Citizenship as a moderator of social capital: knowledge hoarding in expatriate-dominated workplaces

This study examines knowledge sharing and hoarding practices in the United Arab Emirates’ (UAE) private sector workforce through the lens of social capital theory, a framework that foregrounds trust, networks and shared norms in enabling cooperation and resource exchange. The UAE, a wealthy and politically stable Arabian Gulf nation, presents an unusual labour composition. Emirati nationals constitute only around 4% of the private sector workforce, with the remainder composed of expatriates drawn from over 200 nationalities (Infographics, 2024). Since the 1990s, the government has pursued ambitious localisation policies (Emiratisation) aimed at integrating citizens into private sector roles (Rees et al., 2007). These policies have included training programmes, employment quotas and financial incentives, yet progress has been slow and uneven (Al Jawali et al., 2021). Global competitiveness rankings suggest ongoing structural challenges: despite being one of the world’s wealthiest states, the UAE has been ranked low for labour market localisation and skills integration (Schwab, 2019; IMD, 2025; PWC, 2024).

This imbalance creates distinctive workplace dynamics. Emiratis benefit from institutional privileges, such as higher job security and guaranteed benefits, while expatriates remain vulnerable to profit-driven organisational decisions (Goby, 2015, p. 416; Goby and Alhadhrami, 2020; Zeffane and Linzi, 2020). Such disparities cultivate a cultural divide that has been shown to result in exclusionary practices by expatriates, including restricting Emiratis’ access to organisational knowledge-sharing networks (Goby et al., 2017; Goby, 2024). These practices are not inconsequential given that knowledge is a key resource embedded within social capital (Nahapiet and Ghoshal, 1998). Limited access to knowledge undermines Emiratis’ ability to build trust, gain visibility in organisational networks and integrate into workplace communities (Inkpen and Tsang, 2005; Tsai and Ghoshal, 1998).

While social capital theory has been widely applied to understand workplace networks, reciprocity and trust (Coleman, 1988; Putnam, 1995; Andrews, 2010), the intersection of national citizenship status and social capital accumulation remains underexplored. Research on knowledge hiding highlights the role of contextual and cultural factors in withholding behaviours (Connelly et al., 2012; Aljawarneh et al., 2022), but little is known about how legal and institutional markers such as citizenship influence social capital formation in stratified workforces. While the contextual specificities of knowledge hoarding (Kho) are beginning to be addressed (e.g. Zhi et al., 2024), more research is needed into contextual antecedents of knowledge-hoarding practices in diverse workplaces (Oliveira et al., 2021). In response to this gap, this paper examines how national citizenship status shapes and moderates the formation of social capital, particularly through knowledge-hoarding practices, in the expatriate-dominated private sector of the UAE, thereby revealing how citizenship functions as an axis of organisational inclusion and exclusion.

Accordingly, this study investigates the following research questions (RQs):

The paper makes three contributions. Firstly, it advances organisational theory by positioning citizenship as a critical moderator of social capital, extending work on trust, reciprocity and knowledge sharing. Secondly, it provides empirical evidence from narrative interviews with Emirati employees in multinational firms, offering context-specific insights into knowledge-hoarding dynamics. Thirdly, it contributes to practice by identifying barriers to Emirati integration, thereby informing policymakers and managers about strategies to strengthen localisation initiatives.

The paper proceeds as follows. The next section reviews literature on social capital and Kho, situating the study within recent debates. This is followed by the methodology, findings and discussion, before concluding with theoretical contributions and managerial implications.

Bourdieu (1986) defines social capital as “the aggregate of the actual or potential resources” linked to durable networks of recognition, while Coleman (1988) emphasises its functionalist role in enabling coordinated action through obligations, expectations and trust. Putnam’s (1995) distinction between bonding (within-group cohesion) and bridging (cross-group connections) remains influential, and Nahapiet and Ghoshal’s (1998) articulation of structural, cognitive and relational dimensions continues to provide the dominant framework. Despite critiques of conceptual clarity (Robison et al., 2010), social capital theory remains widely applied.

Research has shown its relevance across workplace contexts, such as gender relations (Murphy and O’Meara, 2022), employee age (Ben Hador and Klein, 2020), HR professionals’ career development (Gubbins and Garavan, 2016) and executive compensation (Maloa, 2018). In knowledge-sharing contexts, social capital facilitates information exchange, while weak social capital undermines trust and can lead to withholding behaviours (Connelly et al., 2012). Strong bonding capital, however, can also produce exclusion by blocking access for non-group members (Lin, 2001; Portes, 1998). Kho is often linked to inequities and distrust (Fong et al., 2018). Recent work has refined these dynamics in light of workplace diversity and digitisation. For example, Murphy and O’Meara (2022) demonstrate how embodied capital intersects with workplace networks, while Cheng et al. (2024) highlight how digital collaboration tools reshape how knowledge can be shared, potentially expanding access.

