No matching fragments found in this document.
This book
written by L. Ron Hubbard
was donated by:
Church of Scientology of Lausanne
Rue Madeleine 10
CH -1003 Lausanne
Switzerland
TO THE READER:
Scientology is a religious philosophy containing pastoral
counseling procedures intended to assist an individual to gain
greater knowledge of self. The Mission of the Church of
Scientology is a simple one-to help the individual acheive
greater self-confidence and personal integrity, thereby enabling
him to really trust and respect himself and his fellow man. The
attainment of the benefits and goals of Scientology requires each
individual's positive participation, as only through his own
efforts can he achieve these.
This is part of the religious literature and works of the
Founder of Scientology, L. Ron Hubbard. It is presented to the
reader as part of the record of his personal research into Life,
and should be construed only as a written report of such
research and not as a statement of claims made by the Church
or the author.
Scientology and its sub-study, Dianetics, as practiced by the
Church, address only the spiritual side of Man. Although the
Church, as are all churches, is free to engage in spiritual
healing, it does not, as its primary goal is increased knowledge
and personal integrity for all. For this reason, the Church does
not wish to accept individuals who desire treatment of physical
illness or insanity, but refers these to qualified specialists in
other organizations who deal in these matters.
The Hubbard Electrometer is a religious artifact used in the
Church confessional. It, in itself, does nothing, and is used by
Ministers only, to assist parishioners in locating areas of
spiritual distress or travail.
We hope the reading of this book is only the first stage of a
personal voyage of discovery into the positive and effective
religion of Scientology.
THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Church of Scientology
This book belongs to _____________________________________________
Date _________
The
Organization Executive
Course
AN ENCYCLOPEDIA OF SCIENTOLOGY POLICY
by
L. Ron Hubbard
FOUNDER OF DIANETICS AND SCIENTOLOGY
BASIC
STAFF
VOLUME
0
PUBLICATIONS ORGANIZATION
Published by
the
CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY OF CALIFORNIA
Publications Organization U.S.
483S Fountain Ave., East Annex
Los Angeles, California 90029
The Church of Scientology is a Non-Profit Organization.
Dianetics� and Scientology� are Registered Names.
Copyright �1970, 1971, 1972, 1973,1974
1950,1951,1952,1953,1954,1955,1956,1957,1958,1959
1960,1961,1962,1963,1964,1965,1966,1967,1968,1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
Scientology is an Applied Religious Philosophy
No part of this book may be reproduced
without permission of the copyright owner.
Reprinted March 1980
Complete Set ISBN 0-88404-03 3-X
Volume 0 ISBN 0-88404-025-9
The E-Meter is not intended or effective for the diagnosis,
treatment or prevention of any disease.
Dianetics and Scientology are the trademarks ofL. Ron Hubbard
in respect of his published works.
Printed in the United States of America by Kingsport Press, Inc.
CONTENTS
8 Sept. 1969 The Org Exec Course Introduction
1
21 Mar. 1967 Org Exec Course 3
20 Sept. 1969 Stability 4
4 Oct. 1969 Organizational Enturbulence 5
9 Nov. 1968 Important-Standard Admin 5
HOW TO STUDY
Vital Data on Study 9
9 Sept. 1969 How to Study this Course
11
27 July 1969 What is a Checksheet
12
26 Aug. 1965 Scien to logy Training-Twin Checkouts
13
4 Oct. 1964 Theory Check-o ut Data (reissued 21 May 1967)
16
11 Oct. 1967 Clay Table Training (HCO B)
18
18 Sept. 1967 Study-Complexity and Confronting
19
STAFF ORIENTATION
25 Apr. 1963 Duties of a Staff Member
21
20 Oct. 1961 Non-Scientology Staff (revised 7 March 1967)
23
5 Feb. 1969 Press Policy-Code of a Scientologist (revised 15 May 1973)
25
6 Mar. 1969 Scientology is a Religion
26
10 Jan. 1968 Politics, Freedom from (reissued from LRH Sec ED 56 Int)
28
13 Feb. 1965 Politics
29
21 Sept. 1958 Theory of Scientology Organizations
(HCO B reissued as HCO P/L 22 Oct. 1962)
31
7 Feb. 1965 Keeping Scientology Working (reissued 15 Junel970,28 Jan. 1973)
35
14 Feb. 1965 Safeguarding Technology (reissued 7 June 1967)
40
19 Oct. 1968 When a student has finished a course ...
41
31 May 1968 Auditors 42
21 Feb. 1964 Staff Regulations-Auditing versus Job
43
10 Aug. 1964 Good Workers
44
26 May 1961 Quality Counts (reissued on 21 June 1967)
45
29 May 1961 Quality and Admin in Central Orgs
46
20 July 1966 Staff Status (amended 19 March 1968)
48
22 Aug. 1966 Addendum to HCO P/L 20 July 1966 "Staff Status"
49
3 Oct. 1960 Holiday Pay and Sick Leave 50
10 Nov. 1969 Former Staff Members
51
14 Dec. 1969 Org Protection
52
29 Mar. 1965 Excerpts from HCO P/L 9 Nov. 1964 & 26 Nov. 1964 (revised)
53
21 Mar. 1965 Staff Members Auditing Outside PCs
54
4 Jan. 1966 Staff Meeting 55
18 Apr. 1965 Contests and Prizes
56
EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES
2 June 1959 Purchasing Liability of Staff Members
57
22 Sept. 1965 Keys 57
8 Sept. 1965 Supply Officer
58
15 Feb. 1964 The Equipment of Organizations
59
3 Nov. 1965 Equipment 61
12 Oct. 1967 Operational, Definition of
62
HATS
28 Feb. 1957 Hats (HCO B)
63
5 May 1959 Policy on Sec EDs and Hats 64
15 Sept. 1959 Hats and Other Folders .
65
1 July 1965 Hats, The Reason for 66
1 Jan. 1968 Hat Write-ups and Folders-Inspection of Hat Folders
68
7 Jan. 1966 Leaving Post-Writing Your Hat
70
7 Nov. 1962 Central Organizations Efficiency (reissue of P/L 22 May 1959)
71
11 Apr. 1961 How to do a Staff Job
73
12 Sept. 1967 Post, Handling of
74
22 Feb. 1968 Ethics and Admin-Slow Admin
76
4 May 1968 Handling Situations 77
PROMOTION AND THE ORGANIZATION IMAGE
16 Apr. 1965 Handling the Public Individual
78
17 Nov. 1965 The Basic Principles of Promotion
82
20 Nov. 1965 The Promotional Actions of an Organization
84
22 May 1968 Prom Action of LRH Communicator 90
23 May 1969 Public Divisions Promotional Actions
91
24 Aug. 1965 Cleanliness of Quarters and Staff-Improve Our Image
94
17 June 1969 The Org Image
95
11 Dec. 1969 Appearances in Public Divs
98
COMMUNICATION
6 Nov. 1958 The Three Basket System
104
15 Nov. 1958 The Three Basket System
see-104
6 July 1959 Outflow 100
4 Jan. 1966 Scientology Organizations Communications System: Dispatches
(includes Pub. Div. Flash Colours per HCO P/L 23 May 1969)
101
30 Mar. 1966 The Three Basket System (revised reissue of P/L 15 Nov.
1958) 104
22 June 1964 Organization Posts-Two Types (reissue of HCO B 24 Apr.
1959) 105
10 Apr. 1963 What an Executive Wants on his Lines (reissue of P/L 26
May 1959) 106
31 Jan. 1961 Message Placement
108
21 Sept. 1961 Despatch Lines
109
29 Mar. 1965 Routing Despatches
110
2 Apr. 1965 Heed Heavy Traffic Warnings 111
26 May 1965 Communications-Registered Mail
112
11 June 1965 Correction to HCO P/L 26 May 1965
112
10 July 1965 Lines and Terminals-Routing
113
28 July 1965 Handling of Photographs
114
17 July 1966 Despatches, Speed Up
115
17 Oct. 1966 Stale Date Reports
116
13 May 1968 Telex Comm Clarity 117
15 Apr. 1968 Speed and accuracy of relay Telex traffic
117
30 Sept. 1969 Orders of the Day
118
DEV-T (DEVELOPED TRAFFIC)
2 July 1959 Developed Traffic-The Delirium Tremens of Central Orgs 119
7 July 1959 Staff Auditing Requirement 120
19 Aug. 1959 How to Handle Work (HCO B reissued as HCO P/L 29 May 1963)
122
4 Sept. 1959 Completed Staff Work (C.S.W.)-How to Get Approval
of Actions and Projects (reissued on 21 Nov. 1962) 123
17 Nov. 1964 Offline and Offpolicy-Your Full In Basket 125
31 Jan. 1965 Dev-T 131
8 Feb. 1965 Dev-T Analysis 134
13 Oct. 1965 Dev-T Data-Executive Responsibility 136
5 Jan. 1968 Dev-T Series, Part of-Overfilled In Basket-Bad News 137
27 Jan. 1969 Dev-T Summary List 138
30 Jan. 1969 Dev-T Summary List Additions 142
27 Oct. 1969 Admin Know-How No. 23-Dev-T 145
4 Nov. 1969 Dev-T Graphed 147
ETHICS
18 June 1968 Ethics 153
7 Mar. 1965 Offenses & Penalties 154
17 Mar. 1965 Rights of a Staff Member, Students and Preclears to
Justice 157
17 Mar. 1965 Administering Justice 159
27 Mar. 1965 The Justice of Scientology-Its Use and Purpose
Being a Scientologist 160
5 Apr. 1965 Scientology Makes a Safe Environment 162
10 Apr. 1965 Dismissals, Transfers and Demotions 163
29 Apr. 1965 Petition 164
26 May 1965 Petitions 165
1 May 1965 Staff Member Reports 166
16 May 1965 Indicators of Oi^s 169
15 Aug. 1965 Things that Shouldn't Be 172
27 Aug. 1965 Housing-Staff, Students, Preclears 172
1 Sept. 1965 Ethics Protection 173
15 Nov. 1965 Reporting of Theft and Action to be Taken 175
15 Dec. 1965 Ethics Chits 176
6 Mar. 1966 Rewards and Penalties 177
5 Mar. 1968 Administrative Know-How-Job Endangerment Chits 181
26 Dec. 1968 The Third Party Law 183
24 Feb. 1969 Justice 185
7 Dec. 1969 Ethics, The Design of 187
CONDITIONS
23 Sept. 1967 New Post Formula-The Conditions Formulas
189
7 Feb. 1970 Danger Condition-2nd Formula (adds to 23 Sept. 1967)
193
5 Jan. 1968 Conditions Orders-Executive Ethics
194
30 Apr. 1965 Emergency, State of
195
1 Sept. 1965 Mailing List Policies
198
30 Sept. 1965 Statistics for Divisions
200
15 Jan. 1966 Hold the Form of the Org
Don't Bring about Danger Conditions
202
16 Jan. 1966 Danger Condition 204
19 Jan. 1966 Danger Condition, Warning
The Junior Who Accepts Orders from Everyone
207
1 Feb. 1966 Danger Conditions-Inspections by Executive Secretaries,
How to do Them 208
19 Jan. 1966 Danger Condition-Responsibilities of Declaring
211
1 Feb. 1966 Statistics, Actions to Take-Statistic Changes
213
23 Feb. 1966 Appointments and Promotions
215
28 Feb. 1966 Danger Condition Data-Why Organizations Stay Small
216
6 Nov. I966 Admin Know-How-Statistic Interpretative
221
12 Feb. 1967 Admin Know-How-The Responsibilities of Leaders
225
24 July 1967 Fixed Public Consumption of Product
235
6 Oct. 1967 Condition of Liability
237
18 Oct. 1967 Conditions on Orgs or Divisions or Depts-Clarification
239
18 Oct. 1967 Failure to Follow or Apply Condition
240
20 Oct. 1967 Admin Know-How-Conditions, How to Assign
241
23 Oct. 1967 Enemy Formula (modifies 6 Oct. 1967)
245
8 Feb. 1968 Admin Know-How No. 18-Statistic Rationalization
246
14 Mar. 1968 Corrected Table of Conditions
247
16 Oct. 1968 Treason Formula
247
13 Feb. 1969 Ethics Protection Conditions, Blue Star, Green Star, Gold
Star 248
20 Apr. 1969 Hats, Not Wearing
249
THE PATTERN OF THE ORGANIZATION AND THE SOURCE OF ITS INCOME
1 May 1965 Organization-The Design of the Organization
250
26 Oct. 1967 The Public Divisions
252
15 Dec. 1969 Class of Orgs
254
8 Feb. 1968 Sea Org Zones of Planning
255
9 Dec. 1969 LRH ED 49 INT-Organization Program No. 1
256
6 Dec. 1969 How to Clear Your Community Illustrations
261
15 Sept. 1965 Only Accounts Talks Moriey
275
21 Nov. 1968 Senior Policy
277
30 July 1968 Gross Income Senior Datum
277
18 Nov. 1969 Central Files, Value of-The Gross Incpme of the Org and
Why 278
11 Jan. 1968 ED 805 INT-Speed of Service
280
19 Mar. 1968 Service
281
EXECUTIVE ACTION AND DUTIES
25 Mar. 1963 A Model Hat for an Executive (reissue of HCOB 19 Sept.
1958) 282
25 Oct. 1968 Important-Admin Know How
285
7 Mar. 1969 Organisation 287
19 Dec. 1969 Executive Duties
289
29 Mar. 1965 The Fast Flow System
291
6 Feb. 1968 Organization-The Flaw 292
23 Apr. 1965 Problems 293
1 May 1965 Order Board and Time Machine
296
30 Apr. 1969 Orders and Responsibility
298
15 Dec. 1969 Orders, Query of
299
19 July 1965 Policy, How to Handle People who Quote Policy . . .
301
26 Jan. 1969 Compliance Reports
see Vol. 7
4 Nov. 1969 Compliance vs Discussion
302
PROGRAMMING AN ORGANIZATION-PLANNING AND TARGETS
12 Sept. 1959 Programming (HCO B reissued as HCO P/L 23 Oct. 1969)
334
3 Nov. 1966 Administrative Know-How-Leadership
303
4 Dec. 1966 Admin Know-How-Expansion-Theory of Policy
305
24 Dec. 1966 Admin Know-How-How to Programme an Org
311
24 Dec. 1966 Admin Know-How-How to Programme an Org
Corrections and Addition
316
14 Jan. 1969 OT Orgs
318
16 Jan. 1969 Targets, Types of
321
18 Jan. 1969 Planning and Targets
324
24 Jan. 1969 Target Types
326
24 Jan. 1969 Purpose & Targets
327
14 Sept. 1969 Admin Know-How No. 22-The Key Ingredients
328
23 Oct. 1969 Programming (reissue of HCO B 12 Sept. 1959)
334
POLICY LETTERS AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTIVES
5 Mar. 1965 Policy: Source of
336
13 Mar. 1965 The Structure of Organization-What is Policy?
338
7 May 1965 Cancellation-Mimeo Distribution Changes
345
8 May 1965 Flash Colours and Designations
346
13 Sept. 1965 Issue Authority Required for Mimeo
349
4 Jan. 1966 Office of LRH-Sec EDs and HCO Exec Ltrs
350
3 Feb. 1966 Sec ED Change in Issue and Use
351
3 Feb. 1966 Sec EDs-Definition and Purpose-Cross Divisional Orders
352
13 Feb. 1966 Sec ED OK (Continued)-Pol Ltr Changes and Origins
354
13 Mar. 1966 Orders, Precedence of Personnel, Titles of
356
10 Aug. 1966 SecEDs, Executive Director & Guardian (amends 7 May 1965)
360
6 Sept. 1966 ED 1 INT-Renaming of SecEDs
361
20 Oct. 1966 Signatures of Pol Ltrs
362
9 May 1968 Executive Directive from L. Ron Hubbard
363
13 May 1969 How to Submit a Proposed Policy Letter
364
14 Apr. 1969 Bulletin and Policy Letter Distribution
365
APPENDIX
12 Oct. 1962 Basic Purposes of a Scientology Organization
368
YOUR POST
A post in a Scientology Organization isn't a job.
It's a trust and a crusade.
We're free men and women-probably the last free
men and women on Earth. Remember, we'll have to
come back to Earth some day no matter what
"happens" to us.
If we don't do a good job now we may never get
another chance.
Yes, I'm sure that's the way it is.
So we have an organization, we have a field we
must support, we have a chance.
That's more than we had last time night's curtain
began to fall on freedom.
So we're using that chance.
An organization such as ours is our best chance to
get the most done. So we're doing it!
L. RON HUBBARD
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 8 SEPTEMBER 1969
Remimeo
Item 1 OEC
Chksht
THE ORG EXEC COURSE INTRODUCTION
This course contains the basic laws of organization.
Primarily intended for Scientology Organization Executives, its policy
letters are
slanted toward a Scientology Org (short for organization). However, it
covers any organization and contains fundamentals vital to any successful
or profitable activity.
This course also applies to the individual. Any individual has his 7 (or
9) Divisions
and his 21 (or 27) Departments. Where one or more of these is missing in
his conduct
of life he will be to that degree an unsuccessful individual.
No matter how organized any company, society or political entity will be
as
unsuccessful as it has these functions missing.
Thus this is not just the Scientology idea of how an org should run-most
of it is
vital basic discovery.
Man did not really know the principles of organization any more than he
knew
what made his mind work before Dianetics was published.
A very small amount of the material on this course has crept into
general use, just
as a very few of the principles of Dianetics and Scientology are now an
"Everybody
knows---". Survival is now conceded as the basic principle of existence.
Universities now know Man can change IQ and Personality. As time goes on
more and
more of the technology "leaks" into general knowledge. But it takes a long
time for all
Mankind to know a whole tech in this fashion.
To date the Scientology discoveries in organization are known to a very
few. But
some of the more general principles are already creeping into business
practice.
Not long ago, for instance, a close friend of the president of the U.S.
was given
the Policy Letter about "Don't reward a down statistic". A few days later
the president
used it in his new relief programme policy.
Of course there are hundreds of other "Pol Ltrs" that haven't been shown
to the
friend of the president. It takes years for new ideas to "leak" into public
consciousness. It took five years for the medical professors in
universities to begin to
teach that aberration could come from the "birth engram". In 18 years, only
a handful
of medical doctors accepted that mental image pictures caused aberration.
In 19 years
only a few medical doctors could also audit.
Therefore, if one were fully conversant with the full subject and all
its principles
he would appear to be a magician, a miracle worker.
If anyone knew the Org Exec Course fully and could practise it, he could
completely reverse any down trending company or country. Indeed, here and
there at
this writing men have done so.
It could be argued or pleaded that this huge body of data should be made
into
texts capable of general application by businesses and countries. The one
effort to
republish these policies in other terms so badly altered the material that
it became a
hopeless bog even though attempted by a very successful business man. He
himself was
applying the originals direct to his company and it soaringly became rich.
Then he
decided to rewrite it all, greatly altered and edited, for his employees
and his business
went on a toboggan slide. His correct action would have been to send his
employees to
take the same course he took-this very Org Exec Course. And let them adapt
what
they now knew to fit their own posts and activities. Instead, he cut them
off from
source and what he wrote for them was only as much as he had gotten out of
the
course from his own viewpoint.
At least there are Scientology Orgs around which are successful living
models of
these policies and org form.
The only real trouble these orgs ever have is not a failure to apply
policy but a
failure of the whole staff to know policy.
Wherever a portion of a Scientology org is in confusion you will find
that the staff
members in that portion have not done the Org Exec Course. They may know a
few
policies. But outside that anyone can come along and say "this is the
policy" or "what
you're doing is against policy" and being ignorant of policy they develop
the idea of
some vast unknown area and go downhill.
The name Org Exec Course is probably a misnomer. Certainly the
executives of
the org should know it well. But the staff member who doesn't know it is at
effect. If
he knew his OEC data he would be able to defend himself and get his own
"show on
the road" in his portion of the org.
ANY FAILURE OF THESE BASICS AND POLICIES IS IGNORANCE OF
THEM.
When you know them all, not just a few, it makes a whole intelligent
picture.
It is rather exciting to be able to cut through the superstition of
yesterday's
organizations and deal in basic down to earth fundamentals.
When you understand all the policies on this course, you will understand
organization itself, no matter to what you apply it. You will also be able
to recognize
mis-organization when you see it.
And I assure you that in a mis-organized society the individual loses
out.
Even dictatorships come about only because the citizen doesn't know
basic
organization. Thus authoritarian rule exists only to the degree that its
subjects are
ignorant of the fundamentals of organization.
Those fundamentals, even if specialized to fit a Scientology
organization, exist in
this, the Org Exec Course.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH: ldm.ei.rd
Copyright �1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 21 MARCH 1967
Qual Div for action
Ore Exec Course
Info Exec Sees
Sees
ORG EXEC COURSE
Effective date April 15, 1967
In addition to checkouts on HCO Pol Ltrs the Org Exec Course is expanded
to
include the following (with the former materials mentioned again):
1. A review of all former other admin activities pre-Scientology and
disagree-
ments all off. Also Remedy A & B on Admin words and subjects to floating
needle.
2. Complete staff hat (regardless of staff status) with all comm colour
flashes,
how to write desp, comm centre, etc. Drills between 2 students or more.
3. Admin procedures (those in use, such as where in-out baskets sit,
stale date,
how to file, materials needed like stapler, staple puller, sellotape,
etc at an
exec's desk, how to send and receive despatches, where a telex is put on
a
desk, etc) so he can operate effectively and on a standard pattern.
Sample
desks and drills between 2 students or more.
4. A fast resume of materials we have on how to study.
5. A study of the pattern of the org including figuring out its
evolution from
1950 from past Pol Ltrs, notes, guesses. All Pol Ltrs on pattern and
theory
of 7 Div Board. Ends on ability to draw current org board from meniory
with Divs, Depts, Sections rapidly.
6. All Ethics Policy Letters covering both theory and practice of Ethics
with a
study of the actual Ethics systems. Include Chaplain's Court.
7. Study of org Pol Ltrs regarding Board, then Exec Council, then LRH
Comm
data, Issue Authority, how to pass Pol Ltrs and EDs, then Ad Council
full
procedures.
8. Study of Pol Ltrs Division by Division.
9. Admin Know-How Pol Ltrs.
10. Remaining Pol Ltrs not covered above.
11. Relationship, admin and financial, of LRH to orgs.
12. A thesis of 500 or more words on the theory and practice of
administration
in Sen, why it exists and what would happen if it didn't.
The authority and action for the exact listings under the above headings
is the
Qual Div Organizer WW.
(Note to Qual Div Org. The Pol Ltrs have been divided by Divs at SH. Do
not write
new materials for this course, just gather and folder it and set up a
sample Exec Desk
for part 3 above. Copy my desk and equipment for the model of your practice
desks.
See any old SH WW LRH Comm for data on the last.)
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jp.rd
Copyright � 1967
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
[Note: No. 1 above was cancelled from OEC checksheet by LRH ED 691 INT
(1967).]
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 20 SEPTEMBER 1969
Remimeo
STABILITY
It can be said of companies, societies and governments that:
THE BEST GUARANTEE OF STABILITY IS ADMINISTRATIVE SKILL.
In areas where the abilities which add up to administrative skill are
missing, the
organization or country can expect to fail or be overthrown.
Even such small things as file keeping, accounts records, personnel
placement add
up to better longevity.
The integrity of personnel is a large factor in administration and a
lack of skills
with which to detect and handle false reports and lack of compliance or
failed
performance of duty can all by itself destroy management and the group.
No matter what the intention of those at the top, no matter how bright
or honest
they may be, if their administrative lines are clumsy or in any way false,
if they are not
backed up by skillful, well taught administrators, they can be nullified.
The plans and
orders put "on the lines" seldom if ever arrive at the level of the worker
in the shop or
the man in the street.
The torrents of laws and directives passed by legislators or even boards
of
directors are 90% of them made necessary by earlier failures in getting
earlier laws or
directives enforced.
Bad administration, lack of know-how, lack of trained clerks and
executives, can
defeat utterly any plan or programme no matter how urgent or beneficial.
The continuance of an organization and its leaders can be said to be
entirely
dependent upon the skill, training and integrity of those who handle the
administrative
lines, details and contacts of the group.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRHirs.ei.rd
Copyright � 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 4 OCTOBER 1969
Remimeo
BPI
ORGANIZATIONAL ENTURBULENCE
THE ENTURBULENCE (COMMOTION AND UPSET) IN AN ORGANIZATION
IS DIRECTLY PROPORTIONAL TO THE IGNORANCE OR ABSENCE OF POLICY
AND PURPOSE.
We can see this easily in processing. Processing is a skilled technical
activity having
precise steps and actions. When an auditor is ignorant of these he gets
into a horrible
mess and the pc likewise. When a Case Supervisor is having trouble it will
be in direct
proportion to his own and his auditor's ignorance of correct and exact
tech.
The answer is to get tech known and exactly used. When this is done, the
trouble,
upset and commotion reduces to zero.
In Dianetics and Scientology our tech is very exact and when correctly
applied
produces exact, predictable results. So getting our tech known and used by
auditors
cures any upset or commotion in auditing or a group of auditors.
Going a lot lower, let us consider a group that has no tech or
inadequate tech. If it
engages in treatment there will be upset because of lack of adequate tech.
This could
be said to be the case of psychoanalysis where 33% of the patients commit
suicide in
the first three months according to a 1950 survey of their own.
Then going into the nether regions, take a group with destmctive tech
such as the
psychiatrist. He not only has trouble in his own field but can smash a
whole society
and has done it to several societies already (Germany, Czarist Russia,
Poland, etc).
______________________
A country whose population does not know what constitution it does have
is an
"organization" of ignorant individuals. It will have riot and civil
commotion.
In the US currently only 4% recognized the First Amendment to the
Constitution
which guarantees freedom of speech, the press and religion. Ignorance of
the law,
compounded by a wilful neglect of the Constitution by government officials
is the
basic reason for the riot, civil commotion and disintegration of the US.
So the same law holds as per the first paragraph above.
______________________
We in Scientology have very basic and strong organizational policy and
structure.
Where a franchise or org is in any way upset or is not giving good
service the
individuals do not know or are aware of and are not using policy.
The answer is that it is dangerous and destructive for staffs and
Scientologists not
to know org pattern and policy. The result will be upsets and decline.
On the other hand sound knowledge and use of Scientology policy and
structure
results in a strong org, excellent service and longevity.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:ldm.rs.ei.rd
Copyright � 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 9 NOVEMBER 1968
(Corrects earlier P/L of same date and title.
In 4th para, 1st line, the word "flow" is corrected to "flaw".)
Remimeo
IMPORTANT
STANDARD ADMIN
This is the first Policy Letter on STANDARD ADMINISTRATION.
STANDARD TECH came in with a crash just by teaching the most basic of
basics
as the most important actions. Cases which hadn't moved for years when
handled by
Case Supervisors and auditors who skipped all the airy fairy nonsense and
just did the
usual ordinary basic actions suddenly flew.
There is also Standard Training Procedure. This again is the ordinary
down-to-
earth basic actions. A class that hadn't moved at all suddenly took off and
all
graduated when the USUAL was done.
Thus we find the flaw in all our actions to be the failure to separate
out the truly
basic important actions and instead engaging upon trivial complexities.
It is a characteristic of a thetan that the least complex actions are
the most
powerful. When his confront lessens he tries to do things by vias that add
complexities
and he then fails and becomes weak.
So, just as we blasted our way to 100% results with STANDARD TECH so we
can
thunder straight through to victory using STANDARD ADMIN.
DEFINITIONS
STANDARD means "A definite level or degree of quality that is proper and
adequate for a specific purpose". (Webster's Third New International
Dictionary
Unabridged. Standard 3 b page 2223.)
ADMINISTRATION means "The principles, practices and rationalized
techniques
employed in achieving the objectives or aims of an organization."
(Webster's Third
New International Dictionary Unabridged, 5 (a). Administration, page
28.) We
commonly call this "Admin" as a shortening of it and to designate the
work of doing
it.
ORGANIZATION means "A group of people that has more or less constant
membership, a body of officers, a purpose and usually a set of
regulations." (Webster's
Third New International Dictionary Unabridged, 2 b page 1590.)
BASICS means "basic-s something that is basic: FUNDAMENTAL".
BASE means "the bottom of something considered its support".
FUNDAMENTAL means "serving as an original or generating force: being the
one
from which others are derived".
DERIVED means "formed or developed out of something else", which is to
say
something formed or made from a basic.
Thus if we have the BASIC or base or starting point, and know it well,
then from
it we can develop more complex actions.
We had to have the fundamental or basic laws of organization in order to
develop
the full structure of organization.
Administration becomes STANDARD when we have the most important points
or laws or actions and when we always use these and use them in just the
same way.
For example, some people look at a factory as a big complex structure,
they
consider it very complicated or hard to understand or are in awe of it. Or
get confused
trying to study it. Well, the moment they know that the basic action of the
place is to
make silk cloth, they have a fundamental on which to understand what is
going on.
When we then know that raw fiber goes in one side, gets processed and comes
out the
other as satin, we can begin to sketch in what its flow lines must be. At
last we have
that, we can assume somebody runs it and that people work there and taken
all in one
piece it's an organization.
To RUN the factory we would have to know the most important duties of
every
person in the place, the functions of the machines and the lines of flow.
And to run it
SUCCESSFULLY we would have to know where its raw fiber came from and its
cost
and who would buy it and its price and how much the various expenses were
to keep it
going and to make it make more than it spent and we'd have its economics
and
accounting.
These would be the BASICS of the place: who did what, what the lines
were,
where the raw materials came from and where the finished product went, and
keeping
the cost and expense in ratio, how to stimulate more demand for satin and
how to get
raw materials in quantity at a reasonable price.
While some might be upset at making a similarity between a factory and
an
organization in general, all organizations have the same basic problems and
similar
solutions.
An Army delivers blows to the enemy and gets recruits, material and pay
from the
government.
It has a supposed product too, since few armies exist after losing too
of^en in a
war.
THE BEST ORGANIZATION
The best organization is one which has a thetan over it, methods of
working out
its problems, basic actions and a good desirable product. It adapts itself
to its
environment or surroundings or conditions of operation so as to expand to
greater or
lesser degree.
Such as organizations must have a clear-cut purpose and fill a definite
need in
order to survive.
Its services must be more valuable than what it costs to produce or
furnish thpse
services.
It must, to remain healthy, obtain more potential than it spends. For
"potential"
can be ready money or power or even strength.
Where an organization violates these very fundamental things it sickens
and will
eventually perish.
For example, a government of a country can violate one or more of the
above
simple ideas and eventually cease to exist. Some governments are really
dead for a very
long time before the fact is discovered.
Such is the persistence and power of a once strong organization that it
can
continue for a very long while, feeding inward on itself. It gradually
contracts and
eventually becomes a memory only.
Thus when you see an organization begin to contract, if it is to be
salvaged, it
must be stripped back to basics quickly, its form simplified, its purpose
clarified and
the important services it can render greatly intensified and the cost of
rendering them
greatly reduced. This formula, intelligently applied even to a dead
government, could
revive it.
Lest we go too quickly, in the single sentence above and the earlier
basics
mentioned we have the whole "secret" of either reviving an old or forming a
new
organization.
If you know the purpose and how to make a desirable service known and
know
how to handle its fundamentals expertly you can found, increase, or revive
any
organization.
Putting together or handling an organization requires very certain,
positive
knowledge of
(a) The basics of organizations
(b) The purpose of the organization
(c) The basic actions necessary in the organization
(d) The potentials of the area in which the organization exists
(e) The needs and desires of the area or people the organization serves
(f) The economics on which the organization will operate.
Handling or serving in an organization successfully, one has to KNOW the
actions
and activities of the organization and its area so well that one does not
have to think
about it. One just does it or one indicates or works with what or who does
it.
You don't think "clutch, gear shift, accelerator, steering wheel," when
you drive a
car. You should, to drive it successfully, know where these things are and
what they do
so well that you simply drive a car.
But learning to drive a car, you learn each of these things and its
function and
then leam them so well that it seems like instinct to use them. It isn't
instinct. It's
knowing them so well you don't fumble.
An organization is like that. Working in it or being one of those who
run a part of
it or the whole of it, one has to know the parts and actions and (a) to (0
above so well
one knows them so fast that one just does them.
So, in STANDARD ADMIN we are acquiring
(a) A knowledge of basics
(b) The basics that exist in and around a specific organization
(c) The ability to handle those basics with such speed and certainty
that it seems instinct.
And when we have this, the organization will go, go, go with an ease and
lack of
effort that is astonishing.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:ei.rd
Copyright � 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
VITAL DATA ON STUDY
One of the biggest barriers to learning a new subject is its
nomenclature, meaning
the set of terms used to describe the things it deals with. A subject must
have accurate
labels which have exact meanings before it can be understood and
communicated.
If I were to describe parts of the body as "thingamabobs" and
"whatsernames",
we would all be in a confusion, so the accurate naming of something is a
very
important part of any field.
A student comes along and starts to study something and has a terrible
time of it.
Why? Because he or she not only has a lot of new principles and methods to
learn, but
a whole new language as well. Unless the student understands this, unless
he or she
realizes that one has to "know the words before one can sing the tune", he
or she is
not going to get very far in any field of study or endeavour.
Now I am going to give you an important datum:
The only reason a person gives up a study or becomes confused or unable
to learn
is because he or she has gone past a word that was not understood.
The confusion or inability to grasp or learn comes AFTER a word that the
person
did not have defined and understood.
Have you ever had the experience of coming to the end of a page and
realizing
you didn't know what you had read? Well, somewhere earlier on that page you
went
past a word that you had no definition for.
Here's an example. "It was found that when the crepuscule arrived the
children
were quieter and when it was not present, they were much livelier." You see
what
happens. You think you don't understand the whole idea, but the inability
to
understand came entirely from the one word you could not define, crepuscule
which
means twilight or darkness.
This datum about not going past an undefined word is the most important
fact in
the whole subject of study. Every subject you have taken up and abandoned
had its
words which you failed to get defined.
Therefore, in studying Scientology be very, very certain you never go
past a word
you do not fully understand. If the material becomes confusing or you can't
seem to
grasp it, 'there will be a word just earlier that you have not understood.
Don't go any
further, but go back to BEFORE you got into trouble, find the misunderstood
word
and get it defined.
That is why we have a dictionary. It will not only be the new and
unusual words
that you will have to look up. Some commonly used words can often be
misdefined
and so cause confusion. So don't depend on our dictionary alone. Use a
general English
language dictionary as well for any non-Scientology word you do not
understand when
you are reading or studying.
HOW TO USE A DICTIONARY
Some words that a student misunderstands and looks up can yet remain
troublesome.
It's this way: The student runs across a word he or she doesn't
understand. He or
she looks it up, finds a substitute word and uses that.
Of course the first word is still misunderstood and remains a bother.
Example: (Line in text) "The size was Gargantuan." The student looks up
Gargantuan, finds "Like Gargantua, huge." The student uses "huge" as a
synonym and
reads the text line, "The size was 'huge'." A short while later he or she
is found still
incapable of understanding the paragraph below "Gargantua" in the text.
The principle is that one goes dull after passing over a word one does
not
understand and brightens up the moment he spots the word that wasn't
grasped. In
actual fact, the brightening up occurs whether one defines the word or not.
But to put another word in the place of the existing words is to mess it
all up.
The correct procedure is to look over, get defined well and understand
the word
that was used.
In this case the word was "Gargantuan". Very well, what's that? It means
"Like
Gargantua" according to the dictionary.
Who or what was Gargantua? The dictionary says it was the name of a
gigantic
King in a book written by the author Rabelais. Cheers, the student thinks,
the sentence
meant, "The size Was a gigantic King." Oops! That's the same mistake again,
like
"huge". But we're nearer.
So what to do? Use Gargantuan in a few sentences you make up and bingo!
You
suddenly understand the word that was used.
Now you read it right. "The size was Gargantuan." And what does that
mean? It
means, "The size was Gargantuan." And nothing else.
SUMMARY
Scientology words and their definitions are the gateway to a new look
and
understanding of life. Understanding them will help you live better, and
will assist you
along the road of truth that is Scientology.
L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
Note: Mbre complete information on Scientology technology in the field of
study and education is
contained in L. Ron Hubbard's eight tape recorded Study Lectures. Send for
your free Catalog which
lists these in detail, available from the publishers.
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 9 SEPTEMBER 1969
Remimeo
Ore Exec Course
Checksheet
Page 1, Item 1B
HOW TO STUDY THIS COURSE
The entire checksheet of this course should be gone through three times.
That is a completion of the Course.
All Scientology Rules of Study and Student Conduct, as given in the
Course
Supervisor's pack (HDG), apply.
A checksheet may be added to, but only for a new student or one who has
discontinued as incomplete and is resuming the course after a long absence.
All LRH Pol Ltrs from 1966 forward are added to the checksheet of 21
Sept
1967 amended 25 Nov 1967 or as indicated in a newly issued checksheet after
the date
of this Pol Ltr.
Beware of going past misunderstood words. Use a dictionary liberally.
If the student bogs or is slow he should be sent to a Scientology Review
for
Administration or Study or Policy. The earlier course began with a Review
but as it
interrupted the fast flow system and many did not need it it was cancelled
by LRH ED
691 Int.
Beware of other students "explaining things" in the Policy Letters or of
Course
Supervisors who say "That isn't used now". The data is the data and it is
in the Policy
Letters.
In particular, beware of memorizing things without understanding them.
What is
true for you is true. The data here is for you and to help make a better
world. You will
often find that what didn't look right the first time, will appear in a
wholly different
light to you on your second time through.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:rs.ei.rd
Copyright � 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
[Cancelled by HCO P/L 29 July 1972 Issue II, Fast Flow in Training, in the
1972 Year Book.]
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 27 JULY 1969
Remimeo
Dian Coutse
All Courses WHAT IS A CHECKSHEET
The "Checksheet" is a Scientology development in the field of study.
A CHECKSHEET is a form which sets out the exact sequence of items to be
studied or done by a student, in order, item by item, on a course. It lists
ALL the materials of the course in order to be studied with a place for the
student (or the person checking the student out in the case of a Starrate
Checkout) to put his initial and the date as each item on the Checksheet is
studied, performed or checked out.
The Checksheet is the programme that the student follows to complete
that course.
Every student is given a complete Checksheet at the start of a course.
It is not added to after he has started working on it. It is in its final
form when it is handed to him.
It may be added to for those who enroll later but is not added to during
the course.
The data of the course are studied and its drills performed in the order
on the checksheet. The student does not "jump around" or study the material
in some other order. The materials are set out in the Checksheet in the
best order for study by the student so that he covers all the material in
logical sequence.
Further, following the exact order of the Checksheet has a disciplinary
function which assists the student to study.
The student's initial beside an item is an attestation that he knows in
detail AND can apply the material contained in that bulletin, Policy Letter
or tape, or that he has done and can do that drill. The initial of the
supervisor or another student against a Starrated item is an attestation by
him that he has given the student a Starrate checkout on the item in
accordance with HCO Policy Letter of 14 May 1969 Issue II "How to do a
Starrate Checkout" and that the student has passed.
The Course Supervisor MUST inspect students' checksheets daily to ensure
that all students are following the Checksheet in its correct set out
order, and that the student is making good progress through it.
"Through a Checksheet" means through the entire checksheet-theory,
practical, all drills-and done in sequence.
When a course consists of three times through the Checksheet, the
student goes through three entire Checksheets once, theory, practical and
all drills in sequence, completing that, and then goes through the entire
next checksheet a second time, then goes through a third checksheet fully a
third time. There is no difference in what is studied and how it is studied
the second and third times through-or any subsequent times through the
Checksheet! It is done fully each time-theory, practical and all drills
(including all study drills).
RETRAINING
"Retraining" or "back to Course for retraining" or (per step [2] in
handling a student who fails to get a good result-HCOB 16 July 69, URGENT -
IMPORTANT) "Send student back to training" means that the student is sent
to Cramming to get straight exactly what is missed and then back to Course
and does THE ENTIRE COURSE AGAIN, three times through the checksheet if
that is the course (such as the Dianetics Course). No short cuts or
skimping is allowed on retraining, as a student who fails to apply one
aspect of the course had a misunderstood which would have prevented him
from fully grasping and understanding the other material on previous times
through the Checksheet. Also-NUMBER OF TIMES OVER THE MATERIAL EQUALS
CERTAINTY AND RESULTS (a major study datum which has been proven beyond any
question in Dianetics and Scientology).
It is illegal to run any Course on any subject without a checksheet in
Dianetics and Scientology.
Ens. Tony Dunleavy
Planning & Training Aide
LRH:TD.ldm.ei.rd for
Copyright � 1969 L. RON HUBBARD
by L. Ron Hubbard Founder
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 26 AUGUST 1965
Sthil Foundation
Students
SCIENTOLOGY TRAINING
TWIN CHECKOUTS
(Excerpts from HCO Policy Letters of
4 October 1964 and 24 September 1964
rewritten)
In Scientology training we use a system called TWIN CHECKOUTS. Each
student
is assigned a "twin" to work with. The student studies his assigned
material and is
sometimes coached over the rough spots by his twin. When the student knows
the
material, he is then given a checkout by his twin. If he flunks, he returns
to study and
when ready gets a new checkout. When he passes, the twin signs the
assignment sheet
certifying that he has grasped it. The assignment sheet is turned in to the
Course
Supervisor at the end of the period.
BAD STUDY HABITS
Earlier forms of education suffer because of a habit. The habit is all
one's years of
formal schooling where this mistake is the whole way of life.
If the student knows the words, the teacher assumes he knows the tune.
It will never do a student any good at all to know some facts. The
student is
expected only to use facts.
It is so easy to confront thought and so hard to confront action that
the teacher
often complacently lets the student mouth words and ideas that mean nothing
to the
student.
ALL THEORY CHECKOUTS MUST CONSULT THE STUDENT'S UNDERST ANDING.
If they don't, they're useless and will upset the student eventually.
Course difficulties stem entirely from the students' non-comprehension
of words
and data.
While this can be cured by auditing, why audit it all the time when you
can
prevent it in the first place by adequate theory checkout?
There are two phenomena here.
FIRST PHENOMENON
When a student misses understanding a word, the section right after that
word is a
blank in his memory. You can always trace back to the word just before the
blank, get
it understood and find miraculously that the former blank area is not now
blank in the
text. The above is pure magic.
SECOND PHENOMENON
The second phenomenon occurs after the student has gone by many misunder-
stood words. He begins to dislike the subject being studied, more and more.
This is
followed by various mental and physical conditions and by various
complaints,
fault-finding and look-what-you-did-to-me. This justifies a departure, a
blow, from the
subject being studied.
But the system of education, frowning on blows as it does, causes the
student to
really withdraw self from the study subject (whatever he was studying) and
set up in its
place a circuit which can receive and give back sentences and phrases.
We now have "the quick student who somehow never applies what he
learns".
The specific phenomena then is that a student can study some words and
give
them back and yet be no participant to the action. The student gets A+ on
exams but
can't apply the data.
Demonstration is the key here. The moment you ask this type of student
to
demonstrate a rule or theory with his hands or the paper clips on your desk
this
glibness will shatter.
The reason for this is that in memorizing words or ideas, the student
can still hold
the position that it has nothing to do with him or her. It is a total
circuit action.
Therefore, very glib. The moment you say "Demonstrate" that word or idea or
principle, the student has to have something to do with it. And shatters.
The thoroughly dull student is just stuck in the non-comprehend
blankness
following some misunderstood word.
The "very bright" student who yet can't use the data isn't there at all.
He has long
since ceased to confront the subject matter or the subject.
The cure for either of these conditions of "bright non-comprehension" or
"dull"
is to find the missing word.
But these conditions can be prevented by not letting the student go
beyond the
missed word without grasping its meaning. And that is the duty of the twin.
COACHING IN THEORY
Coaching Theory means getting a student to define all the words, give
all the
rules, demonstrate things in the text with his hands or bits of things, and
also may
include doing Definitions of Scientology terms.
The usual Course Supervisor action would be to have any student who is
having
any trouble or is slow or glib team up with a twin of comparable
difficulties and have
them turn about with each other with Theory Coaching.
Then when they have a text assignment coached, they gi/e their twin a
checkout.
The checkout is a spot checkout, a few definitions or rules and some
demonstration of
them.
DEMONSTRATION
Giving a text assignment check by seeing if it can be quoted or
paraphrased proves
exactly nothing. This will not guarantee that the student knows the data or
can use or
apply it nor even guarantees that the student is there. Neither the
"bright" student nor
the "dull" student (both suffering from the same malady) will benefit from
such an
examination.
So examining by seeing if somebody "knows" the text and can quote or
paraphrase it is completely false and must not be done.
Correct examination is done only by making the person being tested
answer
(a) The meanings of the words (re-defining the words used in his own
words and
demonstrating their use in his own made up sentences), and
(b) Demonstrating how the data is used.
The twin can ask what the words mean. And the twin can ask for examples
of
action or application.
"What is the first paragraph?" is about as dull as one can get. "What
are the rules
given about _____ ?" is a question I would never bother to ask. Neither of
these
tells the twin whether he has the bright non-applier or the dull student
before him.
Such questions just beg for natter and course blows.
I would go over the first paragraph of any material I was examining a
student on
and pick out some uncommon words. I'd ask the student to define each and
demonstrate its use in a made up sentence and flunk the first "Well...
,er... .let me
see...." and that would be the end of that checkout. I wouldn't pick out
only
Scientologese. I'd pick out words that weren't too ordinary such as
"benefit"
"permissive" "calculated" as well as "engram".
Students I was personally examining would begin to get a hunted look and
carry
dictionaries-BUT THEY WOULDN'T BEGIN TO NATTER OR GET SICK OR
BLOW. AND THEY'D USE WHAT THEY LEARNED.
Above all, I myself would be sure I knew what the words meant before I
started
to examine.
Dealing with new technology and the necessity to have things named, we
especially need to be alert.
Before you curse our terms, remember that a lack of terms to describe
phenomena can be twice as incomprehensible as having involved terms that at
least can
, be understood eventually.
We do awfully well, really, better than any other science or subject. We
lack a
dictionary but we can remedy that.
But to continue with how one should examine, when the student had the
words,
I'd demand the music. What tune do these words play?
I'd say "All right, what use is this text assignment to you?" Questions
like, "Now
this rule here about not letting pcs eat candy while being audited, how
come there'd be
such a rule?" And if the student couldn't imagine why, I'd go back to the
words just
ahead of that rule and find the one he hadn't grasped.
I'd ask "What are the 3 parts of the ARC triangle?" And when the student
gave
them, I'd still have the task of satisfying myself that the student
understood why those
were the 3 parts. I'd ask "How come?" after he'd given them to me. Or "What
are you
going to do with these?"
But if the student wasn't up to the point of study where knowing why he
used
the ARC triangle was part of his materials, I wouldn't ask. For all the
data about not
examining above level applies very severely to Theory Checkout as well as
to Practical
and general Instruction.
I might also have a stack of paper clips and rubber bands and use them
to have
students show me they knew the words and ideas.
Theory often says "Well, they take care of all that in Practical." Oh no
they
don't. When you have a Theory Section that believes that. Practical can't
function at
all.
Practipal goes through the simple motions. Theory covers why one goes
through
the motions.
I don't think I have to beat this to death for you.
You've got it.
DICTIONARIES
Dictionaries should be available to students in Theory and should be
used in Twin
Checkouts as well, preferably the same publication. Dictionaries don't
always agree
with each other.
No Twin should try to define English language words out of his own head
when
correcting a student as it leads to too many arguments. On English words,
open a
dictionary.
A Scientology dictionary will be available in a few months from the date
of this
bulletin as one is being rushed into publication.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:ml.rd
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 4 OCTOBER 1964
Reissued on 21 May 1967
Remimeo
All Staff
All Students
Tech Hats
Qual Hats
THEORY CHECK-OUT DATA
(Modifies HCO Pol Ltr of Sept 24, '64)
In checking out technical materials on students or staff, it has been
found that the
new system as per HCO Pol Ltr of Sept 24, '64 is too lengthy if the whole
bulletin is
covered.
Therefore the system given in Sept 24, '64 Pol Ltr is to be used as
follows:
1. Do not use the old method of covering each bit combined with the new
method.
2. Use only the new method.
3. Spot check the words and materials, do not try to cover it all. This
is done the same way a final examination is given in schools: only a
part of the material is covered by examination, assuming that if the
student has this right the student knows all of it.
4. Flunk on comm lag in attempts to answer. If the student "er. . .
.ah.. . .well. .. ," flunk it as it certainly isn't known well enough to
use. (Doesn't include stammerers.)
5. Never keep on examining a bulletin after a student has missed.
6. Consider all materials star rated or not rated. Skip 75%'s. In other
words, the check-out must have been 100% right answers for a pass. 75%
is not a pass. When you consider a bulletin or tape too unimportant for
a 100% pass, just require evidence that it has been read and don't
examine it at all. In other words, on those you check out, require 100%
and on less important material don't examine, merely require evidence of
having read.
THE "BRIGHT" ONES
You will find that often you have very glib students you won't be able
to find any
fault in who yet won't be able to apply or use the data they are passing.
This student is
discussed as the "bright student" in the Sept 24, '64 Pol Ltr.
Demonstration is the key here. The moment you ask this type of student
to
demonstrate a rule or theory with his hands or the paper-clips on your desk
this
glibness will shatter.
The reason for this is that in memorizing words or ideas, the student
can still hold
the position that it has nothing to do with him or her. It is a total
circuit action.
Therefore, very glib. The moment you say "Demonstrate" that word or idea or
principle, the student has to have something to do with it. And shatters.
One student passed "Itsa" in theory with flying colours every time even
on
cross-check type questions, yet had never been known to listen. When the
theory
instructor said, "Demonstrate what a student would have to do to pass
Itsa," the whole
subject blew up. "There's too many ways to do Itsa auditing!" the student
said. Yet on
the bulletin it merely said "Listen". That given as a glib answer was all
right. But
"demonstration" brought to light that this student hadn't a clue about
listening to a
pc. If he had to demonstrate it, the non-participation of the student in
the material he
was studying came to light.
Don't get the idea that Demonstration is a Practical Section action.
Practical gives
the drills. These demonstrations in Theory aren't drills.
Clay Table isn't used to any extent by a Theory Examiner. Hands, a
diagram,
paper-clips, these are usually quite enough!
COACHING IN THEORY
There is Theory Coaching as well as Practical Coaching.
Coaching Theory means getting a student to define all the words, give
all the rules, demonstrate things in the bulletin with his hands or bits of
things, and also may include doing Clay Table Definitions of Scientology
terms.
That's all Theory Coaching. It compares to coaching on drills in
Practical. But it is done on bulletins, tapes and policy letters which are
to be examined in the future. Coaching is not examining. The examiner who
coaches instead of examining will stall the progress of the whole class.
The usual Supervisor action would be to have any student who is having
any trouble or is slow or glib team up with another student of comparable
difficulties and have them turn about with each other with Theory Coaching,
similar to Practical Coaching in drills.
Then when they have a bulletin, tape or policy letter coached, they have
a check-out. The check-out is a spot check-out as above, a few definitions
or rules and some demonstration of them.
DICTIONARIES
Dictionaries should be available to students in Theory and should be
used in Theory Examination as well, preferably the same publication.
Dictionaries don't always agree with each other.
No Supervisor should try to define English language words out of his own
head when correcting a student as it leads to too many arguments. On
English words, open a dictionary.
A Scientology dictionary is available.
_________________________
Remember that with Courses becoming briefer in duration, the number of
bulletins and tapes which the student must know on a Star-Rated basis is
also less.
General written examination for classification, however, remains on an
85% pass basis.
_________________________
Be sure that students who get low marks constantly are also handled in
Review, preferably by definitions of words they haven't understood in some
former subject. Scientology is never the cause of consistent dullness or
glibness.
Processing of this nature can be on an Itsa basis. It does not have to
be Clay Table. Just finding the prior subject by discussion and discussing
its words usually blows the condition. I've seen it change the whole
attitude of a person in just 5 or 10 minutes of auditing on a "locate the
subject and word" basis.
Therefore, definitions exist at Levels 0 and I, but not with Clay Table
or assessment, only by Itsa. You'd be surprised how well it works and how
fast. "Subjects you didn't like", "words you haven't grasped" are the
discussion questions.
_________________________
The subject of "wrong definitions cause stupidity or circuits, followed
by overts and motivators", is not easy to get across because it is so
general amongst Mankind. There is a possibility that past lives themselves
are wiped out by changing language, whether it is the same language that
changes through the years or shifting nationality. But however that may be,
don't be discouraged at the difficulties you may have in getting this
principle understood and used in Scientology departments-the person you are
trying to convince has definitions out somewhere also!
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jw.jp.rd
Copyright � 1964, 1967
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
NOT HCO POLICY LETTER
CORRECT COLOUR FLASH
RED ON WHITE
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 11 OCTOBER 1967
Re mime o
CLAY TABLE TRAINING
PURPOSE:
1. To make the materials being studied real to the student by making
him DEMONSTRATE them in clay.
2. To give a proper balance of mass and significance.
3. To teach the student to apply.
The student is given a word or auditing action or situation to
demonstrate. He then does this in clay, labeling each part. The clay SHOWS
the thing. It is not just a blob of clay with a label on it. Use small
strips of paper for labels. The whole demonstration then has a label of
what it is.
On the checkout, the student removes the overall label. The student must
be silent. The examiner must not ask any questions.
The examiner just looks and figures out what it is. He then tells the
student who then shows the examiner the label. If the examiner did not see
what it was, it is a Hunk.
Clay table must not be reduced to significance by the student explaining
or answering questions. Nor is it reduced to significance by long-winded
labels of individual parts. The clay shows it, not the label.
The clay demonstrates it. The student must learn the difference between
mass and significance.
For example, the student has to demonstrate a pencil. He makes a thin
roll of clay which is surrounded by another layer of clay-the thin roll
sticking slightly out of one end. On the other end goes a small cylinder of
clay. The roll is labeled "lead". The outer layer is labeled "wood". The
small cylinder is labeled "rubber". Then a label is made for the whole
thing: "pencil". On checkout, the student removes "pencil" before the
examiner can see it. If the examiner can look at it and say, "It's a
pencil," the student passes.
It might also be noted that checkouts on bulletins must also ask for
demonstrations. Use paper-clips, rubber bands, etc. The examiner should ask
questions that require an ability to apply. Give the student a situation
and have him tell you how he would handle it.
Questions about what is rule "a" do not detect the glib student. Long-
winded explanations on clay table put it back into significance, prevent
the student from learning to apply, and prevent the student from getting
the proper balance of mass, and do not blow confusion.
All checkouts must keep in mind that the purpose is application, not
just getting a checksheet complete.
If clay table training is not brightening that student up, then the
above is NOT being done. Someone is in such a rush that real learning is
being put aside for the sake of speed.
This student has to audit with his materials. Don't let him fall flat by
lousy checkouts and lousy demonstrations. A well done clay demo, which
actually does demonstrate, will produce a marvellous change in that
student. And he will retain the data.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jp.rd
Copyright � 1967
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 18 SEPTEMBER 1967
Remimeo
Academies
SHSBC
STUDY
COMPLEXITY AND CONFRONTING
In some researches I have been doing recently on the field of study, I
have found
what appears to be the basic law on complexity.
It is:
THE DEGREE OF COMPLEXITY IS PROPORTIONAL TO THE
DEGREE OF NON CONFRONT.
Reversing this:
THE DEGREE OF SIMPLICITY IS PROPORTIONAL TO THE
DEGREE OF CONFRONT
and
THE BASIS OF ABERRATION IS A NON-CONFRONT.
To the degree that a being cannot confront he enters substitutes which,
accumulating, bring about a complexity.
I found this while examining the subject of NAVIGATION in order to teach
it
and clarify it.
I found that Man had based the subject on an incorrect primary
assumption. All
subjects have as their basis a point of first assumption. In Man's
technology this is
usually weak and non-factual which makes his technology very frail and
limited. To
reform a subject one has to find this primary assumption and improve it.
This
reforming of technical subjects is of great interest to us because our
subject
Scientology is advanced even beyond the space travel technologies of very
high
civilizations. Yet it is flanked on all sides by Man's corny antique
technology in the
field of physics, chemistry, "mathematics" and so on. This tends to hold us
back
somewhat. We strained his tech forward to get the E-Meter, the one thing we
had to
have.
In Navigation, man bases the whole subject on the assumption that one
can't
confront where he came from or is going or where he is. It assumes he is
lost.
This is a basis assumption of non-confront. He can't directly see where
he has
been or where he is going at sea-it is so large-so he takes off from a
point of
no-confront in all his reasoning in the subject.
Therefore he goes into a series of symbols and begins to substitute
symbols for
symbols. This winds him up in a mass of complexity. One spends 90% of his
time in
studying this subject trying to find out what symbols the symbols are meant
to
represent. He says in his texts "G.H.A." On search we find this means
"Greenwich
Hour Angle". On further search we find this means what angle some heavenly
body
forms when related to Greenwich as Zero. On further search we find the
idiocy that
the navigator's clock tells angles in HOURS when all he needs is a clock
face giving 360
degrees. This is of course complete nonsense. Why hours, and two sets of 12
at that
(midnight to Noon and Noon to midnight) when what he is trying to find out
is how
many degrees of time have passed. He refers his time to the Sun which,
because of the
rotations of Earth every 24 hours, appears at an increasing number of
degrees from
Greenwich England as the day advances.
Because he starts from a no-confront of ship or plane position he then
carries
no-confront through the whole subject. If a man isn't lost as he begins to
"navigate" he
very often is when he finishes!
Actually no ship or plane is ever lost as to position. One knows he is on
Earth and
in what ocean and on what side of what ocean and the subject really should
be one
which merely lets one CORRECT his position a bit.
Man in this subject of navigation even scorns direct observation
(confront) and
calls it "jackass navigation!"
In actual fact real navigation is the science of recognition of
positions and objects
and estimation of relative distances and angles between them.
The subject is made complex because it has become, in Man's hands, the
substitution of symbols for symbols all based on the assumption that he
can't confront
his departure, his current spot or his point of arrival.
Out of this, with further study in other fields, I found that any
complexity
stemmed from an initial point of non-confront.
This is why looking at or recognizing the source of an aberration in
processing
"blows" it, makes it vanish.
Mental mass accumulates in a vast complexity solely because one would
not
confront something. To take apart a problem requires only to establish what
one could
not or would not confront.
The basic thing man can't or won't confront is evil.
These people who always rationalize evil behavior-"He wasn't feeling
well which
is why he murdered the policeman", etc., can be counted on to voice some
theetie-weetie (goodie-goodie) justification for somebody's thoroughly evil
conduct.
Mr. X wrecks a house and you remark on it and Miss Theetie Weetie will feel
compelled
to say, "Oh, Mr. X had a poor childhood and he didn't mean any wrong . ..
." She
can't confront the simple but evil fact that Mr. X is a complete dog. One
feels his hair
stand on end when Miss Theetie Weetie does this because one is observing a
complete
non-confront on the part of Miss Theetie Weetie. She is too unreal to do
other than
make one feel he has had an ARC Break.
One will also find that Miss Theetie Weetie leads a horribly complex
life-adjust-
ing her thinking to agree with "air spirits" and leaving her family because
there might
be mice in the basement.
When no-confront enters, a chain may be set up which leads to total
complexity
and total unreality.
This, in a very complex form we call an "aberrated condition".
People like that can't solve even rudimentary problems and act in an
aimless and
confused way.
To resolve their troubles requires more than education or discipline. It
requires
processing.
Some people are so "complex" that their full aberration does fully not
resolve
until they attain a high level of OT.
A large number of people de-aberrate just by the education contained in
Scientology as they find in our subject the natural laws of life and seeing
(confronting)
them, "blow" huge holes in their complexities and aberrations.
Therefore the above laws are very important ones as they explain what
aberration
really is and why processing really works.
Aberration is a chain of vias based on a primary non-confront.
Processing is a series of methods arranged on an increasingly deep scale
of bringing
the preclear to confront the no-confront sources of his aberrations and
leading him to a
simple, powerful, effective being.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jp.rd
Copyright � 1967
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 25 APRIL 1963
Central Orgs
DUTIES OF A STAFF MEMBER
(Re-issued and slightly amended
from HASI Pol Ltr of August 7, 1958)
ATTACH THIS BULLETIN TO THE INSIDE FRONT COVER OF YOUR
STAFF MEMBER HAT FOLDER.
1. Each staff member is responsible for seeing that organization policy
is carried out.
If you see another staff member at variance with organization policy,
it is your
duty to advise them direct-if that fails, advise the Association
Secretary.
2. Abide by the working hours of the organization-arrive on time, keep a
set lunch
hour. If you need to change your lunch hour, check with your
department head
for okay. A post not covered throws randomity into the organization.
3. Keep your own desk, equipment and quarters neat and orderly. See that
papers
are not scattered on your own desk and in your office.
4. If you see doors open with nobody on post, close or lock the door.
5. All staff members are responsible for seeing that their doors are
locked in the
evenings, lights turned off, recorders off, coolers off, cigarettes
not left lighted.
Leave your office clean and neat.
6. See that your supplies are adequate-order before you give out.
7. Make your daily pickups to and from the Comm Center, or see that this
has been
done by HASI or HCO Communicator.
8. If you change your residence or telephone number, report this
information to
personnel, your department head, Reception, and the person in charge
of
Evacuation Plan.
9. Know well the Organization Board. Know the various posts and who
covers them.
10. Abide by the purchase order system of the organization.
11. Be courteous and helpful to students and preclears on our
premises, and anyone
else who calls by. Refer people to the correct terminal. Take
responsibility to see
that they get to the right terminal, even if you have to walk them to
the
terminal's desk.
12. Abide by the Policy of Outside Auditing, i.e., HCO Pol Ltr of
October 16, 1962,
"No staff to Audit private pcs".
13. Keep your attire as presentable as possible. A good presentation
to the public
creates a good impression upon them.
14. If you see something around the premises which needs repairing,
report it to the
Director of Administration.
15. Make your posts or post real to other staff members and the
field.
16. Answer people's questions. Understand the question, answer it,
make friends.
17. Attend Staff Meetings.
18. Keep your bulletins and policy letters in proper hat folders:
Technical bulletins in
a gold or orange folder marked "Technical Bulletins", your own hat
bulletins in
your hat folder or folders (blue) and all other bulletins not
technical and not your
hat, in your "Staff Member" hat folder (yellow).
19. Review your hat folders periodically. Refresh your memory
regarding your duties.
If they are not current, bring them up to date.
20. If you receive a dispatch which does not concern your post, re-
route it. Do not
attempt to handle any and every dispatch coming to you which is not
your hat.
(1) You are introducing randomity on your own post, and (2) you are
handling
something which another person should know and handle.
21. If you see another person off post, it is your duty to advise
them direct. If this
fails, advise their department head. Try to be helpful to them in
this regard, not
chop them. Help them get back on post.
22. If the Organization Board does not reflect the reality of your
posts, report this to
HCO.
23. If you occupy more than one post, and you find that you do not
have enough
time to devote proper attention to another of your hats so that the
job is lagging
or not getting done, it is your duty to iron this out with your
department head in
order to remedy the situation. If it is found that one of your posts
is being
neglected due to lack of time available to cover it, the department
head may take
this up with Dir Admin or Assoc Sec in order to get that particular
hat worn
properly. If a person has too many hats, or if the workload has
increased to the
point that one of your hats is not being worn due to lack of time to
devote to it,
much randomity can occur within the organization itself and in the
field. If you
occupy posts in several departments, always consult the department
head under
which your post exists.
24. You are responsible for following the DISPATCH SYSTEM and the
COLOUR
FLASH SYSTEM of the organization (see HCO Policy Letter of April 8,
1958).
25. If you have questions concerning your duties on any post, check
with your
departmental head.
26. When you change posts, be sure to report to Personnel, Dir Admin
and HCO Sec,
so that your file can be changed accordingly.
27. To the best of your ability, help your fellow staff members.
Staff members are a
team, not opponents. If you see a person not doing his job, or doing
it poorly,
give him a hand-give him some suggestions for him to look over-this
works
better than merely chopping him up. Maybe he really doesn't know any
better. It
is to your advantage to assist your fellow staff members. When you
assist them to
do a better job, it results in a larger pay check for you. When you
chop them in
person or to their backs, you are cutting your own and the
organization's throat.
If you see how they could improve their job, tell them, not somebody
over the
back alley. Confront them. Help them.
28. Each staff member is responsible for the organization itself.
For its physical
appearance-its personnel-its performance. It cannot properly perform
unless
each staff member makes it do so.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:jw.rd
Copyright � 1963
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
[HCO P/L of 7 August 1958 and this 25 April 1963 re-issue are
substantially the same, the main amendments being the change of Org post
titles reflecting Org Board evolution in the period. ]
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 20 OCTOBER 1961
REVISED 25 JANUARY 1967
REVISED 7 MARCH 1967
Sthil
NON-SCIENTOLOGY STAFF
Whether by fate or fortune, you have found yourself to be a member of a
group
that has an interesting technology and a definite set of standards of
conduct.
Whether this is fortunate for you or unfortunate, you are yet a member
of this
group by the simple fact of working in it.
That you do not have any knowledge of its technology does not make you
any
less a member of this group.
You are only expected to uphold certain standards as a member of this
group.
These standards are rather easy to understand:
1. This group has accepted you at face value. No one of this group will
hold your
past against you. A person entering a Scientology group is looked upon
as a
person whose conduct now is important, but whose conduct in the past is
utterly
unimportant.
2. This group is composed of people who want to get more able in life
and to live a
better life. These people have, unlike others, enough courage to face
their own
past and misdeeds and recover from them. Ordinary people most often run
from
their past or blame it on others. When you see a person upset in an
auditing
session, it is because he had enough nerve to try to face his past and
get the better
of it. Such people are stronger and saner than people who, like chips of
wood,
merely drift on life's river, or who cry and moan in the eddies that
life has "done
them in".
3. A person does not have to know Scientology to be a member of a
Scientology
group. They only have to believe people can be or deserve to be helped.
4. This group believes that honest people have rights and that dishonest
people have
sacrificed their rights by being dishonest. The definition of dishonesty
is whether
or not a person is trying to hurt his fellow human beings with malicious
talk,
hidden actions and injustice or outright crime.
5. This group frowns heavily on trying to prevent people from being
processed by
cautioning them against it, lying to them about it or just being
ignorant of it.
6. This group believes that making a commotion around or talking around
an injured
person can hurt his chances of recovery. As this has often been proven
to be true
and can be demonstrated, members of this group do not talk to or around
or
make commotions around people who have just been hurt. They work quietly
and
silently to help the injured person.
7. A member of this group may be a member of any religion.
8. This group refuses to speak ill of Scientology or criticize it to
outsiders.
9. This group will not talk about Scientology to members of the press.
10. There are the Code of Honour, the Code of a Scientologist and
the Auditor's
Code. All other group standards are wholly technical. There are no
secret
standards.
As a member of this group, you are expected to uphold these elementary
standards of conduct.
You are quite welcome to know more about Scientology, about life, and
about
your life. But nobody is going to force you to study it.
Everyone on earth has problems. They would not be human if they didn't.
Primarily Scientology helps people to come up to handling their problems
instead of
being handled by them.
Just suppose for a moment Scientology really worked. Just suppose it
could really
free men from pain and suffering and help them with their problems.
Just suppose people you like or know were in need of help and
Scientology could
give it to them.
Scientology can help you if you haven't done things to hurt its people.
But however that may be, by working at Saint Hill, you are a member of
Saint
Hill. Its standards are those of Scientology. This is a good group. Be
proud to be here.
We are glad to have you.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jp.rd
Copyright � 1961, 1967
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 5 FEBRUARY 1969 R
(Revised 15 May 1973)
Remimeo
PRESS POLICY
CODE OF A SCIENTOLOGIST
The Code of a Scientologist as per "The Creation of Human Ability" is
withdrawn. It is reissued as follows:
As a Scientologist, I pledge myself to the Code of Scientology for the
good of all.
1. To keep Scientologists, the Public and the Press accurately informed
concerning
Scientology, the world of Mental Health and Society.
2. To use the best I know of Scientology to the best of my ability to
help my
family, friends, groups and the world.
3. To refuse to accept for processing and to refuse to accept money from
any
preclear or group I feel I cannot honestly help.
4. To decry and do all I can to abolish any and all abuses against life
and Mankind.
5. To expose and help abolish any and all physically damaging practices
in the field
of Mental Health.
6. To help clean up and keep clean the field of Mental Health.
7. To bring about an atmosphere of safety and security in the field of
Mental Health
by eradicating its abuses and brutality.
8. To support true Humanitarian endeavors in the fields of Human Rights.
9. To embrace the policy of equal justice for all.
10. To work for freedom of speech in the world.
11. To actively decry the suppression of knowledge, wisdom,
philosophy or data
which would help Mankind.
12. To support the freedom of religion.
13. To help Scientology orgs and groups ally themselves with public
groups.
14. To teach Scientology at a level it can be understood and used by
the recipients.
15. To stress the freedom to use Scientology as a philosophy in all
its applications and
variations in the humanities.
16. To insist upon standard and unvaried Scientology as an applied
activity in ethics,
processing and administration in Scientology organizations.
17. To take my share of responsibility for the impact of Scientology
upon the world.
18. To increase the numbers and strength of Scientology over the
world.
19. To set an example of the effectiveness and wisdom of
Scientology.
20. To make this world a saner, better place.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:ldm.nt.rd
Copyright � 1969, 1973
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 6 MARCH 1969
Remimeo
BPI
SCIENTOLOGY IS A RELIGION
"Scientology is a religion in the oldest sense of the word, a study of
wisdom.
Scientology is a study of man as a spirit, in his relationship to life and
the physical
universe.
It is non-denominational. By that is meant that Scientology is open to
people of
all religions and beliefs and in no way tries to persuade a person from his
religion, but
assists him to better understand that he is a spiritual being... ."
Mary Sue Hubbard
From Supplement to "Communication"
September 1964
The following definitions are from Webster's New Twentieth Century
Dictionary
(2nd Edition-The World Publishing Company, Cleveland and New York-1959).
A. RELIGION (noun)
Derivation: from Latin religio (-onis) (religion), (piety),
(conscientiousness),
(scrupulousness), from religare (to bind back), re-, and ligare, (to
bind), (to bind
together).
(a) Any specific system of belief, worship, conduct, etc., often
involving a code of
ethics and a philosophy; as the Christian (religion), the Buddhist
(religion), etc. (b)
loosely, any system of beliefs, practices, ethical values, etc.
resembling, suggestive of,
or likened to such a system, as, humanism is his (religion).
B. RELIGIOUS (adjective)
Derivation: from Latin religiosus (religious). Of, concerned with,
appropriate to,
teaching, or relating to religion; as, a (religious) place; (religious)
subjects.
Also
Careful; scrupulous; conscientiously exact; such as religion requires;
as, a (religious)
observance of vows or promises.
C. PHILOSOPHY (noun)
Derivation: from Latin philosophia; Greek philosophia, from Greek
philosophos,
from philos (loving), and Sophos (wise).
Originally, love of wisdom and knowledge.
A study of the process governing thought and conduct; theory or
investigation of the
principles or laws that regulate the physical universe and underlie all
knowledge and
reality; included in the study are aesthetics, ethics, logic, metaphysics,
etc.
The general principles or laws of a field of knowledge, activity, etc; as
the (philosophy)
of economics.
(a) A particular system of principles for the conduct of life;
(b) A treatise covering such a system.
A study of human morals, character and behaviour.
The mental balance believed to result from this; calmness; composure.
____________________
Scientology is a religion by the very nature of its philosophy and
system of
Ethics, Technology, and Administration, all of which is designed and set up
for life to
free itself from entrapment, and restore total freedom to the spirit.
_______________________
"But one of the oldest things that was ever given into the training of
wise men
that I know of was simply this-the basic faith in which the individual has
been trained
and the basic political allegiance of the individual must not be tampered
with by the
Order training him. And it was the Order itself which laid that down.
That's an old, old
one. They were training very wise men and that was the first thing that
they made sure
not to do. They did not tamper with these things. If the individual cared
to alter these
things himself nobody was even vaguely persuading him. It might be in the
course of
his study that he found certain things that men did laughable, or
confusing, or he
found certain things that men did remediable-but nobody was standing there
trying to
lead him into a higher religious or political conviction. And that is the
case with
Scientology."
Extract from Phoenix
Lectures.
by L. Ron Hubbard
(The celebrated lecture
series
given by L. Ron Hubbard to
the
Professional Course, Phoenix,
Arizona, in July 1954.)
L. Ron Hubbard's treatise on Scientology as a religious philosophy and a
religious
practice is given in Hubbard Communications Bulletin (H.C.O.B) of 21 June,
1960
"Religious Philosophy and Religious Practice" (as revised 18 April, 1967).
It is highly important that all promotional literature and Church
literature reflect
the fact that Scientology is a religion.
For instance one promotional piece of recent time stated "Scientology is
a
philosophy and a science." There was no mention that Scientology was a
religion.
If any statements are made in any literature which reflect that
Scientology is
other than a religious philosophy, an appropriate condition must be
assigned to the
party so making same.
Kevin Kember
Policy Safeguard Chief WW
Jane Kember
The Guardian WW
Mary Sue Hubbard
The Controller WW
for
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:ei.rd
Copyright � 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 10 JANUARY 1968
(Reissued from LRH SECED 56 INT June 14, 1965)
Remimeo
BPI
POLITICS. FREEDOM FROM
1. I hereby declare Scientology to be non-political and non-ideological.
2. Politics and ideology may be no part of any decision to train or
process
individuals, and any such interrogation shall cease to be a part of any
application for
training, processing or membership.
3. This does not change any policy relating to suppressive persons. It
does
delete any words in any form which seek to bring about a statement of
political
allegiance or antagonism.
4. It must be kept in mind and brought forward emphatically that
Scientology
does not work in the absence of official control and no matter who
sought to use its
principles, has uniformly failed in the hands of non-Scientologists and
organizations
not controlled by the Central Organizations of Scientology or myself.
5. The reason for this declaration is the consistent disaster visited
upon her
"allies" by the United States government and the efforts of that
government since
1955, stepped up since 1963, to seize Scientology in the United States
rather than
forbid or stop it and the role played by the United States in inspiring
the Victorian
State attacks in Australia. Scientology technology is no longer offered
to the United
States government in any effort to assist her in political ends. Our
participation
extends only to our willingness to process U.S. officials as individuals
unconnected
with their political aims, if as individuals they are not debarred by
other existing
policies relating to treating the insane or our Ethics system.
6. All statements attacking any political entity or ideology are hereby
withdrawn and cancelled in any lectures or literature.
7. Scientologists may be members of any political group on this planet
without
restraint only so long as these individuals or that group do not attempt
to seize
Scientology for their own warlike ends and so make it unworkable or
distasteful by
invidious connection.
8. Scientology is for a free people and is itself on this date declared
free of any
political connection or allegiance of any kind whatever.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jp.rd
Copyright � 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 13 FEBRUARY 1965
General Non-Remimeo
BPI
POLITICS
Now and then you hear me speak derisively of governments and ideologies-
including democracy.
If, by seeing I criticize an ideology, anyone seeks to believe I embrace
its opposite,
he has failed to get the point.
What political system could work amongst very aberrated people?
A democracy or a Communism would be a huge joke in an insane asylum.
Well,
isn't it?
The basic building block of any political system is the individual. One
can seek to
avoid this point by conceiving of the masses. But you can't have masses
which aren't
made up of single units. Therefore the single unit is the basis of a mass.
No political system applied to a colony of monkeys would have anything
to
govern but monkeys. That's plain, certainly.
A political system seeking to function amongst ignorant, illiterate and
barbaric
people could have marvellous principles but could only succeed in being
ignorant,
illiterate and barbaric unless one addressed the people one by one and
cured the
ignorance, illiteracy and barbarism of each citizen.
The collective think of apes is ape-think. A Fascism led by and applied
to idiots
would be idiot-Fascism.
So there is no reason to suppose any political system is any better than
those who
use it to govern or be governed.
The only difference in existing systems of politics is their relative
values in giving
the individual a chance to develop and receive a higher level of personal
sanity and
ability.
That rules out any system which witch hunts, freezes opportunity, or
suppresses
the right to improve by any workable system or suppresses a workable
system.
Watching the U.S. and Australia fight Scientology with blind fury while
supporting oppressive mental and religious practices proves that democracy,
applied to
and used by aberrated people, is far from an ideal activity and is only
aberrated
democracy.
Every human has in common with every other human the same reactive bank.
This is the most they have in common.
The reactive bank-unconscious mind, whatever you care to call it-
suppresses all
decent impulses and enforces the bad ones.
Therefore a democracy is a collective-think of reactive banks. Popular
opinion is
bank-opinion.
Any human group is likely to elect only those who will kill them. That's
concluded from actual 1950 experiments.
The group succeeds only by the efforts of individuals who rise above
their banks
and do their best for their fellows despite the vicious character of groups
and the idiot
nature of collective-think.
Believe in the individual being and work with him and you will find he
is basically
good.
Work only with a group and you work with collective-think which is
basically
bank and therefore evil.
Scientology gives us our first chance to have a real democracy.
By freeing from the worst aberrations each individual, one then achieves
a group
which doesn't react only on bank and which will be, like the individual,
basically good.
For the bank was made to keep people who were not bad from going bad. It
was a
mistake. So it is bad.
We prove daily in Scientology that an individual freed of aberrations
reacts more
decently toward his fellows and that an individual, restimulated, acts
worse; we prove
that the individual under stress of aberration is unreasonable and an
individual freed is
bright.
So we can conclude on actual evidence that the first true democracy will
emerge
when we have freed each individual of the more vicious reactive impulses.
Such beings
can reason, can agree on decent and practical measures and be depended upon
to
evolve beneficial measures.
Until we have done that we will continue to be critical of human
"democracy"-
and any other political philosophy advanced upon Man as a cure for his
ills.
A political philosophy can't audit. We can.
And don't be so sensitive to popular reaction. Just get on with making a
saner
world and it will all come out all right.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:jw.rd
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 22 OCTOBER 1962
RE-ISSUE SERIES (2)
CenOCon
Franchise
THEORY OF SCIENTOLOGY ORGANIZATIONS
(Reissue of HCO Bulletin of September 21, 1958)
An organization is a number of terminals and communication lines united
with a
common purpose.
The actions of an organization can all be classified under the heading
of particle
motion and change. To analyze a post or a department or an organization,
make a list
of each particle it handles (whether types of bodies, types of comm or any
other item)
and follow each item from the point it enters the post or department or
organization
to the point it exits. If a particle isn't handled properly and passed
along properly there
is a confusion or a dead-end. To organize an organization requires more
than theory.
One has to inspect and list the particles and get their routes and desired
changes of
character enroute. Then he has to see that terminals and comm lines exist
to receive,
change and forward the particle. All types of particles belong to somebody,
are
handled some way, come from somewhere and go somewhere. There are no
confusions
when lines, terminals and actions exist for each type of particle.
Judgment and decision are needed in every staff post. If the handling of
items are
just "petty details" then so is your fellow man a "petty detail".
There are no labourers in a Scientology organization. We are all
managers of these
particles.
Routes of handling are not orders to handle but directions to go. A
route is not
necessarily correct for all cases. It is only correct for most cases.
Robots can't handle
livingness. Robot organizations and robot civilizations fail. They only
seem to
work-like the commie empire seems to work until you find out everyone is
starving to
death in it. A perfect organization is not a machine but a pattern of
agreements. A
route is only the agreed upon procedure. It is not only occasionally
broken, it now and
then should be. The terminals involved make the agreement or the route
doesn't work.
A route along terminals that never agreed is no route but a labyrinth.
People agree to
postulates they can understand and appreciate. Hence, a route and handling
begins
with a particle, develops with a theory, comes to life with an agreement
and continues
to work because of judgment and decision.
The routing, the comm lines, the pattern of an organization do not do
the work.
The work is done by living beings using good sense and skill. The
organizational pattern
only makes their work easier and lessens confusion and overburden.
Governments,
armies, big research bureaus reduce themselves down to routes and titles.
They don't
work. They don't do work. They allow for no human equation. Therefore,
slave
societies (composed only of routes and unthinking terminals) are always
beaten
eventually by free peoples. There is a point where routes and exact
procedures become
unworkable, just as there is a point, facing a volume of work, that
individuality and no
teamwork becomes unworkable. An optimum organization is never severely
either one.
Total individualism and total mechanization alike are impossible. So if you
or your
department or your organization seem to be too heavily inclined to either
one, yell
don't talk. A bad organization will fire you and you can do something more
profitable. A good organization will listen. BUT-always have a better idea
than the
one in use. Grumbling, refusing to work don't work. A better idea, talked
over with the
terminals on either side of you, put down in concise writing, submitted,
will be put
into action in a good organization. Of course, there's always a chance that
the new
proposed handling throws something out of gear elsewhere. If it does, you
have the
right to know about it.
An "organization" doesn't get the work done. As an orderly plan it helps
its
terminals get the work done. The staff as individuals do the work. An
organization can
help or hinder getting the work done. If it helps, it's good. If it
hinders, it should be
examined thoroughly.
An organization can work wholly at "taking in its own laundry". All the
work
that gets done is the work generated inside the shop by unreal routes and
weird
changes of particles. This is a government circa mid-20th Century. Its
highest skill is
murder which in its profundity it makes legal.
A totally democratic organization has a bad name in Dianetics and
Scientology
despite all this talk of agreement. It has been found by actual experiment
(L.A. 1950)
that groups of people called on to select a leader from among them by
nomination and
vote routinely select only those who would kill them. They select the
talkers of big
deeds and ignore the doers. They seem to select unerringly the men of
average skill.
That is never good enough in a leader and the people suffer from his lack
of
understanding. If you ever have occasion to elect a leader for your group,
don't be
"democratic" about it. Compare records as follows: Take the person who is a
good
auditor, not just says he is. Take the person who has a good, not
necessarily the
highest, profile and IQ. Take the person who can grant beingness to others.
And look at
the relative serenity and efficiency of any past command he may have had.
And even
then you're taking a chance. So always elect temporarily and reserve the
right of recall.
If his first action is to fire people, recall him at once and find another
leader. If the
organization promptly prospers, keep him and confirm the election by a
second one. If
the abundance of the organization sags in a month or so, recall and find
another.
Popularity is some criterion-but it can be created for an election only, as
in the U.S.
Select in an election or by selection as an executive the person who can
get the work
done. And once he's confirmed, obey him or keep him. He's rare. But beware
these
parliamentary procedure boys and girls who know all the legal and time
wasting
processes but who somehow never accomplish anything except chaos. A
skilled,
successful leader is worth a million impressive hayseeds. Democracies hate
brains and
skill. Don't get in that rut. In the U.S. War Between the States militia
companies
elected their officers with great lack of success in battle. They finally
learned after tens
of thousands of casualties that it was skill not popularity that counted.
Why be a
casualty-learn first. Democracy is only possible in a nation of clears-and
even they
can make mistakes. When the majority rules the minority suffers. The best
are always a
minority.
WHAT IS YOUR JOB?
Anything in an organization is your job if it lessens the confusion if
you do it.
Your being exactly on post and using your exact comm lines lessens
confusion.
But failure to wear another hat that isn't yours now and then may cause
more
confusion than being exactly on post.
The question when you see you will have to handle something not yours is
this:
"Will it cause less confusion to handle it or to slam it back onto its
proper lines?"
Example: A preclear wandering around looking for somebody to sell him a
book.
You see him. The book sales clerk isn't there. The books are. Now what's
the answer?
You'll create a little confusion if you hand him a book, take his money and
give it to
the book sales later. You'll create confusion for your own post and the
organization if
you go chasing around trying to find "book sales terminal". You'll create a
feeling of
unfriendliness if you don't help the preclear get his book. Answer it by
deciding which
is less confusing. You'll find out by experience that you can create
confusion by
handling another's particles but you will also discover that you can create
confusion by
not handling another's particles on occasion.
The only real error you can make in handling another's particles is to fail
to tell
him by verbal or written comm exactly what you did. You stole his hat for a
moment.
Well, always give it back.
Remember, in a Scientology organization every Scientologist on staff
potentially
wears not just his own but every hat in the organization. He has to know
more jobs
than his own. Particularly jobs adjacent to his post. He often has to do
more jobs than
his own because those jobs have to be done and he sees it. A non-
Scientology member
of an organization is only limited in what he can do in the organization by
lack of
know-how. But the limitation is applicable only to instruction and
auditing. But a
Scientologist: he may find himself wearing any hat in the place including
mine. And
others may now and then wear his hat.
A staff member gets the job done of (1) his own post, (2) his
department, and (3)
the whole organization.
People who are always off line and off post aren't doing their own jobs.
When we
find somebody always off post and in our hair we know if we look at his
post we'll
find a rat's nest. So there are extremes here as well.
HOW TO HOLD YOUR JOB
Your hat is your hat. It is to be worn. Know it, understand it, do it.
Make it real.
If it isn't real it is your fault since you are the one to take it up and
get it clean with an
Executive. If he doesn't straighten it up so you can do it, it's still your
fault if it's not
done.
You hold a job in a Scientology organization by doing your job. There
are no
further politics involved-at least if I find out about it there aren't. So
do your job and
you've got a job. And that's the way it is.
But on post or off, we only fail when we do not help. The "public" only
objects
to us when we fail to help or when we fail to answer their questions. So we
have two
stable data on which we operate whether we are on post or not:
HELP PEOPLE!
ANSWER PEOPLE'S QUESTIONS EXACTLY!
When you don't you let everybody down.
NEATNESS OF QUARTERS
- THE PUBLIC KNOWS US BY OUR MEST -
A part of everyone's hats is keeping a good mock-up in people, offices,
classrooms, quarters.
Keep your desk and your Mest neat and orderly. It helps.
And when you see things getting broken down or run down or dirty, fix
them or
clean them or if you can't, yell like hell on the right comm line.
THE DISPATCH SYSTEM
The Dispatch System is not there to plague you but to help you.
Except when you've got to have speed, never use an inter-office phone to
another
terminal. And never write a dispatch and present it and you at some other
point at the
same time. That's "off-line" just as a phone is "off-line". A good use of
the
organization's lines reduces confusion. The other guy is busy, too. Why
interrupt him
or her unnecessarily with routine that should go on the lines. You'll
usually get an
answer in the same day or at least in 24 hours. The organization's comm
lines are
pretty good. They make it possible for this small handful of us to get more
things done
in this society than any other organization on Earth in terms of actual
accomplish-
ment.
A comm line can be jammed in several ways. Principal of these is
entheta. Ask
yourself before it goes on the lines-It's bad news but is it necessarily
important?
Another is overburden. Too much traffic jams a line. Too long a dispatch
doesn't get
read. Another is too little data. That can jam a line but thoroughly. It
takes more
dispatches to find out what goes. Another way is to by-pass the line itself-
this jams
the terminal. The final way, in broad classes, to jam a comm line is to put
erroneous
data on it.
The last is a pet hate of Scientology people. Generally its form is
"everybody
knows". Example: "They say that George is doing a bad job", or "Nobody
liked the
last newsletter". The proper rejoinder is "Who is Everybody?" You'll find
it was one
person who had a name. When you have critical data omit the "everybody"
generality.
Say who. Say where. Otherwise, you'll form a bad datum for somebody. When
our
actions are said to be unpopular the person or persons saying so have
names.
IN SUMMARY
A post in a Scientology Organization isn't a job. It's a trust and a
crusade. We're
free men and women-probably the last free men and women on Earth. Remember,
we'll have to come back to Earth some day no matter what "happens" to us.
If we
don't do a good job now we may never get another chance.
Yes, I'm sure that's the way it is.
So we have an organization, we have a field we must support, we have a
chance.
That's more than we had last time night's curtain began to fall on
freedom.
So we're using that chance.
An organization such as ours is our best chance to get the most done. So
we're
doing it!
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:gl.rd
Copyright � 1962
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
[Added to by HCO P/L 25 July 1966, Allocation of Quarters-Arrangement of
Desks and Equipment, Volume 1, page 75.]
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 7 FEBRUARY 1965
REISSUED 15 JUNE 1970
(Reissued 28.1.73 to correct word on p. 39,
para 2. [Change in this type style.])
Remimeo
Sthil Students
Assn/Org Sec Hat
HCO Sec Hat
Case Sup Hat
Ds of P Hat
Ds of T Hat
Staff Member Hat
Franchise
(issued May 1965)
Note: Neglect of this Pol Ltr has caused great hardship on staffs, has
cost countless
millions and made it necessary in 1970 to engage in an all out
International effort to
restore basic Scientology over the world. Within 5 years after the issue
of this PL with
me off the lines, violation had almost destroyed orgs. "Quickie grades"
entered in and
denied gain to tens of thousands of cases. Therefore actions which
neglect or violate
this Policy Letter are HIGH CRIMES resulting in Comm Evs on
ADMINISTRATORS
and EXECUTIVES. It is not "entirely a tech matter" as its neglect
destroys orgs and
caused a 2 year slump. IT IS THE BUSINESS OF EVERY STAFF MEMBER to
enforce it.
ALL LEVELS
KEEPING SCIENTOLOGY WORKING
HCO Sec or Communicator Hat Check
on all personnel and new personnel
as taken on.
We have some time since passed the point of achieving uniformly workable
technology.
The only thing now is getting the technology applied.
If you can't get the technology applied then you can't deliver what's
promised.
It's as simple as that. If you can get the technology applied, you can
deliver what's
promised.
The only thing you can be upbraided for by students or pcs is "no
results".
Trouble spots occur only where there are "no results". Attacks from
governments or
monopolies occur only where there are "no results" or "bad results".
Therefore the road before Scientology is clear and its ultimate success
is assured if
the technology is applied.
So it is the task of the Assn or Org Sec, the HCO Sec, the Case
Supervisor, the D
of P, the D of T and all staff members to get the correct technology
applied.
Getting the correct technology applied consists of:
One: Having the correct technology.
Two: Knowing the technology.
Three: Knowing it is correct.
Four: Teaching correctly the correct technology.
Five: Applying the technology.
Six: Seeing that the technology is correctly applied.
Seven: Hammering out of existence incorrect technology.
Eight: Knocking out incorrect applications.
Nine: Closing the door on any possibility of incorrect technology.
Ten: Closing the door on incorrect application.
One above has been done.
Two has been achieved by many.
Three is achieved by the individual applying the correct technology in a
proper manner and observing that it works that way.
Four is being done daily successfully in most parts of the world.
Five is consistently accomplished daily.
Six is achieved by instructors and supervisors consistently.
Seven is done by a few but is a weak point.
Eight is not worked on hard enough.
Nine is impeded by the "reasonable" attitude of the not quite bright.
Ten is seldom done with enough ferocity.
Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten are the only places Scientology can bog down
in
any area.
The reasons for this are not hard to find. (a) A weak certainty that it
works in
Three above can lead to weakness in Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten. (b)
Further, the
not-too-bright have a bad point on the button Self-importance, (c) The
lower the IQ,
the more the individual is shut off from the fruits of observation, (d) The
service facs
of people make them defend themselves against anything they confront good
or bad
and seek to make it wrong, (e) The bank seeks to knock out the good and
perpetuate
the bad.
Thus, we as Scientologists and as an organization must be very alert to
Seven,
Eight, Nine and Ten.
In all the years I have been engaged in research I have kept my comm
lines wide
open for research data. I once had the idea that a group could evolve
truth. A third of a
Century has thoroughly disabused me of that idea. Willing as I was to
accept
suggestions and data, only a handful of suggestions (less than twenty) had
long run
value and none were major or basic; and when I did accept major or basic
suggestions
and used them, we went astray and I repented and eventually had to "eat
crow".
On the other hand there have been thousands and thousands of suggestions
and
writings which, if accepted and acted upon, would have resulted in the
complete
destruction of all our work as well as the sanity of pcs. So I know what a
group of
people will do and how insane they will go in accepting unworkable
"technology". By
actual record the percentages are about twenty to 100,000 that a group of
human
beings will dream up bad technology to destroy good technology. As we could
have
gotten along without suggestions, then, we had better steel ourselves to
continue to do
so now that we have made it. This point will, of course, be attacked as
"unpopular",
"egotistical" and "undemocratic". It very well may be. But it is also a
survival point.
And I don't see that popular measures, self-abnegation and democracy have
done
anything for Man but push him further into the mud. Currently, popularity
endorses
degraded novels, self-abnegation has filled the South East Asian jungles
with stone idols
and corpses, and democracy has given us inflation and income tax.
Our technology has not been discovered by a group. True, if the group
had not
supported me in many ways I could not have discovered it either. But it
remains that if
in its formative stages it was not discovered by a group, then group
efforts, one can
safely assume, will not add to it or successfully alter it in the future. I
can only say this
now that it is done. There remains, of course, group tabulation or co-
ordination of
what has been done, which will be valuable-only so long as it does not seek
to alter
basic principles and successful applications.
The contributions that were worth while in this period of forming the
technology
were help in the form of friendship, of defence, of organization, of
dissemination, of
application, of advices on results and of finance. These were great
contributions and
were, and are, appreciated. Many thousands contributed in this way and made
us what
we are. Discovery contribution was not however part of the broad picture.
We will not speculate here on why this was so or how I came to rise
above the
bank. We are dealing only in facts and the above is a fact-the group left
to its own
devices would not have evolved Scientology but with wild dramatization of
the bank
called "new ideas" would have wiped it out. Supporting this is the fact
that Man has
never before evolved workable mental technology and emphasizing it is the
vicious
technology he did evolve-psychiatry, psychology, surgery, shock treatment,
whips,
duress, punishment, etc, ad infinitum.
So realize that we have climbed out of the mud by whatever good luck and
good
sense, and refuse to sink back into it again. See that Seven, Eight, Nine
and Ten above
are ruthlessly followed and we will never be stopped. Relax them, get
reasonable about
it and we will perish.
So far, while keeping myself in complete communication with all
suggestions, I
have not failed on Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten in areas I could supervise
closely. But it's
not good enough for just myself and a few others to work at this.
Whenever this control as per Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten has been relaxed
the
whole organizational area has failed. Witness Elizabeth, N.J., Wichita, the
early
organizations and groups. They crashed only because I no longer did Seven,
Eight, Nine
and Ten. Then, when they were all messed up, you saw the obvious "reasons"
for
failure. But ahead of that they ceased to deliver and that involved them in
other
reasons.
The common denominator of a group is the reactive bank. Thetans without
banks
have different responses. They only have their banks in common. They agree
then only
on bank principles. Person to person the bank is identical. So constructive
ideas are
individual and seldom get broad agreement in a human group. An individual
must rise
above an avid craving for agreement from a humanoid group to get anything
decent
done. The bank-agreement has been what has made Earth a Hell-and if you
were
looking for Hell and found Earth, it would certainly serve. War, famine,
agony and
disease has been the lot of Man. Right now the great governments of Earth
have
developed the means of frying every Man, Woman and Child on the planet.
That is
Bank. That is the result of Collective Thought Agreement. The decent,
pleasant things
on this planet come from individual actions and ideas that have somehow
gotten by the
Group Idea. For that matter, look how we ourselves are attacked by "public
opinion"
media. Yet there is no more ethical group on this planet than ourselves.
Thus each one of us can rise above the domination of the bank and then,
as a
group of freed beings, achieve freedom and reason. It is only the aberrated
group, the
mob, that is destructive.
