[Z399 INTELLIGENCE ANALYTICS] October 3, 2014
INDIANA UNIVERSITY, BLOOMINGTON
SOIC, DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION AND LIBRARY SCIENCE
SPRING 2015, SYLLABUS
Z399 INTELLIGENCE ANALYTICS
Room
Class
Instructor:
Email:
Office Hours:
Phone
3 CREDITS
LI 001
Tue, Thu 9:30-10:45
Carol E.B. Choksy
cchoksy@[Link]
LI019 Mon 1:30-3:00 PM
317-294-8329
PREREQUISITES: NONE
RESOURCES OTHER THAN CLASSROOM NEEDED: NONE
COURSE DESCRIPTION
September 11, 2001 was not a strategic surprise because the U.S. intelligence community did not have enough
information to perform an analysis. Nor was it a surprise because flying a plane into a large building was
unthinkable. Poor analysis was the root cause. Information silos, disciplinary silos, lack of needed organization
change, inability to recognize the adversarys capabilities, and decision-maker short-sightedness fed the calamity.
Intelligence analysis takes information from many different sourcesalong with the deficiencies and biases of
those sources, combines it with historical, political, technical, social, ideological, economic, and religious
knowledge, and uses analytic methods to create background and recommendations for decision makers. The
analytic techniques used are qualitative resembling methods used in business for project management and
problem solving. Brainstorming, visualization, scenario building, and hypothesis generation are a few of the
structured analytic techniques used by the U.S. intelligence community.
Students will analyze intelligence failures using a variety of analytic methods, then write up their results into
intelligence reports with their findings and recommendations for decision-makers.
[Z399 INTELLIGENCE ANALYTICS] October 3, 2014
STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES
Describe four examples of behaviors and organizational pathologies that lead to intelligence failure
Describe two examples of cognitive biases leading to intelligence failure
Demonstrate the use of four structured analytic techniques
REQUIRED BOOKS
Sarah M. Beebe (Editor), Randolph H. Pherson. Cases in Intelligence Analysis: Structured Analytic Techniques in Action. Los
Angeles: CQPress, 2014. ISBN-13: 978-1483340166.
Richards J. Heuer, Jr. and Randolph H. Pherson. Structured Analytic Techniques for Intelligence Analysis. Washington, DC:
CQPress, 2015. ISBN 978-1-4522-4151-7
ASSIGNMENTS
Students are to assume their audience is the President of the United States, the Director of a major NGO, the CEO of
a major corporation, etc. In other words, your audience is very busy and must make an informed decision.
Date
Due
Jan 29
Feb 10
Feb 17
Feb 19
Feb 24
Feb 26
Mar 3
Mar 10
Mar 24
Mar 26
Mar 31
Apr 2
Apr 7
Apr 9
Apr 14
Apr 16
Apr 23
May 4
%
Grade
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
15
Assignments
Cognitive Bias Assessment
Who Poisoned Karinna Moskalenko?
The Anthrax Killer
Cyber H2O
Is Wen Ho Lee a Spy?
Jousting with Cuba over Radio Marti
The Road to Tarin Kowt
Who Murdered Jonathan Luna?
The Assassination of Benazir Bhutto
Death in the Southwest
The Atlanta Olympics Bombing
The DC Sniper
Colombias FARC Attacks the US Homeland
Understanding Revolutionary Organization 17 November
Defending Mumbai from Terrorist Attack
Iranian Meddling in Bahrain
Shades of Orange in Ukraine
FINAL CASE STUDY write-up
[Z399 INTELLIGENCE ANALYTICS] October 3, 2014
Traits
Poor
RUBRIC
Adequate
Good
Excellent
There is no clear
introduction, structure, or
conclusion.
The introduction states the
main topic. A conclusion is
included.
The introduction states the
main topic and provides an
overview of the paper. A
conclusion is included.
The introduction is
inviting, states the main
topic, and provides an
overview of the paper.
Information is relevant
and presented in a logical
order. The conclusion is
strong.
The writer uses a limited
vocabulary. Jargon or
clichs may be present and
detract from the meaning.
