CIA CAREER COUNCIL 39TH MEETING THURSDAY, 24 JANUARY 1957

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP80-01826R000800040022-0
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 40
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: October 29, 2002
• Sequence Number: 22
• Publication Date: January 24, 1954
• Content Type: MIN

Approved For F ase 2003/01/27 : CIA-RDP80-01826ROO 800040022-0
Au.
CIA CAREER COUNCIL
39th Meeting
Thursday, 24 January 1957
Room 154, Admin Building
Present
Gordon M. Stewart
Director of Personnel
. Chairman
Robert Amory, Jr.
Deputy Director (Intelligence)
Member
Matthew Baird
Director of Training
Member
25X1A9A
Assistant to the Inspector General
Alternate for IG, Member
25X1A9A
Richard Helms
COPS-DD/P
Alternate for DD/P, member
25X1A9A
25X1A9A
25X1A9A
Assistant Executive Officer, DD/P
Alternate for DD/P, Member
Direct or o_ _ __._______ _ __ _ _ =-s
Member
Lawrence K. White
Deputy Director (Support)
Member
Deputy Director of Personnel
for Planning and Development
Executive Secretary
Office of Personnel
Reporter
25X1A9A
A/DD/I (Admin) ( Members of
PPS/OTR ( Language Development
DDS Committee
Also members of
Language Development Committee
Approved For Release 2003/01/27 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000800040022-0
 Approved For Release 2003/01/27 : CIA-RDP80-01826RO90800040022-0
25X1
. . . This motion was then passed . . .
. The 39th meeting of the CIA Career Council convened at 2:45 p.m.,
Thursday, 24- January 1957, in room 154 Administration Building, with Mr. Gordon M.
Stewart presiding . . . .
MR. STEWART: The meeting will come to order.
The first item on the agenda is the minutes of the 38th meeting
C10 January 19577. Any comments? Is there a motion they be approved?
MR. STEWART: As the second item we will move to the Language Development
Program, if that is acceptable.
Rud, do you want to present that?
Since Mr. Amory has a plane to catch we moved the meeting up
25X1A9A
25X1
15 minutes so that he could speak to the Council before he rushes to his plane. I
suggest, in order to accommodate him, we take this item first.
MR. AMORY: I won't take anything like the 15 or 20 minutes, and aside
from that, Von is completely briefed on my points, detail by detail. But I did feel
very strongly--have a feeling of alarm about the philosophy that the sub-group working
on this had expressed in respect to this matter. So I thought we should look at that
somewhat philosophically before we get down tp the details of comparing or dealing
with it. I feel very very strongly that we must not be shocked by seeing a group of
seven figures - Arabic numerals - in front of us. It looks like a lot of money and
would be a lot of money to any of us here or to all of us put together, but the fact
is that percentage-wise; of the total of .01 funds in this Agency, which I compute
running roughly around a
this is a very small percentage.
The object of the exercise by the Boss is to improve the quality of our people both
at headquarters and overseas, but particularly overseas, and to invest what would
amount to 1 of increased incentive pay in order to gain a 5% efficiency increase
would obviously be a sound investment. I don't think any of us have any doubt that
if this program is worked out properly it would increase our efficiency by far more
than 141. And I can report--and Dick can confirm this, and Red, and the others who
were there--that when this figure was tossed out casually to the Boss the other morn-
ing in the meeting, he didn't blink an eye. So I think he wants this job done, and I
feel it should be done.
Approved For Release 2003/01 /P80-018268000800040022-0
 Approved For tease 2003/01/27 : CIA-RDP80-018268000800040022-0
Now the next stage of the inquiry, to my mind, relates to the question of
distinguishing between languages. I think we ought to be very careful not to get
into a mood of downgrading the importance of fluently reading and speaking the
common, simple European languages. In some respects I think you can make a strooX1A6A
2 5X1A6Aargument that those are the most important ones. If you go into
really expects to find an American speaking fluent
you can do it, and undoubtedly valuable, but the
0
25X1A6A
J It's a wonderful bonus if
25X1A6A
who are really influential in
the Government are.English-speaking, and if you have English, French and German you
can get along, as far as the really high-class targets are concerned, whereas if you
25X1 A6Amove into
- admittedly in this last decade they got pretty used to people in
the Golden Ghetto speaking nothing but English, but the time is coming, as your range
of operations goes on for another 15 years or so, when as a matter of Chauvinistic
25X1A6A 25X1A6A
pride a man who speaks good is going to get somewhere in and he who
does not will not, and the same goes for French in the other countries. Therefore,
to save money by pulling out of the incentive program those languages could well be
the reverse of what the Director wants and I think soundly should have. As I have
listened to him, he has not talked with alarm of not having Swahili, but of having
a whole station somewhere in Latin America where not a single soul can talk gentle-
manly in Spanish. So I strongly urge on you generous liberality with the funds. I
am in favor of the higher premium for the most difficult ones but let's not overlook
the French or Spanish, because ultimately, if we're going to have a good group, we
should have no one in Latin America who isn't Spanish-speaking. Now, that was the
reason for my asking you to meet early today.
MR. HELMS: Bob, I'd like to speak early about the question of the mainten-
ance problem, because that obviously is a key problem in this. I want to be sure we
all understand alike, and if I don't understand it I want to be corrected, and if I
do understand it then I want to speak about it a little bit.
If I understand the term "maintenance" it means--to use my own case--
if I have been able at some juncture in my life to speak some French, it would be an
award for my maintaining that French at the same level year after year after year.
On the other hand, suppose that I don't have any opportunity to speak French over a
period of years--which I have not, very much--and there comes a time when I am going
25X1 A6A to have to use it, if I go to
or some place of that kind. Obviously,
then, I would go and take a language refresher course, but I wouldn't think it would
Approved For Release 2003/01/ '' 80-01826R000800040022-0
 Approved For Wease 2003/01/27: CIA-RDP80-01826R000800040022-0
NW
take a great deal of time to refresh to the point where I would get it back at least
to the point where it was once before. So the question I raise is this: Is putting
out money for maintenance really a productive effort in terms of what we get back
or is it in effect something of a hand-out? Now I am not deprecating the point
but I am raising the point because I think it is a valid one. If I was going to im-
prove my language, bring it up to where it was before and get better and better at
it, I could see a certain value in inciting me to do this, through financial contri-
butions, and so on. But I don't quite see it's worth the money if by going back to
a refresher course at the time I am going to need it, I can get it back for the
Agency in a useful fashion. That is my main point.
MR,AMORY: I'd like to meet that point on your own ground. That is a
well-taken approach to the problem. I think if you were really rusty in a language
it probably would take more than a fitw months. But when you take your salary during
that time, plus the cost of teaching you, giving you that course, its going to run
somewhere on the order of $12OO or $1-O0, or the equivalent of 12 or 14 years' main-
tenance payments. In other words, by looking at the $100 figure for intermediate
language proficiency, the immediate availability--think of our problems with respect
25X1A6A
to when we suddenly needed people who spoke French to go out there--
the fact that you have a reserve of people who have maintained their skill and who
are ready to go immediately to Central Processing and go out, and not say, "Gentle-
men, I'll have to take a full quarter of a year to do this before I'll be ready to
go." I do think, however, that the maintenance of an elementary status of a language
is probably the one we should be most skeptical about, because that is awfully hard
to test.
MR. STEWART: I agree.
MR. AMORY: Because there he can really fake. But when you move on to high
proficiency, that means that a fellow here in Washington has to cultivate French
friends, dine and talk with them, and use records or something like that, and it's
going to take real effort, and the percentage bonus he is going to get - 2% - that
is giving him a 2% incentive for doing all this extra work. But it ought to be fig-
ured--you are quite right--so that it is not the uneconomic way to approach it.
MR. HEIMB : That was my basic point .
25X1A9A MR-~ May I speak to that point a little bit, since in the Committee
we have had similar discussions and felt the different opinions on this subject would
Approved For Release 2003/01/2SL~I, R P80-01826R000800040022-0
 Approved For ,ease 2003/01/27: CIA-RDP80-01826R000800040022-0
be constructive to add here. No. 1, the point you raise Cinaicating Mr. Helms,
again, is very sound, that it would pay a man who is to be assigned to such an area
to maintain, over a. period of time, his proficiency. At the same time it must also
be recognized that not everybody who has a language. will ultimately end up using
it, and what the ratio is, is hard to say. No. 2, what struck us all in Committee
deliberation was the sharp disproportion between what we would pay for achievement
and for maintenance. On this we had only those figures to go back to which the
Office of Personnel has compiled over the years on language knowledge, and they were
not entirely perfect, but probably illustrative to use as a basis. And as you will
see on Chart No. 4, on the bottom line, the most telling item here is that we would
pay, of our total sum spent on awards, between 9% and 15%, depending on the year,
in the achievement category, and around 90% for maintenance, and that 90%o in the
neighborhood of a million dollars plus. Now you can, of course, slice this differ-
ence different ways, but it would seem. to me that our major effort for the Agencyts
purpose is to make people study languages, that being the No. 1 requirement; and
that we have a secondary requirement, namely, to see to it that people who know
languages or who acquire them at Agency expense, keep their knowledge, maintain it
and keep it up. The first effort, it would seem to me, that might achieve this, is
a little moral pressure, which we haven't really tried in. the past. Certainly if
the language program from the point of view of achieving new knowledge is to gain
some impetus, it will also carry others--if people understand "there's good reason
for me to understand a language of which I have a certain amount of knowledge," and,
No. 2, "to keep it up in the Agency's interest - because that is after all what I
am being paid for."
