CONSULTANTS' REPORT

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP79S01057A000100070014-7
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 9
• Document Creation Date: December 20, 2016
• Document Release Date: February 15, 2006
• Sequence Number: 14
• Publication Date: July 11, 1957
• Content Type: MF

Approved For
se 2006/03/10: CIA-RDP79S01057i
CONFIDENTIAL
100070014-7
11 July 1957
MEMORANDUM FOR: Deputy Director, Intelligence
FROM : Assistant Director, CR
SUBJECT : Consultants' Report
lo In setting the date of 11 July for my final accounting on
the Consultants' report you have made it impossible for me to reply
to its countless criticisms effectively, Perhaps this is just as
wello It is easy to toss off criticisms and sloppy generalities,
and it doesn't take much time to do it., but it takes a long while
and much painstaking work to answer them effectively. Most likely
the Ten Horrible Cases cited in the report were "discovered" and
written up in the space of a few hours, though it took me the
better part of a week to examine them in detail, discuss each with
the people concerned, and finally to write mar memorandum of 1 July,
which showed., beyond any possible dispute, that most of them were
? untrue and misleading m the product of inquiries so hasty and so
careless that they could only be described as irresponsible.
Probably it would take me many months to reply to all the other
criticisms in the same way, and very likely it would not be worth
the effort. But since I must account to you for the whole report
by July 11th it becomes necessary for me to (a) speak in general
terms rather than specific, (b) discuss only the more important
recommendations, and (c) leave manar questions unanswered,
Intellofax System
Intelligence Periodicals Index (IPI)
?
5 MAR 80
Approved For Release 2006/03/10: CIA-RDP79?AATb'57A000t08
20 My memoranda of 18 June and 1 July have proved that most
of the criticisms of the Intellofax system are thoroughly unsound,
and it is certain that we should reject the Consultants' most
important recommendation., i,ee that the Intellofax System should
be phased out as rapidly as possible and replaced by an expanded
Me
With all its admitted imperfections, the Intellofax
System is doing a far better job for us than any conventional
DOCUMENT NO. i
NO CHANGE IN CLASS. ^
El DECLASSIFIED
CLASS. CHANGED TOt TS S C
COIN L) TIA .~ NEXT RcYII;W DATE: ~99d
~? j( ~UTH: HW iii.y
 Approved For Pose 2006/03/10: CIA-RDP79S010571100070014-7
S-E-C-R-E-T
published index could do. To reassure myself on this score I made
a close scrutiny of the Bibliography of Agriculture (BoA) which is,
as all agree, one of the best published indexes in existence. This
study is appended hereto as Tab A, and it shows quite clearly the
kind of difficulties we would get ourselves into if we accepted the
Consultants' proposal.
An IPI big enough to index all incoming substantive intelli-
gence, as recommended by the Consultants, would be of immense bulk.
Each monthly issue would be nearly as big as the Washington tele-
phone directory. Semiannual or annual cumulative issues would be 6
times or 12 times as big unless it were decided not, to repeat titles
in the cumulative issues but to provide only document or page numbers
which the analyst would have to search out one by one in the preced-
ing monthly issues. To get the references to documents on a given
subject over a 5-year span the analyst would have to work through
5 annual or 10 semiannual cumulations. Is it reasonable to suppose
that the man.who complains about having to read several hundred
titles on an Intellofax tape would be willing to read or search out
the hundreds of titles listed under appropriate subject headings in
several volumes each as big as the fattest NIS?
The fact is that most of th .defects which are found in -the
Bibliography of Agriculture are unavoidable in any published biblio-
graphy. They cannot be eliminated even with unlimited budget and..
manpower. Th why CIA set out to develop a mechanized system,
and it is why himself spent so many years trying to develop a
mechanized Rap elector.
I cannot leave this subject without a speculation as to why
the Consultants attacked the Intellofax System so recklessly and
irresponsibly. The blind violence of this attack, spearheaded by
I Ireminded me of nothing so much as the American Medical Asso-
c a on charging off with loud hue and cry after some village bone-
setter. I really believe that iwas infuriated to find that 25X1
others had succeeded where he Yumself had failed ? that while the
rapid selector he worked on for so many years is dead as the dodo*
a different approach to the same problems has overcome the mechanical
difficulties and created a system which, however imperfectly, is.
A fact which himself refuses to admit, but which can be
confirmed by one who wishes to phone the Patent Office and
ask them what they are doing with it. Our phone call brought the
reply that if CIA was interested in It they would gladly let us
have it for about two dollars and fifty cents.
