Lab-Genetics

Please refer to the screenshots I added in the documents, and do the lab.

Pre-Activity Checklist

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on

Lab-Genetics

Just from $13/Page

Order Essay

Make sure you know how your computer/device saves screenshots

Follow this link to get details on how to take and save a screenshot

Read the background material to help you understand the concepts related to this activity
Get the Activity Form and your Activity Data Code (look under the Activity Form tab)
Record your Activity Data Code in your Activity Form
Close any unneeded browser tabs for best performance

Important:Please note that your instructor may have specific guidelines regarding screenshots. For example, your instructor may require additional screenshots or may prefer that screenshots are submitted in a particular manner. Please ask your instructor what their expectations are to ensure that you are meeting their requirements.

Activity Procedure

In this activity you will observe, record, and interpret data related to genetics. Specifically, in the first four procedures you will investigate the offspring that can be produced from different sets of parent bugs. In the last three procedures you will investigate how the composition a small bug population can change over time when there is (or isn’t) a breeding preference.

Procedure I Part A Baby bugs produced when the parents areBB and bb

Adult bugs breed to produce offspring. Only a single data run is needed for this procedure.
1. select the Baby Bugs testing setup by clicking or tapping on its button
2. select the bug parents by clicking on the
BB & bbbutton

3. start the data run by clicking or tapping on the Start Data Run button

Note: allow 6 seconds for the data run to complete
do not interrupt the data run

4. record your Bug Baby Results in the Procedure I Part A Data Table of your Activity Form
5. take a
screenshotof this completed data run (it will be used to confirm your identity and Activity Data Code)

6. press the reset button and move on to the next procedure

Analysis of Procedure I Part A Data

Complete the Procedure I Part A section of your Activity Form. Review the background material as needed.

Procedure I Part B Baby bugs produced when the parents areBB and Bb

Adult bugs breed to produce offspring.
Note:10 data runs are required for this procedure.

1. select the Baby Bugs testing setup by clicking or tapping on its button
2. select the bug parents by clicking on the
BB & Bbbutton

3. start the data run by clicking or tapping on the Start Data Run button

Note: allow 6 seconds for the data run to complete
do not interrupt the data run

4. record your Bug Baby Results in the Procedure I Part B Data Table of your Activity Form
5. press the reset button and do your next data run or, if all 10 data runs completed, move on to the next procedure

Analysis of Procedure I Part B Data

Complete the Procedure I Part B section of your Activity Form. Review the background material as needed.

Procedure I Part C Baby bugs produced when the parents arebb and Bb

Adult bugs breed to produce offspring.
Note:10 data runs are required for this procedure.

1. select the Baby Bugs testing setup by clicking or tapping on its button
2. select the bug parents by clicking on the
bb & Bbbutton

3. start the data run by clicking or tapping on the Start Data Run button

Note: allow 6 seconds for the data run to complete
do not interrupt the data run

4. record your Bug Baby Results in the Procedure I Part C Data Table of your Activity Form
5. press the reset button and do your next data run or, if all 10 data runs completed, move on to the next procedure

Analysis of Procedure I Part C Data

Complete the Procedure I Part C section of your Activity Form. Review the background material as needed.

Procedure I Part D Baby bugs produced when the parents areBb and Bb

Adult bugs breed to produce offspring.
Note:10 data runs are required for this procedure.

1. select the Baby Bugs testing setup by clicking or tapping on its button
2. select the bug parents by clicking on the
Bb & Bbbutton

3. start the data run by clicking or tapping on the Start Data Run button

Note: allow 6 seconds for the data run to complete
do not interrupt the data run

4. record your Bug Baby Results in the Procedure I Part D Data Table of your Activity Form
5. press the reset button and do your next data run or, if all 10 data runs completed, move on to the next procedure

Analysis of Procedure I Part D Data

Complete the Procedure I Part D section of your Activity Form. Review the background material as needed.

Procedure II Part A Changes in bug population over time when there is a breeding preference for blue-rimmed bugs

This is a situation where natural selection occurs, specifically, sexual selection based on a trait.
A small population of bugs live, potentially breed, and die. Bug interactions, births, and deaths are random. For this procedure there is a strong breeding preference for blue-rimmed bugs. Only a single data run is needed for this procedure.
1. select the Bug Pop testing setup by clicking or tapping on its button
2. select the
Bluetrait breeding preference by clicking on its button

3. start the data run by clicking or tapping on the Start Data Run button

Note: allow
300seconds (5 min) for the data run to complete
do not interrupt the data run

4. record your Bug Population results in the Procedure II Part A Data Table of your Activity Form
5. press the reset button and move on to the next procedure

Analysis of Procedure II Part A Data

Complete the Procedure II Part A section of your Activity Form. Review the background material as needed.

Procedure II Part B Changes in bug population over time when there is a breeding preference for yellow-rimmed bugs

This is a situation where natural selection occurs, specifically, sexual selection based on a trait.
A small population of bugs live, potentially breed, and die. Bug interactions, births, and deaths are random. For this procedure there is a strong breeding preference for yellow-rimmed bugs. Only a single data run is needed for this procedure.
1. select the Bug Pop testing setup by clicking or tapping on its button
2. select the
Yellowtrait breeding preference by clicking on its button

3. start the data run by clicking or tapping on the Start Data Run button

Note: allow
300seconds (5 min) for the data run to complete
do not interrupt the data run

4. record your Bug Population results in the Procedure II Part B Data Table of your Activity Form
5. press the reset button and move on to the next procedure

Analysis of Procedure II Part B Data

Complete the Procedure II Part B section of your Activity Form. Review the background material as needed.

