Remote Work, Impression Management, and the Leadership Pipeline

Introduction

Remote work has become a staple in many organizations, particularly in the wake of COVID-19 lockdowns, which introduced remote work on a large scale. As businesses adapt to this new mode of operation — preferred by many workers — there are significant implications for leadership development and the leadership pipeline. One critical aspect that has not been thoroughly explored is how impression management, the process by which individuals attempt to control the perceptions others have of them, plays out in a remote work environment (Franken et al., 2021; Pianese et al., 2023). This research intends to bridge the gap between theory and practice by examining the interplay between remote work, leadership development, and impression management.

The two central research questions guiding this study are: (1) How does remote work influence impression management strategies among emerging leaders? (2) What are the implications of these strategies for the leadership pipeline in organizations?

Theoretical Framework: Impression Management in Remote Work

Impression management is rooted in sociology and psychology. It is the process by which people attempt to influence the perceptions others have of them — either to present themselves in a favorable light or to shield themselves from negative judgments. Sociologist Erving Goffman developed the concept of impression management in his seminal work, The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life (1949). Goffman likened impression management to a theatrical performance in which individuals play roles, make use of props, and perform in a manner expected of them by their audience. The concept also has roots in symbolic interactionism, a theoretical perspective that emphasizes the subjective meanings and symbolic interactions people have with one another (Whelan, 2021).

Several key concepts and mechanisms must be explained as they relate to impression management theory before moving forward. These provide a deeper understanding of how the theory is applied. They include frontstage and backstage action, positive and negative impression management, and defensive and assertive impression management (Ghasempour et al., 2023).

Goffman (1949) introduced the idea that in social interactions there is a "frontstage" where individuals perform and a "backstage" where they prepare for their performance. In a professional setting, for example, a meeting might be the frontstage while the preparation that goes into that meeting constitutes the backstage (Pelzer, 2021).

Most impression management strategies are designed to create a positive impression (Jackson & Lilleker, 2020). Typical examples include punctuality in virtual meetings, sharing achievements, and active participation in team meetings. However, there are times when people might engage in behaviors intended to create a negative impression if doing so serves a purpose — for instance, playing the "bad cop," lowering expectations in order to exceed them later, or distancing oneself from failure by highlighting earlier reservations or a lack of personal involvement.

Defensive strategies are used to protect one's self-image (Myers et al., 2021). Examples include justifying actions, avoiding controversial topics, and downplaying mistakes. Assertive strategies are proactive measures taken to enhance one's image, such as taking initiative, publicly assisting colleagues, and seeking feedback (Myers et al., 2021).

It is also helpful to understand impression management in relation to several influential theoretical frameworks: self-monitoring theory, self-verification theory, and social identity theory.

Developed by Mark Snyder in the 1970s, self-monitoring theory posits that people vary in their ability to regulate their behavior to fit social situations (Snyder, 2022). High self-monitors are adept at reading social cues and adjusting their behavior accordingly, making them skilled at impression management.

Impression management focuses on influencing how others see us, while self-verification theory — proposed by William Swann — emphasizes the need for individuals to seek confirmation of their self-concept (Swann, 2022). In some cases, this means that individuals prefer feedback that aligns with their self-view, even when that feedback is negative. One of the primary reasons people engage in impression management is to maintain a consistent image in the eyes of others (Sun & Zhang, 2021). This consistency relates to how others perceive them and to ensuring that external perception aligns with their internal self-concept. Thus, self-verification theory intersects with impression management: people seek external feedback that matches their internal self-view in order to maintain a sense of coherence in social interactions (Sun & Zhang, 2021).

Proposed by Henri Tajfel and John Turner, social identity theory suggests that people classify themselves and others into social categories such as in-group and out-group (Saeed et al., 2023). Based on this idea, impression management can be influenced by one's desire to fit into a particular group or to differentiate oneself from another.

Key processes in impression management include tactic selection, audience segregation, and the cultivation of authenticity. Depending on the situation and the desired outcome, people choose specific tactics (Xie et al., 2019). For example, one might use flattery to gain favor or self-deprecation to appear humble. Audience segregation refers to playing to one's audience: just as an actor might play different roles in different productions, individuals present different versions of themselves to different audiences (Xie et al., 2019). A person might maintain one persona for colleagues and another for friends. Finally, while impression management involves a degree of performance, that performance must remain consistent and authentic to be believable. Inconsistencies can lead to a loss of credibility, and a performance that feels inauthentic is easily detected by discerning audiences (Xie et al., 2019).

Traditional Office Settings vs. Remote Work Context

Setting also shapes how impression management is conducted. In traditional office environments, the stage for this performance consists of tangible objects. Props include attire, office décor, lighting, and even vocabulary choices during meetings. The audience typically comprises co-workers, subordinates, and superiors who are physically present.

