Having remote workers requires a very different operation style and a lot of trust in yourself as a manager, trust in your workers, and trust in the technology you're leveraging to communicate. Can you as the manager lead from afar -- its harder than you might think. You can trust workers to actually work, you can just let them go for not doing so. But it's harder to trust your remote workers to engage with the company and their peers digitally. It's not easy. Also, the technology may be a pain to use, and kill any good intentions or habits you may have started.
The similar problem with remote is that the manager and their team must consciously prevent the "silence" the author alluded too. Likely, the silence was not intentional. People get distracted in "realspace" and easily can neglect remote worker. In order to have a remote team be viable, you have to overcome this barrier. That's where the trust/competence of all parties comes into play.
There are other problems with remote workers. You can't have a face-to-face conversation. A remote worker can't go into a coworkers office and help track down a tricky bug. These issues can be alleviated to some extent by email, phones, and video-conferencing, but those things require a fair amount of work to set up and still aren't the same as having the person in the office.
The similar problem with remote is that the manager and their team must consciously prevent the "silence" the author alluded too. Likely, the silence was not intentional. People get distracted in "realspace" and easily can neglect remote worker. In order to have a remote team be viable, you have to overcome this barrier. That's where the trust/competence of all parties comes into play.