Barriers to Analysis Chapter 5 ©2013, Taylor & Francis

Introduction Intelligence analysis should be objective, unbiased, and free from political “spin,” yet this is difficult to achieve The problem generally rests with analysis, not collection Analysts face personal and cognitive challenges, as well as political and organizational pressures and constraints ©2013, Taylor & Francis

Psychological Barriers Simon’s Bounded Rationality and satisficing – The brain lacks the capacity to consider every fact at hand so it develops shortcuts Heuer’s Psychology of Intelligence Analysis – “Thinking about thinking” – Perception ©2013, Taylor & Francis

Psychological Barriers Mindsets and Biases – Mirror imaging Everybody thinks like we do – Fundamental attribution error Others’ behavior is attributable to their skill or personality and not the situation – Recency effect Individuals better recall information they have learned in the recent past ©2013, Taylor & Francis

Psychological Barriers Mindsets and Biases – Availability bias Attach the most credence to the information that is most easily retrieved from our memories – Vividness criterion Personal rather than secondhand exposure – Representative bias The inability to reliably gauge probabilities, even qualitatively ©2013, Taylor & Francis

Psychological Barriers Mindsets and Biases – Cause and effect Correlation Temporality Control of other variables – Fallacy of Big Results/Big Cause – Fallacy of Centralized Direction – Failure to Recognize Questionable Assumptions ©2013, Taylor & Francis

Group Decision-Making Group decision-making isn’t always better than that of individuals; it may actually be worse. Groupthink – Conformity within groups – Pressure to come to a “consensus” decision – Self-censorship – Pressure on dissenters – Apparent unanimity ©2013, Taylor & Francis

Bureaucratic Barriers: Politics and the Will of the Policymaker Politics have no place in analysis – Politicized intelligence Capital–P politics and small-p politics The analyst tells the boss what he wants to hear Policymakers with an agenda may attempt to sway intelligence Analysts that are skeptics can cause policy-makers to perceive a “can’t do” attitude Analysts should always “call it like they see it” ©2013, Taylor & Francis

Bureaucratic Barriers: Information Sharing Security is an issue Agencies hoard valuable information Competition Stovepipes – Computer systems which are isolated from one another Cultural differences ©2013, Taylor & Francis

Bureaucratic Barriers: Information Sharing Connect-the-dots – A metaphor for a complete and transparent sharing of information among agencies The DNI’s Culture of Collaboration – Agencies work together for the common good ©2013, Taylor & Francis

Security and Sharing: The Inherent Tension Need to know – One of the preconditions under which classified information can be shared – How can one share information with those that need it and yet protect it from adversaries? – This can restrict valuable information from getting to the right place Security clearances can cause a barrier The DNI’s responsibility to provide ©2013, Taylor & Francis

Conclusion Good analysis does not just “happen.” It requires extraordinary effort on the part of analysts, support from collectors, and leadership on the part of policymakers. ©2013, Taylor & Francis