MINUTES OF EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING, 12 DECEMBER 1980: LONG-RANGE PLANNING, REVIEW AND DECISIONS (U)

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP84-00933R000200160001-4
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 3
• Document Creation Date: December 16, 2016
• Document Release Date: June 8, 2005
• Sequence Number: 1
• Publication Date: January 9, 1981
• Content Type: MF

25X1 A
25X1
S E C R E T
81-900
1
EXCOM
Approved For Release- 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP84-009000200160001-4
9 January 1981
MEMORANDUM FOR: Executive Committee Members
FROM
Long-Range Planning, Review and Decisions (U)
1. The Executive Committee met on 12 December 1980 to review
and evaluate its first annual long-range planning exercise. Partici-
pants.included the DCI, DDCI, and Messrs. McMahon (DDO); Lipton (Compt.);
Hinman (DD/NFAC); Ware (D/EEO); Briggs (IG); Hart
Taylor (ADDS&T);
(ADDA); Stein.(ADDO); (D/Compt.); and Silver (GC). (U)
20 In reviewing the Executive Committee Staff's draft summary
report and recommendations on long-range planning, Mr. Carlucci
suggested that the Committee focus on lessons learned, the process
per se, and the resulting proposed guidance for the Comptroller. The
Committee concurred with the summary of major problem areas that
had been identified in the long-range planning issue papers: a
proliferation of consumer demands for intelligence on a growing number
of topics; the need for large capital improvements in vital support
areas
3. Mr. Lipton initiated a discussion on the recommendation
that a capital project development budget be devised to accommodate
the large capital improvements mentioned above. Mr. Carlucci did
not think such a budget would be compatible with, the OMB and
Congressional budget processes. Mr. Lipton noted that: in contrast
to the last 10 years of shrinking Agency budgets, he expected a
more supportive environment during the next few years for growth,
which could accommodate capital improvements. Reviewing the four
main requirements for large capital investments -- SAFE, the NPIC
upgrade, a new building, and modernization of the communications
system -- Mr. Taylor noted that the first two had been accommodated
in the CIA Program, and there was no reason not to move forward
now on the latter two. Later in the meeting suggested
that what was needed was an improved capital development planning
process. Mr. Carlucci asked Mr. Lipton to draft a memorandum
from the DDCI to the transition team outlining the four capital
investment projects listed above and to lead a study in the next
90 days to provide such a capital planning process. (S)
4. In reviewing the "Implications For Intelligence" section
of the report on the planning exercise (pp. 8-9), Mr. Taylor noted
the absence of analysis of the problem of coping with the greatly
Approved For Release 2005/06/2?: (PA-1qDft4b0933R000
:1 1
SA DDCI
2 1 A
Minutes of Executive Committee Meeting, 12 December 1980:
25X1
25X1 A
25X1
 2 A
Approved For Release 2005/0&22~ CFi4-F PI 4-0 93 000200160001=4
increaseo data that will be available from the new collection
systems. said that this had been an identified planning
issue but NFAC had not been able to produce an issue paper on
intelligence production. Mr. Carlucci suggested that the final
Executive Committee planning report elaborate on the implications
of the forecasted trends for intelligence production and that NFAC
move ahead in studying the issues. (S)
25X1
5. The Committee then discussed how the expanding future
needs identified in the planning issue papers would be affected
by projected budgets based on two assumptions -- no growth versus
high growth. Mr. Lipton thought the budget implications
in the draft final report on planning were exaggeratedd
explained that they were based on a factual analysis of the ten
planning papers and were rough estimates to generally illustrate
the upper limits of the problems being addressed. After some
discussion, the Committee agreed that a generalized order of
magnitude of estimated resources required. to meet the major
needs outlined in the issue papers was an appropriate and
necessary part of the planning roject. The Committee agreed
that an approximate increase in the FY-1983 program
was necessary to address seriously the long-range issues identified
in the planning process. (S)
2,1'.
25X1
Mr. Carlucci then characterized the failure of most of the issue
papers to identify activities/programs that could be eliminated
to free resources for new initiatives as a shortcoming that should be
addressed in the next cycle of the planning process. (S)
7. The DCI led a discussion regarding the serious problem of
attaining an appropriate balance between current intelligence
reporting and in-depth research. He also noted the need for initiatives
in new analytic techniques. (U)
25X1
8. Regarding the proposed FY-83 planning guidance to the
Comptroller (Tab B), Mr. Lipton said that he and Mr. Wortman agreed
that in the next budget cycle the Agency should focus on obtaining
funds for modernizing its communications system. They did not
think, however, that a Community study of communications needs
would be appropriate at this time. The Committee concurred that
the Agency should focus internally on this issue. (C)
9. Revisiting the concept of a capital development budget,
Mr. Carlucci agreed with suggestion regarding a
capital development planning process and requested that such a
process be highlighted in the next budget cycle. After discussing
recommendations a-c under intelligence coverage (Tab B, p. 2),
Approved For Release 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP84-00933R000200160001-4
S E C R E T
 S E C R E T
Approved'FoRelease 2005/06/22 : CIA-RDP847009 8000200160001-4
the Committee agreed that the entire final report: on the planning
exercise should be considered as guidance to the Comptroller
for the FY-1983 CLAP. The FY-1983 CLAP should include an analysis
of how the ZBB decision packages track with the issues surfaced
during this first cycle of the planning process. (U)
10. The pros and cons of a. top-down versus bottom-up planning
process were discussed. The latter was considered preferable in
a number of areas: It does not require a large central staff
that would reduce line participation; it permits the line to solve
problems as they are discovered and move up only those they can not
solve; and it generates productive internal dialogue. The Committee
agreed that. it should retain responsibility for the Agency-level
planning process and that the Executive Committee Staff should
continue to provide, the required staff support. (U)
11. In evaluating the planning process to date, the Committee
identified the following shortcomings: The planning issue papers did
not provide a comprehensive view of the Agency; the Executive Committee
discussions of the issues were somewhat shallow; and the schedule
was too tight. On the positive side, the Committee thought this first
round of the planning process made significant progress in Agency-
level planning; produced some excellent issue papers; generated
good internal dialogue in the line components, 'both within and
among directorates; apprised. senior managers of broad Agency-wide
problems; and permitted appropriate participation from both line
and staff elements. Suggestions for improvements included starting
the process earlier and pacing it better; including an evaluation
function; and the possibility of tying major decisions made into
the goals program. The Committee agreed that this first year's
process was valuable and should be continued in 1981 with improvements
as discussed. Mr. Carlucci noted that the revised planning issue
papers could be circulated to the Committee for review, precluding
the need for an additional session. The meeting was adjourned. (AIUO)
25X1 A
Approved For Release 2005/06$22 E CIA-RJDP$4-0t933R000200160001-4