Corporate Culture and Its Impact on Employees’ Attitude, Performance, Productivity, and Behavior: An Investigative Analysis from Selected Organizations of the United Arab Emirates (UAE)

Abstract

The present research paper focuses on four key aspects of organizational culture in the United Arab Emirates (UAE): employee attitude, performance, behavior, and productivity. Every organization has a unique culture, which shapes the employees’ perspectives to a large extent. The greater the consistency of the approach, the greater the likelihood of that organization achieving success. The main purpose of this study was to examine the influence of corporate culture on the behavior of heterogeneous groups of employees. The UAE, as an emerging economy, has various ethnicities and nationalities in its workforce, each having its own distinctive national customs, languages, religions, histories, and work patterns. This paper examines two cases in the remittances and foreign exchange industry in the UAE as being characteristic of finance companies, comprising employees who originated from many nations working together regardless of their socio-cultural background. Based on a questionnaire, the literature, and a hypothesized model, this paper investigates the relationship of UAE’s heterogeneous work culture on employees’ perspectives. In an innovative way, the result of this study reveals and supports our hypotheses that organizational culture has a high impact on the work performance, attitudes, and behaviors of the employees belonging to two selected companies, regardless heterogeneous nationalities and cultures.

1. Introduction

The seven emirates of Abu Dhabi, Dubai, Sharjah, Ajman, Umm Al-Quwain, Fujairah, and Ras Al Khaimah are collectively called the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Abu Dhabi is the capital city. Most of the UAE except Dubai depend on oil revenues. It is a member of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), which also includes Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia. According to the World Bank Data of 2019, the UAE’s population increased from 4.6 million in 2005 to roughly 9.77 million in 2019.ItsGDP is estimated to be US$421.142 billion, and it has a per capita income of US$43,470 [1]. The UAE suffers from a substantial shortage of qualified local workers, and relies heavily on foreigners to fill the gap. More than 85% of the UAE labor workforce comprises expatriates from more than 100 nationalities, reflective of many races, cultures, ethnicities, and languages. The largest groups of non-UAE nationals are South Asian, 59.4% (includes Indian, 38.2%; Bangladeshi, 9.5%; Pakistani, 9.4%; other, 2.3%); Egyptian, 10.2%; Filipino, 6.1%; and others, 12.8% [2].

The economy will contract this year, 2020, as the pandemic and low oil prices weigh on productivity. Next year, GDP is expected to recover on the back of stronger aggregate demand as economies reopen globally. Nevertheless, downside risks remain. Uncertainty over the pandemic lingers, and further spikes in infections could dampen the oil demand ahead. Focus Economics panelists forecast the GDP to expand 3.0% in 2021, which is unchanged from last month’s forecast, and 3.6% in 2022 [3].

According to Schein [4] corporate culture is a pattern of shared basic assumptions that the group learns as it solves its problems that works well enough to be considered valid and is passed on to new members as the correct way to perceive, think, and feel in relation to those problems. It is a mirror of corporate identity and an image of its maturity. According to Sedliakova [5] a decent corporate culture is basically one in which the organization is fruitful during the time spent meeting its targets and workers’ needs. Creativity as the sole difference in corporate culture is not as simple as it appears.

According to Hawes [6] corporate culture messages constantly state that fruitful partnerships adjust and consistently improve their societies in light of changes in the outer business climate. Societies are moldable. This implies that a “fruitful” administrator (or generously compensated administration specialist) should have the option to go into any enterprise with a negative or “broken” culture and utilize the different social strategies referenced above to change that culture into a positive one that improves worker execution and profitability.

ElKelish et al. [7] found that the organizational culture of hierarchy has a critical positive outcome on the UAE corporations’ risk metric. A study made on the “impact of organizational culture and perceived process safety in the UAE oil and gas industry” conducted by Mazrouei et al. [8] showed that different attributes affect and improve the safety performance in the UAE’s oil and gas industry. The findings of their study indicated that mentalities and convictions decided the degree of safety culture effectiveness of society viability, which matched with earlier literature.

A study conducted by Shwana et al. [9] on workers and clients of an Iraqi telecommunication organization demonstrated the effect of human resources development practices on human capital, which would instigate positive conduct in workers and would influence insight, aptitudes, capacities, and perspectives, thus affecting organizational performance. Alrawi et al. [10] found that getting trust and the perceptions of management executives in light of directors’ individual insights and managerial styles has a negative relationship with the apparent advantages of these creativity negligence factors.

A study conducted by Sweis et al. [11] on “the relationship between total quality management (TQM) implementation and organization performance: evidence from the airlines companies in UAE” revealed that there is a positive relationship between TQM and organizational performance. A Dubai-based survey conducted by Obay [12] demonstrated that organizations’ social responsibility programs, worker health, and safety policies were considered as the areas of strength. The views on inevitable worker offense were, then again, especially disturbing. Moral frameworks needed greater comprehensiveness. Aspects of irreconcilable circumstance, autonomy of board enrollment, segregation, misleading clients, illegal installments, and encroachment of natural law and principles, among others, are not appropriately addressed.

The UAE has been positioned second in the Arab world and is among the main 20 nations monetarily indicated by The Economist’s investigation of 66 nations. The UAE’s solid sovereign wealth resources worth $1.16 trillion provide an important part of its financial stability [13]. The present study narrates the influence of corporate culture toward the attitude, performance, productivity, and behavior of 200 employees working in two major foreign exchange companies of the United Arab Emirates.

1.1. Background of the Study

It is a fact that corporate culture plays a vital role towards the behavior, performance, attitude, and productivity of workers. The United Arab Emirates, comprising seven Emirates, has few locals of its own to fulfill the demand for labor. As a result, workers from various countries, western and non-western, entered these Emirates and started forming into a large workforce. They are ethnic groups. It was observed through analytical study that there is a strong influence by corporate culture on the attitude, performance, productivity, and behavior of employees working in diverse industries in the UAE. There were separate studies on corporate culture and its impact on other factors. Some studies focused on the impact on employees’ attitude on account of corporate culture, whereas other studies focused on the impact of performance and productivity [7,14,15,16,17]. This study necessitated a comprehensive study of corporate culture, having impact on all of the above factors. The researcher, therefore, selected the workers of two popular foreign exchange companies of the UAE and collected their information through a questionnaire. This study found that 69% of workers concurred that corporate culture makes a critical or significant effect on their presentation, while 62% and 63% of the workers moreover concurred that corporate culture affects mentality and conduct, respectively. The majority of the target employees agreed that a company influences the productivity level of the employee and, therefore, the organization itself.

Corporate tradition is difficult to inculcate formally in newcomers to an organization, though it has to be learned nonetheless. It is gradually uncovered through a set of company processes, values, customs, incentive programs, and approaches, wherein employees are managed, they engage with each other, and they prioritize essentials. Altogether, culture is both a rationale and a set of outcomes of behavior in the day-to-day running of an organization, as a primary enabler of high-performing businesses.