Now, there are categories of language in which maintenance awards
can very well be advocated for those really complex, like the Far Eastern, which
are based not on alphabetic writing, and therefore without much doubt you can say
maintenance makes sense because it IS hard work and an impetus is called for, and
you might make your exception there, and you will find then the costs are in balance--
the amounts. spent on maintenance in that category would be less than. the amounts
likely to be spent on. achievement, and you have something which appears to be more
defensible. I would then say that given the fact that all we have to go on now is
very vague information, that we know very little about what Agency members really
know in languages--what their abilities are as. against the statistics that we have--
Approved For Release 2003/01/?7 U; P80-01826R000800040022-0
 Approved For ase 2003/01/27: CIA-RDP80-01826R000800040022-0
that we are embarking upon a very careful program of ascertaining what we do have,
and it would be best for us to start off in such a way so that we do not need to
subsequently reduce our awards for reasons beyond our control--it would be well to
restrict maintenance initially to these intermediate and high levels of proficiency
in the Far Eastern languages - Japanese, Korean and Chinese, and to leave the rest
to develop, to allow us about a year to figure out what we should do about mainten-
ance elsewhere, and to maintain this so that we do not need to start new regulations
and new policies in order to have them, but to grind them in as we can determine
the Agency really needs them--because we do not know this now.
MR. AMORY: I think you are drawing too hard and fast a line between them.
I think the real incentive to learn them is the fact that you get $?+OO plus a $200
dividend thereafter to maintain it. When they buy airplanes they need to equip the
Air Force to train and use them--it's all part and parcel of the same problem. So
I don't get excited about this ratio point. What you want is a growing concern - a.
language facility. But that is a good statement of the disagreement between the two
positions.
So saying, I leave it to these wise and hard-working gentlemen.
. . . Mr. Amory left the meeting . . .
MR. BAIRD: Mr. Chairman, I feel this Committee was set up advisory to
me to administer the program generally, and I'd like to make an orderly report on the
findings of that Committee, and I'd like to have the Council hear some of my recom-
mendations on this.
MR. STEWART: Fine.
MR. BAIRD: I think that is in order.
MR. HEIMS:: There is nothing we would like better, Matt.
MR. BAIRD: I think we can say that the completed work of the Committee is
represented by items 3, 4 and 5 on the agenda. for this meeting. There remains to be
completed before the program can be launched, one notice - Schedule of 25X1
Awards and. Qualification Procedures. The Committee requires guidance from the Coun-
cil before it can proceed with the final drafting of the remaining notice in view of
its findings on estimated costs of the program to the Agency, and its disagreement on
two major points.
The findings of the Committee on costs of awards are as follows:
5
ern . r
Approved For Release 2003/01/"P80-01826R000800040022-0
 Approved For Re ase 2003/01/27 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000800040022-0
'Wr
i , i
a. - you have charts l through 4 before you, dated 24 January 1957. They summarize
the cost data developed and considered by the Committee. I call your attention to
Chart No. 1, which is the Schedule of Awards, which lists the values of achievement
and maintenance awards for the types and levels of proficiency in three language
groupings. The cost estimates on all charts are based on these amounts. Chart No. 2,
the Estimated Annual Total Costs of the Language Development Program for the first
five-year period includes costs of training as well as the combined costs of achieve-
ment and maintenance awards. The four totals shown on the chart for the fifth year
indicate the effect on total costs of alternative restrictions on maintenance awards.
Chart No. 3, the Annual Estimated Costs of Maintenance Awards, based on the fifth
year estimates, illustrates the values of maintenance awards for various types and
levels of proficiency by language group. It was prepared for use in arriving at a
formula for placing restrictions on maintenance awards, if we so desire. Chart No.
4, the Estimated Annual Costs of Awards for the first five years of the Program
shows the relative amounts of achievement and maintenance awards for various cate-
gories of candidates.
After consideration of these data, the Committee concludes that: (1)
the amounts and the ratios of awards in Chart No. 1 are adequate for purposes of the
Program. It is possible at these levels of award for an individual to earn awards
in the average amount of 215 per year in Group 1 languages to $567 per year for
Group III languages over a 25-year period, provided that no limitations are placed
upon maintenance awards. (2) the ratio of maintenance award costs to total award
costs is disproportionate to the Agency but not to the individual. Chart No. 4
shows maintenance costs ranging between 85% and 95% of total award costs. (3) that
a line should be drawn cutting off maintenance awards at some point, but the Com-
mittee could not agree on where to draw it. In this respect the Committee considered
the following alternatives: a "That maintenance awards should not now be authorized
except for the intermediate and high levels of comprehensive and specialized pro-
ficiency in Group III languages only." If this proposal were adopted it would save
an estimated $1,606,875.00. You can see that on total 4+ on Chart No. 2 - the effect
on total cost of the Program. b. "That maintenance awards should be authorized
only for intermediate and high levels of comprehensive and specialized proficiency in
Group II and Group III languages." If this proposal were adopted, it would save an
estimated 41,163,775.00. See total 3 on Chart No. 2 for effect on the total cost of
y F P80-01826R000800040022-0
Approved For Release 2003/014
 Approved For Rase 2003/01/27 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000800040022-0
r u
the Program. Another alternative: c. "That maintenance awards should be authorized
at present only for those who have qualified for an achievement award under the Pro-
gram, unless the individual is already at the highest proficiency level in a Group II
or III language and is eligible for award, except that no maintenance awards should
be authorized for elementary levels of proficiency in any language group." The
effect of this proposal on costs would be to postpone payment of maintenance awards
on any scale comparable to that reflected on the charts, except for those in directed
training in full-time intensive courses. It would also provide more time to consider
all of the complicating factors surrounding the principle of maintenance awards and
to gain experience with the Program. It would also have the effect of stimulating
those now skilled in languages to increase levels of proficiency.
Now I'd like to speak also on the disagreements in the Committee.
No. 1, on the Maintenance Awards, the Committee failed to agree on either of the
three proposals that I have just mentioned. The Committee believes that guidance
from the Council is the only recourse in resolving this issue, and I'll give you my
recommendations at the end of this paper.
25X1 Now in Notice
that two criteria should govern the designation and classification of languages for
award purposes, namely: Agency need and relative difficulty of the language. Accord-
ingly, and after consultation with various components within the Agency, 40 languages
were designated in three groups, each with a different monetary value, as being those
which are awardable under the provisions of the Language Development Program for the
foreseeable future. And I think that should be under constant review - at least
twice a year. The notice further provides for the addition, deletion or shifting of
languages from one group to another from time to time as Agency needs may indicate.
The Committee was divided four to one on the manner in which the two
criteria--agency need and relative difficulty of the language--should apply to the
designation of any given language as being awardable or non-awardable at any time.
The majority view holds that Agency need, which is a variable factor, may make it ad-
visable, from time to time, to place, for example, one or more less difficult language
in a language group for which higher awards are authorized, in order to encourage the
voluntary study of such languages. Conversely, it may also be advisable, following
the same reasoning, to shift a more difficult language to a group for which lower
awards are authorized, in order to decrease the numbers who might undertake its study,
7
Approved For Release 2003/41 Z A-IZDP80-01826R000800040022-0
 Approved For Release 2003/01/27 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000800040022-0
1Sr
11 L
without removing it from the awardable list. In its present draft Notice
25X1
lists Greek, which on the basis of relative difficulty alone properly belongs in
Group II, in Group I.
Now the minority view, represented by the DDS member, who wished
his dissent to be a matter of official record, is that if a language is awardable
at all, it should command an award commensurate with its relative difficulty. It is
his view that if Greek is awardable at all it should appear in in language
25X1
Group II, not in Group I. While he sponsors the criterion of Agency need, he believes
that the removal from or addition to the lists of awardable languages is the only
appropriate and equitable way to reflect that need since the Language Development
Program is based upon award for effort and it takes a greater effort on the part of
the individual to acquire a given level of proficiency in a more difficult language
than it does in a simpler language. He further believes that rather than devaluate
a language to decrease the numbers who might undertake its study, it is better to
remove it from the list of awardable languages entirely and satisfy limited Agency
requirements by means of directed rather than voluntary language training.
25X1 Notice
therefore, while placed on the agenda of the CIA
Career Council, does NOT represent the unanimous view of the Committee on Language
Development.
25X1
Now, if you would be interested in my recommendations for action to-
day--it is recommended that the CIA Career Council authorize the granting of main-
tenance awards in the intermediate and advanced levels of comprehensive and special-
ized proficiency only to those who have earned an achievement award in the language,
unless they are at the highest level of proficiency, in Group II and Group III
languages only. Notice can then be drafted accordingly and prepared for
Group I.
publication by 1 February 1957. The great value to me of that compromise is that
it gives us time to know how we are going to operate this Program, and I, honestly,
need a little time. That would be my recommendation on that.
COLONEL WHITE: Excuse me, Matt. I think this is quite important. Could
you state that again so that I know exactly what it is.