When you don't do Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten actively, you are working
for the
Bank dominated mob. For it will surely, surely (a) introduce incorrect
technology and
swear by it, (b) apply technology as incorrectly as possible, (c) open the
door to any
destructive idea, and (d) encourage incorrect application.
It's the Bank that says the group is all and the individual nothing.
It's the Bank
that says we must fail.
So just don't play that game. Do Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten and you will
knock
out of your road all the future thorns.
Here's an actual example in which a senior executive had to interfere
because of a
pc spin: A Case Supervisor told Instructor A to have Auditor B run Process
X on
Preclear C. Auditor B afterwards told Instructor A that "It didn't work".
Instructor A
was weak on Three above and didn't really believe in Seven, Eight, Nine and
Ten. So
Instructor A told the Case Supervisor "Process X didn't work on Preclear
C". Now this
strikes directly at each of One to Six above in Preclear C, Auditor B,
Instructor A and
the Case Supervisor. It opens the door to the introduction of "new
technology" and to
failure.
What happened here? Instructor A didn't jump down Auditor B's throat,
that's all
that happened. This is what he should have done: Grabbed the Auditor's
report and
looked it over. When a higher executive on this case did so she found what
the Case
Supervisor and the rest missed: that Process X increased Preclear C's TA to
25 TA
divisions for the session but that near session end Auditor B Qed and Aed
with a
cognition and abandoned Process X while it still gave high TA and went off
running one of Auditor B's own manufacture, which nearly spun Preclear C.
Auditor B's IQ on examination turned out to be about 75. Instructor A was
found to have huge ideas of how you must never invalidate anyone, even a
lunatic. The Case Supervisor was found to be "too busy with admin to have
any time for actual cases".
All right, there's an all too typical example. The Instructor should
have done Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten. This would have begun this way.
Auditor B: "That process X didn't work." Instructor A: "What exactly did
you do wrong?" Instant attack. "Where's your auditor's report for the
session? Good. Look here, you were getting a lot of TA when you stopped
Process X. What did you do?" Then the pc wouldn't have come close to a spin
and all four of these would have retained certainty.
In a year, I had four instances in one small group where the correct
process recommended was reported not to have worked. But on review found
that each one had (a) increased the TA, (b) had been abandoned, and (c) had
been falsely reported as unworkable. Also, despite this abuse, in each of
these four cases the recommended, correct process cracked the case. Yet
they were reported as not having worked!
Similar examples exist in instruction and these are all the more deadly
as every time instruction in correct technology is flubbed, then the
resulting error, uncorrected in the auditor, is perpetuated on every pc
that auditor audits thereafter. So Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten are even more
important in a course than in supervision of cases.
Here's an example: A rave recommendation is given a graduating student
"because he gets more TA on pcs than any other student on the course!"
Figures of 435 TA divisions a session are reported. "Of course his model
session is poor but it's just a knack he has" is also included in the
recommendation. A careful review is undertaken because nobody at levels 0
to IV is going to get that much TA on pcs. It is found that this student
was never taught to read an E-Meter TA dial! And no instructor observed his
handling of a meter and it was not discovered that he "overcompensated"
nervously, swinging the TA 2 or 3 divisions beyond where it needed to go to
place the needle at "set". So everyone was about to throw away standard
processes and model session because this one student "got such remarkable
TA". They only read the reports and listened to the brags and never looked
at this student. The pcs in actual fact were making slightly less than
average gain, impeded by a rough model session and misworded processes.
Thus, what was making the pcs win (actual Scientology) was hidden under a
lot of departures and errors.
I recall one student who was squirreling on an Academy course and
running a lot of off-beat whole track on other students after course hours.
The academy students were in a state of electrification on all these new
experiences and weren't quickly brought under control and the student
himself never was given the works on Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten so they
stuck. Subsequently, this student prevented another squirrel from being
straightened out and his wife died of cancer resulting from physical abuse.
A hard, tough instructor at that moment could have salvaged two squirrels
and saved the life of a girl. But no, students had a right to do whatever
they pleased.
Squirreling (going off into weird practices or altering Scientology)
only comes about from non-comprehension. Usually the non-comprehension is
not of Scientology but some earlier contact with an off-beat humanoid
practice which in its turn was not understood.
When people can't get results from what they think is standard practice,
they can be counted upon to squirrel to some degree. The most trouble in
the past two years came from orgs where an executive in each could not
assimilate straight Scientology. Under instruction in Scientology they were
unable to define terms or demonstrate examples of principles. And the orgs
where they were got into plenty of trouble. And worse, it could not be
straightened out easily because neither one of these people could or would
duplicate instructions. Hence, a debacle resulted in two places, directly
traced to failures of instruction earlier. So proper instruction is vital.
The D of T and his Instructors and all Scientology Instructors must be
merciless in getting Four, Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten into effective
action. That one student, dumb and impossible though he may seem and of no
use to anyone, may yet some day be the cause of untold upset because nobody
was interested enough to make sure Scientology got home to him.
With what we know now, there is no student we enrol who cannot be properly
trained. As an instructor, one should be very alert to slow progress and
should turn the
sluggards inside out personally. No system will do it, only you or me with
our sleeves
rolled up can crack the back of bad studenting and we can only do it on an
individual
student, never on a whole class only. He's slow = something is awful wrong.
Take fast
action to correct it. Don't wait until next week. By then he's got other
messes stuck to
him. If you can't graduate them with their good sense appealed to and
wisdom shining,
graduate them in such a state of shock they'll have nightmares if they
contemplate
squirreling. Then experience will gradually bring about Three in them and
they'll know
better than to chase butterflies when they should be auditing.
When somebody enrols, consider he or she has joined up for the duration
of the
universe-never permit an "open-minded" approach. If they're going to quit
let them
quit fast. If they enrolled, they're aboard, and if they're aboard, they're
here on the
same terms as the rest of us-win or die in the attempt. Never let them be
half-minded
about being Scientologists. The finest organizations in history have been
tough,
dedicated organizations. Not one namby-pamby bunch of panty-waist
dilettantes have
ever made anything. It's a tough universe. The social veneer makes it seem
mild. But
only the tigers survive-and even they have a hard time. We'll survive
because we are
tough and are dedicated. When we do instruct somebody properly he becomes
more
and more tiger. When we instruct half-mindedly and are afraid to offend,
scared to
enforce, we don't make students into good Scientologists and that lets
everybody
down. When Mrs. Pattycake comes to us to be taught, turn that wandering
doubt in her
eye into a fixed, dedicated glare and she'll win and we'll all win. Humour
her and we all
die a little. The proper instruction attitude is, "You're here so you're a
Scientologist.
Now we're going to make you into an expert auditor no matter what happens.
We'd
rather have you dead than incapable."
Fit that into the economics of the situation and lack of adequate time
and you
see the cross we have to bear.
But we won't have to bear it forever. The bigger we get the more
economics and
time we will have to do our job. And the only things which can prevent us
from getting
that big fast are areas in from One to Ten. Keep those in mind and we'll be
able to
grow Fast. And as we grow our shackles will be less and less. Failing to
keep One to
Ten, will make us grow less.
So the ogre which might eat us up is not the government or the High
Priests. It's
our possible failure to retain and practise our technology.
An Instructor or Supervisor or Executive must challenge with ferocity
instances
of "unworkability". They must uncover what did happen, what was run and
what was
done or not done.
If you have One and Two, you can only acquire Three for all by making
sure of
all the rest.
We're not playing some minor game in Scientology. It isn't cute or
something to
do for lack of something better.
The whole agonized future of this planet, every Man, Woman and Child on
it, and
your own destiny for the next endless trillions of years depend on what you
do here
and now with and in Scientology.
This is a deadly serious activity. And if we miss getting out of the
trap now, we
may never again have another chance.
Remember, this is our first chance to do so in all the endless trillions
of years of
the past. Don't muff it now because it seems unpleasant or unsocial to do
Seven, Eight,
Nine and Ten.
Do them and we'll win.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jw.rr.nt.ka.mes.rd
Copyright � 1965, 1970, 1973
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 14 FEBRUARY 1965
(Reissued on 7 June 1967, with the word
"instructor" replaced by "supervisor".)
Remimeo
All Hats
BPI
SAFEGUARDING TECHNOLOGY
For some years we have had a word "squirreling". It means altering
Scientology,
off-beat practices. It is a bad thing. I have found a way to explain why.
Scientology is a workable system. This does not mean it is the best
possible system or a perfect system. Remember and use that definition.
Scientology is a workable system.
In fifty thousand years of history on this planet alone, Man never
evolved a
workable system. It is doubtful if, in foreseeable history, he will ever
evolve another.
Man is caught in a huge and complex labyrinth. To get out of it requires
that he
follow the closely taped path of Scientology.
Scientology will take him out of the labyrinth. But only if he follows
the exact
markings in the tunnels.
It has taken me a third of a century in this lifetime to tape this route
out.
It has been proven that efforts by Man to find different routes came to
nothing. It
is also a clear fact that the route called Scientology does lead out of the
labyrinth.
Therefore it is a workable system, a route that can be travelled.
What would you think of a guide who, because his party said it was dark
and the
road rough and who said another tunnel looked better, abandoned the route
he knew
would lead out and led his party to a lost nowhere in the dark. You'd think
he was a
pretty wishy-washy guide.
What would you think of a supervisor who let a student depart from
procedure
the supervisor knew worked. You'd think he was a pretty wishy-washy
supervisor.
What would happen in a labyrinth if the guide let some girl stop in a
pretty
canyon and left her there forever to contemplate the rocks? You'd think he
was a
pretty heartless guide. You'd expect him to say at least, "Miss, those
rocks may be
pretty, but the road out doesn't go that way."
All right, how about an auditor who abandons the procedure which will
make his
preclear eventually clear just because the preclear had a cognition?
People have following the route mixed up with "the right to have their
own
ideas." Anyone is certainly entitled to have opinions and ideas and
cognitions-so long
as these do not bar the route out for self and others.
Scientology is a workable system. It white tapes the road out of the
labyrinth. If
there were no white tapes marking the right tunnels, Man would just go on
wandering
around and around the way he has for eons, darting off on wrong roads,
going in
circles, ending up in the sticky dark, alone.
Scientology, exactly and correctly followed, takes the person up and out
of the
mess.
So when you see somebody having a ball getting everyone to take peyote
because
it restimulates prenatals, know he is pulling people off the route. Realize
he is
squirreling. He isn't following the route.
Scientology is a new thing-it is a road out. There has not been one. Not
all the
salesmanship in the world can make a bad route a proper route. And an awful
lot of
bad routes are being sold. Their end product is further slavery, more
darkness, more
misery.
Scientology is the only workable system Man has. It has already taken
people
toward higher I.Q., better lives and all that. No other system has. So
realize that it has
no competitor.
Scientology is a workable system. It has the route taped. The search is
done. Now
the route only needs to be walked.
So put the feet of students and preclears on that route. Don't let them
off of it no
matter how fascinating the side roads seem to them. And move them on up and
out.
Squirreling is today destructive of a workable system.
Don't let your party down. By whatever means, keep them on the route.
And
they'll be free. If you don't, they won't.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jw.jp.rd
Copyright � 1965, 1967
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 19 OCTOBER 1968
Remimeo
All staff
All students
When a student has finished a course, he should want the next course in
training.
If not, out Tech or out Ethics or both. Just as a pc's good indicators
should be in
wanting next level of auditing, so should a student's good indicators be in
wanting next
level of training. If this is not the case something missed by the
supervisor or student or
both the supervisor and the student.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:nf.ei.rd
Copyright � 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 31 MAY 1968
Issue II
(Reissued from Flag Order 808)
Remimeo
AUDITORS
Auditors have since the first session of Scientology been the only
individuals on
this planet, in this Universe capable of freeing man.
An Auditor is one who has been trained in the technology of Scientology.
An
Auditor applies standard technology to pre-clears.
At times some will forget or choose to ignore the fact that the Auditor
is not just
another fellow or a guy who works in Scientology. An Auditor is a highly
trained
specialist, no matter what level of Auditor. He or she is the only one who
can give man
the truth, that man knows.
An Auditor is to be respected. An Auditor is very important in Clearing
this
Planet, and this Universe. It's a big job and the Auditor will do it. All
Auditors are
appreciated.
Special designations and insignia are to be developed to distinguish the
Auditor
from others and signalize his class.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:sb.js.rd
Copyright � 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
UBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 21 FEBRUARY 1964
CenOCon
Sthil
STAFF REGULATIONS
AUDITING VERSUS JOB
(EFFECTIVE ON RECEIPT)
It is an Academy maxim that if an auditor feels warm to the touch he or
she can audit. There is no excuse of CASE. "I can't audit today because my
case . . . ." If this were not the maxim, a lot of auditing would never get
done.
Now we are extending this to administrative staff members in Scientology
organizations. Case is no excuse. If a staff member's breath can be
detected on a mirror he or she can do his or her job.
Further, Case is not to be used as an excuse for errors or transfers off
post or retraining or being ordered to the HGC, etc. Case is no excuse.
Case is not a point.
This gives rise to the following regulations which become effective on
receipt and which cancel any conflicting earlier policies.
A staff member may not be absent from his or her job to give or receive
auditing during working hours. Exception only staff members whose job it is
to audit. Exception: Severe temporary illness or physical injury.
A staff member may not be ordered to training or processing as a
disciplinary measure or as an effort to improve performance on the job.
A staff member may not be transferred to another post or dismissed
because of "Case Difficulties".
All disadvantageous transfers, suspensions or dismissals shall be made
only by reason of actual performance of duties and the usual and easily
recognized sins of omission or commission.
The individual staff member's preclear classification may be taken into
account in appointments and promotions just as his or her auditor
classification would be, but may not be taken into account as a cause for
demotion, suspension or dismissal.
Whereas it is of interest that all Scientologists have their cases in
good condition to the extent of conducting co-audits in the individual's
own time in instruction and auditing, it is also true that Scientology
organizations are not huge HGCs for staff members and have their own
functions.
A staff member may not use his working hours for being instructed or
trained and aside from Academy personnel whose job it is to train students,
a staff member may not employ his or her staff time to instruct. Exception:
Technical officers may give staff auditors instructions about their
preclears or students, but no course or conference may be held for the
purpose.
The possession of a certificate carries with it the responsibility of
knowing the skills covered by it. Constant retraining within a level for
which the auditor has already been classified is forbidden.
Staff members aspiring to the next higher classification should become
part of evening or weekend courses teaching those skills. Enrolment in such
courses may or may not be at the expense of the organization according to
the decision of the Association or Organization Secretary.
Co-audit training or processing may not be undertaken during working
hours.
An organization should arrange at its own cost the management of a co-
audit for its staff members, providing all such training or processing is
done in the staff member's own time.
Administrative staff members or executives may not audit during working
hours unless specifically transferred temporarily or permanently to the HGC
and no transfer shall be for less than one week, during which the duties
shall consist exclusively of auditing and during which a minimum of 25
hours must be delivered.
A Director of Processing may not assign himself to audit individual pcs
for full intensives.
LRH:gl.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright � 1964
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 10 AUGUST 1964
Central Orgs
General Remimeo
GOOD WORKERS
It should be established as a matter of principle that the staff member
who does a
good job gets lots of processing and a person who is not doing a good job
is given
minimal processing.
Don't be held down by people who do a bad job just to be processed.
It pins the whole advance of the Org down to its lowest staff member's
case.
An almost perfectly run organization will fail to get in income or give
service if
the reverse policy is used and if the whole effort to improve the Org is
concentrated on
processing only erring staff members.
You can only go a certain distance in improving an Org by processing
staff
members. Beyond that it deprives people of an incentive to do a good job.
People don't have to be aberrated and the best job deserves the fastest
road to
O.T.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:jw.rd
Copyright � 1964
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 26 MAY 1961
(Reissued on 21 June 1967)
Remimeo
All Staff
Tech Hats
Qual Hats
A MESSAGE TO THE EXECUTIVE SECRETARIES
AND ALL ORG STAFF
QUALITY COUNTS
Clearing is now in the reach of every Scientologist.
Excellent Auditor training is now in the reach of every Academy.
And these are the only things in the long run that will count.
When I see an Organization staff panting after newspaper publicity or
going mad on the subject of dissemination, and at the same time turning in
to me bad results and poor student quality, I know somebody has their
targets mixed up.
Quality is the only thing that counts. If quality in training and
processing is not given first rank and constant priority by Secretaries or
Executive Secretaries, then all the administration in the world will not
make the grade for any Central Org.
Deliver the goods. That's a crude way to put it. But if you want a new
and better civilization you won't get it by advertising or worrying what
people think of you. You will get it only by releasing and clearing people
and sending them out into the society to get the show on the road in all
branches of human activity, including Scientology.
I know we have been a long time without clearing people. But we're
clearing them now. What does it take to clear people? It takes highly
skilled and tightly supervised auditing. It takes good technology. It takes
good technical application.
If you'll forget about how easy it is to mob students all up in a class
and actually confront each student as an individual, make sure he knows
every essential step he has to know, make sure all his questions get
answered, you'll have auditors that can audit.
Will you please put attention on raising technical skill in the HGC,
releasing people, clearing people, and on the quality of training in the
Academy to the end of getting every student capable of all the steps
necessary to release people.
I have made the grade technically in the field of research. Now it's
time to drop all the booboo's and nonsense. All you have to do in an Org is
release and clear people and turn out auditors who can release people and
keep in contact with the public and treat them well and you're over the
top.
This morning I received a cable from an Org. An urgent cable. Did it
say, "How do you assess for a Pre-Hav level" or something sensible? No, it
didn't. It said, "Send us some biographical data for a newspaper article."
I spit. That Org is doing the lousiest job possible in Technical and is all
worked up to get publicity. What's this? Do they think a society in this
shape will approve Scientology into power? Hell no! And to hell with this
society. We're making a new one. So let's skip the approval button from a
lot of wogs and settle down to work to make new people and better people.
Then maybe you'll have a society.
Right here and right now this policy is laid down in concrete with an
atomic branding iron: THE FIRST AND PRIMARY GOAL OF AN ORGANIZATION IS
DELIVERING THE FOREMOST TECHNICAL QUALITY THAT CAN BE DELIVERED IN ITS
AREA.
All right. I've made my technical target bang in the bull's eye. You can
release and clear. You can train auditors well. Well, Christ! Let's do it,
do it, do it!
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:ph.jp.rd Founder
Copyright � 1961, 1967
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 29 MAY 1961
CenOCon
QUALITY AND ADMIN IN CENTRAL ORGS
The function of the Administrative Personnel in a Central Organization
is to make
technical quality possible and get it delivered to Scientologists and the
public.
Administration is no unimportant function. On the contrary, I had to
work in
Scientology a long time before I found out that in the absence of good
administration,
technical quality is impossible. At first I counted on high calibre
business men to do it.
Then I found, after 1954, that they didn't have a clue and that their use
had led us on
a bad course. So we had to develop and learn administration and we are
winning on it.
An administrative personnel is there to keep the lines moving and the
function of
his post operating.
Administrative personnel gets Scientology to the public, keeps the
public happy
and the organization solvent.
Administrative personnel are there to keep Administration out of
technical hands
and let technical work.
Administration gets the public in and out, keeps communication going,
gets the
data to tech and keeps the Org from going broke.
Administration is, however, owed something by technical. If
Administration gets
people in for service it is only right that that service, when rendered by
technical, be
the highest possible quality.
For if Administration in all departments is not backed up by quality
technical
achievements, then administration is betrayed.
If one keeps, as in accounts, collecting money for service rendered by
technical,
then accounts has a right to demand that it was good service or else the
accountant, in
collecting, betrays.
Therefore, Administration may at any time, just as technical may demand
good
Admin, demand of technical that it produce and hold its own.
As of this moment there is no excuse of any kind for any technical
failure in any
Central Org.
The moment we got all the tools, it showed up that technical often had
not
understood any of the tools it already had. A clear cut, simple routine as
it now exists
makes Auditing and Training a problem in black and white. Either it is done
or it isn't.
If results are not forthcoming for any person as of now, then somebody
is
goofing. And it won't be any small goof.
It is working out that goofs are of this magnitude:
Auditor does not know anything about reading a meter but has been
kidding us
one and all that he or she knew;
Auditor has not the vaguest on how to handle rudiments;
Auditor couldn't security check Krushchev and find a crime;
Auditor has no clue about assessment;
Auditor just doesn't even report to session.
That would be the sort of thing it would take to keep Scientology from
working
on every case. The errors are gross, never slight, if a case doesn't move.
All right. Admin personnel do their job. Therefore they have a right to
expect
techwill do its job.
The whole source of low units is tech failure. Bad tech makes it almost
impossible
to get pcs or students in. Therefore Admin has a right to raise hell over
bad tech. A
graph drops. ARC breaks gleam clear to anyone. Admin, working at a less
interesting
job, has the right to scream loud enough to be heard on Arcturus. Because
that took a
fantastic, large technical goof to achieve.
None can now say all is changing in Tech. The only thing that's changing
is the
communication and information to get tech to do its job.
Low units, lack of enough personnel, lack of new executive personnel all
trace to
tech failure in the past.
Now is the time to make good. We can release people easily. Why not do
it? We
can clear people. Why not do it?
A high executive in a Central Org who had had a tech department that was
failing,
failing, failing owned up the other day to "having all the data but being
too busy to
study it." He meant, obviously he was too busy to do his job. And a Joburg
Security
Check found out why.
All staff members, Tech and Admin, of a Central Org, each one or
altogether, has
a right to demand that every tech person knows his business and does the
job.
All staff personnel in a meeting or by petition has a right to demand
certain
personnel be sent to Saint Hill to be trained.
All staff personnel has a right to demand that any or all staff
personnel be given a
Joburg Security Check, WW Sec Form 3, by somebody who knows how to give
one.
All staff personnel has a right to demand practical and functional
releasing and
clearing 1. of staff 2. of executives and 3. of the public who buys our
service.
If we're going to put a new world here, we better get going on the
project. It isn't
as if we could fool people forever.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:jl.rd
Copyright � 1961
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 20 JULY 1966
AMENDED 19 MARCH 1968
Remimeo
STAFF STATUS
(Corrects all earlier Sec Eds and Pol Ltrs)
The intentions of the staff status system and the conduct of it require
a clarification as follows:
TEMPORARY
1. After two weeks' employment, if a newly hired staff member can obtain
a written recommendation from his immediate superior, he can report to
the Staff Training Officer in the Qualifications Division, give him the
recommendation and receive the training materials for provisional. He
can then study these and get checked out on them by the Staff Training
Officer and if passed, get his Staff Status One, Provisional.
STATUS ONE PROVISIONAL
2. When the Provisional Staff Member has his Staff Status One, he can
receive the materials for Staff Status Two from the Staff Training
Officer and begin to study and pass them by check outs from day to day.
When he has passed them all, he is given a written examination and,
passing this, he obtains his Staff Status Two.
STAFF STATUS TWO
3. When a staff member has his Staff Status Two he can apply for the
materials for Staff Status Three, executive rating, and so on up the
Staff Status levels.
Obtaining an executive Staff Status does not ensure the appointment as
an executive but makes one eligible for such appointment.
The one year service between One and Two is abolished.
Only a Staff Status Two is now eligible for contract.
Staff Status Two, if on contract, is entitled to free processing up to
Grade V, a 50% discount on training and further processing and uniforms. No
lower status has these privileges. This is true for all Orgs, SH, WW and
AO.
A Temporary Status staff member may be dismissed, transferred or demoted
without any Ethics action. Any person still a temporary status after 3
months on staff will be let go.
A Staff Status One must have been given an Ethics Hearing and found
guilty of a misdemeanor or more in order to be dismissed but may be
transferred without a hearing.
A Staff Status Two must be given a Committee of Evidence and found
guilty beyond reasonable doubt to be dismissed and an Ethics Hearing to be
demoted or transferred.
A deputy or acting appointment may be demoted without Ethics action, but
only to the last permanent grade.
Staff Members may request transfer or demotion without Ethics action.
PENALTY
If a Staff Member breaks his Contract, leaving employ or going to a higher
Org
with Contract incomplete, he is then liable for FULL PAYMENT of all courses
and processing he has received at FULL RATE (not just 50%), and owes for
all transport or expenses he may have been paid.
SECURITY CHECKS
Security Checks should be given any new staff on a meter.
When a theft or insecurity has occurred staff should consent to such a
check and such a consent is contained in the hiring Contract.
CHECK OUTS
Any staff member receiving a check out from the Staff Training Officer
and flunking is told to go off and study some more. The item being checked
out is marked with a date and initial at the point just about where the
flunk occurred and if the staff member comes for re-examination within one
week, the item being checked out is simply checked from the last mark on.
But if more than one week elapses the whole item must be examined again.
A staff member is only sent to STAFF REVIEW OFFICER for remedies if his
flunks have been continual and he is not making progress at all.
A log, loose leaf, containing the names of a staff member per page is
kept by the Staff Training Officer.
The Staff Training Officer may not hold any additional post than Staff
Review Officer and if so check outs must consistently be at one period of
the day and review another. If traffic is too heavy not even this
additional hat may be worn. If Staff Review Officer is singly held the
holder may also audit staff, and do assists.
ORG BOARD
The Org Board must reflect the status of a staff member.
UPPER STATUS GRADES
Grades Three and above are given check sheets by the Guardian WW.
EVENING STUDY
Staff members should study in their own time not on the job. But they
may be examined or reviewed while on the job.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jc.rd
Copyright � 1966, 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
[Note: The 19 March 1968 amendment added the last sentence in paragraph 8,
and also the section headed "Penalty"; and under "Security Check" added and
such a consent is contained in the hiring Contract and changed No Security
Check should be given any new staff on a meter except investigatory
personnel to the above.]
ADDENDUM per
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 22 AUGUST 1966
Issue III
Only a staff member with Staff Status Two is eligible for contract.
Thus, before a Class VI may start his actual Internship period, he must
come on staff and while working in the org, study for and attain Staff
Status Two, at which time he will be eligible for both Internship (provided
of course he meets the other requirements for Internship) and staff
discounts.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:lb-r.rd
Copyright � 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 3 OCTOBER 1960
Sthil
HOLIDAY PAY AND SICK LEAVE
(Reissued)
This Policy Letter is intended to summarize and clarify the schemes for
holiday
pay and sick leave in operation at Saint Hill. Both schemes are in line
with similar
schemes which apply in other Scientology Organizations all over the world.
HOLIDAY PAY
Holiday pay is allowed to all staff who work full time on a weekly wage,
on the
following scale:
3 months' service = 3 days
6 months' service = 5 days
9 months' service = 7 days
1 year's service = 10 days
The "days" referred to are working days. For each year of continuous
service,
therefore, a staff member would receive two full weeks' holiday pay. Each
day's pay
for lesser periods would be estimated as one-fifth of the gross weekly
wage.
A full time staff worker is one who works 35 hours or more per week
regularly.
A part time staff worker is one who works less than 35 hours per week
regularly.
Part time workers, or those who work on an hourly rate, do not normally
receive
any holiday pay.
Holiday pay is not normally granted unless the staff member has been
employed
continuously for at least a year, even though a holiday may be taken by
permission. In
all such cases, special permission must be obtained before any holiday pay
is granted.
On leaving the organization, a staff member is not entitled to any holiday
pay unless he
has been employed continuously for at least a year.
When taking a holiday, staff members who normally work Saturdays or
Sundays
should do so before starting on holiday, or have their pay docked for the
time lost.
SICK LEAVE
Sick leave with pay is allowed to full time staff members at the rate of
2 days in
every calendar month. Sick leave is not cumulative from one month to
another. Such
pay is granted upon the presentation of a Doctor's certificate.
Issued by: Peter Hemery
HCO Secretary WW
for
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:js.pm.rd
Copyright � 1960
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 10 NOVEMBER 1969
Remimeo
FORMER STAFF MEMBERS
Any former staff member who has not completed the contract he or she
signed
when coming on staff, is to repay the Org in full for any services taken
free, or at
reduced rates, before being allowed to have any further services at any
Scientology
Organization.
This applies to former staff members of the Sea Org, St. Hill Orgs and
the
Churches of Scientology.
In all cases where a contract is broken an Ethics Order is to be written
and
distributed to Ethics WW, all St. Hills, all AOs and all Orgs. The Master
at Arms or
Ethics Officer will keep a folder of this type of Ethics Order.
Under no circumstances whatever will any services be allowed for a
former staff
member with an unpaid debt to a Scientology Organization. The HCO Executive
Secretary of the Organization at which a contract is broken must ensure
that an Ethics
Order is written and distributed within 24 hours of the contract breach.
The Ethics
Order is to include the amount of money owed to the Org.
A further Ethics Order is written and distributed as above when the debt
is paid in
full.
W/0 Larry Krieger
Mission Boom I/C
for
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:LK.nt.ei.rd
Copyright � 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 14 DECEMBER 1969
Remimeo
Div 1's
Div 2's
Div 3's
ORG PROTECTION
Orgs who send their staff for training to a higher org, must first
demand of the
staff member that he sign a Note to the extent of $5,000 in order that he
may
commence the course. (Each course received by the staff member at org
expense, is
priced at the value of $5,000.)
Such a Note, as mentioned above, must be legally binding in that if he
breaks his
Contract, he is automatically in debt to the org for $5,000. Legal action
is taken in the
case of refusal to pay this debt, or failure to adhere to regular payments
until the debt
has been paid off fully. His Certs and Awards are suspended, and further
training or
processing is denied until the matter is handled. SH & AO Registrars are
informed by
the org of Contract breakers.
Val Docs, Div 1, Dept 3, receives the original of the Note once it is
signed and
witnessed, and Accounts receives a copy for filing in the staff member's
Accounts
folder. A copy is retained by the staff member and presented to the
Registrar prior to
being enrolled on the course. NO NOTE = INELIGIBLE FOR THE COURSE.
The note is withdrawn and cancelled when the staff member has completed
his
Contract.
It is the intention of this Policy Letter that before Contracts are
signed and
services taken at Org expense, due consideration is given to the
consequences of
Contract breakage.
Lt. Robin Roos
CS-3
for
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH: RR.rs.ei.rd
Copyright � 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 29 MARCH 1965
Remimeo
EXCERPTS FROM HCO POLICY LETTER OF NOVEMBER 9, 1964
AND NOVEMBER 26, 1964 (REVISED) FOR STAFF HATS
STAFF MEMBER LOANS
All loans to staff members from any organization or outside source must
have the
permission of the nearest Finance Secretary, before being granted or
received. The
Finance Secretary must also at once report the matter to Saint Hill.
Exception is actual
personal leases and/or Hire Purchase or Time Payment purchases by the staff
member
for his or her own use, and no monies may be borrowed by full or part time
staff
members from past or present organizational students or pcs.
STAFF REGULATIONS
Any staff member accepting for training or processing any student or pc
for his
personal profit or for favours during his time of employment on staff, or
any HASI
student or pc for two years following will be subject to a Committee of
Evidence and
possible suspension of a certificate or certificates and awards and made to
refund all
fees so illegally received to the person who paid.
REPORTING OF UNUSUAL FAVOURS
Any unusual favours received by a staff member from organizational
students or
pcs must be reported to the HCO Area Sec who must at once report the matter
via
HCO Continental to HCO Sec WW. This includes uses of cars, apartments or
receiving
expenses as well as other favours.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:mb.rd
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 21 MARCH 1965
General Non Remimeo
Post Staff Boards
HCO Sec Hat
Sthil Sen Staff
STAFF MEMBERS
AUDITING OUTSIDE PCs
It is expressly forbidden that executives or staff members of
Scientology Orgs
(which of course include Saint Hill) audit for pay any outside pcs while
employed on
staff in any organization anywhere in the world.
To do so with orgs on proportionate pay robs your fellow staff member.
Two executives have been relieved of post in the past two years for
permitting
this practice in their orgs.
If one has pcs they should be turned over to the org.
If staff works hard, pay, particularly under new promotion programmes,
is very
adequate. Pay only becomes inadequate when policy is out. To keep pay up,
keep
policy in.
Staff Auditors may only audit family and friends 8 hours per week
without pay.
This is the original rule, to save them from demands on their free time.
This is
sometimes interpreted wrongly as permission to audit 8 hours for fee. It is
not so
applicable. They must not receive pay for those 8 hours.
Just think what you would do in Scientology if I started working for pay
outside
orgs. Things would get really upset and, as proven by the slump all orgs
take whenever
I move about or take time off (it just happened again), we need all of us
on the team.
When I have audited pcs for pay, ever since there have been orgs, I have
turned over
every cent to the org I was in-they were just org pcs even when they
applied to me. (I
haven't offered to audit anyone for years but it would still be done that
way today if I
did.)
Failure to report instances where the outside auditing policy is
violated is also
reprehensible.
If you don't have enough money, do your job well enough to put all of us
in
clover. That's how I do it. Try it if you need extra money. It works.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:ml.rd
Copyright � 1965
By L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 4 JANUARY 1966
Remimeo
All Staff Members
STAFF MEETING
Staff Meetings should convene on the first Tuesday evening of any month
at the
Organization headquarters.
The Chairman of the Staff Meeting has always been and shall continue to
be the
Executive Director or his deputy, the LRH Communicator.
The business of the Staff Meeting shall be:
To gather agreement and permit staff origination on matters
relating to personnel and duties. To suggest promotional, maint-
enance and organizational changes to the executives of the
Organization.
For any staff resolution to be a staff resolution, a majority of staff
members must
be present, else there is no quorum. For any staff resolution to be passed
or
conclusively killed, a majority vote of those present is necessary. In case
of a tie, only
then does the Chairman vote.
Robert's Rules of Order may be applied or not by the Chairman to the
Staff
Meeting as the need of formality may seem to be indicated but in no case
should the
business of Staff Meeting be unduly retarded by the introduction of Rules
for that
purpose.
Staff Meeting resolutions should be made into minutes. These are
presented to the
Advisory Council for information and the Executive Director for approval
before they
become law.
Special Staff Meetings not on a regular meeting date may be called, (1)
by the
Executive Director or his deputy the LRH Communicator, or (2) by a Staff
Member on
three days' notice by posting a notice on the Comm Center Bulletin Board,
stating the
time (but not during business hours) and the exact business to be covered
by the
meeting and the meeting shall be convened only if a majority of staff then
sign or
initial such notice. Neither meeting shall have legal force if a majority
of staff members
are not present and if the Executive Director or his deputy the LRH
Communicator is
not in the chair. Resolutions of such meetings must proceed in the usual
channels.
The Secretarial to the Executive Director shall take down and type all
minutes of
Staff Meeting.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH: ml.rd
Copyright � 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 18 APRIL AD 15
Gen. Non Remimeo
Exec HATS
Magazine Article
Franchise
Field Staff Members Hats
CONTESTS AND PRIZES
In Scientology, we have a policy about CONTESTS and PRIZES.
The surest way to break a lot of hearts is to run a contest in which
only a minority get prizes. That is very homo sap.
In Scientology we never offer minority type prizes.
Our CONTESTS must be planned so that EVERY ENTRANT gets a prize or the
prize.
This comes from the nature of Scientology itself. Scientology is the
only "game" in the Universe where everybody wins.
We must mirror this fact and punch it home whenever we can.
From this various policies develop: Scientology is open to all people.
In certificates and status the road is open to all Scientologists who
can qualify level by level.
On any offering, anybody can have it if he or she qualifies.
We have lots of certificates and grades.
There are no exceptions. Anybody has a chance to go up in certificates,
staff status and case gain and state of beingness.
Our posts are something else. Bill's top attainment is his recovery of
self. His attainment is not becoming Joe.
Our posts we hold in trust as our appointed place. Though gained by
ability, posts are not prizes. They are responsibilities we hold to help.
Therefore we do not seek each other's posts.
We respect the other fellow whatever his status and give him his right
to win the biggest prize of all, himself or herself. That prize is won by
dedicated exact application of Scientology and full support of our mission
in our organizations and the public.
Organized, we can each one win the biggest prize that can be offered-a
full recovery of self.
As a team, helping one another, respecting each other's posts, our
seniors and juniors on staff, and following our admin and tech procedures,
we keep the door open and make the grade ourselves-the Top can't be reached
without help, without organization, without the policies that coordinate
our actions and the exact technology we apply.
So we don't offer minority prizes. We symbolize in every contest an open
door for case and status gain for all by giving everyone a prize in any
"contest" we hold.
And we hold our posts, not as something to be contested for, but as a
competent teammate in a strong and well coordinated operation in which each
one does his job.
There is no greater game in the Universe than Scientology, for it is the
only game in which everybody wins. And that places it far above all other
games and makes it the game of games where everybody gets the ultimate
prize of self-and sound companionship as well.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:mb.rd
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
37 Fitzroy Street, London W.I
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 2 JUNE 1959
CONVERT TO
SEC. E.D.
PURCHASING LIABILITY OF STAFF MEMBERS
All purchases by a Scientology organization must be done by purchase
order, duly
agreed upon and signed by those in authority before any purchase or
contract may be
binding upon the organization.
Should a purchase be made or a contract entered into for the
organization by a
staff member with no purchase order, the Association Secretary,
Organization
Secretary, HCO Secretary or person in overall charge of that organization
may refute
the purchase or contract and may require the offending staff member to pay
for the
purchase or contract out of his own pocket as a personally entered into
arrangement.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:gh.rd
Copyright � 1959
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 22 SEPTEMBER 1965
Gen Non-Remimeo
KEYS
When a person receives a key from the Key Officer, he or she must
immediately
sign for it in the key book.
If at any time a person leaves that space for which he or she has a key,
then
sometime during that same day, that person MUST take the key back to the
Key
Officer, who will then give the key to the new occupier who then signs for
it.
If the Key Officer finds that a space has been taken over by someone and
that he
or she has a key which has not been signed for in the key book, then the
previous
owner of that space gets fined 10/- as he did not return the key to the
proper source.
The new owner also gets fined 10/- as he is using the space illegally.
A person is also fined 10/- if he or she loses a key.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:ml.rd
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 8 SEPTEMBER 1965
Gen Non-Remimeo
SUPPLY OFFICER
All divisions should have a quantity of Internal Requisition Forms to be
filled in
whenever supplies are needed.
The person who requests the goods, signs his name at the bottom of the
form and
so does his department head. The exact reason why these goods are required
should
also be included on the Internal Requisition Form.
Only one type of requirement should be asked for on one form, e.g. "A
Black
Biro and a Red Biro". This would be OK as it is just on the subject of
pens. But "A
Black Biro and a ream of foolscap paper" should be entered on two forms.
This shows
how many items each division orders per week.
Do not order extravagantly-you can only write with one pen at a time;
otherwise
the Supply Officer has to do the cutting down of requirements and this can
lead to
unnecessary ARC breaks.
All Internal Requisition Forms should be in the Supply Officer's basket
by 12.0
p.m. each day. If you have ordered goods since 12.0 p.m. the previous day,
then you or
a representative should go to the place appointed by the Supply Officer
between 1.0
p.m. and 1.30 p.m., where the Supply Officer will issue the requirements.
The Supplies that are available at short notice are such items as:
Folders of each
division colour, paper of each division colour, black, red, green Biro
pens, felt pens for
poster work and make-up department, most envelopes, paper clips, drawing
pins,
typewriter ribbons, Sellotape, foolscap paper, ink for stamp pads, rubber
bands,
gummed labels and carbon paper.
However, if in doubt, present yourself at the appointed place between
1.0 and
1.30 p.m. The Supply Officer will then inform you if the requirement is in
stock or if
it has had to be ordered.
When a requirement has to be ordered, the Supply Officer will inform you
when
it arrives at Saint Hill. If it is a rush item, it can be issued as soon as
it arrives, otherwise
it is collected at the correct time.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:ml.rd
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 15 FEBRUARY 1964
All Heads of
Organizations
HCO Sees
Dir Admin
Administrators and
Supervisors of
Companies.
THE EQUIPMENT OF ORGANIZATIONS
The person in possession of organization equipment is responsible for
the equipment. On its loss or damage through carelessness or neglect the
person in whose charge it had been placed, not only the person who damaged
or neglected it, is liable to have to recompense the company or myself for
the cost of the repairs or loss of the equipment or some portion thereof.
Stock cards for all equipment possession or issue in organizations shall
be prepared by the administrative head of the organization. If equipment is
not so accounted for and is lost or damaged the administrator of the
company, not having a stock card of issue on it, becomes liable financially
to the organization or myself for its repair or replacement.
The idea of "company property" is both stupid and dangerous. That which
is "owned by everyone" is actually owned by no one and falls apart. A
company, corporation or state does not live or breathe and so it cannot
care for anything. The doubtless noble experiments of totalitarian communal
states such as Cuba or Russia starve and fail because of this one idee
fixe: only the state owns. That leaves nobody to have or take care of
anything. Their enormous five year plans never materialize because their
tractors will not run. Their tractors won't run because they belong to
nobody. Saying they belong to the state is a way of abandoning them. A
company can't really own anything since it has no concept of ownership. And
you see how "company property" falls apart.
Look at it this way: You own those things that are in your charge. When
you take over a position you become richer by the things that go with it.
You stay rich as long as you keep them in good shape. You get poor to the
degree they go bad or won't work or get abused because you incautiously
lent them to a careless fellow worker. Righteous indignation because "you
messed up my typewriter" or "you scarred up my auditing table" is not
peculiar, it's quite in order.
Look around you and see what you own in your position. If two people use
it, only one, even so, can own it.
It is curious that around orgs my own personal possessions are given
good care. I never worry about my Mest being in org hands. And a lot of it
is. If it's Ron's, it's taken care of. That's a long standing observation.
But "company property" gets badly abused at times. If you figure that I own
everything in Scientology and you own the things that go with your
position, we'll have more and have it longer.
___________________
There are three kinds of possessions in Scientology organizations.
TITLE A: These are permanent installations, buildings, walls, radiators,
anything fixed in place.
TITLE B: Valuable equipment which is not expendable. These are desks,
typewriters, mimeo machines, blackboards, chairs, furniture, rugs,
decorations, cars, etc.
TITLE C: These are expendables. Office supplies, paper, chalk, stencils,
dust rags, mops, etc. They are issued on the understanding they will get
used up.
In inventorying and making up cards of issue to persons in charge, Title
A is issued to the head of the organization or department exclusively using
them. Title B is made up to the head of the department or the person who is
actually using them. Title C is issued to the person using the material.
Stock cards are kept on Title A and Title B. The administrative head has
to have a signature for Title A and Title B as having given it to somebody
who then signs for it.
No stock cards may be written as "Issued to Training Dept" or "Director
of Training". They are issued to Richard Roe, the person himself. The main
building is not issued to "Organization Secretary". It is issued to George
George, a person who happens also to be Organization Secretary. A car is
not issued to "Department of Materiel". It is issued to John John, who
happens also to be Director of Materiel.
When a person is transferred, his possessions are signed for by the
person, as a person, who takes over that position. And so long as the
person who owned them has failed to transfer them to the new person, he or
she can be charged up for them. Regardless of post transfers, the person on
the Stock Card remains the owner and is liable for any loss or abuse until
the possessions are actually signed for by somebody else.
If it exists somebody owns it and has signed for it. And until a new
person signs for it the old owner is liable for it regardless of his
whereabouts or new post.
Until it is signed for initially it is owned by the administrative head
and if anything happens to it or it is lost, the administrative head is
liable for it.
The stock cards should be stiff cards of good size kept in a box that
fits them. There is only one card per piece of equipment. The card says
where it is and what it is and when bought and has ample area for owning
and transferring signatures.
Cards are prepared from Inventory and are checked by Accounts records.
A new acquisition brings about a new card which is then signed for.
The head of the organization is accountable personally for any losses up
to July 1, 1964, which occurred during his term of office.
To dispose of Title A or Title B, or account for its loss, it is
necessary to survey it. This is done by a board of three executives of
departments who must see the equipment being disposed of or certify it as
lost. A Survey Board is liable for any falsification of records.
In organizations that have no Director of Administration, the head of
the organization acts in his capacity and is responsible for having Stock
Cards.
_________________
We are pretty good withal on the subject of equipment. Its loss or
damage is not one of our major problems. Only one organization,
Johannesburg, has gone mad on the subject where one Senogles, temporary
head of it, had a passion for "losing tapes and tape recorders".
However, we are expanding. Expansion needs some orderly ownership. There
is not very much Title A and Title B about so it is not a very heavy task
to organize it. If we straighten this out now, we'll save ourselves a mess
later.
Further, at this time inventories for corporation transfers have to be
done anyway, so we may as well get it all done at once.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:gl.rd
Copyright � 1964
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 3 NOVEMBER 1965
Remimeo
EQUIPMENT
Equipment of all types in HCO and the Org must be specifically assigned
to
divisions and departments and the Inventory Officer must have a signature
for every
piece of equipment in the organization.
No single piece of equipment may be across two or more divisions. Each
piece
must be wholly in one.
By equipment is meant any item costing more than #5 or $10.
If a piece of equipment is lost or damaged or neglected there must be a
division,
department and a person that can be named.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:ml.rd
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 12 OCTOBER 1967
Gen Non-Remimeo
OPERATIONAL, DEFINITION OF
A lot of trouble in the Sea Org comes from lack of grasp of what we mean
by
Operational.
Definition: AN ITEM THAT IS OPERATIONAL WORKS WELL WITH-
OUT FURTHER ASSISTANCE OR ATTENTION.
This does NOT say that operational means something works. It works well.
It
works without assistance or patch up or holding on to it. It works without
attention. It
doesn't have to be continually watched.
The break down in mail comm stemmed in part from the Photocopier. The
error
was not in the copier. The error was in having something around that
doesn't work
well, needs continual attention, breaks down regularly. That comes from not
reading or
understanding the Ships Org Book. Operational was misunderstood. This
Photocopier
was wholly non-operational in that it had to be continually .nursed, was
operated in
bright light and took up tons of time. Because it was there nobody simply
typed a
copy of the vital dispatches. One must NOT keep non-operational things
around or
they must be made operational by above definition.
Also the early Flag Order about fast communication being vital was not
complied
with.
A costly mess resulted from delayed comm. All because OPERATIONAL was
not
understood.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jp.rd
Copyright � 1967
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
NOT HCO POLICY LETTER
ORIGINAL COLOUR FLASH
NOT GREEN ON WHITE
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
LONDON
Issued at Washington
HCO BULLETIN OF 28 FEBRUARY 1957
ALL STAFF, U.S. and LONDON
HATS
Every Staff Department head in every organization should have a folder
in his
desk in which to place all written material and bulletins which apply to
his job.
This is not a casual action. It is vitally important. It is his "hat".
This folder should be labelled, for example, "Director of Processing",
or "Indoc
Instructor", or "HCO Secretary", or any such post.
The folder should then receive, after study, any policy letter or
executive order or
HCO Bulletin applying in general or in particular to that job.
If you do not have a complete hat, obtain from HCO or elsewhere the
missing
pieces.
Also, and this is very important, write up and paste into the front of
the folder a
full description of your job.
Only in this way can we have use of such orders and bulletins. Only in
this way
could you be relieved in an orderly fashion for a vacation or transferred
to another
post.
Please do this at once. Whoever is in charge of supplies can make a
folder available
to you.
L. RON HUBBARD
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 5 MAY 1959
POLICY ON SEC e.d.s AND HATS
The function of Sec E.D.s and HATS is to preserve the policy, lines and
shape of
the organization.
However, when we make a staff the effect of the post too much we spoil
the
necessity of the staff member creating his post and job. He ceases to be at
cause and
cannot solve the problems of his post.
It is vital that HCO Area Sees at once get staff members to realize the
real role of
Sec E.D.s and Hats and despite these to create the post continually and
handle the
problems of that post. HCO Sees should insist upon the necessity to be
causative on a
post while still abiding with policy and purpose.
Let's get these staff members at CAUSE POINT.
The actual mechanics are these. The individual case-wise is being a
total effect of
something (nothing to do with Scientology or his post). Sec E.D.s and hats
come in as
a lock on this-not themselves bad.
The thing to do is get an individual on post case-wise up to cause by
modern
processes. Then preach at him (1) Keep the post created and in line and (2)
Solve the
problems of his post and handle things.
This is the path to raising (1) Dissemination, (2) Effectiveness of
Central
Organizations and (3) Units!
Let's do it.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:mp.rd
Copyright � 1959
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 15 SEPTEMBER 1959
CenOCon HATS AND
OTHER FOLDERS
There are three classes of folders permanently assigned to each staff
member of HCO and the Central Org.
The first of these is a hat folder. In it should be included only the
hat write-up and policies issued which directly relate to the individual
post.
The second of these is a technical folder into which one places all
technical bulletins issued. These must never be put in one's hat folder.
The third of these is an organizational folder. All bulletins and policy
letters relating to one's job but only by reason of being a staff member
are included in this folder.
These folders are the following colours for your info and ready
reference:
Hat Folders are Blue
Staff Folders are Yellow
Technical Folders are Goldenrod.
THE KEEPING OF THESE FOLDERS
The responsibility of keeping these folders straight lies with the
individual staff member.
One must always have all the write-ups and policies governing his job
ready to hand in his hat folder. The reason for this is basically to keep
the structure of the organization in writing and straight for reference by
the staff member. There is also a great advantage here in having a complete
hat folder in one's desk when one is not present, for his duties and
functions can be looked up and done by another when he is on vacation.
Further, when one is promoted or posts are changed there is always a loss
of the bits and pieces, and the person new on post needs constant guidance
from the member leaving it unless all these bits are in the hat.
Random despatches, technical bulletins, general staff bulletins are
never put in one's hat folder. To do so is to thicken the folder up to a
point where it cannot be used for ready reference. This defeats the purpose
of the hat folder for the staff member himself and for his possible
temporary relief.
Letters and policies governing the fact of being a member of staff, such
as rules and regulations of HCO or the organization and hours and schedules
for this and that, all belong in the staff member folder. This should
include no technical.
All technical bulletins, policy letters and other technical matters, and
even one's own notes on the technical aspect of keeping one's job straight,
belong in a separate technical folder which, accumulating, becomes very
valuable to everyone.
________________________________________________________
This then is the way we keep our posts and positions and functions
straight in HCO as well as in Central Organizations.
These three types of folders are stored handily in one's desk and are
the only pieces of paper allowed in one's desk. (Never make despatches or
comm material vanish off the lines and into a desk.)
If these three folders are in good order one has a ready method of
checking over all sides of his job and all policies relating to his job. If
one has his folders it is possible to break down his job into various parts
when the volume of the post gets too high so as to have exact write-ups of
instructions to pass over to newly acquired assistants.
Unless we have some visible record of our posts and functions we can
easily get into a confusion of lines and actions, which has been known to
bring chaos to an organization to say nothing of much extra work and Dev-T
to its individuals.
We have long since found that the old time 'organization chart' was
inadequate for our complex functions and actions. We have also found that
memory is inadequate in the supervision of posts and functions.
Your attention to and care of these three types of folders is
recommended.
LRH:brb.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright � 1959
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 1 JULY 1965
Issue III
Remimeo
Basic Staff Hats
ALL DIVISIONS
HATS, THE REASON FOR
HAT: Slang for the title and work of a post in an org. Taken from the
fact that
in many professions such as railroading the type of hat worn is the badge
of the job.
Organization consists of certain people doing certain jobs.
Disorganization consists of each person wearing all hats regardless of
assignment.
In a smooth organization that runs well and succeeds EACH PERSON WEARS
HIS OWN ASSIGNED HAT.
When a person has a job that belongs to another hat than his own, he
passes the
job to the other hat.
Each staff member is a specialist. He specializes in his own hat.
When people wear only their own hats then one has terminals in the org.
If
terminals exist then communication can flow correctly. If communication can
flow
correctly then work gets done and the org can get in income.
TERMINAL-a point that receives, relays and sends communication.
If people present each wear any old hat or all the hats, then no
terminals exist, no
communication can flow properly, work can't get done and there is no
income. There
is chaos and it is an unhappy place.
In a green org staff members don't know what other staff members do. So
they
don't know where to send things so they do them themselves. Worse, they
don't even
know there is an org there. It is quite pathetic. Like rookie troops or
militia or a mob.
Of course the place goes broke.
You can tell a good executive. He only hands out despatches and work to
the
correct hats. A lousy executive hands the work to anyone handy, regardless
of title.
He's in apathy and doesn't know there's an org there.
The whole theory of successful organization is to have posts that only
do specific
things, to have sections and departments and divisions which specialize,
and to have
people who only wear their own hats and know who is wearing the other hats
and send
their work to them.
A train crew has a Conductor. He wears a Conductor's hat. It has an
engineer. He
wears the engineer's hat. It has a fireman. He wears the fireman's hat.
Where do you
think the train would get to if each of these three didn't know who were
the other
two? The Conductor wearing the engineer's hat would mean no fares. The
fireman
wearing the Conductor's hat would mean no steam. And the engineer wearing
the
Conductor's hat would mean no train going anywhere.
So beware of wearing other hats than your own, or of being ignorant of
what
other hats are being worn. For nobody will get anywhere and you'll find
yourself
overworked, dismayed and unhappy.
Each person to his own job and damn the fellow who tries to give you
things
which aren't your hat and doesn't know there's an org there.
Realize that the basic theory of organization is this:
1. SO LONG AS EACH KNOWS AND WEARS AND WORKS AT HIS OWN HAT
ONLY, THINGS WILL BE SMOOTH.
2. AND SO LONG AS EACH PERSON KNOWS WHAT THE OTHER HATS
AROUND HIM DO, HE CAN GIVE THEM THEIR WORK WHEN IT COMES
HIS WAY AND ALL WILL BE SUCCESSFUL AND SMOOTH.
If you let somebody steal your hat (do your work for you that you are
supposed
to do) that person will soon have you in trouble or have your job so
snarled it can't be
done.
If you don't know who in the org is supposed to do what and make them do
their
own jobs when those drift your way, you'll be overworked like mad.
If somebody tries to get you to do something that isn't your job on the
org board
then FILE AN ETHICS CHIT FOR JOB ENDANGERMENT. For at the very least that
person is reducing income by not knowing the lines and posts of the org.
When you are assigned an additional duty, make sure it is also properly
in your
department or division or you'll be messed up.
Don't permit people to mess up hats around you or you will be in chaos.
Only organization can make your job smooth. And wearing your hat and
doing
your own job and knowing and making other people wear only theirs and do
their own
job, is the total secret of organization.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:mh.rd
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 1 JANUARY 1968
Remimeo
All Staff Hats
HAT WRITE-UPS AND FOLDERS
INSPECTION OF HAT FOLDERS
(Excerpts from HCO Policy Letter of
January 10th, 1958 and May 13th, 1964 rewritten,
SECED 707 SH 385 WW 9 Aug 1966, SECED 100 LONDON 26 Jan 1959)
WRITE UP YOUR HAT.
This applies to every staff member.
A copy is furnished the HCO Exec Sec WW.
By "Hat" is meant your job title and duties. It comes from Railway slang-
the
trainman wears one kind of hat, the conductor another-thus "Hat" equals
what your
job is.
A "Hat" is a permanent folder, in your possession, which describes your
duties on
your post in full and which contains policy letters which directly relate
to that post.
The folder must be completely up to date.
When writing up your hat, put down your Division and Department number.
(Find yourself on the Org Board in the Comm Centre.) Then write down your
post
TITLE (i.e.. Mail Clerk, Cook, etc.). Then the PURPOSE of the post is to be
given,
followed by the DUTIES of the post-to be numbered separately. This write-up
is a
brief but complete account of your current duties, i.e., exactly what you
are doing on
your post at the time, not what you are supposed to be doing or hope to do.
Write in the times things are done and where you work and who your
immediate
senior is.
KNOW YOUR HAT-MAKE SURE IT IS KEPT CURRENT. You are responsible
for seeing that it is kept up to date.
Do not destroy old hat material. Forward anything now obsolete in your
hat to
the Hats Officer, HCO Div 1, Dept 1, for master filing.
If you do not know what to do with anything in your hat, send it to the
Hats
Officer, otherwise valuable details of the organization may be lost.
The Hats Officer may call upon any staff member at any time to deliver
up his hat
folder, in person, for immediate inspection.
If the hat folder does not completely describe the post it covers and
the duties
and procedure thereof, or if it is incomplete, or if it is in gross error,
the Hats Officer
may notify the Dir Income to debit the account of the person concerned to
the
amount of #2.10.0 sterling; $10.00 U.S., or equivalent in other currencies.
If the folder
is missing entirely, the fine shall be #6.0.0 sterling or $25.00 U.S.
There is no limit to the number of times a folder may be called for or
the number
of fines save only that only one fine may be levied for each offence.
Recentness of
appointment shall be no excuse.
The Dir Income is authorized herewith to so debit a person's account on
notification from the Hats Officer. Any funds so derived shall be made part
of the
Building Fund.
Scientology Organizations are complicated structures. The know-how is
contained
in its hats. The structure becomes unworkable when posts and duties become
lost.
Proposed by a Board of Investigation
Len Regenass
Kevin Kember
Halldora Sigurdson
Tony Dunleavy: Qual Sec WW
Len Regenass: HCO Area Sec WW
Eunice Ford: HCO Exec Sec WW
Tony Dunleavy: Org Exec Sec WW
Ken Delderfield: LRH Comm WW
Joan McNocher: D/Guardian WW
Mary Sue Hubbard
The Guardian WW
for
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jp.rd
Copyright � 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 7 JANUARY 1966
Remimeo
Staff Hat
URGENT
LEAVING POST
WRITING YOUR HAT
(A copy of this should be clipped to every transfer
order issued in an org but failure to do so does not
relieve the transferee of responsibility.)
On changing post, it is vital for the staff member (executive or
general) to write
up his or her hat for the post being vacated.
A copy is furnished the HCO Exec Sec WW.
A person is still considered to also be on any post he is vacating
until:
(a) A new person is provided for the post.
(b) He or she has written up a complete hat giving the duties, lines
and
peculiarities of the post.
(c) Turned the hat over to the new staff member and a copy to HCO
Exec Sec
WW.
(d) Turned over all the equipment and supplies of the post and
gotten a receipt
for them signed by the new person on the post.
(e) Sent a copy of the items in (d) to the Supply Officer.
(f) Settled the new person in the post so that it is operating.
If these are not done, an organization goes to pieces on expansion as it
loses its
lines and terminals and functions through promotions.
Staff members not doing the above may be called upon as responsible for
the
actions, failures and materiel of a post for up to 2 years after leaving it
and his or her
pay may be debited for any losses or damages in the post vacated without
complying
with the above even though the loss or damage was done by a successor.
Note that a person ordered to a new post is also responsible (regardless
of any
other action by another to fill it) for seeing that the post is competently
filled before
he is legally off it. This is of long standing custom.
None of this exempts Personnel or executives from filling posts, writing
hats or
accounting for materiel or supplies. But the staff member leaving a post
has the
greatest responsibility.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:ml.rd
Copyright � 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 7 NOVEMBER 1962
CenOCon
Franchise
Field
RE-ISSUE SERIES (4)
CENTRAL ORGANIZATIONS EFFICIENCY
(Re-issue of HCO Policy Letter of May 22, 1959)
One could say with bitterness that the only place some Central
Organizations
show self-determinism is the HGC and then only on processes.
We are getting too big to refuse to make decisions locally. If we are
going to bring
self-determinism back to man, we'd sure as the devil better display it in
ourselves and
on our jobs.
Once the basic purpose of a post or department is known, only two things
should
then be necessary:
1. Self-determined and responsible continuous creation of department and
post, and
2. Holding the communication lines rigidly in place.
No number of specific, detailed orders can remedy anything if these two
are not
in existence. Specific, microscopic orders on how the job is to be done is
not only
impossible but defeats the purpose of posts.
The unit depends utterly upon each department and post acting
causatively. The
more problems that aren't handled by the department or post receiving them,
the more
confusion develops.
It is my job to appoint or confirm people on posts, to map general
strategy, to
provide written communication and keep myself informed. If I am impeded in
doing
that job, we'll never make it. And floods of requests for decisions which
are well within
the power of central organizations to make defeats us in two ways:
1. It cuts my lines by jamming them and
2. Denies us general leadership and materiel.
When I appoint or confirm a Scientologist on a post, I say "There, he'll
handle
that area." I don't say "Now I've got some more nursing to do."
If we are to bring self-determinism to Man, we must be prepared to
exhibit it
ourselves. Defining self-determinism as it applies to departments and
posts, is very
easy-It is the willingness to decide and act in a causative manner toward
the traffic
and functions of that post. When we have a person on a post who is the
total effect of
that post, we have the post caving in on him and the tendency to pull the
organization
in with it. Only when the person on that post can assume positive and
effective cause
do we have gains in dissemination, units, ARC and MEST.
There are two ways of being a total effect-just to fixate and act not at
all, just to
disperse and throw everything off with resultant confusion to all.
We must come to orderly cause point on every post. We must, we must, we
must.
The full statement of function of every post is necessary or we have
duplication
of effort which we can't afford. But why beyond that do people demand
decisions by
others? Information they need. Traffic they need. A rigid communication
system and
exact lines they need, but decisions?
How psycho can you get? Given information and the purpose anybody can
make
a decision. Unless he's batty.
Right here and now I declare us to have become of an age to grow up.
Here we must decide, are we to have a Mussolini empire where only Rome
could
decide? Or are we to have tightly run departments and posts, taking their
own
causativeness over their functions and traffic.
True, I'm pretty clever about things. And I'm handy to have around. But
I rebel
at making slaves. If I cannot teach you to stand on your own two feet on
your post,
I've surely failed. You've got to be willing to be hanged for mistakes and
not tremble
for fear of making them. Be right on a majority of decisions, and don't be
wrong on
any important ones. But if you are you'll only be hanged. How come your
neck is so
precious when mine isn't?
Yes, it's important what you decide. Yes, it's the survival of your area
at stake if
you're wrong. But why be timid about it? The whole place will wither and
die where
you are if you aren't causative. The man or girl on the post is the one who
puts life in
it.
We have attained now
1. Our technical know-how
2. Our method of progress into the society-HAS Co-Audit
3. Our best form of organization (6 departments).
And we can only be stopped now by failure to be causative, correct and
decisive on our
posts.
We're playing for blood. The stake is Earth. If we don't make it nobody
will.
We're the sole agency in existence today that can forestall the erasure of
all civilization
or bring a new better one. If we aren't willing to be hanged for our
mistakes we'll
surely fry for them.
So, let's get causative, each and every one.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:gl.rd
Copyright � 1962
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 11 APRIL 1961
CenOCon
HOW TO DO A STAFF JOB
If you want a higher level of dissemination and a higher unit or salary,
the way to obtain them is simple.
1. Do your own job.
2. Insist that the other staff member do his-but don't do it for him or
her.
Example of error: HCO Sec is so busy being D of P or D of T, no hats or
tech bulletins get checked. Result: randomity. Assn Sec is so busy being
Dir of Accounts, no executive supervision and assistance occurs. D of P
does so much Admin, no technical results happen. Etc., etc.
You can wear several hats. The point is, do them, not other hats.
Every time you do the other fellow's job for him or her, you cover up a
camouflaged hole. People who are camouflaged holes make Dev T. The next
thing you know you are protecting the ineffective, have a large number on
staff and get no work done and get no unit.
Let the ineffective either sink or get audited. Don't protect them.
Do your own jobs.
Refuse to do the other fellow's.
Make ineffective staff members look like ineffectives by leaving the
hole open, not hidden.
Don't hide bad work from executives. Your game is not to protect the
goofballs but to get a show on the road.
So please do your own job and do it well.
Even if an executive asks you to do somebody else's job-don't. Say,
instead, "Am I transferred?" If the answer is no, tell him to get lost.
I'll back you up.
Do your own jobs. What are they?
And you'll see-you'll have wider dissemination and higher income.
Every hour you spend off post doing somebody else's job is an hour lost
off your lines. They catch up with you. Only then could you become frantic,
overworked, dispersed.
So please. Do your own job and let the other fellow reap the hurricane
if he doesn't do his.
I do my own job. I have pretty exact hats. They are Research, Writing,
Dissemination, Goals, Justice and higher level personnel. Every time a
staff member goofs, it tends to roll on up and knock my hats sideways.
So please handle your own job. That way the world will prosper and so
will we.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:ph.rd
Copyright � 1961
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 12 SEPTEMBER 1967
Remimeo
Org Exec Course
POST, HANDLING OF
Handling your post contains an element which is easily overlooked but
without
which you may have many troubles hard to trace.
IN ESSENCE YOU ARE WEARING MY ADMINISTRATIVE HAT FOR THAT
POST.
You may wear the hat letter perfect and yet have a miss. As it is my hat
really, no
matter how small the post is, it has to be worn as I would wear it. The air
and attitude
of how it's worn is important.
Many an HCO Sec in the old days successfully got out of a tough problem
by
asking, "What would Ron do in this situation?" And did it and all worked
out.
Therefore it is worthwhile to know how I would go about things.
I could detail for hours the admin indicators and admin technology I
use. But
you've got the bulk of it already in org policy letters.
There are only a few things I might add that would help.
One is that I work exclusively on the "Greatest good for the greatest
number of
dynamics."
I believe that to command is to serve and only gives one the right to
serve.
I have to be, above all things, effective and cannot fall short of being
effective or
explain ineffectiveness away.
I never compromise with a situation to be agreeable.
In handling something I figure out if I want to play that game or not
and if I
don't I won't. And if I don't I will do anything needful to disconnect from
it and if I
do I will do anything I can to win it.
There is at least one, however, that is wildly out in many executives.
And that is
how I handle other posts.
My entire concentration is to put the person on a given post that
possibly can
handle it and then let him or her get on with it.
The difference is this: others put a person on a post and then hammer
and pound
him with orders as to how to handle it. If the appointee gets in trouble,
others give him
streams of orders and directions.
I don't. If a person has been trusted with a post I also trust him to
handle it.
If he or she obviously can't, I find another person who possibly can.
I give a person on a post a lot of chances. I know posts are hard to
handle. But if
the statistic goes down and down and stays down, and no admin or tech
advice has
been of any avail, I don't hammer away with streams of orders. I just find
another
person.
This I know is a greater plus and minus than people easily tolerate. The
plus is
that I extend complete trust to an appointee. The minus is that, if the
stat is down and
WON'T come up, I find another person. There is no in between streams of
directions or
nagging.
Also, after a time, I grant that people can change and give a removed
person
another chance. I don't consider they will be bad forever. When I handle a
situation
that is bad I handle it according to the greatest good for the majority of
dynamics.
Then, when it IS handled, I usually try to pick up individuals who have had
to be shot
in the handling. I don't forget them.
You will see me handle situations ruthlessly and bring it all off and
then you may
not see that I try afterwards to patch up whoever had to be shot.
People also try to teach me that it is useless to try to salvage a gone
dog, a low
stat failure who had his chance. I refuse to learn it. I still try.
As time goes on I even love my enemies but after I have rendered them
powerless
to stop us.
I put a person on a job and let him or her get on with it. I don't act
unless it is
obvious the roof is falling in. Then I find somebody else who possibly can
hold it. And
also I patch up the fellow I had to remove and some day give him another
chance.
Evidence of this is all around.
I don't try to force a job to be held by streams of detailed
instructions once
failure is apparent. From the moment I see it isn't being held to the
moment I appoint
somebody new I will myself act to hold the post in any way I can, no matter
how
distant it is. But my attention is really on finding a new person to
appoint and when
that's done I get off the line and let him get on with it.
It makes a far more forceful organization to handle things this way and
a far
happier one in the long run.
A person always knows, with me, if his job is secure. If his stat is up,
it is. I'll not
admonish or permit him to be pushed about.
This may seem to be a brutal way to go about things but remember this:
We are a
few and we have an enormous area to salvage that long ago went down for the
third
time. If we fail it is improbable the job will ever again be done as, on
evidence that the
problem still exists, it has never before been solved in all the past long
ages. So we can't
really take chances. Not with the whole human race. So we do our jobs and
see that
our jobs are done. We have a trust which, if we fail it, condemns
ourselves, our friends,
our future to continued oblivion. So we mustn't fail. Or permit others to
fail. And that
is how and why we ARE getting the job done.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jp.rd
Copyright � 1967
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 22 FEBRUARY 1968
Remimeo
ETHICS AND ADMIN
SLOW ADMIN
The secret of any executive success is the ability to Complete Cycles of
Action
Quickly.
The operative word is COMPLETE.
Ability is the ability to complete a cycle of action, to handle the
matter so it does
not have to be handled again.
Referral is irresponsibility. Executives who refer to others to make a
decision
aren't executives. They are irresponsible or are afraid of responsibility.
People who are
afraid of taking responsibility are not executives. They are labourers.
An executive who doesn't handle but puts something on wait is also
irresponsible.
Slowing an admin line by not acting NOW is also suppressive.
Suppressives cannot complete cycles of action. They either act in an
altered
direction or they continue an action beyond any possible expectancy. In
either case
they do not COMPLETE.
THEREFORE this ethics policy is brought into being:
EXECUTIVES WHO DO NOT HANDLE MATTERS SO
AS TO COMPLETE THEM, WHO REFER OR SLOW
ADMIN ARE LIABLE TO A COMM EV ON A
CHARGE OF OUT ADMIN.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jc.rd
Copyright � 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 4 MAY 1968
Remimeo
HANDLING SITUATIONS
The only tremendous error an organization makes, next to inspection
before the fact, is failing to terminatedly handle situations rapidly.
When I say terminatedly handle I mean finishedly handle. That it is
handled and that'sail, boy!
The fault of an organization's woffle, woffle, woffle, Joe won't take
responsibility for it, It's got to go some place else, and all that sort of
thing, is that it continues a situation. It just goes on and on and on
until it finally gets somewhere, goes snap, and that would be the end of
that situation. So what you ought to do is complete action now, in the
first place.
The other day I was looking at why I used to have a high stat
businesswise and cinewise and otherwise, and I suddenly realized I was
peculiar in the vicinity in which I operated. I ended cycles, I could end
more cycles in less time than any organization could dream up. In other
words I was concluding actions.
Ending cycles doesn't consist of shooting people. It consists of seeing
that it stays handled.
One of the things that has happened in the past is that I have had to
rehandle. Situations I had handled became unhandled some place and I had to
rehandle them again.
What you should specialize in is terminating the end of a situation, not
refer it to somebody else.
If the situation comes up in your vicinity well, handle it-that is
finish it off so that is the end of it.
Somebody comes along saying (natter, natter, natter). I've caught too
many of these guys. Finally I handle the situation, if it hadn't been
handled up to that point. He hadn't been handled up to that point.
When you have got this guy, handle him. Handle him, so that the fellow
is handled from here on to the end of time. Don't try to patch it up so
that it won't cause any trouble.
You have to be on the ball to do this, very much on the ball. An example
was a dissatisfied steward. The guy was going around serving up spanners in
the soup. He's going around, and he's going around and he's going around.
Well, let's handle it right there, now, when he wants the situation
handled. The guy appears for his pay and that's it! Do you get the idea.
It's finished right now.
Please quit continuing situations by reference. Handle! You can develop
more traffic internally, more upsets, more ARC breaks, than anything you
can mention by simply continuing to shunt the responsibility for ending the
cycle of action. That is all it is, just a refusal to take responsibility
for ending a cycle of action.
Somebody comes over to the Registrar to sign up. Does she have to refer
to eight different terminals as to whether or not this person is permitted
to sign up? No. She either signs the guy up or she doesn't sign the guy up.
Take responsibility for the various cycles of action. When you have
taken responsibility for them, let's hear no more about them any place.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jc.rd
Copyright � 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 16 APRIL AD 15
Issue III
Gen Non Remimeo
ALL DIVISIONS
HANDLING THE PUBLIC INDIVIDUAL
We have learned the hard way that an individual from the public must
never be asked to DECIDE or CHOOSE.
Examining experiences we have had, I finally saw there was a hidden
datum we had not been aware of in our orgs and particularly in handling the
public. I finally dug it up and here it is:
TO DECIDE ONE HAS TO UNDERSTAND.
Examining our big org chart you can see quite plainly that Understanding
is higher than the point of public entrance into processing.
Example: Mr. J is offered Particle A. He can accept it just because it
is offered. He does not have to even perceive it or talk about it or
recognize any condition. He needs to see only two things-(a) That it is
being offered by somebody or something (source), and (b) that Particle A
exists. All you have to do is show him where to obtain it and that it
exists. This is acceptance without decision. Therefore he can have it.
Example: Mr. J is offered Particle A or Particle B. Now we have an
entirely different situation. Mr. J must compare Particle A and Particle B
in order to see which is best. Therefore he must see where each comes from
(source), that each exists, establish the condition of each particle,
communicate with and about them, perceive them, relate them to each other
(become oriented), understand them, be enlightened and finally decide
(establish own purpose). If he can do this Mr. J can choose which he should
have, A or B. If Mr. J can't do all these things, Mr. J is overwhelmed,
gets confused and takes neither. One has asked Mr. J to jump up a lot of
levels. Actually the ordinary Mr. J, when raw meat and even not so raw,
would have to have a Grade IX Certificate to obtain a Grade I Certificate.
And that of course is impossible.
The door, then, is barred utterly for the majority of people into any
department or function or org, let alone the promotion and accounts
functions.
The moral is very plain. Never ask anyone in the public or field to
Decide or Choose.
Erase from our org patter "Which do you want, Mr. J?" Don't ask which
course, or what pin or what book or which auditor or what door or what time
he or she wants to start anything or which door or which road or which
membership.
Cultivate totally on a staff a didactic but pleasant approach. "Your
intensive starts________ ." "This is your next book________ ." "Your next
course should be taken on________ ." "Go to the third door." "I see you're
a pc. You go up to the second floor ________ . "
Erase even the banal "What do you wish?" or "What can I do for you?" as
even that throws confusion into it.
Example: Miss N has heard of processing. She wants
some. She never did decide to want some. She just wants
some. Now to ask her to decide anything about it
blunts that purpose. It is a thin purpose. It quivers.
Don't ask her does she want a book or want training or
want a pin or want anything else. Say only "Ah. You want processing.
That is a good thing to want. Be here on Monday and bring funds." That's
all. For heaven's sakes don't sell her processing or books or alternate
schedules or ask her if she can pay or anything. That want is frail at
best. Don't crush it! // she says timidly, "I only have________ funds,"
say, "Good. Bring them, you can owe the rest. Be here on Monday."
In short MAKE Miss N RIGHT for WANTING, thus intensifying the want. Make
her RIGHT when she talks about money. Then, being right, she can come in
Monday. Simple. Chances are, even if she works, she'll still come in.
When she comes in she says, "I'm Miss N. I'm here for my processing."
Reception MUST say, "Ah. You're Miss N. Good. There's the Accounts window.
Sign up there." The Accounts says, "Here's the slip. Sign here. Take the
slip to Room ________." Reception says, "This way Miss N." Estimations
says, "Let me have your Accounts receipt. Good. That's fine. Have you been
processed before? No? Well, you soon will be. This way please. Your auditor
is waiting." The Auditor says, "Over here, please." Adjusts the pc's chair,
etc, and sits down and says, "Start of Session." At its end he says, "Be in
this room at ________" for Miss N's next. And so on. When she gets her
Grade Certificate she's told, "That means you're a Grade I preclear. Get
the book ________ down in reception. It will tell you all about Grade II."
Miss N throughout is never anything but 8c'd. The general promotion told
her what to want by saying she could have it. She expresses the want. The
org people say, "That's a good thing to want. You can have it." And give it
to her.
That's all.
Just as you'd never ask a pc which command he wanted, you never ask the
public individual to decide.
You can teach them anything, particularly the truth. But never ask them
to decide.
By processing up through the grades this person will soon begin to see
and be there and understand and decide. And she'll surely decide she's a
Scientologist as it's true all the way!
_________________
This is new Admin tech.
You will see us knocking out now all requests to choose in all promotion
and in all routing of the public in an org. If we do so we will succeed
beautifully.
_________________
THE FUNDAMENTAL
There is an even deeper fundamental at work here. It is quite startling.
You cannot get a flow without agreement. Examine your ARC triangle and
you'll see why.
This is why an org won't flow traffic when Policy is out or not formed.
That's why any policy, agreed upon, is better than points of individual
decision on flow lines.
It's not that people can't decide in orgs. They can. But when a staff
member makes an individual decision not laid out by policy, the flow stops.
Thus all flow and traffic lines including people and money and
despatches will flow smoothly and rapidly only so long as the decisions
that can be made are also part of policy and are simple decisions.
THE RAPIDITY OF PARTICLE FLOW ALONE DETERMINES POWER.
Thus an org's strength and its sphere of influence and domain are all
regulated by
the speed of flow, both inside and outside an org!
And an org particle inside or outside an org (promotion, books, people,
money)
flows as fast as it's free of independent, unagreed-upon decision points.
Example: A flow line can go to A or B. Unless policy says "If it's above
80 it
goes to A. If it's below 80 it goes to B," then that particle becomes the
subject of a
decision that is not covered by policy and the flow stops.
You can have a lot of choices on a Comm line or traffic line but none
may be
random choices made by an individual at that moment. The flow will stop,
not because
the decision is wrong but because the next point on the flow doesn't know
what it
really is and so can't handle it except slowly or by stopping it at least
to think it over.
An org full of individual decision points not covered by group
understanding is no
org at all and will fail. It is a bunch of individuals working at cross
purposes-each
person okay, but the combined strength of the "org" is only that of one
person in a
state of confusion!
When the public is also being asked to decide about coming into an org
full of
individual decision points you get a total collapse.
The new Org Board overcomes all this. It has the choices laid out by
policy and
org form and formula. So it can grow, will be easy to work in and will
remain a happy
place unless somebody puts in some new decision points not on the chart.
The result
will be stopped flows, no traffic, no money, no org.
Never put in an "Individual random decision point" on a chart! That's
the moral.
Then all staff can look over and see easily on what's decided where.
A multiple decision point can work providing only that all the decisions
to be
made are already known to all. Take a Communicator. She has to make many
"decisions" that are known in advance. Which basket does what dispatch go
into?
That's an easy multiple "decision" providing the Org Board is easy to read
and staff
understands it and is doing the jobs for which they are posted. The line
stops when the
posts cross or aren't being handled, or at an "individual decision point"
not then easily
knowable to the staff.
This was the main problem in working out the 1965 Org Board. For the
first time
even my own post was being clarified by the need for knowable decision.
Every post
on the Board is like that. And it was all worked out. It could not have
been worked out
at all unless I had found some of the most fundamental formulas of this
Universe. The
type of pattern used kept one org going for 80 trillion years, believe it
or not. And to
that were added some very basic laws that had been overlooked by that
outfit and
which caused its eventual decay. It couldn't correct itself!
We aren't actually radically changed by the Org Board as all our own
customs are
functional on it also.
But it will flow and prosper as long as the decisions to be made are
known
already. Example: A bill disputed decision = deposit sum in Reserved
Payment
Account and get the bill straight then pay right amount. Example: Policy
says Blue
Students. They seem to be aquamarine coloured not blue. Report it to the
Inspection
and Reports Dept with all data. Inspection and Reports inspects and reports
to the
Office of LRH and policy is adjusted everywhere. Now we can handle
aquamarine
coloured students-or see that the Office of Estimations is forbidden to
wear
sun-glasses while estimating! And while the policy is under adjustment we
stick by
known policy until adjusted.
Frankly, the 1965 Org Board pattern, as posted, gives all the routing hats
and
therefore the "decisions" are already visible. If a flow stacks up or a
basket fills, or trouble occurs, we have an overload or an absence or an
injected "individual decision point".
Far from robbing anyone of self determinism, the 1965 board is welcomed
by sighs of relief. Even I was glad to get my own work onto it. The whole
room went bright when I cognited "Gee, this is what everyone is trying to
do to me; make me an individual decision point!"
One puts one's baskets and one's "hands" into the lines and acts on the
lines. One doesn't put his decisions on the lines as the lines then hit
him! A postulate or a decision is too close to a thetan's identity! It
confuses him and makes him feel hit personally by the Communications when
he has to newly decide on each one. If the decision is already there, A or
B, he can then route with his "hands", not with himself. If he is always
newly and randomly deciding he gets carried eventually on down the comm
line himself and goes off post! A thetan can handle a vast volume of action
so long as he doesn't have to make a strange or fresh decision in each act.
We can tell in orgs who is making fresh individual decisions as that person
has to bring each of his own dispatches in personally. (We call it,
"bringing a body".) He routes himself too! Only a Communication runner who
is involved only with who and where can do this safely as her decisions are
known beforehand. Thus she can move on lines with impunity. Note that she
only stops when she has to figure out who has now gone where and why she
was not informed! Otherwise a Communications runner could go through fire
and war with impunity without a pause so long as the who and where are
known. Thus an investigation's personnel cannot also be a communications
personnel without going half mad! But an investigation's personnel with her
set of "who to look for and where" can move swiftly too! They (the
communications personnel and the investigations personnel) have entirely
different previously known decisions to make. Both are who, wheres. But the
comm who, where is the comm station of a known person. And the
investigation who, where is composed of types of whos and reported wheres.
The purposes are different. The comm personnel sees to whom and where and
delivers. The investigation personnel sees what and finds out whom and
where and reports. Other staff must know what decisions these two will
make. Other staff sees a jam of traffic and will feel comfortable if a
Communicator predictably sends an expediter to help clear the jam. Also,
seeing a confused area, other staff will feel all right about it if an
investigator pops up and finds out what and whom and reports it accurately
for a predictable decision. Thus a staff trained in the pattern of
decisions that will be taken by the various departments only complains when
somebody green puts somebody else's traffic on their lines or leaps in
investigating the maintenance men when it's a bulldog a pc brought to
session that's howling. Things get predictable. One sees a pile of traffic
growing, one knows an expediter will show up. One sees a student blowing,
one knows an investigator will show up. One can live in a predictable
environment. One gets nervy only in the presence of unpredictable
decisions. Want to know why wog courts make people nervy? Who can predict a
wog court decision? Who can even predict the sentence man to man for the
same crime? It's not knowing that makes men stupid. Part of knowing is "In
a given situation what should be decided?"
Only a new knowledge of universal laws has made it possible to make,
such an org pattern, for its decisions are then basic in every person and
the universe in which we live. We need only avoid bank dramatizations to
own the lot.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:jw.rd
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
[Note: The above Policy Letter was reissued on 13 October 1970 without
change. A revision was issued on 15 December 1972 deleting the first page
and a half. This revision should be studied in conjunction with Policy
Letters on sales closing techniques which appear in the 1972 and 1973 Year
Books.]
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 17 NOVEMBER 1965
Remimeo
Dissem Sec
HCO Exec Sec
Dir of Promotion
Promotion Staff
THE BASIC PRINCIPLES OF PROMOTION
The following points are a summary of the basic principles of promotion.
It is
important that you understand them and apply them in your promotion.
1. The basic principle of promotion is to drive in more business than
can be
driven off by a service unit or mistakes can waste. This applies to any
promotion
anywhere.
Never allow your standard of how many people should be brought into the
org to
be set by any other division or part of the organization. Promote as far
above as
possible the present operating capacity of the organization and you will
win.
From this it follows that Tech or any other part of the Org can never
tell the
Dissemination Division when or how many customers to bring in or that "we
can only
handle 10 preclears this week". It is the job of promotion to drive in as
many preclears
as possible. It's up to Tech to find the space and the auditors.
In other words, promotion must be so huge and effective so that even if
other
divisions are blocking the line or driving people off so many people are
being crowded
into the org by promotion that it makes up for any waste done by other
parts of the
org. You get the idea. It's not flattering but it is the stable datum that
successful
promotion anywhere operates on. By the way, the error does not necessarily
have to be
within the org. A bus strike could temporarily prevent people from across
town being
able to start the HRS Course. Promotion should have promoted so much the
Course is
still full despite such an error.
The motto of promotion could be "we shall overcome-by numbers" . . . . .
"Despite
any errors we bring in so many people into the org continually or sell so
many books
that even if the body registrar drives them off at gun point enough will
get through to
keep the statistics rising."
2. If a promotional programme does not seem to work find out where it
is not
being applied-don't Q and A and abandon the programme. Spot instead the
non-compliance which is preventing it from going into operation.
3. Later promotional programmes will not work if earlier ones have not
been
executed. .Example: the programme is to send out fliers to sell bla bla to
all buyers of
foo-foo's. But it turns out that the original programme to compile a list
of the buyers
of foo-foo's off old invoices was not done therefore a flier to sell bla
bla can't be sent
to buyers of foo-foo's. And since the invoices were burnt up by some long
gone
suppressive (let's say) the original programme can't be carried out.
What to do?
Don't give up or abandon the programme of selling bla bla to buyers of
foo-foo's.
Get clever and dream up some other way of compiling the list you want.
Maybe it's as
simple as a notice in your local newspaper or a questionnaire to everyone
in your files:
"Did you ever buy foo-foo's?"
SUMMARY
Having a successful promotional programme consists of getting it
executed. If it
seems to not be working, spot where it isn't being done. The non-execution
could be
years earlier in a former programme which was not executed.
We have had lots of workable programmes in Scientology. It takes no
cleverness
to dig them up and use them. There is no need to embark on new programmes
until the
earlier programmes are completed.
Let's take the Franchise programme as an example. The original order
given to an
ex-Franchise Sec years ago was to get all Franchise holders trained at
Saint Hill. Years
later we find that that order has only been partially carried out. The
Franchise
programme bogged down at exactly that point. Now, the whole matter is being
handled by getting the current Franchise Officer to carry out the original
order.
The cleverness required in promotion is not starting a new programme or
carrying
out a programme. But cleverness is required in getting an old programme
executed
when the means to get it executed no longer exist; such as when a mailing
list has been
lost and you need to devise a means of re-compiling the list.
Finally, promote until the floors cave in because of the number of
people-and
don't even take notice of that, just keep promoting.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:neg.rd
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 20 NOVEMBER 1965
Remimeo
All Staff Hats
All Divisions
Qual Div Hat Check on all Staff
THE PROMOTIONAL ACTIONS OF AN ORGANIZATION
(Contains 129 Actions that ensure
solvency and are vital in an org)
When one hears that an Org or a Division, a Department or Section or
Person has been ordered to promote, the question can be asked "What does
this mean?"
Some suppose it means get an incredibly brilliant new idea that has
never been done before. Another thinks it means hiring an ad agency.
Somebody else may think it means telling lies or working confidence tricks.
It is none of these things.
Only in emergency promotion does one need new ideas and these most often
consist of how to accomplish a long neglected action in some other
department one doesn't have control over. The brilliance required here is
how to get your part done anyway.
PROMOTION means, to make something known and thought well of. In our
activities it means to send something out that will cause people to respond
either in person or by their written order or reply to the end of applying
Scientology service to or through the person or selling Scientology
Commodities, all to the benefit of the person and the solvency of the org.
Now do you see that a staff member smiling is sending something out that
will make someone respond and think better of the staff member and the org.
That comes under the definition of Promotion. A janitor making the steps
clean is presenting something (the view of clean steps) that will make both
himself and the org a bit better thought of. A mail clerk doing up a neat
package is sending something out that will make the org well thought of. Do
you see?
So any action that makes the staff member of the org visible and well
thought of is promotion.
Furthermore any job in the org well done makes it possible for others to
promote but not done makes it very hard to promote or makes it impossible
altogether. Every task in the org contributes to promotion. And without
promotion there is no job.
There are, however, very standard promotional actions which we
concentrate on in an org.
ROUTINE PROMOTION
Through the years orgs have developed various standard promotional
actions which invariably achieve results if done.
Today these actions are woven into the standard organizational pattern
as administrative activities.
If an org follows the organizational pattern and does what the hats say,
then it will be promoting with no further strain.
The promotion ideas and patterns as they now exist are never at fault.
Only failing to do them is at fault.
Promotion only fails because of non-execution.
Without promotion one has insolvency.
Promotion without adequate delivery of service or commodity will
eventually fail to deliver income.
THE PROMOTION ACTIONS
The Standard Promotion Actions of an Org, by Division and Department
are:
(Note: There are other actions in these portions of the org. These are
only the Promotional Actions.)
1. HCO AREA SECRETARY - Co-ordinates and gets done the promotional
functions of Division 1.
2. DEPARTMENT 1 (Dept of Routing, Appearances and Personnel) sees that
the
org has a good clean appearance.
3. Sees that personnel are properly dressed, well-conducted and give the
org a
good tone.
4. Requires Reception to make known free introductory lectures to all
callers.
5. Has books on display at Reception.
6. Keeps staff from collecting in Reception Centre and talking
Scientology before
callers.
7. Controls public notice boards of the org and makes sure they also
feature org
services available.
8. Routes people swiftly and accurately to the required services.
9. DEPARTMENT 2 (Dept of Communications) - Keeps a complete Address File
in such shape that mailings are wide and sent to people who will
respond. Never
lets go of an address or a mailing list and keeps them all properly
corrected and
up to date and in proper categories for ready use.
10. Sees that mailings go out promptly and on schedule.
11. Sees that internal despatches are swiftly delivered and are in
accurate form.
12. Sees that letters and orders arrive safely and are quickly
handled and not
overlooked.
13. Oversees stationery and typing quality so that communications
going outside
the org look smart and sound bright.
14. DEPARTMENT 3 (Dept of Inspection and Reports) - Sees that the
org is there
and functioning.
15. Sees that Suppressives and enturbulative elements do not block
dissemination.
16. Sees that service is accurately given and that no squirrel tech
is used.
17. Prevents the phenomenon of no-case-gain by spotting Potential
Trouble Sources
and handling.
17 a. Ethics gets case resurgences by finding the right SPs.
18. HCO DISSEMINATION SECRETARY - Co-ordinates and gets done the
promotional functions of Division 2 and makes the org and services
known to
Scientologists.
19. DEPARTMENT 4 (Dept of Promotion) - Issues magazines on schedule.
20. Properly presents services in ads in org magazines and mailings.
21. Does promotional pieces for Publications Dept.
22. Executes planned promotions as laid down in Sec Eds.
23. Compiles promotional pieces and programmes for issue to
Scientologists.
24. Sees that the files, addresses and requirements of persons
interested in
Scientology are used to the full.
25. DEPARTMENT 5 (Dept of Publications) - Sees that good quantities
of books
are in stock.
26. Sees that books and mimeos look well when completed.
27. Ships swiftly on receipt of orders.
28. Issues the technical and policy materials of the org to get in
Pol and Tech.
29. Gets promotional pieces printed.
30. Gets pins and insignia in stock and ensures broad issue so they
will appear in the
world and thus disseminate.
31. Sees that book fliers (handbills) are shipped out regularly to
Scientologists and
book buyers.
32. Sees that tapes are available and that presentation of them is
of good tone
quality.
33. Sees that any cine material is available and ready for broad
use.
34. DEPARTMENT 6 (Dept of Registration) - Letter Registrar works to
accumulate questionnaires and mail from those responding to
promotion.
Follows exact policy and gets out floods of mail to all possible
proper
candidates for service.
35. Keeps Central Files right up and in excellent shape and adds all
new names of
buyers of books and services.
36. Uses Central Files to the limit to produce business and routes
everyone in it
individually in accordance with the routing sheet on the back page of
Auditor
10, by employing Gradation Charts and sending them out marked and
devising
other means of utilizing CF to produce business.
37. Sends out questionnaires with all offers which detect people's
plans for training
and processing.
38. Accepts Advance Registration and encourages more advance
registration until
her months ahead are scheduled full of students and pcs.
39. Does Phone Registration in City areas in addition to other
registration actions
such as Letter Registrar.
40. Registers everyone who comes in for service as pleasantly as
possible with due
regard for the solvency of the org.
41. ORGANIZATION SECRETARY - Co-ordinates and gets done the
promotional
functions of Division 3.
42. DEPARTMENT 7 (Dept of Income) - Persuades payment of cash or
increase in
purchase whenever possible.
43 a. Collects outstanding notes by monthly statements.
43 b. Collects outstanding notes through Field Staff Members via Dept
17.
44. Gets all mail orders invoiced and/or collected so they can be
shipped at once.
45. DEPARTMENT 8 (Dept of Disbursement) - Keeps bills paid in such a
way that
the org is in excellent credit repute. (Promotes with good credit
rating.)
46. Gets salaries accurately and punctually paid to keep staff
happy.
47. DEPARTMENT 9 (Dept of Records, Assets and Materiel) - Gets
proper
quarters to make the org look good, whether for momentary or
permanent use
for all divisions.
48. Keeps materiel of org bright.
49. Acquires reserves to give a reputation of stability to org.
50. Keeps staff clothing issued and in good order (in those orgs
providing
uniforms).
51. TECHNICAL SECRETARY - Co-ordinates and gets done the promotional
functions of Division 4.
52. DEPARTMENT 10 (Dept of Tech Services) - Makes the customers
happy and
glad to be there.
53. Gives brisk service.
54. Acquires for the ore a reputation for swift and excellent
handling of people.
55. DEPARTMENT 11 (Dept of Training) - Gives excellent training.
(The soundest
possible promotion quickly mirrored in numbers enrolling.)
56. Routes dissidents quickly to Ethics and slows to Review.
57. Briskly arid punctually schedules classes.
58. Accomplishes lots of completions.
59. Turns out very competent auditors whose excellence promotes the
Academy
(or College at SH) and Scientology.
60. Writes letters to possible prospective students to get the
Academy (or College at
SH) full. (This is an old, old activity of the D of T who never
depends on
Registrars or magazines.)
61. Makes sure the excellence of training that is there is bragged
about in
magazines, etc.
62. Gets students (Free Scientology Centre) to find new, raw meat
pcs of their own
around the town and audit them for student classification and gets
them to
bring such pcs in for Release examinations and declarations (during
which they
get routed through Registrar who presents the award) and refuses any
for
classification in cases already known to be a paying pc of some org
or auditor.
63. DEPARTMENT 12 (Dept of Processing) - Gets excellent results on
all pcs.
64. Becomes well known for standard tech.
65. Spots SPs and PTSs early and routes to Ethics. Routes bogged
cases quickly to
Review.
66. Takes responsibility for all cases in the whole area where the
org is.
67. Makes auditors look and act professionally outside the HGC so
people will have
confidence in them.
68. Insists on clean, attractive HGC quarters and helps Materiel to
achieve and
maintain them.
69. Gets pcs in such good shape they are walking advertisements for
the HGC and
Scientology.
70. Writes letters to possible pcs (the D of P has had this duty for
15 years).
71. [Deleted per P/Ls 15 Dec '65 and 4 Feb '66. Now appears as 85a.]
72. QUALIFICATIONS SECRETARY - Co-ordinates and gets done the pro-
motional functions of Division 5.
73. DEPARTMENT 13 (Dept of Examinations) - Makes sure no untrained
student
or unsolved case gets past.
74. Finds the real errors in any failures (no student or pc ever
gets upsei if the
actual error is spotted-they only get upset when a wrong error is
found).
75. Refuses to get so concentrated on "validating people" that
errors are
overlooked for this backfires also.
76. Routes those passed quickly to Certs and Awards and those failed
quickly to
Review and routes any Ethics matters discovered promptly to Ethics.
77. DEPARTMENT 14 (Dept of Review) - Quickly repairs any flat ball
bearings
turned out by the Tech Division so they will be no discredit to org.
78. Gives brilliant standard isolation of any errors in students or
pcs-discovers
them with ease.
79. Repairs thoroughly.
80. Makes a continual effort to get failed cases in the field or ARC
Broken Scientologists in for a Review.
