Interesting article with some ideas I'll try to push at my company, but I think the title is a bit misleading and could potentially cause people who follow much of what is good advice to end up with big problems.
My problem is with the word "I manage 40 people remotely". Almost no one can manage 40 people themselves, probably no one can do it well. It sounds instead that you "run a company of 40 people remotely through managing seven people remotely". I got seven from the department heads meeting you described.)
Of those seven people you directly manage, how many of them are in the same location of their direct reports? It sounds like you have an office manager in Orlando who manages a good sized group of people. What percentage of your employee's work in that office. Because if its a high percentage, then a large part of your true solution on how to manage 40 people remotely is to hire someone who manages them locally.
That's the way I think it could be read and that distracts greatly from the other interesting tools and processes you discussed.
My problem is with the word "I manage 40 people remotely". Almost no one can manage 40 people themselves, probably no one can do it well. It sounds instead that you "run a company of 40 people remotely through managing seven people remotely". I got seven from the department heads meeting you described.)
Of those seven people you directly manage, how many of them are in the same location of their direct reports? It sounds like you have an office manager in Orlando who manages a good sized group of people. What percentage of your employee's work in that office. Because if its a high percentage, then a large part of your true solution on how to manage 40 people remotely is to hire someone who manages them locally.
That's the way I think it could be read and that distracts greatly from the other interesting tools and processes you discussed.