1.) An organization has a number of REGISTRAR MINUTES to invest. And this determines the number of sign-ups the Organization has.

2.) If the REG INTERVIEW stat is TOO HIGH then the Reg is NOT regging, just saying "Hello", or brushing them off.

3.) This is the "coins" of an Org, the internal economy, the real factors of economy.

4.) The HAS makes them AVAILABLE to be spent. He's in charge of personnel, lines, and spaces, so is in charge of the potential "coins" the org HAS, to spend.

5.) Not "Dollars". They are worthless. No, he's in charge of how many HOURS the HGC can furnish in auditing, how many Instructor minutes, interview minutes, typist minutes, etc.

6.) How long does it take to type a letter, which has been dictated by a reg onto tape, after CF folder study? If you examine this you will see immediately that the org has a "ceiling" of Letters Out, based on the actual time required to do it correctly. Again, too high a stat is "quickly" brush-off or false. Too low, requires better hatting & organization. This is ECONOMY.

7.) I'm NOT talking about this corny Hungarian stunt where they tell Wilson (a US President), "All you've got to do is borrow a hundred million-billion from the International Bank!" That's not ECONOMY. That's CRAP!

8.) We are talking about REAL things - typist minutes, etc. If you ARE working at the "ceiling", the HAS would say that "to get the stat up NOW" would require another team of Letter Reg, 2 typists, a CF Liaison Clerk - 4 people.

9.) And to the degree the HAS sees that their HATS get on, the QUALITY of that production will get very good.

10.) Sometimes we get examples of letters from orgs. Some are quite good. But one was hilarious. It said: "Dear..... ." "You are invited." "Signed.... ." (Laugh) 11.) Their quality could be improved, but I imagine with that short of a letter, their volume was pretty good! (Joke - Laugh).

12.) If it's "enturbulated" in HCO, then HCO does not have control of the lines of the org - obviously.

13.) The calmest, most orderly place in an organization should be HCO.

14.) When the P/O, who deals with observational actions to get products anywhere in the org, and who essentially works without "LINES", finds he HAS to deal with a "line" (to put it in, or correct it) he is now into the province of the Org Officer.

15.) As a Product Officer, if you find yourself having to "borrow" a terminal or "get someone from another post" to assist in getting the product - you DO it, yes, but you ARE in the province of the O/O, and that then MUST be handled by the O/O or the P/O will "drown", or get into even "single-handing".

16.) The lines of the org are under control of the HAS. So the O/O to keep ahead of the P/O, (so he won't find any lines "out") does "DUMMY RUNS" through the lines and drills them. The O/O tries the lines out HIMSELF to see if they work. Then he gets the HAS to handle any outnesses to get the line in permanently, after he has patched it up.

17.) The other way to Dummy Run a line is with "Bullbait" questions: Ex: to Cashier - "I have a 2000 Dollar check here. Can I buy the 200 Dollar course and get it changed here and you give me 1800 in cash?"

18.) The plain "dummy run" tests the LINE. The bullbait "dummy run" tests the TERMINALS.

19.) So the O/O does these, and from the results, furnishes the material or data to the HAS for handling the ESTABLISHMENT.

20.) So, if the HAS were "on the ball", he would run his OWN dummy runs, wouldn't he? (Laugh).

21.) It's actually an I & R function to do a "Dummy Run". (Inspections & Reports). He does Form 1, Dummy Runs, etc.

22.) The O/O is trying to find out if the Establishment is THERE (by doing a Dummy Run), and the HAS is responsible for putting the Establishment there.

23.) One of the troubles the HAS will run into is from FP or Treasury. They say "We don't have any money". Even if it's a lie. It just stops things.

24.) If he runs into that, he should show the "coins" he has - which measure the potential volume of production per department for the Final Valuable Product of the department. These then add up to the FVP's of the org. (And if there are not enough, then expansion will halt at a "ceiling".)

25.) Or if the HAS can furnish 150 Auditing Hours per week, and only 100 are being consumed, there is something wrong in sign-up or delivery areas and the Product Officer is not getting the consumption or creating the "want" to consume all those "coins".

26.) This is why the PR man is needed to work WITH the Product Officer after some expansion has occurred. His job will be to increase the consumption by increasing the "want" and demand for services and products. (He also handles the "Barriers to Production" or HE&R as per FEBC2).

