Admin Tech 1) Battle Plans: Daily - turning strategic planning into exact doable targets which are t hen

executed in terms of motion and action for the immediate period being worked on. A list of targets to be executed in the immediate short term future that w ill implement and bring into reality some portion of the strategic plan. The do able targets in written form which accomplish a sesireable part of an overall st rategic plan. One writes a battle plan on the question: What exact actions do I have to do to carry out this strategic plan to achieve the exact results necessary for this s tage of the strategic plan within the limits of available resources?" The test of an executive is whether he can competently battle plan and then get his plan executed. 2) Product orientation: primary duty is to look around and find some production to do. The idea l scene is approximately 75 percent production and 25 percent organize. it is the responsibility of an executive to keep his staff busy producing. Pers onnel are actually put at risk when aren't ke[t in production. a big company wh ich suddenly dismisses a lot of workers simply hasn't t=found things for them to do. Even if production in some area is temporarily halted for some reason, other rel ated or different products and sub products can be found to do with the existing resources. 3) product officer system. NAME, WANT AND GET YOUR PRODUCT. A. The most common failure is in NAME YOUR PRODUCT.

IF PRODUCTION IS NOT OCCURING, THE ABILITY TO NAME THE PRODUCT IS PROBAB LY MISSING. give it ALL it's name, NAME IT FULLY. Spend some time exactly and accurately na me the exact product you want before asking for it. if non-production find out if they can NAME WHAT products they are trying to produce. B. WANT - A product officer has to name, WANT, and get his product. Where no realy or valuable production is occuring, one has to ask: Does the product officer really WANT the product he is demanding? Do the other staf f WANT it? The reason an evilly intentioned person cannot achieve anything is he does not W ANT the production to occur. the intentions of psychos are aimed at destruction , not creation. people who are PTS are likely to slide into the valence of the antagonistic pers on who would NOT want the product. One has to actually WANT the product he is trying to produce. There may be many reasons he does not, none of which are necessarily connected with being pyscho. If it is a valuable product, and assists his and others survival, and he still doesn't want it, look for PTSness, or maybe a bit of psychosis, and at least so me withholds.

ie - ruds, prepcheck, new model, ETC. c. GET- push, debug, drive. name it, want it, get it. DEBUG i. inspection. The first action in debugging an area is an inspection to see what is going on i n terms of production. 1) look for what products have been gotten out in the past. 2) look for products that are there completed. 3) look for what products can be attained in the immediate future. 4) look for the value of products produces compared to the overall cost of the p roduction organization. 5) look for overt products or cycles where products continuously have to be redo ne, resulting in no or few products. look don't listen. if you don't see them, or invoices / receipts, they don't ex ist. next weeks production may never arrive. a product is something that can be exchanged for a valuable product or currency. they have subproducts.. a sub product can also be an over product, and block fi nal products. B) Are things arranged so there is no time wasted in useless motions which are u nnecessary? If products have to redone, or if no products are coming out, proceed as follows . II) Personnel handling. A) Find a product that can be gotten out, any product, and insist that i t and products like it, or similar cycles be gotten flat out by the existing personnel. DO NOT let this debug act as an excuse for them not to produce. the fir st step of this handling is to demand production. when you have gotten them on that, you enter the second stage of debug. This consists essentially of finding out if the place is knowledgeable and able enough to produce what is actually required and what is actually valuable or be ing needed from it. as follows: A) where are the orders relating to this target, project or production area? if it isn't written it isn't true. it it's written read it. did the person who wrote it have the authority or know how to order it? if you can't understand it, clarify it. if you can't clarify it, clear the mis-understoods. if the mis-u's won't clear, query it. has it been altered from the original? get it validated as correct, on policy, in tech order.

B) have you read the orders? ..if not, read, word clear, and star rate. Ca) do you have mis-u's on these orders? get the orders word cleared, m 4, m9, m2, or whatever word clearing is needed to fully clear any Mis-u's. Cb) Do you have false data on these orders? Strip off the false data with false data stripping. handle this step Ca and Cb until the person has duplicated the orders an d issues relating to this production area. Cc) Clean Slate Cd) dipoles to product ce) disagreement check cf) remedy A & B D) Are there financial or logistics problems on them? E) Are there personnel problems? F) Are there hatting problems... use word clearing and false data stripping to g et the scene debugged. getting a course. G) is there exterior influence stopping the production which cannot be handled i n the production area? --> immediately verify by asking the person who is supposedly putting s tops on the lines if he has issued such orders. how to defeat verbal tech check list. H) What other excuses exist? I) routine fining of mis-U's per word clearing series. J) Crashing MIs-U tech. K) do they have any ideea at all they they should be getting out products? do t hey pretend to, but don't. 2 way comm on why you're there. exhange by dynamics product clearing. may be pts or sp .... de pts. L) wrong stat? does the person have a stat that has nothing to do wit what he i s supposed to produce. get the right stat figured out so that is measures his actual production . M) wong Valuable final product or wrong product? Do they have the idea of VFP right? are they turning out a product that has no exchange value. come down on their sense of fitness of things.

