Question: What does the manager do?
About the article "Baseball", section "Other personnel".

Candidate passages:
"What Does The Bee Do?"
is a children's poem from the late 1800s by Christina Rossetti.
Margaret Schroeder's daughter recites it in the episode. 
The 3-P's (Philosophy, Process and People) are often used to describe the reasons why the manager is able to produce above average results.
Philosophy refers to the overarching beliefs of the investment organization.
For example: (i) Does the manager buy growth or value shares, or a combination of the two (and why)?
(ii) Do they believe in market timing (and on what evidence)?
(iii) Do they rely on external research or do they employ a team of researchers?
It is helpful if any and all of such fundamental beliefs are supported by proof-statements.
Process refers to the way in which the overall philosophy is implemented.
For example: (i) Which universe of assets is explored before particular assets are chosen as suitable investments?
(ii) How does the manager decide what to buy and when?
(iii) How does the manager decide what to sell and when?
(iv) Who takes the decisions and are they taken by committee?
(v) What controls are in place to ensure that a rogue fund (one very different from others and from what is intended) cannot arise?
People refers to the staff, especially the fund managers.
The questions are, Who are they?
How are they selected?
How old are they?
Who reports to whom?
How deep is the team (and do all the members understand the philosophy and process they are supposed to be using)?
And most important of all, How long has the team been working together?
This last question is vital because whatever performance record was presented at the outset of the relationship with the client may or may not relate to (have been produced by) a team that is still in place.
If the team has changed greatly (high staff turnover or changes to the team), then arguably the performance record is completely unrelated to the existing team (of fund managers).  
Marr treated vision as an information processing system.
He put forth (in concert with Tomaso Poggio) the idea that one must understand information processing systems at three distinct, complementary levels of analysis.
This idea is known in cognitive science as Marr's Tri-Level Hypothesis:  computational level: what does the system do (e.g.
: what problems does it solve or overcome) and similarly, why does it do these things  algorithmic/representational level: how does the system do what it does, specifically, what representations does it use and what processes does it employ to build and manipulate the representations  physical level: how is the system physically realized (in the case of biological vision, what neural structures and neuronal activities implement the visual system)  
Do the Kayapó Indians manage their natural resources?
Do they plant forest islands in the savanna?
Do they recognize eco-zones and know what resources are to be found in each?
Is their agriculture sustainable?
Their hunting?
What about their medicine?
Does what they know constitute a science? 
People performing roles in systems often do not perform the role suggested by the name the system gives that person, nor does the system itself perform the role that its name suggests.
* People in systems do not actually do what the system says they are doing Falsity.
* The system itself does not actually do what it says it is doing.
Operational Fallacy