sourcing insight

Al-Akhbar is currently going through a transitional phase whereby the English website is available for Archival purposes only. All new content will be published in Arabic on the main website (www.al-akhbar.com).

Al-Akhbar Management

Date 2011-07-29 22:08:01
From [email protected]
To [email protected]
Others Listname: mailto:[email protected]
MessageId:
InReplyTo: [email protected]

Text
I think you should make responsiveness a separate category. Like we do with our red, orange, yellow classifications during source list reviews.
That is responsiveness/accessibility, and it is distinct from reliability.

From: Jennifer Richmond
Reply-To: Alpha List
Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2011 15:05:28 -0500
To:
Subject: Re: [alpha] sourcing insight

As Stick said earlier, you can have a reliable source that is highly responsive that sometimes sends crap. Item credibility is the place where you assess the information, and this changes from insight to insight. Reliability is more about source responsiveness. That said, and as Stick notes, reliability also speaks to the overall source's access to information as well as dependability. In part some of this should also be addressed in the source description.

We'll be fleshing these out a bit more in the next few weeks, and all suggestions are welcomed.

On 7/29/11 2:51 PM, Kamran Bokhari wrote:

My understanding of source reliability has always been the contact's personal reliability as a person who can provide accurate information.

On 7/29/11 2:54 PM, Jennifer Richmond wrote:

Sending to the list since these are good questions. My responses in red.

On 7/29/11 1:48 PM, Allison Fedirka wrote:

I have 2 questions on this item.
SOURCE RELIABILITY: A-F, A being the best and F being the worst. this grades the turnaround time of this source in responding to requests

1) If this is based solely on turn around time, do we have company standards for the letters. Like A = a couple of hours, D = a couple of weeks, etc? We do need to better identify what each letter means. In the meantime, in my book A=within 24 hours, B=48 hours, C=a couple of days, D=over a week, F=lucky if we get a response
2) Also I previously thought this item reflected both reliability in turn around time and also reliability to give good information. So like if someone was obviously anti-chavez or exaggerates a lot, I would bump them down a bit since the insight should be taken with a grain of salt. How do you want us to inform others of potential bias or questionable material? In the description section? It is mainly addresses their reliability to respond. ITEM CREDIBILITY is the place where we code the information. In most cases this changes from insight to insight whereas SOURCE RELIABILITY is a little more static. Some sources know nothing about politics but give excellent info on econ. So, credibilty changes frequently even with the same source and one of the reasons why we need to keep up with the entire ID tags when sending in insight. As to the last question, I usually make a note of their bias for a particular insight in the credibility section. In the description section you can write out their personal biases - e.g. the dude only hangs with the wealthy so this insight is likely to be skewed towards elite perceptions, or something like that.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Jennifer Richmond"
To: "Alpha List"
Sent: Friday, July 29, 2011 1:41:39 PM
Subject: [alpha] sourcing insight We've gotten lazy on insight source IDs again. Not only do you need to put the source code in the subject line, but all of these categories need to be filled out for every single insight sent to the list.

SOURCE: code
ATTRIBUTION: this is what we should say if we use this info in a publication, e.g. STRATFOR source/source in the medical industry/source on the ground, etc SOURCE DESCRIPTION: this is where we put the more concrete details of the source for our internal consumption so we can better understand the source's background and ability to make the assessments in the insight PUBLICATION: Yes or no. If you put yes it doesn't mean that we will publish it, but only that we can publish it. SOURCE RELIABILITY: A-F, A being the best and F being the worst. this grades the turnaround time of this source in responding to requests ITEM CREDIBILITY: 1-10, 1 being the best and 10 being the worst (we may change the range here in the future). this changes a lot based on the info provided. 1 is "you can take this to the bank" and 10 would be an example of maybe - "this is a totally ridiculous rumor but something that is spreading on the ground" SPECIAL HANDLING: often this is "none" but it may be something like, "if you use this we need to be sure not to mention the part about XXX in the publication" or any other special notes SOURCE HANDLER: the person who can take follow-up questions and communicate with the source

If you have any questions, concerns or suggestions, let me know. I'll be back in the office next Tues so if you want to discuss this process in person we can do so soon. In the meantime, remember that every piece of insight needs this ENTIRE ID unless it is just something that you picked up off the ground from a source that you will likely not hear from again. Even then, you should fill out the entire ID and in the SOURCE field simply say - n/a with a description on why we are not coding them.

Jen
PS: Also remember that is something is highly sensitive to send directly
- not thru a WO - to the "secure" list. Secure list insights still need the above ID tags.

--
Jennifer Richmond
STRATFOR
China Director
Director of International Projects
(512) 422-9335
[email protected]
www.stratfor.com

--
Jennifer Richmond
STRATFOR
China Director
Director of International Projects
(512) 422-9335
[email protected]

--
Jennifer Richmond
STRATFOR
China Director
Director of International Projects
(512) 422-9335
[email protected]

Comments

Post new comment

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd><img><h1><h2><h3><h4><h5><h6><blockquote><span><aside>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

^ Back to Top