There is no longer a secret the fact that the most difficult work is the one with humans. People are very different from each other, and so are the organizations that come in many shapes and sizes. A company, an organization or a firm is an economic entity with unique management. A private organization has one or more owners, each holding a percentage of company shares. With ownership in more than one hand, it is imperative that the leaders and subordinates will also come from more than one background, and hence will bring varied sets of culture, ethos, and relationship building styles. Thus, bringing an important question: What is more effective in coordinating social relationships in a successful private sector organization? Is it Trust or is it Power? The purpose of this essay is to raise awareness of the social relationships in privately held companies and present the most effective methods whereby these relationships can manage more productively and more efficiently.
Insertion to Organizational Behavior
An organization is a collection of people who work together and coordinate their actions to achieve a wide variety of goals. Organizational behavior (OB) is the study of the many factors that have an impact on how people as individuals or a group act, think, feel and respond to work, and how privately held companies respond to their environments. Understanding how people behave in a firm is important because most people work for a company at some point in their lives and are affected – both positively and negatively – by their experiences in it. An understanding of a firm’s form and structure can help people to enhance the positive and also while reducing the negative effects of working in organizations. The study of a firm’s form provides guidelines that help people at work to understand and appreciate the many forces that affect behavior in privately held companies. It allows employees at all levels in a firm to make correct decisions about how to behave and work with other people to achieve organizational goals. OB replaces intuition and gut feeling with a well-researched body of theories and systematic guidelines for managing behavior in organizations (Jennifer M. George, 2008). OB also offers guidelines for managers and employees to awareness the implications of their actions on others (Steve Ellis, 2006).
Employee Engagements and Empowerment
All stakeholders of a private organization are expected to align through their social relationships. In this context engagement and empowerment promises to be a crucial tool and ascertains that the relations are effectively managed and aligned with the cultural expectations of the organization. While the human relations model encompasses a certain degree of suppleness, from an engagement point of view the internal focus should mandatorily include training. It is essential for the broader improvement of human interaction that in turn accelerates engagement process. Once the people start communicating at a higher level, it helps in attaining cohesion and thereby providing a strong boost to employee morale. This model of organizational values referred to as ‘group engagement culture’ since it links with trust and participation through teamwork. That is the reason managers in most private organizations would prefer to pursue employee engagement processes that inspire and mentor the employees and help the organization reach greater heights (Bradley and Parker, 2006).
Empowering employees is another tactic that modern day organizations, especially the privately owned ones are resorting. A delegation of authority is is a key concept towards empowering the workforce to extract maximum efficiency unless each feels strong about the level of commitment required; at a personal level, it is not possible that power can be a handful tool. Schein (2004) asserts that the composition of the empowered group of employees is pretentious by the degree of trust and sincerity within the organization. Predominantly, on deciding if senior level employees, who often hinder decision-making discussions during meetings with subordinates, should refrain from giving such opportunities.
Schein (2004) has also expressed further refinement, by taking a cultural view to the proposal of empowerment. He feels that the process should initiate with a combination of a heterogeneous group since the level of power and trust across employee designations that may act as boundaries surpass the first hurdle of a cultural barrier. Thereby, allowing the group of employees to experience the scope of engaging in fruitful communication and enhancing social relationships that are often not inhibited by the presence of materialistic reasoning.
The Project Manager
Generally, in a company, a project is led by a single manager who has full authority and responsibility for the complete project management. Depending on his professional and managerial capacity, talent and style of work, this ‘team leader’ must ensure that the other people involved in the project have all the necessary conditions to get the job done in the most organized and efficient manner. This means that he must manage relationships within the project team and all other stakeholders. Watson (2006) stressed the fact that a significant trend in managerial conduct in the recent times has been one of the inspiring managers to try to build the resilient organizational culture and social relationships. The work of a project manager should not mandatory be a supervisory one. He must work with different types of people, in situations full of uncertainties, using many resources and keeping compact in budget constraints.
However, the most powerful ‘weapon’ of a project manager will always be his team. An important potential benefit of having a diverse workforce is the ability to make higher quality decisions. In any work team, people will usually have different opinions and perspectives. Thereby, in these teams, individuals are more likely to consider more alternatives and think outside the box when making decisions. When team members think about a problem, they may identify new and original solutions. The more diversity of a team the bigger the chance to make higher quality decisions (McLeod, 1996).
Personality Speaks Up
Personality represents a complex of attributes through which an individual can integrate into a group with the same features. According to Ellis S. & Dick P. (2006), personality is concerned with understanding how individuals behave in patterned ways across time and situations. They also claim that there are two assumptions about personality: homothetic (predictable, measurable and largely inherited and resistant to change) and idiographic (cannot be measured meaningfully and the environmental and social influences are seen as critical. Because the study of personality is so central to an understanding of human nature, you might assume it has always occupied a prominent position in psychology. For more than half of psychology’s history as a science, however, psychologists paid the low level of attention to personality (Duane P. Schultz, 2005).
A very interesting comparison of the human personality but also of group individuality and originality of various organizations can carry out as described in Ellis S. & Dick P.’s book. In Western organizations evaluation methods are used to observe the efficiency and performance of employees. The direction oriented towards achievements and results, so everything focuses on performance outcomes and related behaviors, rather than on personality attributes. The employees of these organizations make different attributions for poor performance levels. The project managers tend to blame the employees’ personal skills for unsatisfying accomplishments and performance while the employees put this to their circumstances. We can see that Western project managers are encouraged to focus on realizations rather than the person because individuals can demotivate if they feel they are blamed for poor performance. This what we can call a ‘power’ way to lead and coordinate relationships in a private sector organization.
On the other hand, there is the Chinese model. These organizations are usually family owned businesses, so the main objective is to keep the business in the family. Therefore, the targets of these organizations are the satisfaction of employees and also the minimization of state unemployment. These objectives have a great impact on a Chinese project manager’s thinking and also on his style of communication with employees. The personality of the project managers is influenced by cultural characteristics of Mianzi culture and Confucianism, with some attributes like morality, the effort prized over ability, the importance of hierarchical relationships and a harmonious style of social relationships. On a large scale, we can consider this a based on trust way to lead and coordinate relationships in a private sector organization.
Trust of Management & the Management of Trust
A specific example where this ‘trust’ type of management concept can apply is the online teamwork projects. Traditionally, trust is assumed to build gradually within teams over time based on an individual’s cognitive assessment of the other person’s behavior. However, the lack of shared social context and limitations of personal interaction and communication among team members in virtual teams decrease the potential for trust. Trust on a collaborative level is more complicated and more pivotal than dyadic trust because the collaborative relationships involve multiple trustees, each with different attributes (Hung-Wei Tseng, 2003).
Trust between teammates can only be built by sharing thoughts, ideas, conclusions, and feelings and having the other group members respond with acceptance, support, and reciprocation of disclosures (Johnson, 2000). Good communication among team members comes with good team spirit, building this ‘all-in-the-family feeling’, and there is a good team performance culture (McShane, 2008).
Communication within the team is crucial for the proper performance of work. Both people from the team and the team leader must possess good communication skills because everyone must be aware of the functions, tasks, and expectations. Besides, when problems arise, and there is no communication between team members and leaders, the task might be jeopardized. A team with high level of trust is more likely to see the spirit of cooperation and information sharing among members (Peters L., 2009), even with the low level of shared expertise. The team leader must be aware of client’s high expectations, communicate and find solutions when these are not realistic or deadlines are hard to reach. He must be flexible, understand the requirements and maintain a close link with the client throughout the project. A proper leadership will successfully fulfill the role of mediator between employees and customers (Schruijer, 2010).
Teamwork is a key element in every business, whether it’s a small business or a multinational company. The productivity of a team depends not only on the level of training of individuals but also on the way it managed and on the efficiency of communication. Thus, tasks will be completed promptly and the results will be as expected. Regarding team cohesion, O’Reilly C. A. (1989) deﬁned this as the attraction to the group, satisfaction with everybody from the group, and social interaction between the group members. The cohesion of a team allows team members to bind together and also communicate more effectively to coordinate their efforts, and enables the group to remain intact and productive in spite of difficulties, which in turn promotes trust (Deutsch M., 2011).
Prof. David Buchanan suggest that the factors that determine group cohesion are: attractiveness of the group, the opportunity to interact with all other members, sharing of common goals, difficulty of entry to the group, status congruence (consensus between group members over hierarchy), equity of reward for members, success of the group, stable membership, external threat to group and also a small size of the group (David Buchanan, 1997).