MR. BAIRD: That we authorize the granting of maintenance awards in the
intermediate and advanced levels of comprehensive and specialized proficiency only
to those who have earned an achievement award in the language, unless they are at
the highest level of proficiency, in Group II and Group III languages only,--not in
Approved For Release 2003/01/2r[.9
ffP80-01826ROO0800040022-0
 Approved For Fase 2003/01/27: CIA-RDP80-01826R000800040022-0
y
25X1
MR. BAIRD: I would also recommend that we authorize the publication of
In so doing I accept the majority opinion, not necessarily because it
is the majority opinion but because it is composed of those people who I think have
the greatest stake. I look to the DDS member of this Committee to advise me on
cost, administrative procedures, and those matters, but I would certainly take more
cognizance of the DD/I and the DD/P viewpoint, because they have the greatest stake--
probably 95 to 99% of the people concerned.
I might call to your attention that this has been designed 25X1
for easy and frequent amendment and revision at any time.
My third recommendation is that we approve items 3, 4 and ~ on the
agenda for today.
MR. HELMS: Mr. Chairman, I would just like to have put into the record
a commendation of Colonel Baird and the Committee that has worked on this, because--
for the first time--I think a really thorough job has been done on this language prob-
lem. It is obvious that a great deal of work and thought has gone into it, and it
seems to come into perspective now, for the first time,.and I think it's a hell of
a fine job, and you might so record.
I have just one question I would like to ask, which is a point of
clarification for me. Language Group III has only three languages in it. Is that
in light of the experts' opinion that those are much more difficult than the rest of
them? I thought languages like Thai and Vietnamese, etc., were difficult as hell,
too--just as difficult as Japanese.
MR. BAIRD: Spoken Vietnamese is more difficult than Chinese.
25X1A9A
25X1
Thai is apparently relatively easy.
Yes, and that came as a great surprise to me.
MR. HELMS: I assumed it was. I was just trying to learn something here.
I
on alphabets, which is one of the reasons why they are so very difficult. Arabic,
which I thought was a fantastically difficult language, because it is based on an
alphabet is not as difficult as the others--and that is one of the basic criteria,
is that not right, Von?
25X1A9A Ml: I _7 Yes. I think you could break this down into 15 cate-
gories, once the experts go into it.
Approved For Release 2003/01/27 ,F DP80-01826R000800040022-0
Chinese, Japanese and Korean are based on ideographs, not
 Approved For Release 2003/01/27 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000800040022-0
%r
MR. HELMS: I have no quarrel with it. I'm just asking for information
on it.
25X1A9A MR. 0 The grouping is completely artificial. There is no
grouping. Every language has a different degree of difficulty. So Noticer
25X1 not
grouped "for award purposes" - isn't that correct?
25X1A9A
difficulty.
T'd like to ask Colonel Baird if he took into con-
They're grouped for award purposes, not because of need or
natural 25X1
but the previous one--which authorizes this, says that they are
MR. HELMS: I understand.
sideration the effect this will have on the morale of people who have on their own
learned languages in any of these groups, who now can't have an achievement award.
MR. BAIRD: Why not?
25X1A9A
Your proposal was that maintenance awards will be
paid only if they got an achievement award.
MR BAIRD: Yes, but they must apply for the achievement award at the
next higher level.
25X1A9A
They are not eligible if they learn the language
prior to the issuance of this Program.
MR. BAIRD: At the next higher level--
25X1A9A
Suppose they are at the highest level?
an example. One of my boys had to instruct in Arabic. He has been in for
25X1 ACA
two years now and has acquired some proficiency so he can talk very well with the
English-speaking students. He did this all on his own and he did it before this
thing comes out, so he can't get a maintenance award. He will come back here to the
United States and I will want him to keep up his language proficiency in I think the
three languages he speaks now. I have one man who has been inl Itwo year sho PA
paid his own money to take Greek from a tutor there, and he has published a diction-
ary--but he can't get anything..
25X1A9A MR.
May I speak to that point,
25X1A6A
that by singling
out the ones who are at the highest level that very fact means they are eligible for
maintenance awards. They couldn't possibly earn an achievement award but they would
be eligible for maintenance awards right away, providing they pass their proficiency
test.
Approved For Release 2003/01/i 9P80-01826R000800040022-0
 Approved For R&Ipase 2003/01/27 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000800040022-0
25X1 A9A MR.
May I suggest a compromise here, which I think would achieve
equity - something along these lines: that if a person on his own--as your two men
25X1A9A
have,
has learned a language, that by special action of the
Director of Training he be granted eligibility for a maintenance award.
COLONEL WHITE: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to speak to the maintenance award
for a minute. I think as a matter of principle, recognizing all these points as
being valid, that the idea behind the whole Program is to encourage people to learn
languages and pretty generally without regard for the immediate need for those lang-
uages. The idea is to have some people who speak the language available without
having to first go to one or two refresher courses, as Dick has described. I think
as a matter of principle we should pay for maintenance and not tie it into an Agency
need. I don't know who thought of the term "Agency need." The requirements in this
field wont be any better, or probably not as good as the requirements in a lot of
other fields--and. we all know how difficult it is to try today them on the line
they come up from behind the bushes, where you don't suspect they're coming from.
So as a matter of principle I an FOR paying maintenance awards. However, if as a
practical matter you need time, or for some other reason you just can't do it, then
I think the approach--I assume paying the fellow who has done the least, last, is all
right, but as a matter of principle I think we should pay maintenance awards.
MR. HELMS: There is one question in connection with that which I would
like to raise, purely a political question. The fact that the Agency was going to
have a Language Development Program has been publicized, I understand. Its inevitably
going to get around, and it is going to be something we will want to push because it's
a pretty attractive thing in many respects. But I think we have to be careful that
in doing this we don't get charged with doing a lot of boondoggling and paying a lot
of the taxpayers' money to people, because you would have an awfully hard time justi-
25X1A9A
25X1 A8Afying that. Let's take two extremes: take the case of ho works for
n who I imagine speaks Chinese pretty well. If we pay him to maintain Chinese,
that is in some respects pretty whacky. On the other extreme you have a lot of
people who speak some of these first category languages in a "dribbling" fashion,
2 5X1A9And I wouldn't like to answerl or somebody like that, for paying $100 to
continue that "dribble." I think there would be a political impact for which we
might be sorry. I am thoroughly behind and sympathetic to the idea that we want to
get people learning languages and maintaining them, but I think we have to be care-
ful we don't get awfully soft around the edges here and end up with a haymaker on our
noses.
Approved For Release 2003/01/ 7/IAr . P80-01826R000800040022-0
 Approved For Rase 2003/01/27 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000800040022-0
25X1A9A MR.
May I ask one question which is pertinent here? Is there any
criteria as to the extent of effort? Is there a series of tests of any kind to
determine this?
MR. BAIRD: No.
I was going to add something to what Red has said, and this will
25X1 A9Artially answer you f indicating Mr
.7. The maintenance of the elementary
level we feel isn't of much value to the Agency. That is why we left it out here.
I mean, if you, as Dick called it, just have a "dribble" - to maintain that "dribble"
we don't think is of any value to the Agency. Therefore we left out that maintenance
for elementary. But it varies with the difficulty of the language.
25X1A9A MR.
There will be an annual test. The maintenance is based
on an annual actual test.
COLONEL WHITE: Under your proposal vindicating Mr. Baird, you would
pay for everything except the elementary qualifications?
25X1A9A 'I ~ I think he cut deeper. He left the Group I out.
COLONEL WHITE: That was my understanding.
MR. BAIRD: Group I, except at those two levels.
COLONEL WHITE: I may be at a disadvantage, but I never saw these charts
before I got to this meeting. My understanding of the way you put it vindicating
Mr. Baird was that you wouldn't get paid for anything, really, except-
MR. BAIRD: The intermediate and high proficiency for Groups II and III.
COLONEL WHITE: And nothing in Group I.
25X1A9A MR.O How about high proficiency for Group I? High proficiency is
difficult to maintain for anyone who doesn't use it a great deal.
25X1A9A
MR.
Group I only at the elementary level?
No - they're out completely.
COLONEL WHITE: For instance, Latin America just happens to be one of the
places where the Director went and came back and raised hell because nobody can
speak the languages. I don't, personally, agree with the Committee.
MR. BAIRD: I'd like to have the DD/P people speak on that. Why don't you
speak on that vindicating Mr.Ir forwH Division, for instance.
25X1A9A MR.
There is no disagreement, Colonel White, on the problem of
paying people for getting knowledge of a language they haven't had or for improving
a language they've had. That should stand out. Because our main interest in the
12
Approved For Release 2003/01/2
t[1P80-01826R000800040022-0
 Approved For Rase 2003/01/27: CIA-RDP80-01826R000800040022-0
Agency, and what the Director criticized in the Agency, is that people haven't made
the effort to catch on. This we must remedy and recognize awfully strongly--that
something had to step into this picture and do it. We feel that the major benefit in
this direction actually will come from the Director's declaration of policy on this
in the Notice, and that the awards will help. People have to be motivated to do
this, primarily. They can't sit overseas saying to themselves, "I don't really need
this - because all these foreigners speak English" - which is too much the case.
MR. HELMS: What would happen, Matt, if you included Group I in your recom-
mendation along with II and III?
MR. BAIRD: As far as costs?
MR. HELMS: Just the high proficiency in Groups I, II and III. I don't
feel uncomfortable about paying maintenance awards for high proficiency. I think
that can be justified to anybody--if you're really good at it, in all groups. I was
wondering if that would answer a large measure of Colonel White's point--put the
Spanish and all the rest in there and pay for it.