is the product wanted? is the product known? N) Never figured out what they would have to do to get a product? -name, want and get your product. - compile a sub products list. O) out-ethics? handle with o/w write ups. auditing, ethics conditions, correction of pa st ethics conditions. debug actions are never carried out past point where desireable products are now being gotten out for real in quantity, the debug has been accomplished. P) is the individual or area creating problems and demanding solutions to them? ---PTS Handling. Q. is the area organize only? indicates many mis-U's in the area, especially on the part of the senior . need full word clearing on the materials related to the production area, including crashing mis-u finding. off hours, and meanwhile make them produce what they can. R. inadequate organization? debug the organization.

no organization? --> irrationaal demands to produce and prevent any organizatio n so production can occur. --clear the mis-U's particlarly on the purpose of production, and why on e is producing. S. lacking a sense of organization? this lies beneath mis-U's, overts/wh/ an d pts ness. handling is de-ptsing, then overts and withholds, then Mis-U's order vs disorder -----KRC Triangle The points are K for Knowledge, R for Responsibility, C for Control. It it difficult to be responsible for something or control something unless you have KNOWLEDGE of it. It is folly to try to control something, or even know something without RESPONSI BILITY. It is hard to fully know something or be responsibible for something over which you have no CONTROL, otherwise the result would be an overwhelm. The route up from death or apathy or inaction is to KNOW something about it, tak e some RESPONSIBILITY for the state one is in and the scene, and CONTROL oneself to a point where some control is put into the scene to make it go right. Then KNOW why it went wrong, take RESPONSIBILITY for it, and CONTROL it enough to mak e it go more toward an ideal scene. Little by little one can make anything go right by INCREASING KNOWLEDGE on all dynamics.

INCREASING RESPONSIBILITY on all dynamics. INCREASING CONTROL on all dynamics. If one sorts out any situaiton one finds oneself in on this basis, he will gener ally succeed. Field Marshall Montgomery was supposed to have said that leadership was composed of "knowledge, willpower, initiave, and courage." These are assumed qualities in a man. This was good advice, but offered no road out or no avenue of INCREAS E in capability. The KRC triangle acts like the ARC triangle. when one corner is increased the o ther two also rise. Most thetans have a dreadful bad opinion of their capabilities compared to what they actually are. Hardly any thetan believes himself capable of what he is rea lly capable of accomplishing. By inching up each corner of the KRC triangle bit by bit, ignoring the losses an d making the wins firm, a being at length discovers his power and command of lif e. This second triangle is well worth knowing. It interacts best when used with high ARC. Thus the triangles interlock. It is for USE. ----@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ DOING WORK The basic Esto problem is getting somebody to do his job. This is not just executives nor "bad staff." It tends to be rather prevelant in our modern culture. The basic question really is "why can't you do what you are supposed to be doing ?" An esto will find many people "busy," but really not doing their post hat. As the esto's own stat depends on people actually doing their jobs, and as as th e pay and well-being of those people also depends on it, it amounts to quite a p roblem. You can do a product rundown to cognitions. But then in some cases nothing happ ens. You hat and still nothing happens. ABERRATION To understand this you have to understand "aberration." Get the idea of a being doing wholly what he is doing. You get this: A.

Being --> Task It is a straight line of attention. Now get the idea of somebody "doing a job that is not doing what he is doing." We get <--Being -/ | | B. This is aberration. Which means, "not in a straight line." so in example (A), the person does what he is doing. In example (B) he is doing but he is not doing what he is doing MENTALLY. Menta lly he is doing something else other while he is doing what he seems to be doing . SCHIZOPHRENIA The most prevelant "mental disorder" is supposed to be schizophrenia. This mea ns "SCISSORS" or 2 plus "head." A two-head in other words. And in this case t wo heads are not better than one (joke). You see this in institutions. A person is changing valences (personalities) cli ck - click - click, one to the next. But the condition is a gradiant one that worsens between sanity and the bottom o f the scale. Midway, the condition is common but almost never noticed. It is so common today that it passes as normal humanoid. The person is not doing what he is doing. Examples of this are: people who do not like a job with responsibility because t hey "like to do mechanical things so they can dream of something else while work ing"; persons who "have to do something else before they can ____"; persons who are out of area; persons who continually make dev-t. There is also the person who rams sideways into the work of others with "mistake s", "demands", and prevents them from doing what they are doing while himself no t doing what he is doing. One can't say these people are crazy. Not today. But one can say they make pro blems which are very difficult unless you know how to unlock the riddle. BARRIERS Study series 2 HCOB 2 june 71 CONFRONTING, and the drills given in the Esto tape series can push their way through an astonishing mass of barriers. For this is what the condition is - an effort to get through barriers. TASK