27.) His "outside" public is senior in importance to the "inside" pubic. So he can survey, collect old successful campaigns, re-use them, spot areas of public from earlier times which used to come to the org and don't anymore, and survey and campaign to re-vitalize them, etc.

28.) But it's the HAS who furnishes the "coins" for the increased consumption.

29.) The HAS can go through each department and "cast up" or "figure out" exactly how many potential "coins" the org has which gives the existing potential production scene, and available stats to be made.

30.) An org that runs "accidentally" on "stats", is not being RUN. That ORG is "running" he HAS!

31.) Then his area WILL be confused.

32.) He can carry a "shadow line" on a graph - giving the "ceiling" production in an area - this then tells him immediately who to HAT.

33.) Ex: Org can furnish 150 Auditing Hour "coins". It only furnishes 80 and only 25 are Well Done. He knows at once who to hat, demote, promote, etc. (Reg, Tech Services, Tech Sec, Qual Sec, Cramming Officer, etc.)

34.) So he could map the entire Org's stat ceiling, and if the org wasn't running close to this, he would know something was wrong with the P/O or O/O, as it's INEFFICIENT.

35.) If nine-tenths of the stats were OK and one wasn't this would be recognized and handled by a conference of HAS, P/O, O/O, and Area senior.

36.) So, by stat ceiling, you could measure your Establishment.

37.) If the HAS doesn't have this "map" or analysis of the org by stat "ceilings", he couldn't possibly operate. It's one thing to "put a bus there" and it's another to "get it driven".

38.) The Product Officer is the "bus driver" of the org. His potential and capability is "How many of those coins are spent?" - or "How close is the stat to the stat ceiling?"

39.) That measures the effectiveness of the Divisional P/O or Div Head AND the P/O of the Org.

40.) So when you have the stat of an org AND the stat "ceilings", no matter whether the org is large or small, you have the effectiveness of the HAS, the O/O, and the P/O.

41.) The Product Officer who can turn out more COMPLETIONS per unit of auditing time, without going "quicky", he's a GOOD P/O!

42.) The P/O UTILIZES the coins of the org to get Products.

43.) Ex: A Product Officer surveys to find out how many incomplete courses and grades people have. Then gets them all to finish the one they are closest to completing. The completions stat shoot up. (Then a dirty trick would be to turn over the hat to another P/O and pretend to have "status" because HE couldn't do it, too.)

44.) You can always find "1/2 done", or "nearly done" products lying around.

45.) So the HAS puts the potential for production there, and the P/O makes it produce. When these are in "phase", both quality and quantity are good.

46.) The P/O who wants to expand the Establishment so it can get more production, better have his "Special Projects" area going. Surveys, pilots, etc. Then when successful, they are incorporated into the organization and the flow increases, and the consumption increases.

47.) I could shoot some of these Execs, who, every time I come out with some new tech developement, they drop ALL existing organization lines and put it all into the "new" thing. No, No! You pilot it in, while keeping the existing lines going.

48.) When somebody tries to grab only the "latest and greatest" and drop the old, just say: "The law of gravity didn't go out just because it was discovered in 1649."

49.) Just because we have the FEBC, we haven't antiquated the org board. What org board did we go back to? The BEST PRODUCTION ORG BOARD, which was 1967.

50.) We are putting the cream on top of this cake now.

51.) It is a "nuttiness", that makes people not use "yesterdays" process because they have a new one "today".

52.) You will find that a product officer will make all of his cash out of YESTERDAY'S DEVELOPEMENTS.

53.) I have some new rundowns now that I don't dare release to orgs because they just are not good enough to do them and would flub. (XDN, L 9, 10, 11,12.)

54.) Another example is when we released the Class VIII Course. It took 3 weeks on Flag to do it. Now they have added to it in AO's so that it goes on & on & on. I think you have to get to be 90 years old now to finish it.

55.) So a Product Officer can WASTE his resources, by ADDING or SUBTRACTING.

56.) By making it "ENDLESS" or "QUICKLY", you get a no, or overt, product.

57.) DON'T let people tell you that "you won't get any money" by finishing up courses and grades already paid for. You can't RE-SIGN them unless they finish what they are on. And you need the RESULTS from the completion for promotion, success, AND as further resources.

58.) The Product Officer makes CAPITAL out of the "coins" and INCOMPLETE PRODUCTS that he finds lying around.