COLONEL WHITE: It would.
25X1A9A
May I point out that the Director, in his own words,
specifically refers to French, Spanish and Russian.
25X1A9A MR.
25X1A9A MR*
But it emphasized the fact that he is pushing the knowl-
edge of these generally useful languages, and to wipe them out, I think--
MR. BAIRD: We only wipe them out from the point of maintenance, not
achievement.
25X1A9A
I think maintenance is very important.
COLONEL WHITE: I don't think the dollars and cents are insignificant here
but I don't believe that should be the thing that guides us. I think our objectives
should come first, and I'm convinced we can get the money.
MR. HELMS: What would be the objection of the Committee to including
Group I?
25X1A9A
May I speak on this business of maintenance as distinct from
achievement, for a moment? The problem there primarily is that we have insufficient
information to come up with a good solution. Obviously what we are looking for is a
compromise. Nobody has argued that we need to pay across the board, and the amount
is disproportionate, and the public criticism element does enter into it but we do
13
Approved For Release 2003/OUIDP80-01826R000800040022-0
 Approved For eF l ase 2003/01/27: CIA-RDP80-01826R000800040022-0
ALI
25X1
not know exactly where. We do know positively that maintenance will work and be of
benefit to us in Group III on the intermediate and high levels, because that is work--
beyond a doubt. In any other area we are in doubt. We don't know how much it would
cost because there are only vague approximations--they don't cover what 2,000 person-
nel in the Agency know. So the only plea that I personally, if I may, would enter
here is a plea for time until we know what we are doing in this--not to exclude main-
tenance as a concept but to include it piecemeal as we see we need it, whether that
is for high elementary in Group I or intermediate in II, wherever it may be, so that
we can work this out in the light of better knowledge. And for that reason I am also
which Colonel Baird has just offered, namely, that here we say--as
somewhat concerned about the compromise solution which eliminates the cost factor,
25X1A6A
rightly put it--that we will not pay a maintenance award to someone who under a lower
level than the highest have done their own work - something we should certainly normal-
ly reward. But if we leave this whole question unresolved for the moment and say this
will be included in due course, as the Agency needs it, then we will retain the free-
dom of action we need here. And the first million bucks we save I would appreciate
your putting into pneumatic tubes. CLaughterj
MR. BAIRD: There is a reason behind this recommendation. I think I'll tell
you, because you are primarily interested. Group I is the group most people in the
Agency are interested in. languages those languages Z -Group IJ
appear, obviously, more often than any of the others. I don't know yet how many
additional people it is going to take to administer this Program, let alone teach it,
and I am begging for time until I can get a little more information on that. The money
value is one thing, but the number of additional people we may need to administer this
Program of the Director's is something that he may raise his eyebrows over.
COLONEL WHITE: I am perfectly willing--if you need time, I understand that,
but as a matter of'principle I think the philosophy should be to pay for maintenance
and pay for achievement, and not to eliminate a Group like this. Whatever we decide
on, I would apply it across all three of these Groups and not take out one Group.
MR. BAIRD: Would you buy not leaving out the elementary for all groups?
25X1A9A If it is, as you say, a "dribble" - it should be out.
What is "elementary"? Just enough to travel?
MR. BAIRD: Travel.
25X1A9A
It would be a positive answer to each of the first of the five
14
Approved For Release 2003/01? DP80-01826R000800040022-0
 Approved For ase 2003/01/27 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000800040022-0
Nwo~
cT
self evaluation questions in item 5 of the agenda.
25X1A9A
people I have overseas.
25X1A9A
I'd like to ask the Committee if they know how many
About 60%n?
25X1A9A I That is about right. Now I want these people to -" n w
maintain their efficiency--if it's only French-~ I don't care, because the
25X1 A6A_peak French and if I can send a training officer out there who speaks French
he will get by all right. If he can't speak anything but English he has to have an
interpreter. This applies to French, German, Spanish and Italian. I wouldn't want
a man to specialize in a language that would require him to. spend the rest of his
life there to be profitable., I want a'man who can go anywhere and speak a language
to get by without an interpreter. French will do this in many parts of the world,
including Arabia. And they are on the move all the time. They don't come back here
to headquarters and stay here. And I think to maintain this--I visualize having a
French Club and a German Club--who will meet say twice a month, or once a month, and
they won't be allowed to speak any English at all, just German all the time or French
all the time, and have to talk in technical terms about communications, etc. And
this is worth a maintenance award if they can do this. But to send a man to
L.L
we had to find a fellow who spoke French well, and we had only one, and I had to pi-1A6A
him from another area. I thought the Director wanted people who. could go anywhere
and get by in the most common languages.
MR. EELMS: We are up against a sort of a dilemma here; on the one side
we would like to see some of these things done, possibly, and on the other side it's
a question of administering it, and the cost and number of people involved. So I
don't think we are running into trouble here on the theory and philosophy on this so
much as we are on the practical application of it, and what we don't know about what
it is going to cost us to apply it.
MR. STEWART: I wonder if it would be possible--we have all agreed so far
that the maintenance at the elementary level be dropped out. I personally question
whether you should give achievement awards at the elementary level, because very
often all a person has proved to himself by the time he has passed an elementary test
is that he doesn't like the language and will never turn to it again. And in terms
of an asset that the Agency commands as a result of having achieved elementary pro-
ficiency in a language, you have nothing unless a person goes on.. As far as the
15
Approved For Release 2003/01/-2X1; :DP80-01826R000800040022-0
 Approved For Release 2003/01/27 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000800040022-0
intermediate proficiency is concerned, I agree we can't have a definition of what
that means, but as a guide I would consider intermediate would mean that a person
could really use the language.
25X1A9A MR.
25X1A9A
Gordon.
25X1A9A MR. I Those same standards would be used as the test standards
for the qualifications register and for the self evaluation--
25X1 A9A MR.
We have that.
You have the standards. that have been established on this,
1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 are used as follows: 1 would be native--
and, actually, beyond the purpose of our Program; 2 is what we consider high; 3 is
intermediate; 4 is elementary; and 5 is simply negative. So although we would
allow for balancing of these elements, No. 3 would give you approximately the pro-
file knowledge of a man in the intermediate group.
MR. STEWART: Then, to go on, in terms of your testing, when you finally
get down to this in terms of tests I think the intermediate test should be reasonably
stiff. High really means he's quite good.
As far as launching the Program is concerned, I would suggest that we
launch it on the basis of paying achievement awards during the first year and under-
take to pay maintenance at the conclusion of that year--because otherwise somebody
is going to start drawing maintenance awards before somebody else has a chance to
get around to be tested.
25X1A9A MR. That is always the intention.
~
25X1A9A
MR. STEW.ART: But you would start this all at one time?
No, we would not start maintenance until the end of the first
25X1A9A MR.
No money would be paid until at least 1 February of the
first year, because an individual would have to pass a test to determine if it was
warranted that he be paid a maintenance award for the year for which he has signified
claiming that award. In other words, the form we are in process of trying to devise
stakes a claim for an intermedial award. A year from the date of that claim, or as
soon thereafter as a test is possible, the individual will be tested. If he passes
the test he gets the award, and if he doesn't - nothing.
MR. STEWART: My proposition, then, is why don't you state that you will
pay maintenance awards, that the size of the awards will be balanced at the end of
16
Approved For Release 2003/0109 -FDP80-01826R000800040022-0
 Approved For Release 2003/01/27 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000800040022-0
the first year, and by that time you will have a pretty clear understanding of how
many customers you have, what the distribution of interest is, and the answers to
the questions you claim you don't have right now. I don't see that we would have to
announce maintenance awards at the present time, or the level.
25X1A9A MR,
You would run the risk of disappointing people who expect a
lot of dough and find they get $25 bucks.
MR. BAIRD: I'd rather announce it and then nullify at a later date.
MR. HELMS: Maybe at this time we need more of one language. Would it be
impossible to say this Program will be reviewed at the end of one year or 18 months)
in order to bring this into balance?
COLONEL WHITE: We will have to do it.
25X1A9A
That is in the regulation. It says the Director of
Training and the Committee will set the standards, review, make changes, etc.
MR, REIMS: I meant, Von, to sort of pull it out and highlight it, so that
it takes care of the problems raised here without throwing Matt into the swamp, etc.,
and giving him a hell of a first year.
25X1A9A MR,
Speaking of the swamp - the thing in the back of my mind is
ASTP, because that was a fine, wartime program in which people were trained in all
kinds of things, including languages--for instance, they gave me German--and it was
in the Army for years, and suddenly CLUNK, out it was, and we were out in the swamps.
It's that kind of thing I fear a little bit, if we start this thing on too large a
basis.
MR. STEWART: I think that is one reason for announcing your achievement
now and your maintenance later, because when people get the maintenance award announce-
ment that is going to increase their interest--a fellow will sit down and figure out
what this means over a period of a lifetime, or the period of his career in the Agency,
and he's going to get interested. So you will have another wave of interest developed
at that time, and a reason for re-publicizing the Program at the end of one year.
MR. HELMS: Gordon, as against that, if you don't announce it now you don't
have this year running concurrently while people are filling out forms and taking
tests, and it will give Training an opportunity to acquire data for the second year.
MR. BAIRD.-. I think also if the Program is to act as a part of your
incentive--even though you know what the achievement award is, if you don't know
what the maintenance award is you might not be nearly as interested.
