The hideous error that an Establishment Officer can commit is to get involved with the traffic of a division. It's very easy to recognize this as, "Audit some pcs," that's easy. Start interviewing students, yeah, it's obvious that that would be a wrong action. But there's a little hair line between the actual legitimate traffic at the org and the establishment of the org. And that little hair line is establishing it in such a way as the org will flow, and adjusting the establishment of the org so that it will produce. So the adjustment of the establishment pattern so that production can occur is a legitimate duty of the Esto.

Now we're going to clear words on a lot of public and a lot of high school and it's in the program, and there's the high school and they've got a lot of failed students over there and they're going to bring them in and word clear them, and it's a great program and somebody's had this idea and they knew the principle and, and they're all going to get five hundred dollars apiece for doing it and it's a marvelous thing, and this program comes out, and the Qual Division is not established to render that service. Therefore the QEO flat out had better establish it to do so, it means an additional piece of establishment.

Now, there's another error that can occur is after that program is all gone and dead and is over, he's sitting there with eight word clearers who haven't got any business. Traffic load is an essential duty of an Establishment Officer, to measure traffic load. Now, this gets over into the efficiency expert. The only thing a wog efficiency expert ever managed to do was do time/motion studies. And they're very good at doing these time/motion studies, they've got it down to a fine feathered frenzy. It takes a fellow a sixteenth of a minute to pick up a wingle and to fit it to the gonk and, and we reduce the number of steps that it takes this machinist to go from the drill punch over to the lathe and we'll put these two machines closer together and we'll rearrange the spatial arrangements of this, and etcetera, and so on. That's all efficiency time/motion study. It's interesting that that whole line of country has tended to sort of fade out. And one of the reasons it has is nobody ever hatted the upper executives on it, and they always worked with the guy down on the floor, they never worked with the foreman.

That gets over into the field of human engineering. Human engineering by the way is a lopsided thing, it's adapting machines to man or something, or you can also adapt man to machines, and human engineering has become, I don't know, they've thought of several other titles for it since. I lost track. I've got a lot of literature on it in there if you're ever interested. There's a lot of articles. It's very, very, very upstairs, wow, you know, technical as hell. The government invests oh, god knows, how much money and they sit around and keep it all secret and the Russians do this and they keep it from the Americans and the Americans do that and keep it from the English.

And it's, the first time I ever climbed into a Renault tank I knew that it needed some human engineering. It had a steel seat, rigid to the tank body, not even a cushion on it. If you fired the machine gun or if you were firing the machine gun in the turret, as the tank lurched you lost your teeth. But they've got this very refined, they take these big airplanes and they figure out where the instruments should be and where the stick should be and where the hostess should be, which knee she should sit on of the captain, it's terrific, terrific study. We had to use intelligence people to get the stuff because it's all so secret.

Now, the first time I ever saw a P-40, I knew that that thing needed some human engineering, wow. There are certain problems in the field of human engineering however, that they never did solve. A pal of mine, a namesake up at Garland climbed into a cockpit one day and found a rattlesnake in it; well, the ship wasn't designed for that. But it's adapting the machinery to fit the person. Now, you're going to have to do a certain amount of this and you'll find out, so it's a subject you should know something about. It's adapting machinery and spatial arrangements and desks and chairs and things like that. And you'll find somebody who makes mistakes consistently at typing has a tired back because they're sitting on some kind of a weird chair or an old box. In other words, they're just not, the typewriter set-up isn't adjusted to the ease of operation. You'll find out that your addresso operator, standing around in hard heeled shoes on a concrete floor get totally exhausted and feel like their heels are being driven up through the backs of their necks, and you just can't seem to keep an addresso operator on there. The second you put them in tennis shoes they're better and as soon as you put some foam rubber linoleum on that floor why, everybody's fighting for the job. You get the difference?

So the adjustment of the machinery and spatial arrangements to the people who are operating it is important. This is also important in auditing rooms. You don't want auditing rooms that can be interrupted all the time, so you have to have some kind of a system going to where an auditing room can't be butted into, and also you have to have an auditing room in such a way that the auditing room is fairly soundproof so that the pc doesn't get continuously startled, particularly by the session next door where the fellow's being run by Bill Deitch and is saying, "Hheh, hheh, hheh, hheh, hheh, hheh, hheh," and Deitch is saying, "Hheh, hheh, hheh, hheh," and it sounds like a bunch of donkeys. We've had that trouble.

Now, I haven't given human engineering much of a build up, it isn't a name that is used anymore. They keep changing the name and it's gotten very secret and so on, and if anything I think we, we have some rights to the name now of human engineering. We did something with it, we were going to do more with it. But they terribly limited the subject in they're just adjusting the equipment to the man, that's what my disrespect is. See? And they really don't do a very good job of it and there's an awful lot of figure-figure in it. It started about l911 along about the same time PR did and there's been a lot of stuff come forward on it and there is literature. And the better literature you will find under the name of human engineering. The room is too cold, St. Hill, the little huts. We had to adjust the temperature of them somehow or another so they could be used at all and so on. Now, that's all very valid, but you can also adjust the guy to the machinery. Simple, simple stuff. You don't necessarily adjust him so that he can run a very uncomfortable set-up, but you have a reverse side of the game and that is TR-0 on the area, TR-1, reach and withdraw from the equipment or the office space or wherever he's doing, as I was talking to you about. You have those techniques, and those techniques will disclose the human engineering faults. Where does it cease to be an aberration and becomes an actual discomfort? At what point?

Now, you are dealing with the United States government budgets, and in view of the fact that you don't deal with those budgets, you have to make adjustments which you very often wish you could make otherwise. And the executive who is trying to get a more comfortable chair or something like that is a perfectly legitimate area for an Establishment Officer because you're now into the field of materiel. All of these things will enormously influence the quality of production, they will influence the number of mistakes. But an executive who is fighting his in-basket and never seems to answer it and so forth, in human engineering they would simply get him a automatic sliding in-basket or put three more personnel on the line or something like this, where as a matter of fact if you thumbtacked a dispatch up to the wall upside down and made him confront it for two hours, the next thing you know he would be swinging like a breeze. Then of course he could reach and withdraw on the thing and he'd get weird masses blowing off of his face that he never knew he had. You've got both sides of the coin. That's why you can't call it just human engineering.

Now, the aircraft that is going to be built in such a way that it waffle waffles and guys can woofle woofle in it, and that's all very fine and so forth, is often wrecked in spite of it's great expertise because the guy couldn't confront it. The radio operator couldn't confront his radio set anymore. The ground radar operator gets the whole thing shot down in battle because he long since has gone hypnotic looking at a radar screen with it's swing, swing, round, round, round, round, duhhhhhh. You can break that, you can break that by just doing a steady confront, but you say, "Well, he's already in this confront." No, he's long since ceased to confront. Or by doing a double confront and the first time you ever run this on anybody you will be accused of being a hypnotist.

