Intelligence And Vigilantes

(Note: This is the third and final entry in a three part series on some of the things I have learned about intelligence support to entrepreneurs from running a number of crowdfunding campaigns. For Part 1, click here and for Part 2, click here.)

Moros is a comic book series by Josh Lucas.  Loosely based on our hometown, Erie, PA, Moros tells the story of a former soldier turned policeman who becomes a vigilante to rid his town of a drug that he takes himself.

Josh successfully funded his third issue of the comic with a Kickstarter campaign that we helped him run back in April.

Josh was an experienced crowdfunder when I met him.  He had funded his first issue with a successful IndieGoGo campaign and had spent the time since that first issue working on his second issue and learning what he could about the comic book industry.

What he learned and what I have seen first hand with almost all of the entrepreneurs I have worked with (myself included) is that there is a kind of insanity that grips you when you are working on these projects.  It is almost impossible for you to see the world as it is.  Instead, you insist that the world is as you want it to be.  

Most intelligence professionals know this problem better as the Intel-Ops Divide.  The argument goes something like this:  Intel and ops need to be kept separate.  If they aren't, the intel guys run the risk of becoming so enamored with the plans the ops guys come up with that intel starts to see all the evidence not as it is but as ops hopes it will be.  This makes the intel guys useless to the organization.

The problem with entrepreneurs is that they don't typically have enough resources to be able to keep intel and ops separate.  So, what is an entrepreneur to do?  It seems to me that successful entrepreneurs manage this problem by asking dramatically different questions of intelligence professionals than the ones asked by either unsuccessful entrepreneurs or traditional leaders.

There is a growing body of evidence (produced largely by the Darden School of Business at the University of Virginia) that successful entrepreneurs and innovators look at problems in fundamentally different ways from the rest of us.  Specifically, they use "effectual reasoning" (as opposed to causal reasoning) and five specific techniques to help them make decisions:  

• Bird in Hand.  "What do I have at hand and what can I do with it right now?" are the kinds of questions that emerge from the Bird in Hand Principle.  The kinds of intelligence questions that arise from this principle focus on expanding the entrepreneur's understanding of what resources are immediately available for use.

• Affordable Loss.  Good entrepreneurs don't focus exclusively on the potential gain.  Instead, they work hard to understand what they can afford to lose at each step.  Helping the entrepreneur understand the full nature of the downside risk is a good task for intel.

• Lemonade.  This principle is about not only taking advantage of surprises (both good and bad) but welcoming them.  It means that intel support to entrepreneurs has to be very flexible and very fast.

• Patchwork Quilt.  Good entrepreneurs rarely try to go it alone.  Instead they are constantly looking for partnerships (both formal and informal) with self-selecting stakeholders.  Identifying and prioritizing these potential stakeholders seems a natural fit for intel.

• Pilot in the Plane.  Good entrepreneurs focus on activities that they can control and don't worry so much about what they can't.  Quoting the Society for Effectual Action, at their core, good entrepreneurs seem to believe that "the future is neither found nor predicted, but rather made."  Intel's role here is to help define what can and can't be controlled in the environment that surrounds the entrepreneur. 

These principles and the associated intel questions that go with them don't ask the intel professional to buy into the underlying goals of the entrepreneur or evaluate the progress towards those goals.  Instead, they set the stage for intel success by asking questions that support the decisionmaking process of the entrepreneur uncomplicated by operational bias.

Intelligence And Cookies

(Note: This is entry number 2 in a three part series on some of the things I have learned about intelligence support to entrepreneurs from running a number of crowdfunding campaigns. For Part 1, click here.)

Ah!  Cookies!  Who can resist a good cookie?  Fresh out of the oven, homemade, imprinted with pictures of horses and bunnies and dinosaurs...

What?  

That is the good idea of Lisa Van Riper, the creator of the Tiny Hands On A Roll Kickstarter (closing in a little more than 24 hours). Little kids like to "help" when it comes to baking but kitchen implements are often too large, too unsafe or too uninteresting for little kids to use.  How can you keep them engaged without them getting frustrated?

Lisa hand makes laser engraved, bakery quality rolling pins that are exactly the right size for small children.  They work just like a good rolling pin ought to work but are sized for tiny hands and completed with customizable laser-engraved images that make the rolling fun.

