Org Board And Livingness
I was listening to a lecture from Ron the other day, trying to find a quote applicable to a project I was working on. The lecture was 6504C06, lecture 420 of the Briefing Course, “Org Board and Livingness”. I found the quote:
If we don’t express the function on the org board, it will be worn unknowingly by everyone.
But as I listened to the tape (yes, tape), I was struck by how pithy it was. That is, how much valuable material was in this one lecture. I’d like to take you through some of the highlights. They’re not necessarily all related to the same point, so I’ve given them sub-headings and heavily edited the text down to just what’s needed to make Ron’s point in each case. You are encouraged to listen to the original lecture to get the full text.
The Lost Battle or The Warring Principles of Org Boards
For some reason, I always found this first principle highly profound. Maybe somewhere on the track I was witness to the exact phenomenon Ron’s talking about. I don’t know.
And you look on an army’s organization board and you don’t find any place to refer a lost battle. … Where do we send this lost battle?
Now, let me tell you why they fail. This is the principle, and this is a principle of this universe: If the function is not expressed, it will be worn unknowingly by everybody. …
[T]he other monitoring function which gives us bureaucracies, and that is: When you put a box on an org board, it will be filled. And that is at war with the other function.
Refund Policy Or Where Ruddy Individualists Go Wrong
Chances are you’re on this planet because you were, at one time, what Ron calls a “roaring, screaming individual”. Your reward was getting dropped here. (I suggest you read the following from the context of the Independent Field.) Ron explains:
Now, oddly enough, Man, when he works as a team, must have policy or he is not a team. He cannot work as a team without policy, so all he works as is a bunch of individuals. Even bad policy, you see, will at least make a team out of him. … Any policy is better than no policy because that is what makes the team. It’s simply the agreement. It’s the extant agreement, and if there isn’t an extant agreement, then you have individualized action.
The worst team you ever wanted to see is one composed of ‘all stars’ taken at random as the starring players, with spectacular individualities from each of the winning teams of a country. I don’t care what game you’re playing, if you want a really stinking team, get those boys, because they’re running according to the different policies of their different coaches, don’t you see? And they are already, by ‘all star’ players, preselected as doing something that was very noticeable, which means they didn’t even follow their own team policy. So now you group all these fellows together in a mess, and each one – each one is magnificent and a collective mess. And they probably could be licked by any little batch of high-school kids on the same game, who were welded together by policy. ‘When Bill does that, I do this. That’s it. That’s play sixty-four. What’s play sixty-four? Well, when Bill does that, I do this and then Joe does that.’ That’s just policy.
So we in Scientology, compared to the world’s population, are a relatively small group. We tend to be a lot of ruddy individualists, which is fine in our private life, but our organizational actions must be coordinated. And if we knitted together our organizational actions and our functions across the world, and we had a good similarity of action, good duplication from organization to organization, and then we grooved this in and put this together very nicely … Who else on this planet is following policy? Nobody.
And oddly enough, I have traced every single blowup we’ve had back to a wild departure from policy – very simple, primary, known policy.
Melbourne blew up on the refund policy. They just didn’t follow any part of the refund policy. That’s rather incredible. Our policy is when somebody – somebody isn’t satisfied and so forth and wants his money back, we promptly give him his money back. We also tell him, ‘Well, you’re through with Scientology’. … And that’s been policy since heck was a pup. And Melbourne didn’t give the man his money back. No-o-o. And when they did give him his money back, they didn’t follow the rest of the policy. They didn’t get a quitclaim from him. So he turned right around and sued them. They gave his money back and he sued them. Pure idiocy.
That’s where they come a cropper, you see? They are not part of the team. And you will find all the symptoms of individuation present, which is they yammer at the other teams, see? They cuss the other teams out. They’re always getting ARC broke about the other teams, do you see? And they just individuate more and more and more and follow policy less and less and less and all of a sudden they aren’t there anymore, unless somebody intervenes with heavy cavalry.
Now, if we’re going to make our forward progress – we have a lot of good organizations through the world, of which Melbourne is one of them now. (I have now acked them.) The situation is that these are placed in rather strategic areas. They’re placed in strategic areas to spread a sphere of influence.
And when those spheres of influence meet on their own borders, we don’t want them to be different and create a ridge; we want them just to flow smoothly out and meet. You follow? It’s all rigged to do so.
Now therefore, if we are a good team, and if we watch our individual cases, and we come right on up the line as people, as beings, and we also are part of the team, then we won’t get into all the trouble we got into as roaring, screaming individuals way back on the track. In other words, we can make it all the way because we’ve kept order all the way.
