Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to shed light on key features of Iranian managerial culture by discussing underlying social and organizational consequences. Design/methodology/approach The paper has been organized in two major parts: conceptualization and discussion. First, the notions of culture and cultural orientations are treated and then, based on the framework proposed by Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck, cultural orientations of Iranian managers are investigated. Findings The findings suggest that Iranian managerial culture is characterized by traditional values such as collectivism, past orientation, high hierarchical distance and evil orientation expressed in terms of mistrust and conspiracy. Research limitations/implications The findings of this research are limited in terms of scope, cultural orientations and sample size. Further studies may incorporate more cultures and take into account the effects of existing sub-cultures to present a more enlightening picture. Practical implications The findings of this study might be useful for MNEs, NGOs, international negotiators, businessmen/women, expatriate managers and those who are concerned directly or indirectly with this part of the world. Originality/value While most cultural research in the area of organizational science has been based on severely narrow, ahistorical and linguistically naïve concepts, this study takes into account not only explicit manifestations of culture, but also implicit and semiotic ones which need to be comprehended. Therefore, the paper is of potential significance at both the theoretical and the practical level.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".