2,000 Greater & Lesser Mysteries/2,000 Greater and Lesser Mysteries.iso/govern/fbi/mys00776.txt

Text File | 1994-06-10 | 18.5 KB | 358 lines

May 1990

              ANALYTICAL INTELLIGENCE TRAINING

                            By

                    Marilyn B. Peterson
                   Analytical Supervisor
           New Jersey Division of Criminal Justice
                    Trenton, New Jersey

                            and

                     R. Glen Ridgeway
                   Director of Training
             New York Organized Crime Task Force
                  White Plains, New York


     The ability to analyze is very important in law
enforcement.  Every investigator uses analytical ability on the
job daily--from the investigation of a single traffic accident to
the most complex fraud and money laundering schemes.  Analytical
ability is what makes a good investigator.

     This article provides a look at the philosophy, environment,
and pitfalls of teaching intelligence analysis within law
enforcement.  It explores curricula now available and the need to
develop more advanced courses.  The article also calls for the
institution of professional standards for intelligence analysts,
including specific training topics.

THE FIELD OF INTELLIGENCE ANALYSIS

     Investigators have always used analysis while performing
their jobs, but not with the disciplined procedures that
characterize a professional analyst.  In most investigations,
which are reactive by nature, analysis is done on a case-by-case
basis.  Yet, a systematic analytical approach requires adherence
to accepted, fundamental principles and techniques, most of which
are learned or assimilated over time.  The ability to develop a
structured, systematic approach is the hallmark of an
intelligence analyst.

     The field of intelligence analysis has grown enormously in
recent years.  As a result, there is increasing focus on complex
crimes, particularly in the area of drug enforcement, strategy
development, and the need to analyze varying types of data.  Only
a decade ago, a handful of law enforcement agencies employed
trained analysts; now, analysts can be found in even small
departments.  Even so, analysis is not so entrenched in the law
enforcement profession that it is taught to every recruit at the
police academy.  It is, however, offered in nearly every State in
various training settings.

     The Federal law enforcement community has influenced the
development of law enforcement intelligence analysis.  The
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the Drug Enforcement
Administration (DEA), and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and
Firearms (ATF) have even created a series of job titles and
career paths for analysts.

     The FBI National Academy Program offers instruction in
intelligence analysis to participants during their training at
the FBI Academy in Quantico, Virginia.  ATF encouraged and
supported the beginnings of the only professional association for
analysts, the International Association of Law Enforcement
Intelligence Analysts (IALEIA), which opened its membership in
1981.  The Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) has sponsored
conferences enabling the various projects to exchange experiences
and build on each agency's success.  Other Federal agencies
employ analysts, as do State agencies such as the Florida
Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) and the Illinois State
Police.

     Federally funded Regional Information Sharing System (RISS)
projects, which provide support to over 2,000 agencies
nationwide, also played a significant role in promoting
intelligence analysis.  RISS projects created computerized
analytical software for specific types of analysis (1) and offered
these services to its members.  Under this system, agencies could
forward data to the appropriate project.  The data was then
entered, analyzed, and compiled into a finished report.
Additionally, some RISS projects taught analysis to member agency
personnel.  As a result, line investigators passed on the
techniques to others.

     Several agencies also developed analytical training in the
public sector.  Many of these agencies are associated with the
Federal Government or the RISS projects.  While most of the
analytical classes cover basic information, a few advanced
courses address such areas as computer-aided analysis, complex
financial case analysis, and strategic analysis.

     The success of intelligence analysis courses suggests that
there is a market for analytical intelligence training.  However,
the courses offered are basic and reflect little initiative in
developing alternative models.  One reason is that agencies have
opted to modify the basic training wheel, rather than redesign
it, mainly because of lack of time and expertise.  This means
that analytical training capabilities remain rudimentary and do
not advance the science of intelligence analysis in law
enforcement.

ANALYSIS IN ACADEMIA

     All colleges and universities offer analytical courses, such
as statistical, financial and market analysis, and most mandate
a minimum number of analytical course credits within the degree
program.  However, few colleges offer courses in intelligence
analysis, and even fewer have courses in law enforcement
analysis.  Even so, the law enforcement analytical courses that
do exist usually focus on the use of intelligence analysis, not
on how to analyze.  As a result, when law enforcement agencies
look for analytical candidates, they generally look for people
with degrees in political or social science and strong research
skills.

