LRH TAPE FEBC - 9 7101C24SO 24. JAN 71 FEBC 9 ====== PRODUCTION AND THE RESOURCES ---------------------------- OF THE HAS ---------- SIDE A ------ 1.) A group which has the idea of where it's going and what it's going to do, and is not all individuated one from another, can normally pull together so it will eventually make it. 2.) Here in the SO (1971), we are on the edge of a 2 year survival, just beginning to make it. We are doing this into the teeth of a relentless enemy, and we hear his "death rattle" once in a while. We will make it, but now are on the margin of survival. 3.) We are in a world which is very "topsy-turvy" (upside down) economically and otherwise. 4.) The MINIMUM of survival is to be able to operate for 2 YEARS without making a penny. That is the BEGINNING of viability. 5.) And IF YOU DO have to operate without income, you have time to get REALLY BUSY and handle it. 6.) For instance, "cash bills" were so bad over the world in 1969, October, that I didn't expect Scientology to survive. It was an insolvent mess. The "cash-bills" of Scientology Orgs were crossed. (Bills were more than cash). (Note: Bills = Debts Owing.) 7.) MSH originated the "Financial Planning Program # 1", which I issued as an ED, to handle. 8.) In 7 or 8 months, she achieved the result of ALL ORGS SOLVENT. It was a HARD job. 9.) She found that many orgs were very unreal on how much they cost per week to run, so they didn't know how much they HAD to make to stay solvent. 10.) The next step is NOT JUST to make as much as you need per week, but to start to buy SURVIVAL, and that is, at a MINIMUM, a 2 YEARS RUN WITHOUT A PENNY WALKING IN THE DOOR. 11.) That would get you over most political and other crises. 12.) These are the HARD FACTS OF LIFE. So how much Establishment can you afford? 13.) Obviously YOU CANNOT afford an Establishment which doesn't PRODUCE. And, YOU CANNOT afford people IN the Establishment which do not produce. And YOU CANNOT afford to harbour machinery which doesn't produce, and offices which have no service use. THESE are the things you CAN'T afford. 14.) The WRONG way to do it, is to fire staff to balance you books when the income goes down. 15.) The way to do it is HAT, TRAIN, and get MORE PRODUCTIVE on post, the staff members you do have. 16.) The manager always has the responisbility of providing work for his workers. (Somebody in Russia ought to learn this.) 17.) It's not just "how much Establishment?", it's "how much Production?" 18.) Now we are back to Resources. How much Resources does the HAS have that can be utilized by production? 19.) It's very simple. Income for last 3 months was "X". Therefore expenses over next 3 months must be "1/2 X", and income must be "2 X". 20.) Then you are at a QUARTER of income for Establishment if you target it and pull it off. 21.) Most organizations are terrifically INEFFICIENT. The IDIOT answer is to "close down" some part of the org or "lay off" thousands of people. But that's what the wog world does! (like General Motors) 22.) That isn't management, that's an INSULT to idiots! 23.) Look at it. They have THAT much Establishment. What is the management responsibility? To get the production CONSUMED, not reduced. Their Product Officer is a lousy manager. 24.) You DON'T reduce production, you INCREASE CONSUMPTION. 25.) So if you have 12 auditors and only half work for 6, WOW! You better increase the consumption! It's not enough to JUST produce products, you have to increase consumption of products, or in the case of auditors as producers, you have to UTILIZE them. 26.) A good manager, P/O & O/O, will balance these factors out. 27.) That is why PR, Distribution, and Dissemination are so important. You've GOT TO KNOW what people want. You've got to estimate what they want and predict what they want - and provide it. 28.) Example: People "say" they want "new" Tech. But the "old" Tech hasn't been correctly produced. They really want "workable" Tech - and RESULTS. 29.) This missing factor in this example is QUALITY. The quality of the Tech was missing. 30.) Most of your basic problems of production are never connecting up the guy who CAN DO IT with the guy who WANTS IT. 31.) If you connect up a guy who CAN'T DO IT with a guy who wants it, you are going to have immediate production problems and the fullest Qual you ever heard of! 32.) We had a situation where Qual dropped out the use of their basic tool - the Green form. They would start in handling from the top, fly a rud and end off. What about the REST of the GF? Well, it wasn't being consumed, but that's where some cases need to be corrected to finish their Qual Cycle. I solved it by having the GF assessed once thru. Then take the biggest read and handle it. Bang! - cracks the case every time. 33.) Of course, the auditor MUST know how to read the meter and run whichever process is needed. 34.) Most of your big ideas in production are about SOMETHING YOU HAVE ALREADY GOT. The "big idea" is, "how are you going to USE this?" 35.) UTILIZE YOUR RESOURCES is the answer. On the "Green Form" example above, the campaign could be - "Come in and get a Free Green Form". This would correct the Tech outness and get the person back on lines as a CONSUMER. 36.) But by survey, we find that GFs have got a bad name because people had them done the old way and were tired of them - so we campaign for "Free Case Analysis". 37.) If you are promoting the "Free Case Analysis" or "Case Cracking Analysis", then somebody has to run like hell and keep the lines in, auditors ready, etc. 38.) This would be the O/O's job, not the HAS or Establishment Officer. Because it's a temporary thing - a pilot. 39.) The line for this pilot has to be Person Recieved, Escorted to Auditor, Assessed, C/Sed, Escorted to Reg to be told what he can now do about it - buy a Case Cracking intensive - and signed up. If all these steps are not in, then the whole "big idea" will fail and you get no increased consumption of auditor's time for PAID intensives. 40.) We had a "Hospital Project" once where Ministers went to hospitals, cheered up people and gave them cards with a phone number. The project was destroyed by having no person as a terminal to answer the phone. That is an example of a "big idea" with no O/O backup. 41.) The O/O then would handle these "Special Projects" from "Big Ideas" of the P/O. Then, if successful and continuing, the HAS would incorporate them into the Organization. 42.) The HAS should then also have "HCO Expeditors" to use under the O/O on these "Special Projects", so the Org doesn't get ripped apart, and vital posts don't go unmanned. 43.) You find HCO Expeditors today "filing in CF" when long ago the HAS should have had TWO CF Clerks. Or "helping in HCO" when LONG AGO the HAS should have a FULLY ESTABLISHED HCO. 44.) No, if Expeditors have free time, they should be on STUDY to become more hatted and valuable resources. And their best use outside of that is for these special "big idea" projects - NOT off filing CF someplace. 45.) So the HAS's job is to maintain the Establishment. And to do that we have an ORG BOARD. IT is NOT accidental. IT is PRODUCTION oriented. It is NOT an "arbitrary". 46.) Every one of those departments on it has a PRODUCT. And if you work it BACKWARDS FROM the product and sub-products of the org, you end up with the 1967 Org Board! 47.) How does a HAS post the Org? He fills it up to the degree it is demanded by production. 48.) He expands his Establishment by increasing the posting of his existing Org Board. 49.) And to do this he requires resources. I've given you one pool of resources - HCO Expeditors. 50.) Occasionally you get a personell man who thinks his personell pools are the bigger and better running Divisions! 51.) A mad scene in the SO is "missionairing". Missions have PRIORITY. And you should hear the screams of the Establishment people. But, in the SO, the Product comes first. And our Product is "Scientology around the World". 52.) Actually it puts a heavy burden on the 3rd Mate (HCO) on the ship. 53.) But he should get clever, and read the old FOs about a MISSIONAIRE UNIT. That would give him an extra pool to draw from, if he sets it up. 54.) The Missionaire Unit spend most of their time studying and on guard duty. If another higher trained missionaire is taken from the org, they can "fill in" while he's gone. Or they go as 2nd or 3rd missionaires to get experience. 55.) So the main problem of HCO is to get PERSONNEL POOLS. His main FLUB in DESTROYING what organization has been put there. 56.) This can be done by "having all the Qual terminals audit in Tech Div. to handle the backlog". That is HCO?S FLUB for not predicting the volume of delivery and TECH Auditors required. (for Example) 57.) So what are the HAS's resources: Money, People, Hatted People, Trained People, Very Valuable People, and the Materials of Knowledge, and the MEST to assist production. 58.) It is a POVERTY HCO if it has no resources and has to unmock what it builds. 59.) It's as stupid as using the wood from the house you just built to build a 2nd house. 60.) You say the problem is FP? Well if I was a HAS who couldn't get the pay for new staff through FP, I would "not OK" anything the P/O wanted until he produced more with what he had and he could afford more Establishment. 61.) It could get so crazy that the HAS is transferring all the staff each week to keep up with production. Trying to run a 345 man org with only 15 staff! 62.) When production is not adequate for the Establishment, then the Establishment goes "poor" in all its resources. 63.) Its main resources are of course TRAINED STAFF MEMBERS. 64.) And willing auditors, and cheap expansion space, and sources of inexpensive materials and equipment of the org - like filing cabinets. 65.) The WRONG way to do it is to spend 8000 Dollars for new desks for P/O, O/O, & HAS. That's beginning into the incredible practice of "spending money you don't have". 66.) You CAN do this in this society. Very clever. They are ALWAYS WILLING for you to "spend money you don't have" - credits, loans, etc. 67.) But we DON'T do that. That is why we STILL own our own souls and why we are NOT in the "pockets" of the International Bankers. 68.) We are SOLVENT, are OURSELVES, and DO EXIST, because we make our OWN WAY. 69.) Some staff wonder why I don't pay them better. It's the wrong question. I'm not even on their Board of Directors. Their low pay is a direct result of unhattedness for production in their orgs. If they produce more they get paid more. 70.) This is the ECOLOGY of the Universe in which we live: - STAFF MEMBERS WHO PRODUCE GET PAID. - HASES WHO PUT AN EXCELLENT ESTABLISHMENT THERE HAVE A HEAVY INCOME POTENTIAL. - PRODUCT OFFICERS WHO CAN SPOT PRODUCTION AND GET PRODUCTS AND PERSUADE CONSUMPTION ARE ALL SET, AND RECEIVE EXCELLENT REWARDS. - WHEN THIS IS ROLLING AND EXPANDING MORE AND MORE, MONEY ROLLS IN MORE AND MORE FOR EVERYONE DOING HIS JOB. - YOU HAVE TO THINK THAT WAY TO BRING ABOUT THAT RESULT. - VIABILITY WILL PRETTY WELL TAKE CARE OF ITSELF IF YOUR VOLUME AND QUALITY IS ADEQUATE. 71.) Example: An Instant Hat of Staff gives VOLUME. A Mini Hat gives some QUALITY. A Full Hat gives VIABILITY. 72.) As a manager, your first thought is for VOLUME. You demand VOLUME of Product. Then as 2nd Action you demand QUALITY of the VOLUME. Then 3rd you calculate and demand VIABILITY. 73.) If you don't do, however, a bit of VIABILITY PLANNING before all this, you may have an awful time of it. 74.) You can predict from stats where an org will be 5 or 6 months from now. (Ex: AOLA will be DOUBLE its current 40.000/wk income and corresponding delivery stats.) So whose job is it to prepare for that DOUBLING of the Establishment? The HAS of the org. And whose fault is it if they DON'T DOUBLE the size of the Establishment - space, auditors, staff, etc. - ? The HAS of the Org. 75.) But it takes months to train, hat, and groove-in staff. And find space and rent or buy it. So who is doing it NOW? I don't think anyone but me. SIDE B 76.) The WRONG time for the HAS to think about Establishment for the increased production IS WHEN IT IS ALREADY INCREASED. No, they must predict it and start way AHEAD of the increase by building up RESOURCES. 77.) We are going to see a boom in Europe. We are translating the lot! OEC SHSBC HAS COURSE BOOKS Into all major EU Languages. 78.) It needed a bright idea, because the cost of PUBLISHING all these things in all these Languages was prohibitive - millions of dollars. (NOT-VIABLE). 79.) The bright ideas was SIGHT TRANSLATIONS onto TAPES. The courses are done on tape or cassette by trained translators. The orgs then only need a lot of tape machines for the students. 80.) New tapes can be sold to the orgs every 3 months, because the tapes will wear out from so much daily use. 81.) The Russians are now fooling around with psychic phenomena. It's a field of interest the government doesn't fully control, so we release into their midst "Russian Scientology". 82.) The only reason you are not making a penetration in some areas is because NO MATERIALS are there. 83.) We are putting out KNOWLEDGE. When applied, you can get production, ability, case gain, etc. But the basis is KNOWLEDGE. So that's what we need to put in an area first - the TRANSLATED KNOWLEDGE. 84.) The consumption of the KNOWLEDGE is quaranteed. It's the basics of LIFE. But you must have the books, tapes, bulletins available in the LANGUAGE. And the SUPERVISORS for the COURSES. 85.) If you put in a FRAGMENT of something, IT WILL BOOM, AND THEN COLLAPSE. Thus we also need to have Supervisors, M/U Word Tech, and the OEC for the Organization. 86.) If you only put in a fragment of this Prod/Org system, it would boom & collapse. Example: The HAS gets 60 staff for the org, but none are auditors, all are unhatted. They would behave like 60 ENEMIES to the org and each other! 87.) A 60 man MOB is not an org nor an Establishment. 88.) So I've elected the HAS as the person who puts and maintains the Establishment there. 89.) If the O/O did all that, he would CEASE to help the Product Officer! 90.) If the P/O has no backup by the O/O, he can't increase VOLUME or QUALITY of products, so will fail. 91.) So the proper division of duties is for the HAS to care for the Establishment. 92.) The HAS must not take people from fast-flowing posts to give to the O/O to fill other fast-flowing posts. That's nuts. And it would be a HAS in POVERTY who didn't have any resources. 93.) Let me give you something from SOCIALISM that IS true. (Most of it is balderdash). "THE WEALTH OF THE WORLD ARE THE REAL THINGS IN THE WORLD. AND THAT IS WEALTH. MONEY IS ONLY A SUBSTITUTE FOR WEALTH, AND IS NOT ITSELF WEALTH." 94.) Money is only valid to the degree that it can substitute for actual wealth. Money is only of any use to the degree that it can purchase things of value. 95.) Value is established by things that are WANTED. Value is established by "wantedness". 96.) You can fluctuate (change) value by making scarcities and demands, etc., but it is basically "wantedness". 97.) "Keynesian" philosophy is valid UNLESS you put it in the field of ECONOMICS. It IS VALID in the field of PRODUCTION, but NOT in the field of MONEY. 98.) So in production, you DO have to "create want" or desire for consumption of the products. 99.) What you are selling is absolutely priceless - KNOWLEDGE, and how to APPLY IT for BETTER, HIGHER QUALITY, LIFE or SURVIVAL. 100.) No "price" could be put on it. So what is its price? Its price is WHAT CAN BE RECEIVED FOR IT; NOT WHAT IT IS WORTH. 101.) So pricing is based, not on VALUE, but WHAT CAN BE RECEIVED FOR IT. 102.) And that depends on HOW MUCH IT IS WANTED. 103.) Once you have this sorted out and aligned, you can determine HOW MUCH ESTABLISHMENT THE HAS CAN PUT THERE. 104.) Don't just "fill in" posts on an org board because they are empty. 105.) Put up the org baord and then post it TO THE DEGREE THAT IT IS REQUIRED TO BACKUP PRODUCTION. 106.) Now the Command Lines will go mad to the degree you don't build it from the top. So the FIRST PRODUCTION man you put on is in-charge of everything AND does the production. 107.) When you have ONE auditor, he IS the P/O AND the whole of Tech and Qual. 108.) When you have more auditors, it's because you have a DEMAND for more auditing. 109.) That is created by RESULTS and BOOKS. 110.) The stats of an org are almost monitored by the degree the knowledge has been circulated. 111.) It's a direct relationship. The stats are proportional to the amount of KNOWLEDGE circulated by the organization. (Not by the amount of "sales-talk") 112.) So the HAS builds the org according to the stats he can build by. If he builds the org at a cost of 50% of the income of the organization, he's really doing great. 113.) A "rich" HAS is one who has reserves, resources. 114.) The wealth of the world are ACTUALITIES. A HAS is wealthy to the degree he has trained staff members, trained staff in reserve, auditors, supervisors, etc. 115.) A "rich" HAS could even ask the P/O to find work for 5 fully trained auditors not being utilized on production lines at the moment - great for use in Special Projects - time for a "big idea" - see? 116.) Or he could ask the P/O to produce more income so he can put on 25 staff - already hatted - to expand the Establishment. 117.) Interesting COINS: "How many auditing hours and Supervisor's minutes can the org furnish?" 118.) "How many students hours, public courses, etc. can the organization furnish?" 119.) That's a RESOURCES SURVEY done by the HAS. "How many hours?" for instance depends on how many auditing rooms and how many auditors. 120.) An HAS should know the resources of his org. The ACTUAL wealth. When he knows this he can then tell if he has spare or reserve resources. 121.) Example: Org with 6 auditors. WDAH for week 36. Wow, should be 150 with 6 auditors at 25 hrs each! So that org is throwing away their gold coins of 114 "auditing hours" every week. And this can NEVER be recovered for that week. It can never be "SPENT" again. They threw it away. 122.) It's "funny money. If you DON'T SPEND it - you HAVEN'T GOT is. 123.) Ex. Student hours. The course room fits 20 students. An 8 hours day org. So that's 160 student-hours per day. For a 5 day week it's l800 Student-Hours. That's the "coins" of the org. 124.) Now you understand why I say the HAS is "poor" if he doesn't have resources. Those ARE his resources. 125.) If he had 160 staff and only one auditor and one supervisor for 7 courses, he would be in poverty. Only 25 WDAH & very few supervisor minutes per course or student possible. That org would go broke FAST. It could not afford itself! There's nothing to deliver! *** END FEBC 9 *** (Continued on FEBC 10, "The HAS and the Coins of the Org") LRH TAPE FEBC - 10 7101C24SO 24. JAN 71 FEBC 10 ======= THE HAS AND THE --------------- COINS OF THE ORG ---------------- SIDE A ------ 1.) An organization has a number of REGISTRAR MINUTES to invest. And this determines the number of sign-ups the Organization has. 2.) If the REG INTERVIEW stat is TOO HIGH then the Reg is NOT regging, just saying "Hello", or brushing them off. 3.) This is the "coins" of an Org, the internal economy, the real factors of economy. 4.) The HAS makes them AVAILABLE to be spent. He's in charge of personnel, lines, and spaces, so is in charge of the potential "coins" the org HAS, to spend. 5.) Not "Dollars". They are worthless. No, he's in charge of how many HOURS the HGC can furnish in auditing, how many Instructor minutes, interview minutes, typist minutes, etc. 6.) How long does it take to type a letter, which has been dictated by a reg onto tape, after CF folder study? If you examine this you will see immediately that the org has a "ceiling" of Letters Out, based on the actual time required to do it correctly. Again, too high a stat is "quickly" brush-off or false. Too low, requires better hatting & organization. This is ECONOMY. 7.) I'm NOT talking about this corny Hungarian stunt where they tell Wilson (a US President), "All you've got to do is borrow a hundred million-billion from the International Bank!" That's not ECONOMY. That's CRAP! 8.) We are talking about REAL things - typist minutes, etc. If you ARE working at the "ceiling", the HAS would say that "to get the stat up NOW" would require another team of Letter Reg, 2 typists, a CF Liaison Clerk - 4 people. 9.) And to the degree the HAS sees that their HATS get on, the QUALITY of that production will get very good. 10.) Sometimes we get examples of letters from orgs. Some are quite good. But one was hilarious. It said: "Dear..... ." "You are invited." "Signed.... ." (Laugh) 11.) Their quality could be improved, but I imagine with that short of a letter, their volume was pretty good! (Joke - Laugh). 12.) If it's "enturbulated" in HCO, then HCO does not have control of the lines of the org - obviously. 13.) The calmest, most orderly place in an organization should be HCO. 14.) When the P/O, who deals with observational actions to get products anywhere in the org, and who essentially works without "LINES", finds he HAS to deal with a "line" (to put it in, or correct it) he is now into the province of the Org Officer. 15.) As a Product Officer, if you find yourself having to "borrow" a terminal or "get someone from another post" to assist in getting the product - you DO it, yes, but you ARE in the province of the O/O, and that then MUST be handled by the O/O or the P/O will "drown", or get into even "single-handing". 16.) The lines of the org are under control of the HAS. So the O/O to keep ahead of the P/O, (so he won't find any lines "out") does "DUMMY RUNS" through the lines and drills them. The O/O tries the lines out HIMSELF to see if they work. Then he gets the HAS to handle any outnesses to get the line in permanently, after he has patched it up. 17.) The other way to Dummy Run a line is with "Bullbait" questions: Ex: to Cashier - "I have a 2000 Dollar check here. Can I buy the 200 Dollar course and get it changed here and you give me 1800 in cash?" 18.) The plain "dummy run" tests the LINE. The bullbait "dummy run" tests the TERMINALS. 19.) So the O/O does these, and from the results, furnishes the material or data to the HAS for handling the ESTABLISHMENT. 20.) So, if the HAS were "on the ball", he would run his OWN dummy runs, wouldn't he? (Laugh). 21.) It's actually an I & R function to do a "Dummy Run". (Inspections & Reports). He does Form 1, Dummy Runs, etc. 22.) The O/O is trying to find out if the Establishment is THERE (by doing a Dummy Run), and the HAS is responsible for putting the Establishment there. 23.) One of the troubles the HAS will run into is from FP or Treasury. They say "We don't have any money". Even if it's a lie. It just stops things. 24.) If he runs into that, he should show the "coins" he has - which measure the potential volume of production per department for the Final Valuable Product of the department. These then add up to the FVP's of the org. (And if there are not enough, then expansion will halt at a "ceiling".) 25.) Or if the HAS can furnish 150 Auditing Hours per week, and only 100 are being consumed, there is something wrong in sign-up or delivery areas and the Product Officer is not getting the consumption or creating the "want" to consume all those "coins". 26.) This is why the PR man is needed to work WITH the Product Officer after some expansion has occurred. His job will be to increase the consumption by increasing the "want" and demand for services and products. (He also handles the "Barriers to Production" or HE&R as per FEBC2). 27.) His "outside" public is senior in importance to the "inside" pubic. So he can survey, collect old successful campaigns, re-use them, spot areas of public from earlier times which used to come to the org and don't anymore, and survey and campaign to re-vitalize them, etc. 28.) But it's the HAS who furnishes the "coins" for the increased consumption. 29.) The HAS can go through each department and "cast up" or "figure out" exactly how many potential "coins" the org has which gives the existing potential production scene, and available stats to be made. 30.) An org that runs "accidentally" on "stats", is not being RUN. That ORG is "running" he HAS! 31.) Then his area WILL be confused. 32.) He can carry a "shadow line" on a graph - giving the "ceiling" production in an area - this then tells him immediately who to HAT. 33.) Ex: Org can furnish 150 Auditing Hour "coins". It only furnishes 80 and only 25 are Well Done. He knows at once who to hat, demote, promote, etc. (Reg, Tech Services, Tech Sec, Qual Sec, Cramming Officer, etc.) 34.) So he could map the entire Org's stat ceiling, and if the org wasn't running close to this, he would know something was wrong with the P/O or O/O, as it's INEFFICIENT. 