Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Master's Theses Graduate School 2002 Organizational culture's contributions to security failures within the United States intelligence community Troy Michael Mouton Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_theses Part of the Arts and Humanities Commons Recommended Citation Mouton, Troy Michael, "Organizational culture's contributions to security failures within the United States intelligence community" (2002). LSU Master's Theses. 1121. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_theses/1121 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Master's Theses by an authorized graduate school editor of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE’S CONTRIBUTIONS TO SECURITY FAILURES WITHIN THE UNITED STATES INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Liberal Arts in The Interdepartmental Program in Liberal Arts by Troy M. Mouton B.A., University of Southwestern Louisiana, 1996 May 2002 ÓCopyright 2002 Troy Michael Mouton All rights reserved ii DEDICATION In memory of Lear Edward Olivier Loving husband, father, neighbor iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I could not have completed this thesis without the guidance and expertise of the thesis director, Dr. Richard White. Dr. White’s knowledge of the principles discussed in this thesis and his ability to encourage intellectual interrogatory are without parallel. For the instruction, counsel, and support Dr. White provided, I am in his debt. The direction and contributions of Dr. Stephen Lucas and Dr. William Demastes were also instrumental to the completion of this project. Dr. Lucas’s expertise in intelligence matters and Dr. Demastes’s willingness to encourage a liberal arts education with interests in organizational culture have benefited the author immensely. Their experience, insight, and constructive criticism were invaluable. I am grateful for their patient consideration and willingness to share their extensive academic talents. I will never be able to summon words that adequately express my love, gratitude, and respect for my wife, Glenis K. Mouton, who has supported me throughout my undergraduate as well as graduate education experiences. I simply owe everything that I am and will become to her. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS…………………………………………………………… iv ABSTRACT…………………………………………………………………………. vi CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION…………………………………………… 1 TWO REVIEW OF LITERATURE……………………………….. 11 THREE COMPLICATING FACTORS………………………………. 29 FOUR POLLARD CASE STUDY………………………………….. 47 FIVE AMES CASE STUDY………………………………………. 65 SIX HANSSEN CASE STUDY………...……………………….. 78 SEVEN CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS………….. 87 WORKS CITED…………………………………………………………………….. 93 VITA…………………………………………………………………………………. 96 v ABSTRACT The institutions that comprise the United States intelligence community have organizational cultures that are unique from other government agencies. These cultures encourage the development and retention of traits that are necessary to mission accomplishment, yet these exclusivities also hamstring organizations and contribute to significant security failures. This thesis isolates elements of organizational culture specific to the United States intelligence community and explores the extent to which the culture is responsible for security and/or counterintelligence shortcomings. For this thesis, the author selected three governmental organizations with intelligence collection and analysis functions: Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI), Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). The use of these agencies demonstrates that the intelligence community’s military (ONI), intelligence (CIA), and law enforcement (FBI) components share common organizational traits. The author subsequently identified a significant security failure case encountered by each agency and employed a case study approach to determine the extent to which organizational culture contributed to the security failures. Internal agency investigations and external assessments of espionage activities reveal that cultural factors impede the early detection of security compromises and thwart law enforcement efforts to investigate suspicious behavior. Despite the deleterious effects of national security collapses, the intelligence community’s personnel increasingly recognize the complicity of organizational culture in such security failures. The intelligence community increasingly analyzes the vi negative aspects of its organizational traits, and there have been substantive strides within the intelligence establishment to minimize the security obstacles that organizational culture imposes on its constituent adherents. The intelligence apparatus must maintain an organizational culture that distinguishes it from other government agencies. Unfortunately, the community’s cultural characteristics also convey increased risks of security compromises. It is possible, however, for the United States intelligence community to maintain its unique organizational culture and minimize the possibility of operational or security failure. vii CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION Organizations tasked with the collection and analysis of intelligence share cultural characteristics that distinguish them from most private sector groups and other governmental agencies that do not deal with intelligence matters regularly. Although certain cultural characteristics are as much a part of foreign (non-United States) intelligence agencies as they are central to the United States intelligence community, this thesis will concentrate on cultural concepts and the role they play in select United States intelligence agencies. The organizational culture of the United States intelligence community allows the establishment to achieve operational objectives, but the same culture also contributes to security failures that continually plague the United States intelligence apparatus. Among the organizational culture characteristics that are specific to the intelligence community is the assumption that intelligence organizations will attract and employ individuals whose personalities, ideologies, and motivations are dissimilar from those of other government and private sector employees. Diverse value systems are also critical to the intelligence function, yet the necessity of divergent value systems poses significant risks to the security of intelligence functions. The intelligence community also stresses concepts such as limited information disclosure, extensive compartmentation policies, and routine counterintelligence protocols that border on paranoia. Other cultural attributes of the intelligence community include the degree of pre- and post-employment screening and security measures to which intelligence employees are subject. There are also numerous personal, public, and institutional 1 factors that contribute to and complicate the intelligence community’s unique organizational culture. It is extremely important for intelligence professionals to be aware of those cultural traits that are specific to the intelligence community because it is possible for individuals to act in accordance with those organizational culture principles while minimizing the possibility of security lapses due to exaggerations, abuses, and neglect of the intelligence culture’s attributes. This awareness is exceptionally vital to intelligence managers and counterintelligence professionals who must proactively balance cultural necessities with the security weaknesses that organizational culture may exacerbate. In its simplest form, organizational culture refers to the norms, values, and expectations that influence and govern the manner in which groups (or agencies) prioritize objectives and conduct their affairs. Culture also establishes acceptability parameters for behavior within a given body and details the consequences or results of nonconformance with underlying assumptions. Organizational culture is basically a theoretical explanation for the means by which an organization accomplishes its objectives (Schein 7). Contrary to common beliefs, intelligence refers to more than mere information. Information develops into intelligence when contextual analysis by persons or equipment capable of interpreting its relation to other information determines that it is of substantive value. Information becomes intelligence when the organizations that employ it in the decision-making process attach worth to it. Mark Lowenthal accurately notes that “[a]ll intelligence is information; not all information is intelligence” (Lowenthal 2). 2 In practically every organization, there exist belief systems, expectations, understandings, and concepts that affect the efficiency of the organization as well as the means by which groups and the individuals that comprise them attempt to accomplish given goals and priorities. Within organizations, there are also value systems at play that allow (and occasionally compel) employees to evaluate group dynamics and determine whether individual values and belief systems are compatible with or contrary to those exhibited by the organization or groups that comprise it. The combination of individual