In the last few hours, a video of a young lady addressing the Chairman of the UBA Group, one of Africa’s leading financial institutions, by his first name during a stakeholder session has made the rounds online.

In the clip, she stands to ask a question, addresses Chairman Tony Elumelu as “Tony”, and he calmly interrupts to correct her, asking that she address him as “Mr Elumelu”, “T.O.E.”, his initials, or simply “Chairman.”

Predictably, the internet has split into camps.

One side argues that UBA has a first-name workplace culture, so she did nothing wrong.

The other insists that, regardless of company policy, calling an elder and corporate leader by his first name is disrespectful.

Interestingly, both arguments contain some truth.

The conversation becomes far more interesting when viewed through the lens of cultural intelligence rather than corporate etiquette alone.

Three facts can be true at once

First, UBA is widely known for cultivating an organisational culture that encourages accessibility. Like many modern corporations, it seeks to reduce unnecessary hierarchy in day-to-day interactions by allowing employees to address one another by their first names, regardless of rank.

This kind of culture is designed to flatten communication barriers. When junior employees feel psychologically safe enough to speak openly, information tends to flow more freely across an otherwise hierarchical organisation.

Second, UBA is not simply another global corporation.

It is an African institution.

Founded in Nigeria, it now operates across more than twenty African countries and several international markets, making it a genuinely multinational organisation whose identity is deeply rooted in an African cultural context.

And that context matters.

Third, many African societies operate within what cross-cultural researcher Geert Hofstede describes as high power-distance cultures.

Power distance refers to the extent to which people within a society accept unequal distributions of authority and status. In high power-distance cultures, respect for hierarchy is not merely organisational; it is social.

It shows up in how we greet elders.

How we defer to authority.

How titles carry meaning.

And perhaps most noticeably, in our reluctance to call senior figures by their first names.

None of these realities cancels one another out.

They simply coexist.

That is precisely why this moment became so culturally fascinating.

The role of Cultural Intelligence

If IQ measures cognitive ability and EQ measures emotional awareness, Cultural Intelligence (CQ) measures something equally valuable in today's workplace: the ability to understand cultural differences and adapt one's behaviour appropriately across different contexts.

Notice the emphasis on adaptation.

Cultural intelligence is not about abandoning your identity. Nor is it about memorising cultural rules. It is the ability to read the room.

To recognise that the same behaviour can carry entirely different meanings depending on the audience, setting and cultural expectations.

This is where I think the viral moment becomes instructive.

Within UBA's internal culture, first-name interactions may be perfectly acceptable.

But a public stakeholder session with the Chairman of a pan-African institution introduces an entirely different layer. Factors like age, symbolism, external audiences, and cultural expectations play a major role in how employees address one another and consult with one another.

In moments like these, cultural intelligence often suggests choosing the option that creates the least ambiguity.

Had she simply replaced "Tony" with "Sir" or "Chairman," she would likely have communicated the same confidence while avoiding the cultural friction that followed.

Knowing which words to use with each stakeholder each time is a question of judgement, and that in itself is a soft skill that must be learned over the course of one’s career.

Equally commendable was Mr. Elumelu's response. His correction was immediate but measured. He protected the boundary he considered important without humiliating the speaker, which is an underrated leadership skill in itself.

In a cultural climate that could easily have derided or belittled the junior person for such a daring act, the Chairman’s ability to identify the goof, correct it, and steer the conversation back was a class act of grace and kindness that many leaders should embody.

African Gen Z and the tension between authenticity and adaptation

This is not an article about naming and shaming one young professional. If you've spent enough time in the corporate world, chances are you've had your own version of a "Welcome to Work" moment.

The email that was sent to the wrong recipient.

The presentation that went sideways.

The meeting where you realised, halfway through speaking, that you'd completely misread the room.

Most of us simply had the privilege of making those mistakes before they went viral. The larger conversation is about what happens as Africa's first fully digital generation enters workplaces that are simultaneously becoming more global and remaining deeply local.

Gen Z has grown up watching professionals across London, New York, Nairobi and Lagos interact online. We consume global workplace norms daily. We observe CEOs on podcasts insisting that "titles don't matter." We watch founders encourage employees to call them by their first names.

Naturally, many young professionals begin to internalise these behaviours as universal professional standards. The problem is that workplace norms rarely travel untouched across cultures.

Within Nigeria particularly, Gen Z has acquired labels ranging from the "phone-pressing generation" to a generation perceived as challenging authority more openly than previous ones.

What older generations sometimes interpret as declining respect, younger professionals often frame as confidence, authenticity or self-advocacy.

Neither interpretation is entirely wrong. They are simply operating from different cultural reference points. The digital revolution has accelerated this gap.

For perhaps the first time, young professionals are learning workplace behaviour from global internet culture at the same time they are navigating local organisational realities.

That creates inevitable friction.

The Leadership Lesson

This incident ultimately says as much about organisations as it does about young employees.

If companies want globally competitive workplaces, they cannot assume cultural norms are self-explanatory. Leaders should make explicit what is expected in different settings.

When is informality encouraged?

When do titles matter?

How do internal norms differ from public-facing engagements?

Clarity prevents unnecessary missteps.

For young professionals, however, the lesson is slightly different.

Authenticity is valuable.

Confidence is valuable.

Speaking truth to power is valuable.

But wisdom lies in knowing that every workplace has two cultures: the one written in the employee handbook, and the one that lives quietly in the room. The professionals who thrive are rarely those who abandon themselves to fit every environment.

They are the ones who develop enough cultural intelligence to recognise which version of professionalism the moment requires. 

Because sometimes success isn't about knowing the global best practice.

It's about knowing when the room is asking for something more nuanced.