COMMENTS ON MANAGEMENT BRANCH SURVEY AND PROPOSED REORGANIZATION OF OCD

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP61-00274A000200190015-0
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: C
• Document Page Count: 9
• Document Creation Date: November 17, 2016
• Document Release Date: August 29, 1998
• Sequence Number: 15
• Publication Date: November 4, 1947
• Content Type: MEMO

trpppi! v For Release 2000/0 1-00274AQJ 0200190015-0
~fflce Memorandum ? UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT
TO : Executive for Administration & Management
FROM : Assistant Director for Collection & Dissemination
DATE: 4 November 1947
SUBJECT: Comments on Management Branch Survey and Proposed Reorganization of OCD
1. In early October the Chief of the Management Branch delivered to this
Office a survey study of OCD made by his Branch, including recommendations rela-
tive to changes in functions and procedures for the Office. The study and recom-
mendations have been carefully studied. The considered conclusion of this Office
is that the recommendations are not wholly practicable or desirable. A detailed
discussion with recommendations are in the following paragraphs.
2. It is well understood that the first step in any survey should be a
complete and objective determination. of facts. In an effort to assure that the
present survey would result in well established facts, OCD provided every possible
access and facility for the survey team, even to the extent of interference with
important work. This was felt justified by the hope that the survey might dis-
close opportunities to supplement the steps-already initiated by OCD to increase
over-all efficiency. In addition, the survey team was invited and urged to re-
view with this Office all findings of presumed fact before undertaking to draw
conclusions from them. It is regretted that the latter offer was not exploited,
for it is now clear that the determination of facts,has been neither complete nor
fully accurate. OCD is prepared to demonstrate this; however, an exhaustive
demonstration should not be necessary, as one or two illustrations will make
clear. For example, the report states that = action has been taken by the
Requirements Branch in the field of general requirements - whereas OCD can show
that Requirements Branch has taken extensive action in this field. The report
states that ORE prepares the first draft of Dissemination Orders - whereas these
drafts are in fact prepared exclusively by the Dissemination Branch of OCD. The
report states that the Requirements Branch has made a study "to determine collec-
tion potential" - whereas the true purpose of the study was not to determine collec-
tion potential, but rather to determine the amount and importance of information
for which ORE can anticipate a need.
3. The nature of such statements in the report makes it difficult to place
suitable reliance on the conclusions. Nevertheless, the ideas for improvement
have been carefully considered by OCD, and certain of them have been accepted and
applied, as will be illustrated in paragraphs 4 and 5, below.
4. B,. The survey report lends weight to a belief which OCD had also arrived
at: to-wit, that collection and dissemination action in the case of requests for
documents might be speeded up. A Requirements Branch study of this problem dis-
closed three significant facts:
(1) There have been avoidable delays iTWMIORRoithe_ rans-
mission of such requests to OCD. _ NO CHANGE in Class. 13
(2) There have been avoidable delays D
of the requests as were not limited by dead es.
[)A ipr 77
Approved For Release 2000/08/22 _ CIA-RQP61- W-W
 Approved For Release 20.00/08/22f! t0274AO,pp200190015-0
(3) The delays have not been important, since requested
documents have systematically been provided within the time
limits set by the requesters themselves, and the latter have
uniformly expressed satisfaction with the timeliness. Never-
theless, the delays were objectionable to this Office and
offered an easy target for uninformed or hostile criticism.
k. OCD has accordingly revised its internal procedure so as to eliminate
undesirable elements of delay in processing the "Transfer Type" requests, and to
accomplish them by direct informal action when possible. ("Transfer Type" is the
term used in OCD to denote a request whose solution consists of the picking up of
a document in one part of Washington and delivering it in another.) The resulting
short cuts apply to approximately 75% of those operating problems falling within
the routine class. The results have greatly reduced the time to complete a request
and have already drawn complimentary comments from researchers. There remain two
external elements of this problem to be corrected:
(1) Delay within 0 . This will be the subject of direct dis-
cussion with ORE after the element in (a), below, has been adjusted.
