Now a group when it gets together, if it's got the idea of where it's going and what it is doing, and if it isn't all individuated one from the next and so on, can normally pull together so that it eventually will make it. For instance, in the Sea Org we've been crawling up toward a two year survival, and we're just making the grade. You see people around, they're not too well uniformed at the present moment, because there's no edge, there's no margin.

1.) An organization has a number of REGISTRAR MINUTES to invest. And this determines the number of sign-ups the Organization has.

We'll eventually make this. We're in the teeth of not only a relentless enemy who, unfortunately we hear his, a death rattle amongst his midst every once in a while. But we're in a world which is very topsy-turvy economically and otherwise and so on, just buying survival. And it's a minimum survival of just two years without making a penny.

2.) If the REG INTERVIEW stat is TOO HIGH then the Reg is NOT regging, just saying "Hello", or brushing them off.

You can do that, you'll survive. And during that two years you can get busy. And first, I'll give you an idea of how rickety things can get. For some reason or other cash/bills were so bad over the world that I didn't expect Scientology organizations to survive, as of October 1969. And I don't know who was, who was saying what about which, but boy they certainly were, by anybody's criteria, insolvent. Their cash/bills ratio was crossed, they were in a horrible condition. It was a mess. Ghastly.

3.) This is the "coins" of an Org, the internal economy, the real factors of economy.

Mary Sue originated, as part of the LRH programs, and didn't take full credit for it, FP number one, the LRH ED which is financial planning, program number one. And she put that out, and she rode that hard, and so on. And as of now the stats may not look all that great across the world and so forth, but those orgs are all solvent. She achieved that in seven or eight months of very hard slug. Back and forth, back and forth.

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.

And she was dealing with the cost of the organization in almost every case. And she found out that most organizations had a very unreal idea of how much they cost. They didn't really know how much they cost to run a week, so they didn't know how much money they had to make.

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.

Now if we've achieved that, we will achieve the next step. Which is just this, that it is not good enough to make as much money as you need for the next week, you have to buy survival. And your survival is a minimum of a two year run without a penny ever walking in the front door. And that's a minimum. And that would get you over most political, other crises.

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.

So let's look at this. Let's take a look at this various criteria. These are the hard facts of life. Now you're up against the hard facts of life. So how much establishment can you afford? Well you obviously cannot afford an establishment which doesn't produce.

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!

And you obviously cannot afford people in the establishment which doesn't produce. And you obviously can't afford to harbor machinery which doesn't produce, and offices which have no service use. And these are the things you can't afford.

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.

There was a trick that Johannesburg, in its early forming days when it was under Jack Parkhouse, used to pull, which was, I was horrified at, is they balanced their books by firing staff members. So that as the stat went up and down, they would fire staff members and take on staff members in order to balance their books. Well now that's the wrong way to do this. The way you do is hat, train and get better on post, the staff members you have.

9.) And to the degree the HAS sees that their HATS get on, the QUALITY of that production will get very good.

Now a manager always has the responsibility of providing work for his workers. And that is something that somebody had better learn in Russia. Just that. A manager has a responsibility. You find yourself, it works two ways. It's how much establishment, well it's how much production. Now we're back to resources. What resources does the HAS have that can be utilized by production?

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)

Now you think, boy you must be in the airy(c)fairy world and so forth, and that it must be terribly difficult and so forth. No it isn't terribly difficult, it's very, very simple. Our average income for the last three months was X, therefore our expenditure and establishment for the next three months must be one half X, and our income must be 2X. And you're immediately at a quarter. And you target it and try to strive for it.

So, it's not very difficult to work out. You will find when you first face an organization that it's inefficient in the extreme, and you're not the hard hearted whip master that says immediately, "This many must go because we don't have," the General Motors answer. See? "We're closing five plants now, ha ha, ha ha, ha ha." Idiots. I use the word advisedly. Actually it's an insult to idiots. That's about the lousiest management that anybody ever heard of. Look, they've got that much establishment. Now what; now let's get it worked in reverse. What responsibility does this hand to the product officer of that org? He's got to get it consumed. He's got to get his product consumed, not reduced. You don't reduce production, you increase consumption.

12.) If it's "enturbulated" in HCO, then HCO does not have control of the lines of the org - obviously.

