Possibly Helpful Advice


Finding your way after leaving the cult of Scientology

Organizational theory does not always translate into a working organization

In the 1950s, Ron Hubbard made some classic observations about the way an organization should work if reason prevailed and the resulting Policy Letter was THEORY OF SCIENTOLOGY ORGANIZATIONS.

The complete policy appears in every staff hat pack and every staff member reads it as part of their basic training, so you would think that staff members would notice when actual practice differs greatly from this policy.

Unfortunately, LRH was never able to translate these observations into actual use, probably because of 4th dynamic engrams he did not appreciate at the time, but those of you who are clear or above may be able to envision what would happen if a group of sane individuals adopted and actually  followed this policy in their everyday operations.

Look at this excerpt and judge for yourself how workable this policy is if followed and how far the church has departed from following this policy. The LRH description of “slave societies” near the end of this excerpt fits corporate Scientology to a “T”.

The excerpt is taken from HCO POLICY LETTER OF 22 OCTOBER 1962, THEORY OF SCIENTOLOGY ORGANIZATIONS  (Reissue of HCO Bulletin of September 21, 1958.

An organization is a number of terminals and communication lines united with a common purpose.

The actions of an organization can all be classified under the heading of particle motion and change. To analyze a post or a department or an organization, make a list of each particle it handles (whether types of bodies, types of comm or any other item) and follow each item from the point it enters the post or department or organization to the point it exits.

If a particle isn’t handled properly and passed along properly there is a confusion or a dead-end. To organize an organization requires more than theory.

One has to inspect and list the particles and get their routes and desired changes of character enroute. Then he has to see that terminals and comm lines exist to receive, change and forward the particle. All types of particles belong to somebody, are handled some way, come from somewhere and go somewhere. There are no confusions when lines, terminals and actions exist for each type of particle.

Judgment and decision are needed in every staff post.

If the handling of items are just “petty details” then so is your fellow man a “petty detail”.

There are no labourers in a Scientology organization. We are all managers of these particles.

Routes of handling are not orders to handle but directions to go. A route is not necessarily correct for all cases. It is only correct for most cases. Robots can’t handle livingness. Robot organizations and robot civilizations fail. They only seem to work—like the commie empire seems to work until you find out everyone is starving to death in it. A perfect organization is not a machine but a pattern of agreements. A route is only the agreed upon procedure. It is not only occasionally broken, it now and then should be. The terminals involved make the agreement or the route doesn’t work.

A route along terminals that never agreed is no route but a labyrinth. People agree to postulates they can understand and appreciate. Hence, a route and handling begins with a particle, develops with a theory, comes to life with an agreement and continues to work because of judgment and decision.

The routing, the comm lines, the pattern of an organization do not do the work.

The work is done by living beings using good sense and skill. The organizational pattern only makes their work easier and lessens confusion and overburden. Governments, armies, big research bureaus reduce themselves down to routes and titles. They don’t work. They don’t do work. They allow for no human equation. Therefore, slave societies (composed only of routes and unthinking terminals) are always beaten eventually by free peoples. There is a point where routes and exact procedures become unworkable, just as there is a point, facing a volume of work, that individuality and no teamwork becomes unworkable. An optimum organization is never severely either one.

—————-

L. RON HUBBARD

If you have been in a Scientology church recently, you will rarely see any judgement being exercised by any staff member. They have been conditioned by force to follow orders exactly, even if they do not make sense in the current circumstances.

This is highly unfortunate because robotic handling of public and staff creates upsets with all concerned. The increasing exodus of staff and public from the church bears witness to the insanity that prevails within the church.  As Ron mentions in the excerpt above, robots can’t handle livingness.

The entire Policy Letter can be seen at: https://www.onlinefilefolder.com/3snAPBPlLcUoWz

Number of views:18658

4 Comments

Marianne  on November 18th, 2012

It seems that policy letter was replaced by computerized, enforced routing forms.

OldAuditor  on November 19th, 2012

My choice of illustration was more appropriate than I realized. 🙂

OldAuditor  on November 19th, 2012

I have been involved in a number of successful startups and I have found this line from the HCOPL to be true: “A perfect organization is not a machine but a pattern of agreements.”

Companies do not have to be top down command and control structures if there are sane people who are willing to make agreements about how the organization operates.

As an organization grows, it employs people who do not understand or subscribe to the agreements and top down control becomes stronger and more rigorously enforced.

In most cases, this is an irreversible transformation which can only be stopped by an internal revolution as by the formation of an employees union or by corporate death as the rigidity of a computerized organization prevents it from adapting to changes in the marketplace.

AnonLover  on November 19th, 2012

I’m showing this HCOPL was corrected and reissued 2 November 1970 and included in OEC Volume 0 under the Basic Staff Actions and Duties section on page 111.

Is that not the correct version to reference in the original green management volumes? TIA!

Leave a Comment