Check out her project page (just click on the image above).  Her images are beautiful, her products demonstrate an over-abundance of quality and care in manufacturing.  Something like this ought to just kill it on Kickstarter, right?

Yep.  Except for one small detail (and my second lesson learned);  Timing.

Every crowdfunding project creator worries about timing.  What is the best day to launch? What is the best time of day to launch?  How long should the campaign be?  When is the best time of month to launch?  When is the best day to end?  What days should I avoid?  

These are all good questions but it is easy to be hyper-focused on these tactical issues and miss the strategic (or, at least, seasonal) trends.

Take a look at the chart below.  It is taken from Google Trends and shows the US search trend for the term "rolling pin" over the last ten years or so.  Talk about strong patterns!  Every peak is in December and every trough is in...ahem...April.  

Hindsight being 20/20, it is obvious why this is so.  Rolling pins are strongly associated with the scratch baking frenzy that begins shortly before the end of October and only ends around the time people are waking up late and cursing the winter sunlight of January 2nd.  In terms of searches for the term "rolling pin" at least, that frenzy is almost three times as strong in the fall as it is in the spring of every year since 2005.

We figured this out before we launched, of course.  Lisa wants to expand her business and she wanted to get this product line out there now and not wait till the fall.  She has already explored other ways to sell the product after the Kickstarter campaign is over and she will almost certainly do well in the fall with these products (when not only baking season but also toy season kicks in).  Our solution was to adjust her expectations - and her goal - accordingly.  

Not every product has this strong of a trend associated with it.  That said, if you have to swim upstream, you at least want to know about it beforehand.

Next:  Intelligence And Vigilantes

Intelligence And Coffee

It has been said (at least by me) that coffee is to intel as air is to life.  In fact, the Food and Drug Administration has reportedly recognized coffee, along with sugar and alcohol, as part of the three basic food groups of intelligence professionals everywhere (note I said "recognized" not "approved of"...)

So, it is no real surprise that I am beginning what I hope will be a three part series on the intelligence lessons I have learned running various crowdfunding campaigns with Roast Assured, a project that is not just about coffee but about the perfect cup of coffee.

Roast Assured is a client of our Quickstarter Project here at Mercyhurst.  Quickstarter allows us to match aspiring, energetic college students and their skills with entrepreneurs who need those skills to help get their crowdfunding projects off the ground.

I received a $10,000 grant from the good people at Ben Franklin Technology Partners last year to help local entrepreneurs run some campaigns (and recently received a much larger grant to run lots more campaigns over the next three years).  Since then, I have run five campaigns (three of which are live right now) and have spoken to nearly 30 other potential creators.

What have I learned?

Lesson #1:  Entrepreneurs need lots of intelligence support.  In fact, I would go so far as to say that the number one requirement of an entrepreneur is reliable intelligence about the environment in which they are operating.  Most entrepreneurs know their idea inside and out.  They know all about their current operational capabilities and limitations. Everything else is almost always enshrouded in varying degrees of fog.

To a certain extent this should be expected.  Clearly there are levels of expertise when it comes to entrepreneurship.  Most of the people who come to me are raw and untested. Some of the people I do see come to me better informed than others but I don't see many serial entrepreneurs or experienced business people.  The fundamental truth seems to remain, though, entrepreneurs love their ideas and know them quite well.  The rest ... well ... not so much.

Much of this intelligence needs to be tactical, real time support, however.  I call it "just-in-time" intelligence.  Intel support at this level is all about being able to fill in the gaps immediately and with just enough info to keep things moving.  To put it in terms most national security intelligence professionals will understand, with entrepreneurs, all of the alligators are at your ankles and all of the targets are 50 meter ones.

Roast Assured is a good example of this.  Jack Barton, an expert coffee roaster and the creator of Roast Assured, has a great idea.  He wants to work with people to help them get their perfect cup of coffee.  He knows how different roasts and different grinds and even different flavorings and spices work together (or against one another) to change the taste of a cup of coffee.

What he really likes to do, though, is to put that knowledge to work for people - to help them craft their perfect brew.  He also wants to take it a couple of steps further.  First, he wants his customers to be able to name their coffee.  It can have personal significance, it could be the regular coffee in a small town diner or even the official coffee of some internet start-up. He even wants to work with you and his artists to craft a logo for your brand of coffee!


