The Foreign Service Journal, September 2020

32 SEPTEMBER 2020 | THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL The Individual vs. the Building Many individual officers place inclusion as a priority. Fortu- nate ones, like me, benefit from these officers. I was lucky that they saw something in me that pushed them to sponsor me for jobs and promotions. But “the building” often works against such efforts. When I interviewed to be a deputy chief of mission for a Black woman ambassador, I was thrilled. There are always so few, and she was dynamic! I was certain that my great interview would get me the job. But she told me she didn’t feel safe having an all-Black front office; she felt compelled to select a white male to protect herself. I thanked her for her honesty; I meant it, but when I got home, I cried. I felt betrayed by a culture that crushed the courage of even those who knew how important such courage was. There is an unspoken presumption in the department, that all white officers took the written exam and are therefore worthy of being an FSO, and that all Black and Hispanic officers likely did not. It is a damaging assumption that burdens Pickering and Ran- gel Fellows, who belong to the only category of fellows who must take the written exam. They, who are often the cream of the crop, have been damaged by the ignorant bias of their peers and the indifference of department leadership to correcting the record. We all know studies have shown that increasing diversity of all kinds among national security professionals improves policy outcomes. I and my success weren’t unique. I wasn’t special. But too many like me haven’t had the same support. The department must finally institutionalize and expand the successful efforts of individuals, because the department can get this right. The talent is there, the ability is there, and the time is now. Getting On with It We have the opportunity—when all of America is saying enough! Let’s get on with this!—to make employees at all levels know they must set aside their individual biases for the good of the organization. And if they can’t, they will not prosper at State. There is no reason to have this discussion again. We are America. We can do this. Every State Department employee should be asking when the following recommendations will be implemented for the good of the Foreign Service: 1. Intake. Ensure that of the four assessors examining new candidates, at least two come from underrepresented communi- ties. As incentive to serve with the Board of Examiners, add one additional year for time in class for every two years spent as an examiner. 2. Promotion Precepts. Add “advancing inclusion” to the core precepts that are used by selection boards for recommend- ing Foreign Service employees for promotion to the next grade and the senior ranks. I propose that promotions be based on leadership, management, intellectual and communications skills, substantive knowledge, advancing inclusion and interpersonal skills. 3. Centralized Accountability. Move the position of chief diversity officer to the Deputy Secretary’s office as a direct report, and empower that individual with authority and staff to collect and share data on diversity in assignments and promotions and to add verbiage to the EERs of officers with authority to make assignments. Ensure that that individual can partner with the Director General and bureaus to lay out benchmarks and goal- posts to guarantee accountability. 4. Diversity Data by Bureau and Grade. Require an annual review and report-out of progress in increasing diversity by bureau and by grade. The review responsibility would lie with the chief diversity officer, supported by bureau front offices. The report would come from the Secretary of State. 5. Assignment Vetting. Require bureau front offices to vet their shortlists for chief of mission and deputy assistant secretary positions against equal employment opportunity case logs. The State Department Office of Civil Rights would provide the needed information, which must be taken into account somewhere in the assignment process. Currently, this does not happen, and prob- lem officers can continue to expand the impact of their biases. 6. Conversion. Reform the mid-career conversion program to allow talented civil servants to more easily use their expertise as members of the Foreign Service. 7. Clarity and Accuracy. Ensure that the department increases accurate understanding of how all of the fellowship programs work. Providing accurate information about Pickering and Rangel Fellows, alone, should improve their standing in the department. 8. Recognition. Change the name of the “Equal Employment Opportunity Award” to the “Diversity and Inclusion Award.” This annual award recognizes outstanding accomplishments by a Foreign Service or Civil Service employee in furthering the goals of the department’s equal employment opportunity program. The name change is important because “equal employment opportu- nity” is a legal construct that is intended to prevent overt discrimi- nation, but it does not get at the affirmative actions necessary to truly support minority officers in rising through the ranks. That informal mentorship, guidance and support is the difference between a successful career and one that stalls for lack of being truly included among those valued and expected to succeed. n