What is encompassed by the idea of ‘style’ in judicial reasons and why might this be of value and something worth striving for in a judge’s performance of their role? Through a synthesis of judicial pronouncements on the topic from judges in common law jurisdictions, the author identifies recurring themes and typologies that are used by judges when they reflect upon what is meant by style – and the manifestations of which are to be, respectively, applauded and emulated or lamented and avoided. Lynch frames this discussion in the context of the High Court of Australia’s contemporary practice of ‘joining in’ to a draft opinion any justice who agrees with it, so that individual authorship is obscured from plain view. This practice reveals an interesting dynamic between the individual and institutional conceptions of the judicial role. 'Joining in' , and its consequences for the benefits that are to be obtained by the conscious development of individual judicial style, is contrasted with the modes of collective expression of agreement in the final courts of the United Kingdom and United States.