Inclusion is in the Eye of the Beholder: A Relational Analysis of the Role of Gendered Moral Rationalities in Saudi Arabia

Introduction

In different parts of the world, the experiences of inclusion (or exclusion) can vary significantly based on the organisational and cultural practices encountered by women and minorities (Hennekam et al., 2017; Nemoto, 2013). Saudi Arabia has a long-standing history of gender inequality that has limited women’s economic activities for decades, making it one of the most gender-segregated nations in the world (Al-Rasheed, 2013). However, since 2016, one of the central objectives of the well-publicised Saudi Vision 2030 has been to increase the labour market participation of Saudi women from 22% to 30% (Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, 2016). Within one year of the announcement of the 2030 vision on 25 April 2016, approximately 500,000 Saudi women entered the labour market (General Authority for Statistics Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, 2018). In addition, recent Saudisation drives (job localisation) have adopted a progressively gendered focus, leading to the feminisation of the Saudi workforce by enabling Saudi women to participate economically (Varshney, 2019). While the Saudi Arabian government’s modernisation project has primarily pursued a political approach to promoting the economic inclusion of Saudi women in the labour market, this structural approach lacks corresponding changes in social norms (Sian et al., 2020) and indeed conflicts with socio-institutional norms rooted in tribal culture and religious influences. Therefore, our study aims to understand how the socio-institutional backdrop, including a conservative tribal culture and strictly patriarchal interpretations of religious views on women working (Al alhareth et al., 2015; Alkhaled and Berglund, 2018), shape organisational approaches to inclusion practices aimed at increasing women’s workforce participation, and how women perceive organisational inclusion practices and policies within the broader societal context.

Although workplace inclusion, like diversity management, has been viewed as a multilevel system of practices (Syed and Özbilgin, 2009), the existing body of research predominantly focuses on how organisational processes at the meso level facilitate employment opportunities for individuals and engender a sense of belonging and contribution(s) to organisations (Conrad and Meyer-Ohle, 2022). Alternatively, studies examine individuals’ characteristics and attributes at the micro level and their impact on experiences of inclusion/exclusion (Bayrakdar and King, 2022; Richard and Hennekam, 2021). However, this approach often overlooks the socio-institutional context and macro-level mechanisms that influence inclusion practices and outcomes. We argue that current inclusion theories offer only partial explanations as they fail to consider how inclusion entails negotiating tensions among practices, processes and norms deeply embedded in institutional arrangements such as family, tribe and society, which unfold between organisations and individuals. Consequently, we adopt a multilevel approach by embracing a relational framework (Syed and Özbilgin, 2009) to understand inclusion. This approach captures the different mechanisms (macro/national, meso/organisational and micro/individual levels) and their interaction with one another, thereby offering a comprehensive contextual picture of workplace inclusion in Saudi Arabia.

Furthermore, we employ the lens of ‘gendered moral rationality’ (Duncan and Edwards, 1997) to understand how women perceive structural and institutional conditions that shape their strategies and tactics to negotiate inclusion. Our objectives are twofold: (1) to understand the experience of women as recent entrants to the labour market and how they perceive inclusion as individuals; and (2) to assess the extent to which women actively negotiate their own inclusion in response to societal and organisational contexts, considering gender and work roles within the framework of gendered moral rationalities. Notably, the article highlights the significance of the societal context and the theoretical and practical limitations of employing homogenous conceptualisations of gendered inclusion.

A relational and multilevel perspective on inclusion

In the context of developed Western countries, there is an ongoing debate and effort focused on decreasing discrimination against women and other minority groups that have been historically excluded (Adamson et al., 2021). These efforts include providing marginalised groups equal access to opportunities and resources and improving their work experiences (Oswick and Noon, 2014). As a result, scholars and practitioners have increasingly recognised the importance of fostering organisational practices that cultivate a sense of inclusion in the workplace (Oswick and Noon, 2014). An inclusive environment is, thus, framed as where ‘individuals of all backgrounds, not just members of historically powerful identity groups, are fairly treated, valued for who they are, and included in core decision making’ (Nishii, 2013: 1754). Therefore, an organisation’s approach to inclusion is often assessed through employees’ perceptions of the extent to which they support fair treatment, involvement in decision-making, and the social integration of all employee groups (Nishii, 2013).

