The Foreign Service Journal, March 2023

THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL | MARCH 2023 21 microscope and the fear of being singled out, for better or worse. Many of us do not feel psychologically safe; our identities feel threatened. We are playing a game we don’t have a rulebook for and are con- stantly questioning and second-guessing our actions. We opt to not fully engage with peers. We lack the support, subse- quently the confidence, to be authentic beyond our own social demographic. Whether a new hire or later in a State Department career, most State employ- ees do not want to go against the grain. Some of us are so busy trying to be seen as acceptable that independent thinking and creativity get lost. Concerns about our corridor reputation reinforce the need to be accepted by others, but at what cost? Whether to call out a wrong is no longer a question of doing the right thing. It’s a question of what implication it will have on your career, your corridor reputation. The more different you are, the greater the danger to speak out. Earlier in my career, I recall several instances when peer assessments were being made casually in both professional and social settings about colleagues. When I attempted to add input, even if in agreement, I would be cut off and shut out. I quickly learned that majority obser- vations were more valuable than mine. Giving that privileged observer greater val- idation, I hoped not to be identified as the difficult one but rather to be looked upon favorably. But I became keenly aware that I would only be seen as adding value if I supported the negative assessment of a colleague who was different like me. This privilege can also be seen in meetings and the decision-making pro- cess. Though we are in the room or even at the table, some colleagues automati- cally get extra votes of support to our one. Rarely are there allies ensuring equity for all voices to be heard. Many of us have lost confidence in our leaders, many of whom do not reflect the overall diversity within State. With a sense of powerlessness, there is an expectation that nothing will be done. Most will keep quiet. The others will only speak after reaching professional aspirations or leav- ing the State Department. And the brave will speak out at their own risk. The Burden of Proof Corridor reputation was presented to me as an inward-looking reflection and self-controlled action. It was very black and white. Navigating as a woman of color, I remain inward, and it is debilitat- ing at times. But for colleagues of the majority, I have seen corridor reputation as a tool for empowerment. It’s easier for them to be seen as acceptable and to look outwardly to control the narrative for themselves and others. In my more than 10-year career span, I have experienced up and downs. This includes managing mental health, marriage, divorce, parenthood, and loss of family members. It also includes wit- nessing successes of family and friends and supporting family members battling cancer. I have experienced COVID, cur- tailment, medevacs, great supervisors, bad supervisors, rewarding tours, tours I wish to forget, the best and worst of col- leagues. This is the beautiful yet common story for all of us. The problem is when only selected parts of you and short encounters are definitive of you and your corridor reputation. Many of us own our corridor reputa- tions, based on consistent experiences from different people. But do we question the people, context, or even the presence of bias? Like discrimination, the burden of corridor reputation belongs to everyone. However, it tends to weigh heavier on individuals that make the State Depart- ment diverse, who hope to feel included. Despite receiving tenure and promo- tion, and being a reliable colleague, I believe my corridor reputation and the biases placed on me provide an opposing, if not incomplete, perspective. Wherever I work, I am often seen through the lenses of race and gender rather than my pur- pose to serve the American people. If I go into a position where my corridor reputa- tion precedes me, people expect the me of years past. Trying to establish my present self is doubly exhausting and often defeat- ing, especially with a new assignment. Disenfranchised groups experience so much trauma in the United States. And at the State Department, even with the emergence of DEIA advancement as a priority, we still experience poor treatment. We associate being assigned less optimal opportunities, talked over in meetings, and questioned more than our peers as part of our being … different. Repeated experiences build up biases and expectations of how people will treat me. Assuming negative biases will be placed on me, I arrive on the job with a chip on my shoulder. Doing my job seems less like a team effort and more like a daily tryout, trying to prove my value and potential to be on the team. I am forever grateful to the allies Why should corridor reputation, often based on half-truths and rumors, and holding people against noninclusive standards, be a thing?