How Formal and Informal Institutions of Middle Eastern Countries Influence Managerial Discretion: An Empirical Investigation

Managerial discretion is the focal theme bridging the clash between two schools of thoughts; whether executives have greater influence on their firms’ outcomes or other factors restrain their actions (Hambrick & Finkelstein, 1987). It is argued that constraints come from inertial, normative and environmental forces (e.g. DiMaggio & Powell, 1983). Of these restraints is the institutional environment in which a firm is headquartered. Our paper falls within this research stream and provides an extension for Crossland and Hambrick (2007, 2011) work. We investigate the national level of discretion in new cross-cultural contexts, provide deeper understanding of its concept, and shed the light on undiscovered discretion’s antecedents and consequences. We adopt a quantitative approach in which questionnaires represent our data collection instrument. We anticipate that in high discretion countries firms tend to follow what Miles & Snow (1978) labeled ‘Prospector’ strategy as opposed to low discretion countries in which firms incline to implement a ‘Defender’ strategy.

Is there any room for the doctrine of fundamental rights of states in today's international law?

This article serves as a general substantive introduction to the special issue on the fundamental rights of states in international law. It introduces the concept in theoretical and doctrinal terms, and lays out the questions that will be addressed by the contributions to the special issue. These questions include: 1) What do attributes like ‘inherent’, ‘inalienable’ and ‘permanent’ mean with regard to state rights?; 2) Do they lead to identifying a unitary distinct category of fundamental rights of states?; 3) If so, what is their source and legal character?; 4) What are their legal implications, eg, when they come into conflict with other obligations of the right holder or with the actions of other states and international organisations?; and ultimately, 5) Is there still room in today’s international law for a doctrine of ‘fundamental’ rights of states? The article reviews the fundamental rights of states in positive law sources and in international legal scholarship, and identifies the reasons for a renaissance of attention for this doctrine.

Moments of Collusion? Close readings of affective, hidden moments within feminist research

This paper addresses affective ‘moments of collusion’ present in feminist research relationships, and contextualises these seemingly personal encounters within a wider systematic framework of the early career researcher and the increasingly neoliberal climate of academia. Focusing on the temporal transition from doctoral research to postdoctorate research positions immediately post-PhD, this paper questions the concept of collusion within (immersive) fieldwork, and examines the delicate and complex question of who is colluding with whom, and for what purpose at different times within the early career academic journey. Specifically, this paper focuses on how the increasing pressures of the neoliberal university play out on our emotions and bodies during fieldwork, an area which still requires attention within the growing critiques of the affects of neo-liberalism in Higher Education. Using personal case studies as springboard for a far wider and important discussion, this paper situates such methodological dilemmas within a broader temporal framework of the increasingly precarious nature of early career academics, where ‘moments of collusion’ may be the only way to keep your head above water.

Introduction: Exploring the Comparative in Socio-Legal Studies

Among the diverse approaches to comparison in socio-legal studies those that employ qualitative research, richness of detail, and attention to context are the focus of this special issue. The Introduction draws on comparative law and social science literature to argue that comparison amongst studies of laws in contexts can follow different trajectories: the comparison may start from an assumption of similarity—in form, purposes, or context—in order to identify significant differences; or it may identify significant similarity across social and cultural divides. What unites many of the projects of comparison undertaken by qualitative empirical researchers is that the points of relevant comparison are identified within the complexity of the empirical studies at hand; and they are allowed to emerge, or change, as the researcher comes to understand the facts and issues more deeply.

Cross-National Differences in Managerial Discretion: Insights from the Middle East

Our study examines the effect of cultural practices on CEO discretion across six Middle Eastern countries. Using a panel of senior management consultants, we extend the national-level framework of managerial discretion and find that an encompassing array of cultural practices play a crucial role in shaping the degree of discretion provided to CEOs’ of public firms headquartered in these countries. We empirically demonstrate that power distance, future and performance orientation along with gender egalitarianism and assertiveness have positive relationships with managerial discretion. However, institutional collectivism, uncertainty avoidance and humane orientation negatively affect the degree of discretion provided to CEOs. As such, our results indicate that executives are able to take idiosyncratic and bold actions to the extent to which the cultural environment allows them to do so. As such, we contribute to the strategic leadership literature by finding new national-level antecedents of managerial discretion that haven’t been considered in earlier studies and confirm the context dependency of the discretion construct.

On the 'inherent' character of the right of states to self-defence

While there is no lack of studies on the use of armed force by states in self-defence, its qualification as an ‘inherent right’ in article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations has received little scholarly attention and has been too quickly dismissed as having no significance. The present article fills this gap in the literature. Its purpose is not to discuss the limits to which article 51 or customary international law submit the exercise of the right of self-defence by states, but to examine what its 'inherent’ character means and what legal consequences it entails. The article advances two main arguments. The first is that self-defence is a corollary of statehood as presently understood because it is essential to preserving its constitutive elements. The second argument is that the exercise of the right of self-defence must be distinguished from the right itself: it is only the former that may be delegated to other states or submitted to limitations under customary international law and treaty law. The right of self-defence, however, cannot be alienated and it takes precedence over other international obligations, although not over those specifically intended to limit the conduct of states in armed conflict or over non-derogable human rights provisions.

Monetary policy, exchange rates and stock prices in the Middle East region

A structural vector autoregressive model is employed to investigate the impact of monetary policy and real exchange rate shocks on the stock market performance of Kuwait, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan. In order to identify the structural shocks both short run and long run restrictions are applied. Unlike previous literature the contemporaneous interdependence between the financial variables are left unrestricted to give a more accurate depiction of the relationships. The heterogeneity of the results reflect the different monetary policy frameworks and stock market characteristics of these countries. Mainly, monetary policy and the real exchange rate shocks have a significant short run impact on the stock prices of the countries that apply a relatively more independent monetary policy and flexible exchange rates.