Abstract
This paper presents a methodology to audit the functioning of an organizational intelligence system that covers all human, informational, technological and procedural elements involved. The methodological process is based in a triangulation of data, qualitative techniques and perspectives, organized in three phases: exploratory, intermediate and focused. A literature review, a participant observation and a case study in the intelligence department of a Spanish private security company are carried out. The results enabled the authors to propose the preference for an operational advisory audit, the operational principles, the procedures to define priority elements and aspects to be audited, the stages and the activities to be carried out, and the techniques and instruments for the collection and analysis of information. The intelligence audit makes it possible to identify the active elements and the relevant actions in the intelligence system and understand how they function within the framework of their relationships with the organization to which it belongs and its environment. The intelligence system should be audited by paying attention to strategic business processes and taking into account the organizational structure, procedures, culture and information behaviour involved. The proposed intelligence audit can be applied to the planning and assessment of any kind of organization due to its comprehensiveness and flexibility.
Keywords
Introduction
Information that is converted into intelligence is an essential resource for organizations. It constitutes a basic raw material for strategic planning, decision making, innovation, business development, problem solving and achieving a competitive advantage. Intelligence is the result of applying tacit and explicit knowledge that an organization possesses in order to integrate, evaluate and analyse information regarding an objective, in order to provide relevant estimates for its needs.
Intelligence used in business is called competitive intelligence. For the Global Intelligence Alliance (2004), competitive intelligence is ‘knowledge and foreknowledge about the external operating environment, whose ultimate goal is to facilitate decision-making that leads to action’. More precisely, Fleisher and Bensoussan (2007) explain competitive intelligence as the action of gathering, analysing, and distributing information in a systematic, targeted, timely and ethical way about products, customers, competitors and any aspect of the external environment needed to produce useful results for decision makers in an organization. When the majority of information used is from an internal source, the expression business intelligence is used.
Intelligence is determined by the information and knowledge it is based on; it is unique for each recipient, adapts to the needs that generate it, is instrumental in nature and is action-based. Each organization obtains information, applies the knowledge of its members and produces intelligence in its own way that is formalized to some degree or another depending on its characteristics and needs. Some organizations have specific programmes and allocate resources to the introduction and maintenance of permanent structures with this in mind, which in general terms can be called ‘intelligence systems’, not to be confused with intelligence service: a state organization whose mission is the collection by covert or secret means, the analysis, and the interpretation of information on risks and threats to homeland and foreign security, intended for government, police or military (Esteban, 2008).
Four groups of elements are defined in an intelligence system: actors (suppliers and consumers) with their needs and behaviour; internal and external information resources; production and communication processes and use of intelligence; and the information technologies and communications used. Developing intelligence demands effective management and the efficient functioning of these four groups. To achieve this, it is essential to identify its components and features and analyse its actions within the framework of the relationships established by the intelligence system with the organization to which it belongs and by the organization with its environment. However, there is no methodology to diagnose the status of an organizational intelligence system that also contributes to its planning and assessment.
The objective of this paper is to present a methodology to audit the functioning of an organizational intelligence system that covers all human, informational, technological and procedural elements involved in its functioning and that will enable the planning and assessment of the system and will be universally applicable.
Theoretical background, literature review and relevance
Theoretical background
The research was carried out within an interdisciplinary meeting point between information science, knowledge management and intelligence studies. It is defined as greater corporate ability in the creation of an information model of intelligence services and of corporate intelligence units (Esteban and Carvalho, 2012).
With this decision, the intention is to contribute to overcoming the traditional mutual ignorance between the disciplines that study intelligence and information (Cronin, 2005), despite the fact that information acquires its highest value in the practical application of intelligence (Davies, 2002). There has been a call recently from intelligence studies with a politological profile for the integration of contributions from knowledge management in this discipline and in the practice of intelligence services (Treverton, 2009; Waltz, 2003).
