The Foreign Service Journal, June 2004

from old-timers that this was not always the case.” “I’ve been a bit disappointed in the culture. There appears to be a well-established tradition of assum- ing that just because one is a junior officer one is incapable of doing cer- tain things. This is exceptionally unfortunate as the vast majority of my JO colleagues are very accom- plished people and are joining the FS as a second or third career,” says an economic officer who joined in 2001 and is back at FSI. Not everyone saw problems with the culture. “FS culture is dynamic, progressive and filled with individu- als who are absolutely committed to advancing and promoting U.S. poli- cies,” says Jennifer Schaming-Ronan, a public diplomacy officer serving in Cotonou. “I don’t think the FS is resistant to change, as is a common concern. In fact, I think the FS is going through a period of tremen- dous change and is becoming an even more flexible workplace.” Would you describe your agency as “family-friendly”? What do you think family-friendly should mean? Most respondents said State was doing fairly well in the family-friend- ly category. USAID respondents criticized their agency for not being family-friendly enough, and for offering fewer benefits than State. There was quite a wide divide between expectations of single and married State employees. Married employees with children generally called for more help from State on family issues, while a strong majority of single officers complained that State is too family-friendly. One offi- cer calls State “disgustingly family- friendly.” The single employees point out that State leaves them at a disadvantage when it comes to bid- ding, vacation time and housing. A few single employees noted that they understand the special treatment for families, but would like to be com- pensated in other ways for being dis- advantaged. In addition, many respondents noted that their agency is family-friendly toward “traditional” families only, not employees with partners. The focus group discussion with female FSOs highlighted a strong desire for flexibility in the system to allow for “a balanced life.” As politi- cal officer Della Cavey explains, “We are a new generation of diplomats who come from non-traditional back- grounds. Our diversity is our strength and we bring a lot to the table. We should be allowed to grow and prosper as individuals so that, in turn, that wisdom and strength can permeate throughout our careers.” She adds that, “This is a dream job for me. I think this is a great institu- tion, and I really see myself here for 30 years if I can make a well-bal- anced life.” The focus group participants pointed out that if the FS wants to retain the greater number of women it has brought in in recent years, it is going to have to do better to accom- modate the demands of women employees who are also mothers. They say that they share with their colleagues high hopes that the DRI 36 F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L / J U N E 2 0 0 4 Today’s employees want to be recognized for their achievements and promoted not on the basis of bureaucratic time-in-class restrictions, but on merit. DRI & the New Generation The Diplomatic Readiness Initiative brought in thousands of eager officers with a broad range of talents, skills and experiences, all of them dedicated to government service abroad in a post-9/11 world. As someone who started the Foreign Service as a new career, not a first one, I was glad to train with these people, rather than the Service one ambassador described as the organization he joined twenty-some years ago; male, pale and Yale. It will be interesting to see if the effort pays off with similar attrition rates to those of the past, or if the bright-eyed, fledgling officers of today have too little patience for incompetence and bureaucratic inefficiency (I have been very surprised by the number of times I’ve heard, “That may be a good idea, but it would never work in the State Department, so just make the best of the existing process.”). The post- Generation X recruits of any organization are known to have little loyalty to any single employer without personal fulfillment (and admittedly, perhaps little respect for seniority for its own sake). While my experience with the Foreign Service so far in my first tour has been quite positive, I know more than a few officers in a variety of cones and geographic bureaus who are highly qualified and good at their jobs but who admit they are disenchanted enough with the State Department “culture” that they plan to quit after being tenured. That would be too bad for those of us who may remain in the Foreign Service. — Jeff Mazur, a political officer serving in an economic position in Lagos