59.) The Class VIII Course here was 3 weeks. We taught it with ferocity. Being "thrown overboard" was the "badge of the VIII". It was VERY successful. (We surveyed this among all VIII's and only 2 brought up the point about overboards as being too harsh.)

(Note: The Original Class VIII Course students were given the choice: To do Lower Conditions formulas for every Gross Auditing Error they made, (which took at least 72 hours to do - OFF course) - or to be symbolically "cleaned" of the overt on the pc by being thrown overboard. ALL chose to do the overboards for auditing flubs.)

60.) Although it's bad PR to bring up a "flap" - we did it and we DID have a COURSE. Now why didn't people go on teaching it?

61.) No, they added EVERY bulletin that came out afterwards to the VIII!

62.) It got longer and longer. What would be the P/O's reaction to this? THEY WERE WASTING STUDENT HOURS AND INSTRUCTOR MINUTES!

63.) They were throwing away the "COINS" AND throwing away CASH.

64.) ALSO, they added a RETRAIN on SHSBC bulletins! VIABILITY went out the window at this point. Why?

65.) THE PRICE of an VIII Course is now covering the SHSBC, VIII MATERIALS, and all the stuff SINCE!

66.) What should occur is:

A.) Need an SHSBC retread? OK. We give it - AND CHARGE THE SH who gave the flubby SHSBC in the first place. Well, VERY shortly they will cease to give flubby SHSBC Courses!

B.) The VIII Course is 3 weeks long. He does it, and goes back home as Class VIII. That's really something!

C.) There is a band of HCOB's, that start just before the Exteriorization RD and runs to about the middle of 1970, which is a IX Course.

67.) There IS something to know, and we've NOW made Cl. 8's and 9's into Class 10's, bringing it on up to the current HCOB's & RDs.

68.) A Class IV, for example, will make a mess out of an Exteriorization RD. The Ext. RD should only be done by Class IX's.

69.) Right now we are losing coins every minute the IX Course is not out there. Over-long Courses burn up not only the "coins" of the org delivering them but also of the org where the student is FROM. They are losing his SERVICES back home. So it's DOUBLY wasteful.

70.) So the Product Officer's "think" on all this is "how much is it COSTING in terms of the COINS OF THE ORG to deliver", not just "is the "price" or "fee" for the course too low or too high".

71.) A good campaign I recently did was the public one of "anyone that had DN auditing". It was to get them to take a DN COURSE "to fully realize all the gains possible". (+ Success stories on it.)

(Note: 50% Gains from Auditing, 50% Gains from Training; and ANOTHER 50% from Application.)

72.) It's easier to furnish "course minutes" than "auditing minutes". And if you don't have auditors, you MUST have Courses to train some.

73.) So this is the "spending" of the "coins". But who puts them there? The HAS. And if he doesn't have "coins" or "reserve Pools of resources" his post is a mess. It's almost unhandlable.

74.) A good HAS will plan to put more 2 coins" into the org - say, 500 more Auditing Hrs + Tech Sers + C/Sing 60 da and then tell the Product Officer to get them consumed by the time they are operating. Wow - that's another way of looking at an org, eh?

75.) So the burden of the HAS is great: He furnishes the "coins" to be spent. He provides the "reserve coins" to be spent. And the REAL "coins of the organization are NOT the "Dollars", although if you don't get EXCHANGE for your services you will fail also.

(In other words, there are MANY ways to FAIL in an organization and one of them is just not getting exchange, but the more IMPORTANT one is not being able to produce or deliver!)

76.) Now we get into the field of 3RD DYNAMIC AUDITING: Do you think a pc would get enturbulated if you never finished a cycle of action on him? Yes! Well, what about an org? It's the same. An Administrator needs ADMINISTRATIVE TR'S to cut through all the noise and chatter and get the action DONE that he has specified TO BE DONE.

77.) It works on the basis of "Stable Datum and Confusion". The Stable Datum aligns the Confusion. It's from "Problems of Work".

78.) The HATTED person CAN stand up to the confusion and the UNHATTED person CAN'T.

79.) So to get the confusion OUT of an organization, you HAT the people.

80.) It's the "inability to confront a confusion" that wrecks an Administrator.

81.) So that's why he "squirrels". It's like in auditing we had to put in the Question: "What did you do?" whenever an auditor said "That didn't work". Then you find out he DIDN'T do the process. TR O was out. Now we are putting that in on the 3rd Dynamic.