Procedure II Part C Changes in bug population over time when there is not a rim-color breeding preference

In this situation genetic drift determines the outcome. You may be expected to share and compare your results with your classmates. Your instructor will provide details as needed.
A small population of bugs live, potentially breed, and die. Bug interactions, births, and deaths are random. For this procedure there is not a rim-color breeding preference among bugs. Only a single data run is needed for this procedure.
1. select the Bug Pop testing setup by clicking or tapping on its button
2. select the
Nonetrait breeding preference by clicking on its button

3. start the data run by clicking or tapping on the Start Data Run button

Note: allow
300seconds (5 min) for the data run to complete
do not interrupt the data run

4. record your Bug Population results in the Procedure II Part C Data Table of your Activity Form
5. press the reset button and move on to the next procedure

Analysis of Procedure II Part C Data

Complete the Procedure II Part C section of your Activity Form. Review the background material as needed.

Post-Activity

Complete any remaining questions. To help with the questions, review the background material, your data, and any additional materials suggested by your instructor.

All Content is Copyright Protected and May NOT Be Posted or Shared Outside Of The Classroom

Name

Course

Date

Bio-103

10/28/2022

Activity Data Code

Procedure I – Part A – Baby bugs when parents are BB and bb

Data Table – Enter your Baby Bug Counts

BB Baby Bug

Count

Bb Baby Bug

Count

bb Baby Bug

Count

Percentage Tables – Enter the Baby Bug percentages

Tip: Baby Bug Percentage = 100% (Baby Bug Count) / (Total Number of Baby Bugs)

BB Baby Bug

Percentage

Bb Baby Bug

Percentage

bb Baby Bug

Percentage

Tip: Blue Rimmed Baby Bug Percentage = BB Baby Bug Percent + Bb Baby Bug Percent

Blue Rimmed Baby Bug

Percentage

Yellow Rimmed Baby Bug

Percentage

Observations and Questions

[1] Complete the Punnett square below when the parents are
BB and
bb.

Punnett Square

Male

Female

Alleles/Genes

[2] Describe your baby bug results from this data run in terms of genotypes and phenotypes.

[3] Why are there no BB baby bugs or bb baby bugs from this data run?

[4] Do the results for the allele distributions confirm the entries in your Punnett Square? Please explain.

[5] What evidence from this data run supports the hypothesis that the B allele is heterozygous dominant? Explain your reasoning.

Procedure I – Part B – Baby bugs when parents are BB and Bb

Data Table – Enter your Baby Bug Counts from each data run

Data

Run

BB Baby Bug

Count

Bb Baby Bug

Count

bb Baby Bug

Count

Data Averages Table – Enter your average Baby Bug Counts

Tip: BB Baby Bug Count Average = Sum of BB Baby Bug Counts / Number of Data Runs

BB Baby Bug

Count Average

Bb Baby Bug

Count Average

bb Baby Bug

Count Average

Percentage Tables – Enter the Baby Bug percentages

Tip: Baby Bug Percent = 100% (Baby Bug Count Average) / (Total Number of Baby Bugs)

BB Baby Bug

Percentage

Bb Baby Bug

Percentage

bb Baby Bug

Percentage

Tip: Blue Rimmed Baby Bug Percentage = BB Baby Bug Percent + Bb Baby Bug Percent

Blue Rimmed Baby Bug

Percentage

Yellow Rimmed Baby Bug

Percentage

Observations and Questions

[6] Complete the Punnett square below when the parents are
BB and
Bb.

Punnett Square

Male

Female

Alleles/Genes

[7] Using your Punnett Square, calculate the expected percentage of Blue Rimmed Baby Bugs and Yellow Rimmed Baby Bugs. Show your work. How do your percentage table results compare with the Punnett Square calculations? (higher, lower, similar) Explain your answer.

[8] Why do we use multiple data runs for this procedure? Explain your answer.

[9] For this set of parents, is it possible to draw conclusions about the genotype counts from examining the phenotypes? Why or why not? Use counts from one of your BB vs Bb data runs as part of your discussion.

Procedure I – Part C – Baby bugs when parents are bb and Bb

Data Table – Enter your Baby Bug Counts from each data run

Data

Run

BB Baby Bug

Count

Bb Baby Bug

Count

bb Baby Bug

Count

Data Averages Table – Enter your average Baby Bug Counts

Tip: BB Baby Bug Count Average = Sum of BB Baby Bug Counts / Number of Data Runs

BB Baby Bug

Count Average

Bb Baby Bug

Count Average

bb Baby Bug

Count Average

Percentage Tables – Enter the Baby Bug percentages

Tip: Baby Bug Percent = 100% (Baby Bug Count Average) / (Total Number of Baby Bugs)

BB Baby Bug

Percentage

Bb Baby Bug

Percentage

bb Baby Bug

Percentage

Tip: Blue Rimmed Baby Bug Percentage = BB Baby Bug Percent + Bb Baby Bug Percent

Blue Rimmed Baby Bug

Percentage

Yellow Rimmed Baby Bug

Percentage

Observations and Questions

[10] Complete the Punnett square below when the parents are
bb and
Bb.

Punnett Square

Male

Female

Alleles/Genes

[11] Using your Punnett Square, calculate the expected percentage of Blue Rimmed Baby Bugs and Yellow Rimmed Baby Bugs. Show your work. How do your percentage table results compare with the Punnett Square calculations? (higher, lower, similar) Explain your answer.