Every time you find yourself thinking in terms of, "Well we've got too many auditors and so forth now, and so on, and therefore," and so on. No, you've got resources. Resources have been furnished to you, you have to quick like a bunny figure out where's this production going to go? So it's one thing just to produce, and it's another thing to produce with some place to put your production. So when you're dealing with commodity of auditing hours it doesn't seem to occupy much storage space, but actually you have a total vacuum. What are you going to do with this? We got twelve auditors, and we don't have any more work than for six auditors. Wow! Wow! We're not going to lay off six auditors, we're going to get the consumption increased for those idle auditors. And that is a responsibility of managing. And a good manager, and a good production officer, and a good organizer will

13.) The calmest, most orderly place in an organization should be HCO.

balance these factors out.

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.

Now you go down to the dist division, or you go over to promotion somehow or another, and you're going to increase that, and that is why PR is so very, very, very important. You've got to know reliably what people want. You've got to estimate what they want and predict what they want. Interesting?

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".

Now you don't think we've ever done this. Oh boy, yes we have. What do people want? Well they want new tech. But the answer to wanting new tech is the old tech hasn't been produced. And they don't necessarily want new tech at all, they want tech. And they hope that the new tech will produce more than the old tech. The factor missing there is quality. Quality of tech.

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.

We've got somebody walking around this ship right now being talked to by the master at arms and other people, and so forth. Trouble with her is, is she never had an engram run and erased. Tough problem. Really tough. We got a thirteen year old auditor that would probably run rings around any HDC in the world. She could sit there and run an engram out, except nobody's ever gotten her to an auditing session by an auditor who would run an engram out. Most of your basic problems of production are never connecting up, see, never connecting up the guy who can do it and the guy who wants it. It's simply that, see?

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?"

Now you try to connect up a guy who can't do it to a guy who wants it, and you're immediately going to have production problems, boy. You're going to have the fullest qual you ever heard of.

18.) The plain "dummy run" tests the LINE. The bullbait "dummy run" tests the TERMINALS.

Very funny, recently we were talking about stalled cases and difficulties, and so forth. The failure of quals, over a period of time, was the failure to use the primary tool of qual. And I was, just investigated this about seventy; oh I don't know how long ago it was. Fifty days ago. Now you know that the primary tool of qual is a green form. And the green form was turned out for qual. Now a survey of the situation shows that the use of the green form was used like this. They'd start in at number one on the green form, go to number two on the green form, go to number three on the green form. By that time they're into, they're just into rudiments, see? And then you get an F/N on the rudiments. You try to go any deeper into the green form, and for some peculiar reason or another, why the TA will go up or something like that will happen. The net result is that only the first page and a tiny margin of the second page of the green form have ever been used. And if you look in all of the stuff; now this doesn't seem to you to be a production/consumption problem, but it is. How do we get green forms consumed? Actually the problem was how do we crack some of these cases. I think I was cracking cases like this that walk up, you know, and they seem to me awful bad off cases. Boy!

19.) So the O/O does these, and from the results, furnishes the material or data to the HAS for handling the ESTABLISHMENT.

So, a type of assessment was adapted to this which all of a sudden gave us back the green form in its totality. It is do a green form once through, take the best read. Bang, you'll crack the case every time, if the auditor can read the meter. If he then runs the process he's supposed to run for that. Consumption of green forms.

20.) So, if the HAS were "on the ball", he would run his OWN dummy runs, wouldn't he? (Laugh).

You could actually, on terms of consumption; let's look at this now. Alright, here's a little technical breakthrough. It isn't much of a; it's a breakthrough just to the degree that this 1965 development, or I think it was even before that, is suddenly used. Now we're going to use it. Now do you get this? Do you get this? You've had it all this time. All of a sudden we look this thing over, how are we going to use this? And that is most of your big ideas that you get in production, is something you already got, and you're going to get the idea of how are we going to use this? You got it? So you look around and you will always find resources of this character. So you start a hell of a campaign. Start a hell of a campaign. Free green form. I'm just giving you an idea. Free green form. Only green form wasn't popular. People got awful tired of these green forms because they never had a green form. People began to shudder when you said green form. So, it's a free case analysis. A case cracking analysis. Dream it up any way you want to. "Anybody who appears at the organization between four and six in the afternoon and so forth will be given a case cracking analysis. Present this card."

