Managers' Areas of Work: Percentages
|
Manager's Area of Work |
Percentage |
|
Market planning, research or analysis |
20.2% |
|
General corporate |
15.6% |
|
Strategic planning |
13.6% |
|
Business development |
9.0% |
|
Competitive intelligence or analysis |
8.7% |
|
Research and development |
5.9% |
|
Product or financial planning/operations |
5.8% |
|
Information center or services |
5.6% |
|
Other or unclassified |
15.6% |
What is interesting about the data on a CI unit's location is how
the situation changed over a period of almost a decade. In a 1993 survey, the
rank order of areas of work was reported as follows: [4]
The changes in organizational location reflect the maturation and
growth of technology- and tactics-oriented CI during that period.
The last element of location is the relationship between the CI
unit and one or more end users. Research on reporting relationships has tended
to focus on how many levels of bureaucracy are between the CI unit and the
firm's board of directors. [5] Although the findings are interesting, especially in
that they show that almost 50 percent of the units are within two levels of the
board of directors, the question is deceptive. That is because it presumes that
the appropriate end users are the directors. That is correct if the CI unit
provides strategy-oriented or target-oriented CI. However, there are other end
users in other locations that are, or should be, receiving one or more forms of
CI.
The most appropriate location for the CI unit, experience shows,
is to report directly to the end user. If there is more than one end user, the
CI unit ideally should be within one level of its best or most important end
user. The reason for such a relationship is that the CI unit (see Chapter 9) must be
able to work with the end user on an ongoing basis, not only to ascertain his or
her CI needs, but also to have access to him or her during the conduct of any CI
assignment. The reason for such access is that, contrary to some popular
misconceptions, the best CI is not provided when the unit is tasked and sent out
to report at the end of the assignment. Rather, it is produced when the end user
and the CI staff are in continuing communication during the process of
conducting the assignment.
This need for ongoing communications has generated an additional
recommendation on "location." In
this context, that means answering the question, "Where should the CI unit be
physically housed?" The answer is, "as close as is possible to the physical
location of the primary or most important end user." The goal is to generate
what is sometimes called "hall friction," that is, frequent one-on-one
unscheduled contact between the CI end user and those producing the
intelligence. If the CI unit cannot be located in close proximity to this end
user, then it is better for the unit's manager to be close to the end user than
it is to be close to the CI unit's staff.