Now your product officer has to be able to recognize a product, and he has to want the product. And the org officer has to be able to make somebody a member of the team, and give him enough expertise so that he can demonstrate his competence. And if he gives him enough expertise so that he can demonstrate his competence, he becomes a member of the team. So these are quite different functions, aren't they?

How are you?

Now as an executive director running an org officer and a product officer, you will run into this immediate problem - you won't know who to give orders to. You will become foggy, you will sometimes give the product officer the orders which should go to the org officer, you'll sometimes give the org officer the products which should go to the product officer. Now I'm saying this, I'm not putting this up as a possible aberration for you to shoot at, I'm just telling you that this point exists, otherwise you'll make ducks and drakes out of this system.

(Fine, thank you.)

Now we could write all about this in cold words and you still wouldn't have the music, because the music is a speed up beyond belief. When you start these two actions together it's something like mixing fire and dynamite. You get a speed up. Now as you get that speed up, all those portions of the area, first all those team members who are not really part of the team and so forth, and all those portions of the area at large in which you're running this team will be impinged upon by the team, because you're running at a much higher velocity level than the area is running, and it inevitably will happen. There will even be a thought like, "Maybe we ought to slow this thing down." It's something like this, it's the old, old story about the salt mill. And the salt mill started grinding out salt, and it perpetually ground out salt, and nobody could stop this thing from grinding out salt. Part of an old story. And it ground out so much salt that nobody could put any of the salt anyplace, so they threw it in the ocean, and that's why the ocean is salty. It's still down there grinding out salt.

Well some of you are alive. Now what happens here, this is the eighteenth of January AD 21. What happens here, very often, used to happen at Saint Hill occasionally, is the developmental line would exceed the write up line. And that essentially is what has happened here. And I found it best to give you a very rapid rundown of the, one of the several developments which have been made in the field of administration.

But, there's some thought like, "Hey," somewhere along the line you say, "Any product officer that," he all of a sudden, it'll be if he wishes to trace it back, he's just had a little failure ten, fifteen, twenty minutes ago, or that morning or something. And you'll trace it back saying, "You know, I ought to slow this thing down. Let's, let's slow this thing down a little bit, you know? Because this is starting to roar." Now that is the music that goes along with this system.

The area of administration is comparable to auditing on the third dynamic. And where an auditor has one pc, an administrator has a whole bunch of them. And he audits on standard procedures, and he audits at a very rapid rate.

Now look at the, look at the factors which are stacked up here. The scarcest thing in the universe is a hat. And you will find first and foremost, the org officer will find at every one of his blunder points an unworn hat. The person will have not quite taken over the hat, the person will have really just left the hat. The person is not wearing his hat. Well now, that not wearing his hat is insufficiently expletive, or it doesn't explain it enough rather, for the org officer to handle the situation. He just goes in and he says, "Wear your hat," you know? No, no, no. The org officer has got to be an expert mini-hatter.

Now if you can perceive administration in this light, as having a great many procedures, but all of them very standard, you all of a sudden get a new look. In the field of PR, for instance, the main trouble is that no one uses standard PR. It's practically no one. There is a textbook on the subject. One of the reasons why the textbook is not completely applied is the discipline is poor in this field, because the subject itself didn't have any great use. Well we'll touch on that this evening, but I just wanted to give it to you as an example.

Now you can run through an organization as an executive, and you can actually hat people without any hat check sheet or pack. You can tell them, "There's your post, there's where you are on the org board, there's the division, this is your boss, and you're supposed to sit there and do so and so." But that's, that's just a lick and a promise. That's about as good as any business ever does, and then the guy is there for a year or two, then he finds out what his job is, maybe. He actually has never been hatted.

So that here is a field, there are certain standard procedures. Now hardly anybody but a Scientologist would know what you were talking about if you said standard procedure. Says, "Oh yeah, well yeah, blaoah. Textbook, yeah, you read that in school and then, then you go out and you do something. You know, textbook hasn't anything to do with it." That's the truth. And one of the difficulties the world is in right this minute is they've thrown away the textbook of economics. And there's a couple of Hungarians, not that there's anything wrong with Hungarians, but it's a great oddity that a couple of Hungarians have been for the last decade or two wandering around from government to government being employed by prime ministers, and they give him a whole bunch of squirrel economic technology, and the country goes broke. It's quite a system. And I'm not joking, actually this has been going on. The last place they stopped was England.

Now this rapid hatting is always your first action of the org officer. It isn't ethics, it's just a rapid hatting, because the guy really must have some kind of a doubt or misunderstood, or he didn't quite know what he was doing, or he didn't quite something or other something or other, and he'll get killed in the rush. And it's only kindness to hat him, and hat him rapidly, because he's something like a soccer player that has thrown himself across the shins of his fellow team mates. And they not only will get some sore shins, they will start getting mad at him. He becomes a social pariah, very quickly. And so therefore the org officer has to be there to catch the ball, putting the guy back in the team line.

A little earlier than that there was fellow name of Lord Keans. And Lord Keans, he had some, he was part of the Oxford movement I think, and he was part of the Fabian group, and they had peculiar sexual ideas and so forth. They were very strange people. And Lord Keans took the textbook on economics and wrote it backwards or upside down, crossed it with the manufacturer of fire crackers and the burial of dead rats, and began to teach this very broadly so that in the early thirties we begin to find Keansian economics being practiced very hard and fast and furiously, and by the professors only, at Harvard. And from Harvard it swung out into the remaining American universities, and went out into other" universities in the world, a completely untried, ivory tower professorial approach to the field of economics, the central theme of which is create want. So that if you create want, economics all solves itself. Only he forgets that he is simply squirrelling on the law of supply and demand, doesn't state that, forgets anything having anything to do with inflation and deflation, and now we as a group actually are confronted by an escalating inflation. And this inflation subject is a very nasty subject to have much to do with.

Now he can always put a better team member there, he can always put a better organization there. Now you as executive director, if you're operating with an org officer; you'd have to have a pretty big sized org to be operating with a product officer and an org officer. Normally speaking the executive director would be the product officer. He'd be both the product officer and the planning officer, and he'd have an org officer backing him up. You get a little bit larger, he's the planning officer, coordinating officer, he's got a product officer, he's got an org officer. And you get a little bit bigger than this, he has to have a messenger, and he has to have a PR man. And the product officer actually is the person who handles the PR man, and then the org officer will use the results of the PR, and so forth, because you're doing rapid survey, because what slowed your production down? Human emotion and reaction. So PR suddenly swings into the line.

Inflation is predicted through the seventies at the rate of about eight percent per annum for the U.S. dollar. Well, that's just another method of placating the public, because it's been escalating, rising much more rapidly than that in the last few years.

Now I clarified PR with you first so that you wouldn't have a misunderstood, thinking you should be nice to people or something. By all means be nice to people, but it isn't, it isn't the substance of PR. PR is that technology which handles human emotion and reaction.

Trouble with inflation, if anybody looked at the basic textbook on the subject, is it goes in an upward, swinging curve. And the curve gets steeper and steeper and steeper, until it gets vertical. And at that point, that's it. You bury your money.

So, that's what you're going to run into. Now why isn't this guy hatted? Well he could be unhatted by ignorance, which is the charitable fact, or he can be unhatted by human emotion and reaction. "Yeah, I'm not going to play, I'm going to sit over here on the side lines," and so forth. "The last time they went down the field they kicked me in the ribs, and they're still sore." So the org officer is actually in the business of picking up the pieces and putting the team back together again. And the product officer is only interested in products. And you as executive director have to be able to get these two things untangled so that you just know them instinctively. Pongo! Or, a product officer has to know these things instinctively. Both of them have to know the organization inside out.

Now it's happened with several countries recently, and these countries have bitten the dust, and they have not been the same country afterwards, they were in different hands. So if the primary financial income of our movement is from the United States, and somebody is tampering with the United States dollar on the basis of a squirrel textbook; people have suddenly woke up to it. I mean, it took them long enough, 1930 forward, you know? People suddenly woke up to the fact that they're dealing with squirrel economics. There's beginning to be a fairly good hew and cry on the subject actually. They've traced it back to Harvard, and it sort of, there's a book just been released on the subject exposing it all. Actually I collided with it a few years ago and wondered where all this came from. Found the rest of the world didn't know where it all came from, and did some tracking down on it myself. Somebody who was a suppressive decided to ruin a lot of economics, and they've succeeded in doing so. And this gives us a problem.

There's a system by which you do this, and which I advocate. In org series ten, The Analysis of Organization By Product, we find there are four products. These four products are the establish machine, the machine's product, the corrected machine and the corrected product. In other words, there is the established machine and the corrected machine. Just think of a generator, see? It's putting the generator there, and then there's repairing it. See? And then, the product officer, he doesn't have anything to do with this machine, except just saying what speed it's to be run at and so forth and so on, because he's not interested in the machine, he's interested in what the machine is producing. It's either producing power delivered or it's producing electricity, or it's producing something. So that is what he's interested in, see?

