MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2160093854 · doi:10.5539/ijps.v5n4p86

Determinants of Work Relation Perception: Organizational Culture in Egyptian Workplaces

2013· article· en· W2160093854 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohamed Taha Mohamed

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Psychological Studies · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicJob Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Massachusetts Amherst
KeywordsOrganizational cultureClanHierarchyPerceptionPsychologyHofstede's cultural dimensions theoryDimension (graph theory)Organisation climateSociologyManagementSocial psychologyPolitical sciencePublic relationsAnthropologyLawMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.300 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Psychological StudiesSame topicJob Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorFrench-language works237,207