Introduction
When the coronavirus hit, it posed a threat to companies which led to them changing daily operations, norms, practices, and cultures to accommodate the new jolt. It was a test of how many organizational cultures could withstand a pandemic. Many were closed down as others were left in a damage control situation. Some companies have very brittle organizational cultures, which cannot withstand the blows or the process of cultural change. Organizational culture and the organizational system took a complete turn due to the strike of COVID-19, as the management made changes to maintain their standards in that harsh situation.
Discussion
Organizational researchers, however, saw the strike of COVID-19 as an opportunity to study the transformation of organizational cultures. They mainly researched how companies were prepared to cope with the sudden pressure change in the field (Parkes et al., 2021). Organizations are either suffering the blow of not being able to adapt to the new norm fast or vice versa. Every organization had to change, modify, or improve organizational systems, cultures, and structures to suit the circumstances of what was happening in the world.
The consequences follow the transformation of the physical working culture to a completely virtual operation within a brief period. After it was established that public spaces made people susceptible to the virus, people were discouraged from going out. They were advised to minimize physical contact and maintain social distance (Machaczka & Stopa, 2022). People could not go to school, board a bus to work, or even attend church. Since work operations could not be brought to a standstill, the organizations created virtual workspaces. People could work from the comfort of their own homes. Even though the efficiency of the workflow was debatable, they were left with no choice.
Organizational operations in organizations took a different turn. The usual routine of workers in the office is popularly known as the nine-to-five (Alam, 2020). Since everything was done virtually with workers in the comfort of their own homes, virtual meetings would take one or two hours. The employees used the rest of the days to finish their assignments. In the office, there was close supervision of this work. The managers could only see the reports, not the work processes.
Employee performance dropped due to the COVID-19 strike. At first, they had no idea what was expected of them. They had doubts about how work was issued, whether it was balanced, and if it was equal (Spicer, 2020). The employees had to access each other’s work which led to duplication of work. Evidently, during the earlier days of this transformation, it was hard for everyone in the organization since they were adapting to the new environment. Supervision of work was very difficult for supervisors (Spicer, 2020). Employees could not get immediate feedback about their jobs and assignments, which demoralized them. Moreover, some employees found it hard to work effectively in their homes due to many distractions, power outages, and lack of internet connection for virtual meetings. It was hard for organizations that were used to physical operations, not virtual.
The regular organizational system could not be used to monitor and supervise employee progress. Many were able to establish ways to do that, but there were no appropriate protocols that were able to be found in various organizations (Brown et al., 2021). Supervisors arranged programs such as Microsoft Team and Zoom. Despite the efforts, there were doubts about the employees’ efficiency. No organizational systems would be employed to track the performance of the workers. They were forced to trust the integrity of the workers that they would be able to deliver. It differs from when the employees were confined within a physical boundary (Brown et al., 2021). Communication was efficient; employees effectively expressed their views, questions, suggestions, and needs.
Due to the strike of COVID-19, the organizations downplayed some organizational cultures while encouraging others. Some elements of the employees’ cultures were left out, which was unchangeable (Kansal, 2021). COVID-19 paralyzed physical customer orientation, collaboration, details orientation, and confrontation. The employees were encouraged to promote individualism, flexibility, and individual work to reach the target. However, it encouraged the competitive nature of the employees in the organization. Since they were working at an individual level with no direct consultancy, it encouraged them to work hard to provide high-quality work. This contributed to the organization’s productivity, as employees had to submit their results on time.
In a social sense, employees grew apart and focused on performance by themselves without considering the assistance of others. The employees’ unity faded as everyone turned to prove their work efficiency when working alone (Howard-Grenville, 2020). It was not easy to get employees together when there was an issue. Decision-making would take a long time due to much virtual consultancy. It was based on the fact that the levels of management in the organizational structure would wait till all were online to discuss issues. In addition, planning virtual meetings was hard and consumed much time. If they were in the office, it would be easier for consultancy and a physical meeting since all of them were present.
