The Foreign Service Journal, October 2008

ues to operate in the “old economy” in terms of recruitment, retention and, more broadly, talent and skill manage- ment, ignoring the fact that there are numerous other international profes- sional opportunities open to Ameri- cans. As a February Strategic Studies Institute paper titled “Developing Strategic Leaders for the 21st Cen- tury” documents, opportunities to live abroad, learn a foreign language and develop negotiating skills — all of which have traditionally attracted young people to the Foreign Service — are now widely available in the pri- vate sector and at many nongovern- mental organizations. These competi- tors offer higher salaries, often lack the level of austerity or danger faced by State Department employees, and impose fewer constraints on two- career families. But this finding also means that there are seasoned private-sector managers in the market, with experi- ence running international teams and engaging in negotiations and cross-cul- tural interactions, who could bring real benefit to the Foreign Service. But bringing them in at the entry level, as State currently does, would violate basic human resource management principles. Ultimately, any civilian organization needs a portfolio of internally devel- oped talent leavened with talent from the external world. As the McKinsey study notes, this recipe aligns well with the human resource industry’s best practices. Even where the dominant strategy is to spot talent early and train it within, companies should still con- sider regularly hiring executives from outside. Rather than seeing this as a failure of the internal development pipeline, they should view it as a way to accommodate rapid growth, refresh the gene pool, and calibrate the inter- nal talent standard. Such outsiders bring broader skills and new insights to the benefit of the organization, and can also reduce critical shortages. As several Foreign Service officers have noted in letters to the Foreign Service Journal concerning mid-level hiring, many FSOs already bring a complete “backpack” when they enter the Service and could perform at a higher level, drawing on their skills, competencies and experience from the private or public sectors. My own A-100 experience mirrors these obser- vations. My class contained colleagues whose level of experience would have allowed them to enter and perform admirably as mid-level officers. They already possessed the skills and com- petencies to operate in the diplomatic corps. This view was reinforced at my first post where, due to some mid-level staffing gaps and performance issues, a few junior officers were privileged to occupy mid-level positions on an inter- im basis. They performed exceeding- ly well. The American Foreign Service Association and the State Depart- ment should not overestimate what the entry-level Foreign Service officer phase brings to career development. Participating in preparations for visits by congressional delegations, drafting cables, working the room at an embassy event, and integrating into the Foreign Service culture are all skills learnable at any level. Further- more, there are plenty of individuals in the job market with experience and competencies that equate to those found among mid-level FSOs. The previously mentioned SSI study argues that expanding interna- tional requirements and the pressing need to maintain a surge capacity require more flexibility for admission to the Foreign Service. For instance, horizontal entry and exit should be considered, whereby those with a par- ticular background or linguistic skill could enter laterally at grades far above entry level. A multilingual senior researcher at an international consulting firm or investment fund, a U.S. Army Special Forces officer, or a desk officer from another internation- al organization are real examples of this “equivalency.” Three Recommendations In my view, three operating princi- ples need to be kept in mind before State embarks on a mid-level hiring program. First, such an initiative should not be conceived or conducted as part of an affirmative-action or gen- der-balancing program. Such goals can be pursued through existing pro- grams, awareness building and recruit- ment initiatives for candidates regard- less of hiring rank. Rather, hiring should be based upon merit and the acquisition of those skills and compe- tencies required to address current critical needs. Second, the consular cone should be a key beneficiary of such a program. One group of advocates for mid-level hiring seem to see it as a way to attract prime candidates by promising them they will not have to serve in “visa mills” or perform other consular duties. This attitude misses the fact that consular diplomacy is a critical factor in foreign affairs; indeed, it is emerging as a major component of soft power. (The Netherlands In- stitute of International Relations has published several papers demonstrat- ing the growing relevance of citizen services, consuls and visa diplomacy in the international environment.) Thus, this field is where the large majority of mid-level hires should be placed. Given increasing demand for consular services and rising visa application vol- umes, this would be a logical applica- tion for such a program. Third, the senior leadership of the State Department must expect strong and vocal resistance, including law- suits, to such a program and have the courage and resiliency to push through 14 F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L / O C T O B E R 2 0 0 8 S P E A K I N G O U T u