81. Sends to Ethics all Ethics matters discovered. Cultivates an
aura of effortless competence.
81a.Review makes the dissatisfied satisfied with the Org by remedying
all tech misses.
82. DEPARTMENT 15 (Dept of Certs and Awards) - Issues credentials
that will be seen around-pins that people will wear, certificates
they will hang up, cards they will show.
83. Never issues anything falsely as it will be hidden or
discredited.
84. Issues literature to all new releases and other completions that
tells them what they have attained and what next to do and encourages
them to do it.
85. Heavily promotes auditors outside the org to bring in their pcs
for examination and Release declarations.
85a.Pushes along the Free Membership programme and makes sure Accounts
sends a bill for the next year's Membership the moment the six months
expires AND IS ITS STATISTIC.
86. DISTRIBUTION SECRETARY - Co-ordinates and gets done the
divisional promotion functions of Division 6 and makes Scientology
and the org known to the broad public.
87. DEPARTMENT 16 (Dept of Field Activities) - Advertises to the
broad public.
88. Advertises and holds Congresses, Open Evenings, etc.
89. Sees that the Introductory lecture and non-classed courses use
no words that will be misunderstood and make people want to buy
training and processing and offers it.
90. Furnishes lecturers to groups.
91. Gets books placed in book stores reviewed and in the public
view.
92. Acquires new mailing lists.
93. Sends out excellent info packets.
94. Guides in new body traffic.
95. Works on the public not on the Scientologists already known to
Divisions 1 and 2.
96. DEPARTMENT 17 (Dept of Clearing) - Recruits and handles Field
Staff Members to get in pcs and students for the org (and collect
past debts).
97. Keeps in touch with Franchise Holders and keeps them informed.
98. Carries out all FSM and Franchise activities and makes them head
people toward the org.
99. Treats the whole departmental activity as salesmen are handled
by any other business org.
100.Trains the FSMs and Franchise Holders and makes them financially
successful.
101.Gets all commissions owed promptly paid to encourage earning more
commissions.
102.Gives FSMs and Franchise Holders things they can use to disseminate
and select.
103.Advertises and conducts an Extension Course.
104.Invites Scientologists to ask that Info Packets be sent to friends
anct relatives.
105.Finds and encourages the formation of Scientology Groups and
Registers them and offers certificates.
106.Sends out mailings to Groups.
107.Registers Franchise Centre names.
108.DEPARTMENT 18 (Dept of Success) - Contacts by letter all ex-pcs and
students of the org. They should be written to at widening intervals
after leaving org.
109.Collects by letters or verbally successful applications of
Scientology.
110.Issues stories of successful application.
111.Handles press.
112.Makes Scientology popular or the thing to do.
113.Sells Scientology to governments and broad social stratas.
114.Issues projects of application to advanced Scientologists,
particularly those projects involving artists or public figures.
115.Acknowledges the activities of Scientologists busy out in the world.
116.Appoints Committees of Scientologists in various areas and groups to
advise on improvements of the civilization.
117.Encourages broad public (lay) memberships.
118.Gets spectacular wins posted on the Org's public notice boards.
119.Condenses wins into data of interest for mags and as handouts.
120.Makes a Catalogue of successes with various processings on various
conditions.
121.Encourages and publicizes various applications of Scientology.
122.LRH COMMUNICATOR - Sees that Executive communications fly and look
well and that promotional Sec Eds are followed.
123.DEPARTMENT 19 (Office of the Org Exec Sec) - Oversees and gets
execution on all promotional actions and functions in his or her four
divisions.
124.DEPARTMENT 20 (Office of the HCO Exec Sec) - Oversees and gets
execution on all promotional activities in his or her 2 HCO Divisions
and the Executive Division.
125.DEPARTMENT 21 (Office of LRH) - The Advisory Council closely watches
gross divisional statistics and quickly acts to handle any division
of low gross divisional statistic. Acts to get into action all
dropped or neglected standard promotions.
126.The Advisory Council develops new ways of making old promotion as
inherent in the org (detailed above) more effective and better
executed. It never neglects old standard promotion to too strongly
concentrate on new promotion.
127.Primarily it handles Secretaries and acts through Secretaries of
divisions to get all the promotion actions done.
128.As Financial Planning sees that pricing of everything sold is not
too high to discourage the public and not too low to make the org
insolvent.
These are the standard promotional actions of a Scientology
organization.
Any org not in a high state of solvency and activity has omitted some or
a majority of the above.
It is almost impossible to fail to succeed if one just does the listed
actions.
There is a great deal of busyness connected with them. But they are
essentially simple actions. Most of us have been doing them for years.
If there is any mystery felt about them, then one either hasn't read his
policy letters or is in disagreement with promoting at all.
Actually it is too simple. I am often amazed when people want me to
write tens of thousands of words to describe these actions.
The thing to do is do them. Then one quickly gets the "hang" of them.
And they are easy.
As usually one at staff level is concerned with only one or two of these
they are very easy to learn all about and do. The thing to know is (a) they
exist, (b) they are
essential actions and (c) their details must be done for them to succeed.
_________________
I have made no attempt here to review the org or old promotions. All
I've done is
write what I would expect to have happening in any org or division of any
org if I
wanted a successful org. I've listed things which, if missing, would cave
in a Division or
the HCO or Org portions.
A far more thorough analysis could be done. This is only a list of the
essential
actions. If less than these are done one will have poverty not prosperity.
If one can't get them done in an org, then there is something awfully
wrong.
_________________
When a staff member is in a part of the org that is in emergency or
danger, he, not
being a high executive, often feels he can do nothing. This is foolish.
Solvency is not
made by high executives. It is made by doing one's own job.
Every action in every department is linked with promotion. To get out of
emergency or danger one must first promote. That means, do the action that
promotes
in one's department or section or unit.
Solvency and org wins are made up of the small actions of the staff all
added
together.
Read again how promotion is defined. Read what is the promotional action
of
your immediate zone in your org. Ask yourself if you are giving it all you
can. Then
maybe you will understand whether you should be solvent or insolvent.
There is no other magic about it.
The one fatal error in promotion is to get so involved in worrying over
things not
your zone of promotion that you do not thoroughly execute your own role in
promotion.
The most successful course of action you can follow is to do your part
of the
promotion in your own zone and do it so well it makes up for any
shortcomings that
might happen elsewhere in the org. Always promote more than can be wasted.
And also promote as a person and staff member. Even if you may not be an
auditor, you never know what your smile, your helpfulness and your quick
attention
to another's confusion or difficulty might have cured,
Your actions and presence are meaningful and valuable too, you know.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:ml.rd
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
Note: Promotional Action 122 in HCO Policy Letter 20 November 1965 is
cancelled and in its place is:
122.LRH COMMUNICATOR - Sees that Ron's postulates stick! Sees that his
comms fly, look well and that Ron's (not EC's) EDs are complied with.
(HCO Policy Letter 22 May 1968, Issue II)
[Note: Deletion of Promotional Action 71 and addition of 17a, 81 a and 85a
have been done per HCO Policy Letters 15 December 1965 and 4 February
1966.]
[Note: Considerable evolution has occurred since 1965, and this Policy
Letter should be studied in conjunction with its revision of 15 April 1973,
in the 1973 Year Book.]
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 23 MAY 1969
Issue III
Remimeo
All Public
Div Hats
PUBLIC DIVISIONS PROMOTIONAL ACTIONS
(Addition to HCO PL 20 Nov '65
Promotional Actions of an Organization)
86. PUBLIC PLANNING SECRETARY: Co-ordinates and gets done the
Divisional
promotional functions of Division 6 and makes Scientology and the Org
known
to the broad public.
87. DEPARTMENT 16 (DEPT OF PUBLIC RESEARCH AND REPORTS):
Discovers the Ethnic values of the local area.
88. Sees that Ethnic data is correctly evaluated for assimilation
and adaption.
89. Makes sure Ethnic data is provided for use in Rehabilitation and
Promotion
Programmes.
90. DEPARTMENT 17 (DEPT OF PUBLIC REHABILITATION): Sells Scientolo-
gy to Governments and broad social stratas.
91. Works on the public not on Scientologists already known to
Divisions 1 and 2.
92. Makes Scientology popular and the thing to do.
93. Uses the media of Press, TV, Radio.
94. Issues projects of application to advanced Scientologists,
particularly those
projects involving artists or public figures.
95. Appoints committees of Scientologists in various areas and
groups to advise on
improvements of a civilization.
96. DEPARTMENT 18 (DEPT OF PUBLIC PROMOTION): Advertises to the
broad public using what is acceptable and valuable (Ethnic values).
97. Produces promotional material for Press Releases, TV Scripts,
Book advertising
using Ethnic values.
98. Gets books placed in bookstores reviewed and in public view.
99. Acquires new mailing lists.
100.Sends out excellent info packs.
101.Invites Scientologists to ask that info packets be sent to friends
and relatives.
102.PUBLIC ACTIVITIES SECRETARY: Co-ordinates and gets done the Division-
al promotional functions of Division 7.
103.DEPARTMENT 19 (DEPT OF FACILITIES, SCHEDULES AND PUBLIC
EVENTS): Plans and organizes Public Events.
104.Advertises and holds Congresses, Open Evenings, etc.
105.Furnishes lecturers to public-bodies and groups.
106.Plans and conducts lecture tours and special events.
107.DEPARTMENT 20 (DEPT OF ACTIVITIES): Guides in new body traffic.
108.Makes sure Public reception area displays full data making
Scientology real to
the Public and includes nothing that would overwhelm or confuse.
109.Sees that the Introductory Lecture and non-classed courses use no
words that
will be misunderstood and makes people want to buy training and
processing
and offers it.
110.Advertises and conducts an Extension Course.
111.Encourages broad public (Lay) Memberships.
112.DEPARTMENT 21 (DEPT OF SUCCESS): Contacts by letter all ex-pcs and
students of the org. They should be written to at widening intervals
after
leaving the org.
113.Keeps bad cases and flopped students out of the field by sending all
who fail
Key Questions directly to Review at the cost of the Organization.
114.Collects by letters, or verbally, successful applications of
Scientology.
114A.Acknowledges the activities of Scientologists busy out in the
world.
115.Encourages and publicizes various applications of Scientology.
116.Makes a catalogue of successes with various processings on various
conditions.
117.Issues stories of successful application.
118.Condenses wins into data of interest for mags and as handouts.
119.Gets spectacular wins posted on the org's public notice boards and
in Success
booklets at Reception.
120.Makes sure morale in the Org is high, with Chaplain picking up any
loose
threads in Ethics matters and seeing they are cleared up and that
people do not
fall off the Org board.
121.Quickly acts through the Chaplain's Court Unit to resolve any
disputes of a
Civil nature among Scientologists.
122.Advertises and conducts a successful Sunday Service.
123.DISTRIBUTION SECRETARY: Co-ordinates and gets done the Divisional
promotional functions in Division 8.
124.DEPARTMENT 22 (DEPT OF FIELD RECRUITMENT, ESTABLISHMENT
AND RECORDS): Recruits, appoints and establishes FSMs, Groups and
Franchises.
125.Registers Franchise Centre names.
126.Finds and encourages the formation of Scientology Groups and
registers them
and offers Certificates.
127.Recruits Field Staff Members to get pcs and students into the Org
and collect
past debts.
128.Gets all commissions owed promptly paid to encourage earning more
commissions.
129.DEPARTMENT 23 (DEPT OF FIELD TRAINING): Trains the FSMs and
Franchise holders and makes them financially successful.
130.Treats the whole departmental activity as salesmen are handled by
any other
business org.
131.Carries out all FSM and Franchise activities and makes them head
people
towards the Org.
132.DEPARTMENT 24 (DEPT OF FIELD SERVICES): Keeps in touch with the
Field and keeps them informed and supplies them with advice and data.
133.Sends out mailings to the Field.
134.Gives FSMs and Franchise holders and groups things they can use to
disseminate and select.
Tom Morgan
Public Exec Sec WW
Jim Keely
Qual Sec WW
Bruce Glushakow
HCO Area Sec WW
Ad Council WW
Edie Hoyseth
HCO Exec Sec WW
Allan Ferguson
Org Exec Sec WW
Tom Morgan
Public Exec Sec WW
Rodger Wright
LRH Comm WW
LeifWindle
Policy Review Section WW
Jane Kember
The Guardian WW
for
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:TM:ei.rd
Copyright � 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 24 AUGUST 1965
Issue II
Remimeo
CLEANLINESS OF QUARTERS AND STAFF
IMPROVE OUR IMAGE
There is no quicker way to depress income and public goodwill than to
have dirty
quarters and slovenly staff.
While we know it takes income to make a place look smart and to have
elegant
quarters, this is not the point of this policy letter.
Clean floors, walls, woodwork and service rooms require very little.
Clean
washrooms and proper paper towels and tissue are an ordinary requirement.
As the world goes more beatnik it is hard to keep up a standard of
cleanliness and
good order.
But it can be done.
And for the sake of income and goodwill it must be done.
The world has been educated by business to a tradition of clean quarters
and
smart service. We must at least equal that.
Staff should be uniformed in orgs that can afford it. A clean well
dressed staff
inspires confidence and begets the payment of bills and more service.
The private Scientology practitioner fails mainly on his personal lack
of
professional address to his clients and his personal dress is sometimes
pretty grim. This
is what costs him his income.
An org, to get anywhere at all, has to look like a real org and its
staff must look
like professionals. Until they can be uniformed, they can be clean.
Similarly, until you can have really swanky quarters you can at least
have clean
quarters, walls, WCs and things picked up.
A clean set of quarters and a neat, professional looking staff can
increase your
income by about 500%.
IMPROVE OUR IMAGE.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:ml.rd
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 17 JUNE 1969
Remimeo
PRO Course
Checksheet
Div 6
THE ORG IMAGE
A poor org public image can cost an org 9/l0ths of its income thus
greatly curtailing pay and facilities. It can lead to trouble with the
area. It can reduce the expansion of Dianetics and Scientology to near
zero.
When important people enter an org and find its premises messy,
themselves and their requirements neglected, the org not only loses their
fee, it also loses the important friends who would actively protect it.
If an org and its staff displays a downstat image, public confidence in
Dianetics and Scientology is shaken.
By showing a good org mock up we are living examples of what Dianetics
and Scientology can do.
There are several zones which comprise the org image.
1. Premises, particularly the entrances and interview and service areas.
These should be neat, not cluttered up with baggage, paper, tattered
notices or unsightly things.
2. Public comm lines. Letters and mailings should be correctly addressed
with the right name and not sent to several addresses for the same
person. The appearance and tone of any mailings and communications
should be good and not offend. "Friendly and agreeable responses" was
the first order I ever gave to an org.
3. Staff. Appearance and attitude to the public.
4. Service Delivery, assurances of.
5. Publicizing values of service.
6. Publications, appearance and suitability of distribution.
7. Alliances with suitable groups and leaders, with due regard to local
"ethnic" values. (Publicly admired values.)
8. Eradication of enemies on public lines with due regard to local
ethnic values (publicly detested values).
9. Alignment of promotion with things publicly admired and against
things publicly detested.
10. Advertising, effectiveness, suitability and lawfulness of.
11. Membership expansion.
12. Group expansion.
13. Expansion planning of facilities.
_________________
Contemporary "Public Relations Officer" duties in business firms are not
as embracive as the above 13 points. These are loosely classified as
follows (quoted from their texts).
"1. To keep management informed of public opinion, and of events and
trends likely to affect its reputation.
"2. To advise management on the policies and actions it should adopt
in order to gain and keep public good will; and on the likely
effects, in terms of public opinion, of any policies and actions
dictated by other factors.
"3. To apply public relations techniques to solve problems in which
the
company's reputation is at stake and to maintain a continuing,
positive
programme of action to secure good will, presenting the company in
all its
aspects to all its audiences by every appropriate means of
communication.
"The executive side of the public relations man's work includes the
company's relations with the press, radio and television; the
production of
many kinds of printed matter, including company reports, house
magazines,
wall charts, brochures and even books; films and film strips;
exhibitions; the
design of company stationery; the way a firm receives its visitors; a
watching
brief on the way it answers its telephone calls, writes its letters,
handles
complaints; its policy on donations to charity and an infinite
variety of items
beyond."
We often hear that we should hire a public relations firm to do all
these things.
The catch is that these firms have a high personnel turnover and new men on
the
"accounts" have to be rebriefed continually.
We have in the past hired contemporary professional PRO men AND THEY
LAID
THE FOUNDATION OF OUR DIFFICULT TIMES WITH PRO ACTIONS.
In Dianetics and Scientology we have gone up against a totalitarian
conspiracy
using "mental health" to control populations. This was not a normal PRO
atmosphere
as encountered by business firms. It began with war where the enemy
controlled all
news media and governments.
We had to be very very good indeed to live through it at all. Our
"public" does
not understand this. They are accustomed to sleek untroubled firms selling
them
"Wheaties the Breakfast of Idiots" or "go Slow gasoline" or "You too can be
insane".
So in Dianetics and Scientology we have a job in PRO which far exceeds
the usual
company demands.
In ordinary PRO actions we have not done too badly in the past. For
instance our
people handling Congresses make the U.S. Democratic Party Convention PROs
look
like rank amateurs.
The enemy has used all available PRO and Intelligence techniques to hold
us back,
and as the enemy also controlled many key government figures, this has been
a very
rough time.
That we are alive at all and expanding shows we have not done too badly.
The
enemy is definitely losing.
The reason for this is INTEGRITY. By and large our people are sincere.
WORD OF MOUTH is a public relations comm line superior to press, radio,
television or Mr. Big.
Radio, press and TV only seek to create "word of mouth". This term means
what
people say to one another.
By standing for what people think is good and opposing what people think
is bad
greatly speeds WORD OF MOUTH.
We will go as far as Dianetics and Scientology work in the hands of
auditors and
no farther.
The enemy, lacking integrity, word of mouth and workable tech has not
won
despite total control of governments, press, radio, TV and all standard PRO
media, plus
financing in terms of billions.
Thus we see that there are three commodities above contemporary PRO
concepts.
These are:
A. INTEGRITY
B. WORD OF MOUTH
C. WORKABILITY AND USEFULNESS OF PRODUCT.
All the PRO advices and direction will not prevail if the above three
things are not
an integral part of "the company" PRO planning.
How much a product COSTS has some bearing on whether or not it is used.
But
unstabilizing prices, we have learned (such as a small increase) is utterly
deadly. And
reducing prices does not actually increase sales in our experience. The
exception is the
granting of 50% scholarships and giving certain courses as Field Staff
Member prizes.
And here it does seem that the STATUS value outweighs the monetary saving
appeal.
Therefore STATUS INCREASE is a vital part of the product.
_________________
However, whether Dianetics and Scientology have been at war or not, the
first 13
points are what we would consider routine PRO actions which, if neglected,
would
result in heavy income losses.
A staff idling in reception, offhand handling of callers, wrong address
or names
misspelled drive off customers. Aside from simply blocking sign-ups these
points also
REDUCE CUSTOMER STATUS.
As our organizations are built (due to tech concentration) on handling
the
individual, any PRO must be very alert to any point which would seem to the
"customer" to diminish his status.
A PRO should himself look at the given points from the viewpoint of an
important potential "customer". Would the org environment and handling
attract or
drive off an important person (let us say, the Mayor) as a "customer". If
the answer is
"yes" in any point, then the Org is losing up to 90% of its income through
these PRO
omissions.
If a staff is poorly paid or the premises are poorly furnished,
cluttered or dirty
then the error lies in either the 1st 13 or the above A, B, C points of
PRO.
A PRO in advising actions to the EC (and he should have direct access to
the
Executive Council or Management) should be very wary of killing off the
Org's vitality
with too much militant control. The PRO also has the staff as a public. If
one wants to
clear sandwich-eating staff off reception the best way is to start a
campaign for a staff
lounge, get it and then forbid staff to clutter up reception.
The PRO in accomplishing PRO points is of necessity a creature of ideas
even in
getting his routine PRO actions done.
The enemy we have had gets very high points on 1 to 13 (omitting 4,
assurances
of delivery and 7 and 8 Ethnic points). Dianetics and Scientology orgs get
rather low
points on 1 to 13 (excepting 4, 7 and 8 which they do well).
Dianetics and Scientology orgs do well on A, B and C. The enemy utterly
collapses on these.
If Dianetics and Scientology orgs did well on all points (1 to 13 and A,
B and C)
the battle would be won in very little time.
If a PRO is not working to bring points 1 to 13 and A, B and C all into
full
operation in his area, he is not doing his job. If he is doing all these
things he is a very
very valuable PRO and should be given every possible assistance on his job.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:ek.cs.ei.rd
Copyright � 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 11 DECEMBER 1969
Remimeo
PES Hat
Dir Eth Hat
(IMPOR TANT ORG BD CHANGE)
APPEARANCES IN PUBLIC DIVS
The Appearance of the Org and Staff is transferred out of Department One
which
becomes the DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND ROUTING and may still be
called RAP but should be changed on the org board.
In accordance with HCO Pol Ltr of 29 Nov 69 NEW PUB DIVS ORG BOARD:
APPEARANCES comes under the Department of Ethnics Div 6, Dept 16, Ethnic
Acceptable Appearance Section.
The Public Exec Sec therefore is directly responsible for the appearance
of the
org, its staff, its literature and publications so far as appearance and
acceptability go.
Appearances never worked under Dept 1. "Image" is actually a PRO
function and
it is of vital interest to the Public Exec Sec as otherwise his promotion
may be dulled
or rendered null. Appearance can even cause him much trouble.
The IMAGE of an org and its staff and its literature and publications
actually is a
form of projection into the public.
The reason it is in Dept 16 is that this is the first department of the
Public
Divisions. Also it is something which has to be fitted into the values of
the population
where the org is located. They have definite ethnic ideas of what an org
would look
like, what a staff would dress like, what the literature should look like
if any of these
had a command position.
It is always easy when one has millions to spend to make a commanding
image.
The trick is to make it without its costing more than one can afford.
One has to make the money before one makes the full image.
There is much one can do-and has to do-at no financial cost or at a low
price.
One can paint up a place with volunteer help for the cost of rented
machines and
materials.
Staff individual areas of responsibility ("Cleaning Stations") should be
assigned
via the HCO ES so that all areas of an org are covered. If one has a
cleaning service this
is still necessary as there is such a thing as litter. Newspapers,
magazines, typewriters,
machines-no cleaning service handles these. That is staff action because
it's staff use.
Where one does not buy the staff its clothing one can still insist on
clean hands,
fingernails and cut hair, bathed bodies and brushed teeth, polished shoes
and so on. It's
poor advertising indeed when a staff member is dirty and unkempt.
When one has money and an Ethnic survey has determined what the
population
thinks a professional looks like, one can buy the staff clothes that
forward a highly
professional image to create public respect and confidence. Remember in
this survey as
in all Ethnic surveys, one does not copy professionals in the society as
they haven't
done a survey. One is interested in looking like what the public thinks a
professional
looks like. This is moderated of course by what the staff will then be
proud to look
like.
Reception and staff manners are part of appearances.
An auditor's bad breath or body odor can cost you quite a lot of gained
ground.
So this is part of it also.
A noisy atmosphere near auditing rooms or in reception, radios playing,
staff
chattering can spoil an image.
Children flying about and babies' nappies hanging are about as far as
you can get
from a professional image. Do all right for the Congo maybe but even there
I can't
imagine a ju-ju being taken very seriously in a hut so equipt.
The way to spoil an org image is of course to subdue or kill what
successful Sen
orgs have always been noted for-a happy, friendly, busy atmosphere. So the
use of
heavy ethics to produce image compliance is murderous. Pride is the primary
reason for
good appearance.
So staff cooperation and enthusiasm for the project is worth thousands
of
conditions seeking to force them to work for an image. Modern schools are
so
backward they don't teach personal appearance, manners, cleanliness. And a
lot of
staff just don't know any better and have to be taught what they weren't
taught in
schools.
Fighting to obtain and improve a suitable image is inevitably quite a
task. If the
org had lots of money it could buy its image. But without lots of money the
image has
to be gradually built. Cleanliness and neatness are the primary building
blocks to
respect in most societies.
An org without money has to have an image to make money but an image
costs
money and the org hasn't any. That's a typical problem. "We should have a
building
like the new Life Insurance Skyscraper" leaves the problem unsolved. There
is a
gradient between. You can pay so much rent you just work for the landlord
or the
bank. Or the rent is so high you can't afford enough space to earn the
rent. Problems
like that crop up.
If the Tech-Admin ratio of 2 Admin to 1 Tech is kept and even brought
toward 1
to 1, and if promotion is excellent and effective and tech service and org
service is
good, it is easy to lay aside enough to earn new quarters. So the image can
be
improved.
Similarly literature quality is desirably very high. But its cost can
rise to a point
where it makes promotion too costly to be engaged upon. That has happened
several
times to orgs where they went overboard on too posh literature.
Quality of presentation of tape recordings-sound quality-definitely
comes under
Dept 16 now.
The org image is in the care of the PES. I trust he does well with it.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:ldm.ei.rd
Copyright� 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
[Amended by HCO P/L 2 October 1970, Appearances-Clarification, Volume 6,
page 53.]
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
37 Fitzroy Street, London W.I
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 6 JULY 1959
Issue 2
Convert Sec E.D.
CenO ,
OUTFLOW
Outflow is holier, more moral, more remunerative and more effective than
inflow.
The order of priority of staff action follows for any department or
staff member:
1. Outflow to general public using any comm particle or body,
2. Inflow of income producing comm particles,
3. Outflow of finished work or reports to other org members,
4. Inflow of orders, requests, information from other org members.
Give priority in terms of time as above and increase your unit.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:gh.rd
Copyright � 1959
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 4 JANUARY 1966
Issue III
Gen Non-
Remimeo
SCIENTOLOGY ORGANIZATIONS COMMUNICATIONS
SYSTEM: DISPATCHES
(Revises HCO Policy Letters of 8 April
1958 and 13 December 1962)
An infra-organizational dispatch is a simple thing. You can keep a copy
if you wish, but only one copy (the original) goes and comes back.
When writing a dispatch, address it to the POST-NOT the person. (If a
person changes post, or leaves, if you address the dispatch to the post, it
will be received by the new occupant of the post, but if you address it to
the person, then if the person leaves it may not be received and handled.)
Set up a dispatch as follows: (for information or advice)
Example:
Mimeograph Officer
Supply Officer
(date)_________________
Dear_________________ ,
Your order of ........ (message).
(complimentary close)
Signature________________________
or for a request or an order:
Mail Clerk
via Dir Comm (date)________________
HCO Area Sec
Dear__________
Please see that . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(order or request).
(complimentary close)
Signature __________________
This form is used so that when it is ready to be returned, an arrow can
be drawn
pointing to the post to which it is to be returned, eliminating the need to
write if.
If the message is one that should go in your hat, either put it in your hat
and
acknowledge sender, or write it up for your hat, returning the original to
sender. If the
dispatch comes to you from a junior always insist the junior has attested
"it is okay".
If you in turn wish to send it on, you too must attest "it is okay" and
send it on. If it
is not OK return the dispatch to the originator stating briefly why it is
not OK.
The receiver handles the dispatch and retains the dispatch until such
time as it has
been completely handled. If it is a matter which involves days or weeks,
you can
dispatch the sender stating that such and such is being attended to and
expected to be
complete within a certain time-but retain the original dispatch until job
is done, then
return it to sender marked "DONE". Do not return the original with "It's
being
attended to". Originals only return with "DONE" or "Can't be done".
Otherwise the
communication stays incomplete.
When replying to a dispatch, put down the date of the message.
Dispatches are
handwritten. Executives, other than Exec Secs, should not have their
dispatches typed
by a secretary except where the dispatch contains large volume.
COLOUR FLASH SYSTEM FOR DISPATCHES AND LETTERS
The colour flashes for paper for divisions are as follows:
HCO Division 1 - Gold
HCO Division 2 - Light pink or violet
Division 3 - Deep Pink
Division 4 - Green
Division 5 - Grey
Division 6 - Yellow
Division 7 - Brown [Public Division Flash Colours
Division 8 - Orange added per HCO PL 23 May 1969.]
Division 9 - Blue or White
White paper is also used for letters to the field, business houses,
Board minutes,
and for manuscripts and research notes.
Copies of letters written are on the colour flash of the division
writing the letter.
WRITTEN REQUESTS
If you have a request, put it in writing. Do not go to the person and
expect him to
carry your request around in his head. Personnel are not supposed to
present their
body, nor their body with a dispatch to other personnel except for actual
conferences
which are kept to a minimum. Few things need conferences. Dispatches take
care of
99% of organizational business.
COMM CENTRE BASKETS
The Comm Centre contains a basket for each staff member. Each basket is
tagged
with the person's name and underneath the name is their post or posts. Each
person is
responsible for delivering his own dispatches to the proper baskets and for
picking up
daily his own dispatches. Do not fail to pick up your dispatches at least
twice a day
(once in the morning and once in the afternoon-make your own schedule). But
do not
let dispatches pile up in your basket.
In larger orgs a Comm Centre and separate Divisional Comm Centres may be
instituted. The Comm Centre would consist of one basket for each division
plus a
basket for L. Ron Hubbard and an outer org OUT basket. Each divisional comm
centre is placed in the divisional working area with a basket for each
staff member
in that division plus a divisional in-basket and a divisional out-basket.
An HCO
dispatch courier would be responsible for delivering dispatches into the
divisional
in-baskets and from the divisional out-baskets into the comm centre
baskets. The sec
sec is responsible for the distribution of dispatches from the divisional
in-basket to staff
members' baskets.
ORGANIZATION BOARD
Keep abreast of all post changes. As the Org Board is changed, the Comm
Centre baskets are changed. Always know who is occupying what post so that
when you deliver a dispatch you will always know whose basket it goes in.
If you are not sure, check the Org Board.
RESPONDING TO COMMUNICATIONS
Handle your dispatches daily. Do not let them stack up on you. When
someone sends you a dispatch let them hear from you. Do not get the
reputation of 'I hesitate to send so and so a dispatch because I don't know
when I'll hear from it, or if I'll ever hear from it.' DO NOT LET YOUR
DISPATCHES DEAD-END. When you let your dispatches (or letters) stack up on
your desk, you are in actuality chopping the comm lines of the organization
and in so doing chopping your own pay cheque.
ANSWERING LETTERS
Secretaries who type letters should always take care to staple the
carbon copy on top of the incoming letter-do not use a paper clip. In
answering letters, answer their questions. Give them the information they
are seeking. Use the gradient scale method. DO NOT FAIL TO ANSWER THEIR
QUESTIONS. If you don't know the answers, find out.
ORIGINATED DISPATCHES
The purpose of the secretarial unit is to type answers to letters. Most
all intra-organizational dispatches can be handwritten: this saves time in
putting them on tape (when you could be writing them yourself) and saves
the transcriber's time for replying to letters. Stay in communication with
other staff members and with our correspondents. If you don't handle your
dispatches properly don't reply to the sender, as I said before, you are
cutting your own pay cheque.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:ml.rd
Copyright � 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
[Note: The two earlier issues of 8 Apr '58 and 13 Dec '62 were the same
basic issue as the above
Policy Letter, with a few changes reflecting the evolution of the Comm
System and the Org Board.
13 Dec '62 was a straight reissue of 8 Apr '58-as part of the Reissue
Series (7)-with minor changes
such as the inclusion of a salutation in the dispatch example, and in the
first paragraph under Comm
Centre Baskets, addition of a phrase, "(except in some larger Orgs, where
there is a Communicator for
this purpose)" after the sentence saying each person is responsible for
picking up and delivering his
own dispatches.
4 Jan '66, Issue III (above) gave two dispatch examples instead of one as
given in both earlier issues,
showing the different routing for information or advice and for a request
or an order; added the
second half of the last paragraph on page 101 re including the attestation
"it is okay" on a dispatch;
updated the Colour Flash System in line with the 7 Division Org Board,
which in the earlier two
issues had been based on type of dispatch, report, letter, carbon copy,
etc. as opposed to Divisional
colour flash; and deleted a second half of the paragraph entitled Written
Requests, which read, "We
have a Comm Centre where dispatches are to be placed. Place your dispatches
in the person's basket,
not in his hands. IT IS ANXIETY ABOUT COMMUNICATION ONLY THAT CAUSES PEOPLE
TO JUMP THE LINES. There may be, however, a few exceptions: emergencies, or
if you have a large
article that would not fit into a Comm Centre basket. The point is, do not
mn around all day handing
people dispatches, nor put them down on someone's desk. This tends to
intermpt their work and
causes confusion on the lines." It also added the second paragraph under
Comm Centre Baskets
re Divisional Comm Centres; and under the paragraph Answering Letters,
after the sentence, "Give
them the information they are seeking," deleted "-but do not try to sell
them a course and an
intensive if all they want is some information concerning an ad we are
running."]
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
LONDON
HASI POLICY LETTER OF 6 NOVEMBER 1958
THE THREE BASKET SYSTEM
Effective immediately, each Admin personnel is to have a stack of three
baskets.
The top basket labelled "IN", should contain those items still to be
looked at.
The middle basket, labelled "PENDING", is to contain those items which
have been looked at but can not be dealt with immediately.
The bottom basket, labelled "OUT", is to contain those items which have
been dealt with and are now ready for distribution into the comm lines
again, or to file, etc.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:ph.bt.rd
[This P/L was reissued without change as FC P/L of 15 November 1958.]
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 30 MARCH 1966
All Divisions
Remimeo
All Staff Hats
Staff Status 2
Check Sheet
Revised Reissue of HCO Pol Ltr
ofl5Nov 1958
THE THREE BASKET SYSTEM
All personnel assigned a desk and a specific stationary working space
are to have a stack of three baskets.
The top basket, labelled "IN", should contain those items and despatches
still to be looked at.
The middle basket, labelled "PENDING", is to contain those items which
have been looked at, but which cannot be dealt with immediately.
The bottom basket, labelled "OUT", is to contain those items which have
been dealt with and are now ready for distribution into the comm lines
again, or to files, etc.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:lb-r.rd
Copyright � 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 22 JUNE 1964
Cent. Orgs
Franchise
RE-ISSUE SERIES (19)
ORGANIZATION POSTS - TWO TYPES
(Re-issue of London HCO Bulletin of April 24, 1959)
We have two types of posts in an organization:
1. Line posts
2. Fixed Terminals.
A line post has to do with organizational lines; seeing that the lines
run smoothly; ironing out any ridges in the lines; keeping particles
flowing smoothly from one post to another post. A line post is concerned
with the flow of lines, not necessarily with the fixed terminal posts at
the end of the lines.
An example of this is a Communicator. His job is mainly keeping
communications flowing smoothly from one terminal to another. Any time
there is a stop in the flow of communications, he straightens it out. Other
examples of line posts are HCO Area Secretary, Central Files Promotion
Liaison, Training Administrator, and Processing Administrator.
A Fixed Terminal post stays in one spot, handles specific duties and
receives communications, handles them, and sends them on their way.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRHJw.rd
Copyright � 1964
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 10 APRIL 1963
CenOCon
SHSBC Students
Franchise
Field
RE-ISSUE SERIES (12)
WHAT AN EXECUTIVE WANTS ON HIS LINES
(Re-issue of HCO Policy Letter of May 26,1959)
There are only four things which an executive wants on his incoming
communication lines.
These are:
1. Information
2. Appointments and dismissals of personnel for his action or
confirmation.
3. Financial matters.
4. Acknowledgements.
He does not want on his lines:
1. Demands for decisions.
2. Backflashes and can'ts.
3. Entheta.
Demands for decisions are always indicative of irresponsibility; people
want the executive to create the mistakes; and an executive can make
mistakes if he is asked to make decisions distant from his zone of action
equipped with insufficient data to make the decision correctly.
Backflashes, by definition, are an unnecessary response to an order.
This can get fairly wicked. They are not acknowledgements, they are
comments or refutals. Example: "Sell the bricks" as an order, is replied to
by "Bricks are hard to sell" or "We should have sold them yesterday". This
is a disease peculiar to only a few staff members. They cannot receive an
order directly and are seeking to be part of the comm, not the recipient.
This goes so far as senseless "Wilco's" or "I'll take care of it" when the
executive only wants to know Is it done? Despatches or orders, in most
instances, are held until completed. We assume that they got through or
rely on other means of saying they didn't. Only a few situations require an
acknowledgement to an order over long lines and all of these occur when
there is doubt that the recipient is there.
In the matter of can'ts, an executive seldom orders the impossible and
generally consults with people before issuing an order. A persistent "Can't
be done" means "I am unwilling". I have learned this the long way. Person A
on a job, saying "Can't" all the time, changed to Person B, receiving the
same orders, discovered to me that the job could be done since B, on the
same post, receiving the same orders, never said "Can't" and the job did
get done.
Entheta means embroidered reports. Data is data. It is not opinion.
Data, not entheta, brings about action. All entheta does is cut the lines.
To jam an executive's lines is a serious thing to do. The result is a
cut line. A bottle-neck is created by staff when staff jams a line to an
executive. Eating up an executive's time and patience destroys harmony,
dissemination and income.
Depending on an executive for petty decisions, is sure to jam lines and
cost units.
The role of an executive is to plan and execute actions and to co-
ordinate activities.
To do this he gets people to do their jobs and establishes the overall plan
of
action. Only an exective can string lines and co-ordinate actions and
resolve the jams that impede things. For an executive to decide for people
decisions applicable only to the sphere of one job is folly.
WHAT AN EXECUTIVE'S LINES SHOULD LOOK LIKE
INFORMATION:
When a member of an organization does something of importance, he should
always inform the executive after the fact. It is perfectly all right to
take actions within one's organizational purpose. It is not all right to
keep it a secret.
1. Do it
2. Tell the right people and the executive by adequate communication at
the speed necessary to the case.
Similarly, an executive ought to tell people his goals and plans and,
when he does something of any importance to others, he ought to say so. The
captain who tells the ship how the action is going saves a lot of nerves
and useless motion.
APPOINTMENTS AND DISMISSALS:
Minor hirings and firings in a department by authorized persons should
always be subject to confirmation at least after the fact. Major
appointments and dismissals of key personnel must be okayed by a senior
executive before the fact and action taken only on the senior executive's
authority.
For example, it is a board action to appoint, transfer or dismiss an
association secretary or an organization secretary. It is an executive
director action to appoint or dismiss department heads and then only on the
advices of an association secretary or organization secretary. It is an
association secretary or organization secretary action to appoint, transfer
or dismiss deputies or section chiefs. It is a department head's action to
appoint or dismiss other staff but always, in every case, with permission
from the next superior and information all the way up.
FINANCE MATTERS:
Consistent finance information as in advisory committee minutes and
authority for changes and capital expenditures are an executive matter. My
own authority is needed only on major changes of policy or expenditures and
on extreme financial emergencies. Ordinary financial planning and routine
actions are better handled locally by the association secretary,
organization secretary or the director of accounts. I do need financial
information. But where I have done planning and promotion and it is agreed
upon, further handling of finance is handled under a blanket authority from
me except for extreme financial emergencies or major capital outlays which
are local matters.
These are the things I want on my lines. I change personnel as the
answer where information is chronically withheld, where appointments and
dismissals are irregular, or when an organization starts getting insolvent.
Where people are continuously demanding that I make the decisions they
should be making, I again recognize other ills and again change personnel.
If we all understand what's wanted, we can do it.
Well, let's look this over and do it and win.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:gl.rd
Copyright � 1959, 1963
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
[Note: No significant change was made when reissued.]
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 31 JANUARY 1961
HCOs
MESSAGE PLACEMENT
HCO's first action is Communication. Everyone should know message
placement.
Cables and Telex: Original is never put on comm lines. Only copies go on
the comm lines.
Take the message out of the telex, date stamp each copy. Put original in
Telex basket. Hand deliver at once all copies to interested parties.
Place cable or telex in the exact centre of the recipient's desk
blotter. Do not place in IN basket. Do not mix with other papers.
Recipient of a cable copy (if by telex) may destroy it or route it to
other interested persons.
If there is only a cable from the company, not a telex, as it has none
but original copies, it must be held and filed.
Cable answers are always delivered to Communicator by hand and have
priority. They do not go on routine comm lines.
DESPATCHES
Despatches marked rush are handled by special handling. They go on
centre of desk like cables and telexes.
Routine despatches go on comm lines.
Letters go on comm lines.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:js.rd
Copyright � 1961
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 21 SEPTEMBER 1961
Sthil
DESPATCH LINES
Every person must have a basket station.
Each domestic staff member has a single station located in the back
hall.
Every office member or school staff member has a three basket station
located by his or her desk.
Every office or school staff member must have a desk. The station
baskets must be at that desk.
The staff member may also have a beanstalk properly labelled.
But all despatches and active work must be in the office staff member's
station baskets or beanstalks and no work may be put in desk drawers or
hidden off the lines that is active.
All active despatches must be delivered where they are going and must
thereafter be visibly in stations or beanstalks under visible headings.
All In baskets must be kept empty.
When an In is viewed but not done, it goes into the person's pending.
It must be possible to locate any active despatch on the lines whether
it is a business day or not.
Keep your basket station straight. Keep your in basket empty. And keep
current work visible and where it belongs on the lines.
By the way, I can always judge the state of a department by the state of
the station.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:jl.rd
Copyright � 1961
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 29 MARCH 1965
Remimeo
STAFF HATS
ORIENTATION
ROUTING DESPATCHES
It is the concern of anyone sending a despatch or mimeo to route it
accurately.
A major part of an executive hat is "routing".
A vital part of any staff member's duties is proper routing.
Our orgs are too big for routing to occur to Bill, Jane or Pete.
Route to the hat only, give its Department section and org. Put any vias
at the top of the despatch. Indicate with an arrow the first destination.
Sign it with your name but also the hat you're wearing when you write
it. You might be holding several hats. Which one wrote?
Just as a post office can't find wrong addresses, so neither can we. If
you want your despatch to arrive, do the above.
When you get a misrouted despatch, look it over and see how it erred and
return it to sender with a copy of this Policy Letter.
That way we'll take a lot of confusion out of our orgs.
There is an org there, you know. A lot of new staff go about for quite a
while never noticing there is an org there that has posts and functions.
If we all route to the right hat from the right hat according to our org
board, we'll make it a lot sooner.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:ml.rd
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 2 APRIL 1965
Gen Non Remimeo
HEED HEAVY TRAFFIC WARNINGS
Any department which has been warned of heavy traffic coming is to take
steps
to see that the department is adequately supplied with the materials
necessary to
handle the coming traffic.
A covert block on the line to stop or slow down a line over which an
important
flow is going, is the no-supply-block. Then everyone has to stop because
there are no
supplies, emergencies develop trying to get new supplies in, the flow on
the line
jams-it is all Dev-T.
Example: Promotion Department has a big programme which will involve a
lot of
mimeoing, and warns mimeo of coming traffic. Mimeo continues to order
supplies in
normal traffic quantities. The delay in delivery is greater than the supply
mimeo has to
hand (the heavy flow is already on the lines). Mimeo runs out of stencils.
WHAM!
Emergency and the flow jams. Work time is lost, and the whole programme
goes off its
time schedule.
This same principle applies to additional personnel-i.e. warning of
heavy traffic
coming-additional personnel needed.
It's just a case of having a little foresight.
Lots of students or pcs coming up in a Division must also be a subject
of warning.
Policy: WARN Org Sec of heavy increases or decreases in traffic volume
so his
division can BE READY.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:wmc.rd
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 26 MAY 1965
Issue II
Gen Non Remimeo
COMMUNICATIONS
REGISTERED MAIL
No org may accept any registered mail.
1. Long experience shows it comes only from psychos and governments.
2. It is a lot of trouble to obtain from the post office.
So just reject it.
There's no worry it may contain writs. It is just sent by nuts.
PHONE CALLS
Phones are psycho. They have no memory.
Overseas phone calls are often incomprehensible and start mysteries.
One often has to hang about for 6 or 8 hours in a mystery trying to
connect with a call coming in.
CABLE or TELEX is far better. Use it.
All overseas phone calls are turned down by orgs.
Inter-org phone calls even on one continent must be discouraged.
Use telexes and cables. Then we can find out what happened.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:mLrd
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
[Amended by HCO P/L 18 January 1970, Registered Mail, Volume 1, page 178,
and HCO P/L 9 July
1971 Issue III, Communications-Telephone Usage-Daily Call In, in the 1971
Year Book.]
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 11 JUNE 1965
Gen Non Remimeo
Reception
Accts
HCO
CORRECTION TO HCO POLICY LETTER OF 26 MAY 1965
ISSUE II - COMMUNICATIONS - REGISTERED MAIL
Exception to the rule that no org may accept any registered mail: as HCO
Policy Letter of April 11th, 1963 states that rolls of names and addresses
from each org are to be sent by registered surface mail to Capetown,
Capetown is to accept, and be alert to accepting, such registered mail.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:mh.rd
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
[Amended by HCO P/L 18 January 1970, Registered Mail, Volume 1, page 178.]
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 10 JULY 1965
Remimeo
All Exec Hats
All Divisions
LINES AND TERMINALS
ROUTING
The most important things in an organization are its lines and
terminals. Without these IN IN AN EXACT KNOWN PATTERN the organization
cannot function at all.
An Executive putting in new lines and posts or making changes in old
lines or terminals REQUIRES CLEARANCE FROM THE OFFICE OF LRH before the
order can take effect.
Anyone following such an order, to alter lines and terminals in the org
which are already established by policy who does not file a job
endangerment ethics report (a statement that his or her job is being
endangered by the illegal order of a senior) must share any penalty for
such alteration.
People who haven't a clue about the org pattern throw it into chaos by
altering the established pattern. Then the org won't work and goes broke
quickly.
Therefore the most serious threat to the stability of an org is shifting
lines with no understanding of what is supposed to happen.
The lines and terminals (hats) outlined in policy are based on long,
hard experience. When they short-circuit the org ceases to function as an
org and becomes a mad scramble.
When despatch and body routing charts laid down by policy are carefully
followed, the org will function. When they are not, it won't.
A serious fault in any executive or staff member is unawareness of the
co-ordinated functions of terminals, or complete unawareness of other org
hats and functions.
A D of T trying to wear an Ethics hat, a Qual Sec shifting his internal
lines, a Registrar who seeks to assign the hours of auditing would be
enough in any large org to throw it into a jumble where nothing works or
flows.
There is more to an org than one person wearing all hats plus another
person wearing all hats, etc. Such an org just won't prosper.
The hardest job any top executive has is teaching the staff the lines
and terminals and getting them followed. That is because green staff is
unaware of the org itself, or its flow lines.
A lot of the time, when one sees a declining statistic, it is only that
certain lines are out or being misrouted.
The lines will flow if they are all in and people wear their hats. If
the body and despatch lines flow, the org will prosper. If they are
disarranged, they won't flow and won't prosper.
No executive or staff member has any right to establish or alter
terminals and lines without express written permission from the Office of
LRH.
Believe it or not there will be people around in orgs who have no
faintest concept of its pattern-or the existence of an org. And these will
be the first to attempt large changes. And these are the first you should
send to the staff training officer to get checked out on their posts.
It is an Ethics offence to issue orders altering lines without clearance
from the Office of LRH.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:ml.rd
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 28 JULY 1965
Remimeo
All Dissem Hats
All Dist Hats
All Communications Hats
HANDLING OF PHOTOGRAPHS
Photographs when sent through the communication line either by mail or
through
the Comm Centre must always be routed either in boxes for such or between
two
sturdy pieces of cardboard which will not bend.
NEVER put a paper clip on any photograph, either to keep several
together or to
attach dispatches to. JUST NEVER PUT A PAPER CLIP ON ANY PHOTOGRAPH
FOR WHATEVER REASON!
The reason for such protection of photographs is simple. If any
photograph has
the least bend or break in it, it cannot be used for photolithograph
reproduction in
magazines or printed matter as the bend or break causes a white streak to
appear in the
reproduction which cannot be corrected or used.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:ml.rd
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 17 JULY 1966
Remimeo
All Staff
DESPATCHES, SPEED UP
DESPATCHES, STALE DATE
INTERNAL DESPATCHES
Any staff member receiving an internal org despatch that has been
enroute more than three days (dated the fourth day earlier than date of
receipt) must report the matter to the Director of Communications who must
thereupon request the Director of Inspection and Reports to investigate and
report to Dir Comm and order any resulting Ethics action.
If an internal despatch is received back by the originator more than six
days after origin the same procedure must be followed.
If an answer to a despatch is not received back by the originator in a
period of six days the same procedure is followed.
These time lags of 3 days and six days are to be considered extreme.
If damage results or expense occurs because an urgent message was not
marked RUSH or if a RUSH message did not promptly arrive, the same
procedure is followed.
EXTERNAL DESPATCHES
Any external despatch received with a date of 3 days earlier plus
ordinary transmission time must be so reported to Dir Comm and the
procedure is the same as Internal Despatches.
If a despatch is not answered in six days plus double transmission time,
the same procedure is followed.
On Rush Despatches, any despatch older than 1 day is considered stale
dated where telegraph or telex exists.
STALE DATE
The term "Stale Date" (used previously by banks on cheques) means any
despatch or answer that is older than one should reasonably expect when one
receives it or any answer that is older in date from origin to answer or
answer to receipt than one should reasonably expect.
VIAS
These regulations apply to all despatches and include all vias.
EXTRAORDINARY LOCATIONS
Locations which are not served by airmail, telex or telegraph are
considered extraordinary locations and stale date occurs only when
reasonable expectancy is exceeded.
TIME MACHINE
All orders or queries may go on Time Machine.
A junior may place queries or info on a Time Machine to a senior and may
complain to Dir Comm re stale date.
A junior Org may place queries or info going to a senior Org on a Time
Machine and may complain to Dir Comm re any stale date.
COPYING DESPATCHES
Anyone sending a stale date complaint to the Dir Comm must first answer
or handle any despatch he is holding and send it to the Dir Comm with its
answer.
Dir Comm copies or xeroxes the original and the answer promptly and
sends the original on to its next recipient and uses the copy only for
investigation.
ALL ANSWERS DATED
Answer notes on despatches and answers must hereafter be dated by the
answerer. All despatches are of course dated by the originator.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:lb-r.rd
Copyright � 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 17 OCTOBER 1966
Remimeo
All Staff Hats
Dir Co mm Hat
Dir I & R Hat
Inspections
Officer Hat
STALE DATE REPORTS
When reporting a stale date to the Director of Comms, bear in mind that
a
weekend during which a staff member is not on post does not count as two
working
days in the routing of a despatch. A despatch dated Friday, October 7th and
relayed
by the next terminal on Monday, October 10th is not stale dated right there
if the
terminal was not on post on the 8th or 9th, and did not receive it till the
10th.
In order to pinpoint the exact source of any delay in handling and/or
forwarding
a despatch, all points through which it passes must not only initial and
okay it, but
date it as well. A series of initials tells the Director of I & R nothing
as to which of
them might be responsible for any delay and necessitates body traffic.
Where action required on a despatch will take such time as to make it
impracticable for the originator to receive back his order or request
within six days of
the date of origin, the person carrying out the order or request must
briefly
acknowledge receipt of the despatch to avoid a stale date report on
himself.
Such examples are where a Purchase Order is sent to Financial Planning
by
Purchasing Officer and where Printing Liaison Officer must obtain and get
accepted
quotes for the printing of materials.
The acknowledgement can be sent direct to the originator and should
preferably
put in the R factor as to what is being done.
Apparently losing sight of a comm cycle can be upsetting to a staff
member. Keep
him posted.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:lb-r.rd
Copyright � 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 13 MAY 1968
(Amends HCO Pol Ltr of 23 April 1968)
Gen Non-Remimeo
TELEX COMM CLARITY
(Dev-T Series)
Communications-particularly telex communications-are to be written in
such a way as to be understandable. Vital words are not to be spared under
the guise of "saving money", or some such consideration. All words
necessary to the understanding of the communication are to be used.
Dev-T, expense, waste of time and executive man hours are spent by
incomplete communication.
EXAMPLE:
Origination
127WW HCOESNT Immediately convene Board of I to investigate dropped
stats in Wollongong Love HCOESWW.
Reply
127WW2 HCOESWW Done Love HCOESNT
This reply is incorrect as it doesn't say what this is all about and now
requires executive time in looking up the original telex.
Correct reply would be:
127WW2 HCOESWW B of I convened on Wollongong stats. Love HCOESNT.
Another example of incorrect communication would be an originating telex
needing clarification, thereby requiring 3 telexes before one can begin to
comply or answer. Telex lines are for speed and quite often there is not
time to get clarification. Therefore a message may go unanswered.
Every person on these lines is ordered to groove this in and be
thoroughly conversant on the subject of telex communications and how to
write them. Seniors are to ensure this is enforced.
Irene Dunleavy
LRH:ID:jc.rd Staff LRH Communicator
Copyright � 1968 for
by L. Ron Hubbard L. RON HUBBARD
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Founder
[Note: The telex numbering in the above Policy Letter has been corrected to
the standard form using the letter designation of the originating office.
The original 23 April '68 issue and 13 May '68 mimeo issue used non-
standard numbering. A fully corrected mimeo, as above, was issued on 23
July 1971.]
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 15 APRIL 1968
Gen Non-Remimeo
To ensure speed and accuracy of relay Telex traffic, communicators must
always include the word relay and destination, i.e. DELD "RELAY PAYER AOA".
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jc.rd
Copyright � 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 30 SEPTEMBER 1969
Remimeo
ORDERS OF THE DAY
Orders of the Day are hereby established in all orgs.
The purpose of the OOD (Orders Of the Day) is to keep staff informed of
Executive intention, Org expansion and progress, Org condition and Ethics.
A poorly informed staff does not work well as a group towards common
targets
and goals.
The form of the OODs is black on white mimeo (or type-written and
displayed on
staff notice board in small orgs) and has the following general layout:
1. A heading giving the date, org, org condition and other pertinent
information such as number on staff etc.
2. The first item is always a short extract or quote from LRH of a
general interest nature.
3. The next section is any orders, targets, or items by Execs arranged
in order of Exec seniority.
4. Any ethics notices.
5. Notices, orders, items of interest, targets, target completions,
general org news and wins.
6. The OOD may not be used to advertise housing, cars for sale etc.
Outside of these general lines there are no other specifications for
OODs.
The LRH Comm as I/A approves all OOD items before they are published.
The intention of this Pol Ltr is to see that staff are kept well
informed on the org
progress and command intention.
The biggest error that can be made with OODs is to fail to inform and
only order.
OODs are not EDs and do not replace them.
Proposed by RodgerWright - LRH Comm WW
JimKeely - QualSecWW
RosVosper - HCO Area Sec WW
Ad Council WW
Anne Tampion - HCO Exec Sec WW
Allan Ferguson - Org Exec Sec WW
Tom Morgan - Public Exec Sec WW
LeifWindle - Policy Review Section WW
JaneKember - The Guardian WW
LRH:RW:ei.rd for
Copyright � 1969 L. RON HUBBARD
by L. Ron Hubbard Founder
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
1812 19th Street, N.W., Washington 9, D.C.
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 2 JULY 1959
Issue 2
DEVELOPED TRAFFIC
THE DELIRIUM TREMENS OF CENTRAL ORGS
There is a phenomenon which costs a Central Org two thirds of the effort
of its staff members and executives.
Stemming from various causes and cured by Process S2 it nevertheless
deserves notice as itself.
I have been working for 2 years on "Analysis of Organizations by
Inspection of its Comm Lines." It is now a fairly complete little science
in itself.
"Developed Traffic" is a statement you will begin to see now. It is
condemnatory. The symbol DevT means on a dispatch, "This dispatch exists
only because its originator has not handled a situation, problem or an
executive order."
It also means, "Responsibility for your post very low." Also it means,
"You should be handling this without further traffic." It also means, "You
are manufact- uring new traffic because you aren't handling old traffic."
Also it means "For Gawd's Sake!"
Every time traffic is developed somebody has flubbed.
"Developed" Traffic does not mean usual and necessary traffic. It means
unusual and unnecessary traffic.
Example: Dept Mat is told "Buy some chairs for the Academy." If this
goes properly, the chairs simply get bought, the Dept Mat estimating
students, state of exchequer and economical available materiel and
arranging delivery. Dept Mat may have to ask a couple verbal questions of
other departments to execute, but this is routine and necessary.
This can be used to DevT in this fashion. Issuing executive of order
"Buy some chairs" is asked "How many?" "What style?" "How much?" "From what
firm?" Or somebody else is asked these at length. Dept Mat is now worse
than a camouflaged hole. Dept Mat is making the acquisition of chairs
costly in terms of consuming dispatch time, other staff members' time,
upset and delay. This is DevT.
DevT costs us the services of 66 2/3% of our personnel. Hence, large
staff, no effectiveness.
Unwilling personnel always makes DevT out of every situation, problem,
order and policy. Take unwilling personnel off the lines and traffic
busyness drops by 2/3rds and effectiveness increases by many times.
"I want a book," gets answered by DevT, gets shunted into other depts,
gets mixed up in billing, makes an ARC break in field which develops more
traffic. Let an unwilling, irresponsible person on our lines, a real
victim, and we get enormously increased busyness, enormously lowered
dissemination.
Look for DevT, Org Sees and HCO Communicators and shoot it from guns
hard before we all get shot.
L. RON HUBBARD
NOTE: A request that a cook book be bought developed 29 dispatches in DC,
all of major executive level. A presentation of a bill that the receiving
terminal in the org knew was valid, and had money to pay, was used to
develop 15 cables and 135 dispatches and almost wiped out the office. An
incorrect price on an item caused 235 internal dispatches and major ARC
breaks with central orgs. An order to mimeo a flyer for one city caused 1
Vs. hours of flashbacks to an Assoc Sec. All persons authoring the DevT
listed above are being suspended pending flattening of Process S2.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:bg.rd
Copyright � 1959
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
37 Fitzroy Street, London W.I
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 7 JULY 1959
Central
STAFF AUDITING REQUIREMENT
(Modifying Earlier Directives)
An Analysis of proportionate pay plans has determined that more errors
on the
whole are being made by most staffs on it, than when straight pay
prevailed. I take this
then as an indicator that enough staff members in Scientology central orgs
have money
difficulties that they are influencing general income. Some of the errors
made are
enormously costly.
I have been studying this for many months and have made some
conclusions.
First, that the errors and comm breaks are an unknowingly intentional
effort on
the part of some to deny themselves income. This is demonstrated by the
fact that
staff does not quit because of low units as often as staff members have
quit in periods
of high units.
I think proportionate pay gives an ample opportunity to a very self-
invalidating
staff member to deny himself and hence everyone money.
Some of the errors made in the past year surpass belief. The most
serious of them
have been aimed at grossly lowering income.
Recently I have been studying life sources and reactions in plants. I
have gained
data now which, on preliminary look, indicates that a plant becomes ill
only pursuant
to a series of shocks which make "it decide" it cannot survive. Only after
that does it
"cooperate" with disease. Up to that time it cannot seem to get ill. But
when it does
decide to die it takes itself and tries to take everything else around it
into illness.
This bears itself out in human beings more obviously than in plants.
Illness
follows postulates to die.
Any channel toward non-survival is then taken. Proportionate income
affords
such a channel.
I first began this particular study when it was obvious that as large a
staff as we
had in DC and London it would not produce higher income of its own
initiative.
I further noted that my own work and dispatch volume was heavier out of
proportion to central org income of years ago. An analysis of my dispatches
indicated
that they were, from certain quarters, designed to stop us by presenting
endless
problems.
DC, left to its own devices, in 60 days went from solvent to $19,000 in
the red.
The biggest bills were errors made by people who apparently punish
themselves in their
own personal lives with insolvency and who seem to be trying hardest not to
survive.
Now all these factors could stem from many causes, the tone scale, etc.
But there
seems to be reason to believe that staffs as a whole are accepting the
gross blunders of a
few to such an extent that if myself and the members of the International
Council as
org officers were not continually alert, central orgs would vanish. This is
happening
when times are good. The errors being made are too obvious and too stupid
to stem
from carelessness. Low units do not happen. They are made.
I have now gone a little further and have found a process which knocks
out the
contra-survival postulates. The pity of it is, a person who now wants to
live is being
victimized by times he didn't want to. So my actions here are not
accusative. They are,
I hope, classifiable as "being effective". It eradicates the urge to be
killed and proofs
one against people who have that urge.
The process is "From where could you communicate to a victim". The
process
number is Process S2.
As by earlier cable this is to be run on every member of staff until
flat. It may not
take too long on most.
There are other benefits. Comm is restrained by a person who fears he
will hurt
something. And we can stand an upward grading of comm.
In the future, admit no person to staff until this process is flat.
Exception, casual
hirings for clerical or materiel posts .... but these may not be maintained
on staff
without being processed on above.
Once this process is flat, we will take the attitude that staff members
do not have
cases.
I could easily write a book of data on all this. The process itself is
quite a triumph
and can be used broadly.
But right now I'm concerned with the forward thrust of Scientology. It
requires
about two good staff members today to handle the errors of one indifferent
one
developing problems and traffic. The volume of work of our staffs could be
done,
therefore, by one third the people. If we salvage them all we could put out
three times
as much dissemination and have many times the income.
It's worth getting serious about. So let's get that process flat on
everybody from
me on down.
L. RON HUBBARD
NOTE: The process is best ran, by auditors on whom it is not flat, fully
muzzled with the question phrased: "Think of a place from which you could
communicate to a victim".
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH-.gh.cden
Copyright � 1959
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
[Note: The above 7 July '59 issue is the same basic Policy Letter as the 2
July '59 issue published in the First Edition, with some minor corrections
and the addition of the Note at the end by LRH.]
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 19 AUGUST 1959
(Re-issued as HCO Policy Letter of 29 May 1963)
CenOCon
SHSBC Students
Franchise
Field
HOW TO HANDLE WORK
Do it Now.
One of the best ways to cut your work in half is not to do it twice.
Probably your most fruitful source of Dev-T is your own double work.
This is the way you do double work.
You pick up a despatch or a piece of work, look it over and then put it
aside to do later, then later you pick it up and read it again and only
then do you do it.
This of course doubles your traffic just like that.
One of the reasons I can handle so much traffic is that I don't do it
twice. I make it a heavy rule that if I find myself handling a piece of
traffic, I handle it, not put it into a hold or a later category.
If I happen to be prowling through my basket in the Message Center Stack
to see what's there, I do what I find there.
If I am given a message or a datum that requires further action from me,
I do it right when I receive it.
This is how I buy "loafing time".
Now I'm not trying to hold me up as a model of virtue as the man who
always does his job; I do many jobs and many hats; I am holding myself up
as an ambitious loafer and as a buyer of valuable loafing time.
There's no need to look busy if you are not busy.
There is no need to fondle and caress work because there isn't enough of
it.
There's plenty of work to do. The best answer to work of any kind is to
do it.
If you do every piece of work that comes your way WHEN it comes your way
and not after a while, if you always take the initiative and take action,
not refer it, you never get any traffic back unless you've got a psycho on
the other end.
In short, the way to get rid of traffic is to do it, not to refer it;
anything referred has to be read by you again, digested again, and handled
again, so never refer traffic, just do it so it's done.
You can keep a comm line in endless foment by pretending that the
easiest way not to work is to not handle things or to refer things.
Everything you don't handle comes back and bites. Everything you refer has
to be done when it comes back to you.
So if you are truly a lover of ease, the sort of person who yawns
comfortably and wears holes in heels resting them on desks, if your true
ambition is one long bout of spring fever, then you'll do as I suggest and
handle everything that comes your way when it comes and not later, and
you'll never refer anything to anybody that you yourself can do promptly.
That people begin to point you out as a model of efficiency, as the
thing expected to cop the next world's speed record, that articles begin to
appear about the marvels you are creating, is all incidental. You and I
know we did it so we could be lazy and not have to work. For it can be
truly said that the way to all labor of a long and continuous grind is by
putting off the action when the message is received and in referring it all
to somebody else, that's the way to slavery, to tired muscles and tattered
brains; that's the route to baskets piled high.
So come loaf with me.
Do it when you see it and do it yourself.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:jw.vmm.rd
Copyright � 1963
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 4 SEPTEMBER 1959
(Re-issued as HCO Policy Letter of 21 November 1962)
CenOCon
Franchise
Field
COMPLETED STAFF WORK (C.S.W.) -
HOW TO GET APPROVAL OF ACTIONS AND PROJECTS
THE MOST IMPORTANT PIECE OF YOUR HAT
There is an old term called "Completed Staff Work" which we will now
employ in
order to reduce Dev T and increase speed of action.
The term "Completed Staff Work" means-an assembled package of
information
on any given situation, plan or emergency forwarded to me sufficiently
complete to
require from me only an "Approved" or "Disapproved".
Here is what slows down approval and action and develops traffic:
Somebody
sends me a skimpy piece of information and demands a solution. As more
information
is required than is presented, I must then take over the person's Hat and
assemble the
missing data using my own time and lines. I must then dream up a solution
and then
order an action to be taken. This causes a slow-down on any action, causes
my lines,
already loaded, to be used for information assembly and brings about a
feeling of
emergency. My pending basket overloads and confusion results. This would be
called
"Incomplete Staff Work". It is incomplete because I have to complete it by:
1. Assembling the data necessary for a solution;
2. Dreaming up the solution based on written data only;
3. Issuing orders rather than approving orders.
If you are mad at your boss you can always ruin him with "Incomplete
Staff
Work". You forward him a fragment of alarming data without collecting the
whole
picture. This makes him do a full job of information collection. You give
him no
recommended solution. This makes him have to achieve a solution by remote
examination of data; such solutions are often wrong as they are made
without full
data. Then you make him issue arbitrary and forceful orders that may ARC
break some
area and hurt his reputation. That's how to get even with a boss. And even
if there's no
intention of harming him, sending "Incomplete Staff Work" to your boss does
harm
him by making him send for information-getting despatches on already
crowded lines,
by making him guess at the situation, by making him cook up solutions which
may be
unreal, and by thrusting him into the role of an arbitrary tyrant.
Now that we've seen the negative side, let us examine the positive side.
"Completed Staff Work" is an assembled despatch or packet which:
1. States the situation
2. Gives all the data necessary to its solution
3. Advises a solution; and
4. Contains a line for approval or disapproval by myself with my
signature.
If documents or letters are to be signed as part of my action, they
should be part
of the package, all ready to sign, and each place they have to be signed is
indicated
with a pencil mark with a note in the recommendations saying signatures are
needed.
Wrong example: A despatch from Canada saying "Central Organization here
is spending large amounts". Look what I now have to do. I have to find out
what is meant by "large amounts", who is doing it, if it is dangerous,
figure out a way to curtail it and issue orders about it. None of this is
my Hat. I am being forced to wear the Hat of the informing person.
Right example: I receive a packet (cable is no good and delays the
situation's being handled as many more cables will be needed). This packet
is covered with a despatch which says:
"145CA. Central Organization here fast approaching insolvency. Data
enclosed. I recommend: Director of Materiel be transferred to the post of
Ext. Course Director that is now empty and that Jules Bentley be hired on
the Dir. Mat. post at 25 units; that the Assn. Sec. be reprimanded for bad
financial management and be ordered to budget his outgo; that a purchase
order system be enforced; that a staff member ordering anything without
permission have the item deducted from his pay; that the Dir. of PrR. be
given lessons in letter writing.
Approved ___________ Disapproved ___________
Signed: Jane
HCO Sec. Canada."
Attached are copies of Ad Comm reports showing insolvency, a summary of
amounts spent in last two months, a summary of income for last two months,
a list of trivial items bought lately at high cost.
What I do then is check the approval line and sign. A cable is sent by
my Communicator: "145CA2 OK best = Ron". The whole packet is airmailed
back. But you must ask in your despatch to have a cable reply if you
consider it that urgent.
On receipt of the cable the HCO Sec Canada issues the local Sec EDs and
takes the other needed actions.
Action could occur because the data, solutions and orders were all
assembled as "Completed Staff Work".
If you want to hold down your post or project don't insist on my
collecting the data you should collect, dream up the solution you, more
familiar with the scene, should achieve, and don't put me in a position of
issuing unreal orders you can't then carry out.
We are a big team and a good one. I know any error on this in the past
has occurred because you didn't know exactly what I wanted.
"Completed Staff Work" is what I want. Then you have your Hat, you can
do more to help, and our lines can stay freer and faster.
There have been good examples of this in the past. Let's make the
circumstances more general.
If you get the letters CSWP on an item it means "Complete the Staff
Work, Please".
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:gl.rd
Copyright � 1962
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 17 NOVEMBER AD 14
Remimeo
Sthil Staff
OFFLINE AND OFFPOLICY
YOUR FULL IN BASKET
(HCO Sec. Hat Check on all Executives and send me a despatch
personally each time you have done so-1 despatch per checkout.)
These two data are paramount in handling Scientology Communication Lines
and
your own In Basket.
1. The first duty of an executive is routing properly and seeing that
others
route properly. If an executive does not do this, then the lines in his
or her area will
stack up and become so tangled that nobody can follow them or get
through them.
This reduces income and dissemination-producing traffic volume-and
general effec-
tiveness. By "routing properly" is meant to see that everyone around
them routes
properly. Forwarding something already improperly routed creates Dev-T
and fails to
handle misrouting where it is occurring.
2. Know and make known policy. The first thought of an executive in
handling
a despatch requiring a decision must be: "Is this already covered by
planning or
policy?" If the executive knows existing policy he or she will find that
99% of
despatches "requiring decisions or solutions" are already cared for by
policy and, the
policy being unknown or non-existent, only then require "special
handling". In short,
if the matter is (a) covered already by policy, (b) if the sender should
know that policy,
or (c) if the first executive receiving the despatch knows policy, then
the despatch
should stop right there. This leaves flowing only traffic where policy
does not exist or
despatches about specialized matters.
The answer to put on a despatch demanding something already covered by
policy
is not some unusual solution. The answer on the despatch should be of two
kinds-(a)
to a person outside who would have no clue of policy, or (b) to somebody in
an org
who should know policy. In the case where (a) originates a query, the
proper answer is
"Policy on this is ______ ." In the case of (b) originating a query already
covered by policy the answer is "Look up old (recent) policy on this."
To outside people, policy is largely unknown. Thus one has to look up
the policy
or recall it to handle. But such seldom have questions needing subtle
points and field
policy is very well known in orgs such as "Give them what we promised if it
was
promised." "Keep entheta to a minimum" etc, etc. A simple "Sorry, it's
against
policy," is the simplest (and usually best) solution to outside wild
queries or ideas. Why
explain? You're not training a staff member.
Where a staff member is involved, it is expected he or she will know
policy or can
look it up.
If an executive gives the despatch querying for policy an "unusual
solution"
where policy already exists, then a problem will occur as this solution
will clash with
the other existing policy and the staff member goes spinning off to no-
policy no-org.
And the organization eventually becomes paralyzed. Any org that has an
executive
who doesn't keep up with policy and general planning and who is always
replying to
queries with unusual solutions of his own will soon find its income
dropping out the
bottom as it's being stuck on the track with counter-solutions. Soon,
nobody will
know what policy is, so in disagreement the org disintegrates. It is no
longer an
org-only a bunch of individuals working at cross purposes.
MISROUTING
Routing consists of forwarding a proper communication to its proper
destination
or, more pertinent to an executive, indicating how types of despatches are
routed to
staff members who route org despatches.
Misrouting would be misrouting indeed if one forwarded an improper
despatch to
anyone else and failed to shoot it back to its originator.
An improper despatch is one which hasn't any business on the lines. This
is the
soul of Dev-T (Developed Traffic)-the forwarding of improper despatches.
One can
forward all the proper despatches in the world without causing Dev-T. The
moment
one forwards an improper despatch to anyone but the originator, one has
involved
other terminals and blocked their lines too.
When you forward a despatch which should never have been written you
become
a party to the original Dev-T. Because the despatch is improper it will do
nothing but
snarl up In baskets all the way along the line. The ONLY correct action is
to send it to
the originator as improper.
IMPROPER
By improper we don't mean insulting or obscene. We mean:
(a) Has nothing to do with the person to whom it is sent or
forwarded, or
(b) Is already covered by policy which should be known to the
originator or the
forwarding person.
Under (a) we get nonsense despatches, despatches to the wrong people,
obvious
lies, "everybody says" despatches, despatches calculated only to make
trouble, useless
entheta and so on.
Under (b) we have (A-HA! discovered!) the staff member who is ignorant
of
what's going on or what policies cover his or her post. We reasonably
expect that, let us
say, a Registrar has read those policies, old and new, that cover
registration. From a
general staff member we expect general planning to be at least known as
general policy
letters all go into his or her basket and so have been available.
OFFLINE
A despatch is offline when it is sent to the wrong person.
OFFPOLICY
A despatch is offpolicy when originated by or forwarded by someone who
should
know that the matter is already covered by policy.
DEV-T
Traffic is developed (developed traffic, Dev-T) by originating or
forwarding an
offline or offpolicy despatch to anyone but the sender. This may seem
obscure when
we say a person originating an offpolicy despatch should not send it to
anyone but the
sender-i.e. himself. He has the policy letters and general planning just as
available to
himself as they are to anyone in Scientology orgs. So querying by despatch
about a
policy that can be looked up is just being too lazy to look it up, isn't
it? And putting
the load on one's seniors to do one's own work.
When you forward an offpolicy despatch to anyone but the sender, you, if
you're
an executive:
(a) Involve other lines and
(b) Fail to take the opportunity to spot a staff member weak on
policy.
Your duty as an executive is to send the despatch to its source with
orders to look
up policy on this. Your duty is not to quote policy. He or she (the
originator) is the
one in mystery. Let the originator do the work. Nay, worse, prowl about
that person a
bit and see how bad it is and order if needed a full check out of the
person on policy
letters applying to his or her post. That's one's job as a senior
executive. Not being a
computer for the org that turns out answers.
Those staff members who habitually forward queries or something
adequately
covered in write-ups of their own duties to others are DYNAMITE in an
organization.
The policy on them has always been THEY LEARN THEIR JOB AND DO THEIR
JOB OR THEY GO. We can't afford them. They can cost us the whole
organization,
and in two or three cases almost have.
They're too expensive when they don't learn their hats and general
policy or push
their duties off on others. One of them in an org costs at least two
additional staff
members to take care of their Dev-T and duties. Actual fact. Even where the
Dev-T
doesn't blow up an org. I could not possibly exaggerate their dangerousness
to an org,
fellow staff members and Scientology.
People who won't or can't learn policy or who continually alter it have
not
progressed case-wise to Level I. They cannot receive a comm so can't answer
or
respond properly and they do awfully wild things. They never dig what we're
at, so
they create a mess.
DUTIES OF AN EXECUTIVE
An executive keeps the organization on the road by getting people to get
the job
done. He may also have his own work and does that too and probably works
very hard
at it. But his organization duties are concerned mainly with enforcing
proper routing
and making people learn and adhere to policy. If an executive won't do that
his post
area or org is in a continual mess.
FLOODED IN BASKETS
All you have to do is look at an Executive's In Basket to know whether
he or she
is performing his or her executive duties. Although he or she may empty it
daily, if
there's much org traffic flowing through it you know at once that the
person does not
properly handle offline or offpolicy despatches.
This executive may be working day and night on the In Basket. It's the
volume of
org despatches that says the executive is not handling offline and
offpolicy despatches
or who has not provided proper routing in his post area. Such an executive
works
himself or herself half to death and is still unable to get his people out
of the red.
If the In Basket is merely stacked up, and isn't being handled at all,
it tells us that
this person simply doesn't do any job at all but is kidding people. In
actual experience
when we find a stacked up, unmoving In Basket we also find (a) pretended
busyness or
(b) just plain no action on post or (c) outright lies. But these conditions
cause an area
of upset in the org because somebody else above or below that person on the
org board
is unable to get his job done because of that "camouflaged hole" (means
post not filled
but only appears to be, thus leaving a hole in the line up). Such people
always cause
overwork by persons above or below them and are pretty dangerous to have
around.
POLICY ON DEV-T
Our policy on finding an habitually full In Basket which never gets
handled is to
(a) attempt to get the person's hat on and if that fails (b) transfer them
to a post they
really can do and if they don't work there (c) dismiss. We don't ever add
"processing"
into our policy of handling such people as they are well below Zero and
take too much
work on them to make them useful.
Policy now regarding the executives who work hard but have fantastic
staff
despatch volume is (a) have them read this policy letter and if their
volume doesn't
reduce (b) hat check them on this policy letter and if their volume still
doesn't fall to
very little traffic (c) have them do the org board in clay, do Scientology
orgs over the
world in clay, do their post in clay and review all policy letters relating
to their post
and the org and planning in general.
The complaint is not that this executive isn't working. The complaint is
that this
executive is not putting his post area together and helping, through
discipline of
offline, offpolicy despatches to put an organization there and put
Scientology across
over the world.
Such an executive, freed of the burden of handling offline and offpolicy
despatches will begin to do his own work industriously, will come out of
protest and
begin to handle and disseminate Scientology and will cease to flood
Scientology lines
by forwarding offline and offpolicy despatches.
Further, the executive will also supply routing directions for his
general traffic
that brings about a smooth flow in his unit or department or org or
continent.
SUMMARY
You never send further an offline or offpolicy despatch. You always
route it back
to the source, the staff member who sent it.
On an offline despatch you see to it that the source routes it properly
whether it
comes from above or below and that the originator of an offline despatch
from below
studies the org board. On this last you must also be sure the org board
reflects the
actuality of the real organization and is functioning. When you skip doing
that you
can't of course get offline routing cured as there isn't a visible line.
Nobody has put the
org board there to be known. Hence, lots of offline despatches.
On offpolicy despatches, you yourself must be familiar with policy in
order to tell
if something is covered by policy. In order to get somebody to follow
policy you must
of course be sure that the policy is available and that you have done
everything you
could to help get policy easily found and known. Time spent on the study of
policy is
very well spent. And when I ask for clarification of or existing policies
in your area you
should give that top priority as you won't be able to do your job unless
you help on
policy when needed. And the way to help on policy is to write up all the
policies for
your hat or area and send them to me if I ask for them so I can review and
publish
them. A group cannot function at all without agreed upon policy and of
course it can
never grow. Its In Baskets get too full. There's no way to get a post
filled and working.
There's no real comm, only Dev-T. The resulting confusion stops any
expansion. So the
org stays tiny and works madly and stays poor. No policy. All Dev-T. Each
person
present wears all the hats and also wears them all differently. That's not
an org. It's a
bunch of auditors pooling their confusions.
We are suckers for origination acceptance. Being trained auditors we are
conditioned to letting people originate. But that's in session. You're not
auditing when
you're an executive. An improper despatch is actually not an origin at all.
It's a
confession that one isn't on staff or should be trained to come on staff.
Such a "staff
member" is still a field auditor knocking around in the org if he doesn't
know policy.
Critical, blundering, creating Dev-T, fouling up lines. Pretty grim. An
executive's job is
first to put an org there by providing comm lines amongst the group and
from the org
to public and public to org. That's the first, the very first
responsibility of an executive
whether Assn Sec or PE Director or D of T or any executive.
ROUTING
When routing arrangements are made inside the org-from staff member to
staff
member-we call it ORGANIZING.
When routing arrangements are made or communication invited from org to
public and public to org we call it PROMOTION.
The executive duties of an executive are primarily concerned then, with
ORGANIZING and PROMOTION and seeing that the arranged actions are executed.
Having put the lines there, the executive must see that they truly exist
and go on
existing. We call this "getting people's hats on" and "keeping people's
hats on" inside
the org, and public to org and org' to public we call "making sure
promotion is
executed."
The bulk of any executive's job is seeing that things are executed.
Seeing that lines
are followed, policy followed, promotion carried out. Even the D of T,
making sure
students are taught only straight technology, is executing policy. The D of
P, seeing
that pcs get gains, is really only following policy and making sure it is
followed.
For a very senior executive to actually forward further on a query he
has received
from a staff member the answer to which is already covered by policy is a
very serious
thing. Why? Because the action says this senior executive doesn't know
policy, or at
the very least isn't putting on the hats of his staff members and juniors
and so hasn't
got a functioning org.
For a very senior executive to forward an already misrouted despatch is
a
confession of the most gross ignorance of his or her own org board.
HARD WORK
It is not saintly then for an executive to merely work hard. In fact,
where that
work is mainly invested in handling the In Basket, that hard work is just
causing hard
work in other places too. It is quite stupid to get tied down to an In
Basket full of staff
despatches. The only way this can happen (countless staff queries or infos)
is by failing
to spot offline and offpolicy despatches and return them to source, saying
"Misrouted.
See Org Board," for offline. Or saying for offpolicy, "Policy already
exists on this.
Look it up, please," or saying "This is contrary to general planning.
Please look up
recent policy letters."
MAKE THEM WORK
The surest cure for such floods of despatches is always to make the
source work
harder because he or she goofed by sending an offline or offpolicy
despatch.
Some offline offpolicy despatches are originated out of pure laziness.
"Takes too
long to look it up, I'll ask the HCO Sec" is the usual line of thought. The
poor HCO
Sec, already too overworked to look up policy, gives in desperation an
unusual
solution. This really messes it up. The solution given can only be as good
as the data
offered and if that data is wrong, the solution is very wrong, and as the
query
originated in laziness it is probably wrong in data and so any effort to
answer it at all
will only louse things up.
Hence, it is contrary to the best interests of the org to give the
source the proper
routing for offline despatches. If you do, you don't handle the real
trouble-the staff
member doesn't know it's an org yet and so will not be able to do his or
her job. You
must get that staff member familiar with the org board or you'll have
betrayed the org.
You see, other staff members also suffer with the offline originations from
this person.
And as an executive you aren't protecting your own people from offline
origins if you
don't handle the person doing it when spotted. Cure it and you help not
just your In
Basket-you'll take a very heavy load off other staff members too. You see,
yours isn't
the only In Basket in the org, and if you are an executive you're the one
who must
handle the routing for only you have the immediate authority to do so.
Expansion
depends chiefly on your taking that action.
On offpolicy despatches, by which we mean the staff member doesn't know
his
policy and so does things contrary to it or wants to know if it is policy,
why should
you study up your policy letters? You are probably fairly well up on them.
The person
who isn't is the source of that despatch. So you must make sure that that
person gets
industrious on the subject of policy and burns some midnight oil on old and
new
policies and general planning.
So again, by your looking it all up for the offender, you cripple your
organization
by leaving uncared for an area in it that will goof. And that staff
member's goof can
destroy the whole org! That's no exaggeration.
Why are you working so hard as an executive to put the org there and
make it
grow if there aren't elements around that are destroying it? If there were
no such
elements your org would just grow and all your work would be promotional or
service.
That you are always continuously creating your department, unit or org or
defending it
somehow, means there must be something knocking it down. The symptom of
that
something is the offline or offpolicy despatch.
For you to be totally effective you yourself must know routing (the org
board)
and know policy and the general planning in progress.
And for an org board to be known it must exist and be real and must say
what
departments, units and staff members do.
And for policy to be known it must exist and be findable.
To make minor changes on an org board and double assign (2 or more hats
to one
person) is quite usual in an org. To make major changes such as Adcomm in
Charge of
HCO or training done by the Accounts Unit would be a gross violation of
policy. And
so your org board must to that degree be a standard org board. But you
still have to do
routing on it and provide routing for it.
To invent policies or supplement policies without sending them through
channels
as completed staff work (which means routed to the board, with all related
policy
letters clipped to the requested change and the new policy letter all
written ready for
issue) will break down the Scientology lines in that area.
You don't believe it? Australia got into its whole enquiry mess because
the senior
executives either did not know or follow the long standing policy
concerning the
prompt return of money to a dissatisfied pc. That cost the org thousands
and
thousands, a year of grief, and risked getting Scientology banned in
Australia. A policy
not known or altered is death. Not from me but from the community in which
the org
operates.
Still don't believe it? Washington D.C. either did not know or did not
follow the
explicit policy concerning receiving favours from preclears but only half-
heartedly
reported them to an uninformed HCO which didn't know or didn't follow the
full
intent and spirit of the policy and never told me as was implied in the
original policy
letter. The wife of that person giving the favours brought on the whole FDA
mess that
cost us tens of thousands and two years of grief and almost knocked out
Scientology in
the U.S.
Policy is survival for a group.
ONLY PRACTICAL POLICY AGREED UPON AND FOLLOWED PROVIDES
THE ARC THAT IS THE LIFE ITSELF OF ANY GROUP. It's the mores, the policies,
whatever you want to call them that makes a group or an organization alive
and
breathing.
Bad policy, bad mores, and you have a dying group, a dying organization.
Governments whose policies are unreal are perishing. They act like
criminals. There's
where anyone gets his distaste for "policy"-he has looked at the policies
of dying
groups and is imitating how they are regarded.
But as in control there is good control and "bad control" so in policy
there is
good policy and bad policy. It has a bad name with some people. It bores
them. They
also kill groups. So if your organization is going to live it must have
real, living policy
and respect it and use it.
All right, so we're serious now. Org boards and policies must exist and
be
followed and the person who makes sure of that is a Scientology executive.
The clue to violations is the continuously full In Basket, whether
moving or not.
If an executive's In Basket is always full, then he or she either isn't (a)
working at all or
(b) is working like mad but is not handling offline or offpolicy despatches
by getting
the lines in and the policy known.
You can't escape it, there it is.
There is nothing wrong with working hard as an executive. I do. There is
nothing
wrong with having lots of traffic through an In Basket. A busy org does.
There is
everything wrong with an executive having a lot of staff traffic because
99% of it is
offline and offpolicy and if you don't act to correct it you not only don't
have time to
breathe, you also will wind up with no income and no org.
Fact.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:jw.rd
Copyright � 1964
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 31 JANUARY 1965
Remimeo
Sthil Staff
DEV-T
(Adds to HCO Pol Ltr Nov. 17, 1964)
The commonest cause of OFFLINE despatches is:
A staff member writes a despatch to himself but routes it to somebody
else.
Example: Registrar writes a despatch to the Org Sec asking how to meet a
quota of interviews. This is Dev-T because it is offline. Why is it
offline? The staff member responsible for increasing interviews is the
Registrar, not the Org Sec. Therefore the despatch should be routed to the
Registrar and routing it to anyone else is misrouting. Informing the Org
Sec, "I am doing so and so to increase the number of interviews" is quite
in order, but it's a despatch containing a report, requiring no answer. The
correct routing of a query about increasing interviews would be to the
Registrar. Thus, the above example's routing would be the Registrar to the
Registrar.
When a staff member generates a lot of despatches about his post, these
are usually misrouted if they go to anyone else but himself. Since who else
should wear that hat? Not the Org Sec or Assn Sec. Not the HCO Sec. Only
the staff member himself or herself.
In orgs a goodly number of people think staff members senior to them
also wear their hats. This is definitely not true. The Assn Sec or Org Sec
does not wear every other hat in the org. If he does, he is a pretty poor
organizer. And if he lets staff force him to, then he isn't much of a
leader.
You can detect people who fear responsibility or consequences of their
most ordinary actions by the number of despatches they send others which
should only have gone to the staff member himself or herself.
It's the figures on the weekly report sheet, the volume of work
accomplished, the resume of results that inform others about a hat and the
activities and effectiveness of the person wearing it. An Org/Assn Sec only
needs to look at these reports, not his in-basket, to know if posts are
being held. It may make one feel grand and responsible when others must
come to one for help on their jobs but it sure doesn't make a strong org to
have "what-do-I-dos" flying up to the head of the org day and night. People
exist who do their jobs without a lot of Dev-T about how to do them, what
to decide, how to think. And people exist who do their jobs without getting
everyone else in trouble.
OTHER PEOPLE'S HATS
There is another type of Dev-T which one encounters. And that is the
origination of comm that should have been originated by someone else.
This has several guises. You see it in a usual form in Academies where
some student is always asking questions "so that the others will
understand". The student himself or herself understood the instructor but
asks a question so "the others will understand also". This is, of course, a
student trying to wear the instructor's hat or another student's student
hat. I can usually detect this one and break it right there with "Are you
asking because you don't get it or because you think the others haven't?"
Such a student can lengthen study hours horribly without helping anyone a
bit.
A staff member occasionally tries to originate for another hat than his
or her own. It is easily detected. The despatch has to do with the Academy
but is from the HGC, etc.
Such a despatch is usually misrouted also. It is sent to a department
head or the HCO Sec or somewhere. Trying to handle it gets pretty deadly as
it's a double snarl.
The originator shouldn't have originated it and also should have sent it
elsewhere if he
or she did originate it. If the HGC thinks it has to wear the Academy hat
then the
despatch should go to the Academy and nowhere else. At least send it to the
hat it
most concerns.
This gets even more snarled when it jumps an org-to wit, an HGC staff
member
originates a despatch for the Academy and sends it to, let us say, the
National Central
Org. In the other org, unfamiliarity with the org board of the originating
org can cause
action to be taken. It isn't noticed that the HGC is talking for the
Academy.
When action is taken other than returning the off-origin despatch to its
sender, a
great many evils can result. The least of them is that it gets the sender
in trouble when
acted upon.
Example: A staff auditor proposes to the Assn Sec that students be
trained better
in 8c because of a recent HGC flub. The Assn Sec jumps on the D of T. The D
of T
privately pounds the staff auditor into the ground.
Ill feeling in orgs usually stems from these off-origin despatches.
In the above example, the staff auditor should have taken it up
emphatically on
the basis of a flub in the HGC with the D of P who then would take it up
with the D of
T still on the basis of an HGC flub. Then it has a chance of straightening
out. You see,
lacking data, the person originating an off-origin despatch usually assigns
wrong cause.
In the above example it may have been certification at fault, not the
Academy at all.
One can drown in a sea of errors on these off-origin despatches. Basically
what ails
governments is their dependence on spy reports, police reports, etc. The
reporting
person does not wear the hat which should have originated.
When a staff member does not himself originate when he or she should, it
will
show up in the OIC reports and in emergencies. It is handled by putting on
the person's
hat, auditing or personnel transfers, not by off-origin despatches.
Did you know you can let an entheta despatch drop right there and create
less
entheta by doing so? Try it sometime.
Not all off-origin despatches are entheta, of course.
Part of this type of despatch is of course off-zone. Perth originating
for Sydney.
Or Los Angeles originating for New York. Or Assoc Sec London (as once
happened
years ago) doing business only in Australia. Or LA getting pcs only from
Nevada. Here
one sees somebody operating for the wrong zone or for only part of their
whole zone.
On a smaller look, a staff member doing only part of his job produces a
similar result.
And somebody doing another staff member's job is another version of it.
Off-origin despatches or work can make an awful lot of Dev-T-not always
pleasant.
ORG BOARD DEV-T
An out of date Org Board can cause Dev-T.
A staff that doesn't have a well done Org Board cannot help but make Dev-
T.
An Org Board is what we use instead of Appointment lists inside orgs. If
it isn't
posted on the Org Board, it hasn't been appointed. Why? Because an
appointment is
effective only if its work will be routed to it. If nobody knows about an
appointment,
then how can anything but Dev-T occur?
Thus prime preventers of Dev-T are:
1. A well done Org Board.
2. A complete Org Board containing all appointments.
3. A staff checked out on the Org Board.
4. All new staff checked out on the Org Board.
5. No appointments existing that don't appear on the Org Board.
A lot of Dev-T occurs because some people are insufficiently aware of
the
existence of an org. They think "we're all here together working". They
don't realize
everybody in the org does a different job than the rest.
There is no one so eager to reorganize everything as a new staff member
who has
yet to discover the org board and its purposes.
And there is a flood of Dev-T from anyone who:
1. Doesn't know the org board well and who
2. Hasn't got his own hat on.
Obviously, to reduce Dev-T and keep one's In-Basket within reason, one
must:
1. Have a complete and well-done Org Board up to date and known, and
2. Get individual hats on.
Otherwise people will misroute continuously-sending their own bits to
others
and flooding wrong others with despatches.
HATS
Given a good Org Board with the purpose of each post stated and the
whole thing
well known to staff, lengthy and complex hats become less important.
Hats, complete ones, are important and of value.
But did you know that a staff member will do best if he has to evolve
his own hat
before he reads up on it or afterwards?
The way to do this is on a Clay Table.
Take a very fundamental statement of the staff member's job-a complete,
simple
statement. Then, have the staff member:
(a) Work out the org in relation to the field and public in clay;
(b) Work out his job in clay in relation to the rest of the org;
(c) Work out his job in clay in relation to his job and himself.
After a staff member has done that (labelling every bit of everything he
makes),
and then done (a), (b) and (c) again, most of those misapprehensions and
not-knows
that cause Dev-T will be gone.
And it pays off in the time spent by increased effective volume and
decreased
Dev-T.
Very little Dev-T is caused by viciousness or mean intent. It's just the
accumulations of (1) Not-knowns and (2) Afraid to dos.
Cure them.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:jw.rd
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 8 FEBRUARY 1965
Remimeo
Sthil Staff
DEV-T ANALYSIS
(Continues HCO Pol Ltrs of 17 Nov '64
and 31 Jan'65)
Probably the basic reason for the expansion of bureaucracies is Dev-T.
When Admin staff in one of our orgs begins to exceed Tech staff then it
is obvious
that a lot of Dev-T is on the lines. Proof of this is the continual finding
that an increase
in Admin staff does not lead to an increase in income but on the contrary
often heralds
an era of decreased gross income.
Within reason, you must not increase Admin staff numbers until you have
thoroughly hunted down all Dev-T and taken adequate remedies for it.
When a government sees a lot of despatches it thinks it needs a lot of
people.
These, making more Dev-T, then seem to need many more people, etc. The cure
for a
lot of despatches without a lot of new income showing up is a brisk
analysis of the
org's comm lines.
This is simply done.
1. Look around for constantly full and not emptied In baskets. When you
find one
in which the traffic does not move, look the post over carefully and
decide which
one of the following to do on the basis of what you find on that post
(a) educate
or (b) replace. If, when (a) is done, the basket again remains as
before, do (b).
2. Look into people's baskets for despatch and letter dates. If you find
a basket
where these are quite old, find out why and make up your mind what to do
about
it on the basis of what you find.
3. Look into drawers for cached despatches, letters, etc. If you find a
drawer full,
realize somebody is staying clean on the boards by hiding what should be
visible.
Find out why this violation is occurring and act accordingly.
4. Look over the traffic flow of the principals of the Org (Assn/Org
Sec, HCO Sec) and
analyze their traffic on the basis of the number of offline, offpolicy,
off-origin
despatches. Note what staff members are doing these and act accordingly.
5. Make the principals of the org keep logs of offline, offpolicy, off-
origin
despatches and also bodies brought with despatches. After one week, take
these
logs and, as they spot the Dev-T artists in the org, act accordingly.
The main thing to know is never get reasonable about Dev-T. If it
doesn't cure by
education or other means, then you have no choice but to act. The sooner
you act, the
better for everyone.
NO WORK
The Anglo-Saxon race has a crazy spot on the subject of work. The whole
ambition is to not work.
This is quite at variance with several other races and normal thetan
behaviour.
Easily the greatest source of Dev-T is non-compliance or no-comm.
You can say all you want about despatches and analyze them thoroughly
and
with benefit to all.
But the most deadly conditions, the things most likely to produce the
greatest
floods of traffic in the long run are non-compliance and no-comm.
One or the other of these is the basis of any emergency.
So in analyzing traffic to increase income and efficiency, be very alert
to the
points of non-compliance and no-comm.
