COURSE REPORT/CHIEFS OF STATION SEMINAR NO. 5 31 JANUARY - 11 FEBRUARY 1966

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP78-05795A000400030009-1
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 11
• Document Creation Date: December 9, 2016
• Document Release Date: March 20, 2001
• Sequence Number: 9
• Publication Date: March 2, 1966
• Content Type: MEMO

Approved For Release2001/04 P78-05795A00040QQ.30009-1
2 March 1966
25X1A6b
MEMORANDUM FOR: Director of Training
SUBJECT Course Report/Chiefs of Station Seminar No. 5
31 January - 11 February 1966
REFERENCE . Course Report/Chiefs of Station Seminar No. 4,
dated 5 November 1965.
1. The fifth running of the Chiefs of Station Seminar was held. from
31 Januar 11 February 1966 full time in the Headquarters Building. The
visit to was eliminated. Innovations were introduced in the form
of seminar presentations by the students and by the running of three adminis-
trative problems. These innovations are described in greater detail. below.
In general, student written evaluations were favorable to those units
involving greater class participation, while they were very critical of
speakers who limited themselves mainly to lecturing about the organization
and functions of their respective staff elements. Going beyond the written
critiques, the Chief Instructor was able to satisfy himself in conversations
with the students that the seminar presentations and problem-solving sessions
did indeed correspond to what they were seeking from a course such as this,
and therefore the proportion of such teaching methods should be increased
at the next running in my opinion. At the same time, the Chief Instructor
will redouble his efforts to dissuade DDP guest lecturers from mechanically
reading their job descriptions, suggesting instead that they select one or
two meaningful incidents or cases from recent operational history for
discussion by and with the class.
2. If this running was more successful than the previous one, it was
certainly in part because of the size of the class (17 students), and the
fact that seven of them had definite assignments as Chief of Station.
Moreover, all but two of the remainder had firm assignments as Deputy
Chief of Station, Chief of Base, or in one case, Chief of Operations
(Attachment A). The average age of the students was 43, the average
grade was GS-14.2, and the average Agency experience was fifteen years.
WH was represented by 5 students FE and NE by 4 each, AF by 2 and EE
by 1. The remaining student, had just finished a lot X1A9a
assignment as Executive Assistant to the DCI, but his next assignment
was not firm as of the time of the running of the course. Although the
Approved For Release 2001/04/09 : CIA-RDP78-05795A000400030009-1
SECRET
Uif+s`WtN 1
Eacladed trG,n zatametic
da~nFr-110n, and
declacciflcation
 Approved For Release 2001/04 P78-05795A000400030009-1
course had to begin one day late because of the now famous Great Blizzard
of 166, attendance was excellent starting with the second day and most
of the scheduled lectures were rescheduled during one of the remaining
nine days of the course (Attachment B).
3. Course Content. Although it is often difficult to distinguish
between operational and administrative subjects, it is fairly accurate
to say that the course this time consisted of about 28 hours on operational
and operations management subjects, about 22 hours on administrative sub-
jects, and 7 hours on broad-brush background subjects such as Walt Rostow's
outstanding talk on problems of the developing areas. Both the students
and the Chief Instructor thought that this balance was just about right,
although we may have assigned somewhat too much time to finance and to
document destruction.
'. Innovations
a. Seminar presentations by students. In an effort to increase
the degree of student participation, each student was assigned a few
days before the actual beginning of the course a given unit of Agency
operational doctrine (Attachment C). Our procedure was to allow the
student thirty minutes for his presentation, and it was suggested that
he utilize the first five minutes to summarize the document in question,
then offer his criticism or defense of the paper in the next ten minutes,
reserving the last fifteen minutes for class discussion of whatever aspects
of the paper seemed most important. In the event, five such presentations
were made rather than the seventeen originally planned. This reduction
was mainly because of the blizzard, but partly stemmed from the fact that
this was an experimental venture and some of the presentations seemed to
warrant more than thirty minutes. None of the students complained of the
extra burden of having to prepare these presentations on his own time,
and I think that this procedure should be continued. Several of the
students mentioned that one respect in which the course was most valuable
to them was in affording an informal opportunity to swap experiences with
officers of parallel rank and experience.
b. The administrative problems. These problems were taken o' 9a
unaltered from the Support Services Course as devised by
25X1A9a and The problems were concerned with a death case, a
drinking case, and the problem posed by the forthcoming move of a station
to new quarters from the point of view of physical security (Attachment D).