Now how does this come in to what I'm going to talk to you about tonight? Well it comes into this because I'm presenting you, there's an actual problem. Money will be worth less and less, but probably under the weird duresses of the thing there will be less of it. Worth less and less, and be less of it.

So actually your org officer has the established-ment, the establishment. He's got the establishment, he establishes the establishment. And when it goes a little awry, he corrects the establishment. So he has products one and three. And then, we've got the product that the establishment has, or the many products which it has, and then the correction of the product, as two and four. The pattern that is followed on this is when the product officer finds himself, this is the law governing it, when the product officer finds himself with product four, which is correcting the establishment's product, he immediately shoots it over to the org officer, organizationally at three, who tries to get it back to one. So it goes four, three, one. You follow this now?

Now therefore, a movement which is expanding requires certain things. It is expanding into; we are actually expanding into a world which is to be, make an understatement of the age, a bit mad. And we have to exist within the economic framework of the society. If we don't exist in the economic framework of the society we'll have had it.

The org officer is finding out, he's having to, "What-what-what, where the devil is the wmfh? And waof and waof and waof and waof." Well he goes right ahead and gets that. He doesn't try to put the establishment together. He doesn't try to correct the establishment any. He can grab anybody that's passing by and say, "Tally onto this waof and produce this waof right away." Do you see? But at the same time he's doing that he's got to make some kind of a notation in passing, and slide it back, "Hey, the waof cutter wasn't here." And that goes to the org officer. And now the org officer has some how or other got to get that corrected, see. And these two guys work against and with each other, on entirely separate things.

For instance, it might amaze you, but that SMIRSH, the World Federation of Mental Health, the National Association of Mental Health Network, is having an awful time. We decided some time ago" to cut off their supply, and we are doing so. They nevertheless have all the government appropriation there is in the field of mental health. They are dependent only on the bayonets of the government, really, and to the degree that they're supported by governments. That makes a very weak movement. Makes a very weak movement. The wheel turns, the political wheel turns, the political fashions fade, because they're not delivering anything, which brings us closer to our subject tonight. Their product is death.

Now the org officer does not work for the executive director or the CO. The org officer works for the product officer. The first product an executive director or commanding officer is a product officer. The first product of the product officer is an org officer. The first product of the org officer is an HCO area secretary, and the first product of the HCO area secretary is an HCO. HCO continues the establishment.

Now anybody can produce that, without going to a university for twelve years. I can see Amathea Hood right now requiring her certificate that he has studied for twelve years... Now this is not into an unsavory line. They are badly organized. They appear to be fairly well organized, but they're not. They're badly organized, they're badly financed. A group such as our own, going into a world which is not too orderly, succeeds to the degree that it is efficient, that it has workable, useful technology, and to the degree that it stays alert and handles the situations as they arise. Those three conditions are necessary to a forward movement and an expansion.

Now, with that in train, and keeping that in mind, and tracking back to it when you find the system is going loyadle, now you just concentrate on products, as the executive director or a product officer. You just concentrate on products. Just products, that's all. You don't take your attention off of products and say, "I wonder why the organization didn't get its FP into the woggle bogs, and why we didn't get any raw materials into the fuel spits, and so forth." Keep it on product two. Product two, product two. Each time you slide into the corrected product of the establishment, slide it to the org officer and say, "Hey, hey, hey. There's no waffle cutter here. You know? We're cutting waffles over here, we don't have any waffle cutter."

So it has been my basic work here in 1970 to bring forward enough administrative information, and enough administrative technology to bring the field of administration into a par with auditing, which as you know is terribly precise. Now that has been accomplished in the theoretical and in the practical aspects, both. Now therefore, the FEBC and the material which is being taught at this time leads up to these breakthroughs in the field of administration. You are not dealing now with somebody's idea of how the thing should be, you are dealing with some natural, basic laws. It isn't because I have an idea that if you say, "Do you have an ARC break, ARCU, CDEI. Is there an earlier, similar ARCU, CDEI? F/N." It isn't because I say this works, or that this is true, or that the mind should operate this way, that is not that. It is a basic discovery, it incorporates many parts, but these things assembled come into flying a rud. Now there's theory merging into practical application with which you are all familiar.

Now this makes the org officer go a bit out of phase, so he has four things. He has the immediate action, he has the medium range action, he has the long range action, and he has the very long range action, which is, "What's this place going to look like two years from now? What's it going to look like in six months?" And what are we going to have here in six months, that's your long range action. The medium range action, organizationally and so forth, well that's maybe a couple of weeks. And the immediate, that's anything from five minutes to a day, or something like that. Usually in actual practice, probably about ten, fifteen, twenty minutes. "I'll get you a wog cutter," you know, something.

Now this can be gorgeously abused. This is for a pc who has an emotional upset. So if the pc is sitting there with a high TA, we say, "Do you have an ARC break?" Misuse of the tool. So, the auditor struggles around, and nothing much happens, and sometimes he actually makes it and gets the TA down by some other means which is disguised inside this subject, but the truth of the matter is, is after he's done this with this pc a few times and so on, you'll find the pc is now ARC broken about ARC breaks. The technology is sufficiently good to obtain a recovery from that too. But this is a standard technology.

So these operate one to the other, and the org officer; let's go back to basics now; he has to know a product when he sees one. And he has to want that product, and he has to get that product, which is the third line. That product he's got to get. He might not get it on schedule, it might not be as fancy as it was, it might not be as big as it is, but he's got to get it.

Now what is this? Basically the situation is that there is a situation. That is the first thing one has to be able to recognize, that there is a situation. Now to know there's a situation one must have a familiarity with an ideal scene and with" the existing scene. And he finds the existing scene is different from the ideal scene, so he knows he has a situation.

Now one of the greatest training mechanisms which you can go through with this system is to get a short term, close up organizational action. Training in a Flag bureau or a liaison officer, you actually are on a very hot line yes, but the product is not as visual in its final accomplishment. For instance, your product is a project, which is sent out, let us say. Alright, that's fine. It doesn't give you as neat a view. It gives you a plenty good view, and they work great as teams, as working with something, "What's my product?"

Now the situation can be analyzed by taking the data related to the situation and narrowing it down, and then we find what caused the situation, which we call a why. And having found that, we can remedy it, and the pc recovers from the ARC break. Oh you thought I was talking about administration, didn't you?

Let us say, let's take a ship, voyage. "The product I'm working on is a voyage." Now the voyage product, somewhere here I've got a sample of trying to get a voyage. Yes, here we are. Product, a voyage. Now this was the write up, this was the write up which ensued in trying to get this product called the voyage. It's actually Flagship order 201. It's investigation and remedy of sailing delay. All of a sudden I noticed that we didn't have a product. Now I'd decided this was a good time to get my hands dirty on the subject of product officer/org officer system, so I stepped in. And much to the dismay of everybody involved and so forth, operated as a product officer without an org officer, for about forty-eight hours, just to find out what this was all about and do it. Working on a tied up product like a voyage, that's the product.

Now if you put these two things then a frame of reference, you find out that we now have in our hands a superior administrative technology, still in a developmental stage, as all progressive or dynamic technologies are. Progressive and dynamic technologies actually do not cease to develop, they continuously refine. That staggers somebody if he doesn't realize that what is being refined is the progress being made by the basic law, not the change of the basic law. They think the law of gravity keeps changing because somebody eventually develops a method to make anti gravity, don't you see? The law of gravity has not changed.

Well we have to get the product started, and the product wasn't starting. There was all kinds of wild things going on. Now because I wasn't operating with an org officer, some of those cycles are still going on at this moment, that came off of this, although this date is one January, which was eighteen days ago, making it a medium range project.

When you have isolated the basic laws you get a continuous refinement. Some people are idiotic enough to call mixing a bunch of chemicals in a test tube and getting soup instead of dupe basic discovery. No it isn't, what it is is simply development from basic discoveries which are made. There probably has not been a basic discovery made on the planet for the last twenty(c)five years, except perhaps in our field. This is pretty interesting. All we get is a developmental progress, whereby people refine what they already knew. There were several basic discoveries made in the early part of the century, and the last of them probably was how you tickle the tiger's tail and plutonium, to cease to exist at rapidity, and then how you managed to make hydrogen de(c)hydrogize at vast violence. Those took some basic and original discoveries which were not new at the time, but the developmental line exposed them into a practical application.

So after I got all this I wrote it all up. And, working on this, trying to get the voyage started; the voyage had begun fifty-eight minutes late, and the faulty product of course was traced down. Why? How come, how come, how come? Actually it had to do with not getting cleared, and somebody had let a customs official and the agent go ashore, to come back later. And we found that an outness there was that there was an apparency of a person scheduling the sailing of the ship who shouldn't have been. In other words, we found a counter-policy.

So anyway, there hasn't been any basic discoveries to amount to anything. Nearly all these discoveries which you see around, they're not, all these developments which you see around, the faster automobile and so on, is simply the refinement of something. So you can continue to expect refinement from the basic discoveries which have been put together here in the last year. And actually within the last twenty(c)five years in this field, because it's been under investigation.

