Tell us about a time when you faced a conflict or disagreement with a team member. How did you handle the situation?

In my previous role, I encountered a conflict with a team member when we were working on a research project. We had different opinions on the approach we should take to gather data. Instead of letting the conflict escalate, I initiated a conversation with my colleague to understand their perspective and explain mine. We had an open and respectful discussion, sharing our thoughts and concerns. Through the conversation, we realized that our ultimate goal was the same - to complete the research successfully. We compromised and agreed on a hybrid approach that incorporated both of our ideas. By keeping the lines of communication open and finding common ground, we were able to resolve the conflict and complete the project successfully.

In my previous role as an Architectural Historian, I encountered a conflict with a team member while working on a research project on a historic site. We disagreed on the methodology for gathering data - I believed in using a combination of archival research and on-site surveys, while my team member preferred a more technology-focused approach using GIS software. To handle the situation, I proactively scheduled a meeting with my colleague to discuss our differences and find a resolution. During the meeting, I actively listened to their ideas and concerns, demonstrating my strong communication skills. I then proposed a compromise that combined both methodologies, using GIS software for initial data collection and on-site surveys for validation. We jointly developed a detailed plan, outlining the tasks, responsibilities, and timelines for each method. By collaborating effectively, we not only resolved the conflict but also enhanced the research process by incorporating diverse perspectives. This experience taught me the importance of open communication, active listening, and finding common ground in conflict resolution.

During my time as an Architectural Historian, I faced a conflict with a team member regarding the preservation approach for a historic building restoration project. The team member advocated for a complete replication of the original building, while I believed in a more adaptive reuse approach that respects the historical integrity while making it functional for modern needs. To handle the situation, I organized a team meeting to create an open platform for discussion. During the meeting, I presented my research on successful adaptive reuse projects and shared the potential benefits such as increased community engagement and sustainable conservation practices. Additionally, I actively listened to the concerns and perspectives of my team member, acknowledging the importance of preserving the historical character. Through extensive dialogue, we realized that our differences were actually complementary, and we could integrate both approaches by identifying architectural features that could be replicated while adapting other areas for modern use. This compromise allowed us to achieve a balanced restoration that satisfied the stakeholders and preserved the building's historical significance. As a result, the project received recognition from the local community and a preservation award. This experience highlighted the importance of respectful collaboration, research-based discussions, and finding innovative solutions that align with preservation principles.