The author uses words that
communicate clearly, but
the writing lacks variety.
The author uses precise
words and phrases. The
choice and placement of
words is inaccurate at times
and/or seems overdone.
The author uses precise
words and phrases. The
choice and placement of
words seems accurate,
natural, and not forced.
Sentences sound awkward,
are distractingly repetitive,
or are difficult to
understand. The author
makes numerous errors in
grammar, mechanics,
and/or spelling that
interfere with
understanding.
Most sentences are well
constructed, but they have
a similar structure and/or
length. The author makes
several errors in grammar,
mechanics, and/or spelling
that interfere with
understanding.
Most sentences are well
constructed and have
varied structure and length.
The author makes a few
errors in grammar,
mechanics, and/or spelling,
but they do not interfere
with understanding.
All sentences are well
constructed and have
varied structure and
length. The author makes
no errors in grammar,
mechanics, and/or
spelling.
Teamwork
Team argued throughout
the process and did not
produce a final product
Team argued, produced a
final product, but the
product is lacking in
cohesion and thoroughness
Team had disagreements
and final product shows
those disagreements
through either lack of
cohesion or thoroughness
Team worked through
disagreements and final
product shows
cohesiveness and
thoroughness
Problem
definition
Unaware of either general
or specific characteristics
that preclude routine
solution procedures
Aware of general illdefined nature of the
problem and some of the
specific problem deficiencies
Identifies most important
ill-defined aspects of
problem as well as general
ill-defined problem nature
Self-awareness
Apparently unaware of
personal perspectives,
biases or assumptions and
their effects
Somewhat aware of
personal perspective but not
fully able to compensate for
its effects
Keenly aware of personal
perspective and biases and
compensates effectively
Context
awareness
Apparently unaware of
broader context In which
problem occurs; assumes
singular perspective
Evidence of awareness of
problem context found
throughout solution process
but some important
connections and
implications not recognized
Also aware of relationship
between present problem
and context in which it is
situated
Structuring the
problem space
Unable or unwilling to
structure on the problem
space within parameters
provided
May structure problem
space based on superficial
problem characteristics or
unwarranted assumptions
Uses goal, mission or
other ultimates to
structure problem space
effectively
Organization
Word Choice
Sentence
Structure,
Grammar,
Mechanics, &
Spelling
[Z399 INTELLIGENCE ANALYTICS] October 3, 2014
Perseverance
Unsuccessful, sporadic,
apparently random,
attempts at problem lead to
frustration and
abandonment
Works through problem
systematically but may omit
necessary reconsideration of
assumptions
Systematically works
through problem; often
makes multiple passes
through the problem
space as conditions
change in order to
assesses consequences of
changes or alternatives
Learning from
failure
Unsuccessful attempts
based on untenable
assumptions not recognized.
Unsuccessful attempts
recognized and abandoned
Unsuccessful attempts
regularly used to better
understand problem and
solution process
Willingness to
explore
Fully commits to first
apparent solution path and
follows it through to
completion without
reconsideration
Generates multiple potential
solutions but may not
consider them all or use
appropriate selection
criteria
Generates rich variety of
alternatives; tests them
objectively and selects
rationally
Random or inappropriate
application of tools; may not
be able to provide reasons
for approach selected
Tendency to use particular
tools and mechanisms
appropriately but may lack
ability to justify the
approach taken or adjust
tools to fit the problem
presented
Use general principles and
fundamental concepts to
frame overall problem
space and as solution
tools; provides reasonable
and substantive
justification for
assumptions and choices
Appropriate
use of tools
Likely to display either no
confidence in solution or
process (may claim problem
Likely to lack confidence in
Appropriate level of
Confidence in
is impossible) or be
solution; limited
confidence and
inappropriately
confident
commitment
without
commitment to eventual
work
and overly committed to
encouragement or support
solution
obviously ineffective
solution
LAST NINE ROWS FROM U.S. AIR FORCE RUBRIC FOR FRAMING AND RESOLVING ILL-DEFINED PROBLEMS
[Z399 INTELLIGENCE ANALYTICS] October 3, 2014
GRADING SCALE
Grade
A
AB+
B
BC+
C
CD+
D
DF
%
93
90
87
83
80
77
73
70
67
63
60
0
[Z399 INTELLIGENCE ANALYTICS] October 3, 2014
Date
Subject
Required Readings
Jan 13
Introduction
Jan 15
Sources of failure
Introduction to the class
Jan 20
Organizational
pathologies
Jan 22
Political and
strategic errors of
senior
government
officials
Jan 27
Failure to adapt
to the target
Jan 29
Cognitive bias
Feb 3
Who Poisoned
Karinna
Moskalenko?
