---
title: "How Smaller Teams Work More Efficiently"
description: "Can hotels solve their staffing crisis by learning from startups?"
published: 2023-03-14T05:25:21+00:00
author: "ONDA 편집팀"
category: "Insights"
image: "https://zqcfqfqgiyckyhazcfrk.supabase.co/storage/v1/object/public/blog-images/webflow/6316f3f75130788ec2d762dd/65fa4a2fe57f679621050dcb_jason-goodman-Oalh2MojUuk-unsplash.jpg"
canonical: https://global.onda.me/en/blog?slug=how-to-work-more-effective-for-smaller-organization
locale: en
---
# How Smaller Teams Work More Efficiently

![](https://zqcfqfqgiyckyhazcfrk.supabase.co/storage/v1/object/public/blog-images/webflow/6316f3f75130788ec2d762dd/65942baa2acbf9833d71d47a_640aeccc9e5c8c4759d2cee1_12page.png)

Hotel hiring is in crisis. The reasons are well documented: ▲ wages that don't match workload ▲ COVID-19 exposed just how fragile job security is ▲ the glamour of being a hotelier has faded.

Multiple causes. One certainty.

Whether it's labor costs or the industry's fallen prestige, hotels can't operate with the same headcount anymore. Bluntly: hospitality will be forced to run on smaller and smaller teams going forward.

This isn't unique to hotels. It's happening everywhere. As technology advances, companies are shrinking. That's not a threat — it's reality.

That's why SaaS (Software as a Service) tools that maximize individual productivity have become non-negotiable. And now ChatGPT and other AI services are pouring fuel on the efficiency fire.

![ONDA provides SaaS tools designed to maximize hotel operations efficiency — and we keep upgrading.](https://zqcfqfqgiyckyhazcfrk.supabase.co/storage/v1/object/public/blog-images/webflow/6316f3f75130788ec2d762dd/65942baa2acbf9833d71d486_640aece48bee9850627f21bb_2page.png)

Every industry is moving this direction. Hotels can't be the exception. But hotels *do* need to prepare their organizations to absorb rapid change.

Otherwise, you risk backlash: internal resistance, disengagement, even deeper anxiety about job security.

That's why hotels need to build a **company culture** and **work environment** that can flex — and keep flexing — as new tools and methods arrive.

## Hotels Should Benchmark Startups

There's one business model that extracts insane efficiency from small teams: **startups** — early-stage ventures chasing 10x or 100x growth in short timeframes.

Successful startups live by "if you can buy time with money, do it." They adopt SaaS aggressively. One person wears multiple hats. When a decision is made, execution happens *fast*.

![](https://zqcfqfqgiyckyhazcfrk.supabase.co/storage/v1/object/public/blog-images/webflow/6316f3f75130788ec2d762dd/65942baa2acbf9833d71d47f_640aed1222b60f2e3f638582_9page.png)

Employees address each other respectfully — often using English nicknames (including at ONDA). Communication flows freely between levels. Startups obsess over creating this culture.

Why? To appeal to Gen Z? Because healthy culture drives growth?

No. The answer is simpler: **if you don't maximize efficiency at all costs, the company dies.**

Most startups say they're creating entirely new markets. But as they scale, they inevitably collide with incumbents. Either big players invade the startup's turf, or the startup pushes into established markets to grow further.

If a startup — with fewer people, less capital, weaker market share, brand power, and network — operates the same way as a legacy player and achieves similar productivity? **Game over.**

That's why startups relentlessly hunt for ways to squeeze maximum output from small teams.

Yes, some people leave startups because of the intensity and stress. From a societal lens, startups aren't yet as attractive as corporate giants.

But inside those startups, there are people working with genuine fire. And if that's true, shouldn't industries suffering from labor shortages learn something from them?

To survive and grow, startups adopt SaaS and collaboration tools. **And to maximize those tools, they build cultures defined by: flat communication, personal accountability, and speed of execution.**

They didn't create "startup culture" to win over Gen Z. They built it to survive. It just happened to resonate with younger workers who thought, "Actually, I could see myself there."