35.) If nine-tenths of the stats were OK and one wasn't this would be recognized and handled by a conference of HAS, P/O, O/O, and Area senior. 36.) So, by stat ceiling, you could measure your Establishment. 37.) If the HAS doesn't have this "map" or analysis of the org by stat "ceilings", he couldn't possibly operate. It's one thing to "put a bus there" and it's another to "get it driven". 38.) The Product Officer is the "bus driver" of the org. His potential and capability is "How many of those coins are spent?" - or "How close is the stat to the stat ceiling?" 39.) That measures the effectiveness of the Divisional P/O or Div Head AND the P/O of the Org. 40.) So when you have the stat of an org AND the stat "ceilings", no matter whether the org is large or small, you have the effectiveness of the HAS, the O/O, and the P/O. 41.) The Product Officer who can turn out more COMPLETIONS per unit of auditing time, without going "quicky", he's a GOOD P/O! 42.) The P/O UTILIZES the coins of the org to get Products. 43.) Ex: A Product Officer surveys to find out how many incomplete courses and grades people have. Then gets them all to finish the one they are closest to completing. The completions stat shoot up. (Then a dirty trick would be to turn over the hat to another P/O and pretend to have "status" because HE couldn't do it, too.) 44.) You can always find "1/2 done", or "nearly done" products lying around. 45.) So the HAS puts the potential for production there, and the P/O makes it produce. When these are in "phase", both quality and quantity are good. 46.) The P/O who wants to expand the Establishment so it can get more production, better have his "Special Projects" area going. Surveys, pilots, etc. Then when successful, they are incorporated into the organization and the flow increases, and the consumption increases. 47.) I could shoot some of these Execs, who, every time I come out with some new tech developement, they drop ALL existing organization lines and put it all into the "new" thing. No, No! You pilot it in, while keeping the existing lines going. 48.) When somebody tries to grab only the "latest and greatest" and drop the old, just say: "The law of gravity didn't go out just because it was discovered in 1649." 49.) Just because we have the FEBC, we haven't antiquated the org board. What org board did we go back to? The BEST PRODUCTION ORG BOARD, which was 1967. 50.) We are putting the cream on top of this cake now. 51.) It is a "nuttiness", that makes people not use "yesterdays" process because they have a new one "today". 52.) You will find that a product officer will make all of his cash out of YESTERDAY'S DEVELOPEMENTS. 53.) I have some new rundowns now that I don't dare release to orgs because they just are not good enough to do them and would flub. (XDN, L 9, 10, 11,12.) 54.) Another example is when we released the Class VIII Course. It took 3 weeks on Flag to do it. Now they have added to it in AO's so that it goes on & on & on. I think you have to get to be 90 years old now to finish it. 55.) So a Product Officer can WASTE his resources, by ADDING or SUBTRACTING. 56.) By making it "ENDLESS" or "QUICKLY", you get a no, or overt, product. 57.) DON'T let people tell you that "you won't get any money" by finishing up courses and grades already paid for. You can't RE-SIGN them unless they finish what they are on. And you need the RESULTS from the completion for promotion, success, AND as further resources. 58.) The Product Officer makes CAPITAL out of the "coins" and INCOMPLETE PRODUCTS that he finds lying around. 59.) The Class VIII Course here was 3 weeks. We taught it with ferocity. Being "thrown overboard" was the "badge of the VIII". It was VERY successful. (We surveyed this among all VIII's and only 2 brought up the point about overboards as being too harsh.) (Note: The Original Class VIII Course students were given the choice: To do Lower Conditions formulas for every Gross Auditing Error they made, (which took at least 72 hours to do - OFF course) - or to be symbolically "cleaned" of the overt on the pc by being thrown overboard. ALL chose to do the overboards for auditing flubs.) 60.) Although it's bad PR to bring up a "flap" - we did it and we DID have a COURSE. Now why didn't people go on teaching it? 61.) No, they added EVERY bulletin that came out afterwards to the VIII! 62.) It got longer and longer. What would be the P/O's reaction to this? THEY WERE WASTING STUDENT HOURS AND INSTRUCTOR MINUTES! 63.) They were throwing away the "COINS" AND throwing away CASH. 64.) ALSO, they added a RETRAIN on SHSBC bulletins! VIABILITY went out the window at this point. Why? 65.) THE PRICE of an VIII Course is now covering the SHSBC, VIII MATERIALS, and all the stuff SINCE! 66.) What should occur is: A.) Need an SHSBC retread? OK. We give it - AND CHARGE THE SH who gave the flubby SHSBC in the first place. Well, VERY shortly they will cease to give flubby SHSBC Courses! B.) The VIII Course is 3 weeks long. He does it, and goes back home as Class VIII. That's really something! C.) There is a band of HCOB's, that start just before the Exteriorization RD and runs to about the middle of 1970, which is a IX Course. 67.) There IS something to know, and we've NOW made Cl. 8's and 9's into Class 10's, bringing it on up to the current HCOB's & RDs. 68.) A Class IV, for example, will make a mess out of an Exteriorization RD. The Ext. RD should only be done by Class IX's. SIDE B 69.) Right now we are losing coins every minute the IX Course is not out there. Over-long Courses burn up not only the "coins" of the org delivering them but also of the org where the student is FROM. They are losing his SERVICES back home. So it's DOUBLY wasteful. 70.) So the Product Officer's "think" on all this is "how much is it COSTING in terms of the COINS OF THE ORG to deliver", not just "is the "price" or "fee" for the course too low or too high". 71.) A good campaign I recently did was the public one of "anyone that had DN auditing". It was to get them to take a DN COURSE "to fully realize all the gains possible". (+ Success stories on it.) (Note: 50% Gains from Auditing, 50% Gains from Training; and ANOTHER 50% from Application.) 72.) It's easier to furnish "course minutes" than "auditing minutes". And if you don't have auditors, you MUST have Courses to train some. 73.) So this is the "spending" of the "coins". But who puts them there? The HAS. And if he doesn't have "coins" or "reserve Pools of resources" his post is a mess. It's almost unhandlable. 74.) A good HAS will plan to put more 2coins" into the org - say, 500 more Auditing Hrs + Tech Sers + C/Sing 60 da and then tell the Product Officer to get them consumed by the time they are operating. Wow - that's another way of looking at an org, eh? 75.) So the burden of the HAS is great: He furnishes the "coins" to be spent. He provides the "reserve coins" to be spent. And the REAL "coins of the organization are NOT the "Dollars", although if you don't get EXCHANGE for your services you will fail also. (In other words, there are MANY ways to FAIL in an organization and one of them is just not getting exchange, but the more IMPORTANT one is not being able to produce or deliver!) 76.) Now we get into the field of 3RD DYNAMIC AUDITING: Do you think a pc would get enturbulated if you never finished a cycle of action on him? Yes! Well, what about an org? It's the same. An Administrator needs ADMINISTRATIVE TR'S to cut through all the noise and chatter and get the action DONE that he has specified TO BE DONE. 77.) It works on the basis of "Stable Datum and Confusion". The Stable Datum aligns the Confusion. It's from "Problems of Work". 78.) The HATTED person CAN stand up to the confusion and the UNHATTED person CAN'T. 79.) So to get the confusion OUT of an organization, you HAT the people. 80.) It's the "inability to confront a confusion" that wrecks an Administrator. 81.) So that's why he "squirrels". It's like in auditing we had to put in the Question: "What did you do?" whenever an auditor said "That didn't work". Then you find out he DIDN'T do the process. TR O was out. Now we are putting that in on the 3rd Dynamic. 82.) "What confusion can you confront?" And "Into what confusion can you HAT?" That is the test of an administrator and of a HAS. 83.) If he can't confront the confusion, he will just blow off of it and squirrel. 84.) I train the messengers to confront these conflicts and confusions: We have three "strata" of personnel here: recruits, students, and veterans, I always know, when we've given a "carried intention" or "order via messenger", if the person is a recruit, because the messenger comes back and says: "He's explaining". (Explaining why it CAN'T be done). 85.) Then I just go to the SENIOR echelon and get it done - and the person (recruit) better hatted and out of Danger. 86.) The hattedness on this ship is usually excellent. But also I know where it isn't. 87.) So you can have "bank" on the 3rd Dynamic. It expresses itself (or dramatizes) as Confusion, Dev-T, out-lines, unhatted terminals, dropped functions, backlogs & non-compliance. 88.) The HAS therefore must be able to confront any amount of confusion, know policy on the area, and know what hat goes on which person and how fast to do it and when to do it. 89.) Then you also get the reverse. TOTAL DEDICATION to a dispatch line. All hell is breaking loose on his post and he is sitting comfortably, handling his stale-dated in-basket as slowly as possible. 90.) So HASes, and ESPECIALLY ED's, P/O's, and O/O's - each MUST know his TR O, and use his knowledge of policy and what is supposed to be happening, his Stable Data & Confusion Tech, and how to get the stable data of a HAT on to someone in a confusion. 91.) He doesn't get into arguments - he just puts on the HAT which aligns the confusion. Then he checks back to see if it's still being worn. He handles the TERMINAL, connects up the LINES, and gets the FUNCTION done. 92.) Now sometimes in a SO Mission, the mission goes in, the org does what it says, conditions improve, and the mission leaves. Then the org reverts back to doing whatever it pleases and conditions worsen. In other words, the Ethics presence was not Extensional. 93.) Now that would mean essentially that the place couldn't confront its OWN confusion. So you have to teach an org to confront its OWN confusion. 94.) You are about to see "bullbaited administrative TR's". Ex: Two tables, 3 people around each, a piece of paper on one table. The 3 people there unwilling to move the paper. The three at the other table unwilling to receive it. The student must get the paper from one table to the other - by intention - and command and ethics presence. 95.) Or bullbaited putting on a "hat" - a cardboard hat - with the person resisting having the hat put on. 96.) So "HCO brings order". That is the DRILL that brings order, because you are dealing with hats, lines, space, products, motions which produce products, organizational actions, filing actions, etc. 97.) One should have sense enough when going into an organization area that IS running correctly, to back out and close the door! But also enough confront that when it's NOT running right to NOT back out and close the door. 98.) So the HAS puts the Establishment there. An Establishment is an ORDERLY ARRANGEMENT. If HCO can't do this it brings DISORDER into the org. 99.) That might not be FULLY expressed in "old" policy, but policy doesn't violate it. 100.) These "old" policies are STILL VALID - you know the ones that came out "yesterday" and should be "reissued" - (Joke) (Laugh). 101.) The truth is: If you don't have a stable point, a "focal point" of stability on an org, you will only have an ENTURBULATED org, and no production "coins" to spend. 102.) So your real "coins", your real "wealth", is KNOWLEDGE and the time, actions, and ability to bring about what that knowledge can do. 103.) We had an organization office many, many years in San Francisco calling themselves the "Psychology Consultants". What do you think happened" - They went broke. A horrible disorder. The information they were exporting wasn't even being used where they were! They were very individuated out from things.... . 104.) So what do you have in HCO. Just what the motto says: "Bring Order". But what is "bringing order"? Putting in STABLE DATA, and stringing the LINES, in SPITE of the confusion. 105.) An HCO, doing well, may feel like a telephone line man stringing lines in a battle. He CAN do it. But DOES he string the lines, or Q & A with the battle? 106.) Ex: HAS goes down to handle Reg Lines. Asks (a wide open question) "What is the trouble with the Reg lines?" Answer: "We don't have any new carpets. FP wouldn't approve them. Bessie Ann wouldn't OK the P/O." HAS goes off to see Bessie Ann. FLUNK. Q & A. That's a non-sequiter "explanation" and has nothing to do with the Reg Lines! 107.) Now multiply this about 500 times per day in the org and a HAS'es life is utterly unlivable! 108.) And if I was a HAS, and a staff walked in and asked about his brother's "petitation for free rehabs", I'm afraid I would say: "What is your post? What are you supposed to be doing at this moment? What traffic haven't you handled? What products haven't you gotten today?" His question for info should have been written and sent to the Letter Reg in the first place! 109.) 90% of an ED's function is ROUTING. He has to know this BETTER than anyone in the org. But ALL staff must know ROUTING of particles. 110.) The ED not only must KNOW the Routings but also often must establish the channel (line) something is to be routed ON. 111.) A tremendous quantity of stuff will come through any post early on and most of it just requires ROUTING. 112.) Most of the stuff in your "Pending" Basket doesn't even belong to you, it's been misrouted. 113.) You can go thru a pending basket on the basis of "It isn't mine" and look it over and route it correctly. You didn't know what to do with it BECAUSE it wasn't yours. (If you know your OWN hat.) 114.) It also tells you there are people around who don't know routing, and others have this problem too. So your action would be to get them all checked out on a Basic Staff Hat. 115.) And "Chinese School" on the Org Board and a few other basics. 116.) We DO have the processes necessary to resolve the confusion. They do exist. Who RUNS these processes? The HAS. 117.) The HAS is the "auditor of the org". But he doesn't run the "org" out, he runs the "confusion" or "Bank" OUT OF IT. 118.) The auditor reduces the "bank" to nothing and puts the PC there as a Clear Thetan or OT. The HAS reduces the "confusion" to nothing and puts the ORG there as a Clear or OT Org. 119.) An HAS who can't do Creative Processing won't be very successful, I could say. 120.) And if his TR O is bad, so that he Q's & A's, he won't be very successful. 121.) So these are the Requirements of a HAS or "auditor to the Org". A.) He can mock things up. B.) He can hold a position in space. C.) He can fix things D.) He does know "Confusion and the Stable Datum". E.) He is determined "to bring Order" regardless of what. F.) He is determined to make the lines go in and on out to other areas, and can straighten them up when needed. G.) He is determined to put the Organization there and bring order in it. H.) He can confront a confusion without Q & Aing. I.) He can HAT somebody. Then he is quite a guy and a TREASURE to the org. 122.) HCO personnel are so rare - because these abilities are rare. Because he is basically an "Auditor to the Org". He audits out all the Confusions in the Organization, and that's HOW he "Brings Order". 123.) Now, what are his duties? To put the Establishment there. 124.) How much Establishment? How much he can AFFORD to put there. 125.) How does he figure out this Establishment? He figures it out in terms of Production that will result in the greatest return to the Organization, so he can put some MORE Establishment there. 126.) And why does he put more Establishment there? So he can put MORE Establishment there. (Etc., Etc. = EXPANSION) 127.) Most people think HCO is just for delivering messages or comm because they don't know IT IS THE CENTRAL HUB FROM WHICH ORDER IS BROUGHT. 128.) And you can't bring very much order over a long period of time unless you have messengers. 129.) I suppose next I will be talking next about HCO Dept. 1 - in sections, then Dept. 2 - in sections, then 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20. 21 - and then chase all of your confusion all the way off the other end of the Org Board. But that would be sort of greedy. It would take all your "goodies" away from you. 130.) It is YOU I expect to chase the confusion all the way down and off the other end of the org board. All the confusion you have had in the past - with ORDER following all the way along the line, VIABILITY rising, and the PLANET in your laps. 131.) Thank you very much. Good night. *** END FEBC 10 *** DEPARTMENT AWARENESS LEVELS --------------------------- 1. RECOGNITION 11. ACTIVITY 2. COMMUNICATION 12. PRODUCTION 3. PERCEPTION 13. RESULT 4. ORIENTATION 14. REVIEW 5. UNDERSTANDINGS 15. ABILITY 6. ENLIGHTENMENT 16. PURPOSES 7. ENERGY 17. CLEARING 8. ADJUSTMENT 18. REALIZATION 9. BODY 19. CONDITIONS 10. PREDICTION 20. EXISTENCE 21. SOURCE (The "Recognition" to "Source" cycle.) PHASES (DIVISIONAL) ------------------- 1.) COMMUNICATION 2.) DISSEMINATION 3.) TREASURY or EXCHANGE 4.) TECHNICAL 5.) QUALIFICATIONS 6.) DISTRIBUTION 7.) EXECUTIVE LRH TAPE FEBC - 11 7102CO3SO 03 FEB 71 FEBC 11 ======= AS YOUR RETURN TO YOUR ORG -------------------------- SIDE A ------ 1.) This briefing was convened to give the ED's, P/O's, O/O's their FEBC Mission Orders to take back to their orgs. 2.) This set of directions IS being given to and WILL BE given to departing FEBC's. 3.) The Flag Bureaux has worked very hard to get the projects together to make the org roll on up the line and make it a great success. 4.) You have to realize that while you were gone, the staff all blew, and you have only 1 1/2 staff left, who were hired yesterday. (Laugh). 5.) So you open your briefcase and you have 27 or 28 projects to give out - to 1 1/2 staff! 6.) No, the actual scene by stats is that people have been trying to keep the show on the raod and the stats are at a bare survival level or above. 7.) So now you are going to walk in after several weeks in the South Seas, admiring the palm trees, and listening to the native girls, and change everything? Well, if you do, I will sit here and watch the stats go down. 8.) No, the orgs have been there for a long time, most of them, and have had their ups and downs, and attentions (which were sometimes regretted) and neglects (which were sometimes approved of) and so are not "nothing". And the staff are not "occluded" on what's going on. 9.) I have sent some policy letters to the orgs, and there is some slight action going on. 10.) So it's snot ALL bad. There is some dissem and public actions going on, people have been promised and sold services, some recovery of blown students is occuring. Some lines and functions are in. 11.) Now what would happen if you just walked in and changed everything? 12.) Now, we know the org SHOULD be making 25.000 Dollars a week. (I would be ashamed to run an org at anything below that now.) 13.) But YOUR org may be making 1500 Dollars a week and think they are doing well! 14.) (Aside) "People are getting born and going aberrated faster than they are being processed right now". *** FEBC MISSION ORDERS *** 15.) Your first order of business then is to find out what IS going on and get it PAID FOR and DELIVERED. 16.) Take advantage of the action that IS there and push it up to a higher level of volume & efficiency. 17.) That would be the first order of business of a PRODUCT OFFICER. 18.) The next order of business of the P/O is to look around and see how he can increase CONSUMPTION. 19.) He might also use the Public Div Sec as a PR Officer, part-time. Or replace him and put him on as STAFF of the P/O. Someone WILL have to keep the Div 6 actions going, so don't just rip him off. But eventually you WILL need a PR Officer on Staff to handle the new subject of PR and Consumption. 20.) He also has to handle the HE&R caused by your coming in and "caroming" (Bouncing) off the slow-moving staff members as you rush through the org. 21.) You may get a new person or recruit someone, but, in any case, the PR Officer, on the P/O's staff, WILL be necessary if you are going to increase the CONSUMPTION and thus the delivery and income of the org. 22.) There is nothing sillier than a canning factory that cans the product, then throws it away out the back door. It won't be in business long. The missing point was: the CONSUMPTION was not built up. 23.) So, what you are doing, is going back to an area that is running to some degree, and has its OWN traditions on how to do it better, and what you have to do is find what's lying around and make it into PRODUCTS. 24.) Now you go back and tell the staff: "Hello! We are back. Everything is fine. You did well and now we are just going to do MORE of it". At this point you hear a groan and the staff says, "But we are overloaded now. We can't do more". You say, "We have an Org Officer to take care of that, so that your overload doesn't particulary worry you". 25.) Then you do TWO things: Get income up and delivery going. 26.) Look around and find all the half-finished products you can complete and all the things lying around you can sell. 27.) So your 1st action is a SURVEY to find out what can be delivered NW. 28.) Usually my 1st action on the 1st day of walking into an org is to move all the Execs out of the Service Space! Then I work with their creditors so they won't be foreclosed on the 2nd day. By then I have looked around enough to get a "big idea" on what we can offer now and we do so PROMPTLY on any comm line there is. 29.) In your materials is a "Special Project" - Big Idea - you can put in at once. But it may not be all you need, of course, locally. 30.) Remember, "good ideas" need EXECUTION. They have to be done. 31.) So you may find other ideas that ARE good, that ARE "under way", that you can push to COMPLETION. 32.) So, LOOK it over. ADJUST it up for PRODUCTION, without disturbing anybody particularly. Then get some PROMOTION out. Get some DELIVERY being done. Look around the Academy and find out how many can graduate today. (They've probably been there for 2 years). Then go into the crowded waiting rooms where pc's wait for their sessions, count them up and go ask "Why don't you hire another auditor?", and about that time you start to get away - you get promotion, delivery, income, and you get the show running. 33.) Remember, you are trying to get FINAL VALUABLE PRODUCTS - namely money, student completions, and pc completions. 34.) You probably have tons of pc's there you can get completed, although it might not get you any money if they paid already - but once complete, they will RE-SIGN UP for further services. 35.) It is necessary to understand completely, utterly, and totally that a Product Officer is there to get the FINAL VALUABLE PRODUCTS. 36.) And it's quite a trick - because you are not a first going to sit down and plan how you are going to build up to it in 2 years - you have to get them NOW. 37.) The first few days will be difficult. You have to brief the staff - we have a tape for you - and then get it going as above. But the machine will start running even though it's a little machine, it WILL start running. 38.) (Tells the story of the salt-mill in Holland, it kept putting out salt - with no consumtion plan - and they couldn't stop it - so threw it into the sea - and that's why the sea is salty and we leave to buy fresh water at high prices in these ports.) 39.) You will feel very strained, tired, and knocked about during this period. The test is: "To LIVE THROUGH THIS PERIOD, and to keep running ahead of the storm from there on out." 40.) The longer you are there without an O/O, 5 feet in front of you, the harder it will be - so the solution is: "THE 1ST PRODUCT OF THE PRODUCT OFFICER IS AN ORG OFFICER". 41.) And the O/O will start throwing some lines together, getting some scratch paper to use for invoices, setting up a place for the money to be paid down, handling the paper and getting a printer to do the promo, (and data-lining the old printer who wasn't paid), clearing out the offices of the execs to use for auditing rooms, etc. 42.) Now after about 3 days of this, the O/O is getting tired also, and now you remind him: "THE 1ST PRODUCT OF AN ORG OFFICER IS AN HAS (HCO AREA SECRETARY)". 