Now the product officer, as he goes on and stacks up more money; of course we get more and more resources in terms of money, but we may not have resources in terms of trained personnel. The Sea Org expansion and so on is absolutely staggering, in terms of; you know, I actually think you, you guys probably believe that we were doing great in '68, and it's all sort of gone down hill, and etcetera and etcetera. It's very, very funny. What's happened is that our statistics at this particular time, have become divided up. And the statistics are of more individual units and areas. And those statistics, do you see, well there's this type of thing. The Sea Org now is running three AOs, there are now three SHs, there's a great many more Scientology orgs, and there are a tremendous number of franchises which are really kind of orgs, do you see, and it's quite amazing. But when you add up these statistics you find out there's just been a general, you should do it just for fun.

Now the org officer, in a highly idealized org, would have an organizing officer in each division of that org, as the deputy secretary. And would call these cats together, and would say, "This is the way it jumps. Let's have the product here of projects. And what are each one of you guys going to do in order to do this?"

Now there's just been a consistent general expansion, and the stats have been going up, and they're going up and going up, the general stats. But it's because they've become compartmented, they're assigned to different units and nobody adds up all the units.

Now the product officer at this particular stage of the game would simply be going on getting more product. Now I do this unreasonable thing whenever I'm in an org, and one of the reasons it's very, very workable in an org; you will see an org go zoom around it. And the reason why is I never take any pity on the organization. I am the most pitiless production officer you have ever heard of. Absolutely pitiless. And if not followed up by an organization action, and compliance with orders to organize, why then I have to start operating to correct the product and correct the establishment, but I do it.

Now furthermore, if you take the Scientology org income, which has lagged as compared to franchise income, and so on, the truth of the matter is the franchises were financed by the AOs, by FSMs early on. So they've sort of robbed the orgs of their income, and then the orgs haven't kept up on that FSM line that would have expanded them, and they haven't continued to operate as their own reliable selves, and they've tried to maintain establishments and so forth without actually producing the things they should have produced. And it's gone agley. But when you add it all up you find out quite amazingly, 1964, 1965, 1966, 1967, 1968, and then you think maybe there was a bong. No at that time there was a tremendous spread, and it just went right on up the keyboard. It went down, it goes down, it goes up.

For instance, every now and then you hear of a director of processing or a CS, or the head of, the tech sec saying, "We can't take more than six pcs because we don't have any more auditors than that." And at that moment you will find me issuing an order to promotion, "At once, promote, to get in all the pcs you possibly can get in from everywhere. To the registrar, sign everyone up. And to the tech sec, you've had it. Where is that part of your hat that says you are to employ auditors? How many auditors do you know? Where do you know them? Get them in here. I think probably your peak load will probably come in another fourteen days, so you have lots of time to put on twelve additional auditors. Get them totally trained and grooved in, and your estate bureau, who ever is handling buildings and so forth, rent two more houses."

But you take our stats as this minute compared to the stats of 1967 and they're way up. And they're way up above 1968. Look it over the you'll see that they are. It's quite amazing.

Now, what do you have to do if you do all this? Now we went back over the analysis of successful actions. Successful actions. And the analysis of successful actions in this particular field is a complete pitiless product officer. He never thinks of the organization, he never thinks of its capacity, except to utilize it to its totality. If he's got an idle piece of machinery that ought to be turning out bunjucks, then by god, had better start turning out bunjucks, even though he has to grab the office boy and tell him to start winding that crank, and send out the janitor to steal raw material to put through it. Now that takes a hell of a disorganization, doesn't it? So where's your org officer that makes that correction real and that can push it back up, after you've done all that?

We are expanding. And the place that it shows strain particularly is in the Sea Org, because in the Sea Org we have a limited number of personnel. And they have already, over a period of time, consistently been stretched so thin; you see we're maintaining three AOs instead of one. We're still making the income of one AO, do you see, but now we've got three establishments to man. And it's just got the lines thin. You'll find that that to a large degree is, the lot of the execs of Washington D.C. for instance were yanked out into the smaller orgs, and so on. There were all kinds of wild personnel tangles, and there was a lot of weight on Washington. And as a matter of fact, I did not want and did not approve the establishment of these tiny orgs. They could only be of service if they were feeder orgs. And they didn't, they set themselves up as independent organizations. Now they're continuously in trouble, but actually they rob some of the income from Washington. So they're harder to manage because there are more of them, but the aggregate income is comparable. And it's been in my mind several times, is to retire some of those places to franchise and force them to feeder service to Washington again. We probably won't do that, we've got a better idea right now. We'll just force all of them to be big.

Well, the org officer actions which I have done in an org apparently are not repeated by other people in orgs. I have a report from LRH comms that they continually say, "The greatest trouble they have with an executive of an org is to get them to walk through their portion of the org." Now that is a direct report line, and so forth. Just awful, that's just awful. That's treason. Well, what the hell are they doing sitting there? What are they doing sitting at that desk? The executives of an organization...

But I thought I would interject that just in passing, because I found out the general impression was that something was happening with this. No, it isn't. As a matter of fact, the Australian, the attacks on Australia and so on are the most ineffective attacks that anybody ever; they've passed laws and bans all over the place, the police have given us all back our books, and there's nothing. To hell with it. Nobody had anything to do with it, so it sits on the books as a dead statute. It made the staffs timid, it worried them, it upset them, it did this and that and the other thing, but it sure discredited the enemy.

I'm only justified in sitting at a desk because I have a twenty-four hour messenger watch, and they run like hell. That's right. And I'm not justified sitting too long at that desk, only I have lines of information which come in from all over the place. I make sure that those lines stay in. But who are these line to? These lines are not necessarily; I'm the fellow who violates the external/internal. I don't know, I can do it and I don't find other people can. I don't know why that is, so I've not solved it particularly. But I do know that I resent having to handle too much product three while I am also having to wear some of my own hats. I know that there's some resentment will come up in that line sooner or later, mostly because there are only twenty-four hours in this cockeyed planet's day. There's only so much you can do. Of course that's a bad postulate too, because as I told you before, god couldn't hold this post. Not possible. You will also be saying that yourself, god can't hold this post, unless you listen very carefully to what I am telling you children, the Jabberwocky.

So if at any time, any time you don't continue to pile up resources in terms of trained staff members, if you don't continue to pile up resources in terms of space, why that is what is going to break your back, because you are not on any down trend at all, you're on an escalating up trend.

The whole point in the thing is there's ways to live with this. That there are certain ways to do this, and they are very standard. Now I can't imagine, it assaults my R, that somebody in charge of an organization would not be, have all kinds of mechanisms, being familiar with the organization, or that an executive would depend in any way, shape or form on his dispatches. Dispatches are usually to forward information, schedules, things that are written down, need OKs and that sort of thing. Dispatches aren't there to handle things. It would just be impossible, if you weren't in total communication with your organization, to handle it at all. It just assaults my R, it's not possible. And I have a very willing group, and they write me anything that they think I ought to know about. That has the liability that you mustn't act on such reports when they contain too much entheta, and so on. You never act on such reports, without getting a recoil. Once in a while I do, I'm always sorry that I do, but it keeps information up.

I invite you to look at the franchise statistics of the last three years, and they're, they almost go double each year. It's not quite that steep, but that's the way it looks. You look at it on a graph, up she went. So don't plan on a level graph.

I also have the ability to look around without going around too much. And the net result of that is a fairly close finger on the pulse. We go back over successful actions, when I'm running an org as an executive director, at least once a day I walk through that entire organization, and speak to every person in that organization. And as I'm normally operating from a product point of view, I nevertheless, because we had no product/org officer system at that time, take the organization step as well. I'm interested in what their product is, I'm interesting in what they're doing personally. I'm interested in what they need on their post, in order to get their product out. There are some people here who've seen me do this."'? Now I sometimes miss a day, and so forth, but I know when I've missed a day, and I know when I should get some more information. And the result of that is, that the org officer's function is performed, completely in addition to the product officer's function, the org officer function.

Your resources are your resources, and they are mainly in terms of manpower. How many people have you hatted? How many people have you trained? How many people in the field do you still have the allegiance of? How many people have you patched up? How many ARC breaks have you handled, and how many members do you have in your auditor's association, and so forth are the only things which will keep you above water, because it's a problem in resources. And the resources are a thing which the org officer has to watch. And if he sees his resources declining; well we just established a new course out in Longville, as a branch course or something from the org. Oh, oh, oh, oh, there goes the trained something, and there goes a trained something else, and so on. Has he got them to send out? So he should stockpile all the resources he can. Money, auditors, books, he should be greedy.

