Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose – This study aims to examine the relationship of the Islamic work ethic (IWE) and individualism among a large sample of supervisors working in Egypt, replicating earlier work by Ali (2005, 1987). Design/methodology/approach – Data were collected from 484 male and female supervisors working in manufacturing organizations using anonymously completed questionnaires, 48 per cent response rate. Findings – Measures of IWE and individualism were highly reliable and significantly and positively correlated (0.39, p < 0.001), replicating Ali’s work. Males and females scored similarly on both measures. Younger mangers were more individualistic, again supporting Ali’s findings. The Egyptian sample also scored very high on both measures, as do samples from other countries. Factor analysis of the IWE suggested two interpretable factors and the possibility of creating a shorter version of the IWE. Research limitations/implications – An interesting question becomes why are levels of economic performance in these countries relatively low despite very high levels of commitment to the IWE? This raised the issue of potential social desirability in the measure of IWE. Future research must include indicators of both individual and work unit performance to examine this further. Practical implications – Suggestions are offered on ways that organizations can develop reliable and valid measures of the IWE and examine their relationships with actual job and work group performance. Originality/value – Supports continuing research on the usefulness of the IWE concept and measures in management research.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".