1.2. The Significance of Culture

Culture is a word for the lifestyle of gatherings of individuals, which means the manner in which they get things done. Various communities or societies may have various cultures. A culture followed by the past generation is generally followed by the present generation, which will be practiced by the future generation. We find various cultures in religions, communities, music, cooking, and so on. Culture can be perceived as a major part of a company’s marquee. However, if a culture is not aligned with the brand or that brand no longer naturally comes up from that culture, then companies can develop a credibility gap by way of promising one thing to the market and providing something else or something less. That is why corporate culture and the values upon which it is based needs to be built into every side of a company, together with management training and efficiency direction. It will have to evolve in tandem with external developments, such as financials, as determined by the market. Furthermore, it should be communicated constantly both internally and externally to stakeholders.

Culture can affect industry results in a number of ways, both positively and negatively. For instance, cultures that are not aligned with corporate systems can lead to reduced loyalty, a reduction in motivation, and excessive employee turnover. However, healthy cultures produce greater job satisfaction, increased productivity, and greater collaboration of company strategies, such as with the employees at a high-production manufacturing plant. Strategy, operational efficiency, and tradition are all strongly related. High-performing companies most commonly view culture as an enabler of technique and efficiency, and wish to create a culture as a way to aid and enable employees to achieve those goals.

Cooke et al. [18] are of the opinion that organizational level factors shape the cultures of organizations. According to the study conducted by Hofstede et al. [19], there is agreement that authoritative culture is comprehensive, generally shared, and socially built; it includes suppositions, convictions, and desires for conduct, exists at an assortment of levels, and shows itself in a wide scope of features of organizational life. According to Schein [4] culture is commonly known to have several components or layers, including underlying assumptions, beliefs, and behavioral standards. Constructive cultures, according to Weidner [20] have been shown to have a positive effect on organizational participants, including confidence in their managers and organizations. Chaudhry [21] is of the opinion that the variability of cultures is due to business as well as organizational variables. It is suggested that the strength of the three types of cultures—positive, passive/defensive, and aggressive/defensive—are influenced at the industry and organizational level. Research using the structure and culture survey conducted by Corbett and Rastrick [22] found that constructive cultures are positively connected to positive results across industries, including success in manufacturing organizations.

Once organizational cultures have begun, they have a tendency to sustain themselves in many ways, in most cases by means of members of the institution. Other group members may experiment with the ways and extent to which their own values and behavior fit in. New members are explicitly taught the crew type. Old experiences and various stories of legendary proportion are revisited from time to time to remind everyone of the crew’s values and their significance. Managers explicitly behave and act in ways that exemplify the culture and its ideals. Managerial and senior individuals of the group may communicate the key values time and again in their everyday conversations or through detailed rituals and ceremonies. Those folks who follow the cultural norms are rewarded, and those who do not may be penalized. A penalty may be as casual and benign as a look of disapproval.

1.3. Mastery Implemented for Employee Behaviours

Organizational culture serves as a swaying mechanism for employee behavior. If the tradition of the group is characterized by using competition, then individuals could be inclined to behave in ways that might be self-serving instead of enhancing the greater interest of the company. However, if the culture is characterized by collaboration, as stated by Nwugwo [23] members will tend to behave in ways that serve the team as a whole. The question that arises is whether a heterogeneous workforce can be influenced by one work culture. However, routinely, where there is a clash of cultures, particularly when a character or group of contributors has a separate set of values, then those prevailing within the organization’s main traditions may be challenged. Strongly held differences of values or opinions can be deleterious to a company.

1.4. Statement of the Problem

There is a considerable body of research confirming the role of work cultures in largely homogeneous organizations, in which the employee body is comprised of similar backgrounds, educations, and meaning systems. The question that arises is whether, in heterogeneous cultures like those of the UAE, thrift, hard work, tenacity, fairness, and tolerance are sufficiently established to make all of the difference. In the two forex organizations used in this study as cases, are their cultures strong and influential enough to inculcate employee awareness of the company mission, and do these employees feel that their attitude and behaviors are being shaped by working towards the overall goal of the company? In other words, is the culture effective by impacting these employees, even if they stay for less than a year?

The competitiveness of corporations should not only be reflected in their technology, but also in their corporate culture. A confident organizational culture can promote the healthy progress of an enterprise, and actively mobilize the productivity of the employee, making them work with extra enthusiasm. In addition, it will fortify production effectively. In short, the performance of a confident organizational tradition may often be self-evident.

One of the purposes of a company is to develop the loyalty of its consumer base. Thus, an excellent corporate image has to be a prime goal. A good corporate image brings good fiscal returns, dependent on an organizational culture that reinforces that image. Can a heterogeneous work force accomplish this? It is questionable, therefore, whether novice and trainee employees have enough time to make adjustments to a work culture that is new to them, and whether more long-standing employees of different backgrounds can make an effective adjustment.

1.5. Objectives

The main objective of this study is to examine the influence of corporate culture on the behavior of heterogeneous groups of employees. As a developing economy, the UAE has in its workforce different ethnicities and nationalities, each with its own distinctive national traditions, cultures, religions, histories, and work patterns. The study also aims to analyze the remittances made by two foreign exchange companies in the UAE as being characteristic of finance companies, in which most of the employees originate from different nations who work together regardless of their socio-cultural background. It is important to examine how company culture may influence employee behavior in an emerging economy when an organization comprises employees from heterogeneous national cultures and backgrounds.

1.6. Research Questions

In this research paper, the researchers have the following research questions:

(1)

To what extent does corporate culture determine expatriate employee attitude?

(2)

To what extent does corporate culture determine expatriate employee performance?

(3)

To what extent does corporate culture determine expatriate employee behavior?

(4)

To what extent does corporate culture determine the productivity of an expatriate employee?

1.7. Hypothesis

The present research has been based on the following hypotheses:

Hypothesis (H1): 

There is a significant impact of the corporate culture of the UAE on employee attitude.

Hypothesis (H2): 

There is a significant impact of the corporate culture of the UAE on expatriate employee performance.

Hypothesis (H3): 

There is a significant impact of the corporate culture of the UAE on expatriate employee behavior.

Hypothesis (H4): 

There is a significant impact of the corporate culture of the UAE on productivity of an expatriate employee.

Hypothesis (H5): 

The work culture of diverse nationalities has a significant impact on organizational performance.