In order to prepare a methodology for the audit of intelligence that is applicable to any organization, it is necessary to first have the reference point of an organizational intelligence system model. Davenport and Prusak’s (1997) theory of information ecology has been used. This theory presents an explanatory model of the way in which organizations manage information, which consists of revealing, by using holistic analysis, the relationships that are produced under different types of information flows between three levels or environments: the external, the organizational and the informational. It is therefore considered that an intelligence audit should discover which elements comprise the information environment, include the functioning of the intelligence system within the framework of its relationships with the rest of the organization and with its surroundings, and propose suitable action for its improvement or conversion.
The theory of Davenport and Prusak gives a general framework to understand how and why information is used in organizations. However, for a deeper analysis of the specific aspects of the information environment (suppliers, users, information resources, production and transfer technologies and procedures), the body of research of information science and, especially, user studies has been used.
Literature review
In organizations there is a great variety of information assets of differing complexity: data, repositories of raw information, corporate documents, external information, information systems, knowledge, communicated information, communities of practice, intelligence, etc. A review of the literature shows the existence of different types of audits of information assets. These include the following contributions (Table 1): audits of information resources (Best, 1985; Burk and Horton, 1988; Esteban, 2004; Pridgeon, 1990), information audits (Barker, 1990; Buchanan and Gibb, 1998, 2007, 2008; Henczel, 2001; Orna, 1990, 1999), knowledge audits (Levantakis et al., 2008; Liebowitz et al., 2000; Mertins et al., 2003; Pfeifer et al., 2000), communication audits (Cortez and Bunge, 1987; Downs, 1988) and intelligence audits (Fuld, 1991; Gilad and Gilad, 1989; Harris, 1976; Jurek, 1997).
Issues analysed in various informational assets audits.
All of the authors agree upon the instrumental nature of audits to assess the information and knowledge management processes of an organization. They also show that there is no universally accepted methodology or general framework from which specific methodologies can be deduced for each type of audit. There is no intelligence audit methodology, although some authors use this term to describe the intellectual capital audit. However, the audit approaches of Gilad and Gilad (1989), Orna (1990, 1999), Buchanan and Gibb (1998), Henczel (2001), and Levantakis et al. (2008) offer a suitable theoretical and practical framework for the preparation of an intelligence audit methodology.
In general, it can be seen that the aforementioned types of audit compare the suitability of resources and information processes with the mission and objectives of an organization. However, they do not consider the relationship that is established between the organization, its surroundings and information environment (Buchanan and Gibb, 2007). There are also few audits that analyse how information and knowledge influence business processes. There are even fewer that consider how suppliers and users use these resources to create intelligence and achieve organizational objectives, respectively.
This final verification requires that user studies be used, which help us to understand the corporate information context and, in particular, the behaviour and conduct of the actors that participate in information processes. The user-based paradigm starts from the assumption that the relationship between the user and information can only be understood when placed in the specific context where it occurs (Wilson, 1997, 1999). However, the literature has barely studied the relationship between information asset audits and user studies. Henczel (2001) has partially used this discipline in her methodology as a support to identify the information needs of an organization, but not for the case of the information behaviour of suppliers and users.
Relevance
The scientific justification for our research can be found in the need to address the absence of an intelligence audit discovered in the review of the literature. It is clear that there is a predominance of approaches for the identification, inventory and assessment of information resources, to the detriment of intelligence, despite its position at the top of the information pyramid and its value to organizations. Furthermore, hardly any attempt has been made for a holistic understanding of the environment where processes related to information and knowledge take place within an organization, and insufficient attention has been paid to the behaviour of the actors that participate in the production, transfer and use of intelligence.
