The Foreign Service Journal, October 2018

THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL | OCTOBER 2018 19 Peter Lohman joined the Foreign Service in 2009. He is currently an economic officer in Jakarta. His previous post- ings include Jerusalem, Chen- nai and Washington, D.C. He was a cavalry officer in the U.S. Army from 2001 to 2005. I magine your typical brown bag lunch. Yes, that one. The one where no one actually brings a lunch. The speaker is a visiting senior official from Washington. Staff from across the embassy come to hear Washington’s priorities, a senior leader’s view of the world or ways we can all better execute our mission. Unfortunately, all too often, the speaker’s remarks are limited to: “You are all doing an excellent job. The relationship with host country X is extremely impor- tant for Washington. It’s really an honor to be here with you. Now what questions do you have?” Awkward silence. No, this is not an article about how to improve brown bag lunches. The vignette I offer above is symptomatic of a larger State Department problem—ineffective, unclear and infrequent communication. One of the aspects of State Depart- ment culture that struck me most when I first entered the Foreign Service was the lack of communication both between leadership and subordinates and among units, offices, embassies, bureaus and agencies. Most commu- nication was restricted to the task at hand. Very little was focused on looking beyond the most immediate project to the overriding principles that help us achieve our goals. I’m not the only one to notice this. The 2017 Listening Tour Report noted the following: • “People say that unclear priori- ties leave them seeking guidance that for too many does not come from their managers or their chain of command.” • “People report that the frequency and coherency of communication— both top-to-bottom and across the web—needed to inform, coordinate and inspire action is wildly deficient for what is required.” • “People talk about unwritten and unstated rules about who is allowed to talk to who[m] in the chain of command … [and] people question their level of seniority or experience in being able to contribute ideas or concerns.” So we clearly have a communication problem. What do we do about it? The Big Picture First, we need to better communicate our priorities and values. While many of us bemoan the ritual of producing SPEAKING OUT Integrated Country Strategies, Joint Regional Strategies and the like, we only compound that error by subsequently putting those strategies on a shelf, where they sit, never to be spoken of again. In my prior service in the U.S. Army, nearly every commander at the company level (FS-4 equivalent in rank) and above had what are called “Flat A** Rules.” (Nothing is official in the Army until it has an acronym, so we called them FARs for short.) FARs were the principles by which each organization operated. They transcended the next crisis and the one after that. They applied to all members and all tasks. Consider them the core principles of an organization. Back to the brown bag example. Imagine if that visiting senior offi- cial had outlined his office, bureau or agency’s goals, and then began a conversation about how the embassy in the host country fits in. Or imagine if she had thought about what values her office, bureau or agency needed to be successful, and then discussed those values with the group. Imagine how the participants would leave feeling like they were part of a bigger team, contrib- uting to a bigger mission. What Is It We’re Doing Again? Time to Rethink How the State Department Communicates BY PETER LOHMAN Imagine if that visiting senior official had outlined his office, bureau or agency’s goals, and then began a conversation about how the embassy in the host country fits in.