Now, an org officer should make a daily inspection around the org, finding out how the staff members are doing. And noting when they're not hatted or slightly unhatted, and rapidly put their hats on, if there's any trouble with that. You'll find hat is the main thing that goes out. There's evidently a scale of hats, which we've suddenly evolved here. I haven't named any of these things. They've been a spontaneous evolution from some quarter or another inside the ship here. And there's instant hatting, there's mini hatting, and then there's full hatting. New nomenclature.

Now the product officer can go on turning out products, turning out products, turning out products, turning out products, but when somebody doesn't do something with these as resources, and get his resources off that line, and stack them up and preserve them in terms of field people and so forth, they're willing to help out, and somebody might come on staff, and the auditor was trained and he wants to know when he can go working for the org. Those are resources. And everybody you hat becomes a resource. So of course he wants to over hat, always. A person hatted for three posts is better than a person hatted for one post. He's a better resource. So your org officer has the duty of piling up resources.

Instant hatting is a sort of an action you do when you slam somebody onto a post and he's got to take the load of it and so forth, and you tell him what you want him to do. That's just instant hatting. You tell him what his post title is and what he's supposed to be doing on that post. Instant hatting, brrr. Don't get on with it. And then of course, HCO can come along, if he's going to be posted there actually. HCO can come along and the first thing they would do, would give him a mini hat. And if it takes more than about thirty minutes to get on a mini hat, then there's probably something wrong with either HCO or the staff member. And then they schedule him up to be fully hatted. That's the sequence of events. If they're fully hatted they get a certificate for it, so that's always been missing. Who is certified for what as having passed what hat? Actually it should be something that happens and is accounted for in a certs and awards area.

Now his sudden demands made, made on him a piece of cake. He's way ahead of it. "Oh, need to buy a new building? OK. How much it cost? Alright, OK. We'll look for one. Yeah, good. Only a million? Well aright, poof. Alright, OK." He's in that position. "Oh you need two hundred auditors? OK." Do you see how an org officer gets behind, because his resources are limited. So therefore he gets ahead by increasing and hording his resources. See how it's done?

So the org officer, however, is not just unhumanly interested in the organization, the org officer is interested in the individual as an individual, how he doing, how he is getting on, whether he is able to do his job, if his health is maintaining, if that post is over loaded, if it needs help, or if the post is empty and isn't getting any product.

Now you don't want a miser on the post who holds the resources to his chest and never will let them go, but you want a provident sort of housewife who has a basement full of next years' canned good rations, and doesn't have to go screaming down to the Safeway to buy a cup of sugar every time that there is a guest for dinner. Now if you look this over from the standpoint of expanding by resources you will see that you cannot expand unless you have stockpiled resources, or tried to. Now you should always try to stockpile resources, and that's how the org officer keeps ahead of the game.

How is this fellow doing? Is he so, has he got nothing to do on post so that he is bored stiff? Has he got too much to do on post and is going down hill? Now let's add this up to detection of a decline, product three. And with a daily swing around an organization, and seeing everybody in the organization, an org officer would of course be in a position; he doesn't take up their time, he doesn't talk to them very long; he would be in a position then to know what was cooking in the place. He would have to know everybody in the place, he would have to know what every one in the place did, so that he could immediately detect any departure from the ideal scene. But he would also be interested in whether the person was getting his pay, whether the person was having troubles.

How many replacement aids do we have in the Flag bureau already trained, who can be spared on their posts at this particular moment? And that tells you exactly what the resources are. That is poverty, boy. That is right down to the bottom of that ole' barrel. "I'm sure there must be a half a herring left in this herring barrel some place. Somebody get a flashlight." Do you see where she errors?

Now it isn't that this would affect efficiency, it's he's interested in them as human being. And that would be an essential action of the org officer.

So now the org officer system should increase resources. And so, when he's called on for one he gets two. And yes, you will eventually wind up, and orgs which I manage by the way generally do wind up, there's an awful lot of old stuff out there that nobody's ever used in the garage. And it probably never will be used now. Somebody says, "Wasn't that a terrible waste." No, no, no. That was just providence extended a little too far. They also don't turn around immediately and look at the rest of the resources that were used. And they're all over the place in full use. And they also don't look around at the bank accounts, because those periods were also attended by very high bank account reserves that went pouring in. And the staffs also were well paid at that time.

Now it's alright to have a chaplain doing this sort of thing, but the trouble with having a chaplain doing this sort of thing is the org officer wouldn't have the information, would he? So therefore he couldn't repair a decline or anticipate a decline. So he couldn't do his product three.

So these are the criteria by which an org officer operates. Now he has to know what a resource is. Resources are things like space, furniture, equipment, and the establishment of the factors of the org. Any of those can be resources. But the final valuable products, what happens to the final valuable products after they're final valuable product? So the org officer sort of steps in after the product officer. And that's how he gets ahead of him.

Now as he walks around on that sort of thing, he would also get a look at the rest of the establishment. What's it look like? Now he could determine out of that they didn't have enough cleaners, or people weren't interested in cleaning, or the cleaning establishment was organized all backwards. Cleaning establishment might have posted themselves as cleaner in charge, and have no product of any kind whatsoever, like clean quarters, or anything of this sort. Maybe all the locks are falling off the doors. Well that obviously means that somebody is, some maintenance hat is totally neglected around here. So here is a needed organizational piece. Well he fills that in. He doesn't go in and look at the org board and say, "Where are some holes in this org board?" As a matter of fact, he might do quite the reverse. In wandering around and talking to the people, and checking them off on his list and so forth on his rounds, he might find out that about thirty percent of that org board is mis-posted. Now he certainly should do something about it. He can leave the org board hanging there, with all those posts held from above that are inactive, or he's got to determine whether or not those posts have any functions and should be filled. He's got to make a judgement. Three. The decline. Arresting the decline.

So the product officer, you see he's turned out a lot of his final valuable products, and they're sitting all over the place. At this moment the org officer says, "Heh heh heh heh! Let's get some of these." Got it? Open up an org officer's desk and there's no list of potential staff members for posts and so forth, he's in poverty.

Alright, from the arresting of the decline he can pass information through so that those responsible for putting the establishment there, who are under his orders, those responsible for it can get together and push it back to its ideal scene, or even raise the ideal scene's height, so that is can handle the traffic. Now do you see how the lines would go there?

Now, naturally an org officer tries to keep everything on an org board, and he tries to keep it all straight, and tries to keep it this way and tries to keep it that way, right up to the point when the org board gets in his road. And at that moment why he can make do in some fashion or another, and get some approved change so that it can be officialized. That's approval sort of after the fact. Otherwise, as you expand you won't be able to fill in the weak points. So the org board is saying, "Well you can't have an organization without weak points if there's a point missing on the org board that you need to have filled." Do you follow? That's a contradiction. If you have a strong organization which won't blow up at the joints, it's of course going to get an expanding org board. Fortunately the org board, 1967 org board, expands from about two or three people, or one person can operate on it actually, to about a hundred thousand. It's inherent expansion is that great so you really don't have to vary the pattern of the org board much. That was the reason it was planned.

Now the production officer and so on is worrying about product all this time, and he will find holes. And he will find what he is doing, so he keeps notes of these thing. And he, while getting his product, passes this information back to the org officer. The org officer, if he's made his tours and he knows what it's all about and so forth, probably knows at that point who's idle, who isn't idle, what he can do to instantly shift this thing. Go over and get somebody by the nap of the neck and shove them over onto that post, and that sort of thing. He knows exactly where his personnel resources are. He knows exactly where his supplies are. As he goes on his tour he also knows where all the spare typewriters that aren't being used are and what state they are in, and the mimeograph machine, and whether the photo offset machine has got any supplies for it, and he's got this and he's got that and he's got the other thing. And he's got his finger on all these points, so that he can detect an incipient or existing decline, get the Now of course one of the things he has to do, and the biggest hole we've got in an organization is hat. And that is the first thing that an org officer detects is wrong, the person's hat. Just like that. "We're having trouble with the, we're having trouble over here with the success stories, and so forth." He doesn't wonder, the org officer doesn't wonder whether or not, he can almost in advance know that whoever is, there is either nobody on the line, or that people on that line haven't got their hat. He can just, just like that. "Well, unhatted, good."