21.) It's actually an I & R function to do a "Dummy Run". (Inspections & Reports). He does Form 1, Dummy Runs, etc.

Now if you're going to do that, somebody's going to have to run like hell to put the lines in. So that is why your org officer is not your establishment officer. Because the establishment is hard enough to maintain with all these wild hats running around in it, without also having an org officer and a product officer who are getting ideas. So you're going to have to put in some temporary line. It's just a temporary line. You're going to have to beef it up more.

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.

So the org officer of the organization always to ask the problem of, "How are we going to get this temporary line in in order to handle this new consumption of product? So a consumption of product here is vitally necessary. Now how are we going to get these people received?"

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.

They walk in with this card, they show this card to reception. Well does reception leave them there for two hours? No, now somebody's got to have that reception, and this person doesn't know his way around through the organization, so somebody's got to escort him down to this terminal, and then there's got to be an auditor who sits there, and that auditor has to know how to do a once through assessment on the thing. And then there's got to be some PR person perhaps there to say how great that is. But then that wouldn't give you that somebody ought to lead him back to the registrar about this time. So the registrar gives him his results. Well if a registrar gives him results, the registrar can say, "Buh! It'll only take five hours to handle this. Twenty(c)five hours to handle this." It doesn't much matter what the registrar says. Or the registrar says, "Well that actually, that actually carries along with it the case cracking intensive, which is of no specified number of hours at all, but it just costs X dollars. You're not under any obligation to pay it. Feel better now don't you? Very good. That's fine. Oh you do, you want that. Oh, well alright. Here, sign on the dotted line and so forth, and go on down the line and pay the cashier and so on. I'm very glad you are. Thank you." And you've got to have that line in.

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".)

If you haven't got that line in, all the ideas that the production officer gets to increase consumption and get the six auditors busy will fail. We had the most marvelous, marvelous caper one time, it was called a hospital caper. And we had volunteer auditors all over the place, and a certain number of hours of the day they were going into hospitals and seeing patients, and pepping them up and patting them on the back and so forth, and giving them little cards. Marvelous! The person in charge of the project broke it right in half and crashed the project right down through the middle, in spite of the hard work put in by these people for weeks. You know how he did it? There was no reception sitting at the other end of the phone number these people were being given, and the office he had had and was rented, was never manned. They couldn't reach it by phone, they couldn't reach it by feet. So the org officer is responsible to make sure that these lines exist.

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".

Now the HAS would eventually incorporate this kind of thing into his organization. Now he's busily running an organization. So therefore, an HAS has to have HCO expediters who can then put together immediate types of lines and set ups to handle special traffic. They usually send them into file and CF, when years ago they should have had two file clerks in CF. And they're usually used, expediters, to put together what HCO should have long since had as establishment.

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).

Now an HCO expediter is somebody who goes down and gets in the special line and sits in as a special escort who handles the special action, so that you don't have to remove people from key posts in order to fit out these wild ideas. Otherwise, the HCOAS is going to get very impatient with you. "What, you need another receptionist? Well, we'll take one of the letter reg typists. Yeah."

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.

Now he should have some HCO expediters, and if those people are not totally employed all the time then they ought to be studying. So any slack time they have, any slack time they have during the day, then they ought to be studying. If he's going to have any full time people on course who are going to something or other something or other, and he doesn't think he can afford full time people in course, why'd he make them HCO expediters? And then not send them off to fix up a file someplace, but use them, put in special traffic lines.

28.) But it's the HAS who furnishes the "coins" for the increased consumption.

Now an HCOAS therefore has to maintain the establishment. The establishment is pretty well established by org board. That org board is not an arbitrary which simply sets up, there is, actually was production oriented. And the end of every one of those departments had a product. When we state that thing loud and

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.

clear, and start to work it all backwards, we wind up with the same '67 org board we had in the past. What do you know? Somebody must have been bright someplace.

30.) An org that runs "accidentally" on "stats", is not being RUN. That ORG is "running" he HAS!

Anyhow, so he's actually organizing backwards, even though he's organizing, he thinks, front-wards. Because he's got a canned org board that he puts there, and bang, that org board is spot on is no reason that makes him the first action. He builds that org board backwards. How does he fill it? He fills it up to the degree that it is demanded by production. So he expands his establishment by increasing the posting of his existing org board. And he too must have resources. And I've given you one of his pools of resources.