17
Approved For Release 2003/01/, A-RtP80-01826R000800040022-0
 Approved For Release 2003/01/27 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000800040022-0
NW
MR. STEWART: That is certainly true. I'm just trying to avoid getting
you swamped, Matt.
25X1A9A
Another possibility to use there, to use Mr. Wisner's term,
this might be "counter-productive." You announce maintenance and also tell a man,
"you're going to get something out of this" - which means he won't have to work to
another level. All this we don't know.
25X1A9A MR.
Over a period of time we can balance maintenance over
achievement. But we have no criteria to determine that maintenance should be half
of achievement. We have no reason to figure that is necessarily the right ratio.
g
e ea
ng
That is a good reason, however, for ma
25X1A9A MR.
one achievement award a condition precedent to being eligible for a maintenance award.
25X1A9A May I ask what "specialized proficiency" means.
25X1A9A
r-~
25X1A9A
25X1A9A MR.
of
rnin
th
ki
Reading, writing, or speaking only.
Not "specializing" in technical terms?
MR. HELMS. To whom falls the job of presenting this to the Director?
COLONEL WHITE: Matt and me, and Gordon, I guess.
MR. HELMS: Because it strikes me here that we can take this thing up to
a point and make our recommendation, be it unanimous or be it majority, but when this
is presented to the Director you're going to have to give him a lot of this back-
ground, and at that point he is going to have some rather positive reactions to the
whole thing. We could probably sit here indefinitely discussing this back and forth
but I would like to see us now face up to the problem and come up with something.
The day has dawned, or the sun is sinking. Let's face it. And if we are too badly
split then I would recommend we present him with an alternative, maybe. I have no
worry about that. This is too complicated a problem to need the house solution. If
we can't agree on it--
25X1A9A MR.
Could I offer one suggestion here? As you know,.we feel
that we should keep the maintenance on as broad a base as possible, but let's say
cutting the maintenance award, as listed here, in half--they are now half the achieve-
ment award for no particular reason--let's cut them to a quarter of an achievement
award. That saves about $800 thousand dollars. They can always be increased in the
future, and you still have the carrot--which is the reason for the maintenance award--
and it lets us keep the base broad, cuts the horrible size of the money involved, and
18
Approved For Release 2003/01/27: C -; P80-01826R000800040022-0
 Approved For Release 2003/01/27 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000800040022-0
gives us flexibility, certainly, to go up and not down at some future time.
MR..HELMS.: But it doesn't solve Matt's personnel problem.
COLONEL WHITE: Matt, would your problem be helped a lot if we just, in
both categories, eliminated both achievement and maintenance awards in the elementary?
MR. BAIRD: I would not like to remove the achievement award in Group I.
COLONEL WHITE: I mean in the elementary.
MR. BAIRD: No, I would not like to remove that because I think particularly
the DD/P has a need for elementary.
25X1A9A
25X1A9A
MR. BAIRD: And Commo.
We have many categories which could profit from the elementary
knowledge. Take RI personnel--they need to know the headings in certain lists.
25X1A9A MR. It's very useful to us.
MR. BAIRD: The only thing--I'd like to speak on Von's suggestion--if you
cut the maintenance award too low then it costs more to test a guy than it does to
give him an award.
25X1A9A
Cut it in half and eliminate maintenance at the elementary
level. There isn't much point in paying a guy $12.50 a year to maintain the element-
ary. As you say, it's going to cost a lot more than $12.50 to test that. And, also,
$12.50 is really no incentive. I don't know anybody who is going to knock himself
out for $12.50 a year. The incentive has to be more than monetary at that level.
25X1A9A
MR. 0 When you cut your maintenance in that way you must consider
the effect not in the Group I languages but in the Group III. In other words, will
a competent man in Group III maintain that for $300 a year? That becomes the issue
when you apply the 50% approach.
COLONEL WHITE: I frankly think, as far as these amounts go - I believe in
leaving them just exactly like they are, and then if we need to cut it, then we will
cut it.
I quite agree. Letts make it painful. L Laughter
25X1A9A Would you leave in all three categories?
MR. HE?.dIS: I an on the side of doing this job right and getting the most
money we can for the right purposes, and that is all we're talking about here, really.
And when I say "painful" I simply mean you really have to put some catnip on this, and
particularly on these tough ones.
19
Approved For Release 2003/01/71: CWk P80-01826R000800040022-0
 Approved For Release 2003/01/27 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000800040022-0
_WP11 145W
MR. BAIRD: Dick, what is it now that you are recommending?
MR. HELMS: My recommendation is - I accept all of yours except I would
like to see in the excellent category--the very top category--I'd like to have the
category I languages included in there. What was the last part of your phraseology
indicating Mr. Baird?
MR. BAIRD: Group II and III languages only. And you want Group I?
MR. HELMS: Would you just read the sentence again?
MR. BAIRD: Authorize the granting of maintenance awards in the inter-
mediate and advanced levels of comprehensive and specialized proficiency only to
those who have earned an achievement award in the language, unless they are at the
highest level of proficiency, in Group II and Group III languages only.
COLONEL WHITE: You would just delete "in Group II and Group III languages
only."
II
The hooker is in those who have earned the achievement
25X1A9A MR4
25X1A9A
awards. None of us are too happy about that, I believe.
MR. HELMS,: I don`t care about them in the first part--
That means all the people now in this Agency who have
done something are out of this until they do something further, and I think that is
COLONEL WHITE: As I understand what the thing is, it's this: that we pay
for achievement and maintenance for the high and intermediate category and leave out
the achievement in the elementary.
MR. BAIRD: Achievement in all three.
COLONEL WHITE: Achievement in all three and maintenance in only the high
Achievement in elementary in all three?
25X1A9A
COLONEL WHITE: Yes. Pay maintenance and achievement in all three groups
at the high and intermediate levels, and for achievement only in.the elementary level -
all three groups.
25X1A9A
And it does not have the cut-off - in other words, it
includes our present personnel, as you visualize it?
COLONEL WHITE: Yes.
ltd like to ask you about that. My people come back
after two or three years, and there is almost a steady flow of them. How long is it
going to take to test them in the intermediate and high?
Approved For Release 2003/01/27~K
RDP80-01826R000800040022-0
r
 Approved For Release 2003/01/27 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000800040022-0
lqw~ 1%W
M.R. BAIRD: We would like to devise a test that is 100% accurate, but
we are not by any means going to achieve that for two or three years--in all the
languages. We will be swamped the first year in this Program in testing large
numbers of people in Group I.
25X1A9A
I have a suggestion. Why not make the maintenance
an annual rate and they may take the test anytime within a period of three years.
Because a good part of the Agency is here all the time and never goes overseas, so
it seems to me the thing would spread out and they can earn this award at an annual
rate and get it anytime once in three years.
25X1A9A MR.
The language of the regulation provides for that now.
25X1 MR.O The
25X1A9A
the same problem, and we saw to it
these awards.
25X1A9A
provides for that completely. We have
I llows for accumulation of 25X1
We can translate the words of this into the table on Chart I
by scratching the maintenance awards for elementary in all categories.
25X1A9A MR.
In both the specialized and the comprehensive.
25X1 A9A MR. Scratch the 25, 50 and 100.
MR. HELMS: I have read the self-evaluation paper written by the Committee,
which I think is one of the best documents of its kind. It's the first time I ever
saw one that made sense. And I would say that if 3 is the intermediate level that we
are talking about, there aren't going to be such a hell of a lot of people that are
going to qualify for it--when you look them in the eye and say come on and give.
MR. BAIRD: But they are going to want to be tested.
COLONEL WHITE: We don't pay until they're tested.
25X1A9A
They're not eligible for the test if they don't come
up with at least 3.
MR. BAIRD: If they say 3, yes, but they may say 3 and when you test them
you find they are a long way from it - but you still test them. They won't get paid
if they don't pass the test. But you have to take their word that they're eligible
for the test.
25X1A9A MR. II What it will probably mean in terms of figures is something
on the order of five to six thousand people will have to be tested every year, except
those who are not here and would have to be tested when they come home in two or
three years. The annual load will be in the neighborhood of 5,000 a year.
Approved For Release 2003/01/#P80-018268000800040022-0
 Approved For Release 2003/01/27 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000800040022-0
w i
COLONEL WHITE: As I understand it, we have only adopted the first of
your recommendations vindicating Mr. Baird]. We have really only dealt with the
first of your recommendations.
MR. BAIRD: That is right. Items 3, 4 and 5 on the agenda you had a
chance to look at prior to this meeting, and I recommend their approval.
MR. STEWART: I think we will go on to that, then, if Colonel White's
formula for compensation is accepted.
MR. HELMS: It will probably be the first self-evaluation around here
that will be honest, - when they have to face up to making good on it afterward.
MR. STEWART: We will now turn to item 3 on the agenda:
25X1
25X1
"Language Development Program." Dated 16 Jan 57J
25X1
COLONEL WHITE: I'd like to speak to that just a minute. When I read this
I tried to put myself in the position of a chief of station or ad-
ministrative officer on the receiving end and anticipate all the people who are
going to come in and say, "Okay, what do we do? How do we apply? What are we
going to get?" And I couldn't find any answers here.
25X1A9A MR.
They're in the notice that goes with this.
COLONEL WHITE: We don't
25X1
25X1A9A MR,
We couldn't
which has just been made on awards levels.
