Document Type: 
Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 
Release Decision: 
Original Classification: 
Document Page Count: 
Document Creation Date: 
December 12, 2016
Document Release Date: 
July 30, 1998
Sequence Number: 
Case Number: 
Publication Date: 
March 15, 1967
Content Type: 
PDF icon CIA-RDP85G00105R000100130024-4.pdf115.83 KB
Approved For Release r2002 . CIA-RDP85G00105R000100130024-4 15 March 1967 25X1A SUBJECT IG Survey on Requirements 1. I have reviewed your proposed DDI comments (dated 7FX1A1O March) on the report and agree with them in almost all respects. The presentation of the material in admirably concise and easily relatable to the basic report. The substance of the comments if adopted, would clearly increase our chances of bringing about the improvements we all seek in the requirements field. 2. Having also studied CGS's comments, I commend them to you for most serious consideration. The burden of making the system work bears so heavily upon CGS itself that we should, in my opinion, err on the side of going along with what Hitchcock believes he needs to bring it off. 3. My main concern has to do with the apparent inconsistency in the mission and mode of operation of the Collection Guidance Advisory Group. It is labeled an "advisory" group--and that is what it should be. In a number of cases, however, the discharge of management functions are made its responsibility. To varying degrees this applies to what is recommended in #6, #7, #8, #10-#12, #13, #24-#25. 4. It is not clear whose advisory group CGAG is. is it DDI? Is it C/CG*? Clearly it should be the latter's. 5. Rather than charge Chief CGS to take certain actions "in collaboration with the Collection Guidance Advisory Group," I would place the charge on Chief CGS alone, leaving it to him to decide when and how to use his own advisory group. 6. The exchange of personnel between PI Staff and CGS should be encouraged on the basis of a full two-year tour. This is not a substitute for dealing with the quite separate problem of holding period%eetings to discuss problems of mutual interest as provided under your revised #9. Both actions are needed, the first to educate, the second to operate. Approved For Release 20 A-RDP85G00105R000100130024-4 Approved For Release 2002/Q6/18 : CIA-RDP85G00105R000100130024-4 7. CGS and DCS should be directed to jointly recommend action for DDI consideration designed to short-circuit the manner in which human resource guidance in provided. If we start with the proposition that the normal route for a human resource requirement is (1) to ascertain if the information is already on hand, (2) then to exhaust DCS potential before (3) we levy the requirement on the more costly clandestine resources, perhaps we can operate more effectively if the management relationship between the HR element of CGS and DCS is more closely integrated--or even combined. 8. Another matter worth exploring is the desirability of separating the two essentially independent functions performed by CGS: (1) guiding collectors, and (2) supporting the CIA Member of USIB and USIB associated activities. This need not, however, be an issue in the present exercise, but would be a useful study conducted an part of the implementation of the report--deals more with the "how" than with the "what." 25X1A irec -o n e gence Support Approved For Release 2002/0sa sr8- : 'e A=ADP85G00105R000100130024-4