The class in each case was divided into two groups for the presentation
of these problems, and the chairman., after a reasonable amount of study
SECRET
Approved For Release 2001/04/09 : CIA-RDP78-05795A000400030009-1
 Approved For Release O01/04/09: 41 Ll 5795A00040QLZ30009-1
and consultation with his group, then presented to the class his solution.
The solutions were in turn critiqued by appropriate officers from the
Office of Medical Services, Office of Security, and the DDS. Again, these
problems were very well received, participation was enthusiastic, and I
believe this innovation should be retained in future runnings of the
course. In fact, I would recommend adding a fourth problem on fitness
report writing. However, I would plan to break the class up into smaller
groups to permit greater individual participation.
c. Two panels were utilized in this course and neither one was
outstanding in my judgment. The one on Communist Party Operations was
much too diffuse and the one on audio operations, while considerably
better, still needed better focusing. It is plain that panels to be
effective need to be rehearsed, and need to be built around a clear-cut
set of opposing viewpoints. If we are to continue to use this device, a
great deal more preparatory work must be invested.
d. For the first time in this course we had a division reports
officer, in this case, C/WE/Reports, who did a fine job emphasizing the
importance of this aspect of our trade. C/WE/Reports, after his talk,
prepared and furnished to the class a very useful set of reminders
concerning various aspects of the art of reports writing, for which the
students seemed very grateful.
e. This time we included in the kit for student retention a
detailed list of regulatory issuances of interest to a Chief of Station
(Attachment E).
f. This time we were fortunate in having both the ADDP and the
DDP for the course, and all students expressed their appreciation for
this. Points made by the ADDP in his talk and by the DDP in answer to
student questions were noted by the Chief Instructor and will be used as
guidelines in arriving at the composition of the next course (Attachment F,
Questions and Summaries of Answers).
g. Headquarters-Branch relations. One hour was devoted to the
playback of a tape recording made in the course of the last CSR Course
on the subject of Branch-Station relations (30 minutes), and to class
discussion thereof (30 minutes). The discussion was lively, particularly
on the subject of crisis reporting.
h. We took advantage of the presence of the former Executive
25X1 C
25X1A9a Mr. -provided. some fascinating insights into the daily routine o
the seventh floor.
Approved For Release 2001/04/09 : CIA-RD'78-05795A000400030009-1
SECRET
 C% r
Approved For Release 20,W/04/09: CI-P78-05795A00040003Q009-1
i. On the first day of the course the Chief Instructor pointed
out that the reading kits contained a checklist of things a COS should do
before leaving for his station. He then requested each student to make
notes during the course of things which a COS should do fairly soon after
arriving at his station so that by this means we might gradually build up
an equally usable checklist for future course members. Accordingly on the
last day the students were invited to report orally on their proposed
checklist. The results are contained in Attachment G. Most of these
items were suggested by Mr. 25X1A9a
5. Student Criti ues. The following are all substantive comments
culled from the final critique forms executed by the students. The
comments appear sound to me for the most part and they will be useful in
modifying the next running of the course. I would also plan to conduct
a conference at the end of the next course on how the course might be
improved, to serve as a supplement to -the written critiques.
a. Please note any sessions you think should be modified,
combined, or dropped, noting whether you think the subject
matter irrelevant or peripheral; the presentation too diffuse,
too detailed, or lacking in punch; the time given too short or
too long.
(1) Sessions devoted to briefings on well-known Agency
components, e.g., FI and CA Staffs, where main
emphasis is on organization, might be deleted or,
better, devoted to discussions of practical problems
in those fields.
(2) We all know what the Staffs do (or don't do). Staff
presentations should be confined to new doctrine,
trends, techniques, problems, and suggested resolution
thereof.
b. How about case studies? Do you think presentation of
more case studies precisely posing certain problems would be
useful (e.g., a monthly finance report requiring your signature,
a brief narrative and correspondence on a personnel case, a
CI case, etc. - all sanitized from actual occurrences)?
(1) Yes, the more the better, and more concreteness
needed in all sessions.