Two object confront. It's way back there in '53. You make him confront the screen and then turn around and confront the helm, and then confront the screen and then confront the helm, and then confront the screen and then confront the helm, and he will go dehhhhhh. Any hypnotism he has feelings of, of having confronted the screen will start to discharge at a remarkable rate of speed and he'll go into a trance and then he'll come right out of it.

Two objects, very simple commands. It can be as simple you see as, "Look at the radar, thank you. Look at the helm, thank you. Look at the ra," make sure that he does it, "Look at the radar, thank you. Look at the helm, thank you. Look at the radar, thank you."

Old book and bottle did this, but that was a series of commands and book and bottle, that is to say Op Pro by Dup, almost invariably exteriorizes the guy and it'll blow him right on out through his head. Well, you don't want it that bad. Very often if the TA goes up afterwards you know the guy did exteriorize, and if he's never had an exteriorization-interiorization rundown his TA will stay up, so you know what to do.

Now, there's something worse than this. Now, that's just confront and reach and withdraw and so forth. "Look at the radar," is one process. This is another one. "Decide to look at the radar and look at it. Decide to look away from the radar and look away from it. Decide to look at the helm and look at it. Decide to look away from the helm and look away from it." Now you really will think he's being hypnotized, because you're moving him straight from effect to cause in the shortest possible route.

And now this tells you at once that an Establishment Officer has to know something about processing. Well really, all he has to know is his TRs and repetitive commands, and although he tells the fellow, "I'm not auditing you," before he starts one of these things, and he should, the guy will be damn convinced that he is. So you should know how to do this trick. Why? Because the guy is having a bad time, he's doping off, he's getting somatics on post and so on, he isn't adjusted to the job. So there's two ways you could go about it. You could actually look at the situation as though a low powered hum that goes on in the room all the time, all the time, all the time. Now, the hum won't do any harm unless it has a lot of force in it. It's a sort of a sub-hearing heavy bellow surge that you sort of feel instead of hear. You'll find out it'll be tiring. That might be what's affecting him. It might be that his chair is wrong. It might be that the machine is wrong. It might be something or other and it might be that somebody else right next to him is creating such fantastic dev-t with regard to his post, which is much more usual, that he just wooaah and he's doing his whole job in resentment and protest and everything else. Well, you can hat that person.

You can look over these various factors that might make a job area uninhabitable and difficult. When you've done that, then you've got the other side of the coin which is adjust the guy to the job area. And that has to do with confront, reach and withdraw, has to do with double confront, and has to do with decisional confront.

Now, you recognize at once that you're spanning his attention when you give him two and your spanning it very forcefully. And then when you're giving him the decide orders, you are putting him at cause. The simpler one is flap your hands, you know, and whose doing it and the guy says I am. Well, that puts a person at cause. This other one, decide to look at and so forth, he gets all tangled up. He realizes you're telling him to decide so therefore he couldn't decide and you know, figure-figure-figure-figure-figure and he eventually will be able to make a clear-cut decision.

Most of the difficulties that human beings have on jobs is an inability to decide, to be causative, an inability to be at cause over something, and their competence is directly proportional to their ability to be at cause. So we have a problem in terms of adjustment of the environment to the person, heat, cold, spatial position, noise level, odors. We had an area one time that nobody could, it had a drain that, somebody finally found this drain, hardly anybody could work there, smelled like an outhouse, and it had an uncovered drain and it was actually draining sewer gas into the room all the time, and it was an old drain that nobody'd ever plugged or cut off. The room just smelled bad. You can also find the condition where, in very closed space, you have somebody who doesn't bathe and the body odor, he never washes his clothes and so forth, and the body odor is such that people can't work around him. Now, imagine your embarrassment to have to tell him; but remember you are his best friend and so you should tell him is the way the old ads went; you should know in passing that Lifebuoy soap and so on will handle that. An auditor whose breath is terribly bad will offend and upset a lot of pcs, but old Listerine or Bradmorow or gargle and washing his teeth occasionally and getting his teeth fixed up will handle that. These are all factors which are in the legitimate sphere of the Establishment Officer.

You're adjusting the environment for A by handling B, do you see, he doesn't bathe, he doesn't keep himself up, creates dev-t and so forth. Alright. That's still adjusting the environment to the worker or the executive. You know, that's all inter, all interchangeable. You know, every worker is really a manager, he's managing something, and every executive is actually a worker, they work harder than the workers. But once you've adjusted the environment then you can adjust the fellow to the environment. And now, you don't always have and seldom do have unlimited funds to adjust this environment.

You can't throw away a typewriter just because this typist and so forth says she'd rather have some other kind of a typewriter. Just because she'd rather have something else and the only thing you've got are Royals or something like that and she's got to have an Underwood, there's not enough difference between these typewriters to bother with, let her learn how to run an Underwood. You'll sometimes, you'll get this, you'll get a typist who is used to an electric and electrics spoil typists, and you probably should get her an electric and you'll find out that she, her typing speed will be much higher on an electric because she's used to one.

But you can go too far in this direction very, very easily, and you'll find out people very often don't respect the very high quality equipment which you get for them. And very often you will get, janitors particularly this falls into, that have to have before they can do. You make it your law that they have to show you they can do before they can have a thing. I have seen literally hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of dollars purchased for somebody who had to have these things so he could do, and then seen these thing sit there, occupy space and gather rust. Actually what he's really asking in the first place is, "Buy me a toy." And if you'd gone down to the toy shop and bought him a dollar ninety-eight plastic woolly bear, why, or something why, he'd just have been just as happy. The guy who can really do, if the tool is practical, well you buy him tools, but the guy who can't do until he has, no. He has to show you he can do before he can have. And then you'll cut out of your line-up an enormous amount of FP trouble.

I know a very, very fancy typewriter one time that was bought for somebody and it was a beauty. It was an IBM executive, it would space properly and did all kinds of things. I looked at it after about two months, I went down and I investigated the thing, and it was covered from one end to the other with snopaque, which is the whiting fluid that you use to correct lines with, absolutely plastered with this lousy snopaque, into the keys and the machinery and everything else. And she must have just been taking snopaque bottle brush, you see, and thwap and it must have been three words and then snopaque those out, and then three more words and snopaque those and drop half the snopaque, and well my god, you never saw such a mess. And I often wondered why we couldn't get out an Auditor. She couldn't do. That was the trouble.

So you see human engineering really doesn't ever make a mention of this, so they must have some of the wildest problems that anybody ever heard of. They're probably trying to build airplanes with pilots sitting on the wings and all kinds of weird things just because they were dealing with one pilot who had peculiarities and didn't want to fly it anyhow. So this is the sort of thing you have to watch, otherwise your money goes all up in smoke and so forth.

