The Basics of Home Office (Re)institutionalisation from the Perspective of Experiences from the COVID-19 Era

Abstract

After COVID-19, the dynamics of home office development slowed down. According to the experiences of major companies, the problem is “fluctuating”. Research from the pandemic era covers various aspects and fails to present the concept of synthetic developmental conditions. Therefore, the issue of extending the organisation to home spaces was undertaken, identifying the determinants of the sustainable development of workplaces and organisations. The key is to create sustainable work systems, i.e., adapted to the environment, while being creative, critical, and productive. This study aims to establish the cultural determinants of home office development based on empirical research from the perspective of neo-institutionalism. For this purpose, the institutional logics were subject to operationalisation and the co-dependencies of metalogics with the types of organisational cultures assumed in the Cameron–Quinn OCAI model were established. The information was collected in a CAWI survey. The presented research procedure constitutes a methodical innovation. The results demonstrate a trend of changes in the dominating types of organisational culture from market control to cooperation and creation with a stimulating role of professional logics (occupation, organisation) from the perspective of working from home which brings sustainable management and business models. There is a subtle role of home logic and low employee readiness level. The adapted cultural approach demonstrates that increasing effectiveness of home office solutions requires development of integrated practices, which consider this type of work as separate and specialised. The past corporate failures and spontaneous methods cannot serve as grounds for strategies (long-term solutions). However, the research demonstrates a low level and limited range of employee impact on the organisational culture. It also indicates the need for additional analyses to determine the concept of designing workplaces in the Sustainability–Harmonisation trajectory.

1. Introduction

The periodical lockdowns and social distancing in the years 2020–2022 led to adaptation of business and social activity based on the common awareness of the division of work into indispensable and remote from home. Indispensable work involved an elevated life or health risk for the employee working at the physical workstation in order to maintain the social function capacity, mainly in terms of securing health care, food, accommodation, gas and electricity, trash removal, etc. In the initial period, these people were praised by others for their dedication [1] and were even glorified in mass media [2]. A new category emerged in employment typologies [3], which required not only original theoretical frameworks, but also repositioning towards other categories like meaningful work [4] or applying the opposite criteria of bullshit jobs. The latter were defined as work, which does not contribute anything sensible, useful, or creative, but still fulfilling specific needs. It included for example 24/7 pizza delivery, receptionists, and security guards [5].

Researchers started to focus on home office, which became a necessity. It was the subject of numerous multifaceted studies, which demonstrated the expectations of certain theoreticians, according to which the benefits of working from home would lead to a considerable growth of the numbers of home offices and various forms of flexible employment [6,7]. However, now that the pandemic is over, home offices are returning to normal and their statistical indicators are returning to the levels from before 2020. This is also the situation in the United States, where flexible forms still have little share in overall employment [8] despite the potential to have 37% of workplaces installed at home [9].

The existing research gap and the shortage of explicit proposals mean that the search and exploration for other determinants of home office development are continuing. Certain authors still propose research on the cultural determinant. For example, it has been suggested that the expansion of organisational limits with home offices is an instrument of a network capable of continuous innovation due to being positioned in a “variable geometry” with an ephemeral, flashing, and kaleidoscopic culture [10]. Moving work to a home, from which it was absent, results from the impact of various cultural environments, which force us to deal with tensions between our public identity of employees and the private and intimate identity of family members or friends—or of ourselves if we happen to live alone [11,12]. The submitted proposals also pointed out the missing contextual factors such as regulations, attitudes of employees and managers, or work culture [13]. When searching for the determinants of development, the experiences of the COVID-19 period should be taken into account. It is of particular importance to consider sustainability as a sustainable functional capacity or the ability to adapt and sometimes proactively create new opportunities. The emerging work ecosystem, extended to the home, is sustainable human and social development in professional life understood as the ability of employees, groups, and organisations to continue functioning in any situation [14,15,16]. This forces the necessity to determine whether the research results implemented in the adopted concept determine the implementation of sustainable development or perhaps the emerging concept of harmonisation.

The concept of home office development requires a shift of resource allocation and organisational limits, including spatial ones [17]. Due to the above, it requires not only cultural research, but also recognition of the neo-institutional perspective, which is developed on the grounds of economic studies, organisation, and management. Ząbkowicz notes that the new institutional economy deals in human transactions in the sense of contracts and resource allocation models, emphasising those outside of the markets, which determine prices in organisational structures [18]. Organisations are sometimes presented as institutions and the people taking advantage of them. Misiński, in turn, believes that the essence of an enterprise based on moving the main form of management from the function of production to the function of selection of the forms of coordination and the systems managing them affects the different limit establishments [19]. Our contemplations adapt the premises assumed in the research of organisation and management. Moving the limits does not alter the essence and point of employee actions, which are directed into the organisation, and the employees’ system of individual values and perception are aligned with the organisational culture model [20].

