Alright, this is the second lecture, seventeen, eighteen January. Second lecture eighteen January, 1971. And this is the product org officer system.

There has not been at this time, sufficient time, I have not had actually sufficient work time to write up all of the material which has been developed in this particular field. And the material is considerable. There has been considerable development which is not at this moment recorded. You will find then, at this time, that what I am giving you are the basics, and these you will not find changing. These basics are not going to be changing, but you will find that this area will develop.

Now the first facts of the case are again, that a small group which is well organized, has good technology, and has good data collection and services of that type, and applies what it knows, can not only survive but can make considerable progress. But I again tell you that organized technology.

Now the technology we have, without any thought at all; we can make the sane saner and the insane sane, and the breakthrough which exists here technically is so strong that it actually cuts though the normal protective mechanisms of the mind, wham, wham. And that the use of this material by any but a well organized, well disciplined group would be very fatal, quite lethal. And therefore we're in the peculiar position now of not being able to export all the technology we have, because the areas into which we would export it, and the orgs into which we export it are insufficiently organized to be able to handle and control it.

Now our organizational technology suffered mainly by not being known. People say, "There must be something wrong with the org board if something or other, something or other," and then you go around and you ask the staff, "Where is the org board posted?" and they look at you, "Org board? Oh yes, oh we have a good org board. Yes, it's uh…" And you go in and you find something that's a year out of date and not general use, it was the ignorance of the subject. So it is ignorance of the technology which we have which is our greatest bug bear.

To overcome this we have improved tremendously now, merely by assembly of what we already knew, the technology of how you teach a course. The course supervisor check sheet that has just been developed, and certain things of that character are direct and immediate improvements, which make it possible for an area to train its auditors better, and train them so they can get results. And then when they have gotten results with the material they have, make it possible to put in a special department, a department of special cases. It doesn't matter how many, by the way, departments a division four has, you see? A department of special cases in division four, and then new auditors can be brought on and trained, not the auditors who were there in the org at the time. I'm very sorry, you will find that they are very, very necessary because no technology disappears under this. A new set of auditors can be brought in, trained up, auditors can be graduated up and so on, and they become your class ten special cases auditors. They can crack any case that walks up the walk, if he'll sit still, or if anybody can hold him down long enough to get the cans in his hand or tie them to his feet.

Now some of you here have had something of this new technology. It came actually from the OT grades. Why, it answers the question of, "Why does an OT restrain himself and cease to behave as an OT?" It works best in that band, but it also works at the lower end of the band. That's why we're pushing a crew up at the present moment, all the way on up as fast as we can push them up, so that when we give them the technology they can go for broke. It works better at the top end of the band than it does the bottom end of the band, but it works at either end of the band.

So, I doubt any of you have had the questionable pleasure of being insane, and so you probably would not be able to experience the tremendous resurgence which a person gets when he suddenly turns sane. It's quite miraculous. But that is residual in this technology, and occurs rather routinely. And I think we're probably the only group in the universe, as far as I know, knowing the back track, who can do this. Now that is on an individual basis, so you have individual technology now which turns the sick well, the insane, turns them sane, and make a one life being, immortal. Otherwise the technology doesn't have very many targets.

Now we're actually sitting here with this technology. Now what do you do with the technology? Of course you could go off and forget about the technology, and that would be about the greatest overt that anybody ever pulled. The overt of omission. We happen to find ourselves on a planet which has a rather unsavory reputation, and amongst planets would be looked upon as a sort of an Alcatraz, and was a dumping ground. So there is a tremendous need for such a technology here, but it is actually going into the teeth of a planet that is not entirely sane.

