Hello. (Hello.) In view of the fact that the lectures the other day were popular, we decided we would repeat the performance just for your special benefit. It's the twenty-third of January AD 21, FEBC Flag.

Now the reason why I want to talk to you however is not just to see your pleasant, smiling faces, which I am always happy to see, but because having cleared up this thing called a product officer, we are, as you would suppose, up against the next barricade.

1.) Now an Org Officer in a highly idealized org would have Organizing Officers for each Division of the Org as the Deputy Divisional Secretaries.

Now the product officer's first product is an org officer. The org officer's first product is an HCO AS. The HCO area secretary's first product is an HCO, and the first product of the HCO is the establishment. Imagine my horror during the last seventy-two hours to find I was dealing with people who didn't know what an establishment was. Horror. And I think it's because people get their attention stuck on bodies.

2.) The O/O Conference would concern itself with getting projects done - while the P/O and Div Secs. go on getting products.

Now many years ago we used to have some drills which were extremely interesting, which was pat your body, and feel your body, and look at your body, and look around the room and look at your body. You know that sort of thing? I think you'll have to run it, because all I find out an establishment consists of is some bodies. That of course would make a mortuary the ideal establishment.

3.) The reason thins go "zoom" when I am around an Org, Is that I never take pity on an organization - I am a pitiless Product Officer.

Now this is so gross that I think actually it's one of those points that has to be cleared on an org officer, because until some of these points were cleared, we did not find operation by the org officer effective at all. And when these; we already have a little case history on that; when this point was cleared, and why then it started to work out very well. So we've had a positive and a negative run on this, and the positive run in the Flag bureau was good, and the run actually that has occurred in the tech division FAO just now, was not good, by a long way. But, what happened was, we were letting the Flag bureau clarification of these points go along to see if they worked out, and since that time, why they have worked out. And, it has not been cleared up in the FAO, or the, that's the Flag admin org, or the FAO division four, that's the tech division, has not been cleared up in that sector, and it is running, you wouldn't believe it. So therefore, what I'm talking to you about is of very great importance. It is not slight. And the reason I called this lecture so suddenly was as I say, not to look at your bright and smiling faces, but to give you some information which you cannot live without.

4.) If My actions are not followed up by organization & establishment, then I will ALSO do Prod 3 AND Prod 2 until it does.

If you try to use this product/org officer system without this data, you're going to come a cropper as an executive director, a CO or a product officer, or an org officer, or an HCO sec, or an HCO, and not know why it all isn't working somehow. But it is something on the order of the auditor has forgotten to turn on his E-Meter. I mean, it's a grossness, but it apparently is something that needs pointing out, it is something that needs clearing, and it is something that needs drilling.

5.) If a Tech Sec tells me - "We can only audit 6 pcs, because we don't have enough auditors." - I will at once order promotion to promote heavily for more pcs, and the regges to sign up more pcs, and tell the Tech Sec - "You've had it! There's going to be a flood of pcs in here within 2 weeks and you better wear you hat of hiring auditors, get them hatted and ready - about 12 more." And also notify Estates to rent 2 more houses to audit in - etc.

Now the product officer can get confused enough in trying to differentiate between his job and his org officer's job, because of course he has a legion of problems and so on, which are bouncing up along his lines. He will find himself however running on a short term cope per products, and his products will get worse, and he will have more and more trouble, and he'll get very exhausted, and he'll eventually say, "This system doesn't work somehow, and it's too exhausting and it's too horrible." And he won't be able to sleep at night, and will be found prowling the streets or sitting in parks with his head in his hands, with over loads and ARC breaks, which can't be audited because he's too exhausted.

6.) The Analysis of Successful Actions in this field shows the key is the pitiless Product Officer, who only thinks of the Organization in the light of how to use it in its totality.

The product officer Flag bureau and I had a talk about this when we saw, in the wee, small hours of the morning, when we saw that there was something wrong with this line up. And we discussed it, and kicked it back and forth, and used the practical experiences and applications which we had already had with regard to it. And we finally isolated it, and this is apparently it. And you see, we found the why, and now when we applied the why did it all work out? And the answer is yes. So I'm giving you a valid, tested result.

7.) If he sees an un-utilized machine or person, he gets them utilized in making products.

Now this why can't be just brushed off as an org officer's ignorance of organization, or something of this sort. This is no shame, blame, regret on the org officer's side of it. It is just what does the org officer have to know? And what does he have to do? Because you see, he could know a hundred million details, and he actually doesn't have to.

8.) The biggest trouble with execs we have found, is to get them to INSPECT their orgs. They shouldn't be at their desks! The production lines are out there - in the org.

The way we were clarifying this originally is, the org officer was the cheerleader. Oh that shifted your gears in a hell of a hurry, didn't it? Yeah well, the org consists of bodies and hats. Yeah. Let's take a look at this, he's a cheerleader.

9.) The only reason I can do so, is that I have a 24 hour Messenger watch and I keep them running like hell, while I also wear my own hats. Even so I do go out and inspect regularly. I only get a bit resentful when I get too much Prod 3 handed to me while I'm also doing my other hats. C/Sing, Writing Tech & Policy, Planning, Books and Films, Lecturing, Coordinating SO, GO, & Org activities, Handling compliance traffic, issuing orders, Conferences, etc.)

Now in our orgs particularly, we are taking care of the problems of the world. Well who takes care of our people? The org officer. When they're over loaded and sick and caved in and need somebody to hold their hands, who is it? It's the org officer, naturally. When they're under paid and over worked, who handles it? It's the org officer, naturally. But to do this kind of thing, the org officer has to have; it isn't that he's just a chaplain, far from it. But that is one of the things he'd have to do. And that was the original little see-through. We all of a sudden saw through in discussing it, this point, of where the org officer might fail.