According to the literature, institutional logics are very important, as they combine the meaning/sense on one side with the social structures and practices on the other, e.g., combining the identity and actions of the actors with cultural values [21]. It is also important to study logic as the result of a specific context defined in the categories of the location [22]. This study aims to analyse employee perception of two work institutionalisation determinants. The first concerns diagnosis of the state and changes in organisational culture models in the conditions of onsite work and home office. The second concerns the evaluation of the impact of institutional logics on working from home in the aspect of cultural models and logic relations. In this sense, there is the possibility of evaluating the potential impact of employees on organisational culture changes in the event of a mass home office system.

The authors believe that a contribution can be made to the literature by analysing the following research propositions of the cultural effects of working from home:

Proposition 1. Employees expect a reduction in the significance of market culture in work processes in favour of a culture of creation and cooperation;

Proposition 2. The changes in the levels and structures of the model organisational culture have been historically accompanied by a developed institutional order, which is a relatively structurally constant system of employee values and opinions (so-called structural change paradox);

Proposition 3. The position of family logic in work formation rises alongside with the importance of the domination of “non-productive” cultures (i.e., clans and adhocracy).

The research requires development of innovative and original methods composed of the following stages: (a) selection and adaptation of the organisational culture model; (b) selection of organisational metalogics; (c) development of an integrated poll questionnaire; (d) selection of the research sample; (e) collection of empirical data; and (f) statistical analyses and compilation of research results.

The structure of the work is assigned to the issues and methodological premises listed and described in detail in individual sections. The next chapter reviews the literature covering home office development trends and the essence of institutional logics. This is followed by a presentation of research methodologies. The final chapter demonstrates and discusses the results and presents the conclusions, including certain restrictions and future studies.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Home Office

Home offices have a long historical tradition. This mainly involves the functional multiplexes in medieval England, where single-floor and single-room homes served as kitchens and spinning/weaving/tailoring shops, bedrooms and dairy shops, dining rooms, slaughterhouses, tanneries, etc. They were followed by hybrid workhouses, which had stores or workshops in the street and living spaces elsewhere. On a wider scale, home offices returned in the late 20th century, when the possibility to work efficiently outside of the employer’s location emerged [23].

The lockdown experiment of the COVID-19 era inspired work researchers to diagnose various aspects of the forced home offices. This involved two research perspectives: of the work location and employee (whose home hosted the home office) and of the organisation. The initial stage included research of matters such as work and employment risks, home office workstation organisation and the scope of work content transitioned there [24], the research response to the recommendations of the article in form of identifying of meaning of impact of monitoring synergy, technical equipment, and work sustainability on the level of satisfaction derived from working from home [25], rhythm of work regulated using ICTs through workflow interlacing practices and changing work intensity [26], adaptation of assignments to material, personal, and efficiency dimensions [27], fitting remote workstations into the physical and emotional space of home and periodical expansion of organisational space [17], or the efficiency and effectiveness of home offices and the quality of maintaining business contacts [28,29]. The differences between onsite work and compulsory remote work have been specified in five dimensions: personal, time, spatial, social, and technical. The significances of fear, uncertainty, anxiety, isolation, and stress of the employees, schedules, the working environment, socialisation, and application of technologies were all established [30]. In scope of personal attributes of the individuals working remotely during the pandemic, the evaluation covered variability of the mood spectrum, sleeping disorders, and general impact of the pandemic on everyday life. In conclusion, it was recommended that authorities should develop local family support programmes [31]. The accumulation of the various types of activities at home led to a decline in physical activity, more pain and stress for parents, and deteriorating disposition [32]. The academic community was also established to have problems in scope of working from home, which included the inability to adapt, no home office availability, loneliness and isolation, inability to harmonise family and professional life, and improve satisfaction from working at home [33].

According to the analysis of the results and effects of working at home in scope of fulfilment of the objectives of sustainable development (wellbeing, dignified work, gender equality, and production benefiting social inclusion), there is a generally positive impact on the short-term disposition of employees and there are now more flexible and proactive opportunities to design work [34].

The organisational perspective also covers various compilations of specific areas. The dominating aspects are those of the output capacity, productiveness, and effectiveness of remote work. The level of factors with potential impact on the productiveness of home offices and working platforms is derived from international research [35]. The research established the conditions required to attain the desired levels of productivity [36]. It was established that the impact of the remote work model on employee productivity and output capacity is determined by numerous factors, including the nature of the work, the profile of the employer and the industry, and the conditions at home. Researchers suggest that strategic applications of remote work depend on improvement of technology and IT training and development of capabilities [37]. An important aspect in the context of remote work is working time registration. With a working time registration system, employees can understand the provisions governing their working time and the expectations of the company. They can also monitor their working hours and labour load alongside the employer. Employers can also take advantage of work registration systems to program employee learning and development and monitor reorganisation of the workflow within the organisation [38]. Another organisational instrument is provided by legal tools aimed to regulate the differences between onsite and remote workers [39].

