DYNAMIC PAGE -- HIGHEST POSSIBLE CLASSIFICATION IS
TOP SECRET // SI / TK // REL TO USA AUS CAN GBR NZL
(U) No Comment
FROM:
Chief, S2 SIGINT Assessment Cell (S20B)
Run Date: 05/13/2006
(U//FOUO) How do SIGINTers measure success? Delivering the mission? Making customers
happy? Protecting the warfighter? When we are asked for hard numbers, we usually provide
some measure of the intelligence reports we generate. Is intelligence just the facts? Is it the
facts blended with our expertise? Or is it some combination of both?
(U//FOUO) In today's climate, protecting the nation requires us to share the facts as well as
insights. "Putting what is between the analysts ears" on paper is an area of emphasis for senior
leaders. One of the benchmarks of progress is the content of the COMMENTS field of a regular
report.
(U/FOUO) As noted in Carl Johnson's SID today article , I recently conducted a review of SIGINT
reports from across the enterprise to assess how well we are sharing insight.
(U//FOUO) Would you believe that in 2005, approximately 75% of our serialized reports
went out without any intelligence other than the fact ? Of course, this means that 25% of
the reports did have a COMMENT. And, more interestingly - only about 12% of the reports
issued last year had COMMENTs that could be described as adding any significant insight, or
interpretation to the data.
(U//FOUO) Of those that had a COMMENT flag:
3% of the total sample had comments with assessments, predictions, judgments, or
forecasts (including those reports that had such characteristics outside of a COMMENT such as SIGINT Assessment Reports)
8.6% of the total sample had COMMENTs that went beyond description and explanation
of SIGINT fact
10% of the total sample had comments that added some insight or context, but were
essentially explanatory or descriptive
The remaining 3.4%, contained things like text clarification, introduction to collateral,
and introduction to previously reported SIGINT and other information.
(U) See below for details on the categories used in this study.
(U//FOUO) Insights are based on facts and or analytic expertise. Insights can be short and
written in the COMMENTS paragraph or sentence of SIGINT report or they can be a more formal,
stand alone, and possibly longer report. Sharing insights and perspective is a relatively painless
way to develop the "so what?" aspect of any report, or even provide your assessment of the
information. A report does not have to be labeled as a SIGINT Assessment Report to be
considered assessment reporting.
(U//FOUO) In my current role, I am charged with increasing the insights along with the facts in
our reporting. My measure of success is increasing the formal reporting of those insights to the
customer. I want to better understand what is driving these numbers - please use the blog to
provide some perspective.
(U//FOUO) Why are so few insights shared?
Is it lack of time? Pressure to get more reports out?
Are they shared in different formats? If so, how often?
Please share your perspective:
SID today blog
(U//FOUO) Study Details:
We used a random, but statistically relevant, sample of reports and developed 8 categories of
COMMENTs used in the report:
1. Text clarification
2. Introduce collateral
3. Introduce previously reported SIGINT
4. Add some degree of insight or context, but not reaching the level of interpreting SIGINT
fact: still explaining or describing
5. Interpreting SIGINT Fact
6. Assessment
7. Other
8. Reports that had interpretation/assessment outside of a COMMENT
"(U//FOUO) SIDtoday articles may not be republished or reposted outside NSANet
without the consent of S0121 (DL sid_comms)."
DYNAMIC PAGE -- HIGHEST POSSIBLE CLASSIFICATION IS
TOP SECRET // SI / TK // REL TO USA AUS CAN GBR NZL
DERIVED FROM: NSA/CSSM 1-52, DATED 08 JAN 2007 DECLASSIFY ON: 20320108