A SURVEY OF JOB-RELATED ATTITUDES AND OPINIONS OF CAREERISTS IN THE DIRECTORATE FOR INTELLIGENCE

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 52
• Document Creation Date: December 19, 2016
• Document Release Date: July 20, 2006
• Sequence Number: 5
• Publication Date: May 1, 1970
• Content Type: STUDY

Approved For Release 204/18/b4 ijCLi-F DP861300269R0009000900 a=$t=Y
A SURVEY OF JOB-RELATED ATTITUDES AND OPINIONS
OF CAREERISTS IN THE DIRECTORATE FOR INTELLIGENCE
Office of Medical Services
Psychological Services Staff
Research Branch
May 1970
MORKIDIF
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Approved For Release 2006/
14 CCk,-HD'86B00269R000900090005-8
Page
SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _. . . . . . .
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Sample Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Questionnaire and Administration. . . . . . . . . 3
RESULTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Basic Job Dimensions--Degree of
Satisfaction on Present Job . . . . . . . . . . 5
Job-Related Attitudes of the DDI Sample . . . . . 6
Differential Job Attitudes of DDI
and Other Agency Professionals. . . . . . . . . 13
Differential Job Attitudes of Five-
and Ten-Year DDI Employees... . . . . . . . . . 18
Summary of Attitudinal Differences Between
1-Year and 5- and 10-Year bDI Professionals . . . 21
Discussion of Comments made in Response to
An Open-End Attitude Survey Question... . . . . 23
Appendix A: Summary of Background Characteristics
of the DDI and Non-DDI Samples . ? 31
Appendix B: Distribution of Response Percent-
ages to Agency Job Attitude
Questionnaire: DDI Sample Only. . 34
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Approved For Release 2006IQ8/I4C C ,ARE '86BOO269ROO0900090005-8
SUMMARY
JOB ATTITUDES AND OPINIONS OF CAREERISTS
IN THE DIRECTORATE FOR INTELLIGENCE
To
describe
job-related attitudes and opinions of DDI careerists
?
To
To
compare
compare
job views
job views
of
of
DDIers with other Agency professionals
DDIers here 5 and 10 years
To
compare
expressed
job
satisfaction of experienced and new DDIers
. DDI group consisted of 190 employees who EOD'd approximately 5 or 10
years ago in professional-level jobs and who were under age 30 when
hired. All carried DDI career service designations.
5-year sub-group numbered 138
10-year sub-group numbered 52
Agency comparison group (non-DDIers) consisted of 358 employees who
met same age and EOD requirements as DDI group. Included were 52%
DDPers, 37% DDSers, 10% DDS&Ters, and 1% from O/DCI.
DDI (1-year)_comparison group, numbering 101, was made up of employees
who had entered the Agency in FY68, at under age 30, in professional-
level jobs. Results for this group were drawn from an earlier attitude
survey.
.-127 item multiple-choice questionnaire covering respondent's back-
ground, and attitudes toward immediate job and work environment,
career, training and supervision, and the Agency in general
1 open-ended question which invited personal comments and suggestions
for change
Survey conducted in _.Fall?1969-I...under .auspices ' of . the inspector
General to,-.whom questionnaires, completed anonymously, were returned
. 190 of 239 DDIers returned questionnaires, yielding 79% return rate
DDI GROUP - General Job Satisfaction
Nearly 70% claimed satisfaction with their jobs as a whole
About 20% were "about as satisfied as dissatisfied"
. About 10% expressed clear dissatisfaction
-i-
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Approved For Release 2006/i@8,j4R Chi,-EDP86B00269R000900090005-8
Job Aspects on which a High Proportion (about 3/4 or more) Satisfied
Co-workers - cooperation and interpersonal relations
? Agency Goals - importance and worthwhileness
? Agency Rules and Regulations - reasonableness
? Intrin.ic Aspects of Work Itself
? Treatment by Supervisor
? Competence of Supervisor
? Personal Work Accomplishments - sense of making a contribution
Impression Job Makes on Family and Friends
Job Aspects on which a Fairly High Proportion t(about 2/3) Satisfied
. Salary Received
Recognition Received for Work - appropriateness and adequacy
Job Aspects on which Low or Moderate-Sized Proportions (about 1/2) Satis.-
fied
? Opportunities for Advancement
e.g., 32% felt promotional opportunities were unfair and that their
rate of advancement would be slower than they were led to believe
? Classroom and On-The-,fob Training - quality and relevance
Nearly 1 in 4 claimed Agency had provided them inadequate training
and that they were dissatisfied with the quality of their instruct-
ors
Physical Surroundings/Working Conditions
Sizeable minorities described their office area as depressing and
affording too little privacy
? Way Agency is Run (see below)
Matters Pertaining to Way Agency is Run Eliciting Unfavorable Comment
? Communications
57% claimed communication gap existed between management and
employees
57% felt that management fails to explain adequately to employees
the reasons for its actions
Coordination
45% felt management does not see to it that there is cooperation
between offices
Personnel Management
46% felt Agency is not doing a good job managing its young officers
40% felt Agency has grown more depersonalized in its relations with
employees
Career Planning and Development
34% indicated that decisions affecting their assignments and
careers were made with little regard for their own preferences
72% indicated that they were rarely asked to participate in the
planning of their careers
. Miscellaneous
Between 35 and 40% claimed that they are unable to get enough
clerical help and that they spend too much time themselves on
clerical tasks
-ii-
S E C R E T
Is
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Approved For Release 200?/0$11(4:lCl -RjDP86B00269R000900090005-8
COMPARISONS BETWEEN GROUPS -- Differences in Attitudes
DDI vs. OTHER AGENCY PROFESSIONALS
Slightly larger percentages of DDI careerists than others satisfied
with their salaries and opportunities for promotion
Proportionately more of the non-DDIers satisfied with their immediate
work environment -- e.g., 49% of DDIers but-?34%'-of'non-DDIers claim
their offices afford them too little privacy
.., A larger percentage of DDIers thought that a communication gap existed
between management and employees
74% of the non-DDIers and 60% of the DDIers indicated long-range
career plans to remain with the Agency
Differences in specific job views and opinions minimal -- expressed
satisfaction on basic job dimensions very much alike
Long-range career plans of 73% of 10-year and 57% of 5-year DDIers
were to remain with the Agency
DDI: NEW vs. EXPERIENCED CAREERISTS
A larger percentage of the careerists here 5 or 10 years than those
here 1 year voiced satisfaction with intrinsic aspects of their work
and salary they receive
Most free response comments were expressions of dissatisfaction and
concerned:
- Career development and personnel management
- Communication and coordination
- Work environment -- an especially salient issue, eliciting strongly
negative feelings from employees working in
25X1
Comments tended to corro orate THE findings from the multiple-choice
items as to the leading sources of discontent and concern
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Approved For Release 200%0%1~: ilAARJ)P86B00269R000900090005-8
INTRODUCTION
This report describes some?jvob-related attitudes of a group
of professional officers serving in the Directorate for Intelli-
gence. For reference purposes, comparative attitude data on
a group of officers from other Agency Directorates are also pro-
vided. Both the DDI and the comparison samples consisted of
employees who had entered on duty approximately five or ten years
ago in professional-level jobs. A complete description of the
samples appears below.
The source of the data for this report was a questionnaire
attitude survey conducted under the auspices of the office of the
Inspector General in Fall 1969, and involving over 550 Agency
officers. The questionnaire was designed to develop information
concerning employees' attitudes and views about their careers,
their immediate jobs and work environment, their training and
supervision, and the Agency in general.
A Psychological Services Staff report dated January 1970 ("A
Survey of Job-Related Attitudes of Five- and Ten-Year Agency Offi-
cers") describes in detail the survey results for the overall
Agency sample. The present report deals more or less exclusively
with the attitudes of the DDIers within this larger Agency sample.
Included are: 1) discussions in absolute terms of the job attitudes
and satisfactions of DDIers as expressed on both objective and
-1-
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Approved For Release 20QJ /V/I 4 RC~Q-q DP86B00269R000900090005-8
open-ended questionnaire items; 2) comparisons in relative terms
of the stated job satisfactions of DDIers and other Agency pro-
fessionals; and 3) comparisons of-job views of'DDIers here five
and ten years.