About ten to twenty percent, unbeknownst to statisticians, and I can't tell you exactly what the percentage is out in the general public because I haven't surveyed it, but I would just say by estimation it's ten to twenty percent of the at large, walking around population is stark, staring mad. The other eighty to ninety percent, whatever that factor is, are quite sane, but are so caved in by the mad ones that the society has an awful time getting off the launching pad. And you get a cultural boom/decay cycle, which has been going on now for many thousands of years. A culture just about gets going, and then a few of these mad men swing into it, and the next thing you know, why she goes up in smoke. It's just the madness of the later day Roman emperors is an example of this. And the Roman culture of course caved right on in. And it was supplanted by religious culture.

Now we've got a boom/depression then in terms of cultures. At this particular time and place we have an opportunity because of many factors which have combined. We have an opportunity to make a very definite line plunge, to use football terms, or to make a very definite forward push in this. It is rather optimum at this particular time. We're in, for some reason or other, a period of peace, and it's the culture is on the way down, and it's just a little bit touch and go. They give us several, we've had several of these little touch and go things. Like there are a bunch of guys monkeying around with this peace/war button, you know? And should we have a war or should we have peace? Well, they've moved in on the button again, and then they go off of it. Well of course, a war would just finish any human communication and cultural lines on which anything can travel. So therefore, we don't really have all the time there is. We can't really sit around on our hands and do nothing. Furthermore, the planet could be expected to resist any such movement, because the most resistance you get toward being cured by anyone is an insane person. An insane person will resist being cured harder than anybody ever heard of, because he knows everybody is Martians and they're all out to get him. And he knows there's no help, and so on. Of course, that's what makes him insane.

A certain number of these on the planet, in high positions, bring about the conditions known as war, and so on. Now recently we traced, by the way, how a person moves from the lower stratas of the society up to an executive position or a political position of magnitude. You can see the pattern of it can be seen in your own org. A person cannot hold the job of central files clerk, and he argues and argues, and finally moves himself over to some other portion of the org. There's very few people in that portion of the org, so he gets an IC, in charge of something, then there isn't anybody else around, and he seems to be very active. And he becomes a departmental head. He becomes a departmental head by accident, and he actually is pushing himself up.

Now he has, he doesn't have the motivation of helping others, he just has the motivation of protecting himself. And the higher he rises on the pyramid, the more he thinks he will be protected. That's part of his insanity. You get up to the top of the pyramid you spend ninety percent of your time ducking bullets.

But the facts of the case are that there is a sort of a system by which a person who can't hold any post winds up with a very high post. I don't, for instance, know what the current president of the United States would be able to do in a law court, I don't think he's ever been able to do anything in a law court, but here he is in the political arena. Most of these fellows who are in the political arena have never studied government, never. They wouldn't know what you meant, they wouldn't know you're talking about. Yet there is a technology of government. But these are politicians, why are they there? Usually there for their friends, and so on. This makes a rather queasy scene in which to operate.

Now the answer to this operation is to be as efficient as all god holy hell. And you have administrative technology which is sharp as the teeth of a bear trap. And what you're doing with your own technology must be very effective indeed, and you must be able to pick up and use data available, and control the human emotion factor in your immediate vicinity.

In other words, if you're tremendously well organized you can not only survive but you can expand. But what you have to know in order to do this, and what the technology has to consist of, and how well you have to know the technology exactly determines the amount of expansion you are going to attain. Given the technology, it will only be because you do not have total knowledge of it, or expertise with it, that would cause one to fail.

Now you can have a staff which isn't hatted, and no matter how clever you are, they'll manage to make you fail. They don't really know there's anything there. So therefore, it isn't enough for you as an executive to know how to do all this, you've got to be able to relay it, train it, check people out on it, and handle it. So a general knowledge, a particular and very broad knowledge is required of any person who is regulating any group.

