Lessons from Cross-Cultural Leadership and Doctoral Research on Power, Accountability, and Trust
By Leroy E. Ainsworth Sewell, DMin
Who in your organization can challenge your judgment without fearing the consequences?
For a founder, executive, or board chair, that question deserves serious attention. Its answer reveals whether people can speak honestly, whether decisions receive meaningful scrutiny, and whether authority serves the purpose for which it was entrusted.
Over, three decades of pastoral and organizational leadership in Jamaica, The Bahamas, and the United States, I have learned to take the relationship between power and trust seriously. My experience has also brought me into contact with abuse of authority in both religious and corporate institutions. Those observations have reinforced a conviction: an organization’s stated values must be reflected in how its people are treated and its decisions are made.
My doctoral research at Andrews University grew out of a concern about the misuse of positional power. I examined how church board officers could be equipped to recognize and address that misuse. The study was grounded in a congregational setting, but it sharpened questions that leaders in many settings should consider: Who controls information? Whose concerns receive attention? What happens when an influential person crosses a boundary? Who holds the leader accountable?
These questions have helped me connect the responsibilities of leadership with the structures needed to sustain trust.
Make Authority Answerable
One of the most consequential lessons from my research was that individual character, however important, needs the support of clear governance. An organization can affirm integrity while leaving people uncertain about how to question a decision or report a concern.
Misuse of authority can be subtle. Information may be withheld, dissenting voices excluded, or personal preferences presented as institutional requirements. When such practices become familiar, people may begin to accept them as the ordinary cost of working with a powerful leader.
For founders and executives, a practical starting point is to clarify decision-making responsibilities. Which decisions can one person make? Which require consultation? Which need independent review? How can a concern about the most senior leader receive a fair hearing?
Clear answers protect everyone involved. They give leaders a defensible process and give those affected a reasonable basis for confidence. Accountability is most credible when the person with the greatest authority accepts it openly.
Listen Across Differences
Leading across cultures has made me attentive to the different expectations people bring to authority. Respect, disagreement, and loyalty may be expressed differently from one setting to another. A leader needs to understand those differences while maintaining consistent expectations for fairness and responsible conduct.
A quiet meeting, therefore, deserves careful interpretation. People may agree, need more time, or hesitate to question someone they respect. Silence alone cannot tell the leader which explanation is correct.
Before announcing a preferred decision, invite others to assess the situation. Ask what might fail, whose perspective is missing, and what evidence deserves closer examination. Give people time to formulate their responses and explain how their contributions affected the eventual decision.
The leader’s reaction matters. When a colleague raises a concern, curiosity encourages further honesty. Dismissiveness teaches people to become more cautious. Over time, these ordinary exchanges establish the real boundaries of participation within an organization.
Turn Awareness into Practice
My doctoral project involved four educational seminar sessions with church board officers at Atlanta Pillars of Faith Seventh-day Adventist Church. The sessions brought together biblical principles, servant leadership, and organizational governance. Among 16 participants, the overall survey mean increased from 3.96 before the intervention to 4.41 afterward on a five-point scale.
The results suggested improved understanding of power abuse and preventive governance practices. They measured learning within one congregation; they, however, did not establish lasting behavioral change or demonstrate the same outcomes in corporate settings. But if continued with evaluation, over a six month or one year period in religious or corporate institutions it could be beneficial.
For me, the practical lesson was the importance of sustained leadership education. People need opportunities to examine how authority works, recognize troubling patterns, and practice responsible responses. A seminar can begin that process, while regular reflection and consistent accountability help carry it forward.
Leadership teams can make this part of their ordinary work. Discuss a realistic ethical dilemma during a meeting. Review how a difficult decision was reached. Revisit responsibilities when someone enters a new role. Evaluate how a manager treats people alongside the results that manager achieves.
Values become meaningful through repeated decisions that people can observe.
Apply the Standard to the Influential
Accountability becomes especially demanding when a concern involves someone whose contribution is highly valued. A respected officer, long-serving executive, significant donor, or exceptional performer may attract considerable loyalty. Leaders must consider whether that loyalty is affecting their judgment.
My research examined how relationships, tenure, and perceptions of spiritual standing can complicate judgments about authority. My observations across religious and corporate institutions have also led me to question how readily reputation can discourage scrutiny.
The appropriate response is a fair process: clear expectations, careful examination of concerns, and an opportunity for those involved to be heard. Neither admiration nor accusation should substitute for responsible assessment.
Leaders establish credibility when they submit themselves to the standards, they expect others to follow. People should be able to see that responsibility increases with influence and that valuable contributions do not place anyone beyond accountability.
Build Something Worthy of Trust
My Christian understanding of leadership begins with stewardship: authority is entrusted to us for the good of others. That conviction shapes my concern for governance, the development of people, and the responsible exercise of influence.
For any leader, it raises practical questions. Are people becoming more capable of sound judgment? Can they exercise responsibility without depending on our approval for every decision? Have we established practices that will serve the organization after our tenure ends?
Begin with your next consequential decision. Identify who should contribute, who has authority to decide, who can question the reasoning, and how the outcome will be reviewed. Where those responsibilities are unclear, take time to clarify them.
Leadership leaves its mark in the confidence people develop, the fairness they experience, and the integrity of the institution they help sustain. Building that kind of legacy requires humility, disciplined judgment, and a willingness to be held accountable.
Who can tell you no—and be heard?
About the Author
Dr. Leroy E. Ainsworth Sewell is a pastor and leadership educator whose pastoral and organizational experience spans Jamaica, The Bahamas, and the United States. He holds a Doctor of Ministry in Leadership from Andrews University. His doctoral research focused on equipping church board officers to address abuse of power, bringing together ethical governance, accountability, and servant leadership.