1.8. Theoretical Implications

Corporate culture can have a profound impact on employee morale, hence, it can be considered as the organization’s brand. A good corporate culture can attract better talents and inspire its employees towards better productivity. An organization with a strong corporate culture can leverage better performance from the employees, as they feel valued, and thereby gain better involvement in new tasks as well as in decision-making. Increased job satisfaction and loyalty to the organization are seen among the employees in an organization with a strong corporate culture. A corporate culture that promotes flexibility, supports professional development, and provides work–life balance will be the key attraction for a prospective employee. A positive work environment will minimize boredom and make the work exciting as well as interesting.

1.9. Limitations of the Study

(1)

Although the study has been implemented very systematically, it could suffer from two deficiencies.

(2)

The data collection may not have harvested sufficient data for generalizing the conclusions.

(3)

An in-depth interview with the HR manager may have included subjective and personal comments.

(4)

The research investigates only two cases of one industry: the financial industry.

2. Review of Literature

A study conducted by Sivakami and Samitha [24] on 50 employees of Source Edge Software Technologies Pvt. Ltd revealed that there is a significant and strong relationship between the culture and performance of employees. Organization culture has made strength in the work environment. The findings further showed that the workforce is satisfied with the organization, and expected to remain in the organization for an extended time. A representative who is exceptionally associated with accomplishing the general objectives and targets of the organization is viewed as the basic indicator of organizational performance.

Ababneh et al. [25] conducted a study by gathering data from 249 members of 26 colleges concerning personnel perspectives and practices. The study revealed that there is a considerable relationship between work attributes, business-related perspectives, and authoritative citizenship working in a non-Western nation, the UAE. The researchers found that there was a strong link between organizational commitment and civic virtue, and was more grounded than the link between authoritative responsibility and unselfishness.

Kapiszewski, A. [26] found diverse behavior in migrant workers in Arab and Asian countries. This behavior of migrant workers happened on account of their pressure on labor markets, reduction of unemployment, and accelerated development. The employment of foreign workers is both gainful and expensive for receiving nations. The advantages of gain to the foreign workforce are genuinely perfect. These foreigners provide an essential workforce and specialization, with required skills, attitudes, and inspiration to the national consumption of goods supplied by native traders, and thereby increase the sales of local markets. They are typically capable of finding better remunerated jobs than those of their home country, providing a quality standard of living, and making opportunity for quick career advancement. They are capable of saving and, by remitting money to their home country, often called “motivating the economy in their home nations,” they do more than just provide for their families alone. The existence of a huge number of expatriates, a main threat to the constancy of GCC nations, risks the culture, impacts the organization of society, and has a strong influence on foreign policy.

Cherian, J. et al. [27] highlighted higher education and elaborated that there is a need to foster an institutional culture of innovation among higher education institutes, which, in turn, will improve creativities and create awareness of the remuneration resultant from the accomplishment of innovation. This also minimizes the resistance to change and motivates openness to innovation.

A theory of implicit leadership in a cultural approach has been explained by Abdalla and Al-Homoud [28]. According to their studies, the Arabian Gulf countries, from the early 1950s onwards, conveyed a version of modernization of hospitals, schools, and roads. The officials of Arab expatriates have developed work approaches and native administrative styles. Therefore, the current native administrative style is a combination of official and customary tribal techniques. Relying on expatriates is necessitated on account of a high illiteracy rate and deficiency of required aptitudes among locals. Though the outcomes display the high bunch of knowledge and education for exceptional leadership, certain leaders, predominantly the uneducated, are apprehensive of professional judgment, and they doom originality, intelligence, and imagination.

A study conducted by Shaw et al. [29] on organizational commitment and performance among guest workers and citizens of an Arab country revealed the relationship between expatriates and local citizens. The Arab officials often positioned a stronger emphasis on organizational devotion than on personal devotion. UAE citizens with an extraordinary range of commitment to organizations may be dedicated to task performance. Serving behaviors decreased as affecting commitment altitudes enlarged across the sample, though the correlation was much tougher for UAE citizens than expatriates.

Barney [30] opined in 1986 that a firm’s culture should generate sustained quality improvements. He acknowledged previous findings that the cultures of some corporations have imbibed this attribute. Corporations that do not have the desired cultures do not implement activities that will drive them to quality initiatives in order to generate sustained superior profit margins. Corporations that have cultures with the desired attributes will get sustained superior profits from their cultures. In fact, this is consistently observed: when a quality culture is achieved, all employees, from senior leadership to frontline staff, have infused quality improvement (QI) into the way they do business daily. Employees, at length, considered the ways improve quality, which was no longer seen as an additional task. Quality improvement (QI) refers to the consolidated and continuous endeavors of everyone in an organization to make every little thing about it, particularly its production process, better. It is a precise way to deal with the disposal or reduction of work, waste, and misfortunes in the production process.

Hafeez et al. [31] found in their study on the “impact of workplace environment on employee performance” that there is a significant positive relationship between physical environment factors and employees’ health. They also found that there is a positive and significant relationship between behavioral factors and employees’ health. However, a blend of monetary and non-monetary rewards is more compelling in accomplishing higher levels of employee performance, which leads to accomplishment of organizational objectives. Improving physical and behavioral factors will improve the health of employees, which can lead to the employees performing their tasks more effectively.

Ghazi et al. [32] also found that there is a positive relationship between organizational culture and job performance. They said that four authoritative culture sub-components, managing change, achieving goals, coordinating teamwork, and cultural strength, emphatically influence job performance, but with varying and distinct intensity. Customer orientation alone was adversely connected with job performance.

The results of the study done by Lolowang et al. [33] showed that the direct leadership has no significant effect on employee performance; organizational culture has a significant effect on employee performance; leadership has a significant effect on work motivation; organizational culture has a significant effect on work motivation; work motivation has a significant effect on employee performance; work motivation is a perfect mediator of the influence of leadership on employee performance; and work motivation is a partial mediator of the influence of organizational culture on employee performance.

According to Kerdpitak et al. [34] the organizational culture and high responsibility of employees are essential for successful human resource management practices, as the culture and responsibility enhance the inspiration of the employees to adapt with organizational goals.

A recent study conducted by Kaur et al. [35] on work culture and employee satisfaction in the banking sector found that the atmosphere of work has a strong association with employee satisfaction. The level of employee satisfaction was increased by employee engagement in the corporate decision-making process, collaboration, knowledge exchange, consistent comprehension of the task, creative atmosphere, and position clarification.

As per the findings of Kerdpitak et al. [34] the laws and regulations that govern corporate culture and employee engagement, as well as organization citizen behavior regulations that improve the efficiency of human resource management, will eventually improve the performance of the business.

