DDI COMMENT ON REPORT OF IG SURVEY OF OER
Document Type:
Collection:
Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST):
CIA-RDP80B01086A000900050001-8
Release Decision:
RIPPUB
Original Classification:
S
Document Page Count:
4
Document Creation Date:
December 9, 2016
Document Release Date:
June 20, 2001
Sequence Number:
1
Case Number:
Publication Date:
March 29, 1973
Content Type:
MF
File:
Attachment | Size |
---|---|
![]() | 245.71 KB |
Body:
Approved I OQ~/0 /1* ;' P
09000500
2 9 1973
MWAORA iDUM FOR : Executive Secretary, CIA Management Con ittee
SUBJECT : DDI Comment on Report of IG Survey of OER
1. The DDI comment on the report of the IG survey of OER is
completely responsive, both in terms of the general discussion of
questions that did not result in formal recommendations and in the
response to the two formal proposals that were made.
2. The new practice of preparing typescript reports of
research, without subjecting the paper to the detailed review
procedure for publication, should materially reduce the workload
on the production machinery of the office. There is nothing wrong
in CER doing research for its own reference --- writing its own
reference library in a sense. Many complex economic problems take
considerable time to research, and if certain work has been done in
anticipation of requirements, it will strengthen the responsiveness
of the office under the tighter deadlines that characterize much of
the work that OER now does for its customers.
3. We note particularly the response to Recommendation No. 2.
We realize the difficulty in developing reliable and useful evalua-
tions from readers of the Agency's intelligence production. Our
suggestion of an organized program of selective elicitation from
consumers derived, In part, from the existence of OER's network of
contacts in the community. The stated purpose of using this re-
source for this purpose is what we had in mind.
(Sioued) William V. Brow
William V. Broe
Inspector General
~ ~ ~ - .. 6 00050001-8
8
Approved For Release 2001/0$114 :~i=b~
Approved For se 2001/0 '14 .. RDP80B01086I 9000
~DDI-3/O-7
MEMORANDUM FOR: Executive Secretary
CIA Management Committee
SUBJECT IG Survey of OER
1. I have reviewed the IG Survey of OER and am, quite
naturally, very pleased by such a favorable report. The Survey
team did a very thorough job in reviewing OER's operations.
Their report is lucid, well written and shows a good understanding
of what OER is all about and how it operates.- -The Survey's
recommendations--both formal and informal--are well taken
and focus on issues about which both the Director; OER, and
I are aware and are taking corrective action. Before commenting
on the Survey's formal recommendations, I would like to make
some general comments on points raised by the IG team.
2. The IG Survey quite rightly made a strong point of
the poor physical working conditions in OER. The crowding of
analysts and the paucity of working space are regrettable and
have a perverse effect on morale and the efficiency of operations.
As you well know, this regrettable condition is not unique to
OER and the space problem remains a constant irritant among
our employees. In my initial sessions with Mr. Schlesinger,
I identified the space situation as one of our principal problems.
As soon as the IG Survey on space is completed, I would hope
that it will become a top priority matter for the Management
Committee to consider and to take effective action upon.
3. The review process in OER was also a problem on
which the IG Survey team focused. I agree that the review
process had been overly encumbered by unnecessary review
layers and, as such, a subject of legitimate complaint by the
dF 'uv
Approved For Release 2001/08Y~a_:?r6lA-RDP80B010
c:~,: a d try G
ar Wore) !
or..: ;.; i .;.~.,~:;,._, r.,?.crt dci.? yr ev.::nr)....._
Approved For Ruse 2001/08/DP80B01086A,
_W0900050001-8
analysts. I do not believe that the review process has had a
double standard. The high priority project obviously passes
through the system much more quickly. This is not only
because of externally imposed deadlines, but also because the
analysts assigned to such projects are our most responsive,
substantively skilled and able writers. Given the rapid pace
of OER daily activities, I cannot subscribe to the view that
routine papers are being over-edited or over-reviewed simply
because the reviewer has time on his hands. I would suspect
that the amount of review and editing required for a given report
is proportionate to the extent to which the draft is deficient in
research or analysis.
4. In any event I believe that recent measures will
eliminate most of the analysts' complaints about the review
process. OER's recent reorganization has reduced the number
of organizational levels through which a draft must pass. In
addition, the Director, OER, has recently initiated a new system
of monthly and quarterly planning of OER production designed to
ensure, among other things, that both analyst and supervisor
understand and agree on the purpose and scope of each project.
These procedures have already reduced markedly the number
of projects that have to be substantially redone during the later
stages of the review process.
5. Furthermore, in response to the DCI's instruction
to reduce the number of publications, I have recently formulated
new guidelines for the production of finished intelligence in the
Intelligence Directorate. These guidelines will mean that a
substantial part of OER production will be produced in typescript
form and disseminated upon request only. Such projects obviously
will require far less editing and review than those projects which
must meet the higher standards required for official Agency
publications. By carefully delineating the types of projects that
will not be published and by tailoring our product to specific
audiences and consumers, it is clear to me that it would not be
practical to adopt a basic and uniform review standard, as
suggested in the Survey.
-2-
CRu
Approved For Release 2001/08/14: CIA-RDP80B01086A000900050001-8
Approver Release'14 : CIA-RDP80B?6A000900050001-8
in order to determine the degree to which they are
satisfied with present approaches to preparation of
reports, as a basis for modifying present practice
if so indicated. "
Comment
This recommendation touches on a problem which is
pertinent to the entire array of DDI production. It is an integral
part of the Agency's approach to "management by objective" and
the means by which we can measure the achievement of our
objectives. We are in the process of trying to devise a meaning-
ful method of evaluating our product. Such evaluation is particularly
difficult in an area where quantitative measurements are desired
for output that must be measured essentially in qualitative terms.
Informal systems of feedback from our customers have
so far not been reliable means of evaluating OER's, or any other
office's product. Customer responses become largely pro forma
or the customer is reluctant to give a negative response for fear
that the tap will be turned off. OER has tried to cope with this
situation by mounting a major effort to determine our customers'.
needs and, in concert with the customer, to decide on the best
production vehicle to meet these needs. Our new production
guidelines have chosen the Intelligence Brief, a highly personalized
and tailored document, as a means of being most responsive to the
policy makers' needs.
OER has also set up a wide network of contacts with staff
officers in the NSC, Treasury, the CIEP and the entire economic
community. Key OER personnel have been designated as the
principal contact points for specified policy level customers and
their immediate staff officers. I am hopeful that as these contacts
become more frequent that we will have considerable success in
eliciting informed reactions to and evaluations of the OER product.
EDWARD W. PROCTOR
Deputy Director for Intelligence.
cc: Inspector General
Approved For Release ZUgqM
: CIA-RDP80BO1086A000900050001-8
m2l