The Foreign Service Journal, May 2006

M A Y 2 0 0 6 / F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L 27 The Glass Is Half-Full The Office Management Specialist Career Develop- ment Program (State 9014, sent Jan. 18, 2006) received mixed reviews. To some OMSs, the arrival of this cable felt like a nail being driven into a coffin. To others, it rep- resented the hammer that they could use to finally demand training. Many OMSs found the CDP requirements over- whelming — I include myself in this category, even after 17 years in the Foreign Service. I have always considered myself somewhat fearless, and my initial reaction to the CDP was “Yikes!” The CDP ambitiously lays out a plan for professional development over the full course of a career, and that means there are plenty of boxes to check. The first time I read the plan, each box represented a hurdle to promo- tion. The more I read the document, however, and focused on mandatory versus elective requirements, the more I came to see that these goals were possible. Not altogether pleasant, some of them — but attainable. F O C U S O N S P E C I A L I S T C A R E E R D E V E L O P M E N T S PECIALISTS S PEAK O UT ON C AREER D EVELOPMENT S OME REACTIONS FROM THE FIELD TO THE NEWLY - ISSUED C AREER D EVELOPMENT P ROGRAM GUIDELINES FOR FS SPECIALISTS . n January, we sent an e-mail via our AFSANET listserv inviting specialist members to comment on the newly-issued Career Development Program guidelines. We posed the following questions: Is the career path for your specialty viable? Are the requirements for promotion to more senior ranks realistic, both in terms of the levels of professional, techni- cal and language proficiency specified, and the time allotted to attain them? If not, what specific advice would you give the department as it prepares to move into the implementation phase of the program for your specialty? Has the promulgation of these principles affected your willingness to compete for promotion to senior ranks? Our thanks to all who responded; here are some of the observations we received. — Steven Alan Honley, Editor I