82.) "What confusion can you confront?" And "Into what confusion can you HAT?" That is the test of an administrator and of a HAS.

83.) If he can't confront the confusion, he will just blow off of it and squirrel.

84.) I train the messengers to confront these conflicts and confusions: We have three "strata" of personnel here: recruits, students, and veterans, I always know, when we've given a "carried intention" or "order via messenger", if the person is a recruit, because the messenger comes back and says: "He's explaining". (Explaining why it CAN'T be done).

85.) Then I just go to the SENIOR echelon and get it done - and the person (recruit) better hatted and out of Danger.

86.) The hattedness on this ship is usually excellent. But also I know where it isn't.

87.) So you can have "bank" on the 3rd Dynamic. It expresses itself (or dramatizes) as Confusion, Dev-T, out-lines, unhatted terminals, dropped functions, backlogs & non-compliance.

88.) The HAS therefore must be able to confront any amount of confusion, know policy on the area, and know what hat goes on which person and how fast to do it and when to do it.

89.) Then you also get the reverse. TOTAL DEDICATION to a dispatch line. All hell is breaking loose on his post and he is sitting comfortably, handling his stale-dated in-basket as slowly as possible. 90.) So HASes, and ESPECIALLY ED's, P/O's, and O/O's - each MUST know his TR O, and use his knowledge of policy and what is supposed to be happening, his Stable Data & Confusion Tech, and how to get the stable data of a HAT on to someone in a confusion.

91.) He doesn't get into arguments - he just puts on the HAT which aligns the confusion. Then he checks back to see if it's still being worn. He handles the TERMINAL, connects up the LINES, and gets the FUNCTION done.

92.) Now sometimes in a SO Mission, the mission goes in, the org does what it says, conditions improve, and the mission leaves. Then the org reverts back to doing whatever it pleases and conditions worsen. In other words, the Ethics presence was not Extensional.

93.) Now that would mean essentially that the place couldn't confront its OWN confusion. So you have to teach an org to confront its OWN confusion.

94.) You are about to see "bullbaited administrative TR's". Ex: Two tables, 3 people around each, a piece of paper on one table. The 3 people there unwilling to move the paper. The three at the other table unwilling to receive it. The student must get the paper from one table to the other - by intention - and command and ethics presence.

95.) Or bullbaited putting on a "hat" - a cardboard hat - with the person resisting having the hat put on.

96.) So "HCO brings order". That is the DRILL that brings order, because you are dealing with hats, lines, space, products, motions which produce products, organizational actions, filing actions, etc.

97.) One should have sense enough when going into an organization area that IS running correctly, to back out and close the door! But also enough confront that when it's NOT running right to NOT back out and close the door.

98.) So the HAS puts the Establishment there. An Establishment is an ORDERLY ARRANGEMENT. If HCO can't do this it brings DISORDER into the org.

99.) That might not be FULLY expressed in "old" policy, but policy doesn't violate it.

100.) These "old" policies are STILL VALID - you know the ones that came out "yesterday" and should be "reissued" - (Joke) (Laugh).

101.) The truth is: If you don't have a stable point, a "focal point" of stability on an org, you will only have an ENTURBULATED org, and no production "coins" to spend.

102.) So your real "coins", your real "wealth", is KNOWLEDGE and the time, actions, and ability to bring about what that knowledge can do.

103.) We had an organization office many, many years in San Francisco calling themselves the "Psychology Consultants". What do you think happened" - They went broke. A horrible disorder. The information they were exporting wasn't even being used where they were! They were very individuated out from things.... .

104.) So what do you have in HCO. Just what the motto says: "Bring Order". But what is "bringing order"? Putting in STABLE DATA, and stringing the LINES, in SPITE of the confusion.

105.) An HCO, doing well, may feel like a telephone line man stringing lines in a battle. He CAN do it. But DOES he string the lines, or Q & A with the battle?

106.) Ex: HAS goes down to handle Reg Lines. Asks (a wide open question) "What is the trouble with the Reg lines?" Answer: "We don't have any new carpets. FP wouldn't approve them. Bessie Ann wouldn't OK the P/O." HAS goes off to see Bessie Ann. FLUNK. Q & A. That's a non-sequiter "explanation" and has nothing to do with the Reg Lines!