43.) And the HAS gets on and thinks it's all easy because there are some comm baskets and hats around, so that's an "HCO". 44.) Then you have to remind him what an ESTABLISHMENT is: Typewriters, desks, carbon paper, pens, space to work, hats, lines, hatted terminals, routing forms, signs, etc. - for the WHOLE org. Also, door locks, safes, invoice machines, mimeo, telephone, telex, etc. 45.) If he says, "that's not the province of HCO", you say "listen to the 3 hours of tape again on the HAS". 46.) And you keep insisting he put Basic Staff Hats in on HCO, and to put an HCO there, which will put an Org there. 47.) Now that's where your FEBC Projects come in. These put an org there Department by Department. 48.) Now you have you P/O, O/O, and HAS mission orders. And you have "Special Project 2" which is DISSEM, and "Special Project 2" which is TECH. 49.) Special Project 2 (Tech) helps you deliver to the business you attract with Special Project 1 (Dissem). 50.) You also have the business the org IS doing, which you musn't neglect. 51.) To review it: The P/O will find he can't live without an O/O. The O/O can't live without an HAS. The HAS can't live without an HCO. 52.) At this point, you probably would have enough money for the HAS to really start putting an ESTABLISHMENT there, and he would do it almost totally independently of the Product and Org Officer of the Org. 53.) But the O/O should carry a ruler to slap the fingers of anyone trying to take personnel from a working installation. 54.) The Rule to follow is: "The org is a personnel pool to the degree it is NOT engaged in direct production and one NEVER dismantles a working installation". 55.) This is something one must teach ship people too. If a piece of machinery or a hoist is a WORKING installation, even if you don't use it right NOW, well, don't touch it - leave it alone. 56.) Let us define a "working installation" in terms of an org: "A WORKING INSTALLATION is any group which is delivering the ADEQUATE, and adequate PRODUCTION, of that product which they are supposed to deliver". 57.) And you leave those ALONE. Don't "monkey around" with them. 58.) If you do "monkey" with a working installation you will find that you have gone 3 steps forward and 4 steps backward. 59.) Do you know the Communists tech the children in schools: "How communism is going to win" by making them march 3 steps forward and 2 steps backward, over and over? 60.) There are very FEW areas where there is a "superfluity" (excess) of staff and a sub-minimum of production. In these areas it's easy for the P/O just to walk in and say "Do this" and the O/O to post up the org fast. 61.) MOST areas DON'T have enough personnel to get any real production, so in these the HAS must recruit, hire, "Shanghai", kidnap, or otherwise get TEAMS of people to work on these FEBC projects and ESTABLISH those DEPARTMENTS and DIVISIONS. 62.) These "teams" are trained, hatted, and put there to be working, DOing installations - thus building up the org. 63.) So the HAS practically has nothing to do with the P/O & O/O. 64.) The SEQUENCE which the HAS puts these teams in is very interesting: DIV 1. HCO 1 (Divisional 2. TECH 4 Sequence of 3. DISSEM 2 FEBC Projects) 4. TREASURY 3 5. DISTRIBUTION 6 6. QUAL 5 7. EXECUTIVE 7 65.) While this is being done, the P/O and O/O are working on PRODUCTION and CONSUMPTION, so as EXECS are doing QUAL, DIST, TREAS, DISSEM & TECH actions. These phase in neatly with the HAS's establishment sequence and meet somewhere around DISSEM and then all begins to expand smoothly. And the org can then handle a greatly increased VOLUME. 66.) At the point where they come into PHASE and the sub-products are now stacking up, the P/O will find he is now having to COORDINATE and PLAN more. This is where you should go to the TRIANGULAR SYSTEM, of ED, P/O, and O/O. ********** 67.) Now here is the sequence of the P/Os mission orders: a.) Get briefed on Flag on what exactly you will be doing on returning to your org. b.) Bring with you the FEBC Projects, a copy of the Org Board you will be using, and copies of the LRH ED's and PROGRAMS to go with the projects. c.) You will have the FEBC tapes with you, and will assume the post of ED and Product Officer. d.) You will immediately choose and appoint someone as your Org Officer. The 1st Product of a Product Officer is an Org Officer, and he has another set of orders. e.) Hat the O/O, using the FEBC tapes. Quickly. f.) Cope like mad, with the O/O, to build the income and delivery up. g.) Put in Special Project 1 - "Dissem" & Special Project 2 - "Tech" to do this. h.) Get them in on an all-hands basis if required. This stimulates business. But don't knock out everything that is ALREADY going better income - wise, appoint an HAS. i.) At soon as you have handled the products "lying around" and are going better income - wise, appoint an HAS. j.) At this point of build-up, nothing has been done yet with the FEBC Projects, except Special Projects 1 & 2. k.) Hat the HAS very well. The O/O does this with the tapes from the FEBC. Then present him with the package of FEBC projects to get done in the sequence given. (Div 1, 4, 2, 3, 6, 5, 7). l.) He does these by DEPARTMENT in the Division named. ******** 68.) To do these projects properly you are going to need INCOME. So when you are running around like mad, you can get up GDS'es (Gross Divisional Statistics) all you want, but CONCENTRATE on DELIVERY and INCOME. 69.) Then the org can be built solidly - department by department - as long as DELIVERY and INCOME continue to rise. 70.) If the HAS is very, very clever, he won't even use a single person from the existing org staff who are being run by the P/O & O/O. He will get NEW teams, build his POOLS, use RESOURCES, PERHAPS from the products from the products already made! 71.) So, the HAS is busy building the Establishment, while the P/O and O/O are busy building up INCOME, DELIVERY AND CONSUMPTION and way they can. 72.) You have got to get COMPLETED STUDENTS, PC's and MONEY for it, no matter whether the PROJECTS are done or not. When THEY move in, it will do the same thing, so is a REINFORCED ACTION. 73.) So, until ALL the projects are in, the P/O and O/O are in a state of COPE - to some degree. 74.) Now, if you find there is a need and fixation on having to have an HES and OES there, due to old custom or habit, and there is a lot of "dispatch traffic" for them - well then put someone on those posts. To answer the dispatches and letters AND keep track of who is writing them all. (HES = HCO EXEC SEC; OES = ORG EXEC SEC.) 75.) But don't YOU get sucked into that line. No Sir! 76.) An O/O should actually carry a "pedometer". It's an instrument used in hiking, engineering, and army, to find out, how far one has walked. It's hung on the belt. 77.) It has a little weight in it that goes "click" every time you take a step. It has to be adjusted. You count off the steps for a measured distance (100 feet or 100 meters), and divide by the number of steps you took. This gives the average "pace". It could be 28 inches, or the old Roman pace of 30 inches, or maybe 32 inches. 78.) And both the P/O and O/O should have a STAT based on that exact count of miles or kilometers at the end of the week. All joking aside, the job is done with MILEAGE. 79.) Now, I have messengers, so I should hang a pedometer on THEM to get part of my stat. But what are they doing? a.) Looking into a situation. b.) Getting questions answered. c.) Trying to find the "bug" in the situation. d.) Giving me the anwered to the situation. e.) Helping me resolve the situation. f.) Directing the handling I give. 80.) This is a substitute for the same thing. But there is no REAL substitute for it. You see, I HAVE done my time as a Product Officer. Now, while I do other hats (Research, Writing, C/Sing) they keep my P/O actions going. 81.) I've also done LOTS of mileage as an O/O. One of the incidental duties of which is to see EVERY person in the org EVERY day- both to see if he is on post and wearing his HAT and personally, to see if he is doing all right. 82.) (Note: There were 300 to 400 people on the ship when this tape was made!) 83.) This system increases VELOCITY on the 3rd Dynamic, and the personal life and care of the person's health may not keep up with it. That is the only real liability in it. So the O/O handles that aspect. You may expect 2 or 3 to drop out when you get this system in - because the VELOCITY is increased and they "break down" on another dynamic. 84.) It is that they are not getting the adequated PERSONAL care in propotion to the amount of ATTENTION they are exerting. 85.) Auditors are particularly susceptible to this. Auditors are like "race-horses". Somebody ought to pat them, rub them down, and feed them oats. 86.) Auditors, themselves, will only fade out of your line-up because they PERSONALLY have not been given enough care and attention from an organizational point of view. 87.) Auditors should have their OWN auditing rooms ideally, their OWN space, for personal effects, certs on the wall, etc. We used to cal them "consultation rooms" in the old London days. 88.) But, as a P/O, you should never have to worry about this - if you have a good O/O. 89.) Ex: I as P/O handled an area directly where the exec was not on post. The staff got upset by all the messages and actions I was taking. I had a PR survey done. NOT ONE STAFF MEMBER HAD REALIZED THEIR EXEC WAS MISSING! So they didn't know why I was doing the actions! 90.) Ex: Do you know that D/Ps will try to limit the number of pc's on their lines? And that a line very easily gets going between Div 4 & the Reg to the point where the Reg is scheduling the pc's? When you find this, look for the Tech Services HAT not being worn - scheduling Board PL, etc. Never let TECH tell YU how many pc's they can take. SIDE B 91.) It's not usually a "determined" effort to reduce the delivery and income, but it IS an "arbitrary ceiling" being put on the amount of delivery, and thus income, which you can do. 92.) The D of P ought to have a thick notebook of all the auditors in a 300 miles range who could be brought in on the job of delivery. And if he gets more pc's, he gets on the telephone and calls them to come in and help - part time, full time, any old time. 93.) So the Product Officer drives this thing on up - and the Org Officer keeps the staff cooled off. That's the reason you have to have a PR Officer sooner or later. 94.) The two things which get in the road of the Product Officer are: 1. A Lack of Understanding of what the SITUATION was. 2. The unworn hat. If you work on this basis, you've got it made. 95.) So, tell the staff, when you arrive back, what is going on - and don't leave them in any mystery. 96.) Brief them on what is going to happen. They will agree on expansion, I'm sure. 97.) But the final action is YOUR responsibility - to get the income and delivery up so you can afford the wherewithal to build an Establishment. 98.) I want to point out that the cobbler (Shoemaker) who became a vast shoe manufacturing company always started out in a shed in a backyard with an old tire and a few pieces of leather thongs. In this case, the "egg" always comes first. (Before the "chicken") 99.) You have to make the money to put the "Chicken" there. 100.) We have two case histories of orgs who tried to put the "chicken" there FIRST (organize everything and establish everything before producing) and they are BOTH horrible flaps. 101.) So that is the MISTAKE you can make. Go back and try to organize everything. That's "trying to put the chicken there first". I doesn't work. 102.) It WILL all work out in the long run if you get Production first. That is the truth. ********* 103.) Now let's take up the Org Officer's action here: His mission orders are as follows - a.) Listen to the FEBC tapes brought back by the Executive Director b.) Star-rate them with him. (It's a very lucky E.D. who has an FEBC Org Officer). c.) Get your hat on as O/O. d.) Cope like mad to get the organization together for the two Special Projects which are designed to drive in lots of business. e.) Preserve the organization and production which is already there. f.) Together with the Product Officer, build the income and delivery of the org up. g.) When income is coming up and delivery is occuring, appoint an HAS. h.) Hat him, give him the FEBC Projects to do in sequence per division. i.) Have him work on the projects in the sequence: Div 1, 4, 2, 3, 6, 5, 7. j.) Insure the HAS builds up the Establishment of the Org per the FEBC projects. k.) Insure he hires, hats, and appoints personnel to build the Establishment. l.) Continue to back up the ED, P/O to get income and delivery while making sure the HAS is busy building the Establishment. 104.) So the O/O is driving TWO horses at this time. He must not get them mixed up. (Ex: Don't force the HAS to hat the auditors he is coping with while the HAS is building HCO. And don't let the HAS rip off the auditors for HCO posts.) 105.) And the O/O must not let the HAS wildly put people into HCO without thought of their security qualifications. 106.) The O/O is driving a "mad elephant" with his right hand and a "12 horse chariot team" with his left hand. 107.) And that utilizes what you've got and puts you into a financial betterment scene which permits these organizational steps to be done. And that's the O/O's mission orders. ******** 108.) Now the HAS you appoint won't even understand what mission orders are. So don't expect him to just do everything right. On the other hand you can't wait a year while he gets fully hatted. But you do have some time to have him do a checksheet to get somewhat hatted. 109.) Here are his mission orders: a.) Listen to the FEBC tapes. b.) Get star-rate checked out by the Org Officer. c.) Fully accept the HCO FEBC Project given you by the O/O. d.) Start implementing these per department with TEAMS. e.) Get busy hiring, appointing, and hatting people to man up the Establishment of the Org, using the FEBC Projects. f.) Don't make the mistake of trying to get HCO to furnish the full services of HCO WHILE it is being built up! (This would make the HAS do the O/O functions. We have made that mistake twice now, so don't do it again.) 110.) Remember, nowhere in these orders does it say the O/O gets personnel THROUGH HCO. He doesn't have to go near HCO at all, except to get the HAS doing his Establishment projects. 111.) Eventually, it will start to work, but remember you haven't got a machine to run YET. 112.) The O/O would be WISE to use the org board, policy, and OEC data in his cope - but his primary job is to back up the P/O's production. 113.) An "Establishment" rises out of the "cope" propotional to the wherewithal mecessary to resolve the "case" (of "coping"). 114.) So the mistake of an O/O is to depend too much on HCO. The mistake of a P/O is to not inform the O/O of what he is doing. 115.) So the P/O should keep a notebook of what he does and pass it to the O/O to brief him. And the O/O should keep a notebook of his actions to keep the has informed. Otherwise you will get a ridge between the Prod-Org team and HCO. 116.) Another mistake is for the HAS to think of the O/O as his HCOES "senior". There IS seniority there, but the HAS works on POLICY and Product 1. The O/O works on Product 3, until it all comes into phase. 117.) And the P/O works Product 2, and when he gets a 4, he gets the O/O to handle 3. 118.) This Prod-Org system does disturb traditional relationships in an org. And a staff that has been grooved in another way, is likely to be confused. 119.) If you have to have, for the staff and the pubic sake, an HCOES, OES, and PES there, well, do so. But don't let them try to form an EC (Exec Council) which slows everything down and tries to get it back to the "orderly good old days" (of low stats). 120.) No, Production is usually accomplished in a DISORDERLY fashion. ORDER is the exception. That's why you have a whole Division devoted to nothing but BRINGING ORDER. (DIV 1 - HCO) 121.) But an org and production CAN run in an ORDERLY fashion and that is what you will build up to with this system. 122.) So that is as far as your orders go. ********** 123.) Remember, putting an HCO there is not easy. In UK last year there were only 1 1/2 HCO personnel! 124.) So what does it take to put an org there? MONEY, INCOME. 125.) And how do you make money and income? You DELIVER. 126.) And you get people to come in and take advantage of the delivery you are doing. This gives CONSUMPTION. 127.) You will run into the proportional pay system. That is being abolished. A new system will go in. The people in the Financial networks should have a "say" on it, which I have asked them to do. 128.) The new system is: a.) An org has a "basic allocation" which is the bare minimum of survival. b.) All allocations above that are for "Production Bonuses", measured by the actual production that week. c.) The FP and Treas work out the "Basic Allocation" - rent, lights, telex, some pay, some promo & supply. d.) The FBO (Flag- or Finance-Banking Officer) banks ALL income into 2 management accounts. One is for Management Services & N/Ws (networks) and the other for the Org. Then he gives the Org its COMPLETE allocation for that week (Basic + Bonuses), into their OWN account. e.) The adjudication of disputes and inequities of this system is handed over to the Guardian's Office for adjustment. They have an excellent record on Cash-Bills. f.) Now the management debts and cost of managing the org come out of the Management Account, so the org doesn't have to worry about that. g.) In this fashion, a reserve can be built up, for expansion, without the income being consumed in day to day operations. h.) That way, you will get an Establishment. (Note: The above system failed in cases where the Networks (FBO & GO) did NOT know or apply the FEBC policy or data or got infiltrated. In present time - 1987, it is better to let the P/O handle the ALLOCATION %'s of income and the O/O to do the F.P. A rough allocation which has proven successful is: 10% - OTC 10% - Reserves 40% - Payroll (inc. FSMs) 40% - Org Basics (ca. 20%) + Promo (ca. 20%) for RON's Orgs.) 129.) If production is there, the allocation is good. And if not, it's bares survival. 130.) The formula here is simple. The org gets enough to keep out of bankruptcy, and if it also produces, it gets Bonuses. 131.) The bonuses to the ORG can then be decided further by FP as to which Divisions get more or less, based on THEIR production. 132.) The proportional pay system has served its purpose to establish the "beach head". When I ran orgs, staff usually were paid very well, but since then it has been sometimes very poor pickings for the staff payroll. (Note: This is the "Unit System" which was destroyed by too much of the Income "coming off the top" to support non-delivery excess staff & networks.) (Note: It got to the point where 35% or more was taken "off the top" leaving the orgs to pay up to 15% to FSMs and ending up trying to operate on 50%, or less, than they MADE, to pay staff, do promo, AND support the organization and its basics.) 133.) The thing you will run into in finance, is that people do not understand it. And the reason is - it's too SIMPLE. *** END FEBC 11 *** (Cont. on FEBC 12 - "The FEBC Org Board and it's VFPS") LRH TAPE FEBC - 12 7102CO3SO 03 FEB 71 FEBC 12 ======= THE FEBC ORG BOARD ------------------ AND ITS VFPs" ------------- SIDE A ------ 1.) The FEBC Org Board has all its VFPs written along the bottom of the Org board for Divisions and Departments. 2.) Now, there are SUB-PRODUCTS and PRODUCTS and VALUABLE FINAL PRODUCTS. That is the gradient. 3.) Each department has a product. Each division has a product. These products are, technically, SUB-PRODUCTS which build up into the VALUABLE FINAL PRODUCTS (VFP's). 4.) A "Valuable Final Product" is one that you can EXCHANGE with the society around you for the wherewithal (or valubles) that the society has. 5.) It is something for which you can EXCHANGE the services and goods of the society. 6.) Now that would seem "to be just MONEY" and in a society which is not really serving and not really delivering, one has to count totally on money. 7.) But a fully trained auditor is a VFP because he can interchange with the society around you. 8.) A completed preclear is a VFP because he brings about an interchange with the society around you. 9.) And money is a VFP because it brings about an interchange with the society around you. 10.) In even a communism, where money is "outlawed", (but they have income tax) - this works. 11.) You can understand the interchange by understanding barter or trade, which is something they don't understand in Switzerland. 12.) In Switzerland money is money is money is money, etc. Someday, it will al as-is and they won't have anything! 13.) "Barter" is a better expression of Economics any day of the week. 14.) Why? Because when money inflates and goes bad, people resort to "barter". Therefore it must be the basis of money. 15.) You should keep this in mind in case the world suddenly goes Communist or Socialist or Facist or something else. 16.) Were your money goes out, you still have a barter type system which can still function. 17.) A barter system is clumsy, so I'm not saying you should engage in it. I'm just showing you there are different coins than "cash". 18.) Some of the PRODUCTS you have could become VFPs if the system of economy changes. (Typed Letters, Surveys, Mimeo, etc.) 19.) But what you need today is MONEY. And the way to get it is turn out VFPs in exchange for money and exchange some of it for your Establishment and you are away! 20.) It's a relatively simple system so it is useful. But there ARE other systems. And you can work them out. 21.) When you realize that every service in a barter system must be able to interchange with a commodity, then you suddenly realize your service must be REAL - and you must have an AGREED UPON value. In other words a pro-survival RESULT. (Would that session I gave be good enough to get a full-course dinner with?) 22.) Money tends to obscure the fact that DELIVERY MUST BE OF GOOD QUALITY. 23.) Remember that as a PRODUCT OFFICER. 24.) A STAT should consist of volume, quality and viability. 25.) You should not neglect quality, but you can try to push it up so high you get no interchange at all. 26.) The ART formula applies to PRODUCTION. 27.) Art is a communication and you can try to push the quality so high it can't be understood - or worse - it never gets released. 28.) I've sees C/Ses do this on pcs - endless repair to get "just one more area handled before he goes on up the next grade". If you keep doing this too much, he will crash from over-repair and NOT going on up. It gets suppressive. YOU HAVE TO LET GO OF THE PRODUCT AT SOME POINT. 29.) There has to be a transfer of comm particles called "products". They have to FLOW. There IS a time to LET GO of it. 30.) This is why you "raise the quality" as you "raise the volume". You don't STOP the volume to raise the quality. That's fatal. Ex: Letter Regs all found checking out on policies and grammar, doing typing drills, filing CF perfectly, but NOT putting out letters. Why? They got two letters complaining about their quality - out of 462 letters - so now they are neglecting 460 people! Result - inflow and income will CRASH! 31.) The way you do it is: YOU GET YOUR VOLUME and THEN MAKE IT OF QUALITY. 32.) You have to do this with TECH DELIVERY and ALL of these products. 33.) GET IT UP IN VOLUME. IMPROVE ITS QUALITY. AND IF YOU DO THAT YOU WILL ACHIEVE VIABILITY. 34.) If you try to improve its quality without raising its volume, you will not even achieve viability, nor will you achieve volume. 35.) So it goes 1, 2, 3. VOLUME, QUALITY, VIABILITY. 36.) And each extends from the last one. And you should think in terms of that for all the products you achieve departmentally. 37.) Now I will give the list from the FEBC Org Board, and I reserve the right to improve the list or the wording of these products: 38.) (Source) DEPT 21 - "The Technology of Dianetics and Scientology and its Products". (In other words, that is the KNOWLEDGE with which you are dealing. In an org, this is handled by the LRH Comm. who also gets back the Policy Knowledge hat from the GO.) 39.) (Recognition) DEPT 1 - "Effective Personnel, Posted and Hatted". (This includes the Org Board and Recruitment. These hatted staff are valuable in their own right as products. I used to lose the Secretaries I trained to millionaires as "Executive Secretaries". They knew the Executive lines and functions so well, they became quite valuable.) 