text: Integrating the Intelligence Warfighting Function
  3-13. The intelligence staff cannot be experts in all aspects of the OE and threat capabilities. Staff members
  must know certain aspects of the OE and threat capabilities related to their warfighting function or specialty.
  Important activities require the entire staff to participate; this ensures the intelligence warfighting function—
  ⚫ Facilitates a real understanding of the many important aspects of the OE (especially when,
  where, and how the threat will employ capabilities).
  ⚫ Assists the commander and staff’s visualization.
  ⚫ Supports in developing friendly COAs and recommending the best COA to the commander.
  ⚫ Assists in synchronizing combat power within the operation.
  ⚫ Supports targeting (through lethal and nonlethal means).
  3-14. Some of the most important intelligence processes and activities requiring the rest of the staff’s
  participation, discussed in section III, includes—
  ⚫ IPOE, led by the intelligence staff, especially initial IPOE during step 2 (mission analysis) of the
  MDMP.
  ⚫ Collection management (the basis for information collection planning), led by the intelligence
  staff, and information collection processes.
  ⚫ Any intelligence working groups, if held.
  ⚫ The information collection working group, if held.
  SECTION III – STAFF TEAMWORK
  3-15. Teamwork within a staff and between staffs produces the staff integration necessary to synchronize
  operations. A staff works efficiently with complete cooperation from all staff sections. In addition to being
  highly knowledgeable in their own fields, operations processes, and procedures, all staff members must be
  familiar with the duties and responsibilities of other staff sections to coordinate and achieve results for the
  commander. A force operates effectively in cooperation with all headquarters. Commanders and staffs
  contribute to foster this positive climate during training and sustain it during operations. However, frequent
  personnel changes and augmentations to their headquarters add challenges to building and maintaining a
  team. While all staff sections have clearly defined functional responsibilities, none can operate effectively in
  isolation; therefore, coordination is critical. Commanders ensure staff sections are properly equipped and
  manned. This allows staffs to efficiently work within their headquarters and with their counterparts in other
  headquarters. Commanders ensure staff integration by developing the unit’s battle rhythm, to include
  synchronizing various meetings, working groups, and boards.
  3-16. Staff teamwork works in both directions. The intelligence staff must fully participate in and bring its
  unique perspectives, knowledge, and expertise to support the rest of the staff across the planning
  methodologies, integrating processes, working groups, and other staff functions. Conversely, the same is true
  of the rest of the staff supporting intelligence processes; tasks; working groups, if established; and functions.
  It is important to remember that the commander and staff are part of the intelligence warfighting function.
  Some of the support provided by the rest of the staff to the intelligence staff includes—
  ⚫ Sharing unique perspectives, knowledge, and expertise with the intelligence staff at key times
  within certain intelligence tasks.
  ⚫ Supporting ancillary and specialized information collection capabilities (see paragraph 3-35) and
  intelligence-related missions and operations (see paragraph 3-41).
  3-17. Certain intelligence tasks are far more effective when the rest of staff, especially key members,
  participates with the intelligence staff at key times in certain intelligence tasks. The value of staff participation
  applies primarily to IPOE and collection management; it also applies to a lesser extent to pre-mission analysis
  of the OE, situation development, intelligence support to targeting, and support to operational assessments.
  Staff members contribute warfighting function/specialty knowledge and expertise as well as perspectives that
  differ from the intelligence staff’s—all of which are invaluable. This comprehensive staff participation is
  similar to the staff participation necessary to adequately conduct targeting, support protection, or any number
  of other staff tasks. Despite pervasive time constraints that hinder participation in key intelligence tasks, the
  lack of staff participation during initial IPOE, mission analysis, or collection management puts a unit’s
  mission at risk.