Kho is defined as the deliberate accumulation and retention of information without intention to share (Connelly et al., 2012). Rooted in social exchange theory (Blau, 1964), Kho reflects calculations of risks and benefits in sharing knowledge. Prior studies identify job insecurity, competitiveness and territoriality as key antecedents (Khalid et al., 2020; Peng, 2013; Singh, 2019). Territoriality is especially salient where historically dominant groups perceive threats to job security, as in expatriate-heavy private sectors.

Kho undermines trust, performance and organisational learning (De Garcia, 2020; Bari et al., 2020; Evans et al., 2015). Research shows that competitive climates elevate Kho, while collaborative climates can mitigate it. For example, Wang (2022) found that interpersonal competition fosters knowledge hiding through mechanisms such as moral disengagement and work overload, while Lee et al. (2022) demonstrated that performance-oriented motivational climates drive knowledge hiding via work alienation. Low levels of trust also reduce knowledge flows (Nahapiet and Ghoshal, 1998). Recent scholarship further highlights generational differences in knowledge-sharing tendencies, with younger employees often more open to digital exchanges (Jabid et al., 2023).

In the UAE context, where Emirati employees enter workplaces marked by entrenched expatriate networks, Kho can be interpreted both as an individual defensive act and as a collective gatekeeping practice. A social capital perspective reveals that hoarding is not only a response to job insecurity but also a mechanism for reproducing exclusionary group boundaries.

This study uses narrative methodology that centres on the lived experiences of participants and the meanings they attribute to those experiences. Narrative inquiry emphasises the co-construction of stories between researcher and participant, making reflexivity a critical element of the research process (Ozturk and Berber, 2022). To minimise hierarchical distance (Essers, 2009), reduce researcher bias (Gioia et al., 2013) and enhance trust with participants (Dundon and Ryan, 2010), interviews were conversational in nature. Participants were invited to begin with an open question about workplace support mechanisms or challenges, after which they were free to guide the direction of the discussion. This approach prioritised their interpretations and ensured that the data reflected Emirati employees’ subjective perspectives.

Participants were recruited using snowball sampling, beginning with initial contacts from the researcher’s Emirati network, and interviews were conducted between March and July 2023. Sixteen Emiratis participated (seven women, nine men), ranging in age from 22 to 45. All were university graduates, three held postgraduate degrees, and their roles spanned junior professional positions, mid-level management and one senior management role. Job tenure ranged from less than two years to over ten years, and participants were used in sectors including finance, logistics, telecommunications and retail. Company size also varied, with most working in large multinational organisations, but three in medium-sized firms. All interviews were conducted face-to-face in English, lasting 60–90 min and were audio-recorded with participant consent.

To mitigate reflexivity concerns, an Emirati research assistant collaborated in the data analysis, providing a culturally grounded perspective (Ozturk and Berber, 2022). Both the researcher and assistant independently coded the transcripts, initially identifying open codes. These codes were then compared and refined through consensus discussions (Gibbert and Ruigrok, 2010; Silverman, 2013). Axial coding (Corbin and Strauss, 1990) was subsequently used to generate higher-order categories, which were developed into aggregate theoretical dimensions. For example, codes such as “being assigned menial tasks” and “denial of guidance” were grouped under the dimension of exclusionary behaviours. The Gioia methodology (Gioia et al., 2013) guided the iterative movement between data and theory, ensuring rigour and transparency in the construction of findings.

The rich qualitative insights that emerged from the interview data coalesced around three key dimensions:

1. Exclusionary behaviours exhibited by expatriate co-workers.

2. Intentional Kho by expatriate co-workers.

3. Disempowering impact on Emirati employees.

Tables 1–3 below present the individual themes that informed the development of each theoretical dimension, along with examples drawn from the interview data.

Participants described recurring experiences of exclusion that reinforced their sense of marginalisation within multinational workplaces. Younger participants noted being assigned menial tasks despite holding university degrees. One participant aged 24 recalled: “I was asked to photocopy and make coffee, while my expatriate colleague with the same title was given a client project”. This reflects the assignment of symbolic rather than substantive responsibilities, a finding consistent among all participants.

Negative stereotyping was also prominent. Older participants (35–45) recalled how stereotypes about Emiratis’ supposed lack of work ethic shaped workplace interactions. One explained: “They assume we are only here because of our nationality. I overheard a colleague saying, ‘Why don’t they just sit in the café?’” Another participant accounted for such negative stereotypes about Emiratis in the workforce as dating from the 1970s when it was reportedly common for Emiratis to be appointed to managerial positions without actively fulfilling associated responsibilities.

