This volume presents results and implications of two studies focusing on methods of selecting foremen and reasons for selection to supervisory posts. The studies were designed to determine what obstacles prevent the upgrading of disadvantaged personnel and whether the disadvantaged could achieve supervisory positions if objective upgrading systems were used. In each case, results of the study had wider implications than expected. The first study involved a detailed field investigation of current supervisor selection procedures in several different types of industries. Part 1 contains the methodology and a lengthy discussion of results, including selection procedures, factors affecting systems used for selecting supervisors, and personal factors and selection criteria. The second study examined and appraised two systems of supervisor upgrading that attempted to select foremen in a more objective manner than is typical. Part 2 describes and compares these two methods--the assessment center method and selection by testing--and concludes that both methods are superior to the usual informal methods. Neither method is obviously superior to the other but the assessment center method is considerably more costly. Part 3 examines the implications of the findings, including the legal implications under the Civil Rights Act of failing to utilize objective systems in selecting supervisors. (Author/JM)