Now the close work with the HCO we've covered, and the org officer moves very fast, and should always move faster than the product officer. Yes. The product officer's going a hundred miles an hour, the org officer will be lost if he doesn't travel at a hundred and twenty-five. If he only travels at a hundred and twenty-five he will be overtaken sooner or later, because he has to stop by the wayside every once in a while to pick up the bodies and pat them together. The best laid plans of org officers aft gangagly. "Yes, we will be able to take care of it. Bessie Ann just ran off with another man."

You'll find out that this work work out ninety-nine and forty-four one hundredths percent of the time. Something wrong with the hats and so forth, so he just does an instant hatting, right away quick. "Look, you're supposed to sit here at the desk, and when the people come along and they give you these successes and so forth, why you're supposed to have some paper here, and they write down the successes. And you're supposed not to snarl at them, or frown at them, you're supposed to be pleasant to them. And they write down their successes, and you take those over and you put them in this folder and so forth, so that that can be staticized, and so that those are available for promotion, so they can be counted. You got that now?" And the guy says, "Well, actually, so on, I haven't seen any case gains go through this org. You see, I don't have any case gain myself. I mean, you know, and I've just been wondering whether or not Scientology works, you see?" And the org officer at that moment knows exactly what to do.

Now in urgent peak periods the org officer might be required to understudy and be at the product officer's side. In other words, they work as a team, and at peak periods or at tough points they must work as a team. They must not be distant from each other. They just work right there, hammer/pound, and they will get over one of these things.

He knows exactly what to do at that particular split instant. He knows exactly where there is a personnel who isn't totally utilized. Within three and a half minutes flat there is another personnel sitting there, and he tells this other personnel, "Now, when the people come through along this line, you have this piece of paper and so on. And there's your ball points and here's a pad over here, and when they write up that thing and so on, why you put in in the folder so it can be counted up. You got that all straight now? Good. Now when people don't come through this line, let's get your hat a little bit expanded now. When people don't come through that line, you go in and you tell the examiner to send them to you, and you put a sign on the examiner's desk. And if that doesn't work we'll move your desk over alongside the examiner's desk. How's that?" The guy says, "What am I supposed to be doing?" And you say, "You're the success officer. You're the guy who is supposed to monitor the successes people have, and so forth. And you have this piece of paper, and don't snarl at them and don't bla-bla, and so on."

Now the org officer should be so familiar with his org's personnel that he would at any time be able to say what each staff member is up to, and know what they are doing. And in his operations he of course follows the data already supplied by LRH in CDOs and lectures. Now if you're operating right now at a period of transition, it doesn't change very much, because of 2 August 1965 HCOPL, which lays down a basic form. That is the one which says what the HES does and what the OES does, that is the first borning of this. And when that was violated, something went astray, and orgs became harder to manage. Really, the HES was an org officer, and the OES was a product officer. And if you look under the OES you will find money in division three, you will find auditors, in the student auditors, in the directors of training, and you will find pcs in the department of processing. And then you will find under also distribution, you will find the field and the products which are going out into the field. And up at the beginning of the line in the first two divisions you find the HES and so forth had hatting forming and so forth, and also had the executive division which contained the estate section. So you see, it all works out right, and that's 2 August HCOPL. And it contains the first elements of the system in which we're operating.

What do you do with this other guy? Route him to qual. HGO says, "What's the state of the personnel in this org today?" "Transferred all the left side over to the right side, and the right side over to the left side." No, you've got to inform HCO, and get an authorization for the transfer, and the reason why and so on, and etcetera, and it's all done after the fact. Everything after the fact. Org officer always operates, he always tells people to authorize things after they have been done. He runs totally backwards.

Now that was an older system than the '67 org board, but the '67 org board was the preservation of this system, and the '67 org board was very well tried out at Saint Hill, and was functioning very, very well at Saint Hill during its peak periods. The org board was copied with all corrections by Mary Sue, in 1967. And I found that when a section is on the wrong part of an org board you'll get into trouble at once. And a great many of these adjustments were made, so the 1967 seven division org board is a fully tested org board. Unfortunately, the division three of that org board was lost, and not published. And the elements of it are still around, and I think we're making some effort to publish this at this time. But Mary Sue wrote it up, and for some reason or other, it just wasn't mimeographed. And I can't imagine what happened.

An org officer who sits around and waits for approvals of course is very safe, until you see his stats, because his stats will be nowhere. You get the, the run of the thing?

The fact that we have developed some new principles in the field of PR, and in the distribution division, has tended to throw the distribution division a bit out because its product was not anticipated totally at that time. And its product is Scientologists. That is its product. And these Scientologists, of course, have products of sold books, contacted people, and other, sending people in, you know interested persons and so on. And they also have, the guardian's office is carrying on some of that now, and they have all kinds of committees and that sort of thing stretched around the world, and they use these committees, and so on. That was really an original distribution division function. So that is in a state of flux at this particular moment, and you could either just use what is on the nine division public divisions, use that, or use the old distribution division org board with these elements put into it. But I can tell you right now that the PE foundation is going straight back in the academy, because a PE foundation requires course supervisors, and it's just, it's just a lower level of the same action of a course supervisor, and they have the facilities, tech services and other things which can be doubled in brass to handle these public actions. Because they're not public actions, it's the same action all over again.

So what does he do about this person? He routes this person to qual. What does he do? He can now put it on a dispatch line, he can even give the person the dispatch, "Take this to qual." Maybe the person doesn't wind up in qual, but he's got to get another dispatch to HCO and say, "So and so has been routed to qual." Well what's qual going to do with him? That's qual's problem. Qual ought to be well enough organized to take care of that. Person says, "What do I do?" And qual says, "What's it all about?" They can find out. They also would then get some kind of, if the qual sec was part of the product/org scene, or if there was a deputy qual sec as there would be in ideally organized org, he would have the full gen on this, within the next day or so.

You will see something resembling a staff college or hatting college thrown into the line up, and that of course makes a valuable final product, if some of the PE actions also came over to it. At the time I'm speaking to you, this has not been completely released. But it shouldn't give you any trouble at all. Just those public courses and so on, right over there. Right over there, bingo, into the academy or department of training. And you'll find they're better cared for.

Now the failure to publish what goes on is the fault. The failure to publish, and that is what your orders of the day are for. They are really not for those people who have cleaning stations and so forth, and Bessie Ann Glutz was married yesterday and we're happy about her, and so on. That has nothing to do with this. The org officer says so and so, and the product officer says so and so. And they don't have to be gloomy about it all, but they certainly have the dominant point. They have to keep the org informed as to their actions.

When that was that way, by the way, I have reports on when it was that way, the public coming in and running into students who were all enthusiastic and in good shape, and had status with them. Then the public had already managed to reach and withdraw. So the organizational pattern, the organizational pattern with which you're dealing, and the OEC which you study, are all of a piece. And there's nothing out of line with any of these patterns. You will occasionally have, something has moved to another division and will have the wrong department or divisional designation on it. That could even be corrected up, because the functions in actual fact haven't much changed. Therefore there is a tremendous wealth of information and technology which has been developed, all of which is of infinite use to the org officer, and he is rich in terms of theory and technology of organization, and particularly rich with the theory and technology of the org product officer system.

Now there's such a thing as keeping an org informed of just what is going on. But certainly, what affects the org would be the product officer and org officer, so that if they don't inform the org of what's going on, why all hell breaks loose, because nobody knows. And they become very unstabilized. And they go in, and they see an examiner one day, and they see another examiner the next day. And then they go around, and they think they're talking to the examiner, but he's now cleaning out mud boxes or something, and they think he sure looks funny as an examiner all covered with mud. And so forth, well they don't know. They don't know. Sews the place with little mysteries unless it's published what you did.

An organization is liable to organize forever without producing anything. An organization is liable to try to produce forever without organizing anything. Both of these things are a hideous crime, because both of them will crash. You can't continue to produce without organizing it, you can't continue to organize without producing.

