Back
About RSIS
Introduction
Building the Foundations
Welcome Message
Board of Governors
Staff Profiles
Executive Deputy Chairman’s Office
Dean’s Office
Management
Distinguished Fellows
Faculty and Research
Associate Research Fellows, Senior Analysts and Research Analysts
Visiting Fellows
Adjunct Fellows
Administrative Staff
Honours and Awards for RSIS Staff and Students
RSIS Endowment Fund
Endowed Professorships
Career Opportunities
Getting to RSIS
Research
Research Centres
Centre for Multilateralism Studies (CMS)
Centre for Non-Traditional Security Studies (NTS Centre)
Centre of Excellence for National Security
Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies (IDSS)
International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research (ICPVTR)
Research Programmes
National Security Studies Programme (NSSP)
Social Cohesion Research Programme (SCRP)
Studies in Inter-Religious Relations in Plural Societies (SRP) Programme
Other Research
Future Issues and Technology Cluster
Research@RSIS
Science and Technology Studies Programme (STSP) (2017-2020)
Graduate Education
Graduate Programmes Office
Exchange Partners and Programmes
How to Apply
Financial Assistance
Meet the Admissions Team: Information Sessions and other events
RSIS Alumni
Outreach
Global Networks
About Global Networks
RSIS Alumni
Executive Education
About Executive Education
SRP Executive Programme
Terrorism Analyst Training Course (TATC)
International Programmes
About International Programmes
Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior Military Officers (APPSMO)
Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior National Security Officers (APPSNO)
International Conference on Cohesive Societies (ICCS)
International Strategy Forum-Asia (ISF-Asia)
Publications
RSIS Publications
Annual Reviews
Books
Bulletins and Newsletters
RSIS Commentary Series
Counter Terrorist Trends and Analyses
Commemorative / Event Reports
Future Issues
IDSS Papers
Interreligious Relations
Monographs
NTS Insight
Policy Reports
Working Papers
External Publications
Authored Books
Journal Articles
Edited Books
Chapters in Edited Books
Policy Reports
Working Papers
Op-Eds
Glossary of Abbreviations
Policy-relevant Articles Given RSIS Award
RSIS Publications for the Year
External Publications for the Year
Media
Cohesive Societies
Sustainable Security
Other Resource Pages
News Releases
Speeches
Video/Audio Channel
External Podcasts
Events
Contact Us
S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies Think Tank and Graduate School Ponder The Improbable Since 1966
Nanyang Technological University Nanyang Technological University
  • About RSIS
      IntroductionBuilding the FoundationsWelcome MessageBoard of GovernorsHonours and Awards for RSIS Staff and StudentsRSIS Endowment FundEndowed ProfessorshipsCareer OpportunitiesGetting to RSIS
      Staff ProfilesExecutive Deputy Chairman’s OfficeDean’s OfficeManagementDistinguished FellowsFaculty and ResearchAssociate Research Fellows, Senior Analysts and Research AnalystsVisiting FellowsAdjunct FellowsAdministrative Staff
  • Research
      Research CentresCentre for Multilateralism Studies (CMS)Centre for Non-Traditional Security Studies (NTS Centre)Centre of Excellence for National SecurityInstitute of Defence and Strategic Studies (IDSS)International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research (ICPVTR)
      Research ProgrammesNational Security Studies Programme (NSSP)Social Cohesion Research Programme (SCRP)Studies in Inter-Religious Relations in Plural Societies (SRP) Programme
      Other ResearchFuture Issues and Technology ClusterResearch@RSISScience and Technology Studies Programme (STSP) (2017-2020)
  • Graduate Education
      Graduate Programmes OfficeExchange Partners and ProgrammesHow to ApplyFinancial AssistanceMeet the Admissions Team: Information Sessions and other eventsRSIS Alumni
  • Outreach
      Global NetworksAbout Global NetworksRSIS Alumni
      Executive EducationAbout Executive EducationSRP Executive ProgrammeTerrorism Analyst Training Course (TATC)
      International ProgrammesAbout International ProgrammesAsia-Pacific Programme for Senior Military Officers (APPSMO)Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior National Security Officers (APPSNO)International Conference on Cohesive Societies (ICCS)International Strategy Forum-Asia (ISF-Asia)
  • Publications
      RSIS PublicationsAnnual ReviewsBooksBulletins and NewslettersRSIS Commentary SeriesCounter Terrorist Trends and AnalysesCommemorative / Event ReportsFuture IssuesIDSS PapersInterreligious RelationsMonographsNTS InsightPolicy ReportsWorking Papers
      External PublicationsAuthored BooksJournal ArticlesEdited BooksChapters in Edited BooksPolicy ReportsWorking PapersOp-Eds
      Glossary of AbbreviationsPolicy-relevant Articles Given RSIS AwardRSIS Publications for the YearExternal Publications for the Year
  • Media
      Cohesive SocietiesSustainable SecurityOther Resource PagesNews ReleasesSpeechesVideo/Audio ChannelExternal Podcasts
  • Events
  • Contact Us
    • Connect with Us