You could for instance spend eight thousand dollars just at the drop of a hat getting some beautiful steel desks for all the executives in the organization with gorgeous chairs to go with them and matching secretary or reception desks. After you've done all this you have not made one extra tiny dime and they won't produce anymore than they did before, so that is a very, very posh investment. And you say, "Well, we should have upstage and very stylish quarters." Well, alright, alright, good, have upstage and stylish quarters but can you keep these quarters you've got clean?

This guy's got to have a new desk because he lets his, puts his cigarette on the edge of it and he's got cigarette burns the length and breadth of that desk, and he wants a new desk? Oooh, no. Get him an old one. Say, "You've used that one up, we've got an old pasteboard box over here you can have now." In other words, there's two sides to this coin and where you have somebody who hasn't been adjusted to using some very, very sophisticated upstage piece of machinery and so forth, for god's sakes don't get it for him because it'll just tangle his wits.

One is always buying dishwashers and washing machines with fancy time set repeating cycles. You come by and you take a look at them, they're wrecked. What happens is, people grab the time set and force it to another point and won't let it finish its cycles and it'll break, and next thing you know you take that, that repeating see, first it washes and then it rinses and then it cleans itself and then it brushes its teeth, something like that, there's some kind of a time set in the back. You take that thing out and you send it to the factory to get repaired, and you get it back and put it in and it just breaks again. And you say, "Well, this machine's no good." That isn't the case. The machine is too sophisticated for its operator, too fancy for its operator. The guy's got to get in there, he doesn't understand the machine, so about the time it's washing he wants it to rinse so he whhhoh twists it and then he whhoh twists it back and then he decides they're not washed enough so resets the cycle while it's in progress and that's how it breaks. You stand and watch these things.

So you can easily get a very sophisticated lay out which is a total flop. It just breaks all the time. This is one of the reasons the PAC area is having trouble right now, they've just gone in for types of machinery which haven't been, haven't proven out at all, machinery which breaks. Now, there's another way to go about it is you can get an old machine that breaks down all the time that is very cheap but then costs you the price of a new machine in repairs every month and never operates either, so it won't give the service. The test is again the test of production, the test of the establishment of a machine is the test of production. Alright. Let's get an addresser or an envelope thing that will address and envelope fifty thousand pieces of mail in an hour. It takes up half of the former academy, and so forth. Well, be real, you're not going to get out fifty thousand in an hour. But on the other hand, you get a Xerox that is supposed to turn out thirty thousand as a max and you try to turn out forty-four thousand on it, it'll break up all the time. So it is an estimate of the amount of production which is going to be done that regulates both the staff and the machinery.

Now, you can have an awful lot of staff standing around that isn't giving that much production. The amount of production regulates both the amount of staff and the amount of machinery. You're going to go into areas that you consider and they tell you are totally undermanned and find out that one of their troubles is they're grossly over manned. That is the most remarkable fact you ever cared to see. Now, going back to the reward of a downstat, he would just keep filling the place up full of downstats, remember the downstat can't produce, so that therefore there is no possible exchange which will continue to support him. There's not an exchange in the department, there's not an exchange in the division or in the org, much less the outside world and your FP will just go splat. You might find a person with a hundred and twenty-five, might find an org with a hundred and twenty-five staff members that is not producing as much as a fifteen staff org. They can be terribly busy and that dev-t is flying to the right and flying to the left and it just requires people, people, people, people, people to handle all of that dev-t and all of that commotion, but there is no exchange, there's just dev-t and that doesn't exchange.

So therefore as you establish, just by going on and establishing what is there already and establishing it thoroughly and getting it to produce thoroughly, you will all of a sudden start running into loaf time. There isn't really enough to do. You cut out the dev-t and the guy's producing all there is to produce, there really isn't enough to do. Then is the time when you internally re-post or readjust loads. Now, just as there can be musical chairs, so there can be musical functions, and you can transfer functions from person to person or you can transfer functions from department to department, until nobody can keep his place in the book. The org can go just as mad changing all of the functions amongst the staff members as they can changing staff members. After I'd solved musical chairs as one of the primary actions that knocked apart orgs, what do you know, a new one was invented and it kept going across this desk, people were changing functions.

So the functions which we had lined up and so on were obviously in need of some adjustment, but before you adjust very heroically along such a line, you want to get a clearance with other people. If you're violently shifting an org board in some way or another, why, get it lined up because that org board might be that way so that it fits in with some other divisional action, and you want to go, go over one of these things fairly carefully. Before you throw a function overboard that seems to a useless function and so forth, look and see whether or not it just isn't being sold. Maybe it's not being sold, maybe nobody knows the function is being done.

So what we get into here, what we get into here is holding a stability not only of an org board which we have put together, but also of a stability of the people on post. Now, the stability of people on post doesn't mean the fellow is there forever. Augustus back in the Roman Empire, he fixed everybody on post for ages to come. The Roman Empire then started to go downhill. Your normal action however is to get people advancing. As soon as you go from the specialized to the general you will start people advancing.

You see really, if you've got a good producing specialist and then you start hatting him on all of the other posts after he's turning out an excellent product, you'd say well, that's a little bit dev-t. No, you'll improve his production enormously. By the time you've hatted somebody for the whole department, you can now have an all hands operation in that department so peak loads can be cared for. And the primary cause of over manning is trying to take care of peak loads by specialist posting. We've got specialist posting just for peak loads. Every Friday we have a peak load so we've got a specialist on that post to handle that Friday peak load. That's idiot, that's idiot posting. Peak loads are handled by all hands operations.

Now, an all hands operation cannot be handled until everybody in the department is hatted for all the functions in the department, so that's one of the first things you want to do as soon as you've got the guy producing on his own post, start hatting him on other hats in the department, he can now do an all hands operation. All hands operations are very bad if you carry them along as the way of life, twenty-four hours a day there are all hands operations, that's nonsense. But, peak loads. You can even have a peak load within the day, you see, it's an all hands operation to get the mail distributed, something like an all hands HCO operation to get the mail distributed, zeeeum, mails in, invoiced out, in the baskets, boom. See? But then wouldn't everybody on that mail line have to be in actual fact hatted to handle mail? Otherwise, you get so many mistakes.

Now, normally you take your all hands operations down to such a thing as getting out a bulk mail and that's your normal all hands operation. Now, why? Let's take a look at that. Well, it doesn't require any hatting. You tell the guy to stand there and put this in the envelope and put it over there. So therefore normally all hands operations and so on are relegated to very simple functions. You could make very sophisticated all hands operations, very. You've got a hell of an influx of people into registration, it's an all hands Division Two operation, register them. Now boy, you'd have a division. "We've got to get out five fliers by tomorrow night." What if everybody in dissem could pile into that and they would get out five fliers by tomorrow night, bang, peak load? That'd be quite a division, wouldn't it? So don't just bring your all hands operations down to the idiot simplicity. No, when they're really hatted on all the posts of the department, you can now care for your peak load actions.