10.) It's mostly because there are only 24 hours in this cockeyed plant's day!

The org officer, in communication continuously with the product officer can, he would go right ahead and pick up the speed of trying to get it organized in order to keep up with the product officer. That is for sure. And he actually should sort of run along ahead. We're going to increase the load on this division, production is going up, well the org officer should be in ahead of that. It's like your heavy traffic warning. The first one to pick that up would be the org officer. Not the product officer, that would be after the fact.

11.) I found myself saying that "even God couldn't hold this post". You may find yourself saying that too, on up the line - unless you listen very carefully.

So if the org officer does not pick this up in the first place, ahead of the product officer, you will get a sequence of booms and depressions, which will consist of this: Over load, lines break, somehow or other put it together, somehow. And over load, lines break, put it together, and so on, because there's no rule that every time loads increase why, those points of your organization which are weak blow up. And we've been observing that here for a long time.

12.) There ARE ways to live with this - by following the standard ways of doing things - keeping information lines open - and not Q & Aing.

So the org officer is there to do product three, which is the correction of the establishment. Preferably before the fact, and certainly swiftly after the fact. And the org's org officer is there for that purpose. And the org officer of the division is there for that purpose, and he's a product three man. You say, "Yeah, well what do you mean product three?"

13.) It assaults my Reality to find Executives depending on "dispatch" lines.

There are four products. One, product one, establishment. Establishing the establishment. Product two is the product of the establishment. It's what does the establishment produce. Product three is the correction of the establishment itself. And product four is the correction of the product. Now these are just arbitrary figures and you could figure it all out backwards, and actually should do your org board backwards, you could rename all of these things, but these are numbers and so on. But just recognize what they are, they are simply the sequential numbers, more or less in order of writing the bulletin. I mean, there isn't any particular reason for those numbers. See? You could say, "Well they're one and two and three and four, and so on."

14.) Dispatches are NOT THERE to HANDLE THINGS, they are only for information, records, and "OK", or compliance reports.

So, there is no point actually in discussing the chicken and the egg problem. What comes first? The establishment or the product. What comes first? Well, what came first, the chicken or the egg? It's pretty obvious, pretty obvious that the egg came first, didn't it? Well the egg would have to come first, because otherwise there would have been a missing sequence that arrived at the chicken. So we have solved that old, ancient problem. Just look over your data series, perfectly true. There would have been omitted, omitted points of sequence, and an altered sequence of events if the chicken came first. So it's quite obvious.

15.) It would be impossible, if you weren't in total communication with your organization, to handle it at all.

So actually probably, the product however does come first. A fellow goes out and he gets some leather, and he brings the leather in and gets an old kitchen knife and so on. He cuts himself a pair of sandals, and somebody else wants some sandals, so he scrounges some more leather and he cuts that up. And eventually why, making money from making sandals, he is able to purchase a better knife, and he can lay in more raw materials. But that better knife is when he starts into establishment. And then he gets an awl, and he's got more establishment, hasn't he? And he himself is gaining more expertise in how to do this, so of course that is more establishment. And gradually, out of the product arrives the establishment. And the funny part of it is, this is perfectly true. You could probably take a hundred thousand dollars, establish an org in New York City, and it'd promptly fail. We've done it. You wonder why we always insist that an org make its own way? And every once in a while we get; we've only had a couple of these in recent years. Somebody puts in a proposal that Flag pay three thousand dollars a week to support this org while it got on its feet; and we've had a couple like this. And believe me, if you want to run something backwards, do that. That's all great.

16.) Never ACT on reports that contain too much entheta or you can get a recoil. Investigate further on another line. Use them, however, as indicators of situations.

Now of course big factories do this all the time, and they don't own themselves anymore. They're all owned by the bank. I wonder how they lost the whole lousy lot? Well they just did it backwards, that's all. And Mr. Henry Ford starts with the, a bicycle factory and winds up with the Ford Motor Company, which winds up with a lot of subsidiaries, so that the Ford Motor Company at any time might establish a subsidiary with the cash it has at hand, and it goes on and manufactures things. And I notice though, as time goes on, the more the reserves are taken out of the Ford Motor Company to establish a subsidiary to do this, that or the other thing, why the less the stockholders get, and the less belong to Mr. Ford. He isn't even there anymore.

17.) I also have the ability to "look around" - without GOING around too much - so I can keep a close finger on the "pulse" of an org or area.

The point I'm making is, is there is no point at which the flow can be reversed. So therefore, you could say that product one is really the product. You see, there would be good reason for reversing this numbering. The product, the establishment, and so on. However, it is as it is. Number one is the establishment as a product, number two is the product of the establishment. If you want to work all this out, why just look at a generator, or something like that for a while, and it'll all evolve. And then of course you have to correct the establishment, and then you have to correct the product. It's easier to take it odd numbers, org officer, and even numbers, product officer.

18.) When I was an E/D in an Org, I would go through the Org daily and talk to every person in the org. I wore Prod & Org Hats both then, as we had no "system", so I was interested in the Products, the Staffmembers personally, and what they needed to get their product out.

So what comes first, the chicken or the egg? The egg came first, and always will come first. And it's economically unsound not to have it first, the egg as first. In other words, two is always primary and senior. But it's properly numbered after all, because to get anything you have to work backwards. You actually do, you have to figure it all out backwards. So, that numbering system presses this point home. If you want to work out an organization, take its product and then work backwards, and you will wind up with the org board. And if you take the org board and write it up, if you haven't got any product, and you aren't going to have any product, and you didn't have any product, and you aren't going to have any product, and that is all. You got an org board, you got a bad, heavy payroll, you got a this and that.

19.) I missed a day every so often - but I KNEW I had missed it, so would take extra attention the next day.