Sample Description
The DDI sample consisted of 190 professional officers --
88% male, 12% female -- all of whom carried DDI ("I") career
service designations. The comparison or non-DDI sample totaled
358.
Most of the DDI officers were between 30 and 40 years of
age at the time of completing the questionnaire survey; all were
under age 30 when hired. Nearly all possessed at least a bachelor's
degree, with 44% claiming advanced degrees. With very few exceptions,
the DDI group reported EOD grades between GS-05 and GS-10, with
grades 7 and 9 being most frequently cited. Slightly under one-
quarter of the group indicated they had been through either the JOT
or CT Programs.
DDI employees with EOD dates in 1963-64 (5-year group) made up
73% of the study sample; the remaining 27% reported EOD dates in
1958-59.
Appendix A contains a breakdown of the DDI sample and the non-
DDI comparison sample on the above and other background factors.
An exact breakdown of the DDI sample by current office is not
available, as this information was not requested. However, the
-2-
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Approved For Release 200t'0#/1O_: Lj-RRP86B00269R000900090005-8
number of respondents in each office to whom questionnaires were
sent is available and allows us to estimate the above breakdown.
This is done by assuming that the proportion of all returned
questionnaires that came from a given office parallels the pro-
portion of the total number of questionnaires that was initially
sent out to that office. The resulting estimates are displayed
below:
CURRENT OFFICE
NPIC
OCI
ESTIMATED %
OF SAMPLE
OSR
OBGI
IAS
CRS
O/DDI
IRS
Currently serving
in non-DDI offices 5
Questionnaire and Administration
A full description of the attitude questionnaire and the
details of its adminstration both at Headquarters and at overseas
-3-
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Approved For Release 2 0 0 ? / O L $ / ' 4 : I #-l DP86B00269R000900090005-8
locations are contained in the PSS Report dated January 1970,
referenced above. It suffices to indicate in the present context
that the questionnaire was to be completed anonymously and returned
directly to the Office of the Inspector General. Self-addressed
envelopes were provided for that purpose.
Of a total of 239 questionnaires distributed to personnel
carrying DDI career service designations, 190 were returned and
included in the analyses. This represents a return rate of 79%,
one which closely approximates the return-rate of 76% obtained for
the non-DDI group.
-4-
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Approved For Release 20061 18 14": (MAERl 'P86B00269R000900090005-8
RESULTS
Basic Job Dimensions -
Degree of Satisfaction on Present Job
M, This section is concerned with the question of how satisfied
the DDIers were with various basic aspects or dimensions of their
jobs. Responses of the group to 15 questionnaire items designed
to assess the degree of satisfaction and/or dissatisfaction felt
toward important job dimensions are the bases for the remarks
that follow.
The data indicated that the great majority of DDIers were
satisfied and very few clearly dissatisfied with most of the
important aspects of their jobs. On only 4 of 15 job aspects did
the proportion satisfied drop significantly below two-thirds, and
only in one instance did the percent dissatisfied exceed 20%. On
an overall job attitude index, nearly 70% of the DDI sample indicated
-+ that they were satisfied with their jobs as a whole and only about
10% expressed clear dissatisfaction. The remainder claimed they
w
were "about as satisfied as dissatisfied".
The specific job aspects responded to with the greatest
degree of satisfaction were "the importance of the Agency's goals"
and "relations with co-workers" -- in both instances more than 80%
responded favorably.
Slightly less, but still impressive percentages of DDIers (75
to 80%) found their work interesting and meaningful, their supervisors
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Approved For Release 20W/08/Cr4RC A FDP86B00269R000900090005-8
competent and fair, Agency regulations reasonable, and their
personal work accomplishments satisfying. One small step below
these dimensions in terms of overall satisfaction were ones con-
cerned with the impression that one's job makes on others, the
recognition received for one's work, and salary received. Between
65 and 75% of the respondents noted satisfaction on these job aspects.
Typically, only between 5 and 10% of the DDI sample expressed
clear dissatisfaction on any of the above job aspects.
Finally, in what constituted the only real exceptions to
the picture of general and widespread satisfaction delineated
above, we note that about one-half of the DDIers are satisfied
with 1) opportunities for promotion, 2) the training they have
received, 3) the way the Agency is run, and 4) their work environ-
ment. It sho,ld be pointed out that only on the last of these.:
job aspects, physical surroundings, did a sizeable minority, in
this case 30%, of the sample express dissatisfaction. Figure 1
shows the percentages of the DDI sample responding "Satisfied" and
"Dissatisfied" to each of the job aspects mentioned.
Job-Related Attitudes of the DDI Sample
The preceding remarks were intended to provide an overview
of the job satisfaction expressed by DDI professionals toward
various aspects of their jobs. What follows are more detailed
descriptions of the job-related attitudes, views, and opinions
-6-
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Importance of
igency goals
Agency rules
nd regulations
PERCENT DISSATISFIED- PERCENT SATISFIED
Work Itself--interesting-
,ess and meaningfulness
v
Treatment by
-upervisor
Versonal work r
accomplishments
competence of
supervisor
?impression job T
makes on others
;eneral job
'Tatisfaction
7ecognition re-
:eived for work
WW
Opportunities
.or advancement
aw
Classroom and on-
:he-job training
Physical surroundings/ r
?;?orking conditions 3P
May Agency
is run
001
10
t
1L1
r
lp
r-
18
14
$3
66
4
_4
--I
5J3
1
48
79
79
J
7~
1
J5
75
1
13
Does not include percent responding "About as satisfied as dissatisfied".
-7-
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006 Eh1C: &IPER@P86B00269R000900090005-8
FIGURE 1
PERCENT OF DDI SAMPLE EXPRESSING SATISFACTION AND
DISSATISFACTION WITH VARIOUS ASPECTS OF THEIR JOBS
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
8
 Approved For Release 2?0 O?/l4 : tLk RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
of these same careerists. No attempt is made to cover the entire
content of the questionnaire in this section; a complete listing
of all the survey items and the distribution of responses of'the
DDI sample to these items is provided in Appendix B.
Nature and Magnitude of Work Demands
More than one-third of the DDI professionals asserted that
they spent too much time doing clerical tasks; not unexpectedly,
39% of the group claimed they've had trouble getting enough
clerical help. Most DDIers could agree that enough work was
assigned to keep them busy; fewer than 10% thought that there
was too much pressure on their jobs.
Attitudes of DDIers toward the intrinsic aspects of their
work were moderately to very favorable. Less than 5% claimed
they were dissatisfied with the nature of the work they do; i.e.,
its interestingness and meaningfulness.
Recognition Received for Work
Overall, two out of three respondents claimed that they were
satisfied with the amount and kind of recognition -- both praise
and criticism -- they have received for their work. About 10%
expressed clear dissatisfaction on this job aspect. Unfair criticism
of one's work was hardly ever cited (4%), but fully 25% of those
surveyed claimed they did not usually receive praise for a job well
done. Evidently, too little praise rather than unjustifiable
criticism is the concern of this minority of employees.
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Approved For Release 200'0/1 d : gLj-R P86B00269R000900090005-8
Views on Supervision
Attitudes toward supervisors were among the most positive
ones expressed anywhere on the questionnaire. On the average,
80% of the DDI respondents claimed that their supervisors were
competent technically, were reasonable in their dealings with their
employees, and were sound decision-makers. On a less positive note,
26% of the sample felt that their supervisors had not shown appro-
priate interest in their (the employees') career development.
Classroom and On-The-Job Training
Among DDIers, attitudes toward training were not particularly
favorable. Overall, slightly more than one-half of the sample were
clearly satisfied with their training and slightly less than one-
fifth were clearly dissatisfied. Yet, just about all DDI employees
surveyed felt that they have experienced growth in their skills
on their present jobs. This feeling is probably attributable in
part to effective on-the-job training and to job-related academic
courses taken by employees. Over 60% of the respondents reported
that they have taken such academic courses since joining the Agency.
For the great majority, course work was paid for in whole or in part
by the Agency.
To round out the training picture, it was noted that one-quarter
of the sample felt that the training provided by the Agency for their
jobs was inadequate; 69% described it as adequate. One-quarter also
-9-
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Approved For Release 20
/2844 RCMP,-' DP86B00269R000900090005-8
claimed they were not satisfied with the quality of Agency training
instructors -- one-half were satisfied, one-quarter were "undecided".
