Determinants of Work Relation Perception: Organizational Culture in Egyptian Workplaces
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed at investigating different types of organizational cultures common in Egyptian workplaces andhow they might be influenced by the type of ownership (governmental, public, or private), the region in whichthe organization exists (Cairo, North Egypt, or South Egypt), and the organization size (large vs. small).Organizational cultures were divided, according to the Competing Values Model proposed Cameron and Quinn(1999/2006), into four types: Market, Hierarchy, Adhocracy, and Clan cultures. Organizational cultures wereevaluated by developing an Arabic/Egyptian standardized version of the Organizational Climate Measure (OCM)prepared originally by Patterson and his colleagues (Patterson et al. 2005). OCM was based on the CompetingValues Model and was designed to assess the four basic dimensions of the model, and it went further to definespecific components (which ranged from 2 to 6) for every dimension, with 4 to 6 items for each component. Inthe OCM, the Clan culture was renamed Human Relations culture, which includes 6 dimensions, and Hierarchyculture became Internal Process culture and included 2 components. Similarly, Adhocracy culture was renamedOpen System culture with 3 components, and Market culture was renamed Rational Goal culture with 6components. A sample of 158 employees working in different professions participated in the study. Their agesranged between 19 to 62 years old and their mean age was 34.94 years (SD = 10.61). 82 (52%) were males ad 76(48%) were females. A 3X3X2 MANOVA of the data was conducted. Results indicated that privateorganizations got higher scores on Human Relations, Open System, and Rational Goal cultures thangovernmental organizations (but not necessarily the public ones). On the other hand, organizations in NorthEgypt and Cairo got higher scores than their counterparts in South Egypt in Human Relations (integration andtraining), Open System (innovation) and most components of Rational Goal culture. However, South Egyptorganizations showed higher level of Internal Process (familiarization and tradition) than the organizations inCairo and North Egypt. As for Organization size, it has in general a limited effect on organizational culture butlarge organizations showed significantly higher level of Internal Process (familiarization) and Rational Goal(efficiency) cultures than small ones, which showed higher level of Open System (innovation) culture. Thepatterns of interactions showed that public organizations in the north can have higher level of Open Systemculture (innovation) than their private and governmental counterparts. Also, Human Relations culture (especiallytraining) can be important in small, family-owned organizations in South and North Egypt in comparison toCairo. Moreover, although private organizations tend to give employees more independence and responsibility,the large ones tend to be more restrictive and formal than public and governmental ones, especially in Cairo(where they usually have their central headquarters). Counter to the common belief, Rational Goal culture (workquality and pressure to work) were higher in governmental organizations in South Egypt than private and publicones because of the limited resources available to the private section in this region.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".