6307C25 SHSpec-290 Comm Cycle in Auditing

     [Illustrations for this lecture are contained in HCOB 74Aug63 "Lecture
Graphs".]

     Most auditors, early on, get the idea that there are all kinds of PCs:
good and bad.  There are PCs who are nervier about comm breakdowns than
others, but practically no PC can stand up against a good comm cycle.  The
difficulty an auditor has comes from his own auditing cycle and his
impatience.

     There are two comm cycles in the auditing comm cycle, one with the
auditor at cause, one with the PC at cause.  They are only connected by the
fact that the auditor has calculatedly restimulated something in the PC which
the PC discharges on his half of the cycle.  That is the whole game of the
auditing cycle.  [See Fig. 12]

FIGURE 12: THE BASIC AUDITING COMM CYCLE

                              [GRAPHICS INSERTED]

     Some auditing breaks down because the auditor is unwilling to restimulate
the PC.  If the PC doesn't answer the auditing question, he never gets rid of
the restimulation.  If the PC alter-ises, e.g.  if he alter-ises the question
[or if he alter-ises the data from the bank], then every restimulation gives
rise to an alter-is.  The cycle of acknowledgment is another little shadow
cycle, a fade-out.  [See Fig. 13] Another shadow cycle is the auditor seeing
that the PC has received the auditing command.  You can tell by locking at him
that he didn't get it, or that he is doing something peculiar with it.  So do
look at the PC to find out.

FIGURE 13: THE FULL AUDITING COMM CYCLE

                              [GRAPHICS INSERTED]

     So there are really seven comm cycles in the auditing cycle:  the four
main ones, plus three more:

     1. Observing that the PC is ready to receive the auditing command.
        Failure to do this one can cause trouble, if the PC is hung up on the
        previous cycle.  He doesn't really get the command if he wasn't ready
        to receive it.

     2. Observing that the PC got the acknowledgment.

     3. A tiny one before the acknowledgment, which is seeing whether the
        PC has or hasn't said all he is going to say.  If you acknowledge him
        before he has said all, you haven't let one line flow to its end, so
        the acknowledgment can't actually go through, and the lines jam.

When you violate one of these comm cycles, you will get trouble, in which case
you might need more cycles to unsnarl it, so the auditing cycle can occur.

     There's another comm cycle inside the auditing cycle, which is between
the PC and the bank.  [See Fig. 141 You have an effect produced by the
auditing command which results in a cause, the restimulation causing the PC to
outflow.  It is actually two comm cycles there: PC to bank and bank to PC.
Then you get PC to auditor.  The latter is actually the least important of the
cycles, except when it isn't being done.  And it is the hardest to detect when
it isn't being done.

FIGURE 14: THE EXPANDED BASIC AUDITING COMM CYCLE

                              [GRAPHICS INSERTED]

     What is mainly wrong with your auditing cycle is that you have confused
some of the comm cycles within it.  When you are doing a complicated action
like R2H, if you are nervy on handling a basic tool like the auditing cycle,
break it down and work on it while doing something simple on an easy PC. Then
you will find out where it is jammed up.

     There is a different auditing cycle inside the regular auditing cycle,
which occurs when the PC originates.  [See Fig. 15]  Just handle it as its own
drill.  It handles any origin, including the PC throwing down the cans.  The
pattern of cause-distance-effect is reversed, because the PC is now being
cause at the start of the cycle.  What the PC causes has to be understood, so
there can be some little comm cycles where the auditor gets it clarified.
What the auditor uses to clarify it mustn't just cause the PC to repeat
himself.  "Tell me some more about that," is a good approach, but whatever you
use isn't rote.  Once the origination has been clarified, the auditor
acknowledges and can then resume the regular cycle, if the PC is ready for
it.  Also, at the beginning of the PC's origination cycle, the auditor should
observe that the PC is about to originate and shut up and make the comm cycle
of "I'm listening".

FIGURE 15: THE PRECLEAR ORIGINATION COMM CYCLE

                              [GRAPHICS INSERTED]

     The fact that duplication is part of the comm cycle carries it over into
A, R, C and U.  This makes the auditing comm cycle different from the military
comm cycle, which doesn't require understanding:

     Military Cycle:  Cause-distance-effect-compliance

     Auditing Cycle:  Cause-distance-effect-understanding.

Hence the auditing comm cycle involves A and R too.  There has to be A and R
at the effect point, because of duplication, and there had better be A and R
at the cause point also.  So there should be ARC at both the cause point and
the effect point.

     The TR's handle comm cycles, from one side or another.  A full auditing
cycle would need a full-dress TR, above what is covered in TR's 0-4.

     A and R come into TR-1.  It is one thing to enunciate syllables clearly
and another to have an understandable communication.  R is involved; it has to
be duplicatable.  An accent can get in the way of duplication.  It is up to
the auditor to be comprehensible, from the point of view of accent, diction,
and sense, since if the auditor is not comprehended by the PC, TR-1 is out and
no comm cycle or auditing takes place.

     Then there is the PC who doesn't want to be audited at all.  Here you
have to establish a comm cycle with some trick, like "Tell me why you
shouldn't be audited." Or if the PC ia misemotional and the A is out, you can
do an ARC break assessment in order to pick up what is awry with the comm
cycles between the PC and himself, where the BPC lies.

     A repetitive auditing cycle is a specialized activity.  It gets you in
trouble if you don't realize that there is a point beyond which you shouldn't
be trying to complete the cycle.  That point is an ability regained.  That EP
is of senior importance.

     The major auditing cycle has as its EP ability regained.  Junior to that
is the process cycle, which, in turn, is made up of single auditing cycles,
repeated as needed.  So the cycles that exist in auditing are:

     1. A single auditing cycle.

     2. A process cycle.

     3. A major auditing cycle.

Indications of flatness in a process cycle are:

     1. Three equal comm lags, with the PC confidently doing the process.

     2. A minor cognition; a win.

     3. TA flat.

     4. Major cognition.

     5. Ability regained.

The above EP's are given in ascending order of seniority.  (1) and (2) are
both absolute minimums.  The first real flat point is when all the TA has been
run out of a process.  A major cognition takes precedence over the TA
criterion.  To continue over a major cognition invalidates the PC.  The senior
EP is ability regained, which is also the EP of a major auditing cycle.