Now that in itself is quite an action. So, the action which I rehearsed on this thing and so on, because I actually moved in as a product officer, and I've been an org officer and so on, so I'm speaking from first hand information, not from a theoretical workout. Is, I found out that after I had undertaken a product and had begun to get the product, at that moment I had to write up whatever I had to do, in order to get that product, and make it known. Now the ball could only be picked up by other people if that were done. So you're operating on two systems. One is the lineal system and the other's the triangular system. The lineal system would be where the product officer is more or less operating autonomously, and he is writing up his products as he, he got the product, he got it going, and then he made notes while he was doing this. And then he wrote it up in some fashion or another, and then he says what he thinks ought to have happened over in that org area. And it may not be what happens over in the org area, but what he has stated that he ran into will be cared for, because you see, he didn't conduct a thorough investigation. It might be somewhat different by the time it's investigated, but he just indicates what he ran into, and then he passes all of that sideways over onto the org officer's lines. So you keep a running fire of what is happening.

The general conduct of the org officer is met to the degree that he is familiar with his OEC, he's familiar with the hats, with the expectancies from duties on the various posts, with the resources he has, with what the establishment is particularly composed of. And the product officer, oddly enough, has to know all that better than the org officer. So if you find yourself going too far adrift or too far astray, either as product officer or an org officer, you do have a tremendous amount of material which can be reviewed. And that material is not out of line, and its theories are definitely not out of line. There's nothing, nothing been thrown away in it at all.

Now he also has notes, and he should mark in these notes consistently and continuously what outnesses he finds. Now he will find a certain number of flubs, and he certainly carries a notation of these flubs. Now the org officer's stats or reputation depends on the reduction of these flubs. If the product officer's notes as of the first week in January are the same as the product officer's notes, carrying the same flubs and names in the third week in January, then the org officer's definitely not doing his job. In other words, the organization is not advancing back toward the ideal scene, because these flub points have not been handled.

1970 was such a stellar year in the advancement of organizational technology that you would immediately expect it would throw everything away. Well, there's a consistency in it all, consistency in it all. It just showed up the importances, and how an evolution of it could take place.

Now to some degree you will find that there are always some flub points that don't get handled. It's impossible, just that, absolutes are unobtainable, and nowhere are they unobtainable so much as in an org officer's area, because he has various human elements. He has to produce personnel from nowhere, he has to actually cope with the fact that finance is busy telling him that "There is no possible FP. If you hire two more people you will decrease our pay and we won't be able to something or other, and of course," if you don't hire. Then he can say, "Well if you don't hire two more people you won't have any pay at all." And it goes back and forth, but he has other conflicts and lines which he is trying to cope with in this, so he doesn't always bring it off the way the product officer thinks it ought to have been brought off, because other factors may have been present. Do you follow?

There is another system on the org/product officer system that I must mention, in closing. And that system is simply the triangular system. That is where you have a very big organization, and until you had this unit up to where you were clicking along at around twenty-five, thirty thousand dollar-type org, you wouldn't really want this type of system, because it's a trifle cumbersome. And that is the triangular system by which the org officer and the product officer are handled by an executive director or commanding Now what happens there is that the product officer goes straight along with the duties as he has, and then he has the various problems which he is running into, or what he wants, or what he can think of, or what he's trying to get through. And the executive director at that time is the planning officer. Now I want to point out to you that the planning officer up to that time, on the lineal system of just product officer to org officer, the planning officer is the product officer. He is the planning officer of, "Where the hell are we going? What we going to do?"

So these things that the product officer writes up are not necessarily orders in themselves. But they are indicators and what he would like to have happen, and what he thinks is wrong. And that gives you a working basis on which to operate. So a product officer, busy getting his product, why it's fine. He at least has to express what he's running into. An org officer, because we're talking mainly about org officers at this time, would be absolutely up the spout if he didn't know what the product officer was up to, and what the product officer had run into in trying to get this and that. He would not actually be able to do his job very long or very well. I've found that that was definitely the case while I was operating as a product officer, and I could imagine what would happen if a person operating as an org officer was not informed of these sudden shifts, changes, actions, orders, and so on, which had occurred, because it would look to the org officer now; let's take the org officer's point of view; it'd look to the org officer like all the product officer was doing was tearing up the organization as fast as it could be put back together again. That would be the complete conviction an org officer would eventually get into, if the product officer didn't scribble down some notes, and make these things available, and so forth, to the org officer of what he was trying to do.

But the commanding officer, if he was operating with a product officer and an org officer, would be the planning officer. And he's the planning and coordinating officer. That is the way we are running the Flag bureau. We sort of run a mixture. It's a sort of a half and half. When we take a whole continental area and all the chips are down and that sort of thing is, why then I will step in as commanding officer and planning. And then I will take it up so that we get a plan of overall projects, and so on.

So therefore, in order to do his job at all, he would have to have a daily cruise around the place, he would have to in that daily cruise note such things as supplies. And you'd have to note such things as the condition of equipment and machinery and whether it was being kept up or not. And you'd certainly have to notice the condition and morale, and the business or lack of business of the personnel involved. And you'd have to notice the condition of the communication lines. And then, the next action that would have to be done there by the org officer, he'd have to ensure, daily, that the org's training program was being followed, and that hatting, on a long range basis, is never slacked off. In other words, is HCO continuing to do a job? Is there a schedule in this place so that we eventually have fully hatted people? Or are we going to go through life with instant hatted people or people on post in total mystery?

So that it would be, actually, in a lineal system it would be the product officer who did that. He would be wearing, he would be double hatted. And where there is no, where the triangular system isn't in, the product officer is always double hatted as the commanding officer or executive director.

A fellow is looking at this stack of folders blankly. And every once in a while he looks over and he sees all that stack of folders, and he's getting kind of allergic to that stack of folders. He doesn't know his post title, and he doesn't know why those folders keep stacking up on his desk. That would be the reductio ad absurdum of the whole show. So he's got to make sure that there is some continuous training action going on, and that hatting is occurring.

In any org that you're running at this particular moment, the lineal system would be the one you are using. But I wish to call to your attention that at the time when you have a product officer and an org officer, and they are working with a commanding officer or executive director, then you also need the rest of the frills. And the rest of the frills are a PR officer, who is a staff officer. He's not down in any division, he's handling the human emotion and reaction and you're going to start running into plenty of that. And you've got to have messengers or runners. That becomes a necessity. You would have to have an executive director's secretary who is shared to some degree in use, or as a guidance factor or coordinative factor with the product officer. And you've got quite a little staff.

He also has the idea of major courses, because as I told you, you begin with a course supervisor, who makes auditors. And then the auditors, you take on some of those auditors and you audit pcs with those auditors, do you see? And he therefore has got to make sure that some of the staff members he has are on some kind of a training schedule, quite in addition to the number of public students who are coming in.

I'll just name them off for you. There's commanding officer, product officer, org officer, staff PR officer, and messengers, and secretary. The only plurality there is messenger. You can't expect a messenger actually to stay on duty forever. Anybody who tries to put a messenger on duty at eight o'clock in the morning and take them off at six o'clock at night's got rocks in his head, because what he's going to do, he's going to spend periods when he doesn't have any messenger, and if he's depending on messengers and so on, why he couldn't do it. But it takes messengers in order to handle anything rapidly enough.

Now in a Sea Org org this becomes vital, because Sea Org members have to be pushed on up the line, and you all of a sudden find yourself organizationally, "Yipes! We got no... We got eight hundred and sixty-five pcs, oh my god. What the hell are we going to do here, because there's no, whoops, no auditors." And then they start hiring auditors, and then the next thing you know why, the Sea Org org is all scrambled up in some fashion or another, and you can't have any Sea Org members in charge of anything because they don't have the technical; that's peculiarly a Sea Org problem. Very peculiarly. You all of a sudden look around, you wind up and you've got a bunch of HDCs, at the most you see, and what you need at that particular moment is class six. And then you can't, you've only got HDCs, so nobody has actually been pushed up the line to become a qual sec. And suddenly you'll find that you're terribly, terribly thin at the top, just because nobody has anticipated a long range training schedule.

Of course I'm doing, as usual, the Roman running three chariots simultaneously from a center horse, with the posts somewhat empty here and there along the line up. And that's done because of the expansion factor. I suppose some day it will all be improved, and it will all be perfect. I don't see it in the foreseeable future.

At this moment we could use aboard Flag, at an absolute minimum, right aboard Flag at this instant, we could use three FEBCs. Just at this instant, just to fill in the screaming gaps. And then you'd need some more, and we should have a spare CLO team, all of whom should be FEBCs.