The bottomline is that it is your coffee with your chosen name on it.  Once you and Jack figure out the perfect blend, your named coffee goes into his database and you can go online and order another pound of Spy Roast (or whatever) anytime you want.

Beyond this, it gets tricky.  Who wants to buy this?  Where can we find him or her? How should we price this?  What's our value proposition?  Who will finance us?  Where can we get this made?  Who are our competitors? And on and on and on!

Virtually all the important questions entrepreneurs have are, at their core, questions about things critical to the success or failure of the project that are largely or completely outside the entrepreneur's control - in short, intelligence questions.  

One problem, of course, is that these raw, untested entrepreneurs don't typically have the money to pay for this kind of intel support.  This problem is unlikely to go away.  A second problem is that most of the entrepreneurial literature and many of the entrepreneurship training programs don't expose creators to the kind of intel tools and skills that could be so helpful in getting their projects off the ground. 

Next:  Intelligence And Cookies

Combatting the Mid-Campaign Slump

(I have been writing about what I call "Entrepreneurial Intelligence" (or ENTINT for those who like acronyms...) on and off for a couple of years now.  Part of what I am coming to realize is that everything I do in support of entrepreneurial crowdfunding efforts through Mercyhurst's Quickstarter Project is really just intel.  The "best practices" report below, put together by my Research Assistant, McKenzie Rowland, and focused on dealing with the dreaded mid-campaign slump, is a good example)

When running a crowdfunding campaign, it is common to notice a dip in the activity in the middle of the campaign.  It is so common, in fact, that it has  a name - 'the mid-campaign slump".  

Fortunately, there are a number of tactics that you can apply to overcome this slump and keep your campaign running at a more even pace.  The table below is a ranking of what techniques the majority of crowdfunding advice-givers have found to be the most instrumental in campaign success (It's a big table so be sure to scroll right to see all the columns!).

Overall, the most common approaches are ones designed to make backers feel valued throughout the campaign.  By sending personal messages or emails and keeping them frequently updated with photos and posts, you’re showing them that you value their contribution and that their donation matters.  

Incentives also appear to be a common way to bring in more contributors and funds, and can boost donations when campaign activity is low.  This may encourage current backers to bring in others to the campaign, so it is likely important to tailor your incentives to the core value proposition of the project in order to bring in the most donors possible.  

These efforts can be time-consuming, however, and may result in greater costs to the campaign so it is important to make some estimate, in advance, of the cost (in terms of both time and money) to benefit ratio before pursuing any of them.

Want To Invest In People Instead Of Companies? Now You Can! (Entrepreneurial Intelligence)

Crowdfunding is a busy place these days.  While the largest and most popular site, Kickstarter, continues to fund a variety of creative projects (last year Kickstarter funded more creative projects than the National Endowment for the Arts...), specialty crowdfunding platforms are now available for everything from education to issues in the developing world to scientific research to, of course, porn.

For me, understanding crowdfunding is becoming an increasingly important part of what I call "entrepreneurial intelligence" - or, stuff that is outside entrepreneurs' control but is still critical to their success or failure.  Crowdfunding is rapidly filling a space left untouched by bootstrapping, angel investors and venture capitalists and understanding the strengths and weaknesses of various crowdfunding platforms would seem to me to be a critical intelligence requirement for entrepreneurs.

One of the most interesting of the new crowdfunding platforms is Upstart.  Upstart allows you to invest directly in a person.  In other words, you give them some money now to pay off a loan or to learn to code or to expand a business, and they promise to pay you a small percentage of their income over the next 5-10 years.  Repayments are capped (typically at 3 to 5 times the amount invested) so people can pay off their backers early if they make a lot of money.

 

Like a venture capitalist or angel investor, you could lose all of your money if the person you backed doesn't make enough.  Upstart uses statistical models to predict how much the "upstart" will earn over the next ten years based on degree, school attended, test scores, number of job offers, work experience, etc.  The amount the upstart can ask from backers is based on this model but as Upstart notes:  "Any estimate of returns is highly speculative, subject to a high degree of variability, and not based on historical experience. The pricing engine is novel and untested and relies on broad-based statistical data that may not be representative of any individual’s actual future income."

