NDIC Thesis Survey: Company Intelligence Sections

[SFdude]

All,

I have been reading some of the discussions and articles on this site and had not thought to talk about my current thesis project until someone else suggested it.

I am conducting a survey to complete my data collection, and evaluate some of my ideas and recommendations on establishing and useing company intelligence sections. If you are interested in completing the survey please follow the link below and follow the online instructions. Please feel free to contact me if you have more ideas and opinions not covered in the survey. If you are interested in my findings or what I have learned so far please feel free to contact me directly.

The introduction below will give you an idea of what I am doing for my research and thesis. I am looking for individuals who have experience in OEF/OIF and other conflicts as company commanders, Battalion Staff, or intelligence experience with tactical units, during operational deployments.

thanks
LTC Paul Cuppett







Survey link: http://www.zoomerang.com/Survey/?p=WEB227LJM8QRYW (if this does not activate please cut and paste)


National Defense Intelligence College Thesis Survey

1. Introduction. My name is LTC Cuppett; I am a Special Forces officer currently transitioning to Military Intelligence. As part of my transition schooling, I am attending the National Defense Intelligence College and completing a Masters in Strategic Intelligence. My thesis project is examining how to improve the intelligence capabilities of units conducting the local counterinsurgency fight. Based on the literature that I have read and personal experience, I feel the critical part of winning a counterinsurgency war, is dependent on the successful mission executed at the local level. Local by my definition, is the area of responsibility for a maneuver company. Usually the company area is a small city, several connected villages or a large neighborhood. In my research and past OIF experience, intelligence appears to be the key to successfully executing the local counterinsurgency mission.

2. Purpose. The following survey is being used to help determine how to best support maneuver companies with intelligence assets. The data from this survey will be compiled with previously collected data that has been gathered through observation, After Action Review’s and Lessons Learned articles. This data will first be used as data for my thesis argument, as part of the requirement for completing a Masters in Strategic Intelligence. I will share the findings of my research with action officers working this issue at the United States Army Intelligence School and Center along with the current Action Officer at the Army G2 office.

3. Attribution. The answers will be considered your personal opinion and not the views of your unit or the Army. Your answers will only be referenced by your position in a unit and experience. The information you provide in your answers will be kept confidential and will only be used to identify trends as part of the larger thesis research project.

3. Attribution. The answers will be considered your personal opinion and not the views of your unit or the Army. Your answers will only be referenced by your position in a unit and experience. The information you provide in your answers will be kept confidential and will only be used to identify trends as part of the larger thesis research project.

4. It is critical that the issues being examined in the survey be addressed by operational units and leaders. The data from the survey, thesis abstract or thesis will be available upon request for anyone participating in the survey. Please contact me at the address below to request a copy of any of the research data or written products. Thank you for your time and participation. This is a critical issue that I hope to assist in resolving.

5. Directions. Please follow the attached link to the online survey and follow the directions on the website. http://www.zoomerang.com/Survey/?p=WEB227LJM8QRYW If you are unable to access the survey on the web, use the attached word document to complete the survey. Indicate your answer by either filling in a short answer or placing the corresponding letter of your answer in the space provided. Please return the survey by forwarding the email to my AKO account.


LTC Paul Cuppett
NDIC Student
(202) 231-3806
DSN 428-3806
AKO paul.cuppett@us.army.mil
SIPR paul.cuppett@us.army.smil.mil
JWICS yacuppj@dia.ic.gov

[Tom Odom]

Paul,

Look at the following CALL products. They all cover the arena you are studying.


Newsletter 05-17 Company level SOSO Vol 1, Command and Control

Newsletter 05-27 Company level SOSO Vol 3, Patrolling, Intelligence, and IO

Newsletter 07-01 Tactical Intelligence

Newsletter 08-05 Company level SOSO Vol 7,Organizing for COIN

I would also suggest that you go to the CALL web site and search the CTC trends for the past 4 years using company and intelligence separately as key words.

best

Tom

[Stan]

Colonel, Welcome aboard !
I would have gladly taken your survey, but didn't make it past the "Rank" drop down menu :(

A shame, that such a survey would not consider or include NCOs. I think you stand to gain quite a bit from NCO/SNCOs.

Good luck with your thesis !

Regards, Stan

All,

I have been reading some of the discussions and articles on this site and had not thought to talk about my current thesis project until someone else suggested it.

