The Results of Work Models Applied During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Abstract

The aim of this study is to investigate the individual effects and institutional reflections different organizational work models have in terms of employees and to contribute to the field of application and the related literature by explaining their results and effects on work life. The study is based on the phenomenological research design and focuses on the participants’ experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic. The study was carried out using the interview method on a volunteer basis with 16 managers. The data were analyzed using MAXQDA 2020 and evaluated by collecting two main categorical themes and 13 sub-themes. The study observed negative aspects such as the ineffectiveness of face-to-face communication, prolonged communication times, experience transfer and socialization problems, and the intertwining of professional life and social life. Positive results were determined such as a reduction in time and money spent on commuting, work flexibility, having the opportunity to spare more time for oneself and family, and reduced office expenses. The following determinations were made: organizations offer different levels of employee support, practices have no standardization, the problems employees experience are preventable with sufficient organizational support, and legal regulations are needed. The results revealed deficiencies to be present in crisis management, the organizations to be unprepared for the crisis, and all organizations to need to review their processes regarding fringe benefits. The study has aimed to contribute to the literature by focusing on the results of the work models that have been applied during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Keywords

• Human Resources Management
• Organizational Behavior
• Working Models
• Organizational Practices
• COVID-19

References

1. Aiman-Smith, L., Bauer, T. N. & Cable, D. M. (2001). Are you attracted? Do you intend to pursue? A recruiting policy-capturing study. Journal of Business and psychology, 16(2), 219-237. google scholar
2. Aktan, C. C. ve Tunç, M. (1998). Bilgi toplumu ve Türkiye. Yeni Türkiye Dergisi, 4(19), 118-134. s. 119. google scholar
3. Aron, R. (1967). What is a theory of international relations? Journal of International Affairs, 21(2), 185-206. google scholar
4. Barker, J. R. (2005). Tightening the iron cage: Concertive control in self-managing teams. Critical Management Studies: A Reader, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 209-243. google scholar
5. Barnett, R. C. (1998). Toward a review and reconceptualization of the work/family literature. Genetic Social and General Psychology Monographs, 124(2), 125-184. google scholar
6. Barnett, R. C. (1999). A new work-life model for the twenty-first century. The annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 562(1), 143-158. google scholar
7. Bogdan, R. C., and Biklen, S. K. (1992). Qualitative Research for Education: An introduction to theory and methods. Needham, MA. google scholar
8. Bowen, D. E., & Ostroff, C. (2004). Understanding HRM -firm performance linkages: the role of the ‘strength’ of the HRM system. Academy of Management Review, 29(2), 203- 221. google scholar