3. Methodology

Data was collected from two forex companies of the UAE on a stratified sampling basis, which had a total working population of 415 employees. A questionnaire was developed for a self-administered survey, and was distributed among 275 employees of the total population. However, we received 221 questionnaires back after three weeks, out of which 18 were rejected for incomplete data. We finally considered only 200 questionnaires as the sample size, which was comprised of 126 males and 74 females. Stratified random sampling was used, for which the following formula was used to get the sample size of 200 [36]

$$\mathrm{ss}=\frac{{\mathrm{Z}}^2\times \left(\mathrm{p}\right)\times \left(1-\mathrm{p}\right)}{{\mathrm{c}}^2}$$

where

Z = Z value (e.g., 1.96 for 95% confidence level)

p = Percentage picking a choice, expressed as a decimal (0.5 used for sample size needed)

c = Confidence interval, expressed as a decimal (e.g., 0.05 = ±5)

The total population of 415 was applied in the formula, and we arrived at the sample of 200 as given below.

Determine Sample Size
Confidence Level:
Confidence Interval:
Population:
Sample size needed:

The questionnaire contained personal information, including age, gender, marital status, experience in a corporate environment, experience in the position of the job, nationality, workgroup, and national origin to compile a composition, firm behavior, reasons affecting job fulfillment, and factors affecting institutional commitment. The questionnaires were presented in SPSS for data analysis. The style of the questions included the open-ended, closed, and Likert format with point–response scales. A Likert scale is a rating scale that requires the subject to indicate his/her measure of accordance to an assertion. Respondents were given five response alternatives ranging from 1 to 5. They are 1—Strongly Agree, 2—Agree, 3—Neutral, 4—Disagree, and 5—Strongly Disagree. The Likert scale was chosen because it provides precise and accurate results. It also addresses the open-ended questions systematically.

Quantitative analysis was used to measure the various perceptions of the employees. This analysis correlated the relationship between variables in a more direct manner. The researchers sought personal help from one of the HR managers while analyzing the data and findings.

3.1. Primary Data Collection

For this study, primary data were collected from the employees of two leading foreign exchange centers operating in Abu Dhabi and Dubai, the main Emirates of the United Arab Emirates. The respondents were comprised of 126 males (63 percent) and 74 females (27 percent); 52 percent of the respondents were married and 48 percent were unmarried. A foreign exchange company, otherwise known as a forex broker, does currency exchange and international payments. All of the respondents, both male and females, were from the clerical cadre. The term is regularly utilized for cash transactions that offer actual conveyance, not towards the ledgers. With Dubai being the center of the economic activities, the investors from throughout the world come to Dubai to explore investment opportunities, and thereby the need for cash trade organizations in Dubai emerges.

A questionnaire was used to collect the data. The questionnaire contained personal information like age, gender, marital status, experience in a corporate environment, experience in the position of the job, nationality, workgroup, and national origin to compile a composition, firm behavior, reasons affecting job fulfillment, and factors affecting institutional commitment.

3.2. Methods Used for Analysis

The respondents were given an assurance, while collecting primary data, that their identity would be kept confidential. Chi-square and ANNOVA were used for the study. The Smart PLS software was used in this research. This software uses the graphical interface for variance-based structural equation modeling (SEM), which is applied in the partial least squares (PLS) path modeling method. This software was used to prove hypotheses in this research. It has become a popular tool for analyzing relationships between latent variables, measured by sets of observed variables [37,38].

4. Data Presentation and Analysis

Two hundred responses collected through questionnaires were thoroughly examined and systematically compiled, and conclusions were drawn. The data were tabulated and displayed by means of tables with the goal of detecting patterns that enabled the authors to draw conclusions. We analyzed the demographic variables of the employees first.

4.1. Descriptive Statistical Analysis

As show in

Table 1. Demographic variables of employees and their corporate service.

Demographic Variables		Frequency	Percentage	Valid Percentage	Cumulative Percentage
Gender	Male	126	63	63	63
	Female	74	37	37	100
	Total	200	100	100	-
Marital status	Married	96	48	48	48
	Unmarried	104	52	52	100
	Total	200	100	100	-
Age	Less than 25	68	34	34	34
	25–35 years	62	31	31	65
	36–46 years	4	2	2	67
	47–57 years	10	5	5	72
	58 or above	56	28	28	100
	Total	200	100	100	-
Years in Corporate	Less than 1 year	80	40	40	40
	2–7 years	30	15	15	55
	8-13 years	36	18	18	73
	14–19 years	18	9	9	82
	20 years and above	36	18	18	100
	Total	200	100	100	-
Years in position	Less than 1 year	112	56	56	56
	2–7 years	38	19	19	75
	8–13 years	36	18	18	93
	14–19 years	14	7	7	100
	Total	200	100	100	-

and Figure 1: 126 (63%) of the respondents were male, while 74 (37%) of the respondents were female. Information was sought about respondents’ number of years of working in the organization as an indicator of cultural awareness.

96 (48%) of the employees were married, while 104 (52%) of the employees were unmarried;68 employees (34%) were under 25 years, 62 of the employees (31%) were between 25 to 35 years, four employees (2%) were from the age group 36–46 years, 10 (5%) were 47–57 years, and 56 (28%) employees were of the age 58 years and above.

40% of the employees worked in the corporate environment for less than one year, while 15% of the employees worked in the corporate environment for 2–7 years, 18% worked for 8–13 years, 9% worked for 14–19 years, and 18% of the employees worked in the corporate environment for 20 years or more. Around 56% of the employees had been in their position for less than one year, while 19% of the employees had been working in the same position for 2–7 years, 18% had been working in the position for 8–13 years, and 14% had been working in the same position for 14–19 years. It has been found that the largest percentage of employees are comprised of the under 25-age group, and that the maximum number of employees have been working in one of the two companies for less than a year. These data have led the researchers to conclude that the employees do not have enough time to adjust to a new work culture or that it is not to their liking, implying that they may resign for a new position or even return to their country of origin. If 56 percent of a company’s workforce are there for less than a year, it also seems to imply that the culture is either too strong and difficult to adjust to (along with other factors), or that it is not strong enough to have an impact, as it might be seen as significantly weakened by the transience of the workforce to stand up for long.

4.2. Analysis of Hypotheses

The hypotheses were framed to find the effectiveness of corporate culture on employee attitude, performance, and behavior. The hypotheses were further analyzed, and we used smart PLS by the SEM analysis method to get a clear and objective result.

The data of

Table 2. Employees’ attitude towards corporate culture.