Feb 5
Who Poisoned
Karinna
Moskalenko?
COURSE SCHEDULE
Assignments
Byman, Daniel (2005) Strategic Surprise and the September 11 Attacks. Annual Review
of Political Science 8: 145-70. In Oncourse
Patrick Conway, Red Team: How the Neoconservatives Helped Cause the Iraq
Intelligence Failure, Intelligence and National Security 27, (No. 4 August 2012): 488-512.
In OnCourse Resources
Allan Doig and Mark Pythian. The National Interest and the Politics of Threat
Exaggeration: The Blair Governments Case for War against Iraq. The Political
Quarterly 76, Issue 3(July, 2005): 368376. In OnCourse
Amy B. Zegart. September 11 and the Adaptation Failure of U.S. Intelligence
Agencies, International Security 29, No. 4 (Spring 2005): 78111
Richards J. Heuer, Jr., "Nosenko: Five Paths to Judgment," Studies in Intelligence 31,
no. 3 (Fall, 1987): 71-101
George Dvorsky. The 12 cognitive biases that prevent you from being rational.
io9, 9 Jan 2013, [Link]
Beebe & Pherson, Cases in Intelligence Analysis, Chapter 1
Heuer & Pherson, Structured Analytic Techniques, 9.1 Premortem Analysis, 9.2
Structured Self-Critique, 5.4 Starbursting
The analysis and the write-up
Do the Cognitive Bias
Assessment
Completion, 5 points
Due Jan 29
Moskalenko write-up
Due Feb 10
Date
Subject
[Z399 INTELLIGENCE ANALYTICS] October 3, 2014
Required Readings
Assignments
Beebe & Pherson, Cases in Intelligence Analysis, Chapter 2
The Anthrax Killer Heuer & Pherson, Structured Analytic Techniques, 4.4 Chronologies and
Timelines, 9.1 Premortem Analysis, 9.2 Structured Self-Critique
Feb 10
Feb 12
The Anthrax Killer The analysis and the write-up
Feb 17
Cyber H2O
Feb 19
Is Wen Ho Lee a
Spy?
Feb 24
Jousting with
Cuba over Radio
Marti
Feb 26
The Road to Tarin
Kowt
Mar 3
Who Murdered
Jonathan Luna?
Mar 5
Who Murdered
Jonathan Luna?