31.) Then his area WILL be confused.

Now very often, as you will find in the personnel series, you have personnel people who think each division, particularly the better running divisions, are personnel pools. And if you've ever seen screams go up in all directions, it's missionairing in the Sea Org. This is a horrible chapter of something or other from the viewpoint of people who are trying to hold the organization there and keep it going, because missionaire has priority. And this makes a mad mess. One day you've got a captain, the next day you haven't. You know? I mean it's that kind of thing, it's that ghastly. And don't think it doesn't just rip everything to ribbons. But it is necessary to do so, because production in the Sea Org comes first. Production happens to be Scientology around the world, and it is now expanding to be Scientology around the world. So, a missionaire has to go, has to go, has to go. Well that's that. Alright, the rest of us will cope, one way or the other.

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.

Now actually it puts too heavy a burden on, in the Sear Org, the division is the third mate, the HCO. Now it puts too heavy a burden on him, and so on. But, he should get clever. He should get clever. There are some old FOs that talk about a missionaire unit. So he's got a second pool, a second pool he has. So he's got a missionaire unit.

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.)

Now in view of the fact there's a heavy demand on highly trained personnel, your missionaire unit spend most of its time at home on guard duty and study. And therefore you have very highly trained people, and you can circulate people who are successful missionaires and also holding executive posts, or less exhaulted posts, you can circulate them into the missionaire unit and so on, and take people in the missionaire unit and put them on up. There are ways and means by which you can shift this sort of thing around. But it gives the personnel pool.

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.

So the main problem of an HAS is personnel pools, because his main flub, exclamation point, is destroying whatever organization has been put there.

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.

Alright, somebody is working, working, working, working, working, to put a qual there. And they work hard and they get the people trained in and grooved in, and then next thing you know HCO regards qual as a personnel pool. Or there's another thing, because qual

36.) So, by stat ceiling, you could measure your Establishment.

can be doubled in brass with tech in an organization, you get the disgraceful action of, "We've got a backlog now, so I have all the qual auditors and so forth. They're going to have to audit on the tech lines." Oh boy, that's nuts! But it says the person in charge of HCO has not allowed for an ebb and flow of traffic, and does not have any auditor pool. So who does it say is out? The HAS. He did not predict. So he's operating on no resources.

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".

Now what are his basic resources? His basic resources, you say of treasury or money. No, that's also the HASs resources. People, hatted people, trained people, very valuable people, people of all sorts and descriptions, not just this blank file filled up with a body. I told you the other day, you can find all the bodies you want in a mortuary.

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?"

So, he must be running some kind of an HCO which is a poverty HCO, because he doesn't have the resources that you would expect from an HCO. So he has to unmock what he builds. That's kind of crazy. A fellow builds a house, then to build a second house he has to take all the timbers out of the first house to build the second house. And then he takes out the... It's nuts. And somebody comes along one day and says, "Say, simple Simon, why don't you have a pile of spare lumber?" "Oh I couldn't do that, I couldn't get that through FP. Yeah well, they can't afford that." Oh I wouldn't say can't afford that. If I were an HAS at that point I would shake my head at every FP meeting, sadly, while looking at the production officer. Sigh. I wouldn't ever say anything.

39.) That measures the effectiveness of the Divisional P/O or Div Head AND the P/O of the Org.

Any time anybody asked me for anything I would say, "When you fellows get around to producing something you can come back and talk to me. Why don't you produce something with what you've got?" would be my standard attitude as an HAS. "I must have, instantly and at once, twenty spares." "Twenty spare what?" "Twenty spare staff members." "Yeah, what for?" "For having spares." "Yeah I know, but there's only fifteen staff members in the org." I'd say, "I know. I'm tired of transferring fifteen transfers every week. You must be running a thirty-five man org. That must be what's wrong with this place, that's the why. You're trying to run a thirty-five man org with fifteen men. And yet we don't seem to have enough money here to deal with, not making very much money. All seems to be very sad. I wonder if we shouldn't train up a production officer?" See, this kind of thing, you know? It could get dirty after a while.

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.

