Quote Originally Posted by CSC2005 View Post
This report is one of hundreds that have come out since 9/11 on how to fix analysis. I am sure this report was well funded, and the researchers did their homework and talked to alot of people. The most important issue was that analysis do not need lots of new tools or technology. A new system is not the silver bullet. Only through long term investment in people will analysis improve.

The rest of the report just repeats what all of the other reports have said. The authors seemed to only have a very basic knowledge of the IC

Quantico, VA
Agreed 110%. I also noted that they offer no insight into their own record as analysts. This strikes as the RAND equivalent of hiring Tom Clancy to speak to the CIA on intelligence.

I second the point on investing in people if you want better analysis. And that does not mean investing by promoting MANAGERS of the analytical effort. It means preserving and promoting in stasis the actual analysts versus the ever increasing levels of bureacracy above the analysts.

I would add to that the best analysis is based on an anaytical body grounded in the operations of its field. For military it means being out there on the ground as an operator as well as being an analyst. For other agencies the same mechanism must apply. All of that means that the eternal search for one size fits all training for analysts is a pipe dream.

Best

Tom