A greater proportion of time spent in directing on the ?->(Show Answer!)

1. A greater proportion of time spent in directing on the

Write Comment

Comments

Tags

Show Similar Question And Answers

QA->Whoase directing career spanned 50 years from Sashiro Sugata to Madadayo?....

QA->Noted Iranian filmmaker who has been sentenced for six years in jail and barred from directing and producing movies for the next 20-years?....

QA->Indian movie producer and director who is known for directing the epic Indian television series Mahabharat, passed away on November 12, 2014?....

QA->In the case of purchases costing above…………the purchasing officer shall forward a draft agreement to the firm along with the supply order directing that the consignment need be sent only after executing agreement.....

QA->What is the total earnings of a worker from the following data? Standard time for completing the job 50 hours. Actual time taken for completing the job 45 hours. Time rate is Rs.20 per hour, premium bonus is 60% of time saved.....

MCQ-> DIRECTIONS for the following three questions: Answer the questions on the basis of the information given below.Five women decided to go shopping to M.G. Road, Bangalore. They arrived at the designated meeting place in the following order:[list=1][*]Archana,[*]Chellamma,[*]Dhenuka,[*]Helen, and[*]Shahnaz.[/list]Each woman spent at least Rs. 1000. Below are some additional facts about how much they spent during their shopping spree.i. The woman who spent Rs. 2234 arrived before the lady who spent Rs. 1193.ii. One woman spent Rs. 1340 and she was not Dhenuka.iii. One woman spent Rs. 1378 more than Chellamma.iv. One woman spent Rs. 2517 and she was not Archana.v. Helen spent more than Dhenuka.vi. Shahnaz spent the largest amount and Chellamma the smallest.What was the amount spent by Helen?
....

MCQ-> Answer the questions based on the following information. Five women decided to go for shopping to South Extension, New Delhi. They arrived at the designated meeting place in the following order: 1. Aradhana, 2. Chandrima, 3. Deepika, 4. Heena and 5. Sumitra. Each of them spent at least Rs. 1000. The woman who spent Rs. 2234 arrived before the woman who spent Rs. 1193. One of them spent Rs. 1340 and she was not Deepika. One woman spent Rs. 1378 more than Chandrima. One of them spent Rs. 2517 and she was not Aradhana. Heena spent more than Deepika. Sumitra spent the largest amount and Chandrima the smallest.What was the amount spent by Heena?
....

MCQ->A greater proportion of time spent in directing on the....

MCQ->Five boys went to a store to buy sweets. One boy had Rs. 40. Another boy had Rs. 30. Two other boys had Rs. 20 each. The remaining boy had Rs. 10. Below are some more facts about the initial and final cash positions.I. Alam started with more than Jugraj.II. Sandeep spent Rs. 1.50 more than Daljeet.III. Ganesh started with more money than just only one other person.IV. Daljeet started with 2/3 of what Sandeep started with.V. Alam spent the most, but did not end with the least.VI. Jugraj spent the least and ended with more than Alam or Daljeet.VII.Ganesh spent Rs.3.50.VIII. Alam spent 10 times more than what Ganesh did.In the choices given below, all statements except one are false. Which one of the following statements can be true?....

MCQ-> Recently I spent several hours sitting under a tree in my garden with the social anthropologist William Ury, a Harvard University professor who specializes in the art of negotiation and wrote the bestselling book, Getting to Yes. He captivated me with his theory that tribalism protects people from their fear of rapid change. He explained that the pillars of tribalism that humans rely on for security would always counter any significant cultural or social change. In this way, he said, change is never allowed to happen too fast. Technology, for example, is a pillar of society. Ury believes that every time technology moves in a new or radical direction, another pillar such as religion or nationalism will grow stronger in effect, the traditional and familiar will assume greater importance to compensate for the new and untested. In this manner, human tribes avoid rapid change that leaves people insecure and frightened.But we have all heard that nothing is as permanent as change. Nothing is guaranteed. Pithy expressions, to be sure, but no more than cliches. As Ury says, people don’t live that way from day-to-day. On the contrary, they actively seek certainty and stability. They want to know they will be safe.Even so we scare ourselves constantly with the idea of change. An IBM CEO once said: ‘We only re-structure for a good reason, and if we haven’t re-structured in a while, that’s a good reason.’ We are scared that competitors, technology and the consumer will put us Out of business — so we have to change all the time just to stay alive. But if we asked our fathers and grandfathers, would they have said that they lived in a period of little change? Structure may not have changed much. It may just be the speed with which we do things.Change is over-rated, anyway, consider the automobile. It’s an especially valuable example, because the auto industry has spent tens of billions of dollars on research and product development in the last 100 years. Henry Ford’s first car had a metal chassis with an internal combustion, gasoline-powered engine, four wheels with rubber types, a foot operated clutch assembly and brake system, a steering wheel, and four seats, and it could safely do 1 8 miles per hour. A hundred years and tens of thousands of research hours later, we drive cars with a metal chassis with an internal combustion, gasoline-powered engine, four wheels with rubber tyres a foot operated clutch assembly and brake system, a steering wheel, four seats – and the average speed in London in 2001 was 17.5 miles per hour!That’s not a hell of a lot of return for the money. Ford evidently doesn’t have much to teach us about change. The fact that they’re still manufacturing cars is not proof that Ford Motor Co. is a sound organization, just proof that it takes very large companies to make cars in great quantities — making for an almost impregnable entry barrier.Fifty years after the development of the jet engine, planes are also little changed. They’ve grown bigger, wider and can carry more people. But those are incremental, largely cosmetic changes.Taken together, this lack of real change has come to man that in travel — whether driving or flying — time and technology have not combined to make things much better. The safety and design have of course accompanied the times and the new volume of cars and flights, but nothing of any significance has changed in the basic assumptions of the final product.At the same time, moving around in cars or aero-planes becomes less and less efficient all the time Not only has there been no great change, but also both forms of transport have deteriorated as more people clamour to use them. The same is true for telephones, which took over hundred years to become mobile or photographic film, which also required an entire century to change.The only explanation for this is anthropological. Once established in calcified organizations, humans do two things: sabotage changes that might render people dispensable, and ensure industry-wide emulation. In the 960s, German auto companies developed plans to scrap the entire combustion engine for an electrical design. (The same existed in the 1970s in Japan, and in the 1980s in France.) So for 40 years we might have been free of the wasteful and ludicrous dependence on fossil fuels. Why didn’t it go anywhere? Because auto executives understood pistons and carburettors, and would be loath to cannibalize their expertise, along with most of their factoriesAccording to the above passage, which of the following statements is true?
....