But when production is not adequate for the establishment, then the establishment goes poor in all of its resources. And its main resources of course are trained staff members, willing auditors who want to come on staff. It includes the estate being coaxed into looking around and see if there aren't any cheap empty office building around here. It's looking around and seeing whether or not there aren't some thisas and thatas, and how can we get a bunch of file cabinets. The wrong way to go about it is to present to FP eight thousand, six hundred and fifty-five dollars for three new steel desks for the product officer, org officer and HAS. That's not quite the way to go about it.

41.) The Product Officer who can turn out more COMPLETIONS per unit of auditing time, without going "quicky", he's a GOOD P/O!

The fellow is now pulling the incredible. And the incredible is, is trying to spend money you don't got. And it can be done in this society, to show you how clever the society is. They're always willing for you to spend money you don't have. So you have to safeguard that, and we are ourselves and we are solvent, and we do exist and we do still own our souls, and we are not in the pockets of the international bankers, solely because we make everything make its own way. And that is the basic action that; I have heard actually that some members of orgs wonder why I don't pay them better. It will be somebody in Keokuk or Cococomo, see? Why I don't pay them better. I don't know, I'm not even in charge of their board of directors.

42.) The P/O UTILIZES the coins of the org to get Products.

The answer to the question of how they aren't; see they're asking the wrong question. The answer to the question is, why don't they wear their hat and do their job in a quantity so that eventually the org will get more money, and they can be paid more? See, elementary. The answer to the question is right on their skull.

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.)

Now this is then the ecology that economic, dog eat dog framework, or dogs eat cats and cats eat rats or something, the ecology if this universe in which we are dealing. And the ecology of the universe is that staff members who produce get paid, HASs that put an establishment there that is hatted and trained to function and so forth, has a heavy income potential, and a production officer who is able to spot production and get the production out of that line, and who is able to persuade consumption, persuade those people he has in PR, promotion, distribution, wherever he has. If he can persuade consumption to occur as he raises his production, why he is all set. And people will just get paid more and more money, and the next thing you know a staff member is declasse who doesn't drive up in a Rolls Royce. But you have to think in that way in order to bring about that result.

44.) You can always find "1/2 done", or "nearly done" products lying around.

Now in view of the fact that we aren't aiming for Rolls Royces, but we have an entirely different target, therefore it goes into the field of volume and quality. Viability will pretty well take care of itself, if your volume and quality is adequate. So your first point that you always; now let me give you a letter reg sequence here. This is for an HAS, what would he be persuaded to do? He could instant hat letter reges. That's going to give you volume. He mini hats them, that gives you some quality. He really hats them, that gives you viability. The first one is volume. And you as a manager always demand first and foremost volume as your first demand. And then when you've got your volume you demand as your second action, quality of the volume. And then your third action you've got to calculate and so forth, as viability.

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.

Now if you don't calculate it somewhat backwards, and figure out what your viability prediction is, you also will have an awful time of it. But right now we have an organizational runaway pattern that is fantastic. It's AOLA, and in just a few successive weeks they have a vaulting height. Their peaks, although they sink from the peaks, the peaks on those weeks give you a curve that says within about seven or eight weeks something on the order of about fifty thousand, within two or three months it says something like about eighty thousand, and certainly within five months it will be hitting a hundred thousand. I wonder what the third mate at AOLA is doing, what he's thinking, what he's worrying about? He doesn't think it's any part of his hat. And, if he doesn't wear that as his hat and take that predicted vaulting, it tells you that the organization reached its make/break point, as far as staff members were concerned, certainly at about forty thousand. And that put that whole staff under considerable strain at about that, because they didn't have quite all of those posts covered, and they didn't have this and they didn't have that, and they really had to get down and sweat to keep the lines running and to keep their quality up. Well that would be a breakdown of the HAS.

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.

So it tells you that at AOLA, within five months they have to have double their staff, double the trained auditors they have, double the space they have, and look, it takes months to get people recruited, trained and so forth. Who is sweating on it? And I'll tell you at this moment there isn't anybody worrying about it but me. Do you see what the prediction is?

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.

So, that is what an HAS has to do, he has to think in terms of. And there isn't any HAS thinking in those terms. Actually there's been no hat written in these terms, because this is your product/org officer system, but this is the hat so there's no condemnation of that. But that is the terms of that, because he has to furnish the establishment. And if he has to furnish the establishment, the wrong time to furnish the establishment is after it's hit. Three times what the organization can possibly handle, and when it's hit that, to do the organization and establishing that you should have done five months ago. Oh god, this behind hand action is pretty horrible.

