Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS: http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.635722
Title: The inter-penetration of agency and structure within the Saudi bureaucracy
Author: Al-Saud, K. F. T.
Awarding Body: University College of Swansea
Current Institution: Swansea University
Date of Award: 1995
Availability of Full Text:
Access through EThOS:
Abstract:
The place of the public sector bureaucracy in the political, social and economic life of Saudi Arabia is central. It plays a major role in both policy making and implementation and it is charged with development, planning and administration. Therefore whether or not the bureaucracy is succeeding in meeting this responsibility is of interest to and directly affects every member of the society. The purpose of this study is to demonstrate that there are two forces at work within the Saudi bureaucracy. First, there is an overt, formal, systematic and rational structure that has been planned and organised. Secondly, there is a covert, informal, network that has no official status or recognition, yet is immensely powerful. We conceive of the inter-relation of these forces, following its discussion in the literature as 'the dialectic of agency and structure'. This work shows that trying to understand one without the other will deliver at best only a partial understanding. The formal structure follows the overt model of other bureaucracies in the modern world. The second, is based around relationships and personal power differences: between the people who work in the bureaucracy and between those officials and the public. We attempt to show how there is an ever-present interpenetration of agency and structure in Saudi bureaucratic organisational life. By demonstrating that this state of affairs exists, we are not claiming to be able to find a final resolution, much less a solution, to the problems faced by the bureaucracy.
Supervisor: Not available Sponsor: Not available
Qualification Name: Thesis (Ph.D.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID: uk.bl.ethos.635722  DOI: Not available
Share: