Copyright 1997

All commercial rights are reserved to the author, who currently wishes to remain anonymous and therefore is writing under the pen name of "The Pilot". Individuals may freely copy these files on the internet for their own use and they may be made available on any web server who does not charge for them and who does not alter their contents.


Feb 12, 1997

Whether or not anybody within organized Scientology is willing to listen, it is still only fair for me to propose a plan for straightening out the subject.

Here I will limit myself to short term practical improvments which could be implemented now. This does not right every wrong or fix every problem, but it is, I believe, a good starting point which gives hope for the future.

First a few points of theory, following which I will list the points to be improved.


One of the irksome things about the current Scientology orgs is that Ron did not carry very much of the auditing tech or the basics discovered in Scientology into the 3rd dynamic (1st dynamic is self, 2nd is family, 3rd is groups, etc).

Modern org policy mainly consists of practical business techniques, things that Ron learned in the Navy, and stuff dredged up out of whole track organizations plus a smattering of scales and some attempts to improve communication. That's all well and good, but where is the real tech and the high powered insights?

Let's see if we can really apply a few of the things we learned about the 1st dynamic to the 3rd.

In the area of problems, we know that the PC (preclear) is usually burried under the weight of old solutions that he's still holding in place and which generate tons of new problems for him (which then must be solved in turn, etc.). We handle this by undoing solutions and taking apart the opposing forces that are locked together in the problems rather than by layering more solutions on top of the mess.

Ron once described policy as a series of workable solutions to organizational problems. So we should be working to take apart these problems and undoing the solutions rather than building upon them.

This means "the less operating policy, the better". I put it in terms of operating policy because we also have useful knowledge and ideas presented in the form of policy, and of that we want more rather than less. The target would be to have less rules and more understanding.

Now situations do exist that have to be handled, and we do need to use policies and orders to cool down the confusions and hold the problems in check. That is our first action. But we can't just drop it at that point because that will encourage a new generation of problems. Instead, we add a second step, which is to go back and see if we can't find some way to undo the source of the trouble and discard the policy. Or at least shift over to a more basic solution instead of handling a surface manifestation.

And then we go a step further and review the policies we did keep and reduce them to the absolute minimum. And at the same time, we find out as much as we can and publish key data so that we can operate from greater understanding.

In the area of communication, we know that communication is the universal solvent and that when the PC starts withholding and blocking communication, its going to accumulate mass and back up on him and kick him in the teeth. It doesn't mean that the PC has to blab all of his withholds to every passerby, but he can't be actively hiding everything or he's going to sink under the weight of it all. This indicates that things like confidentiality and hiding stuff for PR reasons are dangerous to the health of an organization.

If you think about the average PR personality, it should be obvious that their communication, although high in quantity, is generally poor in content and somewhat undesirable. This is actually a very poor level of communication and these salesman types are generally looked down upon with a bit of distaste. The truth of the matter is that the communication isn't real and the affinity is kind of false and people notice that. It's out ARC (Affinity, Reality, and Communication).

A person can communicate a lot and they can promote things with true ARC instead of this false PR crap. The same is true of organizations. You do need to promote and advertise and put out lots of communications. But if you get totaly PR oriented, people smell a rat. They are much happier learning that you are working actively to fix things that are wrong rather than hiding them.

But in terms of grades 0 (communications) and 1 (problems), the orgs are only slightly screwed up and perhaps better off that the average in the society.

Its grades 2 (overts), 3 (ARCXs), and 4 (service facsimilies - makeing yourself right) which are grossly out in the orgs.

At first glance, grade 2 looks hopeless. The org almost never admits to mistakes, makes amends, or even imagins that it has done something bad. It is all extremely well justified.

But you could help a PC with a case like this. Let's say that you've got someone who's made lots of mistakes, gotten things screwed up, and turned into a bit of a con artist. And furthermore, there are angry people hunting him down looking for blood. How would you get grade 2 in on him? It seems like there is just too much and its too dangerous and overwelming. But it could be done on a gradient. You'd find out what small thing he could confront taking responsibility for and start with that and gradually build up until his lines were clean again.

You can't just cave in to somebody who's looking for vengance, because they're out for blood and can no longer deal with you on a rational basis. But most people are not fixated on vengance and will cut you some slack if you make an honest effort to reform. So you attempt to deal on a reasonable basis, admit the mistakes and find out what you can do to remedy the situation. You watch out for the occasional guy who'se too viscious to come to a resonable settlement, but you don't assume that everybody is like that.