In mainstream management studies, social psychology scholars view inclusion as predominantly ‘a psychological state’ (Adamson et al., 2021). For instance, Mor-Barak (2015) links inclusion to the extent to which individuals feel a sense of belonging within an organisation, while Shore et al. (2011) highlight that the fulfilment of an individual need for uniqueness is an additional component of inclusion. Building upon this perspective, Shore et al. (2018) have developed a framework for workplace inclusion orientation that illustrates how meso-level factors influence belongingness and uniqueness, which combine to create workplace environments characterised by exclusion, assimilation, differentiation and inclusion. According to Shore et al.’s (2018) framework, an inclusion environment implies that individuals are treated as insiders in the organisation while being encouraged to maintain their uniqueness within their workgroup. On the other hand, when individuals are neither treated as organisational insiders nor valued for their uniqueness, organisations are deemed to have an excluded environment. An assimilation environment occurs when individuals feel compelled to downplay their distinctiveness and conform to the prevailing organisational cultural norms to be accepted as insiders. Lastly, a differentiation environment refers to a situation where an ‘individual is not treated as an organisational insider in the workgroup, but their unique characteristics are seen as valuable and required for group/organisation success’ (Shore et al., 2011: 1266).

Although existing research has made significant contributions to understanding the individual and organisational aspects of inclusion, in line with Adamson et al., (2021: 215), we argue that ‘it is necessary to bear in mind that an individual’s psychological state is not formed in a social vacuum’. While the management literature emphasises that organisational practices that promote a balance between uniqueness and belongingness foster inclusion within the workgroup (e.g. Shore et al., 2011), the underlying individual-centric perspective seems to overlook the unique national and social context at the macro-structural level, which can shape how employees experience uniqueness and belongingness. For example, in collectivist tribal cultures, a sense of ‘belongingness’ to the community may take precedence over the sense of belonging to the organisation (Barakat, 1993). Adamson et al. (2021) draw attention to the limitation of narrowly defining belongingness solely as the need to be part of a workgroup, neglecting the importance of the individual need to be part of the broader collective cultural context for their perceptions of inclusion.

Empirical research is still needed to explore the process of inclusion, the underlying dynamics of the tensions involved and how different contextual conditions can shape inclusionary/exclusionary organisations’ practices (Hennekam et al., 2017). Scholars have recently recognised the importance of adopting a multilevel framework that considers the unique culture, history, legislation and socio-economic environments to contextualise diversity management processes and practices (Tatli, 2011). The relational framework proposed by Syed and Özbilgin (2009) captures the interconnectedness of these multilevel factors, spanning macro/national, meso/organisational and micro/individual levels, to offer a contextual approach to diversity management and inclusion. This framework also aims to bridge objective and subjective aspects of equality, which are crucial in understanding an individual’s perceptions of inclusion. This conceptual framework has been used to research the identity transition to motherhood in the Netherlands (Hennekam et al., 2019), the use of the quota system in the United Arab Emirates (Forstenlechner et al., 2012) and the underrepresentation of female medical doctors in Pakistan (Mohsin and Syed, 2020). Building upon this research stream, our study seeks to contribute by adopting a relational and multilevel perspective that provides a comprehensive understanding of the challenges women face as they navigate inclusion in the workplace in the context of Saudi Arabia.

