The Foreign Service Journal, April 2020

40 APRIL 2020 | THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL inordinate amount of time to release promotion results. Third, as a subsidiary of the promotion process, MSI awards did not get the consideration that would ordinarily be required for citations of exceptional and important service. Unlike the old MSI process, the new program is purely nom- ination-based. A one-page nomination form can be filled out by anyone and only requires the approval of an official in the nominee’s chain of command. The pool of potential awardees has been expanded by defining eligibility as follows: (1) career members of the FS in grades 1 to 7, (2) generalist career can- didates recommended for tenure prior to the MSI nomination deadline, and (3) specialist career candidates who are eligible for competitive promotion. Nominations are considered and awards granted by special MSI panels that are created in the same way as selection boards, by the Performance Evaluation division of the Bureau of Global Talent Management. The appropriate MSI Panel (i.e., specialist or generalist) reviews the nominations and rank orders those nominees who have met or exceeded the criteria set out in the MSI Procedural Precepts, which establish the scope, organiza- tion and responsibility of the panels. Gauging the Response To gauge the response to the pilot program, AFSA Director of Professional Policy Issues Julie Nutter conducted a member survey in November. At the time, we shared basic data on the pilot’s operation. Such data include the fact that during each of the three years, more than 810 nomination slots had been allotted to bureaus. Unfortunately, on average, the total number of nominations received by the bureaus was only 60 percent of the total slots available. In other words, 40 percent of MSI award opportunities were not utilized. Of those nominated, an average of 77 percent received MSI awards. We are pleased to report that 822 members participated in the AFSA survey, and 418 respondents provided us with additional comments. We thank those who participated; your responses and comments are invaluable as we look to the future of the MSI award process. [See p. 38 for a selection of additional comments from survey respondents.] Approximately 70 percent of participants identified them- selves as generalists. A plurality (45 percent) has been in the Foreign Service for more than 15 years; the second-largest cat- egory (26 percent) has been in the Foreign Service for 11 to 15 years. Among respondents, 45 percent had received MSIs prior to the 2017 pilot program; just 16 percent had received them under the pilot. Although 61 percent of the respondents believed they received adequate information and guidance on the pilot program, it is a shared goal of AFSA and the department to increase messaging and guidance on the MSI program going forward. To better understand how engaged our participants were in the newMSI program, AFSA asked whether respondents had been nominated for an MSI under the pilot: 23 percent said they had, while 77 percent had not. We also asked whether partici- pants had nominated anyone for an MSI under the pilot program: 25 percent had nominated someone, while 75 percent had not. The survey then asked whether respondents preferred an MSI program that was: (1) nomination-based and open to all; (2) tied to recommendations for promotion; or (3) other. Significantly, more than half of participants (53 percent) chose option 2, MSIs tied to recommendations for promotion. About a third (30 per- cent) voted for a nomination-based system; and 17 percent chose “other.” Based on the comments we received, the consensus for “other” appeared to be a hybrid system incorporating options 1 and 2. The survey results and comments also revealed that the majority of those who preferred an MSI system tied to recom- mendations for promotion (like the old system) found a nomina- tion-based process (like the pilot program) too burdensome. The concern raised most often was that, while anyone can nominate an individual for an MSI, supervisors did not, or were not, taking the time to nominate their employees. AFSA also received several comments noting that the delay in receiving MSI award results under the new system—as opposed to a Meritorious or Superior Honor Award—made the MSI a “riskier” option. Future of the Pilot Program The shared goal of AFSA and the department is to create an MSI award process that is transparent, efficient and true to the intent of the Foreign Service Act of 1980. In an effort to reach this goal, the parties have agreed to continue the MSI pilot program with gender-neutral nominations for an additional year to allow time to review and improve the award process based on observa- tions and data collected by the department, as well as the survey results and comments received from our members. We invite any members who wish to share their views and comments with us to do so via email to afsa@state.gov with the subject line “MSI Pilot Program.” Emails sent to this address will go directly to AFSA’s Labor Management office. For additional information on the MSI Pilot Program, please see State VP Tom Yazdgerdi’s column in this month’s AFSA News. n