In a physical office, attire often acts as a non-verbal cue. A well-dressed individual may be perceived as meticulous and serious — a direct, visual form of impression management that influences the audience without the audience necessarily realizing it.

Small talk is another dimension of impression management in traditional office settings (Bleakley et al., 2022). Casual conversations by the water cooler or in the elevator may appear to be purely social, but they are actually opportunities to subtly convey personal values, work ethics, or organizational loyalty. Showcasing achievements is another facet, ranging from overt presentations to subtler gestures such as strategically placing an award on one's desk.

In a remote work context, the stage becomes virtual, the props intangible, and the audience intermittent. This shift requires a reevaluation of how impression management is conducted. In place of physical attire, the focus shifts to digital presentation: the clarity of one's video feed, the professionalism of virtual backgrounds, and the quality of written communication in emails or chats. These elements collectively constitute a kind of "digital attire" that functions as a new dress code.

Small talk similarly transforms into proactive engagement in virtual meetings (Bleakley et al., 2022). Being among the first to speak up in a virtual meeting, sending follow-up emails, or maintaining an active online status all contribute to impression management in the virtual setting. In the absence of a physical desk on which to display awards, people may share achievements on professional networks such as LinkedIn or in team chats and virtual meetings.

Conclusion

The rise of remote work has undeniably reshaped the professional landscape. As this mode of work becomes increasingly prevalent, understanding the new dynamics of impression management becomes not just beneficial, but essential for organizations. By addressing these challenges and integrating the recommendations outlined above into their leadership development strategies, businesses can better ensure that their leadership pipeline remains robust and reflective of authentic potential.

References

Bleakley, A., Rough, D., Edwards, J., Doyle, P., Dumbleton, O., Clark, L., ... & Cowan, B. R. (2022). Bridging social distance during social distancing: Exploring social talk and remote collegiality in video conferencing. Human–Computer Interaction, 37(5), 404–432.

Franken, E., Bentley, T., Shafaei, A., Farr-Wharton, B., Onnis, L. A., & Omari, M. (2021). Forced flexibility and remote working: Opportunities and challenges in the new normal. Journal of Management & Organization, 27(6), 1131–1149.

Ghasempour, M., Ghahramanian, A., Zamanzadeh, V., Valizadeh, L., Killam, L. A., Asghari-Jafarabadi, M., & Purabdollah, M. (2023). Identifying self-presentation components among nursing students with unsafe clinical practice: A qualitative study. BMC Medical Education, 23(1), 524.

Goffman, E. (1949). Presentation of self in everyday life. American Journal of Sociology, 55, 6–7.

Jackson, N., & Lilleker, D. (2020). Microblogging, constituency service and impression management: UK MPs and the use of Twitter. In The Impact of Legislatures (pp. 414–433). Routledge.

Lochmiller, C. R. (2021). Conducting thematic analysis with qualitative data. The Qualitative Report, 26(6), 2029–2044.

Moon, M. D. (2019). Triangulation: A method to increase validity, reliability, and legitimation in clinical research. Journal of Emergency Nursing, 45(1), 103–105.

Myers, V., Price, J. P., Roulin, N., Duval, A., & Sobhani, S. (2021). Job seekers' impression management on Facebook: Scale development, antecedents, and outcomes. Personnel Assessment and Decisions, 7(1), 10.

Pianese, T., Errichiello, L., & da Cunha, J. V. (2023). Organizational control in the context of remote working: A synthesis of empirical findings and a research agenda. European Management Review, 20(2), 326–345.

Rose, J., & Johnson, C. W. (2020). Contextualizing reliability and validity in qualitative research: Toward more rigorous and trustworthy qualitative social science in leisure research. Journal of Leisure Research, 51(4), 432–451.

Ruslin, R., Mashuri, S., Rasak, M. S. A., Alhabsyi, F., & Syam, H. (2022). Semi-structured interview: A methodological reflection on the development of a qualitative research instrument in educational studies. IOSR Journal of Research & Method in Education, 12(1), 22–29.

Saeed, A., et al. (2023). [Social identity theory reference as cited in source].

Snyder, M. (2022). Social psychology and me. In Pillars of Social Psychology: Stories and Retrospectives (p. 220).

Sun, L., & Zhang, Y. (2021, June). Self-verification: Application in organizational management. In 2021 International Conference on Enterprise Management and Economic Development (ICEMED 2021) (pp. 55–64). Atlantis Press.

Swann, W. B., Jr. (2022). The power of firmly held beliefs. In Pillars of Social Psychology: Stories and Retrospectives (p. 333).

Whelan, J. (2021). Specters of Goffman: Impression management in the Irish welfare space. Journal of Applied Social Science, 15(1), 47–65.

Xie, J., Huang, Q., Wang, H., & Shen, M. (2019). Coping with negative workplace gossip: The joint roles of self-monitoring and impression management tactics. Personality and Individual Differences, 151, 109482.