...

WHYS

One uses the above knowledge and skill to track down the real reason for the positive or nonoptimum situation. This is called a “Why.”


Why = that basic outness found which will lead to a recovery of statistics.


Wrong Why = the incorrectly identified outness which when applied does not lead to recovery.


A mere explanation = a “Why” given as the Why that does not open the door to any recovery.


Example: A mere explanation: “The statistics went down because of rainy weather that week.” So? So do we now turn off rain? Another mere explanation: “The staff became overwhelmed that week.” An order saying “Don’t overwhelm staff” would be the possible “solution” of some manager. BUT THE STATISTICS WOULDN’T RECOVER.


The real Why when found and corrected leads straight back to improved stats (statistics).


A wrong Why, corrected, will further depress stats.
A mere explanation does nothing at all and decay continues.
Here is a situation as it is followed up:


The stats of an area were down. Investigation disclosed there had been sickness two weeks before. The report came in: “The statistics were down because people were sick.” This was a mere explanation. Very reasonable. But it solved nothing. What do we do now? Maybe we accept this as the correct Why. And give an order, “All people in the area must get a medical exam and unhealthy workers will not be accepted and unhealthy ones will be fired.” As it’s a correction to a wrong Why, the stats really crash. So that’s not it. Looking further we find the real Why. In the area, a boss gives orders to the wrong people which, when executed, then hurt their individual stats. We organize the place, train the boss and we get a stat recovery and even an improvement.


The correct Why led to a stat recovery. Here is another one. Statistics are down in a school. An investigation comes up with a mere explanation: “The students were all busy with sports.” So management says “No sports!” Statistics go down again. A new investigation comes up with a wrong Why: “The students are being taught wrongly.” Management sacks the dean. Statistics really crash now. A further, more competent investigation occurs. It turns out that there were 140 students and only the dean and one instructor! And the dean had other duties! We return the dean to his job and hire two more instructors making three. Statistics soar. Because we got the right Why.


Management and organizational catastrophes and successes are all explained by these three types of Why. An arbitrary, a false order or datum entered into a situation, is probably just a wrong Why held in by law. And if so held in, it will crash the place.
One really has to understand logic to get to the correct Why and must really be on his toes not to use and correct a wrong Why.


In world banking, where inflation occurs, finance regulations or laws are probably just one long parade of wrong Whys. The value of the money and its usefulness to the citizen deteriorate to such an extent that a whole ideology can be built up (as in Sparta by Lycurgus [a Greek lawgiver] who invented iron money nobody could lift in order to rid Sparta of money evils) that knocks money out entirely and puts nothing but nonsense in its place.


Organizational troubles are greatly worsened by using mere explanations (which lead to no remedies) or wrong Whys (which further depress stats). Organizational recoveries come from finding the real Why and correcting it.


The test of the real Why is “When it is corrected, do stats recover?” If they do that was it. And any other remedial order given but based on a wrong Why would have to be cancelled quickly.

INVESTIGATORY ACTIONS

Correction of things which are not wrong and neglecting things which are not right puts the tombstone on any organization or civilization. 


This boils down to correct investigation. It is not a slight skill. It is the basic skill behind any intelligent action. 

Suppressive Justice

When justice goes astray (as it usually does) the things that have occurred are: 


1. Use of  justice for some other purpose than public safety (such as maintaining a privileged group or indulging a fixed idea) or 


2. Omitted use of investigatory procedure. 


All suppressive use of the forces of justice can be traced back to one or the other of these. 


Aberrations and hate very often find outlet by calling them “justice” or “law and order.” This is why it can be said that man cannot be trusted with justice. 


This or just plain stupidity bring about a neglect of intelligent investigatory procedures. Yet all group sanity depends upon correct and unaberrated (rational) investigatory procedures. Only in that way can one establish causes of things. And only by establishing causes can one cease to be the effect of unwanted situations. 


It is one thing to be able to observe. It is quite another to utilize observations so that one can get to the basis of things. 

Sequences

Investigations become necessary in the face of outpoints or pluspoints. 


Investigations can occur out of idle curiosity or particular interest. They can also occur to locate the cause of pluspoints. 
Whatever the motive for investigation, the action itself is conducted by sequences. 


If one is incapable mentally of tracing a series of events or actions, one cannot investigate.

Altered sequence is a primary block to investigation. 
At first glance, omitted data would seem to be the block. On the contrary, it is the end product of an investigation and is what pulls an investigation along—one is looking for omitted data. 
An altered sequence of actions defeats any investigation. 
Examples: We will hang him and then conduct a trial. We will assume who did it and then find evidence to prove it. A crime should be provoked to find who commits them. 


Any time an investigation gets back-to-front, it will not succeed. 


Thus, if an investigator himself has any trouble with seeing or visualizing sequences of actions, he will inevitably come up with the wrong answer. 


Reversely, when one sees that someone has come up with a wrong or incomplete answer, one can assume that the investigator has trouble with sequences of events or, of course, did not really investigate. 


One can’t really credit that Sherlock Holmes would say, “I have here the fingerprint of Mr. Murgatroyd on the murder weapon. Have the police arrest him. Now, Watson, hand me a magnifying glass and ask Sgt. Doherty to let us look over his fingerprint files.” 


If one cannot visualize a series of actions, like a ball bouncing down a flight of stairs, or if one cannot relate in proper order several different actions with one object into a proper sequence, he will not be able to investigate. 


If one can, that’s fine. 

Investigations

All betterment of life depends on finding out pluspoints and why and reinforcing them, locating outpoints and why and eradicating them. 


This is the successful survival pattern of living. A primitive who is going to survive does just that and a scientist who is worth anything does just that.

The fisherman sees sea gulls clustering over a point on the sea. That’s the beginning of a short sequence, point number one. He predicts a school of fish, point number two. He sails over as sequence point number three. He looks down as sequence point number four. He sees fish as point number five. He gets out a net as point number six. He circles the school with the net, number seven. He draws in the net, number eight. He brings the fish on board, number nine. He goes to port, number ten. He sells the fish, number eleven. That’s following a pluspoint—cluster of sea gulls. 


A sequence from an outpoint might be: Housewife serves dinner. Nobody eats the cake, number one; she tastes it, number two; she recognizes soap in it, number three. She goes to kitchen, number four. She looks into cupboard, number five. She finds the soapbox upset, number six. She sees the flour below it, number seven. She sees cookie jar empty, number eight. She grabs young son, number nine. She shows him the setup, number ten. She gets a confession, number eleven. And number twelve is too painful to describe. 

Discoveries

All discoveries are the end product of a sequence of investigatory actions that begin with either a pluspoint or an outpoint. 


Thus all knowledge proceeds from pluspoints or outpoints observed. 


And all knowledge depends on an ability to investigate.

And all investigation is done in correct sequence. 


And all successes depend upon the ability to do these things.