It was also established that remote work can improve output capacity with appropriate hardware, training, and management, as well as the level of sustainable development by reducing commuting to work and providing for dignified work involving more independence and flexibility [40]. The studies of working at home adapted the operationalisation of Lefebvre’s triad model in order to depict the workstations spatially (physical space, cyberspace, social space) for purposes of the analysis of securing developmental continuity in scope of the home office system, in particular ensuring continuity of education through home-office system [41].

The perspective of the organisation also includes various thematic studies. The level of factors potentially impacting the productiveness of home offices and work platforms was based on international research [30]. In addition to sector-specific and international research, the solutions adopted by major global corporations are also important to practical aspects of the solution. In the context of a long-term home office strategy, the recommendations are rather pessimistic. The historical experiences of returning to the office due to dropping revenues in Yahoo in 2014 or IBM in 2017 [42] are pointed out. Facebook’s projections of having 50% of employees working from home by 2025 seem excessively optimistic following the sharp decline in the company’s value and employment reductions. The study also covered the work of 61.2 thousand employees of the American Microsoft from the first half of 2020 to assess the impact of home office throughout the company on cooperation and communication. As it turned out, the employee cooperation network turned more static and intracellular with fewer relations between specific departments. Furthermore, synchronous communication decreased and asynchronous communication increased. Instead of developing the “network communication effect” expected in big corporations, information acquisition and sharing and work paces slowed down [43]. Thus, the research conducted on global corporations indicates an adaptive and conservative nature of work organisation in the COVID-19 era, which indicates a shortage of “good practices” possible to engage in strategic home office development.

In light of the presented results of research of material, psychological, social, and spatial factors, attention was turned to previously unresearched cultural aspects of home offices, which—in addition to the institution—serve as one of the foundations of management. The positioning of culture is presented in the Williamson schematic, which demonstrates the levels of analyses and frequencies of changes, especially in scope of management and resource allocation, suggesting that the effective research period would be up to ten years. When it comes to home offices requiring structural optimisation, the variant of constant change applies [44].

2.2. The Essence of Institutional Logic

Organisations are often subject to research regarding the impact of institutions on individual and organisational behaviours and on the ways institutions are established and transformed by entities and organisations. An advanced social sciences instrument—including organisation and management—is the perspective of institutional logic [45]. Institutional logic is defined broadly and specifically. The broad definition sees it as socially structured models of material practices and symbols, premises, values, beliefs, and standards used by entities and organisational to produce and reproduce their material preservation, organise their time and space, and attribute meaning to their social reality [46]. The more specific definition covers cultural element systems (normative expectations, values, beliefs), which make it possible for people, groups, and organisations to attribute meaning and evaluate their daily activities and organise said actions in time and space [47].

The idea comes from the concept of a society constituted by various institutional orders. Thornton developed a theoretical research programme around the concept of institutional logic and started to develop the relation of logic with the institutional system, defining seven institutional orders (family, society, religion, market, state, occupation, and corporation) to represent various repertoires of excuses used by entities and organisations to attribute meaning to and rationalise their decisions. They constitute contemporary sources of legitimisation of motivation. The literature defines them as metalogics or “high-level institutional orders” [48]. Logics also appear on lower levels of the analysis, down to and including the organisation. Examples of such logics include quality, equal access, and effectiveness in health care [49] or institutional logics forming the reactions of cooperative banks in Poland, specifically in the context of organisational identity [50]. The valuable insights into the (de)motivation of Gen Z women and men at work offer a comparative analysis of gender differences in motivation within the young generation [51]. Understanding the factors that motivate or demotivate individuals in the workplace is crucial to establishing sustainable and productive remote work environments, especially with consideration of the preferences and needs of the younger workforce. The concept of emotional intelligence is highly relevant to the topic of sustainable remote work and the (re)institutionalisation of home offices [52]. Emotional intelligence plays a crucial role in remote work environments, as it influences individual abilities to manage stress, communicate effectively, and maintain positive working relationships, all of which are essential in order to maintain sustainable remote work practices. Understanding emotional intelligence profiles, particularly in the context of intergenerational collaboration, can provide valuable insights into fostering a supportive and inclusive remote work environment, which accommodates the needs of diverse age groups within the workforce.

The methodical separation of institutional logic from institutional order makes it possible to treat organisations, industries, or fields as sets of multiple coexisting logics. An individual logic may also be associated with or derived from numerous institutional orders. Organisational research assumed study of the relations of logics and coexisting conditions, conflicts, or in the sense of the effect of achieving domination, competition, disorder, substitution, complementarity [53,54,55], preservation of existing logics [56], or an institutional bricolage of numerous logics [57]. The methodical process of applying logic in research is presented by Ławrynowicz [50].