(2) Relati o ship bettwe n ORES the RefArrance Center an OCD.
OCD has drafted a procedure, including the use of a form designed
to insure rapid progress of each ORE Transfer Type request
through the Reference Center to OCD. Only those requests which
cannot be satisfied by the Reference Center from material already
on file in CIA will be transmitted to OCD. This procedure, which
is intended to apply also to requests from 00 and OSO, has been
forwarded to your office with Reference Center concurrence. If
the requesters are satisfied with the loan of items, the procedure
should eliminate many requests to OCD. When the work load is
actually determined it will be possible to assign collection
personnel accordingly.
5. Other examples of beneficial adjustments made are as follows:
a. Adequacy check procedure has been revised so that personal contacts
by survey officers will ordinarily be made only when a recipient makes a positive
report of dissatisfaction on the blank form provided him automatically at the
time of dissemination. Heretofore, personal contact (generally by telephone)
had also been made when the requester failed to return the blank form and thus
left OCD without evidence as to his satisfaction. These contacts also provided
a needed opportunity for working out details of procedure with a wide circle of
requesters. Many misunderstandings were eliminated and steady improvement was
brought about in the precision with which requesters stated their needs. In view
of favorable progress to date, this feature of survey activity can now be reduced
to contacts with the dissatisfied customers and to such new contacts as are needed
to discuss requirements problems.
g. A few elements of Collection Branch procedure were found to duplicate
unnecessarily cer1.n functions which are responsibilities of the Requirements
Branch and which it performs with high efficiency. These duplications were of
Approved For Release 2000/08/22 : CIA-RDP61-00274A000200190015-0
2
RNOWNTIA1
 Approved For Release 2000/081; 11011-0 0 2 7 4AQ00200190015-0
the trivial character which might logically be expected during the early period
of trial and development in a new organization. They stemmed chiefly from minor
misunderstandings and personal factors which have since disappeared, and they in
no way justified the assertion in the survey report that the Collection Branch
duplicates the receiving, coordinating, processing, or defining of requirements.
This is discussed further in par. 6 i, below. All undesirable duplication has been
eliminated. A former source of minor duplication, and a measure of OCD's success
in eliminating it, are illustrated by two samplings conducted by OCD. The first,
conducted in March before the Requirements Branch had completed the indoctrination
of requesters described in 1, above, showed that the Collection Branch performed
major editing on 15% of the requests which had passed through Requirements Branch.
The Requirements Branch promptly took remedial action; and a recently completed
sampling, applying to all ORE document requests solved between 5 June and 28 July,
shows that need for substantial editing by the Collection Branch has been eliminated.
6. IL. The chief problem raised by the survey will now be discussed: i.e.,
the proposal for a major reorganization of OCD. Unfortunately, the survey report
tends to regard the elementary routine transactions as the full and only business
of OCD. The simplicity of the routine problems has long been recognized by OCD
and - as pointed out in par. 4 14 above - such streamlining as is considered con-
sistent with security and common sense has been effected. These routine problems
appear statistically important, since they currently make up about 75% of the re-
quirement requests received; however, in reality they account for much less than
50% of the important work load. For example, a routine requirement directive may
be cleared by the Requirements Branch in a matter of minutes; whereas a single
non-routlae requirement directive recently issued by this Office necessitated weeks
of preliminary coordination by that Branch. It resulted in 237 separate collection
and dissemination obligations. It offered security hazards and policy complications
for which no means of solution is apparent in the reorganization suggested in the
survey report.
b. A major premise of the survey report is the idea that the Collection
Branch's processing of a request duplicates operations already performed by the
Requirements Branch, and therefore the operations by both Branches could best be
centered in one collection desk. However, this premise is not consistent with the
facts. A quick sampling of the log of actions taken by Requirements Branch in re-
sponse to follow-up queries initiated by requesters has disclosed that Collection
Branch became involved in only 36% of the cases, and more than half of these 36%
involved the Dissemination Branch or other outside offices as well as Collection.
