivation as positively related to performance in environments where employees are highly autonomous. The reason is that when employees are autonomous, they are typically intrinsically motivated to work towards achieving goals, and especially if they are expecting a reward for their efforts and knowledge (Gerhart & Fang, 2015). Further, Amabile (1997) agrees with this while highlighting the importance of the amount of extrinsic motivation since it can have negative effects on creativity. Therefore, it is paramount for managers to find the right balance between intrinsic- and extrinsic motivation. To combine the two motivation types successfully, Amabile (1997) identified the following determinants:

• The person's initial motivation state - A person with high intrinsic motivation levels is less likely to be creatively negatively affected by extrinsic motivation.

• What type of extrinsic motivation is used - Informational extrinsic motivators such as recognition and feedback are not necessarily negative for intrinsic motivation. Hence,

(21)

controlling extrinsic motivators is likely to have a negative impact on a person's intrinsic motivation.

• Timing of extrinsic motivation - The timing is important, as extrinsic motivators seem to be more important in later stages of creativity or novelty process, as extrinsic motivators in early stages can undermine creativity.

Prior literature has seen Pay-For-Performance (PFP) systems as harmful to motivation and the organization. However, the view has changed during recent years. Employees in the absence of extrinsic motivation in the form of PFP can feel unappreciated because their performances are not rewarded, and lack of extrinsic rewards can deteriorate intrinsic motivation. An important aspect of PFP and extrinsic motivation is that the reward must encourage creativity, not force creativity because that can have the opposite effect and make employees feel controlled (Gerhart & Fang, 2015).

(22)

3. Methodology and Method

This chapter contributes with presentations and discussions regarding employed research- philosophy, approach, and design. Additionally, the method part explains how the study was executed, while it explains why specific techniques and methods were applied. Lastly, ethical considerations are discussed.

3.1 Research Philosophy

Ontology refers to people's philosophical perceptions and assumptions about the world and reality. Ontology can be seen as the core of research philosophy, and researchers need to have a solid and clear ontological perspective as the foundation of their research (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018). We aim to examine how managers in a specified case study motivate their employees in a virtual environment. We assume that there can be many different practices that motivate employees in a virtual environment depending on contextual aspects. Our perceptions and assumptions are in line with the relativist ontology, which refers to that many truths and facts exist, and are dependent on the researcher's viewpoint (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018).

The relativistic approach differs from the realistic and internal realistic approach since they are more oriented towards finding one single truth. Additionally, the relativistic approach is also different from the nominalist approach, which argues that there are no truths (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018). Moreover, we will not formulate hypotheses or propositions and test if a statement holds as what can be expected from a more positivistic study. Instead, we aim to gain insights from different managers and explore different practices that can motivate employees. The findings will not be generalized or presented as facts that can be applied to all cases, and we will rather remain content-specific and relate to the contextual aspects of our case study. By disregarding generalizations and remaining context-specific, we aim to align our method with the relativist ontological position.

In research philosophy, we also want to define the epistemological position, which concerns how knowledge is created in physical and social terms. The epistemological position distinguishes how we know what we know, and in practice, different positions take shape in different perceptions of how we can create knowledge. The two main opposing positions in the study of epistemology are the positivist view and the social constructionist view. In social

(23)

constructionism, the truth is not externally determined. It is determined by people, interactions, interpretations, and contexts (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018).

As we immerse in the subject of how managers motivate their employees in a virtual environment, we consider that the findings will depend largely on the specific case study we conduct. It means that considerations are made regarding if we are using the viewpoint of managers, including employees' viewpoints, or looking at a different case in another industry. If we made any changes to the perspective from which we conduct our study, we would probably come across different findings. Our epistemological approach resonates with the social constructionist view, in which it is argued that knowledge is socially constructed. In opposite to the social constructionist approach, the positivistic approach would argue that the world is externally constructed. In our case study, it would mean that there can be motivating managerial practices that are applicable in all situations, regardless of the context (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018). This type of reasoning will not be used in this study as we believe that our findings are dependent on our specific case study.