S-E-C-R-E-T
Approved For Release 2006/03/10 : CIA-RDP79S01057A000100070014-7
 Approved For Rase 2006/03/10: CIA-RDP79S010571100070014-7
SEC 1R-E T
?
?3a
able to carry an even bigger workload than that in the Depart-
ment of Agriculture. This fury, I surmise, brought on so severe
an emotional disturbance that he became incapable of telling
black from whites I can think of nothing else which could
account for the way he shuffled perfectly simple and straight-
forward data in such a way as to produce false arguments in
support of his prejudice.
I recommend., in conclusion on these subject:,., (a) that %e
go ahead with Intellofax and our planning for Minicard, doing
our best to correct such genuine deficiencies as we can find,
and (b) that we continue to exclude most types of information
reports and unfinished intelligence from the IPI.
Intelligence Subject Code
3. The criticisms of the Intelligence Subject Code are
generally sound, and we are already taking steps to comply with
the recommendation on page xxx that it be revised and made in-
ternally consistent. The devoted and competent staff which has,
developed the ISC has gone too far in attempting to satisfy all
? the specialists$ each of whom wants to see his section of the
code expanded into great detail. The ISC has in truth become
too detailed for efficient and consistent use, and we must
whittle it down. Other agencies also are using it however, and
Air Force wants to expand the aeronautical segments of the code
into the most minute detail. We cannot prevent them from doing
this for their own purposes, even though we may think it a mis-
take, but we can decide unilaterally to use only the first four
digits of that section of the code for our own purposes. Some
such solution as this will have to be found, and we are working
on it in a Working Group of the AHIP Committee.
No subject code is perfect. The Bibliography of Agri-
culture's index is very imperfect even for agricultural subjects,
and as I have shown in Tab A it cannot be used without inconn
sistencieso All the specialists criticise each other's classi-
fication schemes, and no two agree., Hundreds of "documentation
experts" hold dreary conferences almost every month to discuss
the general theory of indexing and classification, and they
seldom achieve anything more tangible than to "point up the
importance of the problem"o They are. like the Concord Trans-
cendentalists of whom it was said,."They dive into the
illimitable, and they soar into the Infinite, and they never
pay cash."
?
Approved For Release 2006/03/10 : CIA-RDP79S01057A000100070014-7
 Approved For Rose 2006/03/10: CIA-RDP79S01057A*100070014-7
S-E-C-R-E-T
0
I recommend, with regard to the Intelligence Subject Code,
that we go ahead along the lines which I have outlined above
and on which we have already started. This is in accord with
the recommendations of the Consultants.. (Let us not forget,
however, that the course which we must steer lies between two
dangers: we must avoid the extremes of complexity which now
make the code so hard to use consistently, but we must also
avoid extremes of simplification which would make it impossible
for us to pinpoint requests with a certain measure of selectivity.
The simpler the code the more numerous the titles falling in any
given subject category, and we do not wish to give the analyst
who is looking for a specific subject too many cards bearing on
related subjects.)
Map Library and Foreign Documents Division
t. It has been suggested many times before that the Map
Library and Foreign Documents Division be merged into OCR on
the ground that they are basically reference services, and in
1948 I was inclined to think this might be necessary in order
to lessen the jurisdictional disputes and overlaps. At this
? time I can see no advantage in the suggestion at all, as there
no longer is any friction between the several units and extremely
little if any duplication of effort. It is certain that the
reference librarians should know of the existence of both FDD
and Map Library, and should remind their customers of the
services which they offer, and it will be a good thing to have
both of them located in the new building right beside OCR. Even
then, however, I doubt that much would be gained by rearranging
the chain of command.
I recommend that this recommendation be put on ice until
1960.
OCR Reorganization ? Three Deputies?
?
Approved For Release 2006/03/10 : CIA-RDP79S01057A000100070014-7
 Approved For R&se 2006/03/10 : CIA-RDP79S010574100070014-7
S-E-C-R-E-T
-5-
A two-way split would be better than this, creating
perhaps a Deputy for Information Services who would have under
his charge the central Reference Staff, the map and library
reading rooms, and the Registers; and setting up a second
Deputy for Technical Support who would have all the rest.
Thought might well be given at this point to the nuvstien of
recommend that we move slowly on this proposal. Re-
organizatao or a sake of reorganization is always bad, creat-
ing more problems than it solves, and I believe we can work
effectively toward a central Reference Staff (see the following
paragraph) without having to toss all the rest of OCR in the
blanket.