Due to the work-from-home routine, specific areas did not require workers. For example, the kitchen staff lost their jobs since there was no one in the office to serve meals. Due to low productivity, there led to low profit margins, which forced the organization to cut employees’ salaries (Drayton & Kuster, 2022). Many even terminated the contracts of temporary employees. It was the organization’s effort to cut the liabilities during that tragic system. However, in the demographics, some people, the majority being women, thought working from home was a good idea. It is because they could get time to work on things other than when they were at the office. Many set up side hustles, such as businesses and enterprises. Others had family duties that they had plenty of time to take care of.
Although working from home was the best way organizations took to cope with COVID-19, it had adverse effects. Many people lost their jobs. For example, the kitchen staff had to drop work since there were no people in the office for meals. The reduced productivity caused a low profit margin, which was insufficient to run the organization (Ahmad, 2022). Therefore, many employees, whether permanent or temporary in the payroll, were cut off. The organization cut the salaries of those who remained. Many of them quit because they were getting nothing from the effort they had made.
As governments eased lockdown restrictions, the possibility of physically returning to work under new safety safeguards grew. Many organizations reported that employees were hesitant to return to work due to the fear of driving to work and the newly discovered convenience and relative safety of working from home. Many also had gotten used to working without supervision, raising their fear of performance upon returning to work. The employees had gotten used to working online and had fully assimilated it (Raghavan et al., 2021). It led to the organizations reevaluating the departments that did not need the employee’s physical presence at work. However much the employees wanted to stay virtual, the organizational system was on the verge of collapse, and they required everyone at work.
Despite the negative economic consequences of this cultural shift, many organizations are now debating whether it is necessary to construct expensive, spacious corporate headquarters because most employees prefer working from home. Whether the organization chooses to keep and repurpose the office or downsize the space for occasional staff use, this significant transition must be managed carefully from a technical and employee impact standpoint (Ahmad, 2022). It means that COVID-19 led organizations to reevaluate their physical space, with others planning to sell the spacious and the luxurious to buy the smaller, in-budget premises.
Conclusion
The strike of COVID-19 was a blow that forced all organizations to change to adapt to it. They could determine whether their culture is strong enough to withstand some changes or if they needed to make significant changes that left the employees out of place. COVID-19 left the organizations recovering from the unexpected epidemic but still in a safe position to take the necessary matters just in case another epidemic happened. Companies are now looking forward to equipping their employees with skills, mindsets, behaviors, values, and physical resources to recover from the COVID-19 epidemic and prepare for any other crisis.
References
Ahmad, R. (2022). The influence of technologies on the workplace, employees, and organizational culture in the post-COVID-19 era. Sociol Int J, 6(3), 110-112.
Alam, M. (2020). Organizational processes and COVID-19 pandemic: Implications for job design. Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change, 16(4), 599–606. Web.
Brown, N. D., Chen, Y., Harrington, H., Vicinanza, P., Chatman, J. A., Goldberg, A., & Srivastava, S. (2021). How have organizational cultures shifted during the COVID-19 pandemic? California Management Review. Web.
Drayton, M., & Kuster, M. (2022). Healthy organizations post COVID 19 need a sense of coherence. Occupational Medicine, 72(2), 109-109. Web.
Howard-Grenville, J. (2020). How to sustain your organization’s culture when everyone is remote. MIT Sloan Management Review, 62(1), 1-4. Web.
Kansal, M. (2021). The impact of COVID-19 on organizational culture and employee engagement: an exploratory research on information technology (IT) professionals in Delhi/NCR (India). Journal of Xi’an University of Architecture and Technology, 68-77. Web.
Machaczka, K., & Stopa, M. (2022). The influence of remote work in particular during the COVID-19 pandemic on changes in human behaviour patterns within organizations. International Entrepreneurship Review, 8(2), 67-78
Parkes, T., Carver, H., Masterton, W., Falzon, D., Dumbrell, J., Grant, S., & Wilson, I. (2021). “You know, we can change the services to suit the circumstances of what is happening in the world”: a rapid case study of the COVID-19 response across city centre homelessness and health services in Edinburgh, Scotland. Harm reduction journal, 18(1), 1-18. Web.
Raghavan, A., Demircioglu, M. A., & Orazgaliyev, S. (2021). COVID-19 and the new normal of organizations and employees: an overview. Sustainability, 13(21), 11942. Web.
Spicer, A. (2020). Organizational culture and COVID-19. Journal of Management Studies, 57(8), 1737-1740. Web.