Supposing you've got twenty-five people have all of a sudden decided that they had better get their ethics fixed up and they're standing all over the place and you suddenly, the HAS has got an ethics, public ethics backlog of people actually waiting to see the Ethics Officer. That's obviously an all hands operation, certainly an all hands for department three. But supposing everybody in HCO could just handle all that backlog, wham. Gee, every one of them would have to be, have to be hatted as an expert Ethics Officer, wouldn't he? Well, let me tell you something. If you did that, you would have the damndest HCO team you ever met in your life, every one of them would know the post of every other one of them, the amount of dev-t that would occur around there would be absolutely zero. They'd scold each other if anything went out of line, they're holding each other on post.

"You know that girl that you interviewed yesterday and so forth, I saw her go out of here, she's crying and so forth, what the hell, hell of an ethics interview. You must have found the wrong why."

Well, another staff member in HCO would know enough about interviews to know that if he hit the right why he'd get GIs, ethics actions or no ethics actions. In other words, they would be critical as a team of their performance.

So you haven't, I know you've thought that all you had to do was take these five staff members in this position and hat each one of them as specialists and that was it. No, I'm sorry. The job has just begun.

If you had fifteen people in a Dissem Division, every one of them a competent Dissem Sec, you would have the darndest division you ever heard of in your life. Stats would go up through the roof. So the ideal scene would be when you said "org staff member" you had anybody that could hold the post of Executive Director down to janitor, and that would be true of everybody in that org, and they would be a remarkable team. They would hold their posts. You would've all of a sudden built a machine with interchangeable parts if you want to put it into machinery. So that isn't gong, gong, what are we going to do, because we all of a sudden have a big backlog. Now, if you had a whole bunch of auditors and they were running an org and every morning they did their admin duties and every afternoon and evening they did their auditing, they would make a fortune, this is a little org. See? But that is one way to run an org, one way to run one, but they'd also have to be hatted on their admin duties otherwise they'd create enough dev-t that they would jam their auditing production lines, bang.

But that's how you make a team, it isn't by everybody making the same motions simultaneously in an automatic whistle drill. Their attention is really spanned out, their attention is really spanned out. And then you also have a capability of expansion, because you take an ordinary fifty man org that you establish, if you establish an ordinary, common garden variety fifty man org, and you established it very, very well and your FP was always against production and you always made sure that there was an exchange factor in all of the hatting, and you kept doing this and the Esto, the divisional Esto, got himself an assistant Esto for that division, then he got two assistants for the division, then he had a department Esto for each of the departments and he was I/C of the division. This kept getting established and established and always against the idea of production and so forth, the original fifty staff members would be a scarcity of executives. You'd hardly have enough executives to man up the org you'd get, but they would be quite competent because each one of them, as far as these divisions were concerned, would be very well hatted, they would know all about these various divisions, they wouldn't be making funny mistakes.

This is when you say, "He has lots of org experience so therefore he's valuable." Well, that is not quite true. See? What is his lots of org experience? How many posts has he been hatted on in that org, not how many has he held, how many has he been hatted on? Now, that is also not an invitation to throw a bunch of musical chairs. Oh yes, org experience is very valuable but org experience that is well hatted org experience that is interchangeably hatted org experience, that is priceless. And away he goes, away goes your org. If you always hatted a staff member in the realization that you are sooner or later handling a CO, if he'd make it, he was sooner or later going to be a CO, why, you would have the right direction. You always keep that in the background. So that's what we really mean from specialist to general. Alright.

There are a couple if other things that I'd better mention to you, one of them is help. An organization which cannot help anybody, which cannot help another staff member, which cannot help the public, will create flaps and have a tendency to fail. The help factor, the help factor, the willing to assist. Now, this also has to do with cause, what can the individual cause. If the org is full of pcs, if your staff is just pcs, they are people there to be helped, they are not people who can help other people, they are people to be helped, and the org is there to help people, so you've immediately betrayed the purpose of the organization by filling it full of pcs as staff members. Now, that doesn't mean that a staff member can't be audited, but if he's only there to be audited, oh my god, your organization will not be able to help people. You'll see this in small ways. Reception will not really give the directions necessary to reach the registrar, as she can't help people. That point is quite important.

Now there is, there are some areas of the world where orgs do badly just because this is a national button. One of them unfortunately, I hate to have to say it, is South Africa. South Africa for various reasons has difficulties with interpersonal relationships and help. Now, I don't say there's anything in their cultural pattern that does this, it's just those cases all crack on the subject of help. If they would just go back in Joburg right now running the help processes which I gave them down there and was cracking cases with, they would be in clover, because they will crack practically every case in South Africa. That's a gradient, failed help, help. And they have trouble, they have trouble with the rest of the world. The African is a rather sweet guy, actually he's held up as being a terrible monster and all this sort of thing. But he has interpersonal problems, interracial problems, that sort of thing, which keeps him from communicating to all the people around him, and then he has a thetan interchange going all the time. Blacks, they want to be whites but they hate whites so they better pick up a white body so therefore they hate whites, therefore the whites like the blacks so they shouldn't pick them up so they do and then, and so forth. I've said this to South Africans, this isn't anything new.

It is simply this fact, and this fact is of interest, that where an org is having difficulty giving service, its help buttons are out, it's on a failed help. That's why you must train auditors well so they won't fail to help. The guy fails on enough pcs, he stops auditing. Now, I did a lot of research on the South African case and it was right at the time when I was working with this, and I got that, I got it pretty well whipped, and we were doing remarkable things down there. Cases that had been on org lines literally for years, we were mopping them up on failed help and help, in brackets. That was quite, quite devastating, that fitted in with overts as it would be and so on, dowww, and I'll bet you they've lost all that technology. I have a hat of finding lost tech. Now you say I've talked about South Africa and probably blackened their name to some degree, but I haven't. When a society begins to be overpopulated it's help button goes out the bottom. The first symptom of an overpopulated society is the loss of the help button.

Although they talk a lot about welfare in the United States, do you know that it takes about six months to get on to a welfare roll, or did a year or so ago. Christ, it only takes three or four days for a guy to starve. So they look like they're big brother to all the world while making it absolutely impossible, so maybe the president to get votes or something like that, maybe he's pushing this button about welfare and all this and how he's going to take care of everybody and so forth, but his departmental people and the people on the lower echelon are so badly hatted and so out of agreement with this program that about the one thing that a New York downstat who is living in a back tenement doesn't want to see is a social worker. They have a nasty name. Why? Well, they're handling people who want to be helped and they themselves can't help people. And it makes a total ridged, messed up disagreement. It's a mess right from the word go, wrong. I want to be helped/I don't want to help you. Makes a dichotomy. And they stick together and have more fights than the man in the moon, they just create engrams morning, noon and night.

Every time a society begins to overpopulate, its help button goes. You are working now with people in an overpopulated society. The United States is overpopulated. They've talked about explosions and talked about this, but have not found the use of people. A lot of people they call downstats would be perfectly valid good people, if anybody would find a job for them. In South Africa, in South Africa they object really to the heavy overpopulation that they've inherited. They, they've inherited about thirteen million I think it is, something like that, something on the order of oh, I don't know, upwards to a third or a half a million whites who are working like screaming mad to support. The welfare that is given to the Bantu would call into disgrace most of the tales told about the viciousness of the South African. If the South African's doing anything, he's trying to give the country back to the Bantu. There's more and more reserves being established, more and more land acquired for the Bantu, more and more money poured out on welfare for the Bantu. You get that? But the same time that's happening, the help button is somewhat resented. They resent this, they don't like that, so it makes some kind of a ridged up problem.

But you are dealing with people now who are in, the youngsters particularly, an overpopulated society. Now, I can pull my long grey beard and I can tell you that I have seen overpopulated societies and this is how I know this, and that is the common denominator that comes up with them. In China, even this lifetime, as a kid I have watched a Chinese stepping over sick and starving people lying on the sidewalk. The guy isn't begging or anything, he's dying. The population just walks right on by, no skin off their nose. A guy falls off a train, gets his arm cut off under the wheels, train ever stop? No. Human beings are suddenly too cheap, why bother with them? And it makes a rather interesting scene and what's going is the help factor. Well, I've actually seen with my own eyes the wounded brought back from a battle in the north lying bleeding and untended, covering all the whole railroad siding and the railroad station and everything else. No medics, not even a guy there to give them a drink of water. The population, who cares?

Now, that's the way they go when they really get overpopulated, the help button goes. And we're in the help business, so you certainly better know something about this. So an essential part of hatting is the help button. Do you see, you could do a product like a car or you could do a product like something else, but if it's not to be an overt act as a product, it must be of some service to somebody. And to be valuable to somebody it must be of some use to them. So therefore to some degree it must help them. So an essential ingredient of the product is something that helps. You for instance wouldn't for a moment tolerate a pair of shoes that were bad looking and hurt your feet. Now, some of the girls might tolerate a pair of shoes that hurt their feet but were very good looking. But certainly these two combinations wouldn't go, they don't help anybody, they hurt your feet, they don't help you to walk, they don't improve beauty, they don't this, they don't that.

That's a Russian pair of shoes, Russia loves to turn out things like that. Their exchange factor's broken down because they don't have any, anything to exchange things with, there's no money, you can get arrested if you dare exchange something. And so the production isn't in the direction of help so therefore it isn't valuable, and you notice that most of their budget is in war materials, or in silly things like they landed a space ship on the moon and it brought back a ton of dirt, yeah, ooh. You say, "Well, that was all very helpful." No, that's a plot, that was a plot which was planted on Russia and the United States by the nuclear physicists in l945. If they could just get them interested in outer space, they could prevent them from using the atomic bomb for war. And that pressure and that thought is still in among the nuclear physicists and that's how come these budgets are so big. They can build cannon that create very nasty wounds and knock out homes, they can build bombers, they can build all kinds of weird things to destroy the living daylights out of most everybody and they can maybe say well this helps the Russians. I don't know, to help their PR or something.

All war is an expression of failed politics. When the statesman fails, the soldier picks it up. Diplomacy has broken down is the first thing a soldier of past years said when he suddenly was told that he had to get busy. In other words, the diplomats are unhatted so they use soldiers. It sure makes them popular, doesn't it? You can imagine the exchange between Russia and the United States of atom bombs, everybody in the world is rather interested in this these days and trying to prevent such things, they've sort of gone into other types of diplomacy and politics about it, but that's a hell of a thing to blow the bulk of your national budget on, isn't it? Well, in such a country as Russia they can put out money for war materials but they can't make a pair of shoes that a girl would like to have. So exchange is out. Only 2.5 or some such percent of the Russians are communists, you must realize that. That is not a communist country, it is a communist-governed country. Only 2.5%, I think it got up to three once, three percent.

So what's this make, what's this make? This makes a silly scene and it makes a very unhappy world. It's the help button. If you're going to make a stove it's got to help the housewife and she will consider it valuable. If it creates a lot of dev-t for her, she's not going to consider it valuable. If it won't cook, it won't sell. Do you see how this button fits into production? Now, there's all kinds of ramifications to this. You say, "Well, the automotive industry in the United States turns out these millions of cars every year and it's one of the most affluent and biggest industries and so forth they've got." It's shut down factories every year. They forgot to make a car help people. It kills them.

The nuttiest thing anybody ever did was build a car that would wreck, and the last thing that Detroit will listen to is a wreck-less car. But I've seen wreck-less cars, I've seen them on fairgrounds way back. They used to fix up a couple of Fords and they would have a polo match, crash into each other and bang around and so forth like dodgems. They had steel hoops, it didn't matter what you did to them they'd just roll over. So it can be done.

And these cars are polluting the whole atmosphere so you can't even go downtown. That helps people, doesn't it? So they've gotten unpopular. That's why they are closing plants. I think seven of the twelve plants of the Ford motor company were closed a short time ago. And then they say, "Well, let's go around and conduct surveys." Well, they don't have the tech, they don't have the tech that's all. They just make that car more helpful and they'd be all set. Only what did the people consider helpful, they'd have to survey for that, and you would have what people considered valuable.

And that's why I don't see how any organization of ours could ever have any trouble financially, and it really doesn't have any trouble financially as long as it's wearing its hats and doing its job. But five hundred and seventy-six pcs backlogged by sending them all to ethics and that sort of thing, that doesn't help anybody does it? Staff staff auditors doing a quarter crew program, that doesn't help anybody does it? It makes a whole bunch of unfinished programs all through the crew so everybody's sort of standing around and in a daze and colliding with walls and so on because they haven't been brought up through as a product. Word clearing auditors that won't use a word clearing correction list, don't ask me why they won't, I don't know why they won't, I've got to find that why, but every time I see word clearing these days I don't see any word clearing correction list and there's even an HCOB says use it, use it, use it. No. So there must be some help button out. Pc staggers out of a word clearing number one session and goes to the examiner and the TA goes dahhh, and he says, "Dahhh," and so on, and then the CS screams like a banshee because the guy's case has been hung up and so on. What was the matter with them? Can't they use a word clearing correction list? Can't they assess? Can't they use a meter?

So there's another point that you assess, there's another point in your hatting. The guy says, "Well what, what's the product?" "Well, what do you do on your post that would most help people?" And you will find some guys in this civilization at this particular time who aren't about to, they're not about to help people, and so they will turn out an overt product. And your overt product normally traces back to the guy doesn't know how and he doesn't want to help people enough so that he breaks his neck to find out how. So you've got a help button and it's primary, it's sitting right there. So if that staff member does not want to help his fellow staff members, if that staff member is not himself turning out things that will be helpful to people, in other words useful, it really helps them, and if the product isn't believed to be helpful, you haven't got a product. So the second, in one of our organizations or any other organization, you find a lot of staff around who aren't about to help anybody, oh boy, you're going to have a rough time with production. So, it goes all the way through, huh?