Promotions
Opportunities for advancement and promotion policy in the Agency
were not regarded with particular favor by a sizeable minority of
the DDI sample. For example, one-third of the group did not think
that promotional opportunities were fair. One-third claimed that
their rate of advancement would be slower than they had been led to
believe. It would be informative to learn the bases from which
employee expectancies regarding promotion had arisen. Was there a
failure in communication or did the expectancies which were subse-
quently disconfirmed really represent wishful thinking or rational-
ization?
A clue to some of the discontent referenced above may be
found in the fact that only 55% of the sample thought that rewards
and recognition in the Agency were based primarily on actual
accomplishments while about 30% disagreed. The response of the
latter group is interpreted as an unfavorable attitude toward
the bases on which rewards are made. Typically, employees would
like to see rewards made contingent upon demonstrated performance.
Within the DDI sample, as many people thought that demonstrated
performance was not the basis for getting ahead as did. Seniority
and getting known by the right people were the most. frequently
cited alternatives to demonstrated performance.
-10-
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Approved For Release 2000i0Z1'4 :PCII;k PIDP86B00269R000900090005-8
Physical Surroundings and Working Conditions
It was noted above that the degree of dissatisfaction expressed
toward physical surroundings and working conditions exceeded that
registered on any of the other basic job aspects. Some of the
specifics include the findings that between one-third and one-
half of the DDIers surveyed described the..ir office area as "depress-
ing" and as offering "too little privacy". Parking and eating
facilities, too, were the objects of more than passing concern.
For example, nearly 60% of the sample thought eating facilities
were inadequate. The fact that 1 in 5 of the DDI respondents
worked ay be contributing to these latter results.
Commitment to Agency Career
About 3 in 5 of the DDI professionals surveyed indicated that
their long-range career plans were to remain with the Agency. About
the same proportion claimed that they really "feel part of the Agency" --
slightly more than 25% couldn't agree.
As might be anticipated, fewer people plan to remain in their
present jobs (42%) than plan to remain in the Agency (60%). Getting
into general management or administration was the most frequently
preferred alternative (cited by 30%) to one's present job.
Caliber and Management of New Professionals
Nearly all DDIers agreed that the young professionals entering
the Agency today are as capable as those who entered when they did.
But a far smaller number, less than 60% of the DDI sample, were of
-11-
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Approved For Release 200?/q/1.4 : I J.-l pP86B00269R000900090005-8
the opinion that these young professionals are as motivated
(i.e., committed to their work) as they were at the outset of
their careers. Perhaps most revealing is the finding that only
1 in 5 of the DDIers thought that the Agency is doing a good job
of managing young professionals; 36% had no opinion.
Way Agency is Run
Only low or moderate degrees of overall satisfaction were
expressed toward management practices, especially as they affect
career development, personnel management, and communication.
Although the great majority of respondents perceived the people
who manage the Agency as possessing "good judgment," many were
clearly dissatisfied with the way the Agency is run. For example,
only 4 in 10 of the DDIers felt that management sees to it that
there is cooperation between offices. In the area of communications,
well over half the group claimed that there is a communication
gap between management and employees, and that management fails
to explain adequately the reasons for its actions. On the plus
side, most respondents did acknowledge that they can make their
ideas known to management and that they feel free to bring complaints
to the attention of their supervisors.
Attitudes expressed toward career development and personnel
management in the Agency were notably unfavorable. Some indication
of this is reflected in the fact that the majority of those surveyed
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Approved For Release 2006D81 44 G A-FRCTP86B00269R000900090005-8
felt that the Agency should take more interest in each employee
as a person than it presently does. On a related matter, 4 in
10 of the DDIers claimed that since they've been here, the Agency
has grown more depersonalized in its relations with its employees.
To illustrate further, nearly 75% agreed that they were rarely
asked to participate in the planning of their careers. Fully
one-third claimed that decisions affecting their assignments and
careers were made with little regard for their own preferences.
More than one-quarter felt that their supervisors had not shown
interest in their career development. Finally, in regard to
views on the availability of personnel-type information, consider-
able polarization of experiences was evident; 46% of the DDI sample
said they were kept informed of personnel policies and procedures
while 42% said they were not so informed.
Reactions to Questionnaire
Two items in the questionnaire asked respondents for their
views on the value of attitude surveys. Sixty percent of the DDIers
felt that "filling in a questionnaire like this is a good way to let
management know what employees think". A significantly smaller
percentage (44%) believed that "some good may come out of filling in
a questionnaire like this".
Differential Job Attitudes of
DDI and Other Agency Professionals
In this section comparisons of job-related attitudes and
satisfactions of DDI and non-DDI officers are presented. The focus
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Approved For Release 20A/(%/F4 RCPA-I DP86B00269R000900090005-8
will be primarily on those survey items on which responses of the
two Agency gfoups differed to both a statistically reliable and,
in our judgment, a noteworthy degree.
Only 16 of 114 questionnaire items were responded to in a
sufficiently different manner by the DDI and non-DDI sample to
warrant additional comment.l The discussion of these differences
is organized around the job dimensions within which the individual
questionnaire items were clustered (shown in Appendix B). It
should be noted that on no items falling on 13 of the 18 job
dimensions tapped by the questionnaire did noteworthy group differ-
ences obtain.
Background Characti stics
As noted earlier, both the DDI an4 the Agency comparison
sample consisted of employees who had EOD'd approximately five or
ten years ago in professional-level jobs and who were under age 30
when hired. The Directorate most heavily represented in the non-DDI
sample was the Clandestine Service with 52% of the total; next came
the Support Services with 37%; then the Directorate for Science and
Technology with 10%; and the Office of the Director with 01%.
total of 358 officers were in the Agency comparison sample.
Differences between the DDI and the Agency comparison sample
on the variables of age, sex, and EOD grade were minimal. The samples
1Statistically significant differences were found on a total of
31 of the 114 items. The DDI sample expressed, on the average,
more favorable attitudes than the non-DDIers on only 11 of the
31 items where reliable differences were found.
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Approved For Release 200(10116 : iUFcP86B00269R000900090005-8
did differ somewhat in distribution of current grades, education,
and the percent that were former CTs. DDIers enjoyed higher
grades, on the average, than the others surveyed. They also
tended to have attained higher levels of education -- 44% with
advanced degrees compared to 20% for the non-DDIers. Finally,
more than twice the proportion of non-DDIers than DDIers reported
having been through the CT Program (52 vs. 23%).
Job-Related Attitudes
Opportunities for Advancement
It will be recalled that in absolute terms, opportunities
for promotion was among the job aspects responded to most unfavor-
ably by the overall DDI sample. Relatively speaking, more dis-
satisfaction was expressed on this job aspect by non-DDIers (31%)
than by the DDIers surveyed (18%). A clue to interpreting this
differential may reside in the finding that nearly one-half of
the non-DDIers but only 29% of the DDIers felt they would advance
more quickly in private industry than in the Federal Government.
Also noteworthy is the fact that the two groups did not differ
reliably in their attitudes toward either "personal chances for
promotion" or the fairness of Agency promotional opportunities.
Classroom and On-The-Job Training
low For both the DDI-and non-DDI sample satisfaction with training
was not particularly high -- about 55 clearly satisfied, 17%
-15-
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Approved For Release 20168f14R GFIAZDP86B00269R000900090005-8
dissatisfied. Slightly more than 20% of both groups felt they
had received inadequate training for their jobs, while nearly
one-quarter were not satisfied with the "quality of Agency train-
ing instructors." Percentage-wise, fewer DDIers than non-DDIers
(22 vs. 32%) acknowledged they have a well-planned training
program "for people in my position". But it should be noted
that the great majority of both groups felt that the training
they had received for their jobs was adequate. Perhaps the dis-
crepancy in these latter two items stems from the feeling that
a well-planned training program cannot (or need not) be designed
for their positions.
Pay and Benefits
Attitudes of DDI and non-DDIers toward salary differed reliably,
sometimes rather substantially. First, in terms of overall attitude
toward present salary, 1 in 10 of the DDIers and 2 in 10 of the
others are clearly dissatisfied. Feelings of being underpaid for
work done are far more prevalent among tie:non-DDI than the DDT
careerists (40 vs. 26% unfavorable). More striking still'is the
fact that fully 60% of the Agency comparison sample, but only
about half that percentage of the DDIers thought they would be
better off salary-wise outside of the Federal Government. This
last finding should be interpreted in light of the fact that nearly
one-half of the non-DDIers but only about one-quarter of the DDIers
reported current grades below GS-12.