H1	Missing	Mean	Median	Min	Max	Standard Deviation	Excess Kurtosis	Skewness
AT_1	0	3.14	3	1	5	1.03	−0.652	0.214
AT_2	0	2.315	2	1	5	1.227	−0.389	0.72
AT_3	0	2.29	2	1	5	1.362	−0.905	0.634
AT_4	0	2.255	2	1	5	1.389	−0.888	0.707
AT_5	0	3.225	3	1	5	1.302	−1.036	−0.192
HYP_1	0	2.675	3	1	5	1.174	−0.574	0.357

AT_1, AT_2, AT_3, AT_4, and AT_5 indicate employees’ attitude. HYP_1 stands for Hypotheses 1.

have been evaluated by the standard deviation (SD) method. The SDs ranged between 1.03 to 1.389; the mean ranged from 2.25 to 3.25, and for the hypothesis, the median of 2 to 3 also matched the mean and median of 2.675 and 3, respectively, as well as the 1.174 SD. Because one SD was1.174 and the mean was2.675 in our hypothesis, we predict that 68 percent of the scores on this test fell between 1.501 and 3.849. A broad standard deviation showed that the data points were far from the mean, and a small standard deviation showed that, as seen in Figure 2, they were clustered closely around the mean.

The findings of data for

Table 3. Employees’ performance related to corporate culture.

H2	Missing	Mean	Median	Min	Max	Standard Deviation	Excess Kurtosis	Skewness
PR_1	0	2.495	2	1	5	1.33	−0.751	0.601
PR_2	0	2.275	2	1	5	1.367	−0.848	0.675
PR_3	0	2.62	2	1	5	1.505	−1.396	0.321
PR_4	0	3.015	3	1	5	1.116	−0.438	0.036
PR_5	0	2.885	3	1	5	1.201	−0.781	0.241
HYP_2	0	2.78	3	1	5	1.158	−0.637	0.302

PR_1, PR_2, PR_3, PR_4, and PR_5 stand for employees’ performance. HYP_2 stands for Hypotheses 2.

were also interpreted by the standard deviation method. In this case, the SD ranged from 1.116–1.505, the mean ranged from 2.275–3.015, and the median of 2 to 3 associated to Hypothesis 2 resembled the mean and median of 2.78 and 3, as well as 1.158 SD. Since one SD in our hypothesis was 1.158, and we know that the mean was 2.78, we calculated that 68% of the scores on this test fell between 1.622 and 3.938. A large standard deviation indicated that the data points were far from the mean, and a small standard deviation indicated that they were clustered closely around the mean, as shown in Figure 3.

The findings of the data for

Table 4. Employees’ behavior in relation to corporate culture.

H3	Missing	Mean	Median	Min	Max	Standard Deviation	Excess Kurtosis	Skewness
BH_1	0	3.23	3	1	54	3.847	152.57	11.555
BH_2	0	2.885	3	1	5	1.316	−1.069	0.148
BH_3	0	2.595	2	1	5	1.386	−0.964	0.505
BH_4	0	3.09	3	1	5	1.213	−0.898	0.08
BH_5	0	3.42	4	1	5	1.27	−0.851	−0.387
HYP_3	0	2.645	3	1	5	1.044	−0.311	0.354

BH_1, BH_2, BH_3, BH_4, and BH_5 imply employees’ corporate culture. HYP_3 stands for Hypotheses 3.

were also obtained through the standard deviation method. We can observe in this case that the SD varied from 1.044 to 3.847, while the mean ranged from 2.595 to 3.23, and the median was 2 to 4 for Hypothesis 3, which also matched the mean and median of 2.645 and 3.1044 SD, respectively. Since one SD was 1.044 in our hypothesis and we know that the mean was2.645, we calculated that 68 percent of the scores on this test fell between 1.601 and 3.689 in this case. A higher standard deviation showed that the data points were far from the mean, and a small standard deviation shows that, as seen in Figure 4, they were clustered closely around the mean.

The data obtained from employees with regard to corporate culture in relation to employees’ development is shown in

Table 5. Corporate culture in relation to employees’ development.

H4	Missing	Mean	Median	Min	Max	Standard Deviation	Excess Kurtosis	Skewness
OR_1	0	3.36	3	1	5	1.123	−0.95	−0.105
OR_2	0	3.15	3	1	5	1.303	−1.079	−0.104
OR_3	0	2.945	3	1	5	1.201	−0.807	0.002
OR_4	0	3.035	3	1	5	0.992	−0.509	0.177
OR_5	0	2.84	3	1	5	1.151	−0.581	0.258
HYP_4	0	3.06	3	1	5	1.052	−0.652	0.321

OR_1, OR_2, OR_3, OR_4, and OR_5 indicate corporate culture. HYP_4 stands for Hypotheses 4.

, and the findings were analyzed by the standard deviation method, while the SD ranged from 0.992–1.303, the mean ranged from 2.84–3.36 with the median of 3, while Hypothesis 4 also reached the mean and median of 3.06 and 3, with an SD of 1.052. Since one SD in our hypothesis was 1.052, and we know that the mean was3.06, we calculated that 68% of the scores on this test fell between 2.008 and 4.112. A large standard deviation indicated that the data points were far from the mean, and a small standard deviation indicated that they were clustered closely around the mean, as shown in Figure 5.

We see from

Table 6. The work culture of diverse nationalities related to organizational performance.

H5	Missing	Mean	Median	Min	Max	Standard Deviation	Excess Kurtosis	Skewness
WC_1	0	2.885	3	1	5	1.316	−1.069	0.148
WC_2	0	3.225	3	1	5	1.302	−1.036	−0.192
WC_3	0	2.495	2	1	5	1.33	−0.751	0.601
WC_4	0	3.015	3	1	5	1.016	−0.438	0.036
WC_5	0	2.780	3	1	5	1.158	−0.637	0.302
HYP_5	0	2.255	2	1	5	1.389	−0.888	0.707

WC_1, WC_2, WC_3, WC_4, and WC_5 indicate work culture. HYP_5 stands for Hypotheses 5.

that the SD ranged from 1.016 to 1.389, the mean ranged from 2.255 to 3.225, and the median of 2 to 3 relevant to Hypothesis 5 satisfied the mean and median of 2.255 and 1.389 SD. Since one SD in our hypothesis was1.389 and the mean value was 2.255, we analyzed that 68% of the scores on this test fell between 1.712 and 3.211. Again, a higher value of the standard deviation indicated that the data points were far from the mean, and a small standard deviation indicated that they were clustered closely around the mean, as shown in Figure 6.

The Figure 7 and Figure 8 show the path coefficient and smart PLS by the SEM analysis method. The results obtained from the analysis show that the relationship between corporate culture and employee attitude was0.786, the relationship between corporate culture and employee performance was 0.161, and the relationship found between corporate culture and employee behavior was0.041. Therefore, the relationship between corporate culture and employee attitude was found to be higher when compared with performance and behavior.

Figure 9 explains smart PLS by SEM analysis by the bootstrapping method, which will help us find the relationship between the employee and corporate culture. The results obtained from the analysis show that the relationship between corporate culture and employee attitude was 2.577, the relationship between corporate culture and employee performance was 0.742, and the relationship found between corporate culture and employee behavior was 0.510. The relationship between corporate culture and employee attitude was higher when compared with performance and behavior.