In organisational research, institutional logic determines objectives and measures, i.e., what is valuated, and the methods used to valuate, while rationality is established only according to the limitations of the specific logic. From the perspective of the presented research, identification of logics in organisational development is important for instances of creation of new organisational fields, and in order to understand the ways organisations can manage complex objectives and processes [53]. Logics contribute to the creation of organisational culture, i.e., the attitudes, beliefs, customs, standards, and rules believed to be enforced in the given organisation [56]. Therefore, culture is a unique desired functional mechanism of the given organisation and its standard is composed of the owners and management. Employees represent various sets of logics formed in their life cycles, which must be assigned to the culture of the given organisation or impact its development.

Researchers recently conducted a study focusing on employability, proactiveness, and workplace behaviours, with a specific interest in whether socioeconomic status acts as a mediator [58]. While their study may not directly address the concept of home office (re)institutionalisation, it provides valuable insights into the factors influencing workplace behaviours and employability. The findings of this study could be relevant in understanding how socioeconomic status may impact individual readiness and ability to adapt to remote work setups. For instance, individuals from lower socioeconomic backgrounds may face different challenges and require specific support in transitioning to remote work. When seeking answers on how remote work leads to sustainable behaviour, discussions about sustainable transformation of financial institutions and its impact on value [59] should be taken into consideration. The findings and insights from this study could be applied in order to understand how sustainable practices can be metamorphosed into value within the framework of remote work setups. By examining the strategies and mechanisms through which financial institutions integrate sustainability into their value systems, valuable lessons can be drawn for organisations, which aim to establish sustainable and value-driven remote work environments.

According to the literature review, institutional logic research must recognise four components, which are (1) the researched logics, (2) relations between logics, i.e., institutional complexity, (3) institutional order, and (4) the strength of logic impact in institutional fields. This determines the methodological assumptions of the research, specifying workplaces at home as institutional fields.

3. Research Method and Material

The research problem required development of the methodology and performance of supplementary studies in scope of the project entitled “Remote work in organisational and social dimension” [24]. The research method was based on development of an integrated surveying instrument covering basic research aspects in scope of creation and functioning of long-term home office workstations. From the perspective of research problems, they included the model of organisational culture and the study of institutional logic relations, i.e., institutional complexity [60].

The first step was to select the organisational culture model. Upon analysis of the appropriate literature, an adapted Cameron–Quinn competitive value model (OCAI) was applied. Five blocks covering the basic model premises (dominating attributes, what keeps the organisation together), interaction models (employee management), and directions of development (strategy determinants, criteria of success) were engaged. Therefore, the scope of the subject matter was reduced by leadership style aspects because the authors of the OCAI model developed leadership attributes as “common identification with” [61]. According to the criteria of the assumed segmentation of multifaceted organisation and management studies [62], this points more to reception and understanding of human management philosophy and programmes rather than policies and practices. This perception of leadership by Cameron and Quinn has limited practical usefulness from the point of view of the purpose and subject of the presented research, i.e., the individual level (employee) and the issue of locating the workplace at home.

The second stage involved selection of the logic level and type. The most important logics are those of the topmost level, which are common and serve as the foundation for human development. The following metalogics were selected for research purposes based on the literature: organisation, occupation, family, and free time. They were verified in scope of a pilot study. The labels and locations of the researched attributes are presented in

Table 1. Institutional logic features attributed to Cameron–Quinn types of organisational culture from the perspective of remote work at home. Source: our own research.

Type of Culture	Institutional Logics
	Organisation	Occupational	Family	Free Time
	Communication	Knowledge	Trust	Balance
	Supporting	Skills	Support	Confidence
Clan	Networking.	Qualifications	Mobilisation	Activate social
	E-conferences	Collectivity	Infrastructure	Volunteering
	Punctuality	Training	Communication	Work habits
	Energy	New solutions	Rationalisation	Active risks
	Creation	Method innovations	Patterns from firm	New resources
Adhocracy	Initiative	Procedures	Activity	The habit of action
	Independence	Polyvalency	Originality	Innovate solutions
	Continuity	Multiskilling	Family features	Search
	Work priority	Initiative	Current needs	Hobby
	Active reactions	Changes	Company goals	R2D
Market	Maturity	Professional competition	Competitive spirit	Purposeful efficiency
	Rivalry	Market dynamics	Efficiency	Expansion activity
	Surroundings		Intensity	Mentality
	Regulations	Subordination	Isolation from work	Freedom
	Rules	Rules acceptance	Rules style	Otherness
Hierarchy	Subordination	Company standards	No pressure	Organise like work
	Security	Systematics	Peace of mind	Favourite relaxation
	Consistency of tasks	Stability	Family org	The same organising principles

. They are expanded upon in the items of the questionnaire. For example, “Continuity” item in organisation’s logic means that “home office workplaces may ensure working continuity and increase the innovative efficiency of the organisation”. Item R2D (“Right to disconnect”) in the logic of free time is “organisation of free time to take a break from work-related tensions. Full separation from work-right to disconnect”. Item “Multiskills” in professional logic is defined as “extensive encouragement to develop new skills and competences. Striving to develop a broad range of skills”. Item “Networking” in organisational logic is “full and punctual functioning of home office workstations with skilful networking with the rest of the organisation”. In total, 20 items were established and distributed in four types of logics corresponding to specific culture types in the OCAI model.