Our research also has a clear social relevance. Having an intelligence audit methodology allows us to assess how information and knowledge are converted and used, and therefore helps to improve the nature and dynamic of intelligence systems. It is not necessary to repeat the importance of having useful and relevant intelligence for organizations for the planning and implementation of their actions within a global competitive environment. The use of intelligence by businesses is also considered to be a factor that aids the economic security of a country
Methodology
The research carried out can be characterized as exploratory and innovative, because its principal objective was to prepare a new intelligence audit methodology. Qualitative techniques were used as it was considered they best suited the nature of the subject of the study. The strategy for obtaining information was non-experimental and the design for establishing the relationships between data, categories and concepts was cross-disciplinary. Induction was used to construct the audit methodology based on the phenomena studied, instead of deduction based on general principles. A triangulation of data, techniques and perspectives was performed to add depth to the study and achieve a greater understanding of the researched phenomena.
The methodological process consisted of three phases: exploratory, intermediate and focused. The exploratory phase had two stages, which enabled us to establish the context for the application of the methodology and define the aspects to be audited. It began with bibliographical research aimed at identifying and analysing the different types and methodologies of information asset audits proposed by the literature, and aspects related to the functioning and the structure of intelligence systems. We then carried out participant observation at the Intelligence and Prospective Unit (IPU) of Eulen Seguridad (http://www.eulen.com/Apartados.aspx?hid=32), the third largest security company in Spain in terms of turnover, for a period of 600 hours over six months in 2009. This enabled us to understand the functioning of a real intelligence system. Situations related to the participation of users, interaction between the producers of intelligence, communication between users and producers, and the intelligence production process were all observed and analysed in accordance with a protocol.
The intermediate phase consisted of the preliminary proposition of an intelligence audit methodology based on the results of the bibliographical research and the participant observation.
Finally, the focused phase consisted of testing the preliminary version of the audit intelligence methodology through a case study in the same system: the IPU of Eulen Seguridad. The objectives were to validate the aspects to be audited and the suggested data capture and analysis tools, to assess the usefulness, the applicability and the comprehensiveness of the proposed methodology and to identify the required adjustments for the definitive design of the intelligence audit methodology. The audit carried out was linked, as our methodology proposes, to a real strategic business process: the protection of the ship BC Teneo owned by the multinational corporation Tyco Marine on its two missions to install fibre optic cables on the African coast and in African waters of the Indian Ocean from Durban to Djibouti and on the coasts of Ghana and Nigeria in 2009, in the most active period of maritime piracy in the zone of operations. The data collection and analysis techniques used were desk study, questionnaires and interviews regarding the technique used in the critical incident.
The desk study consisted of consulting internal restricted access documents of the IPU and of the company Eulen Seguridad, which helped to define the environment, the organization, the intelligence unit and the strategic business process. The questionnaires and the interviews dealt with the activities regarding intelligence production, transfer and use, the information resources and the techniques employed and the behaviour of the actors participating in the business process. Thirteen respondents participated in the questionnaires and interviews (100% of the people involved): four producers and nine users of intelligence. The producers were three members of the IPU and an employee who had been hired to prepare intelligence reports on its professional speciality. The users that responded were six employees from the company Eulen Seguridad, with different levels of responsibility from general manager to the head of security for land operations, plus three executives from the company that owned the ship, Tyco Marine. The results of the test enabled us to propose the operational principles, the procedures and techniques of an intelligence audit methodology designed to be used in any organizational intelligence system.
The objective of this article is not to describe and analyse the state of the art on information or knowledge or intelligence audits. The purpose is to explain neither the participant observations nor the case study, whose field notebooks, questionnaires and interviews to collect data, and results are presented and discussed in detail in the doctoral thesis of Carvlho (2013). They are just some of the techniques used to achieve the aim of our research: to propose an intelligence audit methodology, and to encourage discussion of this issue.
Results
Operational principles of the intelligence audit
The proposed intelligence audit methodology is based on four operational principles, which all audits must follow:
The recognition of the profound interrelation between the organization, its information environment and its surroundings: That is, the intelligence system of an organization influences the way in which the organization operates and how it relates to its surroundings, and, at the same time, the effectiveness of this system depends on its ability to adapt to the features and contingencies of the organizational sphere and the environment where it is placed. Changes in one sphere affect other spheres. Therefore, an audit must study these three aspects and attempt to discover and understand their relationships.