MR. BAIRD: Well, I must say that
25X1
25X1A9A
is the author of this--
MR. HELMS: It will be adequately backed up with explanatory material
25X1A9A
25X1A9A
what the Council hasn't seen is the
it all in the self evaluation form. We hope to make this a reasonably self-sustaining
form in which a man gets all his instructions on how to get into the Program.
The forms will have the instructions built in.
MR,I
MR, REIMS: That answers Colonel White's question.
25X1A9A
May I ask a very basic question.
but we will put 25X1
really necessary or can it be covered by a
25X1 rather than through a
25X1A9A MR.
L Laughter)
I can see you've been well trained by Mr. Kirkpatrick.
COLONEL WHITE: I'd like to respond to that, even though I don't make
Approved For Release 2003/01/'7 SJP80-01826R000800040022-0
until we had this decision
25X1
25X1
 25X1 Approved For Release 2003/01/27 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000800040022-0
Approved For Release 2003/01/27 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000800040022-0
 Approved For Release 2003/01/27 : CIA-RDP80-01826ROO0800040022-0
the Agency regulation says.
COLONEL WHITE: Well, it certainly would be my hope on this, as it is on
other things, that where we can give the field station chief guidance enough to let
him carry out his own Program without having to check back at headquarters every
time he spends fifteen cents, we ought to do it.
25X1A9A MR.
But aren't we splitting off responsibility? How are we going
to establish the standards and maintain the various criteria that are applied here
when each chief of station--
MR. BAIRD: He will get guidelines and points of reference as to how he has
to conduct his station Program.
25X1A9A
COLONEL WHITE: Maybe you're f indicating Mn 1T thinking of the
testing. The testing will be done here.
25X1A9A MR4
budget for that?
25XX5X1A9A MR`
25X1A9A MR4
these questions.
25X1A9A MR.
How about the granting of awards--can the chief of station
That [----]would answer all those questions, if it were be-
Maybe we ought to have that~efore we try to answer 25X1
This is the heart of the
0
25X1
COLONEL WHITE: But wouldn't you test the man, Matt, regardless--
MR. BAIRD: Well, Red, we test them, but I would certainly hope that one
of the things the testing people will come up with is a kit for testing in the field.
COLONEL WHITE: I'm for delegating. Anytime you take on something at
headquarters it takes four people. I'm for delegating as much as we can delegate
to the field, and do it right - I sure want to do it.
MR. BAIRD: I don't want the responsibility for telling the station chief
how he is to conduct his Program.
. . . Mr. Helms left the meeting . . .
25X1A9A
Is this standard procedure, as a rule, to give these
things to the chief of station?
MR. May I speak on that for one moment? Our target on this was
ncv4nnn
to get the Program going and get people to study. .And if you give the station chief
in the field adequate authority and after that tell him, "Look, Bud, it's your respon-
sibility to get going" - then you have a chance of moving it. If it's hinged in any
24
Approved For Release 2003/01/27 1 C, RDP80-01826R000800040022-0
 Approved For Release 2003/01/27 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000800040022-0
'ter` w
way by navel cords to headquarters procedures, you're apt to get very few results,
considering the workload. At the same time, the whole awards business, including
the administrative burden of this phase we have left here at headquarters in such
a way that the man at the overseas station---no matter how long he's overseas--will
not be at a financial disadvantage, will not be punished for being overseas, and
would. get everything he would get if he was here.
25X1A9A MR?
This is what I wonder about:
says the paymenn5X1
of awards will be handled entirely at headquarters.
25X1A9A MR 0 This takes place through the instrument of the self-evaluation
form. The self evaluation form for the field, and probably for headquarters, will
have, as a part of it, an application which will say, "I have herewith told you what
I know of this language. I now apply, as of this date, for a maintenance award."
Which means that a year from that date if he can pass a test which checks with his
claim, he will be eligible for a maintenance award. And if he comes. to headquarters
three years later, after filling out this form, and then passes the test, he will -
by the rules laid down here - be eligible for three maintenance awards.
25X1A9A MR.
The station chief,
25X1
already has authority to spend $250 for language training. This is putting his
present authority in the frame of reference of the new Language Program. He already
has that authority.
25X1A9A MR.
As a matter of fact, in our cost calculations it emerged
that was about all he could spend with profit on any case, with. voluntary training
MR. BAIRD: He has always had the responsibility. In this the Boss is
telling him to get to work, and that he still has that responsibility.
25X1A9A
' 25X1
itative determination of the language requirement in his area--the chief of station?
The Agency regulation places this responsibility on. the Deputy Directors. The
25X1
25X1A9A
Does he have the responsibility today for making the author-
First of all we want the Program to get going. We are con-
scious of taking the risk here that some language instruction will now take place
which we don't really need too badly. This will have to be corrected as we estab-
lish requirements--which we do not have at present. But we want to encourage and
give people the green light. There will be certain. disadvantages and certain
25
23 J: Approved For Release 2003/01% - 2 P80-01826R000800040022-0
 25X1 Approved For Release 2003/01/27 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000800040022-0
Approved For Release 2003/01/27 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000800040022-0
 Approved For Release 2003/01/27 : CIA-RDP80-01826R00 800040022-0
Training to the chief of' station in the field.
COLONEL WHITE: You have training going on all over the world which is
the responsibility of the Deputy Director for Plans and his chief of station wherever
the training may be conducted. Matt is the Director's staff officer for training,
and I don't think you can start separating out this little piece of training from
some other little piece of training and inject Matt into this one. He is function-
ing as the Director's staff officer for training, and this is just one of a multitude
of things that is going on at field stations in the training area for which the
station chief is certainly responsible. But Matt in his capacity as a staff officer
can inject himself into it. He would have an impossible task, and we would have to
increase his T/O by a couple of hundred if items of this kind had to come back to
the Director of Training.
25X1A9A MB.
in mind, really, that Matt should undertake to personally conduct the training in
25X1
which divides the responsibility here, and I think that is what I object to, pri-
marily. In most of the other training activities, that which is at least formalized
in any respect, Matt has at least a supervisory responsibility which is maintained
in writing somewhere--
COLONEL WHITE:
25X1A6A
ing on his training
I don't think that is true.
25X1A9A
Matt, as the Director's staff officer for
training, is just as interested in that as he is in language training in
and the relationship is practically the same.
25X1A9A
training?
25X1A9A
I agree with that, Colonel White, but that isn't what I had
Doesn't he have a closer interest to
COLONEL WHITE: Physically he's closer, but--
In terms of sponsorship--
MR. STEWART: He doesn't test them.
COLONEL WHITE: They're closer and he might know more about it and see
the training oftener, but his staff responsibility is no different in that training,
or something going on in ORR which he is not conducting in formal courses, from
something going on in the field.
MR. BAIRD: There is a regulation defining the responsibility of the
Director of Training which includes training as requested by the DD/P for overseas.
Approved For Release 2003/01/2
[P80-01826R000800040022-0
0
25X1A6A
25X1A9A
 Approved For Release 2003/01/27 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000800040022-0
Obviously, if I were requested to do something I would be happy to do it if I had
the capability to do it, which in this case would be nothing more than giving advice,
or, as we are presently doing, we are sending a man to IF to help the chief of
25X1A6A
station to understand the Language Program and to advise him how he best can dis-
charge his responsibility. But I wouldn't want anymore than that. I couldn't do
anymore than that.
MR. STEWART: Any further questions or further discussion?
25X1A9A MR There are a number of technical suggestions, Mr. Chairman.
In the course of the coordination system which the Council uses, going to the
staffs of the Deputies, the RCS and General Counsel, certain technical suggestions
for simplification of language have been made. None of these affect the substance.
If you want to take up each one, I have them all here, otherwise, if you wish, you
can authorize that these be made. But I can assure you that they are not substan-
tive changes.
MR. BAIRD: I would so recommend.
COLONEL WHITE: I would suggest they be made.
25X1A9A MR,
25X1A9A MR.
I will refer them all to the Committee before they are made.
MR. STEW'ART: All right, we will pass on, then to the next item - the
25X1
"Language Development Program - Classification
of Languages for Award Purposes." This is item 4.
COLONEL WHITE: Could I speak to that, too? I an not a language specialist
but administering this Program is going to be difficult, and I personally am worried
about injecting into'this the Agency's need too much, as opposed to the difficulty
of learning a language. I don't know who or how we are going to determine that
Greek isn't needed any worse than Spanish or Swedish or something else. And, further-
more, that is going to vary all the time. And I just foresee down the road the
possibility of tremendous headaches in trying to decide what the Agency needs. You
get back to the old requirement thing, which is sure hard to nail down - for languages
or anything else. I don't know very much about languages but it seems to me it would
be far simpler to base these awards on the difficulty of learning languages, rather
than to try to inject into it this factor of what are the Agency's needs. I don't
know what the Committee thinks on this, but--
Where does that appear?
25X1A9A
28
i~
Approved For Release 2003/01/24-~ i P80-01826R000800040022-0
 Approved For Release 2003/01/27 : CIA-RDP80-01826RR0000800040022-0
i"i %W
COLONEL WHITE: Matt brought it out in his discussion and illustrated it
by Group I there - in which Greek as far as difficulty goes would be placed over in
Group II but based upon the Agency's need would be placed in Group I. For my money,
I would place it in Group II and pay both for achievement and maintenance - based
on the difficulty of the language rather than to try to go back and forth as to
what the Agency needs most.