So what kind of actions might start an org on the road to recovery? What gradient of responsibility could be confronted to start with?

A complaint department might help. Big stores have these and it doesn't cave them in to let people bitch about things and exchange a few defective toasters or whatever. It acts as a bit of a safety valve and maintains good customer relations.

The org already has a post which almost does this. It is the chaplin, and sometimes a good chaplin will actively work to right wrongs, but they do not have a lot of authority and are quite constrained by the existing tech and policy. This could be beefed up. They could be given full authority to override policy in individual cases. They could actively strive to clean things up. They could even be advertised as a complaint department.

You would have to make it safe for people to complain to them. They probably need a special dispensation to keep things told to them in confidence from the rest of the org as priviledged communications, much like a priest or lawyer would protect his client's withholds. These chaplins would have to be highly trained as auditors and highly trained on policy as well (the same is needed for ethics officers).

Many things could be done to compensate for mishandling. Best might be to give someone an academy training level because that will raise the recipients understanding and responsibility whereas a free intensive of auditing can sometimes encourage the person to take less responsibility and make the org responsible for his case and abberations.

Appologies and admission of error can also help a lot. The chaplin could even write letters of appology on the org's behalf to non-Scientologists in cases where they have been harmed by things such as wrongful disconnection etc.

But this also needs to be carried up to a higher level. There should be a senior chaplin at the international level who has the power to get policy changed when necessary and who keeps an eye on the whole subject. His job would be to really make Scientology into a safe environment.

At one time Scientology was banned in Victoria, Australia. Eventually the org bit the bullet and cancelled the fair game law, sec checks, and disconnection. As a result the ban was lifted. Even though these things have gradually crept back in, the cancellations let in a breath of fresh air and were of great benefit. From that perspective the ban served a useful purpose, but it would have been better if the org had confronted what it was doing and cancelled these without the need for heavy outside pressure.

Once the org began to take some responsibility it would become easier for it to take some more and begin to tackel some of the bigger out points. If they could bend just a little and admit some mistakes and make good on them without the roof falling in, then it will be easier for them to confront the bigger sore spots and handle them.

Next in the lineup is grade 3 which deals with ARCXs. Here we have some extreme ones between the org and the freezone, the org and the middle class, the org and the psychs, and the org and "wog" society. The very usage of the term "wog" in Scientology is symptomatic of the deep ARCX and its use is also a mechanism that further encourages the ARCX.

There are a number of factors underlying this. One problem is, of course, the various witholds. Members who believe in the subject don't want to admit to the more brutal or unreasonable actions that sometimes take place. At the same time, they feel that they will be attacked or ridiculed for their beliefs.

Furthermore, Ron encouraged fighting psychs and squirrels etc.

And then there are the basic disagreements as to social values. Those lead to breaks in reality. The Scientologist is generally trying to look at things from a multi-lifetime view and it comes in conflict with middle class values. This doesn't mean that the middle class is suppressive. They are a productive and stable backbone to the country.

Instead of attacking, you find what goals you have in common and promote those. And you work to increase communication and understanding between the two sides.

It is actually a bit of a mistake to primarily push Dianetics instead of presenting Scientology to the society. The culture has grown a lot since the 1950s and there is a great deal of acceptance of metaphysical concepts. And the average Scientologist has much more of a metaphysical rather than a psychological slant on things. A bit more promotion on past lives and operating with the viewpoint of an immortal spirit instead of as a body would make the Scientologists much more comprehensibile to the public at large.

And again, I would beef up the chaplin to handle these things. What is really needed is a chaplin's office of comparable size and power to the ethics office. This would act as a balancing influence. A large org would need both a public chaplin and a staff chaplin, because there are screw ups and wrongs that need to be righted in both areas.

As to service facsimilies, it should be obvious that the tech itself is currently used by the org to make itself right. This is why the tech has to be considered perfect and defended against all doubts or criticism. Delivering the tech and freeing mankind justifies all possible overts.

Let's stop worshipping the tech and start learning to think with it. Let's realized that its flawed and admit the imperfections and then promote it anyway because its the best we've got.

A service fac wouldn't blow that easily, but we can make a start.

At the highest level, we would also need a powerful chaplin's division in OSA whose duty is to make peace rather than war. If you have an army, you must also have a diplomatic corps.



The org board is rumored to have come from Ron's recollection of an anchient galactic civilization. If so, then I would point out that that civilization is now dust.

