The Foreign Service Journal, November 2011

N O V E M B E R 2 0 1 1 / F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L 17 promotion for seniority and no reward for exceptionally dedicated service. Foreign Service members who serve repeatedly in hardship posts are not provided a career advantage. Those who demonstrate dedication, hard work and technical expertise are not necessarily rewarded with regular pro- motions or choice assignments. This vagueness leads to accusations that “it is not what you know but who you know,” and erodes morale. Likewise, the Foreign Service seems to assume that everyone in the ranks wants to become an ambassador. Officers who do not aspire to enter the Senior Foreign Service are often re- garded as slackers, rather than indi- viduals with their own specific career goals and objectives who make a pos- itive contribution. Perhaps a system of equally weighted career tracks could replace the current “fast track” and “slow track.” A Rule Is a Rule The Army spells out rules and regu- lations and enforces them. If the insti- tution faces repeated deployments to war zones, most personnel are expected to go. Those who try to pull strings to avoid deployment know that their ca- reer will suffer. Personnel are told early and often what will benefit their career and what will hurt it. As a result, they can make informed career decisions knowing the full consequences. In contrast, the State Department issues rules and then almost immedi- ately makes exceptions to them. There are limits on how long person- nel can serve in Washington, D.C. Those who do not serve in hardship posts are supposed to face negative consequences. Those who do not ful- fill their language requirements are supposed to pay the price. Like the military, we must staff po- sitions in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pak- istan that are dangerous and require separation from family. Everyone is supposed to pull their fair share, but for some reason it just doesn’t happen. There always seem to be people who are able to manipulate the system. They stay in Washington longer than they are supposed to and avoid hard- ship tours, yet continue to be pro- moted. Conversely, those who serve hard- ship tours have no assurance they’ll be rewarded for their dedication. The re- sult is a drop in morale, as those that do the right thing feel they are being taken advantage of. A rule is a rule and must be en- forced. Otherwise, the perception grows that the institution is not inter- ested in fairness. Restrain That Ego! West Point cadets with large egos, who constantly tell their peers that they will become generals and who seek as much “face time” as possible with offi- cers, are known as “tools.” Being a tool is not a good thing. This does not mean that the military does not reward strong personalities, of course. Ambition is the first require- ment for anyone aspiring to make the higher grades, after all. But the system teaches such individuals to rein in some of that egoistic behavior. Cadets study the lives and careers of successful commanders and learn that they come in all shapes and sizes. Gen- eral Robert E. Lee was the ultimate tool, the only cadet in the history of West Point not to earn a single demerit. He was defeated by Ulysses S. Grant, who had a rocky time while at West Point and was often punished for com- mitting infractions. Unlike Lee, Grant was consumed by self-doubt and was anything but arro- gant. In the end, he prevailed because he was a talented general who under- stood modern war, while Lee did not. From such examples, West Point cadets learn that the most egotistical general is not always the most success- ful, and that an effective institution must make room for different leader- ship styles. Or, to put it another way: A little hu- mility is not a bad thing. Perhaps the Foreign Service could benefit from a similar teaching model. Jon P. Dorschner recently retired from the Foreign Service after a 27-year ca- reer that included two years on the faculty at West Point, a year with a Provincial Reconstruction Team in Iraq, and a stint as political-military adviser in the Bureau of South Asian Affairs, among many other assign- ments. His last posting was as an eco- nomic officer in Berlin. S P E A K I N G O U T Unlike the Army, the Foreign Service spends little time explaining to its members why they are doing what they are doing.