[12] For this set of parents, is it possible to draw conclusions about the genotype counts from examining the phenotypes? Why or why not? Use counts from one of your bb vs Bb data runs as part of your discussion.

Procedure I – Part D – Baby bugs when parents are Bb and Bb

Data Table – Enter your Baby Bug Counts from each data run

Data

Run

BB Baby Bug

Count

Bb Baby Bug

Count

bb Baby Bug

Count

Data Averages Table – Enter your average Baby Bug Counts

Tip: BB Baby Bug Count Average = Sum of BB Baby Bug Counts / Number of Data Runs

BB Baby Bug

Count Average

Bb Baby Bug

Count Average

bb Baby Bug

Count Average

Percentage Tables – Enter the Baby Bug percentages

Tip: Baby Bug Percent = 100% (Baby Bug Count Average) / (Total Number of Baby Bugs)

BB Baby Bug

Percentage

Bb Baby Bug

Percentage

bb Baby Bug

Percentage

Tip: Blue Rimmed Baby Bug Percentage = BB Baby Bug Percent + Bb Baby Bug Percent

Blue Rimmed Baby Bug

Percentage

Yellow Rimmed Baby Bug

Percentage

Observations and Questions

[13] Complete the Punnett square below when the parents are
Bb and
Bb.

Punnett Square

Male

Female

Alleles/Genes

[14] Using your Punnett Square, calculate the expected percentage of Blue Rimmed Baby Bugs and Yellow Rimmed Baby Bugs. Show your work. How do your percentage table results compare with the Punnett Square calculations? (higher, lower, similar) Explain your answer.

[15] For Bb vs Bb parents, discuss how the genotype counts confirm the counts for the phenotypes in the display. Be specific. Use counts from one of your Bb vs Bb data runs as part of your discussion.

Procedure II – Part A – Bug Population changes when there is a breeding preference for
blue rimmed bugs

Data Table – Enter your Final Bug Counts

BB Bug

Count

Bb Bug

Count

bb Bug

Count

Percentage Tables – Enter the Final Bug percentages

Tip: Bug Type Percentage = 100% (Bug Type Count) / (Total Number of Bugs)

BB Bug

Percentage

Bb Bug

Percentage

bb Bug

Percentage

Tip: Blue Rimmed Baby Bug Percentage = BB Bug Percent + Bb Bug Percent

Blue Rimmed Bug

Percentage

Yellow Rimmed Bug

Percentage

Observations and Questions

[16] Describe the bug population change results during this data run in terms of genotypes and phenotypes.

[17] Do your results suggest anything about what the composition of this population might be at some distant point in the future? Defend your answer.

[18] Based on the initial starting population, use the Hardy-Weinberg equation to predict the future bug population phenotype composition.
Hint: Under the Background tab, go to the
Summary of Formulas Needed for Calculations section, see the example titled
Using the Hardy-Weinberg Equation, then do Step 1 and Step 2 using the initial starting population for this data run.

[19] Is this population consistent with the expectations of the Hardy-Weinberg model, that is, is this population stable?
Hint: Under the Background tab, go to the
Summary of Formulas Needed for Calculations section, see the example titled
Using the Hardy-Weinberg Equation, then do Step 3 and Step 4 for this data run.

Procedure II – Part B – Bug Population changes when there is a breeding preference for
yellow rimmed bugs

Data Table – Enter your Final Bug Counts

BB Bug

Count

Bb Bug

Count

bb Bug

Count

Percentage Tables – Enter the Final Bug percentages

Tip: Bug Type Percentage = 100% (Bug Type Count) / (Total Number of Bugs)

BB Bug

Percentage

Bb Bug

Percentage

bb Bug

Percentage

Tip: Blue Rimmed Baby Bug Percentage = BB Bug Percent + Bb Bug Percent

Blue Rimmed Bug

Percentage

Yellow Rimmed Bug

Percentage

Observations and Questions

[20] Describe the bug population change results during this data run in terms of genotypes and phenotypes.

[21] Is this population consistent with the expectations of the Hardy-Weinberg model, that is, is this population stable?
Hint: Under the Background tab, go to the
Summary of Formulas Needed for Calculations section, see the example titled
Using the Hardy-Weinberg Equation, then do Step 3 and Step 4 for this data run.

[22] Discuss what your analysis above indicates about the applicability of the Hardy-Weinberg criteria to this population. Which assumptions, if any, of the Hardy-Weinberg criteria are violated?

Procedure II – Part C – Bug Population changes when there is
not a rim-color breeding preference for bugs (genetic drift)

Data Table – Enter your Final Bug Counts

BB Bug

Count

Bb Bug

Count

bb Bug

Count

Percentage Tables – Enter the Final Bug percentages

Tip: Bug Type Percentage = 100% (Bug Type Count) / (Total Number of Bugs)

BB Bug

Percentage

Bb Bug

Percentage

bb Bug

Percentage

Tip: Blue Rimmed Baby Bug Percentage = BB Bug Percent + Bb Bug Percent

Blue Rimmed Bug

Percentage

Yellow Rimmed Bug

Percentage

Observations and Questions

[23] Describe the bug population change results during this data run in terms of genotypes and phenotypes.

[24] Is this population consistent with the expectations of the Hardy-Weinberg model, that is, is this population stable?
Hint: Under the Background tab, go to the
Summary of Formulas Needed for Calculations section, see the example titled
Using the Hardy-Weinberg Equation, then do Step 3 and Step 4 for this data run.

[25] Discuss what your analysis above indicates about the applicability of the Hardy-Weinberg criteria to this population. Which assumptions, if any, of the Hardy-Weinberg criteria are violated?

