Management stems from a collection of varied interpersonal, conceptual and technical skills. A single manager cannot physically possess all the skills required to run an organization, he or she must rely on their ability to get work done from/through others. For the selection of a manager to the newly opened post, a simple written test is not enough as it cannot evaluate many of the skills one looks for in a good manager such as employee relations and motivation etc., hence creating the need for a more comprehensive form of evaluation. Addressing the issue of fairness to begin with, the qualification for attempting the written test should have been based on work performance, years of experience, and other quantitative measures rather than simply opening it up to the general employee strength of the organization. To expand further on the idea of a written test, many of those who attempted the same may have simply gotten lucky with the answers to the given paper. Another factor which cannot possible be accounted for with any sort of accurate measure, possibly allowing undesirable candidates for the job to appear perfectly suitable. Even allowing a new employee to compete for this position is not justified, as managers by definition require a broad and versatile set of skills which can only be gained through years of work and an accumulation of experiences including handling of employees etc. Hence, only seasoned employees who have proven themselves over the years as suitable candidates for the same should be considered. Further, while a new employee may well bring fresh ideas into the organization it is not necessary that these ideas be viable or potentially productive. Added to this the lack of experience such an employee would suffer from should clearly remove him or her from the running for the position. Referring to the idea of the written test once again, it would in fact be unfair to deny a hard working employee a decent chance at