Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of figures
- Acknowledgements
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Framework for Researching Intelligence Knowledge
- 3 Intelligence in Swedish Political Culture
- 4 The Institutional Setting
- 5 The Swedish Military Intelligence Directorate
- 6 Practice for Producing Knowledge
- 7 Practice for Creating Knowledge
- 8 The Intelligence Worldview
- 9 The Representation of NATO
- 10 The Representation of Russia
- 11 The Representation of Terrorism
- 12 The Intelligence Discourse
- 13 The Intelligence ‘Style of Thought’ and ‘Collective of Thought’
- Bibliography
- Index
7 - Practice for Creating Knowledge
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 20 April 2017
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of figures
- Acknowledgements
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Framework for Researching Intelligence Knowledge
- 3 Intelligence in Swedish Political Culture
- 4 The Institutional Setting
- 5 The Swedish Military Intelligence Directorate
- 6 Practice for Producing Knowledge
- 7 Practice for Creating Knowledge
- 8 The Intelligence Worldview
- 9 The Representation of NATO
- 10 The Representation of Russia
- 11 The Representation of Terrorism
- 12 The Intelligence Discourse
- 13 The Intelligence ‘Style of Thought’ and ‘Collective of Thought’
- Bibliography
- Index
Summary
DIRECTING THE INTELLIGENCE KNOWLEDGE
The analytical work of the intelligence service is directed based on the previously accepted knowledge. Even though parts of the analytical work are directed by the need of the intelligence consumer, many of the choices of prioritising and the scope of the analysis are made by the individual analysts. The chapter examines which facts and arguments are used, how the analysts argue when conceptualising the issues in focus and how choices are made regarding what information to relay for the intelligence analysis. The information and facts used for the assessments are primarily dependent on previous analytical work and therefore are also constrained by the accepted knowledge. Additionally, the chapter examines the literary style of the estimates by investigating how conclusions are presented and substantiated in those estimates. That is, it examines how analysts relate to the possibility of objectivity and value neutrality.
Direction and Prioritisation
There are three different ways for a specific assessment to be written: first through the annually revised production plan, second as a result of something that has happened and direct tasking coming from the intelligence consumers, and third through initiation by the analysts themselves motivated by their insight into changes within their area of expertise.
The first of the ways to initiate an assessment begins with the established production plan of general issues and topics that the intelligence consumers have expressed interest in. Next follows organisa- tional decision making and prioritisation over how and when different assessments should be written. The general topics to which the intelligence service should pay attention are decided by the intelligence consumer, but prioritisation between the different needs is conducted within the intelligence service. The prioritisation choices are usually made after preparation by a specific planning management team and thereafter through a decision made at an organisation-wide weekly production board meeting at which all departmental management is represented. Following this, the question is distributed to the analyst or group of analysts.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Swedish Military IntelligenceProducing Knowledge, pp. 94 - 117Publisher: Edinburgh University PressPrint publication year: 2016