Sensitivity to movements: An intelligence system should be understood as something flexible, changeable and subject to continuous transformation that needs to adapt to the continuous changes within the organization and the environment if it wishes to meet intelligence needs. Therefore, the audit must attempt to identify these changes and offer recommendations so that the intelligence system can adapt and can continue to fulfil its mission.
The importance of the information behaviour of actors: The observation and understanding of the behaviour of intelligence suppliers and users must be the centre of attention of the methodology. The identification and analysis of the resources employed, the technologies used and the intelligence production and distribution processes are very important, but are secondary to the behaviour of the actors; that is, they should be analysed from the perspective of their influence on the modelling of behaviour. The audit should enable auditors to understand the intelligence needs of users and the behaviour and attitudes of people regarding information and intelligence, so that the audit can make recommendations that efficiently guide decisions regarding resources, technologies and processes.
The importance of observation and description: The understanding of the intelligence system of an organization demands an empirical approximation, due to its complexity and to its conditioning by the specific environment in which it operates. Approximations centred on the search for the ‘ought-to-be’ of things and phenomena based on theoretical models should be avoided, in favour of an approach focused on the analysis of events, processes and behaviour that have actually taken place. The intelligence system should be audited by paying attention to strategic business processes and taking into account the organizational structures, procedures and cultures involved. This is because only this enables us firstly to gain real understanding of how information is collected and shared, and how intelligence is produced and used, and secondly to make appropriate, viable recommendations for improvements.
The audit within the life cycle of the intelligence system
An organizational intelligence system, like any other system, has a life cycle made up of four phases: planning, implementation, maintenance and assessment. The intelligence audit methodology has been prepared by considering that its application should be useful both for planning and for the assessment of an intelligence system.
The aim of the intelligence audit is to enable the establishment of the objectives that should guide the introduction of the organizational intelligence system and the definition of its characteristics. When an organization decides to introduce an intelligence unit, it should begin by auditing how intelligence is produced, distributed and used, because the whole organization consumes intelligence, although it may or may not be aware of this, and has an intelligence system of varying complexity even if sometimes it is not manifested in a formal, recognized structure that carries out non-systematic, informal practices. Reflection about the nature of this system and decision making in this regard are evidence of a degree of maturity and of proper strategic management. The audit will avoid making rushed decisions or incorporating intelligence systems based on theoretical models or on experiences from other organizations that could be ineffective if they do not consider the reality of the informal intelligence system that operates throughout an organization.
The intelligence audit should show its usefulness especially regarding the assessment of a formalized intelligence system. To do this, the audit must make an assessment that considers all the key elements of the system and that enables recommendations to management about measures to improve the system and adaptation to the changes in the organization and the environment. The recommendations can be of varying strengths and affect a varying number of elements and can even lead to the planning of a new system that replaces the audited one. Profound changes should never be made to a system without first carrying out an audit. The intelligence audit is also most effective when it is done regularly, in accordance with a calendar that is appropriate for the reality of each organization.
Objectives and scope
Audits of information assets can be of different types according to their aims: cost-benefit, topographic, hybrid, management or operational advisory (Barker, 1990). We believe that the intelligence audit should be operational advisory; that is, that its objective is to define the purpose and the functioning of the audited system and assess if this system is suitable for the aims and the culture of the organization, if it offers useful, reliable support and if the resources are managed efficiently and effectively. Clearly, the breadth and complexity of this type of audit allows it to cover several specific objectives in its introduction into specific situations. Therefore, we should clearly identify when we are dealing with complex systems, which elements are the priority to be audited and which aspects to pay most attention to. The management of the organization, with the help of the auditor, must clearly define the ultimate objective and scope of the audit before it begins.