Org after org after org is sitting out there, and because we have delivered an org board, they've put up this org board, but if they had to really work it out they would figure out what their product was and work backwards to their org board. We can give them the org board that they should wind up with, but it is posted backwards. An org board is always posted backwards. It is not posted in such a way as, we put a name on a post. There's a post, so we put somebody on it. There's a post, so we put somebody on it. So there's a post, so we put somebody on it. That is not how, and is actually pointed out in your OEC as an absolutely fatal way to go about it. And you'd wind up probably with a government that governed nobody and nothing.

20.) The O/O should take a tour thru the Org daily to find out how the staff are doing.

So, what do you, what do you actually do to put together an org board, even when you have one handed you? You post the personnel who get the product. And if you're organizing an org you would put on these posts. Alright, why? See?

21.) He should note when a hat is missing or weak and handle.

Now let me give you the valuable products. The basic valuable products of an org are auditors, preclears and money. And they're the final valuable products that are the obvious ones. There are some additional ones, but these certainly are the obvious ones. So therefore, you work it backwards. You don't post an HCO OES, OES, PES in a three man org, who don't also work. Somebody could hold these posts, but it'd have to be posted backwards. You'd have to put on an auditor or auditors, to make the preclears, you'd have to put on the course supervisors, to make the auditors, and then you'd have to put on somebody to get the people to collect the money.

22.) The troubles with HATS can be solved on a gradient:

Now if we went at this very straightforwardly we'd find in what I've just told you there's a slight altered sequence of events. So, I'll just show you how neat this is. You would of course put on a course supervisor. And you'd put on somebody, even if it was the course supervisor, to get some students to pay to be trained. That gives you the money. And then you'd put on some auditors who had been so trained, in order to process pcs who are procured, and that gives you some money. And then you train more auditors, and you get some money. And you've now got auditors who can process more pcs, which gives you some money. And so, you can buy broader promotion in order to more broadly bring people in to be trained, so you about this time you've got to have somebody hot on the promotion line. You get how we're posting this thing now? And one of the little secrets of org failures is, is they don't post the course supervisor first. He's posted as an afterthought. And they don't bother to deliver the course because it isn't a primary posted action. And so of course they don't get any auditors who can audit, so there, when they bring in pcs they don't get audited, and then people don't pay money for no service on a course and no service from the auditor, so of course you run out of money, and it goes backwards, because it wasn't posted backwards. Posted backwards.

1. INSTANT HATTING

Now when we say somebody to train a course, we want a course supervisor, not somebody that once heard of something. When we audit people, we want an auditor. What is an auditor? An auditor is somebody who attains flubless results. Right now about fifty percent of the field auditors, maybe not that great a percentage. We haven't done a survey, but it seems like that, with cases coming back. Why the walls down there in Flag Qual would be charred. Absolutely charred. We're going at a level of certainty which does not say, "Well of course the reason why the session, or the pc, bla-bla, reasonable, you know, it explains easily. I mean, married a long time ago and probably is still PTS to somebody in Nero's time. You know? Ha, ha, ha. So of course, you say there's nothing you can do about it, and so on. And the reason that the chain didn't F/N at the examiner is it didn't F/N at the auditor's end, because it, narrative or something. But that doesn't have anything to do with it, because nobody knows what a narrative somatic is. And..."

2. MINI HATTING

So now, let us go over this again. If you want an org you would post it backwards. You would post a course supervisor, not somebody to not be there. Now he would have to have the materials, wouldn't he? And then, when we gild the lily here, we'd have to have somebody counting the noses of students as they walked in and out of the door, and have folders for them and so forth, so we'd have to have some administrative check on all of this to find out of they were coming to class at all. So we would build it up from product to org officer.

3. FULL HATTING

Now, the product comes first, but to get the product you have to have organization. So we're back the other way around again. Chicken came first. If you were to crash in a space ship on a god awful desolate planet, and you were faced with having to build the entire civilization, you would probably have to start with a sharp rock, right? And from that, over a considerable period of time, why you would eventually get the metal that bubbles out of the stones that are parked around the fire, and have copper. Now those are the long spans. But even though you might look at this prospect and sigh, and even though you might have done this, there is no reason why it cannot be done, providing you start with a sharp rock. In other words, there is some place to start.

23.) INSTANT-HAT is verbal-orient, tell duties - flows - what to do.

Now when you get to a product org officer line, you get this on your bing, bing. Now somebody's got to get some potential students who want to be trained, who will pay for the training, but the moment that that action starts, the org officer, anticipating a traffic flow, has ought to have procured at that moment a course supervisor, and the materials that the students will be taught, and the tape recorders, and the tapes, and the folder supplies, and the room, with a roof over it so the students don't get rained on, and the chairs, and the tables, and the clock, and the schedule. "Hey," you say, "what's this product officer doing all this time?" Well, if the org officer's that over burdened, he's putting in a product one, isn't he? He's putting in a product one all that time. So he'd better unload product one because he'll find it very rapidly in over burden. So he forms his first embryonic action of an HCO, even if he just does it by dividing his hat. Product one belongs to HCO, it belongs to the org officer's product. HCO AS.

MINI HAT is a basic small pack which HCO comes around and hats the staffmembers on in about 30 minutes.

So what's the org officer do? Well he got rid of it, see? He got rid of it. And somebody's putting the establishment there. "Well yeah but," you'd say, "treasury actually buys this stuff and other things, and the bookstore orders this stuff. And it's all ordered up and down the org, and you haven't got any org." No, no, no, no. Product one, the establishment of the establishment belongs to HCO. "Yeah, but the org officer got rid of that, didn't he? He got somebody there to put in the establishment and so on." So what's he do? He's even got to get a registrar and somebody there to pull the students in, and put this thing together and so forth. But that's, you know, that's HCO, isn't it? So that's immediately at HCO, so it's..."

