Category: Uncategorized

"Umuntu ngumuntu ngabantu." A person is a person through other persons.

This is Ubuntu — the African philosophical concept that sits at the heart of how millions of people across the continent understand identity, community, and belonging. And yet, in over a decade of DEI work across organisations, boardrooms, and global conferences, I have rarely heard it named.

That silence tells us something important.

The Framework We Borrowed — and What We Left Behind

Western DEI frameworks, for all their value, are built on a particular set of assumptions. They tend to centre the individual: individual bias, individual allyship, individual metrics. We count representation numbers, we train people to check their unconscious assumptions, we create affinity groups where individuals find others like themselves.

This is not wrong. But it is incomplete.

Ubuntu offers a fundamentally different starting point. Where Western DEI asks "how do we include more people?", Ubuntu asks "what kind of community makes inclusion inevitable?" It’s not a question about access — it’s a question about essence.

What Ubuntu Actually Means for Organisations

Ubuntu is often translated as "I am because we are" — and that simplicity is deceptive. In practice, it holds several implications that organisations rarely sit with long enough.

Interdependence is not weakness. In Ubuntu thinking, your flourishing is inseparable from mine. An organisation operating on Ubuntu principles doesn’t just tolerate diversity — it recognises that its own vitality depends on the full contribution of every person within it. Inclusion becomes self-interest at its most enlightened.

Dignity is communal, not just individual. When someone in the room is diminished — talked over, passed over, made invisible — everyone in that room carries some of that diminishment. Ubuntu makes bystanders impossible, because there are no bystanders. There is only community.

Accountability is relational, not transactional. The DEI training model often treats inclusion like a compliance exercise: attend the workshop, check the box, move on. Ubuntu suggests something different — that accountability is ongoing, relational, and woven into how we show up every day, not performed in a 90-minute session once a year.

Why This Matters Now

We are in a moment of DEI fatigue — and understandably so. Programmes proliferated, promises were made, and many organisations find themselves with diversity numbers that barely moved and cultures that feel just as exclusive as before.

Part of the problem is that we built inclusion as a layer on top of existing structures rather than as a redesign from the inside out. We hired diverse people into systems that were never built to value them.

Ubuntu doesn’t let us off that hook. It insists that the community — the organisation, the team, the leadership — is responsible for creating conditions where everyone can genuinely be.

Practical Starting Points

This isn’t abstract philosophy. Here’s what Ubuntu-informed DEI looks like in practice:

Ask different questions in your listening sessions. Instead of "what barriers do you face?" (individual), try "what would need to be true about this organisation for you to bring your full self here?" (communal).

Redesign accountability structures. Instead of performance reviews that ask "did this individual hit their DEI goals?", ask "how is this team creating conditions for all its members to thrive?"

Value collective wisdom explicitly. In many African decision-making traditions, the voices of elders, community members, and those most affected are sought out before decisions are made. What would it mean for your leadership team to genuinely pause and listen before acting?

Name interdependence out loud. When a leader says "your success is my success," and means it, something shifts. Ubuntu-informed leadership doesn’t just tolerate this — it builds it into how the organisation talks about itself.

A Closing Thought

I am not suggesting we import Ubuntu wholesale and rebrand it as a DEI framework. That would be its own kind of extractivism.

What I am suggesting is that the wisdom exists. It has always existed. And in our rush to build DEI programmes that look good on annual reports, we have walked past some of the most profound thinking about human community ever articulated.

The question isn’t whether Ubuntu has something to offer. The question is whether we are willing to listen.

---

Chika Idoko is a DEI Strategist, People & Culture Leader, and Board Member. She works with organisations across Africa and globally to build workplaces where inclusion is not a programme — it’s the culture.

When organisations talk about “diversity fatigue,” they almost always frame it as something that happens to employees. Teams are tired of the workshops. People groan when another mandatory training hits the calendar. Managers say they don’t know what more they can do. And so the conclusion drawn — often quietly, at the leadership level — is that perhaps DEI efforts are being pushed too hard, too fast.

I’d like to offer a different lens entirely. One that starts — and stays — at the top.

The Fatigue Is Real — But It’s Misdiagnosed

Diversity fatigue is real. But in my experience working with organisations across multiple sectors and continents, the fatigue is almost never caused by too much inclusion work. It is caused by inclusion work that is disconnected from power, policy, and actual accountability.

When people sit through their fourth “unconscious bias” workshop and nothing has changed in who gets promoted, who gets heard in meetings, or who is represented at the senior table — they are not fatigued by diversity. They are fatigued by the performance of diversity. There is a critical difference.

What Leaders Are Actually Saying When They Blame Fatigue

When a CEO says “our people are exhausted by DEI,” what they are often describing — without realising it — is an organisation where inclusion has been treated as an initiative rather than a value. A project. A campaign with a beginning, middle, and hopefully an end. That framing is itself the problem.

Genuine inclusion is not an extra thing you do. It is how you do everything. When it is embedded into hiring, into compensation review, into leadership development, into how meetings are structured and who is invited into which rooms — it does not create fatigue. It creates belonging. And belonging, as the research consistently shows, creates performance.

The Uncomfortable Question Leaders Must Ask

The question is not “are our employees tired of diversity?” The question is: “Have we created conditions where people can see that this work leads somewhere?”

If the answer is no — if the metrics haven’t moved, if the senior team looks identical to how it did three years ago, if marginalised employees are still leaving at higher rates — then the fatigue is not a signal to slow down. It is a signal to go deeper. To get structural. To make the hard decisions that diversity workshops were never designed to make on their own.

Diversity fatigue is not the end of a DEI programme. It is the beginning of an honest conversation about whether the programme was ever built to work.

That conversation takes courage. But courage, in my experience, is precisely what leadership requires. Not comfort. Not compliance. Not the path of least resistance.

The organisations I have seen transform — genuinely transform — are the ones whose leaders decided to hold themselves to the same standard they were asking of their employees. That is where the real work begins.