Tony Elumelu and the Question of Respect: Why His Correction Is Sparking Debate

An exchange involving Tony Elumelu and a young woman has revived a familiar debate in many African professional environments: should an older or more senior figure be addressed by their first name, or should a respectful form of address be used?

The exchange prompted opposing reactions. Some see it as a legitimate reminder of etiquette and boundaries to be observed in a professional setting. Others believe that the public correction may have made the young woman uncomfortable. Beyond the incident itself, the controversy primarily reveals differing cultural expectations surrounding first names, status and familiarity.

What Tony Elumelu requested

Addressed with a simple “Hello Tony,” Tony Elumelu immediately stated that he did not wish to be called that. He asked the young woman to use “Mr Elumelu,” “T.O.E.” or “Chairman” instead.

The young woman then rephrased her greeting using “Mr Elumelu.” Her expression, as it was commented on, was interpreted by some observers as a sign of frustration or embarrassment.

The context mentioned was an initiative linked to UBA, the bank associated with Tony Elumelu, bringing together young participants and entrepreneurs in particular. In this type of setting, supporters of formal forms of address consider that the role of an executive and the generational difference justify the use of a title.

A correction considered necessary by some

Some reactions defended Tony Elumelu’s response. Under this view, addressing an older, prominent or authoritative person solely by their first name can be perceived as overly familiar. An immediate reminder of the rule would therefore prevent any ambiguity about the expected professional distance.

This position draws on a cultural reality found across different parts of Africa: forms of address do not merely identify a person; they can also mark age, rank, experience or respect. Using a title before a name is therefore not necessarily cold or distant; it can be a mark of consideration.

In many contexts, using a first name directly is more commonly reserved for people of the same age, close acquaintances or colleagues whose relationship has already established that degree of familiarity. Where such a relationship does not exist, a form such as “Mr,” “Ms,” “Doctor,” “Chief,” “Chairman” or a local title may be expected.

Why the incident is divisive

Critics do not always challenge a person’s right to state a preference about how they are addressed. Their concern is instead with the manner of the correction. In their view, an experienced person can remind someone of a rule in a less exposing way, particularly when speaking to a young participant at a public event.

Others point out that professional habits vary greatly from one organisation to another. In some companies, including those in English-speaking countries, hierarchy encourages the use of first names, even between employees and executives. This practice is associated with a more direct workplace culture, rather than with a lack of respect.

The central issue is therefore less the first name itself than the setting in which it is used. A rule that applies in one company, country or social group does not automatically apply elsewhere. The ability to identify the expected conventions in a particular environment is a matter of social and professional intelligence.

The weight of cultural conventions in professional relationships

In many African societies, respectful language extends beyond the workplace. It also appears within families, neighbourhoods and exchanges between generations. A term meaning “sister,” “brother,” “father,” “mother,” “uncle” or “auntie” may therefore be added before a first name.

These conventions reflect a desire to acknowledge the other person’s position within a relationship. The first name is not forbidden, but it is framed by an expression that preserves the consideration due to age or status. In East Africa, for example, using a term such as “Dada” before a first name can express this recognition.

However, the situation is far from uniform across the continent. Cities, families, companies and generations do not all share the same reference points. Some people favour titles, while others prefer first names to create a less formal atmosphere. It would therefore be reductive to present a single practice as the absolute rule.

The often-cited Maya Angelou precedent

The debate surrounding Tony Elumelu has also been compared with an exchange involving Maya Angelou. In that case, the American writer corrected a young interlocutor who had called her “Maya.” She asked to be called “Ms Angelou,” explaining in particular that she was not her friend and recalling the symbolic role she could hold as an elder, aunt or teacher.

The comparison illustrates the personal and cultural significance of a form of address. For some public figures, the use of their first name by a younger person does not automatically convey equality or friendliness. On the contrary, it may be perceived as erasing experience, age or social standing.

An apparent difference in treatment involving a journalist

The controversy intensified because of another interaction in which a Western journalist greeted Tony Elumelu by calling him “Tony,” without him correcting her. For some commentators, the comparison raises the question of a possible double standard: why accept the first name in one case and reject it in another?

A distinction has nevertheless been made between the two situations. In the exchange with the journalist, Tony Elumelu was appearing as a guest on a programme that was not part of his organisation. In the UBA-related setting, he was presented as the chairman of the organising institution. According to this interpretation, the respective roles, venue and conventions of the event explain the difference in reaction.

This explanation does not end the debate, as people may assess the tone of the correction and the importance of consistency across contexts differently. It nevertheless serves as a reminder that the same form of address can carry a different meaning depending on whether it is used in an interview, a work meeting, an institutional ceremony or a private exchange.

Respect, boundaries and adapting to the context

The incident highlights a simple principle: politeness cannot be reduced to a rule that is identical everywhere. In some environments, using first names is entirely normal and does not imply excessive familiarity. In others, those same practices may be understood as reducing the necessary distance between two people.

To avoid misunderstandings, observing the context remains essential. When an organisation, an elder or a manager clearly states a preferred form of address, knowing and using it can contribute to more harmonious exchanges. Conversely, those in positions of authority can also consider the effect of their corrections on less experienced people.

The debate over Tony Elumelu is therefore not limited to whether one should say “Tony” or “Mr Elumelu.” It brings two sensibilities into tension: one emphasises visibly maintaining marks of respect, while the other favours a less formal relationship and a more discreet correction. Both approaches coexist in contemporary professional spaces, including in Nigeria and among African diasporas.

FAQ

Why did Tony Elumelu correct the young woman?

He stated that he did not want to be called only by his first name and requested the use of “Mr Elumelu,” “T.O.E.” or “Chairman.”

Is it impolite to call an executive by their first name?

It depends on the setting. In some companies, it is an accepted norm. In others, particularly where age, status or cultural conventions matter, a title is expected.

Why is the comparison with a Western journalist mentioned?

Because a journalist greeted him by saying “Tony” without being corrected. The difference in context between an interview and an event linked to his institution has been put forward to explain the two reactions.