ATP 2-33.4, page 50

Chapter 4 Step 1: Develop Indicators 4-35. When developing indicators, intelligence analysts start from the event, work backwards, and include as many indicators as possible. Analysts can remove some indicators later if decided that they are unnecessary. 4-36. Each indicator must meet five criteria: e Be observable and collectible. There must be some reasonable expectation that, if present, the indicator will be observed and reported by a reliable source. If an indicator is to monitor change over time, it must be collectible over time. e Be valid. An indicator must be clearly relevant to the end state the analyst is trying to predict or assess, and it must be inconsistent with all or at least some of the alternative explanations or outcomes. It must accurately measure the concept or phenomenon at issue. e Be reliable. Data collection must be consistent when comparable methods are used. Those observing and collecting data must observe the same things. Reliability requires precise definition of indicators. e Be stable. An indicator must be useful over time to allow comparisons and to track events. Ideally, the indicator should be observable early in the evolution of development so that the analysts and decisionmakers have time to react accordingly. © Be unique. An indicator should measure only one thing and, in combination with other indicators, point only to the phenomenon being studied. Valuable indicators are those that not only are consistent with a specified scenario or hypothesis but also are inconsistent with all other alternative scenarios. 4-37. Are the indicators mutually exclusive and comprehensive? Have a sufficient number of high-quality indicators been generated for each scenario to enable an effective analysis? Can the indicators be used to help detect a planned attack or deter a possible enemy COA? 4-38. Common knowledge and understanding of threat characteristics and the various operational environments are essential to ensure all avenues are covered. This can be as simple as using threat characteristic factors in a more conventional scenario. If presented with a PIR, indicator development may include— e@ = Threat characteristics—particularly composition, disposition, tactics, training, sustainment, and combat effectiveness. e Electronic characteristics, which are the identification of threat digital and analog communications links, systems, and associated units. @ Personalities. e@ = The location in the AO to expect a particular threat activity. Note. In stability tasks or defense support of civil authorities (DSCA) missions, it might be more applicable to use queries such as who, what, when, where, why, how, and in what strength. See appendix A for indicator development. Step 2: Weigh Indicators 4-39. Analysts weigh indicators to help resolve uncertainty. Intelligence analysts often encounter conflicting indicators, resulting from— e@ Deliberate deception. @ Poor mission execution. e Temporary indecision (hesitation in making a decision). e = Transition between missions. e Random activity. e = Incomplete or inaccurate information. e@ Uncertainty or doubt of the indicator itself. 4-6 ATP 2-33.4 18 August 2014 Chapter 4 4-6 ATP 2-33.4 18 August 2014 Step 1: Develop Indicators 4-35. When developing indicators, intelligence analysts start from the event, work backwards, and include as many indicators as possible. Analysts can remove some indicators later if decided that they are unnecessary. 4-36. Each indicator must meet five criteria:  Be observable and collectible. There must be some reasonable expectation that, if present, the indicator will be observed and reported by a reliable source. If an indicator is to monitor change over time, it must be collectible over time.  Be valid. An indicator must be clearly relevant to the end state the analyst is trying to predict or assess, and it must be inconsistent with all or at least some of the alternative explanations or outcomes. It must accurately measure the concept or phenomenon at issue.  Be reliable. Data collection must be consistent when comparable methods are used. Those observing and collecting data must observe the same things. Reliability requires precise definition of indicators.  Be stable. An indicator must be useful over time to allow comparisons and to track events. Ideally, the indicator should be observable early in the evolution of development so that the analysts and decisionmakers have time to react accordingly.  Be unique. An indicator should measure only one thing and, in combination with other indicators, point only to the phenomenon being studied. Valuable indicators are those that not only are consistent with a specified scenario or hypothesis but also are inconsistent with all other alternative scenarios. 4-37. Are the indicators mutually exclusive and comprehensive? Have a sufficient number of high-quality indicators been generated for each scenario to enable an effective analysis? Can the indicators be used to help detect a planned attack or deter a possible enemy COA? 4-38. Common knowledge and understanding of threat characteristics and the various operational environments are essential to ensure all avenues are covered. This can be as simple as using threat characteristic factors in a more conventional scenario. If presented with a PIR, indicator development may include—  Threat characteristics—particularly composition, disposition, tactics, training, sustainment, and combat effectiveness.  Electronic characteristics, which are the identification of threat digital and analog communications links, systems, and associated units.  Personalities.  The location in the AO to expect a particular threat activity. Note. In stability tasks or defense support of civil authorities (DSCA) missions, it might be more applicable to use queries such as who, what, when, where, why, how, and in what strength. See appendix A for indicator development. Step 2: Weigh Indicators 4-39. Analysts weigh indicators to help resolve uncertainty. Intelligence analysts often encounter conflicting indicators, resulting from—  Deliberate deception.  Poor mission execution.  Temporary indecision (hesitation in making a decision).  Transition between missions.  Random activity.  Incomplete or inaccurate information.  Uncertainty or doubt of the indicator itself.