The social constructionist view aims to increase general understanding or knowledge within the studied phenomena or area, which is in line with the aim of our research. Building on that the world is socially constructed, an important element is that people's different experiences are of interest because it allows the researchers to understand the dimensions of a complex phenomenon rather than searching for external causes and laws. This is mirrored in our research as we conduct a case study consisting of several different managers that operate in the same company. The case study approach allows the research to explore different perspectives of motivation in virtual teams and will essentially contribute to a nuanced understanding of how the different managers work to motivate employees in a virtual team environment.

To conclude, we argue that our choice of ontology and epistemology, relativism, and social constructionism is in line with how we have conducted the research and that it is argued to be both appropriate and suitable for the thesis.

(24)

3.2. Research approach

This study will be approached with abductive theory, which is a pragmatic theory that aims to gain an understanding of the underlying conditions to explain a particular observation (Bryman & Bell, 2015). Through this, we aim to obtain a deeper understanding of the structure in virtual environments and explain the phenomena of how managers work to motivate employees in virtual teams. This aim will be pursued by not only asking the question of “what” is happening but also addressing “how” and “why.” The abductive theory lies between theory and empirical data and uses both to reach plausible conclusions regarding the studied phenomena (Alvesson & Sköldberg, 2017). This means that our research approach will not be completely grounded in either theory or empirical data. Rather it aims to be an interplay between theory and empirical data during the research process. Therefore, our approach is different from a deduction, which is often used to confirm or deny hypotheses (Bryman & Bell, 2015) and different from induction, which is often used to generalize patterns found on a broader set of observations (Alvesson & Sköldberg, 2017). The abductive approach will allow us to modify our original theoretical framework during the ongoing study. This is due to unexpected empirical findings and new insights that we have obtained during the research process (Alvesson & Kärreman, 2007; Dubois & Gadde, 2002).

3.3. Research Design

In line with our relativistic and social constructionist philosophical approach, qualitative methods are used to seek increased understanding of a specific phenomenon. If we had conducted a quantitative study, where numerical data would be collected, it might not have provided us with elaborated answers regarding context and managerial practices employed. By conducting qualitative research, we seek to gain a deeper understanding of motivation in virtual teams from the perspective of managers. To obtain the necessary data, we aim to conduct interviews, with the aim to receive detailed explanations of the participants' experiences. In this regard, the choice of employing qualitative research is argued to be suitable for answering our research question.

There are multiple possible paths to pursue when conducting qualitative research. Based on the aim of the study, we have decided to use a case study design. Case studies intend to go in-depth and explore one or a small number of individuals, events, or organizations and are one of the

(25)

most well-known research designs in social science. There are two types of case studies, single- and multiple case studies (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018). We chose to employ a single case study, which is in line with our research philosophy, while the multiple case study often has positivistic influences. Our case has been to investigate management practices that motivate employees in a virtual environment by interviewing managers from an insurance company. By conducting interviews with virtual team managers from the same company, we were aiming to particularize rather than generalize. This means that instead of using a broader sample to draw generalizing conclusions, we are more interested in the setting of this particular company.

3.4. Data collection

3.4.1. Primary data

The interviews aimed to go in-depth and gain an understanding of the respondents' views and experiences. To achieve this, we found it important to be open regarding the question we ask and whether the respondents are allowed to elaborate. Since we wanted to gain an understanding of the respondent's world, elaborations were crucial. We decided to conduct semi-structured interviews, using questions related to the topic we want to gain insights in but remaining open and listening attentively to new inputs that could be used to ask follow-up questions. This is an important feature of semi-structured interviews, as the key is to ask questions purposefully while listening for potential hints that can be followed up on (Saunders et al., 2012). We found the probing questions beneficial in our objective to seek the contrast between leading a team physically compared to virtual. During the interview, we hovered around the semi-structured interview guide. When the respondents mentioned seemingly interesting changes between leading physical compared to virtual, we asked probing questions like: "As you mention that this is more difficult in a virtual environment, what are you doing practically to make it work?". These types of questions allowed us to gain elaborated answers, focusing on the contrast between managing physically compared to virtually, which is in line with the objective of our study.

When conducting the interviews, we chose to communicate with our respondents in Swedish. All the respondents had the ability to speak English, but they had Swedish as their mother tongue. The choice of conducting the interviews in Swedish is based upon that we seek elaborated and detailed answers. We wanted to avoid any language barriers that could make it

(26)

difficult for the respondents to answer and for us to receive elaborated and detailed information about their way of working. By reducing eventual barriers, we have attempted to acquire as elaborated and nuanced answers as possible, resulting in a higher quality of the data.

