An intelligence product - no matter how well put together it is - has no value as intelligence unless it is in the hands of someone whose decision it is relevant to.
For instance, a warning about a small protest taking place near one of ExxonMobil’s UK petrol stations may be highly relevant to the regional security manager responsible for that location, but would be unlikely to warrant the attention of the company’s chief security officer (CSO).
Conversely, intelligence indicating that insurgent groups are increasingly targeting oil extraction infrastructure worldwide may be highly relevant to the CSO, but have little value to a UK-based regional security manager whose responsibilities are limited to the physical security of a small number of regional petrol stations.
Irrelevance is the least-worst outcome when it comes to sending intelligence to the wrong level of decision-maker. More severe potential consequences include burying intelligence that is actually relevant to that customer’s decision and drawing senior leaders into issues that should be handled further down the customer’s organisation.
We can avoid these potential issues by categorising our intelligence based on a concept known as the Three Levels of War to ensure it reaches the correct level of decision-maker.
The Three Levels of War
The Three Levels of War is a military theory which allocates responsibility for the planning and execution of the different levels of warfare to different ranks of commander:
