Why Does Unknown Number

Intelligence: poison and antidote mixed in a single jar

In my previous post , I referred to the example of confusion between "industrial espionage" and "intelligence" that we had been given by the Minister of Industry January 6, 2011 at the microphone by Jean-Michel Apathy RTL. The FéPIE also responded in a press release denouncing a mixture between poison and antidote . The problem is there in this mix of poison and the antidote in one jar labeled "economic intelligence".

It must indeed be noted that large response FéPIE who by its Chairman Herve Seveno, notes in a statement to AFP confusion made by the minister, adding that he gets well in the posture of the doctor who confuses pathology and care, and poison antidote . Hervé Seveno so appealing to the Interministerial Delegate for business intelligence (D2IE) so that educates members of the government to avoid such misinterpretation detrimental to the overall economic and industrial sector, if need reminding previous communication from the Minister of Economy Christine Lagarde to Cabinet on 8 December 2010 on the "public policy intelligence" .

I had a previous post welcomed as it should this communication from Ms. Lagarde, noting that it constituted a fundamental first step to a better understanding of economic intelligence, but I added it remained In my opinion, an important clarification work to be done for this public policy can result in the company by an activity and crafts based on recognized academic discipline enough structured. It must therefore also welcome this reaction FéPIE that identifies the problem by comparing acute confusion between "industrial espionage" and "intelligence" that could be made between between poison and antidote .

But the problem is actually there and there! If the Minister, not only if we judge by the many articles published on the occasion of the Renault affair (see my note precedes nt), blend poison and antidote Is it not simply because both are together in the same jar labeled "intelligence"? The

FéPIE D2IE and will say and do, as the concept of intelligence, both public policy, strategic function in companies and academic discipline has not been clarified further by distinguishing with great clarity of the poison antidote , confusion will remain. Now it is done for public policy with the recent communication from Christine Lagarde, who distinguishes three different axes, thus defining jars in which poison and antidote can be met: BI for the benefit of the economy, supporting the competitiveness of the economy (public research, influence, export assistance), economic security. Its translation in private enterprise, but also and especially its academic component that is fundamental must now be inspired to delineate the different trades at stake in the company and the relevant academic disciplines, not forgetting to remove everything that falls within the sovereign domain, and thus avoiding together in the same jar poison and antidote .

FB

How Does Club Penguin Work ?

Industrial espionage or intelligence?

The title of an interview with Frederick Saffroy , published January 7, 2010 by blog EasyBourse and directed by Nabil by Bourassa, is indicative of the confusion between intelligence and industrial espionage. Following the interview confirms this confusion, as many other items in response to the Renault affair reflected in the news.

dint confuse the security requirement inherent in any strategic activity, with the intelligence function or intelligence (use of information useful to economic players as defined by the Fisher report), it comes naturally to reduce economic intelligence in any activity competitive heritage protection against the threats of industrial espionage, as companies must learn to cope with more vigilance.

What is the title that simply reducing the function of the conditions of its realization, is transformed from reading the article into a real confusion over the issues asked, because of economic intelligence and industrial espionage two notions are perfectly interchangeable. Witness this last question, seeking to identify the economic sectors most affected by industrial espionage, is thus formulated: "Is there sectors favored by the intelligence? .

can see in this example (from the recent past gives us many more) * a demonstration of disintegration of the intelligence found in my previous post, which gradually removes exploitation of useful information (research, processing and distribution), activity yet essential function according to the report Marten, confusing the need for security with the function itself, to make one of three pillars of the discipline.

FB

(*) Eric Besson, Minister of Industry, Energy and the Digital Economy, guest RTL January 6, 2010, about the espionage case in Renault: " it illustrates once again the risks to our business in industrial espionage, economic intelligence as we say today . How can we think that the confusion between "intelligence" and "espionage" can not be completely trivialized when the minister himself is the confusion?
How to avoid these conditions in a regional newspaper published a front page article began: "The intelligence economic or industrial espionage ..." (Hubert Besson Intelligence : these businesses under surveillance Yonne, Yonne Republican edition of January 11, 2010)?

Soft High Cervix 2 Days Before Af

And if the difficulties encountered by the concept of intelligence drew their source in its founding document?

If originally the concept of intelligence Economics is not specifically French (the British long before we speak of " business intelligence, business intelligence, and the U.S." competitive intelligence, competitive intelligence) is the Martre report in 1994 will launch the concept in France and clarify the concept. In his review, 16 years later, one wonders if the imperfections of the definition adopted by the Working Group who participated in drafting the report, which reflects the will to reach a consensus despite some differences, are not a kind of original sin, the consequences detrimental to the harmonious development of the function.

The report defines indeed " economic intelligence as a set of coordinated research, treatment and distribution [economic actors] useful information", " for of its operations .

protection does not appear in the definition itself, but so all-in-fact Annex stating that "these actions [the coordinated research, treatment and distribution of useful information] are conducted legally and with full guarantees of protection necessary for the preservation of . The influence does not appear. However, the report then states that the concept of intelligence implies " exceeding the partial shares designated by the names of documentation, monitoring, protection of heritage competitive influence .

Protection and influence conditions of realization of the action, not logically appear in the definition strict sense of the function, but are curiously named as true specific activities of the intelligence, even if they are only "partial". This amazing shortcut mix reality conditions involved (legality and safety) of an activity (business intelligence) with the activity itself. It also confuses a constraint applicable to the activity in question (the legality) with an implied warranty given to him (the security). This shortcut is to double our opinion doubly vicious because it carries with him all the excesses that plague in France the concept of intelligence economy since its inception.

Featuring effect in the same bag these two concepts are interrelated particularly the legality and protection, and forgetting the quality of simple condition to ensure the second to be confused with the action itself, it completely blurs the quality condition in respect of the first. The condition is so essential to due process and disappears before a safety requirement which makes the protection action of intelligence in itself. It will also eventually become one of the three pillars of the discipline with the use of information useful (research, processing and distribution) that if one believes the original definition is sufficient to characterize the activity of intelligence, and influence that is grafted on the disparate device without one really knows why.

Exit then the legality that should go without saying, but it becomes necessary to remember every moment as the excesses seem easy or at least tempting. By dint of explaining, not without reason, but with great lightness of great ambiguity, it is necessary to know the methods of thugs to better it protect, discipline has created an image that sulfur using a anglicism largely connoted by the practices of major espionage "agency" does not help to alleviate. The mixture of the notions of legality and protection, and the confusion between stress action, guaranteed to provide him and the action itself, which weaken the concept of obscuring the contours are probably the source of many interpretation difficulties it encounters.

Thus, the concept of economic intelligence, moving away slowly from the operation of information useful (research, processing and distribution) which bases its function, dissolves slowly in the strategic concept developed to blend in all respects with the strategic function (you can read useful on this subject an article published some years ago already "Should we leave economic intelligence to dissolve in the strategic management? " Agoravox, December 13, 2007).