2. Grateful Relationship Orientation

Taken from:
Suntaree Komin, Psychology of the Thai People: Values and Behavioral Patterns, National Institute of
Development Administration (NIDA), Bangkok 1991, ISBN 974‐85744‐8‐2, pp. 139‐143 (without tables).
References and tables are available in the original. Typing errors edited. Underlines by author.

For a culture in which relationship is also very important besides “ego”, it is not surprising to find a
number of relationship related values emerged and secured high ranking orders in the cognitive systems
of the people. In general, the presentations of most Thai interactions are honest and sincere, and the
Thai are bound for sincere and deep reciprocal relationships. And the deepest one is the psychologically
invested Bunkhun relationship, as opposed to the “etiquettical” or “transactional” relationship. Bunkhun
(indebted goodness) is a psychological bond between someone who, out of sheer kindness and sincerity,
renders another person the needed helps and favours, and the latter’s remembering of the goodness
done and his ever‐readiness to reciprocate the kindness. The Bunkhun relationship is thus based on the
value of gratitude. Therefore, this value orientation is characterized by the highly valued Grateful quality
in a person, and by the patterns of Bunkhun or grateful relationship.

Reciprocity of kindness, particularly the value of being Grateful is a highly valued characteristic trait in
Thai society. It therefore emerges on the Thai value list, but does not emerge on the American value list.
This clearly suggests that the cognition with regard to relationship of these two cultures has a basic
difference. The Thai have been socialized to value this Grateful (Katanyuu) quality in a person. A person
should be grateful to persons who render Bunkhun (goodness, helps, favors, etc.) to him. By being
Grateful, it implies two aspects—Roo Bunkhun, which means to know, acknowledge, or constantly
conscious and bear in heart of the kindness done; and Tob thaen bunkhun, which means to reciprocate
the kindness whenever there are opportunities. It is an exchange relation that is not bound by time nor
distance. Although the person, who renders help, kindness, and favors, is usually done without
expectation of anything in return, the obligated person must be Grateful. And Bunkhun must be
returned, often on a continuous basis and in a variety of ways, because Bunkhun should not and cannot
be measured quantitatively in material terms. It is an ongoing, binding of good reciprocal feeling and
lasting relationship. Therefore, being Grateful to Bunkhun constitutes the root of any deep, meaningful
relationship and friendship—be it grateful bond towards one’s parents, or to a relative who supports
one through school, or a teacher who provides one with knowledge, or a good friend who helps one out
at times of troubles, etc. Certainly, there are degrees of Bunkhun, depending largely on the subjective
perception of the obligated person, the degree of need, the amount of help, and the degree of concern
of the person who renders help. But what is important is the fact that the Thai are brought up to value
this process of gratefulness—the process of reciprocity of goodness done, and the ever‐readiness to
reciprocate. Time and istance are not the factors to diminish the Bunkhun. It is the important base for
relationship.

While Grateful is a dominant value underlying important relationships, there are variations found among
different groups, which help to explain certain observable behavioural patterns. Specifically, the rural
people value this characteristic trait significantly higher than the urban Bangkokians. In fact, the national
rural sample ranked it the most important value of all, while the Bangkokians ranked it 4th. Inspection
across occupational groups reveals that farmers ranked it top significant order, while government
officials and students ranked it 4th or 5th respectively. This clearly explains the congenial, warm and
sincere relationship and atmosphere one feels once he/she enters the rural area.

“Bunkhun” Value and Exploitations

However, this characteristic trait of the rural people also leads to the manifestations of several
behavioural patterns as well as the pattern of their being exploited usually by urban‐based, businessminded
exploiters. The process of exploitation usually goes like this. The sweet‐tongued urban
middleman will contact the locally known person trusted by the villagers, to persuade the villagers that
he comes with good intention to help them out of their poverty‐ridden life, by bringing them jobs in the
city. He even pays them in advance, usually a few thousand Baht, which worth about one or two years
earning for a poor farmer. Being poor, uneducated, yet sincere and grateful, particularly with such
ubvious guarantee (few thousand Baht) of good intention and kindness, the poor farmer fully trusts the
middleman, and let him take his sons and daughters to the city. He never anticipates anything bad could
happen to his children. How can he refuse the obvious goodness of the other person. The job ordeal of
the rural migrants drawn into the urban labour market starts from this point. They are drawn into lowpaid
jobs as domestic servants, construction workers, factory workers, and services in restaurants,
massage parlours, tea houses, and brothels. Under various conditions, all sorts of abuses of human
rights occur, including child labours and the well publicized Thai prostitutions.

On the part of the rural poor children, to start with, they have no reason to object their parents. They
want to work and send their earnings back to their parents, to help rise up the younger ones in the
family. Those who employ rural workers will validate this fact that their servants for example, often ask
for advanced salary to send to their parents. Their being grateful and responding to the needs of their
parents and family, also shown in the fact that when the planting and harvest seasons come, they will
get back to help their family in the rice fields. If their employers do not permit their request for leave,
they would just leave the job, even knowing that they would not get the job back. Foreigners residing in
Bangkok often felt puzzled by the sudden leave of their servants. Some foreign observers have cited this
phenomenon of the Thai servants, as showing the individualistic characteristic of the Thai, who would
coma and go any time they please. Such observation might have totally missed the point. The rural Thai
have a close tie with their family, friends, and community. Demographic analysis of seasonal migrations
of the rural‐urban migration has also substantiated this fact, Research report shows that return
migration was found to be highest among these engaged in agriculture at their origin (61% over 39%
who remained), and the Northeast has the highest return migration. Even those who have no jobs at
home will also return home (Chamratrithirong et al., 1979, pp. 49‐54).

