The atmosphere in Room F2 was the opposite of the environment Erik had encountered today. 𝘦𝘯𝑜𝑣𝘦𝑙.

The room was light and airy, with a gleaming obsidian-colored floor that reflected the light streaming down from the elongated panels on the ceiling.

The polished walls were adorned with high-tech, ethereal screens that scrolled continuously with lines of complex-looking code and diagrams.

The examiner sat in the center behind a solitary, sleek table made of translucent material.

The examiner was a middle-aged man dressed in the guild’s formal attire. His hair was neatly combed back and flecked with gray. His sharp blue eyes glinted in the soft, white light, full of experience and wisdom.

He exuded calm authority, his demeanor as steady and unyielding as that of a seasoned warrior. A digital pad was in front of him, ready to record the interaction.

The chair was a marvel, automatically adjusting to his posture and providing maximum comfort. He had a calm, confident expression, ready to answer the questions.

The invisible barrier of judgment stood between them, a surreal expanse of clarity. The only sound in the room was the soft hum of technology, which accompanied their conversation.

The examiner began the interaction with a formal nod and a slight smile on his lips as he said, “Let’s start then, shall we?”

“Yes,” Erik confirmed.

“So, this is my first question. Assume you are leading a team on a mission, and one of your team members consistently disregards the team’s decisions, causing discord and lowering the team’s performance. How would you handle a situation like this?”

Erik paused for a few seconds before responding. He finally broke the silence. “In such a situation,” he said confidently, “I would first assert my leadership position. The mission will undoubtedly become more dangerous if a group’s leader cannot keep his men and women in check.”

The gentleman nodded. “However, I would approach the offending member privately to discuss his behavior. It is critical to comprehend the motivations behind his actions. He could be dealing with personal issues or misunderstandings that we can work out. If that doesn’t work, I’ll consult with the team and decide on the members as a group. Depending on the circumstances, he may be excluded from the team and sent home.”

The examiner appeared satisfied with the answer as he nodded slightly before moving on to the next question. Erik was prepared, his face calm and composed as he considered the hypothetical scenario.

The examiner nodded appreciatively in response to Erik’s response, but he seemed to have something else to say. “That’s a commendable strategy, Erik, focused on the team’s and mission’s well-being. However, there is one detail that you may have overlooked,” he remarked, steepling his fingers.

“In your response, you’ve certainly addressed the issue from a leader’s perspective. But what about the guild’s perspective? We’re not just an organization but a community, and that means our concern goes beyond the immediate task at hand,” he elaborated.

He leaned forward and locked his gaze on Erik. “If the individual feels undervalued or singled out due to the reduced role, it may breed resentment and, in the long run, escalate into a bigger problem. Remember that a guild thrives on camaraderie, mutual respect, order, and efficiency. As a result, an additional step in your solution could be to create a communication platform where you, as the leader, can address these issues openly with the team. What are your thoughts?”

The examiner’s tone was adamantly challenging. He wasn’t just testing Erik’s knowledge of the guild’s values to the test but also his adaptability and ability to consider different perspectives and implications.

Erik sat in contemplative silence as he processed the examiner’s words. His brow furrowed in thought, and he paused momentarily before responding. The holographic lights reflected off his intense gaze, revealing a deep, thoughtful consideration that prompted the examiner to sit back in quiet anticipation.

“Your point is valid,” Erik finally agreed, nodding. He respected the examiner’s point of view and recognized its significance. However, he couldn’t help but stick to his original stance. He looked directly into the examiner’s eyes as he spoke. His tone was calm and clear, not challenging but confidently asserting his viewpoint.

“I see where you’re coming from. However, in this case, the individual has not only disrespected the team’s decisions but has also disrupted the team’s harmony,” Erik explained, leaning forward with his elbows on his knees. His fingers were intertwined, indicating the gravity of his reaction. His body language conveyed his concern for the issue and his dedication to the guild’s values.

“Of course, it’s critical to foster camaraderie and mutual respect. That responsibility, however, falls not only on the leader’s shoulders but on the shoulders of every single member of the team. If someone consistently undermines the team’s decisions without engaging in constructive debate, that person is compromising the guild’s values. It is not only the leader’s responsibility to make things right. It’s about everyone understanding their roles and acting accordingly.”

Erik leaned back in his chair, his words sinking in. The only sound in the room was the soft hum of the holographic lights and the occasional beep from the futuristic devices surrounding them. Erik’s argument reverberated throughout the room, bouncing off the high-tech walls.

“Having said that, I agree that creating a communication platform could be beneficial. However, the person must be willing to participate constructively and respect the team’s decisions. If not, then it’s not just my failure as a leader but their failure as a guild member.”

Erik’s voice faded away, leaving a profound silence behind. His eyes were unwavering in their intensity, indicating his firm belief in his position.

Erik didn’t mind holding people accountable for their actions, regardless of their position on the team.

His responses demonstrated his understanding of the guild’s values, and his tenacity in upholding them even in difficult situations was admirable.

His ability to analyze, reason, and articulate his points of view was truly remarkable.

As the silence grew longer, the examiner gave Erik a thoughtful look, clearly taken aback by the depth and clarity of his argument. Erik met his gaze steadily, steadfast in his stance, ready to answer any additional questions thrown his way by the examiner.