10 Practical Ways to Cultivate Trust With Your Leadership Team
Ecclesia Network
June 10, 2019

The fundamental role of a leader is to build trust, bear pain and give hope.

Ultimately, all leadership flows from these three streams.

This week I was reminded once again of the crucial and irreplaceable stream of trust. It is the least common denominator in all leadership contexts, the fuel by which the leadership car moves. It is impossible to lead effectively over the long haul absent of trust. In Patrick Lencioni’s helpful book The Five Dysfunctions of a Team, he lists the major destructive factors among team dynamics: fear of conflict, lack of commitment, avoidance of accountability and inattention to results . But the keystone trait that undergirds all the others is the absence of trust . As one of my doctoral professors recently said, “The absence of trust is ultimately the absence of grace.” Conversely speaking then, building and deepening trust is the single greatest thing leaders must cultivate within and among their team in order to be healthy, fruitful and effective.

Albert Winseman, in his book Growing An Engaged Church , wrote that every person who walks into your church is asking two questions: Am I valued? and Do I have something to contribute? These questions get to the heart of the matter. Yet, I would offer that these are not just questions asked by churchgoers; they are also asked by any person who serves on any team in any capacity.

I don’t think anyone would argue with what I’ve offered thus far. Every well-meaning leader I’ve met believes trust is important. And every leader I’ve talked to wants people to feel valued and to allow space for collaboration, participation and contribution with their team. However, you may be thinking: Yes but how? Practically speaking, how am I to go about deepening trust with my team?

With Lencioni’s book in one hand and Winseman’s book in the other, it’s important for leaders to drill down further and consider how we can cultivate health in specific and practical ways, first by self-assessment. I offer the following ten elements – and questions – for self-evaluation.  

  • Value and love: how do I treat the people on my team (i.e. my words, posture, presence, tone, affirmation, etc.)? Is it a judgement-free zone? Which is more important to me: healthy relationships or accomplishing more? Are our team meetings and interactions safe spaces for people to really share what they are thinking and feeling?
  • Participation: how much do I actually empower and include our team on decisions being made? Am I collaborating or simply informing them of decisions already made?  
  • Congruence: how much do my words match my actions? Where might I be out of alignment? How would I even know?
  • Consistency: is there evidence of results in my leadership over an extended period of time? Do people have confidence in my ability to lead?
  • Self-differentiation: How much of my identity is wrapped up in me being the leader? Being a “successful” leader? Ultimately, which direction are the arrows pointing: toward me, toward our team or toward our mission?
  • Vulnerability: how vulnerable have I been (and how vulnerable am I willing to be) in order to model what a safe space looks like on the team? When others are vulnerable how have I responded? Am I capable of readily admitting “I don’t know” and verbalizing phrases such as “I’m sorry”?
  • Failure: How do I respond to risks and failures, individually and as a team? How much does it define who I am as a leader or who we are as a team?
  • Truth-telling: How am I at telling the truth – and embracing it – even if it stings? Am I actually telling the whole truth or am I telling the truth, plus or minus ten percent?
  • Unity: how much are we pursuing unity (not uniformity) as a team? Am I willing to let go of my personal preference(s) if it means we will be better off as a team in the long run? Do dissenting voices have a valued role among our team or are they hushed, ignored or swept aside?
  • Clarity: How clear and compelling is our vision, priorities, what we care about? How do we know if we are being clear in our communication?

In closing, I submit these additional questions worthy of reflection for leaders when it comes to deepening trust among our teams:

  • Why should people follow me? What gives me the right to lead others?
  • Because I have power, who, in turn, is flourishing?

It takes courage to ask these questions of ourselves about our own leadership; and it requires even more courage to ask others these questions about our leadership. But because trust is so crucial to the process, we can’t afford not to ask them. Ironically, we may find that if we ask these questions of ourselves and others with a humble, inquisitive and courageous tone and posture on a consistent basis, trust among our team will deepen.  

By Bob Hyatt September 15, 2025
A New Ecclesia Network Benefit! 
By By Jim Pace September 15, 2025
In the aftermath of Charlie Kirk’s shooting, social media has been filled with perspectives, as is typically the case. I am reluctant to add mine as there seems to be no lack one way or the other. To be clear, this is not just about Charlie Kirk, this is about violence across the board. I did not feel led to write this because it was Charlie Kirk specifically, but rather another in a long and winding line of acts of violence, that my ministering at Va. Tech gives me a bit of personal experience with. But as I have just finished teaching two classes on Christian Ethics, and as I was encountering again the spread of responses from my Christian sisters and brothers, I felt led to look at this event through that lens. Ethics, at its base, seeks to answer the question, “What is better or worse? Good or bad?” As a follower of Jesus, this is what seems right to me… 1. We never celebrate harm. Whatever our disagreements, rejoicing at a shooting violates the bedrock claim that every person bears the imago Dei (Gen 1:27). Scripture is explicit: “Do not rejoice when your enemy falls” (Prov 24:17); “Love your enemies, pray for those who persecute you” (Matt 5:44); “Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good” (Rom 12:21). I don’t love blasting verses like this, but you cannot get away from them if you are reading the scriptures. 2. Moral responsibility sits with the shooter—full stop . Saying “his rhetoric got him shot” smuggles in a just-world logic that excuses violence. As a contextual theologian, I have an enormous amount of respect for the impact our various narratives have in shaping our understandings of the world around us. They are inescapable. But that is not what I am talking about here. Ideas can be wrong, harmful, or worth opposing vigorously, but vigilante ‘payback’ is never a Christian category. My primary gig is that of a consultant for churches and non-profits. Today, in my meetings and among friends, I have heard some variation of “He got what he deserved,” and “I vote for some very public justice for the shooter.” Both of these views speak of revenge; the follower of Jesus is called to lay these down as our Messiah did. Not asked to, told to. 3. Grief and outrage about gun violence are legitimate; schadenfreude is not . Channel the pain toward nonviolent, concrete action (policy advocacy, community intervention, survivor support), not dehumanization. Here are four thinkers who have had a profound impact on the Christian ethic I try to work out in this world. As I share them, three things are worthy of mention. One, I certainly do not claim to follow their guidance perfectly, and at times I do not even do it well, but they have all given me what seems like a Jesus-centered and faith-filled direction to move in. Second, I do not claim to speak for them in this particular matter; I am merely showing how my ethical lens has been formed. Third, clearly I am not dealing with all the components of our response to these types of violence, this is not a comprehensive treatment, merely the reflections in the moment. Stanley Hauerwas : “Christian nonviolence is not a strategy to rid the world of violence.” It’s part of following Jesus, not a tactic we drop when it’s inconvenient. Stanley Hauerwas, Walking with God in a Fragile World, by James Langford, editor, Leroy S. Rouner, editor N. T. Wright : “The call of the gospel is for the church to implement the victory of God in the world through suffering love.” Simply Good News: Why the Gospel Is News and What Makes It Good. In other words, we answer evil without mirroring it. David Fitch : Our culture runs on an “enemy-making” dynamic; even “the political rally… depends on the making of an enemy. Don’t let that train your soul.” The Church of Us vs. Them. Sarah Coakley : Contemplation forms resistance, not passivity. For Coakley, sustained prayer trains perception and courage so Christians can resist abuse and give voice against violence (it’s not quietism). “Contemplation, if it is working aright, is precisely that which gives courage to resist abuse, to give voice against violence.” Sarah Coakley, God, Sexuality, and the Self. Coakley would say that far too often we react before we reflect. This is the problem that Fitch is getting at in much of his writing, that our culture actually runs on antagonisms, the conflict between us. We need to find a better way.