Another example of this high attachment to family, and showing of gratitude, has to do with the sad but
true stories of the rural poor daughters who, with the hope for city jobs, unfortunately end up in the
traps of prostitution, but somehow always manage so send money home. A well‐known Northern village
called Baan dok kham tai, which is very different from ordinary villages in that the whole village is full of
big and beautiful houses, is known that the villagers built their big houses from the money sent to them
by their daughters who work as prostitutes in Bangkok and Pattaya. Northern girls have been known to
have fair complexion and are beautiful. In the past few years with the rapidly growing tourism industry,
the blooming of prostitution comes with the territory, leading to the beyond imagination report of poor
parents selling their young daughters way. The point of all these illustrations is that, sad as it may be in
some cases, being Grateful dominates the cognitive world of peasants in general, and farmers in
particular, regardless of regional differences. This Grateful value has exactly the same median for the
Northern, the North‐eastern, and the Southern peasants.

“Bunkhun” Value and “Saang Bunkhun”

Evidently, this grateful relationship orientation can be double‐edged. The concept of being Grateful in
response to Bunkhun or kindness and favours given, has been the base for good and meaningful
relationships in general, and has helped to explain the effectiveness and efficiency of successful
completion of jobs and projects which have been accomplished basically through good connections and
social relations (Tontisirin et al., 1988). On the other hand, this value can be manipulated and exploited
by those who are power‐oriented, in creating, monitoring, and maintaining of any “power” group, clique,
gang of hooligans, including “entourage” of superiors—be it in the governmental departments like the
sol‐called “mafia” ministry (Ministry of Interior), or in the general business circle, in which “creating
gratitude” (Saang Bunkhun) is one of the basic means to get things done or get business going for one’s
benefits. Since the Thai in general are too Kreng jai to refuse kindness, the process of “creating gratitude”
is often used to establish Bunkhun and power connections. “Ingroups” in many circles are thus built and
reinforced. And where money and benefits are involved, the connections of “ingroups” are further
strengthened and perpetuated. This helps to explain the behavioural patterns of the so‐called Chao phor
(“godfathers”) of the “mafia” type gangsterism, who manifest their influence and connections with
government officials, policemen, up to politicians and ministers, in various forms, from policy decisions
benefiting business deals down to direct corruptions as appeared in publicized scandals every now and
then. It is a known fact that, not only these local “godfathers” have connections for their own good,
political parties exist and are able to win Parliamentary seats at general elections because of the support
from these local Chao phor. Some of them in turn were officially appointed to be advisors to the
Ministers, like the last Minister of Interior, who had appointed over a hundred advisors, too many even
for his own memory. Others have made their ways into the Parliament (Bangkok Post, August 2, 1990).
In fact, in most government offices, these “ingroups” with vested interest are often connected with
medium to large scale corruptions, leave alone their being the major stumbling blocks, for any attempt
of organizational change and development that is perceived to be incongruent with their own interest.
Such behavioural patterns surfaced in various levels of government organizations. This is why the work
of the National Counter‐Corruption Commission (CCC) has never been successful. Through power and
relationship connections, people with connections can always get away from troubles including wrongdoings.
These are exploitations of the gratitude value of the Thai people.

Conceptually, it would be appropriate to state here that, in those circumstances when the relationships
become more and more dominated by power and interest, Mulder’s “fear and power” base analytical
frame seems to be applicable to some extent. But to the extent that his model assumes that those in the
inferior positions are deeply motivated by fear, by insecurity, by higher needs to be accepted by Phoo
yai, and are thus psychologically very dependent and insecure (1978, pp. 70, 72‐74, and many other
pages throughout the book), it cannot be correct. Mulder probably forgets to further look into the fact,
that when once the Phoo yai in power happens to lose his power, all the Look nong (followers,
entourage, or lackeys, etc.) will leave him, but definitely not for the mental hospital, and might or might
not seek another power figure, depending on how close they are identified with the former power. It is
a power play and should not imply that people in inferior power positions are insecure or have high
dependence needs, unless one has empirical proof. In this case of the Thai, there is no proof. In fact, the
Thai have strong “ego”, and when the grateful relationship turns into a “power” dominated relationship,
the relationship becomes a “transactional” relationship, where there is no deep psychological bond, the
“ego” is kept intact and independent, and the duration of the relationship has no meaning. This is
triggered off by the value of being Responsive to situations and opportunities when there is no deep
psychological bond.

Therefore, in general, having the high value for sincere and meaningful relationship as base, followed by
those social smoothing interpersonal relation values, one can say that Thai relationship is usually a
presentation of sincerity. Deep and long‐term relationship results from a process of gradual reciprocal
rendering and returning of goodness and favours, through successful experiences of smooth
interpersonal interactions. In fact, Thai people are easy to be friends. And deep friendship is not difficult
to develop, even across hierarchies and culture, provided that their “ego” are not slighted in the process
of befriending. It is a wonder to learn that Mulder, as a foreign anthropologist who can speak and read
Thai, after 3 years in Thailand, expressed in his book that he cannot develop a single deep friendship
with the Thai. It is even more unfortunate that Mulder’s statement has led Cooper (who wrote Culture
shock! Thailand, 1982) to devote one whole chapter describing the Thai as being polite and friendly but
are superficial, insincere, and would rarely engage in deep lasting friendship. This is evidently incorrectly
generalized, if not superficial. The present researcher is certain that many former Peace Corps
volunteers, who have successfully shredded off there prejudices, and immersed themselves in the Thai
culture, would not agree to those statements.

Back