The Foreign Service Journal, July-August 2023

THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL | JULY-AUGUST 2023 21 SPEAKING OUT Sonnet Frisbie was an economic-coned Foreign Service officer from 2009 to 2022. Her assignments included Mexico, the Czech Republic, Iraq, Poland, and Washington, D.C. She is currently the lead geopolitical risk analyst for Europe, the Middle East, and Africa for Morning Consult. Her analysis and commentary have been featured in The New York Times , Bloomberg , Axios , The Financial Times , Politico , and more. A sincere thank you from the author to AFSA, the State Department Bureau of Global Talent Management, and all the former and current Foreign Service officers who shared their experience and expertise for this piece. W orkforce changes across the U.S. econ- omy in recent years have made it more common than ever for so-called “boomerang” workers to return to previous employers. A growing literature suggests that these employees bring a number of benefits. Those who return are generally more satisfied than employees who never left, presumably because they know the exact hue of the grass on the other side. They are significantly cheaper to onboard and already know the organi- zational structure and culture. In certain types of roles, they seem to perform better. This is why well-meaning family and friends were befuddled by how much I agonized over whether to leave the For- eign Service last year for an exciting new opportunity. “But you can always go back, right?” they frequently asked. The answer for most Foreign Service officers (FSOs) up to this point, as many readers of this journal will know, is no. That may be about to change. Current Policy: A Product of Culture and Process There has long been a theoretical path back into the Foreign Service. But as implemented, the policy has actively discouraged reentry. The Foreign Ser- vice Act of 1980 (as amended) allows for the reappointment of former FSOs when it meets the needs of the Foreign Service. The Bureau of Global Talent Manage- ment (GTM) has historically interpreted this to mean: (1) there must be a deficit of employees in the grade and skill code of the position to be filled, (2) there must be no active bidders to fill the position, and (3) the position must remain unassigned for 30 days or more after the opening of the stretch assignment season. There are additional restrictions, including a requirement to serve a directed assignment upon reentry. And reappointment has to be sought within five years of resigning (extended to eight years for those employed in the Civil Service). Furthermore, when applications have been open in recent years, the skill codes with deficits have been limited to some specialists and consular- coned generalists. In effect, reappoint- ment has not been a viable option for the majority of FSOs. This begs the question, why? Culturally, an FSO career is viewed as an apprenticeship. The assumption has long been that FSOs will start at entry level and serve a 20-year career, much as the assumption once was that employ- ees would spend a full career span at a single company. Department workforce planning models are still based on this underlying assumption. Process also drives policy. Reap- pointment affects a very small group. While major initiatives like changes to the oral exam are hotly debated, reap- pointment has been a sideshow, with commensurate resources and attention allocated to it. There is no dedicated reappointment team in GTM. The cur- rent process for bureaus to get needed staff through reappointment is report- edly so onerous that they typically opt The assumption has long been that FSOs will start at entry level and serve a 20-year career. Boomerang Diplomats? Another Look at Reappointment BY SONNET FR I SB I E