FULL HAT is the Checksheet packs, books, demos, drills of the post to be done in study time.

So what's this org officer do? Well, product one. Product one is his responsibility. But having taken that responsibility he passes it over to somebody. So what's that leave him with? It leaves him with product three, the correction of the establishment. It leaves him with, when the chairs don't arrive, he gets some there. He calls the local funeral parlor and has them, rents some right away. Brezzo, zoom, boom.

24.) When a person is fully hatted, he gets a Cert from C & A.

Meanwhile, telling his establishment officer HCO ES, "You get some chairs. Buy some chairs." So he doesn't have anybody to operate as a course administrator because if nobody wandered in and it wasn't established, and so forth. That's a three then, isn't it? So he has a friend of his, or somebody that's standing around with his mouth open and so forth, suddenly finds himself kidnapped and on that post, and there's a dreadful row about this because the person's actually the director of disbursement. If he's director of disbursement, what the hell was he doing standing there? Good question. And that's the org officer's rebuttal.

25.) Now the Org Officer is not just "inhumanly" interested in "the organization". HE is interested in the individual staffmember.

The assignment of the course administrator, the hiring of somebody, the putting of somebody there, under of course the pressure of the org's org officer, is of course the HCO job.

26.) How is he doing? How is he getting on? Is he able to do his job? Is his health maintaining? Is the post overloaded? Does he need help? Is the post empty or no traffic flow coming or it's piling up? This all adds up to: DETECTION OF A DECLINE (PROD 3)

How do we actually get here? There are some other areas that have something to do with this establishment. There is the estate bureau. "Ah well hell, we don't have any estate bureau yet, we haven't even glued up an org board." So it must be, belong to what we call HCO. HCO generates the number one, establishment.

27.) He doesn't take up their time. It's brief, but he must know what all posts are SUPPOSED to be doing so he can detect a DEPARTURE from the IDEAL SCENE.

What's it consist of? It consists of the establishment. But what is an establishment? And right away we start to get into the basis of our deepest misunderstood. You ask almost anybody what an org consists of he'll say, "Well it consists of some people and it consists of some hats." And boy, that is about the faintest statement that anybody ever made under god's green Earth. You've got to beat this out and recognize it for real. What does an org consist of? What does an organization consist of? What is this thing called an establishment? We can go on and on and on and on and on. But it has very specific things. If you don't have a place to do this action, you will be training people in the rain, or the snow or something. So if an org just consists of some people, why they're going to awfully wet people. If it consists of some packs, they're certainly not going to be protected from the weather. There's got to be some safeguarded or protected space there. It's got to have a roof over it, it's got to have doors and windows and floors. And that contains what?

28.) He's interested also in them as human beings - are they getting paid?, do they have troubles? - you may think this is a Chaplin Hat, but it's also the Org Officers, because if just the Chaplin did it, the O/O wouldn't get the information.

Now I could go on and rattle off a list here of what, but I can give you certainly the basics it consists of. The tables, the chairs, the desks, supplies, the paper clips, the staplers, the comm baskets, the labels, the machinery, the typewriters, the address machines, the CF file cabinets, the CF folders, the content of the CF folders filed in them. It would consist of hats, and it would consist of packs and tape recorders, and it would consist of its various commercial contacts that set it up, and it would consist of; you get the idea. You start looking around, all of a sudden your eyes will open, the attention of anybody you're trying to break in as an org officer will come off of this thing called a body. That's the establishment.

29.) If he doesn't get the info, he can't REPAIR or ANTICIPATE a DECLINE.

Now you say, "Here, well yeah. Of course this is a, this is a ship, naturally. And of course that's under the ship org." Oh yeah? It's under what of the ship org? There must be somebody over there establishing a ship. So this is all very interesting.

30.) Thus he couldn't get Prod 3 - The Correction of the Establishment.

Now that's when you get very sophisticated indeed. Up to the time that it's all out it's all up to HCO. Somebody walks into HCO and says, "Where's the packs?" See? Yeah, but you only got one person, see? You say, "Well, you're division two today, too." That finishes that. Then you got two hats. "Where's the packs?" "Yes, well you see, and we wrote a letter..." and at that moment the org officer says, "God damn it to hell." Now, he deletes that because you must be nice. Remember your PR. "A dispatch is not a product, and it never will be, and it never will get us anything, and it is not anything that ever establishes anything. It is not a doingness, it is a gesture." And the first guy that says, "Well I wrote, I sent a dispatch to HCO..."

31.) He also inspects the Establishment on his tour - cleanliness?, is MEST in good order?, enough space?, files backlogged?, etc.

I'll tell you an exact situation. A personnel, who is facing internally; here you see, we have an internal/external situation, and that applies to CLOs. There's internal/external. Your org officer actually is operating a little more broadly in a CLO to establish the establishment, unless your CLOs HCO is competent to keep it established, because the org officer is operating internally, but the product officer in a CLO or on the Flag bureau is operating externally. It's a slightly different situation than you'll find in an org, because in an org directly, or in the FAO here, both the org and product officer are operating more or less internally. Their attention is internal.

32.) He may find out that about 30% of the org is misposted!

Now it's very funny, when you have a personnel whose attention is external to the org, and internal to the org simultaneously, he tends to go bonkers. We've already analyzed this and we've had a lot of experience with this. The guy whose attention is out there and in there. The Guardian's Office for instance at this moment that I speak has heroically acceded to our pleas, so that we could teach an FEBC and hold the fort in, all over the world; and it's much broader than you imagine; has loaded onto itself a great many internal concerns. It's also trying to hold the fort externally. Well they can't do that very long, that's why you are getting pressure here, because the Guardian's Office will probably be holding the org, or the CLO out there will be holding the org, until trained personnel get back to that org. And it's not much mentioned to students, because it would harass them, and put them under a worry, and a stress. So I'm telling you, speed up.