9. Burke, R. (2000). Do managerial men benefit from organizational values supporting work life balance? Women in Management Review, 15(2), 81-89. google scholar
10. Castells, M. (2013). Communication power. Oxford University Press. google scholar
11. Chacko, T. I. (1983). Job and life satisfactions: A causal analysis of their relationships. Academy of Management Journal, 26(1), 163-169. google scholar
12. Clark, S. C. (2000). Work/family border theory: A new theory of work/family balance. Human Relations, 53(6), 747-770. google scholar
13. Cook, A. (2009). Connecting work-family policies to supportive work environments. Group & Organization Management, 34(2), 206-240. google scholar
14. Cooper, R., & Baird, M. (2015). Bringing the “right to request” flexible working arrangements to life: From policies to practices. Employee Relations, 37(5), 568-581. google scholar
15. Çağlar, C. (2013). Okulların Değişime Açıklık Düzeyi ile Öğretmenlerin Örgütsel Bağlılık Düzeyi Arasındaki İlişki. Adıyaman Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 6(15), 119- 150. google scholar
16. De Sivatte, I., & Guadamillas, F. (2013). Antecedents and outcomes of implementing flexibilitypolicies in organizations. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(7),1327-1345. google scholar
17. Dex, S. & Scheibl, F. (2001). Flexible and family-friendly working arrangements in UK-based SMEs: business cases. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 39(3), 411-431. google scholar
18. Ferris, G. R., Arthur, M. M., Berkson, H. M., Kaplan, D. M., Harrell-Cook, G. & Frink, D. D. (1998). Toward a social context theory of the human resource management-organization effectiveness relationship. Human Resource Management Review, 8(3), 235-264. google scholar
19. Foucault, M. (2005). Büyük Kapatılma, (Çev. Ferda Keskin-Işık Ergüden). Ayrıntı, İstanbul. google scholar
20. Fraenkel, J. R. & Wallen, N. E. (2006). How to designand evaluateresearch in education. NY: Mc Graw Hill. google scholar
21. George, E., Prithviraj C., Sim B., Sitkin & Barden J. (2006). Cognitive Underpinnings of Institutional Persistence and Change: A Framing Perspective. Academy of Management Review, 31(2). google scholar
22. Hawley, A. H. (1986). Human ecology: A theoretical essay. University of Chicago Press. google scholar
23. Hodrab, R., Maitah, M. & Smutka, L. (2016). The effect of information and communication technology on economic growth: Arab world case. International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, 6(2), 765-775. google scholar
24. Iverson, R. D. (1996). Employee acceptance of organizational change: the role of organizational commitment. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 7(1), 122-149. google scholar
25. Kanten, P., Gümüştekin, G. ve Durmaz, M.G. (2018). “Öfke yönetimini etkileyen öncüller: Hemşireler üzerinde nitel bir araştırma”, 6. Örgütsel Davranış Kongresi, 2-3 Kasım 2018, Isparta Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi, Isparta. 940-952. google scholar
26. Kapız, S. Ö. (2001). İşin değişen anlamı ve birey yaşamında önemi. ISGUC The Journal of Industrial Relations and Human Resources, 3(2). google scholar
27. Karakoyun, (2007). Esnek Çalışma Yoluyla Kadınların İşgücüne Katılım Oranının ve İstihdamın Arttırılması; İŞKUR’un Rolü. Çalışma ve Sosyal Güvenlik Bakanlığı, Türkiye İş Kurumu Genel Müdürlüğü, Uzmanlık Tezi, Ankara. google scholar
28. Kaya, K. (2002). Ekonomik Krizin Yaşama Tarzı Üzerindeki Etkileri (Isparta Örneği). SDÜ İİBF Dergisi, 7(2), 207-226. google scholar
29. Keser, A. (2009). Tükenmişlik sendromu. Çalışma Yaşamında Davranış İçinde, Kocaeli, Umuttepe Yayınları. google scholar
30. Lagree, J. C. (1991). Generations. CRIV google scholar
31. McNamara, T. K., Pitt-Catsouphes, M., Brown, M., & Matz-Costa, C. (2012). Access to and utilization of flexible work options. IndustrialRelations, 51 (4), 936-964. google scholar
32. Meda, D. ve Ergüden, I. (2004). Emek: kaybolma yolunda bir değer mi. İletişim Yayınları. google scholar
33. Musura, A., Korican, M. & Krajnovic, S. (2013). Work-life and life-work conflicting croatian companies: Some perspectives. International Journal of Organization Theory & Behavior. google scholar
34. Nilles, J.M. (1998) Managing Telework: Strategies for Managing the Virtual Workforce, John Wiley ve Sons, New York, NY. google scholar
35. Patton, M. Q. (1987). How to Use Qualitative Methods in Evaluation (No. 4). Sage. google scholar
36. Powell, Walter W. & Paul J. DiMaggio (eds.). (1991). The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis. Chicago: University Press. google scholar
37. Purvanova, R. K. (2014). Face-to-face versus virtual teams: What have we really learned? The Psychologist-Manager Journal, 17(1), 2. google scholar
38. Sabuncuoğlu, Z. (1987). Çalışma Psikolojisi, Uludağ Üniversitesi Basımevi, Bursa, 3., s.2. google scholar
39. Sığrı, Ü. (2018). Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri. Beta Basım Yayım Dağıtım, İstanbul. google scholar
40. Slack, N. (1991). The Manufacturing Advantage: Achieving Competitive Manufacturing and Operations, Mercury Books, London. google scholar
41. Şen, E. ve Batı, G, F. (2020). COVID-19 Pandemik Krizinin Yönetim ve Ekonomi Politik Üzerine Olası Etkileri. Yönetim, Ekonomi ve Pazarlama Araştırmaları Dergisi, 4(2), 71-84. google scholar
42. Tunçer, P (2013). Değişim yönetimi. International Journal of 'Social Science, 6(2), 891-915. google scholar
43. Türkiye Bilimler Akademisi Covid-19 Pandemi Değerlendirme Raporu (2020). Türkiye Bilimler Akademisi Yayınları, TÜBA Raporları No: 34 ISBN: 978-605-2249-43-7 google scholar
44. Ulrich, D. (1998). A new mandate for human resources. Harvard Business Review, 76(1). google scholar
45. Ülgen, H. ve Mirze, S. K. (2018). İşletmelerde stratejik yönetim. Beta Yayıncılık, İstanbul. google scholar
46. Webster, F. (2006). Theories of the Information Society, Third Edition, Routledge, London ve New York, s. 8-10. google scholar
47. Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek, H. (2013). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. (9. Baskı). Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık. google scholar