(2) For one who has never had these responsibilities
before, the case studies are great. Not in such
detail as to actually make out a monthly report,
but the discussion is thought-provoking and helpful.
Approved For Release 2001/04/09 : CltMaT95A000400030009-1
 Approved For Release 20QI104/09 : %@RbT05795AO0040003QQ.09-1
(3) The case study approach is both interesting and
informative and gives each participant an oppor-
tunity to share his previous experience with
others. More of these would be useful and help
to break up a long day of straight lectures.
(4) Yes - But ops cases. We have all signed enough
vouchers not to need another.
(5) No No No - except orally from former COS's.
25X1 C4a
(7) Yes. However, give participants enough time to
prepare for interviews, etc. Suggest one day
lead time.
25X1A9a
(8) Yes. The case brought out how easily
competent peop e can make mistakes. Case
studies seem to make a more permanent impression
than abstract discussion.
(9) Yes. Would be helpful. The cases used in this
course pointed out many problems and handling
procedures of interest and future utility.
(10) Believe the case study method should be expanded.
These give an opportunity for the group to exchange
views and express ideas as a result of their
individual past experiences. The time, of course,
should also be expanded. These are very worth-
while exercises. We think more is gained if we
are permitted to participate rather than just
listen.
c. Are there any subjects not covered in the course which
you think should be included?
(1) No - Your curriculum seems quite com rehensive-
though every class should have ani (so2$jA9a
Approved For Release 2001/04/09 : CIA F ?.11-ff95A000400030009-1
 Approved For Release 2&01/04/09 : -61RU05795A000400030009-1
(2) Discussion with a friendly Ambassador or high
State official on the role they see for the
Agency.
A briefing by the Executive Assistant to the
Director.
A briefing by a CS/DO on the functions of that
office.
25X1A9a A briefing by on the DDP functions,
demands, and priori ies.
A briefing on DIA, by a knowledgeable but objective
officer.
25X1C14c Some scoo on the
An Briefing, preferably by someone from
25X1 A2d 1 DDP's office rather than from Cover, so the
COS's will understand the DDP's view of the
program.
Relations with USIA - how to deal with field reps.
(3)
25X1A2d1
25X1 C4a
25X1 C (4)
25X1A9a
There should be more emphasis on the role of the
COS as the central figure in the creation and
maintenance of morale. Also the role of the wife
of the COS, which is an important factor in any
Station in terms of overall Station morale. Also,
in covering - there should be more emphasis
on the day to day application of it in terms of
(5) Division chiefs' attitude.
(6) Formal presentation by officer from DCI office
such. as one given by
(7)
Hard. to think of any specific lack. But course
really has to be tailored to neo-"Renaissance Man'
i.e., much more detail and breadth could be used.
course as it stands is excellent.
But
25X1A9a (g) Yes. Believe the area on which-held forth"
was most useful and enlightening. What means a COS
has for communication with the Division head in a
Approved For Release 2001/04/09 : CIS- ,F tc 5795A000400030009-1
 Approved For Release 209J/04/09 : CIA J5}'95A00040003QQ09-1
confidential way? What tools are at his disposal
for this? As our final discussion"* showed - more
time should be expanded on the various type messages
to be cabled and the mechanics of the transmission,
receipt and dissemination. It wouldn't hurt to even
write a few practice messages.
=Office of the DCI
* Hqs-Station Relations"
d. Can you suggest any changes in the architecture of the course
(the basic emphases made, the way things track from one subject to
another, the relative weight given various items) that would give
it more value? Should there be more use made of panels of experts?
Should we make more use of the method whereby students research solu-
tions to problems for presentation to the group?
(1) Every student should get at least one problem. See
no special value in panels, which tend to diffuse
issues - unless you could get panels to conduct
debates.
(2) Panels are fine, particularly for fielding questions
from the students, particularly if the panelists
wouldn't always agree with each other. The problem
idea is not bad, but break the group into three parts
(so each student has a chance to get into the act),
and then select only one of the groups to present
their solution (they'll be mostly repetitive).
(3) 1 thought that the variety of subject matter was
well chosen and pertinent to the purposes of the
course. The case study approach to problems was
particularly enjoyable and a good change from the
steady barrage of guest lecturers.
