They asked a question that was somewhat confusing at the time but made a lot of sense later. They asked how I would deal with monitoring the work done by payroll administrators even as I was not their supervisor but was still responsible for the accuracy and quality of their work. Ironically, this question rang in my ears for a long time--it was definitely a dilemma.
Lacking overall context, this question appears to be taking a long view on the project ... if you're managing budget, tracking tasks and attentive to remaining scope of effort, it would be useful to ensure (minimally) that: - hours worked/paid aligned with estimates - hours worked by groups aligned with delivered work -- is it done, did that element exceed budget - reporting on overall project relative to plan ... in short, does it mirror (quite literally) where you say we should be. In this space, labor is one of the few variable costs ... failing to completely supervise payroll could quickly cause a project to go over budget.
That is true and I was happy to do that. The problem did not lie in tracking and managing budgets. The problem dealt with administrators having trouble receiving constructive criticism or being asked to fix their entry errors by someone that was not their supervisor, especially on a weekly basis since books closed weekly. Nonetheless, that was a big part of the job I was paid to do, the accuracy and integrity of the reports was my responsibility.
I was asked how long I had been in the construction trade? How long had I been licensed? Did I possess a OSHA 30 certification? Was I legal to work in the US? Was I proficient on a computer? Did I possess a valid drivers license? Did I have my own transportation? Did I have a recent background check?