The Optimisation of Commercial Intelligence through the employment of multiple philosophical dispositions.

What causes conspiracy theorists to question consensus reality and to hypothesise that the world is just one big revolving door, with the majority of the human race being caught inside?

Whatever it is, we believe that conspiracist psychology has a real part to play in developing alternative competitive intelligence perspectives for industry.

Paranoiac disposition can play a significant role in the acquisition, interpretation, processing and assessment of effective intelligence.

The CIA and MI6 have had a policy for years which ensures intelligence is derived from assets comprising multiple philosophical dispositions. Many of these dispositions are hostile to the US and UK, but their perspectives are a welcome input to the numerous intelligence thinktanks, operating around the world.

It goes without saying that in order for global brands to fully secure their investments that they must embrace the opportunity to develop resource acquisition policies that lead to the introduction of multiple philosophical dispositions into the process.

Never has this been more important, given the rise of China and India as economic powerhouses.

Choose your analysts carefully. If you hire analysts with the same background as you - don't be surprised when they don't churn out anything new!

Looking to hire multiple philosophical dispositions? 

Hiring Competitive Intelligence Analysts:: One place to start?

Brand Security expert reveals::

I was asked once to interview candidates for the role of competitive intelligence analyst for a major corporation. My first question was "why don't you hire from within and train the chosen candidate in CI techniques?". The manager in question thought that was a good idea, but he also felt that many of his staff would not be objective enough. He was right of course. There was a further issue which revolved around company politics. Executives who have worked for the company for many years are unlikely to be accepted as the company CI Analyst.

So we decided to do a little experiment. We decided to look for the most unlikely candidate, not the most likely. In other words, someone who had served the company well for many years and had a good appreciation of the brand - but who was a relatively junior member of staff and unknown in this particular area of the business.

We decided that we would train and mentor a young secretarial assistant called Julie in the role of Competitive Intelligence Analyst. Julie had all the credentials we needed. She was beautiful, bright and most importantly approachable. We knew that once trained that Julie would be able to do the most important job of all. Attract and absorb - competitive intelligence. And so it was that everywhere Julie went, people would share information freely with her.

Sure, we had to train her in CI methods and process. Sure we had to mentor her to understand the business models and market dynamics at play. Sure we had to nurture her through her lack of confidence in her own abilities at times.

But we got the most important thing from Julie in the shortest space of time.

The truest reflection of ourselves in relation to our competition ever.

Commercial Analyst or Spy - Did you open yourself up to Corporate Espionage?

Brand Killer Robots reveal::

In the world of commercial analysis, it seems that there are a hundred different job titles for almost every role. Everything from technical, networking, data and systems analysts on a technical level and business analysts, information analysts, competitive and business intellgence analysts on a business level. Then there are even more specialised types of analyst such as stock market analysts, underwriting analysts, financial analysts and business systems analysts.

With such a diverse array of analysis talent on show, how can hiring managers ensure they are selecting the most appropriate level of analyst - and more importantly hiring analysts they can trust? In other words, how do they ensure that they are hiring people who have the right intentions - not the wrong intentions? How can they tell when they interview them?

It is our experience that many UK executives are failing to conduct proper checks on analysis staff prior to recruitment, prefering to protect the company from any hiring misjudgements by offering short-term contracts or exercising rights by extending periods of probation.

Whilst employment law may protect companies like this from dealing with analysts who have somehow not met the conditions, it does not protect the company from industrial espionage.

In a recent study, a comparative analysis was conducted which investigated the behaviour of military intelligence analysts versus that of their commercial analyst counterparts.

It was clear from the investigation that military intelligence analysts asked very different questions than that of commercial analysts. Military Intelligence analysts were highly objective, impersonal and non-specific in their approach whereas commercial intelligence analysts were highly subjective - preferring to concentrate on the specific labels and subject matters of the company, rather than obtaining a higher level objective view.

Another difference was in the methodologies of analysis used. Intelligence analysts preferred to develop open methods of analysis, using transparent communications. Whereas business analysts were happier maintaining a less open methodology with closed communications.

Suffice to say that infiltrators prefer to install devices and mechanisms to encourage staff to do the knowledge acquisition, requirements gathering and even the analysis work for them, thereby freeing the analyst to concentrate on the real purpose of their engagement i.e trawling for secrets (espionage). Whereas the business analyst would be so absorbed by the burden of using conventional business analysis techniques for acquisition and analysis that he or she would only be able to concentrate on what he was being paid to do.

If any advice were to be offered to managers in this respect it would be to hire and train analysts from within, rather than seek them from outside. In the Competitive Intelligence business, there is no substitute for loyalty.

For more information on this study email Stephen at intrench@gmail.com

How not to hire a security consultant

Brand Killer Robots reveal::
So this IT security guy at a major investment bank in London says, "hello Mr X, thank you for coming along today to interview for the position of security consultant with ABC Merchant Bank".

He says, "what we're really looking for is someone who has a good level of understanding of business level security matters, because the current IT team are only really competent in Microsoft technology level security". Mr X replies, "so what do you mean by business level security". After a brief pause the IT security guy says "well i don't mean site security or business contiguency security, i guess we're really talking about is any other type of security beyond IT, office and disaster recovery". Mr X replies, "so what specifically do you mean?".

IT security guy finally cracks and says, "well...... we're really concerned that nobody is in control of the gaps which exist between the different areas of security specialism in our company". "What really frightens us, is that if this information leaks out and we become a target for every one and its cat, from our most fierce competitors to the hacker guy working out of his basement in Atlanta.

"I see", said Mr X, "so when do you want me to start?". By this time IT security guy has built up sufficient confidence in the candidate Mr X, to offer him the job on the spot.

Several days later, the recruitment agent calls to say that the company in question has had second thoughts about hiring Mr X, as the information gleened from the interview had lead them to the conclusion that they must restructure their entire security operations forthwith.
Had Mr X been a black hat, he might have sought revenge in a multitude of different ways, from hacking their highly visible UNIX systems, to dropping a line or two to some interested parties or perhaps even having a whisper in the chief executives ear.