Write a brief response to this discussion.

Democratic When I took a Data Science class, and that class was based on a group project. There were many times when we had to agree on decisions. They were made through discussions and votes in order to make everyone in the group feel that they were all heard. The result was higher commitment and fewer last minute re-doing the work as everyone understand the reason for the decisions we made.

Laissez-faire For the same class above, the professor had his syllabus for the class and deadlines for the project, but other than the basic rubric, he let us decide on it. Even the topics for the project, we were able to choose (even though we needed to get his confirmation). This actually motivated our group and we learned fast as well. However, some groups drifted without milestones and had to scramble before the deadline.

Authoritarian Currently, I work at a busy cafe with tight direction. It felt rigid, but when the rush hour comes, the tight direction and clarity kept us from duplicating our work and let the work flow quickly. We were able to get through the rush hour without any big mistakes and also reset on time.

I believe my strength is the democratic leadership because I tend to get ideas from the room, and then synthesize to come up with a plan. It works well with my communication style and improving my outcomes. However, I think authoritarian is one of the side that I can improve more on. I need to work on being more concise when working in a fast pace environment and under pressure. Also, a situation where a different style was needed was when I was working on a project for few months. I stayed democratic, seeking for answers for each obstacles, but I was able to fix some of the conflicts in just few hours. I should have switched to authoritarian and fixed it quickly.