What a doughnut, a war zone, and modern leadership can teach us about trust
Most leadership advice focuses on what to do when everything is working.
How to motivate people.
How to communicate vision.
How to build culture.
How to inspire performance.
But leadership isn’t really tested when things are going well.
It’s tested when pressure arrives.
When targets are missed.
When restructures happen.
When uncertainty increases.
When difficult decisions need to be made.
Because pressure has a habit of revealing what’s already there.
It exposes behaviours.
It shows people who step forward and people who step back. It reveals who protects trust and who damages it. It highlights the difference between the values organisations talk about and the values people actually experience.
In a recent episode of Freeformers Unplugged, leadership expert and Trust by Design founder Maria James shared a story that perfectly captures this reality.
It starts with a doughnut.
The doughnut that became a leadership principle
Twenty years ago, Maria was serving in Basra, Iraq, with the Royal Military Police.
Waiting in line for lunch during a deployment, she spotted a doughnut she had every intention of claiming for herself.
Then an RPG attack began.
As alarms sounded and personnel moved towards cover, Maria grabbed the doughnut and ran.
Halfway across the compound another explosion landed nearby. She hit the ground.
What happened next became the foundation of what she now calls the Doughnut Principle.
A colleague turned around, picked her up, and helped her reach safety.
He didn’t stop because a process told him to.
He didn’t pause because a policy instructed him to.
He acted because helping others was already part of his standard.
The decision wasn’t created in the moment.
The moment simply revealed what was already there.
That’s the insight many organisations miss.
Pressure doesn’t create character.
Pressure exposes it.
Why trust becomes visible under pressure
When organisations talk about trust, they often treat it as something abstract.
Something cultural.
Something emotional.
Something difficult to measure.
But trust becomes surprisingly visible when circumstances become difficult.
It’s revealed through behaviours.
Do leaders become transparent or defensive?
Do they communicate clearly or disappear?
Do they own mistakes or hide behind process?
Do they support people or protect themselves?
These moments shape how people experience leadership far more than any values statement ever will.
As Maria put it during the conversation, leadership intent is often positive.
Most leaders genuinely want to do the right thing.
The challenge is that intent and experience are not the same thing.
Employees don’t judge leaders based on what they meant to do.
They judge them based on what they experience.
And when those two things become disconnected, trust starts to fracture.
The problem with values that nobody understands
Many organisations invest heavily in defining purpose and values.
The challenge isn’t creating them.
The challenge is translating them into behaviour.
Words like integrity, collaboration, inclusion, and excellence sound good on posters and websites.
But what do they actually look like on a Tuesday afternoon when a team is under pressure?
How should a manager demonstrate them during a difficult conversation?
What do they mean during a restructure?
How should they influence decisions when priorities conflict?
Without clarity, values become open to interpretation.
And when everyone interprets them differently, consistency disappears.
That’s where culture starts to fragment.
The organisations that build strong cultures aren’t necessarily the ones with the best values.
They’re the ones that help people understand what those values look like in practice.
Not just what they mean.
How they show up.
The leadership challenge nobody talks about
For decades, leadership often relied on hierarchy.
The assumption was simple:
The leader speaks.
Everyone listens.
But today’s workplace looks very different.
Five generations are now working alongside one another.
Expectations have changed.
Employees expect transparency.
They expect dialogue.
They expect leaders to explain decisions, not simply announce them.
And increasingly, they expect authenticity.
A title may still get someone into the room.
But it no longer guarantees influence once they’re there.
Trust has become the new source of authority.
And trust cannot be demanded.
It has to be earned.
Why process can quietly destroy trust
One of the most common mistakes leaders make is hiding behind process.
We’ve all heard it.
“The policy says…”
“The process requires…”
“HR has decided…”
While process is important, people rarely remember the process itself.
They remember how it felt.
They remember whether they were treated with respect.
Whether they were listened to.
Whether someone took accountability.
Whether someone showed empathy.
Leaders often believe process protects trust.
In reality, process without humanity can damage it.
Especially when difficult decisions are involved.
The organisations that rebuild trust successfully tend to do something different.
They acknowledge mistakes.
They explain what happened.
They show what they’re changing.
And they do so consistently.
Not once.
Repeatedly.
Because trust isn’t rebuilt through a single communication.
It’s rebuilt through repeated proof.
Radical visibility in a hybrid world
Perhaps the most powerful idea from the conversation was Maria’s concept of radical visibility.
Not visibility in the sense of being everywhere.
Visibility through behaviour.
The small moments that signal what matters.
Checking in on someone.
Giving full attention during a conversation.
Following through on a commitment.
Being present when it would be easier to avoid the discussion.
These moments often feel insignificant.
But they’re exactly how trust is built.
Especially in hybrid and remote environments.
Many leaders assume visibility comes from being seen.
Actually, it comes from being experienced.
People notice whether you’re listening.
They notice whether you’re distracted.
They notice whether your actions match your words.
And over time, those observations accumulate.
Behaviour compounds.
Trust compounds.
Distrust compounds too.
Leadership isn’t a position. It’s a standard.
Perhaps that’s the most important lesson from the Doughnut Principle.
Leadership isn’t defined by title, rank, or authority.
It’s defined by standards.
The standards people hold themselves to before pressure arrives.
The standards that guide behaviour when circumstances become difficult.
The standards that determine whether someone turns back to help another person when it matters.
Because in the end, people don’t follow titles.
They follow evidence.
Evidence that a leader can be trusted.
Evidence that they’ll show up consistently.
Evidence that their values remain intact when things become difficult.
And in a world where change, uncertainty, and complexity continue to grow, that evidence matters more than ever.
The question every leader should ask
Before the next period of pressure arrives, ask yourself:
What evidence are my behaviours creating?
Because when pressure hits, people won’t remember the leadership framework.
They won’t remember the values poster.
They won’t remember the strategy presentation.
They’ll remember how you showed up.
And that’s what determines whether trust survives.