reply to post by jkrog08
RE: my quote: Reminding them that we don't care what they do
As a person with significant expertise in Secretive R&D Projects
(Commercial and otherwise), the subject of information containment
is a significant duty/pain in the A** for any intelligence management
Regarding the employees who have lots of time and energy involved
and invested in an SAP/CAP project, they are the ones MOST UNLIKELY
to be a source of a leak simply because of their intellectualism
(i.e. they actually understand the need for secrecy)
and that they also happen to LIKE the jobs they do and thus
would not generally jeopordize their positions.
The above are very easy to deal with because MOST of the time
a leak tends to be of a minor nature or is an actual "mistake".
Like I said earlier, a letter of reprimand and a simple but fairly stern
talk is all that is needed.
Unfortunately, those who are ATS members are part of the "Maverick"
community who, because of a heightened sense of independence and
libertarianism, are exactly those types of people who would MOST LIKELY
become a leak point in any Special Access Program (SAP) or
Compartmentalized Access Program (CAP).
ATS members are usually NOT those who generally like to take or follow
orders and thus your sense of information entitlement and dislike of
secrecy in general is a valid risk factor and it is UNLIKELY you would
make it through any initial SAP/CAP screening program.
However, many ATS members are also SMART and can, with sufficient skill
and a powerful knowledge-base, defeat the psychological screening
programs including initial polygraphs.
But because of probationary periods and periodic polygraph re-examinations,
it would be UNLIKELY that you would be able to KEEP any security clearance
for an extended period of time unless you had a skillset that was
absolutely CRITICAL to the success of a particular program.
In most cases, upon the finding of any "Mavericks" in the system,
we simply give-em some severence, and pass em off to another
white-world project (i.e. "Due to extennuating circumstances,
I must respectfully resign my position of ***** and blah blah blah).
A fast and direct Thank You and goodbye and a signed ConAgree doc
is all that is usually needed for most mavericks.
SOMETIMES HOWEVER, you get a REAL MAVERICK, one who doesn't take
kindly to uniforms, orders or secrecy period!!!!...and sometimes
a SigSau on the table isn't gonna faze them because of their innate
sense of "Constitutionality" or "You won't or can't do that!"
"I'll have your badge/I'll Sue sort of attitude"...These are the
one's I can have some fun with.......
So my comments generally pertain to overall information management
and project secrecy containment and that a simple firing and some nasty
lawyer letters GENERALLY (but not always) works on the mavericks that
get through initial screening.
On a workers ability basis, it's NOT your overall brilliance that will
get you hired but rather your steadfastness, stoicism, CONSISTENCY,
stability and level-headedness which matters most.
When a titanium cog can cost $50k to re-machine, careless
explosive mavericks are NOT what we want in an R&D program,
I want someone cool and collected, that can LEARN from their mistakes
and be smart enough to ask for help when it is needed.
We don't need whiners or complainers or half-a** almost-there
people, we need DOERS and I'll-GET-IT-DONE by XXX attitudes.