40.) (Communication) DEPT 2 - "Communications Easily Accepted and Swiftly Delivered". (This can have volume, quality and viability. Remember, when you are sending out mail, that quality IS a factor in "easily accepted". But don't reduce your volume or message if, say 1 or 2 out of a 1000 complain. Because there are 998 who DIDN'T complain. I saw a magazine go broke once because 12 people out of 6000 got protesty about "hard sell". The magazine changed its policy and went to soft-sell and went broke.) 41.) (Perception) DEPT 3 - "An Established, Active and Ethical Org". (That is ALSO the product of HCO as a whole division. Look what that department contains: Inspections, Stats, Ethics. Neglect of any of these three will result in not having an "Established, active, and Ethical Org".) 42.) (Orientation) DEPT 4 - "Effective Promotion Pieces Printed and Sent Out". (Effective means ANSWERED, and preferably answered with a BODY coming for service. So this means SURVEYS go IN and sloppy mags go "out" (not done anymore). You can figure the effectiveness by % response.) 43.) (Understandings) DEPT 5 - "Hats, Course Packs, and Tapes" plus these VFP's of the ORG: SOLD AND DELIVERED BOOKS SOLD AND DELIVERED TAPES SOLD AND DELIVERED METERS SOLD AND DELIVERED INSIGNIA (When you don't have books out there, you are not exporting knowledge to the society. A book keeps on being a VFP, it gets read, and re-read and passed around and read again. And tapes - when an area went bad once, the "why" was found to be no LRH Tape Plays for 2 years in the area. So if Div 6 isn't playing tapes, or they aren't on study checksheets, or being sold, you will develop some trouble.) (I don't know why a student is not sold the materials of his course, or the tapes he hears, or staff can't be sold a hat when they leave. Sometimes it's more trouble than it's worth, but a P/O would be wise to examine it - as a possible new product.) (And meters - we ARE getting them - over the dead bodies of the government agencies who are, I suppose, trying to protect their withholds from being found out by stopping the shipment of meters.) 44.) (Enlightenment) DEPT 6 - "Income greater than Outgo plus Reserves". (The invoice machines are all going over to Dept 6, so the Reg CAN take money directly. They also get the address plating to correespond to CF. They take care of all the paying customers. I found that the line of Reg-Cashier-Tech Services will not work smoothly because the Reg has the files and Cashier only has accounts. So the personal touch is missing.) (This was found because our management org was close to a Service Org here. You must NOT put a management org REMOTE from a Service Org or it loses touch, gets unreality, and loses familarity with the scene.) 45.) (Energy) DEPT 7 - "All Funds collected from Services and Sales" (Dept 7 COLLECTS, they are set up to collect all money in sight, owed, regged, APed, mailed in, etc. If this Dept. is not functioning, you will never attain viability.) 46.) (Adjustment) DEPT 8 - "Pleased Creditors" (Now you could please all the firms and people you owe money to by OVER paying them, but that isn't expected. In fact it would mess up their bookkeeping so they WOULDN'T be pleased. Sometimes a printing firm will send 3 bills and then a combined bill of all 3 and try to make you pay on all 4 at once - don't do it. Pay only what is owed or you give them a "withhold" of trying to rip you off, and that doesn't please them either - its "case".) 47.) (Body) DEPT 9 - "Adequate and well cared for Materias, Assets, and Records." ("Adequate" means issued in sufficient quantity to do the job, and "cared for" means maintained. They have to keep up the accounts and records for Quarterly & Yearly summaries.) 48.) (Prediction) DEPT 10 - "Adequately supplied Courses. Rapid and efficiently scheduled, routed, and handled Students and PC's." (That is Tech Services, and we have found it can get goofy and try to make half the auditors handle 90% of the pc's and leave other auditors idle, schedule by what the Reg says rather than by Reference Policy in OEC Vol 4, etc.) (Or they will get a list of PC's, and Class of Auditors required, from the D of p and then let the Auditors argue about the schedules between themselves. If you are having trouble with getting WDAH up in volume, you will probably find jams and arbitraries in Tech Services.) 49.) The worst case I saw of this was an org that had 35 auditors all getting full pay, and some were only auditing 2 1/2 hours per week! The arbitrary was: The Registrar was scheduling the sessions with the additive of asking the pc "When do you want your sessions?" I just eliminated that and had the pc told to "be there Monday morning". Suddenly all the auditors were busy and the income shot up along with delivery. Then we had the problems of invoice machines breaking from overuse and the bottoms of cash drawers falling out because of too much money in them - but THAT'S the kind of problems I can HAVE! (Laugh) So you see how simple it CAN be. SIDE B 50.) (Activity) DEPT 11 - "Auditors who understand the data they have learned and CAN apply it." (Notice it doesn't say "certificates". An Auditor who can not audit is a liability. He is NOT a Valuable Final Product. And there are too many of those around. We have to RETRAIN them when we get them here a Flag.) 51.) It takes 2 WAY COMM, ACTUAL COURSE SUPERVISION, and NO EVALUATION FROM THE BULLETINS. They way to do it is to get the course taught that way. 52.) It's very easy to make an Auditor. If you DON'T, it's not a VFP, it's actually something that can recoil on you from the "auditor's" messing up cases in the field. 53.) (Production) DEPT 12 - "The WINS of Preclears and Pre-OTs." (It is trying to move people up to the PERSISTENT F/N. It is NOT trying to "reform" people to make them behave in a certain way.) 54.) As far as the HGC is concerned, it is WINS, quantity of, and this is expressed actually by the WIDTH of an F/N on a meter. 55.) We are getting more and more fantastic WINS on this line by doing retrain, retread, cram, and C/Sing of auditors. When you don't get big F/Ns and persistent F/Ns, it is only that the auditing or C/Sing was poor. 56.) If you give "quicky" lower grades in 20 minutes, you have ONE win. Whereas there are 30 or 40 wins to be gotten in that area. 57.) I had a case who was "hopeless" - 179 hours of Life Repair, self-auditing for years, really messed up - how did I get a win on him? I pulled out a disused Power Process which cleans up auditing (PrPr 3) and used it. Wow! Big win! 58.) This works out also for those who have gone up the OT levels without confronting them, but who flinched away from the data and false attested. 59.) You can give a case a WIN by straightening out the case and recognizing it HAS been straightened out. That is a WIN. 60.) Now you have the whole bridge from Dianetics to OT 6 to get MORE WINS on. 61.) Although a "completion" is a stat, the way you get to it is by a series of WINS on the case. 62.) So, from the Product Officer's viewpoint, it's "How many WINS is that HGC getting per person?" 63.) Keep that flying and the enthusiasm will go out in all directions. (WINS also promote to others.) 64.) (Result) DEPT 13 - "EFFECTIVE and WELL TRAINED ORG STAFF MEMBERS." (This now has a "Hatting-College" in it as well.) (Also examiner) 65.) When you don't understand what's happening, it's a good MAXIM t just "hold on to what you've got". This is the old "STO" (Staff Training Officer) area - programming, training & checking out Staff. 66.) (Review) DEPT 14 - "More efficiently produced org Valuable Final Products." (This is a built-in "Establishment correction machine". It handles the Product 3, from "Org Series 20" (HCOPL) Has Review and c/Sing in it.) 67.) This doesn't relieve Product and Org Officers of their responsibilities but it will probably cut a lot of miles off their pedometers when it goes in. 68.) (Ability) DEPT 15 - "Corrected org Products" + "Earned Certificates and Awards." 69.) Now we have a series of stats for an org which give you the volume of production, the quality of production, and the viability of the org. Your OIC (Org Information Center) stats give you all three of those when you know how to read them. 70.) If you just measured by products, you may or may not wind up with the answers. It's chancy. 71.) Now "SUCCESS STORIES" and the "GI (Gross Income) devided by STAFF" have been the traditional stats of Qual, and when you dropped those it wasn't so well off. These two measure the WINS from public, and per staff member and the org. 72.) The PRODUCT of Qual is the CORRECTED ORG PRODUCTS, or the "Products of the org Corrected". Thus it can be measured by SUCCESS STORIES and EARNED CERTIFICATES AND AWARDS. If they ARE earned, they ARE very valuable to the people who earned them. 73.) (Purposes) DEPT 16 - "Effective PR and Advertising actions that attract members of the public to become Scientologists." (So now we have gone EXTERNAL. If you want to understand Distribution Division, you must realitze its EXTERNAL, external into the public.) 74.) Div 2, Dissem, is INTERNAL Div 6, Distribution, is EXTERNAL. 75.) When England dropped advertisements in books a while back, there was trouble. They didn't have the flow they had before. 76.) When you drop advertising, you decrease CONSUMPTION, so this is where you count on consumption to be built-up - Dept 16. 77.) This is NEW ZONES of CONSUMPTION. (Note: Advertising gradients: - BOOKS AND DEMONSTRATION. - RESULTS FROM IT. - WORD OF MOUTH ABOUT IT. - DATA ABOUT IT. (Lectures, etc.) - PROMOTION OF IT. - ADVERTISING OF IT.) 78.) (Clearing) DEPT 17 - "Hatted Scientologists." (It probably will take a few days to cognite on this - but then you are away.) (If all Scientologists are USING Scientology, or hatted to do so, they will create a good effect on the society. Conversely, a person who says he "is a Scientologist", but is not hatted, can be rather strange.) 79.) 80.) (Realization) DEPT 18 - "ACTIVE Field Scientologists." (These are the ones who do a lot of your field promotion. Furnish them with books to sell, materials, etc. 81.) By personal contact, these Field Scientologists do a lot of your selling for you. 82.) The old "Sell a book and make a Friend" campaign was for these Field Scientologists. So ASSIST them. Thus, new groups and new people can be attracted to come in, and this is EXPANSION for your CONSUMPTION. 83.) So get the "Hatted Scientologist" in 17 and turn them into "Active Field Scientologists" in 18. OK? 84.) (Conditions) DEPT 19 - "A VIABLE ORG." (Now the VFPs of the Active Field Scientologists are: - BOUGHT BOOKS - DISSEMINATED KNOWLEDGE - ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL - A CLEARED PLANET This is for ANY Scientologist, not just "FSMs", although they could be one of those too. So you see how the VFPs and Departmental VFPs all go together to create VIABILITY for the org.) (And the ED and his Execs are the ones responsible for seeing this is done.) 85.) (Existence) DEPT 20 - "ACCEPTANCES of Scientology." (This is the "Office of the Controller" which contains the Guardian Office's Bureaux, A/G, A/G-F, etc.) 86.) This can be several things: - Combatting an enemy propaganda action. (PR, Intelligence, Legal.) - Getting in good press, etc. (It helps the viability of the org so adds to the other products.) 87.) The GO is basically EXTERNAL, and it detracts from their product to handle orgs internally. 88.) 89.) So when you go back as FEBC's, give the GO reassurances that you will handle the org internally, so they don't have to walk up and down the corridors with Sherlock Holmes caps on, and CAN get on with their EXTERNAL work. 90.) Now, in Dept 19, you have the E/D, P/O, O/O, and P/O's PR and Messengers. That's their offices. And their products are: E/D - Products 1, 2, 3, 4 of Org Series 10. (The E/D is the Planning Officer. He meets with the P/O & O/O on this in the triangular system. You must not lose sight of the fact that when he is ALSO the P/O of the org. He is DOUBLE-HATTED.) P/O - Products 2, 4 of Org Series 10. O/O - Products 1, 3 of Org Series 10. (The O/O does "delegate" Product 1 to the HAS after a while, but is still RESPONSIBLE for it.) (Many P/O, O/O functions are "delegated" to the proper departments, once established.) 91.) Now, a Finance Officer will soon come into Dept 21 (FBO or Flag Bannking Officer) whose product will be "RESERVES". But just to clean up a point now, this is MANAGEMENT reserves. The org reserves are set aside from their OWN allocation. This is what is counted on the Cash-Bills of the Org, NOT the Management Reserves. 92.) Now the P/O has all those VFPs of the Org & Departments, and the O/O puts the Organization there to obtain them. The Establishment is put there by the HAS - by delegation of the O/O. 93.) The FEBC projects, as you put them in, move smoothly and easily into BEING the actual department and its function. 94.) What do you do when an FEBC project is completed? Well, you start in AGAIN from the Major Target and DO IT ALL AGAIN - this time bigger and better! 95.) The projects are all numbered for ease in reporting, adding "R's" (Revisions) and to keep down the telex time in refering to them. 96.) Now you all are on MOs (Mission Orders) and they are to be reported on regularly. 97.) What is your relationship to the CLO? (Continental Liaison Office). 98.) A CLO is there to: - COLLECT DATA FOR FLAG. - GET FLAG PROJECTS EXECUTED. - HANDLE THE EMERGENCIES IN THE AREA. 99.) Iis not there to "send out work parties", or to "hold your hand" or necessairly to "shoot people". It IS there to help, give advice, & relay data. 100.) For that reason, you have in Dept 21 another post called the "Bureaux Liaison Officer" or "Flag Representative". ALL comm back and forth between Org & Flag or CLO should go through him. 101.) The exception to this is the GO traffic lines. They don't go through the Flag Rep., but can go direct to GOWW OR to Flag. 102.) The other exception is the Finance Officer. These lines go direct also, to Flag FBO. 103.) On Flag, there is an Aide to Supervise each of these Management areas. 104.) There are 3 basic "through this terminal" communication hats in Dept 21: 1.) LRH comm - my comm. (I hope to get this going again as until now, the LRH Comms have been double-hatted and mostly off post.) 2.) Bureaux Liaison (Flag Rep.) - Org/Flag comm. 3.) Finance Banking Officer (FBO) - FP & Financial comm. 105.) So Mission Orders are reported via Flag Rep & Management Aide CLO, to Flag, to me. 106.) The CLO has a VFP in their Data Bureau of "Data Collected for Flag". 107.) Flag Management has a VFP of "Workable Projects which increase the Volume. Quality and Viability of an Org", among others. 108.) A CLO has: "Successfully completed projects which increased the Volume, Quality, and Viability of an Org" as one of its VFPs. 109.) An Aide or Management, Bureau staff here at Flag sits there with the COLLECTED DATA (a VFP) and EVALUATES IT and HANDLES IT, WRITES A PROJECT, and gets it COMPLETED. When the Project is SUCCESSFULLY DONE, then IT is a VFP also. 110.) The Action Bureau is the "port of last resort" to an Aide or Management terminal. So, "a report a day keeps the mission away". But if it is a NO or FALSE REPORT situation, then a mission is sent to observe, collect data, and handle. 111.) The Action Bureau then has the job of finding out IF there IS a situation, what the BUG is, or what the WHY is, and handle until it can be turned back over to Management. 112.) The Bureaux are helpful in other ways too. But we frown on them sending out "work parties to file an org's CF". An Org can NOT be made competent by "babying" it or "holding its hand". 113.) And we are trying to make competent orgs that can stand on their own two feet. 114.) And this is the whole intent and purpose of this FEBC package - to make it go toward EXPANSION, each org at its own pact determined by its Execs, the ED, P/O, and O/O. 115.) Your own COMPETENCE will determine this. It's up to YOU! THANK YOU! *** END FEBC - 12 *** (LAST TAPE OF THE FEBC) ***** "ESTO'S INSTANT HAT - PART 1" -1- ESTO SERIES - 1 LRH Tape Notes ESTO - 1 7103CO1SO 01 Mar 72 ESTO SERIES - 1 =============== ESTO'S INSTANT HAT - PART 1 --------------------------- SIDE A ------ 1.) Hello! The subject is ESTABLISHMENT OFFICERS. The background history of this begins in 1950, when I was the Establishment Officer. 2.) I brought the desk, did all the products, gave lectures, did most of the auditing and worked about 18 to 20 hours a day, and to some degree made it come off OK. 3.) When I dropped out of the scene, there was an instant collapse. 4.) The organizations "ran" to some degree, but had out ethics, out tech, out policy, and eventually went down the drain. (Those were the "First Foundations".) 5.) I was NOT on the Board of Directors of those Foundations, so I was not the prime mover. I was a managing officer and "doer". 6.) The Board of Directors was a barrier to getting ANYTHING done mostly because they believed they should be "popular" (have status), and do "usual" things (conform). 7.) "Popularity is one thing, and TRUTH is another. 8.) The reason why the University, the psychairitry, the medical doctors would never make it, or the usual research scientist would never make it, - is because their discoveries are always VETTED or EDITED against the "REPUTATION" of the Institution. - 9.) "Reputation is ALL, truth is nothing" is their motto. And that is the downfall of any University, Research Organization or Research Scientist. 10.) So when I found out that THIS was necessary to resolve the case it hat to be edited, because it might not be "popular" or be "acceptable" to the "very best people" - who were running people into the "very best possible" GRAVE. 11.) So, that type of "editing" of the org actions and that type of government, is one that will FAIL. 12.) The SUCCESSFUL management lines in the world are - were they exist - conducted by men in a mood of DESPERATION and EXASPERATION. "ESTO'S INSTANT HAT - PART 1" -2- ESTO SERIES - 1 13.) They are carried on the back of ONE person, and there will be a half a dozen "stalwarts" (loyals" in a very large group that keep the show on the road one way or another - over slumberous (sleepy), alter-ising, editing "all for the best people" - MOBS. 14.) And as a result, the LIFE SPAN of organizations approximate the WILLINGNESS span of their prime motivators. 15.) And after someone has wrestled with it long enough, and has been caved-in by it, he tends to move-off or quit it to some degree and put his attention to something else. Then things cave in here and there. So then, with great heroism he goes in again to try and make the machine go and leaves bruised feelings and HE&R widespread, but he does get something done. 16.) And then he relaxes and it tends to fall apart again. 17.) You ask any executives who have been the causative factor in organizations and they will tell you that cycle is very TRUE. 18.) And it is the cycle of CIVILIZATIONS, not just the cycle of one organization. 19.) EX: A missionaire goes into an org, does what he is supposed to do, leaves, and one week later it is GONE. 20.) ESTABLISHMENT then, is the KEY to organizational prosperity. 21.) And, it has never been recognized to what DEGREE ESTABLISHMENT accounts for the prosperity and long life (or longevity) of the organization. 22.) Man, in his cultural, ethnical and anthropological background, is essentially a NOMAD. (A wanderer or traveller) 23.) When you have a society at a high tension and where its values are changing or variable, and where the society itself is enturbulative in the extreme, the individual society member is knocked here and there, back and forth, around and around, and is himself, in a state of foment or change. 24.) It's a continious state of CHANGE - the number of addresses that have to be changed in an organization to keep the address list up to date is great. It's WORST in the United States where the society itself is the most chaotic. But it is certainly bad enough in UK and EU. 25.) The society itself doesn't take care of a person's RIGHTS. 26.) Examples: Divorce laws, debts, shoddy products. You could probably spend 100,000 Dollars to try to get your money back for a rotten basket of blackberries you were sold, and it would take years. If there is an injustice in the USA, then the US government has probably committed it. 27.) As a result, these injustices and these social stresses, and economic stresses, create people who are PTS to the Society, cannot concentrate on what they are doing, and who, themselves, are in MOTION. "ESTO'S INSTANT HAT - PART 1" -3- ESTO SERIES - 1 28.) They, themselves, are UNSTABLE. 29.) So, you have a Dissem Sec today and you don't have one tomorrow. And you don't have a Dist Sec today, and you are not about to get one. 30.) In other words, the EBB and FLOW of PERSONELL is the primary DIS-ESTABLISHING factor. 31.) The stresses the personell are under, and their nervousness and restlessness in the society makes them UNSTABLE. 32.) Now, our organizations are built out of PEOPLE. So we have an analogy in a machine - whose parts are there today and gone tomorrow, whose parts are OK today, but broken tomorrow - in other words, that machine would have an awful time trying to keep running! 33.) Also, the ECONOMIC stresses of this society make no allowance for this INSTABILITY. 34.) So the hustlers, bill collectors, tax man, and landlord must all still be paid. So no matter if an org is suddenly, or slowly, disestablished, the economic burden is STILL THERE. 35.) But that's not all. Not only does the economic burden NOT decrease, it INCREASES - because of INFLATION. 36.) Money at this stage of the game is becoming LESS valuable per unit. It takes MORE money to buy the same things you used to get for less. 37.) Money is thus INFLATING. And that is because there was no ESTO to hat the President of the United States. Instead, he read a book by a pederast named Keynes, who was part and parcel of the "Fabian Society", an honored guest of Stalin, the husband of a Russian ballet dancer, and who has dominated the political-economical scene for decades. They are just starting to get wise to this now and throw out his text books from the university courses. 38.) He advocates "INFINITE INFLATION". The keynote is "CREATE WANT". He sure IS creating that where governments use his principles. 39.) There were also two Hungarians who used to go around and advise governments on economics. I'm sure they were backed up by the CFR (Council on Foreign Relations) or someone like that. Somebody wondered about this and checked up on theirs back-trail - IN EVERY COUNTRY THEY HAD "ADVISED", there was a trail of "RUIN and BANKRUPTCY" afterwards. They advised Wilson (US President) just before the depression (of 1929). 40.) Now also, England's economics were not built originally by 2 odd-ball Hungarians who drifted in with some "Keynesian" theories. But now they are using it too! 41.) Now, nobody has evaluated this economic scene because first and foremost, they don't know HOW to evaluate. But the other reason is that Governments are on a sort of "suicidal kick". They are not constructive, they are destructive. "ESTO'S INSTANT HAT - PART 1" -4- ESTO SERIES - 1 42.) The only answer a government has to any given situation is VIOLENCE. You press them a little bit and you get VIOLENCE, you don't get anything sensible at all. They cannot be talked to. 43.) Now you could understand VIOLENCE if they were being attacked by violence, but they are not, and they use it mostly against the weakest and most easily controlled people - their own citizens. 44.) So here is a planetary economic scene with "squirrel tech", and it gives the establishment of anything a "curve" (a tricky situation). 45.) So you plan an establishment costing "X" Dollars per week, and several months later it is much more. Added to that are the increased stresses economically on the staff members which add to the DIS-establishment and you finally have to have "4X" to keep going. 46.) And you will have auditors leaving the org to make "more money" in the Keokuk franchise, and they will be lured away by the promise of "big bucks". (But probably will end up making LESS.) 47.) So there is also an effort to "pull off" trained staff or experienced people. 