The Power of Good or the Go (O) D of Power
According to Steve Ellis & Penny Dick (2006), there are many kinds of leadership powers that a project manager can use to coordinate activity and relationships in a private sector organization. The referent power is coming from the leader’s personality characteristics that command identification and respect. Elected power is a power derived from votes of interested parties, such as trade union representatives. Resource power is the power to allow the use of exclusive resources such as land or capital. Legitimate power means the power coming from a formal position in the organization and the authority attached to it. The reward power is the one stemming from the leader’s ability to bestow rewards, financial or otherwise. Coercive power represents the power to punish or recommend punishment. Expert power is resulting from the leader’s knowledge or skill regarding the tasks performed by followers.
Pettinger (1996) describes the way that leadership styles vary from dictatorial, (in which employees have no input into the decision-making process and just told what to do) to democratic (decisions are taken only after full consideration of employee’s views). In-between are consultative (the leader consults those affected by the decision and may modify his or her position before making it), and participative (the leader encourages employees to propose their solutions and work out the implications of what is, in effect, their decision). The key point to recognize here is that none of the styles is universally applicable. The effective leader is one who can operate across the range of styles as is appropriate (Steve Ellis, 2006).
Manager’s behavior strongly influenced by forces coming from its personality and the problems he perceives regarding his expert knowledge and professional experience. A manager who runs a company in a based on power pattern ensures its management position rather by the things he is making than by who he is; he always adapts its behavior to meet the competitive needs of any situation. This leadership model is often used mainly in multicultural organizations since avoids the problem of using a leadership ‘foreign’ (imported) style in a different local and cultural context. This was demonstrated by using this model for a long period over many countries over the world (J.Wilson, 1997).
Managers differ widely regarding confidence they have in employees they lead at some point. Therefore, the answer to a question like ‘who is the best qualified to deal with this problem?’ Can determine a manager, justified or not, to have greater confidence in his skills than in the skills of his subordinates. Some managers feel more comfortable solving problems themselves and giving orders while some feel more comfortable taking on a role in the team, and continuously dividing functions and duties with subordinates.
The manager has the responsibility to identify problems and also to take decisions. However, instead of just announcing the decision, he has to make an extra effort on convincing his subordinates to accept it. By doing so, he accepts that he might face some resistance from those who will have to apply the decision and will seek to reduce this resistance, indicating, for example, what the subordinates have to win this decision. In this case, after taking a decision and struggling for it to be accepted, the manager gives his subordinates the chance to get explanations as clear and complete as possible about what he thought and what he intends to achieve. Accordingly, he invites his subordinates to ask any questions enabling him and them also to obtain a complete image of the implications of his decision.
The initiative of identification and diagnosis of a problem is the manager’s job, who, before meeting his team he had already reached a certain decision, but not a final one, rather an attempt or a try. The message of the manager for his subordinates will be something like this: ‘I would like to hear what you have to say about this plan that I developed myself. Your sincere reactions are welcome, but I reserve the right of taking the final decision’.
The higher the distance to the power the bigger a managers gain in social status. This makes him having a tendency to impose in relations considering the need to provide answers to professional problems. The manager is usually a person with rich consistent and successful professional experience and this role usually taken by an elderly person whose image is no longer nowadays a positive cultural stereotype especially in Western cultures and in especially in the Anglo-Saxon countries where aging is less associated with wisdom and more with decay and degradation. This mentality was surprised very plastic and also very cynical by a journalist in Sunday Times newspaper, in March 2009: ‘The great terror of our age is the age. […] It is clear that fear is not the elderly: is the fact that we will reach it. Elders are zombies at the end of our home horror movies.’
No matter if a manager relies on a power style to maintain relationships to get things done or how, based on trust he makes for an effective social relationships building measure and hence creating successful organizations, based on the preceding, organizations, irrespective of size should Endeavour to also consider the factors that are relevant to job satisfaction and employee performance. Such factors range from achievement through responsibility to security. Employees have multiple needs based on their individual and cultural values. Satisfying these needs will not only lead to job satisfaction but also to life satisfaction bearing in mind that to some extent, a satisfied employee is a happy citizen (Stephen I. Dugguh, 2014). But human relationships are those who, in most cases, lead to success (for all intents and purposes) of a company or its collapse. The environment is also equally important in a company, as a pleasant and relaxing social environment can lead to good results, besides a stressful and tensed one can also bring good results, but predispose to errors. Eventually, the best solution could be finding a balance between maintaining an authoritarian style of relationships and giving trust in employees, in their skills and a good communication between everyone involved in a project.
Alexander J.Wilson, 1997, ‘Leading accros cultures: Five vital capabilities. The Organization of the future.
Bradley, L. and R. Parker (2006) Organisational Culture in the Public Sector, Report for the Institute of Public Administration Australia(IPAA), Australia: IPAA National.
Curs eu P. & Schruijer S., 2010, ‘Does conﬂict shatter trust or does trust obliterate conﬂict? Revisiting the relationships between team diversity, conﬂict, and trust. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice.
Deutsch M., Marcus E. C. & Brazaitis S., 2012, ‘A framework for thinking about developing a global community.
Duane P. Schultz , Sydney Ellen Schultz, 2005, ‘Theories of Personality’, 5th edition.
Hill C. W. & McShane S. L., 2008, ‘Principles of management’, New York, NY: McGraw Hill.
Hung Wei Tseng, Hsin-Te Yeh, 2013, ‘Computers & Education 63.
Jennifer M. George, Gareth R. Jones, 2008, ‘Understanding and Managing Organizational Behavior’, 5th edition.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, F. P., 2000, ‘Joining together: Group theory and group skills’, 7th edition, Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.
McLeod, P., Lobel, S., & Cox, T. H., 1996, ‘Ethnic diversity and creativity in small groups. Small Group Research.
O’Reilly C. A., Caldwell D. F. & Barnett W. P. ,1989, ‘Work group demography, social integration, and turnover. Administrative Science Quarterly.
Peters L. & Karren R. J., 2009, ‘An examination of the roles of trust and functional diversity on virtual team performance ratings. Group & Organization Management.
Prof. David Buchanan, Dr. Andrzej Huczynski, 1997, ‘Organizational Behaviour: Integrated Readings Paperback.
Richard Pettinger, 1996, ‘Introduction to Management’, 4th Edition Paperback.
Schein, E.H.(2004) Organizational Culture and Leadership, Third edition, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Stephen I. Dugguh, Ayaga, Dennis, May, 2014, IOSR Journal of Business and Management – ‘Job satisfaction theories: Traceability to employee performance in organizations’.
Steve Ellis, Penny Dick, 2006, ‘ Introduction to Organizational Behaviour’, 3rd edition, McGraw-Hill, London.
Watson, T.J. (2006) Organising and Managing Work, UK: Pearson Education Limited.


From 6th to 12th February 2012 it is National Tinnitus Awareness week.
So what is Tinnitus?
Tinnitus is where a person can hear sounds or noises in their ears without there being an external cause for this noise. The sounds themselves seem to be within the ear channels themselves but on examination there is no physical cause for it. It seems that the brain gets confused by the nerve signals coming from ears.
The word 'Tinnitus' comes from the Latin word meaning 'ringing'. This gives an indication as to what the sounds can be like. Some sufferers hear ringing, for others it's buzzing, hissing or whistling.
As well as the type of sound varying, the location, pitch and continuity of the sounds also varies from person to person.
Causes of Tinnitus
Tinnitus is not a disease but a symptom of something else. The exact causes for tinnitus starting is not fully understood by the medical world.
However the following may often precede tinnitus:
- Head injury
- exposure to loud noise
- Severe or chronic ear infections
- Hyperactive thyroid disease
Tinnitus can occur to anyone of any age, it's not just restricted to older people. It is thought that up to 10% of the population suffers from tinnitus at some stage in their life.
The sounds can disrupt sleep and a lack of concentration. This can lead to anxiety and even depression.
Treatments for Tinnitus
If someone is suffering from any ear disorders or noises in the ears it is best to get this looked at by a medical professional to rule out any serious problems. They may refer you to an ear, nose and throat specialist too.
Generally, if there is an underlying cause and this can be found and it can be treated it will diminish the sounds.
Some sufferers find using 'white noise' a good way to mask out the sounds in their ears, as it's usually most noticeable when sitting in silence.
Some people find that their tinnitus gets worse when they are stressed or anxious so some form of relaxation therapy could aid this.
If anxiety and depression are present the medical team may treat using anti-depressants and counselling.