Figure 10 clearly signifies that the corporate culture had an impact on employee attitude, as the path coefficients showed a high relationship within the significance ratio of 0.05.

From

Table 7. Chi-square test for Hypothesis 1.

Hypothesis 1
	Q1—Individual Differences Are Respected	Q2—My Present Salary Is Appropriate for the Work I Do	Q3—The pay Raises at My Organization Are Satisfactory	Q4—The Salary Package Meets My Needs	Q5—All of My Benefits Will be Provided by the Organization
Chi-Square	68.200	50.850	68.750	79.100	10.850
Df	4	4	4	4	4
Asymp. Sig.	0	0	0	0	0.028

, it is clear that the significance value was less than 0.05. The table also resembles Q1–Q5 and had a significance of less than 0.05, which signified that there was a notable effect on Hypothesis 1. Hence, the null hypothesis was accepted and we could disregard the alternate hypothesis. Therefore, it is evident that the corporate culture had a significant impact on employee attitude.

We see from Table 7, the significance value was less than 0.05.

Table 8. Chi-square test for Hypothesis 2.

Hypothesis 2
	Q6—Employees in My Team Cooperate with Each Other to Get the Job Done	Q7—Sufficient Encouragement Is Provided by the Teammates at Work	Q8—Everyone Is Encouraged to Participate in Group Teams	Q9—Team Success Is Celebrated as a Group Achievement	Q10—I am Recognized and Respected within My Team
Chi-Square	32.450	71.350	31.150	69.950	31.050
Df	4	4	4	4	4
Asymp. Sig.	0	0	0	0	0

also resembles Q6–Q10, which had significances of less than 0.05. This signified that there was a significant effect in relation to Hypothesis 2. Hence, the null hypothesis could be accepted and we disregarded the alternate hypothesis. Therefore, the corporate culture had a significant impact on employee performance which is also indicated in Figure 11.

It is apparent from

Table 9. Chi-square test for Hypothesis 3.

Hypothesis 3
	Q11—I Understand Day to Day Objectives of My Department	Q12—My Job Responsibility Is Clearly Described	Q13—The Overall Infrastructure Provided by the Organization Is Satisfying	Q14—I Can Arrange My Work Place as Per My Comfort	Q15—My Shift Findings Are Flexible
Chi-Square	42.460	8.150	24.250	27.150	23.350
Df	5	4	4	4	4
Asymp. Sig.	0	0.086	0	0	0

that the significance value was less than 0.05. Hence, the null hypothesis could be accepted and we disregarded the alternate hypothesis. Therefore, as can be seen from Figure 12, the corporate culture also had a significant impact on employee behavior.

Table 10. Chi-square test for Hypothesis 5.

Hypothesis 5
	Q21—The Organization Promotes Diversity through Its Recruitment Practices	Q22—The Organization Provides Equity and Support to Diverse Employees	Q23—The organization Promotes Diversity through Its Internal Promotion Practices	Q24—Work Culture Diversity Increases Organizational Performance	Q25—Any Internal Policies Provided by the Organization to Support Diverse Employees
Chi-Square	22.520	72.220	35.150	39.950	51.050
Df	4	4	4	4	4
Asymp. Sig.	0	0	0	0	0

reveals that the significance value was less than 0.05. The tables also resemble Q21 to Q25, and had a significance of less than 0.05, which signified that there was a notable effect on Hypothesis 1. Hence, the null hypothesis was accepted and we could disregard the alternate hypothesis. It was thus evident that the work culture of diverse nationalities had a significant impact on organizational performance.

Table 11. Chi-square tests for H1–H5.

Significance > 0.05
	H1	H2	H3	H4	H5
Chi-Square	67.750	39.950	40.900	69.350	60.250
Df	4	4	4	4	4
Asymp. Sig.	0	0	0	0	0

demonstrates that the significance value was less than 0.05 when considered with the entire hypothesis. Hence, the null hypothesis was accepted and we again disregarded the alternate hypothesis. Therefore, the corporate culture had a significant impact on employee attitude, performance, and behavior. It also signified that the corporate culture had a significant impact on the productivity of the employees.

4.3. Verification and Validation of the Analysis of Hypotheses

We see from

Table 12. Does corporate culture affect employees’ attitude?

		Frequency	Percentage	Valid Percentage	Cumulative Percentage
Valid	Strongly Disagree	20	10.0	10.0	10.0
	Disagree	37	18.5	18.5	28.5
	Undecided	71	35.5	35.5	64.0
	Agree	62	31.0	31.0	95.0
	Strongly Agree	10	5.0	5.0	100.0
	Total	200	100.0	100.0

that 31% of the employees agreed and 5% of the employees strongly agreed that there was a significant impact on employee attitude through corporate culture; 35% of the respondents were undecided, 18.5% of the respondents disagreed, and 10% of them strongly disagreed.

4.3.1. Test of Hypotheses

Until a hypothesis has been analyzed and verified, available data are comprised of little more than assumptions or expectations. A few statistical tools can be used for the analysis of hypotheses, but such analysis is likely to be constrained to the chi-square tool. The chi-square test is suitable for verifying whether a particular set of observations is reliable. Chi-square (X²) is calculated making use of the formula given below.

$${\mathsf{\chi }}^2 = \sum \frac{\left(\mathrm{O}-\mathrm{E}\right)²}{\mathrm{E}}$$

where O = Observed frequency, E = Expected frequency.

Hypothesis 1

H₀: Corporate culture does not significantly impact employee attitude.

H₁: Corporate culture significantly impacts employee attitude.

Test result of H1 is shown in

Table 13. Test for H1.

	Observed n	Expected n	O−E	(O−E)^2	(O−E)^2/E
Strongly Disagree	20	40.0	−20.0	400.0	10.00
Disagree	37	40.0	−3.0	9.0	0.225
Undecided	71	40.0	31.0	961.0	24.025
Agree	62	40.0	22.0	484.0	12.10
Strongly Agree	10	40.0	−30.0	900.0	22.50
Total	200				68.85

.

Decision rule: Accept H₁ and reject H₀ if the calculated value is greater than tabulated

Calculated value:

$${\mathsf{X}}^2 = \sum \frac{\left(O-E\right)²}{E}$$

X² = 68.85

Degree of freedom “d.o.f” = n − 1

where

n = number of rows

Therefore, d.o.f = 5 − 1 = 4

Tabulated (X²) at 0.05% level of significance, the table value of chi-square (68.5, 4) is 9.488.

Decision: Accept H₁ and reject H₀ if the calculated value is greater than tabulated.

This indicated that the corporate culture had a significant impact on employee attitude.

Table 14. Does corporate culture have a significant impact on employee performance?