Beebe & Pherson, Cases in Intelligence Analysis, Chapter 3
Heuer & Pherson, Structured Analytic Techniques, 4.2 Getting Started Checklist,
8.1 Key Assumptions Check, 9.5 Devils Advocacy
Anthrax Killer writeup
Due Feb 17
Beebe & Pherson, Cases in Intelligence Analysis, Chapter 5
Heuer & Pherson, Structured Analytic Techniques, 4.4 Chronologies and
Timelines, 7.5 Deception Detection, 7.1.3 Quadrant Hypothesis Generation,
7.3 Analysis of Competing Hypothesis
Wen Ho Lee write-up
Due Feb 24
Beebe & Pherson, Cases in Intelligence Analysis, Chapter 4
Heuer & Pherson, Structured Analytic Techniques, 11.4 Force Field Analysis, 7.5
Deception Detection, 9.1 Premortem Analysis, 9.2 Structured Self-Critique
Beebe & Pherson, Cases in Intelligence Analysis, Chapter 6
Heuer & Pherson, Structured Analytic Techniques, 8.1 Key Assumptions Check,
9.5 Devils Advocacy, 11.5 SWOT Analysis
Beebe & Pherson, Cases in Intelligence Analysis, Chapter 7
Heuer & Pherson, Structured Analytic Techniques, 4.4 Chronologies and
Timelines, 7.1.1 Simple Hypothesis, 7.1.2 Multiple Hypotheses Generator, 7.3
Analysis of Competing Hypothesis
The analysis and the write-up
Cyber H2O write up
Due Feb 19
Radio Marti write-up
Due Feb 26
Tarin Kowt write-up
Due Mar 3
Date
Subject
Mar 10
The Assassination
of Benazir Bhutto
Mar 12
The Assassination
of Benazir Bhutto
Mar 17
Spring Break
Mar 19
Spring Break
Mar 24
Death in the
Southwest
Mar 26
The Atlanta
Olympics
Bombing
Mar 31
The DC Sniper
Apr 2
Colombias FARC
Attacks the US
Homeland
Apr 7
Understanding
Revolutionary
Organization 17
November
[Z399 INTELLIGENCE ANALYTICS] October 3, 2014
Required Readings
Assignments
Beebe & Pherson, Cases in Intelligence Analysis, Chapter 8
Heuer & Pherson, Structured Analytic Techniques, 4.4 Chronologies and
Timelines, 4.11 Mind Maps and Concept Maps, 7.3 Analysis of Competing
Hypothesis,
Jonathan Luna writeup
Due Mar 10
The analysis and the write-up
No assignments or readings
No assignments or readings
Beebe & Pherson, Cases in Intelligence Analysis, Chapter 9
Heuer & Pherson, Structured Analytic Techniques, 5.1 Structured Brainstorming,
5.4 Starbursting, 8.1 Key Assumptions Check, 7.1.2 Multiple Hypotheses
Generator, 7.3 Analysis of Competing Hypothesis
Bhutto write-up
Due Mar 24
Beebe & Pherson, Cases in Intelligence Analysis, Chapter 11
Heuer & Pherson, Structured Analytic Techniques, 8.1 Key Assumptions Check,
7.1.2 Multiple Hypotheses Generator, 5.7 Quadrant Crunching
Atlanta Olympics
Bombing write-up
Due Mar 31
Beebe & Pherson, Cases in Intelligence Analysis, Chapter 10
Heuer & Pherson, Structured Analytic Techniques, 8.1 Key Assumptions Check,
11.3 Pros-Cons-Faults-and-Fixes, 7.1.2 Multiple Hypotheses Generator
Death in the Southwest
write-up
Due Mar 26
Beebe & Pherson, Cases in Intelligence Analysis, Chapter 12
Heuer & Pherson, Structured Analytic Techniques, 5.1 Structured Brainstorming, DC Sniper write-up
8.4 Red Hat Analysis, 6.1.4 Multiple Scenarios Generation, 6.2 Indicators, 6.3 Due Apr 2
Indicators Validator
Beebe & Pherson, Cases in Intelligence Analysis, Chapter 13
Heuer & Pherson, Structured Analytic Techniques, 7.1.1 Simple Hypotheses, 9.3
What if? Analysis, 5.7 Quadrant Crunching
FARC write-up
Due Apr 7
Date
Subject
Apr 9
Defending
Mumbai from
Terrorist Attack
Apr 14
Iranian Meddling
in Bahrain
Apr 16
Shades of Orange
in Ukraine
Apr 21
Shades of Orange
in Ukraine
Apr 23
The Whole
Enchilada
Apr 28
More Enchiladas
Apr 30
Last Day of
Classes
May 4
FINAL DUE
[Z399 INTELLIGENCE ANALYTICS] October 3, 2014
Required Readings
Assignments
Beebe & Pherson, Cases in Intelligence Analysis, Chapter 14
Heuer & Pherson, Structured Analytic Techniques, 5.1 Structured Brainstorming,
8.4 Red Hat Analysis, 5.7 Quadrant Crunching, 6.2 Indicators, 6.3 Indicators
Validator
Organization 17
November write-up
Due Apr 9
Beebe & Pherson, Cases in Intelligence Analysis, Chapter 16
Heuer & Pherson, Structured Analytic Techniques, 5.1 Structured Brainstorming,
8.5 Outside-In Thinking, 6.1.1 Simple Scenarios
Iranian Meddling
write-up
Due Apr 16
Beebe & Pherson, Cases in Intelligence Analysis, Chapter 15
Heuer & Pherson, Structured Analytic Techniques, 5.4 Starbursting, 5.6
