Quote:
Originally Posted by kelric
In my somewhat cynical opinion, this question really means "tell me that you can do multiple things perfectly at once, so that, if hired, I can pile multiple things on you and interrupt you constantly, and then blame you if you can't handle it all flawlessly."
|
"Quality" needs to be defined...not verbally, written down. Most HR operatives would be loathe to do this I suspect. Quality on an assembly line differs from that in a tailoring establishment. I suspect that quality in the hiring context means "how much can we pile on you at our whim and your performance will not vary?" or "can you play this word-game?". A dynamic office environment certainly will require multi-tasking and rather more as a rule than an exception. With that in mind a competent manager should be able to arrange available resources to achieve the desired level of quality. More often than not I have found managers of all abilities tasked with producing "quality" without the necessary resources.
I can take some multi-tasking as long as I have seen that the overall system that I am working within is a sucessful model. What I can't tolerate is when a flawed or incompetent system of management tries to compensate by squeezing resources beyond a prudent limit for no discernable gain.
At the end of interviews with these type of questions I'll say "I can do anything you ask of me as long as you provide the necessary tools and resources". This usually leaves them looking baffled and suspicious as if I said something sinister.