Competitive Intelligence

Tactical, Operational & Strategic Analysis of Markets, Competitors & Industries

The CI community seems to have mixed feelings about its future given the fact that technology threatens to make access to "intelligence" an un-exclusive virtual free for all. I shall explore some possibilities here, and attempt to locate my own place with the winning team of the future in the bargain as well.

Here is the issue: Technology and the "Intelligence 2.0" phenomenon are poised to present to industry a kind of Commercial Intelligence Panopticon (hereafter CIP).

First of all--and this is a great concern to all of us--that CIP should become the basis for industrial success surely recommends to industry itself that it become further absorbed into government, and vice versa. I'm thinking of the US, and well beyond. Should governments become part of the CIP, then private, civilian intelligence may not be able to meet the challenge, governments having instant access to a truly mind-bending range of data. Food for thought. The 21st century may be a dangerous season for free enterprise. I doubt it, myself, but one likes to see around every corner... even that dark, nasty, hooked one on the left at the bottom of the hill.

Now for the fun stuff. The advent of a CIP will usher in an era of universal intelligence (or so it would seem). With this would come, among "progressive," i.e. homogenistically and generically inclined businessfolk, a certain utopianism (even "ecstasy" maybe? Help me out Eric Garland!). This is what we want, for there is no moment at which systems and structures are more vulnerable to their own weaknesses than in moments of exalted irrationality; and no moment is more irrational than the utopian moment.

In the CIP utopia a feeling of universalism will develop within the human part of that system (which will also extend to the general public and thus generate a highly pervasive "folklore" about the CIP itself). Now the moral effect of universalism generally is that it fosters an atmosphere in which the definitions of "friend" and "truth" may be--and very, very often ARE--radically oversimplified. It is a situation in which the old threats to all those romantically cherished "possibilities" seem to be neutralized, and all the big, mean monsters are gone for good. Yeah, keep dreaming Goldie Locks!

If "friend" and "truth" are anything deemed enclosed within the universal system, then the functions of "enemy" and "lie" attach to that individual, organization, locality, or region which resists the utopian bliss of that presumably universal system... To that entity, three options present themselves:

1) Join the self-justified yet no less doomed universalism;

2) Be a gadfly to the universal system, but nonetheless exist within it by default;

or 3) Exploit the weaknesses of the system, and so get rich.

I would angle for #3, personally. Shameless, I know. Yet most ambitious people feel this way too as soon as they get an opportunity to make it work. Will China go the way of the USSR? Well, hasn't it begun to do so already? But I digress...

Whether a generic version of Competitive Intelligence is assimilated into [increasingly generic] corporate structures, or whether good CI professionalism wins the day, the Commercial Intelligence Panopticon will be a major deciding factor in success from now on. ..... You know, and maybe Jarvis will diversify to become a kind of intelligence Super Wal-Mart, or start selling intelligence franchises, in which case market complexities for CI will increase further yet as it competes against itself for market share. Just kidding, Jarvis. You're awesome.

In my next blog entry, "Intelligences' Future", I plan to explore a few ideas about how CI professionals might attempt to wrangle with the elephantine reality of the Commercial Intelligence Panopticon.

Tags: 2.0, intelligence

Share 

Add a Comment

You need to be a member of Competitive Intelligence to add comments!

Join this social network

Latest Activity

valeriane is now a member of Competitive Intelligence
5 hours ago
China CI brings together all those using or delivering competitive and market intelligence in China as well as those interested from around the world.
6 hours ago
Hi, Vivek, you mean Glomarization [the terms "Glomar response," and "Glomarization" are used to describe an agency's response when they can neither confirm nor deny whether records exist ( http://www.fas.org/irp/program/collect/jennifer.htm )], do...
15 hours ago
As far as I know all companies always use 5 Force Analysis. Now it depends on how effective is the OODA loop
16 hours ago
If they do not vote by Caste, then they would vote by their Religious Ideology or Political Ideology or Individual Ideology. Catch 22 situation.
16 hours ago
Reminds me of Glomerization. Glomer response at a time when companies represent countries in the Race for Economic Supremany of Nations.
16 hours ago
Advisor, Corporate Risks
16 hours ago
Vivek Raghuvanshi Advisor, Corporate Risks, http://www.corporaterisks.info/ Assistant Professor, http://amity.edu/aici/
16 hours ago
Cited by: http://www.corporaterisks.info/ Why mergers acutally fail is because of a clash of corporate cultures Have we addressed the cultural incompatibilities Was cultural due diligence done correctly Did we undertake cultural audit Did we cre...
19 hours ago
Dissonance in Beliefs, Values, Norms and Behavior is the main reason why mergers fail.
19 hours ago
Vivek Raghuvanshi added 2 blog posts
19 hours ago
Cited by: http://www.corporaterisks.info/ Further, were similarities and differences assessed, do organisations have mutual respect for each other, do they acknowledge professional and individual competence, business capability etc. Is there a d...
19 hours ago
Cited by: http://www.corporaterisks.info/ It all depends, who has done the Due Diligence Like Ayn Rand said: Thinking is man’s only basic virtue, from which all the others proceed. And his basic vice, the source of all his evils, is that namele...
19 hours ago
yesterday
Thanks for sending me the link, Arik. Looks interesting, and I am glad to see you got Gabriel Andebjork with you. I am sure if Per Jenster had been at home in Shanghai right now he would have linked to come. Take care, From Stanford Klaus
yesterday
Rubel Bin Goffar is now a member of Competitive Intelligence
yesterday
For anyone practising CI in Canada, or anyone with Canadian clients. Or anyone who spells "neighbour" with a "U"
yesterday
Hi Arik, Thanks for the update. I am interest to learn your perspective of the CI industry in China, as compared to the North America? And which industry is relatively more advanced in the CI development? Thanks, Lan
yesterday
Today, I've added the next problem ( http://fedcba.ning.com/group/wpb/forum/topics/istota-odpowiedzialnosci-za ) to the topic Organizations, subjects and structures responsible for Security & Safety ( http://triton.cs.put.poznan.pl/platon/files/op...
yesterday
Hi Erik,I will be intersting to hear your impressions from this summit. Best, Avner
yesterday

Visitor Statistics

© 2009   Created by Arik Johnson

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Privacy  |  Terms of Service

Sign in to chat!