Now, a lot of guys in the universities, professors and so on, used to stand around, the professors, never been anyplace to amount to anything, and tell students that they should write for their own satisfaction. Man, that's the stuff you get out of the lower cow pasture with shovels, just to be as crude in comparable magnitude to the crudity of the remark. What's he doing that for? Why did he do that? What's this, an exchange with himself? Well, there are certain things you can exchange with yourself, you say, well I'll fix a good dinner and eat it, but you aren't really exchanging with yourself, you're exchanging with your body. I'll make enough money to buy some clean sheets for my bed and then I'll sleep comfortably. Well, that's fine, yeah, it's fine. You could work out a whole rationale this way. The guy after while has clean sheets up to his woof and what's he got? Do you get it?

So what a person has to have in order to get along is normally imaginary, what he really has to have, and what other people have to have is somewhat illusory and somewhat imaginary. This is in terms of have, meaning in terms of MEST, what MEST people have to have. America's gone mad, it's gone total enMESTified. Now, you're in the business of digging them out of MEST so, if you're in the business of digging people out of MEST why you can get people around who get obsessive at making nothing out of things. They get not-is, not-is, not-is, not-is and they will function very poorly on a production line because their idea of building a tin can would be to smash it. Make nothing, make nothing is not the same as erase it. Do you see? So you can get a, you can get a little ridge going there. It's just that they're operating non-sensibly.

Yeah, a guy ought to erase his bank. What the hell does he want with a bank? The reason you erase a bank is so you can mock something up, only when you mock it up now you can really mock it up if you took it into your head to do so. I was having a hell of a time the other day, I was almost blowing my head off and I couldn't figure out exactly what, I didn't believe I could make a mock-up that solid, and I found out I could. I stopped trying to blow my head off.

But the long and the short of it is, is on the third dynamic, other dynamics, you have interchange, interchange. And by interchange you get a do-ability, and that's one of the basic thetan tricks of do-ability. He wants to go on having something so somebody else had better have mocked it up for him. Now, there's a lot to know about all this, and I'm giving you bits and pieces as they come along, I'll give you one more before I end it off, that has to do really with you and with any staff member.

You realize that study is trying to find out to some degree, but only when you have decided somehow that it is difficult to find out. One of the things that's wrong with student auditors is that they're trying to find out from the pc, trying to find out from the books, trying to find out from the bulletins, and of course it puts them at effect. And they're at effect, effect, effect, effect, effect, effect, effect, effect. You want them at cause. An auditor who is a good auditor audits somewhat in this fashion. He walks over to the wall and pushes the button and the lights go on. He knows if he goes over to the wall and pushes that button the lights will go on, that's all. That's what's known as certainty. He doesn't hope the lights will go on, he knows they will.

Now you in studying, being an Establishment Officer, can go around looking at the staff and trying to find out, you'd better get up to a point where you can try to find out and find out with the greatest of ease and with the greatest relaxedness, because you always can find out. And you are not really trying to learn as much as you are trying to be cause. And you could get into a situation where you can bring about your own overwhelm. You live in a world of data. Data, data, data, data, data, there's lots of data, I'm giving you lots of data on these tapes, it's all valid data. What's saving your bacon is the fact that you're going to see the application of it in very short order and that will put you at cause over it. And when you see an Establishment Officer who is very overwhelmed by it all, then you know that he hasn't been able to find out. He has actually stopped trying to find out because he's just gone bonk. He's created an inflow, inflow, inflow, inflow. But his job is to outflow, he's the fellow who tells them what bulletin, he's the fellow who tells them where they sit, he's the fellow who tells them what they produce. Mixed with all that, you have to find the whys of why they're not doing so, and if you get too puzzled and if you get to inexpert in finding these whys, you get overwhelmed because now you've gone on an inflow, inflow, inflow. Got to have the data, didn't find it; got to have the data, didn't find it; got to have the data, didn't find it, got to have the data, didn't find it.

"I don't know why they won't go together, I don't know what's wrong with that division, I don't know what's wrong with that department, oh my god, I've just been into thirteen and I don't know what the hell is going on in there, I just saw them, they were impolite to me and so snide and they're not doing anything, a couple of guys sitting there and one of them told me to get out." You get the state of mind? So the guy retreats, so the guy retreats.

Now, did you ever try to run backwards and throw a ball? You can't, not very accurately and certainly not with very much force. If you try to throw a ball while running madly backwards, you are doing the same thing as an Establishment Officer who is very overwhelmed, trying to be cause. And it will all stem back to the fact that you didn't get the right why. It'll trace there every time and the right why will be a piece of idiocy you never would have dreamed of. The Data Series is actually a study of illogics because man has never gotten anywhere running logics, right? So if he's never gotten anywhere trying to think on a totally logical pattern, you have to go to the other side of it. In order to study logic you have to know all about illogic. And once you've got illogic, you can solve any problem, you can solve any situation, because all situations are caused by illogics not logics. The idiocies which you find at the bottom of the barrel are so idiotic, they'll make you feel stupid until you find them. I can tell you the common remark you will make will be, "Boy, I was sure dumb. I didn't notice that. I didn't notice that." Well, you needn't really feel that way because what you were looking for was a dumbness, it was so illogical you missed it.

You were wondering and wondering, and wondering and wondering, and wondering and wondering, why we can't keep this course taught, why the supervisors can't be hatted, why nothing comes off the course, why it's such an, oh my god, and you just after a while and there's no success and the guys are just wild, and they're practically blowing up in your face and it's all going to hell in a balloon, and then one day you happen to find out they don't have any packs of any course materials at all, and what the students are sitting around reading is a bunch of culled packs that really belong to another course because they don't… And you say, oh no, nothing like this can happen. That's right, but it does.

They're never little things and they're never anything but big general idiocies. The basic why is always the major outpoint which has all other outpoints as a common denominator and that's the real why, that explains everything. What is this everything? All the other outpoints. What is this major outpoint that explains all other outpoints that I've found in this area? And that could be the definition of a why. So you have to learn how to think like an idiot.

Now, I can see you now, you'll be saying, you'll be sitting there and kind of feeling kind of introverted and wondering about all this, then all of a sudden you say to yourself, "I'll bet they…" and go down and look and I'll be a son of a gun, all the other facts added up to the fact that this one must be true, and you've actually, it's been lying there all the time and you've seen it time and time again, but you didn't think anything could be that stupid. And it's always some huge, enormous piece of stupidity, at outpoint any one of the various outpoints and it explains all other outpoints, that's a common denominator. Once you find that one, all the other ones are dependent on it. It's like finding basic on the chain, the chain goes. So Data Series 23 is a way of life, you actually have to learn to think that way, so that you look over this situation, that situation, the other situation and bang.