In our ordinary despatch system these are not easily spotted as we
seldom keep
copies of our despatches.
The way to locate these spots is by questioning the principals of the
org and
getting a list of:
1. Emergencies of the past 3 months and what departments and personnel
were most
closely connected to them.
2. Present time problems of the principals with the org and the names of
the staff
members most closely connected with these.
Compare lists 1 and 2. You will find that there are names common to both
these
lists.
Query what despatches remain unanswered by these persons or what orders
have
not been complied with. This selects out one or two people.
You now have the basic sources of Dev-T in the org which cause more
visible
Dev-T to build up.
Act accordingly. And don't get "reasonable".
Principals seldom realize that their softness on bad Dev-T offenders
works great
hardship on other staff members. The real overt is against other staff
members by not
acting effectively to locate and reduce Dev-T.
As an example, I know of an instance where two staff members' non-
compliance
and neglect of orders cost an org �20,000 cash in one year alone and
brought the org
to a point where only heroic action saved it. Only two out of 50 were
responsible. The
other 48 were working their heads off trying to make a go of things. These
two, by
non-compliance with despatches, with no-comm, sabotaged all promotion and
the
entire PO system and nobody could tell how it was happening. When they
departed,
not only the losses vanished but org income doubled.
So don't ever get soft where you see non-compliance or unanswered
despatches.
You're looking at trouble and future emergencies that may wipe out the org.
DEV-T ANALYSIS
You can pretty well size up a whole org just by watching its despatch
lines and
baskets.
If you were very skilled at this, you really wouldn't need to move out
of the
communicator's chair to spot every bad and good point in the org.
Without analysis by Dev-T, an org is carried on the backs of a few
desperate staff
members.
Why do it the hard way? Watch and handle Dev-T sources and you'll be
able to
breathe again.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:jw.rd
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 13 OCTOBER 1965
Remimeo
All Executives
DEV-T DATA
EXECUTIVE RESPONSIBILITY
Executives may not OK anything done or to be done below their level
unless their
immediate junior has also stated or attested with initial that it is OK.
Unless one can fix responsibility for actions there is no responsibility
anywhere
and the whole show goes to pot.
Never let a junior say, "Is this OK?"
Always require the junior to state or initial, "This is Okay" on all
work, actions or
projects.
An organization permitting a lot of "Is this OK?" will soon go to
pieces. Things
are or aren't OK. Make them say so. Hang them if it's a false attestation.
"Is this okay?" is Dev-T and should be chitted as such.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:ml.rd
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 5 JANUARY 1968
Remimeo
DEV-T SERIES, PART OF
OVERFILLED IN BASKET
BAD NEWS
If an executive is trying to do his or her job and looking ahead and
handling things and yet is being hit constantly with bad news and problems
and has his In basket loaded continually
(a). HE IS GETTING NON COMPLIANCE AND FALSE REPORTS
and
(b). HIS JUNIORS ARE NOT GETTING HIS ORDERS EXECUTED
and
(c). HIS JUNIORS ARE NOT PUTTING IN ETHICS BUT LEAVING IT ALL TO HIM.
What he sees is bad news and hard to handle items and an overfilled In
basket.
He does not see (a) (b) and (c) above as they are out of view and often
blurred by efforts by juniors to LOOK and SOUND active in his sight while
actually really loafing and goofing or outright betraying him.
This is the most senior datum in all Dev-T policy-that
IF YOU ARE BEING HIT BACK BY LINES YOU ARE TRYING TO HANDLE then YOU
HAVE UNSEEN NON COMPLIANCE AND FALSE REPORTS ON YOUR LINES.
Therefore, to remedy this situation, when an Executive is being knocked
about by his lines, bad news, disasters, etc. and he feels PTS he must
apply this formula mercilessly
(A) MAKE THE PENALTIES FOR NON COMPLIANCE AND FALSE REPORTS TOO
GRUESOME TO BE FACED AND ENFORCE THEM
B) LOCATE AND DISCIPLINE THE JUNIORS WHO DO NOT EXECUTE OR DO NOT GET
ONE'S ORDERS EXECUTED
and
(C) SACK EVERY JUNIOR WHO WILL NOT PUT IN ETHICS IN THEIR OWN AREA
ON THEIR OWN.
The only reason an otherwise competent and industrious executive gets
hit by bad news and has an overloaded in basket lies in (a) (b) and (c)
above and the only effective remedy is (A) (B) and (C).
It takes far more ethics and far steeper enforced penalties to make an
organization work than Scientologists have been using.
If you don't learn and use the above you will not be a big success and
your life will be miserable and your post untenable.
We work in a jungle of non compliance and false reports called the wog
world. Our ethics must be proportional to our ability to do good or we will
all vanish.
You must give attention to this Pol Ltr or you'll never cure the Dev-T
on your lines. It all comes from Non Compliance, False Reports and your
juniors patty-caking around and not getting in Ethics on their own, no
matter HOW it may look from your post.
Of course your lawyers and accountants "know best" and have OUT ETHICS
and therefore give you the most trouble as they are outside your control
perimeter as "experts" and so you have more legal and accounts problems
than others. This Pol Ltr still applies to them too.
You CAN function as an Executive if you do your job and do (A) (B) and
(C) above. Otherwise, lord help you, your juniors will get you shot by (a)
(b) and (c). A good fellow is a dead good fellow when he's dead. So being a
good fellow is NOT the solution to getting a job done. The solution for an
Executive is (A) (B) & (C).
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jp.rd
Copyright � 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 27 JANUARY 1969
Remimeo
DEV-T SUMMARY LIST
(Add to Dev-T Policies)
The following list is a summary of items which Develop (Increase)
Traffic.
It is based on years of experience with the subject of Dev-T.
1. FALSE REPORTS
A report that is false can cause greatly increased useless action
including at times
Bs of I, despatches verifying it, etc.
2. NON-COMPLIANCES
Failure to comply with an order can set an emergency flap going which
crowds
the lines with despatches. One consequence of non-compliance when repeated
over a
long period is to move a large number of Targets into PT in a sort of
frantic jam.
Catastrophes can occur because of non-compliance.
3. ALTERED COMPLIANCE
Something was introduced or changed in the orders which made them
non-optimum. This sometimes wastes and repeats all earlier traffic.
4. NO REPORTS
The scramble to find out if something has been done increases traffic.
This
includes lack of data forwarded as it should have been. It causes as well
anxiety and
uncertainty.
5. COMM FORMULA UNUSED
All orders out answers in are on the Comm Formula. Failing to answer the
question asked can triple traffic.
6. INFO FAILURE
Those in charge fail to brief their juniors. These then have no idea of
what's going
on and develop other traffic in conflict. Reversely, juniors fail to inform
seniors of data
they have.
7. LACK OF CSW
Failure to forward an assembled package of information on any given
situation,
plan or emergency or failure to forward complete information on any
despatch,
sufficiently complete to require only an approved or not approved, slows
down
approval and action and develops traffic. It often requires returning for
completed staff
work, or the senior concerned must take over the person's hat and assemble
the missing
data using his own time and lines. And thus traffic develops.
8. SUPPRESSION ON LINES
Lines get closed by arbitraries so that vital info does not get through
or vital
action is not ordered.
9. CROSS ORDERS
Juniors issue so many orders unknown to a senior and across his lines
that a
senior's orders are obscured or lost. Things get very confused, very active
but
non-productive.
10. PRESENT TIME ORDERS ONLY
Basic Programmes or standing orders or policy go out by not being
enforced. PT
orders only are being forwarded or handled. This eventually balls up in a
big wad and
an organization vanishes. Primary Targets go out.
11. NON-EXISTENT TARGETING
Targets are not set, major targets are unknown. Actions are then
unproductive.
12. UNREAL TARGETS
Targets are set and worked on which are not derived from any useful
major target.
13. CROSS TARGETS
The senior's target system is neglected due to conflicting targets being
set on
lower levels.
14. BUGGED TARGETS
A target develops bugs in its forwarding which are not seen or reported.
The
target stalls. A furious traffic burst may eventually occur to redo it and
catch it up.
15. HOBBY HORSES
A staff member can "ride his favourite hobby horse", ordering and
complying
only in his favourite area, neglecting areas of greater importance. His
orders often
cross-order and distract from important targets and create Dev-T, vital
actions being
neglected.
16. STALEDATED ORDERS AND DISPATCHES
Staledating delays action, often important, and creates anxiety and
emergencies.
New (developed) traffic results in an attempt to get an answer or
compliance.
17. FORMULA EVASION
Areas or persons fail to follow the conditions formulas assigned or
actually
indicated and pursue the wrong or no formula.
18. INCORRECT CONDITIONS
Incorrect conditions are assigned or assumed with consequent ball up of
lines.
19. HAT DUMPING
This is referring everything to someone else. It greatly increases
traffic without
producing.
20. CHANNEL SKIPS
Something is not forwarded in channels but skips vital points and if
acted on
confuses the area of the points skipped.
21. VIOLATED PURPOSE
A Division, Dept or staff member or materiel used for things it was not
organized
to do. It disrupts its normal lines.
22. BACKLOGGING
If traffic or bodies begin to be backlogged one can stall completely
just handling
the queries about the backlog without getting anything really done.
23. OFF ORIGIN
(Statements and Despatches)
A terminal originates something not its hat.
24.OFFLINE
Despatches or orders are passed in a manner to deny info on record.
25. INCORRECT ORGANIZATION
The Comm System or procedures are not organized so as to be easily used.
They
are either not organized at all or are made too complex to be useful.
26. ORG BOARD DEV-T
An out-of-date Org Board can cause Dev-T. A staff that doesn't have a
well done
Org Board cannot help but make Dev-T. A staff that doesn't know the Org
Board will
make Dev-T.
27. UNTRAINED STAFF
Staff not grooved in on the lines mainly deal in Dev-T and although they
even
look busy seldom accomplish much.
28. UNPRODUCTIVE PERSONNEL
Keeping a personnel on a post who is a flagrant Dev-T source.
29. PEOPLE WHO PRESENT PROBLEMS
Problems presented by juniors when solved by a senior cause Dev-T
because the
source of the problem usually won't use the presented solution either.
30. HAVING TO HAVE BEFORE THEY CAN DO
Projects stall "because of FP" or "because it would be nice to have a
_____".
31. PERMITTING DEV-T
The biggest single goof anyone can make is failing to recognize
something as
Dev-T and going on to handle it anyway. One's basket soon overflows. The
reason for
"overwork" and "heavy traffic" is usually traceable to permitting Dev-T to
exist
without understanding it or attempting to put the Dev-T right.
32. LACK OF EXECUTIVE RESPONSIBILITY
Is this OK?
Executives may not OK anything done or to be done below their level
unless their
immediate junior has also stated or attested with an initial that it is OK.
Unless one can fix responsibility for actions there is no responsibility
anywhere
and the whole show goes to pot.
Never let a junior say "Is this OK?" Always make him state or initial
"This is OK"
on all work, actions or projects.
"Is this OK?" is Dev-T and should be chitted as such.
33. EXECUTIVE ENTURBULENCE
An executive is seldom hit unless he has had non-compliance on his
lines. He is
almost never hit if he polices Dev-T. When an executive is hit by a
catastrophe, he
should handle it and AT ONCE CHECK UP ON DEV-T AND HANDLE IT. I keep a
daily log of Dev-T and who and what every time I find my lines heavy or
there is a
threatened catastrophe. Then I handle the majority offenders.
34. USING DEV-T AS AN EXCUSE TO CUT LINES
An executive must really know what Dev-T is and really say what the
exact Dev-T
was in order to reject or handle Dev-T.
35. CATASTROPHES
A catastrophe occurs by lack of prediction of a possible circumstance.
Those
things planned for do not become catastrophes. Catastrophes USUALLY FOLLOW
A
PERIOD OF EXCESSIVE DEV-T.
_______________
The above make a great many motions necessary where only the one correct
one
was needed.
Thus a crew or Org can look very busy when it is only handling Dev-T. It
will get
nowhere. Real Targets are not done. Tempers go bad. Staff and crew are
overworked.
Also when I get Dev-T on my lines I know that it is despite various
screenings. If I
get it, then it must be 100 times that for the fellow who has no such admin
defenses.
I routinely run a Dev-T check on my lines and advise all officers and
executives to
do the same.
The way to handle this is REVIEW and CLASSIFY all targets into their
types as
per three recent Policy Letters.
Find and note all instances of Dev-T as above with the person who did
them.
Turn in KNOWLEDGE REPORTS or ethics chits concerning them.
Concentrate on COMPLETING proper targets set as per the recent Policy
Letters.
ONLY REPORT COMPLETIONS.
Work to get COMPLETIONS. Then we'll get the job done.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:ldm.ei.rd
Copyright � 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 30 JANUARY 1969
Issue II
Remimeo
DEV-T SUMMARY LIST ADDITIONS
Adds to HCO P/L 27 Jan '69
(add to Dev-T Policies)
An actual example of Dev-T (Developed Traffic) follows:
A warm wind came up and the heating system on the "MV APOLLO" was no
longer required to be on. A message was sent to the Engine Room to "turn
off the heat".
The order was not complied with.
The order was repeated some time later to a steward to send a messenger
to the Engine Room and tell them to "turn the heat off the fans". The
messenger was not sent by the steward, but the steward instead told the I &
R (Inspections and .Reports) of the Engine Room who was making his
inspection rounds, to turn down the heat.
Again the order had to be repeated, this time to a messenger who went to
the Engine Room and gave the order to "turn the heat off the fans" to the
Engineer of the Watch.
He replied, "We turned it down a short while ago!"
The messenger accepted this ALMOST and reported back to the senior
executive, who again had to send the messenger to repeat the order to "turn
off the heat". This time the messenger returned with the compliance that
the heat had been turned off.
FOUR TIMES the message had to be repeated before compliance was
reported.
Developed Traffic.
______________
From the above some new forms of Dev-T can be isolated.
36. ACCEPTING AN ALMOST
The messenger accepted the ALMOST of turning down the heat. The order
was to turn it off.
An executive or communicator or messenger who accepts and forwards an
"almost" is permitting Dev-T.
Orders given are to be executed and reported DONE, not to be nearly done
or almost done.
A communicator can often be tripped up by this form of Dev-T. It is most
easily spotted by insisting that the original order or orders be returned
with the compliance so that any terminal on the line can tell at a glance
what was ordered, and what was done.
37. FAILURE TO GET AN ORDER CLARIFIED
Upon questioning it was found that the messenger had not fully
understood what was required and passed this uncertainty on to the Engineer
of the Watch.
38. IRRELEVANT INFORMATION
The Engineer of the Watch, when told to "Turn the heat off the fans",
gave the messenger the irrelevant information, "We turned it down a short
while ago".
A later check revealed that he did indeed comply and turn the heat off
but failed
to inform the messenger of this, giving her only the irrelevant information
that they
had earlier turned it down.
This form of Dev-T can also take the form of forwarding to a senior
large
quantities of irrelevant information, jamming his lines, and reducing his
productiveness.
The opposite of this, of course, is failure to inform one's seniors of
relevant data (see
P/L 27 Jan '69, Dev-T Summary point 6).
39. REASONABLENESS
A staff member or executive can be "reasonable" and accept reasons why
something cannot be done, accept incomplete cycles as complete, and fail to
follow
through and get completions.
All of which results in further traffic. This form of Dev-T is best
handled by
knowing and applying HCOB 19 August '67, "The Supreme Test" [Volume 7, page
362].
THE SUPREME TEST OF A THETAN IS HIS ABILITY TO MAKE THINGS GO
RIGHT.
40. FAILURE TO TERMINATEDLY HANDLE, REFERRAL
The only tremendous error an organization makes, next to inspection
before the
fact, is failing to terminatedly handle situations rapidly. The fault of an
organization's
woffle, woffle, woffle, Joe won't take responsibility for it, it's got to
go someplace
else, and all that sort of thing, is that it continues a situation.
What you should specialize in is terminating the end of a situation, not
refer it to
someone else. Complete the action now.
41. FAILURE TO COMPLETE A CYCLE OF ACTION and REFERRAL
One of your most fruitful sources of Dev-T is your own double work.
You pick up a despatch or a piece of work, look it over and then put it
aside to
do later, then later you pick it up and read it again and only then do you
do it.
This of course doubles your traffic just like that.
If you do every piece of work that comes your way WHEN it comes your way
and
not after a while, if you always take the initiative and take action, not
refer it, you
never get any traffic back unless you've got a psycho on the other end.
You can keep a comm line in endless ferment by pretending that the
easiest way
not to work is to not handle things or to refer things. Everything you
don't handle
comes back and bites. Everything you refer has to be done when it comes
back to you.
Complete the action, do it now.
42. FAILURE TO RECORD AN ORDER
Failing to make an adequate record of an order given, losing or
misplacing the
order can result in endless Dev-T.
The original orders being lost or not recorded at all, wrong items are
purchased,
incorrect actions are taken, cross orders are given, and a tremendous waste
of executive
time and money occurs straightening the matter out.
This is one of the most serious sources of Dev-T.
43. UNCLEAR ORDERS
An executive giving an unclear order puts uncertainty and confusion on
the line
right at the very beginning of the cycle of command.
The safe way on an important programme or action is to Target it.
44. MISUNDERSTOOD ORDERS
Orders misunderstood by the recipient will not be properly complied with
as the order was misunderstood. The incorrect or no action following will
require further traffic to correct.
As an executive, originate clear precise instructions and orders.
As a junior, duplicate the order, and never fail to clarify if you have
mis- understood.
45. RELAYING AN ORDER IN A CONFUSING MANNER
Communicators and messengers can create Dev-T and foul up actions by
poor relay of information.
46. CLEANING CLEANS
Doing something that is already done or ordering something to be done
already done.
47. REPEATED TRAFFIC
The same traffic repeated to the same executive is Dev-T. Often takes
the form of information or compliance reported by telex and then the same
information being sent by despatch. There are times when a telex is
followed by a more lengthy despatch or report, but this should only occur
when extra information is really needed.
48. FAILURE TO WEAR YOUR HAT
A person on one post not doing that post but doing every other post
creates endless Dev-T, all despatches and origins being off-origin and he
covering the hole of his own post.
The person himself is the Dev-T.
49. UNUSUAL SOLUTIONS
Requests for authority to depart from the usual are dangerous when
okayed as they then set up areas of difference and cause policy to wander
and misfit at the joints.
Juniors who propose unusual solutions generally don't know the policy or
orders anyway.
The proper thing to do is order a checkout on the appropriate policy.
50. REMOVING PARTICLES OFF THE LINE
Apart from being a serious offense, taking comm particles off another's
desk or out of their In Basket or off the comm lines causes Dev-T, and lost
time in searching for the missing particles and can sabotage projects or
actions, vital data being missing.
51. SLOW COMM LINES
Despatches held up on lines cause other despatches to be originated
about the same subject, causing Dev-T to both sender and recipient.
The power of an organization is directly proportional to its speed of
particle flow (letters, despatches, telexes, bodies).
Ken Delderfield
LRH Comm Aide CS-7
for
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:KD:ldm.ei.rd
Copyright � 1969
by L. RonHubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 27 OCTOBER 1969
Remimeo
Admin Know-How No. 23
DEV T
The entire, complete and only major source of Dev T is ignorance or
failure to
grasp CONFUSION AND THE STABLE DATUM as covered fully in "Problems of
Work" (and LRH Tapes of 1956).
Unless an executive or staff member fully grasps the basic principles of
Confusion
and a Stable Datum then the org board is completely over his head, the
reason for
posts is not understood and Dev T becomes routine.
A post on the org board is the STABLE POINT. If it is not held by
someone it
will generate confusion. If the person that is holding it isn't really
holding it, the
confusion inherent in that area on the org board zooms all over the place
near and
far.
Any executive getting Dev T knows at once what posts are not held
because
Dev T is the confusion that should have been handled in that area by
someone on post.
With that stable terminal not stable, Dev T shoots about.
Excessive transfers in an org promote fantastic Dev T as the posts do
not really
get held as people are on them too briefly. "Musical chairs" (excessive
transfers) can
destroy an org or area.
The remedy is to get people trained up (OEC) to handle their posts, to
get people
on post who do handle their posts.
An essential part of such training is a study of "Problems of Work" and
a full
grasp of how a stable terminal handles and prevents Confusion. If the
person cannot
fully grasp this principle, he is below the ability to conceive of
terminals and barely
able to perceive lines. He cannot communicate since there are no terminals
to him.
REMOTE AREAS
If an area remote from an executive does not contain a stable point to
which he
can send his comm and get it handled, then his comm only enters Dev T into
the area
and he gets back floods of despatches and problems but no real handling.
The area is
not organized and does not have people in it who have grasped "Problems of
Work" or
how it applies to an Org Board or even why there is an Org Board.
Communicating into a disorganized area without first organizing it to
have at least
one stable terminal is foolishness.
An Org Board is that arrangement of persons, lines and actions which
classifies
types of confusions and gives a stable terminal to each type. It is as
effective as its
people can conceive of terminals and understand the basic principle of
Confusions and
Stable Data.
A good executive arranges personnel and organization to handle types of
actions
and confusions. He does not broadly Comm into disorganized areas except to
organize
them.
Any area which gives an executive excessively Developed Traffic (Dev T)
is an
area where the persons supposed to be the stable terminals in that area are
not holding
their posts and do NOT understand what they are or why and do not know what
an
Org Board is and have never understood the Scientology fundamental known as
Confusion and the Stable Datum. They are NOT doing their post or organizing
their
areas.
An executive's evidence of this is the receipt from there of Dev T.
The executive's action is to get somebody THERE, get him to understand
Confusion and the Stable Datum and how it applies to posts as Stable
Terminals, get
him trained up and use that now stable point to handle further confusions.
If an executive goes on handling Dev T of people who are not stable
terminals
that handle their areas, HE WILL BE FORCED TO WORK HARDER THAN IF THE
POST WERE EMPTY. At least if it were empty, he would get only the confusion
of
that area. As it is if the post is improperly held and wobbly he gets not
only the area
confusion but also the enturbulation of the wobbly incumbent.
Volumes could be written about this subject. But there is no reason
whatever not
to be able to grasp the fundamentals concerning confusion and stable data,
confusion
and stable terminals, apply it to Org Boards, to areas and to expansion.
Chaos is the basic situation in this universe. To handle it you put in
order.
Order goes in by being and making stable terminals arranged to handle
types of
action and confusion.
In organizing units, sections, divs, depts, orgs or areas of orgs you
build by stable
terminals.
You solve areas by reinforcing stable terminals.
Executives who do not grasp this live lives of total harassment and
confusion.
The whole secret of organization, the whole problem of Dev T, the basic
ingredient of all expansion is contained in this.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:rs.ldm.ei.rd
Copyright � 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 4 NOVEMBER 1969
Remimeo
Dev-T
Series
DEV-T GRAPHED
Confusion and the Stable Datum is graphed on every org board.
The stable terminals are at the top of every section, department,
division or
portion of the org, as seen on the org board.
If you consider each area small or large as a BOX CONTAINING PUSHED
ACTIONS AND RESTRAINED CONFUSIONS and its In Charge or executive the
Stable Terminal that makes this happen you will really grasp what Dev-T is.
Dev-T
occurs when the stable terminal of a box on the org board is not stable but
is itself a
confusion.
There are five major conditions on an org board, one right and four
wrong.
The actions that should be pushed in any box on the org board are
labeled on the
org board as belonging to that box. The Confusions that are supposed to be
handled in
that box are easily deduced.
A stable terminal pushes the actions that belong to his area on the org
board and
handles or suppresses the confusions of that area or aligns them with the
correct flows.
Many people do not relate an org board to reality or understand that it
itself is a
pattern which handles flows and actions and dispenses with confusions.
However its
stable points must be stable and held as stable terminals or the org board
gets into
confusions and develops Dev-T.
All Dev-T is a result of the above violations of staff members being
stable
terminals.
If you study this and really understand it you will have made a big
break through
in grasping the science of organization.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:rs.ei.rd
Copyright � 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
[pic]
[pic]
[pic]
[pic]
[pic]
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 18 JUNE 1968
Remimeo
Flag Order
ETHICS
The Purpose of Ethics is
TO REMOVE COUNTER INTENTIONS FROM THE ENVIRONMENT.
And having accomplished that the purpose becomes
TO REMOVE OTHER INTENTIONNESS FROM THE ENVIRONMENT.
Thus progress can be made by all.
Many mechanisms can exist to mask a counter intention.
One has an intention to expand the org. An "expert" says it is difficult
as "The
building society . ...". The impulse is to then handle the problem
presented by the
"expert", whereas the correct ETHICS action is to remove his Counter
Intentionedness
or Other Intentionedness. If he were an EXPERT he would simply say "OK.
I'll handle
my end of the expansion".
There are many ways to handle counter and other intentionedness.
There is a fine line between Ethics and Tech.
The point where a thetan goes mad is very exact. It is the point where
he begins
to obsessively stop something. From this the effort becomes generalized and
he begins
to stop lots of other things. When this includes anyone who or anything
that would
help him as well as those people and things that help, the being is
suppressive. His
intentions counter any other intention, particularly good intentions.
Other intentionedness comes from unawareness or dispersal. By removing
things
which disperses others. Offering bottled medicine to cure "the blues" is a
direct
distraction. It is the purveyor of the distraction who is the target.
The person who enters on Sen groups to then sell other-answer is of
course an
enemy.
However we go about accomplishing the above is the action of Ethics. The
above
is the purpose.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:js.cden
Copyright � 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 7 MARCH 1965
Issue III
Gen Non-Remimeo
Post Org Public
Boards
HCO (DIVISION 1)
JUSTICE
OFFENSES & PENALTIES
These are the penalties we have always more or less used, and these are
the offenses which have been usually considered offenses in Scientology.
Formerly they were never written down or routinely enforced, there was
no recourse, and these lacks made staff members uncertain of their fate.
They knew something happened but not why. They knew certain things were
frowned on but not how much or little. The penalties were suddenly
administered without warning as to what they would be or for what offense.
This then is a Code of Discipline which we have almost always more or
less used, made plain for everyone to see, with limits against over-
punishment and recourse for those who are wronged.
Accordingly this Code of Offenses and their penalties becomes firm and
expressed policy.
Lack of specified offenses, penalties and recourse brings everyone to
uncertainty and risk at the whim of those in command.
___________________
There are four general classes of crimes and offenses in Scientology.
These are ERRORS, MISDEMEANORS, CRIMES AND HIGH CRIMES.
1. ERRORS. Errors are minor unintentional omissions or mistakes. These
are auditing "goofs"; minor alter-is of tech or policy; small instructional
mistakes; minor errors or omissions in performing duties and admin errors
not resulting in financial loss or loss of status or repute for a senior.
Errors are dealt with by corrections of the person, reprimand or
warnings by seniors.
Certificates, Classifications and Awards may not be cancelled or
suspended or reduced for an Error. The offender may not be transferred or
demoted or fined or suspended for Committing an Error. No Committee of
Evidence may be convened because of an Error.
Repeated corrections, warnings or reprimands by a senior can, however,
bring the repeated error offenses into the category of Misdemeanor.
2. MISDEMEANORS. These are non-compliance; discourtesy and
insubordination; mistakes resulting in financial or traffic loss;
commissions or omissions resulting in loss of status or the punishment of a
senior; neglect or gross errors resulting in the need to apply the
Emergency Formula to their person, section, unit, department, organization,
zone or Division; knowing and repeated departures from standard technology,
instructional procedures or policy; continued association with squirrels;
abuse or loss or damage of org materiel; waste of org materiel; waste of
funds; alteration of senior policy or continued ignorance of it; consistent
and repeated failures to wear their hat regarding Dev-T; refusing an E-
Meter check; refusing auditing when ordered by a higher authority;
disturbing a course or class; disrupting a meeting; the discovery of their
having an undisclosed criminal background in this lifetime; the discovery
of an undisclosed tenure in a mental hospital; processing a known Trouble
Source or the family or adherents of a Suppressive Person or Group;
omissions resulting in disrepute or financial loss; inadequate or declining
income or traffic in a section, unit, department, org, zone or Division;
assisting the inadequacy or decline of income or traffic in a section,
unit, department, org, zone or Division; failure to acknowledge, relay or
comply with a direct and legal order from an executive staff member;
Auditor's Code breaks resulting in a disturbance of the preclear; failure
to follow the Instructor's Code resulting in disturbed students;
contributing to a crime;
failure to appear before a Committee of Evidence as a witness or interested
party when personally given summons or receiving summons by registered
post; refusing to testify before a Committee of Evidence; showing contempt
or disrespect to a Committee of Evidence when before it; destroying
documents required by a Committee of Evidence or refusing to produce them;
withholding evidence; false swearing on a signed statement or form;
impeding Justice; refusing to serve on a Committee of Evidence; refusing to
vote while a member of a Committee of Evidence; misconduct; issuing data or
information to wrong grades or unauthorized persons or groups or issuing
data or information broadly without authority.
Such offenses are subject to direct punishment by order and for a staff
member the punishment is the assignment of a personal condition of
emergency for up to threeweeks and for an executive staff member the
assignment of up to a three months personal condition of emergency.
Personal conditions of emergency reduce pay or units one third for the
period assigned.
Recourse may be had by requesting a Committee of Evidence for return of
pay but not damages.
The same offenses may be used for a Committee of Evidence but not both a
Committee and punishment by direct order-one or the other.
However if any of these offenses become the subject of a Committee of
Evidence the penalty for a misdemeanor may be increased to include
suspension of a single certificate and/or classification (but no more) or a
minor demotion or transfer, but not dismissal. None of these offenses may
be made the subject of dismissal by direct order or Committee of Evidence.
Persons may not be dismissed for misdemeanors. Nor may any certificates,
classifications or awards be cancelled.
Non staff or field or franchise Scientologists committing those of the
above (except org) offenses applicable may have a Committee of Evidence
convened on them.
Where serious, repeated or of magnitude harmful to many, the same
offenses can be re-classed as Crimes by a Convening Authority.
3. CRIMES. These cover offenses normally considered criminal. Offenses
which are treated
in Scientology as crimes are theft; mayhem; harmful flagrant and continued
Code Breaks
resulting in important upsets; non-compliance with urgent and vital orders
resulting
in public disrepute; placing Scientology or Scientologists at risk;
omissions or
non-compliance requiring heavy intervention by seniors consuming time and
money,
with Dev-T; failure or refusal to acknowledge, relay or execute a direct
legal order
from an International Board Member, or an assistant board member; being or
becoming
a Potential Trouble Source without reporting it or taking action;
receiving auditing while
a Potential Trouble Source; withholding from local Scientology executives
that he or she is
a Potential Trouble Source; failing to report a Potential Trouble Source
to local HCO;
organizing or allowing a gathering or meeting of staff members or field
auditors or
the public to protest the orders of a senior; being a knowing accessory to
a
Suppressive Act; using a local Scientology title to set aside the orders or
policies from
the International Board; following illegal orders or illegal local policies
or alter-is,
knowing them to be different or contradictory to those issued by the
International Board;
not directly reporting flagrant departures from International Board policy
in a section, unit, department, org, zone or Division; being long absent
from post
while a senior executive without advising the board member of his or her
division;
permitting a section, unit, department, org, zone or Division to collapse;
not taking over
as a deputy in a crisis not otherwise being handled; passing org students
or pcs to
outside auditors for private commission; using an org position to build up
a private practice; taking private fees while on staff to audit outside
pcs, run
private courses, coach or audit students or org pcs; embezzlement; taking
commissions from
merchants; reselling org materiel for private gain; using an org position
to procure personal
or non-Scientology funds or unusual favours from the public, a firm,
student or pc; impersonating a
Scientologist or staff member when not authorized; inciting to
insubordination; instigating
a local power push against a senior; spreading destructive rumours about
senior Scientologists;
pretending to express a multiple opinion (use of "everybody") in vital
reports, which could
influence assistant board or board decisions; not reporting the discovery
of a Crime or High Crime
to Saint Hill while in authority or as a member of a Committee of Evidence
or as a witness before
a Committee of Evidence; refusal to accept penalties assigned in a recourse
action; refusal to uphold
discipline; getting another staff member disciplined by giving false
reports about him or
her; overworking an executive by ignoring one's duties; falsifying a
communication
from higher authority; falsifying a telex message or cable; causing a staff
member to
lose prestige or be disciplined by giving false reports; seeking to shift
the blame to an
innocent staff member for the consequences of one's own offenses;
protecting a staff
member guilty of a Crime or High Crime listed in this code; stealing or
seducing
another's wife or husband; committing offenses or omissions that bring
one's senior
staff member, unit, department, org or zone official to personal risk
and/or a
Committee of Evidence, civil, criminal or court; wilful loss or destruction
of
Scientology property; making out or submitting or accepting false purchase
orders;
juggling accounts; illegally taking or possessing org property; causing
severe and
disreputable disturbances resulting in disrepute; obtaining loans or money
under false
pretenses; condoning circumstances or offenses capable of bringing a
course, section,
unit, department, org, zone or Division to a state of collapse; holding
Scientology
materials or policies up to ridicule, contempt or scorn; heckling a
Scientology
Instructor or lecturer; falsely degrading an auditor's technical
reputation; imperson-
ating an executive staff member; pretending Scientology certificates,
classifications or
awards not actually held to obtain money or credit; selling auditing hours
or training
courses for advance which are not then delivered as to hours and time in
training (but
not results or subject matter); using Scientology harmfully; not bringing a
preclear up
through the grades but overwhelming the preclear with high levels;
processing or giving
aid or comfort to a Suppressive Person or Group; knowingly using
Scientology to
obtain sexual relations or restimulation; seducing a minor; neglect or
omission in
safeguarding the copyrights, registered marks, trade marks, registered
names of
Scientology; issuing the data or information or instructional or admin
procedures
without credit or falsely assigning credit for them to another; issuing any
Scientology
data under another name; condoning the suppression of the word
"Scientology" in its
use or practice; allying Scientology to a disrelated practice; neglect of
responsibilities
resulting in a catastrophe even when another manages to avert the final
consequences.
Crimes are punished by convening Committees of Evidence and may not be
handled by direct discipline. Crimes may result in suspension of
certificates,
classifications or awards, reduction of post, or even dismissal or arrest
when the crime
clearly warrants it. But such penalties may not be assigned by direct
discipline.
Certificates, Classifications or Awards may not be cancelled for a crime.
4. HIGH CRIMES. These are covered in HCO Policy Letters March 7, 1965,
Issues I and II and consist of publicly departing Scientology or committing
Suppressive Acts.
Cancellation of Certificates, Classifications and Awards and becoming
fair game
are amongst the penalties which can be leveled for this type of offense as
well as those
recommended by Committees of Evidence.
A reward system for merit and good performance also exists.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:jw.cden
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
CANCELLATION OF FAIR GAME: The practice of declaring people FAIR GAME will
cease. FAIR GAME may not appear on any Ethics Order. It causes bad public
relations. This P/L does not cancel any policy on the treatment or handling
of an SP.
(From HCO P/L 21 October 1968-Volume 1, page 489.)
COMMITTEE OF EVIDENCE (COMM EV): A fact finding body composed of impartial
persons properly convened by a Convening Authority which hears evidence
from persons it calls before it, arrives at a finding and makes a full
report and recommendation to its Convening Authority for his or her action.
(From HCO P/L 7 September 1963, COMMITTEES OF EVIDENCE-Volume 1, page 538.)
[The above Policy Letter has been added to by HCO P/L 12 July 1971 Issue
III, Offenses and Penalties-Addition, and HCO P/L 29 July 1971 Issue III,
Penalties for the Hiring or Recruiting of Institutional or Insane Persons,
the latter being modified by HCO P/L 21 July 1972 Issue IV, Staff
Qualification Requirements for Hiring Cancelled, in the Year Books.]
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 17 MARCH 1965
Issue II
Remimeo
HCO (DIVISION 1)
JUSTICE
STAFF HAT
RIGHTS OF A STAFF MEMBER, STUDENTS AND PRECLEARS TO JUSTICE
1. HCO is the Justice agency of Scientology and Scientologists in
addition to other functions.
2. All matters of internal Justice in orgs. Committees of Evidence and
complaints are taken to the HCO personnel so indicated on the Org Board.
3. All Scientologists and staff members in accepting posts or membership
agree to abide by the HCO Codes. These include the Justice Codes.
4. HCO Justice applies to all Scientology and Scientologists.
5. When we say Legal matters we mean outside law and law agencies such
as attorneys, civil courts, suits, contracts and corporation and
copyright matters. This comes under Division 3.
6. When we say JUSTICE we mean HCO, Division 1, Internal activities such
as Committees of Evidence, internal enforcement and discipline.
Scientology Justice safeguards the rights of Scientologists, prevents
injustice, prevents punishment by whim, and brings order. Before the
Justice Codes, discipline was inequitable and often unjust. The HCO
Justice Codes bettered this by making offenses and penalties known and
milder. HCO Justice prevents wrongful disgrace, demotion, transfer or
dismissal and protects the staff member's reputation and job from being
falsely threatened.
7. In a Condition of Emergency assigned to a Department or org, staff
members may be subjected to demotion, transfer or dismissal as the
Assignment of the Condition of Emergency suspends the Justice Codes.
There is no recourse, then. In addition, offenses may still be made the
subject of Committees of Evidence. The thing to do is not get into such
a state. Lessened traffic and other matters all found on the OIC charts
of each week are the sole evidence used to assign a Condition of
Emergency. A Condition of Emergency cannot be assigned unless these
graphs show a declining condition.
8. When the org or department is not in a Condition of Emergency, the
protective Justice Codes are in full force.
9. A staff member who believes he has been falsely wronged (unless a
Condition of Emergency exists in his department or org) may request a
Committee of Evidence of HCO with himself as an Interested Party and
this must be granted him. He must however agree to abide by its
findings. It can restore any lost pay in cases of injustice but not
damages. No senior executive in the org may be named as an Interested
Party in matters of recourse requested by a junior but below the level
of Executive Councilman may be called as witnesses. An Executive
Councilman cannot be called before any Committee of Evidence by anyone
in his or her org including other Councilmen of that org. Only a senior
org may call Executive Councilmen of a junior org before a Committee of
Evidence and then only for a crime or high crime and then only in the
premises of the senior org. Do not then seek to name Executive
Councilmen as interested parties in any Committee of Evidence and do not
seek to name any member of any senior org in any Committee of Evidence
requested by anyone in an org junior to it.
10. If a staff member wishes to sue a fellow staff member or right a
wrong he or she may request a Civil Committee of Evidence of HCO. HCO
usually [appoints] one senior staff member on which the two contenders
can agree. The senior staff member holds a session or sessions and both
contenders must abide by his findings and award of any money or damages
or return of property. There is no further appeal. A Civil Committee of
Evidence follows the same procedure and has the same rights as any other
Committee of Evidence. A Civil Committee of Evidence may not be called
by contending co-auditors. These must seek out the D of P and abide by
the D of P's advice.
11. Students or pcs may not request Committees of Evidence for
causes occurring during a course or an intensive but may appeal in
writing to the Division 2 Service Executive. They must report matters
covered under the Justice Code, however, to HCO.
There are no student rules and regulations except the Justice Codes. All
others are abolished. The penalties that can be awarded are for an
error, an instructor reprimand, for a misdemeanor, a pink sheet which
must be completed before classification is given, for a crime, one to
three weeks at the student's expense in the HGC. A Committee of Evidence
can also be convened on a student or preclear for offenses as covered in
the Justice Codes.
12. In times of stress, commotion, riot or threats to person, an HCO
personnel may instantly deputize any other Scientologist merely by
saying loudly, "HCO. Bring Order," making it known in any way that the
Scientologist or Scientologists present should intervene or act. Any
Scientologist whose help is thus commanded at once becomes deputized by
Division 1 by the fact of required assistance and may not be charged
before a Committee of Evidence for any act committed in rendering
assistance to HCO during the period of stress and must be protected by
the organization from any civil authority and the organization must pay
any fines or expenses incurred or reasonable costs for damage to dress
or hospital aid. When the incident is over, the HCO personnel must say,
"HCO thanks you for bringing order," thus ending the deputization.
An HCO Personnel requiring an eviction of a person or persons from a
premises or meeting or area need only point to the person or persons and
say, "HCO. Order!" Any staff member or Scientologist present is
instantly deputized as above and must act promptly to carry out the
eviction or be liable under Justice Codes when failing to do so. This
can be used in any circumstances, no matter how mild the offender even
down to slovenly or unauthorized persons on the-premises or in any
office. When the person or persons are removed, the HCO personnel
removes the deputization by saying, "HCO thanks you for order." These
orders apply even when the person causing a disturbance is an officer,
director or councilman of another division and none may be disciplined
for complying but may be liable under Justice Codes for not doing so.
13. When personnel of other divisions foresee stress or danger,
while they themselves have ample authority in their own divisions to
handle their own personnel, where Scientologists in general are
involved, they may not take Justice in their own hands as it is a
Division 1 HCO hat and Divisions must not cross in functions. Where
mixed divisions or not staff persons are concerned they should be
careful to have an HCO personnel present or available, a wise precaution
in event of the possibility of charges or Committees of Evidence
resulting, in which case an HCO personnel as a witness would bear
weight.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:ml.cden
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 17 MARCH 1965
Issue III
Gen Non-Remimeo
HCO (DIVISION 1)
JUSTICE HAT
ADMINISTERING JUSTICE
There are some things to firmly keep in mind when you have to use HCO's
Justice function:
1. Only the criminally inclined desire a society in which the criminal
is free to do as he pleases.
2. Only the criminally inclined are frightened enough of Justice to
protest and complain that it exists.
3. Without order nothing can grow or expand.
4. Justice is one of the guards that keeps the channel of progress a
channel and not a stopped flow.
5. All reactive minds can exert pain and discomfort on a being. They
demand the suppression of the good and the production of the
bad. Therefore, in administering Justice, restrain just a trifle more
than a bank can compel a bad action. The external threat need be just
enough to make the internal pressure to do wrong the lesser of two
discomforts. Judgment lies in how much external restraint to apply.
6. Decent people are in favour of Justice. Don't confuse the opinion of
the majority who wish it with the snarls of the few who fear it.
7. A person who is dramatizing his criminal intent can become very angry
if he is not prevented from hurting others.
8. A thetan is good. He invented a bank to keep others good. That
mechanism went wrong. And that's why we're here.
9. In a session you would keep a burglar from bursting in the room and
disturbing the preclear. In Scientology you keep offenders out so we
can get on with our session with society.
10. Look up the person who rails against Justice most and you will
have the one you have been looking for.
11. The only overt in handling Justice is not to work for the
greatest good of the greatest number.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:ml.bp.cden
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 27 MARCH 1965
Gen. Non Remimeo
M.A.
Post B Board
THE JUSTICE OF SCIENTOLOGY ITS USE AND PURPOSE
BEING A SCIENTOLOGIST
The reason we have Justice Codes is to have justice. We don't want or
need injustice.
When we have no codes, "justice" can be anything any authority cares to
make it.
We have had too much caprice passing for justice. It is time we had
justice.
Committees of Evidence work. I recall one Tech Director accused of
tampering with a student. I was told he was about to be disciplined and
sacked. I stopped that action and had a Committee of Evidence convened.
Accurate testimony revealed the story false and the Tech Director innocent.
Without that Committee he would have been mined. I know of other instances
where a Committee found the facts completely contrary to rumour. Some are
guilty, most are innocent. But thereby we have justice and our necks aren't
out. If a person is to keep the law, he or she must know what the law is.
And must be protected from viciousness and caprice in the name of law. If a
person doesn't keep the law knowing well what it is he or she hurts all of
us and should be handled.
The enturbulence of the society around us is fantastic. There is no just
civil law left, really. It is that lawless and disorderly condition in the
society about us which makes it hard for us to work. Shortly we will be
even more powerful. That power must not be lawless or we will have anarchy
and dismay, enough to stop our growth.
If we have a superior law code and legal system which gives real justice
to people we will swiftly flow easily over the society and everybody will
win.
Where we fail to apply our own administration, technology and justice
procedures to the society around us (let alone Scientology) we will fail.
There is too much truth in our lives not to cause a social upheaval.
Therefore, let us have justice and expand into higher order, not plunge the
world into darkness because our power as a group struck innocent and guilty
alike.
A Scientologist must understand his own justice system. Without
understanding again there will be no justice.
Already the following points need correction in the uninformed person
concerning our justice.
A Committee of Evidence is not a court. It is simply a fact-finding body
with legal powers, convened to get at the facts and clean up the ARC Breaks
caused by rumour. When it has the truth of it, then a Convening Authority
acts-but only in exact accordance with a Justice Code.
Our justice really rehabilitates in the long run. It only disciplines
those who are hurting others and gives them a way to change so they can
eventually win too-but not by hurting us.
A Scientologist who fails to use Scientology technology and its
administrative and justice procedures on the world around him will
continue
to be too enturbulated to do his job.
That sounds extreme to anyone.
But if you look it over, you will find that the "power" of the "Society"
and "State" is pretended and is made from an effort to be powerful where
they actually lack power. Our situation is quite the reverse. Ours is the
power of truth and we are capable of power as a group, having power as
individuals due to processing and power of wisdom due to superior
technology.
Therefore when we grant too much beingness to their "power" we are
granting validity to a falsehood and so it recoils on us.
We are in short, knocking our own heads off by failing to use our
knowledge and authority when we administer or handle our fellow man or
society. It's like refusing auditing to somebody or not making it possible.
It's also investing a lie with power. Society is losing ground because its
"power" is based on a pack of falsehoods. We will lose ground if we empower
those lies.
There's real magic to be seen here. For instance every upset we have is
traceable to our not knowns or failing to apply our technology and Admin
and Justice procedures to the society around us and its individuals, firms
and groups.
This is worse than you think. A Scientology executive not handling Dev-T
(Developed and unnecessary traffic) from a government in accordance with
our Dev-T policies when it was off-line and off-policy recently caused an
upset. A government official was off-policy (his own bureau's) and the
Scientology executive did not follow our procedure of (a) send it back to
source (b) correct the policy error and (c) inform his superiors when
results were not obtained. You say, "But that's wild! Run a government by
Scientology Admin." Well, all I know is that it caused trouble when we
didn't.
Evidently it's not "them" and "us". It's just "us" and a false "them."
So all we have to do is to get their hats on and they're us.
Failure to take our usual justice actions on offenders against us will
result in eventual chaos. What matter if they don't appear before the
Committee of Evidence we convene on them? How do we know they won't? How
could the Victoria Parliament ever come right if we failed to (a) Convene a
Committee of Evidence (b) Follow our legal procedures?
No, they just stay "they".
Has anybody informed the F.D.A. of our amnesty? Well, did you know the
F.D.A. was looking for a way out of their mess for fear we'd sue for a
million? They'd drop the E-Meter case if they thought we wouldn't sue.
How do we know if we don't try?
____________________
So therefore we must use Scientology tech, Admin and Justice in all our
affairs. No matter how mad it sounds, we only fail when we don't.
____________________
And therefore every Scientologist should understand his own tech, codes
and procedures.
Some Scientologists believe when a Committee of Evidence is convened
that they are at once suspended.
Nobody can be suspended or punished by the convening of a Committee of
Evidence. It's there to find the truth. Only when its findings are
submitted to its Convening Authority and where the Convening Authority acts
can anyone be suspended or transferred or demoted.
Don't react to Scientology Justice as though it were "wog" law. In
society's "courts" one is given the works and truth has little bearing on
the findings. A mean judge or clever attorney and small legal errors decide
a lot of their cases. Wog courts are like throwing dice. There is huge cost
and publicity and punishment galore even for the innocent.
So we must preserve our Justice.
And use it.
That's the main lesson. If we don't use it in all questions where the
truth of the matter is in doubt we'll just go on being wogs.
If we don't exhibit our science as a group and show a good example, what
can we achieve?
So let's grow up to our own technology and take responsibility for it.
And wear our hats as Scientologists to the world.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:wmc.rd
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 5 APRIL 1965
Gen Non-Remimeo
BPI
Mag Article
SCIENTOLOGY MAKES A SAFE ENVIRONMENT
We're working to provide a safe environment for Scientology and
Scientologists in
Orgs everywhere.
The dangerous environment of the wog world, of injustice, sudden
dismissals, war,
atomic bombs, will only persist and trouble us if we fail to spread our
safe environment
across the world.
It starts with our own orgs. They must be safe environments.
Only good tech and Justice can make the Org environment safe. Like an
auditing
room, we must be able to work undisturbed by the madness at our doors.
We can make every org a safe island then by expanding and joining those
orgs,
bring peace and a safe environment to all the world.
It not only can be done. It is happening this moment. Push it along.
Support
policy, good tech and Justice.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:mb.rd
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 10 APRIL 1965
Remimeo
All Staff
Sthl Staff
Post Bulletin Bd
All new Staff Members HATS
DISMISSALS, TRANSFERS AND DEMOTIONS
It may not have come to the notice of all staff that HCO Justice policy
letters
forbid staff members being sacked, demoted or transferred.
Only persons with "Temporary" or "Probationary" status can be dismissed
as
they are not staff completely as yet. Only persons with Acting or Deputy
status can be
demoted as the appointment is not permanent.
All others, to be demoted, transferred or dismissed without their
consent must be
called before a Committee of Evidence. If the findings of the Committee
recommend
dismissal, demotion or transfer, only then may it be done.
A Committee of Evidence is convened by the Office of LRH through the HCO
Secretary and is composed of 5 other staff members like yourself. Its
purpose is
entirely to obtain evidence and recommend action which the Office of LRH
then
modifies or orders. No other Justice actions or punishments exist in this
org than those
found in Justice pamphlets or Letters.
If a person is wrongly dismissed, demoted or transferred he or she may
request a
Committee of Evidence from the HCO Secretary and may have recourse. A
person so
requesting may not also request their seniors to also be tried but evidence
may be
obtained from them (seniors). If your seniors have acted outside the
Justice Codes they
can be handled in exactly the same way by higher authority.
Your job is secure. It is also covered by the Justice Codes of HCO.
These are
found in HCO (Hubbard Communications Office) Policy Letters which arrive in
mimeograph form in the HCO Secretary's Office and which are also being made
available in booklet form.
Keep the Justice Codes for a secure job and a peaceful organization.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:wmc.cden
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
[Amended by HCO P/L 12 July 1971 Issue III, Appointment of HCO Area
Secretaries, in the 1971 Year Book.]
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 29 APRIL 1965
Issue II
Remimeo
BPI
ETHICS
PETITION
The right to petition must not be denied.
It is the oldest form of seeking justice and a redress of wrongs and it
may well be that when it vanishes a civilization deteriorates thereby.
Therefore these policies apply:
1. Any one individual has the right to petition in writing any senior or
official no matter how high and no matter by what routing.
2. No person may be punished for submitting a petition.
3. No two persons or more may simultaneously petition on the same matter
and if so the petition must at once be refused by the person petitioned.
Collective petition is a crime under Ethics as it is an effort to hide
the actual petitioner and as there may be no punishment for a petition
collective petition has therefore no excuse of safety and is to be
interpreted as an effort to overwhelm and may not be regarded as a
petition.
4. No generality may be used in a petition such as a report of
collective opinion unspecified as to identities. This is to be
interpreted as an effort to ARC Break a superior and the petition must
be refused.
5. Only one person may petition on one matter or the petition must be
refused.
6. Threat included in a request for justice, a favour or redress
deprives it of the status of "petition" and it must be refused.
7. Discourtesy or malice in a request for justice, a favour or redress
deprives it of the status of "petition" and it must be refused.
8. If a "petition" contains no request it is not a petition.
9. There may be no special form for a petition beyond these policies.
10. A petition which cannot be deciphered or understood should be
returned to the sender with a request that it be made legible or
comprehensible, but this should not be interpreted as a refusal or
acceptance of the petition.
11. A copy of a petition seeking justice against another person or
group must be sent that person or group to qualify the request as a
petition. No action may be taken by the person or group but he or they
should append the copy to their own statement of the matter and send it
at once to the executive being petitioned.
12. Petitions are normally directed to the heads of activities such
as the head of a portion of an org (HCO or the Org in the persons of the
HCO Executive Secretary and the Organization Executive Secretary) or the
Continental Heads of orgs or to Mary Sue Hubbard or L. Ron Hubbard.
13. Petitions may not demand Committees of Evidence or punishment
for executives but may only state what has happened and request the
matter be righted.
14. A petition is itself and is not a form of recourse and making a
petition does not use up one's right to recourse.
15. All petitions delivered in person verbally or in person with a
note particularly
when this restricts a senior's freedom of motion, must be refused.
16. HCO Secretaries or Communicators receiving petitions directed to
be forwarded
to higher executives which do not comply with these policies should
append a
copy of this policy letter to the petition and return it to sender. The
sender should then reform the petition into acceptable form and return
it on the same channels. When receiving his petition back with this
policy letter attached to it, the sender must not assume it has been
refused and become apathetic. He or she should realize that a favour has
been done for a petition in violation of these policies would have to be
refused by the person to whom the petitioner addressed it and that by
rewording or complying with these policies the petition now has a chance
and will undoubtedly be given courteous attention. A petitioner should
consider himself fortunate if a discourteous or collective or
threatening petition is returned as it would not be regarded as a
petition by the executive to whom it is addressed and might colour his
or her opinion of the petitioner, perhaps obscuring some real wrong
which might well have received attention.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:ml.rd
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 26 MAY 1965
Remimeo
ETHICS
PETITIONS
(Add to HCO Pol Ltr 29 April 1965)
No person under sentence or awaiting a Committee of Evidence may validly
petition the Office of LRH.
A petition may only be submitted before or after the full course of
Scientology Ethics has been taken.
As all Ethics actions such as a Committee of Evidence are reviewed, in
effect a line already exists due to the Ethics action and the facts will be
on it.
Therefore a communication from a person under legal sentence from Ethics
Officers or a person named in a Comm Ev may not petition. Ethics actions
must be permitted to take their course.
A protest from Ethics actions worded as a petition routinely causes
further investigation as the "petitioner" is actually only protesting
Ethics actions and is handled as such.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:ml.rd
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 1 MAY 1965
Remimeo
Staff Member Hats
Executive Hats
STAFF MEMBER REPORTS
Staff Members must personally make certain reports in writing.
Failure to make these reports involves the executive or staff member not
making a report in any offence committed by a junior under him, or, in case
of job endangerment, by a senior over him.
These reports are made to the Ethics Section of the Department of
Inspection and Reports.
The report form is simple. One uses a clip board with a packet of his
division's colour flash paper on it. This includes a piece of pencil carbon
paper. This is the same clip board and carbon one uses for his routine
orders.
It is a despatch form addressed simply to the Ethics Section. It is
dated. It has under the address and in the centre of the page the person or
portion of the org's name. It then states what kind of a report it is (see
below).
The original goes to Ethics by drawing an arrow pointing to "Ethics" and
the carbon goes to the person or portion of the org being reported on by
channels (B routing).
The following are the reports required:
1. Damage Report. Any damage to anything noted with the name of the
person in charge of it or in charge of cleaning it.
2. Misuse Report. The misuse or abuse of any equipment, materiel or
quarters, meaning using it wrongly or for a purpose not intended.
3. Waste Report. The waste of org materiel.
4. Idle Report. The idleness of equipment or personnel which should be
in action.
5. Alter-Is Report. The alteration of design, policy, technology or
errors being made in construction.
6. Loss or Theft Report. The disappearance of anything that should be
there giving anything known about its disappearance such as when it
was seen last.
7. A Found Report. Anything found, sending the article with the despatch
or saying where it is.
8. Non-Compliance Report. Non-Compliance with legal orders.
9. Dev-T Report. Stating whether Off-Line, Off-Policy or Off-Origin and
from whom to whom and subject.
10. Error Report. Any error made.
11. Misdemeanor Report. Any misdemeanor noted.
12. A Crime Report. Any crime noted or suspected but if suspicion
only it must be so stated.
13. A High Crime Report. Any high crime noted or suspected but if
only suspected must be so stated.
14. A No-Report Report. Any failure to receive a report or an
illegible report or
folder.
15. A False Report Report. Any report received that turned out to be
false.
16. A False Attestation Report. Any false attestation noted, but in
this case the
document is attached to the report.
17. An Annoyance Report. Anything about which one is annoyed, giving
the
person or portion of an org or org one is annoyed with, but the
Department
of Inspection and Reports and a senior org are exempt and may not be
reported on.
18. A JOB Endangerment Report. Reporting any order received from a
superior
that endangered one's job by demanding one alter or depart from known
policy, the orders of a person senior to one's immediate superior
altered or
countermanded by one's immediate superior, or advice from one's
immediate superior not to comply with orders or policy.
19. Technical Alter-Is Report. Any ordered alteration of technology
not given in
an HCOB, book or LRH tape.
20. Technical Non-Compliance Report. Any failure to apply the
correct
technical procedure.
21. Knowledge Report. On noting some investigation is in progress
and having
data on it of value to Ethics.
These reports are simply written and sent. One does not expect an
executive to
front up to personnel who err. One does expect an executive to make a
report
routinely on the matter, no matter what the executive also does.
Only in this way can bad spots in the organization be recognized and
corrected.
For reports other than one's own collect and point out bad conditions
before those can
harm the org.
_____________________
These reports are filed by Ethics in the Ethics files in the staff
member's folder or
in the folder of the portion of the org. A folder is only made if Ethics
receives an
Ethics Report.
Unless the staff member is part of a portion or an org that is under a
state of
Emergency, FIVE such reports can accumulate before Ethics takes any action.
But if
the report is deemed very serious, Ethics may take action at once by
investigating.
If a State of Emergency existed in that portion of the org or org, ONE
report can
bring about a Court of Ethics as there is no leeway in an Emergency
Condition.
The most serious reports, which are the only ones taken up at once, are
technical
alter-is, non-compliance, any false reports, false attestations, no
reports, misdemean-
ours, crimes and high crimes. The others are left to accumulate (except in
Emergency
when all reports on that portion or org are taken up at once).
_____________________
CLEANING THE FILES
An amnesty for a portion or an org or a general amnesty can be declared
by the
Office of LRH Saint Hill. An amnesty will be effective up to a date three
months
before it is issued. The Ethics files are therefore nullified previous to
the date declared
in the Amnesty.
An amnesty signalizes a feat of considerable moment by a portion of an
org or an
org or Scientology.
An HCO Executive Letter can compliment a portion of an org or an org and
wipe
out the Ethics Piles of the portion of an org or the org complimented. An
award is
usually added for the persons responsible.
An assignment of a State of Normal Operation after an Emergency (but not
assigning affluence) cleans the portion of an org or the org's Ethics
Files.
An individual may clean his own file by approaching Ethics and offering
to make
amends.
The person may be shown but may not touch his Ethics files which are
always
kept locked when the office is empty. The person should present a written
and signed
Amends Project Petition to Ethics. Ethics attaches the person's file to it
and sends it
safely to the Office of LRH "Ethics Authority Section". If accepted as
adequate
amends by the Office of LRH it is authorized by the "Ethics Authority
Section" and
returned to Ethics which places it on its "Projects Time Machine".
When accomplished the Amends Project is taken off the Time Machine and
forwarded to the Inspections Section which inspects and verifies it is done
and sends all
to the Office of LRH "Ethics Authority Section" which then authorizes the
retirement
of the reports on the person.
If the project comes off the Time Machine without being done, the matter
goes at
once to a Court of Ethics.
Any Amends Project must benefit the org and be beyond routine duties. It
may
not only benefit the individual. Offers to "get audited at own expense in
Review" are
acceptable as auditing will benefit everyone.
"To get trained at own expense up to ..... and serve the org two years
afterwards" is acceptable amends. But the person's staff pay is also
suspended entirely
during any auditing or training undertaken as amends. "To get another
department's
files in order on my own time" would be acceptable amends. Getting a
celebrity into
Scientology would be acceptable amends. No work one would normally do
himself on
post is acceptable amends. A donation or fine would not be acceptable
amends. Doing
what one should do anyway is not amends, it is the expected. No org funds
may be
employed in an Amends Project.
No amends are thereafter accepted if the person has failed to complete
an amends
project since the effective date of the last amnesty applying to the
person's portion or
org.
Any bonus specifically given by the person's name also cleans the
person's Ethics
Files without comment.
The responsibility for handling the cleaning of files is that of the
Ethics Section of
the Department of Inspection and Reports which notes amnesties, compliments
and
specific bonus awards and handles its Ethics files accordingly.
No Amends Projects may be accepted except through the Office of LRH and
a
superior may not bring a junior who wishes his files cleaned by Amends into
Ethics and
assist him to make the proper project applications. It must be voluntarily
done by the
junior.
No amnesties, compliments or bonuses may be made or declared except by
the
Office of LRH and authorized also from Saint Hill.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:ml.cden
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 16 MAY 1965
Issue II
Gen Non-Remimeo
HCO Div 1
Dept Insp & Rpts (Dept 3)
Ethics Section
INDICATORS OF ORGS
Just as pcs have indicators so do orgs.
There is a probable long list of Good Indicators. When these are
present, Ethics is
quiet and hangs onto an interrogation, etc only long enough to get policy
and
technology in.
There is a probable long list of BAD Indicators. When these are present
Ethics
becomes industrious in ratio to the number of bad indicators.
The first indicators, Good or Bad, are Statistics-the OIC graphs for
units,
sections, departments, divisions and the org. When these are rising, the
rise is a GOOD
INDICATOR.
When these are falling the fall is a BAD INDICATOR.
The second of these indicators, good or bad, is TECHNICAL GAINS. When
technology is in cases are gaining. This is a Good Indicator. When
technology is out,
cases are losing. This is a Bad Indicator.
Ethics only exists to hold the fort long enough and settle things down
enough to
get technology in. Ethics is never carried on for its own sake. It is
pushed home only
until technology is functioning and then technology resolves matters and
Ethics prowls
off looking for other targets.
We don't hang people because we started to hang them and so must do so.
We
start to hang people and keep right on tying the noose in a workmanlike
fashion right
up to the instant we can get tech in-which of course makes the noose
unnecessary.
But if tech never does get in then we complete the hanging.
You will find if you label a Suppressive you will some day get him back
and get
tech in on him. If you don't ever label they wander off and get lost.
Labelling as a Suppressive is our hanging.
When things are bad (Bad Indicators heavily visible) putting a body on
the
gallows is very salutary. We call it "Putting a head on a pike". Too many
BAD
Indicators and too goofed up a situation and we must put a head on a pike.
Then
things simmer down and we can begin to get tech in.
That's the whole purpose of Ethics-to Get Tech IN. And we use enough to
do so,
to get correct standard tech in and being done.
When there are lots of bad indicators about-low and falling statistics,
goofed
cases, we get very handy with our Interrogatories and put the place very
nearly under
martial law-we call this a State of Emergency. Once Emergency is declared,
you
usually have to put a head or two on a pike to convince people that you
mean it. After that necessity level rises and the place straightens up. If
an Emergency is continued beyond a reasonable time, we resort to very heavy
discipline and Comm Ev the executives who wouldn't get off it.
Ethics, then, is applied to the degree required to produce the result of
getting tech in. Once tech is really in on a person (with a case gain) or a
tech division, let us say, and auditors actually audit standard processes
by the book, we know it will resolve and we ease off with Ethics.
Ethics, then, is the tool by which you get Good Indicators In by getting
tech in. Ethics is the steam roller which smooths the highway.
Once the road is open we are quite likely to skip remaining
investigation and let it all be.
But somebody promising to be good is never good enough. We want
statistics. Bettered statistics.
SYMPTOMS OF ORGS
Orgs have various symptoms which tell us how things really are Ethic-
wise.
One of these is Dilettantism.
DILETTANTE-ISM
Dilettante = One who interests himself in an art or science merely as a
pastime and without serious study.
In an org, this manifests itself with "people should live a little."
"One needs a rest from Scientology." "One should do something else too."
All that kind of jazz.
It also manifests itself in non-consecutive scheduling, part-time
students, "because things are different in this town and people can come
only two nights _____". Ask what they do with other nights. Bowling. Horse-
racing.
Boy, you better mark the case folders of staff. You have a Suppressive
aboard. Maybe six.
Scientology, that saves lives, is a modern miracle, is being compared to
bowling. Get it?
That org or portion just isn't serious. Scientology is an idle club to
it, an old lady's sewing circle. And to somebody, selling training and
auditing are just con games they put over on the public.
SUPPRESSIVES!
Root them out.
WILD RUMOURS-This Symptom is caused by Potential Trouble Sources. Find
whose case roller-coasters (gets better, gets worse). Investigate. You'll
find a Suppressive or two outside the org.
Put a head on a pike with an HCO Ethics Order and publish it widely.
ARC BROKEN FIELD-The Johannesburg Comm Ev Order of last week is a
perfect method of handling the situation. Appoint a Comm Ev Chairman to
inquire into matters and form a list of interested parties based on reports
he will now receive.
BAD TECH-When results just don't happen in the Academy, HGC or Review
one or another, look for the Potential Trouble Sources and Suppressives.
Only they can
keep tech out. Put a big head on a pike and then begin to interrogate every
slip in the
place. Suddenly Tech is in again.
There are many such symptoms.
AT THE ROOT OF EVERY BAD CONDITION WILL BE FOUND A SUPPRES-
SIVE PERSON.
Locate your Potential Trouble Sources by locating passers of rumours,
etc. Then
locate the Suppressive and shoot.
Calm reigns. Tech is in.
And that's all one means to accomplish.
Today TECHNOLOGY WORKS ON EVERY CASE. If the local org can't handle
a case, Saint Hill can.
If you get tech in well enough in an org, tech handles all. Beautifully.
But if it is
out, only Ethics can bat down the reasons it can't be gotten in.
______________________
OPTIMUM STATE
The optimum state of an org is so high that there is no easy way to
describe it. All
cases getting cracked, releases and clears by the hundreds, command of the
environment. Big. That's an optimum state for any org.
If it isn't rising toward optimum today, it is locally being held down.
The viewpoint of Ethics is there is no adequate reason why an org is
stumbling
except Ethics reasons. Let others take care of any other lacks. Ethics
never gets
reasonable about lack of expansion. If Ethics shoves hard enough others
will get a high
enough necessity level to act.
So when an org is low:
Find out where its statistics are down and who is a PTS or an SP and
ACT.
That's the job of Ethics. Thus little by little we take off the breaks
for a cleared
Earth.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:wmc.cden
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 15 AUGUST 1965
Remimeo
All Staff Hats
Inspection Officer
THINGS THAT SHOULDN'T BE
If you see something going on in the org or incorrect that you don't
like, and yet do not wish to turn in an Ethics chit, or indeed don't know
who to report, WRITE A DESPATCH TO THE INSPECTION OFFICER.
Tell him what you have noticed and give him what data you can.
The Inspection Officer will then investigate it and make a report to the
right executives or turn in an Ethics chit on the offending persons
himself.
Don't just natter if there's something you don't like.
Tell the Inspection Officer. Then something can be done about it.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:ml.rd
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 27 AUGUST 1965
Sthil
Staff
Students
Preclears
HOUSING
STAFF, STUDENTS, PRECLEARS
Any staff member, student or preclear living in rented quarters is to be
held responsible for leaving the quarters in as good condition as he found
them. This of course doesn't include normal wear and tear.
If a claim is presented by a landlord, and the Scientologist feels it is
unjust it is a matter for the Inspection Officer to inspect and decide.
If the Scientologist is found to be at fault, the non-payment of such
damages will become an Ethics matter. The intention is that justice be
given both the Scientologist and the property owner. Therefore damages may
be awarded a property owner, but should be in proportion to the actual
damages done.
There are many Scientologists living in East Grinstead and with the
course expanding, there will be a lot more in the future. Housing is
limited already. There is no need to further this condition by creating bad
will with the local property owners. This Policy is in keeping with our
Scientology justice codes.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:ml.rd
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 1 SEPTEMBER AD 15
Issue VII
Remimeo
All Hats
Div 1
ETHICS
ETHICS PROTECTION
Ethics actions must parallel the purposes of Scientology and its
organizations.
Ethics exists primarily to get technology in. Tech can't work unless
Ethics is
already in. When tech goes out Ethics can (and is expected to) get it in.
For the
purpose of Scientology amongst others, is to apply Scientology. Therefore
when tech is
in, Ethics actions tend to be dropped. Ethics continues its actions until
tech is in and as
soon as it is, backs off and only acts if tech goes out again.
The purpose of the org is to get the show on the road and keep it going.
This
means production. Every division is a production unit. It makes or does
something that
can have a statistic to see if it goes up or down. Example: a typist gets
out 500 letters
in one week. That's a statistic. If the next week the same typist gets out
600 letters
that's an UP statistic. If the typist gets out 300 letters that's a DOWN
statistic. Every
post in an org can have a statistic. So does every portion of the org. The
purpose is to
keep production (statistics) up. This is the only thing that gives a good
income for the
staff member personally. When statistics go down or when things are so
organized you
can't get one for a post, the staff members' pay goes down as the org goes
down in its
overall production. The production of an organization is only the total of
its individual
staff members. When these have down statistics so does the org.
Ethics actions are often used to handle down individual statistics. A
person who is
not doing his job becomes an Ethics target.
Conversely, if a person is doing his job (and his statistic will show
that) Ethics is
considered to be in and the person is protected by Ethics.
As an example of the proper application of Ethics to the production of
an org, let
us say the Letter Registrar has a high statistic (gets out lots of
effective mail).
Somebody reports the Letter Registrar for rudeness, somebody else reports
the Letter
Registrar for irregular conduct with a student. Somebody else reports the
Letter
Registrar for leaving all the lights on. Proper Ethics Officer action =
look up the general
statistics of the Letter Registrar, and seeing that they average quite
high, file the
complaints with a yawn.
As the second example of Ethics application to the production of an org,
let us
say that a Course Supervisor has a low statistic (very few students moved
out of his
course, course number growing, hardly anyone graduating, a bad Academy
statistic).
Somebody reports this Course Supervisor for being late for work, somebody
else
reports him for no weekly Adcomm report and bang! Ethics looks up the
person, calls
for an Ethics Hearing with trimmings.
We are not in the business of being good boys and girls. We're in the
business of
going free and getting the org production roaring. Nothing else is of any
interest then
to Ethics but (a) getting tech in, getting it run and getting it run right
and (b) getting
production up and the org roaring along.
Therefore if a staff member is getting production up by having his own
statistic
excellent. Ethics sure isn't interested. But if a staff member isn't
producing, shown by
his bad statistic for his post, Ethics is fascinated with his smallest
misdemeanor.
In short a staff member can get away with murder so long as his
statistic is up and
can't sneeze without a chop if it's down.
To do otherwise is to permit some suppressive person to simply Ethics
chit every
producer in the org out of existence.
When people do start reporting a staff member with a high statistic,
what you
investigate is the person who turned in the report.
In an ancient army a particularly brave deed was recognized by an award
of the
title of Kha-Khan. It was not a rank. The person remained what he was, BUT
he was
entitled to be forgiven the death penalty ten times in case in the future
he did anything
wrong. That was a Kha-Khan.
That's what producing, high statistic staff members are Kha-Khans. They
can get
away with murder without a blink from Ethics.
The average fair to poor statistic staff member of course gets just
routine ethics
with hearings or courts for too many misdeeds. The low statistic fellow
gets a court if
he sneezes.
Ethics must use all org discipline only in view of the production
statistic of the
staff member involved.
And Ethics must recognize a Kha-Khan when it sees one-and tear up the
bad
report chits on the person with a yawn.
To the staff member this means-if you do your job you are protected by
Ethics.
And if you aren't so protected and your statistic is high, cable me.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:ml.rd
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 15 NOVEMBER 1965
Remimeo
All Staff
REPORTING OF THEFT AND ACTION
TO BE TAKEN
When a theft occurs in the Organisation, a routine set of actions should
occur.
These actions are as follows:
1. The person discovering the theft goes immediately to the Ethics
Officer and
makes a full verbal report of the article/articles stolen, when they
were last
there-who was responsible for their safety-and any further data that he
has on
it.
2. The Ethics Officer writes down all details of the theft and the
articles stolen.
In the cases where large objects such as a machine, car, or the building
has been
broken into and something taken, he calls the Police immediately giving
full
details of the theft.
3. The Ethics Officer then makes a Xerox copy of the details of the
theft and takes
it to the Insurance Officer, Dept of Records, Assets and Materiel, Org
Division.
4. The Insurance Officer takes the Report and immediately notifies the
Insurance
Company with which the article was insured.
These actions should be done speedily as in some cases unless a theft is
reported
immediately to the Police and the Insurance Company, the Insurance is not
collectable.
It is the responsibility of the Insurance Officer to see that all
articles of value are
insured.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:ml.rd
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 15 DECEMBER 1965
Remimeo
ETHICS CHITS
When anyone receives an Ethics Chit which the recipient feels is
incorrect, the answer is not to issue another chit naming the person that
issued the first chit. Such action merely sets up a vicious circle of
Ethics Chits going between two persons.
The purpose of Ethics is to get Technology and policy in and get the org
going, not to start slanging matches. Therefore if anyone receives an
Ethics Chit, he or she should first take a good look at his or her actions
and see what needs to be done in order to avoid a repetition of the
offence.
If, however, after careful consideration they consider the chit really
unjustified, they should politely despatch the Ethics Officer, stating
briefly their reasons, supported where possible with data and ask for the
chit to be withdrawn.
If, in light of the data received, Ethics is satisfied that the chit was
incorrectly issued, he/she can return the chit and explanation to the
originator asking for the chit to be withdrawn. If the originator decides
now to withdraw the chit after seeing the explanation he returns it to
Ethics requesting cancellation and Ethics removes the chit from the file.
If the originator is dissatisfied with the explanation the chit should
not be withdrawn. The originator sends the despatch and chit back to the
Ethics Officer with 'To Ethics-File' written on it. Ethics infos the
receiver and files. In this case, the receiver can if he wishes appeal by
despatch to the Ethics Officer and ask for a hearing. Thereupon, the Ethics
Officer calls both the originator and the receiver (unless the originator
is a Secretary or above) to his office and, taking only the facts set out
in the receiver's despatch to Ethics, makes a quick investigation.
The Ethics Officer then makes one of the following adjudications:
1. Have the Ethics Chit destroyed.
2. Have the Ethics Chit destroyed and if he finds that the Chit was
carelessly or incorrectly issued (bearing in mind what information was
available to the originator at the time of issue), indicate the
incorrectness to the originator and order any necessary checkouts on the
relevant Policy Letter/s violated to correct the originator into future
on-policy handling.
3. If he discovers the Chit to have been a willful and knowing false
report, convene an Ethics Hearing on the originator (not for the fact of
filing, only for the willful and knowing false report); or if the
originator is a Director or above, request an Executive Ethics Hearing
be convened by the Office of LRH via the HCO Area Secretary.
4. Order the Ethics Chit to remain on the file.
5. Take up all the receiver's Ethics Chits and hold the hearing
accordingly.
If the originator is a Secretary or above the Ethics Officer and the
receiver visit the Secretary in his Office for the hearing on appointment.
But a Secretary or above need not grant the appointment at all if so
inclined. In such a case the hearing is held without the originator in the
Ethics Office.
No person may be penalized for issuing an Ethics Chit.
This policy letter is retroactive from this date. In other words old
chits may be protested as above.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:emp.rd
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
[ Note: The original issue of this Policy Letter contained errors in the
fifth paragraph which have been corrected in this edition. Also, point 2
above, which was incomplete in the original mimeo, has been corrected and
completed, and a new item as point 3 has been included. The corrections and
additions are shown in italics.]
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 6 MARCH 1966
Remimeo
Guardian Hat
Exec Sees Hat
HCO Area Sec Hat
Dir I & R Hat
All HCO Hats
LRH Comm Hat
REWARDS AND PENALTIES
HOW TO HANDLE PERSONNEL AND
ETHICS MATTERS
The whole decay of Western government is explained in this seemingly
obvious law:
WHEN YOU REWARD DOWN STATISTICS AND PENALIZE UP STATISTICS
YOU GET DOWN STATISTICS.
If you reward non-production you get non-production.
When you penalize production you get non-production.
The Welfare State can be defined as that state which rewards non-
production at
the expense of production. Let us not then be surprised that we all turn up
at last
slaves in a starved society.
Russia cannot even feed herself but depends on conquest to eke out an
existence-and don't think they don't strip the conquered! They have to.
Oddly enough one of the best ways to detect a Suppressive Person is that
he or
she stamps on up statistics and condones or rewards down statistics. It
makes an SP
very happy for everyone to starve to death, for the good worker to be
shattered and
the bad worker patted on the back.
Draw your own conclusions as to whether or not Western Governments (or
Welfare States) became at last Suppressives. For they used the law used by
suppressives: If you reward non-production you get non-production.
Although all this is very obvious to us, it seems to have been unknown,
overlooked or ignored by 20th Century governments.
In the conduct of our own affairs in all matters of rewards and
penalties we pay
sharp heed to the basic laws as above and use this policy:
We award production and up statistics and penalize non-production and
down
statistics. Always.
Also we do it all by statistics-not rumour or personality or who knows
who. And
we make sure every one has a statistic of some sort. We promote by
statistic only. We
penalize down statistics only.
The whole of Government as government was only a small bit of a real
organization-it was an Ethics function Plus a Tax function Plus a
Disbursement
function. This is about 3/100ths of an organization. A 20th Century
government was
just these 3 functions gone mad. Yet they made the whole population wear
the hat of
government.
We must learn and profit from what they did wrong. And what they mainly
did
wrong was reward the down statistic and penalize the up statistic.
The hardworker-earner was heavily taxed and the money was used to
support the
indigent. This was not humanitarian. It was only given "humanitarian"
reasons.
The robbed person was investigated exclusively, rarely the robber.
The head of government who got into the most debt became a hero.
War rulers were deified and peacetime rulers forgotten no matter how
many wars
they prevented.
Thus went Ancient Greece, Rome, France, the British Empire and the US.
This
was the decline and fall of every great civilization on this planet: they
eventually
rewarded the down statistic and penalized the up statistic. That's all that
caused then-
decline. They came at last into the hands of Suppressives and had no
technology to
detect them or escape their inevitable disasters.
Thus, when you think of "processing Joe to make a good D of P out of him
and
get him over his mistakes" forget it. That rewards a down statistic.
Instead, find an
auditor with an up statistic, reward it with processing and make him the D
of P.
Never promote a down statistic or demote an up statistic.
Never even hold a hearing on someone with an up statistic. Never accept
an Ethics
chit on one-just stamp it "Sorry, Up Statistic" and send it back.
But someone with a steadily down statistic, investigate. Accept and
convert any
Ethics chit to a hearing. Look for an early replacement.
Gruesomely, in my experience I have only seldom raised a chronically
down
statistic with orders or persuasion or new plans. I have only raised them
with changes
of personnel.
So don't even consider someone with a steadily down statistic as part of
the team.
Investigate, yes. Try, yes. But if it stays down, don't fool about. The
person is drawing
pay and position and privilege for not doing his job and that's too much
reward even
there.
Don't get reasonable about down statistics. They are down because they
are
down. If someone was on the post they would be up. And act on that basis.
Any duress levelled by Ethics should be reserved for down statistics.
Even Section 5 investigates social areas of down statistic. Psychiatry's
cures are
zero. The negative statistic of more insane is all that is "up". So
investigate and hang.
If we reverse the conduct of declining governments and businesses we
will of
course grow. And that makes for coffee and cakes, promotion, higher pay,
better
working quarters and tools for all those who earned them. And who else
should have
them?
If you do it any other way, everyone starves. We are peculiar in
believing there is a
virtue in prosperity.
You cannot give more to the indigent than the society produces. When the
society, by penalizing production, at last produces very little and yet has
to feed very
many, revolutions, confusion, political unrest and Dark Ages ensue.
In a very prosperous society where production is amply rewarded, there
is always
more left over than is needed. I well recall in prosperous farm communities
that charity
was ample and people didn't die in the ditch. That only happens where
production is
already low and commodity or commerce already scarce (scarcity of
commercial means
of distribution is also a factor in depressions).
The cause of the great depression of the 1920s and 1930s in the US and
England
has never been pointed out by Welfare "statesmen". The cause was Income Tax
and
government interference with companies and, all during the 1800s, a gradual
rise of
nationalism and size of governments and their budgets, and no commercial
develop-
ment to distribute goods to the common people, catering to royal
governments or only
a leisure class still being the focus of production.
Income tax so penalized management, making it unrewarded, and company
law so
hampered financing that it ceased to be really worthwhile to run companies
and
management quit. In Russia management went into politics in desperation.
Kings were
always decreeing the commoner couldn't have this or that (it put the
commoner's
statistic up!) and not until 1930 did anyone really begin to sell to the
people with
heavy advertising. It was Madison Avenue, radio, TV and Bing Crosby not the
Gre-e-eat
Roosevelt who got the US out of the depression. England, not permitting
wide radio
coverage, never has come out of it and her empire is dust. England still
too firmly held
the "aristocratic" tradition that the commoner mustn't possess to truly use
her
population as a market.
But the reason they let it go this way and the reason the great
depression occurred
and the reason for the decline of the West is this one simple truth:
If you reward non-production you get it.
It is not humanitarian to let a whole population go to pieces just
because a few
refuse to work. And some people just won't. And when work no longer has
reward
none will.
It is far more humane to have enough so everyone can eat.
So specialize in production and everybody wins. Reward it.
There is nothing really wrong with socialism helping the needy.
Sometimes it is
vital. But the reasons for that are more or less over. It is a temporary
solution, easily
overdone and like Communism is simply old-fashioned today. If carried to
extremes
like drinking coffee or absinthe or even eating it becomes quite
uncomfortable and
oppressive. And today Socialism and Communism have been carried far too far
and
now only oppress up statistics and reward down ones.
_________________
By the way the natural law in this Pol Ltr is the reason Scientology
goes poorly
when credit is extended by orgs and when auditors won't charge properly.
With credit
and no charge we are rewarding down statistics with attention and
betterment as much
as we reward up statistics in the society. A preclear who can work and
produces as a
member of society deserves of course priority. He naturally is the one who
can pay.
When we give the one who can't pay just as much attention we are rewarding
a down
social statistic with Scientology and of course we don't expand because we
don't
expand the ability of the able. In proof, the most expensive thing you can
do is process
the insane and these have the lowest statistic in the society.
The more you help those in the society with low statistics the more
tangled affairs
will get. The orgs require fantastic attention to keep them there at all
when we reward
low society statistics with training and processing. The worker pays his
way. He has a
high statistic. So give him the best in training and processing-not
competition with
people who don't work and don't have any money.
Always give the best service to the person in society who does his job.
By not
extending credit you tend to guarantee the best service to those with the
best statistics
and so everyone wins again. None is owed processing or training. We are not
an
Earthwide amends project.
No good worker owes his work. That's slavery.
We don't owe because we do better. One would owe only if one did worse.
Not everyone realizes how Socialism penalizes an up statistic. Take
health taxes.
If an average man adds up what he pays the government he will find his
visits to
medicos are very expensive. The one who benefits is only the chronically
ill, whose
way is paid by the healthy. So the chronically ill (down statistic) are
rewarded with
care paid for by penalties on the healthy (up statistic).
In income tax, the more a worker makes the more hours of his work week
are
taxed away from him. Eventually he is no longer working for his reward. He
is working
for no pay. If he got up to �50 a week the proportion of his pay (penalty)
might go as
high as half. Therefore people tend to refuse higher pay (up statistics) as
it has a
penalty that is too great. On the other hand a totally indigent non-working
person is
paid well just to loaf. The up statistic person cannot hire any small
services to help his
own prosperity as he is already paying it via the government to somebody
who doesn't
work.
Socialisms pay people not to grow crops no matter how many are starving.
Get it?
So the law holds.
Charity is charity. It benefits the donor, giving him a sense of
superiority and
status. It is a liability to the receiver but he accepts it as he must and
vows (if he has
any pride) to cease being poor and get to work.
Charity cannot be enforced by law and arrest for then it is extortion
and not
charity.
And get no idea that I beat any drum for capitalism. That too is old-old-
old hat.
Capitalism is the economics of living by non-production. It by exact
definition is
the economics of living off interest from loans. Which is an extreme of
rewarding
non-production.
Imperialism and Colonialism are also bad as they exist by enslaving the
population
of less strong countries like Russia does, and that too is getting a reward
for
non-production like they did in Victorian England from all the colonies.
Parasitism is Parasitism. Whether high or low it is unlovely.
All these isms are almost equally nutty and their inheritors, if not
their
originators, were all of a stamp-suppressive.
All I beat the drum for is that the working worker deserves a break and
the
working manager deserves his pay and the successful company deserves the
fruits of its
success.
Only when success is bought by enslavement or rewards are given to bums
or
thieves will you find me objecting.
This is a new look. It is an honest look.
Reward the up statistic and damn the down and we'll all make out.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:ml.rd
Copyright � 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 5 MARCH 1968
(HCO POLICY LETTER OF 31 OCTOBER 1966 Issue II
Amended and reissued)
Remimeo
Staff Status I
Check Sheet
ADMINISTRATIVE KNOW-HOW
GENERAL FOR ALL STAFF
JOB ENDANGERMENT CHITS
If you are given orders or directions or preventions or denied materials
which
makes it hard or impossible for you to raise your statistics or do your job
at all, you
MUST file a job endangerment chit on your next highest superior.
If you are admonished or ordered to a hearing for NOT doing your job and
having
low statistics and have NOT previously filed a job endangerment chit at the
time it
occurred, you have no defense.
You should not come to a hearing as a defendant and say you were
prevented or
inhibited from doing your job. Unless you have filed a job endangerment
chit
previously when your job was endangered the statement MAY NOT BE ACCEPTED
by
the Hearing Officer or the Comm Ev.
POLICY
Most people who have trouble with policy or admin do so simply because
they
don't know it or can't or don't use it.
Such a person can be told anything and tends to take it as fact.
Policy exists to speed the wheels and make a job do-able.
But sometimes one has a senior who continually says this or that is
"against
policy".
Always respectfully ask for the date of the Policy Letter and to see a
copy of it.
Then you will know that what you propose is or is not against policy. If
no policy
letter can be produced or if what you proposed is NOT against policy and is
still
refused, you must file a job endangerment chit.
WHERE TO FILE
FORMERLY ONLY ONE COPY WAS WRITTEN. THIS IS NOW MODIFIED.
USING CARBON PAPER, MAKE AN ORIGINAL AND TWO COPIES. SEND
ONE COPY TO THE PERSON BEING FILED ON.
SEND TWO COPIES TO THE ETHICS OFFICER.
THE ETHICS OFFICER WILL FILE ONE IN THE FILE OF THE PERSON
NAMED AND ONE IN THE FILE OF THE PERSON WRITING THE CHIT. THESE
COPIES MUST BE CAREFULLY PRESERVED IN EVENT OF A COMM EV OR
HEARING AS THEY ARE NECESSARY DEFENSE PAPERS.
WHAT TO FILE
Full details, without rancor or discourtesy, must be given in the
report, including
time, places and any witnesses.
VEXATIONS FILING
Anyone filing job endangerment chits on superiors or equal or juniors
must be able to back them up.
One cannot be given an Ethics Hearing or Comm Ev for a false job
endangerment chit unless it contains a willful and knowing false report
which endangers somebody else's job. But even so, no Ethics Hearing may be
ordered for the fact of filing, only for a willful and knowing false
report.
So if your facts are straight there is no slightest risk in filing a job
endangerment chit. On the contrary, it is dangerous NOT to file one. For
then one has NO defense.
PERSONAL MATTERS
Sometimes a staff member is imposed on in such a way as to prejudice his
job such as having to do off line favours.
This is an occasion for a job endangerment chit.
_________________
If one is threatened with punishment if one files a job endangerment
chit, one must then file a second chit based on the threat.
_________________
If an org as a whole seems to refuse job endangerment chits or ignore
them, one can be filed with Worldwide simply by sending it direct to "HCO
Ethics Worldwide, Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex."
WRONGFUL DISMISSAL
Dismissal without following proper procedure of a Hearing may be sued in
the Chaplain's Court, Division 6. If no Chaplain's Court exists in the
local org then one surely does in the Continental Org and one can file such
a suit there or at Saint Hill.
CHITS BY SENIORS
Seniors let down by juniors had better file job endangerment chits
before calling a lot of Ethics actions. Staff members are seldom willful,
they are just unknowing. Senior chits on juniors should carry a copy to the
junior on channels as well as Ethics.
FALSE REPORTS
When one finds he has been falsely reported upon he should file a job
endangerment chit.
HEARINGS ON CHITS
Ethics action is not necessarily taken because a chit has been filed on
one. But if too many chits occur in a staff member's file, an investigation
should be ordered and only if the Board so recommends does Ethics action
then occur.
STATE OF MIND
Don't sit around muttering because you are being kept from doing your
job.
And don't be timid about filing a job endangerment chit.
Don't accept orders you know are against policy or at least unworkable.
File a job endangerment chit.
There is no vast THEY weighing you down. There is only ignorance of
policy or misinterpretation or arbitrary interference.
If you are willing to do your job, then know your job and do it. And if
you are being shoved off so you can't do it you MUST file a job
endangerment chit.
You have a right to do your job, you know.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jc.rd
Copyright � 1966, 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
[Note: The reissue expanded the section under "Where to File".]
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 26 DECEMBER 1968
Remimeo
(Note: This data is turned out as an HCOB and a Pol Ltr [issued as each
one] as may
apply very broadly in both the OEC and Level IV or above Courses.)
THE THIRD PARTY LAW
I have for a very long time studied the causes of violence and conflict
amongst individuals and nations.
If Chaldea could vanish, if Babylon turn to dust, if Egypt could become
a badlands, if Sicily could have 160 prosperous cities and be a looted ruin
before the year zero and a near desert ever since-and all this in SPITE of
all the work and wisdom and good wishes and intent of human beings, then it
must follow as the dark follows sunset that something must be unknown to
Man concerning all his works and ways. And that this something must be so
deadly and so pervasive as to destroy all his ambitions and his chances
long before their time.
Such a thing would have to be some natural law unguessed at by himself.
And there is such a law, apparently, that answers these conditions of
being deadly, unknown and embracing all activities.
The law would seem to be:
A THIRD PARTY MUST BE PRESENT AND UNKNOWN IN EVERY QUARREL FOR A
CONFLICT TO EXIST.
or
FOR A QUARREL TO OCCUR, AN UNKNOWN THIRD PARTY MUST BE ACTIVE IN
PRODUCING IT BETWEEN TWO POTENTIAL OPPONENTS.
or
WHILE IT IS COMMONLY BELIEVED TO TAKE TWO TO MAKE A FIGHT, A THIRD PARTY
MUST EXIST AND MUST DEVELOP IT FOR ACTUAL CONFLICT TO OCCUR.
It is very easy to see that two in conflict are fighting. They are very
visible. What is harder to see or suspect is that a third party existed and
actively promoted the quarrel.
The usually unsuspected and "reasonable" third party, the bystander who
denies any part of it is the one that brought the conflict into existence
in the first place.
The hidden third party, seeming at times to be a supporter of only one
side, is to be found as the instigator.
This is a useful law on many dynamics.
It is the cause of war.
One sees two fellows shouting bad names at each other, sees them come to
blows. No one else is around. So they, of course, "caused the fight". But
there was a third party.
Tracing these down, one comes upon incredible data. That is the trouble.
The incredible is too easily rejected. One way to hide things is to make
them incredible.
Clerk A and Messenger B have been arguing. They blaze into direct
conflict. Each blames the other. NEITHER ONE IS CORRECT AND SO THE QUARREL
DOES NOT RESOLVE SINCE ITS TRUE CAUSE IS NOT ESTABLISHED.
One looks into such a case THOROUGHLY. He finds the incredible. The wife
of Clerk A has been sleeping with Messenger B and complaining alike to both
about the other.
Farmer J and Rancher K have been tearing each other to pieces for years
in continual conflict. There are obvious, logical reasons for the fight.
Yet it continues and does not resolve. A close search finds Banker L who,
due to their losses in the fighting,
is able to loan each side money, while keeping the quarrel going, and who
will get then-lands completely if both lose.
It goes larger. The revolutionary forces and the Russian government were
in conflict in 1917. The reasons are so many the attention easily sticks on
them. But only when Germany's official state papers were captured in World
War II was it revealed that Germany had promoted the revolt and financed
LENIN to spark it off, even sending him into Russia in a blacked out train!
One looks over "personal" quarrels, group conflicts, national battles
and one finds, if he searches, the third party, unsuspected by both
combatants or if suspected at all, brushed off as "fantastic". Yet careful
documentation finally affirms it.
____________________
This datum is fabulously useful.
In marital quarrels the correct approach of anyone counseling, is to get
both parties to carefully search out the third party. They may come to many
reasons at first. These reasons are not beings. One is looking for a third
party, an actual being. When both find the third party and establish proof,
that will be the end of the quarrel.
Sometimes two parties, quarreling, suddenly decide to elect a being to
blame. This stops the quarrel. Sometimes it is not the right being and more
quarrels thereafter occur.
Two nations at each other's throats should each seek conference with the
other to sift out and locate the actual third party. They will always find
one if they look, and they can find the right one. As it will be found to
exist in fact.
____________________
There are probably many technical approaches one could develop and
outline in this matter.
There are many odd phenomena connected with it. An accurately spotted
third party is usually not fought at all by either party but only shunned.
Marital conflicts are common. Marriages can be saved by both parties
really sorting out who caused the conflicts. There may have been, in the
whole history of the marriage several, but only one at a time.
Quarrels between an individual and an organisation are nearly always
caused by an individual third party or a third group. The organisation and
the individual should get together and isolate the third party by
displaying to each other all the data they each have been fed.
Rioters and governments alike could be brought back to agreement could
one get representatives of both to give each other what they have been told
by whom.
SUCH CONFERENCES HAVE TENDED TO DEAL ONLY IN RECRIMINATIONS OR
CONDITIONS OR ABUSES. THEY MUST DEAL IN BEINGS ONLY IN ORDER TO SUCCEED.
This theory might be thought to assert also that there are no bad
conditions that cause conflict. There are. But these are usually REMEDIAL
BY CONFERENCE UNLESS A THIRD PARTY IS PROMOTING CONFLICT.
In history we have a very foul opinion of the past because it is related
by recriminations of two opponents and has not spotted the third party.
"Underlying causes" of war should read "hidden promoters".
There are no conflicts which cannot be resolved unless the true
promoters of them remain hidden.
____________________
This is the natural law the ancients and moderns alike did not know.
And not knowing it, being led off into "reasons" whole civilizations
have died.
It is worth knowing.
It is worth working with in any situation where one is trying to bring
peace.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:ei.rd Founder
Copyright � 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 24 FEBRUARY 1969
Remimeo
AN ETHICS POLICY LETTER
JUSTICE
In an extension of 3rd Party technology (see HCOB of THIRD PARTY LAW) I
have found that false reports and suppression are very important in 3rd
Party Technology.
We know as in the above HCOB that a Third Party is necessary to any
quarrel. Basically it is a 3 Terminal Universe.
In reviewing several org upsets I have found that the 3rd Party can go
completely overlooked even in intensive investigation.
A 3rd Party adds up to suppression by giving false reports on others.
In several cases an org has lost several guiltless staff members. They
were dismissed or disciplined in an effort to solve enturbulation. Yet the
turbulence continued and the area became even more upset by reason of the
dismissals.