48.) Now the answers to these things are not so grim. But, if you have the view that an ESTO is just needed to put it all there in concrete and then he is no longer needed - well, forget it. 49.) It WON'T just stay there because of the restive economics of society, the nomadic tendencies of people and the violence that governments use against their populations. So you get shifts and changes in the society around you and in the staffs of the organization you are trying to establish. 50.) So, ESTABLISH and MAINTAIN ESTABLISHED is the index of it all. Your cycle is: ESTABLISH & MAINTAIN ,then, ESTABLISH & MAINTAIN ,then, ESTABLISH & MAINTAIN ,etc. 51.) You are handling stuff that makes quicksilver look like iron. 52.) So the ESTABLISHMENT OFFICER IS probably better named as the: ESTABLISHING OFFICER 53.) "Day to day and sun to sun, the Establishing Officer's work is never done". 54.) Now if you are dealing with a "guicksilver society" with that much disappearing, then you must learn to establish very rapidly. Rapid establishment is the answer. "ESTO'S INSTANT HAT - PART 1" -5- ESTO SERIES - 1 55.) There are three types of establishing targets: 1.) INSTANT 2.) MEDIUM 3.) LONG You are ALWAYS dealing with ALL THREE. 56.) They don't go in gradients. You are ALWAYS dealing with an INSTANT WHILE you work on a MEDIUM WHILE you work on a LONG. 57.) The successful ESTABLISHING OFFICER will have all three of those balls in the air simultaneously. Instant, Medium Range, and Long Range. 58.) Ex: You have a Dissem Sec in full time training, due to finish OEC next Tuesday. But today you have no Dissem Sec. What to do? That's the typical ESTO problem. I can only advise you: "Do it!" (Put her on post, finish trg. in study time.) 59.) So we have a 22 year history of "Booms" and "Depressions". 60.) When the DATA SERIES was developed, we then had a tool to penetrate these obscure mysteries - booms and depressions, booms and depressions. Not only with the network as a whole but also with individual orgs. 61.) Ex: The BOOK receipt monies at SH in 1967 were greater than its total income today! 62.) The "ban" (1968 Summer) had very little to do with it, but they did lose their American trade. But they didn't listen when I told them to build up their domestic trade. 63.) I noticed that since 1950, EXTERNAL actions to an organization have almost nothing to do with its survival factors at all. 64.) You can go almost anyplace, and establish an org and get it producing, and it will get, IN DIRECT PROPORTION, the income which it is ESTABLISHED to achieve. Now that is a factor that an ESTO has to learn. 65.) And that's a tough one to learn, because the staff around you all have their aberrated "whys" for why the income is down. 66.) Most often you hear "WIG" (The Why is God) from people who don't know the data series. 67.) The tool to discover CAUSES exists, and that is the DATA SERIES. "ESTO'S INSTANT HAT - PART 1" -6- ESTO SERIES - 1 68.) And when the DATA-SERIES was used against this whole picture of booms-depressions of orgs, the answer emerged: "AN UNHATTED STAFF GENERATES DEV-T" - They develop enough bad and sour traffic that they impede all productive traffic. 69.) And the reason back of Dev-T IS UNHATTEDNESS. 70.) These orgs can be "BUSY", and work themselves to the fringes of exhaustion - WITHOUT PRODUCING ANYTHING - but more Dev-T. 71.) An adequate description of any GOVERNMENT on the face of the planet today would be - Dev-T. 72.) If they all VANISHED, the world would be far better off. 73.) The Dev-T they generate also affects you organizationally - and the best way to handle it is to just "hive it off" - or compartment it off. (Into a special section that just handles it and nothing else, and doesn't cross the production lines.) 74.) Call it "ACCOUNTING" or "LEGAL" or something. Ex: Capitol airlines had 25 CPAs (Certificed Public Accountants) that did nothing but handle the government tax men. 75.) So there is Dev-T all around an org, so it is no wonder that it gets into this "tradition" that has been going on for the entire history of man. 76.) And that Dev-T comes from unhattedness. And the reason the economics of the US are bad, is because there is no ESTO hatting the President - as I said before. 77.) Currently the US is handing out about 75% of the National Income into channels that will never do anybody any good at all, and which solve nothing. And then they wonder why they have inflation! 78.) AND they are working on the "wrong why" that the working man's demand for more wages is the reason prices are increasing! WRONG why. The working man wants more wages because he can no longer buy bread! 79.) No, the great, gaunt, wolf at the door is UNHATTEDNESS generating DEV-T. 80.) Now for an ESTO, "unhattedness" is too simple a statement. It isn't JUST that. It's also the LINES, the "meshing" of these hats, the space in which these hats are worn, the arrangement of it, the adequacy of it. 81.) Ex: A division with its comm center 3 floors down in the basement. Ex: Two hot traffic lines crossing each other. This is SPACIAL Dev-T. 82.) The space arrangements are then important to an ESTO. "ESTO'S INSTANT HAT - PART 1" -7- ESTO SERIES - 1 83.) Also, the equipment used in production. Ex: A Dir. Comm at AOLA who let the Address Machine break down making it hard to get out a mailing. Ex: A folding and stuffing machine at SH, which needs a repair part costing a few pounds, and which has never been fixed. The whole staff has to work to put out a mailing. And they don't design the mailings to fit the machine anyway! Terrific Dev-T! 84.) Now this planet is rotating on a 24 hour day around a 12th rate sun at the outer corner of one of the smaller galaxies, and it inexorably rotates at 24 hrs per day. And as hard as you try, you can't make it rotate at 28 or 36 hrs per day. If it would, you might have a chance. 85.) The Product Officer who is trying to handle 5 auditors who quit because of the cramming order, with 10 public waiting, and one asking for a refund, and trying to hold off the bill collector while he gets the income up somehow, is not likely to notice a broken machine even if all the staff disappear to stuff the mailing. 86.) Now the boom and depression cycle was caused by the exhaustion of the exec in trying to handle, and to dispersal of staff due to the nomadic character of society. 87.) The "boom-depression" cycle can be looked at as an "establish-disestablish" cycle. It is accompanied by an increasing cycle of Dev-T. And that is an exact description of why orgs rise and fail. SIDE B 88.) If we are ever going to take this planet, we are going to have to eradicate (erase) the "failure end" of that cycle. 89.) That's elementary, isn't it? so a vast study of this has shown that there is a "division of labour". ESTABLISHMENT is what adds QUALITY to a product. 90.) Ex: You can't quarantee a good dinner, without stove, fuel, supplies, food preparers, a hatted chef, etc. 91.) It's no good to scream at the ED of an org about the quality of his product if the org isn't established. The Dev-T in it would be enough by itself to DIS-establish it. 92.) And that would be enough to shatter the quality of the product he is trying to produce. 93.) Now I can hold one of these orgs together, and I normally can build one up, but it gets so bad sometimes that it takes a 20 hour day, and you wouldn't believe some of the things I have to handle. "ESTO'S INSTANT HAT - PART 1" -8- ESTO SERIES - 1 94.) It's because the hats are not known or worn and because the hats are not meshed with each other so the lines run smoothly and coordinatedly. 95.) The material breaks down and the spacial relationships get tangled. 96.) And the economic duress puts barriers and brakes on what you can do. 97.) And that brings us to RESOURCES. "An Establishing Officer must always work within the reality of what resources are available". 98.) It's OK as a plan to "attack the German Army" - but the resources available? One corporal with a broken leg. 99.) It is called "megalomania" when the plan is far greater than the resources at hand. But it CAN be accomplished if you establish up to it. 100.) Resources is the limitation factor. "What do you HAVE to DO WITH? 101.) And now we get into the genius department: "THE LESS YOU HAVE, THE MORE GENIUS IT REQUIRES" 102.) And that's the rule of the ESTO: "The LESS resources you have, the MORE genius you have to inject into the situation to substitute for the lack of resources." 103.) Ex: How do we establish the division with only 2 people? "Well, I could get in there and do it all." - WRONG ANSWER. 104.) The primary ERROR the ESTO can make is to start handling the traffic of the division. The org will never grow, and he will not be an Establishing Officer. 105.) It is an ILLEGAL order to give an ESTO an order to start handling the traffic of the division. It's also ILLEGAL to take him off post and put him on another post because "personell is so scarce". That is the exact way to never have ANY personell. 106.) So, the resources are made up for by the brilliance of the performance. 107.) Ex: Sweden is a small country but has maintained its position in the world thru technical developments and efficient organization with regard to its relationships with other countries. How did they stay out of those world wars? How did they emerge prosperous on the other end of it? So you can always substitue for numbers by efficiency and brilliant ideas. "ESTO'S INSTANT HAT - PART 1" -9- ESTO SERIES - 1 108.) So, you can always substitute for "numbers" with efficiency And BRILLIANT ideas. 109.) If your technology is BRILLIANT, and your efficiency is FANTASTIC, you CAN take the lame corporal and attack the German Army. And have a very good chance of winning. (Joke - I think that's what Hitler did - attack the German Army - because he defeated it, utterly!) 110.) The G.O. (Guardian's Office) at this time (1972) is one of the hottest, smartest units of its kind in the world today. It was handbuilt for a certain definite plan and policy, with a certain and definite purpose. It is BETTER, today, than MI-6, CIA, D.I.M., State Intelligence, or the Abwehr (German Intelligence). (MI-6 is British Counter Intelligence) (CIA is America's Central Intelligence Agency) (D.I.M. is Defense Intelligence Ministry) 111.) The decline of psychairitry on the planet came about because they attacked the wrong target - us. 112.) There wasn't any unpopularity of psychairitry till we opened our mouths - now its generally thought to be the case that they are sort of a failed, half-baked, murderous, sort of "bunch of bums". 113.) The World Federation of Mental Health (WFMH, called "SMERSH" in those days) has now just been transferred to the West Indies (it was in Switzerland, then Scotland, previously) and put in the hands of an obscure psychairitrist nobody ever heard of in a back village of blacks. 114.) That WAS the world's most powerful Mental Health Organization, formed by the Death-Campers who escaped to England. Now, how did it ever get to Jamaica on the back street of a small village? You get the idea? The G.O. doesn't have vast amounts of money or resources of personell. But they have TECHNOLOGY, some of the hottest tech you ever heard of. 115.) One piece of that technology is over 2000 years old. It comes out of the "Art of War". It's called the "Dead Agent Technique". But the "Art of War" doesn't state what the DA (Dead Agent) technique could be - in full. So it was developed fully. "ESTO'S INSTANT HAT - PART 1" -10- ESTO SERIES - 1 116.) Ex: A newspaper reporter going into his own "morgue" files, any paper, any place, to get some material to write about Scientology, collides with data on "how bad psychairitry is". Now, how was that done? By DA tech. The people who were running the psychairitry push are DEAD - they were "worried to death". 117.) Psychairitry had a huge escalated program: 1.) To degrade the human race. 2.) To supersede normal justice with psych justice, which is "guilty" before trial" and "punished before proof". 118.) They had legislatures all over earth proposing and passing laws that allowed imprisonment, seizure of property, setting up "camps" for mentally disturbed, etc. and were moving forward toward the heaviest totalitarian "police" state that anybody ever heard of, based on only the pschairitrist's opinion of who was "sane" or not. 119.) Then they made the mistake of attacking us, and attracting our attention. And it was quite a feat for a little handful of guys to knock the multi-billion dollar financed organization flat on its back. 120.) And the whole organization (GO) was put together in 3 months, and accomplished its job in 3 years. That shows what CAN be done. 121.) They have good admin procedures. - They follow target policy. - They program everything. - It's all carried through to an enormous degree. 122.) Now that's what can be done by "establishment". 123.) That required brilliant technology, small resources but sound, hard organization, and fantastically able management. 124.) So don't underestimate what you CAN DO as an STO. It's a complete disgrace that Scientology and S.O. Orgs haven't taken more territory than they have. people will say, "Maybe the Org Board is out" - "Bla, bla" - no, that's all a "Why is God" - or wrong why. The REAL reason is a failure to Establish and to CONTINUE to Establish. They are destroyed by Dev-T, and that comes from UNHATTEDNESS. 125.) Orgs have brilliant technology - both in tech and admin - but it's not APPLIED. 126.) It (Technology of Scientology and Dianetics) is INFINITELY greater and INFINITELY more effective than the technology the Guardian Office has (on "Intelligence") and an which they operate. "ESTO'S INSTANT HAT - PART 1" -11- ESTO SERIES - 1 127.) But the tech is not KNOWN or APPLIED. 128.) The old HCO's used to police Dev-T hard, hard, hard. They used to get the staff member's "communication hat" on as a 1st action. (How to write a dispatch, one subject per dispatch, had to be "on hat", and concern also the "hat" of the other person, etc.) 129.) They kept this up until they had a well-disciplined org that would hold its form. That action has not been done for years. When it ceases to be done, the org tends to disintegrate. 130.) So also with building up an org goes HATTING. 131.) I'm giving you here the bad spots, bright spots, and background history of Estoing. It has been very hard for me to do it all these years, WHILE getting out the products, and WHILE developing the technology. 132.) But from the experience of doing it, all the pieces are now falling into place: 133.) The Product-Org System is a brilliant system. BUT it has a FATAL hole in it: ***** ** ** It is NOT possible for the HAS to establish the org ** ALONE. We underestimated the job by a factor of ** about 10. Thus, we have now the Prod-Org- ** ESTO-System. ** ***** (This was found by observation, survey, and actual experience in many orgs since the FEBC.) 134.) The Product Officer and Org Officer were not backed up at any time by an effective establishing action, under the FEBC system. We know that now. It was a brilliant system, but in these confused, mad, spinny, "whirling-dervish" times, it was underestimated by about 10 times the number of people needed to ESTABLISH the org. 135.) So, using all that WAS good in the Prod-Org-System, a NEW system has been evolved: 136.) The C/O or E/D of an org is the PRODUCT OFFICER of the Org. He thinks, eats, breathes PRODUCTS. 137.) He knows the VFP's of the org and demands them. 138.) If he doesn't get them, he analyzes "why", using the "Data Series", debugs them, writes a program to handle. 139.) The program is executed by the DEPUTY D/D, who also takes care of staff and polices Dev-T for the Product Officer. (Same as earlier O/O functions.) "ESTO'S INSTANT HAT - PART 1" -12- ESTO SERIES - 1 140.) The E/D also has a Secretary (or Yoeman) who handles the E/D's traffic, fends off Dev-T, and does "executive secretary" actions for the E/D. This person is hatted by the Deputy E/D, so he can spend more time getting the programs done. 141.) Planning, then, is carried out at the TOP, where it should be. (The C/O or E/D does this.) 142.) Planning carries with it: - SUMMATION OF OBSERVATION - INVESTIGATION - LOOKING PERSONALLY INTO IT - EVALUATION - WHY FINDING - DEBUGGING - PROGRAMMING TO HANDLE - BRIGHT IDEAS BASED ON A BRILLIANT PLAN. 143.) The program must be short, NOT so long and complicated that it, itself, is Dev-T. 144.) And - ANYTHING BASED ON A WRONG WHY IS TOTALLY DEF-T. 145.) So this short, succinet, program is passed to the Deputy E/D for execution. This IS the Org Officer, but he is really not doing ONLY organization, he is doing PROGRAM EXECUTION. (Organization may be a part of it, of course.) 146.) Now the E/D has a conference with the Divisional Secretaries, and that is the PRODUCT CONFERENCE. 147.) And each of those Div Heads is HIMSELF a Product Officer for his division, and HE investigates and debugs where HE is not getting the product. 148.) And each DIV HEAD has a Deputy who carries forth HIS divisional programs. (This is the Divisional Org Officer or Program Executor.) 149.) And the Deputy Div Head also handles the Administration for the Div Head and polices Dev-T. 150.) That is the new Prod-Org team or Product Officer - Program Officer team. 151.) In the Pac Area, the product Officers became so impatient with the slowness of Establishment they sent a team of students into CF to find names for a campaign and tore the CF apart - and went insolvent. "ESTO'S INSTANT HAT - PART 1" -13- ESTO SERIES - 1 152.) So this "anxiety for product" carries with it a deadly germ. THE SCRAMBLE FOR PRODUCT WILL DIS-ESTABLISH. 153.) So there has got to be somebody there to keep it established and free of Dev-T. So the 3rd member of the team is the ESTO I/C or Executive EstablishING Officer or Executive EstablishMENT Officer. 154.) Now it is HIS job, in the midst of that hurricane of demand, to ESTABLISH. 155.) ERRORS he can make: 1.) Start to DO the actions of the Division himself. 2.) Not establish in a way that backs up production. 3.) Build an establishment far greater than the org can afford or support. 4.) In efforts to get people, he could offer far more pay than can be afforded. 156.) The ECONOMICS of the org then are in the hands of another conference called the ESTO conference. 157.) F.P. (Financial Planning) is done by the Establishment Officers. 158.) It's done by the rules of policy, so they know how much money they have to establish with. 159.) Now, it is a remarkable fact, that, an organization tries to spend all it makes. 160.) And they usually spend MORE than they make. 161.) And that is a terrible dis-establishing factor in itself. 162.) Now the production per S.O. member in the PAC has gone from $ 5000 per member per week to about $ 100! So they are mostly involved with Dev-T. 163.) So the economics of the establishment are in the hands of the ESTO. He controls OUTGO. The P/O and his Deputy control INCOME. 164.) An organization that spends more than 60% of what it makes has got "rocks in its head", no matter who gets the other 40%. 165.) And regardless of the tax people. The hell with them. They will do you in anyhow, so why worry about it. They've made themselves so obnoxious and so bonkers that you just take those steps necessary to obfuscate them. (Obfuscate - eliminate by putting behind a barrier or in shadow) It doesn't matter whether you submit correctly or incorrectly, they will tell you "all these expenses are really income because we have a new rule that says the worth of a company is its debts plus its assets so you owe on all of it". "ESTO'S INSTANT HAT - PART 1" -14- ESTO SERIES - 1 166.) So never let the fact that money will be taxed deter you from making a mint! If you HAVE money, you can afford to spend HUGE sums to protect the even HUGER sums you have made. 167.) The "crime" is - not to have made money. 168.) So don't fall for that old "we must not make this money because it will be taxed". No. Just go on making it and figure some way it ISN'T taxable. 169.) An org has to be valuable enough to compensate Management and the Management of it. 170.) In Scientology orgs management does take place on a higher level than the C/O or E/D. Just figure out how much goes into training execs, auditors, providing materials, books, issues, programs, policy, defense, advertisement on a board scale, etc. 171.) Ex: Boston Command Team - they only sent 15% until I called it to their attention how much it cost to provide a non-Boston staff command team for the org. Then They sent 30%. It's still not enough. 172.) An org must compensate management enough to retain management's interest. An organisation HAS to make money to be worthwhile to anybody. 173.) So if you manage it close enough and sweat at it, what do you know? It gets very efficient and prosperous, and CAN afford such management. 174.) The WRONG way to approach it is: "We need 5000 a week, so we make 5000 a week." - Except for the 2 or 3000 more that WILL be required to handle the factors mentioned before, AND the expansion you need to have viability. 175.) So the solvency of an org is founded on these two principles: The income is the responisbility of the Product Officer. And the outgo is the responsibility of the Establishment Officer. 176.) Got it? OK. Thank you very much! *** END ESTO - 1 *** "ESTO'S INSTANT HAT - PART 2" -15- ESTO SERIES - 2 LRH Tape Notes ESTO - 2 7203CO1SO 01 Mar 72 ESTO SERIES - 2 =============== ESTO'S INSTANT HAT - PART 2 --------------------------- SIDE A ------ 1.) There is a dichotomy here between Production and Establishment. (One tends to get in the road of the other unless brilliantly coordinated.) 2.) Example: In 1950, I had a PE Lecture Line set up. Ads on radio. 125 people per week came to Lecture. Filled in cards with name, address and service wanted. Left them on the chairs. Then the line broke. But the janitor, sweeping up the floor afterwards, decided the cards were valuable and brought them to me instead of burning them with the other trash! So the line was: Ad - PE Lecture - Card - Janitor - Me! Wow! 3.) The org in 1950 (Dn Foundation) was making a fortune until it crashed because of out-ethics and Dev-T, dishonesty and takeover attempts. 4.) It could be put back together again. ANY org can. It doesn't matter what the PR is, The papers and Time Magazine say, the attacks by psychs and the governments, the word of mouth in the street. None of that matters. 5.) An effective, efficient organization which is running viably makes money EXACTLY IN PROPORTION to the amount of production done by each individual post in it without Dev-T. 6.) And THAT is how an org is put together. 7.) The flow is not to just "hat somebody". The flow is not to END there. The full action of HATTING means to HAT HIM AND GET HIM PRODUCING THE PRDUCT OF THE POST. 8.) And that is what an ESTO does. Ex: New guy comes on post. ESTO says: "There you are on the Org Board." "There is your desk." "Here are your supplies." "Here is your hatpack." "The guy you relieved can answer your questions." "Read your hatpack." "I'll be back in a couple of hours to check you out." - "Now, what's your post" who is your senior? What do you produce on this post?" - "Take hold of these cans. What are your misunderstoods? What word is it?" (Method 4 Word Clearing) - "What machines do you have here?" "This is your instruction manual for that machine. Study it for one hour. Identify all the parts. I'll be back in an hour to star-rate you on it." - "ESTO'S INSTANT HAT - PART 2" -2- ESTO SERIES - 2 "I'm sorry you are confused. Sit here and confront your area for 2 hours." - "Good. Now we will run Reach and Withdraw on your typewriter." (or other equipment). 9.) This is an example for how I have done it in the past. By the way, do you know how to run Reach and Withdraw on a Steward? You have him com in the dining room and then go out. ("Reach" = he comes in "Withdraw" =he goes out.). 10.) And before you run R&W, you have them do a 2 hour confront of their area first. It's the gradient of the TRs. These are "Work TRs". And they WORK. All of the TRs can be done between the person and his post. 11.) You would be amazed. Around here someplace is the account by Bill Robertson of hatting a Steward on Reach and Withdraw who had been one of the wildest Dev-T artists we had for sometime. He had the guy having wild cognitions and gains. Afterwards the Steward did function quite well on his post, and became a good Sea Org member. 