The SOAR method: putting the obstacle front and centre

SOAR explicitly adds the Obstacle to the structure: Situation, Obstacle, Action, Result. It is the method to choose when the difficulty you overcame is itself the proof of your value — tight constraints, limited resources, deadlines met despite everything.

Why it works

A result achieved despite a serious obstacle is worth more than a result achieved in ideal conditions. SOAR brings this difference to light: it turns a constraint into an argument. Where STAR describes a neutral context, SOAR names the adversity, which makes the result more impressive.

Obstacles worth naming

• Budget or headcount cut mid-project.
• Shortened deadline, emergency, crisis to manage.
• No tool, process or data at the outset.
• Resistance to change, stakeholders in disagreement.
• Unfavourable market or context.

Example

"Despite a budget cut by half mid-year, delivered the website redesign on time by prioritising the highest-impact features — organic traffic +35%."

The obstacle ("a budget cut by half") fits in a single clause, yet it doubles the perceived value of the result.

Getting the balance right

Keep the obstacle short and factual: it sets the stakes, it must not steal the spotlight from your action. Also avoid complaining: the obstacle is the backdrop, not an excuse. The message stays positive — "here is what I achieved in difficult conditions".

When the obstacle adds nothing, go back to a more neutral structure: XYZ or CAR/PAR.