INITIAL THOUGHTS RE DIA MANPOWER AUDIT

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP83M00171R001200020006-7
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 5
• Document Creation Date: December 12, 2016
• Document Release Date: May 14, 2002
• Sequence Number: 6
• Publication Date: November 2, 1976
• Content Type: MF

Approved For Release 2002/08/21 CIA-RDP83M00171 R001200020006-7
2 November 1976
25X1A
25X1
MEMORANDUM FOR:
SUBJECT: Initial Thoughts re DIA Manpower Audit
1. Introduction
In order to provide us with some "strawman" talking
points for getting our review of the DIA manpower audit
underway and for talking to Mr. Wasaff 've prepared 25X1
this brief paper. It is based on a hurried reading of the
DIA report. Therefore, it is not definitive, by any means.
II. DIA's Audit Objectives
The stated objectives of the manpower audit are:
provide a means to review, analyze, and improve
the utilization of ... manpower;
- what manpower is doing;
how it is organized;
trace resources, efforts and processes by every
major substantive and support area in intelligence;
determine magnitude and balance of resources and
efforts in collection, processi:lg, analysis, and
dissemination;
separate and finitely measure the costs in manpower
and effort of management, coord'_nation, analysis and
support to determine if balance and benefits are
at the correct levels; and
DIA HAS NO OBJECTION TO DECLASSIFICATION AND
RELEASE.
Approved For Release 2002/08/21 : CIA-RDP83MOOl7 R001200020006-7 25X1
DIA review(s) completed.
 Approved ForRelease 2002/08/21 CIA F DR83M ?y~}0171 R001 200020006-7
-- look for deficiencies, if any, and appropriate
improvements in organization, functional align-
ments, manning, grade structure, military service
designations, career fields, civilian/military
mix, and layers of management.
III. General Comments on DIA Report
The DIA report, although it is the culmination of a
herculean effort, achieves few of the objectives set for the
audit. Som-e hurried comments on the study are:
- The report is opaque--impossible to determine what
data were used and are available for use by ICS;
judgments were made, but criteria are defined
vaguely and generally.
It is not clear where the audit fits in terms of
recent reorganizations and anticipated reorganizations
of the near future. The recommendations may or
may not be acted on as DIA's reorganization continues.
This raises question of validity of the audit.
Admittedly, the only approach the audit teams
could have taken was to take a slice of DIA at
this point in time. If study plans for anticipated
reorganization were not taken into consideration,
the audit might be a "paper chase" with no relationship
to DIA's future configuration.
The audit moves slots around within the organization,
but finds only 29 slots. Is this credible?
Since, in the main, reliance was placed upon
managers' perceptions of what individuals' functions
are (few analysts were probably interviewed) there
is a possibility that the actual functions/inter-
relationships are not reported.
The audit appears to proceed from the premise that
the functions currently performed (or performed in
the recent past) are optimal.
- The audit, at least on the surface, does not seem
to be based on function (collection, processing,
production, overhead) nor on number and type of
product.
Approved For Release 2002/08/21 CIA-14DP83M00171 R001200020006-7
 Approved For, Release 2002/08/21 _CIAR[QP83M10171 R001200020006-7
IV. Possible Approaches for ICS Review
In the review/validation of the DIA manpower audit, we
have basically three options:
a minimal approach in which we examine how the
audit: was conducted, review data collected in the
interviews, and summarize evaluatively the benefits
to be derived from implementation of the benefits--
a "rubber stamp";
A maximum approach in which we redesign the audit,
make an all-out data call from DIA and the audit
teams, and conic up with our own possibly competitive
recommendations; and
an in-between approach in which we make data calls
in strategically selected areas for product-manpower
related data, and functional distribution (overhead
vs. production), etc.
In terms of the amount of time available to complete
the review (approximately 60 work days, not counting holidays,
from now to 31 January) and thn ces that we can commit
, it is 29MA
clear that we cannot opt for t e maximal approach. There-
fore, the in-between approach, making selective data calls
from DIA, appears to be the best choice. (It doesn't seem
that contractual support will help on the DIA audit.)
I suggest, as.a strawman, that the following general
schedule be followed:
8 November - meet with DIA team leaders to get all
available data not in report
9-12 November - draft terms of reference, study, plan,
data requirements, formats, etc.
15-16 November - review plan with DIA
3 December - receive structured/arrayed. data from DIA
31 December - analysis and drafting of our review/valida-
tion report
Approved For Release 2002/08/21_::CIA-RDP83M00171R001200020006-7
 Approved ForRelease 2002/08/21 : CI YRD 4-3M00171 R001200020006-7
3-7.January - internal coordination
10.-21 January - DIA review
24-31 January - Modification/finalization of report and
final coordination.
V. Contract Objectives and Talking Points
In considering potential contractual support, I believe
our priority should be to obtain conceptual and methodological
support (and possibly participation in) future efforts to do
Community-wide audits. Time doesn't permit great help to be
provided for the DIA audit review. However, we might hope to
get advice on the approach, types of data, data arrays, and
mode of analysis for the DIA review. Any support we would get,
however de ends on how soon a contract could be let and how
quickly do fI ends
respond.
As talking points among ourselves and with the contractor,
I submit that future Community-wide audits (or for agencies)
should:
permit definition of acceptable levels of duplication
among agencies;
-- be input-output based;
-- be tied to type, priority, and volume of production;
-- permit inter- and intra-agency definition of balances
among collection, processing, production, and support;
-- address questions of job standards, qualifications/
training of staff members;
-- be based on both manpower and dollar costs;
address efficiencies (in management "layering,"
attrition/turnover in civilian and military
personnel, timelag to distribution (due to printing,
etc.) );
address questions of intra-agency fragmentation of
effort (e.g., dispersion of air defense analysis
in DIA across several organizational elements);
Approved For Release 2002/08/21 :ECIA- 83M00171 R001200020006-7
a
 Approved For Release 2002/08/21 : ,ClA-RDP83M00171 R001 200020006-7
address formal and informal Community interactions
(agency to agency; analyst to analyst);
reveal and evaluate potential benefits from new
organizational concepts (matrix management and
centers of excellence);
address problems of producer-user interface as an
information flow process;
delude Service production agencies;
provide definitions of optimal civilian/military
mixes and professional/non-professional ratios.
25X1A
Approved For Release 2002108/21 :,.CIA-RDP83M00171 R001200020006-7