Mary Sue got together some estimates here, and she says, "Based upon recent figures in relationship to the training of executive directors, it takes approximately three hundred and sixty hours to make an administrative expert in nine divisions. Therefore, it would take roughly the following hours to train various organizational personnel. One hundred and twenty hours, an executive secretary or expert in three divisions. Forty hours, a divisional secretary and expert in one division. Thirteen and a half hours, a department head and expert in one third of a division, three hours, a section head and expert in one fifth of a department. With staff training hours of two and a half hours per day, it would roughly take the following number of days: An executive secretary, forty-eight days, a divisional secretary, sixteen days, a department head, six days, and a section head, two days. But therefore you'd have to be determined that these fellows do get trained, and you would have to have some program by which these people did check out, and you'd have to have some system by which they did have some understanding of the hat and duties they were wearing." Is that agreed? You'd have to have that, wouldn't you?

Well supposing you did all this. And you use this scale, and you got everybody in your org hatted. Almost unimaginably, almost unattainable. You always have one or two guys sitting around someplace that can't find their hat and never did have a hat.

Now if all of this was going on, and if somebody was putting their hats on and that sort of thing, I'm afraid you still wouldn't have anything, because the other side of the coin is production. Now what is all of this training and so forth about? Is it to attain production? That is what that is all about. So, the other half of this coin, production, supported by the first half of this coin, organization, gives us the coin. And we have what you could call the product officer/org officer system.

Now undoubtedly this will be shortened up. We can't call it a PO system because that means purchase order. We might very well hear it called the prod-off system. But I've simply been calling it the product officer/organizing officer system.

Actually however else these things are stated, or what words you used, it is exactly this. It's the product officer, not the production officer. These are the niceties of it. The product officer, and the organizing officer.

Now the first thing we run into by the introduction of this system is the question of, "Is production necessary?" The org series, as the org series goes back it speaks of this, and I've had a letter or two and a DR. It makes it look like a very exhausted world would be the result of this. Nobody ever says anything to me that bluntly. There's just a little bit of a curve on it. And this idea of production unfortunately carries with it the label which has been given to it by the communist who has tried to get at the bosses of their existing society as production monsters, who are sweating the last drop of production out of the poor, suffering worker. And we have gotten into a period where that orientation occurs. And now I'll tell you the cream of the jest, the jest has real cream on it. It's the primary production problem of Russia is how to get production out of the poor worker! And the Russian is now going mad, and he even brought a whole bunch of guys back from Siberia and so forth, because they knew something about production. He started going mad. And the top men in the Presidium these days are ex-production officers, because it is such a crucial problem in the Soviet Union. Kruschev, he'd sit down; I don't know whether he would have talked to you much about politics, but if you had mentioned something about the electric light plants he would tell you exactly how you should get production out of an electric light plant. Brrrrr.

Now the capitalist society deifies the money lender, or the money haver, and tends to down grade the producer. And the production man, by title in a plant, is not the general manager, he's not even the general manager's assistant. The plant manager has a production man. It's about eighteen echelons down the line, because for some reason or other, the guy who inherits the money was king. Throughout the nineteenth century the social stratas, and so forth, are not quite straight.

The whole field; you get into this in a non-production oriented society. The whole field of psychiatry and psychology and so on stunk to high heaven, simply because they had no production orientation whatsoever. They merely had status orientation. And the thing that makes these guys insufferable is they have status. One of the things that makes a Spanish official rather insufferable is he has status. And they have status and they look around, and it's status, status, status. But it's status based on nothing. A Spanish engineer gets a certificate as an engineer and he never has to engineer for the rest of his life. That's what's wrong with these birds. I'm a line man, I think there was one once that graduated some time or other that did produce something. They produced revolution.

But here, here is a subject. Now the reason I'm making these little comments on it, it has many ramifications. And in studying the org series, and in studying this which I assume you all would have done up to this point, since this is additional org series material which I am giving you. You, possibly the question has passed you mind, "Production, well it's not too popular. It's, I wonder. It seems to be a strange orientation." So you find yourself in a position actually, if you're trying to get production you will usually face to some tiny degree some little resistance to production as a subject, because it has been subjected to so much propaganda, and because it sometimes requires some sweat. And the guys who are objecting to this are the birds who hoped that they would be able to hide in the coat closet while everybody else worked anyway.