The data on relations between institutional logics—the database used to survey the level of institutional complexity—were gathered in a separate information block. Said data were established with the method of paired comparisons in order to identify the levels of logic impact autonomy and cohesion. For example, item PROFESSIONAL VALUES ARE INDEPENDENT AND DO NOT SUPPORT FULFILMENT OF FAMILY VALUES in the OC/FM relation defines autonomy. In turn, item HOME OFFICE ORGANISATION AND ASSIGNMENTS EXCLUDE AND/OR IMPEDE FULFILMENT OF PROFESSIONAL VALUES concerning OR/OC relations surveys the level of logic impact cohesion. The obtained results were converted to the sums of coexistence relations (support, redundancy, complementarity, substitution) and conflict, such as domination, competition, disturbance, and exclusion.

The individual elements of all surveys composing the research package were graded on the 7-point Likert scale as follows: 1 = “I strongly disagree”, 2 = “I disagree”, 3 = “I somewhat disagree”, 4 = “I neither agree nor disagree (sometimes no, sometimes yes)”, 5 = “I somewhat agree”, 6 = “I agree”, 7 = “I strongly agree”. The results were converted into values of average item attributes of the OCAI model and organisational logics.

The selected logic criteria and items were tested in a pilot survey in October and November 2022 on a sample of 20 employees. The proper research was conducted between December 2022 and February 2023 on a sample of 254 employees, which produced 246 surveys verified for research purposes. The selected sample was partially random (CAWI method) and partially intentional in order to obtain information from the Generation Z community, i.e., young workers born after 1995. The cohesion result for institutional logics was high as Cronbach’s alpha reached 0.708 for organisation, 0.725 for occupation, 0.849 for family, and 0.869 for free time. The Cronbach’s alpha value for the entire logic set was 0.863. The obtained results indicate a high level of credibility falling between 0.7 and 0.95 [63,64]. The research involved structural analyses and correlation methods (Pearson, partial and full correlation) in order to establish the coexistence of effects.

The profile of respondents in the surveyed group of 246 people indicates a clear majority of women (167, i.e., 68%), ages 21–30 (93, i.e., 38%) and 31–40 (89, i.e., 36%), with tenure of 6–10 years (98, i.e., 40%) and over 10 years (91, i.e., 37%), academic education (160, i.e., 65%), 3 household members on average (167, i.e., 68%), one child (152, i.e., 62%), working in administration (98, i.e., 40%) and commerce (93, i.e., 38%) as an executive (202, i.e., 82%). The data indicates a strong level of professional feminisation and complex social relations (household members, children), which may be significant in scope of working from home.

4. Results

4.1. Home Office Organisational Culture Models

The first research problems subject to empirical verification were the current state and the expected model of attributes for workstations located at home. This problem was surveyed with the aforementioned adaptation of the Cameron–Quinn competitive values model, which includes four model types of culture based on different determinants: clan—cooperation; adhocracy—creation; market—rivalry, and hierarchy—control. The model mechanisms for filling out this part of the survey, i.e., distribution of a hundred points in each of the five blocks among the listed attributes of the types in question, grading the current state and the state desired by the respondent, and the result calculation mechanism, were preserved (Figure 1).

Subsequently, the respondents graded their feelings in scope of the attributes of the four selected organisational logics in reference to the creation of home office workstations from the perspective of the model OCAI attributes. Here, logic features were assigned up to 100 points in total for each model feature. This was because the logics selected for research purposes were the most probable ones and as such did not have to cover every opinion of the respondents. This is why there are five circles inside the rectangles referring to each type of culture (Figure 1), as a white field depicts no indication.

The survey results indicate expectations of radical changes to the model of organisational culture in the event of a strategic and long-term home office campaign. According to the opinions of respondents representing various organisations, jobs, and social environments, the current model is dominated by hierarchy (28%), clan (26%), and market (25%). Adhocracy—creation is clearly supplementary (20%). In practice, this means that there is a balanced model, but the position of each element of the triumvirate is determined by different factors. The “lean” market instruments appearing commonly in various sectors and industries must be recognised. The structure of respondents—with 40% representing various state or local administration institutions—may also have an impact.

The expectations of respondents develop the target model based on the dominating role of cooperation, i.e., the clan. This value, established at 33%, clearly supersedes the cultures of adhocracy (25%) and hierarchy (22%) supported by the supplementary role of the culture of rivalry (19%). This means that people are expecting new solutions with attributes desired by employees, which include joint objectives and values with a strong sense of “community” in the organisation, employee responsibility, the spirit of teamwork, a friendly atmosphere at work, and personal development of employees [50]. The items of ad hoc, dynamic, and periodical organisational formulas (adhocracy) as well as of formalisation and hierarchy (control) have supportive pillar roles in the expected model of the researched form of home offices (outside of the organisation’s premises).