A number of sufferers turn to Complementary Therapies as a way to manage their tinnitus. Some use Reflexology, Ear candling, Massage and Acupuncture. There are some herbal remedies that some people find beneficial too, but it's always best to seek the advice from a medical herbalist first.
If you suffer from tinnitus and would like more information or support, or if you would like more information about how to help during Tinnitus Awareness Week then take a look at the British Tinnitus Association website.


Dog bites to children are far too common. So let’s teach our children how to be safe around dogs. Dog bites occur when dogs feel threatened, frightened, or defensive. Space is important to dogs. When they feel cornered they are more likely to bite. Understanding dog body language is the single best tool for eliminating dog bites. The perception is sometimes that a dog “bit without warning,” but the reality is usually that the people did not understand the dog’s warning or take the necessary measures to resolve the situation peacefully.
So, in saying all of this, it’s so important as parents that we teach our kids these three steps for meeting a dog safely. Our children copy our every move too so it’s important that you model these steps and show them how it’s done. These steps can also be applied to your own family dog…
Three steps to Teach your child how to safely say hello to dogs
STEP 1: Always Ask the Owner first
It’s very important to teach kids how to interact with dogs they are interested in and to not just run up to them. Childish excitement could be interpreted as a threat by inexperienced dogs.
Teach kids not to rush toward a dog. Encourage them to stop about 3 steps away and ask the owner, “May I pat your dog?” Sometimes the answer will be no. Many dogs don’t live with kids and are not comfortable with them. So if the dog’s owner says no, that’s okay. In fact, good on them, for standing up for their dog and being their advocate. This owner is just protecting you and protecting their dog who might not enjoy being patted by children or strangers. Remind your child that there are lots of other dogs who would love to be patted by them but this dog just doesn’t feel like a pat right now. You could suggest that they wave to the dog or blow a kiss instead.
If the owner says yes, then the children must ask the dog.
Please teach your child that if there is no owner in site, they should never pat the dog. For example if the dog is tied up to the fence outside school or at the supermarket, you must leave them alone. A dog who is tied up without their owner in site, might be feeling stressed, scared or anxious. They have no way to escape the situation if a stranger approached them and they are feeling uncomfortable. so they could react with a bite.
STEP 2: Always ask the Dog
Do Not Skip This Step! Tell kids that dogs don’t use words but instead rely on body language. So we are going to ask the dog and see what his body language tells us…
Ask your child to tap their leg and call the dogs name in a happy high pitch voice… They don’t need to stick their hand in the dogs face to get them to sniff it – this can actually be dangerous as some dogs will find it scary and might react. Dogs have a great sense of smell so can already smell your child from where they are. Rather we want to encourage them in.
Also direct eye contact can be scary for some dogs. I like to encourage a dog in, whilst standing side on and not making direct eye contact – if the child is old enough, please make sure to teach this to them too.
When the dog is being given the option to approach, watch his body language.
- Does he come forward with loose, waggy motions? That’s definitely a yes.
- Does he lean forward for a quick sniff and seem comfortable? Also a yes.
- Does he turn his face away from your child’s hand? Back away? Bark? Move behind the owner? Look anxious and unsettled? Growl? These are all no’s.
Unfortunately some owners don’t understand or respect their dog’s decision and will drag the dog forward saying, “Oh, he’s fine. He loves kids. You can pat him.” DON’T! Do not ever allow children to pet a dog that does not approach them willingly. If we approach an anxious or nervous dog, especially if they are on lead and cannot escape, they could react out of fear. So please don’t put your child in that situation.
To some dogs, children can be quite scary. So it is really important that we give the dog a choice.
If it’s your own dog that your child would like to pat, your child should also ask the dog for permission first before approaching.
STEP 3: How to Pat the Dog
If the owner said yes and the dog said yes, the kids can pat the dog. Tell the kids that they need to be careful of a dog’s sensitive eyes and ears. Most dogs don’t like to be patted on top of their heads, but nearly all people do it —it’s a hardwired human behaviour. There is a blind spot on top of a dog’s head. If he sees a child’s hand moving toward that area, the natural inclination is for him to tilt his head up and watch where the hand is going. Now the child’s hand is reaching right over the dog’s teeth—not a very good place for that hand to be. Suggest that the children stroke the side of the dog’s neck, rub under his chin, scratch his chest, or pat along his back. Most dogs prefer slow, gentle strokes to rapid pat-pat-patting. Alternatively your child can ask the owner if the dog has a favourite spot to be patted. Let your child pat the dog for 3 seconds and stop. If the dog’s had enough it will move away, shake off or turn its head. If the dog wants more, your child can continue to pat. At Family Paws, we say ‘one hand enough… two hands too rough’.
You might not know this but a dog will always communicate if they are feeling stressed in a situation before reacting with a bite. So it is up to you to recognise their signs, and intervene before it’s too late. We don’t ever want to put a dog in a situation where they feel they need to bite a child to escape. If we listen and respond to their subtle signs of communication, we can avoid situations like dog bites happening.
For more info on child and dog safety and how dogs communicate make sure to have a read of these articles:
- How Dogs Communicate
- Our Dogs Are Always Communicating Let’s Learn To Understand Them And Help Prevent Dog Bites To Children
- Good Intentions Aren’t Enough. We Want Dogs To Enjoy Their Encounters With Children Rather Than Just Tolerating Them.
- Teach your child to interact safely with dogs and know the warning signs to look for
- Five Important Skills to teach your Dog when Around Young Children
- Lead by example to show your child how to interact safely with dogs
- Managing your Dog when having Visitors and Children Coming Over
As always if you have any questions on this topic, please get in touch.


The definition of art should fall under Wittgenstein’s open concept. Clarifying if it is ‘good’ art or bad art is irrelevant. The economic value does not always do justice for ‘good’ art and majority of the time, the artist him/herself does not get the awards of value directly until late.
Collingwood’s argument is sketchy, especially against more of the art that falls under the modern genre. Wittgenstein’s open concept also involves the evolving of art from the beginning of time to the present time. A strong argument like today’s film industry is strictly entertainment, but not art or if it is art, it is merely just ‘bad’ art. However, ‘bad’ art is still art. Therefore, it forges a weak argument.
With Wittgenstein’s open concept argument, Hume’s long list can also be in play. All theories that give necessary and sufficient definitions have just as strong counterarguments with the biggest one being the evolution of art in itself and the turning of time.
If art is not entertainment, than Shakespeare is not an artist, either. That can also argue for Kabuki Theatre in Japan is also not art, but craft. No one can argue that Shakespeare or Kabuki Theatere is ‘bad’ art or can they? This argument would fall a subjective approach, rather than objective. One must be alert of the direction, fore the equation is now motus tollens; entertainment is not art, therefore if it’s entertainment, it’s not art.
Art and entertainment can co-exist within each other. In today’s film and movie productions, you see that in the majority of the final product. A primary example of how today’s film industry can still provide art within its product is Black Swan (Aronofsky). There are different levels of art being displayed in the final product, including but the not limited too, music, fashion, writing, and acting. It is all art coming together for one final piece to be displayed. The same would have fallen with Shakespeare’s plays back in the 16th-17th century.


There are many misconceptions about the meaning and application of “intelligence” — not only among the lay public but also within law enforcement. Colloquial uses of the term, such as “Officer Jones collected some good intelligence,” provide an intuitive understanding. These uses, however, lack precision and are unable to account for the diverse applications and rules associated with the intelligence function.
As a primer, there are two broad classes of intelligence, as illustrated in Figure 1-1. The first category is the “discipline” of intelligence, which refers to the set of rules, processes, and lexicon of the intelligence function. This Intelligence Guide is solely about the discipline of intelligence.
Within the framework of the discipline, there are three types of intelligence of concern for the present discussion which include:
- Law enforcement (or criminal) intelligence
- Homeland Security—also known as “all-hazards”—intelligence
- National Security Intelligence.
While there are important similarities across these three categories, there are also distinct differences. These critical factors are discussed throughout this Guide as they specifically relate to state, local, and tribal law enforcement (SLTLE) agencies.