This then, there are social or human reaction factors connected to the subject of production itself, just as a word, as a name, or an activity. You must face that. It is a subject which is able to paralyze the economy of the United States for months on end, is paralyzing right now the subject. The entire British postal system right at the present moment, labor management relations, General Motors in the United States, weeks or months of strike. The largest business in the United States totally paralyzed, tied up. Management's saying, "Produce," and the worker is saying, "Wages, wages, cash, cash, cash."

Now one of the things that you will run into perpetually and continuously is you're talking to somebody about production, and he's talking to you about wages. He's talking to you about return for production. These subjects do not necessarily have anything whatsoever to do with each other. They are a non-sequitur. And that's why there's so much problem on it, because the term opterm really doesn't match.

Now what is this subject? What is this subject that doesn't have to do with wages, and company contracts, and then what the hell is this subject? Well now, you hold your head, hold your head on, because this will blow it. Production is the basis of morale. In the absence of production you will have problems in morale. The cure for morale is production.

Alright, now let's give us some actual actions here. What has happened? Some things that have happened here. Cases and staff morale, the PL, the F/N, VGI PL, they're perfectly true. But that's out of the field of first dynamic tech. Now because it says staff morale tends to throw it over into third dynamic tech. Cases and staff morale is perfectly true from the viewpoint of a C/S. The number of people that you have doing F/N, VGI at the examiner's will, to a marked degree, determine your staff morale. And after you've got a hundred percent F/N, VGIs at the examiner, you have accomplished staff morale on the first dynamic. And your organization is liable to be a bogged mess.

So we say, "Alright, we will have to get on," you see to have no staff auditors of any kind whatsoever would be fatal. So, we say, "We'll have to get on some auditors, and they'd better audit the staff and get all the staff up to F/N, VGI status." So we do that. And the org falls apart. They got morale on the first, but not on the third.

Now the funny part of it is, they really don't have morale on the first. They just have morale about that part of the first which is their case. Now it works this way on the management cycle. If they're having a great deal of trouble with their case trying to pull them up much further than that is very difficult. So you start with the first factor of the management cycle having to do with where you're really having trouble as an org officer, dealing with the person's case. That's just the beginning. That's the first step up.

Now let me give you, let me give you the sixty-four dollar punch now. Hold your head. If the individual is auditing, the auditor is auditing a pc and he has a win, the auditor's morale is good. Right? Do you agree with that? Hm? Alright. Now if he audits the pc and he has a lose, the auditor's morale is bad. Right? Alright, good. The monitoring factor is clothed in this ugly word production. He's accomplished something. Production is the evidence of the demonstration of competence.

Now after you've gotten all the case gain there is, how do you get any other gain? That's an interesting question, isn't it? Well actually it goes case gain, right up on the line to a cross line, and from there on it is competence. Competence is what gives the case gain. And you say, "Well look, somebody flying around out here on a, doing a good job on a set of water skis and so forth, appears to be very happy and so forth." He is merely engaged in the exhibition of competence. His morale is up because he is making an expert demonstration of water skiing. When he falls in front of the large crowd…

I saw the sorriest sight I ever hope to see in my life. It was a command performance before the queen. And there was a clown who had waited all of his life; he was a tight wire clown; and he'd waited all of his life for a command performance. The lights went up, the drums rolled, the clown with his umbrella and his baggy pants climbs up. Gets onto the tight wire and starts across the tight wire. There he is, total exhibition of competence, twirling an umbrella between his legs and over his head, and dancing on the wire. And at that moment the apparatus collapsed. They killed the lights, and in that dark blackness removed him from the scene. Seen afterwards in the dressing room he was one of the saddest, sorriest looking fellows you ever saw in your life. Exhibition of competence. Production is an exhibition of competence, an exercise of competence.

Play can become eventually very boring, because it has no cycle which proves the competence. No cycle there at all. So, he skied on water skis, so the crowd cheered. So he had to ski on water skis so the crowd cheered. What's he got? Nothing. But his morale went up because he exhibited competence.

