What would you do if you had to collaborate on a project with a colleague with whom you disagreed?

"(Situation) I believe it's important to collaborate with my colleagues even if we don't always agree. (Solution) If I had a challenging time agreeing with a colleague, I would approach the situation in a way that made them feel seen and heard. I would initiate an amicable conversation and ensure that they felt validated. (Benefit) My communication skills are strong, and I look at situations from various angles. My previous leaders have recognized me as a highly collaborative team member.

(Option: follow up with a story-based example using the STAR method) One example of this, in my current office, the Accounts Payable and Accounts Receivable departments often disagree. Regardless of disagreements, we must collaborate and get the job done every month-end and year-end. Each time, I am the person who encourages collaboration and asks everyone to deliver the other departments' needs on time and in a friendly manner. My leaders have commented on how much they appreciate the way I encourage teamwork and collaboration."

"(Situation) Approaching a disagreement in the workplace can be a sensitive situation, and it's essential to avoid making the disagreement worse by acting defensively. (Solution) I would approach a difference of opinion by taking an honest look at the other person's point of view. Then, I would respectfully ask them to look at the circumstance from my viewpoint. From there, we could discuss which approach would ensure the best outcome for our team, employer, and customers. (Benefit) When hired, you'll find that I often approach situations from a range of viewpoints which helps to smooth disagreements and often prevent them from occurring in the first place.

(Option: follow up with a story-based example using the STAR method) In my current job, I am responsible for merchandising mannequins throughout our department. However, I am to collaborate with the department next to me to ensure cohesive branding. At first, the other merchandiser and I disagreed on the direction of our mannequin styling. So, I proposed that we lay out our plans and make a mini 'pitch' to each other. From there, we could see the other person's vision and understand the end goal. This plan got us on the same page and allowed us to see that our visions weren't much different - our approach was different. We collaborated and came up with an incredible set of stylized mannequins. We ended up working together more frequently after then, and today our working relationship is very friendly and in-synch."

"(Situation) Collaborating with a colleague with who we disagree can occur from time to time, especially in a highly competitive sales environment. (Solution) I would handle this situation by making the disagreement part of the creative process. I would approach my colleague and work on developing our ideas together so that the solution would end up being a compromise. (Benefit) If I were to join Company ABC's sales team, you can rest assured that I would add to your culture of finding solutions professionally and constructively rather than shy away from a disagreement.

(Option: follow up with a story-based example using the STAR method) For instance, my co-worker and I were recently asked to do a joint presentation to a group of prospective clients. It was a high-stakes presentation, and he and I have very different styles of performance and preparation. Luckily, we both identified this as a potential obstacle early on. We agreed to get together and brainstorm ideas on how the outline would go and who would say what. Because we were able to identify that we could clash and took a proactive approach to delegate tasks and distribute the presentation, we worked very well together and delivered a successful presentation."

"(Situation) It's crucial to handle situations like this with the utmost care for the good of our students and our learning community. (Solution) If I disagreed with a colleague but still needed to collaborate with them, I would apply the same rule that I have in my classroom. This rule is to 'listen without interruption.' One of my favorite adages is that 'disagreements become arguments when we fail to listen.' If I were to disagree, I would let my colleague express themselves uninterrupted. (Benefit) I will never reject someone for their point of view and believe that my approach strongly aligns with School ABC's culture of giving people the space to be themselves.

(Option: follow up with a story-based example using the STAR method) While writing curriculum, teachers' creative differences come to light--both in regards to our teaching styles and what we prioritize in teaching our students. There's one particular teacher with whom I sometimes clash, but we are the two most tenured in the department, so we are the leaders. This difference can challenge my patience, but I am always sure to go to the meetings with enough coffee, patience, and kindness to get me through even my most challenging moments. Because I choose to listen without interruption, we can get through our curriculum development and come out better, which is a significant benefit to our students and school community."

"(Situation) Disagreeing shouldn't be frowned upon as these situations present opportunities for relationship growth. (Solution) I believe it's possible to disagree respectfully. So, if I disagreed with a colleague with whom I needed to collaborate, I would work to find common ground and focus on the points where we agreed. Then, we could work on refining the points of disagreement. (Benefit) The benefit of this approach is that it means getting to know others on a more personal level to understand better how they problem solve and come to critical decisions.