Now by getting that out of the way, and somehow getting the voyage started, and then carrying on that voyage to complete that voyage as a product, and nothing but a product, and then working on a product at the end of that line I was able to get a hand, first hand knowledge of this system. These were the products which I worked on. One of the first things I found out is you have to be able to recognize the product you're working on, with no nonsense. You've got to state that's the product. It doesn't matter whether it's in a policy letter or not, it's the product you're working on at that moment. You'll find yourself working as a product officer on a typing typist. See? I got a product here, I got a typing typist. This is the product, you see. And you'll start working on a typing typist and suddenly realize that you're working on an org officer's product. Do you follow?

Now these laws which we're working with now are not resident in just last year's work. You will find them spattered all through the OEC course, these fundamentals. Now as these fundamentals are put together you approach something that appears to be a standard procedure. A standard procedure is subject to refinement, just as you get a further workability. In the field of public relations itself, we have just started the subject. The subject actually did not exist, except in somebody's imagination, as an applicable technology, because they didn't apply it the way they should have" applied it, and they didn't know what it was for, and they didn't know it's basic laws. It's very amusing, but public relations just began. Now every professor that teaches public relations would contest this madly. "Oh it began back in the, 1911!" And I would say, "Professor, for the love of Christ, will you please research your subject. It began in Rome with political campaigns, painted on the outside of the coliseum." I don't happen to be kidding right now. But as far as our written technology of public relations is concerned, it goes back, way back. And as far as the written technology is concerned, it belongs in Rome. And it started out there as a formal subject to get senators elected.

So you hastily, you find yourself, you can't get these mimeos out, so you've got a product in your lap which is typing typist, that's an org officer product. So you promptly would get a hold of the org officer and say, "For heaven's sakes, give me a typing typist so I can get my attention back on this mimeo." So there, you would be a little bit late. But if you couldn't identify what product your attention was on, you might find yourself working with the wrong product, which belonged to the org officer. You see what I mean?

But there's been very dim fumblings all the way along the line. Now what would you do if you suddenly took this subject, if you took this subject in so many wads, and all of a sudden it had a precise, exact role that you couldn't get along without? What would happen? All of a sudden it wouldn't be something that they hired six guys in this hundred million dollar firm to exploit and to monkey with, and they sit in the back room and figure out how they can do this or that with this or that. If any of these guys use their standard technology they'd probably run, run well. But it's very difficult to get these fellows to use a standard technology, because they really don't know their own textbook too well. There is a textbook see, but it's some technologies. Now what are they for?

So, now what would have missed then is, you were trying to get a mimeoed project, and you were trying to finish this up so that you could say, "Period to that. That is the product I'm working on." And all of a sudden, you find yourself in four. You're having to do something to correct this thing, and it's not coming out in the org line. Then you just shift it over, it's obviously a three. So it goes over to three, you say to the org officer, "Get me a typing typist." And then the org officer can do that right away, and then try to get the establishment back into line on a medium range thing, like get enough typists in mimeo, you know? And that might become a long range of trying to employ some and so on, and it drifts around that way. But they'd have to know what they're operating on.

As a result, they have let an entirely different part of the university walk off with about fifty percent of their subject. I can tell you what public relations is for. What is this subject for? Public relations is for the handling and control of human emotion and reaction. Ah, we've got a subject now. Yeah but look, they gave fifty percent of this away to the psychologist who fumble(c)dumbled it all up and applied it to rats. Now there's something coming adrift. So they split their subject.

So, it is necessary for the product officer to make notes of everything he passes to the org officer. If you were the commanding officer in this instance, you'd write up something like this product, a voyage. And it goes on and on and on and on and on. And then this is passed over to the org officer. And he can jolly well repair all this, and patch it up. Now what got in the road of this is the fact that the two orgs split. This thing has not been totally done yet. Do you see?

It's a third dynamic technology. The psychologist moved it all over onto another dynamic. He tried to get it over onto the first dynamic, and this, that and the other thing. So what is the central subject itself? It's the handling and control of human emotion and reaction. Good. Well now you have to do quite a bit with this subject. Immediately you have to do quite a bit with this subject. Ah, we're away now. Oh this is what this stuff is for. Good.

Now the way you get this in line is to drill yourself as an executive director on this thing, is to write product one, the establishment, product three, the corrected establishment, product two, the establishment's product, and the corrected product of the establishment is four. Alright, now you get those cards, you could put them down on your desk. That's product one, two, three, four, with these wordings written on them. And then you put down volume, quality, viability, on three separate cards. And every action you do, just turn these cards to the right one. And all of a sudden, all the clouds will come out of your skull on the subject, and you'll be able to hand the rights things to the product officer and so on. Product officer can do this, "What am I working on?" See, each one of the products has volume, quality and viability.

Alright, now what parts of what do you have to use in order to do this? Well, according to the public relations technologies, you've got one that runs something like this. You do a survey, and on the basis of this survey you put together a program, and you use your various communication media, word of mouth, newspaper, magazines, loud speakers. And with this various communication media, based on this program, you alter human emotion and reaction. Actually it's such a failure the way it has been done, that in the public relations textbooks they say, "People who say they are molding public opinion of course are just silly. Newspapers think they" mold public opinion. Ha, ha, ha," you know? In other words, they're laughing at their own subject. In that little line it says, "This subject has failed."

Now this whole subject goes along on this, that an intermittent or Un-uniform; now an intermittent flow is one thing, but a non-uniform flow is quite something else. And what will really get in your hair is non-uniformity on your assembly line. So, one of your main things of a product officer is spotting non-uniformity, so that he can hand it to the org officer to get uniformities.

Let's go back to Science of Survival and see how this thing works. We do a survey, we put the exact arithmetical number on each question of this survey in its response. Alright, let's ask this question, "Do you like dogs," and the fellow says, "I hate dogs!" We put.5. You got it? Science of Survival, put it down arithmetically, you add up that question and its arithmetical values, and number of people it was asked. You could do it as crudely as then divided by the number of people, and you find exactly what tone scale point you are working with. To control a tone scale point you move; old law; you move half a tone to a tone above it. Your campaign must then be half a tone to a tone above it. Instantly and immediately you have a successful campaign, which molds public opinion, which controls human emotion and reaction.

Well I'll give you a weird one. We have a staff hat, fifty percent of the staff members have one staff hat, and the other fifty percent have another staff hat. Entirely different. They tell them to write their dispatches in an entirely different way and route them in entirely different routings. You've got a dog's breakfast at once. Now that would be a gross, silly example. Yet we have a tech services just twenty-four hours ago, who had some of their auditors writing up their sessions immediately after the session, and the bulk of their auditors writing up all their sessions later. Some of their auditors came to tech services to ask for a pc, and some of the auditors have an arrangement whereby the pc was sent to the session. Now you see what I mean about non-uniform flow? In other words, you've got a non-uniformity which is so great here that you can't get a team function. When people are unhatted entirely, you get almost total non-uniform flows, and total non-uniform flows can become so great that they practically overwhelm an org. Yet at this time that I speak I doubt there are very few orgs which have staff members which have done a staff hat. Just the basic staff hat. See? Practically none of them around. It's almost an unknown action at this immediate time. So you see, by not having in a basic staff hat, or a basic division hat, or a basic section hat, a department hat or a section hat, if you don't have those things you'll get a non-uniform flow. So your production line won't run. And now you've got trouble, trouble, trouble.

So there we are. Yeah, but how do you get these questions, I mean the question, that's it. That's very simple. There's nothing much to this question. Three questions, one is the equivalent of be, one is the equivalent of do, one is the equivalent of have. Very good. Be, do, have, three questions. Above and below it why, you could have a couple of null questions. You're trying to find out if somebody on the assembly line likes automobiles. He's building them, does he like them? Well that's an easy one, because it's already a human emotion. "Do you like automobiles?" Well lets' find out if he's going to work on the assembly line. Let's make it a little bit tougher. Now we're going to find out, "Are you going to work on the assembly line?" Alright, we go around and ask the public relations thing, "Are you going to work on the assembly line?" The guy says, "No," and the next guy says, "Yes," and so forth. You're no place.

So as far as the group is concerned, it's the non-uniformity of flow, and different systems at work internally which then sort of block it all up. And if the individual gets across the track of the team members, or the department gets across the track of the team members, when it isn't wearing its hat. So just remember, there are two types of hats. There's the hat of the group and the hat of the individual. And if you don't have a group that is fairly uniformly hatted, you're going to run into a certain amount of trouble. They have to have some kind of a group hat.

So therefore you take the questions you want to know on the subject of be, do, have, and you encode them into human emotion, using the ARC triangle. We don't care whether you put A or R or C after each question, you're going to translate the basic question that you know into human emotion, in order to obtain involvement. And you immediately have involvement. So you get the true answer, don't you? But the target of your subject is of course the control of human emotion and reaction. So if that is the case, then you would have to have involvement in human emotion and reaction.

Now with that you can get a tremendous amount of action out of all of this. I'm trying to give you the music. You can read all the rules and laws, I'm trying to give you the music that goes along with this thing, see? It's a wham, bam, bong. You have to be right on the ball. You have to be right on the ball as a product officer, and as an org officer.

