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
0 comments:
Post a Comment