The Foreign Service Journal, January 2005

partment and AFSA recently agreed to abolish the multifunctional skill code, the preference for broad- gauged officers will be a key feature of the classwide competition that will replace multifunctionality for mid- level FSO generalists beginning in summer 2005. What Not to Do In addition to deciding which employees to recommend for promo- tion, boards must also identify employees for low-ranking. The pre- cepts identify numerous things that may be grounds for that designation. They include: failure to carry out assigned tasks, low productivity or work poorly done, an inability to work effectively and cooperatively with oth- ers, and a pattern of failure to safe- guard properly classified material and information. In practice, low rankings may also result from a significant, but otherwise non-fatal, shortcoming that is cited in more than one efficiency report over the most recent five years. While boards may not low-rank employees for the following reasons, they do constitute grounds for mid- ranking (i.e., not recommending the employee for promotion): a small but noteworthy performance flaw, an unproductive assignment pattern, or the lack of an important skill. Many mid-rankings simply result from an employee’s failure to keep up with his/her higher-performing colleagues who are busy following all or most of the 10 tips listed above. Tips for Raters Selection boards may only evaluate employees based on the documents contained in their official perfor- mance folder. Such items include efficiency reports, long-term training reports and award nominations. Obviously, the drafting of those docu- ments is a critical supervisory respon- sibility. Here are a few tips for raters and reviewers: • Specifics: As the employee eval- uation form itself makes clear, raters and reviewers need to provide specif- ic examples of performance. Without concrete examples, praise of an employee’s performance will ring hol- low. • Context: Boards not only need to know what the employee did, but also why it was important to the accom- plishment of U.S. policy goals. But don’t go overboard. Reports should be about the employee’s performance, not a mini-briefing paper on the bureau, mission or host country. • Hyperbole: It will be news to no one that many evaluation reports suf- fer from “grade inflation.” But raters and reviewers need to exercise cau- tion. Boards read hundreds of reports and often see reports from several years on the same position and/or on multiple employees in the same sec- J A N U A R Y 2 0 0 5 / F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L 41 WE DESERVE EQUAL BENEFITS FOR EQUAL WORK glifaa members serving with distinction at home and around the world. Gays and Lesbians in Foreign Affairs Agencies For details about benefits not afforded to “ineligible” partners of your gay and lesbian colleagues, see http://www.glifaa.org/html/family/in.html. To show support for your gay and lesbian colleagues at home and abroad, please print, sign, and send to us the GLIFAA statement of support at the bottom of our home page at www.glifaa.org.