33.) He has to decide if all those HFA (held from above) posts are really necessary, or should some be filled to relieve a load, or would the functions be done better with a reorganization - Prod 3 again.

Actually the Guardian's Office at this exact moment all over the world is holding its breath, waiting for the FEBCs to come back, because they're holding internal actions. Now they're an external group. It wasn't the Guardian's Office in this instance, but I'm just telling you the difference between external and internal. Their attention is out into the public. Their tech is with the ARC broken pc out there in the public, not in the org. So, the person I was speaking to had permitted, who is an external personnel, I found was holding several internal hats. And I said, "Would you, what action have you taken to fill the vacant post?" And she said unfortunately, "I have repeatedly written a dispatch to HCO." That's what that charred mark is right there, my reply. We'll get the stewards to polish it out. And my order to her was, "You go down to the personnel files, and you look through these personnel files until you find somebody who is suitable, who is not holding a key post, and you take that person and put that person on that post." And the reason I did this is, I'm talking to a key personnel whose product is too valuable to be monkeyed with. And who was permitting herself to have an internal attention. Actually, probably a great deal of percentage of her time was being occupied internally.

34.) He (O/O) is able to order all persons responsible for Establishment, so uses his authority to arrest the decline, and get the area back to the ideal scene or even higher to a NEW ideal scene.

Now in the; that's not the Guardian's Office; but in the Guardian's Office matter and so on, why the, Mary Sue is saying, "Where are the FEBCs? Where are the FEBCs? Where are they?" They're perfectly willing to handle this sort of a situation, but you've got policy knowledge and other actions of one kind or another in the Guardian's Office at this moment, holding posts of temporary executive director. USGO is holding a post, his communicator is holding a post in DC, or was 'til a very short time ago and so on. And they're spread thin. They're controlling all of Africa right now, and actually were telexing for help here within the last week or so. So this is an external/internal strain. So you got to figure out which is your external and which is your internal personnel. So you do have external personnel. Who's your registrar?

35.) Now the P/O is getting products all this time and he makes notes of flubby areas and passes them to the O/O. The O/O, by doing these inspection tours, knows exactly where unutilized people and MEST are, so can handle quickly to get them moved over to beef up the Production areas, thus arresting the decline.

Now your registrar is working for people to come in and take that course, so that they can become auditors. Right? So she's got time to monkey around with how the files are or are not straight? You want to cut your income to pieces? Take an external facing personnel and give them internal distractions.

36.) The first things that the O/O usually detects as wrong is the person's HAT.

Now that goes broader than that. You want to cut your products to pieces? Take an org officer who isn't anticipating or running before the product officer with load lines, because your product officer will have his attention yanked over onto the subject of organization.

37.) Ex: Trouble with Success Stories - O/O will know either no one is there or there is trouble with the HAT.

Now just as there's external/internal, there is the organization of things and the production of things. The production of things is of course totally dependent upon the clear cut organization of things. But, the funny part of it is, you can produce without a clear cut organization, and one of the ways of stalling a whole org is to go into one hundred percent organize. You go into a hundred percent organize, you'll choke it down every time. You organize while you produce, is the proper sequence. And you produce while you organize is actually much closer to the truth.

38.) 99% of the time its HATS. So the O/O must be an expert at doing instant hats.

Now when you look over this team of the product officer/org officer, you find out that the org officer has to have a fantastically clear idea, and so does an HCO AS have to have a fantastically clear idea of exactly what an establishment consists of. Now this idea that I'm talking about is just like this. What does it consist of? Well it consists of a building, or rooms, or auditing rooms, of desks, of typewriters, of supplies, of personnel, of hats or hatting actions, and so on. The whole thing. The whole bang shoot. And if they don't have a total grip on what is an establishment, the org officer will not be able to back up the product officer, because he will never detect a decline. He won't see it as a departure from the existing scene. It isn't necessarily staticized. You know, the roof falls in. There's no stat for the roof falling in. But it is a departure from the ideal scene, I assure you.

39.) If an O/O needs to make an instant transfer to fill a post, he gets an authorization from HCO AFTER the fact. (No case gain or PTS persons should not be on Public Lines - route them to Qual, then onto a backlines job.)

So, therefore the first requisite of an org officer is not necessarily a verbatim knowledge of the OEC, but the definition and the extent of, and everything that there is in this thing called an establishment. And not only that, but what is everything in this particular establishment. Just like that. Now comes his knowledge of the OEC, because that tells him how it ought to go together and how it ought to run.

40.) The O/O gets things authorized AFTER they are done. An O/O who "waits for approval" is very "safe" - UNTIL you see his stats.

Now along with that is apparently you cannot ever have sensible hiring or personnel posting in an organization, unless there is a list of all of the essential hats and duties of those hats, in the organization, which is just a mini list. It's not even a mini list, it's an instant hat list. What do these people on these posts do?

41.) The failure to PUBLISH these actions is a big fault - and this is what the "Orders of the Day" (OOD's) are for. This keeps the team informed.

No one in personnel can function at all in personnel unless he has such a list. And where does one exist right now? There is no such list, not even in the most sophisticated personnel offices anyplace. What is this job? Well very often you'll get some big corporation, and it'll have some personnel thing and so on, but you won't find that list. They'll say, "Get me a shop foreman." So they look around to find somebody who has been a shop foreman.

42.) The P/O & O/O have the big space in the OOD's. If they don't keep the org informed, all hell breaks loose.