So how do you put this question together? Let's go right back to battery now. This subject is the control of human emotion and reaction, so therefore the questions of your survey have to be what you want to know, transported over into a human emotion and reaction. B, "Do automobiles exist?" translate at once across for an A is, "Do you like automobiles?" Now you will get then an emotional response which can be plotted.

Now one of the ways a product officer keeps track of the org officer is everything he passes to the org officer he says date, item, date, item, date, item, date, item. He can say more than that if he wants to. Now he keeps a record of this. He keeps a notebook. He's got to keep a notebook of this so that he knows if the establishment is improving.

Now why all this? Now you see I'm teaching you this backwards. " I"m moving back. Now the penny drops. The primary barrier to production is human emotion and reaction. The primary barrier to production. All at once we know where PR lives, there's its use. Not in getting somebody to become a man of extinction by drinking Seagram's Whiskey, to aid and assist advertising, which would be a minor use, but actually to sound out the public to which the campaign is addressed, so as to handle the human emotion and reaction.

Now how would he know if the establishment is improving? Because the notes he gave to the org officer in the week from the first to the seventh, should be different than the notes he gives to the org officer between the seventh and the fourteenth. And if they are not, then the org officer's being ineffective.

Alright, now I'll trace it back through the basic laws that we're involved with then is, the primary barrier to production is human emotion and reaction. Public relations is the technology of handling and controlling human emotions and reaction, so you have to find out what is the human emotion and reaction, so you get an encoding of the question. Three questions, one be, one do, one have. You translate those over into an emotional question by adding the ARC triangle, you plot that now, you get your human emotions in response to these questions. You add them up, you put your program together against the tone scale, one half to one band above. You will have a pretty uniformly successful method of reach.

Now there's an immediate check of course, instant check on a well staticized org, on the product officer of that org. Oh, it is a marvelous check. It's the stats.

Now are you willing to argue with me that I all of a sudden tell you that PR has suddenly become of age? So the subject has been around since Rome, and it does have its own technologies. But the most ignorant people of its technologies are some of the PR guys with whom I've worked. Now I've been trained in this field, and the oral tradition of the field does not contain a great many of the textbook solutions. The textbook technology is missing to a very marked degree in much of what you call the oral tradition, when you're taught verbally by these fellows. They know what to do, kind of, but they find themselves often adrift.

Now I hope we don't change the method of reporting of our present stats, because they give us, in some mysterious way, they are not just volume stats. And they interlock in such a way that they're subject to an analysis of the whole org. Whereas the product of each department, or the four final valuable products of the org, or something like this, if they were simply staticized you might not be able to get a total picture. So volume stats which do not give you any idea of viability, and no idea of quality, can give you a false picture.

I went back recently and read the textbooks of this subject on its developmental line, mostly accumulations of experiential application. And I was struck by the fact that very few people use, in this field of PR, very few people in this field actually use standard approaches. They're a little bit squirrelly, but there is a standard approach. Ah so!

For instance, we had some very, very high hour stats, without any completions. Now let me show you how an org officer could change that picture. It's rather fantastic, by the way. I can't give you the exact to the hour and minute, I just had a report on it, because I'm not sure how far we are into this week. What is today? Alright. During the previous week, stemming back from last Thursday, they had six completions at fifty-eight hours each. Uh!)From Thursday 'til Monday period, after it had been worked over product officer wise and so forth, it had improved to I think something on the order of sixteen completions at about sixteen hours each. Now what's the quality of the completion? Well the policy is fairly well guaranteed, because there isn't any completion permitted to go through the lines that is not an attest. And we haven't put down a success line, but in your machinery if it was put down also as a success line, if the success line was well in you would have your quality check.

Now, why don't they use a standard approach? Well the subject wasn't oriented. What is this subject for? So the dumb fools go and hire a psychologist. They're the birds who control human emotion and reaction, so they hire a psychologist. I think this is marvelous. Right in their own technologies. Now these were then insufficiently exact as procedures to impress the practitioner. They were insufficiently exact, insufficiently precise. So he thought he had some judgement involved.

Now it could be very, very misleading. This organization audited four hundred and one hours. Well you say, "Great." We've got one right now. We've got an org which has a very high rising stat of very well done auditing hours, and a reducing stat, almost in danger, on completions. What they doing? Well they could easily be repairing repairs, and doing all sorts of things. But I was just showing this that there is a stat change as a result of the product officer's intervention, backed up by an org officer. See? That sure changed the hell out of that, didn't it? Bongo!

But if you know Dianetics and Scientology, and you move into this field, you will all of a sudden find that they mourn the absence of a science of the mind in their own field. Like how can you do anything with this subject unless you have a science of the mind? That remark is made in their textbooks you see, types of remarks" like this. They mourn their lack of success, and actually they don't even know our communication formula.

Now these things run very fast. These things run very fast. And you get into the most amazing tangles, and you get into the most wild jungles you ever heard of, and it's enough to discourage most anybody, and a fellow just ought to quit, of course.

Our communication formula is vitally necessary to the practice of this field. Vitally necessary. It's as simple as cause, distance, effect. If you take just the short handed formula, cause, distance, effect. Their public relations are communication media, and they think of themselves as a communication technology, they do not have that of cause, distance, effect. They don't have it streamlined down like that. So, when they say, when you make a survey, they actually have missed. If you go into some of their textbooks, they've actually missed certain points that were vital.

But what we're trying to do, what we're trying to do of course is bring about a product, and that product has got to be of good quality, and then we've got the factor of viability. Now what knocks people's eyeballs out is viability does not necessarily have anything to do with money. What coin is the division spending? An HGC spends an auditor's hour. The student hour and the instructor minute are the coins being spent by a training division. Now what do they buy with it?

There's an FO right now which gives you the proper cycle, and it does not agree with the textbook cycle because the textbook cycle has simply left out a couple of steps, that would have made somebody fail. I needn't go into it any further than that, it's just there's the reason why, why one was turned out, which was a public relations form for submission for an OK. And it follows a definite cycle of action which is based on, actually, the communication formula and so forth. It's highly precise. And that was because they didn't have the communication formula, so they couldn't write it up in their textbook as to what you did exactly, so they missed out a couple of points. And then, those two points of action would bring about a failure.

Now if they owe too many, here's your backlog, they can be bankrupt. And a lot of orgs right now are running on, they're bankrupt with auditing hours. There's a lot of orgs right this minute are bankrupt on auditing hours, has nothing to do with cash. They owe far more auditing hours than they have any possibility of delivering. Well, what's an exchange money system? You owe more money than you've got, brother, you're bankrupt.

One of the reasons why managers sometimes throw them out the front door and won't have a public relations firm anywhere around is they very often popularize a flap. They don't pre(c)survey. Somebody just gets killed in the plant, newspaper reporter calls up, "What's this I hear about somebody being killed in the plant, Bud?" You know, in good English like they use. And the public relations man gets on the phone and he says, "No comment." See? Or he says this or he says that or he says something else. And he mishandles this, and then he assumes that there is a situation, that the people in the town are going to be very alarmed because somebody has been killed in the plant by poisonous gases or something, so public relations at once gets out a campaign saying how these poisonous gases are not very poisonous; they didn't bother to survey. Was there a situation? You see what point was missing?

Now let's look at this in the form of economics. Let's move it right out of the field of money, and you'll find out that the economics of this situation open the field of economics wide open. You've got a subject of economics opening up in front of you. We haven't touched it. But economics actually is not the buck that is published in a printing press someplace, it has to do with viability. And there's in internal production viability, the like of which; you start studying this thing, you become absolutely amazed.

So public relations very often is involved in handling situations which don't exist. And they very often find themselves involved in bringing about situations which didn't exist.

For instance, how many minutes of the MAA's time buys a product of a corrected situation? Now if you add the number of corrected situations that the MAA has engaged upon, an investigation leading to a correction, and you divide that into the number of work minutes of the MAA, you have his viability.

Let's take a fellow who isn't good textbook in the field of public relations now. He glanced at the textbook on his way through class one day, by accident. Now he goes out, and he's worked alongside of some guys who are old timers, and they know best. And, frequent change of auditors is one of the reasons why the firms they go to work for fail, by the way. It's actually just that. The company account, your company's account is handed through so many account executives, and the turnover of account executives is so rapid, that the service being rendered from that account is poor. And" this is traced as a primary reason why you shouldn't use an independent, outside public relations firm. Frequent change of auditors. Goes back almost to an auditor's code, don't you see?

Now you take the number of situations which exist that aren't corrected and the average amount of time it will take to correct them, and you may find yourself with a bankrupt MAA. Just like that, see?