Any organization pattern worked out in detail and carried through into practice would be useful to an organization, and the Scientology org board has its good points and is certainly no worse than most of the management structures used in this society. But its far from perfect.

The older 7 division pattern was expanded out into 9 divisions based on Ron's coming up with the Mind/Body/Product theory that divides the organization structure in progressions of three (3 executive divisions each divided into 3 regular divisions which are each divided up into 3 departments etc.).

The theory itself is actually quite reasonable, but the application of that theory to devising the pattern of the org was flawed.

When you see a successful team of 3 partners launching a business, one of them will ineveitably be an expert in producing the product of the business. The other two may consist of an expert at organization and an expert at sales and marketing. And if its only a team of 2, then one is an expert at producing and the other is the salesman and promoter and they will somehow or other manage the organizational hat between them. It never really works if you're missing the technical person who can really produce the product.

If its a software company, one of the top 3 has to be a software guru or you're dead. And if its cars you're building, then one of the 3 had better be an automotive engineer. If you've got a hospital and one of the 3 top execs isn't a doctor, then you'd just better forget it.

Established companies often violate this rule, and they lose their ability to deliver the product and they sink.

If you only have the organizational executive, then there is nothing to sell and nobody to sell it and therefore it is the least important of the three.

If you only have the salesman, then its all promotion and no delivery and you end up with what's known as a get rich scheme or a con game.

If you only have the technical hotshot who can produce, you end up with these obscure but well respected little firms that gradually develope a small following but achieve little market penetartion. Even so, this is the only one of the three that has any chance at all of surviving alone and therefore is the most critical to the entire venture.

For a Scientology org, one of the 3 senior executives must be a super expert on the tech and his executive division must be devoted to the technical aspects of the subject.

When Ron did his division by 3s, he created a set of 3 public divisions in one executive division and also had a dissemination division (more sales) in another. So the structure was heavy with PR. And to make room for this, he bundled up a treasury division along with the technical and qual (QA) divisions to form an executive division whose manager would be just as concerned with money as with real delivery. So his pattern is weak on actual production and he regulates the technical hotshots to a lower rung in the management hierarchy.

Its not surprising that we see so much promotion and so few results with such an org board.

A better pattern would be as follows:

1st Executive Division: Organizational (this is what the org calls the HCO exec div.)

1.1 External affairs (the president's office, planning, legal, etc.)

1.2 Internal Management (this is the org's HCO division) (personel, communications, ethics)

1.3 Treasury (income, disbursements, supplies) (in Ron's pattern, he has this in the 2nd exec below and places the dissemination division here instead)

2nd Executive division: Production / Technical

2.1 Auditor Training (this is only a department in Ron's pattern) (for software, this would be the analysts and designers, for building houses this would be the architects, etc.)

2.2 Processing (Auditing) (this and 2.1 above are both just departments in Ron's single technical division) (in other businesses, this is the appropriate main line production)

2.3 Qual (QA)

3rd Executive Division: Sales and Marketting

3.1 Sales (Dissemination)

3.2 Marketing (the public divisions) (this spreads across 3 divisions in Ron's plan)

3.3 Publications (Ron has this as a department in the dissem division. But this is a critical area. It is a key element in the spread of a subject).

As a further justification for giving publications its own separate division, one of the key reasons behind IBMs success was its exceptionally large publications division. They are one of the largest publishers in the world. They combined this with a fantastically strong sales force and swept the market in the early days of computers.

At a minimum, this pattern at least assures that one of the key people at the top really knows the score on the business that the organization is in.



This is what I would do immediately if I had absolute power and authority to fix the CofS.

I believe that these 40 points in the areas of tech, policy, and external affairs would be enough to completely turn things around and revitalize the subject.


First of all I would keep the existing lineup pretty much intact. Experimental ideas like the supergrades that were presented in the Super Scio writeup are best left to the freezone.

But some things do need to be corrected.

1.1 Cancel all eligibility checks except for routing on staff. The FPRD would remain as a case action for use when needed, but grade 2 and later OT grade 2 processes would be the preferred way of handling overts.

1.2 Restore the sanctity of the confessional. All examination of PC folders for any purpose outside of auditing is to be forbidden. No ethics penalties, amends projects, or lower conditions are to be assigned based on anything revealed in an auditing session even if the session is an eligibility check or DofP interview that is prefaced by the phrase "I'm not auditing you". However, currently dangerous or harmful situations are to be handled in ethics by getting the person to do the right thing and eligability to join staff may be refused even though no ammends can be required.