Morphological Analysis, 5.1 Structured Brainstorming, 6.2 Indicators
The analysis and the write-up
Brookings Institution, Organizing and Managing Intelligence Analysis to Fight
Terrorism, 2013 [Link]
Eric C. Anderson, Red Cell! Global Agenda 2012, University of Delaware
[Link]
Course wrap upno readings
FINAL CASE STUDY WRITE-UP ASSIGNED
FINAL CASE STUDY WRITE-UP DUE
Mumbai write-up
Due Apr 14
Orange in Ukraine
write-up
Due Apr 23
[Z399 INTELLIGENCE ANALYTICS] October 3, 2014
INSTRUCTOR COMMUNICATION STATEMENT
COURSE PARTICIPATION AND ATTENDANCE EXPECTATIONS
This course heavily involves student participation. This necessitates attendance and
completion of readings and assignments prior to class.
Students uncomfortable with participation in class or with a need to practice spoken
English should read from notes taken while reading course assignments.
If you must miss a class because of an illness or family emergency, please let the
instructor know. Also make arrangements with your classmates to pick up class
notes.
SUMMARY OF COURSE DELIVERY METHODS (ASSIGNMENTS, FORUMS, GROUP
WORK, EXAMS)
The instructor reserves the right to make, with notice, adjustments to the calendar
and content of this course syllabus.
Assignments are either brief papers of five to eight pages or an exam. Papers are to
be concise and follow standard essay writing with a complete introduction and
conclusion stating the main topic, the ideas to be explored in the body of the essay,
and the recommendation. Students are encouraged to use graphics: pictures, graphs,
etc. to illustrate their points.
SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS FOR ASSIGNMENTS (STYLE MANUALS, FORMATTING)
Use Chicago Manual of Style for citing and listing sources in your projects.
You may use one-inch margins, but all papers must be double-spaced and at least
size 10 font.
ACADEMIC INTEGRITY STATEMENT
Students are reminded that double submission of work for academic credit, fabrication,
and plagiarism are serious academic offenses that can result in penalties up to and
including failure on an assignment or failure in the course. According to the Indiana
University Code of Student Rights, Responsibilities, and Conduct, they are defined as
follows:
1. CHEATING
Cheating is considered to be an attempt to use or provide unauthorized assistance,
materials, information, or study aids in any form and in any academic exercise or
environment.
1. A student must not use external assistance on any in-class or take-home examination,
unless the instructor specifically has authorized external assistance. This prohibition
10
[Z399 INTELLIGENCE ANALYTICS] October 3, 2014
includes, but is not limited to, the use of tutors, books, notes, calculators, computers, and
wireless communication devices.
2. A student must not use another person as a substitute in the taking of an examination or
quiz, nor allow other persons to conduct research or to prepare work, without advanced
authorization from the instructor to whom the work is being submitted.
3. A student must not use materials from a commercial term paper company, files of papers
prepared by other persons, or submit documents found on the Internet.
4. A student must not collaborate with other persons on a particular project and submit a copy
of a written report that is represented explicitly or implicitly as the students individual
work.
5. A student must not use any unauthorized assistance in a laboratory, at a computer terminal,
or on fieldwork.
6. A student must not steal examinations or other course materials, including but not limited
to, physical copies and photographic or electronic images.
7. A student must not submit substantial portions of the same academic work for credit or
honors more than once without permission of the instructor or program to whom he work
is being submitted.
8. A student must not, without authorization, alter a grade or score in any way, nor alter
answers on a returned exam or assignment for credit.
2. FABRICATION
A student must not falsify or invent any information or data in an academic exercise
including, but not limited to, records or reports, laboratory results, and citation to the
sources of information.