Figure 1.1 Intelligence Analysis of Raw Information
The second broad class is the “application of intelligence,” which deals with knowledge related to a specific crime type. Intelligence analysis that produces information about new methods and indicators in the uses of improvised explosive devices (IED) by jihadists, for example, is the “application of intelligence.” Another illustration would be indicators drawn from an analysis of international financial transactions that are characteristic of a money-laundering enterprise. An essential ingredient for the application of intelligence is an understanding of the nature and constituent elements of the crime phenomenon of concern. For example, if a community is threatened by multi-jurisdictional gang activity that operates as a criminal enterprise, an understanding of the gang culture, signs, symbols, hierarchy, and other gang-specific characteristics is essential for analysts and officers to be effective in combating the crime problem. While the two classes of intelligence are inextricably linked for purposes of training and application, it is nonetheless essential to understand the unique aspects of each. With an understanding of the classes of intelligence, attention will be directed toward the definitions of each.
Law Enforcement Intelligence
This Guide uses definitions based on generally accepted practice and standards by the law enforcement intelligence community at the local, state, and tribal levels. This does not mean that other definitions of terms are wrong, but this approach provides a common understanding of words and concepts as most applicable to the targeted audience of this Guide.
Before defining intelligence, it is essential to understand the meaning of “information” in the context of this process. Information may defined as “pieces of raw, unanalyzed data that identify persons, organizations, evidence, events or illustrates processes that indicate the incidence of a criminal event or witness or evidence of a criminal event. As we will see, information is collected as the currency that produces intelligence.
The phrase “law enforcement intelligence,” used synonymously with “criminal intelligence,” refers to law enforcement’s responsibility to enforce the criminal law. Oftentimes, the phrase is used improperly and, too often, intelligence is erroneously viewed as pieces of information about people, places, or events that can be used to provide insight about criminality or crime threats. It is further complicated by the failure to distinguish among the different types of intelligence.
Diverse Information Collected for Intelligence Analysis
Pieces of information gathered from diverse sources, such as wiretaps, informants, banking records, or surveillance (see Figure 2-1), are simply raw data that frequently have limited inherent meaning.
Intelligence is when a wide array of raw information is assessed for validity and reliability, reviewed for materiality to the issues at question, and given meaning through the application of inductive or deductive logic. Law enforcement intelligence, therefore, is “the product of an analytic process that provides an integrated perspective to disparate information about crime, crime trends, crime and security threats, and conditions associated with criminality.” The need for carefully analyzed, reliable information is essential because both policy and operational decisions are made using intelligence; therefore, a vigilant process must be in place to ensure that decisions are made on objective, informed criteria, rather than on presumed criteria. Often “information sharing” and “intelligence sharing” are used interchangeably by persons who do not understand the subtleties — yet importance — of the distinction. In the strictest sense, care should be taken to use terms appropriately because, as will be seen in later discussions, there are different regulatory and legal implications for “intelligence” than for “information” (See Table 2-1) The subtleties of language can become an important factor should the management of a law enforcement agency’s intelligence records come under scrutiny.
2.1 Comparative Illustrations of Information and Intelligence national security intelligence
In understanding the broad arena of intelligence, some perspective of national security intelligence (NSI) is useful for SLTLE agencies. This primer is meant to familiarize the law enforcement reader with basic terms, concepts, and issues, and is not intended as an exhaustive description.
NSI may be defined as “the collection and analysis of information concerned with the relationship and homeostasis of the United States with foreign powers, organizations, and persons with regard to political and economic factors as well as the maintenance of the United States’ sovereign principles.” NSI seeks to maintain the United States as a free, capitalist republic with its laws and constitutional foundation intact, and identify and neutralize threats or actions that undermine United States sovereign principles.
NSI embodies both policy intelligence and military intelligence. Policy intelligence is concerned with threatening actions and activities of entities hostile to the U.S., while military intelligence focuses on hostile entities, weapons systems, warfare capabilities, and order of battle.
Since the fall of the Soviet Union and the rise of threats from terrorist groups, both policy and military intelligence have evolved to grapple with the character of new threats. The organizations responsible for NSI are collectively known as the Intelligence Community (IC).
The IC is a federation of executive branch agencies and organizations that work within their own specific mission as well as in an integrated fashion to conduct threat assessment and intelligence activities necessary for effective foreign relations and the protection of United States national security.
These activities include the following:
- Collection of information needed by the President, the National Security Council, the Secretaries of State and Defense, and other Executive Branch officials for the performance of their duties and responsibilities;
- Production and dissemination of intelligence related to national security and the protection
of U.S. sovereign principles from interference by foreign entities;
- Collection of information concerning, and the conduct of activities to protect against, intelligence activities directed against the U.S., international terrorist and international narcotics activities, and other hostile activities directed against the U.S. by foreign powers, organizations, persons, and their agents;
- Administrative and support activities within the U.S. and abroad that are necessary for the performance of authorized activities such as foreign relations, diplomacy, trade, and the protection of interests of our allies; and
- Such other intelligence and activities as the President may direct as related to national security and the U.S. relationship with foreign entities.
As seen in the definition and descriptions of NSI, there is no jurisdictional concern for crime.
As a result, constitutional restrictions that attach to criminal cases that law enforcement faces on information collection, records retention, and use of information in a raw capacity do not apply to IC responsibilities where there is no criminal investigation.
Figure 2-3: Law Enforcement and National Security Intelligence Authority Comparison
The lessons learned from this brief review of national security intelligence are threefold:
- State, local, and tribal law enforcement officers have no jurisdiction to collect or manage NSI;
- Use of NSI in a criminal investigation by a state, local, or tribal law enforcement officer could derail the prosecution of a case because of civil rights protections; and
- Use of NSI in a criminal investigation by an SLTLE officer and/or retention of NSI in a records system or in the personal records of an SLTLE officer could open the possibility of civil liability from a Section 1983 lawsuit.
Law Enforcement Intelligence Initiatives in the Post-9/11 Environment
Several important initiatives were spurred by the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, that have had a significant and fast effect on the evolution of law enforcement intelligence. The more significant developments occurring during this time are listed in Table 3-2.
In October 2001, about six weeks after the 9/11 attacks, the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) held its annual meeting in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. During this meeting, the Police Investigative Operations Committee discussed the need for SLTLE agencies to re-engineer their intelligence function as well as the need for national leadership to establish standards and direction for SLTLE agencies. From this meeting, the IACP, with funding support from the COPS Office, held the Intelligence Summit in March 2002. The summit developed a series of recommendations, a criminal intelligence sharing plan, and adopted Intelligence-Led Policing.
The Global Justice Information Sharing Initiative (Global), a group funded by the U.S. Office of Justice Programs, was already in existence with the charge of developing processes and standards to efficaciously share information across the criminal justice system. In response to the IACP Intelligence Summit of 2002, Global created a new subgroup, the Global Intelligence Working Group (GIWG). The purpose of the GIWG was to move forward with the summit’s recommendations. The first GIWG product was the National Criminal Intelligence Sharing Plan.
Formally announced at a national signing event in the Great Hall of the U.S. Department of Justice on May 14, 2004, the National Criminal Intelligence Sharing Plan (NCISP) signified an element of intelligence dissemination that is important for all law enforcement officials. With formal endorsements from the DOJ, DHS, and the FBI, the NCISP provided an important foundation on which state, local, and tribal law enforcement agencies could create their own intelligence initiatives. The intent of the plan was to provide SLTLE agencies (particularly those that do not have established intelligence functions) with the necessary tools and resources to develop, gather, access, receive, and share intelligence.
Table 3-2: Significant Post-9/11 Law Enforcement Intelligence Initiatives
The NCISP established a series of national standards that have been formally recognized by the professional law enforcement community as the role and processes for law enforcement intelligence today. The plan is having a significant effect on organizational realignment, information- sharing philosophy, and training in America’s law enforcement agencies.
The NCISP also recognized the importance of local, state, and tribal law enforcement agencies as a key ingredient in the nation’s intelligence process and called for the creation of the Criminal Intelligence Coordinating Council (CICC) to establish the linkage needed to improve intelligence and information sharing among all levels of government. Composed of members from law enforcement agencies at all levels of government, the CICC was formally established in May 2004 to provide advice in connection with the implementation and refinement of the NCISP. Members of the CICC serve as advocates for local law enforcement and support their efforts to develop and share criminal intelligence for the purpose of promoting public safety and securing our nation. Because of the critical role that SLTLE play in homeland security, they must have a voice in the development of policies and systems that facilitate information and intelligence sharing. The CICC serves as the voice for all levels of law enforcement agencies by advising the U.S. Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security on the best use of criminal intelligence as well as the capabilities and limitations of SLTLE agencies related to information sharing.