So this guy, he fumbles around, and he gets himself some kind of a; he's got a job. He's sort of trained experientially in practical aspects of it. Maybe he gets up as far as TR0, see? But, practical aspects of it he puts into practice. And these various practical aspects are some little rules that have sort of been made up, and he manages to go through. Whereas a matter of fact, a matter of fact, there was a procedure in the textbook, if he had studied it, which probably would have brought the situation off. So he goes off half cocked on some kind of a campaign on somebody's hunch, "I'm just sure that these characters will like these Wheaties with green tops instead of red tops." Get over in the field of market research, you see? "I'm just sure of that. Alright, now we're going to have you tear off your mother(c)in(c)law's head and send it in, and we will send you a box top," or something, you see? And he lays a god awful egg with this campaign. The company puts out a hundred and twenty(c)three thousand, seven hundred and ninety(c)four dollars and sixty(c)two cents, and they don't get any mother(c)in(c)law's heads at all. And then somebody goes back and he says, "Say, what do you know?" He said, "We did, you know," he gets a tip some place or another, you know? "You should have asked people first. You know?" "Yeah, I guess I shoulda asked people first."

Now what do you owe and what do you got? Now an over manned post, an over manned post could also be expressed this way: You have three MAAs and you have two situations a week, so the number of MAA minutes which you are spending to handle the two situations, it may be that only two situations exist a week. The police solve this, by the way, very well. They just go out and make the situations. But we don't go in for that sort of thing, but there we are.

Actually, they might not even get as close as a formal survey. But they might get this close, "Well alright, we'll call up the Gallup Company. And after this, when we talk about mother(c)in(c)law's heads we will get a survey made out in the public as to whether you like this sort of thing or don't like that sort of thing, and that costs another two hundred and twenty(c)five thousand dollars." And they get a whole Gallup Poll survey done, and guys go around in the streets and shove microphones at people, and knock on doors, and they get all written down, and send letters to selected publics and oh, they're very expensive. Anyhow, then they find out this survey, when it was all put together, seemed to be very reliable, but now they said to tear off the bottom of the box which is now purple, and that they would, the company would send the family their mother(c)in(c)law's head, see? And then this campaign doesn't work either, and somebody then gets a vast research project together and they finally find out that people on surveys don't tell the truth. And now they've got the bug(c)boo.

So viability to a product officer is what has he got to spend, for god's sakes spend it, and what can he buy with it? And don't owe too much of it that he can't supply. In other words, these are factors that are involved with the economics of the job. And the economics of the job is, what is the coin of this division? What is the coin of this section? How many does it owe, how many does it have, what is it buying with this coin, and so on.

The bug(c)a(c)boo of a survey is that people say what they think somebody wants to hear, and they say, "Oh yes, I love Wheaties," whereas a matter of fact, they smoke Lucky's, you see? And they find out that the lie factor is so great that they have to put a lie question into the survey, in order to, and so on. Well I'm clowning up a series of examples here, but I think you comprehend some of these examples. And this is what it finally amounts to. This is what it finally amounts to, that they didn't know what their subject was for exactly. Didn't know what their subject was' ' for, so it is sort of being oddly used, and it's sort of off its own standards because it isn't oriented. So if they had the definition that there was human emotion and reaction, they wouldn't go around with questions that didn't elicit an emotional response. In the first place they would have to know a great many refinements.

Now oddly enough, you'll find all this translates directly over into money, if you're in a commercial society, or it would translate directly over into shoe coupons in a communist society, because the basis of money is; of course money is an idea backed with confidence, or enforced confidence, and is actually a representation. The basis of money is eggs and beans, it is not gold. Gold is a complete non-sequitur wrong item, because when inflation occurs, what do they drop back to? When an inflation occurs, they drop back to barter, they don't drop back to gold. So therefore, the basis of money is barter. And what does an org have that is barter, eggs for hams, milk for shoes? What does it have to barter with? It has minutes, production minutes. Do you see? So actually, the internal economics of an org is what have you got to spend, are you spending it, do you owe more than you could have to spend? If you just regard an auditing hour, for instance, a coin. If you regard the PR man's time and staff time, what he is buying with the number of surveys, what they're buying with the number of campaigns, what they're buying with the number of releases and so forth against this. Ignoring totally the amount of cash involved you will have the actual ecology of the PR department.

Now I'm not ignorant on this subject. I was actually trained by Midwest Rogers one time, when I innocently walked in with my wide blue eyes open, pulled in as a writer to the California Centennial, 1849(c)1949. And they had to get a hold of a writer, and they had to have somebody who could write up the little history books, and so forth, that they needed. And so I said, "OK, yeah, I'll do that. I'd been up in the Mother Lode country, I know all about that and I can look it up and you've got a lot of books, and we'll put them together and we'll give you your little manuals and so forth. So fine, alright boys?" and so on, and they said, "No." And I said, "What's the matter?" Said, "Well we have a rule in the Midwest Rogers that anybody who is working anywhere in, around centennials or things,"; see they're the outfit, wild name, Midwest Rogers. It doesn't say anything, don't you see? They want to remain anonymous, I think. But they put on all of these big centennials like the sesquicentennial of Texas, and all of that sort of thing. The big boom shows, you see?

Now the product there might wind up in a final product which has value, if they're working on campaigns to sell something, and so forth. The sales and the investment of time and the number of products that it took that much sales, gives you the economy of the PR man. Now if you want to reverse all this back to short handedness, sloppily, you can; I said sloppily; you can translate it across to money in each case. But it's very sloppy.

And they say, "You've got to study the technology and so forth of how we work, before you can work with us," which is great. American firms have this down pretty pat. Two advertising agencies, or an account executive in the advertising agency and his staff talking to the company advertising contact man, put on about the wildest show you ever wanted to see. Well, one of them is educating the other one into what we do, and then the other one will turn around and educate them into what we do, and they get a feel that; they're good at this sort of thing. They've got a lot of these little gimmicks. They do have technology, see? They don't quite know where it fits a lot of times.

PR costs us six thousand dollars a month, and that's what it costs us, six thousand dollars a month. And let's see, we had three stories published in the local newspaper, and therefore those stories cost two thousand dollars apiece. Well there's some fact in this. There's some fact in it, but it's sloppy, sloppy, sloppy. It doesn't take into account anything about the efficiency, or the cleverness, or the anything else, and so forth.

So here, they say to me, "Well yeah. What do you think, you're just a writer. And you've got to study what we do, so you come to school," and the next thing you know, I'm sitting there listening all about, and doing the clay demos on exactly how you throw together, exactly how you throw together a centennial. Now don't think there isn't technology in this field, because a Midwest Rogers man walks in with his little grip, and he's got a few little things in there. He's got some tickets and he's got some other little things, with very little money in his pocket. And he walks into this town, and a few months later they have the centennial. It's absolute creative magic, if you ever saw one. This is promotional par excellence.

Now if there was one PR man there and he got three newspaper stories published in a month, he wouldn't be doing too bad, providing they weren't just death notices or something. You see, he wouldn't be doing too bad. If he had page two, page three, blurbs of some kind or other. Somebody, some actor's PR man would be deliriously happy with this, don't you see? It might cost quite a little bit to do so, but maybe it required a tremendous amount of cleverness. So quality went into this, didn't it? So what was your final product? It was printed publicity in the mass news media, or the TV minutes, or something like this. So you figure these things out.

He organizes the various contests, he gets the businessmen, the local chamber of commerce, it all goes off almost by checklist. You do this, you do that, you do the other thing, and then you do something or other, and then etcetera, and then when you've got' ' that the beauty queen contest and so on, and then the tickets are sold in the stores, and that's the votes for the beauty queen. And you do the bla(c)bla(c)rwof, and the Midwest Rogers man, he gets the hats and whips. What's this?

You could get quite dizzy doing this. You could get quite dizzy doing this, until all of a sudden it becomes very real. You'll find out such thing as the auditor who didn't audit today has just cost you five auditing hours you will never get back. It's a decaying coin, it isn't anything could be put in the bank. That's five hours that were never spent, so they didn't buy anything. You get this kind of thing. And you say, "Wait a minute. What the hell's going on here?" See?

Actually I wouldn't be able to tell you too much of the technology, because it's all super technological. We could be criticized on the same ground. They've got their special names for everything. Hats and whips, that's the souvenir business. So the guy who organizes the whole thing, why the Midwest Rogers man, he reserves to himself the hats and whips concession. So he sells out this hats and whips concession, and that's how he gets a side payoff from all of this, and they wind up with the doggondest, biggest, wildest centennial anybody ever heard of.

Now you turn over to the org officer, "What's going on there?" something like that. Or you gets into some kind of a program of action. Then you can figure out the economy of something. What is the economy of a section, a department, a division, an org? You can get too tight to this, but if you don't follow it through from the valuable final products; the valuable final products - well that's pcs, students, different types of students, course supervisors, money, these are valuable final products of an org. Valuable final products, because they translate into the society. Now we're into a completely new subject. They translate into the society for the wherewithal to survive.

So when I finished with their course and got all set with that, and took my examination and etcetera, I was getting all ready to sit down to my typewriter and write about the dear old days of '49, when Black Bart was preventing the digging of gold, why they said, "Say, how would you like Sacramento?" And I said, "What? What are you talking about?" "Well," they said, "you're one of the best agents we got here," and so on. "You've got the highest grades, and wouldn't you like to go up to Sacramento and take charge of that sector?" And I said, "No, I'll sit here and write your stories. Thank you very much." But they do have technology. There's lots of technology in the field.