      rsis.ntu
      rsis_ntu
      rsisntu
      rsisvideocast
      school/rsis-ntu
      rsis.sg
      rsissg
      RSIS
      RSS
      Subscribe to RSIS Publications
      Subscribe to RSIS Events

      Getting to RSIS

      Nanyang Technological University
      Block S4, Level B3,
      50 Nanyang Avenue,
      Singapore 639798

      Click here for direction to RSIS

      Get in Touch

    Connect
    Search
    • RSIS
    • Publication
    • RSIS Publications
    • CO06114 | The Future of Strategic Early Warning
    • Annual Reviews
    • Books
    • Bulletins and Newsletters
    • RSIS Commentary Series
    • Counter Terrorist Trends and Analyses
    • Commemorative / Event Reports
    • Future Issues
    • IDSS Papers
    • Interreligious Relations
    • Monographs
    • NTS Insight
    • Policy Reports
    • Working Papers

    CO06114 | The Future of Strategic Early Warning
    Tom Quiggin, Kumar Ramakrishna

    23 October 2006

    download pdf

    Commentary

    BY definition, strategic warning intelligence must be able to provide anticipatory assessments of future problems in order to avoid strategic surprise. Senior leaders must be well enough informed so that no one particular event, however catastrophic, does not overwhelm them and cripple their reactions. This is an increasingly difficult task which is getting more problematic as the complexity of the international environment grows.

    Good strategic early warning intelligence is also the key to a number of non-traditional areas of interest as well such as transport security, social resilience, supply chain management, criminal and health issues. Without anticipatory knowledge, all of these areas of policy interest are subject to disruption and shock.

    Requirements for good strategic early warning

    What are the requirements for good strategic early warning in the future? Perhaps the most critical requirement is to realize that intelligence is a much different function from the rest of government and it must be allowed to function as such. A Monday-to-Friday approach is not sufficient for strategic level analysts. Intelligence personnel must be deeply motivated and highly involved in their work. Their functions in their work must closely mirror their education and personnel interests. No degree of application of methods and process will suffice if the key personnel involved do not have the necessary backgrounds and interests.

    Strategic early warning cannot be reduced to a process like much of the rest of government. It is both dangerous and naïve to think that a machine or a bureaucratic organizational process will somehow produce a quality of intelligence that is greater than the quality of its producers. Current bureaucratic approaches to government management frequently involve the concept of breaking down a required function into a number of smaller tasks that can be carried out in a specialized manner by staff who have a minimal degree of training and responsibility. This sort of Fordist approach cannot work where broader generalist skills are required and longer term perspectives are necessary. Specialists — those with precise, narrowly defined tasks — are not generally capable of competently integrating scattered and seemingly unrelated bits of knowledge from a large number of different domains of interest. Without this all-important intelligence integration process, the strategic early warning system will not work.

    The quality of strategic early warning work also cannot be subjected to blunt quantitative measures such as numbers of reports, milestones or even so-called “key performance indicators”. The strategic early warning community must have its overall impact measured by one criterion: the extent to which its assessments actually add informational and analytical value to the national decision-making process. This requires a qualitative, rather than a quantitative, judgment by policy elites. The strategic intelligence community must thus be granted the authority and autonomy to best carry out its responsibilities free from artificially- imposed impediments created by the clumsy application of unresponsive bureaucratic norms.

