ArticleslgStudy

science

Intelligence cycle (target-centric approach)

Intelligence cycle (target-centric approach) is a science topic covered in the lgStudy science library. This page brings together a partial reference excerpt, illustrations, worked examples, real-world applications and a short study plan, so you can understand Intelligence cycle (target-centric approach) rather than just read about it. In short: The target-centric approach to intelligence is a method of intelligence analysis that Robert M. Clark introduced in his book "Intelligence Analysis: A Target-Centric Approach" in 2003 to offer an alternative methodology to the traditional intelligence cycle.

Intelligence cycle (target-centric approach) — main illustration
Intelligence cycle (target-centric approach) — illustration

Key takeaways

  • Intelligence cycle (target-centric approach) belongs to science; place it in that map before memorising details.
  • Learn the definition first, then one example that makes the definition concrete.
  • Connect Intelligence cycle (target-centric approach) to a quantity you can measure, compute or draw — that is where exam questions come from.
  • Reproduce the core statement of Intelligence cycle (target-centric approach) from memory before moving on to harder problems.

Reference excerpt

The target-centric approach to intelligence is a method of intelligence analysis that Robert M. Clark introduced in his book "Intelligence Analysis: A Target-Centric Approach" in 2003 to offer an alternative methodology to the traditional intelligence cycle. Its goal is to redefine the intelligence process in such a way that all of the parts of the intelligence cycle come together as a network. It is a collaborative process where collectors, analysts and customers are integral, and information does not always flow linearly.

Target-centric analysis

Intelligence process

The most common view of the intelligence process is the model known as the intelligence cycle. In the original concept of this model, the steps are isolated stages where each part has a designated purpose or task. When the contributors and collectors complete data collection, the cycle continues. While this procedure completes each part of the cycle, it may constrain the flow of information. The intelligence community often discusses the problems with this pure model and offers multiple approaches to solving them. In the pure model, there is limited opportunity for contributors or consumers to ask questions or provide feedback. To fully understand what they analyze, analysts should have the opportunity to ask questions about the sources where collectors gathered information. Likewise, when the decision-maker receives an intelligence estimate, he or she should have the opportunity to ask questions concerning not only how the analyst reached a particular conclusion, but also questions concerning the reliability of sources. Sherman Kent the "father of intelligence analysis," left a legacy in not only his work, but in the faculty members at the Sherman Kent Center. The faculty teaches intelligence principles to future intelligence analysts. According to Jack Davis, of the Sherman Kent Center, Kent encouraged arguments and dissent among analysts, as well as taking into account a "wide range of outside opinions." Kent also encouraged "collective responsibility for judgment," which supports a network approach to intelligence. In such a network, analysts are directly accountable for the work, and a decision maker or consumer's questions help the intelligence process by leading by pushing the analyst to challenge and refine his or her own work. Agencies constantly modify the traditional, pure model in intelligence practice. For example, various "centers" under the Director of National Intelligence deliberately put collectors and analysts into teams. The traditional intelligence cycle separates collectors, processors, and analysts and too often results in "throwing information over the wall" to become the next person's responsibility. Everyone neatly avoids responsibility for the quality of the final product. Because this "compartmentalized process results in formalized and relatively inflexible requirements at each stage, it is more predictable and therefore more vulnerable to an opponent’s countermeasures.” Kurt April and Julian Bessa examined weaknesses of the competitive intelligence community in their article "A Critique of the Strategic Competitive Intelligence Process within a Global Energy Multinational." They examined two competitive intelligence processes: Competitive Strategic Business Intelligence (CIAD) and Competitive Technical Intelligence (CTI). According to April and Bessa, CIAD is a linear process where the intelligence product moves upward through the layers of the organization. In contrast, CTI is a more networked model. They found that the organizational structure associated with CIAD prevents open-sharing of information and ideas, and is a stumbling block to intelligence analysis.” Testifying to the House Committee on Homeland Security Mr. Eliot A. Jardines, President of Open Source Publishing, Incorporated, presented a statement and supported the target-centric approach to intelligence. According to Mr. Jardines, Dr. Robert Clark "proposes a more target-centric, iterative and collaborative approach which would be far more effective than our current traditional intelligence cycle." With a target-centric approach to intelligence analysis, intelligence is collaborative, because this model creates a system where it can include all contributors, participants, and consumers. Each individual can question the model and get answers along the way. The target-centric model is a network process where the information flows unconstrained among all participants, who also focus on the objective to create a shared picture of the target. For other models and their limitations, see Analysis of competing hypotheses and cognitive traps for intelligence analysis.

Creating the model

Models in intelligence Conceptual models are useful for the analytic process, and are particularly helpful to help understand the target-centric approach to intelligence. A conceptual model is an abstract invention of the mind that best incorporates and takes advantage of an analyst's thought process. The model allows the analyst to use a powerful descriptive tool to both estimate current situations and predict future circumstances.

Sources of intelligence information Once the analyst constructs the skeleton structure of the model, the next step is to add substance. This is where the analyst must research, gather information, and synthesize to populate the model. For an analyst to successfully populate a model for a complex target, he or she must find information from a wide range of both classified and unclassified sources. This includes retrieving information from the body of existing intelligence. Depending on the target, an analyst may seek out information from open source intelligence (information available to the general public), human intelligence (HUMINT), measures and signatures intelligence (MASINT), signals intelligence (SIGINT), or imagery intelligence (IMINT). Even though open source information is inexpensive or free, and easily accessible, it can be just as useful as the more specialized, technical intelligence sources that are expensive to use.

… excerpt ends here. Continue reading the full article.

Illustrations

Intelligence cycle (target-centric approach): Target-centric intelligence cycle
Target-centric intelligence cycle

Worked examples

Example 1 — a first encounter with Intelligence cycle (target-centric approach)

Start with the simplest possible case. Write down what Intelligence cycle (target-centric approach) claims or describes in one sentence, then invent the smallest concrete situation in which that sentence is true. In science, the smallest case is usually a single object, a single equation or a single measurement. Check that every symbol or term in your sentence has a meaning in that case.

Example 2 — changing one variable

Take the situation from Example 1 and change exactly one quantity: double it, halve it, or set it to zero. Predict what should happen to Intelligence cycle (target-centric approach) before you calculate. Comparing your prediction with the result is the fastest way to find out whether you understand the idea or only the words.

Example 3 — an exam-style question

Typical questions about Intelligence cycle (target-centric approach) ask you to (a) state it precisely, (b) apply it to given data, and (c) explain a limitation. Practise writing all three answers in under five minutes; the third part is what separates a full-mark answer from an average one.

Applications of Intelligence cycle (target-centric approach)

In research
Intelligence cycle (target-centric approach) appears in science research whenever the underlying quantities have to be modelled precisely. Papers usually cite it as a starting assumption and then explore where it breaks down.
In technology and industry
Engineering practice reuses Intelligence cycle (target-centric approach) in design rules, simulations and safety margins. Knowing the idea lets you read a specification sheet and understand why the numbers look the way they do.
In the classroom
Intelligence cycle (target-centric approach) is common in secondary-school and first-year university syllabi. It links to neighbouring topics Intelligence analysis, Intelligence assessment, Military intelligence, so understanding it makes those chapters shorter.
In everyday life
Look for Intelligence cycle (target-centric approach) outside the textbook — in sport, cooking, traffic, electronics or the sky above you. An example you found yourself is remembered far longer than one you were given.
Ask Teacher Smith questions about this articleOpens your AI tutor with a question about “Intelligence cycle (target-centric approach)” →

Affiliate

Preply — study more efficiently by working with a personal tutor. 50% off.

How to study Intelligence cycle (target-centric approach) in 20 minutes

  1. Read the reference excerpt below once, without taking notes.
  2. Close the page and write down what Intelligence cycle (target-centric approach) means in your own words.
  3. Compare your version with the excerpt and mark what you missed.
  4. Work through the three examples above with pen and paper.
  5. Explain Intelligence cycle (target-centric approach) out loud to somebody else — or to Teacher Smith in the lgStudy chat.

Frequently asked questions

What is Intelligence cycle (target-centric approach) in simple terms?

The target-centric approach to intelligence is a method of intelligence analysis that Robert M. Clark introduced in his book "Intelligence Analysis: A Target-Centric Approach" in 2003 to offer an alternative methodology to the traditional intelligence cycle.

Why does Intelligence cycle (target-centric approach) matter?

Because it connects several science ideas at once: it gives you a definition you can apply, a quantity you can calculate, and a way to check whether a result is plausible.

How should I study Intelligence cycle (target-centric approach)?

Read the excerpt, restate it from memory, then work through the examples and applications listed on this page. The five-step study plan above takes about twenty minutes.

What does this page cover?

It gives you a compact reference excerpt plus original lgStudy explanations, examples, applications and study material on Intelligence cycle (target-centric approach).

Tags

  • Intelligence analysis
  • Intelligence assessment
  • Military intelligence

Keep exploring