Latest news
The JDI Latin America and Caribbean Unit - a new unit to support research on crime and citizen security, and professional development
Mailing List
Short Courses


Advanced Hotspot Analysis

Predictive Crime Mapping

Hypothesis Testing Analysis

Crime Analysis

Understanding Hotspots

Strategic Intelligence Assessments

Dates to be confirmed

Geographic Profiling Analysis

26th June - 7th July 2017

Department of Security and Crime Science

ICIAC 2012 Seminar stream 6B

Abstracts and slides

Intelligence Products and Models

A generic process model for intelligence agencies

Onno Goldbach M.Sc, Netherlands Defense Institute for Security and Intelligence and Dr. E. Dado, Netherlands Defense Academy, The Netherlands

Key words: Functional Modeling, Intelligence agency, Generic process model, Process efficiency
Slides: Goldbach

The intelligence community is responsible for delivering required intelligence products to intelligence consumers. Due to the pressure from consumers and society for better intelligence products and more efficiency, intelligence agencies started to evaluate their responsibilities in terms of process efficiency and quality. Traditionally, intelligence processes are presented as a cycle containing four iterative sub-processes: (1) direction, (2) collection, (3) production and (4) dissemination. However for the purpose of evaluating existing processes, this cycle and its four sub processes is not detailed enough. In order to alleviate with these problems, we have defined a generic process model which will be presented in this paper.

The IDEF0 methodology has been applied to define a generic process model. This methodology provides a functional modeling language for the evaluation and analysis of processes such as the intelligence process. The IDEF0 method recognizes functions (activities, actions, processes, operations) and relationships (input, controls, output and mechanisms). The purpose of modeling the intelligence process is mapping information flows within an intelligence agency. This has been done with the viewpoint of intelligence analysts. This viewpoint focuses on the information processing performed. The derived generic process model is characterized by four first-level subprocesses: (1) management of the intelligence production process, (2) collection of the required data, (3) transformation of data into information and (4) transformation of information to data. Within each of these four processes contributory lower-level subprocesses have been identified. In total 19 subprocesses are described in this paper.

The military relevancy of this generic process model is threefold:  (1) it can help intelligence agencies to manage their intelligence process;  (2) it can aid in training and educating intelligence personnel in their specific role and  (3) it can help identifying and strengthen crucial and/or vulnerable elements within intelligence processes. Ultimately this model can help improve process efficiency and quality of intelligence agencies. 

The scientific relevancy is that this model will provide a foundation for further research. The authors will use this generic process model to analyze a specific subprocess: the transformation of information to intelligence – also called intelligence analysis. Aim of this further research will be the development of a quality management system for intelligence analysis. Because the researchers aim to develop a quality management system for intelligence analysis that can be applied at a western intelligence agency, the scope of this research has been limited to a military intelligence agency within NATO and this model is primarily based on NATO doctrine and doctrines from contributories to NATO.

Partners working together to achieve one goal

Erika Sorrenson, Jonathan Borrett & Debbie Unwin, Peninsula Strategic Analytical Team Devon and Cornwall CSPs and Constabulary

Key words: Partnership working, Peninsula-wide Strategic Analysis, Police Crime Commissioner, Crime & Disorder, Alternative Hypothesis testing.
Slides: Yet to be supplied by presenter

As the conference begins, all the work leading up to the election of the new Police and Crime Commissioners (PCC) has come to an end… or has it?   Community Safety Partnerships across Devon and Cornwall were keen to ensure that the successful candidate received the information that they needed to understand the strategic crime and disorder issues impacting on our varied geography.

To achieve this we produced a Peninsula Strategic Assessment which drew together the findings of individual strategic assessments.   Our first interim document resulted in the Home Office approval as a model of good practice but the PCC timeframe demanded our first full joint Peninsular Strategic Assessment to be completed by October 2012.  The key to our success was not just producing the document but how we as a group of analysts faced the processes and challenges along the way.

There are always several sides to a story, so please let the key contributors and customers describe our journey …….

We need to go back to this time last year to a group of partnership and police analysts meeting around a table in Cornwall. Our joint objective - to produce a document that would provide a more rounded perspective of what was impacting our communities and for us to present key issues and recommendations as one voice to the new PCC.

This challenge was complicated by reducing budgets and resources,  different organisational targets, objectives and cultures, availability and access to data, a broader reading audience, different levels of support and organisational expectations - to summarise we were all coming at this from very different angles.

On our side was wide ranging experience, a broad scope of analytical techniques, an understanding (we thought) of crime and disorder, and most importantly the overarching drive to make sure that the document would be the best we could achieve.  We wanted to provide a clear and precise picture of Crime and Disorder within Devon and Cornwall and ensure that it was the foundation for all future planning.

Inevitably, blending our data caused us to reconsider some of our hypothesis, and raised new research questions which the 2012/13 year will hopefully see us testing through further joint analytical activity.

This presentation covers the highs and lows of this process from a range of perspectives, describes the analytical foundations for the document, obstacles and opportunities when partnership working, and highlights the research questions now being explored as we seek to understand together the crime and disorder drivers within our rural, urban and coastal communities across the Peninsula.

Page last modified on 30 jan 13 16:57