		Frequency	Percentage	Valid Percentage	Cumulative Percentage
Valid	Strongly Disagree	12	6.0	6.0	6.0
	Disagree	31	15.5	15.5	21.5
	Undecided	64	32.0	32.0	53.5
	Agree	69	34.5	34.5	88.0
	Strongly Agree	24	12.0	12.0	100.0
	Total	200	100.0	100.0

reveals that 34.5% of the employees agreed and 12% of the employees strongly agreed that corporate culture has a significant impact on employee performance; 32% of the respondents were undecided, 15.5% of the respondents disagreed, and 6% of them strongly disagreed.

Hypothesis 2

H₀: Corporate culture does not have a significant impression on employee performance.

H₂: Corporate culture has a significant impression on employee performance.

Test result of H2 is shown in

Table 15. Test for H2.

	Observed n	Expected n	O−E	(O−E)^2	(O−E)^2/E
Strongly Disagree	12	40.0	−28.0	784.0	19.6
Disagree	31	40.0	−9.0	81.0	2.025
Undecided	64	40.0	24.0	576.0	14.4
Agree	69	40.0	29.0	841.0	21.025
Strongly Agree	24	40.0	−16.0	256.0	6.4
Total	200				63.45

.

Decision rule: Accept H₂and reject H₀if the calculated value is greater than tabulated.

Calculated value:

$${\mathsf{X}}^2 = \sum \frac{\left(O-E\right)²}{E}$$

X² = 63.45

Degree of freedom “d.o.f” = n− 1

where

n = number of rows

Therefore,

d.o.f = 5 − 1 = 4

Tabulated (X²) at 0.05% level of significance, the table value of chi-square (68.5, 4) is 9.488.

Decision: Accept H₂ and reject H₀ if the calculated value is greater than tabulated.

This indicated that the corporate culture had a significant impact on employee performance.

Table 16. Does corporate culture have a significant impact on employee behavior?

		Frequency	Percentage	Valid Percentage	Cumulative Percentage
Valid	Strongly Disagree	15	7.5	7.5	7.5
	Disagree	34	17.0	17.0	24.5
	Undecided	58	29.0	29.0	53.5
	Agree	63	31.5	31.5	85.0
	Strongly Agree	30	15.0	15.0	100.0
	Total	200	100.0	100.0

reveals that 31.5% of the employees agreed and 15% of the employees strongly agreed that there was a significant impact on employee behavior through corporate culture; 29% of the respondents were undecided, 17% of the respondents disagreed, and 7.5% of them strongly disagreed.

Hypothesis 3

H₀: Corporate culture does not have a significant impact on employee behavior.

H₃: Corporate culture has a significant impact on employee behavior.

Test result of H3 is shown in

Table 17. Test for Hypothesis 3.

	Observed n	Expected n	O−E	(O−E)^2	(O−E)^2/E
Strongly Disagree	15	40.0	−25.0	625.0	15.625
Disagree	34	40.0	−6.0	36.0	0.9
Undecided	58	40.0	18.0	324.0	8.1
Agree	63	40.0	23.0	529.0	13.225
Strongly Agree	30	40.0	−10.0	100.0	2.5
Total	200				40.35

.

Decision rule: Accept H₃and reject H₀if the calculated value is greater than tabulated.

Calculated value:

$${\mathsf{X}}^2 = \sum \frac{\left(O-E\right)²}{E}$$

X²= 40.35

Degree of freedom “d.o.f” = n− 1

where

n = number of rows

Therefore,

d.o.f = 5 − 1 = 4

Tabulated (X²) at 0.05% level of significance, the table value of chi-square (40.35, 4) is 9.488.

Decision: Accept H₃ and reject H₀ if the calculated value is greater than tabulated.

This indicated that the corporate culture had a significant impact on employees’ behavior.

Table 18. Does corporate culture have a significant impact on the productivity level of employees?

		Frequency	Percentage	Valid Percentage	Cumulative Percentage
Valid	Strongly Disagree	11	5.5	5.5	5.5
	Disagree	31	15.5	15.5	21.0
	Undecided	66	33.0	33.0	54.0
	Agree	69	34.5	34.5	88.5
	Strongly Agree	23	11.5	11.5	100.0
	Total	200	100.0	100.0

shows that 34.5% of the employees agreed and 11.5% of the employees strongly agreed that there was a significant impact on the productivity level of an employee by corporate culture; 33% of the respondents were undecided, 15.5% of the respondents disagreed, and 5.5% of them strongly disagreed.

Hypothesis 4

H₀: Corporate culture does not significantly impact the productivity level of employees.

H₄: Corporate culture significantly impacts the productivity level of employees.

Test result of H4 is shown in

Table 19. Test for Hypothesis 4.

	Observed n	Expected n	O−E	(O−E)^2	(O−E)^2/E
Strongly Disagree	11	40.0	−29.0	841.0	21.025
Disagree	31	40.0	−9.0	81.0	2.025
Undecided	66	40.0	26.0	676.0	16.9
Agree	69	40.0	29.0	841.0	21.025
Strongly Agree	23	40.0	−17.0	289.0	7.225
Total	200				68.2

.

Decision rule: Accept H₄and reject H₀if the calculated value is greater than tabulated.

Calculated value:

$${\mathsf{X}}^2 = \sum \frac{\left(O-E\right)²}{E}$$

X²= 68.2

Degree of freedom “d.o.f” = n− 1

where

n = number of rows

Therefore, d.o.f= 5 − 1 = 4

Tabulated (X²) at 0.05% level of significance, the table value of chi-square (68.2, 4) is 9.488.

Decision: Accept H₄ and reject H₀ if the calculated value is greater than tabulated.

This indicated that corporate culture significantly impacts the productivity level of employees.

Table 20. Does the work culture of diverse nationalities have a significant impact on organizational performance?

		Frequency	Percentage	Valid Percentage	Cumulative Percentage
Valid	Strongly Disagree	16	8.0	8.0	8.0
	Disagree	32	16	16	24.0
	Undecided	51	25.5	25.5	59.5
	Agree	74	37	37	86.5
	Strongly Agree	27	13.5	13.5	100.0
	Total	200	100.0	100.0

shows that 37% of the employees agreed and 13.5% of the employees strongly agreed that there was a significant impact on organizational performance through diverse work culture; 25.5% of the respondents were undecided, 16% of the respondents disagreed, and 8% of them strongly disagreed.

Hypothesis 5

H₀: Work culture of diverse nationalities has no significant impact on organizational performance.

H₅: Work culture of diverse nationalities has a significant impact on organizational performance.

Test result of H5 is shown in

Table 21. Test for Hypothesis 5.

	Observed n	Expected n	O−E	(O−E)^2	(O−E)^2/E
Strongly Disagree	16	40.0	−24.0	576.0	14.4
Disagree	32	40.0	−8.0	64.0	1.6
Undecided	51	40.0	11.0	121.0	3.025
Agree	74	40.0	34.0	1156.0	28.9
Strongly Agree	27	40.0	−13.0	169.0	4.225
Total	200				52.15

.

