Ginni, I wonder how a more direct communication style might have worked in your situation. A direct communication style is an approach that is clear, concise, and unfiltered. There is no hidden message and no intricacies (Thorpe, 2020). Leaders with a direct communication style prefer transparent and actionable information without any nonsense or small talk. Also, these leaders are about getting right to the point quickly and want others to do the same. Leaders with this style are typically known as being assertive in the way they communicate with others. They can dominate a conversation either in an individual or group setting. One of the benefits of this communication style is that an individual knows exactly where they stand with their leader (Thorpe, 2020).

At times a mixed method of styles make work as well. You stated, "leadership's adoption of collaborative communication styles such as open dialogue, active listening, and structured communication plans played an important role in improving the situation." Certainly, in your example, a collaborative leadership style seems to have worked in this situation but sometimes a mixed method or balanced approach can be even more effective. In this case you might balance a direct style with collaborative style. The collaborative approach gives all the parties involved an opportunity to explain what went on and why. It allows each individual to offer their perspective instead of just being told what to do or stop what they are doing. It also helps each person understand better the best solution for the situation (Thorpe, 2020). as you look back on this situation, do you think a collaborative leadership style balanced with a direct communication approach might have worked just as well? What about some other approach? I look forward to your thoughts on this