Yeah, I'm sure that's true. And why my temp bosses always liked me -- I was really good on the phone and good enough in the database or whatever the boring part was.

I was like that too. I now SUCK at the boring part (although I probably wouldn't if it was my only job), so I really need someone to be able to pick up the slack. Or just do those things

My favorite interview question is whether the candidate, given a project and a deadline, would rather finish on time and hand in something imperfect, or hand it in late but perfect.

The answer is...increase the budget/resources and meet time and quality. Isn't that the project management constraint trifecta?

It's also being purposely evasive, so double win. But if you mention triple constraints, maybe you'll get lingo points.

OMG, I want a Paul Bettany issue. Not Paul Bettany issue, though.

increase the budget/resources and meet time and quality

Not an available option. The candidates try that all the time. Even if they refuse to answer the question, I learn something from how they handle it, and what they will be like to manage.

In my job, I'd say the right answer is always meet the deadline, but seriously, get your shit together so that it is also excellent!

My favorite interview question is whether the candidate, given a project and a deadline, would rather finish on time and hand in something imperfect, or hand it in late but perfect.

What would I rather do, or what I would do? I would rather it be perfect, even if it had to be late, but I would finish it on time, as close to perfect as I could get it.

I know how I'd answer! This is the very situation I'm in at work almost all the time.

I would probably let you know I wasn't going to be finished in time and ask which you'd prefer. For some things, it has to be on time, for others it has to be perfect.

My answer to that would be a slightly more elaborate version of Meara's. I'd *prefer* to manage both, but if we were in a situation where we could not do both, then it would depend on the priorities for the particular task in the particular context in which it was being done. Unless the choice was a very clear one, based on existing policy or well-established priories, I would ask which was more important.

In my experience, nothing is ever perfect. Someone up the chain is always going to revise something, and the later you turn it in, the more stressful it's going to be for everyone. So I would always turn in my best possible work on time.

I'm thinking of the consultants we're working with right now. They're late getting a draft of the report they're working on for us. We know that we're going to have comments and revisions on it, but we can't even do that until they give us something to look at. I'd much rather have something to work with on time than have something late.

In theatre, what I do is give the designer choices. So-- do you want this finished by tech rehearsal so they can use it OR do you want it to be perfect but I won't finish until final dress. In theatre it pretty much has to be finished by opening night, perfect or not so often the options include some other solution that is faster and sometimes better, and sometimes more creative. Of course the trouble is when you have a designer perfectionist. I slaved and slaved over an evening dress which was super hard, and he really wanted it perfect, and then he painted it with mud and put a sweater over it. I could have saved myself a lot of aggravation having that dress be 'good enough'

In the office I do not have a lot of hard deadlines, so if it is a boss deadline (as opposed to an event happening, which, like theatre has to be done when it is supposed to), I also ask which is the priority.

If it is my choice, I will take done well, on time, but not perfect.

Or, as the sign at many printers says,

"Good. Fast. Cheap. Pick two."