Talk:World Institute of Scientology Enterprises

Comment

more needs to go into the actual history of Scientology... the more could be enunciated about the institute. This really needs some cleanup and clarification, but I don't understand much of the author's intent.

"It uses what it calls 'standard admin' (administration) and that is a fairly large volume of information. WISE applies this information into the business world in such a way as to make the Admin Tech useable in the business world." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Snakeyeswin (talk • contribs) 00:23, 19 April 2006

Removed section

I have removed a section suggesting that the Mission: Renaissance art school is a Scientology front. As editors in this area well know, it is imperative with Scientology topics that our sourcing be absolutely rock-solid and that WP:NPOV be followed scrupulously. Sourcing an accusation like this to a blog just isn't thorough enough. I invite editors in this area to please better nail this one down. Phil Sandifer 18:45, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

If you research the WISE directories, you will see that Mission:Rennaisance is indeed a Scientology WISE organization. Since it is also appears to be a sucesfull business, perhaps calling it a "front" is not accurate. Did not find any additional confirmation that there is recruiting pressure through Mission:Renaisance, though there are researched articles on other WISE organizations putting pressure on employees to attend Scientology training programs. LA Times: Converting the Business World (Sterling Management Systems). Perhaps somebody with more free time than I can research this further. Gallup 23:11, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't doubt you in principle, but still - a more reliable source is going to have to be found for this. We can't go making accusations about people on the basis of blogs. Phil Sandifer 05:23, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Point of fact; being a "Scientology WISE organization" simply means that the owner(s) of the firm have embraced Hubbard's administrative ideas such as Management by statisitics and the Org board and have agreed by abide by a certain Code of Ethics which includes arbitration by a WISE mediator of any disputes with another WISE member. That is the basic company membership. Now if the firm also wants to train its employees in the Hubbard administrative technology using WISE materials then they become a higher-level member. It is this formal training that some object to but most WISE members to not provide the formal training. --Justanother 10:52, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

On the other hand, some do (Hey, isn't an e-meter a religious artifact?) AndroidCat 21:11, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

That is right, some do. And I imagine only a small number of firms use an e-meter in cramming (cramming means finding out what a person does not understand about their job and fixing that misunderstanding). In a Scientology church, the meter is usually used in cramming to help spot the area of confusion and may or may not be a part of the remedy. Usually the remedy is some sort of study order that the person does on their own or with another (no meter) and then back to the meter to check for the floating needle on the action. While every WISE member would have an Org Board with someone in charge of Qual (correction) I doubt many use a meter. And certainly the meter would not be used if the person objects to it. Most likely the auditing skill desired is to audit only those staff that are Scientologists, a position known as Staff Staff Auditor (to distinquish from Staff Auditor that audits public in the HGC). --Justanother 22:48, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

deletion of critical material

A link to the site http://home.snafu.de/tilman/prolinks/I-20.html has been repeatedly deleted with no apparent reason beyond that it is critical of scientology. While it is not the sole source for this article, it does contain material that is directly relevent to the article's subject matter and regardless of whether or not individual scientologists agree with that material it should remain present in the links section. (RookZERO 18:48, 16 June 2007 (UTC))

Heheh, Justanother claims (once again) that my site is a "hate site". I wonder why he hasn't filed a criminal complaint in Germany in all these years, since creating "hate sites" is a crime (§ 130 StGB [1]) that is punished with jail up to three years.

Maybe it is because my site isn't a "hate site" at all :-) --Tilman 19:19, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

gormez et al

See Sterling Management Systems, talk page. Shutterbug 03:26, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

External reference links???

I thought external reference links were supposed to be in the references section - linking to other non-biased WIKI pages. What I see here is an attempt to trick people into following content links to reference pages. This seems unfair to other WIKI pages that obviously cannot put external links into the content of the article (otherwise, there would be external links all over WIKI).

Naglma 19:15, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Done! Be bold next time and just change it! No need to ask on talk page for such uncontroversial changes. Unfortunatly there are external links in the body of articles "all over WIKI" wich want to be moved to the appropriate section ;). -- Stan _talk 19:43, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

'space character' spam

I just NEED to comment on something that I find infinitely amusing. I just read the Scientology arbitration case and how these pages are being monitored for substantial modification etc. Then I went here to read the pages. Now, I just edited this page to remove a space character that was added to the beginning of a paragraph. Not a substantial edit by any stretch. But it turns out that the wiki markup makes paragraphs that start with spaces be unformatted i.e. the text doesn't wrap. This made the paragraph difficult to read, especially the last part where there are some negative facts about the subject of the article. Human creativity and willpower truly have no boundaries! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.115.90.252 (talk) 17:38, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Is WISE a front group?

