Seen on the blog echoes the intelligence this interesting article Claude Revel ( The key influence in Brussels - blogs.lesechos.fr , July 23, 2008 ) who inspired me the following commentary.
Bravo for this clear vision, clear and intelligent about what you call "influence" and our weaknesses matter. long been involved in the profound changes imposed by the explosion of information technology in the intelligence field, I became interested in close economic intelligence, his concept so controversial as its practices so necessary. While not understanding the reasons that led its designers to present the influence as one of three major areas of discipline, I was led to my interest (only a little I admit) in this activity. I must say that your article is radically changing the perception I had from reading the mainstream press and some professionals (who were probably not good). The latter, influenced no doubt by some ideologues of economic intelligence, developing a vision indeed (and probably the practices that go with it) very martial influence, considered a weapon more or less underground in the "economic war" they make all the sauces. Also well aware of the importance and necessity of what you call "network activity", the primary interest to weigh in community decisions or international, and the urgent need for a true public-private partnership in this area, I was very pessimistic, however, in these circumstances, the prospect of positive developments from this activity. Reading your article I was reassured.
I remain convinced of the need to make a clear distinction between intelligence (or Business Intelligence) and influences which are two totally different functions with distinct purposes, even if they are very complementary, and your item am raised awareness, in many ways quite comparable (weaknesses, but also methodological aspects). I agree with you on the fact that the influence is "completely related to economic intelligence," but this does not mean that it incorporates or she is part. The intelligence source of knowledge and foresight is essential for the practice of influence, but it is also for corporate strategy and in other areas, to national security, military strategy the fight against drug trafficking and against terrorism, and many other activities that do not make them sub-assemblies. In the same manner as a source of energy is essential for the functioning of a machine without the machine is considered a subset of the source of energy it uses, there is no reason to consider the influence as a subset of its source of information or knowledge.
I developed in several articles published on Agoravox the reasons I think that impose a strict demarcation of the intelligence function to the operation of useful information (the Business Intelligence), without extending it to other business activities such as strategy, management, influence, but also protection. As you in the area of influence, I see the contradiction and applications of chaotic concept of economic intelligence, and too often its difficult to win. Like you, I attribute these disorders and these weaknesses to our inability to implement a true "operational thinking" able to build a theoretical foundation and methodological deficient while remaining firmly oriented development practices. Your article confirms my diagnosis, while it comforts me to work in a discipline that is not alone in experiencing these difficulties.
FB
0 comments:
Post a Comment