Note: The topic below depends on sharing and comparing Procedure II – Part C data with your fellow classmates. Your instructor will inform you about the sharing process including details about how, where, and when, you should post your results and answers to the questions presented below.

[26] Compare your data run results to the results of the class as a whole. What population changes are possible? Are there any cases of extreme changes in population composition (e.g. all blue-rimmed or all yellow-rimmed)? What does the variety of population outcomes tell us about potential outcomes for small isolated populations that experience genetic drift?

Procedure I

Procedure II

image1.png

image2.png

image3.png

image4.png

image5.png

image6.png

Assignment 1

Question 1 worth 50 Points:

Define and describe what is meant by management.
Describe the characteristics of management.
Using your own experience (e.g., work, volunteer, athletics, home, etc.):

Give an example of good management.
Give an example of bad management.

Question 2 worth 50 Points:

Define and describe what is meant by leadership.
Describe the characteristics of leadership.
Using your own experience (e.g., work, volunteer, athletics, home, etc.), or using public figures:

Give an example of good leadership.
Give an example of bad leadership.

400 words each is average (C level work).
Double space.
Page numbers.
Superscript footnote; not APA

Thiscopyisforyourpersonal,noncommercialuseonly.Youcanorderpresentationreadycopiesfordistribution
toyourcolleagues,clientsorcustomers,pleaseclickhereorusethe”Reprints”toolthatappearsnexttoany
article.Visitwww.nytreprints.comforsamplesandadditionalinformation.Orderareprintofthisarticlenow.

February26,1989
BUSINESSFORUM:FORGETCHARISMA

BUSINESSFORUM:FORGETCHARISMAFocuson
Teamwork,VisionandValues
ByALLANCOXAllanCoxisamanagementconsultant.Hisfifthbook,”TheAchiever’sProfile,”hasjustbeenpublished.

Charismaisourelixir.Weswallowitasacureallforwhatailsus.Nowhereisthismoreapparent
thaninourcompanies.Itshowsupeveninthewayweuselanguage.Wesaywewantleadersfor
ourcorporations,notmeremanagers.

Theword”leaders,”inthiscase,isspokenwithliltingvoiceandbrighteyes,conveyingthatthese
areespeciallywinsomecreatureswithendowmentsnotquiteofthisworld.

Thisisallnonsense.Arichmixtureofjudgmentandtimingcontributesmoretoeffective
leadershipthanacaptivating,swashbucklingpresence.

Wehavebeenthroughadecadeofgrosshucksterisminwhichexecutiveshavebeenadmonished
toundergoassertivenesstraining,spruceuptheirimagesandevenforgowearingbrownsuitsto
theoffice.

Justafewweeksago,whenbeginningateambuildingprojectforachiefexecutiveandhisstaff,I
wastakenasidebytwostaffmembersandtold,”He(thechiefexecutive)needstoworkonthe
charismafactor.”

Butwhenitcomestoenhancingtheirleadershipqualities,executiveshavebetterplacesthan
charismatodirecttheirattentionandyearnings.Isuggestthreealternatives:

First,executiveswillbebetterleadersbygivingtheirenergiestotheevaluationandmanagement
ofcorporatevalues.

Whenexecutivesbeholdthecorporationasthesocialinstitutionitisaninterpersonalnetwork
committedtosomemissionintheserviceofcustomers,employees,shareholdersandthepublic
itisnotsurprisingthattheythinkthemanagementofvaluesmaybetheultimatedescriptionof
theirjobs.

Somechiefexecutivesbecomespokespersonsonthispoint,whileothers,notasvocal,havejustas
energeticallyputsuchconvictionintoplayintheircompanies.

http://www.nytreprints.com/

http://www.nytimes.com/

http://www.nytimes.com/adx/bin/adx_click.html?type=goto&opzn&page=www.nytimes.com/printer-friendly&pos=Position1&sn2=336c557e/4f3dd5d2&sn1=384b867d/98162d56&camp=FoxSearchlight_AT2015-1977466-Sept-A&ad=MistressAmerica_120x60-NOW&goto=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Efandango%2Ecom%2Fmistressamerica%5F182432%2Fmovieoverview%20%20

PerhapsthemostimportantexampleofachiefexecutivewhoisconcernedwithvaluesisJames
Burke,thegenuine,butuncharismaticchiefexecutiveofJohnson&JohnsonInc.Mr.Burke,you
willrecall,hasreceivedmuchpraiseformanagingJohnson&Johnson’sresponsetotheTylenol
poisonings.Yet,asdeservingofhighpraiseastheseactionswere,theyarenotwhatismost
remarkableabouthim.

Rather,itissimplyhisdaybyday,yearbyyear,layerbylayerinvolvementinrecognizing,
evaluating,prioritizingandarticulatingJohnson&Johnson’sethicalvalues.

AgimleteyedfriendofminewhohasworkedwithMr.Burkesaid:”What’stypicaltodayisforthe
C.E.O.tosendoutastaffdraftedtwoparagraphethicsstatementtohismanagers.Themanagers
areaskedtoreadandsignit.Theydothisperfunctorily,andthat’sit.AguylikeBurkeknowsthat’s
ridiculous,thatit’snotenough,thatthere’snoreinforcementwithouttheC.E.O.’sinvolvement.By
spendingthetimethathedoesonvalues,Burkesignalstheirimportancetohispeople.”