(4) Would like to see each area division chief of DDP
speak individually on what he expects from and
objects to re COS's. Then have division chiefs
in panel.
No. Believe school problems are too artificial.
Would prefer to hear students or former COS's
talk of real case problems and how they solved them.
(5) Panels of "experts" good idea but class should
phrase questions, and submit them, prior to
appearance of experts.
- 7 -
Approved For Release 2001/04/09 : Cl a ET 795A000400030009-1
 _t1% r
Approved For Release 200U04/09 : CIA-RMC STA000400030009-1
(6) I believe this course should be required for outgoing
COS, DCOS and Chiefs of Base. I also believe that
Branch Chiefs - the home end - should be encouraged
to attend. Ideally, the course should be taken
several months prior to departure to prevent conflict
with other briefings and training and to set the
stage for them.
(7) Please see item #3 Lb-(10) above/. Strongly feel
that this course, though basically good in archi-
tecture and execution, would be more effective in A6 b
more isolated atmosphere such as afforded in
It is a course worthy of our full concentration away
from interruptions of lingering business. We lacked
the time or atmosphere to get to know each other in
an air of comraderie. Lacking this, I feel we missed
much by not being able to swap stories and exchange
experiences.
6. Recommendations. In answer to suggestions coming from several
students, the Chief Instructor will attempt to line up more Division
Chiefs for the next course, not so much to talk about their areas, but
to give them an opportunity to express their thoughts on what they expect
and do not expect from a Chief of Station. On the basis of several conver-
sations with students in the course, the Chief Instructor concluded that
they all hoped to gain from the course (1) a better feel for what was
expected of them by top management, and (2) a better feel for the way the
other members of the Chief of Station fraternity think operationally.
Thus one way we can help out is to try to persuade our Division Chiefs
to sit down with. the class and engage in a little philosophizing.
In view of the relative success of this running of the course
and the relative non-success of the fourth running, it is strongly recom-
mended that the course not be given when the enrollment is below twelve
and when the majority do not have firm responsible overseas assignments.
This probably means in practice that the fall running should be eliminated
since most transfers occur during the summer and by autumn have been
completed.
ief Instructor
25X1A9a
Approved For Release 2001/04/09: CIW E 1 95A000400030009-1
 Approved For Release 2001/04/09 :
T05795A00040002DO09-1
Course Report - COS Seminar No. 5
Attachments (w/Original only):
A.
Student Roster
B.
Course Schedule
C.
List of Seminar Assignments and Invitation Form
D.
Station Administration Problems
E.
Title List
of
Regulatory Issuances of Interest to the COS
F.
Questions
for
DDP
G.
Checklist
of
Things to do After Arrival at the Station
Distribution:
Orig. - DTR
1 - C/OS
1 - DDP/TRO
Approved For Release 2001/04/09 : CIA-RDP78-05795A000400030009-1
SECRET
 Ui W,ri ' - Y., .,,~ r~~,~:~? ., ~ ~~~ `"11t dal ^ SECRET T7 1 - AN'
ROVING AND ?RECORD SHEET
SUBJECT: (optional) Course Report - COS Seminar No. 5
31 January - 11 February 1966
FROM:
EXTENSION
NO. J)
,
cis Hr- 6 9-
q
Chief Instructor, yy~~C. ?
fN ?
2065
DATE
2 March 1966
COS Seminar No. 5
TO: (Officer designation, room number, and
building)
DATE
OFFICER'S
COMMENTS (Number each comment to show from whom
RECEIVED
FORWARDED
INITIALS
to whom. Draw a line across column after each comment.)
CH/OS/TR
~L
2.
4.
5.
DTR
6.
7.
DDP/TRO
#x
/~
7: Your copy attached.
8. ;4cf4
-
~)DT(~
9.
c/OS/TR
25X1
9
= ~~'~ `
~"
Rm. 609, 1000 Glebe
a
?~
~
w0AW,
10.
..~ ?Y'
CH/OS/TR
~r
12.
13.
14.
altar T--~~`~-'
/~AM~
1s, .... R!
-
 Approved For /ANGA-J~DQ000400030009-1
ORIGINAL DOCUMENT MUSSING PAGE(S):
Approved For Release 2001/04/09 : CIA-RDP78-05795A000400030009-1