It is of the utmost importance that HGC Technical continues to be maintained as the world’s best auditing.
The whole repute of Scientology on a continent ultimately depends on the quality of technical delivered by Central Organizations.
In times of shifting technology this may be considered difficult. However, nothing in the book maintains that an HGC must only deliver “the latest”. The book only says the best.
Staff morale, the unit, broad dissemination depend basically upon technical quality.
If you will look into even the oldest HGC files you will find profiles with firm gains. This does not mean, then, that today’s research line has to be installed at once to get gains on pcs.
Of course to attain clear or OT today’s research line is vital.
But the problem is not upper echelon processing in HGCs, it is lower level cases.
If you go not on the basis of “make clears and OTs” but solely on the basis of “get maximum Tone Arm Action on the pc” you will have very happy pcs and eventual OTs.
To get Tone Arm Action it is necessary to
1. Have pcs who are getting wins and
2. Have staff auditors doing processes they can do successfully.
HGC Gains then depend on:
A. Getting Tone Arm Action on every pc; and
B. Training Auditors to handle the five basics well.
Programming for HGC pcs depends on the pc and the auditor available.
The stable datum for programming a pc is:
Rule: Run the highest level process on the pc that can be run that produces good Tone Arm Action.
The stable don’t for programming a pc is:
Rule: Don’t run a process a pc feels he or she cannot do or the auditor cannot do.
You don’t need to predetermine (and sometimes downgrade) a pc’s level in order to process him or her.
Programming has nothing to do with tests or hope or critical opinion.
Programming is a trial and error proposition based on:
C. What highest process gives the pc TA Action?
D. What process has the pc been interested in?
E. What process can the auditor do confidently?
Pc interest is a nearer certainty of needle reads on the meter and Tone Arm Action than many other methods of assessment.
Any pc who has had earlier auditing can tell you what was or was not interesting. A discussion of this with the pc will establish which type of process it was. Don’t necessarily just go on doing that process. But use it to classify what type of process the pc will most likely have wins doing – i.e. objective processes, repetitive processes, engram running, etc. A lot of pcs are audited at levels they have no idea they can do. They will do them, but a simple discussion about processes they have been interested in doing will reveal to them and the auditor where they are most likely to get TA Action with no strain.
Gains on a pc can be measured in terms of charge discharged, not necessarily in goals run out or some specific action done.
You can run out goals with no TA Action, run out engrams with no TA Action and yet the pc does not change.
The goals set by the pc at session beginning change on a changing pc. In reviewing cases watch those goals on the auditor’s report. If they deteriorate the auditor has messed it up, leaving by-passed charge. If they remain the same session after session there was no real TA Action. If the goals change session by session there’s lots of TA Action, too.
You can just get lots of TA Action, whatever you run, and eventually see a cleared pc.
No matter what is run, lack of TA Action will clear no one.
Wrong time is the exclusive source of no TA Action. Therefore as a pc’s time concept is improved or his dates corrected you will see more TA Action. But many things contribute to wrong time, including bad meter dating and time disorienting implants. The question is not what corrects the pc’s time so much as: is the pc getting the Tone Arm Action that shows Time is being corrected. Well done auditing cycles alone correct a flawed Time Concept.
So you have Pc Interest, and Tone Arm Action that tell you the programming is right and if the pc is going Clear and OT. Buck these things and the pc won’t go anywhere no matter what is run.
Wrong dates, wrong goals, wrong Items, by-passing charge, never flattening a process, running a pc beyond regaining an ability or cogniting the process flat account for most upset in auditing.
There is no valid reason for a pc getting upset now that ARC Break assessments exist, providing that the auditor is auditing as per the next section.
Basic Auditor Skill consists of five things. If an auditor can do these five, little further trouble will be found.
Any staff training programme, any Academy basic goal, any HGC Auditing that produces results depend on these five basics.
If you review staff auditors or examine students on these basics by themselves, all auditing would rest on solid ground and get gains. Where any one of the following are out in an auditor there is going to be trouble all along the line. No fancy new process will cure what is wrong in a session if these things are not present.
