Could the way we address one another as a society actually reflect deep-seated differences in social status and power dynamics? Do we address one another by name, or do we use more formal terms? Do these forms of address truly express mutual respect, or do they reinforce differences in social status? Have you ever considered what qualities make someone worthy of being addressed as “Mr.” or “Ms.”? Perhaps these qualities are merely a privilege that comes with occupying a higher rank in the hierarchy or holding a certain position. This culture of obedience, which is less common in developed societies, is like a continuation of the “Long live the sultan” system in our society.
A Meeting Memory: Crossing the Invisible Line
I think it was 2005. At a board meeting, one of our directors was presenting information about an architectural project. There were many people in the room listening intently—board members, managers… As the presentation progressed, everyone’s eyes were fixed on the manager. Everyone was silent—until one of the board members spoke up and asked the manager a question.
The board member addressed the manager directly by name when asking the question. The manager, perhaps a bit nervous but just as determined, responded by addressing the questioner by name. At that moment, an invisible tension hung in the air. The board member responded with a look of surprise and a slight smile; it was an unexpected reply.
After the meeting ended, I approached the director. I told him that the board member didn’t actually have any ill intent—he was simply being sincere. The director paused for a moment, then turned to me and asked, “That may be, but what gives him the right to address him that way?”
I hesitated for a moment. This question challenged a boundary that everyone in the room had unconsciously accepted. Had the board member shown his sincerity by addressing the director by name, or had he spoken because he felt entitled to that right due to his status? And when the director reciprocated this sincerity, had he granted himself the same right, or had he, too, unconsciously crossed a line?
The Invisible Line
This incident resembled two fishermen on the bank of a river. One was sitting on a large rock in the river’s most picturesque spot, fishing for big fish with a sturdy rod. The other was a little further downstream, perched on a small outcrop along the riverbank, trying to catch small fish with a simpler fishing rod. Between the river’s waters lay an invisible line. No one could see this line, but everyone knew it was there. One day, the fisherman upstream took a step downstream and cast his line into the other fisherman’s territory. This action might have been simply a desire to catch more fish, or perhaps an unintentional crossing of the boundary. The fisherman downstream, noticing this, responded by casting his line upstream. At that moment, the flow of the river’s water came to a brief halt. Everyone wondered what had caused these reciprocal moves, but no one could answer: “What defined this invisible boundary in the river?” The incident at the meeting and this metaphor actually highlight a reality we often encounter in the workplace and in society: When it comes to forms of address, is it sincerity or status that takes precedence? Does addressing someone by their first name signify mutual respect and equality, or does it reveal an invisible power dynamic?
Perhaps the real issue is recognizing these boundaries and questioning why we need them. No one can easily answer this question—just as I couldn’t answer the manager’s question that day.
Social Status, Forms of Address, and True Respect
In everyday life, we notice that while many people address each other by name, certain individuals are addressed using more formal terms. This situation becomes an indicator of differences in social status. For example, when addressing people perceived to have a higher status—such as a stranger or someone in an official position—we use terms like “Mr./Ms./Dear.” But why? Should the form of address depend on who the person is, or on the position they hold?
Titles and forms of address are distinct concepts. While a title indicates a person’s professional position, the form of address determines the level of respect and familiarity used in interpersonal communication. Therefore, the fact that a person holds a title such as “doctor” or “director” does not necessarily mean they must always be addressed as “Mr./Ms.” or “Dear”; the choice of form of address depends on mutual respect and the dynamics of communication.
The key issue here is whether forms of address reinforce status differences. Do they truly express mutual respect, or do they merely reinforce social hierarchy? It should not be forgotten that, regardless of status or title, no one has the right to speak down to or treat another person harshly. The form of address is a personal preference, and respect is shown to the person, not the position. While some people prefer to be addressed by their first name, others may prefer more formal forms of address. What matters is that these preferences are mutually respected.
Aligning Beyond Identity
There is a question frequently asked in coaching sessions: “How would you like us to address you?” This simple question actually carries deep meanings that go beyond identity. A person’s choice of how to be addressed conveys a message about their identity and the respect shown toward them. Asking this question signifies mutual respect for human dignity and the establishment of an equal relationship. The form of address is not merely a means of communication but also an indication of the value placed on the other person.
For Example, in the Workplace…
In many workplaces, we see that managers address their employees by name but expect employees to address them using formal terms such as “Mr./Ms./Dear.” While this reinforces hierarchy, it can also make it difficult for employees to express their opinions. So, as managers, have we ever considered how the power of our position influences our behavior?
Could we adopt this same style and attitude toward employees—simply because of our position—toward a complete stranger on the street? If not, why not? Is it the position that truly deserves respect, or is it human values?
Culture of Silence
A culture of silence describes a workplace atmosphere where employees are reluctant to freely express their ideas and thoughts. Employees prefer to remain silent in the face of a manager’s authority because they believe they will otherwise be criticized or excluded. This phenomenon is known in behavioral psychology as “learned helplessness.” However, this helplessness eventually turns into accepted helplessness. In other words, people develop obedience as a natural reflex under an authoritarian management culture. This situation stifles both individual creativity and the overall development of society.
Yet an important psychological question arises here: Can submission create an internal conflict that fosters feelings of worthlessness or a loss of self-respect in an individual? Employees’ silence in the face of status-imposed demands can sometimes emerge as a survival strategy. However, such repetitive behaviors can erode an individual’s self-worth and, in the long term, lead to psychological issues such as learned helplessness. Sometimes, the healthiest way to protect one’s personal dignity is to consciously distance oneself from such toxic environments.
Mutual Rights and Freedom of Choice
The form of address is a personal preference, and both managers and employees are free to ask how they would like to be addressed. Status does not give anyone the right to belittle others or use harsh language. Whether someone is addressed by their first name or with titles like “Mr./Ms./Dear,” this preference should not be imposed and must be handled within the framework of mutual respect. Just as in coaching, even a simple question about how to address someone can make a big difference in interpersonal relationships.
🤔 Questions Worth Thinking About
How would you prefer to be addressed at work? Have you ever explicitly expressed this preference?
How does the difference in how managers and employees address each other at your workplace affect you? Are you able to express your opinions freely?
Given your position, could you behave toward your employees the same way you would toward a stranger outside of work? If not, why?
If managers address their employees by name, do you think employees have the right to do the same? Or is this right reserved only for those with a certain social status?
Building a fair and equal society begins not with major changes, but with small differences in our daily communication. Developing awareness of how we address and treat one another can help us create a more equitable society. 🌱