Only 1.7%
If you have an object-oriented design, then it makes sense to use an object-oriented programming language. If NOT, there's no point in using the OO programming language. There's no benefit. No inheritance, no polymorphism, no encapsulation, no abstraction, no ojects, no object relations, no planned architecture. Those are design matters.
Only 1.7% of the programmers on the Front Range who attended Microsoft Dev Days at my last attendance - get that. That's because they aren't required to know that. In fact, before the informal survey revealed that 98.3% believed they WERE doing OO. They believe that using an OO programming language is what makes software OO. Well, having a hammer doesn't make one an architect. Management does not know what OO is really about, so the workers aren't required to know, either.
Those software development cultures that are doing OO will leave their competition in the dust and from what I've seen in the front range area of Colorado, the entire industry is vulnerable to being replaced. Recruiting firms LOVE this situation. They can keep supplying an endless stream of highly-paid people who can't do the job, but who claim to be doing OO. Those people come back and say "OO doesn't really work so we'll just keep doing what we used to do". That means they'll be using an OO programming language to implement an ad-hoc design, which is NOT "doing OO". Their programs will be highly coupled, have low cohesion and they will be unmaintainable as always.
Ask your programmers to show you an OO design. If they do, it will be done with UML, "Unified Modeling Language" which is the industry standard notation for OO design. If they don't have one, they believe they're doing OO, but they are NOT. If they have that design, they will be able to show you Use Case Diagrams/models and detailed flows, Activity Diagrams, Sequence Diagrams, and Class Diagrams at minimum.
I've seen that from programmer to programmer, it is very difficult to convince those that THINK they're doing OO that they're not. Management must know the difference, and they must enforce the standard. The difficulty is in "filling a cup that is already full". That is normally thought to be impossible.
Good luck. You'll need it if you believe something that just isn't so.