Saudi Arabia’s socio-institutional context offers a unique setting for understanding the interplay between society, culture, organisation and individual perceptions of gender inclusion. At the macro level, existing research in Saudi Arabia highlights the significant influence of societal norms, cultural traditions and social codes on women’s status and gender equality (Al-Rasheed, 2013), particularly concerning women’s inclusion in the workplace (Aldossari et al., 2021). Within Saudi Arabia, the social codes surrounding women’s modesty, in which family honour and pride are tied to the reputation of the woman, play a central role in governing woman’s lives and impose various restrictions on interactions between genders (Aldossari and Calvard, 2022; Sian et al., 2020). Observance of modesty ‘entails humility and restraint in dress, conversation and dealings between men and women who are not mahram’ (Banihani and Syed, 2017: 137). A mahram refers to ‘a woman’s immediate family whom she cannot legally marry’ (Banihani and Syed, 2017: 138). Under the mahram system, Saudi women are required to obtain permission from a male guardian for various aspects of public life, including education, work opportunities, travel and even access to health services, due to the perceived ‘lack of capacity’ of women (Le Renard, 2014; Sian et al., 2020).

Although the male guardianship system was abolished in 2019 as part of more extensive public policy reforms (Arab News, 2019), the influence of tribal culture continues to have a significant impact, contributing to the exclusion of women from the public domain and reinforcing gender segregation at the societal level (Varshney, 2019). Tribal traditions impose patriarchal control and assign subordinate roles to Saudi women within society (Al alhareth et al., 2015). Tribalism, which is associated with being a member of clans originating in Saudi Arabia, enforces certain restrictions on tribal women, dictating their behaviour and defining what educational and occupational opportunities are considered appropriate for them (Hakiem, 2021). Recent research on working women in Saudi Arabia (Aldossari and Calvard, 2022; Alkhaled and Berglund, 2018) highlights that tribal norms view women working in gender-mixed settings as socially unacceptable. Consequently, women are encouraged to seek employment in gender-segregated organisations, which further restricts their career options to specific professions (Aldossari and Calvard, 2022). These enduring patriarchal structures promote traditional gender segregation of labour and restrict women’s work to limited, stereotypically ‘feminine’ roles in both public and private sectors (Hennekam et al., 2017).

Recently, the Saudi government has prioritised women’s empowerment and increased their participation in the workforce as part of its broader modernisation agenda to transition to a knowledge-based economy and move beyond its tribal Bedouin heritage (Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, 2016). Various governmental initiatives have been implemented to integrate women into the Saudi labour market, including granting them access to jobs and sectors previously restricted to men (Jamjoom and Mills, 2023). However, despite these state-driven policy reforms, recent research has highlighted that progress in Saudi Arabian social attitudes and norms, particularly concerning daily work and career development, does not align with government initiatives (Jamjoom and Mills, 2023; Sian et al., 2020; Syed et al., 2018). Therefore, our research aims to gain insights from a unique situation in which women represent the first generation to be included in new environments that were previously off-limits to them. Tracing inclusion or exclusion from different levels of influence in this setting, therefore, provides an opportunity to investigate how women perceive organisational inclusion practices and policies, as well as the broader societal context. Additionally, we seek to explore the individual strategies and tactics that women employ to negotiate their own inclusion in the face of these challenges.

In this research, we focus on exploring the influence of organisational structural factors at the meso level on gender inclusion/exclusion in the workplace and the potential impacts of macro-societal influences on these organisational-level factors. The effect of influences at the macro-societal level is particularly relevant in settings like Saudi Arabia, where contextual factors profoundly shape organisations’ formal and informal practices (Aldossari and Robertson, 2016). At the organisational level (meso level), previous research has identified several prominent organisational structures that are influenced by the societal factors affecting Saudi women’s careers, such as limited opportunities for development and advancement (Hennekam et al., 2017), the absence of family-friendly policies (Metcalfe, 2007) and the presence of gender stereotypes and discriminatory organisational policies and practices (Sian et al., 2020). In this research, we focus on how women perceive organisational inclusion practices aimed at increasing women’s participation in the workforce, particularly in response to government initiatives and pressures for recruiting Saudi women in public and private organisations. By adopting a multilevel and relational approach (Syed and Özbilgin, 2009), we aim to facilitate an interdisciplinary understanding of inclusion within the specific context of Saudi Arabia. This approach combined the organisational psychology perspective, which emphasises the action organisations can take to create inclusive environments for individuals (Shore et al., 2018), with a sociological perspective that considers the societal, structural and institutional conditions that shape individual strategies and tactics for negotiating inclusion (Duncan and Edwards, 1997). To understand the socially embedded process(es) through which Saudi women negotiate and evaluate their work inclusion, we will delve into the literature on gendered moral rationality in the next section.