12.) You will find people go downhill on post just because they don't ACK and have never been ACKED. (So TR 2, 3, 4 are very valid too.) 13.) So TRs can go out on a post. They don't report or say they have "done it" when they complete something. 14.) More hatting Examples: "Read Problems of Work - I'll be back in 4 hours to see if you've finished." "Buy a Volume 0 from the bookstore and read it." "Come over here and I'll show you the comm system." 15.) Now that's an example of Hatting ON Post. As an ESTO, you would even go into greater detail and get him to produce a product of his post as a practical demonstration of his competence. 16.) "ON THE JOB TRAINING" has been used in the wog world, alternating training and apprenticeship work and study and practical. Now we are going to step that up enormously. 17.) We are going to INSTANT HAT and then have him PRODUCE THE PRODUCT of THE POST. And then HAT HIM A LITTLE MORE and PRODUCE THE PRODUCT OF THE POST. And then HATHIM MORE and PRODUCE THE PRODUCT of THE POST. Etc., etc. 18.) We are going to do ON THE JOB HATTING. So you could expect to get a brand new typist and have her almost immediately getting out letters. 19.) And tomorrow, they are going to be BETTER letters, because in between you are going to be hatting her. 20.) You can "track" an I&R thru an investigation to see what he can't handle. Hat him and do more. Eventually he will become a VERY professional investigator. "ESTO'S INSTANT HAT - PART 2" -3- ESTO SERIES - 2 21.) I have C/Ses telling me - "But I know where to LOOK FOR the technology, so I really don't have to know it, do I...? Ahh - so. The C/S HAS to know the TECH so he can tell the AUDITOR to look it up. And so he can PLAN and PROGRAM the handling of the case. The Reason C/Ses make mistakes it that they haven't gone over their materials enough times. (Number of times through = CERTAINTY). 22.) I have studied BASIC PHYSICS, for instance, 5 times. I got very familiar with all of its laws. Once at George Washington University (where the media say I never went) I helped a Senior design a Locomotive. He didn't know what a "British Thermal Unit" was so couldn't figure out the Dimensions of the coal-burning firebox. I was a freshman at the time. 23.) Do you know that C/Ses hang up because they don't know what an Engram does? They will send a guy to a doctor because right after a session he breaks out in a rash on his skin! Man, that's a restimulated or unflat engram for sure! 24.) I have to take C/Ses back to their basic TEXTBOOKS I never bother to teach them the "upper story" of tech till BASICS are in. 25.) Every post who is NOT doing its job well has its BASIC TECH FUNDAMENTALS OUT! 26.) This can be so bad, they don't even know these BASICS EXIST! 27.) Ex: I found a person writing "ARC Breaky" letters who was crammed and crammed until it was found finally what was out. The person had never heard of the ARC Triangle! 28.) These fantastic outnesses are possible in the ABSENCE of an ESTO. Just as in auditing, there is the "POLICY that will resolve the case". 29.) There IS a thing called STANDARD ADMIN. There IS a way to file a CF. It has to do with cabinets, folders, pre-file baskets, etc. I sent Herbie (Parkhouse) to AOLA to handle their CF. He found 3 children working in it and one out-ethics case. The Product Officer never had time to notice it. THAT'S why you need an ESTO. 30.) What does it take then, to put somebody on a post and hat him? Well, it takes: - PUTTING HIM THERE. - SAYING HE IS THERE. - SHOWING HIM WHERE HE IS ON THE ORG BOARD. - WHAT HIS POSITION AND RELATIONSHIP IS AND WHAT TERMINALS HE GOES IMMEDIATELY TO ON HIS FLOW LINE OF PRODUCTION AND HIS COMM AND COMPLIANCE LINE. "ESTO'S INSTANT HAT - PART 2" -4- ESTO SERIES - 2 - HIS ACTION ON POST, HIS SUPPLY LINE, HIS EQUIPMENT, HIS PRODUCT. - THEN WHAM! PRODUCE SOMETHING 31.) This begins to reveal all. NOW you can find his misunterstoods. 32.) Now listen- you can muster him, march him, chant the org board, etc. - but you won't find out if he knows anything about his post or not, unless you ask him to PRODUCE SOMETHING. 33.) And THEN all the confusion rises to the surface, like the "body after 3 days in the water". 34.) "Now, lets see you produce a sample product of you post." This is where you get the blank stares and the comm lags. AND THIS IS WHERE THE DEV-T COMES FROM. BECAUSE PEOPLE NEVER DO "NOTHING". THEY ALWAYS DO "SOMETHING". SO HE WILL "FILL IN" FOR HIS NOT-KNOW OF HOW TO PRODUCE WITH DEV-T, NON-PRODUCTIVE MOTION. 35.) So very soon, as an ESTO, you want to see him PRODUCE A PRODUCT. Now you will see what policy he needs, what supplies are missing, what CONNECTED lines are out - because all of this starts EXPOSING ITSELF the moment you say "Produce a Product" at that post. Also the backlogs, the unfiled things, the space, lines, and comm breakdowns will show up - as if by magic! 36.) Now this doesn't conflict with the Product Officer at all. The P/O wants ALL of the products and he wants them NOW so they can be numerically counted. And if he doesn't get a sufficient quantity and quality he gets bloody-minded, and this goes into ethics, heavy-ethics, and then "witch-hunts". 37.) Probably of all the "witch-hunts" we ever had, only 2 or 3 were valid. The rest were simply "Dev-T" merchants who, through UNHATTEDNESS, were too damm stupid to know their actions were totally suppressive. 38.) They may even produce a bit of their products but then get into other things which are NOT their hat and snarl everybody up. 39.) We had a spate (time) of heavy ethics when we started establishing on the ship. It was a wrong why. It wasn't that people were lazy or slow to comply - they were "stupid" about WHAT THEIR POST PRODUCT WAS beyond belief! 40.) They wasted half their time producing things that were NOT the product of the post that NOBODY WANTED! "ESTO'S INSTANT HAT - PART 2" -5- ESTO SERIES - 2 41.) The worst producers of Dev-T in an ORGANIZATION are - now hold your hat - AUDITORS! They are trained as AUDITORS, so because they know Scientology AUDITING technology, they think they know Scientology. And you are dealing with somebody who "KNOWS he knows". And you try to get in ADMIN TECH on him and it has "nothing to do with his post". Now, because he is "such a good auditor", you graduate him up to an executive post in total ignorance of POLICY. By this, you are demanding the organization go TOTAL DEV-T, because ADMINISTRATION ITSELF IS A TECHNOLOGY QUITE SEPARATE FROM AUDITIONG TECHNOLOGY, AND IS JUST AS STANDARD. AND has just the same "horrible consequences" to the organization, or a division, when done WRONG, that AUDITING, misdone on a pc. 42.) So when you are ESTABLISHING something, you have to make it all MESH (fit) together, so that it PRODUCES. That is its purpose. 43.) You will never have any MORALE unless the guy PRODUCES. Production IS the basis of MORALE. 44.) So, your final test of whether or not the guy has been hatted is whether or not he produces a quality product of his post. 45.) Not whether he can "pass an exam. BUT if he CAN produce the product, he could pass the exam too. But not the reverse necessairily. 46.) So, by introducing the idea of "on the job" training, we don't get in conflict with the Product Officer. That makes a "Bridge" across the Dichotomy (See note # 1). 47.) "Wrong Whys" are the bugbear of the Establishing Officer. 48.) They are also the bugbear of Establishing Officer. 49.) THAT IS THE FAILURE POINT OF ALL MANAGEMENT UNITS. THEY OPERATE ON "WRONG WHYS". 50.) THEY DO "OFF THE CUFF" management, not based on sound evaluation. 51.) From this, they introduce PROGRAMS INTO THE AREA WHICH ARE UNREAL, but which involve EVERYBODY in the organization and create enormous Dev-T. 52.) So, you can have a 2-page "program" busily being done in the org which has nothing to do with anything at the other end (like production or viability) because it's based on a "wrong why". 53.) But, you don't dare establish anything in that atmosphere because that "program" has total emergency priority. "ESTO'S INSTANT HAT - PART 2" -6- ESTO SERIES - 2 54.) It's got to be done NOW and nobody has any time to be hatted - If that IS a wrong program BASED on a "wrong why", it will practically DESTROY THE ORGANIZATION. 55.) That means an STO has to be a BETTER evaluator and "why finder" than a Product Officer, who has to be the best in the world! 56.) Now the qualifications of an ESTO would be the ability to perform and take responsibility for the FUNCTIONS of each one of the departments of HCO. (He doesn't actually deliver the dispatches. That is about the only thing he doesn't do that is an HCO job.) 57.) He does not just duplicate HCO's work, however, but he is a "hip pocket" HCO (all HCO functions able to be done by one person). And that is the source of his authority. 58.) And, like a HCO he may start using "heavy ethics". Dept3 is his ultimate solution instead of Dept 1 (recruiting, posting, hatting. But this just comes from "bloody-mindedness" (or desperation on trying to make it "go right" against heavy counter effort). But "bloody-mindedness" itself comes from AN INABILITY TO FIND THE RIGHT WHY. 59.) All "bloody-mindedness" troughout an organization Ceases when the RIGHT WHY is discovered. It's remarkable. It's a sort of a 3RD DYNAMIK CASE GAIN for the whole org. 60.) "They got the RIGHT WHY" is like "erasing the right engram". 61.) In 1950, I was looking for "group auditing" because I was well aware of the fact that groups COULD get an engram, a MUTUAL engram. 62.) Since then, group auditing has been worked with and experimented with from time to time, even on a Continental level, in an effort to do something about this. 63.) And what do you know! We finally found out what it is. IT'S A WRONG WHY WHICH CAUSES A GROUP ENGRAM. 64.) And to 'DE-ENGRAMIZE' a group, all you have to do is a COMPLETE, COMPETENT, EVALUATION and find the RIGHT WHY and HANDLE IT CORRECTLY, and the group will "dis-emote" (or de-aberrate). 65.) In other words, DATA ANALYSIS IS THIRD DYNAMIC DE-ABERRATION. 66.) It is remarkable technology and is as effective on a group as running engrans and erasing chains is on a case. "ESTO'S INSTANT HAT - PART 2" -7- ESTO SERIES - 2 67.) So therefore, the aberrations on the PLANET are simply built on the WRONG WHYS of yesterday! 68.) I'll give you a flagsant example of this in modern times that has a relationship to our activity. 69.) Psychairitry operates on a "wrong why" that gets it into terrible trouble and makes it extremly unpopular. It thinks there is a thing called "mental disease" or a physical germ or bug that does its work to make people "insane". I've read their whole basic books on this. Only as an afterthought or footnote do they even consider "enviornmental stress". To them, insanity is "physiological". 70.) Freud's "breakthough" was that it might have something to do with "mental states". But psychs at large have never admitted that this might be the case. So they have this thing called "mental health" which is in a MEDICAL field, run by DOCTORS. 71.) Dr. Thomas Szaz exposes the insanities and unworkability of institutional psychairitry in his books. But he source of this goes back about 450 years to the time of the Inquisition where DOCTORS WERE THE JUDGE OF WHETHER A PERSON'S "INSANITY" WAS PHYSICAL OR CAUSED BY "DEMONIAC POSSESSION". If physical, the person was under the doctor in an asylum. If "possessed" he was likely to be BURNED AT THE STAKE by the church, after torturing him on the rack of course. 72.) So the MEDICAL DOCTOR has been the HIDDEN SOURCE behind "deciding on insanity" for 450 years AND right on up into present time. 73.) And the "wrong why" of "INSANITY is a PHYSICAL disease" is STILL taught in the universities today. 74.) Szaz's book is called "The Manufacture of Madness" and exposes this quite well. 75.) And it's gotten so bad, that psychology departments still teach that people "think with their BRAINS"! I ran this out the other day as a series of 'locks'. You keep "blaming the prefrontal lobes of the brain" and it kind of makes them hurt. - (Laugh) (All they are is just some meat!) 76.) People have been told this lie so often, they become suspicious of this area of the body. . (Laugh) 77.) Now, it IS true in "paresis", which is the advanced stage of syphillis, that there are some wierd states. But then perhaps it is the hiddenness of the disease and the cut-off of any future procreation that would produce a mental response such as you get with that. 78.) There is no evidence of any kind whatsoever that there is anything called "a mental disease". 79.) So, the whole of psychairitry is based on a "wrong why", and the whole of civilization for 450 years has been tossed into dungeons and tortured and burned at the stake and electric schocked and prefrontal lobotomied and put in ice-packs and drugged and everything else. - Wrong why. "ESTO'S INSTANT HAT - PART 2" -8- ESTO SERIES - 2 80.) Now we come along and we find the "right why", and start remedies of this sort of thing. The fact that somebody might be CURED of insanity, and that THEY MIGHT BE WRONG is what drove psychairitry down the spout. 81.) They KNEW Scientology and Dianetics worked and the fear of being made wrong drove them around the bend. 82.) They had their theory - it DIDN'T WORK. We had our theory - it DID WORK. So they couldn't speak anymore with sincerity because we could catch them out. We missed their W/H. 83.) Now, in an org, if you work a whole series of programs and projects off of a "wrong why", the place will be frantically busy - with no result. 84.) So perhaps, the ESTO should side-check the Product Officers evaluation. 85.) Now you can get the funny situation where as an evaluation you DO have the RIGHT WHY and know all the data and know the eval is right - and yet it doesn't bring in good indicators on the org - BECAUSE IT IS OUTSIDE THE REALITY OF THE PEOPLE YOU ARE WORKING WITH. On a single-hand basis you CAN make it resolve because it IS the right why, but you don't get cooperation, at least at first, until the RESULTS start showing up from the handling. 86.) On the other hand, my eval on Establishment was greeted by VGIs all over the place and agreement that "HCOs had failed to establish". And when I released the ESTO program, I received a snowstorm of reports cheering and supporting it. 87.) It was like blowing a great area of aberration. It had been a great "mystery" we were living with (of why HCO's couldn't establish) until I found the "why". - (The UNDERESTIMATION of what it take to ESTABLISH in a Dev-T civilization and org.) 88.) Now many people think a "why" has to be a "who". Ex: Tells the story of New York org who fell apart by doing "witch hunts" looking for the "suppressive" among the executives. All kinds of "secret report" lines were set up which got 3P going and crashed the org. The execs blew and the org is still crashed and the engram is still there. A smart ESTO would go there and do a real evaluation, publish the "right why" and send it to all the old execs and staff and it might recover very fast. 89.) Part of that eval would have to be "why was the staff so weak that it went off-lines and sideways into secret report channels?" I don't know the answer. I know the Events but I don't know the WHY. The execs who blew were NOT poor producers, but they haven't come back yet, probably they are ARC Broken clear back to the beginning of track! 90.) It also doesn't have to be a "PR" why, it has to be the TRUTH. That is what blows charge all over the place. 91.) Staff members will develop more "PR per square inch" to explain why they are NOT producing than you ever heard of. "ESTO'S INSTANT HAT - PART 2" -9- ESTO SERIES - 2 92.) That is why an ESTO must be an expert in PR AND the Data Series. (I recommend to you the FEBC Tape # 3 - "PR Becomes a Subject"). 93.) This tech now is used by the ESTO, not the Org Officer or the Product Officers PR Man, at least internally. (The PR man and Div 6 can use it EXTERNALLY). 94.) The ESTO must be able to handle HE&R (Human Emotion & Reaction) fast, WITHOUT taking "sides" with the staff against the executive strata. He is himself, part of the executive strata. His authority as an Exec ESTO, comes from the chain of command. 95.) If the ESTO goes too "worker oriented", he will destroy the workers. If he goes too "martinet" (Status & authoritarian), he will destroy their confidence in him. 96.) So there is a "happy ground in-between" where he has got to be the "friend of the staff member". 97.) And the ESTO must not go into agreement with a staff member saying he's being "done in". There are channels in policy to use to handle any injustice or outness. He should be hatted to USE them. (Staff Member reports, Job-Endangerment chits, Illegal Order & Conditions policy, Vital Data Policy, Petition Policy, etc.) 98.) And if he was "standing in the wrong place at the wrong time", the ESTO has to teach him how to "stand in the right place at the right time". 99.) Don't ever take the side of a nattering staff member. The "Auditors Rights" are also part of an ESTO's kit. I recommend to you C/S Series # 1 "Auditors Rights" as the basic reactions of human beings as far as auditing is concerned. (Ex: You can handle a "sad effect" by having ARCBLD'2 pulled. You can handle "natter" by having MWH's pulled. You can get "service fac dramatizations" handled by running the Ser Fac, even on an OT 3. His list could have been incorrect or Grade IV wasn't run on all flows.) 100.) These people will generate Dev-T also. They DON?T DO their posts - they DRAMATIZE their "banks" or "case". So the basics of what is handled on the bridge and their symptoms are also part of an ESTOs kit. 101.) And, all of the Data Series and expertness in it, and all of the Org Series and HCO Series are all part of the tools and weapons the Establishing Officer can use. 102.) Now there is probably an "ESTO's Code", which hasn't been written because he is something NEW. 103.) Now I've tried to give you the width and breadth of the post and something of the importance of the post. "ESTO'S INSTANT HAT - PART 2" -10- ESTO SERIES - 2 104.) If the ESTO does his job well, the org will NOT "Roller-Coaster", but will continue to EXPAND. 105.) At the time of expansion, the one thing he will forget to do is put on an ASSISTANT ESTO. 106.) When a Division gets 30, 40, 50 staff, he needs an STO assistant for sure. Because when the WHOLE ORG had 30, 40 staff, HCO was UNABLE to establish it. So he must remember that what brought the ESTO to view was that there were not enough people ESTABLISHING. 107.) And then when a division has 2000 people in it, there would have to be - I don't know the exact ratio, but say 10 to 1 - 200 Establishing Officers in it! 108.) If anyone questions the economic necessity of having ESTO's because of Tech Admin Ratios, etc. tell them this: As an org grows, it has a corrosive (worsening) effect on the EFFICIENCY of the individual staff member. In other words, an organization does not get more productive the more numerous it gets (in proportion to the individual rate of production). Ex: 20 staff produce 20,000 units. 100 staff produce 65,000 units. (This is WITHOUT ESTOs) Ex: 20 staff produce 20,000 units. 90 staff + 10 ESTOs produce 100,000 units. (This is WITH ESTOs) 109.) So an org can't afford NOT to have ESTOs! It is a WASTEFUL action to have a 30 man org WITHOUT some ESTOs. 110.) Let me give you an idea: - A 3 man org should have one ESTO. (An auditor, a C/O and ESTO would be the three.) It would shortly become an organization of 5 or 6 because it HAS an ESTO. It will stay an org of 2 or 3 if not. 111.) You will have to "sell" the idea of ESTO's to the org, because many people do not understand it. Ex: An exec saying, "We don't need an ESTO because I had all the staff myself". But actually the staff are NOT hatted and I (LRH) get all the products out of the area! Ex: An exec saying, "I don't want to be an ESTO, I want to be an O/O". He doesn't realize we have refined the system and that he wouldn't raise the income as an O/O but COULD help quadruple it as an ESTO. 112.) So, even in the case of a 3 man org, one should be an ESTO. And he would be the only one who was SINGLE HATTED. The O/O might be the Reg & D of P and everything else, and the auditor might hold hats in tech and Qual, but the ESTO would be single hatted. "ESTO'S INSTANT HAT - PART 2" -11- ESTO SERIES - 2 113.) There is no such thing as a double-hatted ESTO. 114.) Now, lets take an org of 10 or 12. You wold have 3 ESTOs: An I/C ESTO, a Div 7, 1, 2 ESTO, a Div 3, 4, 5, 6 ESTO. 115.) If it has ESTOs in this proportion, it will shortly become VIABLE. It can't fail because it's HATTED. All these "hopes of decay" are gone! (Laugh) 116.) It will soon become an org of 25 or 30. You now start going for one per division. You put in the TEO & QEO. (Tech ESTO & Qual ESTO) By the time it gets about 50+ staff you should have an ESTO for every division. 117.) In a CLO, you would have a 7, 1, 2 ESTO, a 3, 5, 6 ESTO, and an Ops (4) ESTO. (Operations Bu.) (That Ops ESTO covers Data, Action, Ext Comm & Management Branches) With an ESTO I/C, that's 4 ESTOS. 118.) Now when an area gets BIT, like a Tech Div with 40 staff in it, you start putting more ASSISTANT ESTOs into the area to help the TEO. SIDE B 119.) Now I've used the terms ESTABLISHMENT OFFICER and ESTABLISHING OFFICER interchangably. The post is ESTABLISHMENT OFFICER and the DUTY is ESTABLISHING. 120.) Any ESTO going on post must do a certain amount of identification of himself and his duties to those he will be ESTOing. If he is over Div 7, 1, 2 and doesn't do this, then the people in one division will think he's lazy because they only see him 1/3 of the time. 121.) We will be putting together the uniform and insignia of the Establishment Officer. It will become a special corps. 122.) There will be a Senior Exec ESTO here at Flag in the Management Bureau. One for SO orgs and one for Scientology Orgs. (Even may break it down into areas, like PAC, EUS, UK, EU, etc.) 123.) This will go in as a NETWORK of ESTOs, each having their opposite number at Flag. 124.) Now, what happens on Flag? It combines Bureaux and Divisions. Each has 2 sets of policy that apply. (HCOPL's and CBOs & FO's.) (Central Bureau Orders and Flag Orders.) The ESTO must realize that a Bureau is EXTERNAL and has EXTERNAL products, and a Division is INTERNAL or LOCAL. "ESTO'S INSTANT HAT - PART 2" -12- ESTO SERIES - 2 125.) The there are my AIDES, who run these Bureaux which manage EXTERNAL ORGS ON POLICY with the overall strategy and tactics and lines given in CBOs and FOs. 126.) Thus they have to know POLICY AND CBOs & FOs. 127.) AND the duties of being an Aide, which are quite demanding and sometimes rough to confront. 128.) A Bureaux is something that operates another org. It handles and controls other 3rd Dynamics. 129.) It's also supposed to operate the org IMMEDIATELY UNDER IT (as management is always set up close to a working org so they maintain reality.) On Flag, this is the F.A.O. (Flag Admin Org), which handles FCCIs, and Public. (FCCI = Flag Case Completion Intensive) 130.) On Flag, it's the EXTERNAL Function that is IMPORTANT. EXTERNAL MANAGEMENT brings in currently 83% of the income of Flag. INTERNAL ORGS bring in about 17%. 131.) And yet the internal orgs here are enormously manned up and the external bureau are terrifically undermanned! 132.) So what is the effectiveness of that External function? It will be as effective as it is HATTED and DOESN'T engage in DEV-T and as long as it is served well by the internal group. (Auditing, Training - FAO) (Food, Transport, Berthing, Security, Office Space, etc. - FSO or Flag Ship Org.) 133.) So, in an ORG, The Div Heads are a PRODUCT CONFERENCE. In a Bureau, the Aides form an AIDES COUNCIL, which decides MANAGEMENT ACTIONS for External Orgs. 134.) So the AIDES COUNCIL does NOT engage in "running the ship", but can "monitor" it if not served well. Its attention must be kept EXTERNAL. 135.) Now, let me show you how important this is: Each big Boom of Scientology orgs was when Flag was heavily on the lines managing. And when the internal noise and Dev-T ON Flag became too great, the attention would be pulled INTERNAL and a crash would occur on EXTERNAL lines. And that is the Subject of a very searching evaluation. You want to know the why of Booms and Depressions? Well, the more general "why" IS Dev-T and unhattedness, but the local Flag "why" is just as above. 136.) So in managing orgs, remember that a DISTRACTION of ATTENTION from EXTERNAL to INTERNAL can crash the stats. And that it is caused by Dev-T and Unhattedness, and is remedied by ESTOs. 