Now why do they do that nonsense? It's actually because they couldn't for the life of them define what are the duties of a shop foreman. Now it might only take three sentences to lay out what the duties of a shop foreman are, but you won't find anybody posting personnel at all sensibly, or hiring sensibly, unless they have a pretty good idea of exactly what each post does. Just in the last twenty-four hours I've run into it aboard here, you wouldn't believe it. I just tried to do a posting to fill in suddenly. Somebody had a class ten as a requisite to somebody to file folders, and to hand them out to people when the name was on the list. You won't believe that; I'm not being critical of this because we're just forming up. "What the hell do you want a class ten for?" "Well, you see, the duties of that post, you find the post there, the duties of that post are, and so forth, will host the CS conference with the auditors." "Hosts what conference?" "Well the CS's conference, you see, with the auditors is held by the D of P." "Whose conference?" "The CS's conference, with the auditors, is held by the D of P." He got the point.

43.) To NOT inform, sows little mysteries around the org and causes confusion.

Now once upon a time, the D of P had as part of his hat CSing. Well we have a CS, and I would like to see a class ten D of P who was not acquainted with the CS line of the various cases, trying to hold a conference with the auditors auditing those pcs. That would really be a clown performance. It wouldn't matter how much tech this fellow would know, he is not the CS. So the only person who could hold a CS conference, or a CS's conference would of course be the CS. But we weren't trying to post a CS, we had a CS. We were trying to post a D of P who would make up the programming of the auditors and the pc's lists, to hand to tech services. And to interview some of the people who were being audited who very often have questions, and walk around in mystery as to why that's being done. There's nobody a CS right now can say, a little side note, "Contact this guy." You can have the examiner say, "What did the auditor do?" but you can't say, "Contact this guy and clarify what his program is." What his auditing program is. It takes the mystery out of it. Well that's what you have to do on public lines, and because we're not handling actually public lines, why that function had dropped out. But it still leaves a whole bunch of little mysteries.

44.) The "Linear System" is: The P/O keeps notes, and passes them on to the O/O, of what needs to be investigated and handled in the course of getting the product.

"When am I ever going to get audited?" "What run down am I on?" You see? Guy goes into session with his jaw dropped, where he's audited with the mystery rud out. You get the idea? Well that's just because there's no D of P post. Well there's no trick to it.

The O/O's stats & reputation depends on the REDUCTION of these flubs.

Now if confidential materials were at question, that would be something else. But the confidential materials were not at question. The person selected was of the class necessary to handle confidential materials. Also was a trained auditor. There were two such people available, idle, with nothing whatsoever to do, in that very department. Not auditing, not anything, either one of them quite capable of performing this duty. But somebody had to have a class ten auditor to perform this duty. I wouldn't know why. Another duty is to hand the list to a tech page, and get the folders together, tech services, see? Hand the list to the tech page so that he can do this list, and get the folders of these pcs together and give them to the other. This post couldn't be filled I think because the person was slow or something, by reputation. That's nonsense.

45.) If the notes of the P/O are the same week after week, the O/O isn't doing his job.

Now the situation arose by overload. These are actual org product officer situations. The situation arose by overload. The traffic line went way up in volume, the stat was going way up in volume, the predict would be that these lines will break. And they broke. The product officer of that division became ill, the tech services chief of that division, over loaded and with insufficient help went to bed with a temperature of a hundred, leaving the post empty. But my effort to fill the post on a high express action, seventy-two hours after the first order that the post must be bolstered up fast, was being done on dispatch lines during that entire period. Dispatch lines! What the hell. I suppose the world has lost feet, because it's an automotive age. And when the person was put on the post somebody in HCO developed a policy that any pc's mail incoming should be opened and read, in case it might enturbulate the pc. And the person put on the post which was supposed to hand out the folders and the list, was opening and censoring student mail in the tech division, which is totally, completely off hat and illegal. At that moment there were loud explosions all the way along the line. The person put on the other post was doing the tech services job because there wasn't anybody there to do it. In other words, it's scrambled up in a mess.

46.) There are SOME areas that don't get handled, as absolutes are not obtainable, and some other factors may come into it. So the P/O notes are NOT orders, they are indicators, observations, and what he thinks is wrong. The O/O must find REALLY what is wrong and fix it.

Now this is the consequence of not predicting a traffic flow in an organization which is just forming. Now when you have an organization just forming, the many outnesses which are presented to you can completely confuse an org officer. And at that time, as at no other time, must the org officer adhere to product three, correction of the establishment, and leave the establishment to someone to get that one. Get product one. And in a fast running organization, the total duty, the total duty of an org officer is arresting a decline. Product three, halting a decline, or a threatened decline.

47.) If the P/O doesn't let the O/O know what he is doing, the O/O may thing he is tearing apart the org as fast as it is being put there.

So actually it works this way. When the product officer finds himself correcting the establishment's product, which is four, this passes at once to three, who may have it in hand already. That makes an org officer somebody with a crystal ball, doesn't it? I'll tell you just in a moment how he doesn't have to run it with a crystal ball. But it's almost a crystal ball job. By the time the product officer says, "The students coming off the line all seem to be limping in their left foot. You know? And they, when I talk to them and ask them why they don't go write a success story, why they sort of look down at their feet and limp off. And I think you ought to go in and see what materials they are being taught by whom, because I've got some inkling of this because I saw some textbooks on yogi lying around the classroom." Now if that team is really functioning; now of course I'm giving it to you a ridiculous pitch, as well as exposing some of our shames here. Well believe me, it's being straightened out. And things will get straightened out here much more fast as it straightens out. They can go wronger and get straightened out faster than anything you ever saw in your life.

48.) In the O/O's daily tour, he also notes the condition of supplies and equipment, the busyness & lack of it of personell, the condition of the communication lines, etc.

