This chapter discusses the second step of the SGAM, highlighted below in gold, Grounding in the Problem and Team Building.
Obviously, an analyst must have a base of knowledge to work with before starting analysis. The significance of geospatial information is always a joint function of the nature of the information and the context in which it is interpreted. When dealing with a new and unfamiliar subject, the uncritical and relatively non-selective accumulation and review of information is an appropriate first step. This is a process of absorbing geospatial information, not analyzing it. Another view of this process is as a problem reduction effort. In this view, a problem is decomposed into a structured set of subproblems. Each subproblem is subject to further decomposition until the subproblems produced are investigatable with given techniques.
Developing an understanding of the analytic problem domain is often referred to as “grounding.” Why ground yourself in the problem? It should be a frightening prospect for a geospatial analyst to develop intelligence without a firm understanding of an analytic problem domain. Grounding is an act of information foraging ,which is a tradeoff among three kinds of processes. Analysts tended to begin with a broad set of documents and then proceeded to narrow that set down into successively smaller, higher-precision sets of data before reading and analyzing the documents. Generally, there are three processes that tradeoff against one another under deadline or data overload constraints:
Grounding is the foundation of future hypotheses. In a practical sense, grounding is the confirmation and discovery of geospatial information about the problem. Grounding is related to the problem of how patterns get their meaning. In Geospatial Intelligence, grounding is developing the ability to see a pattern by the inner eye. This is to say, patterns on maps and images only acquire meaning when they are observed by a recipient that is self aware. The analyst needs an explicit theoretical and methodological grounding in the problem with special attention to the contexts in which the patterns occur. This allows knowledge to be focused as specifically as possible to the context of the problem. In recent years, the confirmation and discovery of geospatial information and a “knowledge team” have become inseparable because of the:
It has often been said that Geospatial Intelligence is a team sport. What does this mean? The Director of National Intelligence’s (DNI) vision for 2015 is one in which intelligence analysis increasingly becomes a collaborative enterprise with the focus of collaboration shifting “away from coordination of draft products toward regular discussion of data and hypotheses early in the research phase.” This is a major change from the traditional concept of geospatial analysis as largely an individual activity. It is driven in part by the growing complexity and need for multidisciplinary input when developing analytic products; the need to share information across organizational boundaries; and the need to identify and explore the validity of alternative hypotheses. It is enabled by advances in social networking practices. It is important to note that team-based analysis brings a new set of challenges comparable to the cognitive limitations and pitfalls faced by the individual analyst. As mentioned previously, geospatial analysis and a “knowledge team” have become inseparable because of the:
A “knowledge team” is an informal network of individuals devoted to vetting ideas which helps the analyst make better geospatial decisions. A knowledge team is more akin to a debating team than a sympathetic support group. An effective knowledge team:
Our knowledge team should be a rich mix of individuals meeting the following:
Action 1: Review the spatial corollary from Step 1 (Problem).
Action 2: Make a list of key words or phrases to help identify information about the topic.
For example:
Action 3: Scan the tertiary sources. Scan means that you should not deal with all of the content, but search through the material looking for an overview and:
Internet sites may provide tertiary source for information. However, citation of unvetted Internet sites, such as Wikipedia, in intelligence research is not considered acceptable because they are not considered a credible source. It is important to understand that a tertiary source is often a selective “downstream” summary and compilation of generalizations, analysis, interpretations, or evaluations of original information or primary sources. The most desirable are primary sources (or evidence), that is an artifact, a document, a recording, or other source of information that was created at the time under event.
Action 4: Skim secondary and primary sources relevant to the topic. To skim the material, read a page by reading the headings and first sentences of each paragraph or section. Note sources that might address your geospatial corollary. Secondary sources involve generalization, analysis, synthesis, interpretation, or evaluation of original information or primary sources. A primary source (or evidence) is an artifact, a document, a recording, or other source of information that was created at the time under study.
Action 5: Create an annotated bibliography of sources you will use. An annotated bibliography is a list of citations to books, articles, and documents. Each citation is followed by a brief (30 words) description of the source and a quick evaluation if it pertains to life space, physical space, or intellectual space. For example:
Pherson Associates (2009) The D.C. Sniper Case.
This document is intended to illustrate the Analysis of Competing Hypotheses (ACH) methodology.
Uncertain as to the factual accuracy. if valid, provides an insight into the life and intellectual spaces.
Action 6: Form your knowledge team. Your knowledge team is an informal network of two (2) to five (5) subject matter experts you organize around the problem. The knowledge team members have in common their knowledge about the analytic problem, tools, or techniques to address the problem. Consequently, ideas can be vetted. The role of the analyst is to make sure that all possibilities are considered.
Action 7: Test your understanding. Test your understanding by:
Action 8: Go back to Action 2 and go through the process again. Remember that the research process is a recursive one which means that you may need to revisit your previous work more than once if you find it doesn't work out.
Action 9: If necessary, go back to the problem Definition (Step 1) and revise your Spatial Corollary.