"Tell me, is it true that…" "Oh yes, didn't you know that? We always do waff waff waff, yes we saw it, we never go to the bank for the cash before we make the payday, you know?" You say, "Well, what cash do you use?" "Well, we always use the cash that came in from last week and that's why we never pay the bills." And you say, "Well now, let me see…" And then they'll tell you but, "But there's no policy that covers this." Yes there is. In the Sea Org there's one called Stupidity. But you say, "Well, how could anybody make that big a mistake?" That would be from your point of view. And do you know you sometimes find something as dumb as the guy can't see? Well, there's a mad one, see, but it will be a mad one that lies underneath this thing. "Oh yes, I had my Staff Status I and Staff Status II." "Where did you get them?" False report, see. It's very baffling unless you know all about data analysis, and data analysis is following that chain of outpoints which leads you to the idiocy nobody would ever believe.

Now I've seen some mad ones, and you will accumulate some madder ones, but that is no reason to sneer and snort and do this and do that. No. I'm talking now about organizational situations. You say, "Well, I won't be handling organizational situations." Well, yes you will, yes you will because everybody who isn't producing well and doesn't hat easily has a great big outpoint why sitting right there with him as an individual. You will find that nearly all these people who don't hat well are slightly off post. They're either just arriving on post or they're just leaving post or they intend to leave or they're not quite there or they have another post of some sort. You see, it's a not quite on post, that is one of the commonest whys that you will run into. You spend a lot of time hatting this person, they're very cheerfully sitting there being hatted and they're all set and yes, producing and so forth and you say, "Now, why don't you get and write some letters?" And they say, well all of a sudden they say, "Well, I'm actually the Dissem Sec secretary, I'm not the registrar, I just was sitting at this desk." And they let you go through enormous rigamarole before they let you in on something like that.

I've had a, I've had a conference with people going on for an hour and a half of trying desperately to have it, and the guy sitting within three feet of me knew why all the time, he knew all this, he just didn't say. It wasn't that he didn't realize it was why, he knew all this time it was why. He just didn't say. So you very often will run into these things and it is a matter of your expertise that it doesn't wind up and make a cynic out of you. But remember there are more things going right than they are going or the people wouldn't be alive at all. But once you've gotten to the bottom of some of these things, this thing called belief in human nature will be a belief that you hope you have some day. As you follow down an outpoint trail to the major outpoint, the major outpoints are so incredibly, unbelievably stupid that you won't believe it, and that is true for the individual on the post.

Now, that isn't the only why the person is not doing well on post, but it's a very common one. "I was just appointed to this post but I actually have petitioned to go to another post." "Yes, that is true, of course I leave in a week on my year's leave." You've hatted a guy in the line up, but look at this, you've hatted a guy in the line up for a very essential action that's coming up on a program coming up and you come in the next morning and the desk is empty and you say, "What happened?" He's been sent on a mission. It is not a smooth road all the way, but you would be very foolish just to say blankety blank blank and let it drop. There is a why there, probably not with the personnel but with another personnel through another Establishment Officer you can get handled. They don't have any missionaire pool, in fact there are no trained missionaires of any kind whatsoever, in fact we go down the line there's a departmental rule of some kind or another that in some fashion adds up to no missionaires shall be trained. Only it may read this, they have to have their SSI, SSII, OEC, FEBC, and their Commanding Officer hat before they can go to mission school, or something like this. You'll find something mad sitting back of the fact that that desk was empty that morning when you walked in. Got the guy all hatted and now he's gone, trace it back, find the why.

Now, it isn't true that every time you catch a staff member out he has BIs. Now, that was maybe true in an office in Dicken's time and it may be true in a lot of other offices and so on, but he only really has BIs about it if you find the wrong why. And the way to handle this sort of thing and the way to have F/Ning staff members right straight on through, is get them producing, get them exchanging or something with something, producing something that helps people and get exchanging with something. And when you find one of these things, find the right one. And when you find the right one you will get, it might not be too acceptable, it might not be too easy to remedy, but if you run into the right why, it may require a program step to handle it, but it'll open the door to it being handled, you get the right why, you'll get GIs.

Commodore's messengers are trained consistently and continuously to run a message to GIs. They keep going back and going back and going back; I shouldn't have let the cat out of the bag, because people think they turn on some GIs I'll have to instruct them now what false GIs are; until they got GIs and do you know that GIs never really come in until you've got the right why? You've got the really what this situation is all about, then you've got it. Now oddly enough they don't carry all the time nothing but pleasant messages. They sometimes carry some very rough ones and they sometimes are quite wrong in the first punch, but then they bring back material and then they go back and correct that and then they get some more material and then they come back and then they go back. All of a sudden it's worked out, we got the right why, all of a sudden GIs all over the place. When they don't run into GIs there's usually a casualty. The fellow gets sick, they fell off the lines, he will de-post or something like this.

Now, this becomes impossible when the guy is sitting on a withhold. If the guy's committed an overt and is sitting on a withhold and you're trying to find a right why, yaaah look out. So we get around to another fact that you are very often going to be persuaded to do and that is you're going to be persuaded that you should sec-check staff. The truth of the matter is there isn't anything much to sec-checking. It's basically a waste of time because the real criminal does not have an R on the outness and he won't read. He doesn't think it's a crime. He just killed seven babies and robbed ten banks and is plotting to shoot the president and he is so submerged into the rightness of his evil purposes that he won't think there's anything wrong about any part of it, and he won't read on the meter. The meter only catches the good guys and that's what's the matter with sec-checking.

In sessions, as you go along in session, auditing, getting this and that, you start turning on R/Ses, it detects an evil purpose of some kind or another, it doesn't always do it but that's a reliable sign, that's dynamite, lying down underneath that is. But at the same time the guy might be getting audited with a ring on his finger and that'll make him R/S too. So that is reliable but that is auditing and that is taken from an auditing session. Now, it is against the law to shoot somebody for getting off a withhold in auditing. So this is a rough one to that degree. Sec-checking does not save you at all, but the character of the case does. A person who has a low OCA, a person whose TA is wrong, a person whose needle is dirty. The meter check has validity, just a plain meter check has validity. You wonder why this guy is sick, well, his TA rides most of the time around five. That would tell you that much, so you should know the technique of meter checking and you should leave sec-checking alone. "I'm going to get a meter and I'm going to come in here and pull that withhold now." I can hear somebody adventurously saying something like this and then pulling one god awful cropper.

I did it with a staff member, one of my own staff members the other day, only I didn't pull his withhold, I didn't see that the pc was doing, the staff member was doing anything but being rather upset and so forth. So I just sat down and flew the staff member's ruds. Here are the ruds. You always make a worksheet of some kind or another. Here's a card which is a demonstration of the worksheet, this is all it consisted of. ARC break with a long fall and so forth and an earlier similar with a long fall, and found out what it was with a long fall, and then it finally did something vaguely resembling an F/N, loosened up. And then problem, there was no problem on the thing, but this ARC break was behaving very peculiarly and then all of a sudden why, a withhold and long fall and then of course who missed it, and when and how did you know, really who missed it and how did you know are the missed withhold the way it's properly run, F/N VGIs, the person was fine, actually was feeling ill, was upset, was out of sight and so on.