Now production actually confirms it. One time in a bunch of actors, a bunch of actors were under training. And they were just hammered and pounded, and pounded and hammered. These were Hollywood actors, starlets and that sort of thing, going to be the stars of tomorrow and so on, in a theatrical training group used by the big studios. And they hammered and pounded those poor guys. The most invalidating, mean, snarling; my god, no stage director would ever be as mean as those instructors were. Sarcastic, weird mimicry, awful. After about three months of it, these actors became utterly impervious to it, and were able to exhibit competence to their own complete and their group satisfaction, regardless of what anybody said. They got so they knew competence. They knew competence in themselves. Their morale came way up, they became very cocky. So their morale wasn't necessarily built by everybody being nice to them.

PR is not necessarily being nice. To bring people out of apathy the PR campaign would be fear. Demonstration of competence. Now I've had a couple of busts by commodore's messengers here. They were tricked by a piece of electronic equipment and so on. And you never saw anybody look so woebegone in their lives, and drag around for the next day or so. But these young characters actually have their own concept of competence. It is fairly high. You don't often see some of the hills they're put to climb. You probably see them going back and forth sometime, you see them, they go down the ladder and that way, and then they come back. And then they go down the ladder and that way, and then they come back. And then they go down the ladder and that way, and they come back. And then they go down the ladder that way and they come back. Have you ever seen this? Maybe some of you have been subjected to it. What is actually going on is they're being asked to accumulate data, ask questions, find out what the score is, get an order across, find out what's happening, and be able to relay the thing back. So that a situation can be estimated, and if there is no situation, dropped, or if it's there, handled, or some future planning.

Usually a CO or executive director hat is basically a planning coordination hat. A planning coordination hat is the real place where planning belongs. It belongs in the executive director's lap. And the coordination can only be done from that status. So you've seen one of these characters go back and forth, back and forth. Now, very few, and there've been quite a few on that post, failed to eventually get a certain amount of aplomb. And their aplomb and their morale and so on, rises considerably out of proportion to their age. You've just seen one go out of here on a mission. Now I imagine there was a little ripple of shock through the ship when all of a sudden, "That little kid is going out as a missionaire." Well that little kid can confront more dumb explanations and more bad data, and more false reports and know what to make out of them. They got together one day and they put together a little roster of everybody on the ship that didn't know what they were doing, because they never gave them any kind of an answer but an explanation.

Their confront on the third dynamic is very, very high. They continuously exhibited competence, and it reflects in their morale. Now one or two have tried to make the grade, and they haven't actually gotten into the run yet, and their competence didn't match it. And they had a rough time. Momentary, we'll catch them some other time. But competence doesn't just go, your case gain goes up to this line, and then from there on up it is competence. Actually the competence sets in coincident with the case gain. Then the demonstration of competence is the basic factor of morale. And production is the evidence of competence.

So in production one gets an exhibition of competence and its evidence. If you want a high morale activity, get them to produce. If you want a low morale activity, have them skip it. "Oh we're just going to be nice to you fellows, you don't have to work. Nobody has to work around here, I mean we don't work." And you wonder, "Why the hell are they all falling apart?" Why? I'm telling you this because it happens to be true, not because I'm PRing this subject of production. That's the truth of the matter.

Now a guy can run, run, run, run, run. Actually it won't be until he runs into a failure that you'll see his, begin to feel tired. And begin to want a lay off, and begin to do this and that and the other thing. Because people involved in this sort of thing are running bodies, there are just so many hours they stay awake, and there's just so long they run without having their gas tanks filled or their batteries recharged, or whatever type of body we're; oh, it's eating. Yeah, that's right. It's just so long that one can run, and so it is that a sustained period of production normally should match the fact that you're running an intermittent type of body. A body is intermittent, it's on and it's off. Do you see? And that comes basically because you have a sun situation, which is a single sun type planet. There's daylight and there's darkness, and there's daylight and there's darkness. In earlier times nobody wanted to move around much in the darkness, so they started sleeping and so forth.