It is very useful to make said decisions by using a matrix that defines the relationship between the components of the intelligence system (actors, resources, processes and technologies) and the fields where the system operates (organization, environment and business process). The first dimension (elements) enables us to decide what to analyse with greater emphasis during the audit, and the second dimension (perspectives) where we should concentrate attention. The perspective of the environment focuses on the capability of the system to interpret the external environment of the organization and contribute to the implementation of corporate actions outside. When the organizational perspective is chosen, this is in order to understand the situation of the intelligence system within the organization, its suitability regarding the needs of the organization, its contribution to the achievement of organizational processes and objectives, and its effectiveness in fulfilling the requirements of users. In addition, the focus on the strategic business process is an attempt to understand the relevance of the intelligence system for one or more of these processes, associating the activities carried out with the information and intelligence flows that are produced. The perspective of strategic business process was adopted in the case study, taking into account all elements of the intelligence system: actors, processes, information resources and technologies.
This enables us to reconcile the comprehensive nature and flexibility of the audit methodology, thereby enabling its application to any organization and its adaptation to specific needs. Clearly, giving priority to some elements and aspects over others will have an influence on the collection and analysis techniques and instruments, the results that are obtained and the recommendations that can be made.
Stages and activities
The various activities to be carried out during the intelligence audit are divided into seven stages (Figure 1).
Planning: approval by the management and the obtaining of the necessary permissions, definition of the objectives and the scope of the audit, training of the auditing team, preparation of the guide to activities and audit calendar and the selection of a strategic business process.
Preparation: communication of the objectives and benefits of the audit, definition of the sources of information regarding the system and contact with respondents, definition of the data collection and analysis techniques and instruments and the preparation of specific data collection instruments.
Collection: application of the selected techniques and instruments to obtain information about the organization, the environment, the strategic business process and the intelligence system.
Analysis: description and attribution of meaning to each audited aspect, with special attention being paid to the identification of strong and weak points and possible improvements.
Preparation of the audit report including recommendations: expression of the findings and the recommendations of the audit process in a clear, concise document.
Communication: presentation of the audit results to those managing the system and the management of the organization; a discussion about the benefits of the process, the validity of the recommendations and the best way to introduce them. The purpose of this step is to allow stakeholders to evaluate the process and results of the audit.
Guide for implementation: preparation of a document that indicates the recommendations to be introduced approved by the management and the procedures to implement them, including specific indications about the what, why, how and when of the changes and the associated economic costs.
Stages and activities of intelligence audit.
Elements and aspects to be audited
The intelligence audit considers the analysis of the organizational intelligence system and its internal dynamic and composition, and in its external relationship with the organization, the environment and a strategic business process. Therefore there are four elements with their own various aspects to be audited.
The definition of the strategic business process chosen as the core of the audit includes defining the objectives, activities, actors, information flows and associated information and intelligence needs. Working with a strategic business process, which will be used to apply the critical incident technique, enables the assessment of the impact that the intelligence actions have on a specific situation. This is also the only way that large and complex organizations can be audited, where a global approach is unfeasible due to the level of profundity that an audit demands. The selection of a process also helps to demarcate the aspects of the environment and of the organization that require special study during the analysis, provides results quickly, facilitates the implementation of recommendations and enables experience to be gained that is applicable to other processes.
The environment plan provides information about the context in which the intelligence system and the organization operate and their abilities to adapt. Within the environment there is the general environment, the specific environment and dominant trends. As this is a subject that is too broad and complex, it is considered that for the purposes of the intelligence audit it is sufficient to analyse the elements and aspects that have a more direct impact on the strategic business process being used. The analysis of the general environment enables us to understand the legal, political, economic, ecological, social, technological and information context in which the organization operates. The analysis of the specific environment makes it possible to identify the demands, contributions and interferences within the organization of its audience, that is, the clients, the business associates, the regulators and the competitors. In addition, the trends make it possible to discover the challenges that the organization and the system must meet.
Regarding the organization, it is necessary to know its aim and its scope of activity, its organic and functional structure, its strategy, its business processes, its organizational culture, the nature of its human resources, its short and medium-term objectives, the resources available to achieve them and its strong and weak points within the framework of its sector. It is also very useful to know whether the organization has a policy for managing the information behaviour of its personnel.