I’ve heard people in the Field argue against organizing. And I’ve heard people in the Field complain that Open Letter To All Clears all but obligates a Clear to contribute back to Scientology. Somehow this is supposed to be a bad thing. Can you say “third dynamic”? Here’s what LRH has to say about this:
[I]t used to dismay me when I would clean somebody up as a case, and then he’d get into busy-busy-busy activity of some kind or another and go tearing off in a big busyness and not do anything for the forward motion. Because normally he would go out there and he would go for a while and he’d be all right, but after a while, why, he’d sort of cave in – loneliness and other things, you see? …
So we find out that case stability depends upon the smooth organization of individuals. See? Sensible as that. And then we’ll be able to make it all the way. And without an organizational shove back of that, then the guy goes up, and I don’t care whether it’s a thousand years – I don’t care whether it’s ten years, a thousand years or ten billion years – why, there he is in the theta trap, or there he is going downhill again, or there he is with all this stuff plastered all over his face, and he can’t figure out what it is, and he’s now forgotten how to run 8-C or Touch Assists. Well, you see, it’d be a temporary affair, and like an Earth government, wouldn’t be worth doing.
Now, it isn’t that anybody is trying to weld everybody together to the end of time, but I should say offhand that every person and being, and so on, who is going up with Scientology ought to take Scientology up with him. Seems only fair. And then you’ll find things will work out fairly smoothly and very easily.
Now, what do you fall back on when you come a cropper all by yourself out in the far reaches of this particular planet? What do you fall back on? You fall back on an organization. You fall back on me. How could I be there at all if there wasn’t an organization to take care of the action? Do you see?
So an organization is not a necessary evil or not some reason why, and so forth. The organization is there to serve Scientologists and to handle the thing and the public and spread it out and so forth.
The Germs of Your Own Destruction
Here’s an interesting look at how organisms are ultimately brought down and die.
And the thing that destroys almost any organism is its own germs. It’s the things it laid in. It’s the things you did, not what were done to you.
It’s Understandings Not Understanding, Or… What’s Wrong With Philosophy
Ron makes some observations about philosophy which explain its failure to markedly assist the forward progress of Man.
What’s interesting is an organization watching its general income curve go down, doesn’t realize when I look at it I am not looking for a thing that is making it go down. I’m looking for the hundred thousand. I’m looking for the gross errors, but the lots of them. They’re not really ever composed of one major error, one howling, major error. That – if you go around looking for that, you make the same mistake that has been made by every philosopher that I have ever read. He’s made a mistake. It’s contained on this chart. And what’s contained is this:
‘What you must have is understanding,’ says the old philosopher. ‘Now please, please, please, please. What you must have is understanding – ‘
Boy, that is an error that I myself fell into and have carried on for a very long time, until I was drawing up this org board the other day and recognized the flaw. It’s understandings. It’s plural.
That’s the biggest – probably the biggest single bug there is in philosophy anywhere – that philosophers looked for understanding. They looked for an understanding.
OT and 1952
And here on this tape is another gem– an explanation of why the technical material of the early 1950s is so important.
Nineteen fifty, fifty-two, Philadelphia Lectures, you know? This is very funny. They tell you all about an OT.
Creation of Human Ability, published here in England ages ago, got the steps in it which you now undertake. Of course, you can’t take those steps with a reactive bank in your road, because it reactivates the bank and the bank shoves you back down again. It’s wild business. You see?
The Importance of Qual, Or Why Old Civilizations Failed
And your next lineup, immediately after your technical, is the point that has been missed in all org charts on this planet and back to eighty trillion years ago. You can’t make a product – just make a product. That is not possible. Times change, things alter. You can’t just say it’s a product. And nobody does, oddly enough, but they don’t have it on their org boards. And sooner or later they neglect it. They’ve got to qualify the product. Got to qualify it. They’ve got to say, ‘This is how it behaves, and this is what it does’, and then they got to go back and straighten up in the manufacture of the product anything that went wrong in making the product that made it fall down in qualification so that it couldn’t meet the conditions which it was going to be used under. Do you see? So this was an absolutely vital step.
Consider this in light of the first quote above. The Qual function, if left off the org board, will be worn by everyone. So bad products roll off the line, and everyone is left to fix them in any old way they can.
In rummaging around for other quotes along these lines, I also found some “bonus” quotes in HCOPL 1 May 65 Issue III Organization The Design of the Organization.
For all those who like to assert that Ron was constantly taking credit for things other people did, here’s a case where he could easily have taken sole credit for the design of our org board, and none would be the wiser. Instead:
This board is one of the very few things in Scientology which is not completely new. It is taken from an ancient organization and which I have refined through considerable experience by adding Scientology and our levels to it. It is based on an extremely successful pattern.
And we should all remember Ron’s admonition at the end of Dianetics The Modern Science Of Mental Health.
In 1950 when I said ‘For God’s sake Build a Better Bridge,’ I had to do it on my own.
But here it is, not only a bridge but also an organization to carry the weight of the spanning, a very needful thing.