90 likes | 198 Views
AQUAINT Scenarios and the Analyst Perspective (Lessons Learned from the Intelligence Community’s R&D Trenches). Lessons Learned from the R&D Trenches.
E N D
AQUAINT Scenarios and the Analyst Perspective (Lessons Learned from the Intelligence Community’s R&D Trenches)
Lessons Learned from the R&D Trenches • Researchers don’t have a clue about how analysts in the Intelligence Community do their jobs to include differences, similarities & challenges • The Intelligence Community (IC) has not done a good job of transmitting the complexity of the analysis function in a clear and structured manner to empower researchers
Lessons Learned from the R&D Trenches • Analysts at all levels (junior, senior, management) do not interact sufficiently with researchers to develop the “dance of change” needed to turn basic and applied science into tools and methodologies that add value to analysts at their desktop. • Neither the IC nor the research community consider the impact of changing technologies on the business processes until “too late”. Your technologies will change the paradigm of the methods we use to do our business today.
Lessons Learned from the R&D Trenches • The intelligence analysis functions won’t change but the methods will. • The technologies must deal with complexity and diversity of methods by different analysts with different missions. • Interaction between analysts and researchers is critical. Both groups must learn from each other and work together to define the future. SO …….
Scenario Exercise • Small group exercise • Two groups with multiple teams of 10-12 people. Teams randomly chosen. Each team has at least one person with analytic experience on the team • Group 1: “low hanging fruit” – what can Q&A technology do for analysts within 3 years • Group 2: “Shangri-la” - what can Q&A technology do for analysts within 7-10 years • 90 minutes to work on scenario • Informal presentation using any style - no more than 5 minutes long per group.
Group 1: “low hanging fruit” Q&A support within 3 years Team 1: Analyst Lead: Rick Castrop Wactlar Shanahan Moldovan Gottlieb Starr Illouz Lowe Soloman Voss Team 2: Analyst Lead: Dan Havrilla Bertolo Gershon Hatzivassiloglou NG Marcu Korelshy Louwerse Waisel Dale Team 3: Analyst Lead: Charles Clark Yang Pasca Croft Mardis Chaudrhi Irie Voorhees Adams Fromm
Group 1: “low hanging fruit” Q&A support within 3 years Team 4 Analyst Lead: Jay Peltz Gish Shefftel Martin Goodwin Feldman Culy Miller, G. Bebee Crowder Team 5: Analyst Lead: Bob Tarr/Anita Kulman Weischedel Manning Ogden Mitamura Jacobs Tong Berkowitz Team 6: (if necessary)
Group 2: “Shangri-la” Q&A support in 7-10 years Team 1: Analyst Lead: Jeff Juhnke McKeown Light Jenkins Sundheim Buss Hearst Berry Matthews Team 2: Analyst Lead: Rusty Butcher Nyberg Burger Harabigiu Wiebe Manning Strzalkowski Waldinger Scholtz Kelly Team 3: Analyst Lead: George Thompson Prager Corrado Cowie Witbrock Hauptmann Evans Hecht-Nielson
Group 2: “Shangri-la” Q&A support in 7-10 years Team 4: Analyst Lead: Joseph Mercurio Miller, S. Hirschman Krugler Pradhan Nirenberg Knight Puffenbarger Lehtola Team 5: Analyst Lead: Frank Hughes Hovy Fikes Caudill Badalemente Hobbs Kantor Ferrucci Maybury Dumais Harman Paul Team 6: (Modified Executive Committee) Analyst Lead: Kelcy Allwein/Carol Van Ess-Dykema Blair Ghiz Bundy Stewart Donelan Pomarede Prange