How Would You Boil Down Kent
1. How would you boil down Kent’s analytic doctrine in understandable terms for policymakers?
Kent explains in the document “Tensions in Analyst-Policymaker Relation” that there needs to be a relationship between the analyst and the policymaker. The policy-maker will criticize the analyst work to ensure that the evidence has been evaluated, the recommendations are not vague or biased and that alternative explanation and projections have been considered. He sums up the job of the analyst by stating “the mission of the intelligence analyst is to apply in-depth substance expertise, all-source information, and touch-minded tradecraft to produce assessments that provide distinctive value-added to policy client’ efforts to protect and advance US security interests.
2. How do the requirements of serving a national policymaker relate to your day-to-day activities with respect to delivering product to your superiors?
Although I wear many hats in my current role, one thing that is common is that I am expected to provide recommendations based on requirements gathering, having an understanding of what the threats and risks are to the environment as well as providing documentation for review. Many times I have to revise the information based on the recommendation of my boss, the PM, the review board who all act as policymakers.
Can you draw correlations? What is your most difficult task with respect to serving your ‘policymaker?’ What can you do to improve?
Based on my experiences the most difficult task I have is producing the best product due to lack of information. If my boss or the policy-maker that I am working with is expecting a deliverable based on various requirements, at times they provide limited data and they do not tend to share pertinent information that is necessary to produce a quality product.
My tasks becomes to try to communicate effectively with the policy-maker, what information is missing, and why it needs to be available to produce the right
Kent explains in the document “Tensions in Analyst-Policymaker Relation” that there needs to be a relationship between the analyst and the policymaker. The policy-maker will criticize the analyst work to ensure that the evidence has been evaluated, the recommendations are not vague or biased and that alternative explanation and projections have been considered. He sums up the job of the analyst by stating “the mission of the intelligence analyst is to apply in-depth substance expertise, all-source information, and touch-minded tradecraft to produce assessments that provide distinctive value-added to policy client’ efforts to protect and advance US security interests.
2. How do the requirements of serving a national policymaker relate to your day-to-day activities with respect to delivering product to your superiors?
Although I wear many hats in my current role, one thing that is common is that I am expected to provide recommendations based on requirements gathering, having an understanding of what the threats and risks are to the environment as well as providing documentation for review. Many times I have to revise the information based on the recommendation of my boss, the PM, the review board who all act as policymakers.
Can you draw correlations? What is your most difficult task with respect to serving your ‘policymaker?’ What can you do to improve?
Based on my experiences the most difficult task I have is producing the best product due to lack of information. If my boss or the policy-maker that I am working with is expecting a deliverable based on various requirements, at times they provide limited data and they do not tend to share pertinent information that is necessary to produce a quality product.
My tasks becomes to try to communicate effectively with the policy-maker, what information is missing, and why it needs to be available to produce the right