Regarding the organizational intelligence system, it is necessary to both define the system in its capacity as a corporate unit and to identify and analyse its key elements. Regarding the first point, it is necessary to discover its objectives, the units and users that it serves, how it contributes to the progress of the organization, how it is located in its structure and what image and consideration it has. The aspects to be studied are: the network of actors, the information resources, the information and communication technologies, and the intelligence production, transfer and use processes.
Network of actors: Knowledge about the features, the behaviour and the perceptions of the suppliers and users of intelligence represents the core aspect of the audit process. The network of actors is the measurement and reference point that serves as the parameter for the analysis and understanding of the other elements of the system. Its study demands the definition of suppliers and users, both internal and external, regarding their training, experience and professional activity and roles, duties and powers in the organization, within the business process and in the intelligence system. Those who use their own personal contacts in both groups need to be identified, and it is necessary to observe the information flows that are established. Specifically for users, it is necessary to analyse their intelligence needs, how they make and receive demands for information and knowledge both inside and outside the organization, what use they make of intelligence products, the satisfaction that this gives them and the relevance that its use has in the execution of their activities. This can be complemented by the feedback that suppliers have regarding the assessment by users of their products and services, the use they make of them, the ability to satisfy their intelligence needs and the impact they have on the business processes. It is also very important to discover the opinions, criticisms and suggestions of users about the various aspects of the intelligence system, as well as being aware of and systematically tracking their information needs and behaviour. Aspects such as communication, sharing and exchange of information will be considered for this last point, both between the two groups and within each of them and towards the outside. Lastly, it is necessary to be aware of how the explicit or implicit information policy of the organization influences this behaviour. Information resources: It is necessary to identify, classify and assess what types of resources suppliers and users they use, which activities they support, where they are stored and how they are accessed. It is very important to discover the resources that users use and the impact that they have, in order to compare them with the products prepared by the intelligence system. Information and communication technologies: It is necessary to identify which ones the various actors use, analyse their suitability for the activities for which they are used, discover how they are used and assess their impact on the production and transfer of intelligence. It is also necessary to assess the need to incorporate other technologies that do not exist in the system. Intelligence production, transfer and use processes: It is necessary to study these processes and very important to be aware of the perception that the actors have of them. Regarding the production it is important to discover what procedures are used to identify the information and intelligence needs of users, how the sources of information are assessed before being used, what analysis techniques are used and whether the production process is assessed as a whole or not. This should be complemented by awareness of the opinion of users regarding the understanding that suppliers have of their needs and whether there are unfulfilled demands or not. Regarding the communication process, facilitating and obstructing factors are sought, as well as discovering whether the contacts that users and suppliers have influence intelligence production in any way. It is important to know the communication channels used and their effectiveness. In addition, regarding the use of intelligence, it is of cardinal importance to discover whether users show interest in the products and services that they receive, if they usually combine it with other pieces of information and knowledge before using it, the frequency of use and the relevance of the supplied intelligence, whether they feel satisfied and whether they have any suggestions to improve the intelligence products.
After the description of each level and aspect, the results must be analysed and the relevant relationships between them established. This makes possible to identify strengths and weaknesses of the intelligence system and propose appropriate recommendations. Carvalho (2013) presented 11 guides including over 300 questions to obtain information about all the elements of the intelligence system (see an example in Table 2). These questions were used in the questionnaires and interviews conducted during the case study. The analysis of responses allowed the assessment of the intelligence unity audited and the proposal of actions for improving its management, the activities and the relations of the actors, the use of information resources, the selection of information and communication technologies, and the conduct of the processes of intelligence production and transfer. An abstract of the results is presented in Table 3.
Some questions for guiding the interviews to analyse the informational behaviour of the users of the intelligence provided by the intelligence system in a business process.
Results of audit of Eulen Intelligence and Prospective Unit (IPU) with the proposed intelligence audit method.
Techniques and instruments
There are suitable techniques and instruments for the collection and analysis of information from each level (Figure 2).
