Maintaining national security requires actionable information derived from intelligence gathered on various activities of individuals and groups. Cognizant of the world’s largest security threat being terrorism, the value, and quality of intelligence information is imperative in the process. Gaining actionable intelligence, therefore, takes the progression of the intelligence cycle. The cycle is pertinent in denoting the flow of information within the process of distilling information relevant to the needs of the intelligence consumers. Therefore the construct of the intelligence cycle denotes the process of information flow and manipulation that seeks to recognize, understand, synthesize and disseminate actionable intelligence to the consumer (Carter, 2004). This paper, therefore, seeks to categorically explore the intelligence cycle within the perspective of terrorism intelligence gathering.
The concept of the intelligence cycle
Pertinent to the process of information flow, the intelligence cycle describes a process through which military and law enforcement agencies employ resources to gather information, and decode that information to make actionable intelligence. The concept of intelligence cycle is implemented on a platform through which activities in the process are in a closed path. The major assumption underlying the closed path concept is that raw intelligence is subjective and unfiltered and may contain information deliberate to influence one perspective. Therein, the process exists to ensure that information collected has objective qualities that allow the intelligence consumers make policies and decisions devoid of subjective information. Therefore, the intelligence cycle portrays four stages that originate from the requirements of the intelligence consumer. Information collected in the initial stage has to pass through all stages of the cycle for the purpose cleaning the information and presenting an actionable course of action.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Requirements
This is the initial stage of the intelligence cycle. Although not labeled as the first stage, as the initial stage, it portrays the needs of the intelligence consumer. It’s through this stage that the consumer presents the objective and the requirement of the consumer agency. For instance, with the aim of gaining terrorist intelligence, military and law enforcement agencies define the parameters of the intelligence questions. The questions define the requirements that the intelligence agency ought to answer and make a contribution. Further, the stage also defines the type of intelligence to be collected (Bose, 2008). For example, there exists several forms of terrorism, cyber terrorism, financial and economic terrorism and violent terrorism. Therefore, based on the intelligence consumer, the initial stage defines the parameters of intelligence collection. Cognizant of vast responsibilities of intelligence and law enforcement agencies coupled with limited resources, the initial stage creates priorities within the definition of the requirements.
Stage one: collection
The stage represents activities of raw information gathering based on the requirements set by the intelligence consumer. The activities in this stage include the collection of information from various and differing sources. Therein, most activities during this process include field research, interviews of various persons of interest in terror activities, surveillance activities on the technical and physical level, operations based on human sources, as well as liaison relationships generated to gain information. Further, the process of information collection take various forms depending on the activities employed to include electronic and satellite sources, as well as the open and covert forms (Mitchell, 2005). All information collected at this stage is raw and unactionable as it may be conflicting on various levels as well as misleading. Therefore, the information is taken to the next stage.
Stage two: understanding or processing
Denoting the second stage of intelligence, the process contains activities that filter the raw data collected in the field with understandable information. Further, the raw intelligence collected from the field is large and unorganized. This stage acts as the information organizational framework that allows intelligence analyst to make sense of the information. Therefore, the activities included in this stage denote techniques such as the exploitation of imagery, the process of message decoding and translation of information to understandable text or data (Hulnick, 2006). Further, the information collected is prepared for computer processing as well as storage, further information collected based on human sources is placed on context for better understanding.
Stage three: analysis or data synthesis
The process that takes place at this stage is denoted by creating and bridging relationships between pieces of intelligence to make a coherent whole. In this section, intelligence analysts contextualize the information collected in the field based on the subject matter of investigation. For instance, while collecting intelligence on violent terror activity plans, there exists both financial information and ground surveillance data. Through information synthesis, the two pieces of information are linked to create a coherent whole (Mitchell, 2005). Further, the stage also provides scenarios through which based on the information available, the terror activity can take place as well as plausible targets for the attack. Similarly, they create recommendations for requirement development.
Stage four: dissemination
Actionable intelligence as derived from an analyst is placed to the relevant intelligence consumers. The finished intelligence placed in the hands of the consumers who include the policymakers, law enforcement as well as the intelligence agencies to take actions based on the information provided. The information provides a skeleton key through which the state of security rests (Bose, 2008). Nonetheless, the finished intelligence may require more explanations and evidence to make concrete decisions and therefore triggering the process of the intelligence cycle again.
References
Bose, R. (2008). Competitive intelligence process and tools for intelligence analysis. Industrial Management & Data Systems , 108 (4), 510-528.
Carter, D. L. (2004). Law enforcement intelligence: A guide for state, local, and tribal law enforcement agencies (Vol. 16). Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.
Hulnick, A. S. (2006). What's wrong with the Intelligence Cycle. Intelligence and National Security , 21 (6), 959-979.
Mitchell, B. (2005). The intelligence cycle and an information management process model: A comparative analysis. Journal of the Australian Institute of Professional Intelligence Officers, 14 (2), 14-27.