A valuable final product by definition is something that can be translated into the society for the wherewithal to survive. Just by definition. Therefore you could run an org in a communist society, so therefore we've jumped up ahead of the economic pattern which we have been occupying before. Not that we intend to go into a communist society, but you do have, it does translate.

Now that's public relations technology applied to promotion. You would apply that type of technology to a congress, or something of this sort. Then there's the other old daily grind technology. But what are you trying to do with all of this? What are you trying to do with all of this? You're either trying to create or generate, handle, control and so forth human emotion and reaction. The whole field of public relations, no matter how many little compartments it got, is actually occupying that zone and area. And that is the subject, if you've got to have one, called psychology. That's what the psychologist should be able to do. That's what a general is always trying to grab ahold of his psychological warfare staff and say, "Bring the enemy to their knees so we don't have to expend all this ammunition. We don't mind expending troops, but firing these guns is expensive, you know?" So he's always asking psychological warfare. Well actually, it's just simply a job in PR. Enemy, job in PR. Friends, job on PR. Just different publics.

Now what do you know? We had some people in Washington and so forth, who are trading furniture for auditing and that sort of thing. That's a barter. A barter action. But it translates up into money, and because the furniture doesn't then translate into food, it's not a very good deal. So no staff members can eat, and unless they could translate the; so it isn't a barter economy, it's a cash economy. You walked into the Safeway with an over stuffed chair and it didn't buy a thing. It would in Russia. Rubles snubles, who wants rubles? Where's my shoes? "A man told me three years ago they had a five year plan on shoes, and it ain't up yet, so therefore I got to go two more years with no shoes."

We right now could take a survey of the enemy, we know them name, rank, serial number, where they live, why their grandmother had to marry the girl. We know all about them, all we'd have to do is take a survey of them on human emotion terms. Plot it up on the tone scale, launch a campaign to them, mold their opinion.

Anyhow, do you get something of what the product officer's working with? So he's actually working with an economy. What is the production? What did the production cost? These are the things which he is asking for, but he isn't asking for what did the production cost in dollars, he's asking for what did the production cost in terms of the coin of what was producing it. And what is the coin? So a product officer has to recognize the coin. And the org officer has to make it valid coin.

Now you are mainly dealing in a world where the war for men's minds is rampant. Russia is fighting a war for the minds of men. And America, and every company in America, and the British Information Service are all fighting a war to capture the minds of men. To do' ' this they use PR technology, we don't care whether it's called propaganda. We have here Our Northern Neighbors, published in Canada, December 1970, number one fifty(c)nine. It is written in Moscow, it is published in Canada. It's a fantastic tour de force. Here are several copies of it, different months. July, August, September, October, November, December. "Here's Popov the Clown and his goat. They're world famous, they'll be delighting lucky Soviet kids this holiday season. For a personal look at the sunny clown in the Soviet circus, see pages fourteen and fifteen."

Let's have an auditing hour. Oh boy, that's general. And they're not delivering any auditing hours to amount to anything, because the public doesn't come in anymore or something or other and so on. How valuable is this coin, an auditing hour? Well a bad auditing hour would be a very bad coin. Somehow or another the org officer would be required to increase the value of the coin, an auditing hour. But the product officer has also got to work on the value of this coin, by getting it better applied. So there's where they get their heads together, because they're both into it with the economy. One's got it to spend and the other is spending it.

We open it up, contents, "Big mystery of human growth. The best year yet for us. Sex, seventy(c)three thousand Dr. Spocks." A very intriguing sort of thing. The cover page, "When they speak about sex, how they're ending farm pollution. Will you go short of power and heat, you people in Canada? Well we've got lots of it in Russia. USSR has nine big problems." This is an amazing, it's an amazing tour de force. Fantastic. They have a technique of counter point. Everything that is publicized in the American press is counter pointed in these magazines that it's good in Russia. "You have juvenile delinquencies in the United States, and we don't have them. In the United States you have to have women's freedoms movements, and in Russia we've had them for years. Women are perfectly free in Russia, in fact they're the only ones who work."

It's the product officer that says what this division should be working on in the way of its product. So the validity of the coin and the value of the coin and so forth, can be disturbed by working on something that isn't very valuable as a product. So just as there are various nuances and changes in an economic system, so there is in this product officer/org officer system. They've got all of the economic values, they're right there in the middle of the org.

"Here is the champion just before," a champion weight lifter. "Just before the world heavy weight lifting champion Jan Tolz left USSR for USA to take part in the tournament at Columbus, Ohio, the international federation bosses stripped him of his title and record, and handed the title over to Robert Bednarsky of USA. Here's what Tolz did to those cheats." And we find out that all the other competitors were on speed, they were on amphetamines. Bet nobody knew that. And nobody listened and so forth, and he really did win after all, even when he lost.

"We produced a grade two release today." "What'd it cost?" I can hear it now, "What'd it cost?" "Well actually, it was a very tough pc, and it cost fifteen auditing hours. And seven hours in review. Yes, that's what it cost." "What'd we get for it? How much are we selling an auditing hour here for today, and so forth?" Well that was how much the value of that thing was. And they all of a sudden will find something amazing, if you follow that back, that we're on a slightly wrong track. Selling auditing hours doesn't pay. Too valuable. I'll give you a wild economy. This is not an org's economy that we operate on at Flag. We don't operate here, neither does CLO. It operates on a different economy, because it's got one more via. It's what can it make the org make? And can it make the org make enough to afford having made the org make it? Do you follow?

"Are Roman Catholics turning to the left?" This is PR. Fantastic. I isolated three systems in use in this. Mary Sue was, did an analysis on it. And I isolated three systems of propaganda which they use. Very effective. Three isolated, technical systems. I gave you one of them, I won't bother with the other two.

Now I'll tell you something shocking, and what is, introduces this whole thing. I can tell you a great deal more about this. This is a ball. There is the subject of economics. And you want to work it out, you fool with it in your head, and all of a sudden you'll say, "Well, what, what, what?" You know? "Gee whiz, god. How can we make this place more viable? How can we make that division more viable? Well, you could make the division more viable by actually filing this stuff into the CF folders instead of letting it occupy floor space. And then it would have something to spend."

"You got dirty streets, Russia's are all clean streets. You havin' troubles? If you was in Russia you wouldn't have these troubles. Western youth, they have acne. Russian youth, no acne. Soviet doctors have cured it all. They found out what it is, yes." You get it? Counter point, counter point, counter point, counter point. Effective, but somewhat defiant, so therefore it's not very smooth. But this is dialectic materialism at use, which is their mental technology. All ideas result from the collision of two forces. These say it differently, then they implant thetans they use a positive/negative.

So, you could go on with this considerably, along the economic lines. Don't let me detour you too far, because the basic thing is the product officer gets the product, and the org puts the org there that gets the product, and the product officer is senior to the org officer. Why? Well, that's because the product of the org is not the org. But you've got to have an org in order to get a product.

Now just as we're sitting here with the undercut of dialectic materialism, we're sitting here with an undercut of propaganda. Now if you use the existing standard technologies of public' ' relations, and if you use the standard existing means and media, and if you gave them just that little bit of refinement necessary of an orientation of the subject and what is this subject for, and you do it right, straight down the groove, and then the people who use it know what they're doing, that is the important point, you have an impingement on the society. We're being treated to a counter propaganda campaign the like of which nobody ever heard of.

Now the way you'd increase the quality, the way you increase quality is increase the organization. And that is a basic law, that isn't just a comment. You increase the organization. You increase the quality of the organization, you increase the quality of the coins the organization is spending. And you will increase the quality of the product. So the pcs in the neighborhood that you're auditing are not feeling very well, and they're not happy with their gains, and so forth. How do you increase that? Do you do in and yell at the auditors? No. Some of that will serve. Yell at the C/S? No. You have to sit back and project this. And you will find out there's something wrong with your organizational assembly line, which is another subject entirely different. There'd be something wrong with this.

Now somehow or another we've got to move up to the front with this, and we don't have the news media under our control, and so on. We're being treated to a counter propaganda campaign, and have for a long time. This isn't the press talking, this is the people who make the press talk talking. We have had innumerable wins, they are never reported. The enemy never does have any wins, they have hope. Did you ever analyze all of their news articles, and so on? Hope. But they have a news office located up someplace in England, and so on, which is a hand out PR office, and it just sends off all these things you read about, "Psychology is new hope for the," you know, "Mentally retarded will no longer be if certain things succeed," you know, "Hope." And we find out that by our survey of the British departments and ministries that they think the public is terribly; well I actually had them surveyed to find out what they thought was bad propaganda so I could give it to them. And they answered up, and we've got it all written down in the bag. If I ever wanted to machine gun them, why there it is, because their PR men would go mad. And they'd just listen to what the PR man says inside the line up.