Gendered and cultural moral rationalities

Historically, women have employed diverse tactics to find their place as new entrants within various work settings. These ‘pioneering’ women fully experience the challenges women face in negotiating their roles in workplaces, organisations and jobs often defined in masculine terms (Rydzik and Ellis-Vowles, 2019). Although much of the research on gendered inclusion tends to focus on women’s experience as ‘individual struggles’ for inclusion (e.g. Denissen, 2010) without considering the broader societal context that might shape these experiences, other theories often highlight how deeply ingrained societal norms shape the division of labour and gender roles and responsibilities, which are then reproduced in organisations (Acker, 2004). Therefore, there is a need to move beyond the current focus on individuals as separate entities and understand women’s inclusion as a (re)negotiated response to shared gendered expectations and beliefs within the larger society (Duncan and Edwards, 1997). We draw upon Duncan and Edwards’s (1997) concept of ‘gendered moral rationalities’ to understand the socially embedded processes through which Saudi women negotiate and evaluate their work inclusion. The notion of gendered moral rationalities revolves around the ‘social and cultural collective understandings about what is best, and morally right, for men, as well as women – that provides a basis for individuals’ economic decision-making within families’ (Duncan and Edwards, 1997: 30). These moral rationalities are shaped by gender and involved careful individual negotiations with structural and institutional conditions that shape patterns of behaviour and what is considered appropriate and socially acceptable (Doucet, 2001). According to the framework of gendered moral rationalities, mothers engage in three rational moral considerations in relation to their employment decisions: (1) they consider the specific attributes of a job that permit or restrain them in fulfilling both work and family obligations; (2) they consider organisational policies and practices that support mothers’ employment, such as childcare facilities or flexible arrangements; and (3) they consider family support and social approval of their employment. Importantly, Duncan et al. (2003) emphasised that these economic decisions are socially negotiated and vary among social groups (such as class, ethnicity and sexuality) and across other welfare states.

A significant body of literature (Duncan, 2005; Duncan et al., 2003; Hagelskamp et al., 2011; Herbst-Debby and Benjamin, 2020; Kerrane et al., 2022; O’Reilly et al., 2014) has adopted the concept of gendered moral rationalities to examine how women negotiate the dual roles of motherhood and paid worker. For example, Duncan et al.’s (2003) research explains how deeply ingrained gendered moral obligations to prioritise children’s needs affect mothers’ decisions regarding participation in paid work. Similarly, Hagelskamp et al. (2011) employ the framework of gendered moral rationalities to capture the complexity of how low-income women experience the interplay between their roles as mothers and workers. More recently, Kerrane et al.’s (2022) study demonstrated that middle-class Singaporean working mothers engage in what Duncan et al. (2003) refer to as ‘gendered moral rationalities’ to justify their work and care decisions. While this body of literature contributes to our understanding of the social processes through which mothers make decisions about working, we argue that focus on the biological imperative (i.e. how mothers combine paid work with motherhood) in the concept of gendered moral rationalities leads to a somewhat narrow conceptualisation of gender differences. Therefore, other equally important historical, geographical, social and cultural moral expectations that shape how women (with or without children) navigate their career development remain underexplored. We propose the need to go beyond a singular emphasis on ‘motherhood’ in the framework of gendered moral rationalities and to consider women living in more socially circumscribed or collective contexts, where rational choices for many women are embedded in tribal and social ties that influence their everyday life experiences. By adopting a multilevel and relational perspective, our study aims to extend the existing body of work on gendered moral rationality by examining how relatively conservative social structures in Saudi Arabia (Aldossari and Calvard, 2022; Moshashai et al., 2020; Syed et al., 2018) may influence women’s negotiation of their dual work and gender roles, as well as how they employ individual strategies and tactics to negotiate inclusion for themselves.

