The Foreign Service Journal, May 2004

W hat to jettisonaswepack for the jet? AnyFS employ- eeworthhis or her frequent-flyermiles has faced this dilemmamany times. Now, with the introduction of the newannual evaluation form(AEF) onApril Fools Day, this samedilemmamust bedealtwith inthe formofworkobjec- tives, performancemeasures, skill areas, sub-skills and “poten- tial,” and must be verbally compacted into one narrative sec- tion. Sorry, sports fans, to write a column on all this AEF rig- marole so close on the heels of the last rating cycle, butmy con- science and your careers made me do it! Since the beginning of time and before, there has been an infinite variety of AEF formats and I amconvinced that there will never be a completely satisfactorymethod- ology—consider this just another “way station” on the endless road trip toward AEF nirvana. Many will point out the shortcomings of this latest iteration, but we will all have to live with it for the short term, so it is best to understand what the changes are —and deal with them. One hope for the new form is that it will cut down immense- ly on the time spent writing the AEF. Instead of two long pages of narrative, there is now only one. All those complaints about missions and offices closing down for the month of April while AEFs get written should now subside. From now on, they will only be closed for two weeks. By the time this column ispublished, thenew rating periodwill be 45 days old andnewwork objectives should already be inplace. Are they? Under the newguidance, ongoingwork objec- tives are to appear under the “Role in the Organization” section. On the new form, there can be only three work objectives and these shouldbe special or unusual assignments. Inaddition, only twoperformancemea- sures are permitted under each work objective. The skill areas have been reduced from six to four, and the performance standards have been redefined for each grade. There are four sub-skills under each skill area. One tricky new fandangle is that the ratermust discuss at least one sub-skill at the next high- er grade level fromthat of the rated employee. The theory is that this will help employ- ees strengthen skills thatmay enhance their career development. Hopefully, realitywill follow theory. Amajor change is that rating officers and appraisal committees canno longermake promotion recommendations. To repeat, promotion recommendations are impermis- sible. This puts a greater onus on the performance boards to ferret out thosewho should get promoted, without the benefit of explicit recommendations. There is a newrequire- ment for the rater to comment on an employee’s potential. While this is not intend- ed to be a surrogate for a promotion recommendation, it should nevertheless provide some insight to performance board members. Reverting back to past practice, the rater must again share the draft AEF with the rated employee. The rater may then tailor alterations to the draft AEF based on dis- cussions with the employee. Those are some of the newAEF highlights. I know…about as much fun as chew- ing on chalk. But remember: You pack the AEF suitcase, but others will open it. So make sure you have packed everything and packed it well. ▫ One hope for the new form is that it will cut down immensely on the time spent writing the AEF. V.P. VOICE: USAID BY BILL CARTER Lots of Baggage — Small Suitcase 4 AFSA NEWS • MAY 2004 KEEPING IN TOUCH WITH MANAGEMENT AFSA Meets with USAID Administrator O n March 15, AFSA President JohnLimbert andUSAIDVPBill Carter met with USAID Administrator Andrew Natsios and some of his staff to review AFSA pro- grams and agenda. Ambassador Limbert began themeeting by complimenting the high-level efforts to produce the joint State-USAIDStrategic Plan (a document that sets forth the Secretary of State’s direction and priorities for both organi- zations in the coming years and clearly delineates the joint objectives shared by the two agencies) and asked that AFSA be kept closely involved as implementa- tion moves forward. In the discussions that followed, Natsios pledged his full support to help secure overseas pay comparability for all FS employees and to regain USAA membership for new USAID Foreign Service members — both hot button issues for AFSA. Carter raised the need for much greater transparency in the selectionprocess for senior positions, not- ing that some senior positions were not advertised and in other cases candidates outside of the service were selected over in-service FSOs. AFSA asked the administrator for reconsideration of some funding prior- ities, criticizing the exorbitant amounts spent on “re-blocking” (making offices contiguous after reorganization) while a student loan repayment program, train- ing and business class travel and other “investing-in-the-employee” initiatives have gone under-funded or unfunded. AFSA also asked that USAID explore alternative dispute resolution techniques as a way of possibly avoiding time-con- suming grievances. AFSAwill be sched- uling periodic follow-up meetings to review progress and to continue this promising dialogue. ▫