But the org officer hat's working on product three, correction of establishment. If he was very good would be able to say to the product officer, "Yes, I spotted that yesterday. We have immediately somebody coming in here from San Francisco that used to be in the org, and so on. He's taking over as course supervisor. And as a matter of fact, the comm-ev has already been convened on the course administrator for crossing practices. And if you walk into class at this moment you will find one of the HGC auditors who is an HDG, at two o'clock took over the class." That'd be a very lucky product officer, wouldn't it? See? Really on the ball.

49.) He would also have to see that the hatting programs, study time, HCO minihats, and Qual were all progressing so that eventually the org can get fully hatted.

A little bit ahead of, a little bit ahead of is what, is what the org officer, that's where the org officer belongs. Anticipating the traffic flows, anticipating their sags, anticipating this sort of thing by reason of the actions of the product officer. So the product officer has to keep the org officer pretty well informed as to what was going on. Therefore, the product officer is always making notes. Anything he runs into, and after he's handled a kerfluffle he always writes it up, no matter how briefly, he makes notes of this kerfluffle, and he passes the thing over, and he usually indicates the organizational action.

50.) He also is interested in Major Courses to train Auditors for the Org. The production started off with a Course Sup to train Auditors to audit the pc's, so this must be kept up for EXPANSION.

Now I don't know if I'm clarifying it for you to any great degree, because you may not believe me. It's just that you may not believe the important point that I'm trying to put across. You may believe you have, if you're operating as an executive director, a product officer, you may have, you may think you have somebody. It's not hard, it's not possible for you to believe completely, probably, because it assaults your common sense, and that's what you want to watch, boy. Common sense to you may appear like complete screaming genius to somebody else. It breaks down on the inability of the org officer to define, locate and establish everything in the establishment, including the duties of every hat in the establishment. And if you're going around in circles as to why you can't operate or why your product officer can't operate, that is the first thought.

51.) The SO suffers from not doing this, so that in AOs, non-SO have to hold the Top tech Posts. This is lack of long range planning.

So you clear it. You can actually clear it in terms of reach and withdraw from typewriters, and reach and withdraw from staff members. Now we're not talking in a theoretical line now, because when we had this conversation that clarified this point and it gave us a win on the thing, this is; I'm not being down on org officers at all. I mean this is, this is the truth of the thing, and this was what was fouling up the line.

52.) We have an old policy here on Flag regarding CLO - "to always send out a better trained team than the last team that wend there".

Alright, we get in the product officer's duties. The product officer has to be able to recognize his product, pang!, that he's trying to get. He has to recognize that it is a product, a product of the establishment. He has to be able to recognize that and he has to be able to get that thing out. That's what he's working on. He has to want that product. The two monitoring laws is, is he has to recognize and he has to want it. And the action is that he has to get it. Doesn't even say how. Actually he has to know more about the organization than the org officer, really.

53.) This works toward the Ideal Scene.

But where you will get a break down will just be on this other thing. That's its other point, this other point. It's just a failure actually to embrace what is this thing called an establishment, because if the establishment itself is not embraced, then no ideal scene could possibly be conceived of, and therefore the org's org officer would not be able to spot a departure from the ideal scene so as to arrest its decline. And he's just in the first business of arresting declines, and passing along back to the person who are responsible for the establishment itself and establishing the establishment, what will be required as an establishment? Now therefore, he can get this thing back up to an ideal scene. But he's working on three.

54.) The "Art Formula" applies here - about "Perfection" - you can work so hard for "perfection" that nothing ever gets DONE. So it's always BETTER than the last, a CLOSER approach to the Ideal Scene, etc., to EXPAND.

Now what is product three? Three is the product which corrects the establishment. Three is the correction of the establishment, and it is itself a product. It's a correction. And org org officer who doesn't work on product three constantly and continuously and so forth, will find that the decline of an organization is not arrested. And an organization will run, and your GDS's will all go up, and your GI will all go up, and everything will go fine, and then all of a sudden the GDS tails off, and all of a sudden another GDS will tail off, and all of a sudden the GI goes boom! And the organization goes all to pieces. And you wonder what the hell happened. And what you hit is an un-anticipated expansion, which sought and found and exploited every weakness in the organization, and it blew up. And that is the reason for booms and depressions of orgs. The booms and depressions of org is, as they expand they expand beyond their tolerance level of handling. The increased volume finds all their weak points, blows them up. Staff members become over loaded, over worked, they can't cope with it anymore. The lines are just too much. Things are too internally vrahh, human emotion has gotten in your road, oh my god. And somebody says, "I think I'll go back to Australia and sit under a Eucalyptus tree, because I'm going mad."

55.) The O/O should work on this basis, always getting the area organized better and better and more established. He should NOT go for "perfection" at great time and expense.

What happened is there was nobody watching product three, and detecting and remedying the points of decline, and patching them up, and pushing them in to the people responsible for the establishment, so they could hire it up and beef it up, hat it up, quick it up. HCO actually as the org board sits at this moment would seem to be totally incapable of putting an establishment there, because it has several thing that are not its preview. That ought to be remedied. But HCO could remedy it right now, because they can order, they can order the other parts of the organization. They've got a time machine to make sure the order is complied with. "We predict at this rate of expansion that we will have used up all existing space of this building by July, which is five months from now. You find this new building and your guy's promoting and so forth. Fix it up so there's every Sunday meetings teas and so forth after we move. But you find us a building, and so on." That is not the org officer's action. It's the org officer's spot, but it's the org officer's order that something be done about this. We need a bigger establishment. And that's going to shatter everything along the lines, and so forth.

So, the decline of the establishment is arrested by ordering bigger space and more staff members. But then somebody has got to figure out how to put this bigger establishment in there. So the order is simply that to arrest the decline it is necessary for you to expand the space of the establishment, economically, so that it does not eat up everything that you are going to make by the expansion.