3. INTERFERENCE
A student must not steal, change, destroy, or impede another students work, nor should
the student unjustly attempt, through a bribe, a promise of favors or threats, to affect any
students grade or the evaluation of academic performance. Impeding another students
work includes, but is not limited to, the theft, defacement, or mutilation of resources so as
to deprive others of the information they contain.
4. VIOLATION OF COURSE RULES
A student must not violate course rules established by a department, the course syllabus,
verbal or written instructions, or the course materials that are rationally related to the
content of the course or to the enhancement of the learning process in the course.
5. FACILITATING ACADEMIC DISHONESTY
11
[Z399 INTELLIGENCE ANALYTICS] October 3, 2014
A student must not intentionally or knowingly help or attempt to help another student to
commit an act of academic misconduct, nor allow another student to use his or her work or
resources to commit an act of misconduct.
PLAGIARISM
Plagiarism is defined as presenting someone else's work, including the work of other
students, as one's own. Any ideas or materials taken from another source for either written
or oral use must be fully acknowledged, unless the information is common knowledge.
What is considered "common knowledge" may differ from course to course.
A student must not adopt or reproduce ideas, opinions, theories, formulas, graphics, or
pictures of another person without acknowledgment.
A student must give credit to the originality of others and acknowledge indebtedness
whenever:
Directly quoting another person's actual words, whether oral or written;
Using another person's ideas, opinions, or theories and claiming them as ones own;
Paraphrasing the words, ideas, opinions, or theories of others, whether oral or
written;
Borrowing facts, statistics, or illustrative material; or
Offering materials assembled or collected by others in the form of projects or
collections.
EXAM POLICIES (PROCTORING, OPEN BOOK, ETC.)
The course has verbal quizzes. Correct answers are rewarded with candy. Students will
special dietary needs should notify the instructor at the beginning of the course.
ADA DISABILITY COMPLIANCE STATEMENT
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is a federal anti-discrimination statute that
provides comprehensive civil rights protection for persons with disabilities. Among other
things, this legislation requires that all students with disabilities be guaranteed a learning
environment that provides for reasonable accommodation of their disabilities. If you
believe you have a disability requiring an accommodation, please contact IU Disability
Services for Students.
LATE WORK / MISSED WORK / EXTRA CREDIT
12
If you cannot deliver an assignment on the date it is due, it is your responsibility to
discuss your situation with the instructor, preferably in advance.
Some assignments will be discussed in class following the due date, late work will
not be accepted for those assignments
[Z399 INTELLIGENCE ANALYTICS] October 3, 2014
The instructor will entertain opportunities for extra credit, but only those available
to all students. Please discuss your ideas with me.
A grade of Incomplete (I) may be given in this course after discussion with the
instructor.
SNOW DAYS / HOLIDAYS
The instructor reserves the right to make, with notice, adjustments to the calendar and content of
this course syllabus.
DEADLINES / DUE DATES
All assignments must be handed in by their due dates.
If you cannot deliver an assignment or a project on the date it is due, it is your
responsibility to discuss your situation with the instructor, preferably in advance.
RECOMMENDED TECHNOLOGY
We will use OnCourse as our learning management system. All assignments, online
discussions, chats, and all course communications will be performed using OnCourse. If you
have not used OnCourse before here is a video tutorial. Here is a written cheat sheet for
using OnCourse.
CONNECTIONS TO CAMPUS RESOURCE CENTERS (WRITING, MATH, LIBRARY
ASSISTANCE)
Students who are unsure of their writing skills are strongly urged to take advantage of
Writing Tutorial Services, 855-6738. You will need to print your paper. You can make an
appointment or stop by the Wells Library Information Commons Mon-Thurs 10 AM to 8
PM, and Fri 10 AM to 5 PM.
For undergraduate library services you can stop by the Wells Library Information
Commons or visit the library web site for specific questions. The main library page has a
chat feature that permits you to ask quick questions and get answers.
TECHNOLOGY ASSISTANCE (HELP DESK, IU WARE)
Technology Assistance is called UITS, University Information Technology Services. Their
web site is very helpful. They have walk-up services in the Wells Library Information
Commons.
13