Thus, a transfer of the requirement function to Collection Branch would immediately
involve that Branch in tasks entirely outside its scope in 6l% of all such oases,
and at least partially outside its scope in 84% of all cases. Moreover, the sampling
showed that in several of the instances where Collection Branch was involved with the
requester, the collector's tendency was to discourage or oppose the requester's
wishes whenever the problem offered complications or unusual collection difficulties.
The Requirements Branch constitutes an impartial and invaluable buffer between the
naturally opposing points of view of the man who wants a job done, and the man who
has to do it.
g. The report of survey fails to distinguish clearly between the flow
of work and the partially parallel flow of related papers; it fails to distinguish
between the transmission of orders for action and the transmission of copies for
Approved For Release 2000/08/22 "am 0274A000200190015-0
 Approved For Release 2000/08/22MPUM0274AOQ0200190015-0
convenience; and it fails especially to show a grasp of the full magnitude and
scope of the staff problems which constitute the bulk of the Requirements Branch
work load. These problems are inescapable, no matter how CIA may be organized;
and no other organization for handling them so far suggested offers a degree of
efficiency equal to that with which they are now handled by the Requirements
Branch. As OCD is now organized, the Assistant Director and Deputy are free from
details, but they have the necessary controls to keep informed of the work load
and special problems which confront the Branches. To make intelligent decisions
it is fundamental that they know the workings of their Branches. They employ the
aid of the three Branch Chiefs in determining policies, programs, and procedures.
The administrative details are handled by the tiny administrative staff in the
Assistant Director's Office, while the controlling operational details are con-
centrated in the Requirements Branch, where they fit because of their natural
relationship to staff functions of the Requirements Branch. Thus, it is primarily
the Requirements Branch which relieves the Assistant Director and his Deputy of
details. There are additional operating details peculiar respectively to the
functions of the Collection and Dissemination Branches, but these ordinarily do
not occupy the attention of the Assistant Director and Deputy except when a Branch
Chief voluntarily appeals for assistance or advice. This whole system has been
thoroughly tried out by a group of professional intelligence officers who find it
completely reliable in safeguarding the responsibilities and operations of CIA
with a completeness not at all evident in the proposed reorganization.
7. IL. A full discussion of the proposed reorganization and new procedure
would lead to an undesirable debate on details. In substance, the proposal is to
abolish the Requirements Branch and replace it by an administrative staff limited
to five people, none of them professionals. The resulting inadequacy would be
compensated for by abolishing, transferring, or ignoring, former Requirements
Branch functions which do not conveniently fit the proposed reorganization. OCD
regards the missing functions as essential ones which - despite their theoretical
abolition or transfer - would still have to be performed by someone in OCD under
the pressure of daily reality. The inevitable result would be to overwhelm the
Assistant Director with details, and leave him confronted with responsibilities
and urgent decisions far beyond the capabilities of his reduced organization to
solve.
k. Once a sound statement of functions is agreed upon, it is not
difficult to design an organization; and thereafter the organization itself can
usually evolve sound procedures to carry out the assigned functions, In the
present instance, the survey report offers what OCD regards as a defective state-
ment of functions; and on the basis of this defective statement a new organization
is proposed, with an entire new operating procedure worked out in such extreme
detail, for example, as specifying that a certain paper shall be handed to a clerk
at a certain point in its progress. It would hardly seem appropriate that pro-
fessional effort of CIA should be required for prolonged consideration of a pro-
cedure in which the handing of a paper to a clerk is regarded as a noteworthy
link in intelligence operations. In any event, details of this type should not
be discussed before the major differences of opinion as to function have been
eliminated.
