If personnel are not programed, you get chaos.

The subject of personnel carries with it always the subjects of training and experience and suitability.

I have always followed a doctrine of hiring or recruiting in excess.

Dept 13 has been created to permit personnel to be “enhanced” or improved.

There is a heavy turnover in personnel. There are many stresses in human society.

This is done by programing.

You lose people from all ranks, particularly toward the top. Early on, for instance, I never could keep a secretary. Because she’d been my secretary, she could get a big-pay job (one of them $10,000 a year) from a bigwig. Or some young man had to marry her (and divorce her when she was no longer so glamorously placed). Anyway she was trained and had become an executive secretary. The only one I know of who didn’t go UP had a commie husband making sure she went down.

HCO should make known what it will need in the org in the next year. How many of what kind it now has.

So the higher they go

Dept 13 must work out what programing is now needed. It posts a board, puts the names on it and sees that part-time study will occur and be followed for the next post. It sees that this will be made.

A. The more altitude they have that has market value, and

HCO by looking back over some period of expansion will be able to forecast what will be needed more easily. Anyone in the org is usually aware of the undermanned points that exist and the unfilled posts as they get hit with them continually. So if HCO doesn’t know what these points are by record, it is easy to do a survey.

B. The more stress that hits them and blows them apart.

With an inefficient HCO which has not recruited and programed, the org is already starting well behind the gate and is already howlingly undermanned and undertrained. Yet to solve all this by instantaneous transfers will unmock the lot.

This is true of auditors. You’ll lose three times as many Class VIIIs as you lose Class Vis. You’ll lose three times as many Class Vis as you do Class IVs. Etc. And you’ll lose more auditors than you will admin people.

The RIGHT way to do it is to

Therefore you have to be very careful indeed who you send for full-time, expensive technical training. You have to ask these questions:

1. Count up what you have.

A. Is the candidate a uniformly good HDC auditor?

2. Figure out where they will be promoted to.

B. Is the candidate scheduled for a technical post?

3. Program them on part-time training and

C. Is the candidate a fast study by record?

4. Recruit.

D. Is the candidate uninvolved with anti-Scientology or non-Scientology connections such as wife or family?

5. When recruits are on, get them genned in fast on the lower posts so they can operate.

E. Is the candidate out of personal debt?

6. Shift the programed people to the posts for which they have been programed.

F. Does the candidate have a good record of keeping his promises?

7. Begin to train up the recruits with part-time programing.

G. Is the candidate willing to sign a new contract and note?

8. Recruit.

H. Have the candidate’s stats been high on post or especially in auditing?

This does not mean you shift every post in the org. It does mean your more experienced people are the ones that go up.

I. Does the candidate stay with the org and not go into franchise?

Various rules go with this:

If the answer to all these is emphatically yes there is a chance that the org will benefit. If any of these are no, or if any are even maybe, then don’t do it. Find somebody who will be able to get a YES on every one. They are more numerous than you suppose.

TRY TO KEEP TECH TRAINED PEOPLE IN TECH.

This is also true for highly specialized admin training. The same list except for B (and is scheduled for an admin post and is a candidate for higher org admin training) applies rigorously.

TRY TO TRAIN ADMIN PEOPLE FULLY FOR ADMIN.

Failing to establish these things first and getting it all understood, you can find yourself with all such funds expended and no highly trained personnel either.

There are ways to waste enough training time to crash your org. Train a person to Class VI, put him in Public Divs. Train up a PES and transfer him to tech training. All sorts of goofs can be made in programing, all of them costly to the org, all of them defeating the objects of Personnel Dept 1 and Enhancement Dept 13. One obvious way is to train somebody up with no contract or note. But the main one is not to program at all and just rattle around as a total effect.

Part of the action by Dept 1 is to beat down all the reasons why we can’t hire anyone. I recently reviewed an area where personnel problems were desperate. Five to ten people a week were applying. Only one to two were “suitable,” whatever that meant. That ratio is wrong. Eighty percent unsuitable? Ten percent maybe, not 80%.

The percentage of loss or incompetence discovered is hard to establish but is remarkably high. In the decade from 1960-1970, personnel turnover was quite heavy even in orgs that were booming.

The area Dept 13 has to beat down is arranging work so no part-time study can occur. Only about 20% of a staff won’t study. Nearly 90% will handle their post if it’s overloaded rather than study, which is okay. But putting somebody on Day and Foundation and putting one man on a ten thousand name address section to keep it up and in use are the usual reasons for no study time.

During that time staff staff auditing was at a minimum. The orgs were jittery under psychiatric inspired attacks. Dianetic tech was not in use until mid-1969. From 1966 to 1970 Scientology tech was quickie and the Grade and Class Chart not followed. Pay, after I ceased to be Executive Director, was low. Therefore you can make a list of things that have to be in hand to reduce heavy turnover.

This comes together between Dept 1 and Dept 13 AND IS AN INDICATOR THAT DEPT 1 IS GOOFING ITS RECRUITING ACTIONS.

1. Audit staffs well and train them for Staff Status.

Dept 3, Inspections, or the Executive Secretaries or Secretaries can also foul up both Dept 1 and Dept 13. By not inspecting and not running on and by stats, these salt the org down with idling people. So you see Dept 22, let us say, with six people and no production while the Treasury Sec has to work every night to handle an undermanned Dept 8.