1.3 Some improved basics such as validating the PC's rightness, shifting from setups to major actions as soon as the PC is flying, etc. See my comments on what is wrong with standard tech in Super Scio #4.

1.4 Some general improvements in course supervision, especially insisting that the supervisor be an expert on the materials that he is supervising and an emphasis on raising understanding rather than raising stats.

1.5 For TRs, you coach the thetan rather than the body. Flunk what the thetan is doing (such as flinching) rather than what the body is doing (such as jerking sideways).

1.6 Running to two major release points in level 1 (help and problems), level 3 (change and ARCXs) and level 4 (responsibility and fixed conditions) as is currently done in level 0 (straightwire and communications). The courses remain the same. Each of the two grades is run and attested to individually.

1.7 Redefinition of the state of clear as being "no longer affected by the force in mental pictures and free from stimulous response reactive thought". You will find that a clear has a moment of free choice before he dramatizes something (he decides to let himself have an ARCX etc.). But he can still have out grades and other abberations. Cancellation of the policy that makes it a suppressive act to invalidate the state of clear. The state should stand on its own merits rather than needing to be defended.

1.8 We should reinstate level 0 to 4 training as a prerequisite to the SHSBC even for Clears and OTs. This encourages people to do their levels right away and provides a fast and easy gradient into training as an auditor. And it will speed up the SHSBC considerably.

1.9 Clears and OTs with somatics are to be handled first of all with assists and if this is inadequate, dianetic rundowns can be used by substituting recall processes for R3R. NOTS can keep a somatic restimulated (and should be included as part of the assist handling on an upper level case), but if the somatic is run out, there is nothing to restimulate.

1.10 Cancellation of confidentiality. However, all rules concerning not going out-gradient on new people and avoiding stirring up things above the persons case level will remain in force. All discussion of entities and BTs below the OT 3 case level is to be restrained and handled by using the referance in "History of Man" (you get worse if you give them power and you do fine if you ignore them) and by further pointing out that our senior datum is that the PC (not entities or whatever) is responsible for the condition he is in. As a last resort, a troublesome entity can be handled in review by using Nots techniques, but this is only if the PC insists that its there, you never search for or stir up these things up below OT 3.

1.11 Improved NOTS correction lists. See Super Scio #6. Add questions like "blaming something on BTs", "putting them there to run", "bypassed the cause over life EP" etc. The "point to the being you divided from" process can be used experimentally in review if the PC insists that he has a split off piece of himself that needs to be handled. Audited Nots rundowns are not to be done after a PC has achieved the Solo Nots EP (and it might possibly be achieved on audited Nots or even on OT 3). BTs can be handled if they show up, but you don't run processes to search for them once the person has reached the solo nots EP.

1.12 Audited Nots should be a brief setup and repair and the main thrust should be solo. Solo Nots should be exported to the AOs as quickly as possible (discussed further below).

1.13 Clears and OTs with grades style difficulties should have the appropriate grade run or rehabbed. There is the potential for OT grades processes which go beyond lower level grades, but this would be something to research.

1.14 Immediate release of OT levels above 8. We need to resume upward motion on the bridge. At a minimum, old 4 through 7 can be expanded with additional processes from the 1950s. But the rumor is that Ron left more OT levels which could be released. So we have lots that can be issued. Beyond this there are things like handling actual GPMs (see Super Scio #3), so there is no need to worry about running out of levels before we make a real OT.

1.15 We need a steady export of higher technology to lower organizations. The ship and flag would remain as centers of technical excellence and have each new OT level as an exclusive for a period of time, but would not permanently hang onto services. The ship can do new OT levels. OT8 can be exported to Flag (and Flag can also pilot new rundowns). Solo Nots can move to the AOs and Nots auditor training can be done at Saint Hills. The Briefing Course, CCRD, and solo to OT2 can be exported to the outer orgs. The missions should be allowed to train people through class 3 (leave class 4 and specialist rundown training at the outer orgs). Note that the missions must offer training as well as processing or else we will be forever short of auditors.

1.16 More 1950s tapes should be added to checksheets, expecially on the upper OT levels.

1.17 If there is something abusive in the Introspection rundown, it should be revised or cancelled. The same for any other abuse in training or processing.


