Distributed Intelligence Assessing the Strengths

Distributed Intelligence

Assessing the Strengths and Weaknesses of Distributed Homeland Security Intelligence Production

In assessing the strengths and weaknesses of a distributed homeland security intelligence production framework and supporting systems, the five phases of the intelligence cycle need to be taken into account at a local, regional, state, district and national level. Information needs across each of these jurisdictions vary significantly, as do their abilities to respond. What unifies the information and intelligence needs together of these diverse areas is the need for orchestrating planning, deterrence and incident responses across each of these jurisdictions (Anderson, Compton, Mason (2004) pp. 4, 5). The intent of this analysis is to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of having a distributed Homeland Security Intelligence Production Process and supporting systems.

Analysis of Strengths and Weaknesses of Distributed Security Intelligence Production

The strengths of creating a distributed security intelligence production framework and supporting systems include more precise capturing, classification and analysis of data across the five phases of the intelligence cycle specific to a given local, regional, state, district and national level. There is also the advantage of being able to budget the specific requirements and needs of homeland security intelligence production to the local level with much greater precision than has been accomplished at the federal level (Kinnersley, Shoulders (2007), pp. 11-12). There is also the advantage of continually improving the quality of information gathering, analysis and reporting that a more localized approach to capturing distributed security intelligence provides. Local, state and district approaches to capturing, classifying and analyzing intelligence have led to significant improvements in overall information quality and the performance of local homeland security operations. Using advanced techniques including Six Sigma to create a highly effective cycle of continual improvement is increasingly becoming commonplace (Stefanko (2009) p. 19). Six Sigma is also making it possible for local, regional, state, district and national organizations to find the gaps in intelligence that represent potential risk to national security as well. The analysis of chemical threats that have regional and state implications yet occur on a local level is a case in point (Kamalick (2006), pp. 22, 23).