ANALYTICAL COURSE DEVELOPMENT

     Developing any course curriculum is a time-consuming
process, and analytical courses are no exception. Minimal
research material is available, and there are no textbooks to use
as a basis for course formation.  As a result, most instructors
must begin from ground zero.  Therefore, the first step in
developing a course is to examine the components, i.e,
definitions, steps, examples, and practical exercises.

Definitions

     Within the intelligence field, definitions have long been a
point of contention.  Everyone seems to make up definitions to
suit individual needs, and most of these definitions are not
written down.  While there have been attempts to define key areas
of analysis, there is rampant disagreement, (2) as can be expected.

Steps

     When formulating an analysis course, step-by-step
instruction should be provided.  This reduces the procedure to
its most basic components, increases the likelihood of
comprehension, and provides a basis for future reference.

Examples

     Actual samples of analytical products are not only
impressive but are also informative.  Ideally, an intelligence
analysis course should include fictitious or sanitized examples
of every method/product taught.

Practical Exercises

     People learn best by doing.  Considering that analytical
concepts are hard to teach and difficult to learn,
authentic-appearing case material should be used during course
instruction.  Many practical exercises can translate the concept
of analysis into the investigator's stock-in-trade  solving
cases.

PITFALLS OF TEACHING ANALYSIS

     There are four general pitfalls in teaching intelligence
analysis.  They are:

     *  Using someone else's material,

     *  Being too technical,

     *  Not being able to respond to questions, and

     *  Creating training programs that are too specialized.

     Each needs to be considered when teaching an analytical
intelligence course.

Using Someone Else's Material

     This pitfall is perhaps the most dangerous, since there are
so few sources that can be used in analytical training.  Also,
developing training modules is difficult and time-consuming; so
borrowing another's material has become a common practice.

     Yet, using another's course curriculum keeps individual
experiences from being incorporated into the training, which
helps to explain ideas and techniques.  This also prohibits an
instructor from truthfully answering the question most often
asked in the analytical classroom, ``Why did (or didn't) you do
it that way?''  If the ``it'' referenced is an example or answer
an instructor did not create, the instructor can either make up
an answer or admit ignorance.  But, too many ``I don't know''
answers may have negative consequences.

Being Too Technical

     Because intelligence analysis is a very technical field, it
is important to explain the subject matter in the simplest terms
possible.  Instructors should speak to the audience as a whole,
not direct the lecture to one or two technically oriented
students who may ask questions frequently.  It may be necessary
to cover certain concepts and techniques more than once.  What is
important is that everyone thoroughly understands and comprehends
the topics covered.

     The presentation should be designed for the audience at
hand.  Investigators are generally the least technical, but most
practical, while managers and analysts usually have a greater
tendency to use details and speak abstractly.  However, all
instruction should be as simple as possible.  The goal is to have
the students learn intelligence analysis.

Responding to Questions

     The nightmare of all instructors is not being able to
respond adequately to questions.  Using original materials helps
to decrease the likelihood that this nightmare will occur.
However, an instructor who teaches a course only a few times a
year can forget to cover certain details.  To prevent this,
materials should be thoroughly reviewed a few days before the
class begins.

Specialized Training

     At present, a limited number of advanced analytical courses
are offered in the United States because there is a limited
audience for such training, making it not cost effective.  For
the most part, those who take analytical courses are not
analysts; they are more interested in an overview of the concepts
and techniques, not in details.  In addition, structured courses
for experienced analysts may only be offered a few times a year.
Therefore, time spent in course development may never be recouped
in terms of the number of persons taught, particularly on the
local or State level.

     The answer might be in forming advanced classes through the
cooperation of Federal agencies, programs such as RISS, or a
national consortium of analytical experts.  This would allow more
advanced classes to be available over a wider area  and  to  a
greater  number  of participants.