MR. BAIRD: Red, as I say, my recommendation is based primarily on how the
DD/P and DDT representatives feel about this, because I thought their reasons should
25X1 A9Abe given the most
25X1A9A M,
25X1 quote out of the missing
to which you have just spoken, is the
following: The group in which the language is classified for award purpose: (1)
for award purposes, all languages are arranged in groups for which corresponding
monetary values are designated; (2) criteria governing the classification in any
group, namely, Agency need and the comparative difficulty of the language. Since
Agency need is a changing and not a constant factor, it is possible and probable
certain languages may be added or shifted from one group to another. But initially
the languages for which awards will be authorized are indicated inI Ithe 25X1
one we are reviewing now.
We have a practical problem within DD/P, in addition to the Office
of Training's problem, in administering the award Program in groups. We all agree
we need groups. The practical problem arises from two considerations: one, that if
you wanted to argue precisely where each language belongs in terms of difficulty,
this would turn out to be a long, very long argument, in which all those who wanted
to study a language which they found difficult, would participate. We need a modi-
fying factor in here which allows us to terminate this argument, to say, "You are
quite right, but the Agency doesn't need it quite as badly." No. 2, we need a modi-
fying factor for another reason: to answer your question precisely, Greek was placed
25X1A9A in Group I because
do you want to speak to this?
First of all, the language which I would like to
didntt need that many Greek speakers. It's a
known fact that the Greek community in the United States has maintained its culture
more than any other. We have in the Agency a sizeable number of people of Greek
origin who know the language very well, as against other second-generation personnel
who have lost their connection with the language. We certainly have more people who
know Greek well than we have people who know Turkish well, and we need Turkish more
29
Approved For Release 2003/01/21;,.-,CM AilP80-01826R000800040022-0
 Approved For W ease 2003/01/27: CIA-RDP80-01826F O 0800040022-0
than we need Greek, although perhaps in terms of difficulty the two languages are
25X1A9Acomparable. Now
does want to encourage people to take up Greek,
but not to that extent. Now in order to allow us to juggle these things--and I
think we can give you requirements, although they will always be imperfect, but in
order to allow us to juggle these things we need to have a device which at first
glance may appear arbitrary but at second will appear awfully practical. That is
the reasoning.
MR. STEWART: Well, if I may make an observation--knowing very little
about languages myself--the only obvious flaw in your grouping is the placement of
Greek in language Group I, and unless Hugh feels he would be embarrassed by riches,
in order to make this appear consistent and to. avoid arguments and questions arising
I think if you were to have your groupings approximately in accordance with your
different levels of difficulty, and then not argue about it--I mean, these group-
ings are set up by the Career Council, but to say we did it because of difficulty
of learning the language or because of Agency needs, seems to me to be quite un-
necessary. Just say "the Career Council has decided these languages will be
Group I, these will be Group II, and these will be Group III."
COLONEL WHITE: That is a good point.
25X1A9A MR.
One can, of course, leave out the argumentation entirely.
That is something Colonel Baird thought would be inadvisable. I would draw your
attention to other imperfections. If Greek belongs in Group II there isn't any
question that Rumanian belongs in Group I--it's a snap, but we need it.
25X1A9A MR, II Weren't we advised by our technical expert that Rumanian
belongs in Group I? I understood Greek was the only language out of position.
25X1A9A
That depends on your expert. Icelandic. is considered
in Group I by some people, and you talk to another expert and he tells you it
should be in Group II.
25X1A9A
The Dutch all speak English and French, but nobody
can speak Dutch. L Laughter]
COLONEL WHITE: I sure am the last person to ask which groups they belong
in. But as long as you have an uneven number you can take a vote and arrive at
something which would stand up - kind of, but to say what the Agency's needs are in
Greek--if it's a firm requirement then it's the first one we have ever had. But no
matter how many disagreements you have, you can appoint a Committee to decide which
languages are the most difficult, but I defy you to defend the Agency's need.
30
Approved For Release 2003/01/271,-' CL-Df 80-01826R000800040022-0
 Approved For Fase 2003/01/27: CIA-RDP80-018260800040022-0
25X1A9A
I Itl1 bet the Agency's greatest need is in French.
MR. STEWART: That certainly was my experience.
MR. BAIRD: I don't agree with you, Red. I think the criterion for the
award - that the needs of the Agency ought to be the primary consideration.
COLONEL WHITE: But my understanding of the Director's desire is to have
people learn languages - to develop a big reservoir of language competence so that
when we have an unforeseen requirement we can punch a button and out will roll some
people who have the language competence and we_KNOW they have it, so we can put them
to work tomorrow. And there's no way--it's like any other requirement - take in the
Logistics field or Communications, if you try to ask the people today, "What are
your requirements?" - they give you their best estimates but they simply can't fore-
see events that are going to come up 6 or 12 or 18 months from now.
MR. BAIRD: It will always be like that, but you have two types of require-
ments: you have the current operational requirement - that is current and you see it,
it is right in front of you; and then your long-range requirement, and it is to that
which I hope we will add 30 or 1+O languages - that is the long-range requirement
business, which is different from the current operational requirement.
COLONEL WHITE: That is what I am afraid of, that Hugh is looking at his
current operational requirement.
MR. STEWART: I think so.
Let me just make a point, Walter. You have a reservoir of Greek-
speaking, to be sure, but I think even you would admit it would be useful to have
people who are not ethnic Greek who can also speak Greek. But take a young fellow,
25X1A6A
like one of Matt's JOT's, who would like very much to go to because it's an
exciting and interesting station, who, however, knows he can get by with French,
which would be equally useful in subsequent tours - there's no question about it,
for this much money he is going to learn French. You are not placing your reward in
relationship to effort. 25X1A6A
25X1A9A Mn. II Chances are Hugh wouldn't send him to l n that situation.
25X1A9A
COLONEL WHITE: I admit my approach is a shot gun approach, but I think
it's practical.
Approved For Release 2003/01/2 '( 1 P80-018268000800040022-0
 Approved For Release 2003/01/27 : CIA-RDP80-01826RO 0800040022-0
L OA]P P MR.I I Aren't we talking about something which really isn't in-
herent in this notice? The very title of the notice says: "Classification of
Languages for Award Purposes" - for Award Purposes. Now it doesn't matter whether
it's need or effort, it's classified "for Award Purposes." So it seems to me we
can talk all day about need and effort, but that is not the purpose of the notice.
25X1A9A
It says this notice and revisions thereto, and I
just assumed there would be revisions from. time to time shifting these things.
25X1A9A
I went along with the DD/P in principle to have need
as one of the criteria, along with the difficulty of the language, on the books,
which gives Matt and the Committee, who after all will pass on and make revisions
as this goes on, the leeway to use need if they want to. I don't visualize that
it is going to complicate things here to any extent, but it is a handle for the
Committee to use in the future if there seems to be a real purpose behind it. That
was why I thought it was useful to have it on the books as it presently is. I think
perhaps we made a mistake in moving Greek -.I think we have highlighted a point here
all out of proportion.
25X1A9A MR.
25X1
25X1
I was going to respond, first, to Rua's point. The reason
it is important is that
we cite that this list is done in accord-
so although we are talking about a conclusion here, it there-
fore is pertinent to discuss it at this time and perhaps come to a conclusion.
The essential problem seems to me to be characterized in this way: we have a list
here of 40 languages out of approximately 96 or 107, depending on who is your
source. We have selected 40 of that number which we have recognized as having an
Agency need, and in recognizing that need we propose to pay money, but for the
other 60 languages--or whatever the number is--we recognize no need and we pay no
money. Therefore this matter of need is implicitly recognized in the proposal to
pay at all. Now, to go further and to say that we are prepared to introduce the
question of degree of need--not its presence or absence but the question of whether
there is a little bit of need or a whole lot of need--as we discussed this after-
noon, our lack of knowledge about those facts goes far beyond our ability to ad-
minister prudently and wisely at this time. Sometime in the future I think we
might know those additional things. But it seems to me now, as Colonel White has
suggested, that we know for a fact that we need Greek, but that is about all we can
really know. We can't know with certainty that we need Greek only a little bit.
32
Approved For Release 2003/01/27; l-, *R[IP80-01826R000800040022-0
 25X1 Approved For Release 2003/01/27 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000800040022-0
Approved For Release 2003/01/27 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000800040022-0
 Approved For Rase 2003/01/27 : CIA-RDP80-01826R0000800040022-0
COLONEL WHITE.: There is at least one of us who wouldn't buy Greek in
Group I right now. So even if your motion were approved--in bringing things to
this Council there's no point in bringing them if the Council isn't going to offer
some criticisms and suggestions.
MR. BAIRD: For a point of clarity there, it seems to me the Committee is
advisory to me. If anybody reports to this Council, I would bring those matters to
the Council.
I'd like to add to this that I would recommend either way here. I
have recommended that the Council accept this as it is written. I would accept the
Council's decision gladly to omit Greek from I and place it back in II.
25X1A9A MR. I iSo do I. I don't think it's that important.
To tie up the Committee's freedom of action in having to
25X1A9A MR.
determine things in accordance with very rigid or debatable, arguable criteria, that
is the problem involved, not necessarily the position of Greek or any others.
MR. STEWART: I think a matter of principle has been raised as to whether
we base our awards on difficulty or on need. I would suggest that we formulate a
statement, which would be guidance to Matt and to the Committee, that difficulty of
learning a language will be the basis upon which placement of languages in one group
or another will be made, as a general matter. So that allows for adjustments and
other considerations.