But actually the system which we are running on right now and getting into shape is actually three, a three org system. Commanding officer of three orgs simultaneously, each one with a pair. That is the product officer and an organizing officer. And with a bounteous number of messengers, and with excellent secretarial counselor-type back up. And one of those orgs right now, the ship org, is running solo at this particular moment. That is to say, there's a commanding officer but not; in essence a commanding officer who is not backed up by an organizing officer, and who at this moment doesn't even have an HCO to establish anything. And I don't know where that's going to go, but I know very well from where I look that at any given instant that there will be a small beginning little whistle of steam, which gradually goes into a high roar, because something, something wild will take place unless that is organized up.

Well, we have to work on a new basis. And we; I mean not a new basis but an old basis. What we do organizationally on long range training and so on, is we always send out people who are better trained than the last team. And we just work on that as the way we work toward the ideal scene. It's always just that, better trained.

You can always anticipate something that, an area that isn't organized to some degree will cave in. So you've got to, as an organizing officer, anticipate the fact. You can look at an area and you say, "That isn't well enough organized, so therefore we can only let it go so long before there will be a boom."

The art formula applies here, perfection. You can work for perfection to a point of where you get nothing done, and an organizing officer can do this, oh my god. He can go for perfection before he lets anything go, and so on. Well that is how we do it with; this time it is better than the last one. And it's true. It's worked out over the last couple of years. We're always sending out a better team than the last one we sent.

Now any time you try to increase the traffic on a line, and you don't increase the organizing functions on the line rapidly enough, or somebody drops the ball in the process of increasing those organizing actions, at that moment you do get a boom. It goes boom. And these are the periods when you've got to have a PR with his coded questions that can be decoded so we can find out what it is, so we can get a program in the thing while the organizing officer immediately gets a hold of this one and that one, and cools off the existing tempers. And you get instant hatting right away, and comm ev the HCOAS. Fast, fast, fast you see, because when it's let go you can operate on this principle, the longer you let it go the bigger the boom. And that is a definite operating principle.

But to do that, to do that you have to make sure that there's not only full hatting training, but there is also some people who are being full time trained along administrative lines. Or, if you can't do that, certainly part time trained along administrative lines, so that you would get another program would follow in through the back of the hat program. The person would finish up his hatting program, and then we're continuing him on to finish off his administrative courses, like his OEC, his FEBC. And we do that at part time. And then if we had very, very alert organizing officers in the tech division who were thinking of the organization at large, they would scream like banshees at the idea of there being a very few people on major courses. And sure enough, not too long ago, were screaming, and said, "There's nobody down here at all on a major technical course. And there hasn't been a full time technical course student for some time." Well they were calling the shots, and it was perfectly true. So that's part of the organization scene. Not only the hatting, but also making sure that somewhere up the line you'll have personnel qualified, even though you're doing it on a part time basis. So he's got to have some kind of programming for some future organization. And an organization is composed of trained people, it isn't composed of dead bodies.

If you don't believe that, we had it all taped out many, many months ago what we were going to do. And it was for a period there when we did not put an organizational pattern together. And Ken and I were discussing this, and we should really organize this, and we really should take this organizational step. But at that particular time were unwilling to take the step due to some of the scarcities of personnel. And I don't know, I think we let it go for about six or seven days, and all of a sudden, boom! And now we had to put it all together in just no time at all. And the other principle is, the longer you neglect it, the more frantically you're going to have to work to salvage it. So foresight really pays off, and that's why the org officer should be way ahead of the product officer.

The Sea Org does a fantastic amount of training. We do a fabulous amount of training. An in compares, definitely with; we used to do a lot of training in earlier Scientology orgs. That training factor of the staff is nowhere near today what it used to be, but I've managed to get it going again in Scientology orgs over the last year. But it's not adequate. Somebody is thinking in terms of, "We haven't got enough money, we don't have enough people world population explosion, we haven't got enough people - bull! I might have believed somebody in 1705. The scarcest thing there is in the world today is a hat. Do you think that for one moment these people on welfare and relief and so forth in the United States or in other areas and so on, are happy to be suddenly relegated to a hatless life? No, boy! Every time you have welfare payments you've got unhappy people, and you've got an incipient revolution. There's people all over the place. But a group has a tendency to exclude, and it shouldn't, particularly a group such as ours.

And he gets way ahead, I call to your attention again, by picking got five people here who are eligible to be executive directors in a pinch, and I've got six people who are triple hatted. That is to say they're on a single post, but they've been checked out on all of the hats in their particular area. Isn't that nice? And so on, now if we just check them out on all the hats of a couple of more divisions here, we possibly will have an org officer here. Ah, that's nice. Goodies." And that is the think which has to be back of that which puts the org officer ahead of the product officer. In poverty it is always very easy to starve to death very quickly.

Well, you raise your, you raise your security standards too high and you don't get any people at all, and you put them too low and the next thing you know you've got some wild ones on your hands. Alright, so somewhere in between is the right level. It not only never has been found, but it never will be found. What it takes is an alert HCO. And by the time the guy thinks his post consists of breaking ketchup bottles on the funnel and so forth, why you have to do something about it. But you have this problem, you have this problem in orgs.

And there's something I must mention to you in, actually in closing. Something I must mention to you. And that is that there's a make/break point of an org. There's a make/break point. And when an organization drops below a certain volume, a certain income and a certain personnel level, it is in the break point. And it not only breaks itself, it breaks the people in it.

Now what an organizing officer has to do as he goes around, he very easily detects where recruitment has been, or hiring has been at fault. Now if he's too critical of it, I've seen somebody stumble around for a day or two, and fumble and try to find the staircase and so on, and finally actually wind up with repeated instant hattings and so forth, and informings and so forth, finally wind up so that they had enough familiarity to do the job. I've seen this happen. But I've also seen it happen, they just got worse and worse, and that, short of processing, you see your management misunderstoods. See, the organization misunderstoods cycle there is something that we can pay some attention to. But those who are out in orgs at this moment are not able to pay as much attention to it as we are at Flag, because in the first place we're dealing with a very superior, and not to be snide about it, in Flag we're dealing with a very superior level of flubless auditing. We do it by the book, and nobody gets by anything, and so on, so the auditing doesn't foul up. And also we're dealing with a very superior level of tech, which when orgs qualify they can have. You will be in the clover when you have got an org well enough put together so it can afford an department that could run L-10s.

Now when you start to getting people trying to blow because of overload, and they can't cope with it and that sort of thing, you are definitely, definitely in the break area. And when you see a lot of trouble and strain and stress, you are in the break area.

The standard of field auditing at this present moment forbids it utterly, so we've got to export course supervisors, course supervision, we've got to support all the little tricks and expectancies and so forth that are done on Flag, how we get these results. It isn't that nobody else in the world gets any results, but they've got to be uniformly good, and the flub results must not be tolerated. And the guy must make his flub results in areas of auditing where it doesn't mess up anything.

Now the break might not be right where you are. It might be on an extensional line. You may have very overburdened lines without recognizing it, which, those lines are extensional outside the organization. Now that would be particularly true of a bureau. A Flag bureau or a liaison bureau set up is peculiarly liable to stresses which aren't easily locatable inside the org, because the stresses are on its traffic lines. Because where it has any responsibilities for organization of outside areas at all, those stresses show up inside the organization. So everything appears to be OK as far as personnel are concerned, and that sort of thing are concerned, but there's internal stress. You're actually in a break area. And that is the time to organize like hell, to promote like mad, and to push up your accumulation of resources at great speed.

So you'll be in clover on your organizational misunderstoods the moment that a Scientology or Sea Org org has achieved a sufficient; well there's various eligibility factors with regard to it, and they probably will always exist, probably be varied one way or the other. Certain volume, certain successes, certain primacies, and so on, because the, at this moment you're in clover. Right now your neck is a little bit out in that you can't probably handle the extreme cases, the suppressives, and so forth, who actually get sideways onto your lines, and cause enturbulation. So you are still on a very heavy alertness along this line, particularly amongst new personnel.

Whenever you find yourself in that; and every Scientology org in the world as I speak at this moment is running below its make point. The make point of a Scientology organization where it's really rolling in cream and so on, is probably somewhere in the vicinity of about a twenty thousand GI. And if you're not doing that, then you're under strain, and very, very heavy strain. And the people inside the organization will be under strain. And then you can expect that to dwindle. Whatever you've got will dwindle, rather than increase, unless you take efforts to actually effectively push it up to the make point.