THE FUTURE

     It is clear that analysis will continue as a necessary
component of criminal investigation in the future.  It is also
clear that computerization will not take the place of the
analyst, but instead will create a greater demand for more
complex analysis.  However, if analytical intelligence
instruction is to reach its potential, there are several areas
that must be addressed.  These include developmental support, the
training of analytical instructors, the development of new models
and curricula in computerized analysis, and emerging analytical
techniques.

Developmental Support

     There is little support to rely on in the area of analytical
training development.  Articles, chapters, books, or monographs
depicting practitioners' methods are scarce.  A few instructors
exchange training manuals informally or permit one another to
borrow teaching modules.  Unfortunately, there is no formal
structure designed to assist in the development of training
through a professional organization or agency.

Training Analytical Instructors

     Outside of one private company that trains its own faculty,
there is no organization that educates analysts on how to become
analytical instructors.  As a result, there are very few
qualified analysis instructors in the United States generally
available for teaching in multiagency settings.  One  solution
may be to form an intelligence analysis faculty in order to teach
others to become analytical instructors.

Developing New Models

     New models for providing analytical training should be
encouraged.  One particular model--definition, how-to steps,
practical exercises--is effective at the introductory level but
not at the more advanced level.  The case-long practex model,
developed in the training course ``Advanced Analytical
Training,'' (3) could be used in various scenarios, such as drugs
and the infiltration of legitimate businesses.  However, other
models also should be designed.

Computerized Analysis

     The field of computerized analysis has opened new areas of
expertise and potential courses.  Currently, classes are limited
to database applications for toll records, event flow, or network
analysis.  Artificial intelligence in which computerized data are
flagged based on certain elements is a solid tool for targeting
criminals and helping to predict criminal activity.  Agencies
with such programs in use should develop applicable training
courses.

DEVELOPING STANDARDS

     The International Association of Law Enforcement
Intelligence Analysts (IALEIA) has called for institution of
standards for analysts.  In fact, the IALEIA's Standards and
Accreditation Committee, first formed in Florida, was able to
have standards adopted there.  However, further efforts toward
standardization have encountered obstacles, mainly because of the
myriad of position classifications used for analysts.  Some
analysts are sworn police personnel, others are civilian.  Some
perform a quasi-clerical function, while others are
management-oriented strategic planners.

     Some analysts view their jobs merely as stepping stones to
investigative work; others look at it as a step toward computer
software development positions.  But few remain analysts for more
than 3 or 4 years, and few receive advanced training, develop
training, or write in the field.  In short, not all analysts are
committed to analysis as a profession for the long term.  This
lack of commitment helps explain the lack of advanced analysis
and standards.  It also does little to foster the goal of IALEIA
to promote high standards of professionalism in analysis.

CONCLUSION

     This article has detailed the support, or the lack of
support, for analytical intelligence training.  Several agencies
have, in fact, devoted time and personnel to analysis
instruction.  As a result, hundreds of law enforcement agencies
have benefited.  However, analytical intelligence training needs
more support.

     Adequate support for the use of analysis within law
enforcement will only come through the education of managers,
investigators, prosecutors, and analysts.  Unfortunately, a vast
majority of agencies in the United States still do not realize
how analysis can help them.

     Analysis is a subject worth exploring, but law enforcement
will only fully accept it when it becomes a routine part of the
teaching curricula and standard operating procedures.  To achieve
this, each analyst must help to persuade the law enforcement
community that professional analysis is necessary and vital to
law enforcement's mission.  Only through standardization and the
cultivation of dedicated analysts will analysis as a profession
receive the acclaim it so rightly deserves.

FOOTNOTES

(1) There are six RISS projects--the Rocky Mountain
Information Network, the Western States Information Network, the
Mid-States Organized Crime Information Center, the Regional
Organized Crime Information Center, and the Middle
Atlantic-Great Lakes Organized Crime Law Enforcement Network.

(2) Marilyn Peterson Sommers, ``Law Enforcement Intelligence:
A New Look,'' International Journal of Intelligence and
Counterintelligence, vol. 1, No. 1, Fall, 1986.

(3) ``Advanced Analytical Training'' includes complex cases
for which teams of analysts were required to do analytical
products.  Areas of instruction include collection plans, fact
patterns, corporate analysis and event flow analysis.