All participants reported obstacles of various types to their acquiring work-related knowledge. Early-career employees described how requests for guidance were deflected. One female participant (age 27, finance sector) recalled asking a colleague how to complete a task: “Instead of showing me, he just did it himself. Later, I realised this happened every time, so I stopped asking for guidance”. Such practices curtailed skill acquisition and contributed to perceptions of relative superiority of expatriates’ performance.

Mid-level managers emphasised vertical Kho, noting that expatriate supervisors sometimes withheld strategic information. One participant with over 10 years’ tenure in telecommunications explained: “I found out about a restructuring plan from a friend outside the company, not from my manager. We were kept in the dark”. The ubiquity of such practices extended beyond the private sector, with three participants noting that similar barriers existed in public-sector organisations.

The cumulative effect of exclusionary behaviours and Kho produced a strong sense of disempowerment. Younger employees reported an externally imposed sense of incompetence, despite their qualifications. A 23-year-old graduate reflected: “They make you feel like you don’t belong, even though you passed the same tests and interviews”.

Older participants expressed self-imposed pressure to disprove stereotypes. One woman in her late 30s described: “I had to work twice as hard, come in early, and stay late to show I am not lazy. But still, the recognition doesn’t come.” Feelings of isolation were common as Emiratis observed expatriate co-workers navigating workplace expectations with ease. As one participant noted: “Everyone else seems to know the rules”.

These findings reveal how exclusionary practices, Kho and disempowerment operate together as reinforcing mechanisms that restrict Emiratis’ access to social capital. Expatriate employees’ withholding behaviours limited structural social capital by blocking access to networks, relational capital by undermining trust and cognitive capital by sustaining stereotypes that prevented shared understandings.

This study demonstrates that the structural, relational and cognitive dimensions of social capital are significantly conditioned by citizenship status in the UAE’s expatriate-dominated private sector, thus responding to RQ1. The findings highlight how the asymmetry between Emirati and expatriate employees undermines reciprocity and trust, which Blau’s (1964) social exchange theory identifies as the foundation of cooperative behaviour. Expatriates, perceiving localisation as a threat to their occupational security, engaged in Kho that functioned both as an individual defensive strategy and as a collective gatekeeping practice, thus providing a response to RQ2. This finding aligns with recent evidence that knowledge withholding emerges where perceived inequities disrupt the norm of reciprocity (Aljawarneh et al., 2022). It also resonates with Reiche et al. (2015), who emphasise that diminished reciprocity weakens the preconditions for developing organisational social capital.

From a social capital perspective, expatriate employees’ practices restricted Emiratis’ structural capital by limiting access to networks, weakened relational capital by undermining trust and eroded cognitive capital by sustaining stereotypes of Emiratis as less competent. This finding reinforces the foundational framework of Nahapiet and Ghoshal (1998), which stresses that alignment across these three dimensions is essential for effective knowledge exchange.

The study further illustrates how historically embedded stereotypes continue to operate as cognitive barriers to trust and collaboration. Narratives positioning Emiratis as passive or less capable workers, linked by participants to legacies of the 1970s, reinforce symbolic boundaries that limit integration. These stereotypes constitute what Bourdieu (1977) terms symbolic violence, sustaining expatriates’ privileged position and legitimising their control over organisational knowledge. In this sense, citizenship functions as a structural determinant of access to social capital, shaping not only individual experiences but also the cultural logics of multinational organisations. This reflects Singh’s (2019) analysis of territoriality given that the UAE private sector was traditionally considered an expatriate domain. The shift brought about by the Emiratisation policies appears to have triggered territorial behaviours among expatriates seeking to preserve their established positions within this changing employment landscape. Such historically embedded discourses which position Emiratis as less capable employees weaken the cognitive dimension of social capital and limit the development of shared understandings across nationality lines. This absence of cognitive alignment compromises collaborative efficiency and reinforces group-based boundaries around access to knowledge (Nahapiet and Ghoshal, 1998). These types of negative stereotypes about work ethic have been demonstrated to negatively impact the organisational socialisation and retention of Emirati recruits (Goby et al., 2017). The exclusionary behaviour experienced by Emirati employees, such as being assigned menial tasks and exposed to hostile stereotypes, reproduce the persistent influence of negative historical narratives associated with their professional competence. The ubiquity of such behaviours, as recounted by participants, generates negative social capital, that is, interactions characterised by discrimination which damages collective engagement (Portes, 1998). This is an example of Bourdieu’s (1977) construct of symbolic violence through which the numerically greater expatriate employees preserve their power.