Thispeoplesensitive,customerresponsive,longrangethinkingchiefexecutivemakesusforget
aboutcharismawhilehegivesethicsandvaluesagoodname.Butthiswouldnotbethecaseif
Johnson&Johnson’sfinancialperformancewerenotalsoimpressivewhichitis.Mr.Burkesays
companiesthatfollowethicalcredosgeneratesuperiorfinancialperformance.

Anexecutive’ssecondalternativetocharismaistheexerciseofvision.Ironically,thereisaneedto
distinguishvisionfromcharisma.Thisisbecausepopularbusinessthought,inerror,rollsup
charismaandvisionintoatightlittleball.

Acommonnotionisthatvisionistheprovinceofacharismatic,almostclairvoyantcorporate
leader.Visionisroutinelytakentomean(1)gazingatacrystalballratherthan(2)understanding
whereacorporationfindsitselfatpresentandwhereit’sheaded.

Initssimplicity,optionNo.2isthewisercourse.ConsiderthislittlegemofChinesewisdom:
”Unlesswechangeourdirection,wearelikelytoendupwhereweareheaded.”Despitelowscores
onthe”excitement”test,executiveswhoareabletotakethisearthywisdomtohearttodevelopa
senseoftheircorporation’spurposeandtrajectorywillbeleadersofdistinction.

Whatalleffectiveleadersdoislaborwiththeirassociatestogainanunderstandingofplaceand
direction.Andthatisaspecialwayofseeingcircumstancesthatwearecorrecttocallvision.
LeaderslikeMr.Burke,whowinlastingadmirationandworktoinsuretheircompanies’futures,
aretheonespoisedtoblowthebugleinfrontofnewandneededinitiativesorblowthewhistleto
stoptheircompaniesdeadintheirtrackswhentheythinkthecourseiswrong.Thetruthforthem
isthatadesirabletomorrowisdependentonthedecisionstheymaketoday.

Asuperiorleader’sthirdalternativetocharismaiscollaboration.Heiscommittedtocollaboration
becauseheknowsfirsthandthatitproducesmanagementteameffectivenessandassures
improvedcorporateperformance.Itdoessobyreenliveningandtappingintothesoulsandminds
ofacompany’sexecutiveswhomayhavegonestale.Anditmakesthemseethemselvesasvalued

contributorsoncemore.Collaborationisthewaytogeneratethebestideasandoptionsfor
runningabusiness.Andthesetimesdemandit.Corporationsthatdonot”think”teamwork,will
notprosper.

Thespiritofcomplexorganizationallifethesedaysisincreasinglycollaborative.Inourfinest
companies,muchgetsdonedailywithoutdazzleorhypebyteamsofpeoplepullingtogether.
Wordslike”we”and”our”replace”I”and”my.”Theteamnottheleaderbecomesthestar,
whilethelatterservesprimarilyasthearticulatorandsponsorofthevisionthatemergesoutofthe
team’scollaboration.Twoormoreheadsarebetterthanone.Whatbetterexplanationthanteam
involvementcanaccountfortheachievementsofaJohnson&Johnsonandtherocksolid,
managementstyleofMr.Burke?Butthemanagementtechnologyofrealteamworkisnotinthe
typicalexecutive’srepertoireeventhoughthattechnologyisnotcomplicatedandcanbelearned
withoutdifficulty.

Thereisnomoreappropriatequestforamanagerthantobuildteaminvolvement.That,afterall,
istheprizeofeffectiveleadership.

Drawing

Copyright2015TheNewYorkTimesCompany Home PrivacyPolicy Search Corrections XML Help Contact
Us BacktoTop

http://www.nytimes.com/corrections.html

http://www.nytimes.com/ref/membercenter/help/infoservdirectory.html

http://www.nytco.com/

http://www.nytimes.com/membercenter/sitehelp.html

http://www.nytimes.com/ref/membercenter/help/copyright.html

http://www.nytimes.com/ref/membercenter/help/privacy.html

http://www.nytimes.com/rss

http://www.nytimes.com/

http://www.nytimes.com/search Principles of Scientific Management, Frederick Winslow Taylor (1911)

Introduction

PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT, in his address to the Governors at the White House,

prophetically remarked that The conservation of our national resources is only preliminary to

the larger question of national efficiency.

The whole country at once recognized the importance of conserving our material

resources and a large movement has been started which will be effective in accomplishing this

object. As yet, however, we have but vaguely appreciated the importance of the larger question

of increasing our national efficiency.

We can see our forests vanishing, our water-powers going to waste, our soil being carried

by floods into the sea; and the end of our coal and our iron is in sight. But our larger wastes of

human effort, which go on every day through such of our acts as are blundering, ill-directed; or

inefficient, and which Mr. Roosevelt refers to as a lack of national efficiency, are less visible,

less tangible, and are but vaguely appreciated.

We can see and feel the waste of material things. Awkward, inefficient, or ill-directed

movements of men, however, leave nothing visible or tangible behind them. Their appreciation

calls for an act of memory, an effort of the imagination. And for this reason, even though our

daily loss from this source is greater than from our waste of material things, the one has stirred

us deeply, while the other has moved us but little.

As yet there has been no public agitation for greater national efficiency, no meetings

have been called to consider how this is to be brought about. And still there are signs that the

need for greater efficiency is widely felt.

The search for better, for more competent men, from the presidents of our great

companies down to our household servants, was never more vigorous than it is now. And more

than ever before is the demand for competent men in excess of the supply.

What we are all looking for, however, is the readymade, competent man; the man whom

some one else has trained. It is only when we fully realize that our duty, as well as our

opportunity, lies in systematically cooperating to train and to make this competent man, instead

of in hunting for a man whom some one else has trained, that we shall be on the road to national

efficiency.

