A modo de cierre

Organisations can also be characterised by their own culture that is, the distinct identity manifested in the form of physical artefacts but also, and far more importantly, embedded in less visible values and beliefs shared among organisational members (Dedoussis 2004). In this respect, Badawy (1980) has argued that managerial culture

58

and styles in Arab countries differ from those in the west, and he suggested certain areas for investigation in order to draw some comparison. This exercise begins with the nature of organisational design, for which according to Badawy (1980), there is a stereotypical structure, which may serve to describe both types of organisations.

Arab culture is typically seen as having a rich tradition of trade and commerce, and Arabs have a very strong sense of community their societies are generally characterised by a vertical integration, where human relationship is based on a person’s hierarchical position, status, educational background, seniority and gender (Hofstede 1991). According to Hofstede’s 1980 measure Arabian societies are relatively higher in collectivism and lower in individualism. Therefore, members place more emphasis on the welfare of the tribe, group or organisation relative to realising individual’s potential. Each tribe, group or organisation perceives itself as a well-knit community. As decisions are made under the influence of the ‘Sharia law, there is no potential for conflict, at least in theory, during the implementation stage and the power of Sharia law also increases employees’ commitment to the final decisions in the organisation. (Abuznaid,1994) The Arab organisation is usually seen as being highly bureaucratic, over centralised, with all the power and authority at the top (Al-Faleh, 1987).

Badawy (1980) argues that this classic pyramid-shaped management structure leads to an ambiguous and unpredictable organisational environment, which creates vague relationships between the people within it. The western organisation, in contrast, is characterised as being less bureaucratic, usually with a management structure that is relatively decentralised, leading to more delegation of authority. Consequently, as Badawy (1980) observes, the patterns of decision-making within these two structures are different - ad hoc planning decisions being made at the very top of the Arab organisation, while much more sophisticated planning techniques are used in the western counterpart. According to Anwar and Chaker (2003) in the Arab organisation many rules are not stipulated as employees are expected to be motivated under the influence of Sharia law and Arabian companies generally tend to adopt a centralised command and control mechanism.

Arab management, according to Badawy (1980) may be unwilling to make decisions due to the high risk that is inherent in decision-making, whereas the western manager is believed to have access to many more modern tools of decision-making and also has the

59

added help of elaborate management information systems. The fact that Arab countries score high on Hofstede’s power distance, and uncertainty avoidance index would seem to account for this management behaviour, and the provision of sophisticated decision- making tools may make absolutely no difference to the decision-making culture. Additionally within the Arab organisation, due to the tribal and personal links, the lines of communication are often overlooked and any workers can break formal lines of communication and take various issues affecting them to the top management. This is due to the fact that, emotions and feelings are quite often expressed in inter-personal communication in an Arabian organisation (Anwar & Chaker, 2003) rather than in a written form. Organisational culture and personal background affect managerial attitudes, values, and beliefs; and although Arab managers are far from homogenous in their orientations, it does appear that most Arab managers share some basic values that reflect Islamic and tribal traditions Abbas (1990). An effect of this is that Arab managers’ select individual employees from what Badawy (1980 p.100) describes as the “right social origin” to fill positions within the company, whereas western managers are much more concerned about candidates’ qualifications when making their selection decisions.

The management culture and methods used in Arab organisations, according to Badawy (1980) are seen as generally traditional and outdated while that in western organisations is much more modern, and this filters through to the communication culture. In the Arab company, for example, the tone will usually depend on the social position, power and family influence of the person being spoken to (Abbas 1990). Friendships in Arab organisations are important and binding as people relate to each other much more. However, where no such relationships exist, the chain of command in Arab companies must be followed, as the bureaucracy is authoritarian and rigid instructions are issued down the organisational structure in the traditional bureaucratic top-down approach (Badaway 1980). The perception of time in a typical Arabian organisation appears to be incongruent with the perception of time management in Western organisations. Activities in these organisations are less oriented towards the notion that “there is a work place and a time for every task” Anwar & Chaker (2003 p. 100). This kind of culture focuses on effectiveness rather than efficiency. The general picture of command and control structures in Arab organisations is in complete contrast, says Badawy (1980), to western companies where typically there is a greater emphasis on equality and a minimisation of difference between employees. People in these organisations

60

relate to each other much more loosely says Badawy (1980) and there is less emphasis on friendships and relationships. Of course these styles are seen as stereotypical but may not be apparent in every organisation in the Middle East or the West.