But this was actually cleaning up the upper charge of ARC breaks, checking, well just flew the ruds. You can always fly somebody's ruds when they don't look good. You're not then accusing them of having any kind of a withhold. That needle was surging, surging, surging, long silences and so forth, and the person was actually sitting there wondering if they ought to tell me. I didn't even read it as such, I just thanked the person, that was that. The person brightened all up and was all cheerful and a completely changed staff member. But that was flying all ruds. Now, you could fly all ruds triple, something like that. That would help out enormously. An Esto who can fly ruds would be very helpful, if it doesn't get in the road of anybody's program, unless of course the person is scheduled for interiorization rundown and list repair. Now when you start flying ruds on that guy why you're going to wind the case up in a ball. But you could legitimately fly somebody's ruds or you could get somebody's ruds flown.

Now, you must know how to fly Method 4 word clearing. And there's an HCOB on it, but I don't know how an Esto could live if he couldn't run a meter on the subject of Method 4 word clearing. I wouldn't like to try it. You've been checking this guy out and been checking him out. What are you going to do? You're going to route him over to department thirteen and department thirteen is going to get a fop from the C/S, and the C/S is going to say that he can't be word cleared and then this is going to happen and that's going to happen and so forth and etcetera. And dev-t, dev-t, dev-t, whereas you want this thing now, the guy is obviously sitting there and he doesn't understand something and that not-understood is, if you please, a misunderstood word, and it isn't anything else.

Now, you can have missing technology, it's just all missing, but then the person doesn't look like a misunderstood word, he wants to know and he looks quite bright. Actually, he could probably figure it out if he didn't have a misunderstood word. But I don't know how an Esto could actually function without being able to do Method 4 word clearing, it'd be too time consuming to do otherwise.

"Where on this HCOB do you have a misunderstood word?" "Oh, I don't have, I don't have." "Well, take hold of these cans and we'll check this, and so forth." "That's just a protest read." Yeah, well if, it there really a misunderstood word on that, that blows down. "That's because you're overwhelming me." "Is there a misunderstood word there?" "Why yeah, there is," and there we go. There you've got a combination of a withhold and a misunderstood word. The misunderstood word is the withhold. But you could smoothly find these and iron the thing out.

Now, when I say that a division that has a good Esto has F/Ning people, it will be to the degree that the Esto knows his business. He knows his business, knows how to handle them, keeps them at cause and so forth. Staff members which don't produce will not be F/Ning staff members, that I can assure you. Staff members that are all unhatted and so forth, they'll go criminal, they'll be very unhappy with themselves. Staff members that are all maladjusted on the post and can't do what they're supposed to do and are forbidden to do something else, and got a big problem and a why and is wrapped around a telegraph pole and you find that and so forth, they'll be able to function.

So in the final analysis, it is not the final test by any means whatsoever of the Esto, the final test is the production, but if you can work up toward F/Ning staff members, it'll all come out right on the other end of the line. I know one little office right now on the ship which has one non-F/Ning staff member to such a degree that it's practically wrapped around a telegraph pole and there's inter-office warfare that goes on most of the time, there's something wrong someplace. That probably would come under the heading of a disagreements check, there's disagreement going on. Not disagreement with policy or me, there's disagreement with another staff member, and this other staff member has disagreements with this first staff member. It's not a third party situation, it's just an outright disagreement both ways. It is not even a personality clash. They disagree on the basic procedure on which that jobs should be done and they're at it, they're at each other's throats all the time. Now what would you do there? That would be a disagreements check. This tech is also known. You just ask for disagreements on this, they'll give you the disagreements. You don't tell them what they're disagreeing with.

Then there's third party tech. Somebody is going downhill and he doesn't know whether he's coming or going, you should know third party tech. It might not be that there's an SP in the environment at all time, there may be somebody whose dislike and disagreements of somebody else who's third parties them so consistently that the other guy can't do his job at all. You should recognize what third party tech is. All of this comes on the verge of auditing, it isn't.

I would add to this lexicon of auditing, on this little bit, I would add of course how to supervise TR-0, how to do reach and withdraw, how to supervise those, how to get somebody to this, how to rehab and overrun on it if it occurs; it occurs less often than people say. And I would get, be able to pick up the misunderstood word, I would be able to do disagreement checks, I would be able to know enough about tech to know whether or not he was on a program and what program he was on and so forth, where he was going. As I told you, you had to know something about OCAs, and I would also know how to do assists. I'd have to know how to do contact assists and touch assists and, because you very often find somebody just fell on his head or something like this, get him to do a contact assist why, he feels fine. A contact assist of course can be followed by a touch assist on the same thing, and then oddly enough you can also run out the engram. There are all sorts of wild things that can be done.

So this is just a little, a little auditing package that an Esto should know how to do. If you don't know anything about the ARC triangle and if you don't know anything about that, why, you'd be lost, and of course you know something about that. If you don't, Notes on Lectures or Dianetics 55 would be of great assistance. You can actually get into a situation where, if you don't know how to acknowledge, if your TRs are out, why a staff member will get very upset or he or he will obsessively, long-windedly bring problems to you, you just don't know how to acknowledge. Some people think that they should be good listeners and never say anything back.

This is a little auditing package that'll help you along in your way. I suppose we could put together a checksheet of does this Esto know this and the Esto know that, and we probably will, but it's, it's, these are usually the subject of mini-courses. If you can fly people's ruds, why you've got it made in the shade. The biggest trouble in the United States is schizophrenia, means disassociation, unreality, that sort of thing, it's what the psychiatrist now defines schizophrenia as, all insanity is schizophrenia, everybody in the United States is schizophrenic and etcetera. What they call schizophrenics you could probably handle simply by flying the ruds of. If you just flew the guy's ruds he would cease to be schizophrenic, what they call schizophrenic.

Now, you could go an awful lot further like, "Where would that typewriter be safe?" and you could do an awful lot of things. Office stuff. I used to be able to watch somebody, I could tell what he was wasting and then I'd have him waste it in mock-ups and he would be able to have it after that. This is getting very, very upstairs and this too interfering with the possible program of auditing the person is on. You should however know that it can exist. You find this guy always throws away all the fresh file cards and that sort of thing, you know he has a, an obsession for wasting file cards. Perhaps if you just made him tear a few up and know he was doing it, he would be able to have some.

In the final analysis, you will wind up with an F/Ning staff member, not by the reason of your bit and piece auditing, but by the fact that the guy has now got a grip on it, is now producing and has got his job in a kind of a position where his certainty such that he walks over, pushes the button, the lights go on. When he does so-and-so, bang he's got a product. When he's got that kind of certainty on his job, you'll have an F/Ning staff member, and when you can make staff members like that, you'll be an F/Ning Esto. Thank you very much.

(Thank you, thank you.)

You're welcome.