This is more than just what makes a good remote vs. in-person leader. It’s also about who we as society traditionally recognize as leaders and who is given the opportunities. 1/ https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20200827-why-in-person-leaders-may-not-be-the-best-virtual-ones

They identify two camps: talkers and doers. We give too much credit to charm and charisma which benefits the talkers. “Dynamic voices” are given more weight than people who “help other team members with tasks, and keep the team on schedule and focused on goals.” 2/

Doers often go unnoticed and are making the talkers look good. 3/

Based on who's usually in executive or leadership roles, talkers are more likely to be men, extroverted and representing dominant-culture traits, while many women, BIPOC and introverted employees are often working hard behind the scenes without recognition. 4/

So this article to me, although it isn’t speaking to it directly, is about our broader definitions of leadership. What’s come to light in the pandemic is who is actually getting things done but wasn’t getting credit before. 5/

Hopefully this will all change in light of our new reality! Let’s revise our notion of what (or more importantly who) a leader is. 6/