56.) Also the O/O should get a program going for longer term admin training of execs thru OEC & FEBC. This would come after full hatting.

57.) The Tech and Qual O/Os will also insist on training for mayor Tech Courses, and this should also be done, Class VI, VII, VIII, C/S Courses, etc.

58.) An Organization consists of TRAINED Persons ideally. It isn't composed of dead bodies.

59.) We do a lot of TRAINING in the SO. In Scn. Orgs It's nowhere near what it used to be in the early days, but I'm getting it going again.

60.) Remember there is no scarcity of PEOPLE today. Maybe there was in 1705 - but not today. The scarcist thing in the world today is a HAT.

61.) These "welfare" people in America and other areas - do you think they are happy being relegated to a HATLESS LIFE? No!

62.) Any time you have welfare, you have unhappy people, and an incipient revolution.

63.) A group has a tendency to "EXCLUDE", and it shouldn't... - particularly a group such as ours.

64.) You raise your Security Standards too high, and you don't get any people at all. And you put them too low, and you have "wild ones" on your hands.

65.) Somewhere in-between is the right level of security - it hasn't been yet found - but what it takes is an alert HCO.

66.) I've seen people make it on a post after several instant hattings and practical - and I've seen some get worse and worse. These are "cases" and need processing.

67.) We have the Org Series-Organizational Misunderstoods list to help straighten out people. It's a list of Management terms to be cleared - given in the Org Series.

68.) We have flubless tech here at Flag and you in the outer orgs will e in "clover" when you have the tech standards to allow your org to deliver the L-10 in the Department of Special Cases.

69.) The Standard of Field Audition at this moment forbids it utterly.

70.) So we've got to export course supervisors and the tech when the orgs get qualified to have it.

71.) The principle we work on is: "Hire lots of people, and retain those who make it."

72.) An indicator of someone who can't make it as staff is their study stats. Not "slow" or "fast", but THEY CAN'T STUDY AT ALL. That's also a case.

73.) This shows up in your hatting actions. The STUDY RATE, or ABILITY TO APPLY what one learns, is another indicator for the O/O.

74.) A personal observation of the post combined with the study rate of the person gives an O/O data on how to select, transfer, or remove personell.

75.) The fact of "going to study or not" is NOT a valid indicator. Sometimes people on heavy traffic posts feel responsible, so skip study to handle the post.

76.) In this case, you point out to them that some of the cope & problems of the post will be lessened by going to study on his study time. VERY true!

77.) One of the things you find is a person has 8 incomplete courses! The solution is to finish them all one by one, taking them in the order of "which takes the least time to finish?" "Good." "Finish it." & DON'T let them start a new course.

78.) The Org Officer must try to finish any orders given by the Product Officer in the time given.

79.) If one doesn't have an ESTABLISHMENT OFFICER - different from an O/O - it isn't likely that any long-range program will ever get done.

80.) The Establishment Officer can be the HCO AS. Then the O/O will find it easier to get the P/O backed up as time goes on - if the Esto is doing his job of putting Prod 1 there.

81.) The O/O who WAITS for orders is already BEHIND the P/O and he ought to be AHEAD of him.

82.) The O/O has to "run like everything" just to keep even with the P/O.

83.) I always like to be "saucy" as a subordinate - but fully competent - and I always end up in Command of an area. I used to think something was wrong with me, but really it's the best way to hold a junior post.

84.) It's to answer all orders with "Oh, that's done." "We already handled that." But it must be TRUE. I could organize and handle things on a ship while most others were eating a sandwich. Then I would just be insouciant, a "gold-brick", and nonchalant. I ended up RUNNING the ship as 3rd in Command.

85.) So the Product Officer has the "Big Ideas" and "Bright Ideas" to sell more service and get people in. The O/O would rapidly figure out what it would take to deliver at that projected volume and gets it set up before hand, so when the P/O tells him that 40 new students and 60 pc's are arriving next week - the O/O casually tells him he has already got a bigger courseroom and more auditing rooms, auditors and tech services people ready to handle, and HATTED to do so.

86.) The Product Officer is in the business of driving people into the org - and the O/O has to put an org there to handle them.

87.) The O/O may hire field auditors, get FSMs to help handle a flow, plan to audit people in their rented rooms, etc. He is very resourceful.

88.) The O/O prevents the decline of the EXISTING org and forces HCO to put enough MORE Establishment there to HANDLE the P/O's increased volume. That's the 1, 2, 3, of it.

89.) The O/O extrapolates the curve of the existing graphs of production to see where they will be, say, 1 year from now. Then he sees what is necessary to produce that. Then he gets it started NOW to obtain the personell, auditors, space, equipment, etc. That's how he stays ahead of the P/O.

90.) If the curve is downward, there won't be any org soon, so he ARRESTS the decline.

91.) When the O/O corrects these Org areas he informs the P/O so there is a backflow there. And he gets CSW OKs for big projects from the P/O (and E/D). This is the linear system where the P/O IS the E/D.

92.) This all comes under the heading of CAPABILITY. The P/O must know the capability of the org.

93.) The "capability" is in the hands of the O/O - not to limit it, but to improve and extend it.

94.) "Capability" implies there are RESOURCES TO DO PRODUCTION WITH.

95.) The P/Os "Black Dog of Karnak" is Resources - he never seems to have enough. So the O/O should keep him advised of Resources.

96.) Resources of an Org are:

- Auditors - Auditors that can be hired - Supervisors - Auditing Rooms - Materials - E-Meters - Books - Course Rooms - etc.

97.) On an Eval, you do a "Resources Estimate" to find out if you have resources to make a handling with. And you have to tailor the handling to fit the Resources, otherwise it's unreal and can't be done.

98.) The ABILITY "to return thins to the Ideal Scene" depends on what Resources you have.