ELF-IV CRITIQUE

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP90-00998R000100040026-6
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: C
• Document Page Count: 5
• Document Creation Date: December 23, 2016
• Document Release Date: December 20, 2012
• Sequence Number: 26
• Publication Date: May 8, 1986
• Content Type: MEMO

Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/12/20: CIA-RDP90-00998R000100040026-6
25X1
25X1
TO: (Officer designation, room number and
building)
25X1
DDA
7D24, Hqs.
E Q IR
7D55, Hqs.
FORM
T-79 910
~tnO r
49,
ROUTING AND RECORD SHEET
running--more Agency leap
DATE
OFFICER'S
INITIALS
COMMENTS (Number each comment to show from whom
to whom. Draw a line across column after each comment.)
Thought you might be
interest is thoughtful
memo from Although
this was not a very inspiring or
inspired group, most of his points
are on the mark.
We must re-do after the next
assessment voluntary
and others notwithst zng, some
SISers find very valuable. I
also like the idea of running
two groups of 30 each to minimize
the impact on Agency speakers.
It's interesting that even
among this last uninspired group,
there apparently was feeling
that all SISers should go to
something--even they are close
to retirement. The reaction
came to my hint that we were
considering disinviting some
people.
CONFIDE: NTIAL
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/12/20: CIA-RDP90-00998R000100040026-6
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/12/20: CIA-RDP90-00998R000100040026-6
a
4P
8 May 1986
TO: OTE/EDS (Attn:
25X1 FROM:
ANI0/~FDIF~
SUBJECT: ELF-IV Critique
1. Did the course ineet objectives?
In such a relatively short, unchallenging course, the
elements comprising the stated objective of the SIS 1-2
Residential Seminar could not possibly have been met. Rather
than dwelling on these one by one, I will suggest a major
revamping of CIAs "Charm School," particularly in response to
question 6 below.
2. Were these the right objectives?
I do not think so. POCM (and probably "Looking Glass") and
the Levinson Seminar address leadership, with the latter
focusing on organizational change. Charm School--and I would
have expected the OTE course directors as well as the CCL team
to be conversant with the relevant experience of the four
military services--should be the occasion for the senior
management of the Agency to snake clear to the new SIS officers
what it expects from them, what their vision of the future is,
and the likely changes in emphasis if not organization it is
anticipating. In addition, there are elements from the present
syllabus that are worthy of retention; especially some focus on
why executives derail, noting those behavior patterns that
contributed to attainment of SIS status but are now most likely
to be counterproductive. Thus, as I noted above, a major
restructuring of the course is necessary. This course should be
a CIA-only show, with all links broken with CCL.
3. Would you send your subordinates to ELF when they reach SIS?
This assumes, of course, that there is a choice. The
present course; unfortunately, is largely a waste of time, with
too much free time to boot. One afternoon, I drove to New
Market to see the battlefield. I found this quite pleasant, but
frankly, the piper had to be paid when I returned to my desk.
Therefore, unless the course is revamped so as to lead to a
rigorous, rewarding week, I would have to answer this question
in the negative.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/12/20: CIA-RDP90-00998R000100040026-6
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/12/20: CIA-RDP90-00998R000100040026-6
CONFIDENTIAL
4. What were the highlights of the week?
The visits of the D/OP, DDA and D "were far and away the
most useful exchanges. During 2-1/2-hour review of
personal security there was a complete absence of fidgeting.
Unfortunately, Bob Magee was was not given'sufficient time prior
to lunch to field questions in response to his provocative
remarks. The session with Bill Donnelly--more than two hours
after dinner--was just about right. These discussions are
exemplars for what I have in mind for the restructured course.
The session with the private-sector executives was fun, but
of little use to me. From personal experience and reading the
literature, I am well aware of MCI's quality-control problems,
which Burt Roberts side-stepped. But more to the point, what is
it that he had to say that is more relevant to our Agency's work
than senior managers could have provided? (In this company, the
Army representative was out of place. Also the Iacocca tape
should have succeeded rather than preceded the evening with the
"real-life" visitors.)
5. What were the low-points of the week?
The discussion by Dr. Randy White of CCL re derailment was
often interesting but of little direct applicability to an SIS-
level officer. His derailment reasons and fatal flaws would
have better been presented to a group of mid-level managers. A
presentation based on government lessons learned would have been
much more useful than those based on a limited private-sector
sampl e.
presentation at times, was useful and
thoug provoking, but her responses to questions from the floor
were shallow. Again, government or military experience would
have been beneficial. For example, it would have been
interesting to hear views expressed on the optimum length of
rotational developmental assignments for line managers in staff
positions. Parenthetically, during this segment George Allen
made a number of useful comments.