137.) So, the HATTEDNESS AND ABSENCE OF DEV-T on Flag must be greater than any other org. It has to be so good, that the most efficient org on the planet would appear "totally Dev-T" in comparison to Flag. "ESTO'S INSTANT HAT - PART 2" -13- ESTO SERIES - 2 138.) And that's why you ESTO trainees were summoned so urgently and why this ESTO program is going in so rapidly. 139.) Now YOU are being told to go on the job without being totally established as an ESTO. There is an FO which says "a S.O. Member can do ANYTHING". We expect a Sea Org Member to be able to do ANYTHING, so you ARE ESTO's, that's it. 140.) You will find this cycle repeats. You won't be able to AFFORD training ESTOs for 3 months full time in a course room. So you do "on the job training" on THEM. 141.) ESTO's will probably always be trained this way. You will have to catch up on your study of the materials I've mentioned WHILE you are ESTABLISHING. 142.) Look at what you must know: - All the policies, functions, and operations of the DIVISION BUREAU, or ORG you are working on establishing. - Plus all the policies, functions, and operations of the HCO division and everything written about it. - Plus all the policies and functions that have been written about TECHNICAL application to the control and handling of Human Emotion & Reaction (HE&R). 143.) And that gives you the scope of what you have to know to do your job successfully. 144.) This talk today, was to INSTANT HAT you - on the scope, the "reason why", and the background, of your post. *** END ESTO - 2 *** "EVALUATION... PART 1" -14- ESTO SERIES - 3 LRH Tape Notes ESTO - 3 7203CO2SO 02 Mar 72 ESTO SERIES - 3 =============== EVALUATION AND HANDLING ----------------------- OF PERSONELL - PART 1 --------------------- SIDE A ------ 1.) This is a talk on ESTOs. As you know, there is nothing covering this in policy at this time. This will be handled and policy letters will be written. 2.) You should note, that the Product Org Officer System, which is the immediate predecessor, was not put into policy either, but was on tapes: It was run and was very successful, but it hat a fatal weakness. And that was the ESTABLISHMENT COULD NOT OCCUR. 3.) There were two reasons for this: 1.) The flurry and urgency of Production make it very difficult for Establishment to Occur. 2.) The Establishment personell of the org were insufficiently numerous to stand up the demands of Production. 4.) Therefore the org was relatively unhatted while production was being demanded of it, and the demands for production produced fantastic quantities of Dev-T. 5.) This Dev-T then drowned the org which had not been established. 6.) This Dev-T policy pack you have covers this fully. Now, you ask, "what is new about this?". "We have known about Dev-T for years!" Yes, we have, and there was a FAINT reference to unhattedness in the Dev-T policies. But it did not step up the IMPORTANCE of that fact. 7.) The CAUSE of Dev-T IS UNHATTEDNESS. 8.) And Dev-T drowns the org. 9.) Ex: It's like "yellow jaundice". The skin turns yellow. That is a symptom. But the cause is a LIVER infection. To just try to apply cosmetics to the yellow skin will not handle the disease. The CAUSE is in the liver, and it needs antibiotics, etc. "EVALUATION... PART 1" -2- ESTO SERIES - 3 10.) Dev-T is only the SYMPTOM. Unhattedness is the CAUSE. 11.) Therefore you can DETECT unhattedness by spotting Dev-T. 12.) A survey of Dev-T throughout the org will bring into your hands those who are UNHATTED. And they are consuming the time of a least 2 other staff member while their jobs and post products are NOT being done. So 1 Person doing Dev-T is like having at LEAST 3 less staff in the org! 13.) So, Dev-T showing up will tell you immediately that you have an added unproductive staff load and a "camoflaged HOLE" in the org. 14.) A "camoflaged hole" is where it looks like something is there, but it's actually a hole. 15.) And that hole ITSELF will generate Dev-T. But the area is so noisy, you don't see it as a hole. Ex: You think you have a Qual Sec, but he is always on every one else's lines with Dev-T. There is a being there with a title, but in reality there are not Qual Sec functions being done. And that "missingness" generates its own Dev-T. 16.) The people all around the area have to wear the hat of Qual Sec - So they don't get their own posts done! AND they have to cope with the nonsense that is coming from that particular post. 17.) So "Dev-T" is a primary diagnostic tool for the "illness" of an org. 18.) Now it isn't a "who". You shouldn't think of it in terms of a "who", as in "Who is the SP?" or "Who should we shoot?". That is an Ethics Officer attitude, not an ESTO attitude. The ESTO thinks of it as "who needs HATTING?" 19.) So you are working with a DIAGNOSIBLE ILLNESS OF A 3RD DYNAMIC, the symptom of which is Dev-T. 20.) So it's somebody NOT doing his job PLUS involving a lot of others around him in the time, effort, and material use, for "no-production". (So you CAN have 8655 staff members getting out the production of only 1 small boy!) 21.) And the small boy would probably be kicked in the head if they caught him at it! (Joke) 22.) It is very easy to think of this in terms of maliciousness, or evil intention, because the destructiveness is so great. 23.) And you as an ESTO will continually receive demands from the Production-Programs side of the org to "shoot". "EVALUATION... PART 1" -3- ESTO SERIES - 3 24.) They don't have a "why". It just seems desperate! So you get a "Shoot him - now - now - now!" 25.) Ex: During WW II the Germans could not believe the ineffeciency and uselessness of the Italian intelligence agency. They concluded it was full of spies and came down on them HARD and took over the whole thing themselves. The Italian intelligence wasn't that bad, they just weren't HATTED. 26.) So in the desperation of operations, with everything going down the spout, the HE&R that can be generated is very great. Its 1st expression therefore is: "Them guys is doing us in! Where are some lions to throw them to?" 27.) So if you wind up automatically throwing everybody overboard, firing, racking, doing-in, Comm Eving, shooting or getting rid of everyone indicated to you as "bad", you would soon have NO-organization at all - and you would lose the war like Italy did. 28.) And the people still left would be so terrified, they would become ineffective and robotically UNdependable and WANT to lose and end the game too. 29.) You can generate a level of INSECURITY in an org this way which is unbelievable. Posts aren't safe, nothing is safe, and eventually you hear a rumour coming up the line "I don't think it's SAFE to be an Exec, the last 6 Execs on that post got shot!" 30.) I have seen this come up in Session folders as W/H's, because the person was from an org where the "yellow jaundice" of Dev-T was rampant and made the "skin" of that org very, very, yellow. 31.) The depths to which humans can sink because of non-comprehension are very, very low. That is no reason to lose your faith in the human race, because they can be "pulled up" from the depths too! 32.) Ex: Three stewards had been hurt in last 3 days, slipping and falling. I sent messengers to investigate. Water was found on the galley floor, slippery soapy water. Traced it to a dishwasher who had long gloves on and when she raised her hands, the dishwater ran on the floor from the gloves. The dishwasher thought the "Jackon Boiler" (For coffee) was leaking and was about to involve the Engine Room repair crew in the cycle, until I just told her to roll up the cuffs of her gloves. 33.) "EVALUATION... PART 1" -4- ESTO SERIES - 3 34.) This is the kind of thing an ESTO has to handle 16 hours a day. 35.) Continous, continous discovery of WHY and handling by HATTING. It's the "why" you can't hat, the "why" it's going wrong, and it has to do with an individual person. And there ALWAYS is a WHY. 36.) Now, when these discoveries are done from Command Level, the WHY is found and there are ORDERS or TARGETS to fully handle. 37.) It's not usually the case that people WON'T get out the bulk mailing. There is a "bug", a "why". This would require an INVESTIGATION, EVALUATION, AND PROGRAM (by C/O, E/D, or Product Officer). 38.) It would have then, targets on it for the ESTO to do to handle any unhattedness. 39.) Ex: - Bulk mail stat down. - Investigated. - Found no postage money asked for in FP. - Further investigation finds it's not correct on FP # 1, so is never approved. - The FP # 1 was not done for THIS org, a faulty one was "borrowed" from another org of the same size to "save time" and get a "fast compliance". 40.) The ESTO would be given the HATTING targets: FP Commitee, Dissem Sec, Treasury, HCO, and anyone who approved the FP # 1, and the originator of it for use in the org. 41.) Ex: A Treasury Division who ALSO invoices the Management Org %'s. When asked what THIS ORG'S income was, they kept giving the Management Org's income (from the %%s). They neglected collecting any of their OWN income because they thought the %'s WERE their income! Really unhatted! I checked further and found not one person in that Treasury Division knew any basic finance policy! 42.) They didn't know: INCOME MUST BE GREATER THAN OUTGO. They didn't know: A MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION MUST BE SUPPORTED BY THE SERVICE ORGANIZATION ATTACHED TO IT. 43.) The 2nd one is because IF a Management Org is so lousy that they can't make the service org attached to them make money, then they have no right to collect from remote orgs. 44.) So this Treasury division was ignorant of ANY policy. How did happen? The FALSE datum came into that: "This is a S.O. org, so Scientology policy doesn't apply". - So of course no one bothered to study it! And also, "We are not a management org, so their policy doesn't apply either". Result? NO INCOME COLLECTED AT ALL. The whole division was a camoflaged hole. "EVALUATION... PART 1" -5- ESTO SERIES - 3 45.) Now there is a thing called a "Disagreement Check" done by Qual in Dept 13. And they should know how to do these fast without backlogging them. This is a good way to find the area of personal, individual, UNHATTEDNESS. 46.) As an ESTO, you will find one of these wild "twists" where-ever it is going wrong. Some are hard to believe. So in the realm of THE INCREDIBLE, it is easy to just substitute "shoot him". 47.) You will find people who say: "He's crazy, he's treasonable, shoot him, nobody in his right mind would think like that". 48.) True, maybe he ISN'T in his "right mind", but you as an ESTO can put him there. His "right mind" as a staff member is with his HAT ON. 49.) There is a management scale of actions that begin with sounding out a person's CASE in the matter. 50.) And that's when you are checking out personell for employment or recruitment. 51.) If you start filling up an org with people whose cases are below the center-line of an OCA, you are going to be in trouble. 52.) Now it's easy to analyze these graphs. If you turn it over, you will find the the Testing Officer has done a beautiful analysis of this case that reads like a horoscope. And that's fine, and the pubic love them. BUT THAT ISN'T HOW I USE THEM. 53.) You use an OCA simply and totally this way: DOWN ON THE LEFT: (below the center-line) = WILDLY SCREAMINGLY, OUT OF VALENCE. DOWN ON THE RIGHT: (below the center-line) = EVIL PURPOSE, WILDLY NUTS OR PSYCHOTIC. SIDE B 54.) And that is all you need to know except this one fact - A PERSON WHO IS VERY THEETIE-WEETIE, HAS A TREMENDOUS NUMBER OF SIGNIFICANCES, AND HAS A VERY HIGH OCA (they are kind of "fey", it's all "significant" - every look, glance, idea, statement is very "significant" to them), WILL, UNDER PROCESSING, FALL VERY LOW ON THE LEFT SIDE, THEN FALL VERY LOW ON THE RIGHT SIDE, THEN WILL COME BACK UP INTO NORMAL RANGE AND BE SANE. "EVALUATION... PART 1" -6- ESTO SERIES - 3 55.) I've now told you, in these few sentences, all you need to know about an OCA. That's all you ever use. 56.) Now an OCA can be "messed up" by evaluation for the person before he does it, telling him what to write on it, falsifying and OCA, or an OCA being done by somebody who was a TEST I/C and knows all the right answers. 57.) But that can be confirmed by an APTITUDE TEST. IF THE SCORE ON AN APTITUDE TEST IS BELOW 65, THE PERSON IS SOMEONE WHO WILL BREAK THINGS AND HAVE ACCIDENTS, SO YOU DON'T WANT TO HAVE MUCH TO DO WITH THEM AS A STAFF MEMBER. 58.) So the OCA can be cross-checked with the aptitude test. That's all you need to know about the OCA (or APA as it's called in America). 59.) The OCA is easier to read as it has the center-line. The APA has the shaded areas. They are both the same test. 60.) Now you want nothing to do with any kind of test that requires OPINION to evaluate. (Like the ROHRSHACH or MINNESOTA MULTIPHASIC.) 61.) The psychologist has gone into "SIGNIFICANCE of his own EVALUATIONS" on cases, because he, himself, is so "significant". 62.) If anybody ever tries to give you a ROHRSHACH, or "ink blot" test, just say "I don't see anything in it." or "It's just ink on a piece of paper." That absolutely RUINS their test. 63.) Most of these psychology tests were born out of "phrenology", which is reading the bumps on a person's head to tell their character! 64.) Then they went a little "deeper", and thought it was the "brain", that caused wierd behavious. You think I'm kidding? No, these are facts! 65.) I.Q. TESTS, precisely timed, are another factor. You don't want anything to do with a person whose I.Q. (Intelligence Quotient) is below 70 (for staff). You want to regard with some suspicion a person whose I.Q. is only 90. 66.) PROCESSING will raise an I.Q. at about one point per hour of processing. 67.) So, there are the 3 tests most used in Scientology (OCA, Aptitude, I.Q.). (Others were tried and discarded, because MSH could do them in 1 min 30 sec and they were supposed to take 20 minutes, so she figured they were worthless - Laugh.) "EVALUATION... PART 1" -7- ESTO SERIES - 3 68.) You can evaluate personell against other things, like PAST RECORD or EXPERIENCE, but that is subject to FALSE REPORTS. 69.) So PAST EXPERIENCE is valid, but has to be taken only conditionally. STATISTICS are valuable as an indicator of past performance - if accurate and not false or meaningless. 70.) The higher in the org the STAT represented, the more validity it has. It indicates ability to control several areas. But an individual stat like "Stamped envelopes" is subject to falsification. 71.) Ex: A C/O whose INCOME and PAID COMPLETITIONS was very high. The validity of that is very great. 72.) But "not statistic at all" and "never kept a statistic" are very significant also - a person like that may be totally Dev-T or lazy. 73.) So, EVALUATION of PERSONELL can be done with a fair rapidity. It includes: - THE TEST BATTERY - HIS ETHICS RECORD - HIS PERSONELL RECORD - HIS STATISTIC RECORD 74.) Now that is the way to Evaluate personell. you will ERR in "failing to believe it" more than anything else. 75.) There is also the "hope" factor people use in orgs - they put somebody on a post just to have a "body" there, and "hope" that somehow he will get audited to handle his outnesses. 76.) It is true that auditing WILL improve a person, but you have to know the "Degraded Being" technology. (There are HCOBs on this). 77.) Yes, 100 hours of auditing and all Lower Grades WILL improve this person's ability on post. BUT YOU HAVE HIRED A PC! And staff members are supposed to HANDLE PCs. PCs do NOT easily handle the public. And you've just mixed your personell pools. You have tried to take your STAFF from the PC pool! 78.) Now, the minute you put a PC on a POST, he will start to absorb ALL the auditing meant for staff. 79.) And the F/N VGIs % of Staff will fall if you have too many of these PCs on post. 80.) This is because you will be processing THEM and not the rest of the staff. 81.) So, you end up "REWARDING A DOWNSTAT" and that is the thing which has driven civilizations right on out the bottom. "EVALUATION... PART 1" -8- ESTO SERIES - 3 82.) So the "pc" ought to be out there with a job, shovelling coal or something, and BUYING his processing. 83.) An org can develop a real "soft spot" on this and end up being a "free clinic". 84.) You as an ESTO may find these people scattered through the divisions of an org. You estimate them by the factors I have given and by the thickness of his pc folders while on staff, plus a meter check. 85.) Now, an ESTO should know all about METER CHECKS. Meter checks are not sec-checks. You just put the guy on the meter. What does he read? That's it. What's his TA? Does he F/N? Does he have a Dirty Needle? That's all you want to know. 86.) Now an INTERVIEW on a meter is very interesting because you always find the charged areas. 87.) I always do my D of P interviews on a meter. 88.) And as an ESTO, I would do personell interviews on a meter. (This is for those already on staff you are trying to debug, not applicants for a job on the recruiting line.) 89.) I would make up a little list of possible areas that COULD be bugging the staff member and ask him each one and note the reads and reaction. You may be surprised at the result. Ex: Staff member not doing his job, causing Dev-T. His wife is divorcing him, he has debts, and lost his car so has no transport. WITHOUT A METER, you may be so foolish as to ASSUME you know the reason he is doing poorly - such as "Of course he has problems, his wife is leaving him." Send him to the Chaplin or to Qual for a session and start causing Dev-T yourself! WITH A METER, you do an interview on various areas - Home?, Wife?, Money?, Job?, Health?, Transport? - and you find he has trouble with his SENIOR on the Org Board and NONE of the other ares are bothering him! Handling can be as simple as a checkout on ONE policy letter! 90.) So don't try to HANDLE until you know the WHY. Otherwise as an ESTO, you will start causing Dev-T yourself! 91.) Before you take any broad, sweeping actions on a case, a staff member, or an org, you had BETTER KNOWN WHY. 92.) There are certain lists which help you in certain areas. For example, if you found a "why" on a staff of not being able to study - we have a STUDY CORRECTION LIST. We are rich in this kind of thing. 93.) But that LIST would have to be done by an auditor and it would have to be C/Sed so as to not interfere with any auditing program in progress. Because it IS AN AUDITING ACTION to handle the areas that come up on such a list. "EVALUATION... PART 1" -9- ESTO SERIES - 3 94.) If a C/S orders, or an ESTO tries to get done, an action like this in the middle of some other major case action - you can WRECK THE CASE. SO DON'T DO IT. 95.) Remember, C/Ses don't like Execs ordering "other actions" to be done on a case in the middle of a program. So, as an ESTO - coordinate these things. 96.) Also, do NOT make your Interview Questions DOWNTONE or ACCUSATIVE. (EX: Are you planning to blow? Are you disappointed in your job?, etc., etc.) Because, if these read and not cleared up fully in auditing AT ONCE the person WILL dramatize or cave in or blow. 97.) You can ask anything you want and he will feel good about it afterward as long as you don't INVALIDATE him in the Questions. (Ex: How are you doing on post? How is your job going?) 98.) So an interview by an ESTO is not a "sec-check" and not "auditing by list", it's just a 2WC to find the area of difficulty. About as far as I would go, is I might ask if he had "Overts on Post?" but I wouldn't "tell him" what they were - and I would get them off right away. 99.) So you are just trying to find the zone he has trouble with. One of the 1st things you say is, "I'm not auditing you." 100.) You just let him talk a bit about each one and you will probably get an F/N. 101.) There was a student here for the OEC, FEBC that went spinny each time he tried to read an HCOB or HCOPL. Finally, I had an HCOPL pinned on a board upside down and had him confront it for two hours. He came out of it, and was able to study. 102.) Your viewpoint as an ESTO is: A) This person is supposed to be occupying a post. B) He is supposed to be producing something for an organization. 103.) The AUDITOR'S point of view is "trying to do something for the case". 104.) So, as an ESTO, when EVALUATING personell and going over these tests and so forth, you are ONLY interested in the EFFECTIVENESS AND EFFICIENCY of this person and how his MORALE affects it. "EVALUATION... PART 1" -10- ESTO SERIES - 3 105.) Someone may say "that's a very capitalistic, totalitarian, communistic, cruel way of looking a people". But it ISN'T. IF THIS GUY DOESN'T PRODUCE, HIS MORALE WILL REMAIN ON THE BOTTOM. 106.) Production is the basis of Morale, and an individual who ISN'T completing cycles of action and getting something done will NEVER have good morale. I don't care how many ice-cream sodas he has every day or how many liberties he goes on every week, I don't care what you do FOR him. If he ISN'T CONSTRIBUTING SOMETHING to his immediate enviornment - he's a "GONE DOG". 107.) We know what "psychosis" is these days, there is a bulletin on it. It is simply an EVIL PURPOSE. It means "a definite obsessive desire to destroy or harm". Now, anybody has a few evil-purposes that they may say or do when they are forced to do something they do not want to do --but that's NOT what we are really talking about. What we are talking about is the MONITORING EVIL PURPOSE THAT MONITORS ALL OF THIS GUY'S ACTIVITIES. 108.) And that is a PSYCHO, a real PSYCHO. 109.) Now there are people who are PTS and who act "fairly psycho", and there are people who are "Aberrated" - who merely have OUTPOINTS in their thinking. 110.) The psychairitrists never differentiated amongst these people. That's because he thought people had a "disease" called "mental illness". It's not true. There is no "bacteria" that produces "psychosis". 111.) So, it falls into 3 groups: A.) The guy is a really evil-purpose boy. He's out to destroy the lot. His whole life is monitored by this. Criminals and that sort, are motivated this way. And they are hard to detect because they carefully "cover it all up". These guys are relatively rare, but not too rare (2 1/2%) B.) People are likely to confuse them with a PTS, who roller-coasters. He has an SP (or Psycho) in his enviornment somewhere. He's way up today, way down tomorrow. He's fairly obvious. (The Psycho SP is NOT so obvious. You can't tell he is an SP by his "behaviour" in most cases. Only by his actions and results.) The "PTS case" in a FOLDER looks like: several good sessions, then a repair, more good ones, then a repair - over and over. On POST it is the same - did OK this last week, now not doing well at all, over and over. So you look at the Folder Summary. (Don't confuse it with a "slow-case" or one having lots of Rundowns who is nevertheless getting F/Ns.) The PTS will go: F/N, BER, F/N, etc. HITA, Repair to F/N, BER, F/N, etc. He IS connected to a Suppressive. There is somebody in his enviornment, or family, or on his case, that is a psycho SP. Sometimes a person can be connected to an SP and HE doesn't cave in..... "EVALUATION... PART 1" -11- ESTO SERIES - 3 THE SUPPRESSIVE DOES! But where you have staff members who continually roller-coaster, you are dealing with a PTS. The PTS Policy all applies and is fully correct. We can solve it these days bay a PTS Rundown. It can be done by a Class IV and is not difficult to do. C.) And there is the "aberrated" staff member who has outpoints in his thinking. He can be handled by normal processing and hatting actions. 112.) So in the category of "CASE" there are two situations the ESTO will come across: I.) He discovers the person is a pc or "case" before he gets hired or during his application or testing. HANDLING: DON'T. Just DON'T hire the person. II.) He discovers the person is already on staff, hired by someone earlier. HANDLING: Don't just kick him out or put him in front of a "fitness board". (It takes a Court of Ethics or Comm EV to recommend a fitness board.) And to just "fire him" would make staff feel insecure. So how do you handle it? *** END ESTO - 3 *** (Cont. on ESTO - 4 "Evaluation and Handling of Personell" - (Part 2)). "EVALUATION... PART 2" -12- ESTO SERIES - 4 LRH Tape Notes ESTO - 4 7203CO2SO 02 Mar 72 ESTO SERIES - 4 =============== EVALUATION AND HANDLING ----------------------- OF PERSONELL - PART 2 --------------------- SIDE A ------ 1.) Normally, you don't offload or fire anyone unless the terms of his staff application form or contract have been falsified. 2.) The "bad off" cases will normally falsify it anyhow. 