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Approved For Release 200W 1t: &IPER(DP86B00269R000900090005-8
Physical Surroundings/Working Conditions
Satisfaction with physical surroundings and working conditions
was less widespread among DDIers than others. Two-thirds of the
non-DDIers, but only one-half of the DDIers were clearly satisfied
with this aspect of their jobs; conversely, dissatisfaction was
registered by 30% of the DDIers, but only 15% of the others. Some
clues to this differential may be found in the facts that far more
DDIers than non-DDIers felt that eating facilities were inadequate
and that their office space afforded too little privacy.
Adequacy of Communication
A significantly greater proportion of DDIers than the others
(57 vs. 42%) asserts that there'is a communication gap between
management and employees. For both groups, the problem does not
seem to arise from any inability to make one's ideas known to
management -- better than 4 in 5 of the total Agency sample felt
they could -- but rather from management's failure to explain
adequately to employees the reasons for its actions. The latter
claim is made by 57% of the DDIers and 44% of the Agency comparison
sample.
Career Development and Personnel Management
Non-DDI officers were slightly more'likely than DDIers to agree
that they are kept informed of personnel policies and procedures
(58 vs. 46%) and that they are asked to participate in the planning
-17-
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Approved For Release 2JOOI00114 ECrA-R DP86B00269R000900090005-8
of their own careers (32 vs. 21%). However, the two groups did
not differ reliably in their attitudes toward a variety of other
personnel management matters. The latter would include attitudes
toward.the personnel office per se, the role of one's supervisor
in career development, and the manner in which decisions affecting
assignments and careers are made.
Commitment to A2ency Career
A final area in which group differences are found concerned
the sense of belongingness respondents felt toward the Agency.
Typically, non-DDIers were slightly more extreme than DDI officers
in asserting that they really felt part of the Agency (73 vs. 62%)
and that the longer they worked here the more they felt they belonged
(64 vs. 46%). In light of the above attitude differences, it is
not altogether surprising that more of the non-DDIers should have
indicated that their long-range career plans were to "stay with
the Agency" (74 vs. 60%).
Differential Job Attitudes of-
Five- and Ten-Year DDI Employees
In this section, job-related attitudes of DDI careerists
here approximately five and ten years are compared.
With but a few exceptions, the distributions of responses
of the two groups of careerists to the attitude survey were
remarkably similar. The exceptions were only six in number, out
of a possible 114, and fell in rather disparate areas. On no
-18-
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Approved For Release 200(N0W14 : iVI- F..P86B00269R000900090005-8
item inquiring about satisfaction felt toward basic job dimensions
did the groups respond in a significantly different manner.
Background Characteristics
The 10-year DDI sample, numbering 52, and the 5-year sample,
numbering 138, appeared very much alike on a variety of demographic
variables (EOD grade, distribution by sex, and percent CTs). They
did differ predictably on current grade; 22% of the 5-year employees
report grades of GS-13 and above compared to 61% for those here 10
years. Another reliable group difference emerged on education
level attained. Whereas more than 60% of the 10-year group noted
that they had earned at least a master's degree, less than 40%
of the 5-year group could make a similar claim. This difference
is probably attributable in part to the longer time the 10-year
group has had to complete advanced degree work after joining the
Agency.
A final point by way of introduction to the two groups is
that a somewhat larger percentage of the 10- than the 5-year
employees indicated that their long-range career plans were to
stay with the CIA (73 vs. 55%). This difference is not unexpected
inasmuch as with increased time in the Agency, the number of
attractive alternative careers open to employees is probably reduced.
Moreover, one might speculate that because of the time factor, a
greater proportion of the disenchanted in the group that EOD'd 10
years ago would have left the Agency by now than would be true of
the 5-year group.
-19-
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Approved For Release 2S010/1 A :ifl -R DP86B00269R000900090005-8
Job-Related Attitudes
A greater percentage of the 10-year than the 5-year group
indicated that it was kept informed of personnel policies and pro-
cedures. However, this perceived information advantage did not
lead the 10-year people to more positive views ofl:the personnel
system. Nearly one-half of the 10-year group but only one-third
of the 5-year group felt that the Agency "personnel program" is
a hindrance.
Although the overall degree of satisfaction/dissatisfaction
expressed by the two samples of DDIers toward classroom and on-
the-job training did not differ reliably, group differences did
emerge on the question of the quality of Agency training instructors.
Twenty-nine percent of the 10 year but only 10E of the 5-year
careerists commented unfavorably on the quality of these instructors.
Two attitude items dealing with physical surroundings and
working conditions occasioned'differential responding from the two
groups. Proportionately more of the 10-year group felt that
eating facilities available to them were adequate and that starting
and quitting times were satisfactory. In interpreting both of
these differences it should be noted that a far greater percentage
of 5- than the 10-year group worked A final group
difference observed was that more of the 5-year than the 10-year
professionals agreed that there was too much "red tape" in the
Government (81 vs. 63%).
-20-
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Approved For Release 200jl00/1(4 :ICIE-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
In summary, differences in specific job views and opinions
between the two groups of DDIers were minimal and expressed satis-
faction on basic job dimensions very much alike.
Summary of Attitudinal Differences Between
1-Year and 5- and 10-Year DDI Professionals
Up to this point in the report, the job-related attitudes
of relatively experienced intelligence officers have been discussed.
In order to gain additional perspective on the attitudes of these
careerists, we have made selected comparisons between their responses
and those of a group of young DDI professional employees. This latter
group, numbering 101, completed an attitude survey nearly identical
to the one described herein approximately one year after joining
the Agency. They were surveyed in Fall 1968 (along with some 200
young professionals in other Directorates) as part of the Agency's
participation in President Johnson's Program for Talented Youth in
the Federal Service. Included in this DDI group, referred to
below as the 1-year DDIers, were employees who 1) EOD'd between
July 1967 and June 1968; 2) were under age 30 at time of hire; and
3) whose entry-level position required the equivalent of a bachelor's
degree.
V.W The degree of job satisfaction expressed by the 1-year and
the combined 5- and 10-year DDI groups toward the basic demensions
OW of their jobs did not differ in most important respects. In fact,
on 12 or 15 such dimensions group differences of less than 10%
-21-
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-R DP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Approved For Release 200f3/0?/16 : l~-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
responding "Satisfied" .(or "Dissatisfied") were found. Slightly
larger differences in expressed satisfaction, averaging about
15% were found in responses to two items: more of the experienced
gfoup than the 1-year group of DDIers were both clearly satisfied
with their "jobs as a whole" (67 vs. 55%) and with the work they've
done, including its interestingness and meaningfulness (79 vs. 63%).
On two related attitude items -- not inquiring about satisfaction
per se -- it was found that the experienced DDIers were more likely
to acknowledge that they got "challenging, important assignments"
and to assert that their work did not bore them. Evidently, over
time the average: level of satisfaction of on-board DDIers toward
the intrinsic aspects of their work is increased to a measurable
degree. It was noted earlier that 73% of the 10-year and 55% of
the 5-year employees indicated that their plans were to remain
with the Agency. For the 1-year group, the percent planning to
stay was 31%, while another 31% indicated that they had no definite
career plans.
Another area in which a group difference was found concerned
communications in the Agency. Proportionately more of the 5-
and 10-year than the 1-year DDIers felt that a communication
gap existed between management and employees. Interestingly,
the groups did not differ reliably in their experiences and views
regarding the handling of their career development. To about the
-22-
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Approved For Release 20065 814: GdAER@P86B00269R000900090005-8
same degree respondents in the three DDI groups claimed they
were asked to participate in the planning of their careers (a
uniformly low degree of participation was claimed) and agreed
that their supervisors had shown an interest in their career
development (about 55% agreed).
Finally, in what constitutes the single largest group differ-
ence in expressed satisfaction on a basic job dimension, it was
observed that favorable attitudes toward salary were more wide-
spread in the combined 5- and 10-year groups than among 1-year
DDIers. Fully two-thirds of the former group but only 40% of
the latter claimed satisfaction with their salary.
Discussion of Comments made in Response To
An pen-End Attitude Survey Questionl-
The last section of the attitude survey contained a single
question designed to give the respondents an opportunity to express
more fully in writing reasons for job satisfaction/dissatisfaction
not covered elsewhere in the questionnaire and to offer specific
suggestions for change.
