Refined Question: "Tell me about a time you had to collaborate closely with a colleague who possessed exceptional technical skills but had a challenging communication style or was resistant to feedback. Describe the project, the specific obstacles you encountered, and the strategies you employed to cultivate an effective working relationship to achieve project success."

Exemplar Story: "Situation: At my previous role as a Senior Project Manager, I was tasked with leading a critical software integration project. The project involved merging a legacy data analytics module, developed by a brilliant but notoriously difficult principal engineer named Alex, into our new cloud-based platform. Alex was exceptionally skilled and the module was essential, but his communication style was often abrasive, dismissive of others' input, and he was highly resistant to any form of feedback or collaboration that deviated from his established methods.

Task: My primary task was to ensure a seamless and timely integration of Alex's module, which necessitated close, daily collaboration with him, despite his challenging demeanor. The success of the entire project hinged on our ability to work effectively together.

Action: Initially, direct requests and traditional team meetings proved ineffective, as Alex would often shut down discussions or become defensive. Recognizing this, I shifted my approach:

1. Adapted Communication: Instead of focusing on subjective feedback or general collaboration, I began framing all discussions around objective data, system requirements, and the direct impact on project timelines. I made sure to come prepared with facts and figures for every interaction.
2. Structured Engagement: I initiated brief, daily 15-minute sync-ups with Alex, always with a pre-defined agenda shared beforehand. This structured approach provided predictability and reduced opportunities for unfocused debate.
3. Appreciation & Recognition: I made a conscious effort to publicly acknowledge Alex's technical genius and the critical nature of his module during team stand-ups, highlighting his contributions to our overall success. This seemed to foster a subtle sense of trust and respect.
4. Problem-Solving Focus: When issues arose, I'd present them as technical challenges we needed to solve together, rather than problems with his code or approach. I'd ask open-ended questions like, 'How can we collectively optimize this interface for better performance?' rather than 'Your interface is inefficient.'
5. Offline Follow-ups: For more complex or sensitive discussions, I'd follow up via detailed email, summarizing decisions and action items, allowing him to process information at his own pace without immediate pressure.

Result: Through these concerted efforts, we successfully integrated Alex's module two days ahead of schedule, with minimal bugs reported post-launch. While Alex's personality didn't undergo a complete transformation, our working relationship became significantly more productive and respectful. He began proactively sharing updates, and even, on occasion, offered unsolicited suggestions for improvements. This experience reinforced the importance of adapting my communication style and influence tactics to fit individual personalities, especially when dealing with highly skilled but challenging colleagues, ultimately prioritizing project success above all else."

The STAR method is a structured way to answer behavioral interview questions by providing concrete examples from your past experiences. It stands for:

• Situation: Describe the background and context of the situation you were in.
• Task: Explain the goal or task you needed to accomplish.
• Action: Detail the specific steps you took to address the situation and achieve your task.
• Result: Summarize the outcomes of your actions and what you learned.