Does the Genome project change everything?

The Human Genome Project (HGP), completed in 2003, was a 13-year project coordinated by the U.S. Department of Energy and the National Institutes of Health. The project goals were to determine the complete sequence of the 3 billion DNA subunits (bases), identify all human genes (approx 30,000), and make them accessible for further biological study.

The research projects based on the results of this project are providing astounding new information on traits and behaviour. Initially thought to comprise more than 100,000 genes on our 46 chromosomes we now know we have approximately 24,000 genes. Only 1.5% of which differentiates us from our nearest cousin the chimpanzee and only 0.1% differentiates us from any other human on the planet.

A common and useful analogy is a book. Matt Ridley in his book ‘Genome’ imagines that your Genome is a book. There are 23 chapters called chromosomes (pairs). Each chapter contains several thousand stories called Genes. Each story is made of paragraphs called ‘Exons’ and ‘Introns’. Each paragraph is made of words called ‘Codons’. Each word is made of letters called ‘Bases’. There are 1 billion words in this book.


Each word is made of 3 letters from a 4-letter alphabet –called ACGT (adenine, cytosine, guanine, and thymine). Therefore your genome contains approximately 3 billion bits of information.
Mutations (beneficial, neutral or harmful) occur when there is an error in this copying process. There are 46 chromosomes in a typical cell and these provide the recipe to create proteins, which build your body and influence your actions.
Consider your thumb – it it straight or hooked – it is an example of the transfer of an ‘H’ or ‘h’ gene from your parents in various combinations – a single characteristic gene. Clasp your hands or fold your arms – is your right hand above or below the left hand? - An example of a genetic transfer of a preference. Scientists have already identifies genes involved in stress, motivation, addiction, jealousy, competitiveness, shyness and many other behaviours.

The recent discoveries have lead to a huge increase in gene research and a corresponding increase in scientific and non-scientific articles relating to genetic aspects of behaviour and instincts. These articles link the genes either directly or indirectly to brain chemicals – notably Dopamine (motivation), Cortisol (stress), Oxytocin (attraction), Serotonin (impulsiveness, aggression) and others – On my desk I have newspaper headers that attempt to out do each other with claims of the gene for ‘religion’, for ‘aggression’, for ‘motivation’, for ‘introversion’ or for ‘personality’. In fact is highly unlikely that we will ever find a single gene for these behaviours.
Many scientists conclude that perhaps personality is a combination of the influences of 100’s of genes. Someday in the far future we may be able to dispense with the expensive psychometric tests in favour of a more accurate and reliable genetic test. These tests will show a preference or predisposition for a certain behavior.
However prior to that day we will have to overcome a number of significant scientific and social hurdles.

It is difficult at times to put a clear definition on what a gene actually is. The following list of uses may help. A gene may be: a unit of heredity, an archive for the storage of evolutionary information, a recipe, a switch, a unit of development, a unit of instinct, a mechanism to capture human experience.

Eugenics, so named by Francis Galton in 1885 was an early attempt to improve the gene pool of the human species. It eventually led to US Eugenics records office in Cold Springs Harbor, Long Island and the Virginia Colony for Epileptics and Feebleminded in the early part of the last century. By the end of WW2 over 500,000 ‘feebleminded’ people had been sterilized in Europe and the USA. Britain appears to be the only protestant countries that did not legalize eugenics. The movement gained its notoriety under the Nazi’s when the world finally understood how it was being horrendously misused.

Finally to state that there is no conflict between the nurture and nature elements of behaviour in project management, it is not a zero-sum game, as they like to call it. Both have inescapable impacts on our future. We only need to discover the balance of their involvement.

A project manager or HR manager needs to be equally aware of an individual’s genetic make up (nature) as well as the experience (nurturing) that he/she has been exposed to since birth. The latter is often covered by a CV , interview or personal knowledge, the former is practically non existent at this stage but is equally valuable in the management of high performing teams.

How big a leap is it to consider that soon we may be using this information to improve individual and team performance on projects?