A case study of moral neglect in the Egyptian sports establishment

Review of Business Research, July, 2007 by Samir M. Youssef

As a result of the failure to win the bid to host the 2010 World Cup Competition investigations were carried out at the political, legal, and administrative levels. A Parliamentary committee, the Public Attorney and the Public Administrative Office looked into the matter. No evidence of bribery, kick backs or corruptions were detected. The different investigations found the reasons of the failure to be underestimation of the task, poor composition of committee members, lack of coordination and avoidance of responsibility in addition to poor follow up. The Minister, who is the top administrator, was found politically responsible since he is the one who formed the file committee of members below the demands of the task. Also, he was deceived by the committee members who gave him a rosy picture about the chances of winning the bid. On their part the committee members exhibited lack of coordination, poor planning, in-fighting and a general lack of seriousness. Once they faced investigators they started denying responsibility and throwing accusations against each other (AlAhram, 2004; AlGamhouria,2004; SoutAl Oma, 2004). It should be added that these shortcomings were also observed by the FIFA Executive Committee members who were approached by the file committee members. There was agreement that members of the Egyptian team were working at cross purpose of each other to the point of destroying the whole mission. These organizational shortcomings created a hospitable environment for seeking self interest and neglecting public interest. The latter requires a sense of collective responsibility which is essential in joint effort (Kaptien @ Wempe, 2002)). Its absence leads to the rise of self interest which is latent in each individual but is triggered once the collective purpose is out of the picture.

Task Definition

Inability to comprehend the complexity of the task could be a major stumbling block in the way of achieving it. Proper definition of the task will help allocate responsibility. A statement made by the MS, immediately after the loss, is revealing of how he looked at the task: "Since we began our campaign we made it clear that our bid would not depend on imposing political or economic pressure on other countries as other candidates did. We refused to beg for votes or pay bribes. We thought it would be played fairly. Our message to the executives and the world was that we weren't playing politics, we weren't playing business. We were simply playing football. But it seems it wasn't fair play." (Ahram Weekly, 2004). So, the task was defined as a "football matter" and was assigned to the EFF to handle it. Federation people were local in orientation and could not comprehend the international nature of the task and the political aspects in terms of how to approach the members of the EC and promote the Egyptian file. Winning the bid involved considerable political and networking activities that required extended and sustained effort on the part of the bidding countries. This is why the South African and Moroccan teams consisted of political figures and well known personalities who are skilled in the art of networking. For example, the South African team included three noble prize winners (Nelson Mandela, FW de Klerk and Archbishop Desmond Tuto). While the Moroccan team included international celebrities such as Felipe Gonzalez, former prime minister of Spain and Senegal President Abdoulaye Wade. Definition of the task in the case of the two countries reflected its international and complex nature. In case of South Africa it was considered as a way to unite races while Morocco used the themes "Football Without Frontiers" and a "World Cup not a Moroccan Cup". FIFA's EC consists of 24 representatives of different football federations around the world. Their diverse interests and background would have required an international perspective to be able to approach them. Lack of understanding of the complexity of the task would endanger giving due attention to he needs of the different stakeholders (Kaptien @Wempe, 2002)