It wasn't competition that caused the problems. It was the legal impediments to data sharing.
I think reorganizing the defense apparatus into a single chain of command runs the risk of even more massive mistakes of the kind we suffered in 2001-2003.
The military needs to have its own intelligence subject to its commanders, and the director of intelligence can facilitate the coordination of ops and information sharing between the agencies.
A competitive culture that leads to extensive multiple intel networks throughout the world, with various emphasis based on the culture and philosophy of the agency running it, stands to be the most flexible and reliable for gathering and cross checking intel.
The director can have and run a combined Intelligence Command Center, where analysts from every agency are based, and which coordinates threat watches, and prioritization.
I just really hate the idea of a powerful Intelligence Directorate operating domestically with the power of the FBI for law enforcement. Gestapo keeps on popping into my head.
There were NO legal impediments to data sharing when Hoover was in charge...and yet there was little or no data sharing.
You can have all the small, independent intel collectors you want, but if we don't have someone to put their little pieces together, we are back to square one.
Now, if you give the intel czar the power to hire and fire the directors of these small services, then I might agree with you. But that's the only way he's going to get their attention and make sure they share the intel they collect. Any other arrangement is, as they say, reshuffling the deck chairs on the Titanic.