I've read through the article a few times, and one of the functions of WISE seems fairly obviously to be to recruit people to the COS. They are not up front about it though, so it is hard to find decent sources. There is a small and very well referenced article by noted Scientology critic and journalist Mark Bunker who goes into some detail of the question, and concludes that WISE is indeed a Scientology front group, here. Is this article:

1) acceptable as a source?

and

2) good enough to characterize WISE as a front group in the intro? Thimbleweed (talk) 13:13, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

A couple of comments:

- the article is actually by Jeff Jacobsen. In my view it's an acceptable source, so long as it's an attributed quote.

- not quite good enough by itself to characterise WISE as a 'front group', but there are other sources which say the same thing: e.g. illustration

thumbnail|center

has WISE's logo (lion and cubs), placing WISE as part of Scintology's 'division 6', something which is 'emanated' from 'the central org'.

--Mknjbhvgcf (talk) 15:23, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Although on further refleciton, perhaps the term 'Front Group' would be unfair, as I think that term denotes a degree of concealment. Since WISE is the World Institute of Scientology Enterprises, it can hardly be accused of hiding the Scientology connection. Perhaps the important point to make is that it's controlled by the Church of Scientology. --Mknjbhvgcf (talk) 15:26, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Additional source: "Spinoffs spread group's message Series: EDITOR'S NOTE", BOB HENDERSON, St. Petersburg Times, 7 August 1995. " When it comes to the Church of Scientology, you need a score card. / The organization is famous for, among other things, having a multitude of front or spinoff groups. Here are just a few of them and what they're about as reported in the Flag Clear Expansion Committee Newsletter, one of Scientology's many publications. / ... "World Institute of Scientology Enterprises members have been expanding in our community at a faster rate than ever before. . . . Over 40 Clearwater business owners have gotten on board to apply LRH Admin Tech correctly by implementing the Model of Admin Know-How Program." " --Mknjbhvgcf (talk) 15:32, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

I have taken the liberty of adding the graphic to the article, it's from a WISE publication after all. As for the front group question: WISE deny they have anything to do with recruiting. Their many front groups (Sterling, U-Man) also deny the COS link. Personally, I would say that makes WISE a front group, but I am happy to accept other points of view. Thimbleweed (talk) 15:34, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I saw. I think that's sensible, given that WISE is in the graphic.

On the 'front group' question, I'd call it a spinoff or 'Scientology-controlled' instead - because it doesn't conceal the Scientology connection - but let's see what other people think.

Also - another possible source: "In Whose Hands? How Allstate Applied Scientology Methods To Train Its Managers --- Led by a Church Member, Classes Elevated Profits Above `Reasonableness' --- Copyright: L. Ron Hubbard", Rochelle Sharpe, The Wall Street Journal, 22 March 1995:

the influence of Scientology at Allstate is no joking matter. Between 1988 and 1992, it turns out, the Good Hands company entrusted the training of workers coast to coast to a consultant teaching Scientology management principles.

The consultant says more than 3,500 Allstate supervisors and agents participated in the nearly 200 seminars conducted by his firm, which was licensed by a Scientology institute to teach such classes. The course materials -- which preached a rigorous, even ruthless devotion to raising productivity -- were developed by Mr. Hubbard, founder of the religion that some critics claim is a cult.

One of the purposes of teaching Mr. Hubbard's management program, a Scientology pamphlet states, is to instill "the ethics, principles, codes and doctrines of the Scientology religion throughout the business world."

Though the company recently banned and repudiated the courses, their reverberations are still being felt -- and may even be growing. Some employees continue to use Mr. Hubbard's techniques, while other workers weave conspiracy theories about an alleged Scientology plot to infiltrate the highest levels of the company. Some agents believe they have been harassed and, despite repeated denials, the insurance giant has been unable to put all the speculation to rest. Recently, agents in Florida have launched a drive to unionize the work force -- and they are using the Scientology issue as a centerpiece of their attack on management.

Allstate employees who took the classes say an important, although hardly exclusive, theme of the training was an uncompromising commitment to the bottom line -- even if that meant treating poor performers harshly. The course materials warned managers never to be sympathetic to someone whose productivity numbers, or "statistics," were down.

"We reward production and up statistics and penalize nonproduction and down statistics. Always," the training booklet said. "Don't get reasonable about down statistics. They are down because they are down. If someone was on the post, they would be up." The course underscored this point by advising that "reasonableness is the great enemy in running an organization."

The program also taught psychological concepts such as the "tone scale," which catalogs emotions and, Scientologists believe, can be used to influence behavior. Illustrated with cartoon characters, the scale contains 41 levels, ranging from death, apathy and grief near the bottom to exhilaration, action and "serenity of beingness" at the top. All of the levels are numbered: Covert hostility is 1.1, boredom, 2.5.

