Gyriana - Michelle

The exchange takes place during a formal speaking assessment (similar to a Cambridge or IELTS Speaking Part 3–4 format).
Examiner / Interlocutor: Organises the test, manages timing, gives prompts, reminds candidates to speak up because of outside noise.
Candidate 1 – Michele Vasquez: Sometimes spelled “Michel”; slightly reluctant to claim leadership experience; will later be asked to compare photos about teamwork advantages.
Candidate 2 – Giuliano Rivas (also rendered “Guilena” in the transcript): More forthcoming about leadership roles; first to complete the Part 2 photo-comparison on “roles a leader may take.”

Examiner asks candidates to speak louder due to “noisy outside” environment—underlines the practical importance of audibility in oral exams.
Timing specifics: Instructions mention $1 \text{ minute}$ for individual comparisons, $2 \text{ minutes}$ for joint discussion, and an extra $1 \text{ minute}$ for final decision-making.

“Have you ever met someone you look up to as a leader?”
• Michele: “No, I didn’t.” (Direct, short; implies limited personal exposure to leadership role models.)
“Have you ever been a leader in any situation?”
• Michele: “Yes … but only when necessary. I don’t like to be a leader but sometimes I have to.”
• Reveals a tension between preference (non-leader) vs. obligation (situational leadership).
• Examiner comments: “You will have to for this job, you become a leader.” → sets job-related context.

Given two photos (not shown in transcript; candidates must infer).
Giuliano’s analysis:
1. Photo 1 – A coach seems to be explaining rules to players. Emphasises instructional and directive leadership.
2. Photo 2 – Coach appears more friendly, possibly giving positive words before a game. Highlights motivational and supportive leadership.
Key concept: Leaders adapt tone—formal rule-giving vs. morale-boosting.

Question to Michele: “Have you ever been coached?” – Michele answers “Yes.”
• Confirms personal experience with being led or mentored, useful for later discussion.

Asked to compare another pair of photos for approx. $1 \text{ minute}$ ; actual detailed comparison not provided in transcript.
Implied expected points (advantages): shared workload, diverse skills, innovation, social support; but deliverables absent in transcript.

“What roles might leaders have in these situations?”
Giuliano lists crucial leadership qualities:
• Enthusiasm – energising the group.
• Risk-taking / bravery – encourages progress & resilience.
• Relationship-building – maintaining “a great relationship with your co-workers.”

Candidates receive a prompt card: “Discuss the skills or qualities you expect from leaders at work.”
Timing: $2 \text{ minutes}$ for discussion; $1 \text{ minute}$ to choose the single most important skill.

Candidates presumably negotiate, evaluate, prioritise. Possible skills they might mention (extrapolated from earlier):
• Communication clarity
• Motivation
• Vision & goal-setting
• Fairness / integrity
• Decisiveness
Examiner’s closing: “Now you have about a minute to decide together on the skill that you would expect the most in a leader.”
Outcome not captured; evaluation ends.

Examiner thanks participants, ends the test: “That is the end of the test for you two. Thank you.”
Promises feedback: “You’ll get the comments as soon as possible… can’t promise anything, but I’ll try my best.”
Courtesy sign-off: mutual “Thank you” and appreciation for waiting.

Leadership Styles: Directive vs. supportive; situation-specific adaptability parallels classic frameworks (e.g., Hersey–Blanchard Situational Leadership).
Teamwork Advantages: Aligns with organisational theory—synergy, collective intelligence, decreased risk by sharing responsibilities.
Essential Leader Qualities: Enthusiasm, bravery, good relationships echo broader competency models (e.g., Goleman’s Emotional Intelligence).
Exam Technique: Candidates must compare visual prompts, use comparative language, manage time, and cooperatively negotiate—a microcosm of real workplace interactions.
Practical Implication: Examiner stresses audibility—technical clarity is as crucial as content in evaluations and professional settings.

Practice loud, clear articulation to overcome environmental noise.
Structure photo-comparisons: describe each image ➜ identify similarities/differences ➜ extract thematic insight.
When discussing leadership, cover role (what), method (how), and effect (why it matters).
In collaborative tasks, use language of negotiation: “Shall we prioritise…?” / “I’d argue that… because…”.