Outside the military, I have found that the understanding of what Intelligence is, is often problematic. My principal work is in cyber security. Marketing people in that environment have bastardized terms without understanding the consequences/implications of what they are doing.
Processes for developing Intelligence have been corrupted, degrading Intelligence processes and Intelligence products.
Intelligence products themselves have been watered down, often containing no foreknowledge ... which is supposed to be the point.
Terms such as 'Threat Intelligence' and 'Business Intelligence' are widely used in industry, despite both terms being nonsense.
David,
Thanks very much for your initial contribution. It provoked some thoughts.
Understanding intelligence is the purpose of intelligence studies, so your question is certainly pertinent.
I don't think military organizations have a monopoly on understanding intelligence. The doctrinal definition of intelligence in Canadian military doctrine is (always has been) inadequate. Military intelligence training is much less effective than it should be, and there is no intelligence education in the CAF (or in Canada at large). That said, I do think military intelligence practices is perhaps the most advanced in government, even flawed as it is.
Research on intelligence is much more advanced and substantive in the fields of human and computer sciences (both of which exercise mutual collaboration), which…