Seventy-six of the 190 DDIers included in the survey made
one or more comments on the open-end question. The overwhelming
majority of their comments contained some element of dissatisfaction,
lMrs. assisted in the preparation of this section.
She was also responsible for the computer analyses of data on
which this report was based. preparation
of this report was provided by
-23-
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Approved For Release 2QjQ6 781144: (2IAyRDP86B00269R000900090005-8
frequently strongly worded. This is not an unusual finding for
an attitude question formated this way, and it does not cast doubts
on the validity of the information (mostly favorable) developed
from the other sections of the questionnaire. Typically, people
restrict their comments to sources of dissatisfaction and negative
concern, leaving unmentioned those areas in which they are either
satisfied or toward which they feel indifferent. Therefore, to
achieve proper perspective and a balanced view of what people are
thinking, the results from the open-end question should not be
considered independently of the results from the multiple-choice
items presented earlier in this report.
In preparing this section, emphasis was given to narrative
material which either enlarged and clarified the information developed
from other parts of the questionnaire or which introduced novel
concerns of respondents. It should be noted that the number of
respondents making the same or closely similar sorts of comments
is usually very small, most often less than five. Relatively few
of the proposals for change offered can be considered new or
unique and they are therefore not give special treatment in what
follows.
By far the greatest number of comments made by DDIers concerned
career development/personnel management in the Agency. Communications
and coordination, construed in the broadest sense, accounted for
-24-
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Approved For Release 200(W0W1,t: f~I Rt)P86B00269R000900090005-8
the second-largest number. Physical surroundings/working condi-
tions and the work itself were the other major categories in which
a significant number of comments were clustered.
Career Development/Personnel Management
A number of DDIers intimated in their narrative comments that
the Agency is simply not devoting enough effort to planning meaning-
ful and satisfying careers for their professional staff. What
career planning that does exist, is seen by some as taking only
a short-range view, as generally for the convenience of the Agency,
and as failing to give enough consideration to "an individual's
desires in personnel matters". This is consistent with the finding
on the multiple-choice attitude items where between one-fourth
and one-third of the respondents noted that decisions affecting
their assignments and careers were made with little regard for their
preferences and that their supervisors had not shown an interest in
their career development.
A cause of concern to many of those who made comments on
personnel management is that employees who are either non-productive
or marginal in performance of their duties are retained rather than
released. Two of the more pointed comments on this topic were
phrased as questions; "Doesn't anybody in the Government know that
incompetents should be fired and not promoted?" and "Private industry
actually fires people -- does this ever happen in Government?"
-25-
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Approved For Release 2606Ei09/1&: IAT-R DP86B00269R000900090005-8
Another point of contention cited by several of the DDIers
concerns the practice of hiring retired-military personnel (after
their having served tours in the Agency) at mid- and upper-manage-
ment levels.
Several comments were made which dealt with the handling of
promotions within the Agency. They seemed to stress two points.
First, promotions should be based more on merit and less on senior-
ity or politics than they presently are. Second, the Agency's
policy of requiring supervisory responsibility of an individual
in order for him to advance beyond a certain grade was questioned.
To illustrate the latter point, one DDIer suggested that "the grade
structure should be revamped to. provide for continuing and mean-
ingful monetary reward to those fulfilling primarily technical
functions when the nature of those functions are so complex as
to require a lifetime of study to master them". Hiring policy
was seen by a couple of respondents as inappropriate and unrealistic
in its insistence on a college degree for some professional-type
positions. More flexibility regarding educational credentials was
urged.
More than one DDIer commented that the Agency should make it
easier for employees to rotate between offices and even between
Directorates and to affect permanent transfers. Rotations and
transfers were seen as procedures which "allow variety and maximum
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Approved For Release 2006 78814: CRIAERE~P86B00269R000900090005-8
opportunity for career development'.''. The suggestion was made
by several to introduce efficient means of providing employees
with information on job vacancies.
Communication and Coordination
On two multiple-choice attitude items inquiring about communi-
cation, more than one-half of the DDI sample claimed that there
was a communication gap between management and employees and that
management fails to explain adequately to employees the reasons for
its actions. Several of the narrative comments concerning communi-
cation suggest that faulty and inadequate communication is not
only something observed between management and employees per se,
but that it is also a serious problem between and within Directorates
and between the Agency and other Government bodies. Within the
Agency, generally, more effort in developing employee understanding
of the various Directorates and their functions was called for.
Specialists, particularly, were seen as requiring this Agency-wide
exposure and perspective. Communication and coordination between
Directorates was characterized by one DDIer as "internecine
frictions". Others agreed that jurisdictional problems existed
and that these had deleterious effects on the overall Agency
mission. Still others were disturbed by the state of communications
between this and other agencies. As an illustration of this feeling,
one respondent observed that constant feuds between the Agency and
-27-
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
S E C R E T
"DIA, State, Army, Air Force, etc., prohibit important (photo)
intelligence from being disseminated to the policy levels in
Government". On a somewhat related matter, one DDIer pointed
out that management's shift in emphasis to vast and expensive
intelligence systems has not been associated with appropriate
concern with "the final product, the mission or the place of
the Agency in the scheme of things".
Although some DDIers acknowledge in their comments that
their advice on management practices such as communications has
been solicited, they felt that "follow-up action, if taken, has
usually been of a sweeping-under-the-rug variety", or that
constructive criticism has,}L:in the past, generated such panic
that the net effect has been to stifle speaking out.
Physical Surroundings and Working Conditions
Comments placed in this category were for the most part
produced by DDI employees who identified themselves as working
Many alluded to the special set of difficulties
associated with working in a building located in, to quote one
respondent, "a filthy, crime-infested slum". At least six of the
group working at this building expressed dismay over the inadequate
and unsafe parking or more generally expressed fears concerning
their personal safety. The feeling that "no one seems to care"
about the difficulties encountered by people
distressed one respondent.
25XJW
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Approved For Release 200Oi
4 RCILk-FDP86B00269R000900090005-8
Another theme concerning physical surroundings on which
several DDIers, presumably analysts, expressed similar sentiments
was that over-crowding in their working areas (and "the noise-
level") was detrimental to their research work. One respondent
suggested increased use of partitions and individual conference
rooms. It will be recalled that overall, about one-half of the
total DDI sample asserted that their office space gave them
too little privacy. Nearly one-third of the total group described
their office areas as depressing.
The Work Itself
On a multiple-choice attitude item, less than 5% of the DDI
sample expressed clear dissatisfaction with the nature of the work
they do. However, well over one-third of the DDIers surveyed
claimed they spent too much time doing clerical tasks and that
they had trouble getting enough clerical help. This complaint
is evidently one felt so strongly that several of the respondents
reintroduced it in their narratives, adding that the "effectivenes/
efficiency of many professionals in research-type activities
would be enhanced by the availability of more secretarial/clerical
support." Complementing this assertion is one made by several
respondents that "the Agency is over-staffed with professionals".
For example, one DDIer claims that hiring of professionals goes
on although "...for years analysts have complained that their
-29-
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
S E C R E T
responsibilities are continually being circumscribed because we
hire too damn many people for the work we have been -- or rather,
ought to be -- doing".
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Approved For Release 2006/
t4 CCU-.@D?86B00269R000900090005-8
Summary of Background Characteristics of
the DDI and Non-DDI Samples
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Approved For Release 2006/08/,t4C CM- RC '86B00269R000900090005-8
APPENDIX A
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND CHARACTERISTICS OF
THE DDI AND NON-DDI SAMPLES
DDI SAMPLE NON-DDI SAMPLE
Distribution of Sample
by Career Service:
executive Service (DCI)
Clandestine Service (DDP)
Support Service (DDS)
Research Service (DDS&T)
Intelligence Service (DDI)
..,Year of EOD:
01
52
37
10
1958 15 22
1959 13 19
1963 56 38
1964 17 20
Have you b6en through the Career
Training Program (CTP or JOT)?
Yes 23 52
No 77 47
"wDuring the past year did you spend
six or more months overseas (PCS)?
Yes 09 53
No 91 47
;How old are you?
25-29 21 15
30-34 49 51
35-39 25 32
40 and above 05 03
What is your sex?