Taken together, these findings contribute to theory by showing that Kho is best understood not merely as an outcome of interpersonal mistrust but as a socially embedded practice which can be substantially shaped by citizenship status. They reveal that citizenship status acts as a moderator of social capital in ways that generate negative social capital (Portes, 1998) and restrict organisational learning. This aligns with Lin (2001) and Westlund and Adam (2010), who emphasise that power asymmetries and social exclusion diminish the collective benefits of social capital. By foregrounding the interplay of institutional policy (localisation), cultural discourse (stereotyping) and organisational practice (Kho), this study demonstrates the layered mechanisms through which inclusion and exclusion are produced in multinational workplaces.

The findings suggest several implications for managers and policymakers seeking to strengthen Emirati integration in the private sector and corroborate Anbar et al. (2025) findings on the need for managerial intervention to enhance knowledge sharing in MNCs in the Gulf. Workforce accommodations for minority groups can substantially reduce attrition (Greer and Wyant, 2024), but the organisational socialisation policies devised for Emiratis thus far have had limited success (Waxin et al., 2020) and need to be revisited.

Firstly, organisations need to address Kho as a form of negative reciprocity, in line with social exchange theory (Blau, 1964). When expatriate employees perceive Emiratis as beneficiaries of undue privilege, they may withhold knowledge as a defensive response. Managers may counteract this by establishing reciprocal exchange norms which could be achieved through mentorship programmes that pair Emirati recruits with expatriate co-workers and evaluate both on the basis of mutual knowledge transfer.

Secondly, systematic monitoring of knowledge flows can be implemented to enable targeted interventions to eliminate obstructive behaviours around knowledge sharing. Monitoring could include anonymous employee surveys, 360-degree feedback and digital analytics that track participation in collaborative platforms. Such measures would help managers identify patterns of exclusion early and intervene before hoarding behaviours become entrenched.

Thirdly, training initiatives should focus not only on Emiratis but also on expatriate employees. Many hoarding practices reported in this study stemmed from expatriates’ sense of territoriality and fear of displacement. Cross-cultural training, combined with performance incentives tied to inclusive collaboration, would help reduce resistance to localisation policies.

Fourth, the rise of AI and digital workplace tools offers both risks and opportunities. On the one hand, digital platforms can make knowledge sharing more transparent, but they can enable subtle forms of gatekeeping when facilitated by superior familiarity with the systems. Managers should ensure equal access to training on digital tools, embed inclusivity in system design, and use AI-based knowledge management systems to flag unequal participation patterns.

Finally, policymakers should consider linking Emiratisation targets with qualitative indicators, such as Emiratis’ reported access to mentoring and knowledge-sharing networks. This would shift the focus from numerical quotas to the actual integration experiences of Emirati employees, thereby addressing the informal exclusionary practices highlighted in this study and aligning with the expectations of Emiratis in the workplace (Rutledge, 2023).

This study contributes to theory and practice by demonstrating how citizenship status moderates the development of social capital and knowledge-sharing practices in multinational organisations. Through narrative interviews with Emirati employees, it shows that expatriate co-workers’ knowledge-hoarding behaviours are not merely individual defensive strategies, but collective practices embedded in organisational culture and shaped by power asymmetries. Citizenship thus emerges as a structural determinant of who gains access to organisational networks, trust-based relations and shared understandings.

The study advances social capital theory by contextualising it within a highly stratified workforce shaped by localisation policies. It extends existing frameworks by showing that structural, relational and cognitive dimensions of social capital (Nahapiet and Ghoshal, 1998) are moderated not only by interpersonal trust and reciprocity but also by institutional markers such as nationality and job security. In this respect, the findings echo Lin’s (2001) emphasis on the unequal distribution of social resources and highlight how exclusion generates negative social capital (Portes, 1998). The study’s integration of social exchange theory (Blau, 1964) demonstrates how perceptions of inequity generate negative reciprocity, expressed through Kho. At the same time, the findings engage with Bourdieu’s insights into both social capital (1986) and symbolic violence (1977), showing how cultural discourses legitimise unequal control over knowledge in multinational workplaces.

In terms of practical implications, the study identifies the informal gatekeeping mechanisms that undermine localisation efforts. It highlights the need for organisations to design inclusive knowledge-sharing strategies that account for expatriates’ territorial responses and Emiratis’ integration challenges. Policy implications extend beyond numerical localisation targets to qualitative indicators of Emiratis’ access to networks, mentoring and tacit knowledge.

By foregrounding the interplay of citizenship and cultural discourse, this research contributes a timely perspective on how power asymmetries are reproduced in globalised workforces. Ultimately, it validates that knowledge is not a neutral asset, but a resource bound up with privilege and exclusion. Addressing these dynamics is essential if localisation policies in the UAE, and comparable initiatives elsewhere, are to achieve their intended goals of integration, equity and sustainability.