And you'll get some people get this blown out, and they start working in the darkness and sleeping in the daylight, and so on. They get this all out of phase. I have a perfect cure for insomnia, by the way. A perfect cure for insomnia. Get yourself from the bookstore a whole bunch of fairy tales, down from the bookstore just get some fairy tales of various types, fairy tales of different countries, and that sort of thing. And sit down and read yourself a fairy tale, and you'll go right to sleep, bong. Marvelous. It restimulates having been put to sleep with the same stories for so many lives. Don't count sheep.

Alright. So a body is intermittent, so therefore a long sustained period of production requires some intermittency, and that's about the only way you'll get into trouble. But, if you try to get an enforced intermittency, and the guys are right in the middle of a cycle and you make them break off, you've had it. So your intermittency can only take place, really, at the end of cycles, because the completion of a cycle of action is the other major factor in production. But when a team cycle of action has been completed, or one or two or three team cycles of action have been completed, it's about time somebody said that, if it's all, all the returns in, "Those who have got them all in now, go on a twenty - four hour break," or something. In other words you're matching up, this is not necessarily native to anything but bodies. And people were horrified when I was trying to give a plan out here. I imagine it was received with complete horror that fifty percent of AOSH DK should be whipped up port and starboard, fifty-fifty, and every weekend one of those port or starboard watch, why took the ship out. And I imagine this was received with some horror, and so forth. Actually it'd be a marvelous thing. So that every weekend why, the fort was held with the port watch, and the starboard watch got themselves a break and they could go for a sail.

This is the type of thing which you have to engage upon with a high production crew. Now hold your hat again. You have never seen production the way you will see production, with the product org officer system. In the first place, it only functions with a team. It functions as a team action. So your product org officer system then will speed up the velocity of flow to such a degree that it approaches peak load for the individuals concerned, particularly a product officer, which is really something. But morale matches it. You'll never see so much motion, and you'll never see so much high morale, and you'll never see so much velocity, if you run the system right. So it is not a slight breakthrough, because it combines right over into morale.

How did we used to have high speed organizations and here and now have low speed organizations? The difference is, the high speed organization was producing, the low speed organization isn't. That's the only difference between the two organizations. It has nothing to do with what you hired on only suppressives or something, that's the difference. You hire a hundred people, you're going to get fifteen or twenty suppressives. I mean, that's inevitable. But the high speed organization and the low speed organizations, the difference between them is production.

Now when I write about this, this product system, do you agree now that there is some coordination between production, getting something done, and so forth, and morale? You can see that.

Alright. Now when I look into this, writing this up, and when I tell people the rules of the product org officer system, they get the words without the music. And you can talk to them, and you can tell them and so forth, but unless you tell them, "Listen, there's some music to be gotten here as well as the words," and unless they've actually gone into an experiential action on a short term product as part of a product officer org officer team, why you'd miss the whole boat. You could read all about this, well there's a product officer and an org officer. Yes, they have those in General Motors; they have strikes there; and, you know what they do in General Motors, by the way, on the assembly line? They carefully take away from every worker his product. We found out by the way that the product officer claims the credit for all of the products produced, and gives no credit of any kind to anybody else producing any of the products for him. And if he just continues to take the credits all by himself, his team will go to pieces. If you put men on an assembly line, they're just tightening a nut and tightening a nut, and they keep talking about the final product, the final product of the automobile, final product of the automobile, they're immediately glossing over the fact that this guy that's right on that assembly line has a product. He has a seated car, or a tightened bolt, but he has a product.