In the past the prevailing idea has been well expressed in the saying that Captains of

industry are born, not made; and the theory has been that if one could get the right man,

methods could be safely left to him. In the future it will be appreciated that our leaders must be

trained right as well as born right, and that no great man can (with the old system of personal

management) hope to compete with a number of ordinary men who have been properly

organized so as efficiently to cooperate.

In the past the man has been first; in the future the system must be first. This in no sense,

however, implies that great men are not needed. On the contrary, the first object of any good

system must be that of developing first-class men; and under systematic management the best

man rises to the top more certainly and more rapidly than ever before.

This paper has been written:

First. To point out, through a series of simple illustrations, the great loss which the whole

country is suffering through inefficiency in almost all of our daily acts.

Second. To try to convince the reader that the remedy for this inefficiency lies in

systematic management, rather than in searching for some unusual or extraordinary man.

Third. To prove that the best management is a true science, resting upon clearly defined

laws, rules, and principles, as a foundation. And further to show that the fundamental principles

of scientific management are applicable to all kinds of human activities, from our simplest

individual acts to the work of our great corporations, which call for the most elaborate

cooperation. And, briefly, through a series of illustrations, to convince the reader that whenever

these principles are correctly applied, results must follow which are truly astounding.

This paper was originally prepared for presentation to The American Society of

Mechanical Engineers. The illustrations chosen are such as, it is believed, will especially appeal

to engineers and to managers of industrial and manufacturing establishments, and also quite as

much to all of the men who are working in these establishments. It is hoped, however, that it will

be clear to other readers that the same principles can be applied with equal force to all social

activities: to the management of our homes; the management of our farms; the management of

the business of our tradesmen, large and small; of our churches, our philanthropic institutions,

our universities, and our governmental departments.

Chapter One

The principal object of management should be to secure the maximum prosperity for the

employer, coupled with the maximum prosperity for each employee.

The words maximum prosperity are used, in their broad sense, to mean not only large

dividends for the company or owner, but the development of every branch of the business to its

highest state of excellence, so that the prosperity may be permanent.

In the same way maximum prosperity for each employee means not only higher wages

than are usually received by men of his class, but, of more importance still, it also means the

development of each man to his state of maximum efficiency, so that he may be able to do,

generally speaking, the highest grade of work for which his natural abilities fit him, and it further

means giving him, when possible, this class of work to do.

It would seem to be so self-evident that maximum prosperity for the employer, coupled

with maximum prosperity for the employee, ought to be the two leading objects of management,

that even to state this fact should be unnecessary. And yet there is no question that, throughout

the industrial world, a large part of the organization of employers, as well as employeee, is for

war rather than for peace, and that perhaps the majority on either side do not believe that it is

possible so to arrange their mutual relations that their interests become identical.

The majority of these men believe that the fundamental interests of employeee and

employers are necessarily antagonistic. Scientific management, on the contrary, has for its very

foundation the firm conviction that the true interests of the two are one and the same; that

prosperity for the employer cannot exist through a long term of years unless it is accompanied by

prosperity for the employee, and vice versa; and that it is possible to give the workman what he

most wants–high wages–and the employer what he wants–a low labor cost–for his

manufactures.

It is hoped that some at least of those who do not sympathize with each of these objects

may be led to modify their views; that some employers, whose attitude toward their workmen

has been that of trying to get the largest amount of work out of them for the smallest possible

wages, may be led to see that a more liberal policy toward their men will pay them better; and

that some of those workmen who begrudge a fair and even a large profit to their employers, and

who feel that all of the fruits of their labor should belong to them, and that those for whom they

work and the capital invested in the business are entitled to little or nothing, may be led to

modify these views.

No one can be found who will deny that in the case of any single individual the greatest

prosperity can exist only when that individual has reached his highest state of efficiency; that is,

when he is turning out his largest daily output.

The truth of this fact is also perfectly clear in the case of two men working together. To

illustrate: if you and your workman have become so skilful that you and he together are making

two pairs of shoes in a day, while your competitor and his workman are making only one pair, it

is clear that after selling your two pairs of shoes you can pay your workman much higher wages

than your competitor who produces only one pair of shoes is able to pay his man, and that there

will still be enough money left over for you to have a larger profit than your competitor.

In the case of a more complicated manufacturing establishment, it should also be

perfectly clear that the greatest permanent prosperity for the workman, coupled with the greatest

prosperity for the employer, can be brought about only when the work of the establishment is

done with the smallest combined expenditure of human effort, plus natures resources, plus the

cost for the use of capital in the shape of machines, buildings, etc. Or, to state the same thing in a

different way: that the greatest prosperity can exist only as the result of the greatest possible

productivity of the men and machines of the establishment–that is, when each man and each

machine are turning out the largest possible output; because unless your men and your machines

are daily turning out more work than others around you, it is clear that competition will prevent

your paying higher wages to your workmen than are paid to those of your competitor. And what

is true as to the possibility of paying high wages in the case of two companies competing close

beside one another is also true as to whole districts of the country and even as to nations which

are in competition. In a word, that maximum prosperity can exist only as the result of maximum

productivity. Later in this paper illustrations will be given of several companies which are

earning large dividends and at the same time paying from 30 per cent. to 100 per cent. higher

wages to their men than are paid to similar ,men immediately around them, and with whose

employers they are in competition. These illustrations will cover different types of work, from

the most elementary to the most complicated.

