In general there seems to be a misunderstanding: The perfectionist are understood to be the same as the "efficientists". I think, there's a big difference between trying to do your thing 100 % perfect or efficient. Perfect means (in my opinion): Absolutely correct (but sometimes boring and normally too expensive regarding time and money), efficient rather: Finding a convincing solution that is 80-90% correct (Pareto principle). Very often I was able to recognise that efficient ideas where refused, reasoning the ideas were "just too perfect".
Anyway – exactly those people refusing just efficient ideas are normally just unefficient doing their job. I assume, that most of all efficient ideas are refused because those "anti-efficientists" refuse these ideas being unable and unwilling to understand the concepts/technologies/methodologies behind them. IMHO the damage for an IT-driven enterprise can be huge.