As indicated by Hofetede’s scale, Saudi culture has a high acceptance of hierarchical status amongst its individuals (Hofstede, 2010). The high acceptance of power status in Saudi culture can be seen in various contexts. Saudi students in an academic context, for instance, show a high level of deference to their teachers and instructors (Alamri, Cristea and Al-Zaidi, 2014). The study of Noer, Leupold and Valle (2007), shows that there are significant differences in coaching style between American and Saudi managers with the latter showing a greater acceptance for hierarchical status. As shown by the present data, considering the power status of the fathers when the participants made requests to parents in a social context was apparent in the use of indirect strategies or expressions that show a higher degree of politeness and formality.
In addition, the impact of Saudi hierarchical status was shown by the tendency to employ imperatives in the requests to requestees with lower status, as well as the avoidance of imperatives in requests to hearers who are higher in status than speakers. The requests in work/study contexts also have highlited the
157
significant impact of the hierarchical system in Saudi culture. As discussed previously, older individuals in Saudi culture are usually treated as higher in power status, thus as shown by the data the older participants tended to use more imperatives in their requests to younger colleagues. The use of forms of address in work/study contexts showed that younger subjects tended to use more politeness markers and formal occupational forms than the older subjects (see section 5.6).
In the second dimension of Hofstede’s model on culture, Saudi Arabia is classified as a collectivist culture. According to Alamri et al. (2014), the collectivist nature of Saudi students can be reflected by studying collaboratively in groups rather than individually and also by accepting the recommendations from their peers to help in their academic endeavours. The data of the current study support this classification and show that Saudi individuals tend to show their loyalty behaviour through their relationships by the use of various linguistic strategies such as brotherhood and kinship forms of address even when addressing unfamiliar individuals. The use of most direct strategies such as imperatives and other expressions that show intimacy in close relationships also show the collectivist nature of Saudis. In examining a model of managerial coaching with a sample of Saudi Arabian and U.S. managers and examining cultural influences on coaching behaviours, Noer et al. (2007) found that as a result of their Islamic values15 Saudi managers adopted a collectivist orientation and showed a less individualist style.
While some studies show that Saudi Arabia has a greater tendency towards masculinity (Alamri et al., 2014; Hofstede, 1985), other studies have shown that the collectivist nature of Saudi culture leads to building emotional connection and using relationship-based behaviours between Saudi individuals. This therefore, contributes to characterizing Saudi culture as a feminine culture (Al-Meer, 1993; Cassell and Blake, 2012; Dedoussis, 2004; Noer et al., 2007). According to Dedoussis (2004), Arab managers are closer to the feminine side of the masculine/feminine scale as they tend to establish friendly relationships and show a greater tendency towards socially imposed commitments of larger groups including one’s family and work organization. In the context of politeness, the findings of this study support Al Ageel (2010) on Saudi compliment responses and Nelson et al. (1993) on Egyptian compliments that show that Arabs use various kinship, endearment and religious expressions and this shows the feminine dimension in the Arabian culture. As discussed in Chapter Two (section 2.4.3) the classification of Saudi culture along the masculinity/femininity dimension raises some difficult issues.
Because of the factor of gender segregation and the dominant role of Saudi males in most sectors in Saudi society, there is only a small literature concerned with Saudi females’ behaviour under Hofstede’s model on cultural dimensions. In addition, because of the focus in several studies on Saudi males this might be one of the reasons of identifying Saudi culture as a masculine culture. The classification of Arab countries including Saudi Arabia on the scale of masculinity/femininity is mostly at the midpoint
15 The relationship between the Islamic and cultural values that form the collectivist nature in Saudi society has been
158
and this, according to At-Twaijri and Al-Muhaiza (1996), results from the impact of the Islamic values and the tribal system that encourage cooperating amongst individuals of the same groups that increases the feminine nature and on the other hand from the impact of the dominant role of males in Saudi society that maximizes the masculine nature amongst Saudi individuals. Thus, there is a need for further studies that focus on wider perspectives to minimize the ambiguity and to provide more understanding about Saudi culture in terms of this dimension.
As for the Islamic beliefs on fatalism, Saudi culture has a high score in the scale of the fourth dimension (uncertainty avoidance) (Al Ageel, 2010; Bjerke & Al-Meer, 1993; Noer et al. 2007). Managers in Gulf countries avoid uncertainties because they believe that they are threatened by ambiguous and uncertain situations and this behaviour reflect the high uncertainty avoidance in such a culture (At-Twaijri and Al- Muhaiza, 1996). The findings of this study supported this tendency for uncertainty avoidance by employing religious expressions that show that the participants as Muslims believe that God is the only controller of the universe and all surrounding events (see section 5.7).
The following discussion will provide an insight into some of the issues around the similarities and differences in politeness behaviour in the Saudi context compared with politeness behaviour in other contexts.