Running this back further one finds that the real 3rd Party, eventually
unearthed got people shot by FALSE REPORTS.
One source of this is as follows:
Staff Member X goofs. He is very furious and defensive at being accused.
He blames his goof on somebody else. That somebody else gets disciplined.
Staff Member X diverts attention from himself by various means including
falsely accusing others.
This is a 3rd Party action which results in a lot of people being blamed
and disciplined. And the real 3rd Party remaining undetected.
The missing point of justice here is that the disciplined persons were
not faced with their accusers and were not given the real accusation and so
could not confront it.
Another case would be a 3rd Party simply spreading tales and making
accusations out of malice or some even more vicious motive. This would be a
usual 3rd Party action. It is ordinarily based on False Reports.
Another situation comes about when an executive who can't get an area
straight starts to investigate, gets 3rd Party False Reports about it,
disciplines people accordingly and totally misses the real 3rd Party. This
enturbulates the area even more.
The basis of all really troublesome 3rd Party activities is then FALSE
REPORTS.
There can also be FALSE PERCEPTION. One sees things that don't exist and
reports them as "fact".
Therefore we see that we can readily run back an investigation by
following a chain of false reports.
In at least one case the 3rd Party (discovered only after it was very
plain that only he could have wrecked two divisions, one after the other)
also had these characteristics:
1. Goofed in his own actions;
2. Furiously contested any knowledge reports or job endangerment chits
filed on him;
3. Obsessively changed everything when taking over an area;
4. Falsely reported actions, accusing others;
5. Had a high casualty rate of staff in his division or area.
These are not necessarily common to all 3rd Parties but give you an idea
of what can go on.
_________________________________________
After a lot of experience with Ethics and justice I would say that the
real source of upset in an area would be FALSE REPORTS accepted and acted
upon without confronting the accused with all charges and his or her
accusers.
An executive should not accept any accusation and act upon it. To do so
undermines the security of one and all.
What an executive should do, on being presented with an accusation or
down stats
or "evidence" is conduct an investigation of false reports and false
perceptions.
An area is downstat because of one or more of the following:
1. No personnel;
2. Personnel not trained;
3. Cross orders (senior orders unattended because of different junior
orders);
4. Area doing something else than what it is supposed to do;
5. An adjacent area dumping its hat;
6. False perception leading to false stats;
7. False reports by rumour or misunderstanding;
8. False reports from single rare instances becoming accepted as the
condition of the whole;
9. False reports on others defensively intended;
10. False reports on others maliciously intended (real 3rd Party);
11. Injustices cumulative and unremedied;
12. Actions taken on others without investigation and without
confronting them with their accusers or the data.
This is a list of probable causes for an upset or downstat area.
SECURITY
The personal security of the staff member is so valuable to him
apparently that when it is undermined (by false accusations or injustice)
he becomes less willing and less efficient and is the real reason for a PTS
condition.
JUSTICE
The only thing which can actually remedy a general insecure feeling is a
renewed faith in justice.
Justice would consist of a refusal to accept any report not
substantiated by actual, independent data, seeing that all such reports are
investigated and that all investigations include confronting the accused
with the accusation and where feasible the accuser, BEFORE any disciplinary
action is undertaken or any condition assigned.
While this may slow the processes of justice, the personal security of
the individual is totally dependent upon establishing the full truth of any
accusation before any action is taken.
_________________________________________
Harsh discipline may produce instant compliance but it smothers
initiative.
Positive discipline is in itself a stable datum. People are unhappy in
an area which is not well disciplined because they do not know where they
stand.
An area where only those who try to do their jobs are disciplined
encourages people to hide and be inactive.
But all discipline must be based on truth and must exclude acting on
false reports.
Therefore we get a policy: Any false report leading to the unjust
discipline of another is an act of TREASON by the person making the false
report and the condition should be assigned and its penalties fully
applied.
A condition of DOUBT should be assigned any person who accepts and
disciplines another unjustly on the basis of a report which subsequently
turns out to have been false.
_________________________________________
This then is the primary breakdown of any justice system-that it acts on
false reports, disciplines before substantiation and fails to confront an
accused with the report and his accuser before any discipline is assigned,
or which does not weigh the value of a person in general against the
alleged crime even when proven.
LRH: ldm.ei.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright � 1969 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 7 DECEMBER 1969
Remimeo
All Exec Hats
HCO Area Hat
I & R Hat
ETHICS, THE DESIGN OF
It is very easy for a staff member and even an Ethics Officer to
completely misunderstand Ethics and its functions. In a society run by SPs
and controlled by incompetent police the citizen almost engramically
identifies any justice action or symbol with oppression.
Yet in the absence of true Ethics no one can live with others and stats
go down inevitably. So a justice function must exist to protect producers
and decent people.
To give you an example, when a little boy this life, the neighborhood a
block around and the road from home to school were unusable. A bully about
five years older than I named Leon Brown exerted a very bad influence over
other children. With extortion by violence and blackmail and with
corruption he made the area very dangerous. The road to school was blocked
by the 5 O'Connell kids, ranging from 7 to 15 who stopped and beat up any
smaller child. One couldn't go to school safely and was hounded by the
truant officer, a hulking brute complete with star, if one didn't go to
school.
When I was about six I got very tired of a bloody nose and spankings
because my clothes were torn and avidly learned "lumberjack fighting" a
crude form of judo from my grandfather.
With this "superior tech" under my belt I searched out and found alone
the youngest O'Connell kid, a year older than I, and pulverized him. Then I
found alone and took on the next in size and pulverized him. After that the
O'Connell kids, all 5, fled each time I showed up and the road to school
was open and I convoyed other little kids so it was safe.
Then one day I got up on a 9 foot high board fence and waited until the
12 year old bully passed by and leaped off on him boots and all and after
the dust settled that neighborhood was safe for every kid in it.
So I learned about justice. Kids would come from blocks away to get help
in their neighborhood. Finally for a mile around it was a safe environment
for kids.
From this I learned two lessons:
1. Strength is nothing without skill and tech and reversely, without
skill and tech the strength of brutes is a matter of contempt.
2. Strength has two sides, one for good and one for evil. It is the
intention that makes the difference.
_______________
On further living I found that only those who sought only peace were
ever butchered. The thousands of years of Jewish passivity earned them
nothing but slaughter.
So things do not run right because one is holy or good. Things run right
because one makes them run right.
Justice is a necessary action to any successful society. Without it the
brute attacks the weak, the decent and the productive.
There are people who suppress. They are few. They often rise up to being
in charge and then all things decay. They are essentially psychopathic
personalities. Such want position in order to kill. Such as Ghenghiz Khan,
Hitler, psychiatrists, psychopathic criminals, want power only to destroy.
Covertly or overtly they pay only with death. They arrived where they
arrived, in charge of things, because nobody when they were on their way up
said "No". They are monuments to the cowards, the reasonable people who
didn't put period to them while they were still only small bullies and
still vulnerable.
Ethics has to get there before tech can occur. So when it doesn't exist
or goes out then tech doesn't occur and suppression sets in and death
follows.
So if someone doesn't hold the line, all become victims of oppression.
TWO SECTIONS
The Ethics Section is in Department 3. This department is called
Inspection and Reports.
In small orgs there is only one person in that department.
Primarily his duties consist of Inspecting and Reporting to his
divisional head and the Executive Council.
That is the first section's function.
WHEN inspection reveals outness and reports (such as graphs or direct
info to the EC) do not result in correction THEN it is a matter for the
second section.
The second section of Department 3 is Ethics.
Now it is an Ethics matter. If correctly reported outnesses that
threaten the org are NOT corrected then one assumes that suppression
exists.
Because he has files of damage reports and chits and because he can see
and investigate, the Ethics Officer locates WHO is causing outnesses and
suppressing the org. By condition assignments, publication and Comm Evs he
gets in Ethics.
It occasionally happens that it is someone high up in the org. It
sometimes happens his seniors or the EC scold him for daring to report on
things or to them. Then he knows the suppression is high up and he is
delinquent in duty if he does not report it to the next highest org and if
no action there right on up to the Sea Org. Anyone removing him for daring
to report the factual results of his inspections can be severely handled by
upper organizations. The Ethics Officer can only be in trouble if he fails
to do his job and keep in Ethics.
Hitting people with conditions is such a small part of Ethics that it is
almost an abandonment of post. Letting people be hit with wrong conditions
is a Comm Ev offense.
Letting an SP collapse stats or an org is a shooting offense.
An Ethics Officer uses Ethics to protect Ethics upstats and keep the
stats up and to smoke out crimes that push people and stats down. It is a
simple function.
The basic duties of Dept 3 are what it says. Inspection and Reports.
These alone usually work. When they don't and stats fall or people fall off
the org board, one goes into Ethics actions.
You don't let incompetent and suppressive people on staff in the first
place and you crowd Ethics in on them if they're found to be there.
You DON'T confuse an executive's effort to get the stats up with
suppression.
The E/0 is making the environment safe so that production can occur and
service can be given. He is making it unsafe for those who by neglect or
continual errors or suppression push stats down and get good staff members
to leave.
If none of this is well understood and yet someone is making it
impossible to work, find a 9 foot high board fence. .....
The E/0 must know his Ethics policy. He must understand why he is there.
And the rest of the people in the org should understand it too.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:rs.ldm.rd
Copyright � 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 23 SEPTEMBER 1967
Remimeo
Page 1 of
Every Hat
NEW POST FORMULA
THE CONDITIONS FORMULAS
Every new appointee to a post begins in non-existence. Whether obtained
by new
appointment, promotion or demotion.
He is normally under the delusion that now he is "THE .........." (new
title). He tries to start off in power condition as he is usually very
aware of his new status or even a former status. But in actual fact he is
the only one aware of it. All others except perhaps the personnel officer
are utterly unaware of him as having his new status.
Therefore he begins in a state of non-existence. And if he does not
begin with the non-existence formula as his guide he will be using the
wrong condition and will have all kinds of trouble.
The Non-Existence Formula is
1. Find a comm line
2. Make yourself known
3. Discover what is needed or wanted
4. Do, produce and/or present it.
A new appointee taking over a going concern often thinks he had better
make
himself known by changing everything whereas he (a) is not well enough
known to do
so and (b) hasn't any idea of what is needed or wanted yet. And so he makes
havoc.
Sometimes he assumes he knows what is needed or wanted when it is only a
fixed
idea with him and is only his idea and not true at all and so he fails at
his job.
Sometimes he doesn't bother to find out what is really needed or wanted
and
simply assumes it or thinks he knows when he doesn't. He soon becomes
"unsuccessful".
Now and then a new appointee is so "status happy" or so insecure or so
shy that
even when his boss or his staff comes to him and tells him what is needed
or wanted he
can't or doesn't even acknowledge and really does go into non-existence for
keeps.
Sometimes he finds that what he is told is needed or wanted needs
reappraisal or
further investigation. So it is always safest for him to make his own
survey of it and
operate on it when he gets his own firm reality on what is needed or
wanted.
If the formula is applied intelligently the person can expect to get
into a zone of
by-pass where people are still doing his job to fill the hole his
predecessor may have
left. This is a Danger Condition-but it is the next one higher than non-
existence on the
scale. If he defends his job and does his job and applies the Danger
Formula he will
come through it.
He can then expect to find himself in Emergency Condition. In this he
must
follow the Emergency Formula with his post and he will come through it.
He can now expect to be in Normal Operation and if he follows the
formula of
that, he will come to Affluence. And if he follows that formula he will
arrive at Power.
And if he applies the Power Formula he will stay there.
So it is a long way from Power that one starts his new appointment and
if he
doesn't go UP the scale from where he really is at the start, he will of
course fail.
This applies to groups, to organizations, to countries as well as
individuals.
It also applies when a person fails at his job. He has to start again at
non-existence
and he will build up the same way condition by condition.
Most failures on post are occasioned by failures to follow the
Conditions and
recognize them and apply the formula of the condition one is in when one is
in it and
cease to apply it when one is out of it and in another.
This is the secret of holding a post and being successful on a job or in
life.
_________________
Here are the formulas of conditions given in order of advance upward:
NON-EXISTENCE
1. Find a comm line
2. Make yourself known
3. Discover what is needed or wanted
4. Do, produce and/or present it.
DANGER
1. By-pass (ignore the junior normally in charge of the activity, handle
it personally).
2. Handle the situation and any danger in it.
3. Assign the area where it had to be handled a Danger Condition.
4. Handle the personnel by Ethics Investigation and Comm Ev.
5. Reorganize the activity so that the situation does not repeat.
6. Recommend any firm policy that will hereafter detect and/or prevent
the condition from recurring.
The senior executive present acts and acts according to the formula
above.
EMERGENCY
1. Promote, that applies to an organization. To an individual you had
better say
produce. That's the first action regardless of any other action,
regardless of
anything else, why that is the first thing you have to put their
attention on. The
first broad big action which you take is promote. Exactly what is
promotion?
Well, look it up in the dictionary. It is making things known; it is
getting things
out; it is getting one's self known, getting one's products out.
2. Change your operating basis. If for instance you went into a
condition of
emergency and then you didn't change after you had promoted, you
didn't make
any changes in your operation, well you just head for another
condition of
emergency.
So that has to be part of it, you had better change your operating
basis, you had
better do something to change the operating basis, because that
operating basis
lead you into an emergency so you sure better change it.
3. Economize.
4. Then prepare to deliver.
5. Part of the Condition of Emergency contains this little line-you have
got to
stiffen discipline or you have got to stiffen Ethics.
Organizationally when a state
of emergency is assigned supposing the activity doesn't come out of
that
emergency, regardless of what caused the emergency, supposing the
activity just
doesn't come out of the emergency, in spite of the fact they have
been labelled a
state of emergency, they have been directed to follow the formula,
they have been
told to snap and pop and get that thing straightened out, and they
are still found
to be goofing, the statistic is going down and continues to go down,
what do you
do? There is only one thing left to do and that is discipline because
life itself is
going to discipline the individual.
So the rule of the game is that if a state of emergency is ignored
and the steps are
not taken successfully then you get an announcement after a while
that the
condition has been continued and if the condition is continued beyond
a specified
time, why that's it, it has to walk forward into an Ethics matter.
NORMAL OPERATION
1. The way you maintain an increase is when you are in a state of Normal
Operation
you don't change anything.
2. Ethics are very mild, the justice factor is quite mild, there are no
savage actions
taken particularly.
3. A statistic betters then look it over carefully and find out what
bettered it and
then do that without abandoning what you were doing before.
4. Every time a statistic worsens slightly, quickly find out why and
remedy it.
And you just jockey those two factors, the statistic bettering, the
statistic
worsening, repair the statistic worsening, and you will find out inevitably
some change
has been made in that area where a statistic worsens. Some change has been
made, you
had better get that change off the lines in a hurry.
AFFLUENCE
1. Economize. Now the first thing you must do in Affluence is economize
and then
make very very sure that you don't buy anything that has any future
commitment
to it, don't buy anything with any future commitments, don't hire
anybody with
any future commitments-nothing. That is all part of that economy,
clamp it
down.
2. Pay every bill. Get every bill that you can possibly scrape up from
any place,
every penny you owe anywhere under the sun, moon and stars and pay
them.
3. Invest the remainder in service facilities, make it more possible to
deliver.
4. Discover what caused the Condition of Affluence and strengthen it.
POWER
1. The first law of a Condition of Power is don't disconnect. You can't
just deny
your connections, what you have got to do is take ownership and
responsibility
for your connections.
2. The first thing you have got to do is make a record of all of its
lines. And that is
the only way you will ever be able to disconnect. So on a Condition
of Power the
first thing you have to do is write up your whole post. You have made
it possible
for the next fellow in to assume the state of Power Change.
If you don't write up your whole post you are going to be stuck with
a piece of
that post since time immemorial and a year or so later somebody will
still be
coming to you asking you about that post which you occupied.
3. The responsibility is write the thing up and get it into the hands of
the guy who is
going to take care of it.
4. Do all you can to make the post occupiable.
POWER CHANGE
There are only two circumstances which require replacement, the very
successful
one or the very unsuccessful one.
What a song it is to inherit a successful pair of boots, there is
nothing to it, just
step in the boots and don't bother to walk. If it was in a normal state
of
operation, which it normally would have been in for anybody to have been
promoted out of it, you just don't change anything.
So anybody wants anything signed that your predecessor didn't sign,
don't sign it.
Keep your eyes open, learn the ropes and, depending on how big the
organization
is, after a certain time, why see how it is running and run it as normal
operating
condition if it's not in anything but a normal operating condition.
Go through the exact same routine of every day that your predecessor
went
through, sign nothing that he wouldn't sign, don't change a single
order, look
through the papers that had been issued at that period of time-these are
the
orders that are extant and get as busy as the devil just enforcing those
orders and
your operation will increase and increase.
Now the fellow who walks into the boots of somebody who has left in
disgrace
had better apply the state of emergency formula to it, which is
immediately
promote.
_________________
WISHING YOU SUCCESS.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jp.rd
Copyright � 1967
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 7 FEBRUARY 1970
(Adds to HCO Pol Ltr 23 Sept 1967,
New Post Formula, The Conditions Formulas)
Remimeo
DANGER CONDITION
2nd Formula
The Danger Condition for the person assigning the condition has been
long known and published.
However, out of all the original formulas conditions published, DANGER
is the only condition which has not had a formula for the person or
activity to which it was assigned. There are therefore TWO DANGER FORMULAS.
One is for the person who assigns the condition. This is (as originally
released)
1. Bypass (ignore the junior normally in charge of the area, handle it
personally).
2. Handle the situation and any danger in it.
3. Assign the area where it had to be handled a Danger Condition.
4. Handle the personnel by Ethics Investigation and Comm Ev.
5. Reorganize the activity so that the situation does not repeat.
6. Recommend any firm policy that will hereafter detect and/or prevent
the situation from recurring.
That formula, fully valid, is for a senior. If he doesn't follow it, he
will always be in trouble.
BUT HOW ABOUT THE PERSON, UNIT, ORG OR ACTIVITY TO WHICH THE DANGER
CONDITION WAS ASSIGNED?
The one on the receiving end has not had a formula to follow.
I have worked out the SECOND DANGER FORMULA, meaning the formula applied
by the person, unit, org or activity which has been assigned a DANGER
CONDITION.
A. List the consequences if the situation had remained unhandled.
B. Work out any conflicts of orders which prevent compliance and
production and get them adjusted.
C. Work out any misunderstoods and get them clarified.
D. Survey and improve comm outflow and inflow.
E. Reorganize Mest (Matter Energy Space and Time) more efficiently.
F. Work out means of becoming more secure.
G. Present the completed formula in writing as above to the one who
assigned the condition for permission to upgrade.
_________________
All these actions A to G apply to the subject and area of the person,
unit, org or activity, whichever has been assigned the DANGER CONDITION.
Above all, be sincere, courteous and honest in applying the formula.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:jz.rd Founder
Copyright � 1970
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
[Cancelled by HCO P/L 9 AprU 1972, Correct Danger Condition Handling, in
the 1972 Year Book.]
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 5 JANUARY 1968
Remimeo
ETHICS
DEVT
POL LTR #2 IN EVERY HAT
CONDITIONS ORDERS
EXECUTIVE ETHICS
ANY EXECUTIVE MAY ASSIGN ANY CONDITION AND IMPROVE ANY CONDITION HE
ASSIGNS TO ANY PERSON IMMEDIATELY JUNIOR TO HIM ON HIS COMMAND CHANNEL OR
WITHIN HIS OWN OFFICE OR AREA.
To assign or improve a Condition it is only necessary to write the order
and send it to Mimeo or the duplication unit which duplicates it and sends
the copies to Dir Comm for issue.
The Ethics Officer files these in the Ethics Files and a copy in the
file of the issuing executive.
The E/0 must see that the order is complied with and the formula
followed. The issuing executive must also demand compliance.
In event of a down statistic of an executive's area of control, the
absence of personally issued Ethics Conditions Orders may constitute
grounds for removal on a charge of out-ethics in his area.
An executive who tolerates non-compliance, false reports or down stats
in his control area without taking personal ethics actions as above is not
an executive.
AN ORDER SO ISSUED IS CALLED A "CONDITIONS ORDER" AND IS PUBLISHED ON
THE DIVISIONAL FLASH COLOUR PAPER NOT GOLDENROD.
Where a Mimeo or duplication line jams, an executive may post the order
in his own handwriting on the staff notice board, filing two copies with
the E/0, all on his division's colour flash paper, using carbon paper and
clip board.
No executive may be removed for issuing Conditions Orders but may be
removed for not issuing them in the presence of non-compliance, false
reports or down stats.
An executive is defined as anyone in charge of an org, part of an org, a
division, a department, a section or a unit.
As Scientology now brings TOTAL freedom, it must also have the power and
authority to bring total discipline or it will not survive.
Heavy In-Baskets, inability to get things done, down stats failures all
stem from non-application of ethics. If Ethics is in one can get in Tech.
If Tech is in one can get in Admin.
Fast flow depends on a total flow without inspection. Therefore Ethics
has to be very harsh when errors occur otherwise the whole line stops.
Students and pcs are also subject to Conditions Orders from their
supervisors and auditors.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jp.rd
Copyright � 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 30 APRIL 1965
Remimeo
EMERGENCY, STATE OF
When an org or portion of an org has consistently down statistics
(O.I.C.) or numerous non-compliances or offences, it is declared to be in a
STATE OF EMERGENCY. This can be assigned to a unit, sub-section, section,
department, division or the entire organization. It is not assigned to a
person.
A small flag on a pin is placed on the org board at the end of the org
board name of the portion or organization. The flag is bright red.
The condition is assigned only by the Office of LRH.
Flags are also used for other conditions assigned. These too are
assigned only by the Office of LRH.
Conditions including Emergency are ended when a new condition is
assigned or just ended. This is done only by the Office of LRH.
To end an Emergency condition the portion of Scientology to which it is
assigned must follow closely the Emergency Formula. On any condition
assigned, its formula must be followed scrupulously and the steps taken
must be reported one by one by the most senior person in the portion. In
the case of an org in Emergency the reports are made to the Office of LRH
Saint Hill by the HCO Executive Secretary or HCO Area Secretary in the
absence of an HCO Executive Secretary.
In addition to following the Emergency formula closely, the following
policies apply to the portion in a State of Emergency:
ETHICS STIFFENED
1. A report of an error, misdemeanour or crime on any staff member in
that portion counts as five reports in other conditions and is acted
on by a Court of Ethics at once.
CREDIT WORTHLESS
2. The credit of the portion is worthless and it may have only those
bare things necessary to carry out the Emergency formula so that it
can promote or deliver.
NO NEW PERSONNEL
3. No personnel may be added to the portion in a State of Emergency. No
new people may be hired on for the portion in a State of Emergency.
No personnel may be transferred to a portion that is in a State of
Emergency unless an incumbent is transferred off, and in such a way
that the personnel of the portion does not increase in number.
RIGHTS
4. Precedent and privilege are suspended for the officers and staff
members of a portion in a State of Emergency.
STATUS
5. No staff status may be increased in a portion in a State of
Emergency.
If the State of Emergency is continued beyond the allotted time period,
then these policies apply:
6. Deputy, Acting and Provisional assignments and appointments are
cancelled throughout the portion.
7. The fact of having been part of a portion which did not recover is
filed in the personnel files of each staff member present in that
portion at the moment the State of Emergency was assigned, and the
statement is made on a red sheet of paper.
8. The executive personnel will be ordered before a Committee of
Evidence to the
end of removing them from the portion or demotion. In the case of an org
this is done by a senior org and in the case of Saint Hill by the Office
of LRH.
___________________
The State of Emergency is a serious condition. For it takes a series of
serious blunders to reduce statistics or bring about local infamy or a
public or press smear campaign.
The State is not idly assigned and is assigned only after a steadily
declining statistic or a series of non-compliances or offences resulting in
overwork for seniors of the org or near catastrophe.
___________________
Persons newly transferred into a portion in Emergency or promoted in it
are governed by these policies:
9. Persons newly transferred into a portion in Emergency are only
affected by the State if they
succumb to their working conditions and cease to do a normal job of
work.
10. An executive newly transferred to a portion in a State of
Emergency is not personally liable
to Ethics unless he or she fails to submit Executive Reports on what
is observed and new
offences found in the portion.
11. Taking charge of a post in an Emergency portion by new
assignment and bringing that post
up to normal operation is credited in the Office of LRH personnel
records on a white sheet
with blue ink and counts heavily in new appointments from Saint Hill.
12. A person in the portion to which the State of Emergency has been
assigned at the time it was
assigned who is promoted, is only assigned temporarily, but if he or
she succeeds in restoring
the post's statistics in a reasonable time period, the fact is noted
in the Office of LRH
personnel records, but the fact is also noted that the person was
already in the portion at the
time of Emergency and must be cleared of any suspicion that the
original Emergency was not
traceable to him or her before the assignment can become an
appointment.
HOW TO PREVENT AN EMERGENCY
13. Don't accept illegal orders from anyone that are contrary to
policy.
14. Do not let the orders of a higher superior be changed by one's
immediate superior. Always
follow the higher superior's orders and request to see them in
writing when in doubt.
15. Don't "cover up" for others. Report offences to Ethics in
writing.
16. Report any immediate superior's illegal orders or alter-is as an
effort to endanger one's job
and statistics.
17. Do your post by the book.
18. When you actually can't apply a policy report it at once to the
Office of LRH Policy Review
Section with all data (not conclusions) so that it can be reviewed
intelligently and meanwhile
apply it as best you can.
19. Handle Dev-T (off-line, off-origin, off-policy) by sending it
back to sender and reporting it to Ethics.
20. If you see people standing about loafing when they should be
working report it to Ethics.
21. Report things that need improving to your Secretary or to your
Executive Secretary.
22. Don't let technology slip for technology going out is the only
basic circumstance in your
portion of an org or the org that can put it beyond rapid recovery.
Report all alter-is or
technical omissions or offences to Ethics promptly.
23. Do your own job as well as you possibly can and aside from
making required reports let the
rest of your portion or org get on with it.
24. If you are not being permitted to do your assigned job by being
pulled off it or by
being given off-policy orders or by letting an immediate superior
endanger
your job with illegal orders or alter-is, report it to my office at
Saint Hill as well as
to your own Ethics Section, even if you have to go outside the org
and off channels
to get the report (with your home address on it) to me; for there is
no surer way
to bring about or continue an Emergency Condition than by failing to
comply
with the exact orders being issued in an effort to end it.
___________________
We have the whole world to handle now. We must set a high example of
teamwork and dedication if we are to bring it off.
The scraggly militia usually go down before the regulars in any
campaign. The
regular is not even better, man for man, than the militia. The regulars
know how to
operate as a team. They have confidence in one another. And even when
numerically
inferior they bring off victory over a rabble by co-operation and
discipline amongst
themselves.
We are very very few in numbers compared to two and a half billion wogs.
We can
easily make it technically the world around IF we are a high precision team
in a
superiorly organized organization.
At the moment I write this policy letter, in the Case-Cracking Section
at Saint Hill
we are handling every case from psychotic or neurotic to release in 8 to 35
hours.
The technical impact of this alone is enough to tear Man's faulty
organizations to
ribbons.
To that fact (itself enough) add the actual attainment of real clearing.
Once more
there goes Man as he has known it.
To that add the upper structure of OT and there goes an aberrated
Universe.
And only if we ourselves are a highly functional precision team can we
hope to
stand up.
We are just at the end of our Dissemination Phase and just at the
beginning of our
Organization Phase (the Third Phase as you can see on the Org Board). Our
militia days
are over.
We have no choice whatever except to become the best organized precision
team
that has ever been known.
Therefore we must be able to recognize, assign and handle any Emergency
that
arises in our midst.
L. RON HUBBARD
Note: Man's organizations never recognized the need for statistics and the
recognition
of Emergency or its signs. Therefore, for instance, a government
bureau, in a
Condition of Emergency, is given the right to buy anything it wants
(thus
breaking the government, as Emergency type people always have to have
before
they can do) and is given the solution of putting in personnel and
more
personnel "to get the work done" when actually it was Dev-T of those
already
there that brought about their Emergency. Thus one realizes one must
never
pour in more and more personnel when a statistic goes down. One must
change
the situation, not multiply the numbers of those involved. It tells us
at once
that Man is, therefore, least efficient in his biggest bureaus! And
that his least
efficient organization must be his largest organization-you have it-
the
government. An organization should only increase in size as things get
better
and never when things get worse.
LRH:wmc.rd
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 1 SEPTEMBER 1965
Issue III
Gen Non-Remimeo
MAILING LIST POLICIES
(Preserved policy from former Policy
Letters which have been cancelled)
The elementary Emergency formula for a down org is:
1. Promote Promote Promote.
2. Then change bad spots and re-organize.
3. Then economize, cut off all Purchase Orders except postage,
communications and rent.
4. Get ready to Deliver to the people who will be coming in as a result
of the promotion and deliver.
To promote you must have a full mailing list. Anyone who failed to get
his mailing list back off old invoices will probably make about thirty or
forty thousand pounds less between now and Christmas-which is punishment
enough for not following my late '64 orders where the job was skimped.
I see two orgs that are limping also have a very small mailing list. Any
connection?
Rush the project ordered in '64 wherein you culled your addresses back
from old invoices and you'll have lots of people and money again. Sciento
legists never get truly lost.
Then get onto Book Promotion, put a return self-address card for "more
info" in the back of every book you sell and get your list up both from the
book sale and the card. Omitted that?
Look over the earlier 1965 Policy Letters that define promotion. That's
all it is.
But promotion is successful when you use books to front for you and a
flop when you don't. If you think promotion is costly it's because the
money isn't invested in getting books sold. Books are your first line of
promotion.
Re-organize your book department if it doesn't slam back a book at every
orderer within 24 hours of the receipt of the order. Why be poor all the
time?
1. Place ads
2. Get mailing lists from anywhere.
3. Get mailing lists by selling books.
4. Sell more books to them.
5. Have good processing available for them and say so loudly.
6. Have good training available for them and say so loudly.
Do just those things and do only those things and you'll be 10 times
your size with a lot more pay.
It's very easy. Why keep doing it the hard way?
I'm interested in review that only those orgs are poor which haven't
been following my direct orders. Well, anybody has a right to be poor, I
suppose, if he has an appetite for it. Personally I don't care for it. It
must be a carefully acquired taste. As a brand new idea in those orgs that
are struggling, why not get rich by doing what Ron says?
HANDLING NEW ADDRESSES IN CENTRAL ORGS AND OFFICES
Starting right away, this is the drill for new book buyers. This drill
also will be
kept in and followed.
1. A person buys a book personally or by mail./w the first time.
2. The invoice is made out with the name and address bright and clear on
all
copies.
3. One copy goes to shipping or books whether mailed or just handed out.
4. One copy goes to own Address. (This is true of all orgs including
City
Offices. Whatever is done with remaining invoice copies is according
to
standard accounts procedure.)
5. Address cuts a plate or stencil and puts a date on it and a
designation like BB
3/3/65, meaning the person bought a book on 3/3/65.
6. This plate is put in File A and receives whatever goes out to File A
for six
months.
7. Any new invoice, indeed all invoices, go to Address. If a BB in File
A buys
more books or training or processing Address obliterates the BB
3/3/65 on
the plate or stencil either by just flattening it on a metal plate or
cutting a
new stencil in case of less durable stencils, and puts it in the
regular active
files.
8. The Distribution Secretary must not place whole lists in the hands of
Field
Staff Members but may send prospects to Field Staff Members of proven
value to the org.
CITY OFFICES
City Offices must send a copy of the invoice of all memberships it sells
or issues free to the Continental Office that issues the Continental
Magazine. It must also send a copy of all other invoices for whatever
service, including book sales, to the Continental Office, so that these
people can get the minor issues of the Continental Magazine, plus any other
promotional mailings that go out from the Continental Office. As the City
Office has collected the membership money for the memberships that the
Continental Office is servicing with magazines, and as the Continental
Office does promotion for the City Offices, the senior org draws on the
junior org's Book Acct for promotion in the junior org's area.
A City Office must maintain some sort of an Address unit, and Central
Files. Until it has funds for buying addressing equipment, it keeps a card
file for each name in its Central Files which is anyone who has bought
service (includes PE) or bought books, with appropriate abbreviations on
the card to match tabbing of a full Central Org Addressograph. Of course,
in such a case, when a mailing is to be done by the City Office, then it
will be necessary for someone to type duplistickers from this card file-but
that is still an address unit functioning. As it can accumulate funds for
equipment, it can get an Elliott addressing machine or some other piece of
inexpensive equipment for addressing. It is not conceived that an
Addressograph would be secured until the City Office had reached full
Central Org size. The silk screen Elliott Addressograph is probably cheaper
and easier to use than duplistickers even as one can write one as fast as a
duplisticker.
The names and addresses of City Offices must be carried in each issue of
every magazine mailed by the Continental Office, and other broad
promotional pieces.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:ml.rd
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 30 SEPTEMBER 1965
Remimeo
Advisory Councils
Advisory Committees
A11 Divisions
STATISTICS FOR DIVISIONS
(Note: We will call the Advisory Council the Ad Council,
never AdCoun, to avoid any errors in confusing it with AdCornm)
Each whole division has a statistic on which it is judged as to
condition.
While this gross divisional statistic does not cover all the statistics
of the division, it is the primary divisional statistic.
An ADVISORY COUNCIL meeting can be very brief if it has these statistics
tallied by AdComms and plotted and submitted by OIC. Then when a gross
divisional statistic is up the Ad Council can find out why and reinforce
what caused the rise. And when a gross divisional statistic is down, the Ad
Council can go through all the remaining statistics of that division and
take action accordingly. Thus the Ad Council need not cover all the
statistics of an org at its meeting. Only the gross divisional statistics
and take action only when these vary widely up or down.
The Advisory Committees of the Divisions record all statistics but
headline in their report their gross divisional statistic for quick
reference. They include all their statistics, headline their gross
divisional statistic.
The gross divisional statistics are:
Exec Division 7 -
Gross Income of the Org.
This of course reflects best the total Org operation and is what the
Exec Division is promoted or demoted for so it is the Division 7 Gross
Statistic.
HCO Division 1 -
Total Org Letters In - Total Org Letters Out.
As HCO has personnel, Ethics and such matters, if they do their job
there is a heavy outflow in of all mail types for HCO and the Org and a
heavy outflow out from all divisions. If the Personnel Officer gets hard
workers and puts their hats on and if Insp & Rpts and Ethics are quick off
the mark and if the HCO Area Sec runs a good division and handles all
about, the Letter In-Letter Out will tell the tale. HCO sees to it, Org
pours out letters and mailing pieces.
HCO Dissem Division 2 -
Number of new Enrollments of Students and Pcs for the week,
and gross Book Sales.
Although this division has Registration, magazines, etc, etc, all these
add up to enrollments, which of course is the final result of all
magazines, letters, promotion and advance enrollment. Book sales are our
oldest index of future business.
Org Division 3 -
Credit collections vs Bills paid.
It will be seen that gross income is established by many in the Org but
collections as a special income is purely the Org Division's. Bills paid
require gross money in, so reflect the gross-no money in, no bills paid.
This is a dual statistic which shows the industry of the division in
general. It even touches materiel as no bills paid equals no supplies.
Monies paid into Reserve Payment do not count as Bills Paid.
Tech Division 4 -
Number of Students and Pcs completed in the week.
The number enrolled is really only partly the Tech Division's as if they
give good service they will get enrollments. However, the completions are
the real index of a Tech Division and show up any weakness of the division.
So their statistic is only total completions of courses and auditing. This
of course includes graduations from any course and completion of any result
for the pc that brings a Grade Cert or just ends intensives.
Completed of course means only certified or classed or graded. However
completion of a 25 hour intensive which satisfied the pc (no review at end
even if one occurred before the end) counts as a pc completed. Five hour
rehabs which did not result in a Grade are not completions. Five hour
assists bought as assists are done of course in Qual and so are not a Tech
statistic.
Qual Division 5 -
Cash Collected by reason of the Division for the week.
This division's certs and grades and awards are all really the Tech
Division's work. But we early found that a Qual Division's various services
were paid for when good and not when bad. So this division's gross
statistic is how much cash was paid-not later collected, for Qual Division
services.
Dist Division 6 -
Number of field staff member commissions paid/
number of new addresses added to CF both for the week.
This dual statistic reflects a healthy Dist Div. The number of new
addresses added to CF means of course new people buying things from the
org. Therefore its advertising quality and basic services can be judged
even though assisted by other divisions as well. The number of field staff
commissions paid reflects its leadership of field staff members.
New people is the business of the Dist Div.
SUMMARY
There are many other statistics, many even more important than these.
But these gross statistics tell one at once if the Division Secretary is
alive and has his division functioning. Thus they provide indicators by
which management can be done.
The AdComms of course handle all their statistics.
The Ad Council handles the gross divisional statistics looking for steep
ups (to assign affluence) or steep downs (to assign emergency).
Gross Income only hereafter influences the Exec Division and is assigned
from Saint Hill. All other divisions are assigned conditions by the Ad
Council in accordance with the gross divisional statistics.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:ml.rd
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
[Note: The last sentence under HCO Div I has been added per HCO P/L 15
December 1965.]
[Considerable evolution of the Statistics for Divisions has occurred since
this policy was first written by LRH. As of August 1973, the following P/Ls
have amended the above issue:
27/4/67 Tech Division Statistic, 1-345, 4-10 18/9/71 AOLA
Division 6 Defined, 1971 Year Book
22/9/69 HGC Statistic, 1-357, 4-12 5/12/71 Statistics-
Dissem Division, 1971 Year Book
29/3/70 TechandQualStatsRevised, 1970 YearBook 10/2/72 III &
revised reissue of 12/6/73
17/6/70 II OIC Change-Cable Change, 1-359 Higher Org-New
Name to C/F Definitions,
5/2/71 III FEBC Executive Director Org GDSes, 1972 & 1973
Year Books
1971 Year Book 7/6/72 AO and AOSH Money
forTraining-GDS
5/2/71 V Org Gross DivisionalStatistics Revised,
forQuals, 1972 Year Book
1971 Year Book 5/4/73 All Orgs-Two Additional
HCO GDSes-
12/3/71 II Treasury DivisionsGDSes- AllOrgs, 3-5
Tech/AdminRatioandPersonnelPointsStats,
2/8/71 III HattingPointsGDS Change, 1971 YearBook 1973 Year Book]
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 15 JANUARY 1966
Remimeo
Exec Sec Hats
Secretary Hats
HOLD THE FORM OF THE ORG
DON'T BRING ABOUT DANGER
CONDITIONS
As long as executives fail to hold firm the form and channels of the
org, their own posts and the org will be a confusion. Worse, it will cease
to exist.
Executives must insist upon the privileges and responsibilities of their
posts and not permit by-pass and misrouting.
The whole org is run on statistics. It is not run on rumours. The more
you follow statistics and the less you listen to rumour the better off you
will be.
Orders are issued to form the org and better statistics and that's all.
There are no other reasons for orders, chits and upsets. Actions which
don't increase statistics should be eliminated. Irrelevant orders and chits
having nothing to do with statistics should never be issued.
To hold the form of the org it is vital that:
1. The AdCouncil minutes only order Secretaries and only on Gross
Divisional Statistics as they appear.
2. Executive Secretaries order and chit only Secretaries.
3. That Secretaries order and chit only Directors.
4. That Directors only order and chit Section Officers.
5. That Section Officers only order and chit persons In Charge or, if
there are none, the staff directly under them.
6. Exec Sees and Secretaries can cross chit.
7. Directors can request and chit only via Secretaries when they cross
divisions.
8. Anyone can file a Job Endangerment Chit with Ethics on anyone. This
however is normally filed on a direct senior and only when explicit
policy has been violated by an order or chit on one's own post and
only when the order or chit might worsen a statistic.
9. If all else fails, petition the Office of LRH.
SEC EDS
Sec Eds issued by the Adcouncil may only change Secretaries as
personnel. They can advise the Secretary on personnel but may not demote,
transfer or dismiss a Secretary's personnel (exception, when sweeping an
org of temporaries, staff that hasn't passed Review for Staff Status 1 ).
An AdComm's orders forwarded to the Office .of LRH for a Sec Ed always
go via the Adcouncil. But again an AdComm may only order Directors and may
not demote, transfer or dismiss a Director's personnel.
A Director should order Officers.
Officers should order In-Charges.
When personnel is assigned directly to an Executive such as a personal
secretary, one may of course order or chit that person directly as there is
no command echelon.
REASON
Danger Conditions are handled on By-Pass. Where a Danger Condition is
assigned, the senior can by-pass anyone to get the job done and does.
The Conditions in sequence are:
6. Power
5. Power Change
4. Affluence
3. Normal Operation
2. Emergency
1. Danger
0. Non-Existence.
By-pass creates a Danger Condition which drops into Non-Existence from
any level.
It is true of all Conditions that if you use one lower than you are in
you will bring the next lower one about. If you use the Normal Operating
Formula when you are in Affluence you will certainly descend into
Emergency.
Therefore if you are in Normal or Emergency Condition and start by-
passing you will quickly descend into Danger Condition (statistics will
drop steeply) and achieve the only Condition below Danger which is Non-
Existence.
Thus if you by-pass you infer the Condition is Danger when it isn't. And
you drop the org or any portion of it into Non-Existence.
So don't by-pass unless you are in Danger Condition. A Danger Condition
exists where statistics show continuing emergency or a steep steep fall. If
a Danger Condition exists, you handle the situation, by-pass anyone at all
and then the personnel who ignored it. So if you by-pass all the time (Exec
Sees issuing orders to Directors, Secretaries ordering Officers, Directors
ordering general staff members) you will infer a Danger Condition and get
non-existence of the Section, Department, Division or the whole activity.
Moral: Only when a Danger Condition exists should a senior by-pass the
command chain, so if you are only in Emergency or only in Normal Operation
or even Affluence DON'T BY-PASS or you will crush statistics.
SUMMARY
Learn your Org Board.
Make your staff learn it.
Handle the org by statistics only.
Order only your immediate juniors.
Don't by-pass (except in Danger Condition).
Don't infer a Danger Condition that doesn't show on a grapn.
Hold the org firm by holding its lines and chain of command firm.
And you will prosper and expand.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:ml.rd
Copyright � 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
[Note: The sequence of Conditions listed above has been amended to include
Emergency, and the paragraph immediately following this list has been
added, per HCO P/L 8 February 1966, Issue II.]
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 16 JANUARY 1966
Remimeo
Executive Hats
DANGER CONDITION
The Conditions of Operation are (6) Power, (5) Power Change, (4)
Affluence, (3) Normal, (2) Emergency, (1) Danger and (0) Non Existence.
The formula of a Danger Condition is:
1. By-pass (ignore the junior or juniors normally in charge of the
activity and handle it personally).
2. Handle the situation and any danger in it.
3. Assign the area where it had to be handled a Danger Condition.
4. Handle the personnel by Ethics Investigation and Comm Ev.
5. Reorganize the activity so that the situation does not repeat.
6. Recommend any firm policy that will hereafter detect and/or prevent
the condition from recurring.
The senior executive present acts and acts according to the formula
above.
A Danger Condition is normally assigned when:
1. An emergency condition has continued too long.
2. A statistic plunges downward very steeply.
3. A senior executive suddenly finds himself or herself wearing the hat
of the activity because it is in trouble.
PERSONNEL
In Step 4 of the Danger Formula one has to call in Ethics to investigate
and must order a hearing and also a Comm Ev as indicated on any person or
persons whose negligence or non-compliance brought the situation about.
EXAMPLES
Example 1
The AdComm of the Distribution Division never orders or takes effective
action to remedy the gross divisional statistic which has been at
continuing emergency level for some time.
The Org Exec Sec is being pulled in to handle the situation as the
statistic's continuous low will swamp the org eventually and no reasonable
advices from the Org Exec Sec have been accepted or used despite the
continuing danger to the org from that Division.
The Org Exec Sec therefore acts personally with personal work
and (1) By -passes the Secretary, (2) Gets the FSM
programme going and ads placed and a Congress scheduled and
advertised all on an urgent basis, all on a by-pass of
existing channels, (3) Has the Division assigned a Danger
Condition, (4) Orders an Ethics investigation of
all personnel in the Division and brings any persons whose non-compliances
or crimes were responsible before a Committee of Evidence including the
Secretary, (5) Appoints personnel and reorganizes the Distribution
Division, (6) From the Ethics Investigation and Comm Ev, sifts out any
needful policy or change and forwards it to the Office of LRH for
consideration for issue.
Example 2
The Letters in-Letters out statistic takes a very steep dive (perhaps
only I /5th the former number). The HCO Area Sec instantly acts to (1) By-
pass all lines, (2) Get mailings out urgently, put expediters on writing
letters, get a magazine in the mails, all off her own bat, using anyone to
hand, (3) Demand the Dissern and Dist Divs be put in Danger Condition and
if refused cables LRH, (4) Order an Executive Ethics investigation of all
areas of outflow that would be responsible for org outflow and demands of
the HCO Exec Sec a Comm Ev on any personnel found by investigation to have
been negligent or non-compliant with policy concerning letters and any kind
of mailing out, and failing to get such assignment cables LRH, (5) Demand
new personnel on key outflow posts, (6) Recommend any firm policy
outgrowing from the investigation and Comm Ev to the Office of LRH.
Example 3
The Tech Sec suddenly discovers he or she is totally wearing the D of T
hat and statistics are falling in that Dept although there is a D of T. The
Tech Sec has already attempted to get the D of T's hat on many times. The
Tech Sec then: (1) By-passes the D of T, (2) Immediately handles the
Academy on a personal full time basis to sort out the students, establish
precise schedules, get in proper check sheets and routes slow students to
Cramming and nattery ones to Ethics and gets completions going, (3) Gets
the Department assigned a Danger Condition, (4) Demands an Ethics
investigation and a Comm Ev on personnel on whom non-compliance or crimes
are discovered, (5) Gets a new D of T and/or Supervisors, (6) Recommends
any firm policy found required in the Ethics Investigation or Comm Ev.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
When I find a hat forced upon me despite all efforts of mine to handle
it previously and which I have then to handle, I follow the Emergency
formula.
When an org is in general danger or a dangerous situation has arisen, I
follow the Danger Condition Formula.
By the time anything gets to a point where I have to wear the hat,
statistics on it must have been bad for some time and I find by experience
that non-compliance will be discovered inevitably, which is why the
situation rolled all the way up the lines to me.
As Danger Condition is handled by a by-pass of those who were supposed
to handle it, then I also by-pass in assigning a Danger Condition, which is
to say, the Condition is assigned not by chain of command but by direct Sec
Ed.
SUMMARY
Emergencies when they continue are usually caused by crimes or
negligence and are always accompanied by non-compliance.
A continued emergency inevitably results in real catastrophe for higher
executives. It causes them heavy overwork at the very least. Sometimes a
danger condition threatens finally the whole org unless handled.
In the current society the manager or executive has no recourse to law
or the culture. Errors can be made or omissions can occur unknown to him,
which actually can threaten not only his job but his person.
The usual action in our organizations is to let things run as long as
they run well. When they begin to show poorer statistics an Emergency
Condition is assigned and we usually talk it over with the person who is
head of that activity, and try to help. If the condition continues we warn.
And if the statistics still go down, we usually transfer and find somebody
else. At the point where a senior executive finds he is being made to look
bad by continued emergency on a lower echelon, he has no choice but to
assign a Danger Condition. The head of the activity is not always removed
but certainly must be investigated. If permanent, it takes a Comm Ev to
remove or transfer.
It will always be found that non-compliance with policy and orders has
for some time existed. It will sometimes be found that lies and false
reports also existed. And one always finds negligence and idleness and
inattention where statistics continue to go down.
It is very bad to assign a Danger Condition or to By-Pass unless the
statistics are continuing to go down or have continued at a dangerous level
for some time without real improvement.
A senior executive is soft in the head if he thinks statistics just stay
down. They are always held down hard. Emergencies don't just happen because
someone is idle. Emergencies are made actively. It takes a lot of counter-
effort to jam an org's flows-if you don't believe it then measure it by the
effort you exert trying to get things going. What's pushing back so hard?
Emergencies are made. They don't just happen. And any hearing in an area
where statistics just won't come up will reveal not mere negligence but
actual crimes as well.
The senior executive's only protection is to handle the bad situation
and follow the Danger Condition formula.
If that seems ruthless, it still is necessary if one is to be at all
successful.
ASSIGNMENT
Only the Adcouncil, an Executive Secretary or Secretary may assign a
Danger Condition. A Director or Officer may request one on their sections
or personnel.
If one was incorrectly assigned and statistics were in fact up it will
of course come out in the hearing.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:ml.rd
Copyright � 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
[Note: The original mimeo issue of this Policy Letter omitted Emergency
from the Conditions of Operation in the first paragraph. Emergency has been
included here per amending HCO P/L 8 February 1966, Issue III.]
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 19 JANUARY 1966
Remimeo
Staff Hat
DANGER CONDITION, WARNING
THE JUNIOR WHO ACCEPTS ORDERS
FROM EVERYONE
It has been found in the hearings on personnel after a Danger Condition
was assigned that:
A PERSONNEL UNDER YOU WHO ACCEPTS ORDERS FROM ANYONE WHO COMES ALONG WHO
HAS ANY RANK WILL PUT YOUR SECTION, DEPARTMENT OR DIVISION AND YOU INTO A
DANGER CONDITION AUTOMATICALLY.
This operates as a permanent by-pass.
If you allow it or don't catch it in time, your statistics will fall
like a shot duck.
Therefore if you find a junior going off lines for his orders and not
refusing all orders from others you must put him in a Danger Condition. For
if you don't you will soon be in one yourself.
Danger Condition is a very funny thing. It actually exists as a natural
phenomenon in organizations, hitherto undetected.
If by-pass of command channels occurs, the exact formula will begin to
operate whether anyone says so or not. And the only cure for this plague is
to follow the formula itself. That works. Nothing else does.
Be careful of that junior who accepts anyone's orders. He or she is like
a charge of dynamite under an executive. Someday it will all blow up.
Juniors must follow the orders of their own seniors or Danger Condition
results.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:ml.rd
Copyright � 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF I FEBRUARY 1966
Issue II
Gen Non-Remimeo
Exec Sec Hats
LRH Comm Hat
Exec Div
DANGER CONDITIONS
INSPECTIONS BY EXECUTIVE SECRETARIES,
HOW TO DO THEM
An Executive Secretary who does not get around his or her divisions now
and then and see what is going on can make a lot of mistakes.
Inspections are desirable. But when an Executive Secretary makes one he
or she commonly issues an order or two, and if this is done without that
division's secretary being present it is a by-pass and willy-nilly begins
the formula of the Danger Condition and can unmock a section or department
or even that Division.
A senior can inspect, chat, advise, but must never issue an order on a
by-pass unless he or she means to handle a dangerous situation and start
the formula. For the formula will run, regardless, if a by-pass begins.
The way to inspect, then, is to collect the seniors and go around, and
issue orders only to the next senior on the command channel, never to his
or her staff.
Example: HCO Exec Sec wants to see if books are stored safely. The HCO
Exec Sec can nip out and look on his or her lonesome providing no orders
are issued. Or the HCO Exec Sec grabs the Dissern Sec and the Dir Pubs and
the head of the books section and goes out and looks. And if the HCO Exec
Sec wants a change in it all, the order is issued to the Dissern Sec only.
It is a great temptation to tell Books-in-Charge how and where to put
what, for an HCO Exec Sec is one normally because he or she is smarter and
more knowledgeable about orgs. But if one is to advise Books-in-Charge, one
had better have the rest of the command chain right there and talk to the
next senior below HCO Exec Sec.
You would be surprised how many random currents a senior type senior
like an Exec Sec can set up with a few comments that skip the command
channels and what a mess it can make for a Secretary or Director, no matter
how wise the comments.
Secretaries who order a director's officers in the absence of the
director or, much worse, section staff without Director or Section Officer
thereby court and make trouble.
You can unmock a section or a whole department by sloppy command lines.
It is not merely the "correct" thing. It's the vital thing to follow
command channels as nobody can hold his job if he is being by-passed by a
senior. He feels unmocked, and the Danger Condition formula begins to
unroll.
The correct way to route an order to a person two or three steps down
the command channel is to tell the next one below you to order the next,
and so on.
If you have to tell the Director of Tech Services to have his Housing
Officer post a list of houses on the bulletin board, you really don't have
a Director of Tech Services anyway as he would have done it as the natural
thing. So an order in such an obvious case is not the right comm. The right
comm is an Ethics chit on the Dir of Tech Services for not posting the
available houses on the bulletin board.
A smart senior is a senior because he is smarter. But when this is not
true and the
junior is smarter, you get an intolerable situation where the senior
interferes. If a dull
senior interferes continually on a by-pass, it's a sure way to start a
mutiny.
And a senior who doesn't inspect or get inspections done does not know and
so looks dull
to his juniors who have looked.
The safe way in all cases is to issue orders that are very standard on
policy and
obvious and to issue them to the next one on the command channel and then
in
the future inspect or get an inspection. If on the inspection one finds
non-compliance with a standard on-policy order, one promptly calls for a
hearing on the
next one down the line who received the order.
Here's a terribly simple example: Org Exec Sec sees statistic for Tech
Div down.
Issue order to Tech Sec, "Get the gross divisional statistic up at once."
Now nothing
could be plainer or more standard. In two weeks the Org Exec Sec looks at
the statistic,
sees it is even further down and calls for a hearing on the Tech Sec for
non-compliance
or a Comm Ev to get all the evidence in about the matter.
This is about as basic as you can get with an inspection, an order and a
further action
all by a senior, the inspection being done by QIC and reported by graph.
Life in actual fact is very simple and an org is today a very elementary
mechanism.
It is easy to run an organization providing one makes it run and handles
things in it that refuse to run.
Where an Exec Sec is baffled on occasion is the apparent unwillingness
of a section
to function. Now this is so far down the command channel that info on it
does not easily arrive
back at the top.
The thing to do where possible is personally inspect. Or get it
inspected. One often
finds the silliest things.
Example: Book Shipping statistic is really down, man, down. One orders
and
harangues and argues trying to get books shipped. One gets the quantity of
books looked into.
It's okay. One gets shipping materials looked into. They're okay. A
Shipping clerk is on the
Org Board. But orders to the Dissern Sec just never get books shipped. So
finally one gathers up
the Dissern Sec, Dir Pubs and Books-in-Charge and goes down to Book
Shipping-Lo!
They have been building a machine that wraps books tightly when a rock is
rolled off a bench!
(This actually happened in DC in about 1958.) It has taken a month to
build it and will
require another to finish it and one and all in that Division are convinced
this is the answer.
The order? "Break that machine up and start wrapping books by hand and I
want that
backlog gone in one week." To the Dissern Sec, of course, in front of
everyone for his
soul's sake. And publish the order in writing as soon as possible.
So you see, you have to inspect because what seems logical and okay to
juniors
may be completely silly. Remember, that is why they are juniors and have
seniors.
Frankly you can never guess at what holds some things up. You have to
look. Often
you can solve it for them. But solve it with their agreement and on command
channel if you want it done.
You can't always sit in an ivory tower and issue orders. You have to
know the ground
and the business.
Over a period of fifteen years of active management of these
organizations I have
a pretty good idea of what can happen in one. And to one.
I try to be right more often than wrong. I don't try to be perfect as
one's best plans
are often goofed. I try to get done what can be gotten done. And I carry a
little
more pressure on the org that it can really accomplish.
I inspect. You would be surprised at how often I do and what I find out.
It sometimes looks to people that I use a crystal ball in taking the
actions I take because they see no possible route by which the data could
have reached me.
They forget how many lines I keep in operation. And also, I do operate
on a "sixth sense".
For instance all accounting summaries today are done for governments,
not for management. A manager has to develop a sixth sense concerning
financial status of the org. One has to be able to know when the bills are
up, the income inadequate and to know when to promote hard and stall
creditors even with no data from accounts or contrary data that proved
false.
Today with OIC this is easy. But I ran orgs successfully with no OIC for
years just by sensing the financial situation. In theory accounts keeps one
fully posted. In actual fact they often goof in filing bills owed and even
in depositing money.
There are many things one can sense, OIC or no OIC.
The thing to do is to inspect or to get the area you sense is wrong
inspected.
I have today LRH Communicators. They are pushing projects home. They
also can tell me why projects won't push home because they have looked.
An Exec Sec or a Secretary has HCO's Inspection and Reports and a Time
Machine to check compliance. And this is how it should be.
But nothing will substitute for inspection by one or for one.
And the Exec Sec who thinks it's a desk job is being very naive. The org
would run better if Exec Sees had no in baskets.
If an Exec Sec watched statistics like a hungry cat at a mousehole and
inspected like fury every time one went down or stayed down, the org would
expand and prosper.
Providing Inspection was done.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:ml.rd
Copyright � 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 19 JANUARY 1966
Issue III
Remimeo
Executive Hats
DANGER CONDITION
RESPONSIBILITIES OF DECLARING
BY-PASS = Jumping the proper terminal in a chain of command.
If you declare a Danger Condition, you of course must do the work
necessary to handle the situation that is dangerous.
This is also true backwards. If you start doing the work of a post on a
by-pass you will of course unwittingly bring about a Danger Condition. Why?
Because you unmock the people who should be doing the work.
Further, if you habitually do the work of others on a by-pass you will
of course inherit all the work. This is the answer to the overworked
executive. He or she by-passes. It's as simple as that. If an executive
habitually by-passes he or she will then become overworked.
Also the Condition of Non-Existence will occur.
So the more an executive by-passes, the harder he works. The harder he
works on a by-pass, the more the section he is working on will disappear.
So purposely or unwittingly working on a by-pass, the result is always
the same-Danger Condition.
If you have to do the work on a by-pass you must get the Condition
Declared and follow the formula.
If you Declare the Condition, you must also do the work.
You must get the work being competently done, by new appointment or
transfer or training or case review. And the condition is not over when the
hearings are over. It is over when that portion of the org has visibly
statistically recovered.
So there are great responsibilities in declaring a Danger Condition.
These are outweighed in burdensomeness by the fact that if you DON'T
declare one on functions handled by those under you which go bad, it will
very soon catch up with you yourself, willy-nilly and declared or not you
will go into a Danger Condition personally.
There's the frying pan-there's the fire. The cheerful note about it is
that if the formula is applied you have a good chance of not only rising
again but also of being bigger and better than ever.
And that's the first time that ever happened to an executive who started
down the long slide. There's hope!
___________________
There is one further footnote on a Danger Condition. I have carefully
studied whether or not HCOBs and Policy Letters and actions by me were by-
passes. And a search of statistics refutes it as when I give the most
attention to all echelons of an org wherever the org is, its statistics
rise and when I don't they fall. Therefore we must assume that advice is
not a by-pass, nor is a general order by me.
Where there is disagreement on a command channel I am trying to forward
then a by-pass occurs.
So we can assume correctly on experience and statistics that danger
conditions occur only when there are fundamental disagreements on a command
channel.
If you yourself then ferret out the disagreement ones of those under
your orders you will clear your command lines.
Review can always find disagreements when they exist with a meter.
Where Danger Conditions are declared, the declaring executive should
make an effort to find the disagreement with himself, policy, the org or
Scientology as a basic Review action on persons found responsible for a
Danger Condition. The only errors are not to look for them and not to find
all the disagreements the person has on the subject of his superiors and
post, policy, technology or orders. "
This is why a low leadership survey grade person can be counted on to
put wherever he is in danger. His disagreements are too many and he doesn't
execute and thereby secretly puts his superior into by-passing and a danger
condition inevitably occurs.
It needn't occur.
We have the data, now.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:ml.rd
Copyright � 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF I FEBRUARY 1966
Issue IV
Remimeo
STATISTICS, ACTIONS TO TAKE
STATISTIC CHANGES
When statistics change radically for better or for worse look for the
last major alteration or broad general action just before it and it is
usually the reason.
Example: Letter out statistic falls and falls. In investigating look for
the last major change in that area and if possible cancel it and the
statistic will then rise. Let us say that just at the top of the down drop,
the 3rd week in November, the Dept of Registration was given new dictation
equipment. Take it away and restore the old arrangement and routing pattern
that was in use with it and sit back and see what happens. The statistic
will probably recover.
Example: The Field Staff Member Commission statistic has been very low
and suddenly leaps to affluence. You want to reinforce it so you study what
happened just before it. As it takes a bit of time on a statistic that has
longer comm lines, you look a bit earlier. You find the Dir Clearing began
to send FSMs big info packets they could give people. So you okay lots of
such info packets to be given out and the affluence of the statistic
continues. And you write LRH what made it do that so a Pol Ltr can be
written.
I learned this while researching the life force of plants. Everytime I
saw a research bed of plants worsen, I queried what routine had been varied
and found invariably some big change had been made that wasn't usual.
It is change that changes things for better or for worse. That's the
simplicity of the natural law.
If you want to hold a constant condition, don't change anything.
If you are trying to improve something make changes cautiously and keep
a record of what is changed (like all orders must be by SEC EDs). Then you
watch statistics and if they decline you hastily wipe out the last change.
And if they improve you reinforce the change that began it.
For instance we know the 7 Division System pattern works for the better
it's gotten in in an org the more its graphs go up.
The Org Board of summer 1964 also works for a small org because it
started their statistics up. But it was not good enough to maintain height
of statistic when a certain size was reached. So we got the 7 Division
pattern of 1965.
It is of course obvious that if Joe as Org Sec did okay and if replaced
with Bill who is only 15 the Org Division will falter.
But frankly it is not just a personnel question by far.
Personnel equates against case gain more than personality. In December
1965 at Saint Hill, the gross divisional statistics very closely matched
the case progress of the Secretaries of each division. You can almost
assign a post by:
1. Grade of Release, and
2. Leadership Survey, plus
3. Experience in org.
Those 3 factors take into no account personality or aptitude much
contrary to all the tests the 19th Century psychologist or 18th Century
phrenologist would have made and used.
So while personnel changes are always a possible reason for radical
shifts in statistics, they are by no means the major ones.
Shifts of comm lines, functions, policies, equipment, duties, locations
are quite often far more responsible for graph shifts.
Personnel comes into it this way: When you make a bad rearrangement and
you have an incompetent personnel also you have disaster!
If you make a bad rearrangement and the personnel are good the statistic
drop may be only a small one as they cope. So even small drops should be
investigated, particularly around good personnel.
The morals are these: If you have a disaster (big Danger Condition) find
the big change which preceded it or the missed order and get that fixed and
also shift personnel.
If you see a person who has a good record coping like mad, inspect the
area of that post to find what needs fixing up, what changes were made that
overpressured that post and get it right.
THE PAUSED STATISTIC
During expansion, one has areas where statistics become level.
Here statistics pause because lines jam. People get overworked and
confused.
The traffic is just too heavy.
And where do you really repair in such a case? More clerks? No! Always
look to the lines of the highest post in the overloaded area and get them
eased.
In expansion the person who never notices is the man in charge. And his
lines are the most crippling to the org if jammed.
Example: Org Sec and Org Division stacked up and coping frantically. Org
Exec Sec wonders what to do. Their statistics are paused (in a level line).
They are overworked. Hire more clerks? No. Sort out the Org Sec and be sure
more help is furnished on that post. Then the Org Sec (with a personal
Secretary to sort her mail, etc.) looks up and starts sorting out the
Division.
The old trick I used to use was to tell an overworked director "Draw me
up a list of all the hats you are wearing". And he or she would finally
bring one in, round-eyed. "35 hats!" I recall one saying.
I would take the one nearest the director in duties and fill it with a
staff member and the department would ease off.
Somebody like the Div 7 Sec or the LRH Communicator can do this to Exec
Sees. If they are slaving, make them put on somebody to unjam their lines.
They'll straighten the rest out.
So a paused statistic comes from the jammed lines of the topmost
executives and is best remedied by easing them.
_________________
An org today is not run on personalities. It's run on statistics. All
orders are based on statistics. The old personality system used by the
business world and military is as yesterday as the rack and almost as
cruel. Go modern. Use statistics only.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:ml.rd
Copyright � 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 23 FEBRUARY 1966
Remimeo
Executive Hats
APPOINTMENTS AND PROMOTIONS
When a staff member is promoted, the principle will be solidly held that
if the post just vacated by him or her goes into Emergency or Danger
Condition within 90 days the promotion is to be suspended and the staff
member is to resume his or her former post.
It is obvious that a post which is not well organized or is held up by
personality alone will slump if changed.
A staff member being promoted may therefore object to the personnel
officer concerning a successor he does not believe capable.
The staff member being promoted has a dual responsibility-to learn his
new post and to write up his old hat and break in his successor properly.
In expanding organizations our greatest liability is promotion. It is
vital and necessary, but it tends to lose lines and leave a messy lower
strata in the orgs which can swamp them.
This follows as well Policy on undoing changes which occurred just
before a slumped statistic.
The Advisory Council and AdComms must always look at this factor of
persons promoted off a post just before a slump as the probable best reason
for the slump.
Similarly a person taking over a new post is in a Power Change Condition
and must not alter anything or do anything rash until enough time passes
for him to appreciate what the new post is all about. Most slumps following
after a promotion occur because the new occupant of the old post has either
lost the post's lines or has made some brand new order that applies to
nothing real. There is no majesty and innocence like ignorance. The first
day of a yacht under a new owner is the hardest day of its life as he
throws all the bits overboard that propped open the hatches thinking they
were kindling wood, tries to hoist the sails with a can opener and runs the
engine on the galley fuel.
A staff member is rarely promoted unless his statistic is good. That
means the old post he leaves is in good shape. If the old post slumps under
a new appointee then that new appointee must have thrown away the lines and
ordered the main cabin turned into the sail locker and the engine into the
anchor. It will take the old holder of the post weeks to get it running
again and he is obviously the only one that can. Further, he goofed in
letting an incapable or fast change artist fill his former shoes and he
didn't yell when he noticed next day that the keel had been hoisted as the
mainsail as soon as he, promoted, left his old post.
New brooms love to sweep clean. Especially the competent orders of old
brooms.
Taking over a post in danger or emergency is a feather in one's cap when
it rises to normal under new management.
Taking over a post in normal operation and getting it into emergency or
danger requires a lot of stupid changes or no work at all and should be the
subject of an Ethics hearing.
But also, the old holder of the post must be returned to it regardless
of holes left at the top for otherwise a hole exists below and the org will
sink into it.
I speak from long, hard experience. Time and again I have had to resume
a post I had left because it collapsed. So I have become very careful of
who succeeds me on a post. Very careful indeed. And I train them
individually and heavily no matter what new post I now hold. The bigger we
get the more I get promoted so I have to keep it up.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:ml.rd
Copyright � 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 28 FEBRUARY 1966
Remimeo
Exec Sec Hats
Sec Hats
LRH Comm Hat
Director Hats
DANGER CONDITION DATA
WHY ORGANIZATIONS STAY SMALL
The size of an organization depends upon this law:
A LARGE ORGANIZATION IS COMPOSED OF GROUPS. A SMALL ORGANIZATION IS
COMPOSED OF INDIVIDUALS.
If you really understand this principle and use it properly you will be
able to have a large organization.
There are other factors such as (1) the desirability and quality of
one's commodity, (2) the able promotion of it, (3) the ability of the heads
of groups in the organization to catch dropped balls and (4) the close
following and comprehension of the policies of the organization and its
groups.
But the gross monitoring law is as above. When one does not know this
and apply it one has a small, semi-bankrupt organization that overworks
everyone and underpays.
This rule applies to a planet or a nation and is most readily seen in
these gross terms. A planet with nations will be far more prosperous than a
planet with one central government governing the individuals of a planet.
Socialism fails (and it always fails) because of two factors:
(a) The government seeks to run the individual, and
(b) Socialism unmocks companies.
At this writing the prosperity difference (and there is one, Russia
currently starving) between the democracy of the US and England and the
Super Socialism of Russia is that the "West" still has companies and the
"East" (Russia and China) have abolished them. Russia seeks to run the
individual. It has collective farms, etc., but they won't leave a manager
alone-to manage-they govern his workers.
To the degree that England and the US tax the individual and seek to
govern him they will dwindle in size.
England at this writing is undergoing one unmock of the whole empire
solely because it is by-passing the manager and the governor and directly
seeking to govern individuals through income tax, "benefits", etc.
The US is about to come to pieces. Like all big countries on the way out
it never looks so good as when it is already about to fall apart. The US is
by-passing the states and US companies and is therefore putting the
governors, managers and the states and companies in Danger Condition. This,
unrepaired, will unmock states and companies and collapse the sub-group on
which the big group called the US depends for an organization is composed
of groups. Non-Existence is the Condition just below Danger. A Danger
Condition carried on too long drops down scale to non-existence. A large
group made up of non-existences is of course non-existent itself. Thus by-
pass by the heads of a big organization of the heads of its internal small
organizations works toward non-existence. It is really quite simple. To
make an organization get smaller all one has to do is by-pass the sub-
groups and run the individuals only and the org will collapse or struggle
along at near-collapse NO MATTER HOW BRIGHT ITS MANAGER MAY BE OR HOW HARD
HE OR SHE WORKS OR HOW BRIGHT THE STAFF IS, OR HOW GOOD THE PRODUCT, the
violation of the law in the second paragraph will decay.
Fantastic, isn't it?
All one has to do to make an organization grow is apply the law that a
large organization is composed of groups. It is NOT composed of
individuals.
In absolute proof of this, in a tiny org it is always observed that
everyone there wears each one all the hats. It is a madhouse of individual
cross-endeavour. Show me an org that stays small and I will show you an org
where every staff member is wearing all the hats in the place. They can't
grow because they violate the law that a large organization is composed of
groups.
Russia, just yesterday sweeping the world has begun to lose ground and
her empire withdraws. Russia won't allow companies. She never says to the
head of Georgia "Get your statistics up, bub" and leaves him to it. Instead
she governs the Georgian individual with spies, secret police and even
income tax and is more apt to shoot the head of Georgia if his statistics
do rise as he is then looked on by a paranoid central government as capable
enough to be a menace. Russia once governed via cells and did so as long as
she was expanding. Now she has Income tax! Russia expanded despite bad
management solely because she was composed of cells and collectives-but she
went too far and erased the individual entirely, so, though growing she
starves. Her groups were mainly dedicated to politics, not production,
which is a frailty of governments anyway. But the basic group is composed
of individuals. (For heaven's sakes don't tell Russia as we don't want her
growing-tell her she must govern her individuals individually and she'll
vanish. You can tell the US, if you like, but only because no president yet
ever listened to anything except his popularity poll and with only a four
year career, isn't likely to. In the US, the government itself vanishes
regularly and only the companies, with plenty of interference, keep the
civilization going.)
England's sad old empire was great as long as India was run by the East
India Company, etc. etc. Its colonies and dominions did fine right up to
the moment the government in Westminster and Whitehall started to run the
natives as individuals, by-passing the company controlled colonies. Then
the "Empire" started to go broke because it never was a political empire
but a commercial one. As a political empire it uniformly failed until about
350 years ago it began to charter companies to rule and govern foreign
lands. Then it got an "empire". When it began to by-pass its company heads
and set up crown controlled governors and then by-pass these it ceased to
be an English Empire and it looks today that soon there won't even be an
England. It could not control even one colony the moment it started to
govern individual colonial citizens on a by-pass of the colonial companies.
You can use the same argument they use. That "concentrating only on
groups is hell on the individual". Marx used that line. Well it isn't true.
When you get too big a group the individual in it, suffering the whole
pressure of the state suffers. The reverse is true-"by concentrating only
on groups the individual is protected and prospers".
Now we get to the philosophic question in the law, how large is large,
how small is small.
Oddly tins is easily answered, unlike most philosophic conundrums. You
have to have the answer to "how big should a group be in order for the
individuals in it to be effectively managed without oppression in order to
get the job done". That asks and answers it. A correct group size is one
where the individuals in it are not made too small by the group being too
large. This is a ratio question. The Government of England! and the
individual Englishman are of incomparable magnitude. What the hell can Joe
Cockney a citizen do against the Government of England! Nothing! So Joe
Cockney goes to pieces. You can't have a comm line between a Billion
horsepower motor and one grasshopper! Something is going to explode and it
isn't the Billion h.p. motor. It's the grasshopper. Therefore when the
management unit is too big the individual (despite all the protection laws
in the world) becomes apathetic and can't work or doesn't see himself as
important enough to bother about.
So what is a proper sized basic group?
A GROUP IS A PROPER SIZE WHEN THE INDIVIDUALS IN IT CAN EASILY APPROACH
THE MANAGER OF THAT GROUP ON A FAMILIAR FRIENDLY BASIS AND BE SURE HE KNOWS
WHAT THEY'RE DOING AND WHY AND IF THEY'RE DOING IT.
The individual in that group is not oppressed. His charm counts. He
feels up to arguing with that manager. The executive (with a deputy on his
side) feels up to confronting the rest of the group. His own personality
counts.
The only reason you have strikes and labour unions is that this group
law has been violated. Too many individuals in the group for them to know
intimately their manager on afriendly co-operative basis.
This is all Marx is about. Marx is really a protest against too big a
group solved by creating a protective state (an overwhelmingly large group)
that "rescues" the individual! So Communism is a mess. For by making a
state group one overwhelmed the individual and sure enough the only
criticism of Communism that a Communist will tolerate is that it has too
big a "bureaucracy" by which he means too big a government for an
individual to confront. Communism goes even further. It abolishes the
individual utterly! It forces him to be a group. And that is very bad for
individuals are the building block of the small group. So Marx neither knew
nor solved the basic problem of government. He didn't know the above 2 laws
about organizations and groups so Communism, supposed to solve individual
oppression, is the most individually oppressive form of Government on this
planet.
How many individuals can effectively compose a group?
It depends on the ability of the manager to handle men on an individual
basis. This varies. But such men or women as can handle a large number are
very, very rare. So we take a safe answer.
A fairly safe answer is six-the manager of the group plus five
individuals, one a deputy manager.
This is determined by the answer to this question:
How many subordinates are you willing to work with on the job? Five
others is about all you'd care to stretch it. Two others would be too
comfortable-even too dull. But you can stretch it up to five.
Thus we could stretch out an org composed of groups of six persons-a
manager, a deputy and four-making 6 maximum in each group.
And you now have the size of the largest building blocks it takes to
make a big org. Six persons in each.
If we pyramid this we have (each maximum):
5 staff members and their In-Charge as a unit;
5 units and the section executive in a section;
5 sections plus the department's director in a department;
3 departments and the secretary, a deputy and a communicator in a
division;
4 divisions in a portion and the Org Exec Sec and a deputy and a
personal sec;
3 divisions and the HCO Exec Sec plus her deputy and a personal sec in
the HCO portion.
Or with a full Exec Division set up:
4 ES Comms in an Office for the Org Exec Sec and a personal sec;
3 ES Comms in an Office for the HCO Exec Sec and her personal sec.
But we build downwards by groups of six if we expand further, rarely
exceeding 5 and an Executive.
You see then that the moment the HCO Exec Sec starts handling Address in
Charge, the jump is too great as it puts Address in Charge up against the
equivalent of the total executives of units and sections of HCO! It makes
his group too big. It makes him too small (being such a small part). He
gets rattled, feels oppressed, tends to snarl because he is overwhelmed-his
group is too big so he is too small. Simple as that.
So long as an Executive only handles 2,3,4,5 people he can handle his
job because they know him. The people under him can handle their sub-groups
so long as they contact only 2,3,4,5 people and themselves.
For instance, so long as there are only 5 Continental Orgs, Exec Sec
Communicators will feel comfortable, providing the Continental orgs have
each 2, 3, 4, 5 orgs under them and have in their turn ES Communicators.
So proper organization for expansion builds in blocks of 6 maximum-5 +
an executive. That can be 5 groups plus an Executive as you go up or 5
staff members plus an executive as you go to the bottom.
Wherever this is violated the organization (whether a nation or a
company or us) will dwindle. Where it is kept, the organization will grow.
I warn you that 5 plus an executive sized groups is hard work, even a
strain at times, but it can be done. 6 or 7 + an executive is quite too
much. And a Government vs Joe Doakes is a complete smash as Joe is only
maybe l/70,000,000th as big as the Government!
So never by-pass. Completely aside from the true mechanics of the Danger
Formula where by-pass results in non-existence, it is hell on the Executive
and every member of the organization to have continual violation of the
maximum groups size.
If an executive feels overworked, even with all Dev-T cared for and
policed, then that executive has below him violations of group size and is
by-passing some point that should have an executive below him, with a group
under that executive. The overworked executive is trying to handle more
than five other people directly. (Five staff members or five group
executives.)
It's like boxes in boxes in boxes. But in this case 6 boxes at the most
fit comfortably.
If a department has 8 sections under its director, then we have to group
the sections by giving the Director 2 who each control 4 sections. This is
a very comfortable director for he has a group of 2 + the director. He can
loaf. But his assistants will sweat. So add I assistant and divide the
department's sections into 3 groups, 3, 3 and 2 and you will have a more
efficient department.
That's the way you juggle it about to prevent overwork by Executives and
overwhelm of individuals.
If you want to increase efficiency on a 5+ executive group, always make
one of the 5 a deputy and slightly senior to the other 4. The four can then
approach the deputy to see if they should approach the executive on matters
they feel uneasy about. This adds a gradient.
There are various ways to juggle this about. An executive with 7
sections can take 3 himself and give a deputy 4, etc. Lots of ways to do it
but just stay at or below 1 + 5 if you can.
The senior to the group exec is not counted as a member of the group.
Here and there we violate this. A Comm Ev is not as acceptable as a
Hearing because one person faces more people. Jury trials are a horrible
strain and a cruelty because one has to face about 14 people! (Judge,
prosecutor, jury.) Too many!
_________________
So those are the laws which underlie organization.
But you can have it all on the org board and not practise it and
collapse. If an Exec Sec is approaching 15 staff members past their
executives, it can wreck the place as the staff members go into apathy, the
secretaries go into non-existence and bang! no org.
So completely aside from Danger Condition, violations of following
proper group organization will bring any organization, a planet, a state,
an org, into a mess.
This is what underlies the decline and fall of civilizations: the state
begins to govern the individual!
An organization is composed of groups not individuals. And that truth
followed and practised in the flesh as well as on paper will bring about a
happy civilization, a happy nation and a flourishing org.
_________________
SUMMARY
A LARGE ORGANIZATION IS COMPOSED OF GROUPS, A SMALL ONE IS COMPOSED OF
INDIVIDUALS.
The primary difference between the opulent West and the starving East is
that the West still permits companies. This means to some extent the
Western nations are composed of groups so they are still somewhat
successful.
A GROUP IS A PROPER SIZE WHEN THE INDIVIDUALS IN IT CAN EASILY APPROACH
THE MANAGER OF THAT GROUP ON A FRIENDLY BASIS AND BE SURE HE KNOWS WHAT
THEY ARE DOING AND WHY AND IF THEY ARE DOING IT.
More than 5 persons plus their executive tends to be too large a group.
The persons under an executive can of course be executives of groups.
And the five persons below each of those executives can be executives of
groups.
If things aren't organized this way the individual is crushed. The
executive is crushed by overwork and the persons under him are overwhelmed.
By-pass of an executive, aside from putting him in danger, overwhelms
the members of his group and makes them do less and makes them feel
attacked and lessens their sense of their own power.
2 + an executive is also a group but the executive is not really working
to capacity.
With all Dev-T cared for an executive will be overworked if he is over
more than four subordinates.
The principal reason orgs stay small is no matter how fancy their org
boards they do not actually practise what is on the board but by-pass or
pay no real attention to command lines and so in actual practice are only
one or two oversized groups-which results in them staying small and being
overworked and also underpaid as their system in actual practice is
inefficient.
The moral is, practise proper grouping as provided by the org pattern,
never by-pass and so expand and have a happy staff.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:ml.rd
Copyright � 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 6 NOVEMBER 1966
Issue I
Remimeo
ADMIN KNOW-HOW
STATISTIC INTERPRETATIVE
STATISTIC ANALYSIS
The subject of making up statistics is probably well known. How one
draws one. But the subject of what they mean after they are drawn is
another subject and one which executives should know well.
Things are not always what they seem in statistics.
BACK LOGS
A backlog caught up gives one a high soaring statistic which promptly
slumps. To call the soar affluence and the slump emergency is an executive
error.
When you see a leaping and diving pattern on something that can be
backlogged you can be very sure it has been.
This activity is working in fits and starts, usually only occasionally
manned.
For a long time, nothing is done or counted, then suddenly a month's
worth is all counted in one week.
So when you see one of these draw a line halfway between peaks and
depressions, more or less the same distance from each and you can then read
the statistic as rising or falling.
CAUSATIVE STATISTICS
In any set of statistics of several kinds or activities, you can always
find one or more that are not "by luck" but can be directly caused by the
org or a part of it.
An example is the "Letters Out" and "Completions".
Gross Divisional Statistics. Whatever else is happening, the org itself
can improve these as they depend only on the org, not on "fate".
So if you see the gross divisional statistics generally down or going
down for the last couple or three weeks and yet see no beginning upsurge in
the current week in "Letters Out" and "Completions", you know that the
org's management is probably inactive and asking to be removed. For if they
saw all stats going down they should have piled in on "Letters Out" and
"Completions" amongst other things as the least they could do. They can
push those up.
So amongst any set of statistics are those which can be pushed up
regardless of the rest and if these aren't, then you know the worst-no
management.
ENROLLMENT vs COMPLETIONS
If you see a statistic going up in "Completions" and see a falling
"Enrollment" statistic you know at once the body repeat sign-up line is
out.
People who graduate are not being handed their Certs and Awards by a
Registrar
but are being given them by Certs and Awards or in mass meetings, or in
some way repeat sign-up is not being procured.
Thus the 40% to 60% repeat sign-up business is being lost.
This also means, if continued over a long period of time, that bad
technology is present as poor word-of-mouth advertising is going around.
Look in such a case at a third statistic, Qual Collections. If this is
poor or very, very high, you can be sure that lack of enrollments is caused
by bad tech.
A very high Qual Collections statistic and a low enrollment statistic is
a terrible condemnation of the Tech Division. Gross income will soon after
collapse as tech service just isn't good.
COMPARING STATISTICS
Thus you get the idea. Statistics are read against each other.
A statistic is a difference between two or more periods in time so is
always comparative.
Also two different statistics are comparative such as in examples above.
PREDICTION
You can predict what is going to happen far in advance of the
occurrence, using statistics.
High book sales mean eventual prosperity. Low book sales mean eventual
emergency all along the line.
High gross income and low completions mean eventual trouble as the org
isn't delivering but is "backlogging" students and pcs simply by not
getting results. Carried on long enough this means eventual civic and legal
trouble.
Low FSM commissions may only mean no FSM programme. But if there is an
FSM programme, then it may mean bad tech. So a low Completion and low Qual
will mean an eventual collapsed FSM statistic also as the FSM's own area is
being muddied up by failed cases.
High book sales, high letters out, high Tech and high Qual statistics
mean the gross income statistic will soon rise. If these are low then gross
income will fall.
Bills owed and cash in hand are read by the distance between the two
lines. If it is narrowing, things are improving; if widening, things are
getting worse. If they are far apart and have not closed for a long while,
with the cash graph below, the management is dangerous and not at all
alert.
THE DANGEROUS GRAPH
All statistics on one set of graphs giving a sinking trend line is a
dangerous situation.
One draws a trend line by choosing the mid-way point between highs and
lows and drawing a line.
If all these lines or most of them are down, the management is inactive.
FALSE COMBINATIONS
When a Continental Org includes its own org on its combined graphs for
area orgs
it can have a very false picture.
Its own org's stats obscure those of the area orgs which may be dying.
Thus if you include a big function with a lot of small ones on a
combined graph you can get a very false idea.
Thus, graph big functions as themselves and keep them out of small
functions of the same kind.
The Continental Org should not be part of a Continental Exec Div's
statistics. Similarly SH stats should not be part of WW's.
A combined statistic is of course where you take the same stats from
several functions and add them up to one line. A very large function added
into a combined graph can therefore obscure bad situations. It can also
obscure a totally inactive senior management as the big function under its
own management may be wholly alert and competent but the senior management
is masked from view by this one going concern, whereas all its other points
except the big one may be collapsing.
THE BIGGEST MISTAKE
The one big godawful mistake an executive can make in reading and
managing by graph is being reasonable about graphs. This is called
JUSTIFYING A STATISTIC. This is the single biggest error in graph
interpretation by executives and the one thing that will clobber an org.
One sees a graph down and says "Oh well, of course, that's . . . . . .
. . ." and at that moment you've had it.
I have seen a whole org tolerate a collapsed Completions graph for
literally months because they all "knew the new type process wasn't working
well." The Tech Sec had JUSTIFIED his graph. The org bought it. None
thought to question it. When it was pointed out that with the same
processes the preceding Tech Sec had a continual high graph and a
suppressive was looked for it turned out to be the Tech Sec!
Never JUSTIFY why a graph continues to be down and never be reasonable
about it. A down graph is simply a down graph and somebody is goofing. The
only explanation that is valid at all is "What was changed just before it
fell? Good. Unchange it fast!" If a graph is down it can and must go up.
How it is going to go up is the only interest. "What did we do each time
the last few times just before it went up? Good. Do it!"
Justifying a graph is saying, "Well, graphs are always down in December
due to Christmas." That doesn't get it up or even really say why it's down!
And don't think you know why a graph is up or down without thorough
investigation. If it doesn't stay up or continues down then one didn't
know. It takes very close study on the ground where the work is done to
find why a graph suddenly rose or why it fell.
This pretended knowledge can be very dangerous. "The graph stays high
because we send out the XY Info Packet" as a snap judgment may result in
changing the Dissern Sec who was the real reason with his questionnaires.
And the graphs fall suddenly even though no Info Packet change occurred.
GROSS REASONS
Graphs don't fall or rise for tiny, obscure, hard to find reasons. As in
auditing, the errors are always BIG.
Book sales fall. People design new flyers for books, appropriate display
money, go
mad trying to get it up. And then at long last one discovers the real
reason. The book store is always shut.
A big reason graphs fall is there's nobody there. Either the executive
is double hatted and is too busy on the other hat, or he just doesn't come
to work.
STICKY GRAPHS
Bad graphs which resist all efforts to improve them are made. They don't
just happen.
A sticky graph is one that won't rise no matter what one does.
Such a graph is made. It is not a matter of omission. It is a matter of
action.
If one is putting heavy effort into pushing a graph up and it won't go
up then there must be a hidden counter-effort to keep it down.
You can normally find this counter-effort by locating your biggest area
of non-compliance with orders. That person is working hard to keep graphs
down.
In this case it isn't laziness that's at fault. It's counter-action.
I have never seen an org or a division or a section that had a sticky
graph that was not actively pushing the graph down.
Such areas are not idle. They are not doing their jobs. They are always
doing something else. And that something else may suddenly hit you in the
teeth.
So beware of a sticky graph. Find the area of non-compliance and
reorganize the personnel or you, as an executive, will soon be in real hot
water from that quarter.
Those things which suddenly reared up out of your In basket, all claws,
happened after a long period of sticky graphs in that area.
Today's grief was visible months ago on your stats.
SUMMARY
The simple ups and downs of graphs mean little when not watched over a
period of time or compared to other graphs in the same activity.
One should know how to read stats and what they mean and why they behave
that way so that one can take action in ample time.
Never get reasonable about a graph. The only reason it or its trend is
down is that it is down. The thing to do is get it up.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jp.rd
Copyright � 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 12 FEBRUARY 1967
Org Exec Course
ADMIN KNOW-HOW
THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF LEADERS
A few comments on POWER, being or working close to or under a Power,
which is to say a leader or one who exerts wide primary influence on the
affairs of men.
I have written it this way, using two actual people to give an example
of magnitude enough to interest and to furnish some pleasant reading. And I
used a military sphere so it could be seen clearly without restimulation of
admin problems.
The book referenced is a fantastically able book by the way.
THE MISTAKES OF SIMON BOLIVAR
AND MANUELA SAENZ
Reference: The Book Entitled:
The Four Seasons of Manuela by
Victor W. von Hagen, a biography.
A Mayflower Dell Paperback, 0ct l966. 6/-
Simon Bolivar was the Liberator of South America from the yoke of Spain.
Manuela Saenz was the Liberatress and Consort.
Their acts and fates are well recorded in this moving biography.
But aside from any purely dramatic value the book lays bare and
motivates various actions of great interest to those who lead, who support
or are near leaders.
Simon Bolivar was a very strong character. He was one of the richest men
in South America. He had real personal ability given to only a handful on
the planet. He was a military commander without peer in history. Why he
would fail and die an exile to be later deified is thus of great interest.
What mistakes did he make?
Manuela Saenz was a brilliant, beautiful and able woman. She was loyal,
devoted, quite comparable to Bolivar, far above the cut of average
humanoids. Why then did she live a vilified outcast, receive such violent
social rejection and die of poverty and remain unknown to history. What
mistakes did she make?
BOLIVAR'S ERRORS
The freeing of things is the reverse unstated dramatization (the
opposite side of the coin) to the slavery enjoined by the mechanisms of the
mind.
Unless there is something to free men into, the act of freeing is simply
a protest of slavery. And as no humanoid is free while aberrated in the
body cycle, it is of course a gesture to free him politically as it frees
him only into the anarchy of dramatizing his aberrations with NO control
whatever and without something to fight exterior and with no
exteriorization of his interest he simply goes mad noisily or quietly.
Once as great a wrong as depraving beings has been done there is of
course no freedom short of freeing one from the depravity itself or at
least from its most obvious influences in the society. In short one would
have to de-aberrate a man before his whole social structure could be de-
aberrated.
If one lacked the whole ability to free man wholly
from his reactive patterns, then one could free man from their
restimulators in the society at least. If one had the
whole of the data (but lacked the Scientology tech), one would simply use
reactive patterns to blow the old society apart and then pick up the pieces
neatly in a new pattern. If one had no inkling of how reactive one can get
(and Bolivar of course had no knowledge whatever in that field), there yet
remained a workable formula used "instinctively" by most successful
practical political leaders.
If you free a society from those things you see wrong with it and use
force to demand it do what is right, and if you carry forward with decision
and thoroughness, and without continual temporizing you can, in the
applications of your charm and gifts, bring about a great political reform
or improve a failing country.
So Bolivar's first error, most consistent it was, too, was contained in
the vital words "you see" in the above paragraph. He didn't look and he
didn't even listen to sound intelligence reports. He was so sure he could
glow things right or fight things right or charm things right that he never
looked for anything wrong to correct until it was too late. This is the ne-
plus-ultra of personal confidence, amounting to supreme vanity. "When he
appeared it would all come right" was not only his belief but his basic
philosophy. So the first time it didn't work, he collapsed. All his skills
and charm were channeled into this one test. Only that could he observe.
Not to compare with Bolivar but to show my understanding of this:
I once had a similar one. "I would keep going as long as I could and
when I was stopped I would then die." This was a solution mild enough to
state and really hard to understand until you had an inkling of what I
meant by keeping going. Meteors keep going-very, very fast. And so did 1.
Then one day ages back I finally was stopped after countless little
stoppings by social contacts and family to prepare me culminating in a navy
more devoted to braid than dead enemies and literally I quit. For a while I
couldn't get a clue of what was wrong with me. Life went completely
unlivable until I found a new solution. So I know the frailty of these
single solutions. Not to compare myself but just to show it happens to us
all, not just Bolivars.
Bolivar had no personal insight at all. He could only "outsight" and
even then he did not look or listen. He glowed things right. Pitifully it
was his undoing that he could. Until he no longer could. When he couldn't
glow he roared and when he couldn't roar he fought a battle. Then civic
enemies were not military enemies so he had no solution left at all.
It never occurred to him to do more than personally magnetize things
into being right and victorious.
His downfall was that he made far too heavy use of a skill simply
because it was easy. He was too good at this one thing. So he never looked
to any other skill and he never even dreamed there was any other way.
He had no view of any situation and no idea of the organizational or
preparatory steps necessary to political and personal victory. He only knew
military organization which is where his organizational insight ceased.
He was taught on the high wine of French revolt, notorious in its
organizational inability to form cultures, and that fatally by a childhood
teacher who was intensely impractical in his own private life (Simon
Rodriguez, an unfrocked priest turned tutor).
Bolivar had no personal financial skill. He started wealthy and wound up
a pauper, a statistic descending from one of the if not the richest man in
South America down to a borrowed nightshirt to be buried in as an exile.
And this while the property of Royalists was wide open, the greatest land
and mine valuables of South America wide open to his hand and that's not
believable! But true. He never collected his own debt of loans to
governments even when the head of those governments.
So it is no wonder we find two more very real errors leading to his
downfall. He did not get his troops or officers rewarded and he did not aim
for any solvency of the states he controlled. It was all right if there
were long years of battle ahead for them to be unpaid as no real riches
were yet won, but not to reward them when the whole place was at his
disposal! Well!
The limit of his ability consisted of demanding a bit of cash for
current pay from Churches-which were not actively against him at first but
which annoyed them no end-and a few household expenses.
He could have (and should have) set aside all Royalist property and
estates for division amongst his officers, their men and his supporters. It
had no owners now. And this failure cost the economy of the country the tax
loss of all those productive estates (the whole wealth of the land). So it
is no wonder his government, its taxable estates now inoperative or at best
lorded by a profiteer or looted by Indians, was insolvent. Also, by failing
to do such an obvious act he delivered property into the hands of more
provident enemies and left his officers and men penniless to finance any
support for their own stability in the new society and so for his own.
As for state finance the great mines of South America, suddenly
ownerless, were overlooked and were then grabbed and worked by foreign
adventurers who simply came in and took them without payment.
Spain had run the country on the finance of mine tithes and general
taxes. Bolivar not only didn't collect the tithes, he let the land become
so worthless as to be untaxable. He should have gotten the estates going by
any shifts and should have state operated all Royalist mines once he had
them. To not do these things was complete, but typically humanoid, folly.
In doing this property division he should have left it all up to
officers' committees operating as courts of claim without staining his own
hands in the natural corruption. He was left doubly open as he not only did
not attend to it, he also got the name of corruption when anybody did grab
something.
He failed as well to recognize the distant widespread nature of his
countries despite all his riding and fighting over them and so sought
tightly centralized government, not only centralizing states but also
centralizing the various nations into a Federal state. And this over a huge
land mass full of insurmountable ranges, impassable jungles and deserts and
without mail, telegraph, relay stages, roads, railroads, river vessels or
even foot bridges repaired after a war of attrition.
A step echelon from a pueblo (village) to a state, from a state to a
country and a country to a Federal state was only possible in such huge
spaces of country where candidates could never be known personally over any
wide area and whose opinions could not even be circulated more than a few
miles of burro trail, where only the pueblo was democratic and the rest all
appointive from Pueblo on up, himself the ratifier of titles if he even
needed that. With his own officers and armies controlling the land as
owners of all wrested from Royalists and the crown of Spain, he would have
had no revolts. There would have been little civil wars of course but a
court to settle their final claims could have existed at Federal level and
kept them traveling so much over those vast distances it would have
crippled their enthusiasm for litigation on the one hand and on the other,
by dog eat dog settlements, would have given him the strongest rulers-if he
took neither side.
He did not step out and abdicate a dictatorial position. He mistook
military acclaim and ability for the tool of peace. War only brings
anarchy, so he had anarchy. Peace is more than a "command for unity", his
favorite phrase. A productive peace is getting men busy and giving them
something to make something of that they want to make something of and
telling them to get on with it.