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."

Now I can tell you right now, we're cracking the roof on Europe. Europe's going to be a run away. We do have a Scandinavian team in training, of four people. That's a Scandinavian team, of four people. Oh. We have got a project going right at this moment that's going to knock the spots off of Europe. All books, courses, we're setting up and we're engineering it one way or the other. We finally found out how the slots drop into place, and how financing, not financing but how we are going to build up to this line. We don't have to worry about the financing, it's just taken care of in a normal course of human events.

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.

We're translating into each principle European language, the lot. An OEC, SHSBC, HAS course, books. Only previously it was not translatable because of the fantastic printing cost that it would have involved. The viability factor then did not forgive it. You could have put out a million dollars translating and publishing books and that sort of thing. It would have been fabulous.

50.) We are putting the cream on top of this cake now.

Somebody reaches in his pocket and does this. No, you have to wait for an idea. And think up an idea of how you can do this. Tapes, site translation, like they do at the United Nations. I got the idea last February. It's taken us a while to get us underway here.

51.) It is a "nuttiness", that makes people not use "yesterdays" process because they have a new one "today".

Site translation. A site translator can hear the thing in his ear and, when he's really trained, spit it out in the other language. So, it's just going right over onto tapes. Then we can copy the, most tapes, and we can sell tapes. And we make it mandatory for every one of those orgs to buy a complete new set of all of their tapes, every three months. They'll wear them out. We get their promotion projects and so forth going, they're all on tapes. We don't have to translate anything on paper. And so on. We're gearing up and alerting Scandinavian orgs right now in the Swedish area, "Start figuring out how you're going to get your tape recorders, kids. And what you're going to be doing." There will be other projects to graduate them into it. And all of a sudden in their midst, why they will have HAS and other materials, and they'll all be in Swedish. Same thing's going to happen in France, same thing will happen in Germany, and so on. We've busted the language barrier. It's always been a worry about how we were going to do this. Alright, we do it.

52.) You will find that a product officer will make all of his cash out of YESTERDAY'S DEVELOPEMENTS.

Now the only other thing we've got to worry about is how do we get a multilingual LRH comm who is a site translator, can take the dispatches of that organization and translate them on tape, or send it on through for his administrative act. Probably be nobody in the organization speaks any English at all. Dianoutex!

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.)

And when we get it into Russian, that's it. Probably we'll put it in Lithuanian, Polish, borderline. So, we're hitting into a boom in this in Russia. Russia's booming on the subject. They're fumbling all around trying to figure out what the psyche is all about. They find out that that's a legitimate sphere of research the government isn't controlling. So into the middle of this boom we simply release Russian Scientology.

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.

So anyhow, we've been trying to figure out how to, how to penetrate that zone and area. Now the only reason you're not making any penetration in some areas is because no materials are there. Nobody has totally translated what we're doing into what we are doing. We're putting out knowledge, and with that knowledge, and with the actions which that knowledge has you can get gain, production, case change, ability and that sort of thing. But the basic of it is knowledge. And when you get it right down to it and do an analysis of the thing, why here is a product called knowledge. And the consumption of that knowledge is guaranteed.

55.) So a Product Officer can WASTE his resources, by ADDING or SUBTRACTING.

But look, you have to have the bulletins, you have to have the tapes, you have to have the course supervisor who says, "And you read this bulletin now." And then see that the student reads that bulletin now. That'd be something new. And who doesn't assign him a condition of enemy because he doped off midway to, but goes over and asks him what is misunderstood.

56.) By making it "ENDLESS" or "QUICKLY", you get a no, or overt, product.

Alright, what kind of organizational structure does that make? What is the establishment structure? Did you notice that I included the OEC? It would be fatal not to put the OEC in with it.

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.

Now I can tell you something else that's fatal. You put in a fragment of something, and it'll boom and collapse. So if you put in a fragment of what your org could be exporting with knowledge, it will boom and it will collapse. If you put in a fragment of your product; if I weren't talking to you now about the responsibilities of establishing establishment, I know it seems very rambling when I talk to you about this because you say, "The HAS has nothing to do with finance." And boy, he doesn't. He can spend you poor, boy. "Well we just, we've got these sixty staff members. I don't know why we're; we got 'em, we got the staff members. No auditors amongst them. Don't have course supervisors, ha ha. No hats. Um, we got establishment, there's sixty staff members." Sixty unhatted people would behave like about sixty enemies, man. To each other, they'd be at each other's throats in no time. So he doesn't have a sixty man staff, he has a sixty man mob. So he doesn't have an establishment. Yes, he has a great deal to do with this sort of thing, so somebody's got to take responsibility for the establishment, and I've elected him it.