This is, however, a pretty good deal for investors if everything works out as planned.  A $300 return on a $100 investment over 5 years represents a nearly 25% annual rate of return.  Sure beats the 2 bucks your average money market fund will likely yield over the same period...

Just Launched My First Game, Widget, On Kickstarter; ENTINT Questions Generated At A Staggering Pace... (ENTINT)

You might notice something different about the site.  Over to the right you will see a small box that contains details on my first game, Widget.  I launched this game last night on Kickstarter.com and the text box you see now will stay up there for the next thirty days or so (clicking on the box will take you to the Widget website in all its glory).

Kickstarter gives you anywhere from 30-90 days to make your target (in my case $4000.  I set my time limit for 30 days -- which Kickstarter recommends).  If you make it, you get the money.  If you don't, you get nothing (and all of your backers do not get charged anything).  Basically, failing costs your backers nothing and costs you only your ego...

So far the launch has generated as many intelligence questions as it has answered.  More next week!

(PS.  On a personal note, I genuinely appreciate the readers of this blog who have backed this game already on Kickstarter.  I have a long way to go yet, but it is both encouraging and humbling to be the recipient of so much good will.  While I also understand that this game might not be perfect for many of the rest of you, I do appreciate those of you who have taken the time to post to Facebook, tweet about it, or otherwise share it with your friends and family.  I am pretty certain that there is someone in everyone's social network who will enjoy this game.  My challenge is to the get word out to them and your help has been invaluable!  Thanks! Kris)

On The Intelligence Requirements Of Entrepreneurs (ENTINT)

(Note to readers:  This is the continuation of an occasional series of posts about providing intelligence support to entrepreneurs   This issue interests me for both academic and personal reasons.  Academically, I can think of no one who has touched it and, personally, I have recently started a games company and am about to launch my first game, Widget.)

To understand the intelligence requirements of entrepreneurs, it helps, I think, to have an understanding of what makes a "good' entrepreneur.   When you consider that both the guy with 10 million dollars in venture capital and the guy with 50 bucks of used CDs are both technically entrepreneurs, such a task might seem difficult, if not impossible. 

Recently, though, some very good research has come out of the Darden School of Business at the University of Virginia. Saras Sarasvathy, (who, it should be noted, got her start at Carnegie Mellon working with Nobel Laureate, Herbert Simon), has done extensive research on how great entrepreneurs think.

Great entrepreneurs, it seems, are "effectual reasoners".  They start with broad goals, assess their means - the birds in their hands - and then move as far as their resources will allow.  This is in contrast to more typical "causal reasoning" which starts with a specific goal and a clear plan for achieving it.  The image below, from the Society for Effectual Action, visualizes the difference: 

http://www.effectuation.org/learn/effectuation-101

Entrepreneurs, according to Sarasvathy's research, operate on five principles.  These principles, in turn, give an insight into the intelligence needs of entrepreneurs:

• Bird in the Hand.  Entrepreneurs start by imagining what they can do with what they have rather than setting a goal and then abandoning it if they do not have the means to achieve it.  Helping the entrepreneur identify what they "have" in this global economy would seem to be at least one intelligence requirement. 
• Affordable Loss.   Instead of large all or nothing plans, entrepreneurs seek, like Napoleon, to conduct "a well reasoned and extremely circumspect defensive, followed by a rapid and audacious attack."  In other words, they seek to determine what they can afford to lose at each step rather than hyper-focus on expected return.  Intelligence should, then, focus on the near-term, external, potential causes of loss.
• Lemonade.  Entrepreneurs tend to see surprises as opportunities.  Intelligence would be useful in helping the entrepreneur explore, understand and exploit those opportunities.  
• Patchwork Quilt.  Entrepreneurs worry less about competition and more about building partnerships with people who want to work with them.  Intelligence could play a significant role in helping the entrepreneur identify potential partners.
• Pilot in the plane.  Entrepreneurs believe that the future is "neither found nor predicted, but rather made."  Sarasvathy contrasts this to managerial thinking which accepts that trends will hold and the future is predictable.  

This last principle would seem to fly in the face of most intelligence analysis activities but I don't think so.  What it highlights for me is a trend I see throughout the five principles - a focus on the immediate (or, at best, the near term) when it comes to intelligence support to entrepreneurs.  