Approved For Release 2000/08/2 - cJU-O274AOOO2OOl 90015-0
4
 Approved For Release 000/08/ - P6A~00274A@00200190015-0
g. The proposed new statement of functions repeats many of the
present OCD functions, but is noteworthy chiefly for those which have been
omitted. The most significant omissions are cited below by underlined words
.in parentheses. In addition, certain of the functions which have been
continued in effect are also cited below, but without underlining, for ease of
comparison with the omitted (underlined) functions:
(1) (yonttnual surveys and contacts among the federal
"al cies concerned with njdional security, ascertains what
d"9 3Z from their resDegtiiTe sources. )
(2) (in, acc c ante w t h the requirements determined as a
remit of the foregoing girveys and contacts) determines the
collection and dissemination requirements for intelligence
information and intelligence to most needs not currently
satisfied . . .
of authorized agencies).
(/;) Insures prompt and adequate dissemination of intelligence
material to all federal intelligence agencies; in such dissemina-
tion safeguards the security classification of CIA intelligence
materials in accordance with prescribed security policies.
A. From the text of ,g, above, it is clear that while'OCD would be
responsible for assuring that intelligence requirements of authorized federal
agencies are satisfied by adequate dissemination, it would at the same time be
deprived of the authority either to ascertain what those requirements are or to
check upon the adequacy of the disseminations made to satisfy them. Especially
paradoxical is the situation revealed by .Q (2), above, which shows that while
OCD would be expected to determine collection and dissemination requirements, it
would not be permitted to ascertain the needs which are the indispensable basis
for such determination. That seems to have been overlooked is that several
ascertained requirements may lead to a determination of the necessity for only a
single collection action, or possibly for none; and that a single collected item
may subsequently become the subject of several disseminations made to satisfy
needs which are systematically ascertained. The whole issue at this point is
fundamental. It rests on a statement in par. I A 1 a of Exhibit IV in the report
of survey, where the problem of ascertaining intelligence requirements is
extenuated in the following words: "ORE is basically charged with developing
intelligence requirements, while ICAPS has primary responsibility for coordinating
CIA activity with federal intelligence agencies." ORE is, indeed, responsible
for developing certain intelligence requirements. The Requirements Branch system-
atically ascertains from ORE its current requirements, its general requirements,
and the NIR, as rapidly as they are developed. However, there are important
distinctions between national intelligence requirements and departmental intelli-
gence requirements: ORE is not charged with ascertaining the intelligence
Approved For Release 2000/08/22 !m'274A000200190015-0
 Approved For Release. 2000/08/22c"0901 274AQ 0200190015-0
requirements which the departments and agencies may have but cannot satisfy from
their own resources, but the Requirements Branch is so charged. This function
is being accomplished regular for the benefit of OSO, for the Contact Branch
FOIAb3 bl of 00, for establishment of ekly and daily targets, and for coordination
of agency requirements to f wethe CIA requirements produced by ORE. Fur-
therance of this function to include other than the 1AC agencies has been
restricted to date by work load and lack of personnel. Development of the
Central Requirement File has been similarly hampered. However, these cannot
be considered as functions of ORS. Ask 0PZ itself if it v;ould accept them! The
coordinated ascertainment of requirements of all types, and their screening at
a central point, are indispensable functions which should not be divorced from
the Office which is charged with collection and dissemination. ICAPS is
responsible for coordinating policy and plans, but has no connection with
operating matters.
.. As presented, the proposed new organization has a deficiency which
could readily result in routine compliance with requests from insecure U. S.
organizations or even from organizations secretly representing unfriendly foreign
powers. This deficiency is not readily observed, since Exhibit IV states "The
functions of the Collection Branch have been increased to include the initial
processing of collection requests formerly accomplished by Requirements Branch."