If the above reasoning is correct, it follows that the most important object of both the

workmen and the management should be the training and development of each individual in the

establishment, so that he can do (at his fastest pace and with the maximum of efficiency) the

highest class of work for which his natural abilities fit him.

These principles appear to be so self-evident that many men may think it almost childish

to state them. Let us, however, turn to the facts, as they actually exist in this country and in

England. The English and American peoples are the greatest sportsmen in the world. Whenever

an American workman plays baseball, or an English workman plays cricket, it is safe to say that

he strains every nerve to secure victory for his side. He does his very best to make the largest

possible number of runs. The universal sentiment is so strong that any man who fails to give out

all there is in him in sport is branded as a quitter, and treated with contempt by those who are

around him.

When the same workman returns to work on the following day, instead of using every

effort to turn out the largest possible amount of work, in a majority of the cases this man

deliberately plans to do as little as he safely can–to turn out far less work than he is well able to

do–in many instances to do not more than one-third to one-half of a proper days work. And in

fact if he were to do his best to turn out his largest possible days work, he would be abused by

his fellow-workers for so doing, even more than if he had proved himself a quitter in sport.

Underworking, that is, deliberately working slowly so as to avoid doing a full days work,

soldiering, as it is called in this country, hanging it out, as it is called in England, ca canae,

as it is called in Scotland, is almost universal in industrial establishments, and prevails also to a

large extent in the building trades; and the writer asserts without fear of contradiction that this

constitutes the greatest evil with which the working-people of both England and America are

now afflicted.

It will be shown later in this paper that doing away with slow working and soldiering in

all its forms and so arranging the relations between employer and employee that each workman

will work to his very best advantage and at his best speed, accompanied by the intimate

cooperation with the management and the help (which the workman should receive) from the

management, would result on the average in nearly doubling the output of each man and each

machine. What other reforms, among those which are being discussed by these two nations,

could do as much toward promoting prosperity, toward the diminution of poverty, and the

alleviation of suffering? America and England have been recently agitated over such subjects as

the tariff, the control of the large corporations on the one hand, and of hereditary power on the

other hand, and over various more or less socialistic proposals for taxation, etc. On these subjects

both peoples have been profoundly stirred, and yet hardly a voice has been raised to call

attention to this vastly greater and more important subject of soldiering, which directly and

powerfully affects the wages, the prosperity, and the life of almost every working-man, and also

quite as much the prosperity of every industrial establishment in the nation.

The elimination of soldiering and of the several causes of slow working would so lower

the cost of production that both our home and foreign markets would be greatly enlarged, and we

could compete on more than even terms with our rivals. It would remove one of the fundamental

causes for dull times, for lack of employment, and for poverty, and therefore would have a more

permanent and far-reaching effect upon these misfortunes than any of the curative remedies that

are now being used to soften their consequences. It would insure higher wages and make shorter

working hours and better working and home conditions possible.

Why is it, then, in the face of the self-evident fact that maximum prosperity can exist only

as the result of the determined effort of each workman to turn out each day his largest possible

days work, that the great majority of our men are deliberately doing just the opposite, and that

even when the men have the best of intentions their work is in most cases far from efficient?

There are three causes for this condition, which may be briefly summarized as:

First. The fallacy, which has from time immemorial been almost universal among

workmen, that a material increase in the output of each man or each machine in the trade would

result in the end in throwing a large number of men out of work.

Second. The defective systems of management which are in common use, and which

make it necessary for each workman to soldier, or work slowly, in order that he may protect his

own best interests.

Mike
Sticky Note
Question

Third. The inefficient rule-of-thumb methods, which are still almost universal in all

trades, and in practicing which our workmen waste a large part of their effort.

This paper will attempt to show the enormous gains which would result from the

substitution by our workmen of scientific for rule-of-thumb methods.

To explain a little more fully these three causes:

First. The great majority of workmen still believe that if they were to work at their best

speed they would be doing a great injustice to the whole trade by throwing a lot of men out of

work, and yet the history of the development of each trade shows that each improvement,

whether it be the invention of a new machine or the introduction of a better method, which

results in increasing the productive capacity of the men in the trade and cheapening the costs,

instead of throwing men out of work make in the end work for more men.

The cheapening of any article in common use almost immediately results in a largely

increased demand for that article. Take the case of shoes, for instance. The introduction of

machinery for doing every element of the work which was formerly done by hand has resulted in

making shoes at a fraction of their former labor cost, and in selling them so cheap that now

almost every man, woman, and child in the working-classes buys one or two pairs of shoes per

year, and wears shoes all the time, whereas formerly each workman bought perhaps one pair of

shoes every five years, and went barefoot most of the time, wearing shoes only as a luxury or as

a matter of the sternest necessity. In spite of the enormously increased output of shoes per

workman, which has come with shoe machinery, the demand for shoes has so increased that

there are relatively more men working in the shoe industry now than ever before.

The workmen in almost every trade have before them an object lesson of this kind, and

yet, because they are ignorant of the history of their own trade even, they still firmly believe, as

their fathers did before them, that it is against their best interests for each man to turn out each

day as much work as possible.

Under this fallacious idea a large proportion of the workmen of both countries each day

deliberately work slowly so as to curtail the output. Almost every labor union has made, or is

contemplating making, rules which have for their object curtailing the output of their members,

and those men who have the greatest influence with the working-people, the labor leaders as well

as many people with philanthropic feelings who are helping them, are daily spreading this fallacy

and at the same time telling them that they are overworked.