    Valuing the Strategic Early Warning analyst

    In essence, if policymakers are serious about developing an effective strategic early warning capacity, much more than seeking out and relying on technological solutions, effective human resource development is crucial. This means hiring promising individuals and being prepared to develop and train them over a period of years. It takes five or seven years of initial training to produce a doctor or veterinarian, plus some years of experience after that. Arguably, given the increasingly complex security environment, the role of the strategic early warning analyst is at least as important as that of the veterinarian, so why not require the same level of training for this individual?

    More than that, the career paths of strategic intelligence analysts must be designed with the logic of continuity of trained, motivated expertise in mind. Endless rotations of analysts in and out of positions to ensure “smooth” manpower throughput in line with a Master Personnel Plan all too often results in creating amongst officers a short-term, risk-averse mentality that may be detrimental to the effectiveness of the overall strategic analysis process. In addition, analysts must feel assured that they can speak the truth without fear of adverse consequences. Being an intelligence analyst often means being the bearer of bad news or presenting views that run contrary to the intentions and views of powerful significant others. Shooting the messenger is an unfortunate reality in highly sclerotic, bureaucratized systems. If early warning analysts learn the hard way that unpopular assessments would land them in hot soup, it is unlikely in the extreme that they will develop either the interest or the capability to pick up on the “faint signals” that need to be put forward and understood in the face of change.

    Finally, in today’s uncertain, complex security context, strategic early warning analysts cannot afford the luxury of tunnel vision. Analysts increasingly need to move outside of government circles on a regular basis to deal with like-minded individuals in think tanks, industry and other parts of government. It is not outlandish to assert that most expertise and knowledge required for effective strategic early warning analysis now lie outside of government. Extra-governmental expertise therefore needs to be tapped and systematically engaged.

    Outlook

    The complexity and uncertainty that are the hallmarks of the current international environment appear likely to increase. Strategic early warning intelligence analysts across the globe must now provide effective anticipatory warnings on a range of issues involving transport security, social resilience, supply chain management, crime, health and other issues. In order to achieve this, the community must be able to break free from bureaucratic straight jackets, hire creative thinkers, train them for years, give them sufficient external exposure to global best practices in a range of domains, and then support them in the face of opposition from conservative, hide-bound elements that may linger in policy circles. To do anything less may well have fateful consequences for governments and nations.

    About the Authorspage3image1832

    Tom Quiggin is Senior Fellow and Coordinator of the Risk Assessment and Horizon Scanning Programme in the Centre of Excellence for National Security (CENS). Associate Professor Kumar Ramakrishna is Acting Head of CENS, a constituent unit of the Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies, Nanyang Technological University. 

    Categories: RSIS Commentary Series / International Politics and Security / Global

    Commentary

    BY definition, strategic warning intelligence must be able to provide anticipatory assessments of future problems in order to avoid strategic surprise. Senior leaders must be well enough informed so that no one particular event, however catastrophic, does not overwhelm them and cripple their reactions. This is an increasingly difficult task which is getting more problematic as the complexity of the international environment grows.

    Good strategic early warning intelligence is also the key to a number of non-traditional areas of interest as well such as transport security, social resilience, supply chain management, criminal and health issues. Without anticipatory knowledge, all of these areas of policy interest are subject to disruption and shock.

    Requirements for good strategic early warning

    What are the requirements for good strategic early warning in the future? Perhaps the most critical requirement is to realize that intelligence is a much different function from the rest of government and it must be allowed to function as such. A Monday-to-Friday approach is not sufficient for strategic level analysts. Intelligence personnel must be deeply motivated and highly involved in their work. Their functions in their work must closely mirror their education and personnel interests. No degree of application of methods and process will suffice if the key personnel involved do not have the necessary backgrounds and interests.

    Strategic early warning cannot be reduced to a process like much of the rest of government. It is both dangerous and naïve to think that a machine or a bureaucratic organizational process will somehow produce a quality of intelligence that is greater than the quality of its producers. Current bureaucratic approaches to government management frequently involve the concept of breaking down a required function into a number of smaller tasks that can be carried out in a specialized manner by staff who have a minimal degree of training and responsibility. This sort of Fordist approach cannot work where broader generalist skills are required and longer term perspectives are necessary. Specialists — those with precise, narrowly defined tasks — are not generally capable of competently integrating scattered and seemingly unrelated bits of knowledge from a large number of different domains of interest. Without this all-important intelligence integration process, the strategic early warning system will not work.