The introduction of home offices, which would “despatialise” work by moving the permanent location of the workstation from the organisation to home, restores the significance of the physical distance from the location of the organisation (office) and colleagues, some of whom may also be “nomadised” by having to work from home or other places. The model result signifies specific employee expectations in light of previous experiences and “fluctuation” of solutions in corporations. This is about creating practical solutions allowing to “bypass” or minimise the impact of the space factor on work (work distribution, assignments, schedules, crunch, working models—e.g., e-conferences, asynchronous work, etc.), the atmosphere at work (mainly in the context of work management, inability to manage face-to-face, machine control of employees), employee rights (from the always-discussed HSE issues to the organisation being charged for using space at home), etc.

The sets of opinions on the sets of values and beliefs in scope of strategic application of the home office formula are important in the proposed model transformations. The blocks of institutional logics indicate that respondents expect preservation of a high level of organisational logic in the culture of hierarchy (25 points), which results from the “novelty effect” of the formula and the inexperience of employees and management. The other logics in this culture act as stabilisers with the same meaning. The model transformation is determined mainly by the reduced significance of logic in the type of market culture as respondents used only 75% of the available points to demonstrate logics in market culture as a heterogeneous system of two blocks—the stimulator in the form of organisation and profession (21 each) and the stabiliser created by family and free time (17 points each). In this block, the significance measured with the value of averages is the lowest out of all types of culture, which—together with the low grades—is a sign of an expected reduction in market culture’s significance in work processes. This verified Proposition 1. Employees are expecting a reduction in the significance of market culture in work processes in favour of the cultures of creation and cooperation.

Respondents indicate repositioning of cultural significance in relation to introducing home offices. The dominating culture is the clan, which is based on the logic of organisation and occupation (23 points each) with a stabilising role of free time and family. The considerable advantage of this culture (33 points) demonstrates an “intuitive” employee opinion, according to which the previous direct support and cooperation in the workplace must be replaced with well-organised cooperation and communication. This indicates the general significance of organisational and professional logics as stabilisers of home offices. A similar mechanism is demonstrated by the culture of adhocracy, which is five points more significant with the same structural mechanism, as the clan. The proposals to make work more flexible, innovative, and creative implemented in reality together with the standards of financial support from the European Union [65] pose another challenge for the organisers of remote work and home offices.

4.2. Relations between Logics in Home Offices

In the presented research results, institutional logics demonstrate stabilised structures of size and order (significance). It is also important to establish the nature of the relations occurring between logics in establishment of the impact on working from home.

According to the presented results (Figure 2), over 50% of positive relations in establishment of home offices comes from substantive logics (organisation and occupation—OR/OC) and the logics of organisation and family (social context—OR/FM). The positive coexistence of social logics (family and free time—FM/T) appears almost half of the time. The remaining relations of substantive logics with free time and the logics of occupation and family demonstrate more turbulence as they impede, exclude, or fail to support fulfilment of the presented confronted logic values. The relations between the key occupation logic and the logic of family (OC/FM) as well as the logic of free time (OC/T) specifically demonstrate that introduction of home offices for the long run may produce changes irrespective of opposite logic (27.2% for family and 25.1% for free time) or are ambivalent towards it (30.2% for family and 31.2 for free time). Meanwhile, the relations between organisational logic and the logic of free time demonstrate a high—35.8%—level of expected exclusion of the value of free time and only 20.6% independence between the two types of logic in question. This means that adaptability to changes is declared by only one in five employees, which indicates a low level of psychological readiness for and maturity toward changes. Employees see 22% more differentiations and various forms of logic disturbances in professional activity and home office evaluations than positive co-occurrence. However, it should be noted that in relation to the base logic of occupation and the logic of family-substantive logic, i.e., the logic of organising work from home, this demonstrates high values of cooperation and complementarity factors (38% for OR/OC and 32% for OR/FM) and indicates potential autonomy in 17.4% for occupation and 23% for family.

The results indicate a duality in the distribution of values. Organisational logic, which determines establishment of home offices, demonstrates a favourable and positive distribution of coexistences with other ones. The logic of occupation will be ambivalent in over 30% for the logics of family and free time. Simultaneously, respondents are expecting a considerable—over 35%—exclusion of the value of free time and only one in five respondents reports readiness for changes. This means that specific criteria for assigning employees to home offices must be assumed. The aforementioned stabilised structures of organisational size and order and the relational roles of professional and organisational logics verify Proposition 2. The nature of changes in the levels and structures of the organisational culture model are evolutionary and the role of stabiliser is being played by the historically established institutional order (so-called structural change paradox) and the role of professional and organisational logics in logic relations.