During the same period these initiatives were occurring, many states and regions somewhat independently were developing multi-jurisdictional intelligence capabilities to maximize the diverse raw information input for analysis and examine potential acts of terrorism that may occur within regions. The units, called “fusion centers,” were embraced by the DHS, which began providing funding to enable some of the centers to operate. The concept of “intelligence fusion” caught on rapidly as an efficient and effective mechanism for developing intelligence products. With recognition that other crimes, such as financial crime and weapons offenses, may have a nexus with terrorism, the centers’ foci broadened to include “all crimes.” Moreover, with the broad mission of the DHS, which was increasingly providing substantial amounts of funding, the fusion centers’ focus broadened further to encompass “all crimes, all hazards, all threats.” Recognizing the benefits of standardization to enhance the quality of work being done by the fusion centers, the GIWG created the Fusion Center Guidelines for developing a series of recommendations and good practices for law enforcement agencies that are participating in the intelligence fusion process. While primarily focusing on criminal intelligence, the Guidelines also give attention to the law enforcement information-sharing relationship with the private sector, as well as public safety issues related to homeland security intelligence.
The Intelligence Process (Cycle) for State, Local, and Tribal Law Enforcement (SLTLE)
Regardless of the type of intelligence, the single function that permeates all activities is the Intelligence Process (also known as the Intelligence Cycle). This process provides mechanisms to ensure the consistent management of information that will be used to create intelligence. This chapter is an overview of the Intelligence Process. Many of the issues introduced here will be discussed in detail in the remaining chapters of this Guide.
The Intelligence Process has been depicted in a variety of ways throughout the intelligence literature. The number of phases in the process may differ, depending on the model used, but the intent of each model of the Intelligence Process is the same:
To have a systemic, scientific, and logical methodology to comprehensively process information to ensure that the most accurate, actionable intelligence is produced and disseminated to the people who provide an operational response to prevent a criminal threat from reaching fruition.
The process applies to all crimes, whether terrorism, drug trafficking, gangs, or any other criminal enterprise. Indeed, the process also helps identify circumstances where there is a nexus between these different types of crimes.
To be consistent with established national standards, the model used in this discussion is the one prescribed in the National Criminal Intelligence Sharing Plan (NCISP). While often depicted as “steps,” in practice the different components of the process are phases, and there is a constant ebb and flow of information between phases as information is processed and shared. The Intelligence Process, therefore, is not a series of independent steps that are mechanically processed in an unbending sequential order; rather, it is a recipe for intelligence and information sharing that will frequently change according to the availability of “ingredients” and the “nutritional needs” of the consumer.
The Model of the Intelligence Process in the NCISP (Figure 4-1) has Six Phases:
1. Planning and Direction. 4. Analysis.
2. Collection. 5. Dissemination.
3. Processing/Collation. 6. Reevaluation.
Each phase may be broken down into sub-processes (Figure 4-2) that collectively contribute to an effective information management and analysis system.
Figure 4-1: Intelligence Process, NCISP
In many ways, the Intelligence Process acts like a radar sweep across a community. The process seeks to identify potential threats, determine the status of suspicious activity, and provide indicators of criminality so that operational units can develop responses.
Here’s an illustration of the ebb and flow of the Intelligence Process: An intelligence bulletin may describe certain indicators. An officer observes behaviors that are consistent with these indicators, collects further information that is processed through the cycle, thereby providing an analyst with more raw data to help refine the analysis.
When a more refined analysis is disseminated to operational units, the likelihood increases of providing more explicit intelligence that operational units may use to prevent a crime or a terrorist attack.
Figure 4-2: Intelligence Process and Sub-processes
As another illustration, an intelligence bulletin describes an emerging threat of Eastern European organized crime operating protection rackets in a major Midwestern city. A police officer working neighborhoods with large populations of Russian immigrants has noticed an increase in thefts and property damage to small businesses largely operated by immigrants. In light of the intelligence bulletin, the officer provides information to the intelligence unit that crimes reported as simple thefts and property destruction within this area of the city may, in reality, be symptoms of “enforcer” activities of Eastern European organized crime-protection schemes. The analyst corroborates the information with practices of the organized crime group in other cities and provides the additional information to officers in a revised bulletin. To be most effective, the Intelligence Process requires this ongoing two-way flow of information.
Planning and Direction
The intelligence function involves the coordination of many activities. Similar to intermeshed gears, there must be a plan for how each moving part will operate in concert with other elements and how the gears will collectively manage a change in the environment. The gears of the Intelligence Process are prioritized and synchronized in the first phase of the cycle:
Planning and Direction
Former FBI Executive Assistant Director for Intelligence Maureen Baginski often stated, “The absence of evidence is not the absence of a threat.” As part of the Planning and Direction process, it is important to recognize not only the threats that have been identified but also dynamic threats in which evidence indicating their presence may appear serendipitously. A threat may emerge within a jurisdiction or region for a wide variety of reasons; therefore, personnel must be trained to be vigilant in looking for evidence of threats (indicators). This, however, must be a pragmatic process.
While there is a common perspective that the Intelligence Process should take an “all- crimes/all-threats approach,” pragmatically, these threats are not “equal” and must be prioritized considering the probability of their presence and the nature of the harm they pose to a community. Threat prioritization is part of the “Direction” component of the first phase. This is done through ongoing threat assessments that are constantly refined by information that is processed through the Intelligence Cycle.
A threat must be assessed on multiple criteria as illustrated in Figure 4-3.
The first threat component is threat identification. When evidence of a threat is identified, the Intelligence Process must assess where the threat lies on a multivariate continuum of probability.
While quantifying a threat would add an element of precision, typically the variables related to a threat can be measured only on an ordinal scale; for example, based on qualitative data a judgment can be made on the relative value of a threat variable on a scale of 1 to 10.
As illustrated in Figure 4-4, the first two variables (A and B) measure the quality of the information.
The second two variables (C and D) measure the probable outcome of the threat. Combined, they provide guidance for decision-making.
A moderate assessment of the quality of information may produce a different operational response as the severity of the threat increases. As severity decreases, a higher quality of information may be desired before an operational response is made. This is basically a method to weigh risk/outcome tradeoffs.
Figure 4-3: Threat Assessment Components for Planning and Direction
The next step is a vulnerability assessment of probable targets. When a threat is identified, the universe of targets is typically narrowed. Regardless of whether the probable number of targets is large or small, some judgments can be made about how vulnerable the targets are. As vulnerability increases so do the seriousness of the threat. As an example, assume that a small group of eco-terrorists plans on fire-bombing the sales inventory of various automobile dealers who sell large trucks. Most dealership sales lots are easily accessible 24 hours a day. As such, their vulnerability increases and so does the threat. In a different scenario, assume that the same group of eco-terrorists plans to fire-bomb tanks at a military installation to protest fuel consumption and damage done to the environment by the tanks traversing their training range. In this case, target vulnerability is low because of the inaccessibility to the tanks on the military base and the ability of tanks to withstand Molotov cocktails should the intruders get near them. As should be apparent, target vulnerability is an important variable in any threat assessment.
Figure 4-4: Simplified Threat Assessment Illustration
Once threats and target vulnerability have been identified, a risk assessment is made. The risk is epitomized by the question: “What is the probable result if the vulnerability is exploited?” In the above illustration, the risk to the automobile dealers may be high and the risk to the military installation may be low; however, before a conclusion may be drawn on risk, more information is needed to corroborate judgments and determine if there are other, previously undiscovered, compounding factors. This process helps define further intelligence requirements—information that needs to be collected to better comprehend the threat.
Essentially, the threat assessment process seeks to make a distinction between whether an intelligence target is “making a threat” or “posing a threat.” This is obviously subjective; hence, as much information as practicable should be collected and analyzed on these three factors. In most instances, there will be insufficient information to make a meaningful assessment of each component of the threat assessment model. As a result, answers to the “requirements” questions will help clarify the threat picture. Obtaining additional information will increase the quality of intelligence by identifying and eliminating the error.
It should also be recognized that previously undefined threats may also emerge. Changes in the character of a community may stimulate new threats, the presence of a particular target may draw a threat, or the threat simply may appear as a result of the combined effect of many factors. The point to note is that law enforcement personnel must be trained to identify behaviors that are more than merely suspicious, record the behaviors with as much detail as possible, and forward this information to the intelligence analysts.
The importance of the threat assessment model in Planning and Direction lies within the ability to maximize resources and operational initiatives for those crimes and circumstances which pose the greatest risk to public safety and security. In many ways, the Intelligence Process looks for images through a lens that is out of focus. The two-way exchange of information helps focus the lens to understand if a threat is present and the degree of risk it poses. The Planning and Direction process constantly monitors changes in the environment and helps define changing priorities as well as new two-way information sharing needs.