107.) Now multiply this about 500 times per day in the org and a HAS'es life is utterly unlivable!

108.) And if I was a HAS, and a staff walked in and asked about his brother's "petitation for free rehabs", I'm afraid I would say: "What is your post? What are you supposed to be doing at this moment? What traffic haven't you handled? What products haven't you gotten today?" His question for info should have been written and sent to the Letter Reg in the first place!

109.) 90% of an ED's function is ROUTING. He has to know this BETTER than anyone in the org. But ALL staff must know ROUTING of particles.

110.) The ED not only must KNOW the Routings but also often must establish the channel (line) something is to be routed ON.

111.) A tremendous quantity of stuff will come through any post early on and most of it just requires ROUTING.

112.) Most of the stuff in your "Pending" Basket doesn't even belong to you, it's been misrouted.

113.) You can go thru a pending basket on the basis of "It isn't mine" and look it over and route it correctly. You didn't know what to do with it BECAUSE it wasn't yours. (If you know your OWN hat.)

114.) It also tells you there are people around who don't know routing, and others have this problem too. So your action would be to get them all checked out on a Basic Staff Hat.

115.) And "Chinese School" on the Org Board and a few other basics.

116.) We DO have the processes necessary to resolve the confusion. They do exist. Who RUNS these processes? The HAS.

117.) The HAS is the "auditor of the org". But he doesn't run the "org" out, he runs the "confusion" or "Bank" OUT OF IT.

118.) The auditor reduces the "bank" to nothing and puts the PC there as a Clear Thetan or OT.

The HAS reduces the "confusion" to nothing and puts the ORG there as a Clear or OT Org.

119.) An HAS who can't do Creative Processing won't be very successful, I could say.

120.) And if his TR O is bad, so that he Q's & A's, he won't be very successful.

121.) So these are the Requirements of a HAS or "auditor to the Org".

A.) He can mock things up.

B.) He can hold a position in space.

C.) He can fix things

D.) He does know "Confusion and the Stable Datum".

E.) He is determined "to bring Order" regardless of what.

F.) He is determined to make the lines go in and on out to other areas, and can straighten them up when needed.

G.) He is determined to put the Organization there and bring order in it.

H.) He can confront a confusion without Q & Aing.

I.) He can HAT somebody. Then he is quite a guy and a TREASURE to the org.

122.) HCO personnel are so rare - because these abilities are rare. Because he is basically an "Auditor to the Org". He audits out all the Confusions in the Organization, and that's HOW he "Brings Order".

123.) Now, what are his duties? To put the Establishment there.

124.) How much Establishment? How much he can AFFORD to put there.

125.) How does he figure out this Establishment? He figures it out in terms of Production that will result in the greatest return to the Organization, so he can put some MORE Establishment there.

126.) And why does he put more Establishment there? So he can put MORE Establishment there. (Etc., Etc. = EXPANSION)

127.) Most people think HCO is just for delivering messages or comm because they don't know IT IS THE CENTRAL HUB FROM WHICH ORDER IS BROUGHT.

128.) And you can't bring very much order over a long period of time unless you have messengers.

129.) I suppose next I will be talking next about HCO Dept. 1 - in sections, then Dept. 2 - in sections, then 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20. 21 - and then chase all of your confusion all the way off the other end of the Org Board. But that would be sort of greedy. It would take all your "goodies" away from you.

130.) It is YOU I expect to chase the confusion all the way down and off the other end of the org board. All the confusion you have had in the past - with ORDER following all the way along the line, VIABILITY rising, and the PLANET in your laps.

131.) Thank you very much. Good night.

1. RECOGNITION 2. COMMUNICATION 3. PERCEPTION 4. ORIENTATION 5. UNDERSTANDINGS 6. ENLIGHTENMENT 7. ENERGY 8. ADJUSTMENT 9. BODY 10. PREDICTION 11. ACTIVITY 12. PRODUCTION 13. RESULT 14. REVIEW 15. ABILITY 16. PURPOSES 17. CLEARING 18. REALIZATION 19. CONDITIONS 20. EXISTENCE 21. SOURCE

(The "Recognition" to "Source" cycle.)

1.) COMMUNICATION 2.) DISSEMINATION 3.) TREASURY or EXCHANGE 4.) TECHNICAL 5.) QUALIFICATIONS 6.) DISTRIBUTION 7.) EXECUTIVE