Methodology

Although there is growing research interest in gender relations in the Middle East (Jamjoom and Mills, 2023; Sian et al., 2020), relatively little is known about how Saudi women navigate and negotiate aspects of their inclusion in segregated and mixed organisations. A qualitative multi-case approach was adopted in this research, focusing on five selected organisations based on their positions as leading national organisations in Saudi Arabia. The multi-case study design ensured evidence from different circumstantial settings (gender-mixed versus gender-segregated) and economic sectors: a petroleum company (gender-mixed), a hospital (gender-mixed), a travel services call centre (gender-segregated), a bank (gender-segregated) and a national recruitment company (gender-segregated).

This study employed purposive and snowball sampling strategies for participant recruitment (Corbin and Strauss, 2014). In the initial stage, five gatekeepers (one from each organisation) were recruited through one of the authors’ personal contacts (purposive sampling) to facilitate access to initial participants. In Middle Eastern countries, personal connections are crucial in obtaining access (Zahra, 2011), especially when involving hard-to-reach populations such as Saudi women (Alkhaled, 2021). The remaining participants were recruited through recommendations provided by the interviewees (snowball sampling). The selection criteria included being a Saudi national woman with more than three years of working experience in the selected organisations. With this sampling strategy, 56 in-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted with Saudi women holding various roles (e.g. operational and technical roles, professional services roles, supervisory and managerial roles). All interviews were conducted in participants’ workplaces, allowing the researcher to observe them within their work environment. The age range of respondents was 24–51, with 24 participants being married, 28 single and four divorced. Participant profiles are summarised in Table 1.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 1.

Summary of the participants’ demographic characteristics.

Contextual background	N (total 56)
Age
24–29 years	19
30–35 years	24
36–40 years	6
41–51 years	7
Marital status
Single	28
Married	24
Divorced	4
Qualification
Diploma	8
Undergraduate degree	37
Postgraduate degree (MSc, MBA, PhD)	11
Job categories
Operational and technical	11
Professional services	35
Supervisory and managerial	10
Company type
Gender-mixed	29
Segregated	27
Tribal affiliation a
Tribal	33
Non-tribal	23
Religious beliefs b
Very religious	4
Moderately religious	35
Not very religious	17

a

Tribal affiliation was defined according to the surname. A surname in the Saudi Arabia context is usually a tribal name.

b

To analyse the degree of religiousness of our participants, we drew on Nancy Ammerman’s (2013) different categories of religiousness – nonreligious, moderate and strong – paying more specific attention to the context of our study, such as the language the participants used and the dress code:

○ Very religious: use quote from Quran (holy book) to support their argument, and wear a niqab or burka (a veil for the face that leaves the area around the eyes clear);

○ Moderately religious: mention the importance of following Islamic beliefs, and wear a hijab (a veil that covers the head and chest);

○ Not very religious: critical of some Islamic traditions, and does not wear a hijab.

Data were collected in two phases: phase one took place from June 2018 to September 2018, and phase two from April 2019 to June 2019. The interview schedule was designed to capture individual-level perceptions of employee inclusion in the organisation and their strategies for establishing their place. Each interview lasted approximately 40–55 minutes and was voice-recorded with the assurance of complete anonymity and confidentiality at the participants’ workplaces in the Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia. The first author, a female native Arabic speaker originally from Saudi Arabia, conducted all the face-to-face interviews in Arabic. The researcher and participants shared the same gender, nationality, religion and culture, which helped alleviate the initial anxieties of participants when discussing sensitive topics related to their experiences as working women in Saudi Arabia. Consistent with Pini (2005), we contend that a shared background between the researcher and participants can facilitate interaction, foster trust and enable a deep understanding of women’s societal experiences. However, the researcher’s position as an insider (that is, a Saudi national) was supplemented with her position as an outsider (that is, an academic who had resided in a Western country for over 10 years). All interviews were transcribed into Arabic and then translated into English. A back-translation technique was employed to ensure the preservation of meaning during the process.