This certainly tracks with my own experience to date.  I don't need perfect answers.  I certainly don't need long-term predictions about the health of the tabletop gaming industry.  I need good-enough answers about things I am working on right now.  

This, in turn, suggests the form of an intelligence activity designed to support entrepreneurs.   It would have to be staffed by a variety of high-quality generalists, able to provide answers on a wide range of topics quickly.  Since almost no entrepreneurs have money to burn, it would likely have to provide support to a number of entrepreneurs at a number of different low-cost support levels (perhaps by subscription or even by the question).  It would have to be available 24/7 and, it almost goes without saying, it would have to be available online and possibly through phone or text message.

Such a service already exists.  Called Fancy Hands, this online site bills itself as a virtual assistant service.  While it provides a wide variety of services, all at a reasonable flat fee per month for a pre-defined number of requests, I have used Fancy Hands almost exclusively as a research service - a proto-intelligence service for entrepreneurs, if you will.  

Fancy Hands, of course, does much more than research for their clients and, I am sure, would dispute any claim that they are an intelligence service of any kind (proto or not).  My point is not to disagree with them (I like their service too much to gratuitously seek to irritate them...).  My point is that any organization seeking to provide intelligence services to entrepreneurs could learn from them.  Much of what they do and, more importantly, the way they do it, is exactly what entrepreneurs require.

Entrepreneurial Intelligence (ENTINT?)

All entrepreneurs are crazy. 

Nuts.  Cuckoo.  Certifiable dingbats.  Need evidence?  How about this:  According to a study published last year, only about 25% of companies that take venture capital are able to make any money off it -- the other 75% lose at least some and perhaps all of the money.  

Need more?  According to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics, only about a third of all small businesses make it for longer than 10 years and 30% fold within the first two years!  You have to be crazy to go up against those odds...

Intelligence analysts live to forecast and one of the easiest forecasts you can make, or so it seems, is the sooner-rather-than-later demise of a new business. 

Easy but worthless.

It is a situation that is sort of like the 1990 National Intelligence Estimate on what is now the former Yugoslavia.  It was completed just before the war broke out in full force.  It turned out to be extremely accurate but was virtually useless to the policymakers of the day.  In fact, it was probably counterproductive as it validated the inertia that was prevalent in Washington regarding the issue at the time.

You see, it was in the US's interests -- heck, it was in everyone's interests -- to keep Yugoslavia from breaking up or, if it had to break up, to do it in a way that was neither bloody nor lengthy.  Saying, as the NIE did, that the breakup was inevitable and that there was nothing policymakers could do about it was singularly unhelpful.  The policymakers needed to try and they could have used some intelligence insights to help them.

So it is with entrepreneurs.  Telling them that they are likely to fail probably isn't going to dissuade them from trying; its just going to make them think that intelligence isn't going to be very valuable.  This is a shame, since entrepreneurs probably have more questions about things that are critical to their success or failure but are outside their control (the essence of an intelligence question) than most businesses.

For the last several months I have been busy starting my own company and working on a number of games (one of them - Widget - is about ready to launch.  You can find out more about it here if you are interested).  I know intelligence has a role to play in entrepreneurship but am just beginning to understand what that role is and how it is both different and the same as more traditional notions of intelligence in business.  As I learn new things and gain understanding, I intend to explore these ideas in an occasional series of posts on the topic.

Sources And Methods Games? Yes!

Well, I went and did it!  Started my own company - Sources And Methods Games!

No, I am not quitting my day job.

But ... I do want to explore the intersection between games, intelligence, learning and entrepreneurship (4 big passions of mine).  Doing so from the safety of the University and with someone else's money, however, just didn't seem right somehow.  I suppose I just like testing theories more than talking about them.

What specifically, do I hope to learn?

• What makes a game good?  
• How do games teach?  
• Is it possible to make good games that teach intelligence concepts or methods?  
• Does it make more sense, from the standpoint of teaching intelligence, to focus on tabletop or video games?  
• How is crowdfunding (KickStarter, IndieGoGo, etc.) changing the gaming industry (particularly the tabletop games industry)?  
• What are the intelligence requirements of a globalized, crowdfunded, social media driven business environment?
• Given the research into effectual reasoning and entrepreneurship, what is intelligence's role in a start-up? 
• What are an entrepreneur's Essential Elements of Information (EEIs)?  
• How can they best be met?  