2. Keep PRO area control in, in areas and in the org.

The answer is stats, honest stats for everyone.

3. Use Dianetics heavily and teach it well.

You can get a situation where you have enough people in the whole org to run an org but a third are overloaded and the rest dev-ting around. That’s where there is no stat watching and no daily area inspections or executive interest.

4. Keep all Scientology tech materials in action with tapes and all materials and books in full use, well used, well taught.

I know of one org that has forty-four on staff doing the work and potential service load of about seventy-five. Naturally they can’t take time off to study so they can’t be programed. Yet the stat situation is not watched or used nor is the place inspected so the production is about a twenty-person org and no funds exist to pay forty-four much less seventy-five. The clue is that it’s all manned except for Tech! The customers are there in droves. They can’t get service. So no pay.

5. Keep personal and sectional, departmental and divisional stats high.

It is silly situations like this that occur when personnel are not programed. Two years ago the above org did not train anyone, worked as a clinic and would not even audit staff. All its auditor contracts expired. HCO and the OES sat there in a fog and let it happen. There was no Dept 13 to program anyone.

6. Keep the org recruited up.

So here is a new angle to the recruitment problem. HCO is faced with the vital necessity of recruiting trained auditors NOW. Yet at this writing hasn’t even sent around a bulk mailing to ask field auditors to drop in.

7. Keep personnel programed.

8. Hold the form of the org.

So this is where Dept 14 gets into the act. It is a problem in org correction. If even Qual is empty, it’s all an OES function. The correct solution is to force recruitment of trained auditors, force recruitment of ordinary applicants, and program it in Dept 13 to train up new auditors as well.

9. Deliver an excellent, flubless product.

10. Work for volume of training and processing as the org’s product.

You should realize that no matter how rough the problem looks, it involves recruitment and programing. Instant transfers can utterly wreck an org. Yet, inevitably, transfer! is all you hear when a solution is required to org production failures.

As recruitment was also neglected and as contracts expired without being filled, we can add

I think this comes in from the world of “psychology.” Maybe labor unions. If a man isn’t doing well on a post you transfer him. It assumes that each person has “aptitude.” It never changes so you fit the post to the person by finding a new post. That’s really nonsense. You can actually more profitably fit the person to the post.

11. Overrecruit always.

Only when programing has failed (or doesn’t exist) does one resort to transfers to solve personnel problems. Of course experienced, able people get promoted. But unless they are programed and trained, watch out! He was a fine CF Clerk and a lousy Dissem Sec. Why? It isn’t his personality. It’s that nobody trained him to be a Dissem Sec. He wasn’t programed.

If you have an idea you will need twenty people in the next six months, you had better take on at least forty and you will have your twenty. And double is a low figure.

It’s cruel to promote a person and let the guy fall on his head.

Transferring because somebody doesn’t do well is discipline, it is not “adapting people to jobs they can handle.”

A firm hires a girl to write their letters. After 60 days they find she doesn’t do her job. So they get rid of her and hire another. And in 90 days find she can’t do her job. So they fire her and hire another.... That’s 150 days of no correspondence. It’s enough to ruin any firm. It’s costly.

There is quite an awful jolt in losing one’s post. Never think there isn’t.

Promote-demote occurs when the person is not programed. Therefore the new Dept 13.

A firm hires three girls feeling they need one.

Therefore this Personnel Series.

At the end of 150 days they have one girl.

But they had 150 days of correspondence. And a profit.

The economical answer in terms of saved profit is keep up the production. Don’t fixate on personnel. Always do multiple personnel procurement.

In actual practice when you do this, you seldom fire anyone. They blow off or they were actually needed.

If people are let go, you don’t just brush your hands of it. You in an organization can let them continue being programed while they hold an outside job, fix them up, get them trained and hire them later.

Modern society is very loose footed. The state pays them not to work (apparently only). The society is suppressively oriented. The push and pull of personal relationships is poor.

You are edged in upon a society of dying cultural values, encroaching drugs, threatened annihilation.

No one out there feels very safe.

This insecurity leaks into the org and people get pushed around or push people around.

Real or fancied wrongs occur.

People are rather timid really.

And the more the society buys the idea it’s a world of tooth and claw, the more it becomes so.

All this reflects into the picture of personnel.

You have to really work to keep orgs manned and trained up.

You do this by

A. Running a very good org

B. Delivering an excellent product

C. Keeping a steady inflow of new personnel

D. Training and processing well those you have.

If the 1 to 11 are in, in the org, then EXPANSION occurs and, losing hardly anyone, you have to scramble to keep up.

As the INCOME OF THE ORG DEPENDS WHOLLY ON ITS GDSes (Gross Divisional Statistics) and as these are wholly under the control of the org, then it’s obvious that the only finance trouble or pay trouble an org can have is by undermanning, undertraining and underproducing.

No great international GI slump has ever occurred unless there has been a long GDS slump. So it’s obvious that an undermanned org is asking for a cave-in.Much of this has been learned in recent years.

At this writing there is little or no recruitment by HCOs and training of staffs could be better.

But the lessons we learn, we learn and apply.

And so it is with personnel.