A great deal has been and is being constantly said about sweat-shop work and

conditions. The writer has great sympathy with those who are overworked, but on the whole a

greater sympathy for those who are under paid. For every individual, however, who is

overworked, there are a hundred who intentionally underwork–greatly underwork–every day of

their lives, and who for this reason deliberately aid in establishing those conditions which in the

end inevitably result in low wages. And yet hardly a single voice is being raised in an endeavor

to correct this evil.

As engineers and managers, we are more intimately acquainted with these facts than any

other class in the community, and are therefore best fitted to lead in a movement to combat this

fallacious idea by educating not only the workmen but the whole of the country as to the true

facts. And yet we are practically doing nothing in this direction, and are leaving this field entirely

in the hands of the labor agitators (many of whom are misinformed and misguided), and of

sentimentalists who are ignorant as to actual working conditions.

Second. As to the second cause for soldiering–the relations which exist between

employers and employeee under almost all of the systems of management which are in common

use–it is impossible in a few words to make it clear to one not familiar with this problem why it

is that the ignorance of employeers as to the proper time in which work of various kinds should

be done makes it for the interest of the workman to soldier.

The writer therefore quotes herewith from a paper read before The American Society of

Mechanical Engineers, in June, 1903, entitled Shop Management, which it is hoped will

explain fully this cause for soldiering:

This loafing or soldiering proceeds from two causes. First, from the natural

instinct and tendency of men to take it easy, which may be called natural

soldiering. Second, from more intricate second thought and reasoning caused by

their relations with other men, which may be called systematic soldiering.

There is no question that the tendency of the average man (in all walks of life) is

toward working at a slow, easy gait, and that it is only after a good deal of thought

and observation on his part or as a result of example, conscience, or external

pressure that he takes a more rapid pace.

There are, of course, men of unusual energy, vitality, and ambition who naturally

choose the fastest gait, who set up their own standards, and who work hard, even

though it may be against their best interests. But these few uncommon men only

serve by forming a contrast to emphasize the tendency of the average.

This common tendency to take it easy is greatly increased by bringing a

number of men together on similar work and at a uniform standard rate of pay by

the day.

Under this plan the better men gradually but surely slow down their gait to that

of the poorest and least efficient. When a naturally energetic man works for a few

days beside a lazy one, the logic of the situation is unanswerable. Why should I

work hard when that lazy fellow gets the same pay that I do and does only half as

much work?

A careful time study of men working under these conditions will disclose facts

which are ludicrous as well as pitiable.

To illustrate: The writer has timed a naturally energetic workman who, while

going and coming from work, would walk at a speed of from three to four miles

per hour, and not infrequently trot home after a days work. On arriving at his

work he would immediately slow down to a speed of about one mile an hour.

When, for example, wheeling a loaded wheelbarrow, he would go at a good fast

pace even up hill in order to be as short a time as possible under load, and

immediately on the return walk slow down to a mile an hour, improving every

opportunity for delay short of actually sitting down. In order to be sure not to do

more than his lazy neighbor, he would actually tire himself in his effort to go

slow.

These men were working under a foreman of good reputation and highly thought

of by his employer, who, when his attention was called to this state of things,

answered: Well, I can keep them from sitting down, but the devil cant make

them get a move on while they are at work.

The natural laziness of men is serious, but by far the greatest evil from which

both workmen and employers are suffering is the systematic soldiering which is

almost universal under all of the ordinary schemes of management and which

results from a careful study on the part of the workmen of what will promote their

best interests.

The writer was much interested recently in hearing one small but experienced

golf caddy boy of twelve explaining to a green caddy, who had shown special

energy and interest, the necessity of going slow and lagging behind his man when

he came up to the ball, showing him that since they were paid by the hour, the

faster they went the less money they got, and finally telling him that if he went

too fast the other boys would give him a licking.

This represents a type of systematic soldiering which is not, however, very

serious, since it is done with the knowledge of the employer, who can quite easily

break it up if he wishes.

The greater part of the systematic soldiering, however, is done by the men with

the deliberate object of keeping their employers ignorant of how fast work can be

done.

So universal is soldiering for this purpose that hardly a competent workman can

be found in a large establishment, whether he works by the day or on piece work,

contract work, or under any of the ordinary systems, who does not devote a

considerable part of his time to studying just how slow he can work and still

convince his employer that he is going at a good pace.

The causes for this are, briefly, that practically all employers determine upon a

maximum sum which they feel it is right for each of their classes of employeees

to earn per day, whether their men work by the day or piece.

Each workman soon finds out about what this figure is for his particular case,

and he also realizes that when his employer is convinced that a man is capable of

doing more work than he has done, he will find sooner or later some way of

compelling him to do it with little or no increase of pay.

Employers derive their knowledge of how much of a given class of work can be

done in a day from either their own experience, which has frequently grown hazy

with age, from casual and unsystematic observation of their men, or at best from

records which are kept, showing the quickest time in which each job has been

done. In many cases the employer will feel almost certain that a given job can be

done faster than it has been, but he rarely cares to take the drastic measures

necessary to force men to do it in the quickest time, unless he has an actual record

proving conclusively how fast the work can be done.

It evidently becomes for each mans interest, then, to see that no job is done

faster than it has been in the past. The younger and less experienced men are

taught this by their elders, and all possible persuasion and social pressure is

brought to bear upon the greedy and selfish men to keep them from making new

records which result in temporarily increasing their wages, while all those who

come after them are made to work h

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Related Post

page paper comparing SQL and NoSQL Database for Big Data.page paper comparing SQL and NoSQL Database for Big Data.

Chapter 11, Case 1Chapter 11, Case 1

busn excel spreadsheetbusn excel spreadsheet