I am conducting a survey to complete my data collection, and evaluate some of my ideas and recommendations on establishing and useing company intelligence sections. If you are interested in completing the survey please follow the link below and follow the online instructions.

[Vic Bout]

as a former 180A w/ intel experience in OEF/OIF I was dismayed that you had no Warrant Officers on the pull down. Lotsa my fellow warrants involved with that business.

[marct]

Hi Paul,

This is more of a conceptual question, but can you define what limits you are placing on "Intelligence"? For example, are you including Human Terrain, local semantics, etc. in your definition or are you restricting it to a more "classical" military definition?

Marc

[Jedburgh]

...This is more of a conceptual question, but can you define what limits you are placing on "Intelligence"? For example, are you including Human Terrain, local semantics, etc. in your definition or are you restricting it to a more "classical" military definition?
Marc,

At the risk of hijacking Paul's thread, I just wanted to state that I feel your question reflects a common misperception about Military Intelligence. What you refer to as "Human Terrain, local semantics, etc", are aspects of intelligence that have long been a piece of the MI collection and analysis puzzle, although using different terms over the years, and often neglected by the conventional Army side of MI. But even the conventional side paid attention to the "subject peoples" of the former Soviet Union and their potential for exploitation should the Cold War have turned hot. I trust that Paul, coming from the SOF side of the house, is more than familiar with past and current applications.

And as an aside, you can't get much more "classical" in a military sense than Ceasar's Commentarii de Bello Gallico, where he certainly covers the bases in analyzing the human terrain.

[marct]

Hi Ted,

At the risk of hijacking Paul's thread, I just wanted to state that I feel your question reflects a common misperception about Military Intelligence. What you refer to as "Human Terrain, local semantics, etc", are aspects of intelligence that have long been a piece of the MI collection and analysis puzzle, although using different terms over the years, and often neglected by the conventional Army side of MI. But even the conventional side paid attention to the "subject peoples" of the former Soviet Union and their potential for exploitation should the Cold War have turned hot. I trust that Paul, coming from the SOF side of the house, is more than familiar with past and current applications.

I knew that they had been, but I wasn't sure if they still were, what with burgeoning specialist groups showing up - it was really for clarification.

And as an aside, you can't get much more "classical" in a military sense than Ceasar's Commentarii de Bello Gallico, where he certainly covers the bases in analyzing the human terrain.

LOLOL - And then there's my favorite Roman author, Tacitus and is Germania :D. One of the backburner projects I have kept simmering away for a decade or so is trying to analyze the relationship between ethnographic writing and military intelligence, going back to Xenophon and Tacitus in the West and THe Book of Barbarian Kingdoms in China.

(Sort of back to Paul's thread...)

One of the things I have noticed about the introduction of the HTTs was that they were at Battalion and Brigade level, and that does, in some ways, bother me. I see it as a potential organizational culture vector that pushes the human terrain away from the company level, at least in terms of analytics and resources, and that makes me concerned that it could decouple the human terrain from the people who have to move in it.

I really should have been clearer and not used the phrase "classical" :wry:. What I was getting at was an analysis of the human terrain that was fairly static (e.g. lists of people, placement in a static social system, etc.) rather than aggressively dynamic (which is much harder to do).

[marct]

Hi Ted,

Marc, now that's something I'd be interested in giving a look-over. Although I enjoy reading the truly ancient, what I've found most useful in that regard is the memoirs, diaries and travel reports of the old Brit "Political Officers" (mostly covering the Middle East & Central Asia) in the late 1800s-early 1900s.

As I said, it's a backburner project at the moment. Part of the reason is that my Latin, Greek (for the Byzantine stuff) and Arabic just isn't up to the task of translating most of what I need :wry:. The memoires, diaries, travelogues, etc. are really interesting. I've always been partial to both the popular ones and the organized ones like the Jesuit Relations (http://puffin.creighton.edu/jesuit/relations/).

For me, one of the more interesting things about them is the insights on how people built their taxonomies of the world in terms of perception (what do I see that makes a difference), understanding (verstehen) and explanation (erklaren). Sort of taking Bateson's definition of information ("a difference that makes a difference") and inverting it to analyze the cultural mindset of the producers of the document. If I can get a similar thing from the "other side(s)", that's when it gets really interesting, although so far I have only found one (the meeting between the leaders of the First Crusade and the Byzantine Emperor recorded by Fulcher of Chartres and Anna Comnenus).

At any rate, I'll stop side-tracking the discussion :D.