Describe a situation where you had to collaborate with a subject matter expert (SME) who was resistant to simplifying complex technical jargon for a broader audience. How did you approach this conflict to ensure the copy was both accurate and accessible?

Employ the CIRCLES Method for collaborative communication. 1. Comprehend the SME's perspective: Identify their concerns regarding simplification (e.g., accuracy loss). 2. Identify the audience: Define their existing knowledge and communication needs. 3. Report back: Reiterate their concerns, demonstrating active listening. 4. Create solutions: Propose tiered content (e.g., executive summary, detailed appendix) or analogy-based explanations. 5. Lead the discussion: Guide them toward mutually beneficial options. 6. Execute and evaluate: Implement the agreed-upon approach and measure audience comprehension. This ensures accuracy while bridging the communication gap.

I'd approach this using the CIRCLES Method for effective collaboration. First, I'd Comprehend the SME's resistance, understanding their fear of oversimplification leading to inaccuracy. Next, I'd Identify the target audience's knowledge gaps and communication preferences, presenting data on their technical literacy. I would then Report back their concerns, validating their expertise while reiterating the business need for broader accessibility. My strategy would be to Create solutions collaboratively, proposing a 'tiered' content approach: a high-level, accessible overview for the general audience, with an optional, more technical deep-dive or glossary for those seeking detail. I would Lead the discussion by suggesting concrete examples of how analogies or metaphors could translate complex concepts without losing integrity. Finally, we would Execute the agreed-upon strategy and evaluate its effectiveness through feedback, ensuring both accuracy and accessibility were achieved. This method respects their expertise while meeting the project's communication objectives.