The Foreign Service Journal, July-August 2016

THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL | JULY-AUGUST 2016 43 These responses can be influential in determining a candidate’s standing in the chosen career track. This is their chance to tell their story to the Foreign Service assessors. The QEP provides a service to both candidates and the department. Because it allows a look at the total candidate, the process has proven effective at indicating which candidates are likely to be successful in the oral assessment. Prior to the QEP, the department invited approximately the top 10 percent of scorers on the written exam to attend the Foreign Service Oral Assessment. Once the QEP was introduced, the invitee pool from the FSOT went from 10 percent to approximately 40 percent, thus providing a wider range of candidates for the QEP to review. While approximately the same number of candidates is invited to the FSOA now as before the QEP, about 49 percent of the candidates invited using the QEP pass compared to 21 percent pre-QEP. Both the department and potential candidates have realized substantial savings. The department reduced expenditures in staff time; and candidates unlikely to pass the assessment were saved the transport and lodging expenses of a journey to Wash- ington, D.C. In addition, the process provided a wider mix of applicants with a broader range of skills. Nine years of data has shown that the better a candidate does on the QEP, the more likely he or she is going to pass the FSOA. The total-candidate approach in the QEP has proven to be among the best practices for employee selection assessments. Evidence also indicates that the QEP produces a qualitatively different and more diverse pool of candidates coming forward to the FSOA. Based on historical FSOA invitation rates, more than half of the candidates (56.2 percent) invited to the FSOA today would not have been invited based solely on the cogni- tive-based skills test, the FSOT. According to a 2013 survey of entry-level officer supervisors to determine if the introduction of the QEP was producing officers with the “right stuff,” today’s candidates bring more international work experience, educa- tion and experience living abroad to the department. As one respondent said, “It is not that today’s ELOs are better, but they are more consistently better.” The Spigot—From QEP to FSOA The QEP results in a rank-ordered list of FSO candidates by skill code or career track. In determining the number of invitations to be issued to the FSOA, the strength of the current register, by skill code, is evaluated. The number of invitations issued is based on the hiring foreseen for each skill code and the number of FSOs necessary to achieve that number. It is thus possible for more candidates of one skill code/career track to be invited to a particular FSOA than those from another skill code. It is also possible that a candidate could receive an invitation during a year in which hiring needs are anticipated to be high, but may not receive an invitation when hiring is expected to be low. The Oral Assessment is conducted primarily in Washington, D.C. Resources permitting, BEX also offers it in San Francisco each year in January and May. The day-long Oral Assessment measures a candidate’s ability to demonstrate the 13 dimen- sions that are essential to the successful performance of an FSO’s work. It includes a group exercise, a structured interview and a case-management writing exercise. It is a job interview, not an educational exam. The Oral Assessment exercises are based on a job analysis of the work of the Foreign Service. They reflect the skills, abilities and personal qualities deemed essential to the performance of that work. The exercises are not an adversarial process: candi- dates do not compete against other candidates, but instead are judged on their capacity to demonstrate the skills and abilities necessary to be an effective FSO. The first update in a decade to the group exercise portion of the Oral Assessment was the addition of the “Ambassador Brief.” Feedback from candidates indicated concern that less demonstrative candidates were being drowned out by more vocal members of the group. An individualized interaction was suggested that would allow those candidates to exhibit their capabilities. During the “Ambassador Brief,” candidates meet individually with the assessors, one of whom plays the role of an ambas- sador. The candidate briefs “the ambassador” on the outcome of the Group Exercise and explains the group’s rationale for its decision. Once initiated, assessors found that this exercise also provided an opportunity to evaluate how well the candidates Nine years of data has shown that the better a candidate does on the QEP, the more likely he or she is going to pass the FSOA.