Central Reference Staff
6. The proposal that there be created a Central Reference
Staff has merit, though there is no doubt that the Consultants
greatly exaggerate when they assert that for want of such a staff
there is now much confusion and duplication of effort. There is
no,evidence to support such a contention, and it probably happens
very rarely that information which should be sought from one of the
Registers is, instead, wrongfully sought from the Intellofax system.'
# The Consultants do claim that the Intellofax system is often wrongly
used for searches which might better be made in other ways, and they
cite some examples of this. I don't have time to scrutinize them in
detail, but it seems almost certain after a quick look-see that these
examples are as ill-considered and misleading as the others in connec-
tion with the Intellofax system which I have already reported on. It
is true that the system is sometimes used for what seem on the surface
to be unlikely purposes., but when this is done it is because all else
has failed. And, sometimes to our considerable surprise, the last shot
try quite often does pay off. Documents which could not be identified
or located in any other way have sometimes been found by the Intellofax
system, and, despite one of the Consultants' examples., we did once find
a crew list in this way after all else had failed.
-5-
S-E-C-R-E-T
Approved For Release 2006/03/10 : CIA-RDP79S01057A000100070014-7
 Approved For Rose 2006/03/10 : CIA-RDP79S010574100070014-7
S-E-C-R-E-T
=?6-
The reference librarians do refer customers to the Registers and
to other sources of information when appropriate, and if they
use the Intellofax system for what seem like strange purposes it
is generally because all else has been tried and has failed to
give the desired data.
Vie should do more than we have done in the way of train-
ing our reference librarians in the use of facilities outside the
Library, and this can be done with or without reorganization. As
to putting individual people from the Registers into a central
Reference Staff, however, there is room for doubt: there are, in
fact, as good reasons against it as there are for it.
The experience of our Registers has always been that they
can best serve the customers, and do so with least waste motion,
when they talk directly with them. Each "channel" between the
Register's analyst and the customer leads to less perfect under-
standing of what is really wanted, and this in turn causes waste
motion. Often, for example, Biographic Register finds that a
request from one of the Requirements Staffs of the other Offices
is reasonably lucid in most respects but needs to be clarified in
one or two. When this is the case it speaks, if possible, directly
with the customer; and almost invariably it is found that energy
would have been misspent and time wasted if the job had been
? started without this additional clarification. Since the Register
is as near to every customer as is the telephone, it takes no
longer for the customer to say what he wants directly to the
Register than it would for him to say it to a middleman,
The Consultants' proposal, of course, is based entirely
on the supposition that customers would get better and faster
service, at less cost to themselves, if the Registers maintained
"contact men" or "liaison officers" in the Central Reference Staff.
I think there is much doubt that this would really pay off for the
customers, and it certainly would not make the Registers themselves
more efficient.
I recommend that we commence building up the present
Reference Branch of the Library, emphasizing its position much
as is suggested by the Consultants, and giving fairly intensive
training to its members; but that we refrain from any formal re-
organization until we have had an experimental trial of the use-
fulness of putting Register liaison officers into the staff. As
a start, each Register might be required to place one person full-
time with the reference librarians for a week or so. Such person
would receive directly all requests which came to the Library for
services which his Register could handle. After a few weeks the
Reference Branch and the Registers should be called upon for
comment as to the usefulness of the venture.
?
-6-
Approved For Release 2006/03/10 : CIA-RDP79S01057A000100070014-7
 Approved For Rose 2006/LtQCJLkL;PP79S01057 11100070014-7
07?
Hard Copy versus Aperture Cards and Microfilm
7. We developed the aperture card system in order (1) to
conserve floorspace,, (2) to conserve file cabinets,, (3) to ensure
that our file would always be complete - i,e,,, that we would
never find ourselves in the position of being unable to locate
or copy a particular document because of its having been borrowed
by an analyst or misfiled, These are good reasons, and they are
as sound today as they were when we first acted on them, The
Consultants doubtless speak in good faith when they say that some
of the analysts have expressed a desire to browse in hard copy
files, just as one browses in the book stacks of a university
library,, but it was our experience while we had the hard copy
files that analysts seldom or never took advantage of this
opportunity. The reason is not far to seek. Browsing in file
cabinets where the documents of necessity are filed according
to source rather than by subject matter is not very rewarding,,
and it is very irksome. I am entirely certain that we would
lose far more than we would gain if we adapted the Consultants'
recommendations on this score.
I recommend that we reject the Consultants' proposals
with regard to a hand copy file,
Space Rearrangements
8. The Consultants' suggestions as to space arrangements in
the new building seem to me entirely sound, and you have already
approved nay recommendation that we accept them for the present,,
subject to such changes as may become necessary before the time
of moving in 1960 or later.
