Why "Going Woke" Often Leads to Going Broke

 

In an era where sensitivity and inclusivity dominate social discourse, many institutions have adopted what’s commonly referred to as “wokeness.” While the intent behind this cultural shift is often rooted in goodwill—seeking to avoid offense and create more inclusive spaces—the unintended consequences can sometimes undermine efficiency, clarity, and ultimately, sustainability.  

Let me illustrate this with a real-life scenario. For this purpose let's assume 1 word is equal to $1:  

I was at a church function, wearing a cap. A woman approached me, presumably to ask me to remove it. But instead of simply saying, “Please remove your cap,” a concise, four-word, $4 interaction, she opted for a lengthy preamble:  

“Is it your culture to wear caps in a church? I thought I’d ask because in many cultures they wear caps, and it may be offensive to ask to remove the cap, so I thought I’d ask first.”  

This turned a straightforward request into a 28-word, $28 exercise in over-explanation. While the goal—to have the cap removed—remained the same, the process became convoluted, time-consuming, and needlessly expensive (if we assign value to effort in communication).  

This anecdote exemplifies a larger problem with the “woke” approach: overcompensation. By prioritizing extreme caution to avoid the slightest risk of offense, institutions and individuals often sacrifice efficiency, clarity, and resources. In business, this phenomenon can result in unnecessary operational complexity, inflated costs, and alienated customers.  

The Cost of Overcompensation  

1. Excessive Resource Allocation

Businesses attempting to accommodate every possible perspective often expend disproportionate amounts of time and money. Whether it’s rewriting policies, creating additional training programs, or redesigning products to preempt potential backlash, the financial and logistical burdens can outweigh the benefits.  

2. Dilution of Core Purpose

 Just as the woman in my story lost sight of her simple objective—to politely ask me to remove my cap—organizations can lose focus on their core mission when they prioritize performative gestures over practical action. The result is often confusion among employees and customers leading to a drain on resources 

3. Alienation of Key Stakeholders 

 Ironically, efforts to appease everyone can alienate the very groups businesses aim to serve. By overthinking and overextending, organizations risk appearing insincere or pandering, which can erode trust and loyalty.  

4. Impact on Bottom Lines  

When companies devote significant resources to symbolic gestures, those costs often trickle down to consumers or employees, whether in the form of higher prices, reduced wages, or diminished service quality. This misallocation of resources can lead to financial decline—hence, the phrase “go woke, go broke.”  

A Call for Balance  

This is not to suggest that sensitivity and inclusivity should be abandoned. Far from it—businesses and institutions thrive when they respect diversity and treat individuals with dignity. However, there is a difference between genuine respect and performative overreach. The former fosters goodwill without compromising efficiency; the latter drains resources and complicates processes.  The lady assumed I would take offence if she simply asked me to remove my cap. What if I find that assumption offensive? 

The key lies in striking a balance. Instead of assuming that everyone will take offense or requiring exhaustive explanations for simple requests, individuals and organizations should focus on clear, respectful communication and practical solutions.  

In my case, the woman could have achieved the same outcome with a simple, “Please remove your cap.” It’s polite, respectful, and to the point. Businesses can learn from this by staying true to their mission while respecting diverse perspectives—without losing sight of their objectives or draining their resources.  

When clarity and efficiency meet inclusivity, everyone benefits.