We decided to conduct our interviews digitally due to the ongoing pandemic and current governmental regulations and recommendations. Our interviews were conducted using Microsoft Teams. Using Teams enabled us to have video-meetings, which were as close to physical-meetings as we could come. The fact that Teams also allowed us to record the interviews was also a great advantage for the transcription phase. In addition to Teams, we also used our mobile phones to record this to ensure that the interviews were recorded if we would face any technical issues. The details of the interviews are displayed in Table 1.

3.4.1.1 Sampling strategy

To select respondents, we employed a non-probability sampling technique. Non-probability sampling refers to the likelihood of being sampled is unknown, and the population entities do not have the same odds of being selected to participate (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018). To evaluate which respondents that we would like to include in our research, we set up criteria that the respondents would have to fulfill. The use of criteria that decide if a population will be included in the sample or not refers to purposive sampling, which is a type of non-probability sampling design (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018). Using purposive sampling with criteria, we could ensure that our sample is relevant for the study and contribute to fulfilling the research purpose (Bryman, 2012). To make sure that our sample is relevant for our study, we set these two criteria:

● The respondent has been a manager in a co-located context. ● The respondent is now a manager in a virtual context.

We contacted the HR-manager by e-mail and asked if they were willing to participate and gave further information about our research. We received an acceptance of participation and a list of managers who fulfilled our criteria. The list consisted of twelve names of managers and their contact details. Further, we reached out to each of these managers with a brief explanation of the study and a request for participation. Ten out of twelve managers accepted our request; this

(27)

acceptance was followed-up by an ongoing discussion where we set a date and time for the virtual interview.

3.4.2. Secondary data

To build our literature framework, we have mainly collected previously published academic articles. Using data and information from other previous works refers to secondary data (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018).

All secondary data was retrieved using the search engine Web of science. We used this search engine because it allowed us to make advanced searches from a broad selection of published articles within different academic fields. When searching for secondary data for the literature review, we limited our possible data to academic articles that had been published in journals. It was important to use published journals to ensure the quality of the article since they have been peer-reviewed. The peer-review process is seen as an indicator of quality, and it means that the article has been reviewed and criticized by several fellow academic experts. We did not limit our selection of data solely based on where it was published, and we also paid attention to the impact factor of the journal. We decided not to use journals with an impact factor below 2, with some exceptions if the article seemed highly relevant for our literature review. The reason why we considered the impact factor is because it indicates how well-cited the journal is. It can be useful because we wanted to conduct a literature review of the most prominent studies within the chosen topic. Finding relevant sources was facilitated by sorting the articles based on if they have been published if the journal was of high quality, and by filtering on the most cited articles to find the more prominent studies.

To find relevant information about our topic, motivation in virtual teams, we selected certain key-words in advance. Some of these key-words remained the same while others got changed and adjusted, and we also added new key-words. We made changes during the collection of secondary data because we gained new insights and knowledge about the topic. It allowed us to make sure that we would find suitable and relevant data and information for our literature framework. Our most common searches were; "Virtual team*" AND "Motivat*", "Virtual team*" AND "Leadership", "Manage*" AND "Virtual team*", "Virtual team*" AND "Covid*", "Working remotely" AND "Motivat*", "Motivat*" AND "Work environment", "Work*" AND "Remote*" AND "Motivat*", "Job satisfaction" AND "Virtual team*", and "Motivation" AND

(28)

"Manag*" AND "Virtual". By using quotation marks and the Boolean operator “AND”, we could decide that all of the words in the quotation marks would have to be included in the findings of the searches. The use of asterisk, so called “wildcards”, allowed us a broader result since it allows different endings of the word/words. To narrow down our results, we refined our searches by selecting years of publication, category, and type of document. Using these keywords, search phrases, and redefinitions, we could identify what literature knew about management and motivation in virtual teams. We kept on collecting secondary data until we felt that we reached theoretical saturation and identified a gap of knowledge in the literature that we decided that we would like to fill.