3.) Ex: They say they are "free from debts" and they owe 10,000! 4.) The time comes when you can only "hold up and support" someone for only so long. So, HANDLE staff so they CAN perform. 5.) But if they produce enormous amounts of Dev-T, you are better off putting them on a direct, simple job under direct, constant supervision. 6.) The "bad off" person used to be called "insane" about 100 years ago. 7.) There is another category of person by the way: (See # 11, ESTO 3) D.) The guy who lives an oddball life, you know? He doesn't eat or sleep much, burns his candle at both ends, etc. You just handle these with good 8C. "You get some sleep. I want you "bright-eyed and bushy-tailed" tomorrow. And EAT well." 8.) Your first action usually in HANDLING a goofy area is just to directly handle it with an order, right away. You observe, do a fast on the spot eval and TELL the guy and order the correct action done. This is the "cope" HANDLING. 9.) Here comes the Reality that an ESTO must know. When you tell somebody the TRUTH they get good indicators. (IF you don't relay it "nastilly or 1.1" or in an invalidative manner.) 10.) My messengers are trained to run messages and orders back and forth until GIs come in. Why? Because he will get GIs when he hits the TRUTH. "EVALUATION... PART 2" -2- ESTO SERIES - 4 11.) A student who has passed and deserved the pass, when TOLD he has passed, will get GI's. (GIs = good indicators) 12.) A student who has passed and deserved to pass, when TOLD he hasn't passed, will get BI's. (BIs = bad indicators) 13.) Why? It's NOT the TRUTH. 14.) A person who hasn't passed honestly, and is told he hasn't passed honestly, will get GIs. 15.) So the way you get GIs is with the truth. 16.) A person who HASN'T passed and is told he HAS passed will get BIs. 17.) So you TELL THEM the truth. Ex: A staff applicant has 3 girlfriends and promised to marry 2 of them. You tell him "that's a situation" and he "should handle it". He gets GIs because he KNOWS he should. 18.) If you hit the right why, you get GIs. So tell them. 19.) Now if you don't get GIs, you haven't got the right why, so don't go off into accusing the person or other desperate statements. Just recognize you don't have the right why. 20.) The "reasonability" of the humanoid starts coming in in some cases, the "cultural reasonability". Ex: Person drinks too much. You tell him to stop drinking BIs come in. A "reasonable" person will think the BIs are because he was told to stop drinking. No, it's because DRINKING is NOT the RIGHT WHY for this person. It's NOT what is wrong with him. You have missed. 21.) Actually, people love to have their lives inquired into. It's a great relief to them. If you stick to the TRUTH and don't invalidate them. An ESTO will only feel bad about doing it if he can't find the RIGHT "why". 22.) Psychoanalysists are not liked in this respect because they are always finding and indicating the "wrong why". 23.) They will find the slightest early childhood "lock" and indicate it as the "reason" for all the person's problems and neuroses in life. 24.) They know Dianetics "works". They use it to get the person to recall childhood so they can evaluate their own fixed idea to the patient when anything comes up that seems to fit. Ex: "Aha, you hate your father because he didn't change your diapers when you were a baby!" 25.) So your action with a staff member is to find the information about what is causing the non-optimum performance, tell them what it is and to handle it. If you get GIs, you've got it. If you get BIs, you haven't got it. "EVALUATION... PART 2" -3- ESTO SERIES - 4 26.) If you didn't get GIs, then immediately find the RIGHT WHY. 27.) Now, however, if you have to handle the same person every day, then it's more deep seated and is an AUDITING problem, and requires case handling. 28.) Remember, you are just trying to get the person to do the functions of his post and produce his products without Dev-T. So if he DOES, fine. If he doesn't, find the WHY and tell him to handle. If he DOES produce then, fine. But if it goes on and on, only auditing will handle it. You have a PC as a staff member. 29.) Remember this: IF SOMEONE IS GIVING YOU DEV-T - and you are the expert in handling it - THEN they are raising HELL with every one else in the org, because those people don't know how to defend themselves against Dev-T! 30.) F HE GENERATES DEV-T FOR YOU AND IS HARD TO HANDLE,HE IS HELL ON OTHER PEOPLE'S LINES. 31.) You are only getting a small portion of what he is handing out elsewhere. 32.) Just indicate this datum to executives and they will have a big realization about this - because they have Dev-T sources on their lines, but perhaps didn't realize that when not in view to them, then Dev-T is being caused on the REST OF THE ORG out of sight! 33.) Now, what about this guy you can't handle? Well, you could Comm EV and off-load or have a fitness board, etc. But it is worth-while to SALVAGE personell as long as you don't take it to great lengths. You give them a chance. Always give them a chance. 34.) For example, you can have an "Estates Project Force" to do jobs under Supervision. MEST work. 35.) But watch out, because a remarkable thing can happen. Others will use the Project Force as a PERSONELL POOL and put these Dev-T producers right back on a post BEFORE they are handled! 36.) People just coming into the org could also get their basics in by being put on the Project Force while learning their basics. 37.) So there would be two categories on the Project Force: Category A: New people learning their basics. Category B: People who have had a chance and are being rehabilitated so they can produce without Dev-T. 38.) Don't put Category B people back on post until they ARE handled. 39.) Employment, Exercise, and a Change of Enviornment can do wonders for a person. "EVALUATION... PART 2" -4- ESTO SERIES - 4 40.) Before psychairitry, there were practitioners called "Alienists" who used to do this kind of therapy. Back in the 1800's. 41.) Employment, Exercise amnd Change of Enviornment with Supervision will Extrovert people quite remarkably. 42.) If a staff memeber is doing this and getting his basics in better and his staff hat on, why then he can have another chance. 43.) You will find that you can salvage a lot of Dev-T producers that way. So there should be such a unit. But it MUST be run right! 44.) You don't want it to happen that no one ever gets OFF an Estates Project Force. That way no one would ever get another chance. And if it was new staff, they never would get ANY chance. 45.) We have found that if you use a new staff member as an HCO Expeditor, he gets sneaked into a post almost immediately WITHOUT hatting. 46.) Most of your failures here at FLAG were because a new staff recruit came and was put at once onto a post without basics. It was VERY UNeconomical. Ex: Four were put on in Mimeo Files and 8 months later had accomplished NOTHING. 47.) So it is a waste of time to put someone on post with no BASICS in. 48.) The principle these Project Forces work on is: ONE JOB, ONE PLACE, ONE TIME. If you just scatter them around through the org, the whole purpose is defeated. 49.) If that rule is violated, then you will NOT get a result of your order to "assign this person to the Project Force until case and study are handled". 50.) It takes an MAA (Master at Arms) or Ethics Officer to be in charge of such a unit. 51.) They are run on Project Orders to paint, polish, build, renovate, clean, etc. Thus they are doing productive work and are not a drag on the organization. 52.) The MAA muster them, orders them and keeps them working. The MAA is NOT a member of the Project Force. He is Hatted Staff Member. 53.) So it is a valuable, organized, operated, producing unit. 54.) They MUST have study time to get their basics in. When graduated from Basics (or RETRAIN of Basics), they go onto a regular post. "EVALUATION... PART 2" -5- ESTO SERIES - 4 55.) The anxiety of people for posting more staff will defeate the project force unless it is protected very strongly. This anxiety for personell can cause enormous Dev-T in an org by itself. 56.) Ex: Stewards area crashes, plates broken, area filthy, execs frantic. It was found that the steward's project force were all put on POSTS in the area without completing their basic study and hatting. 57.) So there is a way to salvage people. You don't have to comm EV, Fitness Board, or offload them necessairily. 58.) UNLESS they are definitely a "pc2 after all this. They will tell you they are only there to have their "case" handled. 59.) Staff members have to handle the WORLD. They don't have time to handle ALSO cases within their own ranks in the org. 60.) The amount of Dev-T will interiorize it, engulf it, and it won't be able to function. 61.) Now I have given you the methods of establishing whether a staff member or recruit is allright or not, and the methods of handling him when he isn't allright. 62.) It's a sort of a STANDARD TECH for handling staff. It's STANDARD ADMINISTRATIVE TECH. This is what you do, ok? 63.) Now, if or when the staff is OK, you just hat and train and keep improving his post performance and you are away! 64.) Then the division or org will function. 65.) What you as an ESTO will tend to bog down on, is that Category of "NOT OK for post". Don't get FIXATED on this kind of people or you will neglect the org! 66.) Remember, don't "reward a down stat" with your time and attention to the exclusion of other producing staff, or you won't have a division or org. 67.) A C/S can fall into this trap too. He doesn't do the steps to get trained auditors, so sticks trying to keep on handling the same thins over and over. 68.) As an ESTO, you may have to hat the C/Ses too. 69.) You say. "Bit wow! He's a Class 12, What do I know about his post?" 70.) Oh, yeah? He may be a Class 12 Technical Person, but REMEMBER, auditors quite often know NOTHING about administrative tech. It is one of their MAJOR WEAKNESSES. 71.) If you try to put a Class VIII; NON-ADMIN TRAINED person on, say, HCO, you WON'T get a HCO Exec and you have LOST an auditor. "EVALUATION... PART 2" -6- ESTO SERIES - 4 72.) So if that occurs, you know as an ESTO, you have PLENTY of hatting to do. 73.) Now if you have a highly trained technical Person who is ALSO trained as an administrator - WOW! This is great! Teriffic! 74.) But it can get lopsided the other way too. You can have a staff member who doesn't even know the ARC triangle! 75.) You will find both conditions: - People on ADMIN posts who say "HCOBs have nothing to do with us". - People on TECH posts who say "HCOPLs have nothing to do with us". 76.) So, if you as an ESTO are handling a C/S who can't get his auditors delivering successfully, you will normally find he has not completed the cycle of: 1) Instruct 2) Cram 3) Retread 4) Retrain but has become stuck in 1) and 2). 77.) Now a "RETREAD" is Method 4 Wordclearing on ALL the materials of the area of tech the auditor is goofing up on. So after a few Instructs and Crams, you order a "Retread". 78.) You as an ESTO should know how to do M4 on a meter to find misunderstoods in people's hats. 79.) M4 does not interupt auditing or "ruin his case". It can be done anytime. It's just spotting and handling specific MUs. Tip: Don't ask too broad a question or you won't get anything. Ex: "Is there an MU word in your hat?" - WRONG. "Is there a MU word in this PL?" (as he looks it over; READ!) - CORRECT. 80.) A RETREAD can also be done in a cycle of: - EXAM on materials. - M4 on areas of not-know or wrong answers. - RE-STUDY those areas after MUs handled. - EXAM on materials to a pass. 81.) After this he goes back to auditing. Now we Instruct and Cram again a few times. But if he goofs up continually now - we send him to 4) RETRAIN. 82.) A RETRAIN is a whole re-do of the course as if he was a brand new student. "EVALUATION... PART 2" -7- ESTO SERIES - 4 83.) Then back to auditing. Now, if he doesn't make it, that's it. An auditor is allowed only one RETREAD and one RETRAIN. 84.) That's all you are willing to spend. It's EXPENSIVE to the org to retrain its auditors, in terms of the "coins of the org". 85.) You are always spending the "coins" of the org when you are handling personell. It's expensive. So don't always spend them on the same guy. 86.) I hope you never run into it, but sometimes a person will not send auditors to cram or retread because it "might ARC Break them". Wow! How about all the pcs THEY are ARC Breaking? SIDE B 87.) So, if you find auditors goofing after many crams, Courts, chits, etc., it's because the RETREAD was never done. It is a missing gradient in study. Somewhere the guy missed it. 88.) They can't LEARN or they can't DO. The missing step or MU must be found so they can LEARN and APPLY. 89.) If a person like this is sent to a project force, he can learn to DO things, CONFRONT Mest, to BE there in the Universe instead of just "figger-figgering" all the time. He can EXTROVERT, REACH outward, EXTERIORIZE, LOOK outward. Nobody ever made them do this. 90.) The Instruct, Cram, Retread, Retrain cycle applies to ADMIN Posts as well. As an ESTO you may have to send 3/4 of an area or division to Retread their hats. Or to Retrain while on the Project Force. Just like that you don't have a division. The Product Officer is screaming! 91.) So how do you handle? You DO it. You may do it on a "one or two" at a time basis, or make the remaining staff cope like mad until the retread & retrains are back. You hold it there by "forte main". (Main Force). 92.) Here is the real test of an ESTO. Because he will find people who have been there a "long time" but who have never done basics. And those who are overdue for retread or retrain. 93.) People don't know "why they are there" or have "orientation" without the basics. 94.) The WRONG thing to do is to just conclude they are malicious or insane and just "shoot them". 95.) So you do as I've told you. Find the why. Put on the hats. Demonstrate a product producing ability. If needs basics, get them in. 96.) You may have to do several evaluations during a day's work to find "whys". A very LIGHT day might be 4 or so. "EVALUATION... PART 2" -8- ESTO SERIES - 4 97.) It may be more like 20! But these are not the kind of Evals you do by writing it all up and doing a program. You do it from Observations, Questions & Answers to get Data. Evaluate and analyze the data to find outpoints, investigate more thoroughly that area with the most outpoints, find the WHY. Indicate it, and issue the order and get it complied with NOW! It can be all done in your head and the orders given verbally. But you better know the ideal scenes and policy for the area so you don't cross it and cause Dev-T yourself. Got it? 98.) Now you are handling human beings, and they have feelings, so HE&R is definitely a commodity here. 99.) The HE&R is handled by 1.) Finding Right Whys. 2.) Issuing the Correct Orders to Handle (Indicating the correct action). 3.) Never being reasonable about it, but being direct and forthright. 100.) Now when you get somebody this DOESN'T work on, you have a pc there, a case. 101.) This is an auditing situation and requires "handling in depth" of a being who is way off the rails. This is best done while he is on a Project Force getting in his basics. 102.) You DON'T want to keep them on post in the org because they are basically: * OUT OF COMM * OTHER PURPOSED * HAVE PROBLEMS * ARE ABERRATED 103.) Ex: After lots of auditing, he finds he has always had a problem with his mother, but she has been dead for 20 years. 104.) Aberration is NOT the same as Insanity. Aberration is the basis of OUTPOINTS in thinking. 105.) There are the: 1.) INSANE 2.) PTS 3.) ABERRATED 106.) These are the 3 categories of being or states of being that produce NON-OPTIMUM behaviour. 107.) They are 3 ENTIRELY different things. "EVALUATION... PART 2" -9- ESTO SERIES - 4 108.) The INSANE you detect by graphs and behaviour. (SP Characteristics, Ev. Purps.) The PTS "roller-coaster" - grief, anatago, 1.1 "nice", propitiation, up and down. The merely ABERRATED has outpoints in his thinking and doing. 109.) I made a list to handle these "aberrated" ones. It's called an "HC list". (Because at one time there was going to be a "Hubbard Counsellor") (or "Consultant".) 110.) The HC list is simply an OUTPOINT LIST. And it's assessed. 111.) It's to find where the guy has outpoints crossing up his thinking. 112.) Having "outpoints in thinking" makes a person look very stupid. But it can be handled. 113.) I will outline these 3 for you more exactly: - The INSANE person will make destructive "mistakes" and "errors". But they are NOT mistakes and errors to him. He knows all the time how to do it right and is DELIBERATELY trying to harm or destroy the organization. He is doing it KNOWINGLY. He will try to "cover it up", pretend they were "mistakes", etc. - The PTS will get on everybody's lines, cause a lot of Dev-T, and be observed to go up and down the tone scale like a "yo-yo". - The ABERRATED will appear stupid in some areas, make mistakes, etc. but will handle when the outpoints are handled. He can improve. 114.) Now these are the 3 lowest categories pf personell. (A totally untrained person may ALSO apper "stupid" and make "mistakes" BUT in the course of normal hatting improves at a rate exactly proportional to the knowledge & application he receives by getting hatted or trained. 115.) So there is the ABERRATED one with outpoints who has trouble learning and applying. And the MISSING DATA one who just needs hatting and then all is well. 116.) The guy who is NOT trained or hatted has missed his gradients and just DOES NOT KNOW. This is the "MISSING DATA" staff member. 117.) You, as an ESTO, are dealing with the field of OMITTED TECHNOLOGY. "EVALUATION... PART 2" -10- ESTO SERIES - 4 118.) Where a staff are unhatted, the technology has been OMITTED. 119.) It's not that it doesn't exist. They just didn't study it or read it. 120.) Now, the ABERRATED one, who has OUTPOINTS in his thinking, don't believe they are just to do with Scientology or Tech or Policy. No, he's got them there all the time. If he's an "altered sequence" outpoint case, his time track will be all mixed up and he will talk and explain things also OUT OF SEQUENCE. Ex: " I came to the Sea Org then I left home before I was born." 121.) The simple outpoint of "OMITTED TECH" bridges from the aberrated one to the usual qualified staff member who CAN be trained and hatted. (And usually looks for the tech and data HIMSELF to learn more about his job.) 122.) So the 3 types of UNQUALIFIED STAFF are: INSANE, PTS (simply connected to somebody who IS insane), to the ABERRATED (outpoints), then to the OMITTED DATA (who just needs to be trained) and this bridges right into the QUALIFIED STAFF MEMBER. 123.) If you are very lucky, you will be dealing with these second types (QUALIFIED) who just need to be hatted or told what to do. 124.) From here on, your usual hatting and ESTO tech works very easily and well. If not, you have skipped a gradient or passed a MU or failed to detect the guy was really in a lower category. 125.) And when hiring, you will save yourself enormous amount of trouble by just NOT taking on a "pc". 126.) You are dealing with PERSONELL. - PERSONELL ACQUISITION - PERSONELL CORRECTION - PERSONELL SORT-OUT and HANDLING. 127.) You are dealing with people, and at a different level than an AUDITOR deals with them. 128.) The Jesuits, I was told once, are taught to accept the world as it is and begin there. This is what an ESTO does. The staff he has are the staff that is THERE and that's where he begins. 129.) So when you go back to your org, we start with what you've got and start hatting them. Then if it doesn't work on a few, they are in these lower categories, so you find which, and handle. 130.) So you are dealing with people as they ARE and as what you HOPE they will be. "EVALUATION... PART 2" -11- ESTO SERIES - 4 131.) So how LONG can you deal with people on a "HOPE THEY WIL BE GOOD STAFF" basis? 132.) Well, with an auditor it may be several MONTHS. Therefor, the recruitment of auditors should take place far ahead of anyone else, and no matter how soon you start, it will be too late. There's ALWAYS a need for auditors. 133.) So you do work on a HOPE basis. But when you walk in to a division, you start with what you have RIGHT THERE, RIGHT NOW. 134.) Then your HOPE factor comes in - What you HOPE to do with the personell and what do you have to do to make that HOPE come true? 135.) And that is your up-grade toward the IDEAL SCENE. 136.) And many are the losses which one must be willing to experience in this line of country. 137.) So realize that you are still making progress when you do three steps forward and only 2 back ( a way they tech the school children in Russia). You will eventually get there. 138.) If you expect success with EVERY human being, you are an optimist the like of which is not seen much anymore, because there are other STRESSES operating on people in the culture of society today. 139.) And other STRESSES in the org itself. Ex: A high exec wants a key staff member to go onto a network job or to Flag, or they want them offloaded. 140.) How do you handle this? Well, don't just sit there and try to "defend" the staff from Execs. That won't help. But do make a sound recommendation on what to do to either SALVAGE or REPLACE the person. 141.) The only way you will get in trouble as an ESTO is if the staff are not getting MORE EFFECTIVE ON POST as you go along. 142.) If they stay the same or get LESS effective, execs and staff both will be colliding with you, AND them. The Dev-T will get enormous. (Ex: You fail to handle the Treasury Division Hats, so the staff don't get paid after waiting in line and the check for payroll can't be cashed till Monday. Now you have HE&R from staff, execs, everybody! All over Treasury AND you.) 143.) So you had better give a "hope factor" to the guys you are hatting too! So they will feel the future will be better, less noise and confusion, stable orderly working conditions, regular pay, etc. 144.) Get them to envision a little more of the "ideal scene" that they CAN envision. 145.) If they finally get to where they ARE producing and wearing their hats - their MORALE will go right on up and they will WIN. "EVALUATION... PART 2" -12- ESTO SERIES - 4 146.) If you guide them well and do the standard things to handle them, these guys will WIN. 147.) It would be great if it all went 1, 2, 3. You get a hat compiled, get it in his hands, check him out, get him producing and then you find it isn't working out - he's OFF post every time you come around. Why? - Well, THAT'S your first EVALUATION. 148.) Now, be prepared to find out anything. And when you do find it out, handle it. 149.) So expect these "bumps" in the road. But you have the tools to handle it. And when you have the "Right Why" handled, it will all straighten out - bongo! 150.) And the beautiful part is that you will find that the "malice" or "bad intention" under it was so slight, in most cases, as to be nearly negligible. 151.) (Gives example of an area where all staff were ridgy, B.I.s, antago, sullen, etc. Finally investigation discovered the "Right Why" that even the staff didn't realize until indicated. Then VGIs and cooperation all over the place. The staff had been driven by outpoints and "wrong whys" into almost a "quiet mutiny". Now, it all blew and VGIs came in - and there was NOT malice or bad intention in the whole area!) 152.) So I just wish that some of these birds who used to run Slave Plantations, and guys like Napoleon who used to run armies and the heads of some of these totalitarian States, would do a little study on the Data Series. 153.) Because they would find out that man was not an "evil beast". 154.) The INABILITY of the Catholic Church, Angelican, Methodist, and other faiths, to unravel the "WHY" that lay behind Human Emotion & Reaction (HE&R), that conceived them utterly that man was a "sinful" being convinced in sin, born in sin, and would die in sin. He was "EVIL". You can see them now shaking their fingers at their congregations and preaching that they were all "evil sinners". No, they just never had the RIGHT WHY. 155.) So, your own future MORALE as an EESTO, ist greatly dependent on your ability to penetrate a situation and discover a correct "WHY". 156.) The definition of a WHY is: "something that will move something higher toward an ideal scene". 157.) And your REWARD will be the total CERTAINTY that you are NOT handling MALICIOUS OR EVIL BEINGS. 158.) Thank you very much! *** END - ESTO - 4 ***