Now you don't want to hire fifteen or twenty personnel, and then just keep them on forever. The principle we operate on is hire lots of them, and retain those who make it. And it's up to the org officer then in this patrol; there's two places in his patrol. He notes this, he sees what's going on, and he knows he's got somebody who is good, or he hasn't. And he can get too highly critical about the whole thing. There's another point where he can detect this. In hatting the person never can seem to get his hat on, and so the statistics, the study statistics he's getting off the individual, have some meaning. They are not reliable, it isn't the person who apparently studies very fast is not always the best personnel, and the person who studies very slow is not always the best personnel, but the person who can't study at all is quite something else.

Now it's nothing very serious, you just make up your mind that we're going to expand this establishment up past the make point. For instance, the accumulated actions of an org like the Los Angeles org at this particular time, have not added up to moving itself into any zone of make. It got into the break point, and it's suddenly grabbed from every direction, and they're putting it back together again. But it is the money made by the individual staff member that determines your make/break point. And it's the old qual stat. And it actually isn't a term of sums of money. You can just lay it aside. I said that that was in that zone, and it is in that zone. You can lay that aside as being, that's only contemporary. Who knows but what tomorrow a barrel load of money will buy a loaf of bread and no more?

Now this will show up in your hatting actions. So the study rate, or the ability to apply the information which is studied is a factor in selecting personnel, which is often overlooked. So the org officer also, in his long range programs, in his daily study, and so on, should also have some kind of point stats and that sort of thing, so that he looks at it and sees who's doing well. I wouldn't go on that all by myself. I would take a personal observation of the post, combined with how the person is doing on his studying and so forth, makes a meaningful picture.

The make/break point and so on is dependent on the amount of money made by the individual staff member, and when it is too high you will find yourself in a break point, and if it's too low you'll find yourself in a break point. If you're counting on every individual staff member to pull in fifty-five hundred dollars a week for the organization, you are in too high a band. And there will be a little bit of a crack start showing up along that line, because you haven't put enough organization there to make that much money. And if it's too low, you've got too much and too inefficient an organization there, and its basis are too bad if it's down at the lower end of the band. And I can tell you that through 1969 the point of membership in orgs was sixteen to eighteen pounds per staff member. Let's look that over. That was the international, sixteen to eighteen pounds per staff member. That isn't even, wasn't even good pay for a Scientology org member out in the society. He couldn't even support himself at that, much less support the organization. So, that organization must have been absolutely product gone. They couldn't have had any product at all. Do you see what I mean? I'm giving you the actual data.

So maybe I'm beating that to death, but the study program has, I'll just point it out again. It has two factors that an organizing officer can get out of it. Not only does he make sure that it's occurring, but also is it being, is anybody getting anything done when he does study? Now it is not necessarily true that a bad personnel never goes to study. Now that is not a true factor either. Very often you find a personnel is too drowned on his post, and too responsible for his post and doing a good job on his post, within limits. And he will put his post ahead of his study. Well this, you can't, you can't be too critical of that. But, you can point out that the things he's having trouble with on his post are usually handled in study. And if he will afford a little bit of time to study he might have a little bit better time on his post. PR action.

Now at this time I instantly became very interested in this network. My ears went up, boom. And this was about, a little over a year ago that I saw what this trend was and I said that they're running organizationally at so low a level that they won't make it. And this is going to crack up somewhere along the line, so we'll bolster it up. And that was the LRH program number one, programs that you saw going out at that particular time were trying to lift that up, trying to lift that up and hold the fort until we could get a better basis of organization which could bring this about. The why of that was lack of products. They were not making products. And the products they were making were very often too poorly costed. Just, just insufficient volume, insufficient quality, and gave you insufficient viability. So that old qual stat will have to be restored.

That is very true. I've seen people struggle and have a hell of a time trying to get out, well let's say a project, something like that, when if, for the love of Pete they had ever spent any time whatsoever on studying the target policies or the data series, why it would all come straight. And the hours and hours they're busy wasting on trying to turn out flubby products could very better, much better be invested in some part time study on turning out a non-flubby product. So there's some point of adjustment in this. But you have to watch the progress of the staff member on his course, as well as his action on his job. It isn't too meaningful on the course, but it must occur. You're mainly interested, is it occurring?

Now, guess what? I don't know what it is at this exact instant, but all the members of the Sea Org, in orgs or not in orgs at this particular instant; well this is a figure that's taken from some considerable time ago actually measured up; but it counted all the people in the Sea Org and the gross income of the Sea Org, and it was fabulously high. The highest income per staff member ever made in the Sea Org was fifty-five hundred dollars. They were pretty high, heavily under strain too, but they were doing it.

You'll find some sort of silly situations develop. As an organizing officer you'll find all kinds of silly situations like, a person has started eight courses. The way to handle that of course is which one requires the least time to finish. "Go on, finish it. Which is the next one that requires the least time to finish? Finish it." Don't let him start a new course. So you're monitor of that.

Now the one, when I surveyed the thing, I said at this instant; not true; when I surveyed this last, and I don't guarantee the absolute accuracy of it and so on, but it was five hundred, about five hundred and twenty dollars for every person in the Sea Org on ships, in orgs and everything else, per Sea Org member, not per staff member. Now this shows there must be some outness.

Now, the third point that we're making here is the, handle any and all orders from the product officer within the time you're given. Well that of course would be a heavenly dream if one could, but one can try. One can try, and if one does not have an establishment officer as different than an org officer, it isn't likely that any long range program will ever come off. So an org officer who isn't operating with a good HCOAS and so forth, it's very, very improbable that he will be able to; he'll find himself after a while, a third month on the post he will find that he is following less and less of the orders which he is getting. But if he's backed up by a good HAS who's putting an establishment there behind him, as he goes along he will find out that it's easier and easier to do this. And the dream of it is, is you say, "Look man, that product officer says, 'And so Bob, and we expect a hundred and sixty-two preclears in the next week, and very good!" The org officer says, "You better hire a hundred and sixty-two auditors, and they're going to be so forth over the next year, of which you will have something on the order of thirty of them will have to be on the job this next week." And immediately why personnel simply sends them telegrams and tells the people to report to work, and the next Monday why they're all there report to work, 'cause they've already been hatted and genned in, don't you see?

Now one of the outnesses is, is that the Scientology org does not have sufficiently large packages to sell. It is selling right now hours, which might not be wise. It ought to sell results of some kind or another, it ought to sell packages. And it could rescue itself very easily by selling training, which isn't cut rate training.

It could be so easy as you simply tell the chairman of the auditor's association that next Monday you will need seventeen additional Class IVs, and they will all be there. You see? Well we're really dealing with an ideal scene. But you see you could work it up to that. It doesn't always have to be frantic.

Do you know that the Los Angeles organization was selling courses for as little as thirty(c)five dollars apiece, actual cash received? They had internal systems of cutatives, so that there was thisa and thata, and that consideration. And then just a failure to walk around and collect the money and so on. And a whole series of their invoices and so on were inspected a few months ago, and it showed that, that somebody just had rocks in his head. And the org was having a great deal of trouble, and they were selling courses, but having sold the course they weren't really delivering the course. But what they sold the course for was staggering. Through some kind of internal think or arrangements or peculiarities and so on; I'm not trying to brand one org that's being particularly bad. I imagine this was fairly general. You could get a Dianetics course, thirty(c)five dollars, and so on.

So that is a duty he has, and he tries to attain, as the org officer tries to handle the orders from the product officer. But the other thing is, is the org officer who waits for orders from the product officer is already four or five feet behind the product officer, and he ought to be four or five feet ahead of him. So he's got eight or ten feet that he has lost, and in view of the fact, which queen was it? He had to run like everything just to keep up in Alice In Wonderland. The org officer has to run like everything just to stay even with the product officer. What he have to do when he gets behind him? See the burst of speed and the demand would be, would be fabulous, so it's; he isn't then just waiting for orders. If he just sits around and wait for the product officer's orders, why right away, and so on.

Now how they managed this I don't know. But there could be, even when you have a package, and even when the package will bring in adequate income to support the org, things can happen internally in the organization, so the resource never, the valuable final product doesn't occur. Well that is of great interest.

