On Friday, March 6, 2015, CIA Director John Brennan announced the 'Agency's Blueprint for the Future' as a 'Message to the Workforce". It is available at

https://www.cia.gov/news-information/press-releases-statements/2015-press-releases-statements/message-to-workforce-agencys-blueprint-for-the-future.html

This is a major change in the CIA. A new directorate is proposed, of Digital Innovation. This is the first change administratively since the early 1950's. It might have merit demanding its' utility, or it might represent internal turf wars between the CIA and NSA. The re-naming of existing directorates is of no consequence. Clandestine services was called Plans originally, and calling it Operations doesn't change its' function. Directorate of Intelligence being changed to Analysis is one of name, not function. Not mentioned are the directorates of Support, responsible for logistics, nor the directorate of Science and Technology.

More ominous is the language of a call to agents for fidelity to the agency first:"We must have the capacity to make the sound strategic decisions needed to build a better Agency and run it efficiently, even as we respond to urgent external requirements."

The 'external requirements' means extra-Agency, not foreign actors. That would include the administration, legislature, and judiciary. Other ominous language includes:

"Enhance and empower the Executive Director’s role and responsibilities to manage day-to-day organizational functions, including overseeing a revamped corporate governance model."

Why would a governmental agency be run on a corporate governance model? Who are the shareholders? Is the object to maximize returns to investors? Is perpetuation of the corporal body more fundamental than what the corporation engages in? When do corporations 'govern' as opposed to compete in an open market? Technically, any such governance should only be internal to the corporation, or in this case, Agency.

The instillation of the CIA University as responsible for all training indicates a perceived lack of cohesion among the personnel at the top levels. It is equivalent to a military boot camp indoctorination of a shared set of values, behaviors, and reflexive actions.

Why would the Director publish this information openly? Given the considerations outlined above, I think the message is targeted at foreign intellegence to assure them that the CIA is still in charge, despite political turmoil, so don't get uppity.

"The pace of world events and technological change demands that Agency leaders be able to make decisions with agility, at the appropriate level, with the right information, and in the interests of the broader enterprise."

I do not trust that this 'broader enterprise' is one in which we, the citizens of the United States of America, may participate in, in a democratic fashion.

"Even as we improve our ability to govern and make decisions and streamline our processes at the enterprise level,..."

Is 'the enterprise' effective de facto control of the U. S. government despite those nusainces who are elected for a term or more?