Learning from how spies think
[Music]
[Music]
i pose the question
what do we need to know in order to take
sound decisions
i was director of gchq
i spent seven years sitting on britain’s
joint
intelligence committee
which since 1936 has been trying to give
british governments the basic
information it needs
to take sensible decisions on national
security and i watched the intelligence
analysts
i learned very quickly the first lesson
in intelligence which is that our
knowledge
of the world is always fragmentary it’s
incomplete
and it is sometimes wrong
but when i looked at the analysts and
the work they did
it’s clear that if you approach these
things
you know with a method and if you’re
self-aware
about the ways in which you can get it
wrong then you can actually achieve
some remarkable results
in the national security
field it really matters to have good
intelligence assessment
i have written up in the book i was the
person who showed margaret thatcher
in her room in the house of commons
three intercepts
from gchq that revealed in april 1982
that the argentine junta had already set
sail
uh an invasion force heading for
the falkland islands which came
as a terrible terrible shock
but it gave just
enough notice for an extraordinary
meeting to take place in her room
in the house in which the decision was
taken
to have a task force set a task force
and sail it for the south atlantic and
that announcement was ready
for when the public news came in on us
that
indeed the argentine junta had
invaded the falkland islands without
that prior notice
even of a few days i think her
government would have fallen
as it was it was a close run thing to
regain
confidence after that uh after that
uh shock i will never forget ringing
from her
office the duty commander in the
ministry of defense
with the historic instruction
ready the fleet for sea so
it matters in matters of national
security
and having some forewarning matters too
in our everyday lives so
what i’ve done is i’ve tried to distill
the experience of those intelligence
analysts
into a simple model and it has four
parts
and i want to walk you through them and
illustrate
each of them the first is situational
awareness which is knowing what is going
on
on the ground or these days knowing what
is going on
in cyberspace without a basic
understanding of the facts on the ground
you can’t even start to work out
what to do just think of all those
coveted statistics
the hot spots the hospital admissions
you need to nail down the facts
so the first part of the model the first
output that you look for
is situational awareness to answer the
questions that all start with
what when and where
but and it’s quite a big but
facts by themselves are dumb
you can interpret facts even solid facts
and
not everything is solid but even solid
facts
need interpretation uh you’ve got to put
meaning into them and so
the next part of my model is explanation
defense lawyers know this very well
fact the fingerprints of the accused
were on the bottle that was thrown at
the police
explanation was this because he threw it
or did the mob rushing past his house
pick up a bottle
from the recycling bin outside his front
door
facts need explanation
now one of the problems about explaining
facts
is that when you come to compare
possible explanations
it’s very easy to fall into
emotional framing of the issue you’re
looking at
your emotion your feelings towards the
issue
creep in if you’re not careful so
imagine that you’re on the last train
from heathrow
it’s late at night and it’s dark a large
burly man comes in sits behind you and
starts shouting and swearing
aggressively
your first instinct is probably to look
for the emergency cord
how far away is it but then you notice
dangling from his ear as a little
earpiece
your whole mental map turns over
and you realize this is a cross and
tired man off a transatlantic flight
berating the mini cab company that
didn’t pick him up
how you frame the issue and if you’d
been watching halloween
or a film horror film like that yourself
on the flight
you might have been even more ready to
jump to the wrong
conclusion so that’s an important lesson
uh in intelligence analysis
but if you’ve got a good explanation
and you’ve got enough reasonably solid
evidence
then you can move on to the third output
which is estimation the intelligence
community doesn’t like the word
prediction nobody has a crystal ball
in cheltenham gchq in cheltenham but you
can
estimate how events might unfold
and if you’ve got a good explanation you
can try your hand
at modeling different assumptions
and then looking at what the possible
futures
uh might be that’s what we’re seeing
every day now with covid
and with the work of sage so estimation
is the third and then i add
in another uh output which can be
extraordinarily useful
which is what i call strategic notice
which is looking over the horizon at the
next
possible big thing to come and hit you
and if you use strategic notice sensibly
it might be it will lead you to take out
a bit more insurance
if you’re a government it might be to
commission some research
on the possible different pandemic
or the flooding risk or whatever it
might be that’s ahead of you
then you can and this is really about my
fourth lesson in intelligence
you don’t have to be so surprised by
surprise
itself so those four outputs
taken together really help make
better decisions and we can all apply
this way
of unpacking the big problems
that may or issues choices that may face
us
in government great care is taken to
separate
two kinds of thought this kind of
thought
the careful analytical stuff from
the political stuff the democratic
mandate
of the decision makers
their hopes and passions for the future
their fears for things they want to
avoid
and we try as happens today with sage
to keep the professional stuff as
objective as possible
and then you can as it were judge the uh
uh more passionate side
the problem when it comes to our
personal decisions of course we have to
do all of that
inside one head our head
and if the emotional stuff leeches too
far
over into the analytical stuff
then you can find you’ve severely
prejudiced
the kind of decision you ought to be
taking
that was always hard it is hard
but i think it’s getting harder and the
reason it’s getting harder
is so much of our information comes from
the internet
and what we see there is to large extent
deceptive manipulative
emotional those who are crafting the
material
know very well how to give us
an emotional hit rather than to put out
a rational argument that’s the basis of
the political advertising that we see
that’s the basis of the sort of stories
the conspiracy stories
that flow across the internet the latest
coming out of russia is about
the oxford vaccine which is
totally disreputable but that’s what’s
out there
and we have to learn how to live safely
with that material so much of it is
deliberately designed to put us at each
other’s throats
when actually what we should be doing
particularly in the face of a pandemic
is coming together so i strongly
recommend thinking rationally
the book i’ve i’m publishing on the 29th
is really a call to arms for
shifting the balance more in favor of
rationality
it doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t be
passionate it doesn’t mean that we
shouldn’t care
about the outcomes of our decisions but
if we’re going to take sensible
decisions
they’ve got to be firmly based on a
rational
analysis to conclude
buddhists would say there
are three mental poisons
anger attachment and ignorance
anger and emotions like that can blind
us
to the nature of the truth
attachment particularly to comfortable
ideas we feel familiar with
can blind us to the fact the world has
changed and we need to recognize that
but the most dangerous of the three is
ignorance
and that’s what my model is designed to
try and help us
cope with thank you all very much
you