I always like to be in a saucy position as a subordinate, in a subordinate post. Very saucy, impudent. Actually it takes people aback. It's about the only way you can occupy it. I don't think very many people know how to occupy a subordinate post actually, if the org officer's subordinate to the product officer, it's an art. It's an actual art. And one time I thought I was; I've told you this story before. But one time I thought, "What is this. Every place I go and everything I do, I always wind up in command of it. I'm appointed the command of it. Is there something wrong with me? Can it be..." this was decades ago, you see, and I was saying was there something wrong with me? I mean is there something peculiar, that I have to be in charge of everything, that I have to be the boss? I guess I'd been reading Freudian literature or something. And, "There must be something wrong with me," and so on. And I would think, "Well, I don't know. I don't remember really, I have occasionally made a bid for that sort of thing, but there must be something wrong."

Now one of the reasons why you have sophisticated technology at this particular time is because of the factors which I have been telling you, and also because of the difficulties of managing from a command position. These difficulties are sufficiently great that they're almost, were almost impossible. So therefore we had to have much higher, much more sophisticated technology, and 1970 was the year in which this was very carefully researched and developed. But your make/break part of your organization is improved to the degree that the policy and technology of Scientology is known and employed in the operation of that organization. And this is your first factor that you have to learn.

And I was very, very happy one time, because I was physically bunged up and wasn't supposed to be around at all, to be put in a subordinate capacity. And I was a third in command. I found it was a breeze. I was never so happy in my life as to discover I was just an excellent subordinate. It was just a piece of cake. I didn't have to be in command of things at all, and so forth. And in that subordinate capacity I was in command of a ship. Didn't want it, didn't want anything to do with it. Actually that was the mock-up.

With some horror just a few minutes ago, just a few minutes before the lecture, I was looking at an otherwise originated policy letter which caved in a corner of one of our finance systems. And now I have got to run this down, and round this up, and cancel this thing out in a hurry.

But inevitably, and so forth, people come around and ask me if they were supposed to do what the captain said, and so on. I said, "No, man. Cool it off. Don't bother me," and so on. I found out the popular valence at that time was a gold brick, and I've had chief petty officers and that sort of thing say to me, "Mr. Hubbard, you are just about the greatest gold brick I have ever seen in the entire navy." Pride, you know? Admiration. And that was because I've, apparently, didn't ever work, and was able to get my job done on the time when somebody else was eating sandwiches, see? It would just be the speed of internal and immediate organization, don't you see? So it didn't appear to be very stressful. And got all kinds of things done left and right. And the way to be a perfectly impudent insouciant, utterly, completely tolerable, but utterly and awfully left alone by seniors subordinate, where they're very nice to you at parties and so forth, but just a little bit, just a little bit on the keeveeve where you were concerned is, "Oh I've done that. Yes, well thank you very much sir. Thank you, thank you. Yes, we handled that, thank you." Only it has to be a fact. Your answers to an order are always past tense.

Now you occasionally in the field will get an order, rarely, but you'll get them. An order or a policy or a directive or an ED which runs contrary to your production, and which makes your production difficult. You would be very remiss in your duties if you did not instantly call this to attention, rapidly. There is even a policy by which a destructive order can be halted on the lines.

So you see how this fits into an org officer/product relationship? A product officer storms in and he says, "There's going to be a hundred and sixteen pcs next week, and what are we going to do about it?" "Well yes, we actually got them and they're all lined up. All the auditors are lined up, we've got the auditing rooms and so on. We're going to use the preclear's own rented rooms when they come in, for auditing rooms and so on. They're all straightened up. We've got five new people on tech services, and they're being genned in this week. As a matter of fact they should be hatted now, as a matter of fact. So, thank you." "Thanks for telling me. It's confirmed, is that right? Oh good, thanks for confirming it. There we are."

For instance, in the middle of the Dianetics course installation, in the Dianetics course you have a statement, when it was released, "Do not drop any Scientology action which you have at this particular time." A couple of PLs, not written by me, and some directives and so forth went out, and in the southern United States you had a belief; the south western United States there was a belief that if anybody audited Scientology grades on anyone that he was committing a high crime, and would be liable to comm ev. Now who the hell put that out, I don't know. And yet that was into the teeth of the actual statement made on the HDC tape when it was made, and on the ED which released it. And for god sakes, don't drop any Scientology actions you are doing, just because we're giving you Dianetics.

You would just be amazed at what this starts doing, except you have to be on the ball and you have to do your job the whole way. And when you do your job the whole way as an org officer, you're always in that position. Somebody says, "What the hell are we going to do? We're going to have this, this, we're going to have this new bunch of students. We're going to run this special course. And the literature and so on has been mailed, and what are we going to do for chairs and that sort of thing?" "They're being made now, sir." Only probably in the org officer/product officer relationship you wouldn't even use sir. Too close. But what an enviable position, and what a fearsome presence.

So what was the broad spread action? To drop every single Scientology action that was being done. There was even a couple of policy letters originated that got by and got circulated, which canceled those things out, and which messes it up, oh my god! So you must assume that somewhere along your lines you will have somebody who finds it very satisfactory to interrupt forward progress. The writing of the current fashion, the writing of the current fad does more to destroy your stats than anything else you could do.

Now somebody else tries to occupy your boots, he's got a near impossibility. "Bessie Ann is off her post." "I know. I sent her home. George will be there in about five minutes to take care of it." But operate as a product officer, how would you like to have an org officer that was like that? Wouldn't that be, wouldn't that be a piece of cake? Wouldn't that be a piece of cake, huh? "Our GI target next month, our GI target next month is twenty-seven thousand a week." Alright, that's all the org officer'd have to hear. And he'd say, "That will take so much so and so, and so and so, and that's on, now take some on to A, and we'd better do so and so and so." And say, "The people in charge of financial planning, you'd better get your financial planning jacked up along the line and so on, because the promotion level is going to be so and so and so and so. We're going to send out very heavy mailing, and we need a whole bunch of new people here, their categories are so and so and so and so."

Yesterday it was true too, and yet man, because of his immediate concern with present time is continuously throwing away what he has in return for what he hopes to have. And it's a sort of an idiot game. Your resources are policy and HCOBs. Do you know that this moment we have just put on a check sheet, I don't know the date of this congress, it must be in the early sixties. Ken could tell me. The State of Man Congress. That's it, '59. We have just put it on a check sheet for a very high upper level course, The State of Man Congress. You haven't any idea of the, of the, what you could do with the resources. If you don't know what those resources are, why of course they won't be utilized, and you ride off in some high hopes of something. Because all the auditors in the HGC flub a Dianetic session, all of a sudden why some brand new technique is looked upon to solve all the cases in the neighborhood, any one of which would solve if anybody ever read the textbook and taught anybody the textbook on Dianetics in the first place.

Now the product officer would actually be in his own rights to do a whole write up of how he was going to get that product. A weekly GI of twenty-seven thousand by next month. See, he'd be of his own right, he could plan it all out and figure it out and so on, but he'd have to decide how he was going to render that much service, and the big idea would be expected from him. "What's the big idea you're going to put out into the public that's going to bring that many men in, Mr. Bones?" See?

The highest breakthrough we have at this moment is covered in full, in the early sixties. And the only thing that's happened with this breakthrough is we have used it to its totality, and have audited it with some new methods of handling a session, which make it come off smoothly enough. Only one new principle has been developed, but there are two new methods of auditing to make it smoother. But the whole theory of it is back there in the early sixties. Now that's amazing, isn't it? Now you're basically in the business of knowledge, as the one thing that you are putting out. And it's knowledge of self. So whatever other valuable final product you have is knowledge. And you would be absolutely startled, but a fellow who is a Class X in training at this moment got stopped by me the other day, and given, when he was asking me questions about why something was happening about a low TA, was told very directly, very directly and very forcefully that he'd damn well better go back and read the Original Thesis. He hadn't ever understood what happened in this session. I've had C/Ss who couldn't audit because they did not know the basic books. Therefore, you then basically are purveying knowledge. So how do you expect to succeed without your mimeo files? How do you expect to succeed without your book store absolutely crammed to the gunnels? How do you expect to succeed without every tape in that place, and packages for sale, that you possibly can lay your hands on? Because you're basically purveying knowledge.