They never let them have part of the product, so the morale is bad, advertisedly. I don't know that it is, I've never worked on an assembly line. But therefore it is necessary to let the people have the product, the credit for the product, even though the product is sold or walks out or does something else, they've got the credit for that piece of the product. Now we have to redefine then what is a product. And a product is a completed cycle of action, which is then, can be represented as having been done, by definition. See, you'd have to know Scientology, you'd have to know things like a completed cycle of action you see, for it to make any sense. So don't think you're studying General Motors's.

So what have you got here? You got a machine that'll run away with you. Just that. If you don't know your OEC, if you don't know your org board, if you don't know everything there is to know about where should be what and who should go which, and how many beans should be over there and so on, and know this thing cold, you'll never make an org officer. And, if you never make an org officer you'll never make a product officer, because a product officer by definition is a good org officer.

Now the first thing that you have to know about a product officer, he has to want the product. Second thing, he has to be able to recognize the product. Maybe I've got those in reverse. Maybe he has to be able to recognize the product and want the product. But that's for sure. If those two things are missing, skip it. Nothing else is going to happen. You have to be able to recognize the product.

Now this is an interesting skill all by itself, because you could walk down a line of typewriters, of people pounding a typewriter, and not recognize what the product is. It could be done, but it would take a little bit of doing. But if one is very airy-fairy he would say, "The product is answered mail, you see. For the whole, for one typist, answered mail. For one typist, the org's mail answered." See? Now let's get more airy-fairy, now let's go way outside the whole thing. Of course answered mail is a product, but it is a sections product. See? We have to recognize whose product it is, and to what does it apply.

Now we go outside and we get some airy-fairy statement like, "What is your product," and we're talking to some clerk. And he says, "Communication lines around the world." Oh boy! He's a telex typist. He's working on the wrong product all the time. He isn't out there putting in communication along the… piece. He's producing sent and acknowledged telexes, one by one by one by one. He can actually be producing the telexes having to do with one cycle of administrative action, but that's what he's producing.

Now if his communication line is just to produce, is just the product of an acknowledged telex; he got it through to the other end, and he knows he got it through to the other end. If that is his product, you may find that he will be too, he's too lonely as a member of, you see he's too lonely as an individual with that product, to have that product be a total exhibition of competence, because he… You get the idea? He isn't looking at this as his product, he's thinking of something else as his product, the usual messed up thing. That telex operator would have to be part of a team, and it would have to be part of a briefed team. That's what's important, part of a briefed team. He'd have to know why he was sending the telexes, and he'd have to know what the telex network is and what these telexes did, he'd have to know a great deal about, about the organization he was operating for. In other words, he'd have to have an organization hat, and he'd also have to have a division hat. He'd also have to have a section hat. In short he would have to be part of the team.

Now when you try to run a bunch of individuals as a product officer on their individual products only, you will find that you are getting into very serious trouble. They are a bunch of individuated people, they are not a team, they are not operating in a team action. Production is essentially a team activity.

Now you've got the stellar star who can water ski beautifully. Very good. It is interesting, and it makes a lot of other people want to water ski too. Actually, the audience is doing a participation, as they watch him water ski. Well, that's enough status and enough expertise, and is rare enough and so on to have other things, so this guy's sitting there. You will run into it often. The reason the telexes don't get answered is because the guy doesn't recognize what this product is, he doesn't know what he's doing with this product, he doesn't know what he's forwarding with this product, because he's not a part of the team. Do you see?

So, he's part of several groups within one group. The product officer then has to be sure that his, the team he is operating with, is a team, and this brings in the org officer. When they cease to be members of the team, there is the first point where the org officer will find himself with a problem. Guy isn't a member of the team.

Now a fellow can become, cease to be a member of the team through failures, and you can explain it in numerous other ways. Actually if you want to really crash somebody's morale, is remove him from post. That's a very, a very cruel, wicked sort of an action, but in his own estimation. Sometimes necessary to do it. And then you'll find out something interesting as an org officer, that a guy's job is valuable. And so we look further into this universe and this world, and we find only those places where people are unhatted are they unhappy.

So your first action of the org officer is hattedness, as a member of the team.