MR. BAIBD: The groupings made on difficulty, in my humble opinion, should
be the basis on which you arrive at the monetary award. But the monetary award,
again, would be based on Agency need.
25X1A9A COLONEL WHITE: I think Gordon stated it very well, and I think it ties
into expose in that you have considered need.
MR. STEWART.- I would also like to suggest that in paragraph 2--or possib-
ly adding a paragraph 3 here--we have a mechanism established for introducing other
languages into the award category without having to revise the notice. Thus, for
example, when one of the Deputy Directors says that he needs a certain language
and has a candidate who could learn it, we can establish that it is a I, II or III
category--but that would be only a one shot thing, let's say just one man or a
couple of men, so that without revising the notice you can make awards.
25X1A9A
It seems to me you have a good measure of control
here, because if you get too many people speaking Greek, then you can say that as
34
Approved For Release 2003/01/2 yCJA-RDP80-01826R000800040022-0
 Approved For Release 2003/01/27 : CIA-RDP80-01826R00.0800040022-0
14W MW
of such and such a date there is no award on that anymore.
25X1A9A
We discussed that in the Committee, Gordon, and the
Committee agreed there might be one shot cases where security reasons would enter
into it, etc., and those decisions could be made and the Committee and Matt would
say, "We will award this fellow."
MR. STEWART: I think we should have this fact in the notice, so that
people won't be writing in long letters saying, "Can we possibly have this or that
added to your list" - and then a lot of machinery going into motion--
COLONEL WHITE: A. statement to the effect that in exceptional cases the
Director of Training may approve languages not on this list. That's all you need.
MR. S.TEWART: Well, then, is this notice as revised, acceptable?
25X1A9A
It is to me.
MR. BAIRD: It is to me.
MR. STEWART: Fine.
Now let's go on to the next item: Self-Evaluation of Language
Proficiency. Is there any discussion on this paper?
25X1A9A
I think it is a very good one.
25X1A9A
I subscribe to what Dick Helms has already said.
MR. STEWART: I do, too. It's excellent.
Then if that is acceptable, let's go back to item 2, which is the
Biographic Profile.
MR. BAIRD: Do you want the Language Committee to remain?
MR. STEWART: I think not.
Thank you, very much.
left the meeting . . . 25X1A9A
MR. STEWART: I have only one comment on this notice. In paragraph 4
[readingJ: "Emphasis will be placed first on the preparation of Profiles for
personnel at the GS-11 level." I merely question whether that is necessary, since
Personnel and the various operating elements of the Agency are going to get to-
gether to introduce this Program and it may be that someone might need to start
with the GS-4's.
25X1A9A MR.
The purpose of this is to avoid hundreds of telephone calls,
"When am I going
to get my Profile?"
CO1'ANEL WHITE: And at a meeting several months ago it was generally
35
Approved For Release 2003/01/27' PZP80-01826ROO0800040022-0
 Approved For Release 2003/01/27 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000800040022-0
agreed here at the Council that that classification was the level which had not gotten
so far along that you couldn't do some career planning for them, and that the others
weren't yet hurting--
MR. STEWART: It's in step with the career planning.
25X1A9A
25X1A9A
Profile form is referred to i Would it be desirable to include2 5X1
mention of that somewhere in this notice?
25X1A9A
We propose to attach to the notice the new form.
25X1A9A
This won't go to the field. The Profile won't go to the
this number - Form 1080 - is a standard form used throughout Government, and it's
for transferring funds from one agency to another.
25X1A9A MR.
25X1A9A
And all the competitive promotion was in there.
Could I make a very minor suggestion here? The Biographic
We will get Forms Control to give us a new number, then.
Dick asked me to bring up a request for a revision of the
second sentence in paragraph 2, as follows:
"It is designed for use in headquarters by supervisors,
operating officials and Career Services in formulating and
implementing decisions concerning the utilization and
development of the individual. It is not intended that the
use of the Biographic Profile will be a substitute for the
review of other available records whenever a more detailed
analysis of an employee's work history is desirable."
25X1A9A
that change would be helpful to the people who are getting the
Profiles. They would know this isn't the sole criterion.
25X1A9A MR.
field.
25X1A9A
at home.
25X1A9A MR.
25X1A9A MR.
Did you see my comment on this, Colonel White--that
I would buy that. I think that would be helpful
My remark is still applicable to the people here
Would you read that statement again, Walter?
"It is designed for use in headquarters by supervisors,
operating officials and Career Services in formulating and implementing decisions
concerning the utilization and development of the individual. It is not intended
that the use of the Biographic Profile will be a substitute for the review of
36
Approved For Release 2003/01/27 -1A t
80-01826R000800040022-0
Lfr
 Approved For Rele
20 /01/27 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000800040022-0
17
other available records whenever a more detailed analysis of an employee's work
history is desirable."
COLONEL WHITE: The only thought that flashed through my mind was just
this: that I think we want to move, in the Agency, in the direction of having
Personnel Files more inaccessible to everybody than they are at the moment. They
are so accessible at the moment that too many people find out too many things that
are more or less of a personal nature, in the File. On the other hand, we are try-
ing to make a conscientious effort to move in that direction and had hoped that by
and large the Biographic Profile would eliminate secretaries, administrative offi-
cers and supervisors generally from opportunity of thumbing through Mr. Jones' File.
This is not inconsistent with that, but it could be so interpreted.
25X1A9A MR. The second part of our sentence as it reads now was de
signed to take care of the need for reviewing the entire file when necessary. I
think these two things are doing the same thing but the emphasis is slightly
different. It is my hope on the Biographic Profile that it will reduce the traffic
on Personnel Folders. I am a little worried that this wording of the DD/P's does
away with part of that drive to--
COLONEL. WHITE: This is a real thing. This feeling is so widespread that
people hesitate to put an admonition into the Official Personnel Folder for fear it
will get advertised by people seeing the Folder that really have no business seeing
25X1A9A
I may have missed the point, but I don't see this language
does more than this phrase that is here now.
COLONEL WHITE: I really don't either, Walter. We are in agreement on
the point, but if we over-emphasize the availability of the Personnel File we sort
of defeat the other purpose of trying to protect the privacy of the File.
MR. STEWART: It's very hard to put what I think is the intent here into
language which would not somehow or other seem discriminatory, but what we are
aiming at in the long run is to restrict the use of Personnel Files to responsible
officials of the Agency and at the same time make available to junior officials,
where it would be very useful as to whether this fellow fits here or there, a device
in a form that is perfectly all right. But what is encountered in placement so
often is the resistance that is developed at lower levels in a branch or somewhere
as a result of everybody going through a File and having gotten together and all
of them deciding - "this fellow must be pretty terrible" - because of an exaggerated
37
Approved For Release I'1P80-01.8
` ~B t 00 1 IA L
 Approved For W ease / MT11T RDP80-001826 0 0800040022-0
wording used by one rater at sometime in the past. And that is the problem we have
in the Selection Board, and have had quite continuously - that people get scared
when they see someone use a bad word about an individual, and nothing good could
ever be said about him from there on.
25X1A9A
"need to know basis." I think perhaps that ought to be added.
MR. STEWART: Neither this wording nor the other one hits the point,
really. That is what we want to say, but the point is whether the Council wants to
determine now that we want to restrict Files to certain individuals, and we can only
do that after the Biographic Profiles have become effective.
25X1A9A
And that will be a good year from now.
Mr. Baird left the meeting . . .
MR. STEWART: When we are over the hump then we can start our restrictions.
I think possibly I would feel that either way of expressing it at the present time
would be all right. And in the future the way to restrict the circulation of
official files would be by another notice - don't you think so?
COLONEL WHITE: Yes.
25X1A9A MR.
This as written doesn't say anything about the
I don't think it matters much one way or the other.
MR. STEWART: Would you re-read. the wording Dick suggests? Just the
25X1A9A MR.
"It is not intended that the use of the Biographic Profile
will be a substitute for the review of other available records whenever a more
detailed analysis of an employee's work history is desirable."
25X1A9A MR- It is unnecessary to say that.
25X1A9A I thought it would be useful for this reason: the
man who looks at that Profile to see whether or not it is correct, if he thinks
this is going to be the main instrument governing his career he's going to look
at it very, very carefully, and there's going to be a lot of correspondence about
it, saying "No, this isn't right" - and fly specking and nitpicking. But if he
knows this is only one part of everything in his file, his commendations and all
that sort of thing, he will relax a. little bit.
MR. STEWART: For that reason I would go along with this wording that
Dick has suggested. And then at a later date place what restrictions we need to
place, because this doesn't say "review by whom?" - the question, review by whom,
38
Approved For Release 2003/01/27 ' ' 33 y] 0-01826R000800040022-0
C I FIDTIL
 Approved For ueastfIfT lcT O kE26 0800040022-0
is the one we want to get at.
COLONEL WHITE: It's all right with me.
MR. STEWART: Any other comment?
25X1A9A MR.
25X1A9A
You will adopt the wording of the DD/P, is that it?
MR. STEWART: Yes, if that is all right.
Any other comments? Is there a motion to adopt the Biographic
So move.
. . . This motion was then seconded and passed . . .
MR. STEWART: The meeting is adjourned.
. . . The meeting adjourned at 4:45 p.m. . . .
39
Approved For Release 2003/01/27
lea