The Importance of Organizational Innovation and Adaptation in Building Academic–Industry–Intelligence Collaboration: Observations from the Laboratory for Analytic Sciences

Cyber Intelligence Networks: A Typology

“…These networks facilitate the dissemination of collected and analyzed intelligence towards governments and private sector parties (Jasper, 2017). Collective research on how to tackle novel intelligence challenges is another example of public-private collaboration (see Vogel et al, 2017).…”

“…For instance, intelligence sharing can be complicated by restrictions on the dissemination of classified information, so that it is unclear what can be shared with whom (Jasper, 2017;Strachan-Morris, 2009;Trim, 2001). Additionally, public and private actors have very different priorities, respectively the provision of basic services and profit maximization, and therefore different expectations of the collaboration (Carr, 2016;Harknett & Stever, 2009;Trim, 2003;Vogel et al, 2017). Consequently, mutual trust may be absent or scarce (Jasper, 2017;Trim, 2001;Vogel et al, 2017).…”

“…Additionally, public and private actors have very different priorities, respectively the provision of basic services and profit maximization, and therefore different expectations of the collaboration (Carr, 2016;Harknett & Stever, 2009;Trim, 2003;Vogel et al, 2017). Consequently, mutual trust may be absent or scarce (Jasper, 2017;Trim, 2001;Vogel et al, 2017). Case studies also report differences in the ways of working, norms, language use, formats, and systems (Jasper, 2017;Vogel et al, 2017).…”

“…Instead, as isolated action will be unable to keep up with fast-developing cyber threats, there is an 'urgency to build a shared intelligence', for which 'cooperation and openness are key' (Velasco, 2017, p. 1). Such cooperation is most effective when it extends over boundaries to include not only traditional public security providers but also private actors (see Carr, 2016;Vogel et al, 2017). Although the need for an active role of both public and private parties in cyber security networks is uncontested, cyber collaboration often proves problematic in practice.…”

Academic-intelligence relationships: opportunities, strengths, weaknesses and threats

“…The relationships between academia and intelligence agencies have waxed and waned since the Second World War, but even in their worst moments never entirely disappeared (Gearon, 2020). Naturally, the form, content and extent of these relationships have varied enormously throughout that period, with spikes in innovation being noticed by Vogel et al (2017) in the aftermath of 9/11 to this day. What sustains these relationships in a common pursuit of knowledge is a simple quid pro quo: on the one hand they benefit intelligence agencies in the fulfilment of their mandate while on the other hand they validate values pursued by academics (such as personal satisfaction and rewards) and their institutions (financial and, where appropriate, reputational gains).…”