1.) There is a dichotomy here between Production and Establishment. (One tends to get in the road of the other unless brilliantly coordinated.)

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!

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

8.) And that is what an ESTO does.

Ex: New guy comes on post. ESTO says:

Ex: New guy comes on post. ESTO says:

"There you are on the Org Board."

"There you are on the Org Board."

"There is your desk."

"There is your desk."

"Here are your supplies."

"Here are your supplies."

"Here is your hatpack."

"Here is your hatpack."

"The guy you relieved can answer your questions."

"The guy you relieved can answer your questions."

"Read your hatpack."

"Read your hatpack."

"I'll be back in a couple of hours to check you out." -

"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?" -

"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) -

"Take hold of these cans. What are your misunderstoods? What word is it?" (Method 4 Word Clearing) -

"What machines do you have here?"

"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." -

"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." -

"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).

"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.).

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.

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.

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.)

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.

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."

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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).

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.

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!

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.

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!

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!

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!

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".

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.

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?

30.) What does it take then, to put somebody on a post and hat him?

Well, it takes:

Well, it takes:

- PUTTING HIM THERE.

- PUTTING HIM THERE.

- SAYING HE IS THERE.

- SAYING HE IS THERE.

- SHOWING HIM WHERE HE IS ON THE ORG BOARD.

- 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.

- 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.

- HIS ACTION ON POST, HIS SUPPLY LINE, HIS EQUIPMENT, HIS PRODUCT.

- HIS ACTION ON POST, HIS SUPPLY LINE, HIS EQUIPMENT, HIS PRODUCT.

- THEN WHAM! PRODUCE SOMETHING

- THEN WHAM! PRODUCE SOMETHING

31.) This begins to reveal all. NOW you can find his misunterstoods.

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.

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".

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.

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!

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".

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.

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.

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!

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!

40.) They wasted half their time producing things that were NOT the product of the post that NOBODY WANTED!

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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).

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.

47.) "Wrong Whys" are the bugbear of the Establishing Officer.

48.) They are also the bugbear of 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".

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.

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.

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".

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.

53.) But, you don't dare establish anything in that atmosphere because that "program" has total emergency priority.

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.

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!

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.)

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.

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.

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.

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".

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.

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.

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.

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).

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.

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.

66.) It is remarkable technology and is as effective on a group as running engrans and erasing chains is on a case.

67.) So therefore, the aberrations on the PLANET are simply built on the WRONG WHYS of yesterday!

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.

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".

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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!)

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!)

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.

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".

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.)

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.

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!

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.

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.

91.) Staff members will develop more "PR per square inch" to explain why they are NOT producing than you ever heard of.

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").

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).

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.

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.

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".

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.)

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".

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.)

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.

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.

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.

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.

103.) Now I've tried to give you the width and breadth of the post and something of the importance of the post.

104.) If the ESTO does his job well, the org will NOT "Roller-Coaster", but will continue to EXPAND.

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.

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.

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!

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).

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.

Ex: 20 staff produce 20,000 units.

100 staff produce 65,000 units.

100 staff produce 65,000 units.

(This is WITHOUT ESTOs)

(This is WITHOUT ESTOs)

Ex: 20 staff produce 20,000 units.

Ex: 20 staff produce 20,000 units.

90 staff + 10 ESTOs produce 100,000 units.

90 staff + 10 ESTOs produce 100,000 units.

(This is WITH ESTOs)

(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.

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:

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.

- 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!

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.

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.

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.

113.) There is no such thing as a double-hatted ESTO.

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.

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)

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.

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.

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.

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.

119.) Now I've used the terms ESTABLISHMENT OFFICER and ESTABLISHING OFFICER interchangably. The post is ESTABLISHMENT OFFICER and the DUTY is ESTABLISHING.

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.

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.

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.)

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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)

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.

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%.

INTERNAL ORGS bring in about 17%.

131.) And yet the internal orgs here are enormously manned up and the external bureau are terrifically undermanned!

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.)

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.

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.

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.

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:

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.

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.

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.

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.

138.) And that's why you ESTO trainees were summoned so urgently and why this ESTO program is going in so rapidly.

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.

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.

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.

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:

142.) Look at what you must know:

- All the policies, functions, and operations of the DIVISION BUREAU, or ORG you are working on establishing.

- 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, 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).

- 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.

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.

144.) This talk today, was to INSTANT HAT you - on the scope, the "reason why", and the background, of your post.