    The quality of strategic early warning work also cannot be subjected to blunt quantitative measures such as numbers of reports, milestones or even so-called “key performance indicators”. The strategic early warning community must have its overall impact measured by one criterion: the extent to which its assessments actually add informational and analytical value to the national decision-making process. This requires a qualitative, rather than a quantitative, judgment by policy elites. The strategic intelligence community must thus be granted the authority and autonomy to best carry out its responsibilities free from artificially- imposed impediments created by the clumsy application of unresponsive bureaucratic norms.

    Valuing the Strategic Early Warning analyst

    In essence, if policymakers are serious about developing an effective strategic early warning capacity, much more than seeking out and relying on technological solutions, effective human resource development is crucial. This means hiring promising individuals and being prepared to develop and train them over a period of years. It takes five or seven years of initial training to produce a doctor or veterinarian, plus some years of experience after that. Arguably, given the increasingly complex security environment, the role of the strategic early warning analyst is at least as important as that of the veterinarian, so why not require the same level of training for this individual?

    More than that, the career paths of strategic intelligence analysts must be designed with the logic of continuity of trained, motivated expertise in mind. Endless rotations of analysts in and out of positions to ensure “smooth” manpower throughput in line with a Master Personnel Plan all too often results in creating amongst officers a short-term, risk-averse mentality that may be detrimental to the effectiveness of the overall strategic analysis process. In addition, analysts must feel assured that they can speak the truth without fear of adverse consequences. Being an intelligence analyst often means being the bearer of bad news or presenting views that run contrary to the intentions and views of powerful significant others. Shooting the messenger is an unfortunate reality in highly sclerotic, bureaucratized systems. If early warning analysts learn the hard way that unpopular assessments would land them in hot soup, it is unlikely in the extreme that they will develop either the interest or the capability to pick up on the “faint signals” that need to be put forward and understood in the face of change.

    Finally, in today’s uncertain, complex security context, strategic early warning analysts cannot afford the luxury of tunnel vision. Analysts increasingly need to move outside of government circles on a regular basis to deal with like-minded individuals in think tanks, industry and other parts of government. It is not outlandish to assert that most expertise and knowledge required for effective strategic early warning analysis now lie outside of government. Extra-governmental expertise therefore needs to be tapped and systematically engaged.

    Outlook

    The complexity and uncertainty that are the hallmarks of the current international environment appear likely to increase. Strategic early warning intelligence analysts across the globe must now provide effective anticipatory warnings on a range of issues involving transport security, social resilience, supply chain management, crime, health and other issues. In order to achieve this, the community must be able to break free from bureaucratic straight jackets, hire creative thinkers, train them for years, give them sufficient external exposure to global best practices in a range of domains, and then support them in the face of opposition from conservative, hide-bound elements that may linger in policy circles. To do anything less may well have fateful consequences for governments and nations.

    About the Authorspage3image1832

    Tom Quiggin is Senior Fellow and Coordinator of the Risk Assessment and Horizon Scanning Programme in the Centre of Excellence for National Security (CENS). Associate Professor Kumar Ramakrishna is Acting Head of CENS, a constituent unit of the Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies, Nanyang Technological University. 

    Categories: RSIS Commentary Series / International Politics and Security

    Popular Links

    About RSISResearch ProgrammesGraduate EducationPublicationsEventsAdmissionsCareersVideo/Audio ChannelRSIS Intranet

    Connect with Us

    rsis.ntu
    rsis_ntu
    rsisntu
    rsisvideocast
    school/rsis-ntu
    rsis.sg
    rsissg
    RSIS
    RSS
    Subscribe to RSIS Publications
    Subscribe to RSIS Events

    Getting to RSIS

    Nanyang Technological University
    Block S4, Level B3,
    50 Nanyang Avenue,
    Singapore 639798

    Click here for direction to RSIS

    Get in Touch

      Copyright © S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies. All rights reserved.
      Privacy Statement / Terms of Use
      Help us improve

        Rate your experience with this website
        123456
        Not satisfiedVery satisfied
        What did you like?
        0/255 characters
        What can be improved?
        0/255 characters
        Your email
        Please enter a valid email.
        Thank you for your feedback.
        This site uses cookies to offer you a better browsing experience. By continuing, you are agreeing to the use of cookies on your device as described in our privacy policy. Learn more
        OK
        Latest Book
        more info