Here is a report from the Ship Programs Chief on Flag of the results obtained from following my orders on how to get Est Os to hat people.

It should be noted that the procedure laid down by my despatch on the second half of this PL was exactly how I operated to develop the data used for Est 0 Series No. 16. (HCO PL 24 April 72 HATTING THE PRODUCT OFFICER OF THE DIVISION.)

“Dear Sir,

“We have been having trouble getting hatting officers in Dept 1 to actually produce. They don’t complete cycles of action to a result, they don’t hat from the top down or hat for production. They don’t seem to understand why they are hatting and what are the results they should achieve in hatting.

“This was the same problem we had back in May of this year in getting Est Os to do effective hatting.

“At that time you sent me the attached dispatch addressed to the Exec Est O. I used it faithfully and, with it, actually got hatting to occur.

“The results are still evident on the Ship. With the DEO hatting per this dispatch the then Dissem Division came right up in production and is still producing very well as the PR and Consumption Bureau.

“The Treasury Division improved markedly. Some improvement was attained in the Steward’s Dept, Electronics and Qual Div where all Est Os hatted per this dispatch.

“All of these Est Os had big wins hatting because I used the data on this dispatch and forced them to persist with a hatting action to a RESULT.

“I kept a big log book with each hatting cycle noted down. I insisted the Est O kept at that cycle until it was complete.

“Each Division had its own program for hatting from the top down.

“Each Exec and Staff Member had his or her own personal hatting program kept by the Est O. These were followed and checked off as they were done.

“A number of the Blue Chip FSO Crew now so valuable for Flag Stability were made by heavy hatting last spring.

“I know the data on your dispatch works if it is done.

“The Est Os under me at the time first had to be forced to hat and to continue hatting to a result. Apparently their lack of confront had to be overcome by a hard driving senior.

“Generally, once they started getting results, they no longer had to be forced. They knew that Est O tech worked and willingly went ahead and applied it with vigor.

“Their confront was improved as well by doing Est O No. 16 drills on each other and running TRs 6-9 on each other every evening for at least an hour.

“Only by applying the principles laid out by you on the attached dispatch was I able to get real hatting done by others.

“As we are having the same problem now with hatting officers in Dept 1, I feel

that if this data were released as policy I could force it into use and get the ship hatted up faster.”

Here is the dispatch I wrote to the Exec Est O on Flag back in May of this year:

Inspections do not show Est Os being industrious in their divs. They are more active than they were.

They are not hatting from the top down and not hatting to get production.

Basically they do not parallel the current push. They do little cycles down the org board.

A general grasp of what’s needed and wanted is missing. Thus Est Os are actually in or below Non-Existence and have not achieved upgrade from a new post or new system condition.

They are getting individual results in some cases. They are not integrated into the scene with what they are doing.

They would have to upgrade their handlings about 500% in order to actually effect a marked change in the on.

Inspections show only a small % of Est Os do Est O actions for a small period of time each day. They have other fish frying or are acting a bit confused.

If you had that many auditors and found them auditing pcs as seldom as Est Os are found doing Est O actions the HGC stat would be nearly zero WDAH.

I know what I’m talking about here because I am piloting the system to find out why it isn’t producing marked changes. I find that, with 2 messengers a watch of 6 hours, working myself part time on it, I have been able to get areas working. They were NOT producing under the attention of Existing Est Os.

The difference is, I force those I find not working at the top to actually produce and demand production from their staffs.

In doing this I have never crossed or found an Est O working on it. I have found 2 Div heads who were refusing to be gotten going. Both of these I later got going.

Thus from my viewpoint

(a) It can be done with untrained Est O Commodore’s messengers.

(b)1 find messengers who know little of a meter can use one without coaching or training.

(c) Production can be achieved by getting people to work.

(d) That Est Os have to be run and exactly ordered to do exactly so and so.

(e) That in running Est Os one has to keep track of what one is doing with them so one doesn’t get a lot of half dones. One has to make up for a lack of persistence.

Therefore I conclude

A. One has to know what he is trying to build.

B. One has to target and direct its building.

C. One has to force in a persistence.

I also conclude that training of Est Os is secondary to getting them to DO and that “lack of training” is an excuse not to do.

This is what I am learning about the system from actually working it.

The current on-board application of the system lacks planning, direction and persistence, does not hat from the top down and does not hat toward production.

It MUST BEGIN.

[See also HCO PL 9 May 1974. Prod-Org, Esto and Older Systems Reconciled, on page 446, which modifies the above Policy Letter.]