INSPECTOR GENERAL'S SURVEY OF THE CIA CAREER SERVICE

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP78-05551A000200050012-7
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: C
• Document Page Count: 3
• Document Creation Date: December 12, 2016
• Document Release Date: May 28, 2002
• Sequence Number: 12
• Publication Date: March 7, 1960
• Content Type: MEMO

1- -K.,.p 2 `~~-( 4 c -3 8851/
STANDARD FO k ^ 1
R
84
M NO.
Approved For Release 2002/071107 - - A000200050012-7
Office MemorThdum ? UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT
TO :Comptroller
FROM :Chief, Financial Analysis Staff
suBJECT:Inspector General's Survey of the CIA Career Service
1. This thought provoking paper is an able and thorough presen-
tation of the background, history and status of Career Service in the
Agency. In general, we agree with this survey which so closely paral-
lels the Comptroller's comment last year in response to a request of
the Inspector General.
2. One can hardly disagree with the statement that Career Service
was set up to provide a "group of carefully selected and trained indi-
viduals who accept an obligation to devote themselves to the needs the Agency and who intend to make a career with the Agency"
or that "there are far too many employees of all kinds and at all levels
who are indisposed to place the Agency's interest above their own".
3. Neither can we find any serious objection with the blunt but
valid and to the point evaluation of the present system, especially
Section G, paragraphs 1, 2, 3 and 5. However, the idea expressed in
Section G, paragraph 4, while in itself inoffensive, is of concern
especially in view of ideas expressed in Section I, paragraph 1(b),
"There is a distinction to be drawn between Intelligence careerists and
non-careerist Agency employees. The latter will include many special-
ists at all levels whose careers lie in other fields but whose services
are required by the Agency in the performance of its mission."
4. There is still a great need for a comprehensive, just and
equitable career development program. We have yet to develop an
"esprit de corps" but we cannot agree that the offering of greater in-
ducements (Section H, paragraph 8) to young people and their develop-
ment will of itself accomplish this result. The offering of more ad-
vantages will only accomplish the hoped for results when there exists
a desire on the part of the individual to become a member of the organ-
ization. In short, the organization itself must create a favorable
climate before the individual on his part can wholeheartedly and
selflessly dedicate himself to the welfare of the organization. The
FBI is a case in point. The Bureau has a hold on its personnel which
transcends the material advantages offered. In fact, to many, the
disadvantages far outweigh the advantages, yet a large majority of the
agents enthusiastically carry on. That is the kind of spirit we need
here but the mere offering of inducements will not accomplish the
results desired.
25X1 A
Approved For Release 2002/07/10 : CIA-RDP78-05551A000200050012-7
 Approved For Release 2002/.07/10 : CIA-RDP78-05551A000200050012-7
1*00 140F
5. In general, one must agree with the objective sought in the
latter part of this survey - The development of an adequate and ef-
fective career service. On the other hand, we cannot subscribe to the
insistence that those engaged in the collection and dissemination of
intelligence are to be considered as the elite - all others being rele-
gated to a sort of second class citizenship. Neither can we accept the
implication in Section J. paragraph 2 (page 23), that all super grades
and all senior management positions should be reserved eventually for
the Intelligence careerist. How can it be said that only "Intelligence
careerists" are subject to hazardous duty, have to endure hardship
posts and, therefore, are entitled to more liberal benefits? Are not
Support personnel overseas also subjected to those disadvantages?
Should they be denied these benefits?
6. We agree that Agency employees should be evaluated. We have
almost limitless potential in the employees presently on board. Unless
steps are taken to evaluate employees in an equitable manner, the
Agency has neither a career service nor can it lay claim to having
taken full recognition of its human resources.
7. The establishment of a Career Development Board is a step in
the right direction. One board superceeding the conglomeration of
overlapping committees, boards, councils and panels, if granted the
backing and given the authority, could develop and administer an equi-
table career program.
8. We cannot quarrel with the comment (Section M, paragraph 12)
that the existing career services are "too many and too limited in
scope to permit the proper functioning of a career program. They
should be substantially reduced in number and be established on occu-
pational lines rather than organizational."
9. The setting up of an Administrative Career Service to include
all senior administrators and Support officers is reasonable but who
is to be included - only those in the present Administrative Service?
Who are to be considered Support officers? Do they consider Logistics
officers only as Support officers or are Comptroller personnel so con-
sidered? A single clerical service covering typists and clerks,
messengers, etc. would be an improvement over the present system but
it will not decrease the turnover rate to any appreciable extent.
Grouping technicians such as business machine operators, radio, com-
munication equipment operators, visual aids, photographers, etc. into
a single service would be desirable.
10. We do question the classification of accountants along with
scientists and economists, educators, engineers, etc. as mere special-
ists whose careers were developed before they joined the Agency, who
wish to remain only in the limited capacity of their specialty, and
perhaps ultimately to pursue their careers further in private life or
elsewhere. We object to being considered employees whose "career
development potential is minimal if it exists at all". We consider
Approved For Release 2002/07/10 CIA-RDP78-05551A000200050012-7
 Approved For Release 2002/07/10: CIA-RDP78-05551AO0022000050012-7
it a low blow to be regarded as "non-careerists in Intelligence and
should not be intermingled with true careerists". We cannot accept a
classification that accountants are not capable of being considered
for a career in Intelligence when a lawyer, at least by inference, is
considered eligible. At least he is not classified as a specialist.
11. Many of us in the Comptroller's shop turned our back on
promising careers outside the Agency. We entered, some of us at least,
at the request of the Agency because we had experience needed by the
Agency. We accepted the disadvantages and occupational hazards because
we felt we could assist in building up an effective Intelligence
Organization. The advantages of a career service status was also
dangled before our eyes. We were offered career status and accepted
willingly the possibility of assignment at the will of the Agency with-
out any compensating benefits. Are we now to infer that it was all a
mistake?
12. We come, therefore, to the crux of the matter. Accountants
or economists along with others are not considered eligible for the
hard core of professional intelligence officers, even though the col-
lection, analyzation and evaluation of financial and economic data in
many instances may provide the key to vital intelligence material. An
FI or PP case officer, on the other hand, even though he is unfamiliar
with financial and economic data, is considered eligible because he
collects intelligence data. He may not know what he is getting, but
because he collects data he is eligible for the hard core career
service.
13. This may not be the intent yet this can be deduced from the
presentation as made. If this deduction be valid then the proposal has
two fundamental flaws. It gives greater weight to location and present
assignment than to background, knowledge, ability and varied experience,
and it assumes that the duties of the specialists in the Agency are no
different in any significant respect from those found in non-intelli-
gence agencies of the government when such is not the case.
Approved For Release 2002/07/10 : CIA-RDP78-05551A000200050012-7
- 3 -