There's more, but this list is a good start.  The bottomline is that this effort -- which is as much a research project as a company -- gives me a chance to explore these questions in a more realistic way.  I recognize that much of the evidence I gather will be anecdotal but I think I will be better able to orient myself on important issues as a result.

This is not the first time I have owned a games company, though.  I ran a small company, Wheaton Publications, back in the early 80's while I was still in law school - ran it right into the ground.  Despite having two pretty good, well-reviewed games, the company was massively under-capitalized and had to be shuttered within 18 months.  

While it was painful at the time, I remember how much I learned from the experience.  While I am no Rockefeller, my financial position has improved a bit since I was a poor law student living in a basement and eating mac and cheese 4 times a week.  I still have good games (including one I which I am about to launch in the next couple of weeks -- if you are interested you can get more information here).  So, who knows?  Maybe I'll make it 24 months this time!

Part 8 -- Going It On Your Own (How To Get A Job In Intelligence)

Part 1 -- Introduction
Part 2 -- The Intelligence Job Market From 20,000 Feet
Part 3 -- The Good News!
Part 4 -- Even Better News!
Part 5 -- Beyond The Big Three
Part 6 -- Beyond Borders
Part 7 -- Beyond Borders: India, Europe And South Africa

Before I move on to all of the tips, tricks and advice I have collected (and others have given me), I felt I would be remiss if I did not at least mention the possibility of going it on your own -- starting your own business in intelligence.

For many people this probably sounds about as dumb as a barrel of hair but for others, with an entrepreneurial personality, it can be the best possible choice. There are lots of resources available to help you get started. For example, if you want to see if you have to have the personality for entrepreneurship, this is a pretty good test. If you want to see what aspect of the business you might be interested in, this article should be helpful.

Two sources that I think might be particularly useful would be Entrepreneur magazine. While there is a tendency in that magazine to focus on franchises (not really an option for intel entrepreneurs (though, who knows? Estimates R'Us anyone?)), there are also a number of good articles on the entrepreneurial life in general.

The second and often overlooked source is the Small Business Administration. This could conceivably be a gold mine for some entrepreneurs. My own impression is that the degree of helpfulness very much depends on the actual office you are dealing with but it, along with any state/local equivalents, can be very helpful.

Beyond my very superficial thoughts, I wanted to get some insider input, so I went out to a number of people who have gone the entrepreneurial pathway themselves. I was going to just use snippets but both of the people who were kind enough to respond, put some time and effort into what they wanted to say. Here, then, with just a little light editing, are their thoughts on the intelligence entrepreneur:

Mike Himley, President and CEO of Eagle Intelligence

My intelligence perspective comes primarily from a business background but I have worked around law enforcement intelligence and intelligence fusion centers and I have found the differences in definition and understanding striking, oftentimes even within the same organization. Could it be they’re all wrong? Or maybe they’re all partly correct. I think it’s more of the latter.

If you asked for the definition of intelligence from someone in national security intelligence, law enforcement intelligence, business intelligence, or the field of competitive intelligence, you would end up with widely different answers. I’ve noticed that, even now, the Society of Competitive Intelligence Professionals seems to be struggling to redefine what they do because few outside the organization understand it. Some are even questioning if Librarians are in the business of intelligence.

If you’re a student of Intelligence analysis and you’re sure you want to work in one of the three-letter Government Intel agencies, then I’m not the best person to offer advice on how to get in. But I can suggest a few ways to make yourself more valuable so jobs find you. To start with, think of intelligence analysis as a skill set instead of a job title, and think about the number of organizations that could benefit from making better decisions. (Reread that last sentence) Every one of those organizations could benefit from sound intelligence analysis but they might not call it intelligence.

I had a business graduate school class in Financial Statement Analysis years ago. Besides teaching, the professor was frequently hired by companies to advise how to make themselves more attractive to investors. Clients were willing to pay (a lot) for specific recommendations that would lead to a gain in investment activity in their companies.

I didn’t know it at the time, but that class could well have been a class in intelligence training. Of course it wasn’t called that and still wouldn’t be today, but it was. We pulled a minimum 10 years’ worth of financials and studied trends, looking for differentials, and finding reasons for changes. We used 10 years of history so that short term aberrations didn’t skew our analysis. I was struggling to keep up with the numerical analysis when we were instructed to read and analyze the footnotes in all the reports. Why? Because that’s where the most important information was located--in the place where most people wouldn’t read it.