The initial analysis aimed to capture participants’ perceptions of ‘work role’ and ‘gender role’. To develop our coding framework, we utilised the concept of gendered moral rationalities (Duncan and Edwards, 1997). Through carefully reading the interview transcriptions, we identified themes related to women’s expectations of their gender roles, their experiences in their work roles and societal expectations placed upon them. We also extracted women’s accounts of the structural and institutional conditions, such as tribe and religious beliefs, that influenced their understanding of what is considered appropriate and socially acceptable. This analytical approach primarily involved categorising shared themes underlying women’s perceptions of the interplay between their gender roles and work roles. Through constant comparison processes, we grouped these thematic clusters into three gender/work orientations: traditionalist, pragmatist and trailblazer. These clusters represented how gender and work roles were reconciled or sometimes integrated, drawing upon previous work that focused on mechanisms of compromise, rationalisation, negotiation, or other methods (Duncan and Edwards, 1997).

The second analysis stage focused on participants’ perceptions of inclusion policies and values within their organisations while considering the social, cultural and political context in which these occurred. We specifically examined whether each organisation practised gender segregation and whether the participants belonged to a tribe. Drawing on Shore and colleagues’ (2011) framework on inclusion and diversity at work, we classified participants’ perceptions of their organisation’s inclusion orientation into four types: exclusion, assimilation, differentiation and inclusion. Our emphasis in this stage was on isolating participants’ perceptions of their organisation’s policies and practices regarding the employment and treatment of men and women rather than their reactions to these actions. The final analysis stage involved establishing theoretical connections between themes identified in the previous stages. At this stage, we regrouped themes into different levels suggested by Syed and Özbilgin’s relational framework: micro (gender and work role), meso (organisational approaches to inclusion) and macro (tribe and religious beliefs).

Findings

The self-narratives provided by respondents offer valuable insights into the process through which the women in this study reconciled the tension between sustaining economic productivity (entering the labour market) and balancing societal gender ideals. Our analysis was guided by Duncan and Edwards’s (1997) framework of gendered moral rationalities, which we supplemented with existing literature on inclusion that focuses on individuals’ experiences (Shore et al., 2018) and the impact of structural and institutional conditions on these experiences (Syed and Özbilgin, 2009). The findings revealed that participants approached the reconciliation of work and societal gender ideals in three distinct orientations: traditionalists, pragmatists and trailblazers. We defined traditionalists as women who fully embrace and prioritise their gender-traditional roles and view work roles primarily as a means to fulfil their families’ responsibilities. Pragmatists were defined as women who strive to balance the tensions between maintaining economic independence through their work role and meeting gender role expectations. Trailblazers were defined as women who prioritise their job and self-reliance, using their work roles to challenge existing gender-cultural expectations. Our findings contribute to the expansion of Duncan and Edwards’s (1997) gendered moral rationality framework by shedding light on the social and structural influences that shape the meaning of work and gender roles in the lives of our participants and inform their perceptions of organisational inclusion.

Discussion and conclusions

Adopting relational and multilevel lenses (Syed and Özbilgin, 2009) allowed us to capture the complex interplay between macro/national, meso/organisational and micro/individual influences that shaped the experiences of women who were among the first to enter workplaces in Saudi Arabia. Our research indicates that culture and tribal norms at the societal level play a significant role in shaping the approaches to gender inclusion within organisations (e.g. offering gender-segregated workplaces to increase women’s participation in the workforce). Furthermore, the interaction between societal and organisational levels influences how individuals negotiate their gender and work roles to attain inclusion for themselves. Thus, our study provides a comprehensive understating of how societal, organisational and individual-level characteristics are interconnected and collectively impact how women perceive their dual gender–work roles and subsequently navigate inclusion for themselves.