Male 88 94
Female 12 06
-32-
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Approved For Release 2006ED8E14: (WARRIDP86B00269R000900090005-8
DDI SAMPLE
%
NON-DDI SAMPLE
- %
What is your highest degree of
education?
Less than a bachelor's degree 06
16
Bachelor's degree 19
36
Bachelor's degree with some
graduate work 31
Master's degree, L.L.B., J.D.,
18
or equivalient 39
Ph.D., M.D., or equivalent 05
02
What was your grade when you entered
on duty with the Agency? (Do not
consider summer jobs.)
GS-5 or GS-6 18
27
GS-7 or GS-8 55
59
GS-9 or GS-10 21
09
GS-11 06
02
GS-12 --
02
01
GS-13
01
GS-14
What is your present grade?
01
GS-7
GS-9
or GS-8
or GS-10 06
13
GS-11
20
34
GS-12
41
30
GS-13
25
15
GS-14
05
05
GS-15
03
01
01
GS-16
and above
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Approved For Release 20W/@,8/e RCLA-g DP86B00269R000900090005-8
Distribution of Response Percentanges to Agency
Job Attitude Questionnaire: DDI Sample Only
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14 :--GI&-R DP86B00269R000900090005-8
* N
w 0 0
(D I-i Fi
W to
m H H 00 Co rn vi .a w w H
ft rt .p o %D %D ko k c 1-' co
H m m
H, m Uri m ?x
t H ri- H O H ri H ttt (A ', H? {~, ;~,+
O W EI 0 w "C I-h 0 0 0 'C 00
P) w to to to 0 I-i E
I-l I?i 'C w x d E W I-h w tD u. (p
C# PV ;N, ? 4 mm O Ort wC 5 0 w?vI1,
CDC m m m ? p I-i 'gy m x m m w Cr 0 0
n w as a x m m ? cn
I ti I rt rr 0 N o to
((DD t-y o
0 0 0 H- o I'- 0 4 m 0
w n 0 0 II : I-h N rt 0 w H?
tt0 = w m LQm m0 to H- 0toH,
F'? .1 d 0) 0 K H- m
to m H- LQ >/ rt x 0 m 0 :4 m
I-h f-1 to I-I a 0 0 I-h N LQ O H
I' w m 0 3 m w 5 ti O fh G
m tr tQ m Iy ft m rt 0 IJ w
m h x & 'C m HaV
ri- H? m 0 w 0 x H- U. & H. H. 0
o 0 5 cn m In LO H- a 0 0 rt 0 ft
0 P.
(a CD 0 , m w w
n "0 rt H? ro 0 w 'C I-i to a m
~c m H m m 'zf n m o m
m H a W m a 14
I-I tr E
to rt "C H- 0 rt m m :r? o
H H- m rr 0 (D H H? Il 0 w m o ll
En 0 N 'C w 0 H- 0
H x
w to = p x n w cI- m H, a C -- w' C
rr a m H? rt w ti 0 H m o
N H, ro 0 : H t0) Hu (D
t'i Ht aH H 0 m ft ft H H
H- u. (p F1 P. ~31 0 (D Pi
a ?~ H ::1 m x CD W ::1 P- in ::S rt (D
(
u a 0 rt I
ft (n
C
P1 0m > d d d d d > zero (D 0
ft to Gm zz
Fl- P)
~dt1
mn
mm
m 0
K O
m tD
Fi U! N
m a w o Ui '..1 CC) N w H e141,
U1 0 m ,f v
m (D H N F~ N w
to t.
a !~+ 1-h
~D pt
m 0 .P - J J .P co N ?.1 -1
Lyd
AP
1-h X71 l--~ w N Ln w w . . Ln
1'r C W ?.1 to Ln co H
0
4D ti ri
7 P1 ro
ro to .p H H N w N
O 9
O' Cry W 00 -a Ol Ul H CC)
1z 0
F1 to
m m
to to to
w 0
h'
m (D Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14: RlA-RDP86B00269RO00900090005-8
H J Ol .P
co Ui .P CS
((DDO 0rt mH H bN0~y OO
Fi 0 'd N Fi H H W 0
"C m O ft (D w (D rt N C O
rI- 5:3, a0 Fi 0 "cw5a
~ 5' 'H rt C ? o E w U' 'H o
rt m P- (D 0 w ' x C) w N 'C
P)
H m(a. I--F ri-O J
5
P- Fh m `~ m "C rt wLQ H- rtrrtm
m rt c Fi UJ .7 UI I-'
m rt m '< N w m a ?J V
w c w - F " w c ((DDN 0 O 0 0 rri-
`m.3 H M N ~ t ( Fit F F I o U ) '<
"OCR w FFii (D ft 0
? ~? 0 0 P?IJ0"c O N
tr a 0 G "C X G N-d
(D 0 Pi (D
0 N 0 "c. P O F1
U) Pj P- En
0 .wP-((DD00
U] ri- 0 7C m (n 01-1
H m
O (D O O
m (t In- m 0 PV
W tj
c . cn
m I
F-' H H
N O O 'D 00
W l0 U1 '.0 co
t7
t)
C7
F~
U1
H
\0
(.J
l0
ah.
Fr--
J
N H H H
Ln Ul CD iP
rt
(D L.J.
Cb
(D co
rt P.
FH- U)
. (n
w
IJ
0)
0
m
w
0)
W
rt
p-
0)
rt
Ca
d d x' O d 10
H IV co
Uy~
J W \0
l0 to CO
vy~~~~4eo
01 A
0 Ln
W W Co 00
9~rQ
P'yp
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86BOO269ROO0900090005-8
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
N H lD n
H H
M H
cr M H
Quo/~~a'~'/7
ao
N
r- ,-i O
H Ln N
N 00
H
d' N Co
H H H
m H
-a I > H 4)
-rI 0 0
W
?) t0, X0-1 :j
4
04 K', r- P
r=i V.
0 ?, 0 0
Z +- O
?I-) N 5 04 M
? jr M U (13 U
td O P O ?I?)
P 0 >1 En
a 04 `" A rd
44 O 0 z A
?r1 ?d ?r1 0
?, 0 z r Aa (0 v
rd 04 ~4 H 0 ' P }4
O a) O 04 a)
> 0>
P4 0
00 04
W 44 0 a) H rI CJ
co r -
m I)
U 41
'bi 0
U)
w
v
a)
d
H
-
0 a)
4
0
O UA
0 Z4J
o b a)
44 1d
U) ? 0 [d
U rd
b O 4J H
U S-1 f ;
a) rd
O M
N O H
H H
Ei
i0 b, 1 W
>1 0 rl 1::
r '1 -,1 aa r- 0
Q) H (a 0 Q) M 4-3
Ea > 4 0 0 P P W
O N H U, 0 41
(L) U 5 4.1 Ul
Ell H 4-) y a) o N
U R N
R 1~
d 4- a) E R
'nn b, 44 y a rI
E
4-- 0 O Z N O Ri rc$
0 04-1 -N >1 .1~ ~ ?F1 -r-I r=j
0 4-) 4-3 rq
?0((1)40 044U) 0
z a) :j 4J M r-4 04
~-1 rd '9 '4H-I H to c ??
