Abstract
In this commentary we reflect on Shaalan, Eid, and Tourky's (2022) article in which they investigated the Chinese concept and practice of guanxi in the Middle East,1 a region in which wasta represents the common way of informal networking.2 While we encourage and welcome research into informal networks, we have serious concerns about the conceptual and methodological approaches taken by Shaalan et al. (2022) in investigating informal networks in the Middle East and explain herein why we do not believe guanxi should have been used in place of wasta.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 1040-1045 |
| Number of pages | 6 |
| Journal | Management and Organization Review |
| Volume | 19 |
| Issue number | 5 |
| DOIs |
|
| Publication status | Published - 1 Oct 2023 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Keywords
- commentary
- guanxi
- informal networks
- methodology
- wasta
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Questioning the Appropriateness of Examining Guanxi in a Wasta Environment: Why Context Should Be Front and Center in Informal Network Research – A Commentary on ‘De-Linking From Western Epistemologies: Using Guanxi-Type Relationships to Attract and Retain Hotel Guests in the Middle East’'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver