What We Heard About The Risk Intelligence System

▼ Overall Direction.

The survey results indicate that clients value the core intelligence provided by the Risk Intelligence System and are looking for ways to make that intelligence more operational, personalised, and actionable.

The clearest message was not a desire for a completely new platform, but for a system that makes it easier to apply intelligence to day-to-day operations and decision-making.

▼ What Clients Value Most Today.

The highest-rated capabilities were:

• Near-real-time incident monitoring and alerts (Duty Watch) – 4.21 / 5
• Strategic analysis (Country TAs, summaries and outlooks) – 4.07 / 5
• Operational analysis (Area TAs, emerging threats and regional intelligence) – 4.07 / 5

These results highlight the continued importance of timely, analyst-driven intelligence in supporting operational risk management.

▼ Where Clients Face Challenges.

While satisfaction with intelligence content remains strong, respondents identified several opportunities for improvement.

The most common challenges were:

• Understanding how analysis applies to their specific operations (20%)
• Customising views, visualising and comparing data (18%)
• Finding relevant content and understanding system coverage (16%)
• Incident reporting timeliness and accuracy (12%)

The results suggest that the biggest opportunity is not necessarily more content, but making existing intelligence easier to apply and access.

▼ The Demand for Tailored Intelligence.

When asked about future enhancements, clients showed strong interest in intelligence that is more closely aligned with their assets, routes, and operational requirements.

The most requested capabilities included:

• Tailored alerts based on routes, locations, assets and risk profiles
• Analysis generated from selected incident data
• Improved personalisation and customisation options

These findings reinforce the need to deliver intelligence that is increasingly relevant to each client's operational environment.

▼ AI: Supportive, Not Autonomous. 

Interest in AI-enabled capabilities was strong, but respondents clearly favoured AI that supports analysts rather than replacing them.

The most valuable AI concepts were:

• Early warning signals and anomaly detection (27%)
• Faster search across validated content (22%)
• Automated route and area summaries (19%)

By contrast, only 11% expressed interest in a standalone AI chat assistant.

When asked what would increase trust in AI-generated outputs, clients prioritised:

• Analyst review and validation (42%)
• Transparent sourcing and access to underlying data (31%)

These results suggest that future AI capabilities should enhance the existing intelligence workflow while maintaining analyst oversight and transparency.

▼ Opportunities for Automation. 

Several clients highlighted manual tasks that could be streamlined through future system capabilities.

Examples included:

• Monitoring threats affecting company assets and locations
• Creating internal risk briefings and reports
• Consolidating intelligence for operational decision-making

The feedback indicates a growing need for tools that help transform intelligence into actionable outputs and workflows.

▼ What We are Taking Away. 

Based on the survey results, several priorities have emerged:

• Continue investing in timely, analyst-driven intelligence and alerts.

• Improve personalisation through tailored alerts, routes, assets and risk profiles.

• Make intelligence easier to find, understand and apply.

• Enhance search, analysis and workflow efficiency.

• Develop AI-supported capabilities with analyst validation and transparent sourcing.

• Explore automation that helps clients transform intelligence into reports, briefings and operational outputs.