Relationship between the plans and the aspects to be audited and the techniques and instruments for the collection and analysis of information.
The information about the strategic business process is obtained from internal documents from the organization that indicate the working guidelines and procedures and by carrying out interviews with those managing it. The results can be represented graphically by using diagram techniques such as IDEF0. Knowledge about the environment can be gained based on studies and reports that the organization has. If there are none or if there is not sufficient authority to consult them, then open external sources will be used along with exploratory interviews with managers about the audiences, the contexts and trends. This environmental information will be analysed using analysis techniques such as STEEP or PEST. The collection of information about the organization is carried out based on questionnaires given to managers and internal documents, such as the strategic plan, the business plan, the organization chart, the procedures manual, status reports and the work flow diagrams. The SWOT technique is very suitable for the analysis of this information.
The joint use of interviews and questionnaires is proposed for the intelligence system. The first provide an opportunity to explore the situation and make it possible to obtain richer, contextual information, especially when this is associated with the critical incident technique. Questionnaires provide more detailed data and enable statistical analysis. The technique of participant observation also gives very useful results, but cannot always be applied because it is very complex and demands a considerable investment of time. The execution of an inventory of the information and technological resources is of great use, especially when it is linked to a distribution and use map and this is then linked to the map of the activities of the business processes. The use of graphical representation and display technique is very helpful in the analysis of the information obtained and enables the identification and understanding of relationships.
The intelligence auditor
This intelligence audit methodology can be used both by an independent auditor hired by the organization and by information or intelligence professionals who are members of the system being audited. Although experience in intelligence auditing is not widespread, we believe that a professional from the system who follows our approach is capable of carrying it out, if he or she has experience, has a good command of the information collection and analysis techniques, and knows how to prepare and present reports.
The establishment of a working group will make it possible to carry out the audit more easily, with the size and features depending on the size of the organization and of the intelligence system, on the objectives and scope of the audit, and on the allocated economic resources. A team of at least two people, where one of them is an audit expert, preferably outside of the intelligence system, and another who is at least a member of the system, would be a team capable of carrying out the process.
Conclusions
The theoretical framework chosen and the methodological process followed have enabled us to achieve the proposed objective: the preparation of an audit methodology, including its operating principles, activities and techniques, that can assess the status of an organizational intelligence system. The application of this methodology in a real intelligence system makes it possible to both validate and correct the methodology and obtain relevant results for the understanding and suggestion of improvements to the system, as Carvalho (2013) states.
The incorporation of contributions from information ecology theory, information asset audits, user studies, knowledge management and intelligence studies have made the proposed intelligence audit methodology holistic, which makes it possible to identify the active elements in the intelligence system of an organization and understand how they function within the framework of their relationships with the organization and its environment. Consequently, the application of this methodology is possible in any kind of organization and makes it possible to propose improvements that will have positive effects on the activity of the organization. And given that the production of intelligence means that there must be prior information collection, storage and distribution processes, it is also possible to adapt this methodology for the assessment of information management systems.
Suggestions and future research
We propose the following:
The application of the intelligence audit methodology to different organizational intelligence systems in order to test its completeness, applicability and feasibility.
The preparation and publication of case studies that report experiences in implementing audit intelligence processes in various information contexts. These experiences will contribute to the methodological development, awareness and teaching of audit intelligence practices.
More detailed research regarding the mutual contributions of the information asset audit and user studies. Despite their unequal theoretical and methodological development, it is believed that these areas can make major contributions to each other.
The introduction of the information asset audit in general, and the intelligence audit in particular, in the training of information and intelligence professionals. This is essential in order to produce professionals who are trained in their practices and for the promotion of research studies that enable theoretical and methodological advances in this field.
Footnotes
Funding
This article is based on a doctoral thesis (Carvalho, 2013) executed as part of the FFI2008-04351 research project financed by the Spanish Ministry for Science and Innovation for the period 2009–2011, directed by Miguel Esteban for the study of open information sources in intelligence services.