# "9 to 5: The spies not in the cold…"



## MarkOttawa (31 Oct 2010)

Post at _Unambiguously Ambidextrous_:
http://unambig.com/9-to-5-the-spies-not-in-the-cold/



> …may not be achieving too much, according to former CIA clandestine service officers...
> 
> I have little confidence that any newly-created Canadian foreign intelligence agency would be any different and I doubt the need for one...
> 
> ...



Mark
Ottawa


----------



## Greymatters (1 Nov 2010)

Ever since 1990, there's been a shift from field-based first-hand observation to desk-based collation of facts gained by remote or electronic sources.  

Those who prefer working 'hands-on' in the field dont like this shift, and go elsewhere to where the work is more challenging; so its only natural that the currently predominent desk-sitters are those who enjoy a routine office environment...


----------



## TimBit (1 Nov 2010)

> Ever since 1990, there's been a shift from field-based first-hand observation to desk-based collation of facts gained by remote or electronic sources.



And volume-wise  these account for the by far largest share of intelligence.

Furthermore, even field-collected intelligence is more often that not useless without processing, review and analysis by, typically, desk analysts. So a balance is necessary.


----------



## Retired AF Guy (1 Nov 2010)

TimBit said:
			
		

> And volume-wise  these account for the by far largest share of intelligence.
> 
> Furthermore, even field-collected intelligence is more often that not useless without processing, review and analysis by, typically, desk analysts. So a balance is necessary.



_*ALL INTELLIGENCE* is useless without processing, review and analysis!_


----------



## OldSolduer (1 Nov 2010)

Retired AF Guy said:
			
		

> _*ALL INTELLIGENCE* is useless without processing, review and analysis!_



He's right. Information needs to be processed and analyzed.


----------



## George Wallace (1 Nov 2010)

Retired AF Guy said:
			
		

> _*ALL INTELLIGENCE* is useless without processing, review and analysis!_



_*ALL INFORMATION* is useless without processing, review and analysis!_  *After all that, INTELLIGENCE is produced and disseminated.*


----------



## Edward Campbell (1 Nov 2010)

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> He's right. Information needs to be processed and analyzed.




That (analysis and processing) is what turns information into intelligence and, altogether too often, makes it too late to be of use.


----------



## Retired AF Guy (1 Nov 2010)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> _*ALL INFORMATION* is useless without processing, review and analysis!_  *After all that, INTELLIGENCE is produced and disseminated.*



You're absolutely right. But, my impression was that TimBit was referring to the fact that there is "intelligence" material (information in other words) out there that was never collated, processed or analyzed before being disseminated. That's what I was replying to.


----------



## OldSolduer (1 Nov 2010)

Information is just that  - information. 

It needs to be analyzed and have the dots connected.

A fer instance - during a course I was on, we received reports that Fantasian Air Assault troops were sighted near airfield X. Also sighted were tactical airlift, similar to the Herc, but from a different source. Our Brigade rear area was in range of the aircraft. We did a quick assessment,  and a map study to look for areas that may have provided decent DZs - voila!! 

That is the process - simplified.
I was a Cpl at the time.


----------



## Greymatters (2 Nov 2010)

TimBit said:
			
		

> And volume-wise  these account for the by far largest share of intelligence.
> 
> Furthermore, even field-collected intelligence is more often that not useless without processing, review and analysis by, typically, desk analysts. So a balance is necessary.



Ah, but a new problem arises when the person who's good behind the desk all of a sudden gets tasked to a field unit  - and still thinks he can treat it like a 9-5 job (minus time for coffee, lunch, PT, admin, and studying for university courses).  Its happened in the past and no doubt will continue to happen in the future.  Not just Int but happens across a whole spectrum of trades...


----------



## Greymatters (2 Nov 2010)

and what's all this about 'processing' and 'reviewing' Information/Intelligence - did someone rewrite the Int cycle?


----------



## OldSolduer (2 Nov 2010)

Apparently did.

Was it this?
Direction
Collection
Collation and Analysis

Dissemination


----------



## Greymatters (2 Nov 2010)

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> Apparently did.
> 
> Was it this?
> Direction
> ...



That's the Canadian four-step cycle, where they consdier anlaysis an after-thought.  AFIK its still the current model.  The NATO cycle has five-steps, with analysis getting its own step (as it shoiuld).  

The model I use on civi street has seven steps: 
Direction - Collection - Collation - Analysis - Production - Dissemination - Feedback


----------



## The_Dictat (2 Nov 2010)

> That's the Canadian four-step cycle, where they consider anlaysis an after-thought.



In fact doing collation requires first level analysis, as you have to analyse the raw data in order to figure out where it fits into the Common Operation Picture (COP).  Collators must then know analysis techniques.  Collators are no longer only doing mapmarking and filling documents.  They do a lot of analysis and writing nowadays.

Analysts when they come to a conclusion must often put results elsewhere in the database and COP therefore doing some collation.

With the digitization of the intelligence process, the difference between collation and analysis diminiches.  Collation and analysis is more and more done concurrently.

So the fact that they are at same level is more of a reflection of the actual process rather than an afterthought.