2.1 The chaplin's office needs to be beefed up considerably and given the hat of righting wrongs as discussed earlier. An international chaplin becomes the post for reforming the subject when there are abusive conditions in policy. If some new insanity like the "Finance Police" should start up, the Chaplin International should be powerful enough to stop it dead in its tracks.

2.2 The org board should be changed to place treasury under HCO and move dissem to the public divisions so that the org exec division can become pure tech and get a tech hotshot on the exec council as discussed earlier.

2.3 Management by stats would be changed to management by good indicators with stats being a highly important management indicator.

2.4 Reinstate "Only Accounts Talks Money".

2.5 Cancel the RPF and substitute a non-abusive staff rehabilitation program to get failing staff members back in shape.

2.6 Real cancellation of Fair Game and Disconnection. The non-enturbulation policy would remain in effect and would be subsituted for disconnection when necessary to ensure case progress. This is currently used when two Scientologists in good standing are at each others throats and going PTS to each other. We will give non-Scientologists the same curtesy while ensuring that the PC is left alone while he is getting audited.

2.7 Tech training of staff members is to be given preferance over management training once a staff member has learned his post hat. Staff co-audits on everything (using readit-drillit-doit as needed) and local delivery of solo levels to staff (as soon as a CS is available) will be used to ensure that staff make good case progress and move up the bridge. This training and processing is their exchange for long hours and low pay and should really be pushed so that staff aren't taken advantage of.

2.8 Lower conditions are not to be assigned except in flagrant circumstances. And the chaplin has the right to overrule these even in the face of policy. Reinstate "Ethics exists to get tech in" (if its not interfearing with the PCs auditing, leave it alone).

2.9 Review and cleanup financial and pricing policies. We should make our money on volume of flow rather than high prices. Outer orgs should not be drained to finance the top command structure because they generate the volume flow that keeps the entire structure doing well. We should have regular lower prices rather than crazy discount schemes. Efforts should be made to streamline progress so that people get more "bang for the bucks" rather than trying to milk as much as possible before letting somebody move on.

2.10 Simplification and removal of unnecessary steps on routing forms. It should be fast and fun to move through lines rather than an annoyance.

2.11 Full reinstatement of the 1967 policy "New 2D Rules". Drop all rules against homosexuals etc. Keep people from messing each other up and encourage them to put aside their 2D games while they are trying to get through a new level, but otherwise leave them alone. If somebody is abberated, it will get run out eventually. We are not the morals police. The Sea Org does have an image to maintain, so their staff shouldn't be wildly promiscious or throwing orgies, but they don't have to be more puritanical than what is currently accepted by the society at large.

2.12 Re-emphasize that policy is a guiding thing rather than an absolute (see "Theory of Organization: What is Policy").

2.13 More truth, more communication, more ARC. Less concern with PR. More compassion and less harrassment.

Note that some abbusive things, such as the "overboards" were cancelled long ago.


3.1 An immediate end to the "war with the squirrels". Acceptance of the freezone as a group with shared goals but differences of opinion.

3.2 Cool down the "war with the psychs". Abusive and barbaric phychiatric practices such as shock treatment remain a target, but many don't engage in these. The orgs general attitude should be that they are usually lacking in spiritual enlightenment and are a bit out of date rather than considering them to be a source of evil.

3.3 Stop fighting the metaphysical community. Mixing practices should remain in force to the degree that you don't engage in metaphysical actions at the same time that you are trying to do a Scientology level, but there is no other block. Let them read Krishnamurti or cast a horoscope as long as they keep it off lines and put it aside while they are doing a course or getting audited.

3.4 Cancel "Issue Authority". Allow free and open discussions, especially on the internet. If we let satisfied public chat as they see fit without bothering them with ethics and letting them talk freely (even when they disagree with tech or policy), there will be enough good communication to balance any amount of viscious attacks. Also cancel "Jokers and Degraders". Humor is not a crime. A viscious attack disguised as humor should be handled based on the visciousness rather than destroying our sense of humor.

3.5 Stop attacking the internet. Make peace with the webmasters etc. Build good relations.

3.6 Drop all court cases except those necessary to defend the organization from harm, and try to settle those in a reasonable manner as well.

3.7 Add a powerful Chaplin's division to OSA. It should work to right wrongs and clean up our external relations. I would not disarm OSA because of the occasional vengeful attacker who will not see reason, but this becomes a last resort. Walk softly and carry a big stick becomes the keynote rather than savagely attacking everything that moves.