58.) The Product Officer makes CAPITAL out of the "coins" and INCOMPLETE PRODUCTS that he finds lying around.

Now if the org officer takes responsibility for the establishment across the line, he will cease to help the product officer. And you know very well that if he ceases to help the product officer, the product officer will start falling on his head. So the wrong division of duties, obviously, is the org officer taking responsibility for the establishment. The right division of duties would be for the HAS to take responsibilities for the establishment, and get one there that functioned. And get the people hatted and checked out.

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.)

The wrong action for an org officer would be to turn around to an HAS and say, "Give me three staff members at once, because I have got to beef up the empty, fast flowing posts of...", and for the HAS to pick off people off of other fast flowing posts and give them to the org officer. That's nuts.

(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.)

The HAS would have to look around and find where he had some people. And if he looks around and finds he hasn't got any spare people, he's one of these poor sods that's just standing in a bread line, clear at the end, with only a gallon of coffee and a half a loaf of bread to give out to a hundred men. He's poor. We ought to give him special clothes, you know with ragged cuffs and...

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?

If you turned around to treasury, and you had to run a mission or something of the sort, and you said to treasury, "We need two hundred and fifty dollars in order to pay the expenses of this."

61.) No, they added EVERY bulletin that came out afterwards to the VIII!

And treasury said, "I'm sorry, don't have any money, because we didn't make any provision for this. And all our money's in the bank, and there isn't any way to do it," they'd say he isn't doing his job. Well look at the HAS, look at the HAS. Resources. What are the realities?" "Now let me give you a little piece of stuff which emerged out of socialism. There's a few bits in socialism which are sound think. The most of it is balderdash. But this is very sound think. "The wealth of the world are the real things in the world. And that is wealth. And money is only a substitute for wealth, and is not itself wealth." And that is true.

62.) It got longer and longer. What would be the P/O's reaction to this? THEY WERE WASTING STUDENT HOURS AND INSTRUCTOR MINUTES!

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. Value is established by things that are wanted. Value is established by wantedness. You can then fluxuate value by making scarcities and demands and so forth, but it is basically wantedness.

63.) They were throwing away the "COINS" AND throwing away CASH.

Kensian philosophy, which he tried to say was economics, is valid, unless you put it in the field of economics. It is valid in the field of production, it's not valid in the field of money. And I think he must have gotten a couple of things crossed, but as far as production is concerned, you also have to create want. What you are selling is absolutely priceless. What we're selling here on Flag, I think you will agree, is priceless. There isn't any possible price could be placed on it. So it's price is what can be received for it. Not what is it worth, but what can be received for it, greater or lesser. So pricing is based totally really not on value but what can be received for it. And that value is totally how much it is wanted. And out of a very, very close knowledge of those, and once you get all of these factors disentangled, and all added up in your skull, you can establish how much establishment the HAS can put there. Has nothing whatsoever to do with any firm factor of, "Well, I'm an HAS, I will now put up an org board. And this org should be manned with fifty people, and we will now put some down the line, and we will put the people, there's blank spaces on this org board. And we'll put the people in those blank spaces, and so forth." No, right thing to do is to put up the org board, and then post it to the degree that it is required to back up production. And you build it up.

64.) ALSO, they added a RETRAIN on SHSBC bulletins! VIABILITY went out the window at this point. Why?

Now you'll find that command lines of the org board will go absolutely mad if you don't build in from the top, so obviously the first production man that you put on is in charge of everything, and does the production. You've got one auditor. He obviously is in charge of all auditing while he is doing all the auditing, and he is obviously the production man for all auditing. So it's built from the top to that degree. But then, when there's more auditing, why it must be because there's more demand for auditing. So want has been created about auditing, and that is basically done by the circulation of books. Books always run out in front of the organization. The stats of an organization are actually almost monitored by the degree that the knowledge has been circulated. They are a direct coordination. It's actually not even by the degree of sales talk put out, it's stats of an organization are proportional to the amount of knowledge circulated by the organization.

