Executive Analysis Group applies human intelligence (HUMINT) methodology — the discipline federal investigators use to assess credibility under pressure — to senior leadership evaluation.
Four practices, developed over decades in federal investigative and intelligence work, adapted for a boardroom instead of a case file.
Structured elicitation techniques developed for federal investigative interviewing — built to surface information a subject isn't volunteering, without the subject feeling interrogated.
Intelligence-community analytic discipline: separating direct observation from inference, and assigning a confidence level to every finding rather than guessing.
Applied understanding of how deception, stress, and impression management actually show up — in speech, physiology, and behavior — under structured questioning.
Findings are written the way an intelligence report is written: sourced, leveled, and defensible — not a scored personality-test printout.
Every observation is logged against a defined indicator framework — not a gut read. A sample of what the framework tracks:
Overuse of hedges — "basically," "to be honest" — clustered around specific claims.
Unusual delay before answering direct, low-difficulty questions.
Details that shift between separate retellings of the same event.
How quickly composure returns after a pointed follow-up question.
Redirecting toward unrelated strengths whenever a specific concern is raised.
Disproportionate detail volunteered around a single sensitive point.
Small, involuntary changes in posture or hand movement at key questions.
Deviation from the subject's own established baseline — not a generic universal "tell."
Whether tone and affect actually match the content of what's being said.
Measurable change in pitch or pace correlating with specific question types.
Shifts in breath control that correlate with question difficulty.
The umbrella check: every signal above is only meaningful relative to this subject's own baseline.
No single indicator is disqualifying on its own. Findings are only reported when a pattern departs meaningfully from the subject's own established baseline — never scored against a generic population average.
Reviews role scope, organizational context, and the specific risk questions with the client.
Provides the candidate's background materials and access for scheduling.
A shared, written understanding of what "risk" means for this specific seat.
Conducts the structured HUMINT interview, calibrated to the subject's own baseline.
No involvement required during the interview itself.
Raw behavioral and credibility observations, logged against the indicator framework.
Analyzes indicators, assigns a composite risk rating, and drafts the intelligence brief.
Available for a brief context check if a finding needs role-specific interpretation.
A 5–7 page confidential brief, sourced and leveled like an intelligence product.
Delivers the brief and leads a private 60-minute readout with decision-makers.
Owns the final hiring decision — EAG doesn't make it for you.
A documented, defensible data point for the board or hiring authority.
Every engagement ends in a written Confidential Intelligence Brief — a composite risk rating, the specific behavioral and credibility findings behind it, and recommended follow-up. The decision itself always stays with you.
A confidential 30-minute call is enough to determine the right scope — and whether EAG is the right fit for this decision.
Request a Confidential Consultation All engagements are strictly confidential · View engagement tiers · Back to overview