4.3. Institutional Logics versus Organisational Culture in Home Offices

The next element is the attempt to capture the statistical relations between co-occurrence of logics and the current and desired state of organisational cultures (

Table 2. Institutional logics versus work and home office workplaces.

Institutional Logics	Organisational Culture
	Stationary Positions				Remote Positions
	Clan	Adhocracy	Market	Hierarchy	Clan	Adhocracy	Market	Hierarchy
Organisational Logic
ORG_C	−0.019	−0.038	−0.086	0.104	−0.023	−0.144	0.011	0.138
ORG_A	0.038	0.253	0.005	−0.187	−0.098	0.039	0.163	−0.001
ORG_M	−0.430 ***	−0.068	0.372 ***	0.149	−0.323 **	0.088	0.280 *	0.160
ORG_H	−0.323 **	−0.262	−0.033	0.488 ***	−0.229	−0.218	0.009	0.413 ***
Professional Logic
OCC_C	0.186	0.248	−0.148	−0.178	−0.015	−0.097	0.049	0.061
OCC_A	−0.213	0.231	0.138	−0.028	−0.329 **	0.051	0.350 ***	0.081
OCC_M	−0.378 ***	0.033	0.306 **	0.095	−0.408 ***	0.032	0.355 ***	0.241
OCC_H	−0.253	−0.136	0.028	0.305 **	−0.345 ***	−0.020	0.113	0.333 **
Family Logic
FAM_C	0.043	0.314 **	0.045	−0.225	0.015	0.224	0.153	−0.291 *
FAM_A	−0.096	0.286 **	0.063	−0.073	−0.137	0.337 **	0.141	−0.170
FAM_M	−0.160	0.068	0.088	0.083	−0.221	0.211	0.244	−0.031
FAM_H	−0.242	0.046	0.083	0.145	−0.307 **	0.285 *	0.209	−0.003
Free Time Logic
FT_C	0.024	0.088	0.030	−0.068	−0.028	0.116	0.176	−0.186
FT_A	0.038	0.216	0.044	−0.172	−0.015	0.184	0.204	−0.261 *
FT_M	0.106	0.227	−0.093	−0.131	−0.051	0.085	0.197	−0.148
FT_H	0.109	0.292 *	−0.135	−0.100	0.044	0.247	−0.031	−0.223

Notes: institutional logic opinion codes focused on organisational cultures: _C—clan; _A—adhocracy; _M—market; _H—hierarchy. Significance levels * p < 0.01; ** p < 0.005, *** p < 0.001. Statistically significant features are bold. Source: research results.

). The results of statistical calculations suggest that the current market and hierarchy model demonstrates the decisive role of the logic of occupation. The values of professional attributes are the statistically significant “spine” of the model in reference to all market attributes, together with the attributes of organisational logic for the market and hierarchy. There are no statistically significant relations between the logics of family and free time with the dominating types of market and hierarchy. Therefore, it is possible to suggest that the current state, which includes a small percentage of long-term home offices, does produce any references due to a lack of broader meaning. The logic of family is currently oriented towards creation and cooperation, while the logic of free time demonstrates significance with the attributes of the culture of hierarchy. The listed relations reflect the current working system.

For mass deployment of home offices, the relations with the desired model of organisational culture demonstrate a foundation of opinion changes rooted in institutional logics. The cooperation and creation models are stimulated by the fundamental role of the logic of occupation supported by the significant correlation with the logic of family. The statistical system is also confirmed by the stabilising role of market culture, which is still determined to a considerable degree by the logics of occupation and organisation, although to a lesser extent. Simultaneously, individual elements of all logics affect the hierarchy culture.

According to the presented research results, the main determinant of organisational culture development for home offices and workstations at home is the logic of occupation. The logic of organisation stimulates the cultures of clan and market. Meanwhile, the logic of family finds more application in the future model based on home offices. The logic of free time has occasional and isolated significance on the development of the types of organisational culture based on home offices. Together with the results of the aforementioned statistical verification, the values of the models (4.1.) and logics (4.2.) verify Proposition 3. The position of family logic in work formation rises alongside with the importance of the domination of “non-productive” cultures (i.e., clans and adhocracy, or cooperation and creation).

5. Conclusions, Restrictions, and Future Research

Home offices have a long history of experiences associated with the previous periodical nature of their application by major companies. It was more a privilege of certain occupational groups or specialists, such as IT specialists. In recent years, we have seen a mass home office experiment, which was forced by the need to preserve social distancing during the epidemic. This led to theoretical explorations supported by employee expectations in scope of the creation of a rational theoretical framework, which could be developed and implemented in the social and economic reality.

The raised and published research results indicate that there are various aspects of home offices requiring diagnosis and consideration in practical premises. This led to the decision to explore instruments allowing for evaluation from the perspective of sets of values, opinions, and beliefs of employees working from home.