One last thing: you might think this only applies to software companies or online-first businesses. But plenty of offline-centric startups — like co-working operators — are thriving with this model. It's not about the business model. It's about **how you run the company.**

![(Source: left FastFive / right Proptech Forum)](https://zqcfqfqgiyckyhazcfrk.supabase.co/storage/v1/object/public/blog-images/webflow/6316f3f75130788ec2d762dd/65942baa2acbf9833d71d48a_640aed2fe4b207ef4993f849_4page.png)

## How Legacy Organizations Can Work Like Startups

Before joining ONDA, I spent years in journalism — one of the most rigid industries out there. I know firsthand how hard it is to change an organization that's been doing things the same way forever.

**In my experience, transformation in legacy orgs doesn't come from the bottom up. It requires strong leadership from the top.** Even in startups, none of this works without the founder's decisive leadership.

I'm deeply skeptical of phrases like "youthful energy" or "Gen Z creativity."

If a company has established rules and processes, expecting a fresh hire to reject those norms and still deliver results? Nearly impossible. And if someone *can* do that, they don't need a salary — they'd just start their own company.

**For an established company to change, leaders must provide a clear, rational case for why.**

**Leaders must identify inefficiencies in current workflows, model the change from the top, find solutions that actually improve efficiency, and cultivate a culture that can absorb the shift. That's what I believe "how smaller teams work more efficiently" looks like.**

> Pyramid-style hierarchies make rapid, dramatic change harder in large corporations.
> 
> But as Hitachi and GE demonstrate, even giants can transform through top-down leadership.
> 
> That said, leaders who drive top-down change often face complaints and resentment. It's a less popular choice than bottom-up.
> 
> **As U.S. education consultant Richard DeFoe put it:**
> 
> **"Most companies operate top-down by default, yet leaders shy away from the 'top-down leader' label.**  
> **But exercising the authority needed to get things done is a leader's duty."**
> 
> (Source: [LG Business Insight](https://www.lgbr.co.kr/report/view.do?idx=19210))

Identify inefficiencies in your company. Don't tell your team "go find a solution." Propose a better direction yourself that fits your organization.

The people who've been there longest — the most experienced — are best positioned to see where inefficiency comes from and how much change the company can handle.

Switching outdated reporting systems, interdepartmental workflows, or booking software to modern collaboration tools or SaaS becomes a **"rational case"** when a leader presents it with a clear productivity scenario.

If your org has always used ranks like "assistant manager," "manager," "director" — and you suddenly decide everyone should call each other by first name or adopt English nicknames — justifying it with "Gen Z prefers this" won't land.

Here's the reality: modern productivity software (SaaS) — whether domestic or global — is **designed to work best in cultures where responsibility and direction may be hierarchical, but communication is open and execution is fast.**

These tools let you naturally tag superiors with questions (e.g., "@jack do we handle this case like this?") and discuss work freely. Changing how people address each other can unlock that cultural shift. But if your team can already communicate openly in collaboration tools *without* that change? Then you don't need it. The goal is to work better *now.*

Whatever method you choose, **as long as you enable "accountability stays vertical, communication stays horizontal, execution stays fast,"** you'll maximize the efficiency of the new workflows and tools your hotel adopts.

## Not a Workplace That Satisfies Gen Z — 
A Workplace That Satisfies *Us Now*

Overhauling an organization's workflows is guaranteed to produce trial and error. Change always comes with failure.

Even ONDA has gone through three major organizational restructurings in the past two years. My own role has evolved or expanded repeatedly. The job title and rank on my business card has changed over four times.

The poster child for startup success in Korea is Woowa Brothers (Baemin / Delivery Hero Korea).

![Source: Woowa Brothers — even successful startups continuously evolve their culture, methods, and priorities.](https://zqcfqfqgiyckyhazcfrk.supabase.co/storage/v1/object/public/blog-images/webflow/6316f3f75130788ec2d762dd/65942baa2acbf9833d71d482_640aee6b35822868ebff73f9_7page.png)

Their "how we work" posters became a sensation. But even those have changed since they first appeared five years ago. And I'd bet they're still changing now.

No organization is perfect. That's why they keep evolving.

Here's what Woowa Brothers says: **"We're committed to building a healthy organizational culture where ordinary people come together to create extraordinary outcomes."**

They believe a strong organization covers for individual weaknesses. When the org is well-designed, it maximizes individual productivity and minimizes mistakes.

Do you really need to hire Gen Z talent? If you already have people who care about the company and do great work — and you can give them an environment where they work more efficiently with *less* effort — why hire more?

And wouldn't that hotel become the dream destination for young hoteliers entering the industry?