3.4.3. Case

In consultation with the company, we have decided not to reveal the company name nor any detailed information, which can be linked to the company. For that reason, we will refer to the company as “the company.” The company is Swedish and is active within the bank and insurance industry. With several smaller offices and a head office, they normally conduct their businesses co-located, where more or less all employees are working at the offices, physically present. Hence, due to the ongoing pandemic and governmental recommendations and regulations, the company has been forced to change to work virtually. Due to regulations within the industry that they are active within. All departments have not been able to work fully virtual, and different departments have conducted their work in different virtuality levels.

3.4.4. Data analysis

The first step of preparing the data for analysis is the transcription. We have transcribed all interviews to be able to re-read the interviews in text form. Transcribing the interviews have been necessary to be able to organize the data. The transcriptions were made by listening to audio recordings from the interviews and writing what was said in a document. The transcriptions were divided equally between the researchers since the step did not require any discussions between the researchers. Categorizing data will allow you to organize meaningful data into units that can be analyzed. The process provides structure for further coding and analyzing (Saunders et al., 2014). After the transcription the coding process was initiated. This is the part where the interviews are reduced in several steps to achieve quotes organized in coherent themes. We started by reading all transcripts individually and commenting quotes that

(29)

were related to the studys’ objective. The reason why the initial coding was made individually was to make sure that we stayed open minded regarding what quotes we included and how we named them. The aim was to create descriptive and nuanced codes to increase the chance of reducing them to the right categories.

After the first round of coding, we ended up with different codes that described what was said in the quote. We removed duplicates and ended up with 77 codes. The codes are displayed in the first column of Table 2. The next step involved categorizing the codes in possible categories with temporary headlines. This step of the process was done together since it involved discussing the meaning of the quotes and the codes. After discussing and sharing inputs we categorized the 77 codes into 11 categories. Looking at Table 2, you can see for instance that the four codes: Lower virtuality, Reduced virtuality, Isolation, and Technical issues were categorized as degree of virtuality. In the last step of the coding our categories were put together in themes with suitable headlines for the categories. This step of the coding process was done together as it also required discussions regarding the content of each category. The 11 categories were reduced to 4 themes which together resembles the 4 main headlines for the Findings chapter. The 4 themes we ended up with are displayed in Table 2, they are Virtuality, Communication, Meetings, and Leading a virtual team.

With the codes as a point of departure, we systematically searched for relevant intersections between theory and empirical findings. The relevance of a code was determined based on if it was either mentioned in theory or linked to the research question. The method we have employed for the data analysis is the content analysis method, which is described as a method where the aim is to systematically search for reasonings from qualitative data that has been structured by concepts or set of beliefs (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018). Keeping in mind that we use an abductive approach, the codes have not been pre-determined, as they have instead been defined with regard to both literature and empirical data. In content analysis, the codes or themes can either be defined based on existing literature or the research question, but they can also be refined during the data analysis (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018). Remaining open and let codes emerge and be refined as we collected and analyzed the data allowed us to focus on the findings of the collected primary data, which was central as the study aims to discover managerial practices within the selected case. The managerial practices were later analyzed with the literature framework, and reasonings were drawn from discovered managerial practices patterns or contextualized using the literature.

(30)

3.4.5. Ethical consideration

To ensure that our research has been executed in an ethical manner, we have based our actions upon the ethical principles presented by Bryman and Bell (2007; Appendix 2).

Following these applied ethical principles participation in our study is fully optional, and no respondent should feel compelled to participate. We sent out invitations over email to ensure this was clearly stated that it was voluntary. In addition to informing the respondents that it is optional to participate, we also provided them with the context and the purpose of the study. Importantly, in this phase, we had to communicate clearly and in detail to avoid providing information that could be misleading, false, or subject to misinterpretation. We also gave the respondents time to think before coming back to us with their decisions. Acceptance to participate required written consent, which is in line with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Even if we had consent from the participants to participate, we had clearly communicated that it could be withdrawn at any time and the respondents were allowed to abstain from answering questions if they felt uncomfortable. Taking these actions has resulted in that the participants did not feel forced to participate, and they had knowledge about what their responses would be used to, which indicates transparency between us as researchers and the respondents.

There are several risks involved when conducting interviews to collect data. We have a responsibility as researchers to ensure we and no one else access the participants' responses and use it only for the study's communicated purpose. By taking this responsibility, we are protecting the confidentiality of the collected data. Another problem that could occur is regarding anonymity since some answers could be directly linked to the individual respondent. To ensure that the participants will remain anonymous, we have given the respondents names such as Respondent 1, Respondent 2, etc. In addition to this, we have chosen not to reveal any information about gender, age, department, etc. These actions do not decrease the study's quality, while they enable anonymity and protect the respondents from potential harm due to the study's participation.

