Competitive intelligence and industrial espionage

[Ющук Евгений Леонидович]

Source

I will reproduce here the entire post from my blog “Competitive Intelligence”.


The Forum of Practitioners of Competitive Intelligence (SECR) examines the question of where the border between Competitive Intelligence and Industrial Espionage lies. In general terms, this causes no doubt. But here are some of the nuances discussed by experts so far.

I will give a couple of quotes from the forum thread.

In real life, the line between competitive intelligence and industrial espionage depends on the art of the person who conducts it, not to conflict with the criminal code ... (from my book “Competitive Intelligence: Marketing Risks and Opportunities”, Evgeny Yushchuk)

We take a step beyond the boundaries of familiar marketing, coming close to the “gray zone”, behind which methods that are allowed only by state intelligence agencies begin. The reader will learn to feel the boundaries of this zone. Borders that are not drawn anywhere, but which are dangerous to cross without conflict with the law. And this is also an important task that we set for ourselves, creating this book ... (from my book “Competitive Intelligence: Marketing Risks and Opportunities”, Evgeny Yushchuk)


There is no doubt a common ground between competitive intelligence and industrial espionage. They have a common task - to help develop response solutions and achieve competitive advantages. But here the methods for solving this problem are different ... ( from my book “Competitive Intelligence: Marketing Risks and Opportunities”, Evgeny Yushchuk) .

From the forum thread:

The premise that competitive intelligence differs from industrial espionage in that it operates within the framework of the law, while industrial espionage goes beyond this framework, is not disputed by any of the experts of competitive intelligence.

Although, at the same time, experts are almost unanimous in the fact that it is not always easy to determine whether the law was violated in each specific case or not.

However, on the question of who can be the subject of industrial espionage - only business or the state too - there is no common understanding in the world.

The English-language Wikipedia says that in recent years there has been a tendency to a broad interpretation of industrial espionage. Personally, I believe that this is due precisely to the transfer of a number of state intelligence technologies to the business, as well as to the interweaving of the interests of states and large business in many countries and state support for national business, including the capabilities of state special services.

 

[Матушкин Андрей Николаевич]

Thank!

 

[Марат]

Thank!

 

[Плотников Юрий Михайлович]

Thank!

 

[Бедеров Игорь Сергеевич]

As I said in an interview, the Kyrgyz Republic differs from intentional espionage in its working methods. KR is not involved in coercion, hacking, penetration without sanction, blackmail. The Kyrgyz Republic takes into operation only information that a person or organization themselves (intentionally or erroneously) left in the public domain.

 

[Ющук Евгений Леонидович]

As I said in an interview, the Kyrgyz Republic differs from intentional espionage in its working methods. KR is not involved in coercion, hacking, penetration without sanction, blackmail. The Kyrgyz Republic takes into operation only information that a person or organization themselves (intentionally or erroneously) left in the public domain.

In my opinion, yes and no. I would still say in a more general form: "Competitive intelligence does not violate the Criminal Code." What you wrote fits into this concept, but you tried to give specifics, and it turned out that many other options were not recounted and not affected.
But if you check each of your actions with the Criminal Code (and, for example, when necessary - draw up the relevant documents confirming your "legend" or not leaving open spaces for ambiguous interpretation) - you will definitely not miss or confuse anything.

And yet I do not agree with this: "The Kyrgyz Republic takes into operation only information that a person or organization themselves (intentionally or erroneously) left in the public domain" . KR really works with open information. But the fact is that open information is not only what lies in the public domain. More precisely, not only that "is already in the public domain." There is such a thing: "information with limited availability." This is such information that is not closed and available to anyone who takes it for granted. But it is not yet in the public domain.

Two examples:

1. Information in the head of its carrier.
Competitive intelligence, unlike marketing, knows that a person can be a carrier of information. Therefore, she has the tools to search for this person, receive information from him, attract him to cooperation. This, in principle, is also an option for working with open information - only you discover it (for yourself) actively.

2. There is one very important thought in information theory. Her and General Platt in his famous book immediately reflected the field of the Second World War. This thought: “Facts do not mean anything” (meaning, do not mean anything by themselves, that is, out of harmony with other facts) and “Information does not necessarily appear in the search for new data, it may appear as a result of analysis of existing data.

This is what this is about. Suppose the office has a courier Gosh - bespectacled, stutters a little, slightly limps on his left leg. And there is an accountant Masha - there is simply everything.

Masha went on vacation to Turkey from May 12 to 22, and to Thailand from September 10 to 15. And also went on sick leave from March 14 to March 20.

Gosh went to Turkey on vacation from May 12 to 22, and to Thailand from September 10 to 15. And also to Paris from March 15 to 19.

If you analyze these facts, which are not very informative in themselves, hypotheses will begin to arise, which, during verification, can give information.

 

[Матушкин Андрей Николаевич]

Thank.

 

[Бедеров Игорь Сергеевич]

Yes, the analysis of information is sometimes more important than its extraction. Analytics allows you to come to something in common than a set of unrelated facts.

I gave an example, which I myself rubbed later ...

In addition to everything, I also manage ... a bathhouse))))) Administrators work in the bathhouse. And these administrators, of course, want to "earn more." They do this by taking left customers, etc.

I give one of the cases (there were a lot of them). I come to the bathhouse before the changeover at 9.00 (Change at 10.00). I look around the premises that I see. In one of the halls is a wet ashtray. The case is interesting, the administrator on duty that night cannot stand the smell of cigarettes and washes all the ashtrays immediately behind the client (plus she still sleeps from the room where the ashtray stood).

Ok, I expose the administrator, I dig the crime scene further. I look at the garbage (yes, work ...) and the visitors' logbook. According to the magazine, the last customers were until 01.00 - a married couple with a child. And the contents of the garbage !!! This family fed the child with Viagra and gave cognac to drink !!! Ay-ya-yay.

I’m looking, the hiccups I know, find the hidden money for the extra hours ...

Such a mini-investigation ... Observation is important in any business ... Although the scope is different, the essence will touch upon both the KR and the NPV!

 

[Ющук Евгений Леонидович]

Thank!

 

[Арсен]

Thank!!!