He never began to recognize a suppressive and never considered anyone
needed killing except on a battlefield. There it was glorious. But somebody
destroying his very name and soul, and the security of every supporter and
friend, the SP Santander, his vice-president, who could have been arrested
and executed by a corporal's guard on one one-hundredth of available
evidence, could suborn the whole treasury and population against him,
without Bolivar, continually warned, loaded with evidence, ever even
reprimanding him. And this brought about his loss of popularity and his
eventual exile.
He also failed in the same way to protect his military family or Manuela
Saenz from other enemies. So he weakened his friends and ignored his
enemies just by oversight.
His greatest error lay in that while dismissing Spain he did not dismiss
that nation's most powerful minion, the Church, and did not even localize
it or reward a South American separate branch to loyalty or do anything at
all (except extort money from it) to an organization which continually
worked for Spain as only it could work-on every person in the land in a
direct anti-Bolivar reign of terror behind the scenes. You either suborn
such a group or you take them out when they cease to be universal and
become or are an enemy's partner.
As the Church held huge properties and as Bolivar's troops and
supporters went unpaid, even of the penny soldiers' pay, if one was going
to overlook the Royalist estates, one could at least have seized the Church
property and given it to the soldiers. General Vallejo did this in 1835 in
California, a nearly contemporary act, with no catastrophe from Rome. Or
the penniless countries could have taken them over. You don't leave an
enemy financed and solvent while you let your friends starve in a game like
South American politics. Oh no.
He wasted his enemies. He exported the "godos" or defeated Royalist
soldiers. They mostly had no homes but South America. He issued no
amnesties they could count on. They were shipped off or left to die in the
"ditch"-the best artisan in the country among them.
When one (General Rodil) would not surrender Calloa fortress after Peru
was won. Bolivar after great gestures of amnesty failed to obtain surrender
and then fought the fort. Four thousand political refugees and four
thousand Royalist troops died over many months in full sight of Lima,
fought heavily by Bolivar only because the fort was fighting. But Bolivar
had to straighten up Peru urgently not fight a defeated enemy. The right
answer to such a foolish commander as Rodil as Bolivar did have the troops
to do it, was to cover the roads with cannon enfilade potential to
discourage any sortie from the fort, put a larger number of his own troops
in a distant position of offense but ease and comfort and say, "We're not
going to fight. The war's over, silly man. Look at the silly fellows in
there, living on rats when they can just walk out and sleep home nights or
go to Spain or enlist with me or just go camping," and let anybody walk in
and out who pleased, making the fort Commander (Rodil) the prey of every
pleading wife and mother without and would-be deserter or mutineer within
until he did indeed sheepishly give up the pretense-a man cannot fight
alone. But battle was glory to Bolivar. And he became intensely disliked
because the incessant cannonade which got nowhere was annoying.
Honors meant a great deal to Bolivar. To be liked was his life. And it
probably meant more to him than to see things really right. He never
compromised his principles but he lived on admiration, a rather sickening
diet since it demands in turn continuous "theatre". One is what one is, not
what one is admired or hated for. To judge oneself by one's successes is
simply to observe that one's postulates worked and breeds confidence in
one's ability. To have to be told it worked only criticizes one's own
eyesight and hands a spear to the enemy to make his wound of vanity at his
will. Applause is nice. It's great to be thanked and admired. But to work
only for that? And his craving for that, his addiction to the most unstable
drug in history-fame-killed Bolivar. That self offered spear. He told the
world continually how to kill him-reduce its esteem. So as money and land
can buy any quantity of cabals, he could be killed by curdling the esteem,
the easiest thing you can get a mob to do.
He had all the power. He did not use it for good or evil. One cannot
hold power and not use it. It violates the power formula. For it then
prevents others from doing things if they had some of the power so they
then see as their only solution the destruction of the holder of the power
as he, not using power or delegating it, is the unwitting block to all
their plans. So even many of his friends and armies finally agreed he had
to go. They were not able men. They were in a mess. But bad or good they
had to do something. Things were desperate, broken down and starving after
14 years of civil war. Therefore they either had to have some of that
absolute power or else nothing could be done at all. They were not great
minds. He did not need any "great minds", he thought, even though he
invited them verbally. He saw their petty, often murderous solutions and he
rebuked them. And so held the power and didn't use it.
He could not stand another personality threat.
The trouble in Peru came when he bested its real conqueror (from the
Argentine), La Mar, in a petty triumph over adding Guayaquil to Colombia.
Bolivar wished to look triumphant again and didn't notice it really cost
him the support and Peru the support of La Mar-who understandably resigned
and went home, leaving Bolivar Peru to conquer. Unfortunately, it had
already been in his hands. La Mar needed some troops to clean up a small
Royalist army that was all. La Mar didn't need Peru's loss of Guayaquil-
which never did anybody any real good anyway!
Bolivar would become inactive when faced with two areas' worth of
problems-he did not know which way to go. So he did nothing.
Brave beyond any general in history on the battlefield, the Andes or in
torrential rivers, he did not really have the bravery needed to trust
inferior minds and stand by their often shocking blunders. He feared their
blunders. So he did not dare unleash his many willing hounds.
He could lead men, make men feel wonderful, make men fight and lay down
their lives after hardships no army elsewhere in the world has ever faced
before or since. But he could not use men even when they were begging to be
used.
It is a frightening level of bravery to use men you know can be cruel,
vicious, and incompetent. He had no fear of their turning on him ever. When
they finally did only then he was shocked. But he protected "the people"
from authority given to questionably competent men. So he really never used
but three or four generals of mild disposition and enormously outstanding
ability. And to the rest he denied power. Very thoughtful of the nebulous
"people" but very bad indeed for the general good. And it really caused his
death.
No. Bolivar was theatre. It was all theatre. One cannot make such errors
and still pretend that one thinks of life as life, red-blooded and factual.
Real men and real life are full of dangerous, violent, live situations and
wounds hurt and starvation is desperation itself especially when you see it
in one you love.
This mighty actor, backed up with fantastic personal potential, made the
mistake of thinking the theme of liberty and his own great role upon the
stage was enough to interest all the working, suffering hours of men, buy
their bread, pay their whores, shoot their wives' lovers and bind their
wounds or even put enough drama into very hard pressed lives to make them
want to live it.
No, Bolivar was unfortunately the only actor on the stage and no other
man in the world was real to him.
And so he died. They loved him. But they were also on the stage too,
where they were dying in his script or Rousseau's script for liberty but no
script for living their very real lives.
He was the greatest military general in any history measured against his
obstacles, the people and the land across which he fought.
And he was a complete failure to himself and his friends.
While being one of the greatest men alive at that. So we see how truly
shabby others in leaders' boots amongst men must be.
MANUELA SAENZ
The tragedy of Manuela Saenz as Bolivar's mistress was that she was
never used, never really had a share and was neither protected nor honored
by Bolivar.
Here was a clever, spectacular woman of fantastic fidelity and skill,
with an enormous "flaire", capable of giving great satisfaction and
service. And only her satisfaction ability was taken and that not
consistently nor even honestly.
In the first place, Bolivar never married her. He never married anybody.
This opened up a fantastic breach in any defense she could ever make
against her or his enemies who were legion. So her first mistake was in not
in some way contriving a marriage.
That she had an estranged husband she had been more or less sold to was
permitted by her to wreck her life obliquely.
She was too selfless to be real in all her very able plotting.
For this marriage problem she could have engineered any number of
actions.
She had the solid friendship of all his trusted advisers, even his old
tutor. Yet she arranged nothing for herself.
She was utterly devoted, completely brilliant and utterly incapable of
really bringing off an action of any final kind.
She violated the power formula in not realizing that she had power.
Manuela was up against a hard man to handle. But she did not know enough
to make her own court effective. She organized one. She did not know what
to do with it.
Her most fatal mistake was in not bringing down Santander, Bolivar's
chief enemy. That cost her everything she had before the end and after
Bolivar died. She knew for years Santander had to be killed. She said it or
wrote it every few days. Yet never did she promise some young officer a
nice night or a handful of gold to do it in a day when duelling was in
fashion. It's like standing around discussing how the plainly visible wolf
in the garden that's eating the chickens must be shot, even holding a gun,
and never even lifting it while all one's chickens vanish for years.
In a land overridden with priests she never got herself a tame priest to
bring about her ends.
She was a fantastic intelligence officer. But she fed her data to a man
who could not act to protect himself or friends, who could only fight
armies dramatically.
She did not see this and also quietly take on the portfolio of secret
police chief. Her mistake was waiting to be asked-to be asked to come to
him, to act. She voluntarily was his best political intelligence agent.
Therefore she should have also assumed further roles.
She guarded his correspondence, was intimate with his secretaries. And
yet she never collected or forged or stole any document to bring down
enemies either through representations to Bolivar or a court circle of her
own. And in an area with that low an ethic, that's fatal.
She openly pamphleteered and fought violently as in a battle against her
rabble.
She had a great deal of money at her disposal. In a land of for-sale
Indians she never used a penny to buy a quick knife or even a solid piece
of evidence.
When merely opening her lips she could have had any sequestrated
Royalist estate she went to litigation for a legitimate legacy never won
and another won but never paid.
They lived on the edge of quicksand. She never bought a plank or a rope.
Carried away by the glory of it all, devoted completely, potentially
able and a formidable enemy, she did not act.
She waited to be told to come to him even when he lay dying and exiled.
His command over her who never obeyed any other was too absolute for his
own or her survival.
Her assigned mistakes (pointed out at the time as her caprice and play
acting) were not her errors. They only made her interesting. They were far
from fatal.
She was not ruthless enough to make up for his lack of ruthlessness and
not provident enough to make up for his lack of providence.
The ways open to her for finance, for action, were completely doorless.
The avenue stretched out to the horizon.
She fought bravely but she just didn't take action.
She was an actress for the theatre alone.
And she died of it. And she let Bolivar die because of it.
Never once did Manuela look about and say, "See here, things musn't go
this wrong. My lover holds half a continent and even I hold the loyalty of
battalions. Yet that woman threw a fish!"
Never did Manuela tell Bolivar's doctor, a rumoured lover, "Tell that
man he will not live without my becoming a constant part of his entourage,
and tell him until he believes it or we'll have a new physician around
here."
The world was open. Where Theodosius, the wife of Emperor Justinian II
of Constantinople, a mere circus girl and a whore, ruled harder than her
husband but for her husband behind his back-and made him marry her as well,
Manuela never had any bushel basket of gold brought in to give Bolivar for
his unpaid troops with a "Just found it, dear" to his "Where on Earth . . .
.?" after the Royalist captives had been carefully ransomed for gaol
escapes by her enterprising own entourage and officer friends. She never
handed over any daughter of a family clamoring against her to Negro troops
and then said, "Which oververbal family is next?"
She even held a colonel's rank but only used it because she wore man's
clothing afternoons. It was a brutal, violent, ruthless land, not a game of
musical chairs.
And so Manuela, penniless, improvident, died badly and in poverty,
exiled by enemies and deserted by her friends.
But why not deserted by her friends? They had all been poverty-stricken
to a point quite incapable of helping her even though they wanted to-for
she once had the power to make them solvent. And didn't use it. They were
in poverty before they won but they did eventually control the land. After
that why make it a bad habit?
________________
And so we see two pathetic, truly dear, but tinsel figures, both on a
stage, both far removed from the reality of it all.
And one can say, "But if they had not been such idealists they never
would have fought so hard and freed half a continent," or "If she had
stooped to such intrigue or he had been known for violent political actions
they would never have had the strength and never would have been loved."
All very idealistic itself. They died "in the ditch" unloved, hated and
despised, two decent brave people, almost too good for this world.
A true hero, a true heroine. But on a stage and not in life. Impractical
and improvident and with no faintest gift either one to use the power they
could assemble.
This story of Bolivar and Manuela is a tragedy of the most piteous kind.
They fought a hidden enemy, the Church; they were killed by their
friends.
But don't overlook how impractical it is not to give your friends power
enough when you have it to give. You can always give some of it to another
if the first one collapses through inability. And one can always be brought
down like a hare at a hunt who seeks to use the delegated power to kill you-
if you have the other friends.
Life is not a stage for posturing and "Look at me!" "Look at me." "Look
at me." If one is to lead a life of command or a life near to command one
must handle it as life. Life bleeds. It suffers. It hungers. And it has to
have the right to shoot its enemies until such time as comes a golden age.
Aberrated man is not capable of supporting in his present state, a
golden declared age for three minutes, given all the tools and wealth in
the world.
If one would live a life of command or one near to a command, one must
then accumulate power as fast as possible and delegate it as quickly as
feasible and use every humanoid in long reach to the best and beyond his
talents if one is to live at all.
If one does not choose to live such a life then go on the stage and be a
real actor. Don't kill men while pretending it isn't real. Or one can
become a recluse or a student or a clerk. Or study butterflies or take up
tennis.
For one is committed to certain irrevocable natural laws the moment one
starts out upon a conquest, either as the man in charge or a person near to
him or on his staff or in his army. And the foremost law, if one's ambition
is to win, is of course to win.
But also to keep on providing things to win and enemies to conquer.
Bolivar let his cycle run to "freedom" and end there. He never had
another plan beyond that point. He ran out of territory to free. Then he
didn't know what to do with it and didn't know enough, either, to find
somewhere else to free. But of course all limited games come to end. And
when they do their players fall over on the field and become rag dolls
unless somebody at least tells them the game has ended and they have no
more game nor any dressing room or houses but just that field.
And they lie upon the field, not noticing there can be no more game
since the other team has fled and after a bit they have to do something and
if the leader and his consort are sitting over on the grass being rag dolls
too, of course there isn't any game. And so the players start fighting
amongst themselves just to have a game. And if the leader then says, "No,
no" and his consort doesn't say, "Honey, you better phone the Baltimore
Orioles for Saturday", then of course the poor players, bored stiff, say,
"He's out." "She's out." "Now we're going to split the team in half and
have a game."
And that's what happened to Bolivar and Manuela. They had to be gotten
rid of for there was no game and they didn't develop one to play while
forbidding the only available game-minor civil wars.
A whole continent containing the then major mines of the world, whole
populations were left sitting there, "freed". But none owned any of it
though the former owners had left. They weren't given it. Nor were they
made to manage it. No game.
And if Bolivar had not been smart enough for that he could at least have
said, "Well! You monkeys are going to have quite a time getting the wheels
going but that's not my job. You decide on your type of government and what
it's to be. Soldiers are my line. Now I'm taking over those old estates of
mine and the Royalist ones near by and the emerald mines just as souvenirs
and me and Manuela we're going home." And he should have said that 5
minutes after the last Royalist army was defeated in Peru.
And his official family with him, and a thousand troops to which he was
giving land would have moved right off smartly with him. And the people
after a few screams of horror at being deserted would have fallen on each
other, sabered a state together here and a town there and gotten busy out
of sheer self protection in a vital new game, "Who's going to be Bolivar
now?"
Then when home he should have said, "Say those nice woods look awfully
Royalist to me, and also those 1,000,000 hectares of grazing land, Manuela.
Its owner once threw a Royalist fish, remember? So that's yours."
And the rest of the country would have done the same and gotten on with
the new game of "You was a Royalist".
And Bolivar and Manuela would have had statues built to them by the TON
at once as soon as agents could get to Paris with orders from an adoring
populace.
"Bolivar, come rule us!" should have gotten an "I don't see any unfree
South America. When you see a French or Spanish army coming, come back and
tell me."
That would have worked. And this poor couple would have died suitably
adored . in the sanctity of glory and (perhaps more importantly) in their
own beds, not "in a ditch".
And if they had had to go on ruling they could have declared a new game
of "pay the soldiers and officers with Royalist land". And when that was a
gone game, "Oust the Church and give its land to the poor friendly
Indians".
You can't stand bowing back of the footlights forever with no show even
if you are quite an actor. Somebody else can make better use of any stage
than even the handsomest actor who will not use it.
Man is too aberrated to understand at least 7 things about Power:
1. Life is lived by lots of people. And if you lead you must either let
them get on with it or lead them on with it actively.
2. When the game or the show is over, there must be a new game or a new
show. And if there isn't somebody else is jolly well going to start one
and if you won't let anyone do it the game will become "getting you".
3. If you have power use it or delegate it or you sure won't have it
long.
4. When you have people use them or they will soon become most unhappy
and you won't have them any more.
5. When you move off a point of power, pay all your obligations on the
nail, empower all your friends completely and move off with your pockets
full of artillery, potential blackmail on every erstwhile rival,
unlimited funds in your private account and the addresses of experienced
assassins and go live in Bulgravia and bribe the police. And even then
you may not live long if you have retained one scrap of domination in
any camp you do not now control or if you even say, "I favour Politician
Jiggs." Abandoning power utterly is dangerous indeed.
But we can't all be leaders or figures strutting in the limelight and so
there's more to know about this:
When you're close to power get some delegated to you, enough to do your
job and protect yourself and your interests, for you can be shot, fellow,
shot, as the position near power is delicious but dangerous, dangerous
always, open to the taunts of any enemy of the power who dare not really
boot the power but can boot you. So to live at all in the shadow or employ
of a power you must yourself gather and USE enough power to hold your own-
without just nattering to the power to "kill Pete", in straightforward or
more suppressive veiled ways to him as these wreck the power that supports
yours. He doesn't have to know all the bad news and if he's a power really
he won't ask all the time, "What are all those dead bodies doing at the
door?" And if you are clever, you never let it be thought HE killed them-
that weakens you and also hurts the power source. "Well, boss, about all
those dead bodies, nobody at all will suppose you did it. She over there,
those pink legs sticking out, didn't like me." "Well," he'll say if he
really is a power, "why are you bothering me with it if it's done and you
did it. Where's my blue ink?" Or "Skipper, three shore patrolmen will be
along soon with your cook, Dober, and they'll want to tell you he beat up
Simson." "Who's Simson?" "He's a clerk in the enemy office downtown."
"Good, when they've done it, take Dober down to the dispensary for any
treatment he needs. Oh yes. Raise his pay." Or "Sir, could I have the power
to sign divisional orders?" "Sure."
7. And lastly and most important, for we all aren't on the stage with
our names in lights, always push power in the direction of anyone on
whose power you depend. It may be more money for the power, or more
ease, or a snarling 'defense of the power to a critic, or even the dull
thud of one of his enemies in the dark, or the glorious blaze of the
whole enemy camp as a birthday surprise.
If you work like that and the power you are near or depend upon is a
power that has at least some inkling about how to be one, and if you
make others work like that, then the power-factor expands and expands
and expands and you too acquire a sphere of power bigger than you would
have if you worked alone. Real powers are developed by tight
conspiracies of this kind pushing someone up in whose leadership they
have faith. And if they are right and also manage their man and keep him
from collapsing through overwork, bad temper or bad data, a kind of
Juggernaut builds up. Don't ever feel weaker because you work for
somebody stronger. The only failure lies in taxing or pulling down the
strength on which you depend. All failures to remain a power's power are
failures to contribute to the strength and longevity of the work, health
and power of that power. Devotion requires active contribution outwards
from the power as well as in.
_________________
If Bolivar and Manuela had known these things they would have lived an
epic, not a tragedy. They would not have "died in the ditch", he bereft of
really earned praise for his real accomplishments even to this day. And
Manuela would not be unknown even in the archives of her country as the
heroine she was.
Brave, brave figures. But if this can happen to such stellar
personalities gifted with ability tenfold over the greatest of other
mortals, to people who could take a rabble in a vast impossible land and
defeat one of Earth's then foremost powers, with no money or arms, on
personality alone, what then must be the ignorance and confusion of human
leaders in general, much less little men stumbling through their lives of
boredom and suffering?
Let us wise them up, huh? You can't live in a world where even the great
leaders can't lead.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jp.rd
Copyright � 1967
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 24 JULY 1967
Remimeo
FIXED PUBLIC CONSUMPTION OF PRODUCT
Any Scientology organisation (or any organisation) which is working in
any way upon a fixed statistic of consumption will eventually fail. By
"fixed consumption" is meant estimates of the public's consumption of
product as a limit on production.
There are several ways to "fix a consumption statistic". These are:
1. Provide just so many auditors for the HGC to agree with expected pcs.
2. Schedule just as many courses in the Academy as one thinks there will
be students.
3. Provide just enough quarters to handle the expected quantity of
business.
Unless one disregards the expectancy and unless one simply furnishes all
the service one can, regardless of past statistics, the org will go
downhill.
Several orgs work on the basis that there is just so much business and
that one must only cater to that. Sydney, Auckland and some others have
gone so far as to hold a one student course with hours arranged to fit that
student. Joburg has in the past let the pc decide how and when he is to be
audited and has had a registrar assigning the hours (with 35 auditors on
the payroll and pcs getting 2 hours each a week, 35 auditors were
delivering only 100 auditing hours a week!).
Any org that does not simply provide good uniformly scheduled service
will fail.
_________________
Let us have an example of a car industry working on a fixed consumption
statistic. The directors look up the last year and see that 1,000,000 cars
were bought. They decide then, for this year, to make 1,000,000 cars. As
they keep doing this year to year they eventually begin to make less and
less cars and one day go out of business.
That is NOT the way to go about it.
What the directors should have done was ignore the last year's stat and
call in the head of production and ask, "How many can you make this next
year?" The guy says, "2,500,000". The Board says, "Good. Make them." Then
the Board calls in their Distribution Division and says, "Tell the dealers
they will get 2 and Vi times as many cars next year so be sure and get
ready to sell them." And the Board calls in the letter reg and says, "Write
every owner of one of our cars that he is going to be very pleased with his
next model. And mail a magazine to all of them once every two months
tracing the new model's development."
Now, in practice of course no car industry has any letter reg or Central
Files of customers and their Dist Div is a sort of list of dealers so that
Board couldn't do that. But a Sen org can!
Now let us examine the exact same procedure in a Scientology org if it
were followed.
Wrong way: The Exec Council sees how many students and pcs were trained
and processed last year and arranges to train and process that many this
year. The registrar working alone must keep up some quota so begins to make
special deals in desperation.
The org goes downhill. Like Auckland, Sydney and Joburg did.
Right way: The Exec Council calls in the Tech Sec, Director of Training
and Director of Processing and Director of Tech Services and says, "What is
the maximum number of students and pcs that we can handle?" These
executives figure it out and say, "500 students and 210 pcs." The Exec
Council then tells them to do it, and calls in the Dissem Sec and says,
"Have your people contact and sign up 750 students and 350 pcs in the
coming year." They call in the Dist Sec and say, "Double the names in CF."
They call in the HCO Sec and say, "Get in Ethics in this whole area and
also locate and give us a list of all failed cases in the past three
years." This last list they give to their Field Staff Members with orders
to offer a free S & D and get the people in.
The Exec Council does NOT work on a fixed statistic of last year or any
year. It DOES NOT CONSIDER IT IS STOPPED BY A FIXED CONSUMPTION. It does
not try to limit its business to expected business.
Of course it is silly to think there is any limit on the people who are
to be trained and processed. We have not even touched the 3,000,000,000
potential Scientologists on this one planet.
_________________
If you schedule a continuous course in the Academy and teach it, it will
fill up. IF you don't break it into arbitrary periods. People who run a
course every six weeks or every year always eventually fail. You have to
run a continuously enrolling course.
At Saint Hill we held to enrolling every Monday for many years. Then a
couple years ago I ordered enrolment on arrival (any day of the week) and
enrolments increased.
_________________
If the service is there it will be used. If it is there only by wait it
will not be used.
Sometimes you have to teach a full course to an empty Academy for weeks
or months when you start this, but given good, well and precisely scheduled
classes and all tech in, the place will fill up and stay filled.
Sometimes HGC auditors sit around for weeks with no pcs after a full HGC
is organised but they will eventually have pcs if the service is there.
There IS NO FIXED CONSUMPTION.
When you do not provide the service first, it will not be used. You
cannot drum up business unless the service is certain. The best way to have
certain service is to provide it before it is demanded. Then, as it exists,
it will be used.
You can promote before your service is complete only so long as the
service will be there when demanded.
In general org management it is very easy to fall for a fixed
consumption idea and limit everyone to it. The only sure way to proceed is
to operate with maximum possible service while bringing maximum pressure to
bear on the Dist and Dissem Divisions to fill the place up.
There is no limit to the number of students and pcs. Why limit the sign
ups?
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jp.rd
Copyright � 1967
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 6 OCTOBER 1967
Remimeo
CONDITION OF LIABILITY
Below Non-Existence there is the Condition of Liability. The being has
ceased to be simply non-existent as a team member and has taken on the
colour of an enemy.
It is assigned where careless or malicious and knowing damage is caused
to projects, orgs or activities. It is adjudicated that it is malicious and
knowing because orders have been published against it or because it is
contrary to the intentions and actions of the remainder of the team or the
purpose of the project or org.
It is a liability to have such a person unwatched as the person may do
or continue to do things to stop or impede the forward progress of the
project or org and such a person cannot be trusted. No discipline or the
assignment of conditions above it has been of any avail. The person has
just kept on messing it up.
The condition is usually assigned when several dangers and non-
existences have been assigned or when a long unchanged pattern of conduct
has been detected.
When all others are looking for the reason mail is getting lost, such a
being would keep on losing the mail covertly.
The condition is assigned for the benefit of others so they won't get
tripped up trusting the person in any way.
Such a person, assigned a "Condition of Liability, may not wear any
insignia or uniform or similar clothing to the group and must wear a dirty
grey rag tied around the left arm.
The formula of liability is:
1. Decide who are one's friends.
2. Deliver an effective blow to the enemies of the group one has been
pretending to be part of despite personal danger.
3. Make up the damage one has done by personal contribution far beyond
the ordinary demands of a group member.
4. Apply for re-entry to the group by asking the permission of each
member of it to rejoin and rejoining only by majority permission, and if
refused, repeating 2 and 3 and 4 until one is allowed to be a group
member again.
CONDITION OF TREASON
When one knowingly takes the pay or favours of a group's or project's
enemies while appearing to be a friend of or part of the group or project,
the Condition is Treason.
The formula for Treason Condition is:
1. Deliver a paralyzing blow to the enemies of the group one has worked
against and betrayed.
2. Perform a self-damaging act that furthers the purposes and or
objectives of the group one has betrayed.
3. Inform the group, project or org one has betrayed of one's previous
betrayal and I and 2 above and petition each member for forgiveness.
4. Abide by their reaction or decision.
CONDITION OF DOUBT
When one cannot make up one's mind as to an individual, a group, org or
project a Condition of Doubt exists.
The formula is:
1. Inform oneself honestly of the actual intentions and activities of
that group, project or org brushing aside all bias and rumour.
2. Examine the statistics of the individual, group, project or org.
3. Decide on the basis of "the greatest good for the greatest number of
dynamics" whether or not it should be attacked, harmed or suppressed or
helped.
4. Evaluate oneself or one's own group, project or org as to intentions
and objectives.
5. Evaluate one's own or one's group, project or org's statistics.
6. Join or remain in or befriend the one which progresses toward the
greatest good for the greatest number of dynamics and announce the fact
publicly to both sides.
7. Do everything possible to improve the actions and statistics of the
person, group, project or org one has remained in or joined.
8. Suffer on up through the conditions in the new group if one has
changed sides, or the conditions of the group one has remained in if
wavering from it has lowered one's status.
CONDITION OF ENEMY
When a person is an avowed and knowing enemy of an individual, a group,
project or org, a Condition of Enemy exists.
The formula is:
1. Examine oneself and one's mind or have it examined to be sure that
one's attitude is not based on prejudice or aberration or mere
similarity to something else.
2. Decide if one's reaction to the individual, group, project or org is
based on one's personal fear or the urging of others or on actual
menace.
3. Assume the Condition of Doubt and apply its formula.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:mwp.rd
Copyright � 1967
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
[The formulas for the Conditions of Enemy and Treason given above were
modified by HCO P/L 23 October 1967, Enemy Formula, page 245, and HCO P/L
16 October 1968, page 247, respectively. The penalties (grey rag, etc)
associated with the above conditions formulas were cancelled by HCO P/L 6
October 1970 Issue III, Ethics Penalties, and reinstated by HCO P/L 19
October 1971 (corrected & reissued 22 Oct 71), Ethics Penalties Reinstated,
and then later modified by HCO P/L 16 November 1971, Conditions, Awards and
Penances. These Policies can be found in the 1970 and 1971 Year Books. A
corrected table of Conditions is given in HCO P/L 14 March 1968 on page
247.]
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
Remimeo
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 18 OCTOBER 1967
Issue V
CONDITIONS ON ORGS OR DIVISIONS OR DEPTS
CLARIFICATION
If an Org or Division or Department is assigned a Condition below Normal
Operation as a whole entity, it applies to all staff members at once
EXCEPT
those individual staff members who can immediately show in person the Org's
Ethics Officer their true statistic as being Normal Operation or above.
The Org's E/O issues at once an Ethics order in a form to upgrade these
individuals promptly.
Form of Conditions Change -
ETHICS OFFICER ORDER
Org ___________________
Date ___________________
The (Org) ( ____________________ Div) ( ________________________ Dept)
having been assigned a general Condition of
_______________________________________________ , on inspection of the
statistics of
________________________________________________________________ (name)
__________________________________________________________________(post)
his/her condition is upgraded to
__________________
(If this order obtained by false statistic or misrepresentation, a
Condition of Non-Existence will be assigned.)
Signed __________________________________
Org Ethics Officer
This is placed in the staff member's file and that staff member assumes
the upgraded condition, not the general condition.
If the statistic however is ever proven to be false or the order
obtained by misrepresentation or coercion or bribe or favor, the staff
member is then placed in a Condition of Non-Existence for one week or until
the N-E formula is followed whichever takes the longer.
The heads of the Org, Division or Dept may never be so upgraded. They
may protest directly for a re-evaluation to the assigners with statistical
proof, meanwhile assuming the assigned condition. In protesting they also
send copies of all stats and order to the Int E/O.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jp.rd
Copyright � 1967
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 18 OCTOBER 1967
Issue VI
Remimeo
ETHICS
FAILURE TO FOLLOW OR APPLY CONDITION
Any executive failing to assign or enforce Conditions penalties below
normal is himself assigned the condition he or she should have assigned
until that post's stats are up (not necessarily that person's as transfer
may be needed).
Any staff member failing to apply the formula or the penalties of a
Condition assigned unless relieved by the E/O or the assigning authority or
review of actual stats shall be downgraded one Condition level.
If he or she still fails to follow the downgraded formula and penalty
within 24 hours of receipt of the downgrade, it is downgraded one more and
so on.
Sagged stats or crimes or high crimes are inexcusable. Seniors must
always seek to raise stats and prevent crimes and high crimes by Condition
Assignments the moment they are aware of the sag or the crime or high
crime.
Staff members who see in their own sagged stats a Condition coming up
should act fast to get the stat up up before a Condition has to be
assigned.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jp.rd
Copyright � 1967
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 20 OCTOBER 1967
Remimeo
ADMIN KNOW-HOW
CONDITIONS, HOW TO ASSIGN
Every post and part of an org must have a statistic which measures the
volume of product of that post. The head of a part has the statistic of
that post.
Every post or part of an org has a product. If it has no product it is
useless and supernumerary.
An Exec Sec has the products of his or her portion of the org. The first
product of an Exec Sec is of course his or her portion of the org's
divisions. If the portion itself does not exist then of course the Exec Sec
has no stat at all as an Exec Sec even if very busy-so he or she is not an
Exec Sec despite the title. This is true of a department head, a section
head and a unit head. One can't really be the one in charge if the thing
one is in charge of doesn't exist. Also things that don't exist themselves
can have no product.
The whole rationale (basic idea) of the pattern of an org is a unit of
3. These are
THETAN
MIND BODY PRODUCT.
In Division One the HCO Sec is the thetan, Department One the MIND,
Department Two the BODY and Department Three the PRODUCT. The same pattern
holds for every division.
It also should hold for every department and lower section and unit.
And above these it holds for a portion of an org.
In the HCO portion of the org we have the HCO Exec Sec as the thetan,
the Exec Div (7) as the MIND, Division One as the BODY and Division Two as
the PRODUCT. And so with other parts of an org. They always go
THETAN
MIND BODY PRODUCT.
Now if you know and understand and can apply this you can not only plan
or correct an org or one of its parts, you can also assign Conditions
correctly. You need data gained from inventories or counts of items or the
statistic assigned and drawn.
It is not enough to only follow graphs. That is a lazy lazy lazy no
confront method when used alone. Graphs can be falsified, can be too fixed
on one thing and can ignore others unless you read all the graphs of the
part you are interested in.
Graphs are a good indicator and should be used wherever possible. BUT
you must also keep in mind that it requires ALL the graphs to be wholly
accurate in a Conditions assignment and the most accurate Conditions
assignment possible and that the graphs must be based on ACTUAL figures.
So, to begin, you look at the graphs. You look for recent
ups and downs. Then you look for trends (long range drifts up or
down). Then you look for discrepancies.
Like high enrollment-low income, high letters out, low enrollment weeks
later.
It is safe enough at first to simply assign moderate conditions
(Emergency, Normal, Affluence) by the current ups and downs of the graphs.
This should result in expansion.
EXPANSION (product increase) is THE WHOLE REASON you are assigning
conditions in the first place, so you expect reasonably that if you assign
conditions by graph .you will get expansion.
Now, after a while (weeks or months) you see you are getting expansion
so you go on assigning conditions by graph. An Exec Sec would also inspect
the physical areas of Dangers and Affluences as a matter of course.
BUT let us take the reverse case. You assign conditions by graph (and
inspections of Danger and Affluence) and what you are assigning conditions
to DOESN'T expand!
Well, now we get to work. There is something wrong.
The first thing that can be wrong is that what you are assigning
conditions to really doesn't exist. The Director of Comm does not have a
Department of Comm. He has only a messenger-telex operator, no way to
handle his other departmental functions and answers the phone himself.
So, finding no Department REGARDLESS OF OTHER REASONS ("can't get staff"
"income too low" "no quarters") you bang him with a Condition of Non-
Existence. Because he obviously doesn't exist as a Dir Comm, having no Comm
Dept. (Non-Existence is also assigned for NO USE and NO FUNCTION.)
Now, if this assignment to the Dir Comm of Non-Existence-with no further
help from you, mind-does not result in a Comm Dept in a reasonable time you
assume he doesn't want one to be there and you assign a Condition of
Liability.
You don't explain it all away. That's what he's doing so why imitate
him?
You don't say, "He's just overwhelmed-new-needs a review-natter natter
figure figure." You simply ASSIGN!
He STILL doesn't get a Comm Dept there.
You inspect. You find the Ethics Officer isn't enforcing the Liability
penalty ("Pete is my pal and I . . ."). So you assign the Ethics Officer a
Condition of Liability as he gets, naturally, what he failed to enforce.
Now they mutiny and you assign a Condition of Treason, shoot both of
them from guns and fill the posts.
The new incumbents you tell, "The boys before you aren't here now and
aren't likely to be trained or processed until we get around to the last
dregs so we hope you do better. You begin in Non-Existence. I trust you
will work your way out of it at least into Danger before the week is out.
As you are just on post, the penalties do not apply for Non-Existence. But
they will after 30 days. So let's get a Dept of Comm and an Ethics
Section."
Now of course, if the E/O had to be shot from guns, Dir I & R is at once
assigned a DANGER CONDITION complete with penalties as that section was in
his/her Dept.
If there's no HCO (Div 7, 1, 2) part of the Org the LRH Comm of that org
yells for the next senior org to act. And if there's no LRH Comm the next
senior org should see that it's gone by lack of stats or reports or
expansion and act anyway.
Now you say, "But that's ruthless! No staff would . . . . . ."
Well, such a statement reasoning is contrary to the facts.
The only time (by actual experience and data) you lose staff and have an
unstaffed org is when you let low stat people in. Low stat personnel gets
rid of good staff members. An org that can't be staffed has an SP in it!
Orgs where Ethics is tight and savage grow in numbers!
Man thrives oddly enough only in the presence of a challenging
environment. That isn't my theory. That's fact.
If the org environment is not challenging there will be no org.
We help beyond any help ever available anywhere. We are a near ultimate
in helping. At once this loads us up with SPs who would commit suicide to
prevent anyone from being helped and it lays us wide open as "softees" to
any degraded being that comes along. They are sure we won't bite so they do
anything they please. Conditions correctly assigned alone can detect and
.eject SPs and DBs.
So if we help so greatly we must also in the same proportion be able to
discipline. Near ultimate help can only be given with near ultimate
discipline.
Tech can only stay itself where Ethics is correctly and ruthlessly
administered. Admin like ours has to be high because our orgs handle the
highest commodity-life itself.
So our admin only works where tech is IN. And our tech works only where
Ethics is in.
Our target is not a few psychiatric patients but a cleared universe. So
what does THAT take?
The lowest confront there is is the Confront of Evil. When a living
being is out of his own valence and in the valence of a thoroughly bad even
if imaginary image you get an SP. An SP is a no-confront case because, not
being in his own valence, he has no viewpoint from which to erase anything.
That is all an SP is.
BUT the amount of knowing havoc an SP can cause is seen easily if only
in this planet's savage cruel wars.
An executive who cannot confront evil is already en route to becoming
suppressive.
Next door to the "theetie-weetie" case is the totally overwhelmed
condition we call SP (suppressive person).
It is so easy to live in a fairyland where nothing evil is ever done.
One gets the image of a sweet old lady standing in the middle of a gangster
battle with bodies and blood spattering the walls saying, "It's so nice
it's only a boy's game with toy guns."
The low statistic staff member who never gets his stats up is making low
stats. He isn't idle. It's a goodie-goodie attitude to say, "He just isn't
working hard." The chronic low stat person is working VERY HARD to keep the
stat DOWN. When you learn that you can assign conditions and make an org
expand.
When stats WON'T come up, you drop the Condition down. Sooner or later
you will hit the REAL condition that applies.
Conversely as you upgrade conditions you will also reach the condition
that applies. Some staff members are in chronic power. Who ever assigns it?
They take over a post-its stats soar. Well, to measure just stats of the
post taken over as his condition is false since his personal condition is
and has been power. And if it is power, then that personal condition should
be assigned.
That is very easy to see.
BUT what if you have a personnel who whenever he or she takes over a
post the stat collapses!
Well you better assign that one too. For just as the one in Power works
to maintain up stats, the one in the lower condition, whether one cares to
confront it or not, works too and is just as industriously collapsing not
only his own post stats but also the stats of posts adjacent to his! So he
is at least a Condition of Liability as the post if vacant would only be in
Non-Existence! And as somebody next to it might do a little bit for it, it
might even get up to Danger Condition, completely unmanned!
DISCREPANCIES
When there are discrepancies amongst statistic graphs SOME graph is
false.
When you find a false graph you assign anyone who falsified it
intentionally and knowingly a Condition of Liability for that action is far
worse than a non-compliance.
And you had better be alert to the actual area where the false graph
originated as it has a tiger in it. Only physical inspection of a most
searching kind (or a board if it is distant) will reveal the OTHER crimes
going on there. There are always other crimes when you get a false report.
Experience will teach one that if he really looks.
RECIPROCITY
It is more than policy that one gets the condition he fails to correctly
and promptly assign and enforce.
It's a sort of natural law. If you let your executives goof off and stay
in, let us say, a Danger Condition yet you don't assign and enforce one,
they will surely put YOU in a Danger Condition whether it gets assigned or
not.
Remember that when your finger falters "on the trigger".
That natural law stems from this appalling fact.
We didn't, a long long time ago, get in Ethics. We goofed. And the whole
race went into the soup where it remains to this day.
And if we are to live in this universe at all at all we are going to
have to get in Ethics and clean it up.
Whether that's easy to confront or not is beside the point. The horrid
truth is that our fate is FAR more unconfrontable!
Now we have to have highly skilled Tech to bail us out. And I assure you
that tech will never get in or be used beneficially at all unless
1. We get Ethics in, and
2. Unless Scientology orgs expand at a regular rate.
Only then can we be free.
So that's how and WHY you assign and enforce conditions. It's the only
way everyone finally will win.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jp.rd
Copyright � 1967
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 23 OCTOBER 1967
Remimeo
ENEMY FORMULA
(Modifies HCO Pol Ltr of 6 Oct 1967 on Lower Conditions Formulas)
The formula for the Condition of Enemy is just one step:
FIND OUT WHO YOU REALLY ARE.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jp.rd
Copyright � 1967
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
Remimeo
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 8 FEBRUARY 1968
ADMIN KNOW-HOW #18
STATISTIC RATIONALIZATION
"Rationalizing a statistic" is a derogatory term meaning finding excuses
for down statistics.
Finding excuses or reasons why a stat is down does NOT bring it up and
at best is a scathing comment on the lack of foresight or initiative of the
executive in charge of the area.
What is wanted is (1) prevention of stats going down and (2) quick
action to bring them up.
Being reasonable about their being down should be regarded as AGREEMENT
WITH THEIR BEING DOWN. Which is, of course, suppressive.
"Well, the letters out stat is down because we were paying a girl so
much per letter and 'policy' stated we could not hire anyone so we fired
her and that's why letters out is down."
That was an actual rationalization given in Wash D.C. for the collapse
of the org last year.
To begin, there is no such "policy" and surely no policy exists to have
down stats. So, here the felony is compounded by seeking to blame policy
for a down stat which for sure revealed the action as a suppressive effort
to rationalize (and get away with) a down stat.
The only reason stats are down, ever, is because somebody didn't push
them up. All other reasons are false.
IDEE FIXE
Some people have a METHOD of handling a down stat which is a fixed idea
or cliche they use to handle all down stat situations in their lives.
These people are so at effect they have some idea sitting there "that
handles" a down statistic.
"Life is like that."
"I always try my best."
"People are mean."
"It will get better."
"It was worse last year."
They KNOW it isn't any use trying to do anything about anything and that
it is best just to try to get by and not be noticed-a sure route to
suicide.
Instead of seeking to prevent or raise a declining stat in life such
people use some fixed idea to explain it.
This is a confession of being in apathy.
One can always make stats go up. Hard work. Foresight. Initiative. One
can always make stats go up. That's the truth of it, and it needs no
explanations.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jp.rd
Copyright � 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 14 MARCH 1968
Re mimeo
The following is the corrected table of Conditions:
Power
Power Change
Affluence
Normal Operation
Emergency
Danger
Non-Existence
Liability
Doubt
Enemy
Treason (below Enemy) is defined as Betrayal after trust. Formerly was
differently placed and defined as accepting money.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jc.rd
Copyright � 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
Remimeo
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 16 OCTOBER 1968
(Reissued from Flag Order 1474 of the same date)
The formula for the condition of Treason is
"Find out that you are"
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:ja.ei.rd
Copyright � 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 13 FEBRUARY 1969
Remimeo
Issued as
an FO
ETHICS PROTECTION CONDITIONS,
BLUE STAR, GREEN STAR, GOLD STAR
(Modifies, clarifies any earlier FO on Ethics Protection)
BLUE STAR
A Class II Auditor who has his Staff Status II may assign his or her own
ethics conditions when requested to do so.
He or she may be given Ethics Hearings or removed from post pending an
ordered Comm Ev for crimes or high crimes.
GREEN STAR
Scientologists who are CLASS IV Auditors or above and who have graduated
from an Org Exec Course may NOT be assigned arbitrary Ethics Conditions but
may be required by seniors to assign themselves a Condition. There is no
penalty if they do not.
Such may not be given a Court of Ethics.
They may be Comm Eved for HIGH CRIMES only as per earlier Pol Ltrs.
These include failure to take Responsibility and failure to act with
initiative in circumstances which, not handled, bring damage to others or
serious overwork.
Such a person duly appointed to a post or duty who then, by absence from
it, neglect of it or failure to show initiative on it, brings about a
decline of the post and damage to it or areas around it or HIGH CRIMES may
be Comm Eved, but must be Comm Eved in order to remove him or her from the
post.
Such a person is called a GREEN STAR.
___________________
A CLASS VIII Auditor who has completed the Org Exec Course has all the
above Ethics Protection and also may not have any Comm Ev finalised on him
until the Comm Ev held and all evidence is forwarded to the Sea Org for
Review on his request.
He is called a GOLD STAR.
___________________
CERTS AND AWARDS
May issue an appropriate cert for the above awards when attested to by
an HCO Area Sec in any org.
NOTE
None of these Ethics protections are valid and none can be claimed
unless actually applied for and awarded by Blue, Green and Gold Star
certificates. These can be awarded in any official org and can be applied
for also by mail.
The certificate must be explicit and quote the actual lines of this Pol
Ltr.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:sdp.ei.cden
Copyright � 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 20 APRIL 1969
Issue II
Remimeo
HATS, NOT WEARING
The formula for Treason is very correctly and factually, "Know THAT you
are".
It will be found, gruesomely enough, that a person who accepts a post or
position and then doesn't function as it will inevitably upset or destroy
some portion of an org.
By not knowing that he is the _____________ (post name) he is committing
treason in fact.
The results of this can be found in history. A failure to be what one
has the post or position name of will result in a betrayal of the functions
and purposes of a group.
Almost all organizational upsets stem from this one fact:
A person in a group who, having accepted a post, does not know THAT he
is a certain assigned or designated beingness is in TREASON against the
group.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:ja.ei.rd
Copyright � 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF I MAY AD 15
Issue III
Gen Non-Remimeo
Hang Near New Org Board
varnished over or relettered
ORGANIZATION
THE DESIGN OF THE ORGANIZATION
As our Org Board and Org pattern we have not only an Org Board but a
"philosophical system", which gives us the levels of able and extra able
beings and an analysis of one's own life as well.
If you look at the levels written above the departments you find the
spans of the Bridge which are followed to Release, Clear and OT. You can
easily see which ones are missing in one's own life and the lives of
others. These are the upper end of the awareness scale.
When you look at the department names you can see what is missing in
your own life.
You can also see where your post or your job breaks down, for every job
has all these "department names".
When you look at the Division names you see what the Cycle of Production
must be in this Universe to be successful. By studying this you can see why
other businesses fail. They lack one or another of these divisions.
Although the organization seems to have a great many departments, and
would fit only a large group, it fits any org of any size.
The problem presented me in deriving this board was how to overcome
continual org changes because of expansion and applying it to organizations
of different sizes. This board goes from one person to thousands without
change. Just fewer or more posts are occupied. That is the only change.
The staff ratio here is one administration person in the five non-
technical divisions to one technical person in the Technical and
Qualifications Divisions (excepting only staff staff auditors and field
staff members who count as Admin personnel). Staff is added in rotation
amongst the non-technical divisions every time a technical person is put in
the Technical or Qualifications Divisions.
The board is entered from the left and proceeds to the right.
It is actually a spiral with 7 higher than and adjacent to I.
The organization corrects itself through the Review Division, under the
authority of the 7th Division.
Organizations go in phases. The phases agree with the Cycle of
Production.
A forming org, unable yet to function fully, is a CLASS ZERO Org. It is
only at Recognition and gives a Class Zero Course only and uses only Grade
Zero processes. When it can give a Level I Course and use Grade I processes
it is a Class I Org. And so on. The HGC of the org may not process above
the class allowed in the Academy. The Review Case Cracking Unit only may
use processes above the class of the Org and then only when its Review
personnel are so authorized by Saint Hill.
There are two tendencies Man has that this board resolves.
Man's systems are based on groups and masses of people.
Every person on this Org Board is "statistized". That means the job he
does is a statistic that can be verified. He is not lost in a group.
The tendency of filling up every box indicated on an organization chart
(which
Man usually does) is checked by the formula that there must be only one
Admin staff member for every tech as above. Thus Divisions 4 and 5 are
heavy with personnel containing five times as many as all the other
divisions.
In expanding, each department acquires seven sections, every section
then acquires seven sub-sections, every sub-section acquires seven units.
At this time of issue we find Scientology itself just at the end of its
Dissemination Cycle (Division 2) and just entering upon the Organization
Cycle (Division 3). There will be a full and long Organization Cycle. This
will eventually be followed by a Qualifications Cycle in which we adjust
civilization. After that will come a Distribution Cycle in which we use
Scientology elsewhere in the Universe, and then will come the Source Cycle
again, finding us all on a higher plane.
This pattern will probably be in use for a very long time.
This board is one of the very few things in Scientology which is not
completely new. It is taken from an ancient organization and which I have
refined through considerable experience by adding Scientology and our
levels to it. It is based on an extremely successful pattern.
This org pattern is designed not to make money or Scientologists as one
might think. Its whole purpose is to make the "Ability to Better
Conditions", which is the mission of Scientology.
THE LEVELS
Your main interest in this board is of course its levels.
There are over thirty-two levels to the left of the board, covering the
average human states.
Our board shows how we move up onto the Bridge at Communications (Level
0), and then progress division by division to Level VII. One Division
equals one Level left to right.
The abilities recovered in these levels are marked above the department
names (Communication, Perception, Orientation, Understanding, etc.) and
take us all the way to a new state at VII.
As he progresses along this line left to right, a level is given the
person each time a division is passed.
At Level V we find we can move people from the lowest human states onto
the Bridge, before we ourselves exit at the top.
Thus we leave behind us a Bridge.
In 1950 when I said "For God's sake Build a Better Bridge," I had to do
it on my own.
But here it is, not only a bridge but also an organization to carry the
weight of the spanning, a very needful thing.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:mh.jp.cden
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
[Note: See HCO P/L 15 December 1969, Class of Orgs, page 254, which
cancels classes of Orgs and permits any official Org to "perform and teach
any Class or Grade up to IV".]
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 26 OCTOBER 1967
Remimeo
THE PUBLIC DIVISIONS
This Policy Letter founds THE PUBLIC DIVISIONS.
The theory of the Org Board is basically
[pic]
We have hitherto had only the Mind and Body (HCO and Org Divs) in an
Org. Consequently we have not expanded fast enough into the Public.
Our task is to make a cleared civilization. As we have not provided for
the public on our org board, it tends to become another determinism.
In order not to redo or alter the 1965 on 7 Division pattern we will
leave all that valid up to a time an org has more than 50 staff members.
At that time the org must have 3 Public Divisions instead of just one
Div (6) devoted to it.
Thus when an org gets over 50 staff members, its divisions become 9. It
is then called a NINE DIV ORG.
The 3 new divisions are HEADED by THE PUBLIC EXECUTIVE SECRETARY.
Former Division Six is simply expanded with each Dept becoming a
Division with added functions.
The Division then becomes
DIVISION NINE - Executive Div
Dept 27 - Office of LRH
Dept 26 - Office of HCO ES
Office of Org ES
Dept 25 - Office of Public ES
DIVISION ONE - HCO Div
Dept 1 - Routings Appearances & Personnel
Dept 2 - Communications
Dept 3 - Inspections & Reports
DIVISION TWO - DISSEM Div
Dept 4 - Promotion
Dept 5 - Publications
Dept 6 - Registration
DIVISION THREE - TREASURY
Dept 7 - Income
Dept 8 - Disbursements
Dept 9 - Records, Assets & Materiel
DIVISION FOUR - TECH Div
Dept 10 - Tech Services
Dept 11 - Training
Dept 12 - Processing
DIVISION FIVE - QUALIFICATIONS
Dept 13 - Examinations
Dept 14 - Review
Dept 15 - Certs & Awards
DIVISION SIX - Public Planning
Dept 16 - Public Planning
Dept 17 - Public Communications
Dept 18 - Public Reports
DIVISION SEVEN - Public Activities
Dept 19 - Facilities
Dept 20 - Activities
Dept 21 - Clearing
DIVISION EIGHT - Success
Dept 22 - Expansion
Dept 23 - Population
Dept 24 - Success
The various sections of old Div 6 are then spread under 3 divisions
controlled by the Public Executive Secretary.
The full functions of the new departments are expressed in the purpose
of the Public Executive Secretary.
TO HELP LRH CONTACT AND PROCESS THE PUBLIC AND PUBLIC BODIES AND TO MAKE
AND GUIDE THE GOVERNMENT OF A CIVILIZATION.
(Note: I am designing these 3 divisions also so they can stand alone and
form the org board of a small org or Franchise holder who will then add
the earlier two parts [HCO and Org] when he comes up to Academy level.)
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jp.rd
Copyright � 1967
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
[Amended by HCO P/L 12 September 1968, The Public Divisions, Volume 6, page
11.]
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
Remimeo
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 15 DECEMBER 1969
URGENT
CLASS OF ORGS
(Cancels any Pol Ltrs or Eds or orders to the contrary including HCO PL 6
Feb 66.)
There is no such thing as a classed official org.
Any official org (not a Franchise or Gung Ho group) can perform and
teach any Class or Grade up to Class IV.
This includes Standard Dianetics HDC and HDG.
ONLY an official org can teach Academy Courses and qualify students for
Scientology certificates.
HDG can ONLY be taught by an official org. (This qualifies Supervisors
to teach HDC elsewhere.)
Dianetic Certificates can only be issued by an official org even when
the course is taught elsewhere.
The difference between an official org and a Franchise or a Mission is
that an official org is looked to as a distribution point for source, runs
on policy, is responsible for its area and looks to its Continental Org and
WW for policy.
It maintains the quality and standard of tech. It sets a standard for
instruction.
If it maintains its ratio of Admin personnel to Tech (auditors and
supervisors) on a 2 Admin maximum for every tech person and inclines toward
I Admin to I Tech, and promotes well, maintains a professional image,
develops no backlogs and delivers excellent service and cares for its field
with ARC it should be far better paid and more solvent than any Franchise.
The idea of a "Public Division Org" is not very good. It is far better
to develop a full org as in LRH ED 49 INT, Organization Program No. 1.
So long as an org functions crisply with the services it can deliver and
defends itself as per Assistant Guardian actions, it can become very
prosperous, serve its community and do its large share in bettering the
community and doing its share in clearing the planet.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:rs.eg.rd
Copyright � 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 8 FEBRUARY 1968
Issue II
Remimeo
Issue as a Flag Order
SEA ORG ZONES OF PLANNING
The Sea Org is an obvious success. Its promotional and mission actions
resulted in a highest ever worldwide statistic in early Feb 1968.
The Zones of Activity of the Sea Org are therefore of general interest
and are outlined for future Sea Org planning.
MISSIONS TO ORGS
The Sea Org sends its officers to individual orgs with unlimited powers
to handle
(a) Ethics
(b) Tech
(c) Admin.
A general Sea Org Mission handles all three.
Individual Sea Org Missions go out to handle only one of the above also.
An individual Sea Org mission may be sent to handle a specific
situation.
The most successful Sea Org mission to date handled (a) Ethics (b) Tech
(c) Admin and a specific situation.
PROMOTION
Sea Org promotional tours where Sea Org members address the public are a
major item.
These work well in any way but would do best on invitation from orgs and
long term advance notice to public.
General Sea Org promotion, magazine, literature, is effective in general
world wide stats as well as Sea Org stats.
SEA ORG TECH
Controlling the upper end of the Bridge and having so many Class VI and
Class VIIs and OT Grade Vs and OT Grade VI personnel, the technical level
of the Sea Org is very high.
That the public knows it and these OT levels are real and exist and are
available is a factor in world wide stats, persuading people to begin the
lower end of the bridge.
SEA ORG ACTIONS
The actions of the Sea part of the Sea Org being adventurous, is good
will advertising.
The confront and organizational ability of Sea Org personnel is high
above that of purely admin personnel.
Such activities give a strong base for Sea Org predominance.
PUBLIC CONTROL FACTORS
The Sea Org has an area of public or political control based on
A. ETHICS ACTION
B. PEACE
C. FINANCE AND ADMIN
The above are the basic elements in Sea Org planning for use in future
activities and for use by orgs in coordinating with the Sea Org.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jp.rd
Copyright � 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
NOT HCO POLICY LETTER
CORRECT COLOUR FLASH
BLUE ON WHITE
EXECUTIVE DIRECTIVE FROM L. RON HUBBARD
Date 9 December 1969
LRH ED 49 INT
ES Hats
ORGANIZATION PROGRAM NO. 1
[Includes correction of PES functions per LRH ED 58 Int]
HCOES for activation
Where an org is forming or where its stats are low or its performance
poor or it is failing it is URGENT that this LRH ED be put into immediate
effect.
As the form of the org is the first thought and action of the HCO Exec
Sec, he or she should activate this ED as it applies, promptly and
positively.
Where an org has less than five staff do the following, no matter
whether it is forming or performing poorly or failing.
If the org has less than 3 persons in it bring it up to 3 persons or it
isn't an org.
Appoint this much org board
HCO ES OES PES
The senior auditor of the three is the Org Exec Sec.
The one who can type or manage is the HCOES. The one with the best
public reach is the Public Exec Sec.
These three beings give you the first glance at the 2 to 1 Admin-Tech
ratio. An org may have 2 or less Admin personnel to every Tech personnel
(auditor or instructor). There must never be more than 2 Admin to 1 Tech.
No matter how many functions you see on a 9 division Org Bd each one of
the above is responsible for all the major functions which appear in his
org portion.
This org board goes down to as few as 3 staff members as above or as
high as thousands.
In its most basic view, in such a tiny org the major duties are as
follows:
HCOES - Form of org. Reception, Registration, Procurement letters.
Central Files, Ethics, Personnel, Appearance of org and staff, any LRH Comm
and Assistant Guardian duties. Communications, legal.
The functions that MUST be covered for the org's basic survival are Form
of the org. Reception, Registration, and Central Files. These are the
income getting actions of her org. Anyone who ever buys anything from the
org whether via the PES such as a book or small course, is INVOICED with
the person's name and address very legible and correct on the invoice and a
copy of this goes to Central Files and into a folder and into a file
cabinet. To omit these actions prevents the org from having a record for
the Registrar to use to contact and sign people up and the org will
probably fail or go broke. This one admin action is the most neglected and
the most destructive. Addresses for mailings come from CF folders and out
of this Address will grow. These folders never decay unless the person dies
or asks to be taken off the list. Everything relating to comm with this
person and new invoices etc including phone notes goes in his folder.
OES - The Org Executive Secretary-Org Exec Sec combines Accts, Tech and
Qual functions. Elementary banking and bill paying (with the registrar and
PES both able to invoice in, giving the money over to the OES with an
invoice copy) is done by the OES. All auditing and major course supervision
is done by the OES. The combination of duties may look all but impossible
to combine but the strange part of it is, they do and I have done all three
at once in a small unit. The trick is to arrange one's time. The major
functions that must be done for the org to be successful are safeguarding
funds by recording and banking and paying bills, auditing pcs, teaching
students and correcting those cases that fail or students that are slow. If
one of those functions is omitted, especially correction (Qual) then the
org will falter and fail.
PES - The Public Executive Secretary-Public Exec Sec works to get NEW
people. He does not work on people who have already bought something unless
they are dissatisfied or ARC Broken with service and muddying up his field
at which time he severely gets the HCO ES to bring them in and smooth them
out and the OES or a higher org (preferably) to handle them as a tough
case. If the HCO ES fails to handle or the OES has out tech, the PES can
have a very hard time of it. By low level public courses, Sunday Services,
invitations, lectures and contacts and book sales, the PES gets people into
the org, drives them in in a number of ways. When they are in and getting
some service the HCO ES signs them up for higher level higher priced
auditing and training. The PES also runs group processing sessions and co-
audits and schedules such activities. As soon as possible he gets in a
Field Staff Member Program using persons who have had service. Getting
people to give their success stories is part of it.
THE PES GETS OUT A TWICE MONTHLY NEWS LETTER TO HIS FSMs TELLING THEM
WHAT IS BEING SUCCESSFUL AND WHAT IS NOT. HE COAXES FRANCHISES TO SELECT TO
HIS ORG AND GIVES THEM ADVICE, PARTICULARLY BASED ON WHAT OTHER FRANCHISES
ARE DOING WELL. HE KEEPS HIMSELF INFORMED OF WHAT IS SUCCEEDING AND KEEPS
OTHERS ADVISED OF IT AND KEEPS THE PICTURE CURRENT WITH CONTINUAL
REOBSERVATION. He also sells memberships as well as books, tapes, meters,
insignia. Methods of getting new names and getting people into the org
vary. One follows the formula of pushing what was successful and dropping
what wasn't. However, all of the above functions are accomplished by the
PES. He is also the PRO and seeks to establish PRO Area Control meaning
keeping the area handled so the org is well thought of no matter how hard
this is to do where there is an active enemy or a muddied up field or a
hostile press.
TECH BACKLOGS are the primary menace in an org. If it can't deliver
auditing it will shortly find no pcs apply. Neither a tech nor qual backlog
must ever exist and must be reduced.
An org is far better off selling courses and when pcs tend toward
backlog the org increases its tech staff on a long range and starts heavily
pushing courses on a short range basis as there is no real limit to the
number of students one can handle. Students also disseminate better and an
org that only audits pcs stays small and is more expensive to run.
ALL AUDITORS ACTIONS
Whenever an org has a tech or qual backlog it is usual to call an "all
auditors" action.
Any admin personnel assist with scheduling and getting pcs in to the
auditors without making pcs wait or wasting an auditor's time.
All tech trained personnel in the org devote a certain number of hours
in the day to delivering auditing for tech or qual and spend a certain
amount of time on their regular posts until the backlog is gone.
Too many of these "All Auditors" can cut an org to bits.
They are only done so long as there is a backlog. If too frequent the
HCOES should get in volunteer (but paid) field auditors to help
(which was always MSH's successful solution to tech backlogs). The HCOES
is personnel so if personnel
stays short, particularly tech personnel, then the HCOES is not taking
adequate personnel
action and doesn't have a Program to get adequate or qualified staff
auditors. Such programs are vital, their
training and support costs money. The program "Steal the VIs and VIIIs from
another
org" is both dishonest and org wrecking and recoils on one's org
eventually. Interne programs for students help this problem and are to be
found in recent Policy Letters.
The above describes a 3 man functioning org. Yet it also describes all
orgs. It is a circle. The HCOES, mind, routes people to the org's body, the
OES, who routes them to the PES as FSMs and the product of the basis of a
field. From a field stimulated by processed trained people the PES routes
new people to the HCOES and around it goes.
If tech and org integrity and service are good, you get an expansion.
More and knowledgeable people in the field stimulate more and more new
people who then by being routed to the HCOES etc. Around and around.
The cycle is only interrupted by inattentive or poor service resulting
in ARC Breaks in the field which if not handled end expansion. Even the
attacks of competitors and the press have never stopped this circle. Only
inattentive service or staff inattention to functions or poor service halts
it. AN ORG THAT BELIEVES ANYTHING ELSE IS DELUDING ITSELF. Thus
organization and function is everything.
THE BIGGER ORG
No matter how many staff members an org may have the above portions,
functions and actions apply.
What occurs is that the HCOES, the OES and PES begin to acquire
assistants. These have post titles. The org board seems to have a larger
form. But it is always the same org board, the same functions.
Let us say now we have an HCOES, an OES and a PES. And we have two more
staff members making five.
One of these is an auditor. One is a typist. As you must never exceed 2
to 1 of Admin-Tech ratio and if possible keep it below that (it's less the
bigger the org so that a fifty staff member org has half its staff in tech
and will go awry financially if it doesn't have half in tech) as regards
these two additionals, the auditor goes to the OES for auditing and
training help and the typist goes to the HCOES to help write letters to
people in CF.
Now let us say we have 5 non tech staff applicants show up. Obviously 4
will have to go into pre-staff tech training but one can go to the PES
temporarily.
Meanwhile the OES has some students graduating so the HCOES persuades
some to interne which helps the OES.
And so it goes. The functions gradually build up. But they are always
assistants to the HCOES or the OES or the PES.
COMBINED HATS
You normally fill posts by overload noted. But you always bend toward
Registration and Tech Service and Promotion.
In the HCOES portion hats can combine like LRH Comm-HCO Area Sec-Ethics
Officer.
As the Guardian's Office is very successful, in areas under pressure we
try to keep this "single-hatted" on its own line to the Gdn WW. It is a
catch-all front line troops org correction sort of hat.
As the LRH Comm is a split off of the old HCO Area Sec hats these two
combine very easily as HCO Area Sees were LRH's first communicators.
Where there is an LRH Comm single-hatted the org would have to be a 40
or 50 staff member org. [See footnote.]
An E/O is more important to single hat in a larger org but if not single
hatted must be a specific duty of the HCOES or the HCO Area Sec.
The OES as he struggles up the line for more tech staff finds accounts
something he can well shed and so, an accounts personnel comes under his
early tech allocations. This is not stated in previous policy. The OES
assigns his better auditors to Qual actions but he continues to do tech
actions until the org is safely large. Early policy on VIIIs placed them in
Qual. However it assumes an org is there. An VIII in a tiny org would have
to be the OES and the Case Supervisor and also audit and it would be quite
a lot of more staff members later before he was now not the Case
Supervisor.
Early on the OES splits apart training and processing as separate
departments and then finally a Qual. Until he has the traffic for it he
patches up the pcs other auditors flubbed. But if he is very clever in a
small org, the OES shunts all the goofed up hard pcs up to a larger org
right away and is satisfied to collect the FSM of it as such pcs stall his
lines or may be beyond local skill. That's what larger orgs are for. The
rougher pcs.
The PES with his share of staff concentrates on his small courses, book
sales and magazine actions as the logical zones to fill and with greater
success tries to get a single-hatted Director of Clearing to handle FSM
actions and see them through.
SHRUNKEN ORGS
We have covered the tiny org but the whole thing applies to an org that
has shrunk.
The only real reasons an org shrinks are because it
(a) Followed illegal or destructive orders from above.
(b) Failed to do its job as an org as outlined in the earlier part
of this paper-in other words was disorganized.
(c) Failed to give good service and got its field muddied up with
ARC Breaks.
(d) Didn't outflow (letters, magazines, had no PES functioning).
(e) Didn't train or process its own staff.
(f) Didn't look or act sufficiently professional in staff member
appearance and conduct or in quarters.
(g) Let huge backlogs occur without giving fast good tech service.
(h) Monitored its rate of sign-up against what a lazy OES was
willing to get handled or would arrange to get handled.
(i) Let its Admin-Tech ratio go kooky.
(j) Was subjected to internal suppression which blew off good staff
and lost its safe environment without anyone locating the SP.
(k) Let itself be raided of auditors by the call of big money in
Franchise.
(j) Let staff procurement be turned into freeloading.
To resolve these or other troubles one has to
A. Confront what it was.
B. Remedy it vigorously.
C. Get in the pattern and actions given in this ED NOW NOW NOW.
REORGANIZATION
To use this ED to reorganize an org or to increase its effectiveness,
restudy the basic functions of the HCOES, OES, and PES as given here,
consider that these three people are the working people of the org and need
assistance. Don't consider them executives. Consider the HCOES with her
hands full of interviews-registration-comm-Ethics functions, consider
the OES as having his hands full of pcs and students and doing
accounts between Case Supervision and lecturing and consider the PES
scrambling around the area selling new people the idea of coming in for
service and
running an FSM sales staff, organizing groups and placing and collecting
for books in bookstores and you see them in the expected light, acting but
needing help. If you see these as high status orderers of destiny with
uncalloused hands operating from mysterious forces with incomprehensible
requirements, the org is up the chimney already. We at the top of
Scientology work and work hard. And the duties are as roughly outlined at
the beginning of this ED. All the way to the top I still C/S case folders
or keep tabs on the C/Sing for pcs around. I still drive students to
complete. I intervene when your books show cash-bills reversed. I work in
the other two ES sectors, actually work in them and do my own research-
writing hats besides.
Right this moment, I am handling your org personally.
The first question I'm asking, "Have you got Ethics Program No. 1
basically done?" Right away get the results packaged and sent off.
The second question, "Have you got a backlog in Tech or Qual? How many
auditors anywhere in the org? OK, get an All Auditors going now, today!"
The third, "What's the state of ARC Breaks in your field? OK PES round
them up and get them to the HCOES and then into Qual to get their overts
pulled. Overts? You heard me. Overts. Then put in their Life Ruds."
The fourth question, "Where's your Ethnic survey, PES, on what people
think staff should be dressed like? To look more professional. Get it done,
and on HCOES orders get the money squeezed out of the OES and buy some
outfits for the Ethics Upstats and reliable contracted execs. And get this
place cleaned and neated up."
The fifth question, "What's your outflow? That's not good enough. Get it
organized-magazine, Info packs, letters from letter reg. All hands onto any
stuffing-mailing cycle."
The sixth question, "How neat and complete is your CF? Get any and all
folders out of mothballs and get a project going on it as you can."
The seventh question, "What state is your Address in? Good. Work it over
so it is the exact index of your CF as you can. Meanwhile use it."
The eighth question, "What's your Tech-Admin ratio? All right, get the
trained auditors into Tech and Qual and off Admin posts. Assign one to
HCOES and one to PES up to a 2 to 1 ratio and put the rest on full time
training. Get personnel staff member procurement going right away of people
who will be Ethics upstats. OK, let's post it up holding as many posts
stable as we can but double triple batting them where we can't cover."
The ninth question, "How is Staff Training Program No. 1 going? All
right, smooth those out. Soon as they're ready get this staff audited."
The tenth question, "What students do you have on courses that are slow
or blowey. All right Registrar here's HCOB 23 November 69. OES to Starrate
it for action on the Tech Auditors and Registrar to sell each slow student
a five hour Student Rescue Intensive."
The eleventh question, "Have you got your staff broken contracts list?
Turn it over to the HCOES's people for further action. Oh, you say some of
the VIIIs you trained up were lured off by a higher org and Franchise?
Well, we'll make do here and audit with what we've got and I'll pass the
contract breaker names to the Sea Org for their further attention, poor
souls."
"You say what do you do with the bill collectors and the enemy and the
half complete project on surveying salesmen? Well, I'll tell you. You turn
those over to the respective Exec Sees each comes under and the enemy to
the Guardian's Office and get the show on the road. You'll never clear the
planet sitting around here worrying. Remember the old maxim? When all else
fails, do What Ron Said."
Love,
Ron
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
[The above issue is amended by HCO P/L 9 July 1970,
LRH Comm-Single flatting, which states: "Amends LRH
ED 49 INT by omitting 'where there is an LRH Comm
single-halted the Org would have to be a 40 or 50
staff member Org.' "]
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 6 DECEMBER 1969
Issue II
All Dissern Hats
All Public Div. Hats
HOW TO CLEAR YOUR COMMUNITY ILLUSTRATIONS
The following illustrations are the basic steps in Clearing your
community.
These steps are covered in detail in HCO Pol. Letters in the Org Exec
Course.
The Illustrations must be prominently displayed in Numerical order in
the Central Files area, the Letter Registrar area and the Division 8
Department 22 area in your org.
Sets of these pictures are to be printed up by Pubs Org for display
purposes in the above areas.
Pubs Org should also have these printed photo litho as a small picture
book for FSMs.
W/O Cathy Cariotaki
F/Expansion Officer
&
W/O Richard Gorman
F/Artist
for
Lt. Cmdr. Diana Hubbard
CS-6
for
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH: DH. RG. CC. rs. rd
Copyright � 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
[pic]
[pic]
[pic]
[pic]
[pic]
[pic]
[pic]
[pic]
[pic]
[pic]
[pic]
[pic]
[pic]
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 15 SEPTEMBER 1965
Remimeo
ONLY ACCOUNTS TALKS MONEY
(HCO Policy Letter of March 15, 1965 Revised)
Scientology organizations are service organizations. Now, it goes
without saying, that service costs money. So please don't equate service
with the idea that it is all give away. People expect to pay for good
service, and they do pay for good service, unless you barrier the line, or
by some foolish handling, convince them otherwise.
It is the job of the Distribution Division to find people to communicate
to, and the job of the Letter Registrar to communicate to these on an
individual basis and to promote to them the service that best suits their
needs and goals, and the job of the Advance Scheduling Reg to see that they
are scheduled for that service and to help them get to the org for it, and
the job of the Body Reg is to see to it that when they get to the org, that
they are signed up and routed to that service, and when they have had it,
to see that they did, and to bridge them to further service. The whole
operation here is to CHANNEL PEOPLE TO THE PROPER SERVICE, AND WHEN THEY
HAVE RECEIVED THAT SERVICE, TO CHANNEL THEM TO FURTHER SERVICE. Now, the
above org personnel, knowing about the Road to Truth and hence knowing an
infinity more about the person usually, than he or she knows about himself
or herself, must take responsibility for this and channel them and keep
them on the Road until the person cognites and reaches for the rest of the
Road himself. Even then, they must now and then be kept from falling into
pitholes, side paths, etc, that the confusions and randomities and
distractions of life present.
But none of this has anything to do with money, except that such
services are expected to be paid for. Money is an Accounting function. When
money is a concern of a Registrar, and "How is he going to pay for this"
and "We have got to keep our units up", and "Gads, I have got to write up a
note form now", and "That's going to cost him too much", when any
Registrar's concern is all about money, money, MONEY, MONEY, MONEY-he or
she gets all inverted into what are we going to get out of it, instead of
what the person is going to get out of it. In all his years of auditing,
which exceed anything any of the rest of us have even dreamed about, Ron
has never talked to the guy who wanted some auditing or whatever about
money. Yes, it was understood it was going to cost something and what it
would cost, but that was the end of it. Ron's concern was for the guy and
getting him better, and he was not even remotely worried about the money,
and the money rolled in because he got the guy better. Sometimes he was
paid in eggs and cheese, but the guy was wanting to pay because he got
service. Ron never had a problem about money, and he never talked about
money. The Registrar's concern about money barriers the line for someone
coming in, and that's an overt any Scientologist recognizes-to barrier the
line of someone coming into Scientology. When a Registrar answers up to
someone's desire for service with a confused mess concerning money, that
confusion is a barrier. And if a Registrar's concern is on money instead of
service then her communications are going to communicate a confusion, and
barrier the line. It amounts to an alter-is, so REGISTRARS ARE FORBIDDEN TO
TALK, WRITE OR THINK ANYTHING ABOUT MONEY.
Well, how about money, then? How does this get handled?
Simple. MONEY IS AN ACCOUNTING FUNCTION. It IS the proper concern of
Accounts. (Div 3-Dept of Income.)
With Accounts, money is simply collected. Accounts collects from the
person the amount of the price of the service desired. That is all there is
to it. It collects the amount, invoices it and routes a copy of the invoice
through the org lines to the Division that the service is to be delivered
in, so that they may know it is all right to go ahead and deliver the
service.
The Invoicing Cashier in Department 7, Division 3 is at post
preferably in a wicket.
This is exactly like a theatre ticket front, complete with the glass window
with
the hole (small and awkward) in it to talk through and the hole at the
bottom to slide money through. Any accounts office door, if up front in the
org, can be fixed with a half door to look like this. It would not at all
be out of place for the cashier to wear a green eyeshade, and have a very
detached attitude about anything except money or money matters. Very
businesslike. Posted on the outside of the wicket or immediately in the
area on display signs are the prices for books, materials and services
offered by the org. If the cashier is asked for data, he points to the
proper sign.
A person coming into the org first comes into Reception. If the person
wants a service he or she is routed to the Body Registrar. The Body Reg
talks about and signs the person up for service. If the person has a
question about the cost, the Body Reg says "You will need to talk to
Accounts about that" and routes them to the Invoicing Cashier, who shows
them the prices on the display signs. When the Body Reg has signed the
person up for the service on proper contract and release forms, the person
is routed to the Invoicing Cashier for paying. When paid the white copy of
the invoice goes to the person, and the pink copy is routed immediately to
the Division the service is to be performed in-generally Tech (pink gets
routed to Dept 10-Tech Services)-or Qual (pink gets routed to the Invoicing
Officer of Dept of Review).
The Invoicing Cashier (Dept 7) always expects for the service to be paid
for i.e. expects cash, not credit. The subject of credit must not be
brought up by the Invoicing Cashier. For example, the question would be
"Are you going to pay this by cash or check?"-NEVER "Is this going to be
cash or credit?" If the person is going to ask for credit, then it must be
his origination. In the event it is asked for, then it must have the Org
See's OK, who before giving it, must check the person's past credit record
with the org. People who have a bad payment record on their org bills must
not be extended further credit. When credit is extended, a proper note must
be signed at 12% interest if not paid in 90 days and they must sign the
debiting invoice.
When the service is completed with the person, the last person he sees
on the org lines is the Body Registrar, who channels the person to further
service.
The Reception area, Invoicing Cashier, and Book Store should be located
close to one another. If someone comes in wanting a book, he or she is
routed to the Book Store in which books are on display, but separated as to
if they are for Beginners or Advanced Scientologists. The books for
Beginners and to the public books should be prominently marked by Display
signs. When the book or books are selected, the person pays the Invoicing
Cashier and receives their invoice (white). The book must be paid for
before it is handed over to him or her. The pink invoice is marked 'Book
Store-Delivered' and routed at the end of the day to the Shipping
Department for entry on the Book Dept Income Sheet and then to the
'Shipped' records.
The Book Store should be close to the Reception area but remember that
to have Reception selling books is crossing Divisions. Reception only
routes. However, in the immediate Reception area should be Display posters
on books, Free Introductory Lecture, BS Course, graphs, and other
promotional material-all prominently displayed. If someone comes in asking
"What is Scientology", the Receptionist routes him to the Free Introductory
Lecture by giving him an Invitation, and routes him to the Book Store for a
book that covers Beginning Scientology. The Receptionist is forbidden to
try to explain Scientology or processing. If someone comes in not knowing
what they want, but that they want to talk to someone about Scientology,
the Receptionist routes them to the Body Reg to channel them into a
Service.
The Letter Registrar may not talk money. However, he or she may enclose
rate cards for org services and book price lists.
So please each Division do its own work. Registrars-channeling to
service; Reception-routes; and only Accounts talks money.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:mh.rd
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
[See also HCO P/L 3 August 1970, Registrars May Now Talk Money-Only
Accounts Talks Money Details, in the 1970 Year Book; HCO P/L II March 1971
Issue I, Registrar Invoicing Line, Volume 2-page 349, Volume 3-page 268;
HCO P/L 26 October 1971 Issue II, Statistic of the Body Registrar, and HCO
P/L 2 February 1972, Invoicing Clarification, in the 1971 and 1972 Year
Books.]
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 21 NOVEMBER 1968
Remimeo
SENIOR POLICY
We always deliver what we promise.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:ei.rd
Copyright � 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 30 JULY 1968
Remimeo
GROSS INCOME SENIOR DATUM
THE SIZE NOT THE QUALITY OF AN ORG'S MAILING LIST AND THE NUMBER OF
MAILINGS AND LETTERS TO IT DETERMINES THE GROSS INCOME OF AN ORG. IF THIS
IS NOT KNOWN AS A SENIOR DATUM TO EXEC SECS AND KEPT IN BY THEM THEIR
CONDITION IS TREASON.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:js.rd
Copyright � 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 18 NOVEMBER 1969
Issue I
Remimeo
Pub Div Hats
Div 2 Hats
HCO ES Hat
OES Hat
PES Hat
CENTRAL FILES
VALUE OF
THE GROSS INCOME OF THE ORG AND WHY
The easy way orgs give away their Central Files or pieces of them to
other orgs indicates a complete miss on their value.
The average file folder in a CF file never costs less than $10 a folder
to obtain.
When you think of all the work and mailings of the Public Divisions and
realize that the direct Product of that thought and activity is a CF folder
you begin to get some idea of what it cost to have a folder to file.
The gross income catastrophes that follow giving another org the CF
folders of its area are fantastic. One check showed Wash DC dropped and
lost around $27,000 Gross Income in about one quarter after it gave away
pieces of their CF to small East Coast US orgs which didn't even have the
facilities to use them.
SH left half a ton of US CF folders in London unshipped to the US for a
long time. The astonishing thing is the tame presentation of at least
$280,000 worth of folders to ASHO with no thought of making any deal.
Jbg some years ago "misplaced" its basic 6500 CF address list and lost
the files utterly. It took 2 years to find the list (they had left it in an
old attic) and then for 2 more years did nothing with it. Stats down all
the time of course.
Treasonable propaganda to the effect "it's an old file" "those names
aren't hot anymore" encourage the disuse and disposal of CF files.
Yet a 5 year old file where the person has been written to dozens of
times can suddenly come alive, the person walking into the org.
I have seen dozens of "disposed" "inactive" files worked over and
produce thousands of dollars.
So a file is worth at least $10 or more to get but it is worth hundreds
when continually written to.
An org's potential fortune, its potential gross income is its CF. So
what would you think of a staff member or executive who simply gave away
big pieces of the gross income.
Well, think the same thing of someone who gives away CF folders. Or who
lets their address go stale. Or who fails to keep them up and work them
over.
In the US if anyone changes his address, the Post Office only keeps the
change of address card for 6 months. DC, failing to mail to a 40,000 CF
list two or three times a year lost 27,000 of those names because the
people moved, the address change at the PO got torn up and nobody could be
reached anymore.
The process by which you get your Gross Income, your portion of
proportionate pay and which pays for further dissern and PRO and service is
not a mysterious action. People don't just walk in out of the blue.
The Public Divisions get people into CF (by definition, CF is "people
who have bought something from an org"). Then Div 2 gets them into higher
services by Ltr Reg or phone actions. Then upper orgs get them into upper
services by paying FSM commissions to the lower orgs.
It can get very baffling how this simple and ONLY source of gross income
can be so missed that an org gives away its CF.
Even if "that folder" has bought everything that org has, it is still
worth a 10% FSM commission to the org who owns it if that org selects it
and sends it literature.
Honest, believe me, this is the only route by which you get in gross
income:
1. Public Div actions
2. Div 2 actions
3. Good service actions
4. FSM to upper orgs.
There isn't any other route for all other routes also have to follow
this route. Even Pub Div FSM selections come back into CF for further
action after first service.
Public Div actions mean "New names to CF."
Is CF then only able to sell to "new" names? If so your Division II
isn't worth scrapping. Or your Divs IV and V need a hammering for having
out-tech and muddying up a field.
Listen: There is no other route to Gross Income than via CF.
Aside from dead people or people who want off the list or people who
move with no address change THERE IS NO VALID CF AGE.
Address of course is the CF index as well as who gets the magazine.
"Yes", somebody says, "but SIOUX Falls is West of our territory.
. . . . And the org there said. . . . . ." Listen, I wouldn't give another
org the time of day if my org got the CF.
Stop being so big hearted with your org's future gross income.
An OES, worried about having enough money to keep the org going and
provide services would be amazed to find out what would happen to his GI if
he forced this Pol Ltr to be checked out on the whole org. I'll bet better
than 90% of staff haven't a clue as to how or why or by what route they get
ANY income at all. It's all in this Pol Ltr.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:rs.ei.rd
Copyright � 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
NOT HCO POLICY LETTER
CORRECT COLOUR FLASH
BLUE ON WHITE
EXECUTIVE DIRECTIVE
11 January 1968
ED 805 INT
(Originally issued
as Flag Order 340)
SPEED OF SERVICE
In the matter of courses and students SPEED of service is of vital
importance.
The prosperity of a business is directly proportional to the speed of
flow of its particles (despatches, cables, goods, messengers, students,
customers, agents, etc.).
To prosper, service must be as close to instant as possible.
Anything which stops or delays the flows of a business or delays or puts
a customer or product on WAIT is an enemy of that business.
Good management carefully isolates all stops on its flow lines and
eradicates them to increase speed of flows.
Speed of service is of comparable magnitude to quality of service and
where exaggerated ideas of quality exist they must become secondary to
speed.
Only then can a business prosper.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
[The above ED has also been issued as HCO P/L 27 December 1972, same
title.]
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 19 MARCH 1968
(HCO Policy Letter of October 29, 1959 Issue II
amended and re-issued)
All Fran. Hids.
SERVICE
It has come to my attention that some Central Orgs are not quick to
furnish service and co-operation to Franchise Holders or Field Auditors,
and also that these are sometimes upset with Central Orgs.
It is not true that Franchise Holders are all out to destroy Central
Orgs.
It is not true that all Central Orgs are out to do in Franchise Holders.
Both Central Orgs and Franchise Holders are inter-dependent. Further, I
have never intended Scientology Orgs or Groups to be bits of third dynamic
each opposed. For nine years Dianetic and Scientology Orgs and Groups have
tended to individuate to my sorrow.
We will win if we are Scientology not a lot of isolated groups.
The watchword is SERVICE.
I don't care how many rules you break if they're broken to give
unselfish service to one another and the public. We live for service not
for rules.
If the combined power of all of us and all organizations were exerted as
a shoulder to shoulder effort we would take this planet just as we are and
with no more than we know.
"Competition" is a trick of the weak to fetter the strong.
Where there's a group to be helped or a preclear to be processed or a
student to be trained, see that it's done and if it gets done don't count
the costs in broken rules.
We are essentially an evolutionary group. All of us together. We must
not fetter ourselves beyond increasing our own efficiency, nor must we
entangle our purposes with arbitrary laws which do not further our cause.
Service is the watchword. Orderly service is preferable to disorderly
service but any service is better than no service.
We are essentially breakers of "now-I'm-supposed-to's". Don't fall into
our own new rituals so hard that we are no longer brave and effective.
Worldwide we are doing better today because of orderly comm lines and
administrative patterns, we are making more headway and suffer less
confusion, but don't worship our rituals. Be as orderly as you can. Follow
our rules as best you can. But a rule can be wrong and service and our
mission can never be wrong.
Use the rules until they prevent you from doing your job. But if these
stop you, then to hell with the rules! Get the show on the road!
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jc.rd
Copyright � 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 25 MARCH 1963
RE-ISSUE SERIES (11)
CenOCon
SHSBC Students
Franchise
Field
A MODEL HAT FOR AN EXECUTIVE
(Re-issue of HCO Bulletin of September 19, 1958)
- Primary -
To accomplish the purposes of the organization and/or his department on
a continuing basis by the use of adequate organization and personnel.
To get people in his or her department or organization to get the work
done.
To understand the jobs of staff members and to get them to ably wear all
of their hats.
- Secondary -
To gain compliance with old or create new standard policy as necessary
and to gain compliance in particular with the policy laid down by the Board
and the policy already existing in standard hats.
Planning of campaigns and activities to create new or fulfill old
demands and to utilize thereby personnel.
Personnel: Improving his personnel's understanding of their posts and
duties and improving their interest and activity on that post.
Acquiring new personnel as needed on that post.
Adjusting work burden.
________________
An executive must realize that this is his whole hat as an executive and
that any other activity in which he is engaged than the above is another
hat and should be written up as such and is no part of his executive hat.
He must also be certain that an adequate amount of his time is spent
filling his executive post, not another post he holds as a staff terminal.
________________
See HCO Bulletin of August 27, 1958, entitled "Executives of Scientology
Organizations". (Re-issue Series [3] dated October 30, 1962.)
________________
The task of an executive is to put hats on people. Therefore, he should
be very careful not to violate hats by introducing emergency programmes
which pull off hats or by "temporarily" pulling people off post to do jobs
not covered by their hats. If he has such jobs not covered by hats he
should make provisions for their accomplishment in existing hats or create
new hats.
________________
Executives should not write critical or confusing dispatches to
terminals having to do with their performance of duty.
Such matters as conduct or rearrangement of post should be taken up with
the terminal directly. The only writing is done after the fact of
arrangements.
Wide open comm lines such as we have cannot tolerate critical, confusing
or distempered dispatches. There is no reason here to learn by experience
what is already known-entheta on free comm lines can disturb an
organization's comm system beyond belief. This applies equally to
dispatches from terminals to executives.
In the case of an executive in one part of the
world having difficulty with the conduct of a terminal in
another part of the world, do not dispatch the terminal.
Dispatch instead the executive in that part of the world closest to the
terminal-explain the situation to that executive and have him take it up
personally with the terminal. Even in a local operation, if you cannot
interview the terminal in question, do not send a critical dispatch to him.
Have the nearest executive to the terminal take it up with that terminal.
No dispatch goes directly to such a distant terminal.
(THE ABOVE IS FACT; THE FOLLOWING IS MY OPINION
AND MAY BE CONSIDERED CONTROVERSIAL:)
Anyone will discover, in actually dealing with people, that these
factors dominate:
1. People are willing to do their best and will until hammered about it.
2. Most causes for complaint are based not on misconduct but on
misunderstanding.
3. Only personal contact can restore understanding.
4. Written criticism or anger is rarely repaired by more writing. A
breach opened by writing is usually susceptible to being healed only
by personal contact. The moral is, therefore, don't open the breach
with a distempered dispatch.
5. Don't let a detected error drift. Take it up and correct it when
found.
6. Don't accumulate "bad marks" against a terminal before acting. Forget
old "bad marks" when they have been corrected.
7. A terminal has his side of the story. As the person on the job he has
more valid data than the executive. Listen and question before you
decide you're outraged.
8. The only capital an executive has is the willingness TO WORK.
Preserve it. No person can be driven to labour-as every slave society
has found out. They always lose. When a man is whipped, that work he
then does still stems from his willingness alone. Anger made it
smaller.
Terminals that are confused and have gone wrong are patched up just as
an auditor patches up an ARC break. The terminal is also conscious of his
own overt acts and thoughts.
The only persons an executive cannot handle are those Who continually
say or dramatize: "It can't be done". These persons are already spoiled by
bad 8c in life. No matter if the person is the attorney or the accountant
or the head sweeper, if his response to all solutions offered is, "It can't
be done" (either stated or acted out) the executive has only two answers:
order him to intensive intensives or fire him. Short of this action, the
executive has no other course to take. Threats, penalties, scoldings, all
accomplish nothing.
We have then three classes of possible personnel:
1. The willing
2. The defiant negative
3. The wholly shiftless.
To handle these we have three classes of action only and none in
between. (An authentic case of white is white and black is black.)
Class One (above): Handle them as outlined here with understanding,
intelligence, helpfulness, courage and compassion.
Class Two (above): Process only, or fire.
Class Three (above): Process only, or fire.
Class two and three are non-employable. Why burden the staff or
economics of the organization with them.
The Willing include the overbearing, the meek, the swift, the slow, the
efficient, the worried. Threats and punishing regulations do not help them-
only hurt the innocent with the guilty. Tight scheduling, insistence,
reason, crispness, and ARC help them.
The Unwilling are bait only for auditors or the unemployment bureau.
Leave a post vacant rather than hire them. You'll wish you had.
Don't confuse a clash of personalities, independence and lack of
subservience with unwillingness to do. The military does this and look at
it! If you only want a staff that won't talk back, join the army-they
punish people for communicating or deserting. Some very high class bastards
can do some high class jobs.
The Unwilling only do or say "can't" no matter what solution or task is
offered. Usually they don't talk. Sometimes they are models of meekness.
But like a hunting dog that won't kill chickens, they are no good to you.
If they're out of your organization or department, you have only the
willing left-so why look further in executing than being decent. The man
who doesn't appreciate it isn't with you anyway. So that leaves only one
code of conduct for an executive to follow, the one outlined here. His
personnel hat excludes the Mr. No and Miss Can't and Master Flop. An
executive needs as much discipline and anger as he lets the Unwilling in.
The first principle of an executive is to accomplish the goals of the
organization and department. He must employ the Willing and maintain ARC.
And remember that there's an R in it.
A quarter of a century of leadership in this life has taught me that the
only underprivileged posts there are, are posts of leadership. As one rises
on the scale of authority his flaws magnify and so does his power to hurt
and destroy. It would take an archangel to be a perfect executive. Despite
the trying nature of an executive post it yet must be filled-and filled
with understanding, intelligence, helpfulness, courage and compassion. When
a lack of these enters upon an organization's comm lines, the organization
sickens and is gone-just as our world at large is doing.
Our staff are willing. I believe in them and trust them. Nobody could
ever do the job we're all doing-but we're doing it.
A hundred thousand years of future are looking at us-we can only measure
up by doing our jobs as best we can today-with understanding, intelligence,
helpfulness, courage and compassion-to the greatest good of the greatest
number of dynamics. It is a large order-but the first to fill it must be
our executives.
HOW TO ISSUE INSTRUCTIONS TO PERSONNEL
1. Have a definite clear-cut and correct estimate of situation.
2. Make a precise, properly communicative statement in writing of
exactly what you want done.
3. Reissue 2.
4. Reissue 2.
5. Reissue 2.
There are no other steps.
Every time you issue a direct, precise and orderly order you may
generate a confusion. It runs out as the order is repeated over and over.
The "reasons why" "the order is hard to duplicate" is the run off of a
confusion. Don't Q & A with the confusion. Just issue the order again while
maintaining good ARC.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:jw.rd
Copyright � 1958, 1963
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 25 OCTOBER 1968
All Execs
Remimeo
Org Exec Course
Introductory
IMPORTANT
ADMIN KNOW-HOW
When trying to get stats up you must realize that what GOT stats up will
GET stats up.
Using new, unusual experiments can crash your full intention.
In new Programmes the BUGS have not been worked out. It's like a newly
designed piece of machinery. The clutch slips or the h.p. is sour.
New programmes are undertaken on a small scale as PILOT PROJECTS. If
they work out, good. Spot the bugs, streamline them and prove them. Only
then is it all right to give them out as broad orders.
So it isn't good for an EC to hand out strings of orders. Or for an
executive to start a lot of new projects.
There is a thing called STANDARD ADMIN. It comes from the Policy
Letters.
When we produced the wild, soaring tech stats with the Sea Org Class
VIII Auditor programme IT WAS BY PUTTING IN THE EXACT PROCESSES AND GRADES.
By going Super Standard we got 100% case gain.
It is the same with Policy. If you get an org in with Super Standard
Policy-Promotion, form and Admin-the stats SOAR.
TELEX ORDERS
Instead of sending out a mad avalanche of orders on Telex, an exec
should only send the number and date of the Pol Ltr he wants in AND THEN
SHOULD RIDE THAT ONE ORDER until it is in.
To choose WHAT Policy Letter is of course the trick. One has to know
something about the Conditions of the org before sending the order.
TRYING TO GET ALL POL LTRS IN at once can also swamp an org. "Get on
Policy" is a meaningless remark. Get on such and such a Policy, if it is
obviously out, is a very valuable action.
GENERAL EXEC ACTIONS
EDs are there to say WHAT policy should be concentrated on, not to give
new orders.
An Executive who is wise, gets in Policy on a gradient (little by
little, building it up higher and higher, keeping the old in while adding
in the new).
To understand how to do this, one must be able to conceive of basic
outnesses. It requires real genius to discover how gross and how basic an
outness can be.
An Exec pounds away with a high level policy on how to do accounting. Is
his face red when he finds the reason for the muddle is that there isn't
anyone in the division!!!
Once we almost "did our nut" trying to find what outness had unmocked an
org. All sorts of involved conclusions were reached. All manner of orders
given without any improvement. And then "murder outed". EVERY registrar in
the org had been removed and no new ones appointed. The public couldn't
find anyone to sign them up.
I once sent a Continent into Power simply by discovering that it had not
appointed people to the posts of Exec Sec in any org! How "out" can it get?
As soon as Exec Secs were appointed, the whole Continent went into Power.
I once read an ED which (a) removed all executives but one and then (b)
gave 20 complex orders "to be done at once". The one remaining personnel
could not have executed any of them. I at once cancelled ALL EDs not issued
by myself and shortly up went the stats.
Wondering why no mail is ever mailed does not call for a complex policy.
It calls for a policy about the form of the org, how it must have Exec
Sees, Divisional Sees. For there to be no mail going out can only mean
there's nobody on post!
A Divisional Sec trying to get in his division's policy must look first
for GROSS outnesses. They are never small. And then he must get them in by
Policy. Then they'll stay in.
