The Appearance of the Org and Staff is transferred out of Department One which becomes the DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND ROUTING and may still becalled 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 theorg, 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 andit 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 thisis 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'spoor 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'timagine a ju-ju being taken very seriously in a hut so equipt.

The way to spoil an org image is of course to sub due or kill what successful Senorgs 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 ofstaff 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.

[Amended by HCO P/L 2 October 1970, Appearances — Clarification, Volume 6, page 53.]