However, careful examination of the detailed procedures presented in Exhibits V
and VI shows that the processing accomplished by the Requirements Branch has in
fact not been included anywhere. Specifically, full responsibility for the
varied analysis of a request is apparently placed in one person in step #18 in
Exhibit V, yet no provision has been made for accomplishing the following tasks,
which are the indispensable prerequisites in every determination of collection
and. dissemination requirements:
(1) Determining whether fulfillment of the request is an
acceptable CIA obligation under NSC policies.
(2) Determining whether dissemination to the particular
requester is permissible under applicable security policies.
(3) Rejecting those requests which should not be approved.
(4) Determining priorities of approved requests and resolving
conflicts of priorities when necessary.
(5) Determining the operating category of an approved request,
and determining whether it is a problem for dissemination only,
or for collection and dissemination jointly, or for collection,
research and dissemination jointly.
(6) Establishing and supervising any special controls which
should be exercised during satisfaction of the requirement.
(7) Reviewing the action, when complete, and reopening or taking
other appropriate action in case the requester is not satisfied.
Approved For Release 2000/08/22 : CIA-RDP61-00274A000200190015-0
NNOUNT11
 CONFIDENTIAL
Approved For Release 2000/08/22 : CIA-RDP61-00274AQQS200190015-0
#. OCD feels that any effort of the proposed Collection Branch to
handle the above seven functions could not be efficient. The suggested Central
Control Section contains no professional personnel, and the amount of detail
involved would be too great for the Chief, Collection Branch, to perform in
person. The functions require specialized attention of personnel familiar with
the applicable NSC policies, legal provisions, and security policies, and can
ordinarily be performed quickly and in stride by people who are already expert
in studies of this kind. To perform these functions efficiently, an entirely
new type of personnel would have to be developed for the Collection Branch, and
in the long run that Branch would have to be augmented in the same amount by
which the Requirements Branch would be reduced. In addition, the functions are -
by their very nature - not appropriate to the Collection Branch. If they are
concentrated there the collection desk will naturally develop itself into two
functions: i.e., one which does the present requirement functions, and the other
which does the collection functions. At present there is a clear distinction of
functions so that requests which arrive in the Collection Branch are clear,
authenticated and ready for pure collection action. A close association of these
functions will develop a tendency to disallow or reject requirements which impose
especially awkward or difficult collection problems. Moreover, to authorize the
Collection Branch to make final decisions which would have a conclusive effect
upon the Dissemination Branch would inevitably lead to friction between those
Branches.
Finally, the proposed new organization makes no provision for
accomplis ng the important staff functions which are not part of the work load
stemming from requests received, but which stem from other causes and occupy
more than 50% of the professional time of the Requirements Branch and the
Assistant Director's office. This omission rests upon a sentence in par. I A 1 a
of Exhibit IV of the survey, which states that the "OCD surveys within federal
departments has (sic) to some extent duplicated ICAPS' efforts and has discouraged
working level liaison between the ORE researcher and his departmental counterpart."
This statement is not concurred in, and it may also be pointed out that prevention
of duplication between ICAPS and OCD is an executive problem which should offer
little difficulty. The OCD surveys and staff studies have been devoted primarily
to matters falling exclusively within OCD's operating field: where they in any
way affected interdepartmental coordination at the policy or broad planning level,
ICAPS has been kept fully informed and coordination effected so as to avoid inter-
ference or duplication. Rather than constituting a function that can be eliminated,
these Requirements Branch surveys and staff studies are performed principally at
the direction of higher office, or at the request of other Assistant Directors.