----------



## TimBit (2 Nov 2010)

The CF model has four steps:

Direction - Collection - Processing - Dissemination

See B-GJ-005-200.

I was mostly refering to the fact that some tactical intelligence needs a lesser amount of analysis, which can be conducted locally in a theater environment. I.e. armoured columns moving SSE at 25km/h, will need a minimal amount of analysis to assess relevance, vs. years and years of paper on the seminal question of Iran`s nuclear program, which is best done by some scientist in HQ working 9 to 5. In both cases, of course there is no int without processing. Apologies for the confusion.


----------



## TimBit (2 Nov 2010)

Greymatters said:
			
		

> Ah, but a new problem arises when the person who's good behind the desk all of a sudden gets tasked to a field unit  - and still thinks he can treat it like a 9-5 job (minus time for coffee, lunch, PT, admin, and studying for university courses).  Its happened in the past and no doubt will continue to happen in the future.  Not just Int but happens across a whole spectrum of trades...



In most cases, I am sure, against their desire  You are right that bringing the 9 to 5 mentality to the field is bad. Arguably, it`s bad the other way around too. Some field collector coming to a strategic desk might go insane waiting for a critical mass of intelligence to be assessed before formulating an assessment. I would argue that both types can be retrained, even though they will always keep their mindset and cultural habits. In the end, I would argue that segregation of analysis and operations, to a certain extent, is the best way to prevent desk-types from meddling with collection to an unhealthy extent.


----------



## George Wallace (2 Nov 2010)

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> Apparently did.
> 
> Was it this?
> Direction
> ...



Actually it is:

Direction        
Collection      
Processing
Dissemination

This is followed by re-evaluation of results, modification of the "Direction" as necessary and the cycle continues; never ending.

A much simpler way of describing what other countries use five to ten steps to describe.


[Edit to add: Too slow.  A good example of "Timeliness".  }


----------



## George Wallace (2 Nov 2010)

Just to clarify what a Collator does, a Junior Collator will be expected to do the fol during their employment:

•	Transfer files between workstations
•	Extract open source information
•	Operate cryptographic systems
•	Identify sources/agencies
•	Assist and maintain collection plans/intelligence logs
•	Set up a collation system
•	Maintain Order of Battle (ORBATs)
•	Maintain image library
•	Provide input to mission planning
•	Develop/maintain/revise target intelligence database and files
•	Prepare/Amend Deployment Books/Intelligence Guides/Area Studies
•	Identify friendly/enemy weapons and equipment
•	Prepare intelligence reading files
•	Monitor tactical operations traffic
•	Disseminate intelligence reports/products
•	Conduct intelligence briefings
•	Prepare Certificates of Destruction
•	Dispose/muster/secure classified material
•	Prepare classified material for handling
•	Prepare maps/charts
•	Measure distance on maps 
•	Conduct terrain analysis
•	Plot positions and mark maps
•	Prepare traces/overlays

Unless they are mindless automatons’, they will be analyzing and pointing out things to their Senior Collator and Battle Analyst.  They have to know where and how to file the info their receive in a fashion by which they can instantly retrieve it. They will also be ready to give impromptu briefings as necessary, perhaps even to the CDS.  These are not your normal troops and a lot more is involved in the job description than what the name suggests.


----------



## The Bread Guy (2 Nov 2010)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> _*ALL INFORMATION* is useless without processing, review and analysis!_  *After all that, INTELLIGENCE is produced and disseminated.*


Spotted the attached in a pam online that builds on the int cycle in an interesting way.

Uncertainty => Data => Information => Knowledge =>Understanding

The full pam, "Company Intelligence Cell in Stability and Support Operations Tactics, Techniques and Procedures (TTPs)" is too big to attach (~1MB) - anyone who's interested in a copy, just PM me your e-mail addy.


----------



## Greymatters (2 Nov 2010)

TimBit said:
			
		

> segregation of analysis and operations, to a certain extent, is the best way to prevent desk-types from meddling with collection to an unhealthy extent.



Segregation has proven not to work and only creates us-versus-them mentalities - cross-training works better, having desk staff get field experience, and vice-versa.


----------



## TimBit (2 Nov 2010)

Greymatters said:
			
		

> Segregation has proven not to work and only creates us-versus-them mentalities - cross-training works better, having desk staff get field experience, and vice-versa.



Maybe for uniformed personel, but as far as civilians are concerned, I know a couple of PhD`s that I sure as hell would not want anywhere near operations. Uniformed personnel MUST be capable in both. Civilians, well it depends on their position description. They don`t need to accept cross-training.


----------



## Greymatters (2 Nov 2010)

TimBit said:
			
		

> Maybe for uniformed personel, but as far as civilians are concerned, I know a couple of PhD`s that I sure as hell would not want anywhere near operations. Uniformed personnel MUST be capable in both. Civilians, well it depends on their position description. They don`t need to accept cross-training.



Uniformed personnel should  be capable in both, but sometimes situations dont allow for it, or the country/organization youre working for won't allow it to happen.    

Ref civilians, Ive worked with some in the field, I agree some of them are a danger to themselves and/or others, but some of them are okay to work with.  I think it depends on what organization they are from.


----------