The pcs come in at reception at the registrar, and the registrar sets their schedule in auditing, and then having set the schedule in auditing there isn't much, there's no auditor there at that time. Anyhow, you have thirty-five auditors who are delivering some of them two and a half hours a week, and; you get the idea? Your assembly line's just bonkers. So, there's no tech services, so that nobody can find the pc's folder, so he's audited without one. This just gives you some of the horror stories that you might run along. "We don't know what to run on this pc, so we'll run anything that comes to somebody's mind." This is terrible, see? So you increase your organization. You increase its effectiveness. You may have to increase it numerically. You certainly refine the steps, and you certainly uniformize the actions.

What is public opinion? Public opinion are what is written in the newspapers and what your PR man says. That's as near as a politician ever comes to it. A government is peculiarly susceptible to clipping newspapers.

One of the first things to increase the efficiency of an organization that happens is the most obvious one, which is the org officer simply walks up to the registrar and says, "What is your hat?" And the registrar says, "Scheduling pcs." Well he's, he's got it solved right there. The org officer's got it solved right that minute. It's all solved.

Now let's go back here to this Soviet deal. This Soviet published magazine, perfectly legal. They have some agreement with Canada and so on. This Soviet published magazine is given the fantastic job of doing what most embassies and so forth do, in the field of overt intelligence they call it, which is clipping magazines and newspapers. They have to do all this covert. To find out what is being said in the American press and in American technical journals and that sort of thing, it's necessary for the Russians to use their satellite states, and to actually smuggle the stuff, and so on, and just to get what the New York Times says. It has to go back in a diplomatic mail pouch to Moscow, for this stuff to be written. So they do a splendid job, really. There isn't anybody in Canada writing this. Russia export an editor that's permitted to write something in Canada? Oh no.

"Now let's take the misunderstoods out of this. Now here's a meter, and you sit there and I'll sit here. And now, what does the word registrar mean?" You could go at it that crudely or, you could go at it that thoroughly, or you could do it a number of different ways, but what you're trying to do is get the registrar to wear the hat of registering and selling packages of this and that.

So, all the material that goes into this is taken from intelligence sources. They have a fantastic network then, just to collect this material. And then this material has to go to Moscow and has to be edited and put together, and the stuff written. Now then it has to be turned around and exported, and all this rapidly enough for it to be timely in order to hit the presses of Northern Neighbors,' ' published in Canada.

Now one of the things that you run into in your team work of trying to do this, is sometimes registrars think they're selling pie in the sky because they're totally unfamiliar with what product there is. They sign it up on this end of the line, and the internal briefings of the organization are so scarce and so rare, that they don't really know what comes up out of the other end of the line, particularly if their re-sign up line is out. So they don't know what's happening. And I've had registrars think they were just selling pie in the sky when the preclears were just happy as jay birds, totally out of communication. So the registrar feeling guilty of an overt every time they sold some auditing. I've actually had this happen. Actually in two orgs, not just one.

Now we're really getting down to pay dirt. PR requires organization, and it requires pretty hot organization. And if you ever wanted to see an organization have to function it's a PR organization. You really have to know administration left, right and center to do PR. There are very few PR men who are ever trained in administration, yet it's essentially an administrative subject.

So, I put the registrar back on an information line, of the success story line. And that looked very practical, like the registrar is sitting there with a packet of success stories. "Well," they say, "well I can read these to the pc, or something like that. Somebody wrote them and so forth." But she obviously is not a member of the team. In other words, you haven't got a team operating.

It is the failure to keep their clipping book up to date that causes many a PR man to fail. Who organizes all of the stuff that brings this stuff in from, covertly, to diplomatic pouches to Russia to get it spilled out, to get it digested, clipped? Who keeps the office running there? Who supplies it with enough personnel that can speak the language and write it? Who organizes the route back into Northern Neighbors and takes care of the PR to keep Canada happy to having it published. It's quite an organizational tour de force.

Now that was true right here. We had some public division people who did not know actually, and we were actually producing some miracles, at a low level here, in qual. We were actually producing some absolute miracles. People had come down from here and there, and we were auditing them up, and all of a sudden they didn't have to have their epizudicks cut out, and so forth. And, they never got in on it. And they didn't get in on it to the point where they never mentioned it to anybody. Here you would think your promotion people actually didn't know what product you had, so they of course were not very enthusiastic about pushing the product, because they didn't know what the product is.

So that propaganda of any kind requires organization. That is why, by the way, we knew extremely well, we knew very well that the enemy that we were confronted with was not a few random newspaper reporters, but it was extremely well organized, because the timing on it, and so on. And I made some interesting discoveries on this because searching for it in the field of organization, I can tell you now just about exactly what kind of an organization they have, and about where it sits, and about what it does, and so forth, just by knowing the organizational requirements. And they stink. They stink. They couldn't run a kiddie car. It was just failing to find them and failing to estimate what they were doing and why, is what kept us being hit by the thing, and also they had, they were there first and they had all the, what they call the mass media under total control and under their thumb. So of course they could say anything they pleased, and we were not in a position to say anything we pleased.

So an essential in any team is briefing. The people have to know what the hell's going on, that's all. And the product officer, if he had a PR, he would have a sort of a cheerleader who kept everybody informed as to what was going on. And you'd get the PR function of interpreting the policies of management and so forth, being used as briefing staff, and so on. So you'd get an org magazine, and so forth. Well usually this falls off to a total banality. It's the quality of difficulties you're having with products which would determine that, because your public involved of course is your staff. And there's too little briefing, people are too poorly informed. When you have a staff meeting, why people nya, nya, they want to know about the new water stand that's going to be put in in the hall or something. That isn't what they're for. It'd be to keep them informed as a team.

So how did we reverse all of this? Well now, there's one little sector of technology, and I've been going along this sector of technology showing you that you can make a breakthrough in a particular field, and give you some sort of an idea of it.

So essential, first, last and always, it is a team. Now how does an org become a team? Alright, well I'll tell you that very rapidly. The deputy secretary is the org officer, the secretary of the division is the product officer. There is an org officer and there is a product officer for every division. And then, there's an org officer and a product officer for the org. So the org officer has all the product, he's got all of the number one, org officers, under him as a conference. And the product officer has got all of the product officers under him as a conference. There are two conferences. The product conference senior to the org conference.

Now PR comes into its own in the field of production. And the reason I am talking to you about PR is the primary barrier to production is human emotion and reaction. And as you move forward you will find you're in collision with human emotion and reaction, almost consistently and continuously. If you don't understand some of this that I've been telling you about PR, you will have an awful time of it. If you think PR is going around and being a nice fellow, or talking somebody around in some fashion or another, why you might as well forget it, because PR is not being a fellow, a pleasant fellow. ARC is only one little portion of PR. PR is a technological activity. Now it always had technological procedures, so we've moved it up onto the front burner."'?Now I'm not trying to sell you anything here with PR at all. I'm trying to give you an example of a technical breakthrough. Now from the basic little laws which I gave you on the subject of PR, definition and scope of subject, you can now develop technical applications, and you can develop practices which are based on these basic actions and laws and formulas, and which utilize anything known about the subject to date. And it puts you in control of human emotion and reaction in your immediate vicinity.

So the product conference lays it out, "This is what we're going to do, and this is how we're going to get the products and so forth." And they write up the projects and products and plan everything out as to what they're going to do in order to get this thing out. And then they make sure that they keep that machine running that way. And the org officer, with your org officer conference, they've got a certain deadline and they're coming up to the planning of the next fifteen days, and so forth, of operation. "And that's the org actions which we're going to have to take, because we've got in front of us the product conference. The product conference has decided this is what they're going to have, so therefore we're going to have to put in this action here in order to back this up."

So, there is a piece of technology, and as a piece of technology it has considerable value. But it gives you where you go when you make a basic breakthrough. We happen to be in the field of human emotion and reaction, and therefore we are in continuous collision with this particular field. Being in continuous collision with this field we'd better know something about handling it. And therefore, one of the adjuncts that a production officer would have to have would be a PR arm of some type or kind. So if he moved it up into the upper story, and he was really working at volume, he would actually have to be supported by a PR man. If he weren't supported by a PR man he would come a cropper. Unless you know something about this, and unless you know that a subject exists; I'm not talking to you to suddenly know this whole subject, but you've got to know that such a subject exists, that it does have technology, and that it has found its basic and primary use, which is an adjunct of production. And if you know those facts, your interest in it would be adequate that when you start running into the problem of human emotion and reaction as a barrier, you would know that there is a technology that can move ahead with this, and handle the human emotion and reaction you're running into, as a barrier to your production.

Now those projects would be immediate, which are done verbal. Maybe with a note in a notebook, maybe on a scrap of paper, but it'd be hot line. Then they would be medium range, and then they would be long range, and then they would be very long range.

We have a whole world right now to handle. It will eventually go out, something along the line of a forward action. Ahead of where we are there will always be a sort of a PR outpost, or a small PR action going on, in advance of where we are working. Now the enemy has been trying very, very hard, with very knuckle headed PR, which overran itself and began to overrun itself and got mixed up along about the time of the Melbourne inquiry. And ever since that time the enemy has been making the continuous mistake of hitting it too hard. About that time he went too far, and you'll find out there's been a press revulsion, but long before that there was a press revulsion there was actually was a public revulsion. So the enemy, in following through various formulas of what he thought it should all consist of, and following them through very badly, has done a very bad job of it. He has made our name known.

