When we think of a typical intelligence officer, one person often comes to mind: James Bond. Bond, alongside his counterparts Jason Bourne and Jack Ryan, reflects the common stereotype of the 21st century spy: white, male, athletic, and good with both weapons and women. The mythology surrounding Bond has leant intelligence work a sexy, thrilling edge for decades. But recent recruiting campaigns by each of the intelligence agencies in Australia’s National Intelligence Community (NIC) rarely feature anyone who looks like James Bond. So why are Australia’s intelligence agencies trying to forget James Bond?
The James Bond stereotype of an intelligence agent is pervasive and widespread. Intelligence chiefs across the UK have highlighted the ongoing influence of James Bond on recruitment to their services, describing it as both a blessing and a curse. One the one hand, being a spy, an agent or an intelligence officer is surely one of the most exciting careers you can have. On the other, for those of us who aren’t James Bond, it can seem like joining an intelligence agency and serving your country is nothing more than an impossible dream. This combination means that while the image of James Bond is very good at attracting a certain type of person to intelligence, many very smart, very capable people who don’t happen to fit the Bond mould simply don’t apply to work in intelligence in the first place.
This is not a new issue, nor is it only an issue for MI6: In 1985, then ASIO-chief Alan Wrigley told Michelle Grattan, “Those with James Bond delusions need not apply. One of our aims is to weed them out… What we want are bright young graduates who get satisfaction from the challenges of piecing together complex intellectual pictures.” Forty years later, the James Bond stereotype remains an issue for recruitment for Australia’s intelligence services.
To remedy this, many agencies in the NIC have begun clever recruiting campaigns aimed at attracting a more diverse range of applicants. ASIO’s “Why I Spy” campaign of short videos, for example, features Australians of different backgrounds explaining why their unique perspectives are valued within the organisation. These include first generation and LGBTQIA+ Australians, as well as a mother working part-time, fitting in work tracking terrorists around visits to the Zoo.
The notoriously secret ASIS has also stepped out of the shadows in recent years, with the organisation’s Chief Technology Officer providing a podcast interview to highlight the valuable contribution made by Australians of Culturally and Linguistically Diverse (CALD) backgrounds to ASIS’s efforts to ensure Australia’s security. Both the ASIS interview and the ASIO campaign send a very clear message to the broader Australian public that that having an immigrant background can be a strength when you apply for an intelligence role, and that overseas travel and connections do not mean that applicants will fail their security clearance.
The Australian Signals Directorate takes a slightly different approach. While ASD also encourages Australians of diverse backgrounds to apply, their public communications often highlight the need for greater neurodiversity among their staff as a strategic priority. ASD aims to recruit staff with the capacity to think about issues in different and unique ways to enhance the strength of the organisation and increase the effectiveness of their operations. If ASIO once sought recruits that like to solve puzzles, ASD emphasises that having neurodiverse staff “gives us an asymmetric advantage” when attempting to solve the more complex challenges faced by modern-day signals intelligence agencies. The idea that unique ways of thinking can be strength when it comes to high level problem solving has become a familiar trope in popular television crime dramas, and this in turn helps reinforce the salience of the ASD message with the public.
The promotion of diversity in intelligence agencies has come under fire recently, with some commentators arguing that the benefits of diversity are unproven, and that an emphasis on recruiting a diverse workforce may result in those who merit recruitment being passed over in favour those that hit certain quotas or targets. However, this contrasts sharply with the public position put forward by the agencies in the NIC.
The ten agencies that make up the NIC argue that to operate effectively “in the slim area between the difficult and the impossible,” increasing diversity is both desirable and necessary. Nuanced insight into the current global operating environment requires cultural and linguistic diversity. Insightful intelligence analysis requires creativity, imagination and an ability to “connect the dots.” As the Office of National Intelligence makes clear, these important capabilities strengthen Australia’s intelligence efforts and develop from bringing together a “wealth of different perspectives” in an environment that “values difference and champions contestability.”
If you always wanted to be a spy but didn’t think you were quite “James Bond” enough to make the cut, think again. Australia’s security could depend on it.