3.8 Separate the publication of tapes, books, and bulletins from orthodox Scientology. Golden Era and Bridge should act as service organizations who sell materials (even those currently labled confidential) to everybody, even freezone and declared enemies of the church. Try to get everything available and get the prices down. Make money on volume.

3.9 Issue an absolute general amnesty, with no amends required, covering every possible offense. In the future, only declare people as enemies if they are truely attacking the organization. Do not declare people who disagree with us or blow or join the freezone. And realize that even an enemy is not fair game, the laws of the land still hold true. The high scaled viewpoint is to fight one's opponents with honor rather than treachery.

3.10 Allow people to move between the orgs and the freezone and back again. The org should maintain its position by the excellence of its technical delivery rather than by stomping out the competition.


There is lots more that could be done: Group processing on TV, a new Dianetic home co-audit book, simplification of policy, expansion of tech, an honest biography of Ron etc. But the above should be enough to clean things up and create a boom in the subject.


The above is a bit too long and complex to serve as a rallying cry, and it requires too much understanding of tech and policy to be easily passed around.

So here is an abbreviated, simplified list to use in pushing for a reformation of Scientology.


The general target is a restoration of truth, open communication, and care for one's fellow man.

1. Recognition that the subject is still on a research line. Redefinition of the State of Clear as being "no longer affected by the force in mental pictures and free from stimulous response reactive thought". Acknowlegement that this does not errase the grades of release or handle the basic problems, overts, and upsets which originally caused the being to decay. The OT levels are a gradient to allow the being to reach these on the early track.

2. Cancellation of confidentially. Re-emphasis of Scientology as a religion and abandoment of the viewpoint that it is a business with trade secrets. Termination of all leagal suits except those necessary to defend the church from direct attack. As a matter of relegious freedom, all materials should be easily available to anyone regardless of their status within orthodox Scientology.

3. Promotion of free and open communication. Cancellation of "Issue Authority" "Jokers and Degraders". Use of "mixing practices" only to forbid actual practice while trying to do a Scientology level at the same time. An end to the persecution of squirrels and psychs except for situations of actual physical abuse. A recognition that we have shared goals with many other groups.

4. Cancellation of eligability checks for students and PCs. Restoration of the sancitity of the confessional, even for those who subsequently are labled as enemies. Use of the FPRD only as a major case action for the purpose of case gain and not to gather data.

5. Cancellation of all policies on suppressive persons and an end to declaring people SPs. Use of "non-enturbulation orders" for the duration of training or processing as a last resort when a PTS condition cannot otherwise be handled. An absolute and total amnesty for all past actions (because we'll never sort out what was or wasn't justified). Subsequently, people are only to be declared as enemies if they engage in flagrant and unreasonable attacks against the church. People who disagree or blow are not to be labled as enemies. Elimination of the use of "lower conditions" except in circumstances of outright damage and danger.

6. Establishment of an International Chaplin, a chaplin's division within OSA, and an expanded office of the chaplin within the organizations, all with the power to right wrongs, override policy as needed, and keep the orgs operating in an ethical manner towards their staff and public.

7. An end to all physical abuse, including cancellation of the RPF and an end to all penalties for lower conditions.

8. Intensive tech training, co-auditing, and solo auditing delivered locally to all staff as an exchange for the low pay and long working hours.

9. A steady release of new OT levels and a steady downward export of levels to the next lower level of organization as the new levels become the premier service for the top level orgs.

10. A cleanup and simplification of pricing. Ethical behaviour on the subject of money. Restoration of the policy "Only Accounts Talks Money".

11, Full reinstatement of the 1967 policy "New 2D Rules". Drop all rules against homosexuals etc. The Sea Org does have an image to maintain, so their staff shouldn't be wildly promiscious or throwing orgies, but they don't have to be more puritanical than what is currently accepted by the society at large.

12. Change from management by stats to management by good indicators with stats being a highly important management indicator.

13. Re-emphasize that policy is a guiding thing rather than an absolute (see "Theory of Organization: What is Policy").

14. More truth, more communication, more ARC. Less concern with PR. More compassion and less harrassment.


I would intend that amnesty to apply to everybody on both sides of the fence. One big reason that revolutions go sour when they win is that they take revenge on the overthrown regime. This is why things never change so much as they remain the same. The revolutionaries soon take on the color of those whom they deposed. You break this and many other deadly cycles by means of forgiveness. Christ was right. Forgiveness is one of the keys to getting out of the trap.

Previous page


Next page