Michael Toebe

This source request is for an interview that will become an article in the Communication Intelligence newsletter on the Substack platform and shared on the LinkedIn platform in a post. If this appeals to you, please closely read the brief, important points below before proceeding to the interview questions and precisely following the instructions. --------------------------------------- 1. Briefly introduce yourself. 2. Please, no use of AI. I value your brain, not answers from technology. Please don't use AI in any form in your reply. 3. Copy and paste the questions (and question numbers) into your reply. Create a new paragraph, with a double space between the question and your answer. This is easier on my eyes and brain. 4. No backlinks offered yet your name, brief professional title, expertise and business are highlighted and added to article tags for SEO and AI finding purposes. 5. Please send a professional headshot, perfectly focused and medium large to accompany the article. ------------------------ INTERVIEW Copy and paste the questions (and question numbers into your reply and double space between each question and your answers). 1) Recently, a head of an organization decided to resign to take a similar role with another employer, yet not before he vented and listed his reasonable reasons for his decision. What he communicated was very pointed - https://reputation.substack.com/p/when-contentious-internal-workings. In a surprising about-face, he has now told his new employer that he has changed his mind and will stay where he had been working. The question is, how does a leader speak pointed, sharp, piercing truth, yet communication that likely offended people, on the apparent way out the door and now decide to come back or stay, and be successful? Can that likely work well (successfully) or not with certain stakeholders to whom the leader's comments were aimed? 2) It seems difficult to imagine that some people who were criticized will think it was their doing and be ok with this decision, even if some at the organization (a university) were upset the leader was leaving. How does the leader now approach conflicts (state succinctly), repairs get made and a healthy begin take place? 3) Succinctly stated, what is an important, valuable takeaway from this type of story, from an organization losing a valued leader, even if temporary, and a leader coming back after possibly burning some bridges on their way out?