The Basic Auditing Skills are:
1. Ability to execute the auditing cycle.
2. Ability to execute the auditing cycle repetitively.
3. Ability to handle a session.
4. Ability to read a meter.
5. Ability to study and apply Scientology data.
It takes very little to establish the presence or absence of these abilities in an HGC Auditor or a Student. Each one can be reviewed easily.
View an auditor’s ability to audit in the light of the above only. Put him on TV for a half-hour rudiments and havingness actual session of any Model Session he or she is trained to use, and watch l to 4 above. Then give him or her an unstudied short HCO Bulletin and see how long it takes for the auditor to pass a verbal exam on it.
A comparison of this data with a number of the staff auditor’s HGC case reports will show direct co-ordination. To the degree that few results were obtained the auditor missed on l to 5 above. To the degree that good results were obtained the auditor could pass l to 5 above. Inspection of half a dozen different cases the auditor has done is necessary to see a complete co-ordination.
There is your training stress for staff training programmes. Only when the above skills are polished up do you dare to go into involved processes with the auditor. For a more complicated process further throws out any existing errors in the above five abilities and makes hash out of the lot.
During such a period, one can fall back on auditor confidence. What process is the auditor confident he or she will get wins with? Well, let him or her run it on the current pc. And meanwhile, with training, smooth the auditor out and get him or her genned in on higher level or more recent processes.
Without an auditor, a case will not progress. And a case will progress more with a confident auditor who can do something of what he or she is doing than with an auditor who is shaky. For the shakiness will magnify any faults in the five skills that the auditor has.
Auditors do by and large a pretty fine job. It takes a while to gen in a new skill. I can do it in one or two sessions so it’s not causing me any strain. Mary Sue can get one straight in about four sessions. So nobody expects a new skill to appear magically perfect in no time at all. But the length of time it will take to groove in on a new skill depends on the five abilities above.
The main auditor faults will be found in auditors who are trying so hard themselves to be right that thee and me must be proven wrong. That shows up most strongly in No. 5 above. The degree of disagreement an auditor has with data measures the degree of unworkability that auditor will enter into processing and this is the same degree that that auditor thinks he or she has to preserve his or her survival by making others wrong. This also enters into the other four abilities by a covert effort to make the pc wrong. This is rare. But it is best measured by an inability to accept data, and so can be tested by No. 5 above.
Processing on rightness and wrongness remedies this. Other processing remedies it. And just practice remedies it. This factor is easily disclosed as unhandled in some training courses where a blowing student sometimes gives long dissertations on “What they don’t agree with in Scientology.” That what they say doesn’t exist in Scientology does not deter them from believing it does, for their last spark of survival demands that only they be right and all others wrong. Such a state of mind doesn’t make a good auditor since both Scientology and the pc must be made wrong. Squirrels are only Case Levels 7 or 6 dramatizing alter-is on Scientology instead of their track. Even they can be made to audit by long training even in the absence of processing. They aren’t just trying to make others wrong. Essentially that is the characteristic of a Case Level 8, Unaware. There aren’t many of these around. Auditing and training can handle them, even if it takes a long time. Such people would almost die literally if they found they had ever been wrong and they get quite ill with aplomb just to prove you are wrong; it goes that far.
Case Level or sanity have little to do with anything when it comes to training auditors. Insanity is a goal “To be Insane”, not an index of potential auditing ability. And only Case Level 8 does a complete shatter of a session as an auditor.
Take these factors into first account in an HGC.
Don’t keep a staff upset by shifting processes continually. Processing is pretty stable which is why I can give you this expectancy for a new high level performance in HGC. Groove the staff auditor in for wins and TA Action. And all will be well. Groove them in by processes only and all will be chaos.
And in the Academy stress this data and teach the five abilities above beyond all other data and you’ll have auditors. If the HGC could expect from an Academy graduates who had the five abilities listed above, everyone would get more comfortable.
An HGC need not have to run a school of its own to provide itself with auditors.
The data I have given you in this HCO Bulletin is not subject to change or modification.
HGC pcs will only win if they are run so as to obtain good TA Action.
The HGC will have trouble achieving that only to the degree that its staff has not achieved the five abilities above.
We are building on very solid ground. All actions we now undertake in the HGC and Academy should contribute to successful auditing, for out of that alone can clearing be achieved.