You've inherited a weekly report that takes a day to build. You can see how to automate most of it, but you've been told to keep it as-is — what do you do?

The tension is real on both sides: the instruction usually protects something a newcomer can't see yet, and a day a week is genuinely worth saving. The answer shows whether a candidate can question a default without torching the instruction or swallowing the waste forever — and it needs no work history.

• What might keep-it-as-is be protecting that you can't see yet?
• How and when do you raise it — what do you actually say?
• Would you build the automation on the side? Why or why not?
• What if the answer is still no?

Curiosity about the instruction's reasons before any campaign against it, a small cheap proof offered rather than an argument — one automated section, a timed comparison — the ask framed as the owner's win, and a graceful landing if no stays no.

Silent compliance with the waste forever, secretly replacing the report and unveiling it as a done deal, contempt for the instruction or whoever gave it, or a pitch with no thought for why the automated version should be trusted.