(Option: follow up with a story-based example using the STAR method) For instance, our digital agency recently received a project from a client that required us to work alongside another agency specializing in mixed reality environments. It was up to me to ensure that everyone worked smoothly together. The other agency's manager and I decided to start with a team-building night out, which helped us get to know each other and find common ground personally and professionally. This approach ensured that we all came to the project with respect for each other and an understanding that, although we all had different approaches, we were on the same side of the project with the common goal of building a stellar marketing plan for our client."

"(Situation) I believe it's important to collaborate with my team members, regardless of a disagreement. As an administrator, it's my job to deliver solutions rather than focus on problems. (Solution) When faced with a disagreement with a colleague, I will ask myself if it's important to address the problem now or can it be done later. I 'put it on pause' and then return to it later. (Benefit) This approach often gives me time to understand my colleague and their viewpoints better. The benefit is that I look for compromises rather than focusing on the problem, allowing it to escalate.

(Option: follow up with a story-based example using the STAR method) For example, I was recently assigned to a Regional Sales Manager as their Administrator for a major client project. This RSM was incredibly challenging. They would email me tasks in the middle of the night and then expect that I had the tasks completed by the time they arrived at the office in the morning. I maintained less of a work/life balance than I prefer to admit, but there was an end date in sight, so I just did the work. When the project was over, I requested that I not be paired on future projects with this individual. My sales director understood the challenge and respected my request. Despite the challenge, I did not cause an unnecessary rift with the regional sales manager, a point that my director was thankful for."

"(Situation) Collaborating with colleagues with whom I disagree is a reality that can arise, especially when working in an environment where people are professional and want to do what they believe is best for their team and employer. (Solution) If I disagreed with a colleague and needed to collaborate with them for a project to be successful, I would be very mindful of my communication. For instance, I would avoid absolute statements like, 'That's wrong,' or 'You're not doing it right.' I would be sure to qualify my point of view and then give my colleagues room to qualify their point of view. (Benefit) I understand that Company ABC values collaboration and qualified approaches. If hired, you can be sure that my desire to qualify everything I say and do will be an excellent match for your team.

(Option: follow up with a story-based example using the STAR method) For example, my current company just finished its year-end inventory audit. This audit required all three department managers to work together for a week. The other two department managers preferred to direct orders to their team rather than collaborate with them. The differences in our management styles were noticeable. I could have said, 'How you treat your team members is wrong.' Instead, I said, 'I understand you prefer to manage your team by providing firm instructions; however, I believe that we generate better performance from our teams when we collaborate versus dictate.' The two department managers agreed to try my approach, and we ended up having the fastest and most accurate year-end inventory count the company had seen in a decade."

Avoid giving a response that hints to the interviewer that you have never faced a disagreement in the workplace. For instance, 'I'm not sure how I would handle that situation since I get along with everyone.' Instead, answer the question in a way that shows the interviewer you are thoughtful in your communication even when you may not agree with a colleague's opinion or approach.

The interviewer wants to know how you would proceed if you faced a challenging collaboration. Because this question is positioned as, 'What would you do if...,' you can respond hypothetically. The Situation, Solution, Benefit formula is helpful in this instance.

Step 1) Situation: Express your understanding of the hypothetical situation.
Step 2) Solution: Outline the solution you would introduce in this hypothetical situation.
Step 3) Benefit: Highlight how your collaborative approach will benefit the hiring company.

It's not uncommon to find ourselves in a situation where we need to collaborate with a co-worker who approaches their work quite differently from us. When we find it challenging to agree with someone in the workplace, it raises opportunities for frustration or conflict. The interviewer wants to see that you have the ability and maturity to recognize when you disagree with a co-worker and handle the situation professionally. They want evidence that you would choose to remain solution-focused rather than dwelling on the point of disagreement.

Since this scenario-based question is hypothetical, consider what you would do if you had to collaborate with a person with whom you disagreed. Perhaps you might disagree with the person's behavior, approach, or actions. Then, using the Situation, Solution, Benefit formula, describe what you would do to move through the situation and work productively with this person. Assure the interviewer that you are a professional who can handle instances where you might not always agree with a co-worker.

Suppose you have encountered a similar situation in the past. In that case, you can use the STAR method (Situation, Task, Action, Result) to provide a story-based example to support your initial Situation, Solution, Benefit response.

Community answers are written by other candidates practicing this set. Reading how others frame the same question is one of the fastest ways to sharpen your own.