There IS a Standard Admin. It deals in simplicities. People are on post.
Particles flow. Promotion is done. Tech is delivered. The org board is up
and is followed.
If policy isn't in at that level of largeness, it will never go in on
higher points.
Knowing an org inside out is also knowing who to tell to do what and
what policy to get in when. It's like knowing how to drive a car. It won't
go if you don't know where the ignition switch is located. Policy outnesses
occur and unusual ideas are put forth only by those who don't know what is
usual in the first place.
Like Standard Tech, in Standard Policy the results come from getting in
the basics and doing them well.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jp.ei.rd
Copyright � 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 7 MARCH 1969
Remimeo
ORGANISATION
It may be that in studying policies and org boards or trying to get
something going, the basic of organisation may be missing.
Organisation is the sub-division of actions and duties into specialised
functions.
One can organise a series of actions to be done by himself or herself.
This would consist of seeing what has to be done, doing what one can do
first and then the remainder as a feasible series of events, all to
accomplish a final completion of a cycle of action which forwards one's
assigned or postulated purposes.
A group is organised so as to permit flows and accomplish specialised
actions which are completed in themselves and from which small actions or
completions, the group purpose, assigned or specialised, is forwarded or
accomplished.
There is a difference between directing and doing which some people have
trouble separating apart. A person in charge of an activity is sometimes
found deficient in organisational understanding and so tries to do all the
actions himself. This if done to excess effectively can break up a group
and render it useless since all members but one have no function, having
been robbed by this one-man monopoly on action.
True, an active and competent person can do things better. But he can
really never do more than he can do. Whereas a well organised group, each
with specialised functions, coordinated by the in-charge, can accomplish
many times the work only one can do.
Because it is organised makes a group harder to defeat than the
individual.
A competent individual who has been let down too often by groups tends
to take it all on himself rather than whip the group into shape and get
things organised.
The correct action when faced by urgent necessity arising from
incompetence of a group or other causes, is to
1. Handle it
2. Organise the group to handle such things and do their jobs.
One can get stuck on I and if he or she does, then will have trouble and
overwork from there on out. Because he or she omits also doing 2.
________________
The major failure of any group is to fail to organise.
Workers of the world may arise but if they are not quickly organised
before or after the fact, they will promptly be put back down!
The major cause of not organising is just not understanding what is
meant by it.
For example, an executive is told he is in charge of
seeing that the X project is done. He doesn't know much
about it. He has two men who do know. The incorrect
action is to try to do the X project himself or issue a lot of unreal
orders about it. The
correct action is to call up the man who does know, give him the other as
an assistant and tell them to get on with it. Then, without interfering,
the executive who received the order should get more knowledgeable about
the X project so he can be sure it is done, while still letting the
designated people get on with it.
This comprehension of organisation is as simple as this-put somebody on
the job and let him get on with it. On a project, make a survey of all the
things there are to do, group types of actions into simple posts, assign
people to them, provide the comm lines, materiel and liaison and let the
group get on with it.
Any post, no matter how junior, has to be organised.
Anyone in charge of people has to be able to organise functions and
work.
Any executive has to know his target policies and be able to write them
up, particularly the primary targets.
Failing that, one gets very little done and is badly overworked. And the
rest of the group is wasted.
So, high or low, get a grip on this thing called organisation. It's
gruesomely simple.
Honest.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:nt.ei.rd
Copyright � 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 19 DECEMBER 1969
Remimeo
Executive Secretary Hats
Executive Hats
Cancellation of
HCO PL 19 July 1963
and London Sec Ed May 4, 1959
EXECUTIVE DUTIES
(The cancelled PL and Sec Ed above stated that an Executive "got people
to get the work done." This principle has been found to result in some
Executives believing they were not supposed to work. It is an old
management definition. Much more experience on the subject in Sen orgs and
the Sea Org show the following to be more fundamental and more workable.)
An Executive handles the whole area while he gets people to help.
An Executive in charge of an org would "single-hand" (handle it all)
while getting others to handle their jobs in turn.
This gives a practical and workable approximation of what top stat
executives actually do do.
The executive who sits back and waits for others to act when a situation
is grave can crash an entire activity.
Essentially an Executive is a working individual who can competently
handle any post or machine or plan under him.
He is a training officer as well. He designates who is to do what and
sees that a training action is done by himself or others to be sure the
post will be competently held. An executive who accepts the idea that if a
person has a school degree in "waffing Wogglies" or sewing on buttons he
can at once be trusted to waff wogglies or sew buttons is taking a
personnel by recommendation, not by his experience with the personnel whose
work-organization potential has never been tested under that executive. A
camouflaged hole (undetected neglect area) may very well develop in such a
circumstance, which can suddenly confront the executive with a time
consuming disaster.
Thus an executive accepts help conditionally until it is demonstrated to
be help, and meanwhile does not relax his control of a sector below him
until he is sure it is functioning.
In this way an executive is one who does and backs off spots
continually. He could be said to always be doing himself out of a job by
getting the job competently done. However, in actual practice, as post
personnel does shift, he has to be prepared at any time to wade back in and
put it right.
The Supreme Test of an Executive (as in the HCOB Supreme Test of a
Thetan) is to MAKE THINGS GO RIGHT.
To the degree he can maintain his observation, communicate and get
supervision done (see HCO PL on the Key Ingredients) he can achieve
production or service and satisfy users.
As observation is often faulty, especially over long distances, as
Communication is not always received or studied and as supervision is often
absent, the Executive must develop a sensitivity to indicators of outnesses
and systems to correct them.
A very good Executive knows how to "play the org board" under him. He
has to know every function in it. He has to know who to call on to do what
or he disorganizes things badly.
An Executive also has to know neighboring org board arrangements in the
same org, the org board of allies and of enemies.
An Executive has to know what users need and want and furnish it. When
normal and routine posts fail under him, the Executive is of course forced
into Non Existence as an executive, has to find what is needed and wanted
and produce it. He applies the whole Non Existence formula to the
situation.
Only if he does not handle fully once he does see an outness does an
Executive go into Liability.
An Executive deals with the frailty of human variations and
distractions. When these engulf his area and he is confronted with the
fruits of alteration and non-compliance, of posts not held and duties
suddenly found left undone, it is up to the Executive to get them done any
way he can. Having handled he applies the Danger formula (or lower as it
appears) to the neglected area.
An Executive has to be somebody who cares about his job and wants to get
things done. If he only wishes the title for status he is of course heading
himself and his area for disaster and it could be said that such an
executive, not meaning to do the job but only wanting the title, is in
Doubt or lower on the third dynamic.
The Executive thinks of the area and organization first and repairs.
Then he thinks of the individual and straightens him out.
An Executive who is worker-oriented winds up hurting all the workers.
The workers depend on the organization. When that is gone they have
nothing.
An organization cannot have more taken out of it than is being put into
it. Efforts to bleed an organization of more blood than it has destroy it.
The preservation of his organization is a first consideration of an
Executive.
In an Executive's hands an organization or one of its areas must be
"VIABLE." That is, it must be capable of supporting itself and thus staying
alive. When his area is parasitic, dependent on others outside it, without
producing more than it consumes, the area and its workers are at severe
risk and in the natural course of events will be dispensed with, if not at
once, eventually.
Thus an Executive is someone whose own sweat and energy keeps an
organization or an area of it functioning. In this he earns and uses help
and they in turn take over executive roles in their subordinate areas and
keep them alive and producing.
An Executive is in the business of SURVIVAL of his area and its people
and providing with service or production an abundance which makes the area,
his own services and that of his subordinates valuable.
If an Executive so functions his own survival and increase is guaranteed
even by natural law. If an Executive functions for other reasons it is
certain the ground will vanish from under him eventually again by natural
law.
An Executive is in fact a worker who can do all and any of the work in
the area he supervises and who can note and work rapidly to repair any
outnesses observed in the functioning of those actions in his charge.
The best liked executive who is most valued by his workers as someone
they need is an executive who functions as described above. One who seeks
to survive on favours given and does not otherwise measure up is not in
fact regarded highly by anyone.
Whatever ideology one finds himself in, the above still applies. The way
to the top may well be marrying the boss's daughter, but the way to stay
there still requires the elements described herein. As bosses' daughters
are few, a sounder way is to learn all the jobs well and study this policy
and just become an Executive.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:nt.rd
Copyright � 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
[Cancelled by HCO P/L 28 July 1971, Admin Know-How No. 26, in the Executive
Division Volume.]
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 29 MARCH 1965
Issue II
Gen Non-Remimeo
ADMINISTRATION FLOWS AND EXPANSION
THE F A S T F L O W SYSTEM
We have introduced many new principles in administration in recent
policy letters. Here is one which if left out would cause mystery.
This is the principle of traffic flows we now use. It is called the FAST
FLOW SYSTEM OF MANAGEMENT.
A being controlling a traffic or activity flow should let the flow run
until it is to be reinforced or indicates a turbulence will occur and only
then inspects the part of the flow that is to be reinforced or is becoming
enturbulated and inspects and acts on only that one flow.
This principle would operate on a committee of 3 in this fashion: the
committee does not act as a body. Each member acts individually in three
spheres of influence (three types of flow). There is no committee
(collective) action until one of the three members wants concurrence from
the other two on greatly reinforcing a flow or until the other two, by
observation, see the third is going adrift. Only in these cases does the
committee act as a Committee. In other words all 3 members go about their
work independently until there is a change in one of their three spheres
and then they act. Otherwise the flows of orders and actions are
independent. Not doing it like this is why Committees have gotten the
reputation of being unable and a waste of time.
To do this one, of course, needs another principle: that of Indicators.
An Indicator is something that signals an approaching change rather than
finding the change is already present and confirmed.
We get this from auditing. An auditor audits so long as things go
evenly. He knows when they will begin to deteriorate or change by an
Indicator. He acts on seeing the indicator. He doesn't wait until the
collapse or total change of the pc occurs and then look it over and act.
The pc could be run into the ground or a good process that was bettering
the case could be neglected if an auditor could not PREDICT from indicators
how it was going before it was gone.
In supervising a number of sections or departments, it would work this
way:
The person in charge does not examine every action or decision on the
lines. If all despatches of all the activities went through his or her one
pair of hands the volume would be too great and would jam. The executive's
"plate" would be too full and this would halt any expansion of the
activities as the executive would feel overworked, yet in actual fact would
be getting nothing much done. The flows which needed watching would be
buried in a huge volume of flows that did not need watching.
Instead, the principle of flows tells us that the executive should have
statistical INDICATORS such as OIC charts on every part of the activity
each week and should act only on the basis of the charts' behaviors.
If a chart went down the Executive would not wait for that area to
collapse before inspecting it. At a dip point the executive should go over
all the plans and traffic and despatches of the area dipping down and
unearth the real reason why it did dip. If the matter needs minor remedy,
it should be corrected. If then the graph still dipped down, the executive
would not only be advised of it by the OIC Indicators but would know,
having inspected earlier, what had to be done on a more drastic scale to
get the graph going up again.
The OIC system must be used and all data plotted and circulated to the
Executives in an org before this system will work.
If the OIC system is put into effect fully the executive can then (and
only then) let go the cornm lines and let the traffic flow.
He then only needs to:
1. Keep alert for and correct Dev-T (off-line, off-policy, off-origin
and non-compliance);
2. Keep an eye on the weekly OIC charts;
3. Find from OIC the upward trends and inspect and find out what's
working so well it can be reported;
4. Be alert to any down dip and inspect the activity itself and correct
the matter; and
5. Spend most of his time getting his own job done (since executives do
have jobs besides supervision).
The one thing he mustn't do is "get reasonable" about dips or zooms and
not act to really check the decline or to reinforce the rise:
(a) Thinking one does know when he has not gotten it inspected
closely;
(b) Not believing the graph and Indicators; and
(c) Not acting, are the fatal errors.
Doing 1 to 5 tells us who's an executive and doing (a), (b) and (c)
tells us who shouldn't be an executive.
If this system is in effect the org can't help but boom.
We will call this the FAST FLOW SYSTEM OF MANAGEMENT.
It is a very precise art. It's like auditing. One predicts the slumps
and reinforces the tendency to boom.
It can't miss. If it's done completely.
LRH:ml.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [LRH NOTE: Study this. Shows why of OIC.]
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 6 FEBRUARY 1968
Remimeo
ORGANIZATION - THE FLAW
I looked for a long time for any flaw in the idea of organization. It
does have a flaw.
The basic flaw in organization is INSPECTION BEFORE THE FACT. That means
inspection before anything bad has happened.
Violations are so harmful they destroyed every great civilization-the
Roman, the British, the lot. For every flow is slowed or stopped.
The prosperity of any organization is directly proportional to the speed
of its particles-goods, people, papers.
World trade, world shipping, world prosperity is dying only because of
the cumulative effect of inspection before the fact. Passports, customs,
safety regulations, general government interference before anything bad has
occurred add up to a SUPPRESSIVE SOCIETY and therefore, soon enough, a dead
one.
Penalty after the fact has occurred disciplines the criminals and does
not pull down the majority to criminal level.
Scientology organizations must never lose sight of the reason
organizations have decayed.
LRH:adv.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright � 1968 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 23 APRIL AD 15
ALL DIVISIONS
Remimeo
All Staff Hats
Sthil Staff
Exec Hats
Use: Executives should keep a stack of these 23 Apr AD 15 Pol
Ltrs near their desk and staple one to every despatch or
report received which violates it. Circle para violated and
return to staff member.
(Changes HCO Pol Ltr on CSW slightly in that conclusions or
solutions are no longer acceptable from a junior to a senior,
only data.)
PROBLEMS
The most senior organizational policies there are follow:
1. NEVER solve the problem any junior presents to you. NEVER NEVER NEVER
NEVER NEVER NEVER.
2. ALWAYS investigate for the true cause of the trouble. ALWAYS ALWAYS
ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS.
3. SOLVE only the problem you find after very careful investigation of
the whole matter and after you have examined all possible causes of
the problem.
4. NEVER solve a problem that has already been solved in general policy.
5. IF someone thinks the policy is wrong or is itself the source of the
problem then (a) he or she must be made to fully read the policy (b)
demonstrate what it is supposed to solve (c) look over the problem he
or she thinks the policy is wrong on to find the actual causes of the
problem he or she is trying to solve.
_________________
The primary aberration in situations that are being mishandled is:
6. THE PERSON IS UNABLE TO RECOGNIZE SOURCE.
_________________
Example: A person A sees another B drop a wall mirror and break it. A
puts in a purchase order specifying thicker glass. B next day drops a chair
down steps and A puts in a PO for new stair carpeting. B a week later runs
a car into a wall and A proposes a different design for the wall. If this
kept on and B was never singled out by A or A's seniors, then dozens of
unusual solutions are entered into the org, not just POs but policy changes
as well! Why? A is "below source" and doesn't recognize the causes of his
problems. Therefore his solutions are alter-is of existing situations and
result in alter-is of tech, policy and orders. Soon the area around A is in
a complete confusion. What about B? He probably generalizes with "they
said" "everybody knows" etc on entheta and so remains "invisible" behind
his generalities. B can be spotted best by damage reports whenever damage
occurs. As they are filed as a statistic in B's file, it soon becomes a
visible datum. The cause of confusion in A's area is not A. It is A's
inability to perceive causes. Thus any system which isolates actual causes
disenturbulates a group and makes unusual solutions unnecessary and only
then can policy go in.
_________________
Therefore we get some other very senior org policies:
7. NEVER accept a conclusion from a junior. NEVER.
8. ALWAYS demand facts of a junior. Always.
9. NEVER take a generality from a junior.
10. ALWAYS challenge any conclusion a junior offers.
11. NEVER act on a junior's data until you have fully investigated
the situation.
12. ALWAYS investigate until you find the basic policy violation
that started the problem in the first place.
TECHNICAL
13. Making Scientology work on pcs and students is the ONLY way you
can salvage org situations.
14. If Scientology is not applied exactly per HCOBs and tapes
technical will "go out" and within a few months the area will be
spinning with unusual solutions.
15. The fastest way for a technical executive to become overworked
is to violate the policies in this policy letter.
16. The fastest way for a technical executive to get into trouble
and a mess is to accept an auditor's conclusions and propose a
solution.
Example: An instructor says, "Process ROO doesn't work on certain cases.
When these cases come on course could I please order them to Review
auditing?" Serious blunder by a senior, "Yes." Why? Because the instructor
isn't capable of spotting an ARC Broken student-can't confront ARC Breaks.
Therefore quite often the instructor lets ROO be run on an ARC Broken
student. The correct technical executive action, and the ONLY correct one
on receiving such a report, is to promptly personally investigate.
Investigation even of the students' case folders would disclose that the
instructor ignores ARC Breaks from comm cycle blunders by new student
auditors, that the instructor won't give ARC Break assessments (who else
could give one on a Zero Level course?) but sometimes runs R6 EW on the
students under the guise of "an assist for a misunderstood word". I think
that's enough trouble to get the instructor's senior into a hurricane of
trouble if only from blown students and no new enrolments! (This is an
actual example. The final result was a Comm Ev for the technical executive
and the instructor, the first for proposing and alter-ising policy and
technology, the second for forcing auditing [rather than doing assessments]
on Zero Level students. The Comm Ev had to be ordered at the request of
their tech senior because neither would accept orders to remedy the above
conditions but just kept on fouling up students.)
NON COMPLIANCE
18. If you think for one moment that a staff member who won't or
can't follow clear, definite policy, will follow your orders either,
you dream.
19. The first thing you know about an off-policy type personnel is
that none of your instructions are being carried out either, usual or
unusual.
20. Look, if they can't apply vividly clear policy, they sure can't
apply a brief order.
SUMMARY
21. You can conclude that where you have a personnel who cannot
perceive the causes of things you will have a continual spinning mess.
None of the problems presented for solution are the actual problems that
exist. In A and B above, the problem presented was "How to get more durable
things." This could not be solved because it was the wrong problem and
didn't exist. The right problem was "How to get B to stop breaking
everything in sight." A senior, not seeing B at all (not being around B),
accepting a problem and a conclusion from a junior (A) soon is involved in
endless discussions over "How to get more durable things." This never
solves. Because it wasn't the problem. Further, any order the senior gives
A is also never put into effect without wild alter-is. Why? A, unable to
see sources, can't see the senior as a source either and really takes his
orders from anyone who comes along! Students, pcs, the garbage man.
22. The basic problem of management then is the problem of cause
blindness. People in the org who cannot see cause cannot solve
problems, for to solve a problem one must see what is causing it!
23. And the solution to all this lies in the policies in this policy
letter.
24. And auditing people up to an ability to perceive and perceive
the causes of things is the primary solution to all problems.
25. Until you get them there you use any mechanism necessary to
follow orders. Only in that way will they ever make it.
26. When tech goes out, when HCOBs aren't followed or tapes known
and used exactly, the Road Out is blocked.
27. Nobody has any right to a bank.
28. For when they are permitted such a right they block the road for
the rest.
29. The only person you could completely trust is a Clear. And
unless the clear is also trained in Scientology tech and admin also
you could never accept his vote on org matters.
That's the truth.
And that's why we're going to make it all the way.
30. If we're determined we will make it, we will make it.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:ml.rd
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
(Note: By Organizational Policy is meant that policy which makes the
organization into an organization and keeps its flows fast and its
design uncomplicated. In absence of these policies the design becomes
altered and flows cease and the org dies.)
[Note: The mimeo issue of this Policy Letter and the First Edition of
Volume 0 skipped the number 6 in the numerical sequence. The text above and
the earlier texts are identical; only the numbering has been altered to
include the skipped 6.]
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF I MAY 1965
Issue II
Remimeo
Exec Hats
Comm Hats
D Insp & Rpts Hats
ORDER BOARD AND TIME MACHINE
Executives must have and use an "Order Board".
In Scientology if it is not written it is not true. That's a major
policy.
It applies to all.
Every order an Executive issues must be in writing.
He does this on a Clip Board. There is a sheaf of paper on it of his
Division's colour. It has a sheet of pencil carbon and a ball-point slipped
through the top of the clip. It can have a hook on the back to slip on a
belt for persons walking about. This is the Order Board.
Even when one gives a verbal order it is also written down.
The executive keeps no copies of his orders. This is done by the
Department of Inspection and Reports.
The original is handed to the person being ordered. The other is sent to
the Inspection section of the Department of Inspection and Reports. If one
is away from his Comm station, the carbons are left on the Order Board
until one returns, when the copies are all sent to Inspection.
COMMUNICATOR ACTION
The carbon of an order is sent to Inspection because it is obviously a
carbon copy and an order. It is not otherwise designated.
An original sent through the Comm Lines is obviously an original order
as it is not a carbon. It is simply delivered to the addressee's basket.
JUNIOR'S ACTION
The person receiving the order does it, says he has (or couldn't) on the
original order he received and sends it TO INSPECTION. However even if he
sends it to his issuing superior the Communicator sends it to Inspection
only.
INSPECTION ACTION
Inspection has a Time Machine. This is a series of baskets advanced one
basket every morning.
A carbon of an order is placed in today's basket.
When the original comes in, the carbon is dug out of the basket (by date
and colour flash) and original and carbon are clipped together and routed
to the issuing executive.
Orders not complied with in one week of course fall off the Time Machine
by appearing in the basket being emptied today. (It was filled one week ago
and advanced once each day.)
A copy is made of the order and it is sent to Ethics for filing in the
staff member's Ethics folder and counts as a report against the staff
member.
The carbon is returned to issuing Executive to show his order has not
been complied with, so that he can handle the situation. No report from the
Executive is required in this instance as a copy is already in Ethics.
The Executive should investigate or ask Ethics to do so if the matter is
of considerable importance.
If an original is returned to Inspection which has no carbon, it is
copied and held and the copy is sent to the Executive with a "Sir, there is
a lost carbon of your order. Did you fail to turn one in?" This disciplines
a forgetful executive. When Inspection receives the answer it attaches the
original to it and sends it back to the Executive.
VERBAL ORDER
A junior may report a verbal order to Ethics as it places his statistics
and job in danger by leaving it open to have it said the order was
otherwise.
PROJECT ORDER
If something requires more than two weeks to do it is a project and
cannot be ordered without clearance from the Office of LRH Design and
Planning Authority section. If a project has been okayed it has a number
and its number must be put on the order as Project Number -.
Inspections file projects in their own files. This is also Time Machined
by one month's emptying of a file drawer or one year's emptying of a file
drawer. Projects run only for one month or one year and must be routinely
inspected by Inspections which then reports to the Office of LRH with any
progress or lack of it.
URGENT ORDERS
Orders marked Urgent by an Executive are entered into a one day time
machine and handled in one day as described above for one week.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:mh.rd
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
[Added to by HCO P/L 19 February 1972, Order Board and Time Machine
Addendum, in the 1972 Year Book.]
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 30 APRIL 1969
(Reissued from Flag Order No. 407 of
January 23, 1969, same title)
Remimeo
ORDERS AND RESPONSIBILITY
Orders occur where responsibility has failed.
Non-Compliance only occurs when orders have had to be issued.
False reports only occur where ignorance of data or avoidance of orders
occurs.
And the down spiral begins when responsibility has failed.
I don't think I need overrun this by drawing further pictures.
L. RON HUBBARD
Commodore
LRH:lw.ei.rd
Copyright � 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 15 DECEMBER 1969
Issue II
Remimeo
All Staff
URGENT
ORDERS, QUERY OF
It occasionally happens that an order is issued or a policy is enforced
or is found to exist which if put into full effect in a certain area would
result in loss or destruction.
Someone told to man up, for instance, all Admin departments, sees that
this would upset the Tech-Admin ratio.
Instead of putting the order into effect he should query the order with
A. The name of the issuer and the exact order.
B. The reason it would result in loss or destruction if put into effect.
C. A recommendation resolving the problem the order sought to solve.
Non-Compliance as a method of avoiding a destructive order is very
risky. It is far, far better, in writing, to make the above submission.
Going ahead and putting the order into effect even though it means loss
and destruction without advising anyone is itself very destructive.
Sometimes a policy is interpreted incorrectly so that if one put it into
effect fully as interpreted, loss and destruction would result. An instance
of this was a type of course omitted from a policy letter. Someone did not
query but instead closed the course and refunded thousands in advance
payments. This was a misinterpretation of the policy which was only
discussing course levels. The correct action of one and all would have been
to have queried.
Another instance was an order that cancelled out and fired the personnel
of a letter registrar because a fixed pay rate was being paid. The org
followed the order and promptly went into debt as this was the only typist
available and her dismissal was destructive of all income. Half a dozen
people at least should have queried the order before executing.
A policy written for an affluent large org is pushed on a tiny org. It
executes even though it doesn't seem correct. The result is destructive.
The very meaning of policy can be shifted by re-interpretation. When
this is done and is seen to be destructive anyone following the re-
interpretation is just as guilty as the mis-interpreter. The correct action
is query.
Even "You're fired" can be an incorrect order and can be queried if done
as above.
"Your Class VIII is appointed HCO ES Canada." Great. But you know you've
only got one VIII. To permit the order to be carried out is destructive. An
order placing your best auditors into Admin leaving Tech crippled should
have the living daylights queried out of it even by the janitor.
IT DOES NOT RELIEVE ONE OF RESPONSIBILITY WHEN ONE EXECUTES A
DESTRUCTIVE ORDER. The one who follows it is in fact far more guilty than
the
issuer since the one following it is right there, able to OBSERVE whereas
the issuer may not be.
The Query should go to the issuer formed as ABC above. If it is still
insisted upon and still is destructive send it and all particulars to the
nearest Sea Org unit. Label it DESTRUCTIVE ORDER and ask for help in
handling. Refuse meanwhile to put it into effect.
NO ONE CAN BE COMM EVED FOR QUERYING AN ORDER IN PROPER FORM.
Using this Policy to avoid routine actions plainly not resulting in loss
or destruction WHICH NOT DONE do result in loss or destruction can result
in an investigation and the one who refused the order can be held at fault
for any resulting destruction.
This policy mainly applies to new, non-routine orders or attempted
changes.
Placing an org or person in an incorrect condition comes under this
policy.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:rs.eg.rd
Copyright � 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 19 JULY 1965
Remimeo
All Divisions
POLICY, HOW TO HANDLE PEOPLE WHO
QUOTE POLICY TO SHOW YOU THEY
CANT FOLLOW IT
Some orgs will find that certain personnel will use policy to stop
action.
When these just don't want to do their job, although it's easily
understood in Policy Letters, they tell you certain policies are wrong or
can't be followed.
The best and only effective way to handle this is to say:
"Since you are an expert on policy, permit me to ask you a few
questions." Take up a Pol Ltr applying to their post and start doing a hat
check on it.
Since such a person is using policy to stop action and show policy
wrong, a rebuttal such as the above will adequately discourage the
practice.
If people won't work, they throw out lines and find ways to use policy
to discuss it.
Policy is valuable.
But ALL policy exists solely to get the job done and establish points of
agreement that permit flows of traffic.
When traffic doesn't flow and somebody says, "Policy so and so prevents
it," then Hat Check at once and you'll be amazed to find they don't even
know enough of it to disagree with it.
Disagreement with policy is disagreement with getting the job done. And
is always accompanied by total lack of data on the policy being quoted.
It's a sure cure.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:ml.rd
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 4 NOVEMBER 1969
Issue II
Remimeo
All Hais
Applies to all
SO Units and
Sen Orgs and Groups
Franchise
FSMs
LRH Comm Hat
COMPLIANCE vs DISCUSSION
Effecting compliance to LRH orders can often require liaison with
another post or posts on the Org Board to co-ordinate the correct actions
called for by the order.
Speed of action often necessitates that such liaison be conducted
verbally.
They should be brief and to the point whether verbal or written. There
is no need to extend discussion beyond the point of agreement and
understanding of others' or another's actions on the same order and of how
they affect one's own actions and priorities. The order is what it is.
If it is difficult to reach agreement and understanding you can be quite
sure that something in the LRH order (OR in an earlier LRH order in the
same area or to the individual now having difficulty) has been not
received, not understood, or has been alter-ised.
This fact must be recognised early before the situation gets out of
hand. The major indicators are
(a) nothing concrete can be arranged to be done after a certain point,
(b) and discussion goes around and around indefinitely,
(c) somebody says, "Well, because of this important significance over
here, we have to do something else . . ." or words to that effect, which
can be very very convincing.
They can occur between executives and executives, between executives and
juniors, between juniors and juniors.
The ONLY action that will restore order into the confusion is the re-
establishment of the STABLE DATUM already placed into the time and place-
the exact LRH order or statement-which will allow form and event to occur.
If the parties concerned cannot successfully re-establish the exact LRH
order as the Stable Datum on which to agree by simply looking at it again,
then they must go to their nearest LRH Communicator who will get the LRH
origination correctly duplicated either by use of duplication drills or by
request for clarification if there is a genuine query.
For any Scientologist to knowingly permit a confusion on or
misduplication of an LRH order, programme or directive to persist without
communicating about it to the LRH Comm is a serious Ethics offense against
the group and Mankind and should be handled as such where poor performance,
emergency or catastrophe results therefrom.
The number of staff members and field members who take care to exactly
duplicate and carry out Ron's intentions is very large and they are each
highly appreciated.
There is no reason why this shouldn't include all of us. You are invited
to see that it does include all of us. The LRH Comms and Ethics Officers
particularly.
Ken Urquhart
LRH:KU:ldm.ei.rd CS-7
Copyright � 1969 for
by L. Ron Hubbard L. RON HUBBARD
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 3 NOVEMBER 1966
Remimeo
ADMINISTRATIVE KNOW-HOW
LEADERSHIP
Leadership is one of the most misunderstood subjects in Man's
dictionary. But it is based almost solely on the ability to give and
enforce orders.
An order or directive is necessary to bring about coordination of
function and activity without which there could be disagreement and
confusion.
In an organisation there is more than one person functioning. Being of
comparable rank and having different purposes (hats) they can come into
conflict and disagreement in the absence of a plan or order or directive.
So, without orders, plans, programmes, one does not have an organisation.
One has a group of individuals. We see in earlier policy letters that a
group composed only of individuals cannot expand and will remain small.
Oddly enough, such a group will also remain unhappy. It will have a low
affinity with the public and each other and if you know the Affinity-
Reality-Communication triangle, you will realise that all three points drop
if one does. Agreement being the basis of Reality, you will find a group of
individuals will disagree with each other and have a low Reality on what
they are doing or what to propose and even what to do.
Most people confuse a "taut ship" with a harshly led ship. Actually
harshness has nothing to do with it. The right word is positiveness.
If a group is led by someone whose programmes and orders are very
positive, then the group has a chance of going into agreement with one
another and so their Affinity improves and so does their Communication and
Reality.
So if one issues no orders, q group will remain a group of individuals,
out of agreement with each other, will do little and will remain small or
at least nonexpanding.
Bill, of equal rank to Joe, cannot give an order to Joe nor vice versa.
Thus no orders exist between them. Occasional agreements do occur but as
their jobs are different, they rather tend to disagree on what is
important.
A person with a senior standing to both Bill and Joe can give the two an
order and this becomes the basis of an agreement.
The order doesn't even have to be liked by Bill and Joe. If they follow
it, they thus "agree" to it and being in agreement on this they get Reality
and Communication on it as well.
Even poorly thought out orders angrily given, if issued and enforced,
are better for a group than no orders at all. But such orders are the low
end of the scale.
Positive, enforced orders, given with no misemotion and toward visible
accomplishment are the need of a group if it is to prosper and expand.
The group is full of "good fellows". This does not give it success. The
group is full of plans. These do not give it success.
What it needs are positive orders leading to a known accomplishment.
Many obstacles can exist to that accomplishment but the group will
function.
We call it "leadership" and other nebulous things, this ability to
handle a group, make it prosper and expand.
All leadership is, in the final analysis, is giving the orders to
implement the programme and seeing that they are followed.
One can build this up higher by obtaining general agreement on the how,
why and what of programmes. But to maintain it there have to be orders and
directives and acceptance or enforcement thereof-else the group will fall
apart, sooner or later.
Positive orders and directions on positive programmes inevitably cause
expansion.
Being wise or a good fellow or being liked, does not accomplish the
expansion. People in the group may be cheerful-but are they going anywhere
as a group?
So the whole thing boils down to:
Positive directions and their acceptance or enforcement on known
programmes bring about prosperity and expansion.
No or weak orders bring about stagnation and collapse.
The ideal is to have programmes with which the whole group or a majority
agrees fully. Then to forward these with positive orders and obtain
compliance by acceptance or enforcement.
But regardless of the enthusiasm for a programme, it will eventually
fail if there is no person or governing body there to issue and enforce
orders to carry on the programme.
Thus we have the indicators of a very bad executive whose group will
disintegrate and fail no matter how cheerful they are with the executive.
Bad leaders:
1. Issue no or weak orders,
2. Do not obtain or enforce compliance.
Bad leadership isn't "grouchy" or "sadistic" or the many other things
man advertises it to be. It is simply a leadership that gives no or weak
orders and does not enforce compliance.
Good leadership:
1. Works on not unpopular programmes
2. Issues positive orders
and
3. Obtains or enforces compliance.
These facts are as true of a governing body as they are of an
individual.
A typical example of a bad governing body, at the present stage of its
formation at least, is the United Nations. It has great ideas about how
better Man should be perhaps, but
1. It issues a confused babble of orders when it issues any
and
2. It issues orders for which it can obtain little or no compliance.
Note that it is also insolvent, at war within itself and that it has not
made a dent in its prime programme, the prevention of war.
However these things come about, they are nevertheless true. It is a
very poor governing body and far more likely to vanish than expand.
You can count completely on the fact that an executive or a governing
body that does not adhere to not unpopular programmes, that does not issue
positive orders and does not obtain or enforce compliance will have down
statistics.
And you can be sure that an executive or governing body that formulates
or adheres to not unpopular programmes, that issues positive orders and
that obtains or vigorously enforces compliance will have up statistics.
Wisdom? Popularity? These unfortunately have little or nothing to do
with it.
The way to have up statistics, a prosperous and happy group is far more
simple than complex Man has ever realized.
LRH: jp. rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright � 1966 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 4 DECEMBER 1966
Remimeo
ADMIN KNOW-HOW
EXPANSION
THEORY OF POLICY
It is not very hard to grasp the basic principle underlying all policy
letters and organisation.
It is an empirical (observed and proven by observation) fact that
nothing remains exactly the same forever. This condition is foreign to this
universe. Things grow or they lessen. They cannot apparently maintain the
same equilibrium or stability.
Thus things either expand or they contract. They do not remain level in
this universe. Further when something seeks to remain level and unchanged
it contracts.
Thus we have three actions and only three. First is expansion, second is
the effort to remain level or unchanged and third is contraction or
lessening.
As nothing in this universe can remain exactly the same, then the second
action (level) above will become the third action (lessen) if undisturbed
or not acted on by an outside force. Thus actions two and three above
(level and lessen) are similar in potential and both will lessen.
This leaves expansion as the only positive action which tends to
guarantee survival.
The point of assumption in all policy letters is that we intend to
survive and intend so on all dynamics.
To survive, then, one must expand as the only safe condition of
operation.
If one remains level one tends to contract. If one contracts one's
chances of survival diminish.
Therefore there is only one chance left and that, for an organisation,
is expansion.
PRODUCT
To expand any company needs a demanded product and will and skill to
produce and deliver it. It can be a service or an item.
If a company has a demanded product and will and skill to produce and
deliver it, it must organise to expand. If it does it will survive. If it
organises to stay level or seeks to grow smaller it will perish.
This is easily observed in nations. Whenever one seeks to remain the
same or to lessen itself it usually perishes. It need not seek only to
expand its borders. It can also expand its influence and service. Indeed,
the effort to expand borders in a nation without increasing a demand for
its influence and products is a primary cause of war. If a nation expanded
the demand for its influence and products it would expand without war. When
a nation seeks to merely expand by force of arms and does not expand the
demand for its products one gets a dark age or at least a social
catastrophe.
Rome, early on, was in great demand for its social technology and
manufacturing
skill and only a cruel streak in her made her wage war to expand. Britain,
for instance,
was ready to welcome Roman baskets and pottery and art and had been
demanding
them for nearly a century when Caesar's vicious ambitions actually wrecked
the smooth progress of Rome by enforced expansion by arms in excess of the
demand for Roman products. This was one Roman product nobody wanted-Caesar
and his legions.
Psychiatry's product of further insanity was not in demand by the people
but by the state which sought to crush people or at least hold them down.
So psychiatry expanded by government regulation not by popular demand and
so at this writing stands in danger of complete extinction, for its
influence depends utterly on "expanding" into the legislatures and
government treasuries and no expansion whatever of any demand from the
public and no product except slaughter.
The Roman Catholic Church once had a healing product, by actual
treatment and by relics and miracles and was in great demand by the public
and eventually even the barbarians. But she began to fight progress in
science and knowledge and her product turned into exported ignorance backed
by autos-da-fe (burning heretics) and thus ceased to expand and today is
rapidly shrinking.
Buddhism, earlier than that, expanded continuously as it never sought
new extension of territory other than that of learning. Buddhism failed in
India alone because its monks became licentious, ceased to deliver true
teachings and were swept up, most likely, in India alone, by the Muslim
conquest of that unhappy country sometime around the seventh century.
Britain of the 20th Century actively sought to contract her empire and
did so to the tune of internal economic catastrophe.
SINGLE PRINCIPLE
Thus it should be obvious that contraction leads to death and expansion
to life providing that one maintains a demand for itself and the will and
skill to produce and deliver a product.
If as ours is, the product is very beneficial and if we continue to
produce and deliver the demand is assured. In this we are fortunate. And we
are also fortunate that try as they will no squirrel is ever able to
duplicate our product since one variation (that of changed brand) leads to
others and they promptly have neither product nor demand-that observation
is itself empirical. No squirrel has lasted more than 2 or 3 years in the
past sixteen years. And there have been many. That they squirrel shows
enough bad faith to drive away the public the moment the public hears of
the original.
Thus, providing we maintain the will and skill to produce and deliver we
can expand and proper expansion that will continue is possible.
All our policy then is built on EXPANSION. It assumes we wish to
survive. And it stresses the production and delivery of a straight non-
squirrel product.
It is calculated to ensure a continued and widening demand by ensuring
that product remains good and beneficial.
The technology itself is complete but it expands also by experience of
administration of it and simplifying its presentation.
But to alter the basics of the technology will stop expansion because it
is what we are producing, not what we are building.
We are building a better universe. It has not been a good universe to
live in so far but it can be.
Our punitive force is our Ethics system and it exists to ensure the
quality of the product and to prevent the blunting of demand for the
product.
INTERPRETATION OF POLICY
The organisation then has all its policy rigged to expand. It takes many
things to ensure expansion.
Thus when you are interpreting policy it should be interpreted only
against EXPANSION as the single factor governing it.
This can serve to clarify questions about policy. The correct
interpretation always leads to expansion, not holding a level or
contraction.
For example, policy bars the entrance of the healing field. This is
solely because there is too much trouble with the occupiers of that field
and only outright war (with no demand) could solve them. This seems to be a
brake on expansion. It is only a brake on expanding by war in the absence
of demand. Therefore the right way to expand is to gradually build up
general public demand, let experience by the public see that we heal and
when the demand is there and howling for us, reinterpret the policy or
abolish it as a brake to expansion. As one can only expand by external
demand for the product, if one seeks to expand in the absence of a specific
demand for the product, one has war and war doesn't lead to expansion any
more than burning heretics and other brutalities expanded the Catholic
movement.
So one interprets policy against Proper Expansion that is proper.
CORRECT EXPANSION
Expansion which when expanded can hold its territory without effort is
proper and correct expansion.
Hitler (like Caesar) did not "consolidate his conquered territory". It
was not possible to do so, not because he did not have troops but because
he didn't have a real demand for German technology and social philosophy
before conquering. Thus Hitler lost his war and fascist Germany died. It is
almost impossible to consolidate territory where one was not invited in in
the first place and force had to be used in order to expand.
One can remove a real suppressive by force to ensure demand will then
build, providing he does not seek to force the product on the suppressive
and all those around the suppressive.
The suppressive, as an individual, can be removed by force because he is
an anti-demand factor using falsehood and lies to prevent demand from
occurring. But one, in removing the suppressive, has to be sure one's own
product and delivery are still correct and straight and in no way
suppressive of anything but suppressives.
Further one must leave, at least a crack in the door and never close it
with a crash on anyone because a demand still may develop there.
The only way to start a full scale revolution is totally and thoroughly
slam the door. One must always leave a crack open. The suppressive can
recant and apologize. The pauper can by certain actions, no matter how
improbable, secure service. Etc.
In short, use force only to shut down false anti-demand factors. Yet
leave the door at least a crack open in case demand without duress
develops. Never finally shut off a possible demand.
You can stimulate demand. You can create it. But you may only
comfortably and properly expand into demand.
Removal of a suppressive only brings a potential appearance of demand
from the area he dominated. That potential, by some means, the best of
which are good dissemination and service examples, must become demand
before one can truly occupy territory.
Thus areas taken purely by force of arms can never be held by force of
arms in the absence of demand for product and thus demand by the area for
occupation and consolidation.
As we have a product that frees in an ultimate sense and de-aberrates
there is of course an end to the game. But it is so far ahead, embracing a
whole universe, that it requires minimal consideration.
Expansion requires area to expand into. And we are in no danger of
running out of that.
If we were dependent as nations often think they are on boundary
expansion on one planet, or into one planet's populations as companies
think they are, we would have brakes on expansions due to territorial or
population limitations alone. But we are not likely to encounter such
barriers for a period of time so long we can consider our expansion
potential as infinite-and are the only organisation that honestly can so
consider. We are not conquering land in the government sense anyway.
OVER-EXPANSION
All factors, then, in policy are rigged for expansion.
And this brings about a possibility one can be asked about, that of
overexpansion.
One can "over-expand" by acquiring too much territory too fast without
knowing how to handle it. One can conquer new territory as fast as one
wants IF he knows how to handle the situation.
There are several ways one can "over-expand". They all boil down to over-
extended administration lines in a single administrative unit.
In this one must know the principle on which the org board was
originally conceived. It is that of Thetan-Mind-Body-Product.
If there is a thetan, a mind (organisation potential not a harmful mass)
can be set up, a mind which will organise a body which will produce a
product.
If any one of these elements (Thetan-Mind-Body-Product) are missing then
an organisation will fail.
Man is so aberrated all mental actions seem to him to be reactive mind
actions. But there has to be in organisations a data and problem-solution
coordination unit in order to set up a body. (A thetan can do this without
a lot of mass, having his memory and perception and intelligence.) We have
then an Advisory Council to coordinate acquired data, recognise and resolve
problems. Above it there has to be a thetan somewhat detached from it. This
may be a higher mind (Ad Council) operating as a director to the lower Ad
Council.
The mind must operate to form a body. This body is the Mest (Matter
Energy Space and Time) and staff of the organisation.
This body must produce a product. This in the HGC, for instance, is
resolved cases.
Any smaller part of the whole organisation is also a Thetan-Mind-Body-
Product. Often the executive is both thetan and mind but as soon as traffic
gets too heavy, he must form a separate mind such as an administrative
committee or a personal staff to compose the mind. In such a smaller unit
than the whole org, there is yet a body (the staff and Mest of the unit).
And there must be a specific product. The product sometimes is absent and
sometimes incorrectly assigned but if so the unit won't function.
Over-expansion occurs only when one tries to handle the larger volume
with the same Thetan-Mind-Body-Product numbers one had before.
This tells you why single practitioners can't expand their practices
without overwork.
It also tells you why some executives are upset at the idea of expansion
as they (lacking organisational insight) see it solely as overwork. They
don't see that when you expand volume and traffic you must expand the
organisation.
There is a wrong way and a right way to expand an organisation.
The wrong way is to add staff and facilities endlessly (like governments
tend to do) without adding to the organisation itself.
If you had huge affluences occurring steadily you would soon go into
collapse if you did not expand also by organisational units or branches.
In taking over a new field or area of operation, for instance, one errs
when he adds that traffic to the basic organisation's traffic.
In the presence of huge escalating affluences one must analyse what is
causing them and reinforce them. BUT one must also see what new KIND of
traffic is being added.
If one finds a new KIND of traffic then one sets up a sub-organisation
unit to handle it which is complete in itself.
If we are now getting "business men" in quantity we set up, under the
control of the original organisation:
1. a thetan to supervise it
2. a mind to coordinate it
3. a body to handle it, and
4. a new product called "released/cleared business men".
If we then were to find the new unit, struggling to form itself into 7
divisions on its own by now, gets a lot of demand and statistics on an Org
Exec Course, it must cease to gratuitously coach it and set up its
"Business Academy" teaching the Org Exec Course as Dept 10, appointing a
thetan, mind, body and achieving a product "trained business men" and see
that units to support it occur in other divisions and an Ethics unit to
prevent blunting of demand and re-aberration. This can even go backwards.
One sets up in Dissern a unit called "Business Course Project Promotion
Section" and stimulates the demand and then when it is there puts in its
Department 10.
Soon all seven divisions have extra units to care for this new action,
each unit with a Thetan-Mind-Body-Product. The products are different but
they all add up to "trained business men", whether they are creating
demand, financing or servicing.
So over-expansion is only under-organisation in the main.
One can of course "over-expand" by attempted servicing in the absence of
demand causing thus losses in finance. In such a case only concentrate on
creating new demand not on servicing old demands. This by the way is the
most common error in organisations of ours. They shrink because they are
not creating new demand and concentrate only on creating demand in those
already demanding (which is lazy-easy).
New demand is expensive to develop. Thus you often see finance units
frowning on "new demand" expenses and cutting down magazines in number of
issue, not buying new mail lists, etc.
To start a new sub organisation, one sets up on the basis of potential
demand, sets up Ethics to prevent demand-blunting or bad internal service
or performance, works on increasing the demand, introduces service, sets up
external Ethics to prevent blunted demand, increases the demand by
dissemination to new. and old areas of demand, increases service, ensures
product, increases the organisation (not just staff), increases demand in
new and old areas, stiffens up Ethics, improves service facilities, etc.,
etc.
It's continuous expansion of volume, continuous expansion of
organisation, continuous expansion of demand. Where one lags behind the
others one gets trouble.
It is almost impossible to run a non-expanding organisation with ease.
One gets into financial crises, staff troubles and overwork. Decay has set
in. And fighting it is sure to overwork an executive. The easiest course is
to expand. Then one has the help.
Summary: In understanding policy one must understand its key and that is
expansion.
Only a Scientology organisation has an unlimited horizon. But any
organisation must expand to survive.
The only ways you can "over-expand" are to fail to expand with new
demand and keep pace with it evenly with organisational expansion as well
as numbers.
It is easier to expand than to "remain level". Organisations and units
which do not expand cannot stay level and so contract.
Org executives and personnel are overworked only when they cannot afford
to expand and thus cannot get the help they need to do the work, quite in
addition to there being more problems made by contraction than by
expansion.
Scientology organisations are designed for expansion.
Expansion requires an expansion of all factors involved and when
something expands out of pace with the rest which is not expanding at the
same rate, trouble is caused.
Uniform expansion of demand. Ethics and service into new fields and
areas as well as old areas of operation is needful to trouble-free
activities.
Each member and unit of an organisation has a product which is
different, contributes to the whole product of an organisation.
The ultimate product of Scientology is a universe that is decent and
happy to live in, not degenerated and made miserable by suppressives as it
has been. This is accomplished by the de-aberration of individuals and the
prevention of blunted demand and re-aberration by suppressives and this is
the method of expansion.
If in these early days of Scientology we have any troubles they occurred
by an earlier imbalance of expansion.
Demand was created without handling suppressives which unequal expansion
gave us a backlog of unhandled ethics in the society. All we need do is
catch up our backlog in those organisational functions which were not
expanded when they should have been and all will go smoothly.
Any time you do not expand uniformly with all functions you get an
appearance of over-expansion by some functions. The best answer is not to
cancel the expanded functions which over-reached but to catch them up by
expanding the ones one neglected in support. You will have trouble wherever
you cut back an expansion as that is contraction. The answer, within
reason, is to advance all else to catch up to the expanded portion while
still, more calmly, expanding it.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jp.rd
Copyright � 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 24 DECEMBER 1966
Gen Non-
Remimeo
Execs SH
Org Exec
Course
ADMIN KNOW-HOW
HOW TO PROGRAMME AN ORG
SAINT HILL PROGRAMMES
In past years we have had many problems resulting in programmes as
follows: The sequence of major programmes at Saint Hill:
To provide a home for LRH and family in Commonwealth area so
Commonwealth area could be organised and made self-supporting.
To provide admin facilities for LRH in Commonwealth area.
To make Commonwealth area self-supporting regardless of US funds or
customers. (Not yet resolved.)
To train technical and admin staffs for Commonwealth orgs.
To make Commonwealth outer orgs run on their income without their using
all the bills sums owed SH or Ron as part of their operating funds.
To find financial support for SH activities resulting in the SHSBC which
also accomplished the next above.
To handle Commonwealth activities and organisations and also handle US
activities. (Solved by Telex and QIC and later the Exec Div WW.)
To establish SH general broad promotion. (Solved by The Auditor.)
To provide facilities for administering critical high level Tech such as
Power Processes. (Solved by SH HGC.)
To organise SH so it could be administered (made needful by '63-'64
collapse of multiple corporative set-up). (Solved by 7 Div System completed
by end of 1965.)
To refine the Qual Div to prevent all "failed cases", train staff and
improve Tech.
To get Reports of Tax, etc. off continual crash programmes. (Solved by
Treasurer but incomplete of any guarantee of chartered accountant
compliance.)
To get field auditors to cooperate and stop conflicts with orgs (FSM
programme). To refine the Tech Div. (Finished about August 1966.) To get in
smooth operation on Ethics system.
To operate the Clearing Course and to assembly line Clears. (Still under
refinement but more or less complete.)
To establish and operate OT Course. (Just now under development.)
To beat back continuous attacks by suppressives in the 3rd and 4th
dynamics. (Solved by establishing Intelligence Branch.)
To train up staffs at SH and in outer orgs by Staff Status and Org Exec
Course. To improve the Cash-Bills ratios of orgs. To safeguard income once
earned by better financial planning.
To reform Ad Councils into representative bodies (now complete with the
formation of an Executive Council).
To assemble all Sen materials. (Flopped by reason of non-compliance but
lately re-instituted.)
Dictionary Project to prevent misunderstood words. (In sporadic and
jerky action to this day.)
To handle legal situations which built up by non-compliance by attorneys
internal and external in org. (Under solution by forming Guardian Legal
Branch.)
To improve and maintain affluences. (Just begun.)
To help Scientology dissemination and attack more broadly to prevent
such quantities of legal defense. (OT Activities programme just begun.)
To safeguard, continue and expand all Scientology orgs. (Worked on a
bit, not really concentrated on except for Cash-Bills and Staff Status.)
General improvement of finances. (OT Activities.)
Buildings for Sen orgs. (OT Activities.)
To establish better audio-visio educational facilities. (Barely begun.)
________________
These have been and are the major programme steps which have been
implemented or are under development at Saint Hill since 1959 and forward
to the end of 1966.
Some of the years covered acquired names such as:
1965 - The Year of Organisation.
1966 - The Year of the Clears.
1967 - will probably be the Year of the O.T.'s.
_________________
It will be noted that each of these programmes solved a self-evident
problem.
It must be realized then that these problems did exist.
If the problems exist again, remember there was already a solution
programme and usually it has only been dropped and the problem reappeared
because it had been dropped. The proper directive action is to re-implement
and improve the solution which is to say in the case of SH, the carrying
out of the successful programmes noted above.
_________________
Ad Councils are always advancing new programmes and often it is only an
old programme dropped out that needs re-instituting, not a new solution.
Certainly an old problem has cropped up again.
There have been other programmes of course. Many solutions to old
problems and of major importance, are found in Policy Letters. Some
programmes although necessary have never been successfully implemented.
There was the motion picture programme but it is dogged by technical bugs
and became part of the Audio-Visio programme now being attempted. There has
been the re-write of all books programme but I've been too overworked to
attempt it.
Other future, self-evident programmes will come into being. They will
only fail if earlier programmes, dropped out or not given reorganisation
when needed, bring old problems into view by exposing them. All the
problems underlying the programme solutions above still potentially exist,
held in abeyance only by the programmes.
The best way to form programmes is to isolate actual problems at any
level of operation and solve them either by removing elements that make
them or by instituting a programme. Sensible planning tends toward both
actions.
An unsuccessful programme usually will be found to be solving the wrong
problem or is itself an improper solution to an actual problem.
If you want to establish the validity of a new programme offered by
someone, ask him what problem it is seeking to solve. You can then see if
you already have a solution to the problem, but most often you will see
that no clarified idea of the problem existed and so the solution is poor
or inadequate.
The common problem of an org is not the development of programmes but
failure to execute existing ones.
Another difficulty with orgs is that they often alter the existing
programme so that it no longer resolves the problem the programme was set
up to handle. A current example is magazines. Magazines exist to solve the
problem of public unawareness of an org. An org has no space unless it is
sending out anchor points to make it. And it is in non-existence for its
Scientology public unless it mails magazines regularly. Magazines do not
develop much new public-that is another, largely unsolved, problem.
Magazines exist to continue the awareness of the existing Scientology
public. Now as these people are already aware of Scientology, the awareness
one is trying to develop is that of the org and its services. Recently
Continental magazines began to issue only Scientology data. The ads making
the Scientology public aware of the org were toned down and omitted and the
Cash-Bills ratio worsened in orgs. The orgs started toward non-existence.
Significantly the trend was begun by a someone who did not like orgs but
was in favour of Scientology. Issue Authority erred in not looking at old
magazines and comparing them to the current layout. There was a vast
difference. No ads in current ones. The programme had been altered.
Artists are taught to be "original" and to alter. Yet successful artists
painted the same picture their whole lives under different names. These
just seemed new.
To change, alter or drop a programme one must know what the programme
was there to solve. Just change for change's sake is mere aberration
(making the lines crooked).
It's a good exercise for a senior executive to list the problems the org
really does have. To know the programmes of an org that are in is to see
what problems an org would have if they were dropped.
It's healthy to revert a programme now and then by meticulously
examining how it was originally when it was very successful and then put it
back the way it was originally. This is done not by adjusting lines but by
looking up old magazines, old policy, old despatches and issue pieces, even
old tapes. What did it used to consist of? If it is no longer successful:
(a) the programme was altered or dropped and
(b) the org will have a problem it once had long ago, or
(c) (rare) the causes of the problem have been removed
and the problem no longer exists.
There's lots of trial and error in developing a programme. That's why
any new programme should only be a "special project" for a while, off the
org main lines really, under special management. If a "special project"
starts to show up well in finance (and only in finance), then one should
include it "in" with its new staff as an org standard project.
To run new programmes in on existing lines is to disturb (by distraction
and staff overload) existing programmes and even if good the new will fail
and damage as well existing programmes.
Provide, then, staff and money to pioneer a new programme as a "special
project". If you don't have money or staff to do this you would do far, far
better simply looking over the problems the org faces and get in the old
programmes that handled them. These are known winners and don't forget,
they cost a lot to find and prove as the thing to do. And they took a long
time.
Take the Central Files,. Letter Reg set-up in orgs. That's a standard
programme. Developed in London and D.C. in the mid '50s. If you dropped it
out, an org would fail. The problem is "how to achieve special individual
contact with existing clientele and maintain existing already developed
business." One large firm, I was told the other day, that has put in our 7
division system was stunned to find they had never contacted their existing
business clientele. They only had done business with new clientele. This
cost them perhaps 200,000 sales a year! They promptly put in our CF-Letter
Registrar system with a vengeance.
In their case (as in a forming or reorganised org) they weren't even
aware of the problem and so had no programme for it.
It is often the case that one can develop a programme that removes the
need of
some other programme. If one removes the factors that make the problem, one
can dispense with the programme that solves it. But this is so rare it is
non-human in most instances.
For instance, doctors are a public solution to the problem of human body
illness. If one removed this problem, one could remove the "doctor
programme" safely. That's why doctors sometimes fight us. We are thought to
be working to remove the problem to which they are a programme. One would
have to have more than a better cure. One would have to remove in the 4th
Dynamic (Mankind) the causes of illness. These would not be what people
think they are as the problem persists and so does the "doctor programme"
in the society. It can't be the right problem. Only enough is known of the
causes of illness to make the problem appear to be handled. Actually the
bad statistic of ill people is rising. We have entered the field in
research only far enough to know that suppressives make people ill but
that's a sufficient departure to make it an Ethics problem, not one in
treatment! By extension of this theory one might find this problem not
caused by Pasteur's germs but by suppressive groups. In that case one would
increase ethics programmes. Eventually, if this solved it, the "doctor
programme" would be diminished as no longer the only solution.
The above is not a statement of intention or a plan. It is an example of
how an old standard programme can become less important. Note that one
would have to (a) state the problem better than it had been stated, (b)
isolate causes of the real problem, (c) institute a "special project" to
handle those causes, (d) see if the problem was now better handled, (e)
abandon it if it didn't handle the problem or (0 make it a standard
programme if it did prove effective, (g) diminish the old programme.
So just dropping a proven programme (without going at it as above [a] to
[f]) can be a catastrophe as it can let in an old problem when one already
has quite enough problems already.
Abandoned programmes that were successful are currently the main cause
of orgs being in any difficulty.
You can always make an org run better by studying old successful
programmes and getting them back in.
If you were to take the above list at Saint Hill, the major SH
programmes since 1959, and simply revert them (make them more like the
original) and reinforce them, income would probably double.
If we abandoned as few as five of these the SH org would undoubtedly
collapse.
If we added six new programmes directly into the org without seeing the
problem to be solved we could distract staff to a point where the old
standard programmes would suffer and the org would collapse.
Sometimes, even in our orgs, we enter new arbitraries which make new
problems we don't need. Those are the sources we can do without. If we
didn't routinely abolish such org-generated problems we would fade away in
a year.
Therefore we cherish and forward the existing programmes we have and
study them continually to be sure they don't "go out".
___________________
This is not a list of the problems faced at Saint Hill, it is a list of
solutions. For these programmes may accidentally be solving problems we
cannot yet clearly state.
This is not a list of all major programmes in Scientology. These are
found in the Policy Letters of past years and particularly 1965.
This is a list of the major SH programmes for use by SH executives and
as an illustration to others on how to programme and to show them that as
Scientologists we use our knowledge of the mechanics of life, problems and
solutions, to govern programmes.
If all the problems we faced were only ours only we could of course
simply audit them out. But we exist in a 3rd and 4th Dynamic which is not
merely aberrated but quite batty. This thrusts problems on us (finance,
international ignorance and intolerance, religious and psychiatric cults,
suppressive governments, retarded or misused scientific technology, lack of
human dignity and a host of other factors).
We exist therefore in a rather madly tossing sea, beset by numerous
counter currents.
As we grow we can remove vicious causes that make our problems problems.
Only then can we begin to drop certain programmes as the problems will
cease to exist. But at this writing those problems do exist and holding
them in check are numerous solutions we call programmes.
Where one of our standard programmes fails through lack of recognition
we then see a problem charging in on us demanding crash programming by
higher executives.
When we let uninformed or worse people put in new arbitraries or
solutions that solve no problem we disturb old programmes and soon have
heavy trouble through unnecessary programming. (Watching a new
inexperienced Ad Council propose "programmes" is a painful experience to a
trained and effective executive. These proposed measures look silly because
they confront no real problems of the org and are dangerous because they
will distract the org from correct existing programmes of which the new Ad
Council seems blissfully unaware.)
When an org doesn't know its programmes it can get pretty silly and
deeply in trouble. If it also knows its problems it is fortunate.
But any Scientology org is rich in programmes already proven and tested
and in exact drill. If it just keeps these going it will win even if it
doesn't see the problems.
As it wins the org expands, can afford more assistance, is less under
duress. Then it can begin to examine the problems themselves (still keeping
the solution as a programme) and possibly remove some of the causes of the
actual problem. Only when the problem is gone can one drop a programme.
A Scientology org is best fitted to do this as its staff is going up
tone by processing and is more and more able to confront and see source.
Therefore it eventually can remove the causes of its problems since it can
(a) see the problem and (b) see the bad sources which make the problem.
Until it can see, it is not safe to drop any of the solutions. And as
orgs are a channel or a way in themselves they always will have a bottom
strata of people who cannot yet see the problems and so need explicit
programmes to follow. As the lower strata moves up, a new lower strata, by
expansion, takes its place so there is no real end to programmes until the
day comes when the Universe is sane.
And that's not tomorrow or even the day after.
But we are making steady, relentless progress in that direction. Mainly
because of our programmes, well applied.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jp.rd
Copyright � 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 24 DECEMBER 1966
Issue II
Correction and Addition
Gen Non-
Remimeo
Execs SH
Org Exec Course
ADMIN KNOW-HOW
HOW TO PROGRAMME AN ORG
CORRECTIONS AND ADDITION
SEQUENCE OF PROGRAMMES CORRECTION
The Sixth SH programme from the top on page one states, "To find
financial support for SH activities resulting in the SHSBC which also
accomplished the next above. " This does not refer to "next above" but to
two above, "To train technical and admin staffs for Commonwealth orgs." The
Saint Hill Special Briefing Course was founded (a) to train tech and admin
staffs for Commonwealth orgs and (b) was found to be the solvency factor of
Saint Hill which was being looked for.
"Next above", "To make Commonwealth orgs run on their income without
using all the bills sums owed SH or Ron as part of their operating funds"
has only partially been solved and the SHSBC was not founded to solve it
although it helped. The 7 Div system began to solve it (financial
independence of outer orgs) but only where a good Qual Div was put in first
and all area failed or overrun cases were picked up. It is notable that
Sydney and Adelaide, reported by Auckland to have put in no Qual Div even
after 2 years of urging, were low orgs on the totem pole. Others that did
get in a Qual Div and pick up their failed cases and overruns improved very
markedly. So the solution to solvent outer orgs that could run without
using SH or Ron's income lay in (a) establishing a fine Qual Div, (b)
picking up their area's "failed cases" and also repairing all overruns, (c)
training their staffs on tech and admin in the new Qual and (d) putting in
a fine Tech Div. Those that really did that are going very well. Sydney,
which butchered cases once by overrun R2-12, evidently completely neglected
the programme and remains insolvent.
ADDITION
To make a simpler statement of What is a Programme, the following is
offered:
1. The org has a problem relating to its function and survival.
2. Unless the problem is solved, the org will not do well and may even
go under.
3. The solution is actually an org activity or drill. We call this a
PROGRAMME.
4. To find and establish a programme, one conceives of a solution and
sets it up independent of org lines with its own staff and finance as
a SPECIAL PROJECT.
5. When a special project is seen to be effective or, especially,
profitable, it is then put into the org lines as worked out in the
"special project", bringing its own staff with it.
6. The usual place to carry a special project is under the Office of LRH
or the Office of the HCO Exec Sec or Office of the Org Exec Sec.
Programmes go in their appropriate departments and divisions, one to
six, not seven.
OVERHAULING A PROJECT
When a programme goes bad, gets altered to a point of unworkability or
carelessly conducted or is dropped without orders to do so, two things may
happen.
1. The Exec Sec (or LRH, Guardian or Asst Guardian or LRH Comm) over
that division puts the executives which should have seen to the
programme in DANGER Condition and personally pushes to get the
programme back in as a programme.
2. If this fails, the Exec Sec (or LRH, the Guardian or Asst Guardian or
the LRH Comm) hauls the whole programme into his own office as though
it were a new special project, gets it personnel and finance and sets
it all up and then gives it over to its correct dept and division.
The second step comes about when one finds any non-compliance in doing
(1) above. As a Danger Condition was already set up and the Exec Sec (or
other senior) is handling it on a by-pass already, if one still can't get
the programme restarted there is no other action one can take than pulling
the whole thing into one's own office. For sure somebody has a foot on it.
Although we can try to find WHO has, this is no reason to continue to stall
the programme. After a Danger Condition on a programme has existed for a
while with no change of activity, one is wasting one's time to keep pushing
on a via. The easier course is simply to say, "As Address has been in
Danger for some time and still continues to goof, I, the HCO Exec Sec,
hereby take Address into my office in Division 7 where I will personally
straighten it out and meanwhile the Ad Council is to nominate for the Exec
Council a new HCO Area Sec."
In actual operation-I often do (1) above-call a Danger Condition on a
programme that is not functioning, handle it personally and use Ethics
action on those by-passed.
Sometimes when (1) doesn't work, I realize there is interference still
and haul the whole section into my office as a function of my office. It
may stay there quite a while. Then I will put it elsewhere as a complete
section transfer. Sometimes after the transfer I again have to haul it
back. Usually that's because it went into the wrong place in the org. If
you put a section in the wrong dept or division it just won't function. The
exception is the Exec Div and anything can be put in there for a while.
The common error in (2) is to forget one has it and forget to transfer
it when formed up properly. If one looks over what hats he is wearing one
usually finds a programme or two he has been handling and which he ought to
finish up in final form and put into the org proper.
In theory any exec or even an In Charge can do (l)& (2) above.
If (1) doesn't work then do (2). The main mistake is to forget to
complete the action of (2) by putting the programme back in place in the
org. To prevent that from happening, when you do (2), change it also on the
org board. Then it stays in view. Otherwise one forgets and soon begins to
feel overworked.
Almost any executive is holding on to a special project or two or even a
programme. So one should routinely look over one's own hats and re-find
these and complete cycle on them.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jp.rd
Copyright � 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 14 JANUARY 1969
Remimeo
Starrate on
all Execs
OT ORGS
What it takes to make an org go right is the intelligent assessment of
what really needs to be done, setting these as targets and then getting
them actually fully done.
We have all the data necessary to make orgs boom.
Therefore we find that when they don't, these faults must be present:
1. Completely unreal analysis of what needs to be done to make things
really go.
2. Cross orders-juniors setting other targets across vital targets.
3. Non-compliance with vital target accomplishment.
4. False reports on actions or false data concerning targets.
5. Failure to doggedly follow through on one action and get it done
fully and completely.
6. Distractions leading to any of the above.
MAJOR TARGET
The desirable overall purpose being undertaken. This is highly
generalized, such as "To become an auditor".
VITAL TARGET
By definition a VITAL Target is something that must be done to operate
at all.
Man's worst difficulty is his inability to tell the important from the
unimportant. "Every target is the same as every other target" is part of
A=A=A.
It takes good sense to be able to survey an area and find out
1. What MUST be done.
2. What SHOULDN'T be done.
3. What is only desirable to be done.
4. What is trivial.
As Man all too easily specializes in stops he tends to stress what
SHOULDN'T be done. While this enters into it, remember that it's a STOP.
STOPS ALL OCCUR BECAUSE OF FAILED PURPOSES.
BEHIND EVERY STOP THERE IS A FAILED PURPOSE.
A stuck picture or a motionless org are similar. Each has behind it a
failed purpose.
THERE IS A LAW ABOUT THIS-ALL YOU HAVE TO DO TO RESTORE LIFE AND ACTION
IS TO REKINDLE THE FAILED PURPOSE. THE STOPS WILL AT ONCE BLOW.
That law (it comes out of OT VIII materials) is so powerful it would
practically revive the dead!
It applies to orgs.
It applies to cities or nations.
When you diverge from a constructive purpose to "stop attacks", the
purpose has been abandoned. You get a stop. The real way to stop attacks is
to widen one's zone of responsibility. And pour the coal on the purpose.
Thus all attacks one makes should be in THE DIRECTION OF ENLARGING ONE'S
SCOPE AND AUGMENTING BASIC PURPOSE.
Thus, in the case of Scientology orgs one should attack with the end in
view of taking over the whole field of Mental Healing. If our purpose was
this then it had to be this on all dynamics. We only got into trouble by
failing to take responsibility for the whole field!
We'll win back by reasserting that responsibility and making it good.
Targets, to that degree, are purposes.
Purposes must be executed. They are something to DO.
OT
Let us look at the definition of OT-cause over Thought Life Form Matter
Energy Space and Time.
As one falls away from that one becomes a SPECTATOR, then one becomes an
effect. Then one is gone.
One causes things by action. Not by thinking dim thoughts.
One can be doing an IN basket as simply a spectator.
In the society today spectatorism is very common. Magazine writers,
reporters write weird pieces that look at how odd things are. The writer
doesn't understand them at all. He just watches them.
Spectatorism is not so low as total effect.
The total effect-no cause-person has mainly a case. He doesn't even
look.
Thus there is a gradient scale of OT. It's not an absolute. One is as OT
as he can CAUSE things.
One of the things to cause is target attainment. When somebody can push
through a target to completion he's to that degree OT.
People who don't push targets are either just spectators or they are
total effect.
ORG STATE
An Org is somewhere on the OT scale. Any org is. Of any kind.
An org can figure out the vital targets and push them through to
completion or it can't.
It's a gradient scale.
An org succeeds or fails to the degree its individual executives and
staff members can measure up to the OT formula: Cause.
Scientology orgs must become cause over their environments.
They do this by each executive and each staff member accomplishing
targets, small and large.
Thus:
(a) if the targets of what MUST be done to operate at all are set
and
(b) are carried out with no non-compliance and
(c) if no false reports are entered into it,
Then
That org is way high on the OT scale
AND IT WILL CONQUER ITS ENTIRE ENVIRONMENT COMPLETE.
That's really all there is to it.
One way to fail at it is do (a) with things that are so general that
they invite no doingness.
Some guys are so bad off they set targets like "Move the Mountain" and
give one and all a big failure. Since there's no way to do it and probably
no reason to either, that's an SP target. So what MUST be done means just
that. What is vital and necessary. Not what is simply a good idea.
Here's some MUST targets as examples:
A. Get Tech delivered 100% in the org itself.
B. Get the public aware of its being delivered and wanting it.
C. Get the admin machinery in to get the public in and out.
Or another series:
D. GET 10,000 trained auditors into the org field.
E. Get the public aware of the project and wanting training.
F. Set up terrific 100% snap-pop courses to handle the flow.
Or another:
G. Get a E100,000 reserve cushion.
H. Get all Accounts staff and Executives checked out on Finance Policy.
I. Shove the throttle down on promotion.
J. Deliver fantastic service.
K. Get enough tech people in training to handle the flows.
L. Find bigger poshier quarters to handle the flow when it rises.
M. Get all staff onto the OEC to diminish flow line flubs.
You get the idea.
An exec who is just a spectator to his In basket flow is doing nothing
but cultivating Dev-T.
You can assess the situation.
You can drive targets home to full completion.
Every executive and every staff member is somewhere on the OT Scale. And
he can rise higher just by setting up the targets and plowing them through
to done, done, done.
Yes, it requires ideas. But ideas come from interested looking and
sizing it all up before you set the target in the first place.
You can even raise an org by gradients so as not to overwhelm it. Set
and make small targets. Then bigger and bigger ones.
Well, you get the idea.
It's the ORG's road to OT.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:bw.ei.rd
Copyright � 1969
by L.Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
NOTE: This Policy Letter has been corrected as per HCO P/L 23 January 1969
OT ORGS CORRECTION.
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 16 JANUARY 1969
(Reissued from Flag Order No. 1734,
same date and title)
Remimeo
TARGETS, TYPES OF
There are several VALUES of targets. Not all targets are the same value
or importance.
There are, in any org "understood" or continuing targets which came from
FOs or Pol Ltrs and Mission Orders.
PRIMARY TARGETS
There is a group of "understood" targets which if overlooked, brings
about inaction.
The first of these is
SOMEBODY THERE
Then
WORTHWHILE PURPOSE
Then
SOMEBODY TAKING RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE AREA OR ACTION
Then
FORM OF ORGANIZATION PLANNED WELL
Then
FORM OF ORGANIZATION HELD OR REESTABLISHED
Then
ORGANIZATION OPERATING
If we have the above "understood" targets we can go on BUT IF THESE DROP
OUT OR ARE NOT SUBSTITUTED FOR then no matter what targets are set
thereafter they will go rickety or fail entirely.
In the above there may be a continual necessity to reassert one or more
of the "understood" targets WHILE trying to get further targets going.
VITAL TARGETS
Under this heading comes WHAT WE MUST DO TO OPERATE AT ALL.
This requires an inspection of both the area one is operarating into and
the factors or materiel or organization with which we are operating.
One then finds those points (sometimes WHILE operating) which stop or
threaten future successes. And sets the overcoming of the vital ones as
targets.
CONDITIONAL TARGETS
It is interesting that one can go into an art type "perfection" with
targets and groom up Primary Targets far beyond the need to accomplish
purposes.
You've seen chaps work all their lives to "get rich" or some such thing
in order to "tour the world" and never make it. Some other fellow sets Tour
the world and goes directly at it and does it. So there is a type of Target
known as a Conditional Target: If I could just ..... then we could .....
and so accomplish ..... This is all right of course until it gets unreal.
There is a whole class of Conditional Targets that have no IF in them.
These are legitimate targets. They have lots of WILL in them, "We will
...... and then ......"
Sometimes sudden "Breaks" show up and one must quickly take advantage of
them. This is only "good luck". One uses it and replans quickly when it
happens. One is on shaky ground to count on "good luck" as a solution.
A valid conditional Target would be
"We will go there and see if the area is useful."
All conditional targets are basically actions of gathering data first
and if it is okay, then go into action on a vital target and Operating
target basis.
This could add up like this:
CT I - Survey Lower Slobovia to see if it would be a suitable place for
an org.
This survey done, if it is positive one then goes into Primary Targets
and Operating Targets.
The Primary Targets would be
Lower Slobovia One: Appoint Local Organization Officer here for Lower
Slobovia.
Lower Slobovia Two: Form up Lower Slobovian Org-Personnel.
Lower Slobovia Three: Train up Org-Staff Training Officer.
Lower Slobovia Four: Translate texts. (Translation Section)
Lower Slobovia Five: Finance Formation. (Finance Section)
Lower Slobovia Six: Transport LS Org. (Transport Section)
Lower Slobovia Seven; Prepare LS bidg in LS BEFORE ORG ARRIVES-LS Org
Officer.
Thus we would establish Lower Slobovia. AND IT WOULD ALL GO OFF WELL TO
THE DEGREE THE PRIMARY TARGETS WERE MADE, DONE, COMPLETED.
Primary Targets setting on Lower Slobovia would fail if some primary
target were omitted in the first place (never set) or if the Conditional
Target findings on LS were a false report.
Thus we are very hot on "false report" and very hot on "non-compliance".
OPERATING TARGETS
An operating target would set the direction of advance and qualify it.
It normally includes a scheduled TIME by which it has to be complete so as
to fit into other targets.
Sometimes the time is set as "BEFORE". And there may be no time for the
event that it must be done "before". Thus it goes into a rush basis "just
in case".
To get all the Shoe Salesmen in Boston enrolled on a PE Course would be
an operating target. This would then go into the framework of a primary
target as to the remaining targets set.
Operating targets often look like "basic purpose". They can come before
or after primary targets. But an operating target has its own series of
Primary targets. To enroll all the shoe salesmen you need somebody in
charge of it, a PE Supervisor, literature, a handbook for salesmen, etc.
etc. which are all set as Primary targets.
Sometimes an elaborate Operating and Primary Target series falls apart
because there was no Conditional Target set, i.e. to find out if Boston had
any salesmen and which types were responsive. You might find the Operating
Target had been set with no inspection.
So, again, we can move backward and find that an Operating Target needs
a Conditional Target ahead of it-to wit, an inspection.
PRODUCTION TARGETS
Setting quotas, usually against time, are production targets.
These often fail because they are unreal or issued for other reasons
than production (i.e. propaganda).
As statistics most easily reflect production, an org or activity can be
so PRODUCTION TARGET conscious that it fails to set Conditional, Operating
or Primary Targets. When this happens, then Production is liable to
collapse for lack of planning stated in other types of targets.
Production as the only target type can become so engulfing that
Conditional Targets even when set are utterly neglected. Then Operating and
Primary Targets get very unreal and stats go DOWN.
YOU HAVE TO INSPECT AND SURVEY AND GATHER DATA AND SET OPERATING AND
PRIMARY TARGETS BEFORE YOU CAN SET PRODUCTION TARGETS.
A normal reason for down statistics on production is the vanishment of
Primary Targets. These go out and nobody notices that this affects
production badly. Production depends on other prior targets being kept in.
PROGRAMMES
Programmes are made up of all types of targets coordinated and executed.
ON TIME.
Programmes extend in time and go overdue to the extent the various types
of targets are not set or not pushed home or drop out.
Programmes fail only because the various types of targets are not
executed or are not kept in.
SUMMARY
You can get done almost anything you want to do if types of targets are
understood, set with reality, held in or completed.
People whose own purposes have failed often cannot either set or
complete targets. The remedy is to rehabilitate their own purposes which
then blows off the stops.
People who stop targets actively have failed so badly that they can only
think in terms of stops.
This whole subject of Targets and purposes is probably a large one.
These are just rough notes and the naming of the different types which is
itself a considerable advance.
It is of help in grasping what is going on and gets one somewhere.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:sdp.ei.rd
Copyright � 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 18 JANUARY 1969
Issue II
(Reissued from Flag Order No. 1736,
same date and title)
Remimeo
PLANNING AND TARGETS
(There are at this writing 3 HCO Pol Ltrs of near date on this subject
of Targets. The area has never before been examined or written up as a
philosophic subject.)
Plans are NOT targets.
All manner of plans can be drawn and can be okayed. But this does not
authorize their execution. They are just plans. When and how they will be
done and by whom has not been established, scheduled or authorized.
This is why planning sometimes gets a bad name.
You could plan to make a million dollars but if when, how and who were
not set as targets of different types, it just wouldn't happen. A brilliant
plan is drawn as to how to convert Boston Harbour into a fuel tanker area.
It could be on drawings with everything perfectly placed. One could even
have models of it. Ten years go by and it has not been started much less
completed. You have seen such plans. World's Fairs are full of them.
One could also have a plan which was targeted-who, when, how-and if the
targets were poor or unreal, it would never be completed.
One can also have a plan which had no CONDITIONAL TARGET ahead of it and
so no one really wanted it and it served no purpose really. It is unlikely
it would ever be finished. Such a thing existed in Corfu. It was a half
completed Greek theatre which had just been left that way. No one had asked
the inhabitants if they wanted it or if it was needed. So even though very
well planned and even partially targeted and half completed, there it is-
half finished. And has remained that way.
A plan, by which is meant the drawing or scale modeling of some area,
project or thing, is of course a vital necessity in any construction and
construction fails without it. It can even be okayed as a plan.
But if it was not the result of findings of a Conditional Target (a
survey of what's needed or feasible) it will be useless or won't fit in.
And if no funds are allocated to it and no one is ordered to do it and if
no scheduling of doing it exists, then, on each separate count it won't
ever be done.
One can define Planning as the overall target system wherein all targets
of all types are set. That would be complete planning.
COMPLETE PLANNING
To get a Complete Plan okayed one would have to show it as:
(a) A result of a Conditional Target (survey of what's wanted and
needed).
(b) The details of the thing itself, meaning a picture of it or its
scope plus the ease or difficulty in doing it and with what persons
or materials.
(c) Classification of it as Vital or simply useful.
(d) The Primary Targets of it showing the organization needed to do
it.
(e) The Operating Targets showing its scheduling (even if scheduled
not with dates but days or weeks) and dove-tailing with other
actions.
(f) Its cost and whether or not it will pay for itself or can be
afforded or how much money it will make.
Complete Planning would have to include the Targets and the Plan of the
thing.
Thus, by redefining words and assigning labels to target types we can
get a better grip on this.
A Plan would be the design of the thing itself.
Complete Planning would be all the targets plus the design.
Thus we see why some things don't come off at all and why they often
don't get completed even when planned. The Plan is not put forward in its
Target framework and so is unreal or doesn't get done.
Also it's a great way to lose or waste money.
Sometimes a Conditional Target fails to ask what obstacles or opposition
would be encountered or what skills are available and so can go off the
rails in that fashion.
______________________
The whole subject of Plans, Targets and target types is new in the realm
of analyzed thought.
It is a subject to "get the feel of" and "learn to think concerning"
rather than a fully "canned" subject.
But if these points are grasped, then one sees the scope of the subject
and can become quite brilliant and achieve things hitherto out of reach or
never thought of before.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:ldm.ei.rd
Copyright � 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 24 JANUARY 1969
Remimeo
TARGET TYPES
(Note: This is a developing subject, new in philosophy.
It is part of the philosophy Scientology.)
You should learn the names and types of targets for quick use and
classification of what you are trying to do.
MAJOR TARGET - The broad general ambition, possibly covering a long only
approximated period of time. Such as, "To attain greater security" or,
"To get the org up to 50 staff members".
PRIMARY TARGET - The organizational, personnel, communication type
targets.
These have to be kept in. These are the terminals and route and
havingness and org board type targets. Example: "To put someone in
charge of organizing it and have him set remaining primary targets". Or,
"To re-establish the original comm system which has dropped out".
CONDITIONAL TARGETS - Those which set up EITHER/OR to find out data or
if a project can be done or where or to whom.
OPERATING TARGETS - Those which lay out directions and actions or a
schedule of events or timetable.
PRODUCTION TARGETS - Those which set quantities like statistics.
PROGRAM - The complete or outline of a complete target series containing
all types.
While there may be other types of targets, these (more fully described
in HCO P/L 14 Jan 69, 16 Jan 69, 18 Jan 69 and Correction HCO P/L 23 Jan 69
and this one, HCO P/L 24 Jan 69) should be studied and every target set
should be classed as one or more of the above.
"Complete Planning" and "Programmes" are synonymous at this time and
PROGRAMMES is the preferred word.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:ldm.ei.rd
Copyright � 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 24 JANUARY 1969
Issue II
Remimeo
Gung-Ho
FSMs
Pub Divs
PURPOSE & TARGETS
(This is No. 5 in the Target Series)
Out of data of OT VIII has come some material that cannot be relegated
to that level. It is minor to that level but major to our operations.
The reason we are fought where we are fought is contained in its major
part in Purposes.
Purposes often fail and wind up in stop.
Stopped purposes can then be dramatized.
In Scientology we use (quite correctly) FREEDOM. While not the most
basic purpose TO BE FREE is a common purpose to all thetans.
This tends to key in (restimulate), in some persons, the stop of being
free. They themselves wanted to be free. They were stopped, they dramatize
the STOP of being free and try then to stop us. We restimulated (keyed in)
their own purpose to be free or free others and where we are opposed the
person or persons dramatizes the stop or disagreement.
Also where we not only restimulate the stop but oppose and deny him as
well, we get an enemy.
We are then stopping stoppers. While this is necessary to save the day,
it is preventable if begun early enough.
The psychiatrist is not the only "freedom stopper" we will ever meet.
Many people who have been in healing and mental treatment in the times
before we came along had only failures. So anything offered to them
(including their own) will be looked on as a failure at best or at worst a
fraud.
That it really can be done in Scientology is not only outside their
reality but regenerated the failed purpose they have had to be free and
free others and they dramatize STOP.
While this is not the total reason (interrelations also restimulate
ethnic values meaning customs) it is a big reason for dedicated opposition
to us.
We restimulate their failed freedom efforts and they dramatize what
stopped them. So they irrationally seek to stop Scientology.
This would also be true for products of a commercial nature. It is good
advertising technology.
Freedom is one of the buttons that gets us forward. It is also the
button that restimulates the opposition into efforts to stop us.
In dissemination then to such people, theoretically one need only get
them remembering when they wanted to be free or free others to blow their
stops. But as they may have many crimes now built up on top of it some may
just spin.
But in all discussions with persons opposing Sen, one should try the
approach of getting them to remember their efforts to be free or to free
others and let them talk. As you listen you will realize they were without
Scientology to help them and they didn't have a chance.
Led in from that point you may get a very receptive person.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:ldm.ei.rd
Copyright � 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 14 SEPTEMBER 1969
Remimeo
Senior OEC
ADMIN KNOW-HOW #22
THE KEY INGREDIENTS
When we look at organization in its most simple form, when we seek
certain key actions or circumstances that make organization work, when we
need a very simple very vital rundown to teach people that will produce
results we find only a few points we need to stress.
The purpose of organization is TO MAKE PLANNING BECOME ACTUALITY.
Organization is not just a fancy complex system, done for its own sake.
That is bureaucracy at its worst. Org boards for the sake of org boards,
graphs for the sake of graphs, rules for the sake of rules only add up to
failures.
The only virtue (not always a bad one) of a complex unwieldy meaningless
bureaucratic structure is that it provides jobs for the friends of those in
control. If it does not also bring about burdensome taxation and threatened
bankruptcy by reason of the expense of maintaining it and if it does not
saddle a people or production employees with militant inspections and
needless control, organization for the sake of providing employment is not
evil but beyond providing employment is useless, and only when given too
much authority is it destructive.
The kings of France and other lands used to invent titles and duties to
give activity to the hordes of noble hangers-on to keep them at court,
under surveillance, and out of mischief out in the provinces where they
might stir up their own people. "Keeper of the Footstools" "Holder of the
Royal Nightgown" and other such titles were fought for, bought, sold and
held with ferocity.
Status seeking, the effort to become more important and have a personal
reason for being and for being respected gets in the road of honest efforts
to effectively organize in order to get something done, in order to make
something economically sound.
Organization for its own sake in actual practice usually erects a
monster that becomes so hard to live with that it becomes overthrown.
Production losses, high taxes, irritating or fearsome interference with the
people or actual producers invites and accomplishes bankruptcy or revolt,
usually both even in commercial companies.
Therefore to be meaningful, useful and lasting, an organization has to
fit into the definition above:
TO MAKE PLANNING BECOME ACTUALITY.
In companies and countries there is no real lack of dreaming. All but
the most depraved heads of companies or states wish to see specific or
general improvement. This is also true of their executives and, as it forms
the basis of nearly all revolts, it is certainly true of workers. From top
to bottom, then, there is, in the large majority, a desire for improvement.
More food, more profit, more pay, more facilities, and, in general, more
and better of whatever they believe is good or beneficial. This also
includes less of what they generally consider to be bad.
Programmes which obtain general support consist of more of what is
beneficial
and less of what is detrimental. "More food less disease" "More beautiful
buildings, less hovels" "More leisure less work" "More activity less
unemployment" are typical of valuable and acceptable programmes.
But only to have a programme is to have only a dream. In companies, in
political parties, useful programmes are very numerous. They suffer only
from a lack of execution.
All sorts of variations of programme failure occur. The programme is too
big. It is not generally considered desirable. It is not needed at all. It
would benefit only a few. Such are surface reasons. The basic reason is
lack of organization know-how.
Any programme, too ambitious, partially acceptable, needed or not needed
could be put into effect if properly organized.
The five year plans of some nations which are currently in vogue are
almost all very valuable and almost all fall short of their objectives. The
reason is not that they are unreal, too ambitious or generally
unacceptable. The reason for any such failure is lack of organization.
It is not man's dreams that fail him. It is the lack of know-how
required to bring those dreams into actuality.
Good administration has two distinct targets
1. To perpetuate an existing company, culture, or society.
2. To make planning become actuality.
Given a base on which to operate, which is to say land, people,
equipment and a culture, one needs a good administrative pattern of some
sort just to maintain it.
Thus I and 2 above become 2 only. The plan is "to continue the existing
entity". No company or country continues unless one continues to put it
there. Thus an administrative system of some sort, no matter how crude, is
necessary to perpetuate any group or any subdivision of a group. Even a
king or headman or manager who has no other supporting system to whom one
can bring disputes about land or water or pay is an administrative system.
The foreman of a labour gang that only loads trucks has an astonishingly
complex administrative system at work.
Companies and countries do not work just because they are there or
because they are traditional. They are continuously put there by one or
another form of administration.
When a whole system of admin moves out or gets lost or forgotten,
collapse occurs unless a new or substitute system is at once moved into
place.
Changing the head of a department, much less a general manager and much,
much less a ruler, can destroy a portion or the whole since the old system,
unknown, disregarded or forgotten, may cease and no new system which is
understood is put in its place. Frequent transfers within a company or
country can keep the entire group small, disordered and confused, since
such transfers destroy what little administration there might have been.
Thus, if administrative shifts or errors or lack can collapse any type
of group, it is vital to know the basic subject of organization.
Even if the group is at effect-which is to say originates nothing but
only
defends in the face of threatened disaster, it still must plan. And if it
plans, somehow
it must get the plan executed or done. Even a simple situation of an
attacked fortress has to be
defended by planning and doing the plan, no matter how crude. The order,
"Repel the invader who is storming the south wall," is the result of
observation and planning no matter how brief or unthorough. Getting the
south wall defended occurs by some system of administration even if it only
consists of sergeants hearing the order and pushing their men to the south
wall.
A company with heavy debts has to plan even if it is just to stall off
creditors. ^.nd some administrative system has to exist even to do only
that.
The terrible dismay of a young leader who plans a great and powerful new
era only to find himself dealing with old and weak faults, is attributable
not to his "foolish ambition" or "lack of reality" but to his lack of
organizational know-how.
Even elected presidents or prime ministers of democracies are victims of
such terrible dismay. They do not, as is routinely asserted, "go back on
their campaign promises" or "betray the people". They, as well as their
members of parliament, simply lack the rudiments of organizational know-
how. They cannot put their campaign promises into effect not because they
are too high flown but because they are politicians not administrators.
To some men it seems enough to dream a wonderful dream. Just because
they dreamed it they feel it should now take place. They become very
provoked when it does not occur.
Whole nations, to say nothing of commercial firms or societies or
groups, have spent decades in floundering turmoil because the basic dreams
and plans were never brought to fruition.
Whether one is planning for the affluence of the Appalachian Mountains
or a new loading shed closer to the highway, the gap between the plan and
the actuality will be found to be lack of administrative know-how.
Technical ignorance, finance, even lack of authority and unreal planning
itself are none Of them true barriers between planning and actuality.
____________________
Thus, we come to the exact most basic steps that comprise
administration.
First is OBSERVATION. From beginning to end observation must serve both
those in charge and any others who plan. When observation is lacking, then
planning itself as well as any and all progress can become unreal and
orders faulty and destructive. Observation in essence must be TRUE. Nothing
must muddy it or colour it as this can lead to gross errors in action and
training.
Next is PLANNING itself. Planning is based on dreams but it must be
fitted to what is needed and wanted and what men can do, even with
stretched imaginations or misgivings. Planning has to be targeted and
scheduled and laid out in steps and gradients or one will be laying
railroad tracks that pass through oceans or boring tunnels in mountains
that do not exist or building penthouses without putting any building under
them to hold them up.
The essence of planning is COMMUNICA TION and the communication must be
such that it can be understood and will not be misunderstood. For unless
those who oversee and those who do know what their part of the plan is,
they cannot execute their share and very well may oversee and do quite some
other action, leaving a monstrous gap and even a structure that ate up
their time and funds but now has to be torn down.
The next is SUPERVISION and supervision is dually needful. It serves as
a
relay point to which plans can be communicated and from which observations
as reports can
be received; and it serves as the terminal which communicates the plans as
orders and sees that they are actually done. This gives one the genus of
the Org Board as a central ordering point which has other relay ordering
points taking care of their part of the whole plan or programme. These
points are often also the points which care for local occurrences which
must be handled and their frailty is that they become so involved with
local occurrences, oddities and purely local concerns that they do not or
can not give any attention to receiving, relaying and overseeing their part
of the main plan.
Then there are the PRODUCERS who produce the service or the structure or
the product required by the plan. Many plans are marvelous in all respects
but putting somebody there to actually DO the required actions that make
the plan real. The primary fault is to use persons who already have
projects and duties to which they are committed and, with their local
knowledge, see must be continued at any cost but who are forced to abandon
existing programmes or duties to start on this new activity, solely because
the new activity has the stress given it in orders and the old activities
are seemingly ordered left alone. Old companies and old countries could be
said to be "that collection of incomplete and abandoned projects which is
confused and failing".
Finally there is the USER, those who will use or benefit from the
programme when it is realized and completed. When planning fails to take
this element into account, only then can the whole programme fail utterly
for it, regardless of dreams, labor and expense, is finally seen to be of
no value anyway. Thus all great programmes begin with an understanding or a
survey of what is needed and wanted and a nose and value count of those who
will use it and a costing action in time, labor, materials and finance,
compared to the value of it, even if only aesthetic, of those who will use
it in any way if only to know they have it or to be proud of it or to feel
better or stronger because they have done it.
____________________
Thus one gets the points which are the true administrative points:
1. OBSERVATION even down to discovering the users and what is needed and
wanted.
2. PLANNING which includes imaginative conception and intelligent
timing, Targeting and drafting of the plans so they can be
communicated and assigned.
3. COMMUNICATING which includes receiving and understanding plans and
their portion and relaying them to others so that they can be
understood.
4. SUPERVISION which sees that that which is communicated is done in
actuality.
5. PRODUCTION which does the actions or services which are planned,
communicated and supervised.
6. USERS by which the product or service or completed plan is used.
______________________
Administrative Systems or organizations which lack at least the
rudiments of the above system will not bring off the dream and will
accumulate an enormous lot of uncompleted actions. Not a few failures,
bankruptcies, overthrows and revolutions have occurred because one or all
of the above points were awry in an existing organization.
The amount of heroic executive overwork which comes from the omission of
one or more of these vital essential points accounts for the ulcers which
are the occupational disease of those in charge.
When some or all these points are awry or gone, an executive or ruler or
his minister is reduced to an anxiety which can only watch for the symptoms
of bankruptcy or attack or revolt.
Even if so reduced, an executive who fends off disaster while getting in
a system which satisfies the above points has an enormously bettered chance
of winning at long last.
______________________
The dual nature of an administrative system or an organization now
becomes plain.
Let us pry apart I and 2 above. The effort to hold an existing
organization together is really different than trying to get a plan into
actuality. In practice one has an organization of some sort. It has
functions and it has local concerns and problems. And it has programmes and
actions from past control centrals or which were locally generated.
To push in upon this plans which, no matter how well conceived or
intentioned, are additional to its load will cause a great deal of
confusion, incomplete projects left dangling and general upset.
To place new programmes into action, two prior actions are necessary
A. Put in a whole new system paralleling the old existing system.
B. Survey the old system and its existing programmes to preserve them,
eradicate them or combine them with the new plans.
To leave A and B undone is to court disaster. Whether one is aware of
the old programmes or the old organization or not THEY REMAIN AND WILL
CONTINUE even if only as a pile of undone, unsorted papers nobody knows
where to file or as a pile of odd unfinished masonry some future generation
can't identify or will identify with scorn of administrations in general.
New leaders are sometimes looked upon as a worse scourge than a foreign
enemy and new patterns of rule are often subjected to overthrow simply
because they did not, out of ignorance or laziness, do A and B above.
One sometimes finds a company unit or a military officer left in some
unheard of place for years, at continuing expense, guarding or nibbling at
some project in a bewildered or philosophic fashion.
The activity remained unremembered, unhandled when a new broom and new
planners entered the scene.
This can get so bad that a company or a nation's resources can be broken
to bits. The old plans, disorganized, not known, discredited, are
superseded by new plans and new ambitions. The old plans are in the road of
the new plans and the new plans prevent old plans from completing. The
result is an impasse. And the men in charge, even at the level of junior
executives, become even more puzzled and bewildered than the workers and
begin to believe no new plans can ever be done, blame the ignorance of the
populace and the cruelty of fate and give up.
