An 'Intellligent' Intelligence Report?

Lost among the death of the pope, and probably a fatigue with commission reports, is the Robb-Silberman report on America's intelligence failures during the war on terrorism. It is a 600 page report and far too long for you to spend time on. I suggest you read this analysis at National Review's online site by Michael Ledeen. He shows the strengths and weaknesses of the report makes a point that readers of Tom Clancy's novels have long known, "that intelligence is more an art than a science, and they therefore rightly insist that the success or failure of the intelligence community will ultimately depend on the quality of the people and how they are treated."

The report shows the value of treating people right in order to retain good people and sustain high morale. Speaking of our intelligence community Ledeen says,
They recognize that the culture of the community is rotten - the results speak for themselves, after all - and they suggest ways to retain talented people, ranging from attractive side benefits like travel, sabbaticals, and greater opportunities to mix with the outside intellectual world.

Here is the money paragraph in Ledeen's article:

The commission vigorously endorses "competitive analysis," and is remarkably open-minded about the best way to accomplish this. I think they are right to recognize that this will often depends on the subject; sometimes it will be best to ask outside analysts to take a fresh look, other questions will be best addressed by "Teams B" from inside the community. Their insistence on the urgency of intellectual conflict within the community is one of the most refreshing parts of the report, and one can only hope that Negroponte, Goss, and Jacoby take it to heart.

The report, and this analysis, speaks to problems common to many organizations beyond the nation's intelligence community. But the stakes are higher when it impacts a nations''s intelligence community.