Beyond resource issues, Planning and Direction require the identification of threat priorities to focus awareness training for officers on how to recognize all threats. It also requires policy and procedural mechanisms to make the organization sufficiently nimble to respond effectively to the changing threat environment. Just like the Intelligence Process itself, the Planning and Direction phase is characterized by an ebb and flow of information that provides insight so that the evolving threat environment can be managed efficaciously.
The collection is the gathering of raw information that will be used by analysts to prepare intelligence reports and products. As a way to better envision the Collection phase of the process, law enforcement personnel typically will gather information in five basic forms:
1. A response to intelligence requirements;
2. A response to terrorism or criminal indicators;
3. Suspicious Activity Reports (SAR) of activities observed by or reported to officers;
4. Leads that officers develop during the investigation of unrelated cases; and
5. Tips that may come from citizens, informants, or the private sector.
The response to intelligence requirements is information that is intentionally and specifically sought to answer certain questions. That information may be sought from open sources or may be a product of law enforcement methods, such as interviews, surveillance, undercover operations, or other law enforcement processes. A response to indicators would be law enforcement officers collecting information based on their observation of circumstances or behaviors they recognize because of information they gained from training and/or intelligence bulletins that describe such indicators.
Typically, indicators will include the signs and symbols of criminal activity such as graffiti, the symbol of an extremist group on a wall or a car, or unusual activity at a location that is consistent with threat activity described in an intelligence report. Typically, information collected from SARs is based on behavior observed by law enforcement officers who, relying on their training and experience, believe the individual may be involved in criminal activity in the past or the future, although a specific criminal nexus is not identified.
The term leads refer to information that officers develop about a probable emerging threat that is largely unrelated to the current investigation but comes to light during the inquiry. Tips reflect information that has been observed by citizens and submitted to a law enforcement agency for further inquiry.
The collection process must seek to establish a criminal nexus with any person or organization that is identified in criminal intelligence records. This nexus is referred to as a criminal predicate. The standard for that criminal predicate is reasonable suspicion that is more than a mere suspicion that the identified person is committing or is about to commit a crime. In practice, law enforcement agencies collect information on individuals where no criminal predicate exists. Examples are SARs, tips, and leads. This may appear to be a contradiction, but it is an inherent part of the Intelligence Process that has a remedy. The law enforcement agency has an obligation to determine if there is veracity to the criminal allegations found in SARs, leads, or tips. This is the purpose of the two-tiered “Temporary File” and “Permanent File” records system used for intelligence records. In practice, retention of collected information becomes the critical issue for demonstrating the criminal predicate.
The reader should note that care was taken to specify that the criminal predicate must be established when collecting and retaining information that identifies people or organizations. The critical point to note is that constitutional rights attach when identity is established.
The Intelligence Process will also seek to collect information about crime trends, methods of criminal operations, ideologies of extremists groups, and other non-identifying information that helps describe and explain criminal phenomena. The criminal predicate rule does not apply to these types of information because individuals are not identified.
A final issue of Collection—and the entire Intelligence Process—is operations security (OPSEC). OPSEC focuses on identifying and protecting information that might provide an intelligence target with clues to an inquiry, and thereby enable the target to thwart the inquiry. To protect the integrity of the intelligence inquiry, it is essential to maintain the security of collection sources, methods, and content.
This phase of the Intelligence Process, Processing/Collation, has four distinct activities, as illustrated in Figure 4-5. The first is to evaluate raw data from the collection phase to determine its utility for analysis. An assessment should first examine the reliability of the source of the information. Ideally, the individual who was the primary collector should record a statement of reliability. The importance of this assessment relates to the confidence level an analyst will give the information when making judgments during the analysis. The conclusion drawn by an analyst when using information derived from a completely reliable source will be different from a source deemed unreliable.
The next assessment during evaluation examines the validity of the raw information. Validity is epitomized by the question: “Does the information actually portray what it seems to portray?” Validity assessment may be done by the collector and/or the analyst. The collector may believe that if information comes from a reliable source and it is logical, then validity is high. Conversely, the analyst may have competing information that questions the validity. In such cases, the analyst should define intelligence requirements to collect additional information in order to gain the most accurate raw information for a robust analysis. The Intelligence Cycle, therefore, starts over, even though this is only the third phase.
Source reliability and information validity are often initially assessed using the ordinal scales. These rudimentary scales nonetheless provide important fundamental guidelines for intelligence assessments. As such, law enforcement personnel should be trained to provide these assessments when collecting information for the Intelligence Cycle. The next form of evaluation is to assess the method by which the information was collected to ensure that it meets constitutional standards.
Recommendation 6 of the NCISP states:
All parties involved with implementing and promoting the National Criminal Intelligence Sharing Plan should take steps to ensure that the law enforcement community protects individuals’ privacy and constitutional rights within the Intelligence Process.
One of the first issues of information collection is the assessment of the method used to collect the data. When a law enforcement agency is collecting information, it must follow lawful processes; for example, information collected about a person should be consistent with constitutional standards (including the four exceptions to the Fourth Amendment search warrant requirement). The issue of lawful collection methods is important for three reasons: First, it is a constitutional guarantee that law enforcement officers have sworn to uphold; second, if there is a criminal prosecution of the intelligence target, critical evidence could be excluded from trial if the evidence was not collected in a lawful manner; and, third, if a pattern emerges that information about individuals was collected on a consistent basis that does not meet constitutional standards, this may open the agency to civil liability for civil rights violations.
Figure 4-5: Processing and Collation Activities
Not only is this assessment of a professional obligation, it also is particularly important should the intelligence target be prosecuted. Once again, training should seek to ensure that the information was lawfully collected and the facts of the collection are carefully documented.
The third activity in the collation/processing phase is to integrate the new information with existing data. During this process, in consideration of all other information that has been collected, the following questions may be asked:
1. Does it meet the criminal predicate test?
2. Is the information relevant and material (as opposed to being just “interesting”)?
3. Does the information add new questions to the analysis?
4. Does the information need corroboration?
5. Does the information support the working hypotheses of the inquiry or does it suggest a new or alternative hypothesis?
The answers to these questions will help define requirements and directions for the inquiry. This process also includes organizing and indexing the data to standardize the data fields and enhance the ability to make accurate data comparisons.
A final activity during this phase is “deconfliction,” the processor system used to determine whether multiple law enforcement agencies are conducting inquiries into the same person or crime. This is accomplished in several ways, including using deconfliction information systems such as the National Drug Pointer Index (NDPIX) managed by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). The deconfliction process not only identifies if multiple inquiries exist, but a system like NDPIX also notifies each agency involved of the shared interest in the case and provides contact information. This is an information- and intelligence-sharing process that seeks to minimize conflicts between agencies and maximize the effectiveness of the inquiry.
In sum, the Processing/Collation phase of the Intelligence Cycle is important for two reasons:
(1) It seeks to provide quality control of information through the process; and,
(2) It provides important insights into defining intelligence requirements.
The analysis is the heart of the Intelligence Process. Entire books have been written on analytic methodologies and the critical thinking process. The intent of the current discussion is not to repeat this information, but to provide some insights into analytic responsibilities that will be of benefit to the intelligence consumer.
The analytic process is essentially the scientific approach to problem-solving. It is the use of established research methodologies—both quantitative and qualitative—that seek to objectively integrate correlated variables in a body of raw data in order to derive an understanding of the phenomena under study. It is synergistic in nature; the completed analysis provides knowledge rather than a simple recitation of facts. The outcome, however, is only as good as (1) The quality of the raw information submitted for analysis; and, (2) The quality of the analysis. Effective training, policy direction, supervision, and an operational plan for the intelligence function are essential for the analytic process to produce robust and actionable intelligence.
The phrase “actionable intelligence” has two fundamental applications for law enforcement. The first is tactical, wherein the output of analysis must provide sufficient explicit information that operational units can develop some type of response. In some cases that response is minimal, such as providing indicators of terrorism or criminal activity for patrol officers to observe. In other cases, it may involve a complex operational activity to make arrests. The second application of actionable intelligence is strategic, describing changes in the threat picture of a jurisdiction or region; that is, the intelligence may describe changes in crime types, crime methodologies, or both.
The output of the analytic process is a report, referred to as an intelligence product. During the course of the analysis, the intelligence analyst will prepare explicit inferences about the criminal enterprise in order to understand its effects. These are typically expressed in the form of conclusions, forecasts, and estimates that are explained in the products.