In our findings section, we present some of the collected data in the form of quotes. However, we have handled all collected data with secrecy from the collection phase until we deleted it. The respondent first approved the data we used in the findings section before we presented it.

(31)

When the study was finalized, we deleted all recordings and transcriptions that we had saved on an external hard drive. By taking these actions, we have ensured protection of the privacy of the individual respondent. To address the privacy issue one step further, we also avoided asking personal and other types of questions that could cause discomfort and just ask questions related to the study. By asking questions that do not make the respondents feel uncomfortable, we also lowered the risk of receiving untruthful and invalid answers.

To ensure trustworthiness of our research, and at the same time respecting our respondents, we have taken actions to avoid any sort of deceptive, false, and misunderstood data makes it to the findings section. To avoid answers taken out of context, we have recorded all the interviews and transcribed them. When the study was finalized, we also sent our respondents a copy. This ensures that the respondents know how their answers have been used and interpreted. This kind of transparency is beneficial for the respondents and us as researchers since we can remain objective and not twist or color data due to our pre-knowledge about the research area.

(32)

4. Findings

In this chapter, the primary data which have been collected through ten interviews with managers is presented as findings. The findings consist of quotes from the managers and explanations to provide context. Furthermore, this chapter is divided into four themes: virtuality, meetings, communication, and leading virtual teams, and these themes emerged from the coding.

4.1. Virtuality

4.1.1. Degree of virtuality

All our respondents have had to change how they are working. Previously, all respondents' employees had been located at the same place, the office. Due to the pandemic and the following governmental restrictions and regulations, they have been forced to work physically dispersed. The respondents have transitioned to work virtually; hence the level of virtuality varies between the respondents and their departments. The majority of the managers are not working fully virtually, where all employees are located at different locations. Two out of ten respondents have all their employees working from different locations, which makes them fully virtual. While the rest of the respondents have had parts of their employees working from different locations and parts from the office, this way of working is virtually but a lower degree of virtuality.

The managers' choice of degree of virtuality is mainly based on their teams' work tasks. Some work tasks cannot be executed from home. There are also technical functions that cannot be used from other locations due to technical issues. Technical issues are not the only challenges to why all technical tools and functions cannot be used outside the office. The Swedish insurance and bank industry is heavily regulated, and some regulations limit what technological functions can be used outside the office due to security issues.

Respondent 8: "My team handles working virtually very well, we do not have to be

available to customers, so I sent them home in November and they have been home since then more or less."

(33)

Respondent 9: "We have divided the team into two smaller groups that take turns to be

at the office. If it has been certain circumstances or if someone has had Covid symptoms then we have made some changes, but standard is shifting every week."

4.1.2. Division of team members

When not working fully virtually, the managers have been forced to decide who will be located at the office and who will be working from a different location. There is no golden rule for how the managers have made this division, and it has differed widely. Some managers have in accordance to empowering leadership empowered their employees to decide by themselves where they want to work from, while others have made schedules that say who will work from where. Even though several managers use schedules, the schedules have been structured differently. Several schedules have been structured to make the team members shift location after a certain time, which will ensure that all will be working both at the office and dispersed. One manager has taken the rotation one step further: Instead of just rotating what place the group is located, this manager has also made a schedule of rotation of group members.

By rotating group members, this manager ensures that all team members will meet while at the office. While some schedules involve rotations, some managers have applied schedules with set locations where the team members work from the same location. However, even if there are schedules with the team's divisions, there is a strong majority of the managers who listen to the individual employee and take his or her opinion into account. Most managers have had discussions with employees and have adapted the schedule after the individual employees' needs and wishes. This has resulted in some employees being located only at the office or remote, and that person has not been affected by the schedule.

Respondent 1:"We have had a schedule where you work from home for two weeks and

then come back to the office, and it might have eased the feeling of being isolated. But we have had two team members that have decided to work from home the whole time and that has been approved by me."

Respondent 9: "We have rotated so all members get to work with each other. Otherwise,

Getting tired of working from home? : A case study of management practices to motivate employees in a virtual environment