For example, out of 25 such surveys started by written directive of this Office,
7 were originated in OCD upon the decision of the Assistant Director. The remaining
18 were performed in compliance with orders or re uests a follows: the Director - 1;
Deputy Director - 1; Executive Director - 2; - 1; Executive for 25X1A9a
A & M - 1; ICAPS - 3; I & S - 2; 00 - 5; ORE -1; and JIOA - 1. Under the pro-
posed reorganization the Assistant Director would have no facilities for executing
these time-consuming and difficult staff problems. They continue to arise con-
stantly, under the pressure of directive from higher office or daily operating
necessity, and their volume is by no means fully represented by the 25 formally
assigned problems listed above. The Requirements Branch, upon its own initiative,
Approved For Release 2000/08/22 : QP-QPft'"T-"UMU2-74AO00200190015-0
7
 nruna
Approved For Release 2000/08/2 : CIA-RDP61-00274A0200190015-0
lemp
or in response to informal telephone requests, or in response to oral or written
instructions from higher authority, is constantly occupied with pressing problems
of this character in addition to its routine business of acting upon the daily
flow of written requests for intelligence material.
8. OCD's consideration of this problem has been in much greater detail
than summarized above, and the supporting analyses are available for discussion
as appropriate. However, the above appears sufficient to substantiate fully the
following conclusions:
&. The statements offered as fact in the survey are in many instances
incomplete, misleading, or incorrect.
b. The recommendations offered in the survey are based on a false
application of functions and a lack of appreciation of the full scope and com-
plexity of many OCD problems.
g. The statement of OCD functions approved and issued by the Director
on 15 October 1947, is sound and well confirmed by more than a year's operating
experience.
s. Procedure and organization should be adjusted in accordance with
mature judgment to meet changing conditions disclosed during operations. Sys-
tematic evolution would be frustrated by sudden, immature or revolutionary changes
of functions.
&L. The proposed reassignments of functions and reorganization are un-
desirable and impracticable, and would result in:
(1) The ignoring of essential operating functions and the failure
to provide working machinery to exercise them, or the assigning of
them to ORE, where they would be inappropriate and unwanted, or to
ICAPS, where all operating functions are inappropriate.
(2) The combining of certain procedures which operating experience
shows are best accomplished separately.
(3) The losing of professionals capable of making the statistical
analysis of intelligence requirements and results required for use in
corrective studies.
9. Nevertheless, the survey has been helpful in bringing to light a nunber
of opportunities for improving the efficiency of operations. Some of the improve-
ments have already been made and others are under study. Meanwhile, the following
steps are recommended for progressive development of the organization to meet
evolving operating needs:
IL. On completion of the present review, the survey report to be filed
for future reference as desirable.
CONHDENIIA
Approved For Release 2000/08/22 : CIA-RDP61-0074A000200190015-0
8
 mmiApproved -4
For Release 2000/ 61-00274AA00200190015-0
k. The functions assigned to OCD and its Branches by the Director on
15 October to be-continued in effect.
g,. Cognizance be taken of the expedited and simplified execution of
the routine simple requests now termed "Transfer Type."
1. bcecutive Office approval be given to the procedure recommended by
OCD, with Reference Branch concurrence, for processing "Transfer Type" requests
through the Reference Branch, and thence to OCD when collection action remains
to be accomplished. Also, approve the forms recommended to facilitate this
procedure.
I,. The Dissemination Order forms requested by OCD so as to eliminate
present need for individual typing of these orders to be approved and printed.
. OCD to observe any change in the proportion of "Transfer Type"
requests, as compared with the other more complicated types, resultant from using
the Reference Branch procedure; and to recommend any desirable reorganization or
reallocation of personnel.
g. OCD to continue its over-all examination of procedure within the
three Branches; to simplify where considered necessary and practicable; and when-
ever operating experience shows the necessity therefor, to recommend appropriate
changes in Branch organization. In this work, OCD will be pleased to have the
benefits of the experience of Management personnel to arrive at the simplest
procedures commensurate with the practical execution of OCDt5 functions.
],. As reviews and recommendations occur, consider the changes of
personnel requested on the basis of the work load to be carried in the foreseeable
future.
25X1A9a
Assistant Director for
Collection and Dissemination
25X1A9a cc
Approved For Release 2000/08/22 00NMIRAJ274A000200190015-0
9