All they had to do was put in a complete new parallel system as in the I
to 6 outline above for their new plans and to meanwhile preserve and
continue the old system while they survey for preservation, eradication or
combination of it. It is sometimes even good sense to continue old projects
to completion currently with new projects just to maintain stability in the
company or country and somehow find new finance and new people for the new
plans. It is often far less costly than to simply confuse everything.
Furthermore, all NEW and untried plans should have PILOT PROJECTS which
by test and use must be successful before one incorporates them and their
new workers into the old system as a parallel dependable activity.
A "chicken in every pot" as a campaign promise could easily succeed if
organized as in I to 6 above.
_______________________
There is a lot to organization. It requires trained administrators who
can forward the programmes. But a "trained" administrator who does not
grasp the principles of organization itself is only a clerk.
At this current writing Man has not had administrative training centers
where actual organization was taught. It was learned by "experience" or by
working in an organization that was already functioning. But as the
principles were not the same company to company and nation to nation, the
differences of background experiences of any set of administrators differed
to such a degree that no new corps could be assembled as a team.
Thus it was said to require a quarter to a half a century to make a
company. But the number of ineffective bureaucracies and national failures
which existed stated clearly that there were too few skilled administrators
and too few training activities.
Man's happiness and the longevity of companies and states apparently
depend upon organizational know-how. Hiring specialized experts to get one
out of trouble is a poor substitute for knowing what it is all about in the
first place.
Organization is actually a simple subject, based on a few basic patterns
which if applied produce success.
If one would dream and see his dreams an actuality, one must also be
able to organize and to train organizational men who will make those dreams
come true.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:rs.ei.rd
Copyright � 1969
by L.Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 23 OCTOBER 1969
Remimeo
PROGRAMMING
(Reissue of HCOB 12 Sept 1959; refer also to HCO Pol 4 Dee 1966
"Admin Know-How - Expansion, Theory of Policy" and
HCO Pol 24 Dee 1966 Issue II "How to Programme an Org".)
Dianetics and Scientology have never suffered from lack of programmes.
There have always been programmes. And there will always be better
programmes and maybe for dissemination purposes, the PERFECT programme.
But what happens to all these programmes?
Alas, I found out the facts of this some years ago, and out of it came
the organizational pattern which is working so splendidly in Central Orgs.
But the facts that I found out all had to do with execution of programmes.
We get a wonderful idea. It's a slayer. It will tear the tops right off
the skyscrapers and send them in for a book. And months later we wonder
what happened to this marvellous programme.
Well, I'll tell you what happened. Nobody did it.
That's the swansong of almost every programme that gets thought up. It
was great, but nobody did it. . . .
And before you think I'm being critical of all the Staffs, I'll give you
the rest of my findings on this subject.
Programmes didn't get done because everybody was so overloaded with what
they were already doing that they didn't have a chance to start the new
programme no matter how good it was. Programmes were already in the run.
Many of these were so fundamental-such as sale of books or answering
letters to incoming preclears and students-that nobody could start on the
new programme. And as a result the new programme didn't get started no
matter how marvellous it seemed to be.
The reason Executives used to keep pulling people off post all the time
was this thing programming. The Executive had, he thought, a better idea or
was trying to carry out an old idea. And to get it going he would draft the
whole staff to do it and the basic programmes would go begging.
Do you know that nearly every function of a Central Org was at one time
a brand new wonderful programme? Well, it was. And this gradually sifting
out of activities brought us to a rather final form with one more step to
go and that step is programmes, a Department of Programmes. A Department
which can carry through new or stunt programmes without bringing the whole
place in ruins by tearing everybody off their standard programmes.
Programming is important enough to pay a lot of attention to. And there
is a lot of gen about it. And the gen all adds up to no matter how many
programmes you have, each one consists of certain parts. And if you don't
assemble those parts and run the programme in an orderly fashion, it just
won't spark off. These are some of the principles about programmes. And you
had better have them because your new HAS Co-Audit Course is a programme
and has to be done like a successful programme. And your preclears are a
programme and have to be done like a programme. If you don't know these
facts of life, here they are:
MAXIM ONE: Any idea no matter if badly executed is better than no idea
at all.
MAXIM TWO: A programme to be effective must be executed.
MAXIM THREE: A programme put into action requires guidance.
MAXIM FOUR: A programme running without guidance will fail and is better
left undone. If you haven't got the time to guide it, don't do it: put more
steam behind existing programmes because it will flop.
MAXIM FIVE: Any programme requires some finance. Get the finance into
sight before you start to fire, or have a very solid guarantee that the
programme will produce finance before you execute it.
MAXIM SIX: A programme requires attention from somebody. An untended
programme that is everybody's child will become ajuvenile delinquent.
MAXIM SEVEN: The best programme is the one that will reach the greatest
number of dynamics and will do the greatest good on the greatest number of
dynamics. And that, my people who want to become victims by going broke,
includes dynamic one as well as dynamic four.
MAXIM EIGHT: Programmes must support themselves financially.
MAXIM NINE: Programmes must ACCUMULATE interest and bring in other
assistance by virtue of the programme interest alone or they will never
grow.
MAXIM TEN: A programme is a bad programme if it detracts from programmes
which are already moving successfully or distracts staff people or
associates from work they are already doing. Doing that is adding up to
successful execution of other programmes.
Let us now take a squint at this all in one piece. Wrong example: We
decide to run an ad in the Hatmakers' Weekly to attract people into the PE
Course. We place the ad. We forget the time this special course is to
start. We have nobody there to answer the phone on inquiries on the Course.
We have nobody there to greet the people and make them feel at home when
they arrive. We have nobody to instruct the Course. We get a bill for
monies three weeks later that we can't pay.
Right example: We decide to hit the hatmaker trade as a source of PE. We
rule out seven other programmes in favour of this one. We have a staff
meeting on it and gen everybody in on the existence of this programme. We
see that we have made a lot of money from Co-Audit enrolments and we
earmark this to pay for the advert, for the salary of the person who will
run the programme. We appoint a special person to administer this
programme. When the advert has been placed and appears, our person
appointed to it goes on to it full time. Reception is genned again to send
all hatmaker calls to this person and to refer to this person all hatmaker
bodies. All persons who may also be acting as Reception are genned with
this data. The person appointed doesn't sit back to wait for the business
to come in. This person reaches for hatmakers with letters and phone calls.
This same person that has been contacted by the hatmakers is then on deck
the zero hour evening to greet them all and get them into their seats and
make sure the instructor is there and to instruct it himself if no
instructor appears. If the programme is sweepingly successful in terms of
new enrollees, then we make sure we leave the person appointed for it in
the first place right on duty pushing hatmakers into the PE. And we have a
programme. And it was successful. And we got somewhere.
A pitiful wrong example of the above was when I was running the first Am
College PE as the experimental set-up some years ago. We started to get in
longshoremen by the squad. And they brought in other longshoremen. The
person in charge thought longshoremen were low cast and tried to get
intellectuals instead, thus switching off the programme. You never saw a
programme dwindle quite so fast as the longshoremen did. The correct action
would have been to notice that longshoremen were responding heavily and to
put somebody maybe even out of their ranks onto the payroll to pressure
away at longshoremen. A million pound programme was let go up in a puff of
nowhere.
A wonderfully right example is the Director of Processing staff auditor
set-up of a Central Organization. That was once just a programme. It
prospered. It's still with us. Every field auditor looks at it with envy
and snarls and tries to copy it. But he doesn't programme. He is doing
everything else in the shop. He can't programme a special clinic drill with
his attention everywhere at once. It's now thoroughly against the law in a
Central Organization to let a Director of Processing take preclears. That's
how far it goes. And we get wonderful results and all is well and the only
squawks you hear about HGCs are from pure green-eyed jealousy or maybe an
occasional real goof that the Central Organization jumped on days before
anybody else did.
Programming requires execution. It requires carry-through. It requires
judgement enough to know a good programme and carry it on and on and to
recognize a bad one and drop it like hot bricks.
There's nothing wrong with the will to do amongst Scientologists. Now
let's see if we can't up dissemination by adherence to good, steady
programming that wins.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH: rs.rd
Copyright � 1959, 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
[Note: This Policy Letter was also earlier issued as HCO P/L 20 August
1969 with abbreviation of the words Director of Processing to D of P,
Organization to Org, Preclears to PCs, and Department to Dept. The above
issue eliminated these abbreviations.]
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 5 MARCH 1965
Issue II
Remimeo
POLICY: SOURCE OF
According to Webster's New World Dictionary:
POLICY: Political wisdom or cunning; diplomacy; prudence; artfulness.
Wise, expedient or crafty conduct or management. Any governing
principle, plan or course of action.
The last definition is the one we use.
According to the World Book Encyclopaedia Dictionary, the one we most
use (published by Field Enterprises Educational Corporation, Merchandise
Mart Plaza, Chicago, 54, Illinois, USA):
POLICY: A plan of action; way of management. Practical wisdom;
prudence. Political skill or shrewdness. Obsolete-the conduct of public
affairs; government.
The sense in which we use policy is the rules and administrative
formulas by which we agree on action and conduct our affairs.
A "policy letter" is one which contains one or more policies and their
explanation and application.
It is issued by the Hubbard Communications Office, is written by L. Ron
Hubbard or written (more rarely) for him, has the agreement of the
International Board and is basic organizational law in organizations.
A "policy letter" is not Scientology org policy unless written or
authorized by L. Ron Hubbard and passed as a resolution or covered by
blanket resolution of the International Board and issued or published by an
HCO. It is not policy if any of those steps are missing.
The International Board is composed of three Board Members, L. Ron
Hubbard, Chairman, Mary Sue Hubbard, Secretary, and Marilynn Routsong,
Treasurer. It is the controlling board of Scientology.
The Chairman, Hubbard Communications Office and HCO Secretaries and
staffs compose Division I of the International Board and all orgs.
The Secretary and all Organization Secretaries (US and Saint Hill) or
Association Secretaries (Commonwealth and South Africa) and their staffs
compose Division 2 of the International Board and all orgs.
The Treasurer, Assistant Treasurers, all accounting executives, and
assistants for Materiel and their staffs compose Division 3 of the
International Board and all orgs.
Policy for all divisions and orgs is made as above.
There are no other boards or board members, individual board members,
officers or secretaries with the power of issuing policy. Boards issue
Resolutions. Individual board members or officers can issue directives,
general orders, and orders. These expire if not re-issued as policy.
Other officers issue Administrative Directives in place of policy
letters but these may only forward policy.
Secretarial Executive Director orders apply mainly to personnel or local
conditions, expire in one year if not stated to expire earlier, may only
last one year in any event.
Policy letters apply broadly to all orgs and Scientologists without
exception.
Almost all policy has been developed by actual experience.
The only way policy can be changed is by writing up a policy letter in
full and sending it to L. Ron Hubbard for approval or disapproval.
Policies cover hats, duties, lines, procedures, rules, laws and all
other aspects of Scientology activity except technology.
Technology is covered in HCO Bulletins.
HCO Bulletins are written by or (more rarely) for L. Ron Hubbard and are
issued by HCO and HCO Secretaries. They do not require sanction by the
International Board.
No one else may issue or authorize an HCO Bulletin.
HCO Bulletins are recommended technical data. Certificates are awarded
on the data contained in them and violation of it can therefore cause a
suspension of the certificate. This is the main power of the HCO Bulletin.
An HCO Bulletin becomes policy only if mentioned in a policy letter.
A book may become policy if made so by a policy letter.
_____________________
HCO Policy Letters are printed or (more commonly) mimeographed in green
ink on white paper. This colour combination may not be used for any other
releases in Scientology. Reprinted policy letters sometimes appear in
magazines in black ink on white paper but they are not the original.
HCO Bulletins are printed or mimeographed in red ink on white paper.
This colour combination may not be used for any other purpose in
Scientology. Reprinted HCO Bulletins sometimes appear in magazines in black
ink on white paper but they are not the original.
Committees of Evidence are called for in any violation of the publishing
or counterfeiting of an HCO Policy Letter or an HCO Bulletin or their
colour combinations or signatures.
The only other official paper from L. Ron Hubbard and HCO is the HCO
Executive Letter, usually a direct executive order or a request for a
report or data or news or merely information. It is not policy but should
be answered if an answer is requested. It is blue ink on green paper.
Using the colour combination for any other purpose or counterfeiting one
calls for a Committee of Evidence.
Sec EDs and HCO Executive Letters are basically LRH comm lines but are
used by International Board Officers also if authorized.
The other Divisions (2 and 3) have other means of comm, with other
colour flashes.
_____________________
If it is not in an HCO Policy Letter it is not policy.
HCO Policy Letters do not expire until cancelled or changed by later HCO
Policy Letters.
No officer or Scientology personnel may set aside policy even when
requesting revision.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:jw.rd
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 13 MARCH 1965
Gen Non Remimeo
DIVISIONS 1,2,3
THE STRUCTURE OF ORGANIZATION
WHAT IS POLICY?
The only reason anyone fights good policy is they're too stupid or too
inexperienced in an org to understand it. Unable to grasp it, they are too
lazy to work at trying. They miss words, don't see reasons, imagine
situations are otherwise and in general can't grasp it. So they try not to
use it or dream up their own. People with bad study histories can't grasp
policy. For policy also follows the rules of study.
Therefore never put a person with bad study history on a key executive
post. They can't grasp policy as they can't study it either.
Only personnel with quick study histories, fast passages through
courses, can be counted on to put in an org or department pattern and keep
it wheeling. The others are too involved in their own troubles and too
imperceptive to be of any use in making an org boom.
Such people do however sometimes have a use even when not straightened
up. They do well in pioneer areas where they have to do it all off the cuff
and where their very inability to accept anything causes them also to
refuse defeats and discouragements. Their inability to grasp a situation is
often of benefit when bravery is required. This does not however excuse
efforts to make them more capable and as they grow older and more
experienced, they will also become brave and quick and will follow policy.
Following policy is a matter of grasping situations and knowing policy
well enough to apply the right policy to the right situation-where no
policy covers, an experienced, quick person can easily extend the idea of
general policy to cover it, knowing it isn't covered.
The dull person has never even grasped basic general policy and so
confronted with usual or unusual situations alike, can't find any policy to
cover anything and so acts in any old way.
On the other hand, policy, to fit and be of benefit, must be itself born
out of great insight and familiarity with the facts. Government policy is
usually written by clerks who have never heard a shot fired in anger.
Therefore almost all current government policy is completely silly. Nobody
can apply it as it fits nothing and just gets everyone in trouble.
Therefore a quick person with good judgement in the field and in the real
situation can get through only by following his own policies and insights.
This is easily mistaken for a dull person acting against policy that is
good.
But even dull policies provide wide agreement as a basis for work co-
ordination and so something happens on a larger scale. Individual policy
making on every post is the definition of chaos. Thus even bad policy is
usually more workable than individual policy and can make stronger orgs.
Brilliant policy based on experience of course can cause orgs to zoom.
We conclude then that where we see a person constantly off policy in an
area that has worked well when on policy, that we must act.
Where we have a large organizational scope we must have workable policy
that is followed. For just lacking policy good or bad and lacking its being
followed, we stay small by definition.
NO POLICY EXISTING MAKES SMALL NON-EXPANDING DEPARTMENTS OR ORGS.
POLICY GOOD OR BAD EXISTING BUT NOT FOLLOWED MAKES CHAOTIC DEPARTMENTS
OR ORGS AND CAUSES SHRINKAGE.
GOOD POLICY BASED ON ACTUAL SITUATIONS EXPERIENCED FOLLOWED WELL MAKES
AN EXPANDING DEPARTMENT, ORG OR CIVILIZATION.
The smaller the org, unit or department the less policy is needed.
Reversely, the less policy is used the smaller will become the org, unit or
department.
One can always safely assume, when policy is available, that non
expansion is the direct result of the policy remaining unknown or not
followed. The steps to take are therefore:
Expansion formula:
1. PROVIDE GOOD POLICY.
2. MAKE IT EASILY KNOWABLE.
3. BE STRENUOUS IN MAKING SURE IT IS FOLLOWED.
This is the most broad possible formula for expansion.
Profitable expansion of a unit, department, org, company, empire or
civilization depends utterly on the above formula being applied.
If it is well applied, literally thousands of other impeding factors
drop into unimportance.
This applies to anything, even a person, but the bigger the number of
individuals involved the more rigorously it has to be followed.
The bigger the size of the activity concerned (the more people involved
in it) the more damage can result from failures to follow policy.
Thus orgs or companies which halt expansion mysteriously only need to
have more policy, or to make policy more easily available or to be more
vigorous in requiring it to be followed.
Policy is a guiding thing. It is composed of ideas to make a game,
procedures to be followed in eventualities and deterrents to departures.
The basic policy of an activity must be the defining and recommending of
a successful and desirable basic purpose.
Take a Navy, to get a more distant comparison. If a Navy has the basic
purpose of defending a nation and its citizens and expanding their scope,
and if the policy is the guiding principle behind all other policies and if
these in turn are developed from experience and made known and followed,
then oddly enough even new inventions or new philosophies of state could
not prevent that Navy from doing its job and expanding the nation. The US
Navy might very well have won the war with Japan in its six weeks if those
who headed it in Washington had not been mere political puppets subject to
every Congressional and Presidential wlum. The text books were very clear
about what the Navy should do. But King, Nimitz and Short, the Admirals
involved, had been chosen by wlum, favoritism and capacity for liquor, not
by raw statistics of "good Navy activity". They had been trained at an
Academy where the basic principles of "Good Navy" and raw statistics on
personnel had not been used to choose an Academy head or Instructors. So
King, Nimitz and Short, as Admirals listened to current political rumours
or whims (being only confirmed in political not naval policy) and so let
Pearl Harbour happen. How? Their own naval text books said "During times of
negotiation with an unfriendly state, the position of the fleet should be
at sea, whereabouts unknown." That is line one of the Navy textbook on
Tactics and Strategy. Where was it? In Pearl Harbour during many days of
hostile negotiation between Roosevelt and the Japanese-the most dangerous
naval rival. Where were King and Nimitz? At a cocktail party with the
politicians. Where was Short? Giving his all ashore, having given his men
full weekend liberty and having ordered all ammunition stowed below for a
coming Admiral's inspection. So Pearl Harbour could happen. But did the
humans learn? No. True, Short, acting on his Washington orders
notwithstanding, was removed and eventually court-martialed. But King and
Nimitz took over the whole Navy for more than four heartbreaking years of
"promote by political whim"
"what policy?" and defeat in battle after battle until aircraft turned the
tide of war and the army and
an atom bomb finally finished it. Now the Navy is really no more. A few
subs. A few patrol ships.
The rest in mothballs. People think the Navy is small now because of new
weapons. No,
it is small because it (a) didn't clearly express its basic purpose, (b)
didn't educate its people well
in the policy it did have, (c) let political opinion shift it about, (d)
chose its officers
by rumour, cabal and social presence and (e) forgot its texts when the
emergency loomed. Result,
long war, now no Navy with anything-officers palling with men, ships in the
bone yard.
Could the Navy have done its job in 1941? Yes. Had its original policies
regarding officer training and
selection been followed ruthlessly despite all politics over the years.
King, Nimitz and Short would not have been in charge or would have acted by
policy had they been. The fleet would have been at sea during negotiations
and the strike on Pearl Harbour would have been a Jap bust. The fleet would
have been there to knock out the Jap in his own home ports. The war might
have ended with Japan in the first six weeks. The point is not whether it
is good or bad to have a Navy. The point is that here is an actual
organization and an actual occurrence.
Therefore one can learn that:
An individual, species, organism, organization, to succeed, survive and
expand in influence must have a formulated BASIC PURPOSE.
To keep beings from growing, the reactive bank is almost entirely made
up of false and booby trapped purposes. Thus we can see that, by its having
been impeded so thoroughly in past ages, the idea of having a personal or
organizational or group basic purpose is an extremely valuable one.
Without one expressed or unexpressed, a being or an organization or
group without one doesn't grow but shrinks and becomes weak-in this
universe nothing can remain long in an unchanging state. Given a
potentially successful basic purpose that is acceptable to the being,
organization or group, one can then formulate POLICY.
POLICY is a rule or procedure or a guidance which permits the BASIC
PURPOSE to succeed.
The basic purpose runs through time. When it is impeded, distracted
from, not complied with, thwarted or stopped, a state of failure of the
basic purpose occurs in greater or lesser degree. Sometimes challenges to
it cause it to strengthen but only when the challenges are consistently
overcome.
A being, organism, organization, group or species or race learns in
forwarding its basic purpose or meeting challenges to its basic purpose
certain lessons. Certain procedures or courses of action, rules or laws
were conceived at times of stress and some of them were successful. Those
that were not successful or helped the opposition were bad. Those that were
successful forwarded of course the basic purpose and were good.
The successful ideas or procedures that assisted the basic purpose were
then dignified by the status of proper ideas, acts, procedure or policy.
Those that were unsuccessful in assisting the basic purpose became bad
policy.
Ideas or procedures that distracted from or balked the basic purpose
were called offenses.
Things, groups, other determinisms that challenged or sought to stop or
refused to comply with the basic purpose became enemies or opposition.
Therefore Policy is derived from successful experience in forwarding the
basic purpose, overcoming opposition or enemies, ending distractions and
letting the basic purpose flow and expand.
Policy laid down which is thought up independent of experience in
similar situations is either the result of great foresight and is
successful or it is simply stupidity, in that it seeks to handle situations
which will never exist or if they do, won't be important.
Policy based solely on bad rumours, unverified, which may or may not
reflect actual existing conditions or which is laid down at the insistence
of some self-interested person or minority without taking the rest of the
group into account is very destructive policy simply because it does not
match the conditions which actually exist and so, in itself, may impede or
distract from the basic purpose. An example of this is legislation by
legislators who, otherwise uninformed, act because of pressure groups,
minority riots or simply sensational press that seeks not legislation but
simply to feed the appetite of a disaster hungry public.
If bad policy or laws or actions based on rumour rather than raw facts
become too frequent and general, then the basic purpose of a being,
organization or group becomes itself distracted, smothered and forgotten
and the result is shrinkage, loss of power, death and oblivion. Although it
is often too late when bad policies or pressure group laws have been the
order of the day to slash them
all from the books and exhume the basic purpose, the action of sweeping
away unreal, inapplicable
and impeding laws and policies which were based originally on rumour and
bad sources can
have the effect of rejuvenation on a being, a group or an organization
which has begun to die. Periodic sweep-outs of antiquated and didactic laws
(rather than general concepts and sub-purposes) must be undertaken by a
being, organization, group or race or species. However, such an action must
be carefully done, selecting only those laws or rules which came into being
because of pressure groups or infrequent enemies or which were derived from
no experience. And before throwing any policy away one must carefully
examine its history to see if it is still restraining an enemy or
forwarding some sub-purpose. For throwing away a lot of lessons could also
collapse the forward thrust of the basic purpose which has "gotten this far
for some reason."
SUB-PURPOSES are the purposes of the various sections or parts of the
being, organism, group, race or species which forward the basic purpose.
They must amplify, qualify and/or describe the action or procedure of the
part of the whole in a brief and crisp way so as to hold them in function
in their support of the basic purpose. They could also be called, the
PURPOSE OF A PART OF THE WHOLE, or as we use them, the purpose of a post,
unit, department or an org with a special function. When one hears of the
PURPOSE of his hat or section, unit, department, org or Division, he is
observing the SUB-PURPOSE of a part of the whole organism which is vital to
the action of forwarding the BASIC PURPOSE of the movement. Indeed he may
never know what the BASIC PURPOSE really is and only know the SUB-PURPOSE
of his own hat, section, unit or department. However, by studying the
various SUBPURPOSES of several hats or sections he could probably figure
out the SUB-PURPOSE of the Department and by studying the various SUB-
PURPOSES of the departments of an org he could probably guess at the BASIC
PURPOSE of the whole being or organization or movement. If study of SUB-
PURPOSES either fails to locate any or ends in being unable to relate them
into any large PURPOSE, one is of course studying a disorganized movement.
One can change a SUB-PURPOSE (cautiously indeed) or add parts with new
SUB-PURPOSES, and leave a movement (a) unaffected, (b) increased in scope,
or (c) decreased in size and influence.
One can, up to a point, add Policies on and on, limited only by the
ability to get them known and leave an organization or movement (a)
unaffected, (b) increased in readiness to meet emergencies, or (c)
crippled. The wisdom of the policy and whether or not it was a successful
solution to some actually possible confusion or crisis determines whether
or not it should be added or deleted. Foresight plays a large role in
formulating a SUB-PURPOSE or a Policy. These two are never wholly the
product of chance or experience; indeed they may be 80% wise foresight and
20% experience and still be good useable SUB-PURPOSES or Policies.
Twentieth Century Science sought to discount wisdom entirely and beings and
organizations were educated or developed with no SUB-PURPOSES whatever and
all policies were developed either by clerks, teachers or legislators
inexperienced in any part of life or were taken from past experience only
with no refinement of any wisdom. The failures of governments and systems
and races in the first half of the Twentieth Century were wholesale and the
wars frequent and senseless.
Personal, state, or organizational or social chaos results from adding
parts with no well defined SUB-PURPOSES, enforcing Policies based on rumour
or taken from the data of mere theoreticians in their ivory towers, an
irresponsible press or legislators in their self-interested heads and smoke-
filled rooms. A study of how the pressure groups, clerks, theoreticians and
irresponsible press and duly elected but completely unselected and
uneducated legislators destroyed individualism, states, businesses,
civilizations and races would be only a study of how not to organize and
survive, how to ignore, abandon or discredit all basic purposes, sub-
purposes and successful policies. The scene was one of indescribable chaos
that filled one with protest and dismay. If there was a wrong way to do
things it became the order of the day and youth went into a complete
apathy, purposeless and drifting and the world began to die a little each
day, the mental hospitals became flooded, life ceased to be any fun at all.
Things are not always like this and indeed don't have to be.
Mismanagement or misgovernment of self, an organization, group or state
would then consist of failing to forward the BASIC PURPOSE, not grasping
and specifying SUB-PURPOSES, and not experiencing and formulating policies
to strengthen successful ideas or actions that forward the Basic and Sub-
Purposes and impede ideas or actions that retard them and not recognizing
actual enemies or oppositions or planning and carrying out successful
campaigns to handle them. Failing in any of these actions the individual,
group, organization, state, civilization, race or species will falter, fail
and die.
Recognizing the Basic Purpose, supplementing it with Sub-Purposes for
the parts of the whole, and learning and enforcing the policies which bring
success, spotting actual enemies or oppositions and planning and carrying
out campaigns to overcome them, removing distractions, rewarding the
forwarding of Basic Purpose and Sub-Purpose and penalizing actions which
retard, an individual, group, organization, civilization, race or species
survives, gets better, lives on higher and higher planes.
The game of life has the formula of having and forwarding a Basic
Purpose and supplemental Sub-Purposes.
This is done by the Formula of Policy which consists of:
1. Conceiving, recognizing, testing and codifying successful ideas,
actions and procedures that forward the Basic Purpose and retard its
opposition;
2. Making these policies known and in greater or lesser degree
understood; and
3. Getting these policies followed.
If in (3) policy is to be followed, there must be discipline, but even
more important, there must be ways of choosing personnel other than by
sloppy rumour or social presence.
Personnel can only be chosen on raw statistics supported by ample data
containing figures. If the raw data is good, then one assumes that basic
purpose is being forwarded as it is meeting with success. The raw data
already has a curve in it as it is tabulated against the success of basic
policy. So the person whose raw data is good must have been forwarding
basic purpose, therefore must be either a screaming genius at originating
ideas that forward the Basic Purpose or a wizard at knowing, applying and
following policy. Either way he or she is worth all the diamonds of
Kimberley.
Such a person will inevitably rise in the organization or group if raw
data alone is observed in selecting and promoting personnel.
If the person is a screaming genius at originating policy and has not
made enough errors to reduce his successful raw data, and has stayed on-
policy otherwise so as not to reduce the effectiveness of those around him,
he will eventually rise to a level which makes policy and the whole
organization will benefit. Similarly a person who grasps and follows policy
very well and forwards the Basic Purpose well and who is very capable will
sooner or later rise to a position of trust that safeguards against
sweeping changes that will retard or crash the group or organization and so
is vital at higher levels.
Out of these two general types of being one gets the leadership levels
of a movement. But they will never arrive at all if those in charge ever
use anything but statistics in judging them since their very success will
cause enough cabal to influence high levels against them if these high
levels ever use fragmentary rumours or opinions in handling personnel.
RAW DATA means assembled but otherwise unevaluated data. It is
"uncooked" and "unflavoured" and "untouched by human hands". It, in short,
is uncontaminated or unchanged data. It is native and natural and
unspoiled. And the only data that answers those qualifications is
statistical data. "How many or how few and how much or how little in what
time." That is the only data that a senior official in a group,
organization or state ever dare use in selecting and promoting personnel.
The "state" of the person, the "result of his tests", "the examination
figure" are all useless to a senior official deciding upon who to promote
or pass over. His decision will be wrong in exact proportion that he
permits opinion to enter and raw data to drop out.
Introducing opinion into personnel selection is a study of "how crazy
can one get." How much liquor a man can hold, how acceptable socially is
his wife, his breath, his taste in ties are all completely disrelated data.
For how does anyone know at the top really what the environment is now like
at the bottom? Maybe that lovely music room-board room requires a pink
necktie, a purring wife and endless capacity for drink, but is that the
organization's environment? It is not! Maybe the organization's environment
demands an allergy to liquor, a complete tart for a wife, overwhelming
breath and neon ties. And maybe tomorrow's board level will too! The world
changes, it does not become softer. Only some people do.
The psychiatric or school test alike are written and administered by
people in ivory towers who again have no contact with the organization's
real environment.
Statistical as they may try to be, such tests are utterly worthless. They
are not on-the-job statistics. They are classroom or laboratory statistics.
They are definitely cooked data. And when used for personnel and promotion
they cook a lot of careers. And by putting eggheads on post, they cook a
lot of parts of an org if not the whole thing. They have some small value
in determining someone's quickness or slowness, but the conditions are too
unreal and the necessity level of real environmental emergency is missing.
It's like a plane crash synthesized in bed. No jolt. So, poor (but not the
worst) of cooked data.
Maybe the working environment demands a dumb guy who is too slow to
panic at awesome futures! Yet bright enough to see what policy applies.
When men with small experience in it can qualify to run the world, they can
only then administer tests to advise who should run it.
Only statistics that represent action and accomplishment are fair tests
of ability and who deserves promotion or the gate.
Therefore the only organization that is a sound organization is one
WHOSE EVERY ACTIVITY can be tabulated by statistics.
If you wish to reorganize you must do so with an eye toward "Can this
post (dept or Division) be statisticized?" Any body of people such as "the
typing pool" or "the instructors" must be broken down to individuals one
way or another. One has three things then that must be tabulatable: (a) the
individual, (b) the part and (c) the whole. Each of these must be so
organized as to be capable of being seen through accomplishment or lack of
it. Only this is fair organization. All other types are unfair, will not
select out leaders or good workers and subject these to the enturbulence of
the lazy or those with other philosophies to fry.
If you have any other type, people are promoted or fired by rumour, back-
biting or common brag and either type has only liability. In using them one
destroys empires and every great civilization that is dead died because
opinion and rumour were the key causes of personnel changes.
It is unfair to every decent staff member to have an org that cannot be
tabulated by relative income, work or traffic.
The common way of the dead and dying past was to put some fellow in
charge and then shoot him or reward him if things went wrong or well and
neglect the rest. This works unless a society only protects the man at the
bottom and routinely weakens the man at the top. When that happens, the
system is useless. Only by chance do things go well. So chance is added to
rumour as the means of promotion or the gate. No wonder the Asiatic, a
member of our oldest civilizations, says "Fate!" and explains it all. He
had too many rulers who ruled by rumour or chance or didn't rule at all.
And so the power died. Only when you can find out who did which or why can
you be just. And only when an organization can be fully viewed top to
bottom through raw data of how much or how little can individual show be
rewarded and individual nuisance be weeded out.
REALITY
Reality in policy, in orders, in advice depends upon either great
insight or great experience. Combining both gives great success.
But no matter how great the insight may be, viewing the actual condition
is a vital step to resolving it. Remote solutions not based on experience
or close inspection are usually unreal.
Therefore no orders should ever be issued without data and experience
and insight. Data comes from tabulation of actions and amounts in
organizations. Experience comes from working in similar or parallel
situations. Insight comes from the ability to observe coupled with the
courage to see and the wit to realize without any thought of personal
importance.
Therefore, the soundest leadership comes from the most extended
experience and intimate knowledge of that or parallel circumstances.
Leadership without this will lack judgement.
Remote leadership is best when it itself is involved close to its hand
with the same problems. Therefore remote leadership must have under it
similar organizational problems and traffic at home that exist at the
remote point. Then understanding is quick and solutions are real.
For one organization to command another, they must be similar.
Management labour problems evolve from the communication formula "Cause-
Distance-Effect with Intention at cause, Attention at effect, and
Duplication". A board room is not a machine shop. The machinists seek to
duplicate the board or refuse to. If they fail to they always refuse to.
Thus only a working org of similar pattern can command a working org.
The commanded org will always seek to follow the pattern of the
commanding org and duplicate what it thinks the commanding org consists of.
A great tension exists at all points of non-duplication. This tension stems
from the effort to duplicate. If foiled trouble or breakage will occur at
that point. Where the subordinate org is unable to duplicate what it thinks
exists at the senior org then it suffers an ARC break of greater or smaller
magnitude. Patterns, officer authority, comm lines, all must be similar.
Size is not important in this. Org pattern is. If the subordinate org has
any hope of ever attaining the size, and if the purposes, pattern and
policies are the same, that is enough. ARC will remain high, execution will
be good and expansion is assured, providing of course that the basic
purpose is good in the first place.
EXPANSION
All that is needed to expand an org or its business, given a good basic
purpose and an area to expand into is the knowledge of the expansion
formula:
DIRECT A CHANNEL TOWARD ATTAINMENT, PUT SOMETHING ON IT, REMOVE
DISTRACTIONS, BARRIERS, NON-COMPLIANCE AND OPPOSITION.
The basic formula of Living (not Life) is:
HAVING AND FOLLOWING A BASIC PURPOSE.
Thus expansion is an increase in living. To increase living and raise
tone and heighten activity one need only apply the expansion formula to
living. Clean away the barriers, non-compliance and distractions from the
basic purpose and reduce opposition and the individual or group or org will
seem more alive and indeed will be more alive.
All an executive has to do to expand a part or the whole of an org is to
divine the basic purpose, divine or issue the sub-purposes, point out an
area to expand into and then remove the distractions from, barriers to and
non-compliance with the basic purpose, and sub-purposes and put something
on the channels that augments existing impulses and expansion will begin.
It will be successful to the degree that the basic purpose is good, the sub-
purposes real and the policies are taken from real experience and
interpreted by persons facing similar current problems.
By the process, thereafter, of just removing barriers, distractions and
non-compliance expansion can be accelerated to a point where it overwhelms
all hostile efforts to contain it and the result is extremely gratifying in
terms of expansion at velocity. It seems completely magical. For life
instantly appears.
One must remember to channel a basic purpose. A channel has two
boundaries, one on either side of it. These must exist in an org. They
consist of discipline of those who would distract or stray or wander or who
help the opposition or suppress the basic purpose or sub-purposes or who
cannot seem to learn or comply with policies or orders. Discipline must
only be aimed at the above and where it is random or doesn't serve to
channel, then it itself is a distraction or a barrier and will breed non-
compliance. But when entirely absent the force is let to wander and
expansion does not occur. Discipline must be precise, known, uniformly
applied and inevitable when the rules are broken. Those who do their job
welcome it as it helps keep others from preventing them from working or
acting or complying or getting their own jobs done.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:jw.rd
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 7 MAY 1965
Gen Non-Remimeo
CANCELLATION
MIMEO DISTRIBUTION CHANGES
(SEC ED DISTRIBUTION)
HCO Pol Ltr 29 April 65 is cancelled.
SEC ED Distribution remains the same as before.
Putting it into the Mimeo line at Saint Hill slowed it.
It is desirable that a SEC ED is broadly distributed to a staff and that
SEC EDs of broad interest be distributed Internationally.
However our old system was best.
HCO steno releases the SEC ED as fast as possible with a seal and her
initials on it.
Cabled SEC EDs are instantly made up and issued on receipt FAST.
Distribute as best you can, just be sure it's effective.
On Airmail SEC EDs we'll try to send you enough for your staff.
If we don't, distribute it as broadly as you can.
Keep SEC EDs off public notice boards.
Sthil staff should have SEC EDs.
Secretarial Executive Directives are explicit temporary urgent orders.
Above all, SEC EDs are fast fast FAST.
Mimeo couldn't help but slow them at Saint Hill as SEC EDs are faster
than other items on the line and the traffic is heavy.
We'll solve this.
Meanwhile carry on as always, with as broad a distribution to staff only
as you can get.
LTD AND GEN NON-REMIMEO
SAINT HILL DISTRIBUTION
All Scientologists at Saint Hill get everything that is marked Remimeo,
General Non-Remimeo and Limited Non-Remimeo and all HCOBs.
The only exception is Class VI material or Power Process (VII) material.
This is not distributed to anyone but the persons designated such as "R6 Co-
audit" (Staff Prov Cl VI) or "Sthil R6 Students" (D Unit course students)
or "Power Process Staff" meaning Review Technical Personnel in the
Qualifications Division only.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:wmc.mh.cden
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
[Amended by HCO P/L 10 August 1966, Sec Eds, Executive Director &
Guardian, page 360.]
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 8 MAY 1965
Issue II
Gen Non Remimeo
FLASH COLOURS AND DESIGNATIONS
SEC EDs, FORM
Secretarial Executive Director will now have the following form:
They will be on BLUE paper with BLUE ink.
They will begin with a number system as follows: Consecutive number of
an area followed by the local cable initials of the area or the zone.
Example, for Melbourne: SECED IOME. For Washington SECED IODC. For
International SECED IOINT.
For a Continental zone only one would have SECED IOSA for South Africa,
meaning all orgs in South Africa.
The number is the consecutive number for that designation.
The initials SECED always precede a SECED Number.
All personnel orders will now also appear in SECED form.
The form itself shall be
SECRETARIAL EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
Office of LRH
Number Date
(Any Addressee to which it is particularly directed.)
1. (Text with numbered paragraphs)
2.
3.
|[pic] | | |
| | | |
| |Initials | |
| |only of HCO| |
| |Personnel | |
| |on seal |L. RON HUBBARD |
DUPLICATION
The small Banda methyl alcohol duplicator should be obtained as early as
possible. It is not expensive.
Telex rolls containing Banda carbon are obtainable. Thus any Telex SEC
ED need only be taken off the telex and stamped with a seal and initialled,
its carbon paper then removed at which it will duplicate at once on the
Banda duplicator.
The machine is also easily used on any colour paper for other purposes.
SEC EDs sent by mail, are sometimes done at Saint Hill ready for issue,
but until a Banda is secured, should be locally redone as a mimeo when not
received in quantity.
HCO EXECUTIVE LETTER
This will now be on WHITE PAPER with BLUE INK, using the old Info Letter
flash mark to make SEC EDs easier to identify.
HCO ETHICS ORDER
All Ethics Orders will now be on GOLD paper with BLUE ink. This includes
all , local Committee of Evidence issues and other matters.
An Ethics Order may only be issued by the HCO Executive Secretary or an
HCO Area Secretary. Any findings must be passed by the Office of LRH but if
so are issued as an Ethics Order colour flashed gold with blue ink.
The form of an Ethics Order will be:
HCO Ethics Order
Date
To:
From: The HCO Secretary
(or Executive Secretary)
Subject: (Convening a Comm Ev, Ethics Court, findings, summons, etc.)
1. (Text with numbered paragraphs)
2.
3.
|[pic] | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| |HCO Secretary (or Executive Secretary) |
ETHICS INTERROGATORY
An Ethics Interrogatory is used as a despatch to carry out an
investigation.
It is used to collect data to determine the facts of a situation.
It is on GOLD paper with BLUE ink.
Its form is as follows:
HCO DIVISION I
Department of
Inspection and Reports
Ethics Section
Interrogation Number - Date
To: (Name of person from whom Info is desired)
From: Ethics Section Officer
RETURN TO ETHICS PROMPTLY
Text of Query......
(lots of space for reply)
Initial of Ethics Section Officer
Any investigation is given a file number and that same number appears on
all interrogatories.
QUALIFICATIONS CHITS AND FORMS
All Qualifications chits are GREY and all forms of Qualifications are
GREY.
The colour of ink is usually BLACK.
TECH DIVISION
Chits & Forms
All Technical Division chits and forms are now GREEN with normally BLACK
ink.
It is quite important for the Tech Division to use Green and the Qual
Division to use Grey paper as it makes admin between these two divisions
faster.
The Tech Division must NOT use white paper on its forms as these then
tangle up with the white of HCOBs and Pol Ltrs.
WHITE PAPER
WHITE mimeograph paper and RED, GREEN and BLUE ink in combination with
WHITE paper in mimeograph work is exclusively the Office of LRH and may not
be used casually in mailings or inside other divisions.
Any colour of ink may be assigned to divisions in combination with
coloured papers, but never with WHITE paper.
WHITE mimeo paper identifies for a staff member HCOBs and HCO Pol Ltrs,
and will now identify HCO Exec Ltrs, Info Letters having been abandoned.
SIGNATURES
When I have personally written anything only my name may appear on it.
The only exception is initials on a SEC ED. The reason for this is that
staff members could become confused as to the issuing person.
The practice of signing anything on WHITE paper with RED, GREEN or BLUE
ink that I have not myself written or dictated or personally released has
long since been abandoned and is not now done.
Thus a staff member can be sure that all current issues on white
mimeograph paper or blue SEC ED paper were in fact written by myself.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:wmc.rd
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 13 SEPTEMBER 1965
Issue II
St Hill only
ISSUE AUTHORITY REQUIRED FOR MIMEO
"OK needed from Issue Authority" means an OK is needed for all things
run through the mimeo machine, whether okayed previously to be mimeoed or
not.
The objects are twofold:
1. To save on mimeo paper and
2. To keep my mimeo policy and technical lines from being jammed. If too
much is put on these lines, the line is cut just because it's too
much for people to read at the other end.
HCO Pol Ltrs, HCO Bulletins and HCO Exec Ltrs are especially my lines.
These are never "by the authority of" mimeo signatures. No Franchise info
issued by the Franchise Officer here is ever put on HCO Pol colour flash or
title.
There are HCO Admin channels, other flash systems, etc, for things that
bear "by the authority of".
The re-issue of a Policy Letter requires Issue Authority Okay.
Providing extra copies of anything requires Issue Authority Okay.
In addition, nobody else puts anything on HCO Pol Ltr, HCO Bulletin or
HCO Exec Ltr except myself over my own signature without any "by the
authority of". These are my own personal lines. When they appear in orgs,
they can be picked out easily from other mail and mimeos. I try to keep the
quantity down to keep from jamming people's lines. Therefore anyone else
putting traffic on these lines is unappreciated. They have other colour
flash anyway.
In filing, designation of where they were sent does not place them in a
different file. HCO Bulletins, HCO Pol Ltrs and HCO Exec Ltrs all go
chronologically. Saint Hill is not separate.
And no matter what colour flash or designation a mimeo has and whether
old or new or whether a stencil exists or not, before it goes into the
Roneo it needs Issue Authority Okay.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:ml.rd
Copyright � 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 4 JANUARY 1966
Issue IV
Gen Non-Remimeo
LRH Comm Hat
OFFICE OF LRH
SEC EDS AND HCO EXEC LTRS
The LRH Communicator is responsible for seeing that Sec Eds and Exec
Ltrs requiring action by an org are executed and acknowledged.
The order is this:
1. Int Exec Div LRH Comm: Enter the Sec Ed or Exec Ltr on the WW Project
Board, with area designation (Int, WW or an org-Int is every org, WW
is Int Exec Div SH only, an org is by area name).
2. Area LRH Communicator: Enter each Sec Ed or Exec Ltr applying to the
org on the Area Project Board.
3. Call the attention of the area persons who will execute it to the Sec
Ed.
4. Put it on the Org Time Machine (Int Exec Div Time Machine is used by
Int Exec Div LRH Comm).
5. Occasionally query in it to the person or persons responsible.
6. If there is a delay, info LRH Comm WW on it.
7. When executed, relay fact on to LRH via LRH Comm WW.
8. Locally file papers on it in the LRH Comm Completed Project F.
It is important if the Sec Ed or Exec Ltr name no specific person that
the Area LRH Communicator consult the Exec Sees in charge of the probable
division to get it specifically assigned to a person or persons who will be
responsible for doing it. If no person is designated then the LRH
Communicator must assign it to a person in the org off his or her own bat,
right or wrong. Any person to which a project is assigned is noted on the
Area Project Board.
Sec Eds and Exec Ltrs containing projects require doingness. They must
be done by someone.
When they are not done, but only discussed, then the whole line balls
up. The LRH Comm wants them done not discussed.
POLICY LTRS
Pol Ltrs are not put on the Project Board. They are routine in the org.
A Pol Ltr overlooked can become a Project such as "Project Get In Pol
Ltr 22 Nov 65". These are called into play by Sec Eds when overlooked by an
org.
The LRH Communicator can assign projects based on Pol Ltrs. This becomes
a local project. To do this the LRH Comm consults with the Exec Sees first.
If they agree it becomes a local project and goes on the project board. If
thrown off or forbidden, get authority from LRH at Saint Hill who will
order the Pol Ltr in by Sec Ed and it becomes a project.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:ml.rd
Copyright � 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 3 FEBRUARY 1966
Issue IV
Remimeo
LRH Comm Hat
Exec Sec Hat
SEC ED CHANGE IN ISSUE
AND USE
Any SEC ED written personally by the Executive Director will hereafter
be:
WHITE PAPER
BLUE INK
Those SEC EDs issued for and on behalf of the Executive Director by
Executive Secretaries or the Adcouncil
BLUE PAPER
BLUE INK
but will be signed:
ADVISORY COUNCIL (Location)
for the Executive Director
(Location)
or: HCO Exec Sec or Org Exec Sec
for the Executive Director
(Location)
All SEC EDs for AdComms or Secretaries are:
DIVISION COLOUR PAPER
BLUE INK
and are signed by the named AdComm or Secretary "for the Executive
Director
(Location)"
The LRH Communicator of the Area may sign and ok for issue any SEC ED
for the area providing only it is not contrary to policy or orders from a
higher org or the Int Exec Div (WW) or the Exec Dir.
No SEC ED or Executive Orders of any kind may be issued without an okay
by the LRH Communicator and ALL general Orders of the Adcouncil or an
Executive Secretary must be in SEC ED form and all general orders of
AdComms or Secretaries must be passed by the Adcouncil of that Org and
issued as SEC EDs with LRH Comm OK.
WW SEC EDs take precedence over local SEC EDs where there is any
conflict or question of importance and SEC EDs written by the Exec Dir
(white ones) take precedence over all others.
SEC EDs retain their traditional forms and seals.
A COPY OF EVERY SEC ED ISSUED MUST BE SENT TO WW.
This Policy Letter cancels Executive Orders of Divisions or orgs issued
in any other form than SEC EDs.
Direct orders to specific posts in own portion of an org need not be in
SEC ED form but any extensive project must be.
Directors may issue general orders and projects only as SEC EDs by the
Secretary in the fashion described above for Secretaries and only with the
approval of their Secretaries.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH: ml. Cden
Copyright � 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 3 FEBRUARY 1966
Issue V
All Divisions
Remimeo
Ad Council Hats
Exec Sec Hats
Ad Comm Hats
Secretary Huts
LRH Comm Hat
HCO Area Sec
HCO Steno Hat
SEC EDS
DEFINITION AND PURPOSE
CROSS DIVISIONAL ORDERS
In a SEC ED neither an Advisory Committee nor a Secretary may order
another division than their own.
An Executive Secretary may issue a SEC ED that crosses divisions but
only those divisions directly under that Executive Secretary (HCO Exec Sec
SEC EDs may only order the two HCO divisions, Org Exec Sec SEC EDs may only
order the four [org] divisions).
The Advisory Council SEC EDs may order HCO and Org Divisions at the same
time.
Advisory Councils, in approving the text of SEC EDs before passing them
on to the LRH Communicator for an okay to issue should be very careful to
see that no AdComm issues SEC EDs to other divisions than their own.
The LRH Communicator in authorizing the issue of a SEC ED, should be
careful that this policy letter is not violated.
No SEC ED of any kind may be issued unless it has been authorized by the
LRH Communicator and any violation of issue authority should be reported to
the LRH Communicator WW who is to refer it to the Adcouncil WW for action.
SEC EDs improperly issued have no validity and need not be obeyed and
may not be used for hearings or Comm Evs.
____________________
The meaning of the word SEC ED is "Secretarial to the Executive
Director". The word "Secretarial" applies to the signature meaning it is
signed as official by a person other than LRH personally. It is the written
initials in the lower left hand corner that are "secretarial".
The system came into use to accommodate cable orders originally. By
being sealed and initialled by an official person like a notary public in
the org, the validity of the order was attested as a valid order of LRH.
Approval by an Advisory Council or an Exec Sec and authorization by the
LRH Communicator for issue are now both required before the secretarial
official in HCO (usually the HCO Steno) may seal, initial and issue the
order. It is this person who requires that the Adcouncil or an Exec Sec and
the LRH Communicator's initials appear on the original copy before she may
type, seal and initial and then publish a SEC ED.
The HCO Steno may not issue any SEC ED today which does not have the
initials of the Adcouncil or an Exec Sec and the initials of the LRH
Communicator on it or unless it is in the handwriting of LRH or has come
off the telex or through the mails from WW and is a valid communication
from proper persons there. The LRH Communicator WW must be the transmitting
authority from WW and must initial an^ despatch or telex before
transmission that is to become a SEC ED at the other end. The HCO Steno
must look for this before issuing. Her guide is that if the LRH
Communicator's initials are not on it she may not issue it, excepting only
it being in the handwriting of LRH or personally transmitted by him.
SEC EDs are fast orders and have top priority in transmission and
execution. They take precedence over all other orders both in transmission
speed and execution.
The priority of SEC EDs is as follows:
LRH Personally written or personally sent
SEC ED Adcouncil WW
SEC ED Exec Sec WW
SEC ED Adcouncil Area
SEC ED Exec Sec Area
SEC ED AdComm Area
SEC ED Secretary Area.
The penalty for not complying with a SEC ED is a misdemeanor and must
result in an Executive Ethics Hearing or an Ethics Hearing.
If Executive Secretaries in an area fail to respond to WW SEC EDs, they
are usually scheduled for early removal by WW.
SEC EDs have the virtue of making orders known and setting them on file
where they can be referred to by other than the recipient.
The only answers to a SEC ED if one isn't going to do it are:
1. An immediate petition to LRH on SEC EDs issued by LRH personally or
2. A job endangerment chit immediately filed in Ethics.
If this step is lacking and it is found that a SEC ED has not been
complied with, then an Executive Ethics Hearing or an Ethics Hearing MUST
follow when the non-compliance is discovered.
Every single major danger condition at Saint Hill in 1965 was found to
have had as its source the non-compliance with a SEC ED. If this policy
seems unduly harsh then add up that fact. Some of these danger conditions
involved day and night work by top brass. And every one of them would have
been prevented had Ethics had this attitude toward non-compliance with a
SEC ED. The cost of these non-compliances ran above ?10,000 and they
threatened the very existence of Scientology. And each one would have been
prevented had SEC EDs been complied with. From this, one should regard non-
compliance with a SEC ED without instantly petitioning or filing a chit for
job endangerment as something one does just before taking the arsenic.
The only thing that holds down the size of Scientology today is simply
non-compliance. The only thing that makes trouble is non-compliance.
The SEC ED system is designed to make orders public and get them
complied with fast.
Conversely, if the order wasn't in a SEC ED or Policy Letter, it does
not have Ethics force-that is to say one can't be seriously tried for it.
All current projects and programmes should be in SEC EDs so people know
what they are. Those written in despatches only are written in sand.
SEC EDs can be confidential and of limited issue.
SEC EDs expire one year from their date of issue if not sooner by reason
of their text.
If a SEC ED is to be preserved beyond a year it must be converted into a
Policy Letter by sending it to LRH.
The Director of Inspection and Reports is responsible for routinely
checking the SEC ED file for non-compliances and when found must forward
the matter to Ethics for prompt action.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:ml.rd
Copyright � 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 13 FEBRUARY 1966
Issue II
Remimeo
All Exec Hats
SEC EDS
SEC ED OK (CONTINUED)
POL LTR CHANGES AND ORIGINS
"SEC ED" = Secretarially signed order of the Executive Director,
expiring one
year from date of issue.
"POL LTR" = A letter laying down Policy continuing until cancelled by a
new
Pol Ltr.
The Executive Secretaries may not change or edit a Secretary's or
AdComm's SEC ED but may only pass or send it back with comments.
A Secretary likewise may not change another lower executive's SEC ED in
the Secretary's Division but must only pass it on or send it back with
comments.
An Executive Secretary or a Secretary may have a job endangerment chit
filed for refusing to pass a SEC ED an executive believes vital to uphold
his or her statistic, with a full explanation of why.
The LRH Communicator may refuse to pass a SEC ED only if it is against
policy and if so, then the full reference of what policy letter or SEC ED
it violates must be furnished with the refusal. This means of course that
an LRH Communicator must be well up on Policy. Nebulous "It's against
policy" is a violation of the LRH Comm's instructions from me.
If no policy concerning such a SEC ED is known to exist yet the SEC ED
seems to the LRH Communicator to put the org at risk, the SEC ED must be
cabled to the LRH Comm WW for further advices.
If by refusing to issue a SEC ED, an executive's statistic becomes bad
and if this is traced beyond reasonable doubt in any resulting hearing on
that Executive, the LRH Communicator must be given a hearing.
On the other hand if a SEC ED is passed by an LRH Communicator that is
clearly against published policy letters and results in dropped statistics
then if any hearing occurs on the Executives whose statistics dropped the
LRH Communicator must be made interested party.
______________________
THEORY
The theory operating here is that SEC EDs are supposed to improve
statistics and that one cannot hold an executive responsible for his or her
statistic if that executive's orders are prevented from being issued.
An executive worth anything at all will issue specific orders to remedy
a dropped statistic or reinforce a climbing one and as that executive is
awarded or penalized only on the basis of the statistics he or she is
responsible for, interference with his or her orders can be serious.
Seniors usually advise a more junior executive who is doing normally.
One who is not gets into a Danger Condition easily and so specific orders
must be originated that by-pass his authority. Advising a junior who is in
affluence is pretty silly unless one simply says he better find out why and
keep doing it.
One can always quote actual policy letters or bulletins at any level
with no fear of making a danger condition unless one is quoting
inapplicable material.
POL LTR ORIGINATION
If an executive is going to be hung for a statistic then he is entitled
to give the orders up to a point where the org is endangered. At that
moment of course he or she goes into Danger Condition.
An executive can always even originate a policy letter or one that
cancels an impeding Pol Ltr or SEC ED if he or she thinks it will help his
statistic.
An originated cancellation of a Pol Ltr or a new Pol Ltr must go to the
Qual Sec for opinion and then the HCO Area Sec and then the Advisory
Council and any changes needed must be noted and it must be sent back to
the originator at any stage for rewrite before it can go to the LRH
Communicator and so on to LRH.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:ml.rd
Copyright � 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 13 MARCH 1966
Remimeo
All Staff Hats
Staff Status 2
Check Sheet
All Divisions
ORDERS, PRECEDENCE OF PERSONNEL,
TITLES OF
The following table gives the precedence, which is to say the greater
value or importance of orders or directions in Scientology. This table
shows what order to follow first and if one below is contrary to one above,
follow the upper one:
|For anything relating to |BOARD RESOLUTION |
|corporate status, starting or |(Black ink on white paper, signed by |
|closing bank accounts and vital|all board members.) |
|planning: | |
|For policy: |HCO POLICY LETTER |
| |(Green ink on white paper, signed by |
| |LRH.) |
| |(HCO means Hubbard Communications |
| |Office.) |
|For all Technical Matters in |HCO BULLETIN |
|Scientology: |(Red ink on white paper, signed by |
| |LRH.) |
|For orders, or plans, expires |SEC ED (SECRETARIAL TO THE EXECU-TIVE|
|in I year. For Personnel |DIRECTOR) |
|permanent appointments: |(LRH) |
| |(White paper, blue ink, signed |
| |personally by the Executive Director |
| |LRH.) |
|For transfers of large sums or |SEC ED (GUARDIAN) |
|property, appointments of Exec |(White paper, blue ink, signed by the|
|Sees WW and urgent matters |Guardian, MSH for LRH.) |
|relating to survival actions: | |
|For Conditions assigned, |SEC ED (Adcouncil) |
|personnel appointments and |(Blue paper, blue ink, signed by the |
|financial planning and |Advisory Council for LRH Exec Dir, |
|directions to Secretaries: |approved by LRH Communicator as not |
| |against policy and by HCO for |
| |Personnel.) |
|For orders to the divisions |SEC ED (Executive Secretary) |
|under the Exec Sec: |(Blue paper, blue ink, signed by the |
| |HCO Exec Sec or Org Exec Sec for LRH |
| |Executive Director.) |
|For orders to a division by its|SEC ED (Divisional AdComm) |
|Advisory Committee: |(Colour of paper of the division, |
| |blue ink, signed by the Advisory |
| |Committee of the Division for LRH |
| |Executive Director, approved by the |
| |Advisory Council and the LRH |
| |Communicator and personnel orders |
| |also approved by HCO Personnel |
| |Control.) |
|For orders to Directors of the |SEC ED (Divisional Secretary) (Colour|
|Division from its Secretary: |of the paper of the division, blue |
| |ink, signed by that Division's |
| |Secretary for LRH Exec Director |
| |approved by the Adcouncil and LRH |
| |Communicator and requiring HCO |
| |approval for personnel.) |
|For Directors of a department in |WRITTEN ORDER (Director) |
|ordering their own department: |(Signed by Director, approved by|
| |his divisional Secretary.) |
|For ordering personnel in work |WRITTEN ORDER (Executive) |
|actions: |(Signed by the departmental |
| |Officer or In Charge, approved |
| |by the Department's Director.) |
|For ordering immediate juniors by |VERBAL ORDER |
|their immediate superiors or one's| |
|immediate clerical assistants or | |
|in a conference or in moments of | |
|urgency. Not valid otherwise and | |
|not binding as evidence in Ethics | |
|hearings or for reason for | |
|charging a noncompliance Ethics | |
|chit. Never accepted when relayed | |
|through a member of the public or | |
|off channels. | |
On all orders, orders from an HCO Exec Sec may not cross to Org
Divisions, orders from the Org Exec Sec may not cross to HCO Divisions
except in the Office of the Org Exec Sec Dept 19. Secretaries may not order
other divisions than their own. Directors may not order staff not in the
Director's departments. Officers may not order other sections than their
own. In Charges may not order other units than their own.
No order lower on the scale may cancel or set aside an order above it on
the scale. Any staff member accepting an illegal order who does not file a
job endangerment chit when he or she received it has no defence in any
resulting ethics hearing. In these organizations one must not permit
himself to be led astray by a senior with "private knowledge".
Anyone using policy to prevent statistics rising is liable to an Ethics
hearing or a Committee of Evidence. The response to a generalized statement
"That's against policy" is "What is the Policy Letter that covers it?" And
get it displayed.
It is possible to know where one stands only if one knows the seniority
of orders. The hardest position to be in is one where one's senior has
thrown the regulations away and is inventing his own-then none knows where
he stands.
Any written or published order may be cancelled by a published order
senior to it on the above chart except that, traditionally, Board Minutes
cannot cancel Policy Ltrs or HCO Bs, these being originated or modified by
the Executive Director whose powers only are ratified by the Board. HCO
Policy Letters and HCO Bs (Hubbard Communications Office Bulletins) are
considered technology and know-how and are outside Admin channels.
SENIORITY OF ORGS
The comparable order of a senior org cancels the order of or takes
precedence over an org junior to it.
The seniority is:
World Wide
Continental
Zone
Sub-Zonal
Area
District Office
Field Staff Member
Centre
Franchise Holder
Field Auditor
Professional Member
Lifetime Member
International Member
Associate.
The Adcouncil WW can cancel or takes precedence over an Advisory Council
Continental. An Advisory Council Continental takes precedence over that of
an org junior to it.
Advisory Councils are senior to Advisory Committees. An Adcouncil runs
the whole org, an AdComm runs only one of its divisions.
Advisory Councils are advisory to the Board of Directors or the
Executive Director or the Guardian and have no other powers. They cannot
open or close bank accounts or change corporate status. They are appointed
by a senior Adcouncil or the Exec Director or the Guardian. An Adcouncil
consists of the two Executive Secretaries of an org and the Executive
Director.
An Advisory Committee exists for each division in the org (7) and is
advisory to the Adcouncil and is appointed by the Adcouncil of the org and
consists of the Secretary of the division and the three directors (heads of
departments) or in an Exec Division, the three Office Co-ordinators of the
3 Exec Div Offices who are the same as directors but have a different
title.
SENIORITY OF EXECUTIVES
The following table gives the seniority of executives:
|EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR |There is only I Exec Director, |
| |LRH, and he is Exec Dir for WW and|
| |for each org. There are no |
| |assistant or deputy Executive |
| |Directors. (Orders issued for the |
| |Exec Dir must be approved by the |
| |LRH Communicator as not against |
| |policy and by HCO Personnel when |
| |personnel is appointed.) |
|THE GUARDIAN |There is only one Guardian, WW and|
| |each org. There may be Assistant |
| |Guardians in larger orgs acting as|
| |liaison personnel for the |
| |Guardian. |
|EXECUTIVE SECRETARY |There are two Executive |
| |Secretaries at WW, two in |
| |Continental Exec Divisions, two in|
| |every other Exec Div. They are the|
| |HCO Exec Sec and the Org Exec Sec.|
| |They head the 3 HCO and the 4 Org |
| |divisions respectively. Together |
| |they with the Exec Dir, form the |
| |Adcouncil. They are appointed by |
| |the Exec Dir, the Guardian or the |
| |Adcouncil WW. The WW (Worldwide) |
| |Exec Sees are appointed by the |
| |Guardian by statistics. |
|SECRETARY |There are 7 Secretaries in each |
| |organization. They head divisions.|
| |They are the Chairmen of the |
| |Divisional AdComm. They are |
| |appointed by the Adcouncil of the |
| |org with the approval of HCO |
| |Personnel and LRH Comm. |
|DIRECTOR |There are 18 Directors in an |
| |organization. They head |
| |departments. They are appointed by|
| |their Secretaries with the |
| |approval of HCO Personnel and the |
| |LRH Comm (Communicator). |
|CO-ORDINATORS |There are 3 co-ordinators in an |
| |org. They are the same as |
| |directors but head the 3 offices |
| |(departments) of the Executive |
| |Division. They are appointed by |
| |the Division 7 Secretary with the |
| |approval of HCO Personnel and LRH |
| |Comm. |
|OFFICER |These head sections within |
| |departments. |
|IN CHARGE |These head units inside sections. |
|EXECUTIVE |A general term including any In |
| |Charge or above. |
|GENERAL STAFF MEMBER |Any staff member who is not an |
| |Executive. |
|STAFF MEMBER |Any and all persons employed in an|
| |org whether an executive or |
| |general staff member. |
|ACTING |A prefix to a title meaning |
| |appointed conditionally and if |
| |shows good statistics for a year |
| |will become of permanent title. |
|DEPUTY |A prefix to a title meaning "in |
| |the place of". There may be a |
| |deputy for each executive post in|
| |an org in addition to the person |
| |with the title. Or it means |
| |"filling in until an appointment |
| |is actually made". |
|TEMPORARY |An impermanent assignment, either|
| |for reasons of expediency or |
| |under trial. |
|STAFF STATUS |A number following the person's |
| |name on the org board that shows |
| |the state of Administrative |
| |training of the individual as |
| |done in the staff training |
| |section. Status numbers go from 0|
| |for Temporary, I for Provisional,|
| |2 for Qualified general staff |
| |member on up for the various |
| |executive grades. If no number |
| |appears after a name the person |
| |is holding the post without |
| |check-out for it. A low ranking |
| |staff member can have a high |
| |status number as it is qualified |
| |for, not "appointed to". This |
| |prevents qualified persons from |
| |being by-passed in promotion. |
|CLASS |A Technical Certificate in |
| |Scientology goes by Classes on |
| |the Gradation Chart. The Class of|
| |a Scientologist's Certificate is |
| |noted in Roman numerals after his|
| |name on the Org Board. |
|GRADE |The case grade of a staff member |
| |is shown after his class as an |
| |auditor or if no class, after a |
| |dash, in Roman numerals on an Org|
| |Board. Example: IV-IV-2 means |
| |Class IV auditor, Grade IV pc, |
| |Staff Status 2 qualified as a |
| |permanent general staff member. |
| |-IV-2 would mean Grade IV pc, 2 |
| |qualified permanent general staff|
| |member but not trained as a |
| |Scientologist. |
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:ml.rd
Copyright � 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 10 AUGUST 1966
Amends HCO Policy Letter 7 May 1965
"Cancellation Mimeo Distribution
Changes (SEC ED Distribution)"
Gen Non-Remimeo
SECEDS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR & GUARDIAN
All Executive Director and Guardian SECEDs are to be typed and run off
by Mimeo World Wide. They are to be distributed by HCO Steno Saint Hill
immediately upon receipt from Mimeo WW.
Executive Director & Guardian SECEDs are a fast, fast, fast line and
take priority over any other issue. It is, therefore, expected that any
SECED will be typed, run off and completely distributed within one hour of
receipt. Any failure to issue an Executive Director or Guardian SECED, or
any stop anywhere on this line will be considered a crime, if not a high
crime.
It is the responsibility of the LRH Communicator World Wide to see that
this line is kept moving at a fast rate of speed and to report any failures
to issue or stops on this line to Ethics who must immediately take Ethics
actions to remove the person responsible for the stopped line from his
post.
SECEDs which have not originated from the Executive Director or the
Guardian go to HCO Steno for typing, running off and distribution.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:lb-r.rd
Copyright � 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
NOT HCO POLICY LETTER
CORRECT COLOUR FLASH
BLUE ON WHITE
EXECUTIVE DIRECTIVE
E.D. I INT 6 September 1966
General Issue
RENAMING OF SECED'S
1. Secretarial Executive Director is now renamed Executive Directive.
2. The colour flash system of SECED's still remains the same for
Executive Directives.
3. Executive Directives are numbered consecutively starting from E.D. 1.
4. Executive Directives continue the SECED line and file and seced's
less than I year old are in force.
5. Executive Directives issued by Ad Council will in future be signed Ad
Council for the Board of Directors for the Church of Scientology of
California U.K. for U.K. and the Commonwealth, Church of Scientology
of California for Western U.S., Founding Church of Scientology of
D.C. for D.C. and its churches, and Founding Church of Scientology
N.Y. for New York.
The Guardian WW
for the Boards of Directors
of
The Churches of Scientology
[pic]
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 20 OCTOBER 1966
Remimeo
SIGNATURES OF POL LTRS
(Modifies any existing Policy
re signature only of Pol Ltrs)
Any Policy Letter I have not personally written must bear the signatures
of:
1. The actual composer
2. Each passing agency or identity required to make it legal.
This may mean as many as five or six names may be signed to policy
letters I did not personally write.
The reason for this is that a recent policy letter that violated six
major policies re Ethics was slipped through and not questioned due to
bearing my name, whereas I had never seen it and it did not pass through
the required approval lines.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:lb-r.rd
Copyright � 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 9 MAY 1968
Remimeo
LRH Comm Hat
Any Executive Directive written personally by LRH will have the
following distinctive format:
EXECUTIVE DIRECTIVE FROM L. RON HUBBARD
It will be signed in the bottom right-hand corner
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
This is achieved by using pre-cut stencils, typing in the orders as with
any ED. The typewriter type face is "Prestige Elite".
LRH EDs will have a consecutive number series starting at one used only
for LRH EDs and will be distinguished from all other ED number series by
the initials LRH appearing before the usual ED designation.
The consecutive number is followed by the cable designation of the area
or zone or org to which the order is directed. The number series for each
designation begins again at one, e.g. LRH ED I INT.
Thus when filed there will exist a file of LRH EDs which contains in
numerical order only LRH EDs for any area and which may easily and rapidly
be referred to.
The flash colour will be blue ink on white paper. This flash colour may
only be used for LRH originated orders, and may not be used by any other.
All others use blue ink on pale blue paper.
Ken Delderfield
LRH Communicator WW
for
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:js.rd
Copyright � 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
| |hco POLICY LETTER OF 13 MAY 1969 |
|Remimeo |(HCO Policy Letter of 14 November 1966, Revised) |
|Guardian |(Corrected and reissued) |
|ECs | |
|LRH Comms | |
| hco area |HOW TO SUBMIT A PROPOSED POLICY LETTER |
|Sec | |
|Qual Sec | |
|All Staff | |
These are the rules one follows in proposing a Policy Letter:
1. Make sure before you propose one that it is not already in existing
policy or is not handling a non-existent problem (refer HCO Policy
Letter of 23 April 1965, PROBLEMS).
2. Write it clearly and simply so that the least experienced staff
member, or student, or pc to whom it would apply can understand it.
3. Type up the proposed Policy Letter exactly as it is to be issued.
4. Give in the top left-hand corner the distribution of the Policy
Letter (refer HCO Policy Letter of 14 April 1969, BULLETIN AND POLICY
LETTER DISTRIBUTION).
5. Give the title of the Policy Letter and any sub-titles or sections in
capital letters, following the format of existing Policy Letters.
6. To be approved (as per HCO Policy Letter of 20 October 1966,
SIGNATURES OF POL LTRS), the proposed Policy Letter must bear the
signatures of (1) the actual composer and (2) each passing agency or
identity required to make it legal, as listed in paragraph #8, below.
7. Attach to the proposed Policy Letter Completed Staff Work. Make sure
that all data is presented so that seniors up the line can attest on the
basis of this CSW that it is OK and that The Guardian in Policy Review
Section need only read the proposed Policy Letter and the CSW to OK and
issue it.
8. Send the proposed Policy Letter and CSW to the following terminals
for their signature and attestation that the proposed Policy Letter is
OK:
1. One's seniors in one's own Division
2. Qual Sec
3. HCO Area Sec
4. Ad Council (Local Org)
5. Exec Council (Local Org)
6. LRH Comm (Local Org)
7. Ad Council WW
8. Exec Council WW
9. LRH Comm WW
and finally to The Guardian WW (Policy Review Section) for
issue.
Any terminal along the way can either attest the Policy is OK, sign and
pass it on, or say it is not OK, state reason why and return to originator.
If you have a proposed Policy Letter sent to you which violates any point
above, so note before returning that it may be corrected and re-submitted
properly.
There is no effort to stop staff members from proposing necessary
policy, but to get it done properly so the line flows smoothly and rapidly.
Tom Armistead, for Ad Council WW
Jim Keely, Qual Sec WW
Bruce Glushakow, HCO Area Sec WW
Ad Council WW
Exec Council WW
Rodger Wright, LRH Comm WW
Jane Kember, The Guardian WW
for
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH: ei.rd
Copyright � 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
[Revised by HCO P/L 26 June 1971, same title, in the 1971 Year Book.]
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 14 APRIL 1969
Remimeo
(HCO PL 2 July 1964 Revised)
(Cancels HCO PL 25 Jan 1966, Issue III)
(Corrected and Reissued)
BULLETIN AND POLICY LETTER DISTRIBUTION
Effective at once, the following is the policy on Distribution of HCO
Bulletins and Policy Letters issued from WW.
ORGS REMIMEO
(Remimeo means mimeo copies to be made by the Org)
Only an electronic stencil will be made of all Remimeo HCO Bulletins and
Policy Letters and mailed to each Continental Org (or Zonal Org).
The Continental Org (or Zonal Org) is then responsible for running off
HCO Bulletins and Policy Letters for their nearby Central Orgs. However,
when an Org gets large enough it may have its own stencil sent to them to
run off copies for their own staff and students.
A Continental Org (or Zonal Org) receiving a stencil as above is
responsible for all copies to be issued to the nearby Orgs, which are
dependent upon it. The local Org (if it hasn't been sent a stencil of its
own) may not Remimeo and re-orders will be at charge payable by the local
Org to their issuing Org at locally arranged prices.
ORGS NON-REMIMEO
(Non-Remimeo means HCO Bulletins and Policy Letters which are intended
for use but only by executives and therefore of limited distribution. It
means
not to be mimeoed again by the receiving Org.)
On Non-Remimeo a very few copies are sent to the Continental Orgs and
they in turn distribute to their nearby Orgs.
There are two classes of Non-Remimeo: General Non-Remimeo and Limited
Non-Remimeo. General Non-Remimeo distribution is based on I copy for Master
files, one copy to LRH Comm, one copy to The Guardian or A/G, one copy each
to HCO ES, OES, PES, one copy to the reference files of all HCO Bs and P/Ls
kept in Reception for staff, one copy to the head of the Department
concerned and one copy to the post in the Dept concerned.
Limited Non-Remimeo means that copies only go to Master files, LRH Comm,
The Guardian or A/G, HES, OES, PES.
When compiling a mailing to a stencil receiving org of Non-Remimeo, one
takes the number required by the local Orgs served by the Continental Org
and sends that many to the Continental Org. In its turn the Cont Org
retains enough copies for themselves (including the Cont Exec Council) and
sends the correct number to each Org they serve.
These are the standard mirneo distribution symbols:
Remimeo
General Non-Remimeo
Limited Non-Remimeo
SH
ASHO
Franchise
Students
BPI
MA (Magazine Article)
Other special distribution may be indicated such as SHSBC, or Class
VIII.
REMIMEO
This indicates main technical or Policy material.
Received by the Cont Org (or Zonal Org) in stencil form, copies are run
off for their staff, and for the staffs of their nearby Orgs and for their
students as they wish. They keep the stencil on file for additional copies
as needed. They file copies in their Master and general files in each Org
including the receiving Org.
The stencil Orgs have considerable discretion in how many they run off,
how many they send smaller orgs (but they must insure I copy for each staff
member in the local Org of Remimeo issues), whether they issue to students
or not. But they must-keep the stencil for re-use and file in their own
Master files with the copy clearly stamped MASTER COPY.
LIMITED NON-REMIMEO
It is usually important that this does not get wide distribution as it
has to do with Org know-how, planning, etc, and could be misunderstood. So
it is not Remimeoed or strewn about. It may be taken up in Staff meetings
but that is about all. One never republishes a Limited Non-Remimeo in a
magazine.
GENERAL NON-REMIMEO
The same as Limited Non-Remimeo but somewhat broader.
These usually deal with broader points of Admin or Tech of interest to
one or two production departments as well as the LRH Comm, The Guardian or
A/G, HES, OES, PES.
Again, they are never strewn about or broadly republished as they could
be misunderstood.
FRANCHISE
Franchise receives for a small fee technological materials, up to his
level of classification. The Franchise Officer WW receives one copy for his
files and one copy for each Franchise holder he is going to mail it out to.
See HCO PL 20 Feb 1969 for local org supply lines.
BPI
Broad Public Issue (BPI) is a designation that sometimes appears on a
Policy Letter or HCO B. This follows the same distribution procedure as for
Remimeo, with the exception that it is also put in 'The Auditor' and Cont
magazines.
These policies have become necessary by reason of new lines coming into
existence and various changes of the past needing clarification.
______________________
In recapitulation, mimeos may not be issued except as designated, extra
copies may not be furnished except for cash payment, and paper and postage
waste must be kept reduced. Fewer pieces make faster lines.
There's one exception to the above and that is the BULLETIN CHECK LIST.
This is issued once each month, before the 15th of the next month. It
will be air mailed to all Scientology Orgs independently. No electronic
stencil is cut for it. Two copies, one for the HES and one for the LRH
Comm, are sent by air mail to each Scientology Org independently.
This cross-checks whether or not the mimeo distribution system is
working. In listing all mimeos sent, the distribution designation of each
is given on the Bulletin Check List.
________________________
Where a relay point temporarily breaks down, its related orgs will
receive independent service direct until the matter is repaired, a matter
which is up to the Dir Comm WW and LRH Comm WW to work out.
PERMISSION TO MIMEO
Nothing may be mimeoed or distributed on these lines unless it has been
okayed by LRH, to prevent extraneous traffic from jamming the lines.
POSTAGE
Study to lighten postage, particularly air mail, for both World Wide and
Cont Orgs.
Reduce it.
Revised for re-issue by:
LRH Comm WW - Rodger Wright
Qual Sec WW - Jim Keely
HCO Area Sec WW - Bruce Glushakow
Ad Council WW
LRH Comm WW - Rodger Wright
The Guardian WW - Jane Kember
for
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH-.ei.cden
Copyright � 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
[Modified by HCO P/L 29 January 1970 Issue II, Freedom to Remimeo, in the
1970 Year Book.]
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 12 OCTOBER 1962
Central Orgs
Franchise
Field
RE-ISSUE SERIES (1)
BASIC PURPOSES OF A SCIENTOLOGY ORGANIZATION
(Taken from HCO Policy Letter of Nov. 27, 1959
and HCO London Letter of Jan. 9, 1958)
L. RON HUBBARD, FOUNDER. Purpose: To develop and disseminate
Scientology. To support and assist Scientologists. To write better
books. To act as a court of appeals in all organizational disputes. To
form and to make official policies and orders affecting the Founding
Church.
FOUNDING CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY (HASI). Purpose: To disseminate
Scientology. To advance and protect its membership. To hold the lines
and data of Scientology clean and clear. To educate and process people
toward the goal of a 'civilized age on Earth second to none. To survive
on all dynamics.
FOUNDING CHURCH CONGREGATION. Purpose: To communicate to the
congregation the principles and philosophy of Scientology. To ensure for
each individual an awareness of their health, happiness and immortality
through good training, processing and fellowship.
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE. Purpose: To be the office of LRH. To
handle and expedite the communication lines of LRH. To prepare or handle
the preparation of manuscripts and other to-be-published material of
Scientology. To keep, use and care for LRH's office equipment. To assist
the organizations of Scientology and their people. To set a good example
of efficiency to organizations.
PUBLIC RELATIONS (under HCO). Purpose: To maintain and increase good
public relations for the organizations of Dianetics and Scientology.
EDITORIAL DIRECTOR (under HCO). Purpose: To keep material in
publications within Organization Policy, and to prepare publishable
material.
HCO COMMUNICATOR. Purpose: To keep the communication lines flowing and
the files in order in HCO.
HCO BOARD OF REVIEW. Purpose: To validate for full results every
certificate ever issued in Dianetics and Scientology. To be the final
authority on any certificates to be issued. To be the final authority on
Clear certification.
ORGANIZATION SECRETARY. Purpose: To get people to get the work done. To
enforce the policies and advise the Board.
LEGAL. Purpose: To make legal the actions of the organizations of
Dianetics and Scientology and safeguard their public and private
interests.
ADVISORY COUNCIL. Purpose: To advise the executives of the organization
as to needed changes and policies. To act as a meeting ground for
department heads. To assemble and report the statistics of finance and
action to the Executive Director. To advance ideas for promotion and
improvement.
STAFF MEETING. Purpose: To gather agreement and permit staff origination
upon matters relating to personnel and duties. To report on performance
of duties. To suggest promotional, maintenance and organizational
changes to FC executives.
TECHNICAL DIVISION
TECHNICAL DIRECTOR. Purpose: To ensure good training and processing,
good service and ARC inside and outside the organization.
ACADEMY OF SCIENTOLOGY. Purpose: To train the best auditors in the
world.
TRAINING ADMINISTRATOR. Purpose: To keep the materials and comm lines of
, the Academy in good order. To keep a Roll Book. To prepare and collect
certification materials.
COMMUNICATION COURSE. Purpose: To give people a reality on Scientology
and to teach the communication formula by Dummy Auditing.
HUBBARD GUIDANCE CENTRE. Purpose: To do more for people's health and
ability than has ever before been possible and to give the best auditing
possible. To help people.
PROCESSING ADMINISTRATOR. Purpose: To handle the persons, communications
and materials of the HGC to the end of improving and continuing the
quality and business of the HGC.
SCIENTOMETRIC TESTING IN CHARGE. Purpose: To give all and any tests or
exams that may be required to any department or organization or
personnel, and to keep and file results accurately to assist research
and presentation, and to have test materials in abundance to hand.
PERSONAL EFFICIENCY FOUNDATION. Purpose: To make a better worker of the
worker, a better executive of the executive, a better homo sap on all
dynamics.
ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISION
Purpose: To ensure good and accurate communication inside organization.
To handle business and administrative affairs. To ensure good working
quarters and conditions for and good work from organizational personnel.
DEPT OF PROMOTION & REGISTRATION. Purpose: To procure students and
preclears by actual, direct and personal contact using personal letters
and assuring an adequate number of students and preclears.
RECEPTION. Purpose: To create and maintain good communication and
service amongst staff, students and public.
DEPT OF MATERIEL. Purpose: To hold in readiness and good repair all the
communication materiel, files, addresses, furniture, equipment, quarters
and transport necessary to adequate function of the organization.
DEPT OF ACCOUNTS. Purpose: To keep the business affairs of the
organization in good order, to maintain the good business repute of the
organization and to see to it that the business activities of
Scientology are up to date in an excellent condition. To make sure that
income exceeds outgo.
DISBURSEMENT CLERK. Purpose: Break down income into proportions;
validate bills; issue checks.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:jw.rd
Copyright � 1962
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
[Note: The original 9 Jan '58 issue tad Advisory Committee in place of.
Advisory Council, giving the same purpose as above, except that the person
to whom statistics of finance and action were reported was the Association
Secretary. The 27 Nov '59 issue changed Advisory Committee to Advisory
Council, giving the same purpose as above. HCO P/L 9 Sept '64, entitled
Purpose of AdComm, amended this purpose saying:
"Sometimes organizations tend to forget what the basic purpose of an
Adcomm is.
The original purpose is amended as follows:
'To advise the Assoc/Org Sec on Promotional Matters relating to the
various Departments.'
This purpose should be read at the beginning of every Adcomm meeting
held in all Orgs. It should be prefaced, 'This meeting is held to advise
........ etc.' - L. RON HUBBARD"]
CHRONOLOGICAL INDEX OF CONTENTS
1957
28 Feb. Hats (HCO B) 63
1958
19 Sept. A Model Hat for an Executive
(HCO B reissued as HCO P/L 25 Mar. 1963) 282
21 Sept. Theory of Scientology Organizations
(HCO B reissued as HCO P/L 22 Oct. 1962) 31
6 Nov. The Three Basket System 104
15 Nov. The Three Basket System see-104
1959
24 Apr. Organization Posts-Two Types
(HCO B reissued as HCO P/L 22 June 1964) 105
5 May Policy on Sec EDs and Hats 64
22 May Central Organizations Efficiency
(reissued 7 Nov. 1962) 71
26 May What an Executive Wants on his Lines
(reissued 10 Apr. 1963) 106
2 June Purchasing Liability of Staff Members 57
2 July Developed Traffic
The Delirium Tremens of Central Orgs 119
6 July Outflow 100
7 July Staff Auditing Requirement 120
19 Aug. How to Handle Work
(HCO B reissued as HCO P/L 29 May 1963) 122
4 Sept. Completed Staff Work (C.S.W.)-How to
Get Approval of Actions and Projects
(reissued 21 Nov. 1962) 123
12 Sept. Programming
(HCO B reissued as HCO P/L 23 Oct. 1969) 334
15 Sept. Hats and Other Folders 65
1960
3 Oct. Holiday Pay and Sick Leave 50
1961
31 Jan. Message Placement 108
I I Apr. How to do a Staff Job 73
26 May Quality Counts (reissued 21 June 1967) 45
29 May Quality and Admin in Central Orgs 46
21 Sept. Despatch Lines 109
20 Oct. Non-Scientology Staff (revised 7 Mar. 1967) 23
1962
12 Oct. Basic Purposes of a Scientology Organization 368
22 Oct. Theory of Scientology Organizations
(reissueofHCOB21 Sept. 1958) 31
7 Nov. Central Organizations Efficiency
(reissue of 22 May 1959) 71
21 Nov. Completed Staff Work (C.S.W.)-How to
Get Approval of Actions and Projects
(reissue of 4 Sept. 1959) 123
1963
25 Mar. A Model Hat for an Executive
(reissue of HCO B 19 Sept. 1958) 282
10 Apr. What an Executive Wants on his Lines
(reissue of 26 May 1959) 106
25 Apr. Duties of a Staff Member 21
29 May How to Handle Work
(reissue of HCO B 19 Aug. 1959) 122
1964
15 Feb. The Equipment of Organizations 59
21 Feb. Staff Regulations- Auditing versus Job 43
22 June Organization Posts-Two Types
(reissueofHCOB24Apr. 1959) 105
10 Aug. Good Workers 44
4 Oct. TheoryCheck-outData(reissued21 May 1967) 16
17 Nov. Offline and Offpolicy-Your Full In Basket 125
1965
Vital Data on Study 9
31 Jan. Dev-T 131
7 Feb. Keeping Scientology Working
(reissued 15 June 1970 & 28 Jan. 1973) 35
8 Feb. Dev-T Analysis 134
13 Feb. Politics 29
14 Feb. Safeguarding Technology
(reissued 7 June 1967) 40
5 Mar. Policy: Source of 336
7 Mar. Offenses Apenalties 154
13 Mar. The Structure of Organization
What is Policy? 338
17 Mar. Administering Justice 159
17 Mar. Rights of a Staff Member, Students
and Preclears to Justice 157
21 Mar. Staff Members Auditing Outside Pcs 54
27 Mar. The Justice of Scientology-lts Use
and Purpose-Being a Scientologist 160
29 Mar. Excerpts from HCO P/L 9 Nov. 1964 &
26 Nov. 1964 (revised) for Staff Hats
Staff Member Loans
Staff Regulations
Reporting of Unusual Favours 53
29 Mar. Routing Despatches 110
29 Mar. The Fast Flow System 291
2 Apr. Heed Heavy Traffic Warnings 111
5 Apr. Scientology Makes a Safe Environment 162
10 Apr. Dismissals, Transfers and Demotions 163
16 Apr. Handling the Public Individual 78
18 Apr. Contests and Prizes 56
23 Apr. Problems 293
29 Apr. Petition 164
30 Apr. Emergency, State of 195
1 May Order Board and Time Machine 296
1 May Organization-The Design of the Organization 250
1 May Staff Member Reports 166
7 May Cancellation-Mimeo Distribution Changes 345
8 May Flash Colours and Designations 346
16 May Indicators of Orgs 169
26 May Communications-Registered Mail 112
26 May Petitions 165
11 June Correction to HCO P/L 26 May 1965
Communications-Registered Mail 112
1 July Hats, The Reason for 66
10 July Lines andTerminals- Routing 113
19 July Policy, How to Handle People who
Quote Policy . . . 301
28 July Handling of Photographs 114
15 Aug. Things that Shouldn't Be 172
24 Aug. Cleanliness of Quarters and Staff
Improve Our Image 94
26 Aug. Scientology Training- Twin Checkouts 13
27 Aug. Housing-Staff, Students, Preclears 172
1 Sept. Ethics Protection 173
1 Sept. Mailing List Policies 198
8 Sept. Supply Officer 58
13 Sept. Issue Authority Required for Mimeo 349
15 Sept. Only Accounts Talks Money 275
22 Sept. Keys 57
30 Sept. Statistics for Divisions 200
13 Oct. Dev-T Data- Executive Responsibility 136
3 Nov. Equipment 61
15 Nov. Reporting of Theft and Action to be Taken 175
17 Nov. The Basic Principles of Promotion 82
20 Nov. The Promotional Actions of an Organization 84
15 Dec. Ethics Chits 176
1966
4 Jan. Office of LRH-Sec EDs & HCO ExecLtrs 350
4 Jan. Scientology Organizations Communications
System: Dispatches 101
4 Jan. Staff Meeting 55
7 Jan. Leaving Post-Writing Your Hat 70
15 Jan. Hold the Form of the Org
Don't Bring about Danger Conditions 202
16 Jan. Danger Condition 204
19 Jan. Danger Condition
Responsibilities of Declaring 211
19 Jan. Danger Condition, Warning-The Junior
Who Accepts Orders from Everyone 207
1966 (cont.)
1 Feb. Danger Conditions- Inspections by
Executive Secretaries, How to do Them 208
1 Feb. Statistics, Actions to Take-Statistic Changes 213
3 Feb. Sec ED Change in Issue and Use 351
3 Feb. Sec EDs- Definition and Purpose
Cross Divisional Orders 352
13 Feb. Sec ED OK (Continued)
Pol Ltr Changes and Origins 354
23 Feb. Appointments and Promotions 215
28 Feb. Danger Condition Data
Why Organizations Stay Small 216
6 Mar. Rewards and Penalties 177
13 Mar. Orders, Precedence of Personnel, Titles of 356
30 Mar. The Three Basket System
(revised reissue of 15 Nov. 1958) 104
17 July Despatches, Speed Up 115
20 July Staff Status (amended 19 March 1968) 48
10 Aug. SecEDs, Executive Director & Guardian
(amends 7 May 1965) 360
22 Aug. Addendum to HCO P/L 20 July 1966
"Staff Status" 49
6 Sept. EDIINT-RenamingofSecEDs 361
17 Oct. Stale Date Reports 116
20 Oct. Signatures of Pol Ltrs 362
3 Nov. Administrative Know-How-Leadership 303
6 Nov. Admin Know-How- Statistic Interpretative 221
4 Dec. Admin Know-How-Expansion
Theory of Policy 305
24 Dec. Admin Know-How
How to Programme an Org 311
24 Dec. Admin Know-How-How to Programme
an Org-Corrections and Addition 316
1967
12 Feb. Admin Know-How
The Responsibilities of Leaders 225
7 Mar. Non-Scientology Staff
(revision of 20 Oct. 1961) 23
21 Mar. Org Exec Course 3
21 May Theory Check-out Data
(reissue of 4 Oct. 1964) 16
7 June Safeguarding Technology
(reissue of 14 Feb. 1965) 40
21 June Quality Counts (reissue of 26 May 1961) 45
24 July Fixed Public Consumption of Product 235
12 Sept. Post, Handling of 74
18 Sept. Study-Complexity and Confronting 19
23 Sept. New Post Formula
The Conditions Formulas 189
6 Oct. Condition of Liability 237
11 Oct. Clay Table Training (HCO B) 18
12 Oct. Operational, Definition of 62
18 Oct. Conditions on Orgs or Divisions or Depts
Clarification 239
18 Oct. Failure to Follow or Apply Condition 240
20 Oct. Admin Know-How
Conditions, How to Assign 241
23 Oct. Enemy Formula (modifies 6 Oct. 1967) 245
26 Oct. The Public Divisions 252
1968
1 Jan. Hat Write-ups and Folders
Inspection of Hat Folders 68
5 Jan. Conditions Orders- Executive Ethics 194
5 Jan. Dev-T Series, Part of
Overfilled In Basket-Bad News 137
10 Jan. Politics, Freedom from 28
11 Jan. ED 805 INT-Speed of Service 280
6 Feb. Organization-The Flaw 292
8 Feb. Admin Know-How No. 18
Statistic Rationalization 246
8 Feb. Sea Org Zones of Planning 255
22 Feb. Ethics and Admin-Slow Admin 76
5 Mar. Administrative Know-How
Job Endangerment Chits 181
14 Mar. Corrected Table of Conditions 247
19 Mar. Service 281
19 Mar. Staff Status (amendment of 20 July 1966) 48
15 Apr. Speed and accuracy of relay Telex traffic 117
4 May Handling Situations 77
9 May Executive Directive from L. Ron Hubbard 363
13 May Telex Comm Clarity 117
22 May Promotional Action of LRH Communicator 90
31 May Auditors 42
18 June Ethics 153
30 July Gross Income Senior Datum 277
16 Oct. Treason Formula 247
1968 (cont.)
19 Oct. When a student has finished a course. . . 41
25 Oct. Important-Admin Know How 285
9 Nov. Important-Standard Admin 6
21 Nov. Senior Policy 277
26 Dec. The Third Party Law 183
1969
14 Jan. OT Orgs 318
16 Jan. Targets, Types of 321
18 Jan. Planning and Targets 324
24 Jan. Purpose & Targets 327
24 Jan. Target Types 326
26 Jan. Compliance Reports Vol. 7-623
27 Jan. Dev-T Summary List 138
30 Jan. Dev-T Summary List Additions 142
5 Feb. Press Policy-Code of a Scientologist
(revised 15 May 1973) 25
13 Feb. Ethics Protection Conditions,
Blue Star, Green Star, Gold Star 248
24 Feb. Justice 185
6 Mar. Scientology is a Religion 26
7 Mar. Organisation 287
14 Apr. Bulletin and Policy Letter Distribution 365
20 Apr. Hats, Not Wearing 249
30 Apr. Orders and Responsibility 298
13 May How to Submit a Proposed Policy Letter 364
23 May Public Divisions Flash Colours see-103
23 May Public Divisions Promotional Actions 91
17 June The Org Image 95
27 July What is a Checksheet 12
8 Sept. The Org Exec Course Introduction 1
9 Sept. How to Study this Course 11
14 Sept. Admin Know-How No. 22
The Key Ingredients 328
20 Sept. Stability 4
30 Sept. Orders of the Day 118
4 Oct. Organizational Enturbulence 5
23 Oct. Programming
(reissue of HCO B 12 Sept. 1959) 334
27 Oct. Admin Know-How No. 23-Dev-T 145
4 Nov. Compliance vs Discussion 302
4 Nov. Dev-T Graphed 147
10 Nov. Former Staff Members 51
18 Nov. Central Files, Value of
The Gross Income of the Org and Why 278
6 Dec. How to Clear Your Community Illustrations 261
7 Dec. Ethics, The Design of 187
9 Dec. LRH ED 49 INT-Org Program No. 1 256
I I Dec. Appearances in Public Divs 98
14 Dec. Org Protection 52
15 Dec. Class of Orgs 254
15 Dec. Orders, Query of 299
19 Dec. Executive Duties 289
1970
7 Feb. Danger Condition-2nd Formula
(adds to 23 Sept. 1967) 193
15 June Keeping Scientology Working
(reissue of 7 Feb. 1965) see- 35
1973
28 Jan. Keeping Scientology Working
(reissue of 7 Feb. 1965) 35
15 May Press Policy-Code of a Scientologist
(revision of 5 Feb. 1969) 25
ADMIN KNOW-HOW POLICIES
IN THIS VOLUME
3 Nov. 1966 Leadership 303
6 Nov. 1966 Statistic Interpretative 221
4 Dec. 1966 Expansion-Theory of Policy 305
24 Dec. 1966 How to Programme an Org 311
24 Dec. 1966 How to Programme an Org
Corrections and Addition 316
12 Feb. 1967 The Responsibilities of Leaders 225
20 Oct. 1967 Conditions, How to Assign 241
8 Feb. 1968 Statistic Rationalization 246
5 Mar. 1968 Job Endangerment Chits 181
25 Oct. 1968 Important-Admin Know How 285
14 Sept. 1969 The Key Ingredients 328
27 Oct. 1969 Dev-T 145
-----------------------
[pic]
[pic]