The viral video of Mr Tony Elumelu correcting a young woman who addressed him as “Tony” has generated a lot of commentary.

But I think we are missing the real issue.

My concern is not whether Mr Elumelu prefers to be called “Mr Elumelu,” “T.O.E.” or “Chairman.” He is entitled to that preference.

In fact, I personally do not favour first-name culture.

Only last week, I wrote this to one of our international clients:

“I’d also like to note, as a matter of personal and professional protocol, that I don’t use first names in official communications. I go by Mr. Akinlami or Mr. Taiwo Akinlami, and I extend the same courtesy by not addressing others by first name either.”

This is not a position I adopted because of the present controversy.

I have held it for many years.

I am African. I am Yoruba.

In Yoruba culture, respect is embedded in the language itself. There is a way I address someone younger than me, a peer, and an older person. Our pronouns reflect age, status and respect.

I do not believe that succeeding in the corporate world requires us to abandon everything valuable in our African culture.

A workplace can encourage openness without becoming culturally rootless.

Employees can disagree with their leaders without pretending that age, history and social context no longer matter.

There can be a healthy meeting of both worlds.

But here is where my problem begins.

Who created the first-name corporate culture that many young Nigerians inherited?

Certainly not the young people.

It was established and normalized by an older generation of corporate leaders.

And this is where we must be careful.

I am not saying Mr Tony Elumelu originated first-name culture in Nigeria. I have never said that.

My point is that he belonged to a generation of leading corporate figures under whom this culture was accepted, practised and presented as progressive.

There is documented evidence that, as far back as 2005, senior executives around Mr Elumelu addressed him as “Tony.”

At the time, that kind of informality was associated with a modern management culture that sought to reduce hierarchy, create openness and encourage employees to speak freely.

So if corporate Nigeria has now changed its mind, there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.

People change.

Leaders change.

Organisations change.

Experience teaches us.

But when leaders change the rules, they should tell the people who were trained under the old rules.

That is the part we repeatedly fail to do.

We create a culture.

Young people follow it.

Years later, we become uncomfortable with the results.

Then, instead of first examining our own role, we turn around and crucify the young people.

We do this at home.

We do it in schools.

We do it in churches.

We do it in workplaces.

Adults create environments.

Young people adapt to them.

Then adults sometimes behave as though the young people created those environments themselves.

That is deeply unfair.

If we promoted first-name culture yesterday and have now concluded that it was culturally inappropriate, we should simply say:

“We used to believe this was the better way. Experience has changed our minds.”

There is dignity in that.

There is leadership in that.

There is no shame in changing your mind.

The problem begins when yesterday’s culture is silently abandoned and young people are publicly condemned for still following it.

This conversation is particularly personal to me.

From 2007 to 2009, I worked as an editor of Effective Manager Monthly, a joint publication of Daily Independent Newspaper and OSC Ltd, under the leadership of Mr. Olakunle Soriyan and coordinated by Mr. Emmanuel E-Bright

My recollection is that one of the earliest subjects we addressed was this exact issue of first-name corporate culture.

We questioned whether Nigerian organisations were importing a foreign management practice without adequately considering African cultural values around age, hierarchy and respect.

We critiqued it.

We argued that corporate modernity did not require cultural surrender.

I am still searching for that publication, and I intend to reproduce it when I find it.

What is interesting is that this subject later became a serious area of academic inquiry.

Researchers have examined first-name office culture in Nigerian organisations and the tension it creates between formal corporate policies and deeply rooted cultural expectations.

Employees sometimes respond by adding titles.

Some say “Sir.”

Some say “Manager.”

Some avoid names altogether.

Why?

Because the employee is caught between two systems.

The organisation says one thing.

Culture says another.

Then we blame the young employee for not intuitively knowing which unwritten rule applies in which situation.

That is the real problem.

If first-name address is acceptable only among peers, say so.

If it is acceptable internally but not when addressing senior executives, say so.

If a chairman or founder is exempt from the general first-name culture, say so.

If the policy has been abandoned altogether, say so.

Young people should not discover hidden rules through public embarrassment.

I do not know the current internal policy of UBA on forms of address, so I will not assume that this particular young woman was following an official UBA policy.

But that does not remove the broader issue.

First-name corporate culture existed in Nigerian banking and other major sectors.

It was consciously promoted.

It was associated with modern management.

Young people did not invent it.

My work with children, families, schools and institutions for close to three decades has taught me something very important:

Adults shape culture before young people enter it.

We establish family culture.

We establish school culture.

We establish workplace culture.

We define what is considered modern.

We define what is rewarded.

We define what is outdated.

Young people enter systems that already exist.

If we later discover that the culture we created needs correction, then correct it.

But first take responsibility for creating it.

Explain what has changed.

Teach the new expectation.

Do not reproduce a viral video merely to ask, “What is wrong with young people today?”

Sometimes the more important question is:

What did we teach them yesterday?

I support the preservation of what is valuable in African culture.

I believe respect for elders matters.

I believe our forms of address carry cultural meaning.

I also believe leadership requires honesty.

We cannot change the rules silently and punish young people for obeying yesterday’s rules.

So for me, the real question raised by this video is not simply:

“Should she have called him Tony?”

The deeper question is:

Who taught her generation that calling senior corporate leaders by their first names was modern, acceptable and professional in the first place?

And if we have now changed our minds, have we told them?

Do have an INSPIRED weekend with the family.

Follower of Christ. Husband. Father. Egalitarian. Goodwill Investor. Attorney. Author. Thriver. Culture-Edge Family Strengthening and Child Safeguarding Pioneer, Innovator and Practitioner. Value-Based Parenting Ideologue. Change Agent. Rebel with a Cause. Three Decades in the Saddle.