You just saw one going out of here on and FBDO, and so on. That's a product officer penchant. What's he going to sell, and so on? One just went out of here. It's a big idea, they're all supposed to come in and get checked out for. So on. We've used it before, terribly successful. Would drive the people down on an org. So the product officer's mainly in the business of driving people in on the org. And the org officer's job is to put an org there that'll handle them. And he does that by preventing the decline of the existing org, and forcing the HCOAS to put enough org there to build it up. And that's the way you do the one, two, three. So the product officer, he's got to go and wham, wham, wham, wham, wham! And he never thinks about how many people he drives in on the org.

When we went over a whole series of franchises we picked out the most successful franchises. And we asked the fellow to write up what made it so successful. At the beginning of ever meeting that he had with his public on a PE level he read them a policy letter, almost regardless of what it was all about. And he got tremendous, he was just a howling success. So now you start comparing this with empty mimeograph files, with packs with holes in them, and you will see what causes your make/break point. You are not spending your primary asset, which is knowledge. And we're not dealing with the kind of knowledge which was true in '61 but was not true in '62. There's very little of that on the track, and it was all corrected out not too long ago. There are tapes beyond belief, the libraries and so forth which we have.

And the org officer takes a look at this and says, "Let's see. The GI in January was two thousand a week, and in February it was three thousand a week, and in March was four thousand a week. I wonder why that little drop occurred there in March. Well I know why it dropped, because we'd already doubled our GI. Now, if that's increasing at the rate of two thousand a week it's probably a slight curve. It probably isn't, so we'll just stretch it out the rest of the year and find out what the GI's going to be by next January. Ah, next January at two thousand and so forth, we're going to be dealing with something on the order of about a twenty thousand GI per week, and that takes that many preclears, that many auditors, that many E-Meters, that many book sales, that much promotion money, this, that, the other thing. Well we'd better get on the ball. What actions are we taking at this very moment to train up auditors in this particular area, to go to work for the org?" So that's how he keeps ahead of the product officer.

So your organizing officer, your organizing officer must recognize that his first asset that he looks on as goodies is all that space taken up there with mimeo files. All that space taken up there with packs. And all of that space taken up in the book store with basic books, and so on. There's resources, and that's where his resources begin. His resources don't even begin with people. The people are all over the place, but they're worth nothing to anybody unless the knowledge is put out. And that is the basic business you're in.

He can do an extrapolation. He can figure out what is the load, and what is the load going to be, just by extending the curve. Now you also extend the down curve, and he will find out what the load is going to be. It's going to be zero. So he's not going to have any organization at all if he extends the GI in some of these orgs a little bit further.

And if an org officer mistakes, you look it over, you will agree with me. I'm not just beating drum for anything of the sort. You look it over here, and you'll find out that you've got a guy in off the street, and you put him on as a clerk or a course administrator. Realize that you don't look on him as valuable at all until he has been checked out and trained, and this. Realize that you always automatically and very often very mistakenly make your Class VIII the HES, because he knows more, knowledge. So knowledge is what makes the difference. And the organizing officer is basically dealing with knowledgeable people, and so his basic asset and basic resource of course is knowledge. And he takes off from there, and then he gets that applied to people, and then the next thing you know, he'll see a thirty-two story building Scientology in gold letters across the front of it. It's more the org officer's basic hat than it is the product officer's, because the product officer doesn't look on a book ordered from some place or another as a product, he looks on a book sold as a product. But the book ordered is the organizing officer's worry.

Alright, now an org officer picks up any outnesses in the establishment of the organization, and handles and reports to the product officer what was done. So there's a back flow here. And where large actions are required he's got to write up a CSW of what was found, and recommended handling and so forth, to the product officer. Now we're still talking about a lineal line flow. That is where the product officer is more or less doubling in brass with the CO or executive director, see? So he would say, "Look, this is what we're going to have," or, "this is what we can't have. But this is what I can put in, and this is what I can't put in." In other words, he's got to give some kind of a back flow here, to inform, keep the product officer informed as to the facilities. And this comes under the heading actually of what you call capability. And the product officer has to have some idea of his org's capability, and some idea of his personnel's capability. Not necessarily to put a limitation on the thing, but so he can improve it or extend it.

Now of course the product officer could say, "Look, I can't sell any books until some books have been ordered and delivered." New York is failing at this moment. Everyone walking around in circles wondering, "Why is New York failing?" I happen to know the missing books that they do not have in New York, and they're all of the basic ones. They're just not there, they don't have them. We should be at Flag bureau, and probably will be, and there is an aide at this moment in charge of Pubs org pushing like screaming crazy to get a lot of basic titles back in print, and to get them into print in the U.S. The world has all of a sudden decided not only to be exclusive with its currency, but also with its literature. U.S. books can't come into Europe, European books can't go into the U.S. now. Very difficult. They can get in on individual book sales, but trying to get them in in any quantity at all is very terrible, and copy rights go to pieces if you do, and so on. So you're up against this.

Now the capability is in the hands of the organizing officer. What is he capable of? Now that takes resources, and we get into the whole subject of resources. They're already mentioned in the, in I think the org series, and so on. There's resources. What are the resources you have? And that's a product officer's, that's a product officers black dog of Karnak. He seldom has the resources to do what he's supposed to do, so actually the org officer should keep him advised of his resources.

So what, what basically, what basically is the basic resource? The individual walks in off the street, until he has been checked out, until he's been genned in, until he knows the administrative knowledge of the organization and so forth, is not a resource. He is just a resource to the point where he may be worth something, he may not be worth something. Now when he's checked out, so therefore knowledge is a dominant factor in the success of an org officer. And I want to point this out, not because of any other reason than when it isn't there he will fail. Time and time and time again this has been proved over and over and over and over.

Well what are resources? How many auditors can we hire? How many course supervisors are there? How much auditing room do we have? And that sort of thing, these are our resources. I'll give you an idea right now. I had to solve a very bad problem administratively. A very bad problem. Something came up and so on, some stats were going down. I had to look around at once and do a resources estimation. Now that actually is an organizing officer has to answer up loud and clear, what resources do we have, because the resources I needed was a CO/product officer and an org officer, and an assistant production aid. Now that is an assistant production aid. And I had, what the devil? Where could we get them? And the resources, we were able to utilize the resources we had at that particular moment to save the situation, and then I actually rewrote the program just last night, to gain further resources. We were going to throw a couple away, so we all of a sudden got those, and we're going to utilize those. So this is resources. Do you follow? What are your resources? The ability to return things to the ideal scene, it's in the data series, the discussion of resources. How do you return things to the ideal scene depends on what resources you have.

So in just winding this up I want to put this, put this home. As far as, as far as the product officer is concerned, he won't get anyplace unless he's got some tapes going, every night, every night, every night, every night, every night, every night, every night, every night, every night, every night. We don't care whether he was running an HAS course or PE course or something, he ought to have some tapes going, every night, every night, every night, every night. Public tapes, on and on and on.

Now, you say, "Well," and so on. Somebody's making a resurgence in an org right now. They've gotten a hold of Ron's Journal '67, and they're just playing it every night. And it seems to me like they're making a terrible scarcity of the situation. But then we found out that the only tapes available were a mixed bag. A mixed bag. There were some excerpts from some various congresses, somebody picks all the cherries off the ice cream, you know? Or just one or two cherries off several ice creams, ruins several ice creams to have three cherries, or something. I don't know what the think is. But we're trying right now at the Flag bureau to do everything we can to bust these lines and to get distribution and so on. It might be done faster, it might be done this, it might be done that. We have certain various logistic problems and so on which we have to overcome. We're trying to make this thing available, but unless somebody at the other end of the line in the person of the org officer recognizes clearly that he is dealing with knowledge, and if he hasn't got it in book form, and if he hasn't got it in pack form, and if he can't make up packs out of any mimeograph set up, he's had it.

Now it's true enough, he could probably get a few sets or one set of an OEC course. He could get that set, and you can see now the trying to do something with this bound set. Well he'd have to have several sets. Well good, so he could have several sets, but it doesn't give him actually the loose leafed stuff that he needs. Therefore, an org officer's whipped at once that he doesn't know what he's doing, and he can't immediately impart and directly and immediately gen in and impart to his staff members rapidly. And of course he could never back up a product officer.

And if you want to know what is wrong with the make/break point of any organization, is Scientology orgs have dropped low on their resources of knowledge that they can hand around and use, at this particular moment, and the knowledge which is in practice and which is available to them as a practiced knowledge in the hands of auditors and instructors inside the org and in their neighborhood.

Thank you. Thank you very much. Good night now.