Decision rule: Accept H₅and reject H₀ if the calculated value is greater than tabulated.

Calculated value:

$${\mathsf{X}}^2 = \sum \frac{\left(O-E\right)²}{E}$$

X²= 52.15

Degree of freedom “d.o.f” = n− 1

where

n = number of rows

Therefore,

d.o.f= 5 − 1 = 4

Tabulated (X²) at 0.05% level of significance, the table value of chi-square (52.15, 4) is 9.488.

Decision: Accept H₅ and reject H₀ if the calculated value is greater than tabulated.

This indicated that the work culture of diverse nationalities had a significant impact on organizational performance

5. Discussions: Corporate Culture, Employees’ Behavior, and Open Innovation

In innovation literature, the use of external information for innovation has gained significant attention. Be that as it may, the human side of open innovation is still poorly known. We considered diversely cultured employees of many countries working in two organizations on the basis of their age, nationality, qualifications, and experience. The chief advantage of such a diverse group of employees is that it fetches many innovative ideas, which will ultimately lead to the development of the organization.

Organizations may not effectively use innovative ideas of its own using their own employees. The diversity of workers, thus, will often lead towards open innovations. They will embed outside–in external concepts and best practices into that organization’s own innovation process. An organization’s participatory and decentralized approach would surely contribute to an effective organizational culture in the pursuit of innovation. Therefore, it is always better to incorporate the underutilized ideas that are effectively shared among the employees of various countries.

We find support for our hypotheses in an innovative way that there is a high influence of corporate culture on job efficiency, attitude, and actions of employees of the two selected companies. In consequence, although the composition of the two cases in the UAE forex industry shows a high degree of heterogeneity, the work culture of each has a major impact on employees. Hence, we considered the role of corporate culture concerning the prediction of firm-level openness.

The largest proportion of employees, 69%, agreed that corporate culture makes a significant or meaningful impact on their performance, while 62% and 63% of the employees additionally agreed that corporate culture has an impact on attitude and behavior, respectively, and about 69% of the employees agreed that a company influences the productivity level of the employees and, therefore, the organization itself. This paper notes by quantification, therefore, that heterogeneity is still subject to significant impacts on employees’ attitude, performance, and behavior. This is demonstrated within the first hypothesis, in which the calculated value of chi-square is 68.85, 63.45, and 40.35, and these are higher than the tabulated value of 9.488. There is also a noteworthy impact on the employees in relation to organizational productivity. The calculated value of chi-square, 68.2, is larger than the tabulated value of 9.488, which leads the authors to accept alternate Hypothesis Four and to dismiss Null Hypothesis Four.

The reasons why work cultures in the UAE can exert such pressures towards conformity are subject to further investigation. More research in this phenomenon would widen our understanding of the ways in which work cultures operate in the UAE. However, the following may cast light on this phenomenon, even though this falls outside of the scope of this investigation. In addition to all of the aforementioned research findings about the nature of work culture, the UAE, as well as other countries in the GCC region, has unique conditions that may exert more influence than in heterogeneous workforces in more developed economies. Work cultures in the UAE may exert particularly strong pressure on employees because expatriates are subject to visa restrictions. Work visas are issued for one, two, or three years depending on circumstances, and correlate directly to residence visas. Without work, no work visa may be issued, which means that an expatriate must, by UAE law, return to his or her country of origin within a month. Since the majority of expatriates come from developing countries, they work in the UAE to support families who would otherwise not be well-supported financially in those countries. This situation generates considerable need, and would exert pressure for expatriate employees to conform to work cultures, because if they did not, they would be deemed unsuitable, and the consequences would likely be finding more suitable employment within a month or a return to their home country.

6. Conclusions

In this study, the researchers investigated the effect of corporate culture on employees’ job performance, attitude, and behavior in selected companies in the UAE. In effect, even though the composition of the two cases in the forex industry in the UAE shows a high degree of heterogeneity, the work culture of each impacts the employees to a high extent. The selected sample size allowed the researchers to reach the data saturation level in the study and to draw the conclusions based on sufficient data. The study had multiple stages of validity and credibility analysis. Research findings were consistent with the historical and new literature, based on a critical analysis and synthesis of literature related to the conceptual framework of organizational culture theory.

The questionnaires were administered to employees who were randomly selected from two forex organizations within the two major cities in the UAE to discover their opinions on whether corporate culture had an effect on their job efficiency, perspective, and conduct. The authors deduce from the data that corporate culture is a major influence in the two corporations under investigation, and that it indeed has a notable influence on employees’ performance, attitudes, behavior, and productivity, according to the participants in the study. Apart from that, corporate culture may affect employees to a different extent, but employees acknowledge that the influence is powerful. The authors conclude that culture has a notable effect on the productivity of UAE employees, with the purpose to reinforce their performance and generate corporate growth. Every organization has a unique culture and set of beliefs that an employee must understand and internalize, regardless of their previous nationality and background. The degree to which an employee adjusts to the corporate culture and integrates with it will significantly influence his or her performance. One corporate culture can collectively bind and produce uniformity even amongst diverse members of the organization, and, accordingly, enhances dedication and employee efficiency and effectiveness.

6.1. Recommendations

The authors make the following recommendations to corporations and other organizations that are interested in applying their culture with a view of facilitating their employees’ performance and efficiency:

(1)

Management acculturates employees, as do long-standing colleagues. Each individual has specific beliefs and traditions that s/he works with when joining an institution that has a unique culture of its own. S/he will have to be acculturated to the firm’s customs, and the values that underpin them. These will impact the ways in which s/he will approach the job, especially in terms of performance, attitude, and behavior.

(2)

Unity is possible in diverse workgroups. In instances where a corporate culture needs to develop, staff ought to be advised and made to learn new cultural elements, as this will affect their attitude and performance.

(3)

Persistence in pursuing cultural elements is required. The culture of the organization will likely produce within a year a strong enough uniformity amongst the group, which highlights the efficiency of corporate productivity.

(4)

Staff who commit to the organizational culture should receive recognition for their effort and loyalty.

(5)

Staff who commit to the organizational culture should also be given opportunities to develop the culture further in their own inimitable ways if they further the overall aims of the organization.

6.2. Implications

The results of this study could be useful for business managers and corporate leaders. The results of the study represent important knowledge and relevant information for company leaders regarding the impact of organizational culture on corporate performance. Business managers must realize the importance of effective organizational culture, because organizational culture has the potential to affect corporate performance. This research study can contribute to the benefit of society, as there can be improvement in employment opportunity, job security, and the best customer service, which are essential to improve the lifestyle of the employees and their society.