The other suggestions as to rearrangement of the River-
side Stadium at the present time depend upon acceptance of the
recommendations for abandoning Intellofax., going back to a con-
ventional published index., and setting up hard copy files, All
these latter are thoroughly unsound and., in rr4Y view., unacceptable.
It follows that we cannot and should not at the present time
attempt to shuffle our space arrangements in MMBuilding or the
Stadium,
I recommend that no change be made in our present space
arrangements, But iat the plan for a Central Reference Staff in
the new building be retained, We can experiment with the Central
Reference Staff idea right here where we are., and can subsequently
adapt the plans for the new building to accord with what we decide
we want.
-7-
Approved For Release 2006/03/10 : CIA-RDP79S01057A000100070014-7
 Approved For Rose 2006/03/10 : CIA-RDP79SO10574100070014-7
S-E-C R.E-T
Library Collections
9o The Consultants are quite right in saying that we have
held down the purchase of books for reasons of econony and be-
cause of space limitations. In the very early days of the Agency
it was decided that we should not attempt to build up a big
collection of our own, but should buy only (1) reference books
of the sort that should be available in the reading room, and (2)
other books in accordance with the stated needs of the research
and operating offices.
Professional librarians tend to measure each other's
prestige by the size of the collections which they administer,
and all of them firmly believe that the librarian's first duty
is to collect as marry books as possible. This is understandable,
but not necessarily wise, Our policy has been applauded by the
Bureau of the Budget, and by all the many groups who have in-
vestigated us except the librarians. As a taxpayer I am in favor
of it IVself, and even in the new building I see no reason to depart
from it. It will not take appreciably longer to get books from the
Library of Congress to Langley than it does to get them to 26th Street,
I recommend that we go slow in "building up the collections"
even in the newbding. Experience shows us from time to time that
we need more than we have in the way of basic documents on foreign
relations, and when this occurs it is feasible to embark on a program
of acquisition in specific fields. This was done in the case of the
Treaty Collection, and in the case of HIC. I believe this is a
better way to provide ourselves with the books which we need than
would be a broad effort to buy more books in all fields of interest
to intelligence.
Efficiency and Manpower in the Library
10, The Consultants offer a number of criticisms of the Library's
efficiency as compared with the State Department Library, Yale
University, and other libraries. A good many of these criticisms
are unsound, being based on faulty comparisons of the apples-versus-
oranges variety, and there is need to examine each in considerable
detail before a decision can be made as to whether manpower really
is being wastefully used and, if so, what we should do about it. We
have a copy of the memorandum from which the Consultants obtained
their information about the State Department Library, and the writer
of the memorandum has expressed to us his own belief that the figures
Approved For Release 2006/03/10 : CIA-RDP79SO1057A000100070014-7
 Approved For Rose 2006/03 DP79S01057100070014-7
? 9 o CONFIDENTIAL
contained in it cannot be directly compared with ours. This is a
question which needs to be explored.
I recommend that the charges of inefficiency and wasteful
use of manpower be placed before the Management Staff, with a request
that they be carefully analyzed and either proven or disproveno
Leadership and Aggressiveness
U. The Consultants' remarks on these scores are exactly analogous
to the remarks made about the Director of Central Intelligence by the
various committees which have investigated CIA since 1948. Without
any exception, I think, all of these groups have solemnly asserted
that the Director has the responsibility to coordinate the intelligence
community and sufficient legal authority to do it. He should get busy,
and go out and do it. He ought to be more aggressive, and exercise
more leadership, and coordinate the other agencies with a stick if
necessary.
This is naive. The community cannot be coordinated against
its will, and any attempt to provide it with aggressive leadership by
CIA will be instantly and strongly resented. This is just as true in
the field of central reference services as it is in every other. Much
? can be done by friendly discussion and voluntary agreement, but very
little by fiat. Most of the other agencies have now voluntarily
adopted OCR's Intelligence Subject Code, but if we'd tried to ram it
down their throats we'd have generated nothing but antagonisms, rival
codes in competition with our own, and duplication of effort. OCR was
first in the field with a mechanized index system, and other agencies
are now moving in the same direction. The AHIP committee is doing a
good job of coordinating in nearly all aspects of information
processing, and its efforts should be encouraged and fostered.
I recommend that the Consultants' proposals for more aggres-
sive leadership in OCR be put back on the shelf. Ue can accomplish
more by the behavior and methods now being used than we could by
trying to crack a whip, or by telling other people how much smarter
we are than they.
CONFIDENTIAL
9
Approved For Release 2006/03/10 : CIA-RDP79SO1057A000100070014-7