Then he taught us to pay attention to photos published by the company. I still remember what he said regarding one unnamed company whose financials were trending downward. He said, “The CEO of this company is about 60 years old. Do you see the pictures of him in the previous annual reports? He’s all alone in them. But not this year. He’s standing next to the Vice President in every photo this year. And see how he’s smiling and putting his hand on the VP’s shoulder? He’s showing that he has confidence in him and that he’s trustworthy. He trusts him and so should you. I am predicting that this CEO is going to be announcing his retirement very soon. You are looking at the next CEO of this company and if you own stock in this company, you’ll do what I’m going to do and you’ll sell it immediately because this VP has no experience or background to run this company.”

Sure enough, 6 months later the stock crashed when the “surprise” retirement was announced. In this case, 10 years of financials, along with text and photos were used to develop historical context and project into the future. It was a story about the future with specific recommendations, and backed up with plenty of data and analysis. It was a lot more than a financial statement review. It sounds like intelligence doesn’t it?

But it doesn’t have to be finance. ADD VALUE TO INFORMATION. Think bigger. Think more broadly. Add value to anything that you’re passionate about. Tell a story about the future and offer recommendations on how it will help someone. Back it up with facts and logic. That’s intelligence.

You need only a few ingredients and you can make up your own career in intelligence:

1. You need to provide context within a specific field or subject matter. You need to work on being a specialist in something. Anything. Pick something your passionate about and begin to study it. Some examples:
   1. Financials or flow of money. Applicable to businesses, law enforcement, intelligence agencies, mergers and acquisitions firms, money laundering, terrorism financing, etc. Money is everywhere and will be there tomorrow. Who needs intel on this? CIA, FBI, Law Enforcement, Businesses, FDIC, SEC, Law firms, etc.
   2. People. Anything regarding people. Demographics, Immigration/Emigration, social customs, communications, languages, etc. Applicable to health agencies, businesses planning on opening new locations or offering new services, communications planning, infrastructure planning (roads/bridges/housing), political analysis and polling, etc.
   3. Building Construction. Applicable for all industries in business, critical infrastructure threat analysis, environmental impact analysis, insurance underwriting, etc.
   4. Medical and Pharmaceutical knowledge. Applicable to medical related industries and drug companies, DEA, law enforcement, etc.
   5. Water. (Think about all the possibilities)

2. You need training in analysis so you can sort through increasing amounts of data, analyze it, and prepare and present logical arguments or recommendations. This is a legitimate set of skills. Add your specialized knowledge and context to it, and you’re onto something big.
3. You need imagination in order to add value to the first two, and to possibly change the definition of what intelligence is to suit your own interests.

In summary, first pick something you’re passionate about and add value to it. Then think about who might benefit the most from that intelligence. Post your work somewhere people will see it, keep learning, and jobs will begin to find you.

So you still want to work in a Government Intel agency? Terrific. Despite the poor job market, I suspect there are exceptions on occasion for those with specialized knowledge and sound analytical skills. Good luck in your interview.

Mark C. Blair, Founder and CEO of DAGIRCO

Is the job going to produce a good and distinguished career? Or will it find you stuck in an unexceptional position producing unremarkable analysis; waiting for the long line of analysts above you to retire?

Such analysts may find their analysis being shoved through a bureaucratically/institutionally shaped hole like a Play-Doh fun factory. By the time they have a chance to “innovate,” their dreams will be the prattle of historians.

The problem with ‘going it on your own,’ is the reputational paradox: If a well respected company spends millions of dollars to build a substandard analytic solution, it is a saint. If you create a truly exceptional and accurate analytic solution on a shoestring budget and no reputation, you are a witch! Will they believe you can do what you do?

The way out of this paradox is the advice of many veteran analysts: think tactical... produce ‘actionable’ intelligence. Forget ideas (vaporware). Find someone with a problem... ‘FIX IT’ and show them the solution. Focus on your client/decisionmaker and IGNORE ALL OTHERS, take no other advice. ...and learn as much as you can about databases!!!

Next: The Five Things You MUST Have To Get A Job In Intelligence