ABSTRACT
All information gathering systems, whether organised formally by the state or an individual person, are prone to ‘naive empiricism’, believing that more information will automatically lead to becoming better informed. Indeed, precisely the opposite may be true: problems of information-overload are endemic in law enforcement (Tremblay & Rochon, 1991, 278). Evaluation is about deciding what information ‘means’ and it may, of course ‘mean’ different things to different agencies working within different contexts: it is a process of ‘making sure that you learn more from the information you have obtained than just what other people want you to know’ (Wilsnack, 1980, 475). Although those responsible for targeting and gathering will operate with some more or less well-supported assumptions about the activities of specific groups and individuals, ‘facts’ rarely speak for themselves - whatever is gathered must be evaluated or analysed. Dissemination is the final stage of the intelligence process and is crucial to the reputation of often-small and sometimes marginalised criminal intelligence units (CIUs). Their ability to maintain credibility and thus enhance their organisational project is determined to a large extent by the perceptions of those to whom they disseminate their ‘product’, whether members of the same or a different agency.