A conclusion, as the term infers, is a definitive statement about how a criminal enterprise operates, its key participants, and the criminal liability of each. A forecast6 describes the expected implications of the criminal enterprise, the future of the enterprise, changes in the enterprise or its participants, and threats that are likely to emerge from the enterprise. An estimate focuses on monetary effects, changes in commodity transactions, and/or likely future effects of the criminal enterprise; for example, profits from a new criminal enterprise, the economic losses associated with a terrorist attack, or the increase of contraband if new smuggling methods are used.
There are different consumers of intelligence, each of whom has somewhat different needs.
Line officers need to have information that concisely identifies criminal indicators, suspects, addresses, crime methodologies, and vehicles thought to be associated with a criminal enterprise. Administrators and managers need information about the changing threat environment that has implications for the deployment of personnel and expenditure of resources. Analysts need a comprehensive package of information that includes raw data sources, methods, and intelligence requirements. Intelligence reports that contain little more than suppositions, assumptions, rumors, or alternative criminal scenarios are not “actionable.”
An intelligence product has virtually no value unless the system is able to get the right information to the right people in a time frame that provides value to the report’s content.
Dissemination—or information sharing—seeks to accomplish this goal. Many issues could be discussed related to dissemination, including the various intelligence and information records systems, privacy issues, information system security issues, operations security of shared information, the means of dissemination, interoperability issues, and the Global Justice Data Standards. However, the intent of the current discussion is to describe the general philosophy and rules of intelligence dissemination.
Pre-9/11, the general philosophy of intelligence dissemination tended to focus on “operations security;” that is, intelligence records were not widely disseminated out of the concern that critical information would fall into the wrong hands, thereby jeopardizing the inquiry as well as possibly jeopardizing undercover officers, informants, and collection methods. While these issues remain important, the post-9/11 philosophy is radically different. Indeed, law enforcement seeks to place as much information in the hands of as many authorized people who need it to prevent threats from reaching fruition. Basically, the idea is that the more people who receive the information the greater the probability of identifying and interrupting a threat. Perhaps the critical question is, “Who is considered an authorized person?”
Right to Know and Need to Know
Even with this changed philosophy, important rules of dissemination seek:
(1) to protect individuals’ civil rights; and,
(2) to maintain operations security as needed.
To accomplish these goals, the first rules of dissemination provide criteria to determine who should receive the intelligence. The accepted standard has a two-pronged test:
1. Does the individual to whom the information is to be disseminated have the right to know the information? This is determined by the recipient’s official capacity and/or statutory authority to receive the information being sought; and
2. Does the recipient have a bona fide need to know the information? The information to be disseminated is pertinent and necessary to the recipient in order to prevent or mitigate a threat or assist and support a criminal investigation.
Intelligence products that provide information about criminal indicators and methodologies are intended to receive wide distribution so that officers are aware of these factors during the course of their daily activities. As a general rule, it can be assumed that anyone working in law enforcement meets the right-to-know and need-to-know tests for these types of intelligence. However, intelligence reports related to a specific criminal inquiry that identifies individuals or organizations would have a significantly more limited dissemination. While all law enforcement officers would have the right to know this information, only those officers working on some aspect of the inquiry have the need to know the information.
With the changing intelligence philosophy and the recognized need to involve the private sector and non-law enforcement government personnel in the ISE, the application of the right to know and need to know has changed somewhat from the pre-9/11 era. For example, anyone in law enforcement has the right to know intelligence (by virtue of his or her employment). Similarly, a member of the National Guard or a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) intelligence analyst working in a state fusion center would also have the right to know intelligence by virtue of his or her assignment, even though he or she is not a law enforcement employee. In yet a different application, the corporate security director of a nuclear power plant would have the right to know intelligence that is related specifically to the security director’s responsibilities of protecting the plant.
Once again, because of the new intelligence philosophy, a significantly broader range of law enforcement officers have the need to know intelligence. The rationale, as stated previously, is that all officers need to be aware of threats to increase the probability of stopping the threat. The need to know certain intelligence by non-law enforcement personnel should be determined on a case-by-case basis. For example, in all likelihood, there is no need for a DHS analyst to know intelligence related to auto thefts; however, the DHS analyst would need to know the information related to a criminal enterprise smuggling cocaine from Colombia because of the value of communications between the DHS analyst and other federal agencies such as the DEA or Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
Third Agency Rule
Another information-sharing restriction is found in what is commonly called the Third Agency Rule. Essentially, if an officer receives intelligence from an intelligence source (such as a fusion center), that officer cannot disseminate the intelligence to a third party without permission from the original source. As an example, Officer Adam receives intelligence from the Central Fusion Center.
Officer Adam cannot give the intelligence directly to Officer Baker without first gaining permission from the Central Fusion Center. This is a general rule—with some exceptions that will be discussed later—and it will be stated or applied differently between agencies. Consumers of intelligence need to be aware of the local applications of the Third Agency Rule.
There are two types of intelligence: (1) case intelligence; and, (2) intelligence products. Case intelligence identifies people, while intelligence products provide general information about threats and indicators. For case intelligence, it should be assumed that the Third Agency Rule is intact, while for intelligence products, it may be assumed that the Third Agency Rule is waived. Fundamentally, the reason is that when individuals or organizations are not identified in intelligence products, civil rights do not attach. Again, a review of agency policy will determine the exact applications of the rule locally. It should be emphasized that in law enforcement intelligence, both the right-to-know and need- to- know provisions as well as the Third Agency Rule, serve two purposes:
1. To protect individuals’ civil rights; and
2. To maintain operations security of intelligence inquiries.
Chapter Annex 4-1: Federal Bureau of Investigation Intelligence Cycle
This illustration is based on an actual case. It demonstrates the interrelationship between the two types of intelligence.
The FBI Intelligence Cycle
The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Directorate of Intelligence (DI) has significantly different intelligence responsibilities than state, local, or tribal law enforcement agencies. This difference is a result of its national criminal intelligence responsibilities and the FBI’s national security responsibilities. One model of the Intelligence Cycle is not “better” than the other; rather, they are just slightly different approaches based on different operational responsibilities. The following brief description of the FBI DI Intelligence Cycle will provide an understanding of the FBI’s approach and terminology that can be valuable for State, Local, and Tribal Law Enforcement (SLTLE) personnel when they are communicating with the FBI’s intelligence personnel.
The Intelligence Cycle is the process of developing unrefined data into polished intelligence for use by policymakers. It consists of the six steps described in the following paragraphs:
1. Requirements are identified information needs—what we must know to safeguard the nation. Intelligence requirements are established by the Director of National Intelligence according to guidance received from the President and the National and Homeland Security Advisors. Requirements are developed based on critical information required to protect the United States from national security and criminal threats. The Attorney General and the Director of the FBI participate in the formulation of national intelligence requirements.
2. Planning and Direction is the management of the entire effort, from identifying the need for information to delivering an intelligence product to a consumer. It involves implementation plans to satisfy requirements levied on the FBI, as well as identifying specific collection
requirements based on FBI needs. Planning and direction also is responsive to the end of the cycle, because of current and finished intelligence, which supports decision-making, generates new requirements. The Executive Assistant Director for the National Security Branch leads intelligence planning and direction for the FBI.
3. The collection is the gathering of raw information based on requirements. Activities such as interviews, technical and physical surveillance, human source operation, searches, and liaison relationships collect intelligence.
4. Processing and Exploitation involve converting the vast amount of collected information into a form usable by analysts. This is done through a variety of methods including decryption, language translations, and data reduction. Processing includes entering raw data into databases where the data can be used in the analysis process.
5. Analysis and Production is the conversion of raw information into intelligence. It includes integrating, evaluating, and analyzing available data, and preparing intelligence products. The information’s reliability, validity, and relevance are evaluated and weighed. The information is logically integrated, put into context, and used to produce intelligence. This includes both “raw” and finished intelligence. Raw intelligence is often referred to as “the dots”— individual pieces of information disseminated individually. Finished intelligence reports “connect the dots” by putting information into context and drawing conclusions about its implications.
6. Dissemination—the last step—is the distribution of raw or finished intelligence to the consumers whose needs initiated the intelligence requirements. The FBI disseminates information in three standard formats: Intelligence Information Reports, FBI Intelligence Bulletins, and FBI Intelligence Assessments. FBI intelligence products are provided daily to the Attorney General, the President, and to customers throughout the FBI and in other agencies. These FBI intelligence customers use the information to make operational, strategic, and policy decisions that may lead to the levying of more requirements, thereby continuing the FBI Intelligence Cycle.