A methodical neo-institutional approach formula was established under the assumption that (a) it is possible to distribute employee values into specific sets of institutional logic attributes; (b) it is possible to apply the selected organisational culture model as a carrier of organisational values represented by the respondents; (c) it is possible to apply institutional logics in the field of organisation, i.e., remote work and home office workstations; and (d) it is possible to establish the scope and strength of the impact of logics on the development of the organisational field in question by developing the organisational culture model. It also took into consideration that home offices and remote work models are more sustainable. The Cameron–Quinn competitive value model (OCAI) was selected for research purposes, a questionnaire of institutional logics integrated with OCAI items was developed, and correlation analyses were applied in order to compile the results of statistical correlation surveys.

Consequentially, methodical innovations were proposed and implemented by the research team. The discourse formula was abandoned in favour of measurements and parametric analyses. The research methodology also recognises the ambiguity–ambidexterity approach based on vagueness and intuition. Not all items of the research survey were fully explicit, as their meaning is composed of numerous elements, which made it impossible for them to include all information. However, they always included the key phrases required to comprehend the problem. The research involved metalogics, which are historically developed and rooted in awareness, meaning that they are still explicitly understood and interpreted even in the convention of ambiguity. Therefore, the depiction of logics was narrowed down to cultural ones.

According to research, the awareness of the types of cultures dominating the context of introducing home offices is transforming. Market and controlling culture are yielding to the culture of cooperation and creation. The new and desired type of culture is determined by the logics of organisation and occupation, which act as stimulators. The logic of occupation is of particular importance, as it continues to have key meaning for onsite solutions and prospectively for home offices. The role of the logic of home is rising, as the home is becoming the location of the physical concentration of the professional world, which had been “alien” for years. Combining professional and occupational life at home also restores—or creates contemporarily new—meanings and needs in scope of the “out-of-home activity” of the employees and the members of their families [66]. The stimulating role of organisational logic remains intact as well, while the logic of free time is statistically unimportant from the perspective of home offices. However, the impact of this logic is shifting from adhocracy to control, which also needs to be identified in additional research. In evaluation of the research results, we must remember that institutional logics are “reflected” in 83% in organisational cultures, which confirms the thesis on “ownership” creation of organisational cultures.

The relations between institutional logics indicate the significance of metalogics enrooted in employees in the expansion of organisational cultures over home space outside the organisation. Organisational logic coexists positively with other logics, although the results indicate a considerable—35%—decline in the significance of the impact of the logic of free time, an ambivalent role of the logic of occupation, and only one in five respondents ready for changes. Therefore, the positive logic impact trends are accompanied by a low readiness level among employees.

The research demonstrates the assumed and unchanged institutional order as the order of strength and significance of individual logics is the same in every organisational culture type. The logic of occupation is the determinant, as it continues to be the core of both types of cultures. It is followed by the logic of organisation, which—in the desired type of culture—is supplemented with the increased significance of the logic of family. In scope of the logics, employees want to be sure that working from home will be efficient despite having to abandon “market intensification” instruments such as lean, high-performance practices (HPWS), high engagement practices (HPWI), etc.

Paradoxically, the results of the research in question, specifically the relations between logics, demonstrate the enormous scale of diverse assignments and the need to develop forms and methods of organisational actions in order to prevent the application of home offices in periodical waves. This is a completely different work model, which requires a specialised set of instruments in scope of all human resource management functions: recruitment; conditions, criteria, and procedures of creating home office workstations; quality requirements towards employees, including the ability to self-organise, resistance to stress resulting from solitude, etc. This also requires beneficial legal solutions and mature management—especially in scope of managing “from a distance” (asymmetric work, crunch, R2D, etc.).

The presented research results do not clearly determine adoption of the concept of determinants in the development of remote work systems. Sustainability options for workplaces, especially when the home is used as a workplace, directly related to WORK-LIFE BALANCE matters, may be insufficient. Perhaps research should also include assumptions of harmonisation of workplace components, including in qualitative dimensions related to technological development such as AI. This is necessary for successful strategic home office implementation. Cost “deinstitutionalisation” and dumping problems on self-employment, outsourcing, or franchising like in the nineties, when the “new American workplace” concept was being implemented, will not be successful.

The results produced by our research should be analysed according to its limitations. The first is the established research methodology. The assumed measures of perception are not entirely free of wrong answers. Our surveys are derived from a cross-section study conducted in the COVID-19 era, which cannot be tested in scope of causal relations. Future research should collect longitudinal data from bigger, more uniform, and more diverse samples. Future research should also emphasise the innovative transformations in scope of product and technological procedures implemented by organisations due to their experiences obtained from remote work during the COVID-19 era. The tremendous financial support of the European Union in scope of development purposes focuses mainly on innovations, sustainable development of digital transformation, and the battle with climate changes, which means that it aims to fulfil the developmental requirements of new forms of work as tools of innovation and effectiveness of contemporary organisations.