The Experts below are selected from a list of 7458 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Mike Mcconnell - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

Kevin Vigilante - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

Steve Escaravage - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

Thomas H Hammond - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • why is the Intelligence Community so difficult to redesign smart practices conflicting goals and the creation of purpose based organizations
    Governance, 2007
    Co-Authors: Thomas H Hammond
    Abstract:

    The adoption of “smart practices” requires that smart practices can actually be identified for the areas of public policy in which we are interested. For the problem of designing structures for public agencies, however, identifying smart practices is not easy. This article explores the reasons for the substantial conservativism, lasting over 50 years, regarding the structural design of the U.S. Intelligence Community. One central argument is simply that it was very difficult to discover a clearly superior structure; in fact, the long-standing structure may have had some unrecognized virtues. But the other central argument is that one smart practice may have emerged since the 9/11 attacks: It involves the creation of problem-focused interagency centers that are intended to enhance the sharing and integration of information within the Intelligence Community. These conclusions about redesigning the structure of the Intelligence Community are based on the arguments of Luther Gulick on methods of departmentalization and Martin Landau on redundancy and system reliability.

  • Why Is the Intelligence Community So Difficult to Redesign? Smart Practices, Conflicting Goals, and the Creation of Purpose‐Based Organizations
    Governance, 2007
    Co-Authors: Thomas H Hammond
    Abstract:

    The adoption of “smart practices” requires that smart practices can actually be identified for the areas of public policy in which we are interested. For the problem of designing structures for public agencies, however, identifying smart practices is not easy. This article explores the reasons for the substantial conservativism, lasting over 50 years, regarding the structural design of the U.S. Intelligence Community. One central argument is simply that it was very difficult to discover a clearly superior structure; in fact, the long-standing structure may have had some unrecognized virtues. But the other central argument is that one smart practice may have emerged since the 9/11 attacks: It involves the creation of problem-focused interagency centers that are intended to enhance the sharing and integration of information within the Intelligence Community. These conclusions about redesigning the structure of the Intelligence Community are based on the arguments of Luther Gulick on methods of departmentalization and Martin Landau on redundancy and system reliability.

Artur Gruszczak - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • The Strategic Intelligence Community
    Intelligence Security in the European Union, 2020
    Co-Authors: Artur Gruszczak
    Abstract:

    This chapter introduces the concept of Intelligence and elaborates on its meaning, theoretical foundations, explanatory properties and cognitive values. The meaning of strategic Intelligence is also explained. The concept of Intelligence Community is presented and discussed with reference to the related terms ‘security Community’ and ‘epistemic Community’. The cognitive framework explained in this chapter focuses on transnational network structures of bilateral or multilateral interconnections built on common strategic interests, congenial ideological bases and like-minded attitudes to national interests. Considerable differences in the understandings of the Intelligence Community by EU officials and government representatives are explained by the interpretation of the EU Intelligence Community as a distorted epistemic Community.

  • Conclusions: The Maturing EU Intelligence Community
    Intelligence Security in the European Union, 2020
    Co-Authors: Artur Gruszczak
    Abstract:

    The concluding chapter makes an overall assessment of the EU Intelligence Community as a cooperative network based on an enhanced capacity to deliver and share. It highlights specific features of this Community as a complex network of agencies and practices dedicated to securing strategic EU interests. Referring to the metaphor of ‘hunters and gatherers’, it discusses the impediments to the establishment of a single EU Intelligence agency. It concludes with a thesis that the complex network of institutions, agencies and services involved in the gathering, processing, analysing and exchanging of Intelligence in the framework of EU law makes a remarkable contribution to EU security policies and strengthens the preventive capability of EU agencies and national authorities.

  • Network Synergies in the EU Intelligence Community
    Intelligence Security in the European Union, 2020
    Co-Authors: Artur Gruszczak
    Abstract:

    This chapter identifies and analyses synergetic mechanisms emerging in institutional, political and strategic domains of the EU Intelligence Community. A multi-variant exercise in the central section tests the viability of interactions among particular Intelligence hubs which function in permeable and intersecting security fields. The concept of fusion centres is discussed as a practical example of synergy building among diverse Intelligence stakeholders. In the final part, a map of Intelligence synergies in the EU is presented and explained. It draws on a comprehensive approach to Intelligence in the EU and functional relationships between institutional entities concentrated in the hubs. The complex network organisation is verified with reference to interactions, connections, dependencies and feedbacks among the hubs.