The Foreign Service Journal, October 2012

26 OCTOBER 2012 | THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL A USAID officer says the Foreign Service has been “a lifelong dream,” and that she has always wanted to serve in the developing world. USAID officers point to the desire to work in development as a primary motivation for joining the Foreign Service. Several mention “the mission” and public service, as well as “job security.” Given that permanent jobs in the development field, as opposed to contract jobs, are difficult to come by, job security is probably more of a factor for those joining USAID than State. Talking about My Generation We asked new hires to describe their demographic, defining it not in terms of age but in terms of when they joined the For- eign Service. (Each orientation class comprises people whose ages range from 22 to 59.) The current average age for entry to the Foreign Service is about 32, which is a year or two higher than a decade ago. Most new hires are coming in with prior work experience; many join the FS as a second, or even third, career. The most common attribute of those joining today is that they have had prior overseas experience of one kind or another. A majority come in with some foreign language skills. The new Foreign Service generation is patriotic and highly motivated, says an Information Resources Management officer, adding “I’m sure previous genera- tions have the same traits.” “This generation ‘gets it,’” says Ambassador Tom Armbruster, who met thousands of Foreign Service candidates while serving as the New York region’s diplomat-in-residence from 2010 through 2012. “They understand that we do tough work in tough places.” The comments from new hires bear this out: They tend to know what they are getting into in terms of hardship and unaccompanied postings. Not many are entering blind to the realities of the career and lifestyle. This is probably due to the expansion of easily accessible information about the career that can be found online. The impact of technology and interconnectedness cannot be overstated when it comes to the new generation. In terms of age, a majority of those coming in under Diplo- macy 3.0 and USAID’s DLI are part of Generation Y (born in the mid-1980s through the early 1990s), but many are from Generation X (born in the mid-1960s to early 1980s). A growing number of former military personnel have joined in recent years, especially into management and specialist tracks. They tend to be older new hires. Today’s new hires seem to be more egalitarian, seeing fewer arbitrary lines between career tracks, among agencies and between Foreign Service and local staff. Only time will tell if this is a lasting trait. “I think our generation is less bound by agency culture,” offers Political Officer Erin Williams. “And since we come from a different generation, we have different professional styles and expectations, to our benefit and detriment. I don’t think we’re overly naïve in thinking we can change the world, but we have a perspective that is more, why not try? “Another difference is that this generation entered the Foreign Service during the financial crisis,” she says. “So there are people who are starting second careers because their first was no longer an option. They bring an outside perspective, but they are also from a different professional generation. So, in this respect, I think it’s difficult to generalize across the spec- trum of FSOs who entered as part of Diplomacy 3.0.” “Our generation seems to mesh well with those who entered within the last 10 years, but there tends to be some friction with FOCUS THE NEW FS GENERATION “We are a team, but one with many highly individualistic people who get paid to think for themselves.” –FSO Mark Palermo My Generation W ith many of us in high school or college when 9/11 took place, we see the world as a more chaotic and dangerous place. I think we are skeptical of any notion that the U.S. has unassailable moral authority. With planes and Internet connections, “remote” posts need not be so remote anymore. Today in almost all countries, the U.S. government is but one means of U.S. influence overseas. Others include U.S.-based diaspora communities, NGOs, media and entertainment outlets, American-educated elites and U.S. businesses. I think many of us new folks see a need to engage with other U.S. actors overseas (i.e., in a kind of “force-multiplying” capacity) rather than keep our work stovepiped and exclusive. —A public diplomacy officer in Europe