...

 While such ideas appealed to some employees, others were amused or offended. David Richardson, who took the course in 1990, remembers exchanging startled glances with a colleague and muttering: "If they turn off all the lights and start singing John Denver music, I'm walking out."

Allstate initially responded to questions from this newspaper with a brief written statement: "There is absolutely no connection between the Allstate Insurance Company and the Church of Scientology." If any Scientology materials were included in training sessions, it was "a blip on the screen . . . a very inconsequential, one-shot situation," a spokesman said.

But later, Jeff Kaufman, a regional vice president who participated in Allstate's decision to use the Scientology consultant, acknowledged that the controversial courses were taught to agents and managers nationwide. Mr. Kaufman described the employment of the consultant as "an accident."

"I feel like our intentions were very honorable," Mr. Kaufman says. But now, he adds, the matter "is biting at me personally." He emphasizes that he didn't know at the time of the training that Scientology principles were involved.

Many Allstate employees, though, did know the connection. For one thing, the introduction to their course book declared the materials "were researched and written entirely by" Mr. Hubbard, who died in 1986. Some trainees recognized the name instantly; others learned who he was from colleagues taking the course.

Mr. Hubbard is best known not as a management guru but as the science-fiction writer who founded the Church of Scientology International in 1954. Since its earliest days, the church has been a target of anticult activists who say it exploits its members and harasses opponents. Church members counter that their organization has been systematically misrepresented, even persecuted, by the media and government.

...

all of Mr. Hubbard's written words, including his management pronouncements, are considered religious scripture by the church, according to the Scientology pamphlet, "The Corporations of Scientology."

One Scientology brochure predicts that as businesspeople use the L. Ron Hubbard technology and "win with it, they will reach for and apply LRH technology in other aspects of their lives and may become Scientologists."

...

"Never even discipline someone with an up statistic. Never accept an ethics report on one -- just stamp it `Sorry, Up Statistic' and send it back," Mr. Pearson's materials advised.

...

"It allowed management by intimidation. It was vindictive -- a way to try to remove people," Mr. Richardson says. "We would harass agents" by calling them constantly and visiting them repeatedly.

...

Lawsuits and Equal Employment Opportunity Commission complaints were proliferating; more than two dozen have alleged fraud, harassment or discrimination by Allstate, often in connection with wrongful-discharge cases. One manager joked about forcing so many to quit that they would have to bring in "body bags" to cart them away, while others described agents with low productivity as below the "scum line," workers said in pretrial statements related to these lawsuits.

...

That fall, for example, some agents participating in a new training program, the Agency Development Process, noticed two pages, titled "Statistics Graphs, How to Figure the Scale," that were identical to those found in the Scientology material. The references to L. Ron Hubbard had been deleted.

Allstate's new companywide Better Prospecting Seminar also had some similarities to Mr. Hubbard's program, focusing on statistical analyses of performance and describing employees' various tasks using the Scientology term "hats." The new program offended some agents, who say they felt they were being taught to deceive and confuse their customers.

...

 (See related letters: "Letters to the Editor: Scientology in the Workplace" -- WSJ April 10, 1995)

(See related letter: "Letters to the Editor: Scientology's Battle Against Hate Groups" -- WSJ May 11, 1995)

It's a long and detailed article, and well worth a read. --Mknjbhvgcf (talk) 15:44, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Reading the quotes, I realized I had read it before. It is as you say well worth the read.

Thank you for rewriting the lede,it is much better now. I am wondering if it would be an idea to make a section on WISE "consultants", similar to the one for Narconon. In the current article, the "affiliated" groups are kind of hidden in the tex. Thimbleweed (talk) 17:57, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Oh good, I'm glad you like the rewritten lede. It's a pretty big change, I wasn't sure if it was any good (but thought it could always be reverted if it wasn't).

re "a section on WISE 'consultants', similar to the one for Narconon" - I'm not clear what you mean, can you re-phrase? Do you mean a new article, similar to the Narconon article (?), to cover the subject of WISE's 'consultants' as distinct from WISE itself? If so then I'd say it might be better dealt with as a section of the existing WISE article... at least unless/until the existing article gets too big.

--Mknjbhvgcf (talk) 20:56, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

The whole 'History' section seems to be without even one source

Just an observation. --Mknjbhvgcf (talk) 20:58, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Dentists

Why are there so many dentists mentioned in courts section. Is scientology so common among dentists in USA? 217.30.64.206 (talk) 21:48, 11 December 2021 (UTC)