The reason example (B) above occurs is that the person's attention is misdirecte d by mental barriers each time he tries to do (A) above. Yet only if he can do (A) will he have any self determinism and power. It does not mean he is crazy. It means he is incapable of directing his attenti on straight. Each time he does, he hits something that deflects it (sends it of f at an angle). All this will seem very reasonable to him because it is the way it has always be en. And like the little girl who never knew she had a headache from time of bir th, and only knew it when it quit suddenly, such a person does not realize he ca nnot control his attention. Such thing about lots of other things while apparently thinking about what they are doing.. And they do lots of other things. MISUNDERSTOODS Misunderstood words prevent them being in communication with materials or others . Thus they do not read or listen. They maunder (which means wander about ment ally). This is the inflow side of it. The outflow side are barriers of odd fears and peculiar ideas. Such people appear rather weak and dispersed. Or too heavy and stubborn make u p for it. They have fixed ideas and other outpoints because their thoughts detour instead of running along a highway. HAPPINESS To get someone to actually do what he is doing when he is doing it will sound cr uel to some people. That's because they find it painful to confront and would r ather withdraw and maunder, sort of self-audit themselves through life. They are not happy. Happiness comes from self-determininsm, production, and pride. Happiness is power and power is being able to do what one is doing when one is d oing it. COMPETENCE When a person is competent, nothing can shake his pride. The world can yell, bu t it doesn't shake him. Competence is not a question of one being more clever than another. It is one b eing more able to do what is doing than another is. Example A is competence. Example B is incompetence.

MORE THERE You could say a competent person was "more there." But this is really "more abl e to put his attention on what he has his attention on." WHY Anyone who is not a fireball on his post could be described by this WHY: Unable to do his post for an individual WHY for each person. Thus, there are two remedies an Esto can use. 1. He can find the Why a person cannot do his post, and then handle it. 2. He can do Esto drills on the person. In finding the WHY, the observation itself that his stats are low may find the p erson a bit defensive. It could be that he does do what he is doing. But if so his stats would be high and he would be moving fast. Thus one has to find his personal WHY. If it is the right one, he should have v ery good indicators, and speed up, and do his job. If it is not quite the right one, he may feel degraded or ashamed. The test of any right WHY is does it raise the existing scene toward the ideal w ith existing resources. Thus, you can get a why that is not wholly acceptable until handled. But if you are really spot on, it should blow a lot of the barriers. Thus, are real why blows a lot of the barriers, when handled, between the being and his job. The drills then push it on through. The drills sometimes blow through the why. The Why sometimes blows right throug h any need of drills. So these two actions interact. If you see someone feeling very guilty after the Why is found, better check it o ver. It could be a wrong why, and in this case, just find a new one. THIRD ACTION The primary rundown, hcob 30 mar 72 should be done on a staff member thoroughly. Otherwise he will remain to some degree out of comm. He will not be able to tak e data in quickly if he cannot communicate with words. PROCESSING Of course, processing removes all the barriers eventually. But it is not necess arily aimed at doing a job. Ability potential is enormously increased by processing.

But traditionally we do not rely on processing to handle staff. We handle people and we handle cases. But auditors and staff members, simply because we do handle cases, must not have cases on post. We do not admit that they cases. This raises necessity level. And it is quite amazing how high that necessity level can be raised and how a pe rson can function despite his case. If we admitted that staff had cases, we couldn't handle public cases. It's that simple. So an Esto does not advise or use auditing on staff members as a post remedy nor accept case as a why. Of course "case" is a why. But when you accept it, you retreat from example A a bove and at once get a (B). you will be amazed how a person can begin to do what he is doing by finding his why and doing drills. And of course you have to handle the fellows who jam in from the side at every t urn and disperse the staff members attention. He too (and especially) isn't doi ng what he is doing. The same procedure (Why and drills) handles him as well. In sum, if a staff member isn't doing what he is doing he is doing something els e. They never do nothing. Ask, "What is the reason you do not fully do your post?" or any such version. F ind the real Why. And handle the person. That's the major part of an Estos job. And don't be surprised if you get a cheerful "but I am!" And find he is. But his stats and speed tell the whole story. ----@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ Disagreement Check 1. Fly All Ruds. 2. Are there any disagreements with: 3. Do you have any disagreement on ____ ?

4. Two Way Comm E/S on the disagreement. 5. In relation to th

at disagreement is there: Handle all with two way comm E/S A) B) C) D) E) F) G) H) I) J) K) L) M) N) O) P) R) S) T) An altered sequence Omitted Data Dropped Out Time A FalseHood An Altered Importance A wrong source A Wrong target Contrary Facts Added Time Added Inapplicable data An incorrectly included datum? An assumed identity which was not identical? An assumed similarity which was not similar? Assumed differences which were not different? An Inconsistency? A Misunderstood word or symbol? Dev-T? Cross - Orders? Counter Intention?

6) Is there any other disagreement on __topic from step 2 above_? 7) Is there anything on ___ that you agree with? 8) Handle all disagreements 9) Reassess topic list to find any more disagreements and repeat 2-9 until F/N i ng assessment. ---@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ The same procedure (Why and drills (TR0 -- R&W)) handles him as well. In sum, if a staff member isn't doing what he is doing he is doing something els e. They never do nothing. Ask, "What is the reason you do not fully do your post?" or any such version. F ind the real Why. And handle the person. ----@@@@@@