The graphic below shows the circular nature of this process, although movement between the steps is fluid. Intelligence uncovered at one step may require going back to an earlier step before moving forward.


Andrew Jackson Professor of History
Richard Blackett is a historian of the abolitionist movement in the US and particularly its transatlantic connections and the roles African Americans played in the movement to abolish slavery. He is the author of Building an Antislavery Wall: Black Americans in the Atlantic Abolitionist Movement, 1830-1860 (Louisiana State University Press, 1983); Beating Against the Barriers. Biographical Essays in Nineteenth-Century Afro-American History (Louisiana State University Press, 1986); Thomas Morris Chester: Black Civil War Correspondent (Louisiana State University Press, Da Capo Press, 1989); Divided Hearts. Britain and the American Civil War (Louisiana State University Press, 2001); Making Freedom: The Underground Railroad and the Politics of Slavery (University of North Carolina Press, 2013); editor, Running A Thousand Miles for Freedom: The Escape of William and Ellen Craft from Slavery (Louisiana State University Press, 1999). At present he is working on a study of the ways communities on both sides of the divide organized to support or resist enforcement of the 1850 Fugitive Slave Law, and the ways slaves by escaping influenced the politics of slavery. Blackett has been named the Harold Vyvyan Harmsworth Professor of American History at Oxford University for the 2013-14 academic year. On May 5, 2008, the Library Company held its Annual Dinner in its 277th year. Professor Richard J. Blackett, the Andrew Jackson Professor of History at Vanderbilt University, was the featured speaker. Click Here for an audio pod cast of his talk about the African American struggle in the age of emancipation.
Blackett taught previously at the University of Pittsburgh (1971-85), Indiana University (1985-1996); University of Houston where he was the John & Rebecca Moores professor of history and African American Studies (1996-2002).
He has been Associate Editor of the Journal of American History (1985-1990), Acting Editor (1989-1990); editor of the Indiana Magazine of History (1993-1996). He is also past president of the Association of Caribbean Historians.


Blog - Nursery Talk
Making Science Magical for Pre-Schoolers
Pre-school age is the perfect time to encourage scientific thought, observation and experimentation. Little ones are so curious about the world, they are like sponges absorbing and noticing everything in their environment, constantly searching for answers to the plethora of questions that they ask on a daily basis and hence make the perfect mini scientists.
“Science is fun. Science is curiosity. We all have natural curiosity. Science is a process of investigating. It’s posing questions and coming up with a method. It’s delving in.” Sally Ride, physicist and astronaut.
Children are never too young to develop a love of science. It’s a great subject for all weathers, either taking children outdoors looking and investigating habitats or indoors exploring different materials, colours and chemical reactions.
It incorporates many key skills for adult life; problem solving and researching, cause and effect. It teaches children to question and hypothesise, encourages listening skills, language development and learning mathematical concepts in a fun and stimulating environment. Importantly it develops children’s patience and the skills of working with others but above all it is exciting and constantly progressing.
Kelly Ridge, Area Manager at Boys & Girls Nursery lists her favourite experiments that the children enjoy at our nurseries, which can also be done at home as part of family time:
1. Homemade Lava Lamps – Filling old empty plastic bottles with vegetable oil until they are three quarters full, adding a few drops of food colouring and observing the patterns that form
2. Floating and Sinking – Testing materials in water and discussing the different outcomes
3. Creating Colourful Flowers – Seeing what happens when you put white carnations in a variety of coloured water
4. Growing Cress – Filling an empty yoghurt pot with damp cotton wool and adding cress seeds on the top, enjoy watching them grow
5. Travelling Coloured Water – Watching the coloured water flow from cup to cup, using cups lined up, kitchen roll and different food colouring.


What are the possible structures external to the cell wall?
Pili, glycocalyx, flagella, axial filaments, fimbriae
Substance that prokaryotes secrete on their surface. Sugar coat that surrounds the cells.
What is glycocalyx composed of?
polysaccharides,polypeptide, or both
Where is it glycocalyx made?
It is made inside the cell and secreted to the cell surface
What is a capsule?
when glycocalyx is organized an firmly attached to the cell wall.
How can the presence of a capsule be determined?
By negative staining
How is the capsule important?
Contributes to bacterial virulence
What is a slime layer?
if the substance is unorganized and loosely attached to the cell wall
What is bacterial virulence?
the degree to which a pathogen can cause diseases
Please allow access to your computer’s microphone to use Voice Recording.
We can’t access your microphone!
Click the icon above to update your browser permissions above and try again
Reload the page to try again!
Press Cmd-0 to reset your zoom
Press Ctrl-0 to reset your zoom
It looks like your browser might be zoomed in or out. Your browser needs to be zoomed to a normal size to record audio.
Your microphone is muted
For help fixing this issue, see this FAQ.


An essay about introduction to communication communication is a process whereby information is enclosed in a package and is channeled and imparted by a sender to a. Introduction to electronics communication essaysintroduction to electronics communications the field of electronics can be roughly divided into three major. Effective communication essay gsm 5101 organizational behaviour page 2 10 introduction communication refers to the process in which information is transmitted. Free communication papers, essays, and research communication and leadership skills - introduction effective leaders understand the importance of strong. Pay essays online communication essay introduction what should i do my narrative essay on midterm papers for sale.
Communication in the workplace essay writing service, custom communication in the workplace papers, term papers, free communication in the workplace samples, research. How to write an essay introduction the introduction to your essay is the first thing people will read, so you want to make it count taking the time to. Communication essays || 100% custom communication essays writing service | introduction communication is undisputedly one of the major pillars of any organization.
Communication skills 2 pages 408 words february 2015 saved essays save your essays here so you can locate them quickly topics in this paper. An assignment on communication essay introduction helpful homework hints for middle schoolers where can i buy watermarked paper. 1 introduction to communication introduction definition of communication elements.
To write an essay on communication, students should know what communication is communication is a two way process in which the receiver and sender, both should. Free written communication papers, essays, and research papers. All these changes in media and communication that have taken place over the last century are due to a huge technological development furthermore, this is a cultural.


|Length||93.0 mi / 149.7 km|
|Time to Allow||at least 2 hours|
A natural beauty capable of astonishing even well-traveled visitors, the Wichita Mountains Byway guides you through the protected valleys of the 550 million-year-old Wichita Mountains, which shelter the largest remnant block of southern mixed grassland and ancient cross-timbers in North America. Experience the Wichita Mountains Wildlife Refuge, one of the oldest managed nature preserves in the Nation and the site that President Theodore Roosevelt chose for the first effort to save American bison from extinction.
In 1901, this area was proclaimed a “Forest Preserve,” and then in 1905 President Theodore Roosevelt created the first “Game Preserve” at the Wichita Mountains for the nearly-extinct bison. Today, the Wichita Mountains National Wildlife Refuge maintains a herd of 600 bison, descendants of the original 15 transported from the Bronx Zoo in 1907. In addition to the bison the refuge also manages a herd of 800 elk and about 400 wild turkeys. The Black-Capped Vireo, a small species of bird historically indigenous to the area from Kansas to central Texas, now resides primarily within the refuge. With about 3,000 breeding pairs, the refuge houses one of the two remaining large populations of Black-Capped Vireo in the world.
The 35-square-mile Wichita Mountains Wildlife Refuge is considered to be the largest remnant block of Central and Southern Mixed Grassland in North America and has attracted more than one million annual visitors every year since 1962.
No information available.


3PA has been captivated by The Girl Who Owned a City! This week, we will continue to read, discuss and record how Lisa and Todd are responding to challenges, we will meet the antagonist Tom Logan, and teams will be adding details to the change generalizations we started last week.
4PA will spend most of the week with the poem "Freedom's Plow" by Langston Hughes. This is a longer poem that the students will be examining for figurative language, themes, and how the text connects to historical events. The kids have several poems by Hughes in their Google Classroom that we will also be reading.
5PA continues to explore the world of Ray Bradbury. This week, most of our time will be spent with "The Veldt" and the nursery that comes to life. We will compare the experience of reading a story to a reading done by Steven Colbert. Does the performance of a story change the experience as a consumer of stories? The class will also be working with a visible thinking strategy, "See, Think, Wonder" that will kick off with an abstract art Google Slide show. Last week we used symphonic music in a grammar lesson and now I'm using abstract art to examine how we think about and discuss literature. It's going to be a fun week!