In an interview, what is the most professional way to describe a situation where you worked with someone you did not like and how you handled it?

Introduction / Context:
Interviewers often ask "Have you worked with someone you did not like? If so, how did you handle it?" to understand your interpersonal skills and emotional maturity. In almost every workplace, you will meet people whose style or personality you do not naturally connect with. Employers want to see whether you can remain professional and cooperative in such situations instead of creating conflict or gossip.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• The question refers to a real or hypothetical difficult colleague.
• You are expected to describe your behaviour, not just complain about the other person.
• The employer values teamwork, respect, and problem solving.
• You want to show that you can work with many different personalities without drama.

Concept / Approach:
The best approach is to show that you separate personal feelings from professional responsibilities. You can admit that you did not connect well with a particular colleague but then focus on how you maintained respect, clear communication, and focus on work. Emphasising common goals such as project deadlines or customer satisfaction shows maturity. If you describe how you listened to the other person, clarified misunderstandings, or involved a supervisor only when necessary, you demonstrate conflict management skills. The key is to come across as someone who prioritises the team and the organisation over personal likes and dislikes.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Step 1: Acknowledge that it is normal to meet colleagues whose style or views differ from yours.Step 2: Describe a specific situation briefly, focusing on the work context rather than personal attacks.Step 3: Explain the actions you took, such as keeping communication clear, staying polite, and concentrating on tasks and deadlines.Step 4: Mention any steps you took to improve the working relationship, such as clarifying expectations or finding areas of agreement.Step 5: Highlight the positive outcome, such as successful completion of work or reduction in tension, and show what you learned about professionalism.

Verification / Alternative check:
Consulting interview coaching resources shows that recommended answers to this question always emphasise professionalism and focus on work. Experienced managers usually say that they look for candidates who can manage emotions, avoid gossip, and cooperate even when there is no personal friendship. They strongly dislike answers where candidates blame others, speak disrespectfully, or show that they cannot adjust. This aligns with option A, which highlights respect, common goals, and calm communication.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Option B encourages open criticism of a colleague personality and blaming them for all problems, which suggests poor self reflection and a tendency to gossip. Option C shows that you refused to work with the person and demanded a transfer, which indicates low adaptability. Option D admits that you started arguments and tried to prove the colleague wrong publicly, which would raise serious concerns about team harmony.

Common Pitfalls:
A common mistake is to speak too negatively about former colleagues or managers, which makes the interviewer wonder how you will speak about the new team in future. Another pitfall is to insist that you only work well with people you like personally, which is unrealistic. A strong answer admits that differences can exist but demonstrates that you can manage them constructively, keeping focus on results and mutual respect.

Final Answer:
The most professional answer is to explain that although you did not personally like the colleague, you stayed professional, focused on common goals, communicated respectfully, and resolved differences through calm discussion when needed.