25X1
segment dealing with an effective leader was too
superficial, in general, for an executive-level group, though
her several minutes of summation were quite good. The
accompanying exercise was ho-hum.
The exercises for assessments were certainly sub-caliber, a
rather unsuccesful attempt to provide grist for the
psychologists' mills. The "Red-Green" was much too drawn out
and bordering on the simplistic; kuctor wanted to
take a 20-minute break! Indeed, tated he had
never seen a team such as ours plan ahead, including greens in
the last round, but it took him an interminable length of time
2
CONFIDENTIAL
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/12/20: CIA-RDP90-00998R000100040026-6
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/12/20: CIA-RDP90-00998R000100040026-6
4P CONFIDENTIAL
to say so. For us, the game was over, having been correctly
diagnosed, within the first minutes. Likewise, we made short
shrift of "Turnaround."
The Tuesday afternoon exercise on detrimental situational
behaviors was in my case a complete non-starter. My three
colleagues--there should have been five teams. of three for
optimimum exchanges--let it be known in the first eight minutes
that they all expected to retire in the next several years. And
they were not interested in hearing me out. Therefore, during
the next two hours, while the contractors and the OTE faculty
sunned themselves, we walked, looked at the scenery, read, and
generally unwound. But is this the purpose of the course? (Let
me hasten to add, however, that I do not think an age cutoff
should be made by OTE for admission to this course. I
anticipate working a minimum of seven more years, while others
in the course who are younger than I are looking forward to
retirement within the next year or so.)
6. Is this course best for the organization or is nothing/something else
better?
I strongly believe new SIS officers need an exposure to
senior management, and to each other. For instance, I had never
seen the new DDA before the course; nor were the majority of the
class known to me. Rehashed POCM is not the prescription. What
I have in mind is a week largely taken up with sessions a la
Donnelly's, which would also include at a minimum the DDI, the
DDS&T, the DDO, the Executive Director, the DDCI, and concluding
with the DCI. By way of preparation, the SIS officers from the
relevant directorate or E Career Service could assemble in
"self-managing work teams" early on to prepare a briefing for
the class on the problems their entity faces. The questions to
the senior managers would then be more intelligent and the
exchanges productive.
Rather than split the course into two sections, I recommend
that the new SIS class to the extent feasible go through as a
group. This should be to istically possible once the new
facility is available The conclusion of the course
would be a session wit t e D I in his conference room, say on
the second Monday. Were any of the other senior managers
unavailable for a session at the off-site center, make-up
sessions with them at. Headquarters could be arranged for that
day as well. I would think it preferable not to settle for the
ADDs, if possible. In addition, I would bring in, depending on
the topics that are then foremost on the Agency's agenda, the
appropriate action officer, say the D/OS, the D/OP, the IG, the
Comptroller, the GC, etc. As executives serving the Director,
the new SIS officers should be made aware of the overriding
problems facing the Agency. Most of my classmates did not leave
ELF, I suspect, with an Agency perspective.
3
CONFIDENTIAL
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/12/20: CIA-RDP90-00998R000100040026-6
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/12/20: CIA-RDP90-00998R000100040026-6
. CONFIDENTIAL ?
Should members of the new SIS group wish to update their
POCM psychological profiles, or create them as the case may be,
then this option should be made available to them. They could
complete the battery of tests, have the subordinate/peer inputs
made, and then meet by appointment with an assessor. As noted
above, the two exercises for the assessments fell way short of
the mark. A week is too short for this to be accommodated in
the new Charm School.
I also recommend that the new SIS officers be given priority
for enrollment in the Levinson Seminar. (I assume most SIS-3
and -4 officers have had a chance to be exposed to Harry
already.)
I would further suggest that all new SIS-1 officers take the
new Charm School, unless they expect to retire within six months
of the session. Levinson, however, should be reserved for those
with no current intention of leaving the Agency within two
years.
Ed Proctor made a number of very useful comments when he
dealt with supervisory failures and the subject for the self-
managing work teams (i.e., personal security). In each case, I
wanted more. I felt that he really did not want to intrude and
so truncated his remarks. He is thoughtful and has alot to
offer, so long as he does not wing it, as he (along with George)
did on the last evening. With no formal presentation or point
of view as a backdrop, the questions tended to be fatuous. An
overly detailed discussion of the NIS program was of no interest
to the majority of the class, most of whom never heard of it,
and so it was not surprising that two just got up and left. We
do need to know more of our history, especially our past
mistakes, and even mythology, and both Ed and George among
others have much to offer. But this time should not be viewed
as a gap-filler between dinner and the poker game; accordingly
more attention to these segments is required.
In sum, I offer the foregoing by way of constructive
criticism. I hope it will prove useful.
4
CONFIDENTIAL
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/12/20: CIA-RDP90-00998R000100040026-6