The One who Intervenes (Part 3)
IN PART ONE of this series, I reflected on a childhood moment from the 1980s, a child in a school yard pinching another who could not speak, assuming silence meant safety. In Part Two, we turned the mirror toward the one who exercised that small act of power, exploring how authority behaves when it believes no one is watching.
For those just joining this reflection, the moment was simple but unforgettable: a non-verbal child was pinched by another who presumed there would be no consequence. When the guardian arrived and understood what had happened, she intervened.
Now, in this final part, we turn our attention to that guardian.
When the non-verbal child signalled what had happened, the adult did not dismiss it. She did not minimise it. She did not tell the child to ignore it. She acknowledged it. That acknowledgment changed the power dynamic instantly.
In organisations and institutions, the most consequential role is often not the instigator or the victim, it is the overseer. The supervisor. The director. The board. The leader entrusted with intervention. What leaders do when harm surfaces defines culture far more than the harm itself.
There are three ways authority typically responds when confronted with imbalance. The first is dismissal. “It’s not that serious.” “You must have misunderstood.” “That’s just how things are”.
The second is delay.
“Let’s revisit this later.”
“We need more information”. “This isn’t the right time”.
The third is intervention. Intervention does not always mean punishment. It means acknowledgment. It means review. It means ensuring that power is not exercised without guardrails.
It means recognising that silence in a system does not equal health, it may simply reflect fear.
Leaders often underestimate how carefully their responses are studied. Employees do not only watch what leaders decide; they watch what leaders tolerate. They observe who is protected and who is expendable. They note whether standards apply evenly or selectively.
A single moment of dismissal can reverberate for years, because oversight carries moral weight.
When those entrusted with authority fail to intervene appropriately, they send a message: that hierarchy outweighs fairness.
That convenience outweighs courage. That protecting image matters more than protecting people.
But when leaders respond with clarity and fairness, something powerful happens. Trust grows.
Systems stabilise. Silence begins to feel less necessary. Accountability is not vengeance. It is alignment.
It is ensuring that roles match responsibility. That opportunity follows competence. That influence does not exempt anyone from scrutiny. That voice, even if fragile, is heard. And this is where leadership maturity is tested.
It is easy to intervene when public pressure mounts. It is harder to act when only one person signals concern. It is easier to discipline the powerless than to correct the influential. It is more comfortable to preserve relationships than to rebalance them. Yet the integrity of a system depends precisely on those uncomfortable moments.
The school yard guardian made a quick decision. In adult institutions, decisions are rarely that swift. They involve policy, procedure, and process. But the principle remains unchanged: Oversight exists to prevent exploitation, not excuse it.
This final mirror asks leaders to examine not only how power is used in their organisations but how it is monitored. Are complaints handled consistently, or selectively? Are entitlements applied evenly, or conditionally? Are strong voices reframed as threats, or recognised as contributors? When someone signals harm, is it received as inconvenience, or information?
Leadership is not only about direction. It is about protection. Protection of standards. Protection of fairness. Protection of dignity. And perhaps most importantly, protection of the future, because today’s junior employee may become tomorrow’s executive. Today’s overlooked professional may shape tomorrow’s policy. Today’s silenced voice may hold tomorrow’s platform.
When oversight is exercised wisely, the system grows stronger. When it is neglected, imbalance compounds quietly. Silence can erupt. Power can misjudge.
Positions can change. But what endures is how leaders respond when imbalance surfaces.
The playground taught me this: the one who intervenes shapes the future far more than the one who instigates. In every organisation, there is always a moment when someone must decide whether to protect comfort or protect integrity.
And long after titles fade and roles rotate, what remains is this: Who stood still, and who stood up.
Because accountability does not begin with power; it begins with the courage to steward it.
Visit us at www.searchlight. vc or https://www. facebook.com/Searchlight1. We’ll help you get noticed.
Comments