Our findings contribute to theoretical and empirical knowledge in several ways. First, our research highlights the need to expand the current understanding of gendered inclusion beyond a purely ‘psychological state’. Instead, it emphasises the importance of considering the social embeddedness of the inclusion process, considering the unique cultural, historical and socio-institutional contexts that shape individual responses to organisational efforts to promote gender inclusion. In line with Adamson et al.’s (2021) critique of existing inclusion literature for its limited conceptualisation and theorisation of gendered inclusion beyond individual perspectives, our study explores how broader organisational and societal structures influence the mechanisms and processes of gender inclusion. Our findings reveal that gender inclusion is deeply influenced by societal and cultural beliefs that not only perpetuate gender segregation in society but also impact interaction within organisations and individuals’ attitudes towards inclusion. For instance, our research demonstrates how participants’ tribal backgrounds influenced their perception of the differentiation approach to inclusion (i.e. organisations offering gender-segregated work environments) as a positive, highly inclusive initiative. Thus, we argue that the existing individualistic ontology of inclusion, prevalent in mainstream psychological and management studies, only offers a partial explanation. Inclusion entails navigating tensions across practices, processes and norms within different institutional contexts, shaped by variations across family, tribe and society, which influence organisations and individuals.

Our second contribution to the literature on inclusion is the application of the gender-rational morality lens, which enhances our understanding of how women experience belongingness and uniqueness in the workplace. While the existing literature suggests that inclusion is achieved when individuals experience a balance of belongingness and uniqueness (Mor-Barak, 2015; Shore et al., 2011), our research demonstrates that these experiences are influenced by external pressures that enforce pre-given gender roles. In this context, our participants prioritised a sense of belongingness to their extended family and tribe over the desire to belong to a social group in the workplace. For example, participants in the pragmatist group perceived the differentiation approach adopted by gender-segregated organisations to increase women’s inclusion to maintain their strong belongingness to their family and society. Similarly, traditionalist participants assimilated to the male-dominant cultural norms in the organisation to enhance their sense of belongingness while still embracing their uniqueness as mothers or wives. In Saudi Arabia, gendered uniqueness is associated with recognising women’s roles as caregivers, and traditionalist participants described their managers as ‘supportive’ and ‘understanding’ of their needs. Therefore, our research highlights the complexity of experiencing belongingness and uniqueness in contexts where collective norms and cultural values influence women’s perceptions of inclusion. We argue that adopting a relational approach and the gender-rational morality lens in the study of gendered inclusion highlights the importance of the societal context and cautions against adopting homogenous conceptualisations of inclusion.

Our third contribution pertains to the theoretical implications of Duncan and Edwards’s (1997) theory of gendered moral rationalities. Despite the sociological lens that gendered moral rationality adopts, we argue that its distinction between mother and work roles is limited and does not adequately capture the diverse meanings associated with gender and work roles shaped by societal factors, especially in Eastern contexts. We contend that the rationality types proposed by Duncan and Edwards (1997) are somewhat narrow and based on Western understandings of gender role expectations and family structures, and they do not fully encompass the socio-ethical and cultural distinctions that shape these roles in Eastern contexts. Our research highlights how Saudi women’s responses to job opportunities and their stances on inclusion (segregation versus gender-mixed) by evaluating their dual roles, consisted of (1) gender roles tied to family and tribal approval of their employment environments and (2) worker roles tied to their sense of values and achievements. These dual roles are embedded in the sociocultural context where families and tribal norms persist and significantly contribute to the exclusion of women from the public sphere (e.g. Varshney, 2019). While previous research (Duncan, 2005; Duncan et al., 2003; Herbst-Debby and Benjamin, 2020; O’Reilly et al., 2014) has utilised the gendered moral rationalities lens to capture the ongoing process of women negotiating dual roles of motherhood and worker, our findings demonstrate the limitation of solely focusing on the biological imperative. We advocate for a broader perspective within the gendered moral rationalities framework, one that includes women living in socially negotiated and collective contexts where rational choices are embedded in tribal and social ties that shape their everyday experiences. Therefore, our approach offers a substantial contribution to Duncan and Edwards’s (1997) ‘integral mother/worker’ categories by drawing attention to the diverse macro-social, cultural and structural factors that shape women’s work experience and gender role beliefs beyond the scope of motherhood alone.