Now that makes a team. When you get a fair sized org that's the team you're working with. There'd be an executive director, and org officer, a product officer, the deputy secretaries would make up the conference or organization, handling products one and three, and the product officers which, of the secretaries, would be handling the products which they have to push out.

The recent "lost" suit in England was worth easily a hundred thousand pounds in advertising. Easily. We couldn't have bought it. It demonstrated that the government had no case against it, and it demonstrated that a member of parliament can say what he pleases. These are disrelated facts, didn't have much to do with that. But that we've attacked the government apparently made us very popular. "'The formula of revolution is as follows: The person who is antagonistic toward the government joins anyone who opposes it. They ask no questions about who they're joining, they only know that they want to blow down eventually, or change or alter a government. Anybody who attacks the government then, that's how a revolution begins. And that's why revolutions are usually betrayed. The people who join revolutions are usually betrayed, because they never ask the question of, "Who am I joining?" They just join whoever's agin' it. That outfits agin' it? Good. Must be a good outfit, join it up. That formula just went on in England. The psychotic up there, Minister Crossman, he's a real spinner. He's quite mad. And that's not just a casual insult. He runs the new statesman. He thinks the Scientologists are some sort of a revolutionary group that are not as bad as the Yippies, or something. And you read this over, why you know you're reading a guy who thinks the Martians are after him, but he wouldn't be able to differentiate who we are or what. He has already decided that we're against the government. As a matter of fact, it isn't even true. But when they; that we lost in suing the government was not the point. That we were against the government was the point. You seldom get a chance to make a statement, "We're against the government."

They would find all sorts of things. But their team work would involve by deadline. And team work is established by time deadline, within some reasonable facet, so that your org is always working on your immediate, medium, long and very long range. Very few orgs even work on medium range. It's usually immediate. Well you want to get out of immediate if you possibly can. That's what makes it a team.

Now people who are looking for a raw red revolution of course would liable to be disappointed when they came to us, because people are misreading the whole situation. Left and right, misreading the situation. We have a PR situation. First and foremost we have a PR situation. Therefore this is part of the technology with which we're operating. This technology should be known to you, but there is a method of proceeding into the public, there is a method of handling and controlling human opinion. If you don't understand that, then your own hopes of expansion would be greatly curtailed.

Now naturally your product conference has to occur before your org conference has to occur. And it isn't a question of whether or not the product conference can order and/or the org conference can rebut, and it isn't a democratic problem at all, it's the product conference orders the org conference, and the org conference tries to cope with the things that they can't move ahead with, with their project. So it takes a double project situation.

Administration and organization is very complex, but there is a method of extending your own basis of operation into the government, into the people, into the this and even into the enemy. And that you should know that that is that. And come off a rather silly approach of just trying to be good, and eventually they'll recognize your worth. That doesn't work at all. Just has no value.

Now in your targets, in your target series it's the org conference would be handling the primaries, primary targets. So the product conference could write something up that they wanted in that division, and the org officer of that division would have to write the primaries for it. But the primaries can appear actually as, on a separate issue.

In the field of PR, good works well publicized is one of the definitions which they give in a textbook on the subject. That's supposed to be the perfect definition of PR. It couldn't be further from the truth. Effective cause, well demonstrated. You see, they've made a few little refinements. Then you can make forward progress.

Now what determines all of this? It would be determined by the planning officer. The planning officer should then be terrifically well informed. You can't have an executive director, or an executive director serving as a product officer, sitting in an ivory tower.

Now all the organization you do in the world is not going to do you any good unless you're making forward progress into the environment in which you find yourself. An organization must only expand, and an organization which contracts dies. That happens to be the way the universe is built. It isn't because I say so, it's because it's true. And so therefore, you must look considerably to your" various PR factors, as you move on out. And these should not be neglected.

Now a product officer's best friends are his feet. It's just run, run, run, run. Here, there, so on, up, down, back and forth. I can keep three messengers, four messengers busy around the clock, when I'm running along this particular line, and so on. And then I myself, pulling back off this line and getting more service and more communication lines, have not done as much moving about as I might have. But when I started to become a product officer I found out I was running my messengers to death and I was running too.

Now in the shininess and brassiness and newness of the technology with which you are now dealing, and the administrative technology which you're now dealing, we haven't yet begun to fight along this particular line. I mean, we're, we're really with it. Why, if you don't know that there is a method of handling human emotion and reaction, and you don't know that that is the method by which you will extend, and you don't know that, that that fancy mailing you are getting out and paying a lot of money for, if this wasn't based on any survey, ha(c)ha! Had no project back of it, had no campaign at all, didn't do anything. Might as well have been thrown in the toilet, because it wasn't put out along technological lines, do you follow? Therefore the technology of PR is necessary, because it forms one of the larger items in the budget of an administrator. It is big, and when it is neglected you fail. And when it itself is bad you also fail.

So, it's based on the reality of the situation. And if the data isn't coming in to you, why you don't have it. Now the data is a stat. The data is a stat. That is the data. That's the data you've got to have, it's a stat. I'm repeating that several times because it's really, really, honest to god, it is pathetic how people will fall for what we could call laughingly; we shouldn't use the word in this because we've gotten the thing dignified up; just PR. It's amazing, it's amazing. It's heartbreaking actually to trace back the reports you erroneously operated on, because you get into a wrong why. And you all of a sudden have removed Gertrude, when her stats were out the roof. Do you see? And you've promoted Gus, and the next guy onto the post finds out there weren't any files there, that he was raising rats. Do you see? And what tells you is stats, but stats must be real. Stats must be actual. Stats do not always represent quality, and they do not also represent viability. For instance, you hear an auditor say, "Why I had fifty-five hours or something last month," or something like this. Now we put quality on it when we said, "F/N VGIs at the examiner." That determined the quality of his auditing. It doesn't always determine the quality of his auditing because the auditor can end the session, and the pc's so relieved he gets F/N VGIs at the examiner. But it does straighten up. And it does keep the line. And all of a sudden, auditors had to start producing. And better tech started coming out of the assembly line when that was the criterion.

So, I am PRing the subject of PR to you, and I'm telling you that there has been a breakthrough in this field. I'm telling you that there is a technology, and I'm telling you that you will find it absolutely vital, and that you certainly somewhere up the line, in handling product and organization, will collide with a situation which can only be handled by PR. And try as you will, you won't be able to get any further without the PR being handled. And you will have a hard enough time handling it, even using all of PR. So when all seems too grim and you can't seem to get your point across, and you can't seem to get your product, and it just won't organize that way, then you do have a tool. And that tool is called PR. And it has its own technology, and we have made a breakthrough in this subject, and I actually respect the fellows who have worked hard in this field to make standard technologies extant. They are most overlooked by their own brethren.

Now the number of lost hours you get are also important. And if you don't see those on a stat, they could overwhelm you. So you have to know how many auditors are auditing for the stat to be real. See? It could totally overwhelm those well done auditing hours. I mean, so they got fifty well done auditing hours that week. Well that's great, great. There were five hundred and twenty-five expended. What kind of a field are you going to have very shortly?

So, all the technology there is in this field is adaptable, providing you know what the subject is for, which the PR man doesn't. Isn't that remarkable? Alright, let's take a five minute break, huh?

So, your stat has to be a real stat. You have to know what this stat is. You have to be familiar with a stat. You have to know the tricks of a stat. It isn't that you see an up stat and you say, "Well it wasn't good quality so you can't have the stat." No, that's your fault for not having a good stat there that also represented the quality.

Alright, now how much can organization improve things? We're a very long way from being perfect at this stage of the game. A very, very long way. Yet we are vested in a great deal of information, technical data, training expertise and so forth, and we certainly have technology that hasn't seen the light of day before. So we've got all the tools in the world. All we have to do is know those tools, and get those tools applied.

All organization has value to the degree that it brings about production. An organization tends to get into trouble, I don't care what organization it is, if it doesn't have a product. If it doesn't have production. You can say all you want to about, "Well, there was a so on, so on, so on." Actually there was one organization which ruled the planet which had the trickiest valuable final product that ever existed. Marvelous. Marvelous valuable final product, 'cause nobody could count it. Nobody could count its stat, and nobody could count the valuable final product, nobody could count the stat in either heaven or hell. The valuable final product of the Christian church obviously was souls gone to heaven. Marvelous, marvelous organization.

So you don't even have to be very good to succeed. Did I suddenly give you some margin? You don't even have to be very good to succeed.

Now when you actually add it up to where you really have a product, and when you really got the laws and rules of organization that put the thing there, and then you've got a team, and then you've got a product system, and you've got your product/org officer combination as it runs it up the line, and you know the ins and outs and ramifications of this sort of thing, god help the planet. Thank you. OK, don't be fooled by the clock. It's four o'clock in the morning. (Thank you.) You bet 'cha.