Thoughts on Analysis: Classification, Accuracy, Reliability and Distribution

Let us clarify the relationship between classification, accuracy of information, reliability of source and the distribution of intelligence. There is often confusion over these four aspects of our work as many people are tempted to link them together.

For example, I often hear the view that top secret information is, due to its high classification, accurate and reliable, but of course that is not true. Classification will be related to the source protection, collection methodology or the sensitiveness of the collected information, but is never determined by the accuracy of information or the reliability of source.

You also see many examples of classification driving dissemination, in the sense that the higher the classification the smaller the distribution list, and conversely lower classifications attracting an ever larger readership, seemingly irrespective of the operational requirement. However, intelligence is produced for a purpose and that is to answer the questions posed in our collection plan, and as such we should be well aware of our customers, as well as their requirements and limitations, from the outset.

Therefore, the ‘need to know’ and ‘need to share’ principles apply to all aspects of distribution. This means that intelligence is produced that fulfils the intelligence requirement (answers the customer’s question) and is usable (in the right format, arrives in time, at an appropriate classification and sent to the right customer).

This all sounds easy…why is it then we often drown under reams of irrelevant ‘Restricted’ information, whilst having to actively seek out pertinent information at a higher classification from operational compartment holders? At one end of the scale there are too few rules on the dissemination of low classification material and too many on higher classifications.

There are even crazy occasions when the classification of intelligence is increased in order to restrict dissemination or to add weight to its content – what are people thinking?

Before discussing reliability of source and accuracy of information, let us first look at a couple of examples of guidelines on source reliability, information accuracy and dissemination within the UK.

Here is the UK police National Intelligence Model 5x5x5 process:

To my mind, the source evaluation gradings shown above are fine, as are the information/intelligence evaluations 1, 4 and 5. It is a debatable issue, but gradings 2 and 3 make less sense to me as they rely heavily on the source to provide confirmation of the information, perhaps letting the analyst off the hook. The handling codes seem to work well within a policing environment, but seem confusing and, again in my view, need some work to be useful in a wider intelligence setting.

The other commonly used system in the UK is that of the military and the intelligence agencies, as shown below:

Generally speaking this system works well in a complex, multi-sourced intelligence environment, although there are those who propose the use of a 7 and 8 accuracy of information grading to represent false and deliberately misleading information respectively.

The weakest part of the system is dissemination, which is controlled within the ‘need-to-know’ principle by:

–          National caveats, for example ‘UK eyes only’

–          Descriptors, for example ‘intelligence’ or ‘limited dissemination’

–          Codewords to depict specific operations

Highly sensitive information will sometimes contain dissemination instructions to limit distribution to named individuals, to certain departments or to particular organisations. I personally would like to see this sort of dissemination control mechanism expanded to include all intelligence material.

The classification of a report is governed by the damage that would result if the report was compromised. This is usually quantified as damage to national security, foreign relations, the ability of the intelligence agencies to do their work effectively and the impact on intelligence collection techniques. So it is entirely possible, and quite often the case, that a top secret report is so classified due to the collection method employed and will have no bearing at all on the accuracy of the information.

Therefore there is no contradiction in a ‘Restricted’ classified report being graded A1 and a ‘Top Secret’ report being F6. The source and information need to be graded completely independently of the classification.

It is also possible that you have a new source graded F ‘reliability cannot be judged’, which produces information graded 1 ‘confirmed by other sources’. These are judgements to be made by the analyst.

The content of an intelligence report will govern its distribution, under the principle that intelligence is only of use if it can be got to the customer that needs it. At this point, there may be a dilemma between the ‘need-to-know’ principle and the requirement ‘need to share’. This will naturally open a debate with the collector and owner of the intelligence on the classification and any dissemination restrictions. This should be a natural and routine event to balance source protection against intelligence utility.

It may well be possible at this stage in collaboration with the collector and owner of the intelligence to downgrade the report’s classification by removing some of the more specific detail, which can be of limited use to the customer.

The requirement to downgrade a report may also be driven by the customer, who may only be able to use the intelligence at a lower classification. Central to the successful completion of the dissemination function in the intelligence cycle is a good understanding of the customer and their requirements.

 Is your intelligence team working efficiently?  Could they be more productive and enhance your business model?  To find out more about what QRO Global could do to assist your business or to learn more about the types of projects that we have worked on in the past, see our Services Page or email us today – info@qro-global.co.uk