65.) THE PRICE of an VIII Course is now covering the SHSBC, VIII MATERIALS, and all the stuff SINCE!

So the HAS builds, according to the stats he can build by. If he builds an organization at the cost of fifty percent of the income of the organization, he's really doing great. A rich HAS is one who has reserves, resources.

66.) What should occur is:

Now the wealth of the world are actualities. An HAS is wealthy to the degree that he has trained staff members, that he has trained staff members in reserve. "Special products is being asked to please find work for five fully trained auditors we are not using at this moment on the production line." How would you like to hear a remark like that? Wouldn't that be remarkable? But that could be a statement which is made by the HAS. "I got five auditors, I don't want to assign them into the administrative lines. Haven't you got some kind of a project where they can go out and audit ARC breaks or something? Do something? Or can't you think up something, or something?"

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!

Now you can run it the other way too. "Look, I want to have here a fifty(c)five man organization, and we've only got a thirty man organization. And at the present moment we can only afford a thirty man organization. Can't we increase production, or demand, or something in some way, so that we can increase our numbers organizationally so that we do get up into a zone where we are running where we have a few reserves, instead of just asking me to pull musical chairs every day, any day of the week? That would be a very comfortable position, so please can't we get the income up, huh?"

B.) The VIII Course is 3 weeks long. He does it, and goes back home as Class VIII. That's really something!

I noticed when we were collecting stats last week, I've got it here. Where is this stat here? Yeah, oh yeah, hm, yeah. Letters out, letters out dropped. "Yes I know, but we're trying to get quality in." Ooh! First you get in volume and then you get in quality, and then you will have viability.

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.

Now he's dealing with some interesting coins. How many auditing hours can the organization furnish? How many instructor minutes can the organization furnish? How many student hours can the organization furnish? How many public courses per unit per person can the organization furnish? And that would be a resources survey of an HAS. How many hours, how many hours. Well that's monitored by how many auditing rooms, how many auditors, how many this, how many that and so forth.

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.

So, an HAS should know the resources of his organization. He should know its actual wealth. That he has fair resources or additional resources depends upon his knowledge of the existing resources. Never saw such a silly thing in my life as a set of graphs come in here one day. An organization had about ten auditors who were auditing six hours a week each. Oh, who's kidding? There must have been somebody in that area that was just throwing the gold coins of that organization right over the side.

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.

Boy, he was just throwing them into the sewer just as fast as he could pick them up and throw them away. Six auditors, count 'em up. How many auditing hours should six auditors furnish? That's a hundred and fifty auditing hours. Or six auditors at twenty-five hours a week. Very well done auditing hours too. Resources.

This organization can furnish that, these auditing hours are worth this much, unless we're selling by packages. So we ought to be selling by packages, we shouldn't be selling by hours because it's too expensive, and it appears too expensive to the public to sell these auditing hours in this fashion, so we probably should sell by packages and so forth. So therefore the package selling, and so on and so on and so on.

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.

But nevertheless, the coins, the gold coins which that organization is spending and has to spend are auditing hours. And if they're not spent this week, they can't be spent, ever again. Funny money. It's real wild money. If you don't spend it you haven't got it. How many student hours can this organization deliver? Hours of students on course. Alright, there's only room for twenty students in this organization, if you jam them in with a shoe horn. Now each student is going to spend eight hours a day on class. So each student is worth eight hours, and they're going to be twenty students, so you can furnish what? In a day, how many student hours. Those are your coins.

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".

Now do you understand why I say the HAS is very poor if he does not have resources? Those are his resources. Supposing he's got a hundred and sixty staff members, and he has as organizational production coins, twenty-five. Twenty-five auditing hours. Supposing he has one instructor for seven courses. Now that's instructor minutes per course. Now you subtract that down to instructor minutes per potential student. So he's got one course supervisor, and he's got one auditor, and he has a hundred and sixty staff members. Does that sound crazy to you? Well I exaggerated a bit so that it sounds real crazy. The organization'd be broke in no time. Do you see that? Uh! There's nothing to deliver. How the hell could he deliver anything?

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 2 coins" 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.

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.

1. RECOGNITION

(The "Recognition" to "Source" cycle.)

1.) COMMUNICATION