'H -- n
OOi0 -1 ft a) 0 4 >4
Uf4 430 UE:
1~ 4J 4 n r
H ?rl H 0 H
0 O Z 04-1 0 0 1~ 4r
x 0 Rd 3 0 ?n A E3 O EA ?rI
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
~>s
.4
b~D
'y lD N
Ln O
d N
a~~~Ja?Nn Ln
N
r-1 00 M 00 Cfl
r-I H r-i
LC) L() 1.0 M m
Ln :V LO r-~
N N H 1qN H
00 r-I N N
N N H N
W
w a
cnraaa
z
? o0 ~C
N r.{ d' EI -V
H
I
0
04
> r w
3 ? C 0
~ H C 4J (a 04 A
r-I A
En 4) ~4
ro 0 0a)
0 a)
0 b~ ?i
O a) 0
1-- `~ 'vim H FL' O
H
~ O f2,
O0 c$ -i H a-- 0
fis ro :3: 44
a) 04 a) H
FZ4 rd
44 C a) 3-I ro Q)
ro
O +- +-- 0 W 44 .11
>
>1 -P .11 En 0
R+
ro ri b -P U) cn rd
g o rd -N )?-I E O
' H O W H H by
i<
d~ N M N
N M l-? 0 H
H H
-A, -- 3 8 -
C11 d' >1
N C51 di
P4
0 0
0 a) 0.
r-I c\ d'
Ln d' H
4J
04
U
N
W
H
$4
w
3-I
H 3
U
W
W 3
W
N
rd H
U)
0
?r w
O
(d E
U
ro 4
(d
rl
?r4rl -P U) O
ro a) a)
rH t)) H 4J 0
W?riro m a) ?rr.?I
LH $4 r1
b g C 04)
o 0 $4 :J 000 00 r0-I W~
>1
Jt 1 W cd
b 0 -P a)
?ri 4 a) 0 >r a) -P a)
xH3
W :', 4J H H .C
N O co
M Lf L.D
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
~>e
b&o
Eby
- 11gba,04&'~V
4-1
O rd
Q) 4J
0 r, ? O~
cd
~4 -1
O U
a) cn
0 ^r1 4-I
Oro 0
O
00
00
m
~10
N
00
M
N
-zr
r-I
M
U)
M
N
d'
LO
d'
H
00
l0
Ln
I-
Lfl
r-I
N
r-I
r?I
a)
?rl cd
?rl 3 4J b1 4J 0
O 0 b' H ro d E
0 o 0 r=; a) }-I
P 44 O U a 4? o
0) O >i r1 (d 1-1
4-)
444
U E rl U) r'-i
-P i U) ro
4?I (1) En ?rI P U 3-1 R) O
Q)rd -N H N ?I -? a
Q (d
U -ri S?-1 ~-I P a)
a) r-I k -ri a U) > (1)
tva)-HH ~ 44 -I~-I A UN0 Q) ()0
4-1 iO U N rd rd 0 (d H ()
O 0 U) w -rl r1,' U) 'Ji Cd
O >j > ~-I ?rl cd Qa Cd H
c -H aa) 0
1~ O U) 0
O45iU 0 0 ON
O -1 E- 1?: a) >i s~ ?rl V .r
,-I Lfl C1 N
N 00 00 0
r-I
H
W
0
0
O
H P
(1)l (1)
Ti
0 U)
b
I~
?'
U
O
H
>1
U]
H
a)o
-O
E
v
.s: >i
a)
0
H
0
4)
Ej
04
U)
N
Cl)
U)
N 0
0
-1
O t
.4
N
4
N
4-I
0
a-)
RS
4J U)
?r?I
0
(Ti
04
U)
Q) cd
H
~?I
0
E
4-1 4
(
O)
U U))
40
-1
?
4-)
O O
>
a r-I
a)rd
0
-)
-r-1
c i
a)
a)
rd
O
4
-)
O >
C
,
a
Aa
?I-)
rd P
.
a)
Cd
v -U
U)
4 4-I
0 :
yi
.S: a)
0
4
U
x cn
z
E-c
3
H
O
M
M
N
10
N
?.M
d'
Lfl
Ul
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
Db
aGI
Lf) lD
N H
Ln
M
N M
N Lf) N m
3~ H H
ab~p
'4by
C A A
P4 C) F a~'w
Lf) r-
110
,
N +) a) 4j
0
E -P r-I -H Q
-rl
00
H
IZV
O
r
Ln
M
Ln
d'
H
H
Ln
%D
Ln
'O
N
H
H
N
H
O
00
N
4-
m
N
H
H
H
N
Lf)
Lf)
I1
A
A
A
A
FC
H
u)
U
?H
w
1 O 44
-
0
4-)
U
U
0
0
4
o
U) 4-4
..4
r4
V)
w rl rd
?rt O
4)
4_
0
o
>-4 N
U)
U
Q)
rd rl
U S-4
r4
4
)
U)
?G
O
0 -p 0
bI
-
U
N
z
>1
ri
r
0
0
S
?rl
i 4
3o H--I4 00
a) O H 4 b-4
En U)
a) (d O c ? rl U
H
H
H
a)
a)
4-4
H
Co N
N CN 00
M lD
~D Lf) N
o %D
Lf) H
04 4-1 0
>1 0 0 0
4J
U)
U)
U)
x
E
E
0
0
to
U)
0 a)
aa))
04 rS4
04
U) -P
U)
U)
E
00
O
d'
~D
~-40-
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86BOO269ROO0900090005-8
p^
b
.Y ~
N
r~
OD
LA
N
tIO
N
LA
N
00
r-I
O
r-i
N
N
1A
N
OD
CN
(n
N
t,0
1-:T
N
m
M
M
M
M
M
N
M
C'r
111
yy
OD
N
M
LA
Cf1
Ln
N
It:V
m
~p
N
M .
Ln
N
M
M
N
r
2
M
H
N
?
M
H
H
ri
N
r-
W
w a
(n Q W
?Q0 Q ~C
0
U
Si
I
4J 4J
-rl
U)
U.)
U
N
4J
ro
O
rd
ri
rI
44
O
O ?4
H
ci
04
. -1) O
b'
-U
F
r'I
U)
P -P
O U)
ra
N
r-1 4-I N
-rq
44
ri Jy
U)
-ri
~-I
UI ~
f??I
U)
(d ro
U)
P (1) 4J
P
Q) 4J
a)
04 04 -
N >1
N N (O H
J H Z U
N
0 (0
I~
U) cd t31
S-1 -rl P U
i4 c
U) H N rd
P4
r-I 04 (1)
(d >
-rl U) (U .~
U) c c
O +) 0
?44) U) >n
U) N
o0bi4
U H N
0 I~+) 3
0 -H
(d I U -I-)
r-1 3 N -H
'-d Q) U b"
4-I Z rd ?ri
rd 0 4-1 is
0 U) 0 r-I 4-4
0 O
>1t31z b-r
Z -rl 1-1 z
0 -ri -rI
rd rU rO O .I-1
O 0 0 4-1 -1
M P- : 0 -1
A 4
I 4) I
N (d r1
a :J1 a
U) -4 cd
4-I is 4-)
040
Ri
to 4) 0
4-3
.H. N N i~
w. 04
x 4) U)
0 (1)
S I ri '~? 4..1 -ri
N -OH 3 aa)
U) N N
~4 U)
3 U 3 U) U)
O cd I-I -I-> E 0
is (d -ri -rI
(ll O U) ?1J w 4)
0 tT (a 9: 0 ->1
U
ri >1
H H rl H ?I-) ; (d H
Q
Q A
~
.s~
H
W
U
4-1
0
0
U
W
b1
-H-I
U]
O
U
A
(ll
-~
tT
-I)
-d
ra
En
0 U)
4-)
b' (1)
4'rd a
tr
?r~?I
M
9
Q) rci
U)
rI
r-t
U)
U)
0 0 -P (d
-,1 0
(d
o
rd
0
() 0
4P-1
4441
U
0
w
rci
rt
bl
0 44
S]1
4-1 -r-1
0
A (1)
>1
4)
H
W z
Z
N
r-{
co
N
Q1
-41-
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86BOO269ROO0900090005-8
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
~7p
N
r-I
O>
N
r-I
r-I
N
rd
ON
N
qtP
00
OD
Lf)
N
ri
M
c1'
N
r
cM
O
00
I-M
N
l0
as
Ui
l0
Ln
l0
d'
Iqr
M
~pNn N
C)
LM
00
N
W
N
Q0
r-I
N
M
N
N
m
r-I
Ln
e~
M
r-1
LO
O
00
RT
0
r-I
~
M
r i
r-A
r-1
m
~gb~p
4
by4~ r-1
r--I
M
H
N
d'
N
M
Ii'
r-I
4 Q Q 4 Q
a)
0 rn +-)
w E
s~
N P
x 0
a) (0 -H
4- 0
4-3
-1-1 O U)
0 r1 't
O4-> 0
r 0.1 V. -H (1) rcj
ai
T$ -1 I~ U)
rl U 4-I O .k
0
a) O -r1 rd rd 0
4-I 54 r-I 0 r-I
-1 4-4 cd O
y Q O r-II cd r -I -I (1)
O -I
0 -r1 a)
O n >I E Ul >1
H
-I -I -1 04
-r44
M Z -' CE-i N
M N N
N 110
4
U)
4
Ei
W
-r-I
a)
c4
U
m
w
w
u
tT
4)
0 4-)
P
(d -H
a)
04
~
O a
)
a)
-IJ
N
-I-> E
>
-H
O
-H
-H
M >
N
?w
-rI (i
a)
:-y -rO
.--I
I4
U)
H
m
a)
0
N co m r-I r-H
N Ln '.0 r- rl
H
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
to ro
>1
Ce
4-J
M.rI
v
(1)
b o
a)
.Ci
-F)
U)
4)
0
0
rd4-)
0
O
O
r I
0
U! -r1
O
HH-
r-I r-I U)
a) I-I
u-1 a) U) r-II
~I - -H
Ord O it Ce W U) U)
Z3 U) U H
>+ H
00 N 'J
N M 3
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
N
N a
00
aA0
h<
w
3~gbaO4b' M
N
N l0
N H
Ln N ' Lr) 'cr N
Ln H r-I M
'cf' Ln Ln
N In m
M l0 11) N
N H ?. M
01 l0 Ln r?