Our findings have practical implications for policymakers and organisations aiming to enhance women’s labour force participation in Saudi Arabia. If policymakers are committed to increasing women’s inclusion in the Saudi labour market, it is crucial to introduce initiatives that consider women’s perceived tensions in negotiating their gender and work roles. Our research demonstrates that the societal and cultural expectations that position women as primary caregivers play a significant role in how they navigate and perceive work. This gender role as primary caregivers is reinforced by Saudi labour law, which grants women 10 weeks of paid maternity leave compared with only three days for fathers as paternity leave. From a policy perspective, the introduction of shared parental maternity leave could encourage fathers to take a more active role in childcare, alleviate the unequal burden of childcare and caregiving on working mothers, and legitimise women’s employment within the broader society. At the organisation level, as more women enter the labour market in response to ongoing governmental reforms, employers must focus on training and developing women who have been historically marginalised. This investment in their development will help women feel valued and respected as valuable members of their employing organisations, fostering a sense of inclusion. Finally, foreign organisations operating in Saudi Arabia must have a realistic understanding of inclusion policies that align with societal expectations. While previous research suggests that Saudi Arabia’s traditional approach to gender segregation limited women’s work to specific ‘feminine’ professional roles (Sian et al., 2020), our findings reveal that providing the option of separate working spaces for men and women might encourage women with traditionalist gender orientations to pursue paid work. Therefore, localising inclusion practices to consider how societal gender expectations may affect women’s entry into the labour market will be a valuable tool for foreign companies.

In conclusion, this study, although focused on the unique context of Saudi Arabia, provides a valuable framework for understanding women’s efforts to negotiate their dual gender and work roles and increase their workplace inclusion across the Arab world. The identified gendered moral rationalities orientations of traditionalists, pragmatists and trailblazers shed light on the sociocultural uniqueness of these contexts compared with the predominantly Western-focused literature. Future research could explore specific social-institutional mechanisms, such as tribal culture on women’s gender role orientations, and conduct cross-gender comparisons to understand how tribal affiliation affects work experiences. Additionally, research should investigate context-specific factors in the Arab region, such as the absence of anti-discrimination policies, political pressures tied to a monarchy-based rule and sectarian religious tensions (Hennekam et al., 2017), which are likely to shape the experience of marginalised groups and communities, such as the stateless in Kuwait (Abu Sulaib, 2020), the Shia in Syria, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia (Syed and Ali, 2021), the Kurds in Syria and Iraq (Monshipouri and Whooley, 2011), and Druze in Lebanon (Karam, 2022) in terms of workplace inclusion or exclusion. Overall, this study contributes to understanding how individuals in minority positions navigate their organisational and societal contexts and extends the understanding of inclusion and gendered moral rationalities beyond Western contexts, emphasising the significance of the societal context. By examining the interaction between the workplace and broader social, cultural and religious influences in negotiating dual roles, this research makes theoretical and empirical contributions to the fields of inclusion and gendered moral rationalities. Although the study focuses on a context deeply rooted in tradition, religion and law regarding the treatment of women, the insights gained have relevance for women facing similar challenges in other industries, professions and companies as pioneers, tokens or minority representatives.