N H
N m m
M d~ N
8b11,p4byti
O Ol l0
N N rl
N M H H
N N co 0) r- Ln
H M
U) I
0 -P E U,
r-I -H ~' Ul
U) 4-1 N 41
4J U a) -r-i
C: 0) U
-P b -H -110 a) -P
(1) -P r O U) a) 0
rd ?rl r1
cd U! a) iZ 4J
-rHi 4-I Ra -~ 0 4J UU)) 3
(a 41
H U) 4J i r-i U) -H
'< O rd z 40-1 E ?ri a U)
N (a U) a) x N O C O O -
O U) = U) 44 Uri 4-4 ?
-P ~4 ri >1
to a) rd 0
H. H U)4) q' -r v
-rA 4-) (1) ro 01
(d >1 114 O
4-I U) 00 E m r
d ( E U)
-ri
-N a) 4J 4J U) U) (d 4J
3 .~
-ri aim 0) 0 tea)
a) (a rd (a - P Z
N U) > 0 z a) E U)
X4 4) H C07 H Z -H ~ H E H 3
H
( N
4-) E
4 >1 -N U
4-) 0
0 0 v z r-1 +~ CO U)
n 01 4-J (1)
4J U) (1] }?1
-P rd E U) 04
ai -ri -a o N
-rl U) ,Li Uri d?) U)
P:
?rI P -I-) 'J ?rHl ~.
4-I 04 44 }-I U)
b ?, O Ram 3 E
rd 0 U) 4 rj
- rj)
-F) l
U 9 a) O (a z ,
9: rd
H Q o 4
U) 0 >14-1 ta (1)
v ~ z 4) 0
>r~-I Ra 0 a) 04o
U) U) n
f o ri r c$
rq 0) r,
14 4 -rq >1 fa >i
H U) [-t ,.c,' H Z O H E
H H
H H ri l0 ri N cr H O Ln l0 O l0
Ln N 01 ON CD H M cr 9.0 [- 01
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
3~bbac'b.Y
H N
H
C)
N
Lf1
N
N
N
CO
N
N
H
lU
H
N
M
00
l4
m
N
ON
M
M
d'
H
011
r
H
H
M
M
N
M
N
H
~~8
b
ao
^`'
1*12 H
Ln
m
00
N
co
N
M
H
H
N
H
H
W
w a
o~ A A Q Q
r-i
En fl, o .~'
H U) )
?ri rd ..1 ?H U rn
~4 r. 0 Q)
11 Id 44 U 04 (d z m
>1 U) rd a) 4 0
Rf Q) -H >, -N rtt
4J 0 fu
a) v a) d-)
fo -P N 4- U)
rl E H N - -H bti
(d 04
o b - ? a-- ~-I rd ?rdl
4-i -rl ^s a) rd 4 N ~-I
? a) rd a) 0 a ? a)
H H 4-I cd 4 .( a) a) z m 34 rd
$1 4I ~ f~ a) 4 m > m a) m ~-I
$1 01 Q) a) >1 O a) ~-I >i m -rl
O H M )4 O H '> a) O a) m
mN $1 4 $1w - 04 H $1a)
H a) Ri -N rd
Via) (W3 i~ ? N 0) 44-l a)
q r1 a) O ,$1 m O N A
a) (a >1 (d 0 rI 0 H -i-' A O Ei H a) rd u E -rirl H -~
H 9
C) CD C)
H H H
U)
a)
U
N 0 -H
4-I a0
O H H
O -N c
O rd .(Ord 0
0 O m N
in co
N
a)$1
H
Ea)
04
b, 44 O 04 -- 0
M O rd 4-1 +) . a
H RI (1) 0
rc a)
Si U) (1)
d -H 0 4) H $1
rd O (1) 0 (1) 0
Ei N rii >1 44 $1 N U U)
.$1 4- -ri ni
m 9,-N r, rd 0 z 4) rd
.. d b -ci $4 X N rx-I
H (U a) 04 rd
H 4
r4 z > rd
U F4 H 5 4 H( H 4-)
d' In W N
..1 H H H
C\ N
H N
r
H ,--I H H H H
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
r-i ?a
O
C O ( rd
44 $
O ( H
P'z >i 0
a)
tyl O 3
0 -P
>1 >ja
H 4) rd 4 a111
)
OP3
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
H lD m m CA Ol r-I
d d' r-I H N H
d' N O m I' N lD H
,a, qw lzr r-I Id' M m in
N H N N tD Lf) N N
H H N H N rl ri N
N N N
tD H N N M O
H H N H N r-I
00
PL4 ~>
1-3 ?N 0 4J S::
'r11
ri (-I (a
M O rU?I 0 ?C )4
?ri a) rl a) a) ~I
3 0 3 r 0 0
~: 4J
a) cc .
-P a) Lf) 4 -P 4 9+ 4-I
) 0-IU)
! I
?
~ 4
0
> 4J r a N 3
(0 H
"i 4J U) cd Ord SOI a) (a H
a) v sa
U) X -P >1 rd 40
to P N? U 44 -lJ ?n
0 -IJ U) z a U 0
U)
Q)
N?
a)
0
r-)
0
a)
rd
4
r~
41
Cd
o
U)
H
rd
U
0
N
a)
ro
0
t
rd ~4
X:
4-)
0
? J
)4 3
a)
4-I
(1)a)3 U) 0H v W zW 0 D0 0
4-4 P 0 rd b' rd a) r?I 4-I 0 +- +
Ofds-] O ~C ~a 01
~-I ?rI ?H 0 cd b) F z 0 En (0 ~O a) 1a) rO a, rd 4 r1 0 P 0? 0 bl 0 04
bird 4J H >+ a) - d-) yH rd 0 > >~ 0 0
z O U (1) >r U 44 0 aJ ri 0 4J H
0 d-) O I~ Z 44 O 4-I z ~' ?n ?IJ H r'I 4J a)
O -P () W i 0 W A? >1 1~ a) 4J O a)
>1 >1 C 0 0 (1) 0 0 0 to 4J r-I (1) ~-I A 'rt Z 4-I
U rd F1, O m U) 4) 'n 0 0 ?r'I 0 a)
r. a) >4 t X r-I ?N Q) -I Id b' H rd >1 >1
H Q) .IJ rd W rd 0 rd 4) (d U) rd E s~ rd H r-I
aJ Al O O N 0 E+ H 4J (1) [n O rl 4 Q r-i
r
i t
P
d
rd rI )?i rd r b' 3 a) U) > 4 U) (1) H (1) r
a) W EA U) 04 a) 04 a) H (L)
5. 0 r zUj o 4-4 Q) z a) ro >r 0 rl 4 44 4-I SOI F 1
O -IJ U a) FG x 0 E-1 H -04 rd Z >?1 ?r-I E-I H H .04 H
to
N 00
N ao C o
00 O r-I N
r-I r1 H
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
6Z'p9b~,
ON
N
H
M
co
H
? 3'
N
O X00
D30
Nn co
H
O
W
u)A
OCW7
r- H
H N
H H
H
4-I
u-1
O 0
41
H -4J O U)
P i~ -P
Q) 0
cd Ux
ri
-H E H
U)4) r 4
r-ig O cd
cd 4 4 4) 0
C U) U) 0 -P
U)
3 m w
0 0 r
H O H 4 as
m E 4
W (d 4) H -H
t11 M
Ln ON
H
H
-46-
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090005-8
 Approved For Release 2006/0?/1i:&L -PJP 6B00269R000900090005-8
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-R?P86B00269R000900090005-8