bout de papier, Vol. 15, No. 3 (1998) — Fall 1998 // Automne 1998, pp. 17–20
The typical attitude of Foreign Service officers towards the prospect of a cross stream assignment is one of scepticism. There is the widely held viewpoint that such a move can be severely career limiting. Traditionally, assignment officers have been reluctant or downright unhelpful in facilitating such assignments, particularly at headquarters, and many Foreign Service officers have remained quite fearful of the process. Nonetheless, in recent years assignment officers have adopted a more flexible attitude and on paper such assignments are even encouraged.
There are many underlying causes/reasons for this change. At headquarters there is the recognition that a growing number of crosscutting issues and initiatives are best addressed by looking at different approaches and not exclusively from a political, trade or development perspective and that this integration can be usefully accomplished at “lower levels” in the hierarchy. There is also the implementation of the “country desk” concept in some bureaux. Effective performance in this type of environment requires that an officer manages both trade and political issues. Abroad, there is the recognition that in micro-missions and mini-posts where human resources are thin on the ground there is need to be able to undertake a broad spectrum of tasks which cut across several programs. Further, in the overall hierarchy of the Department senior officials need the breadth and scope to handle multifaceted issues, which comes from seeing the broad picture. With the reduction in the number of positions at the Director General level, Directors of geographic divisions are now required to integrate and synthesize policies and activities from both the trade and political perspectives. Abroad, heads of missions have traditionally dealt with a multifaceted range of issues.
So, what are considered the “positives” and “negatives” of a cross stream assignment? Several officers who have “ventured out” are willing to share their experiences.
Fred Jacques, a senior Foreign Service officer in the political stream with current responsibilities at headquarters for Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and the Maldives, served as immigration officer in New Delhi from 1993-1996 where he and his wife were posted as an “employee couple”. Fred, a lawyer by training with some private sector immigration experience, was well placed to assume the responsibilities of this cross stream assignment (secondment) and he believes this was instrumental in allowing him to become fully operational very quickly after arrival. He observed that in the immigration stream there were many opportunities to exercise judgment earlier on in an officer’s career and that the officer was held fully accountable for decisions taken. He found that the day-to-day operational challenge of making decisions which impacted on other peoples’ lives honed the capacity to “think on one’s feet”, act decisively and go with the consequences.
Fred concludes that what he took away from this assignment was a deeper understanding of regional issues and the linkage, for example, between immigration and trade, critical to Canada’s overall foreign policy effectiveness in many parts of the world, particularly in light of the current trade agenda. That experience also brought special insights to the emerging and multi-faceted issue of “human security” Invariably, as well, there were certain transferable skills such as conflict resolution which can be applied in any assignment including his current one.
When asked whether there were any drawbacks to a cross stream assignment, Fred opined that he was “uncertain whether it has aided his promotional prospects”. His advice to anyone considering a cross stream assignment is to ask yourself “why it is being done, what sacrifices may be involved, skills to be gained for personal growth or career enhancement” and after weighing these considerations, to make a decision. Recognizing that the introduction of the “country desk” concept has to some extent blurred the lines between streams, Fred had a cautionary note: “ to make it work care should be taken in the selection of countries”. The concept is probably best suited to smaller countries without major human rights problems which might place the desk officer in the difficult position of having to execute or defend two opposing policies with respect to the same country. Sitting where he is and with the recent developments in India and Pakistan, he should know!
John Kneale, Canada’s ambassador to Ecuador, is a strong advocate of cross stream assignments and simply of taking “the road less travelled”. John, who came up through the ranks of the trade stream and who is on his third posting in Latin America, has done a variety of assignments at headquarters and abroad ranging from “traditional” trade development assignments to being Departmental Spokesperson(Trade) in the press office, Legislative Assistant and Senior Departmental Assistant to the Minister for International Trade, Fellow at the Canadian Foreign Service Institute and most recently, before going to Ecuador, Minister Counsellor (Political) in Madrid John, a published author and regular contributor to bout de papier, recalls that it was never easy to negotiate a cross stream assignment. There was always a requirement to go out there and “market your skills”. There were many naysayers whose philosophy ranged from “people should not stray from their stream” to others who would never accept that you could do any work in their area which could be of value. He found such attitudes frustrating but was convinced that they were wrong! It was this conviction that caused him to repeatedly seek out assignments which held his interests and where he was convinced he could make a worthwhile contribution.
Among the key areas of satisfaction which John cited was the feeling of being “a fully rounded Foreign Service officer” with a better sense of the “globality of Canadian interests abroad”. Doing a variety of tasks also reinforced the feeling that “you could do a lot more than you were given credit for” and you could test yourself successfully by other peoples’ standards. Sometimes, there was even more respect “among one’s peers”! In particular, he found that working in a Minister’s office was an excellent experience because you were forced to think of the different aspects of Canada’s bilateral and multilateral interests as well as how Ministers, other Government Departments and the Prime Minister’s Office saw the rest of the world.
John insists that if you want a cross stream assignment you must go looking for it yourself. Except for the lucky few, it is unlikely to happen if you wait on the bureaucracy to offer you something. You might even be actively discouraged! Looking back, he recalls that when he expressed an interest in going to the Canadian Foreign Service Institute in 1992 there were many who counselled him against this move as they thought it would be career limiting at best and at worst, career destroying! He persisted because he had a vision of what he could accomplish and he wanted to make his contribution. He thinks that the Institute has made “a fundamental contribution to the way the Department sees itself, in spite of limited financial resources and working against deeply-held Departmental prejudices”.. He stayed for three years and was subsequently promoted. John is convinced that his experience there prepared him extremely well for his next assignment in Madrid. John noted that there were many successful senior officers who had spent their careers performing a range of non-traditional “stream jobs” — legal, communications or corporate services, for example as well as assignments outside the Department. All these experiences in his view are career enhancing though they may not always be a “fast track” to promotion.
My own experience as a member of the South Africa Task Force and subsequently the Eastern and Southern Africa General Relations Division (GAA) from 1991-1993 can be summarized in very positive terms. It contributed significantly to widening my knowledge of departmental processes and personalities outside my stream, and exposed me to a broader range of considerations in the bilateral relationship by demonstrating the trade/aid/political interface and the linkage between political, trade and economic issues. It furnished a more complete view of Canadian Government and non-governmental interests and priorities.
Given the historic nature of events which were taking place at that time, it was perhaps inevitable that one would meet a diverse cross section of South Africans, admittedly outside the trade field since trade was not permitted at the time. Nonetheless, this did not lessen the impact or thrill of meeting personalities who had become familiar through the media such as the civil rights activist, Albie Sachs, who lost an arm in a letter bomb incident; Walter Sisulu, longtime anti-apartheid political activist; Helen Suzman, well respected human rights advocate and former member of South Africa’s white parliament who was almost a lone voice in the wilderness in her time; and Thabo Mbeki, then Head of the African National Congress’s Department of International Affairs, now Deputy President of South Africa. Others included Judge Richard Goldstone, head of the Goldstone Commission which led an enquiry on political violence and intimidation in South Africa and who later went on to head a UN tribunal investigating war crimes in Yugoslavia;
Nelson Mandela; or Martin Seemungal, the CBC’s Johannesburg-based correspondent who fed us the news almost nightly on CBC National television in those turbulent “pre-democracy” days — to name a few. Lastly, and not to be discounted lightly, was the camaraderie which developed among colleagues who worked on South Africa during that period, which has surprisingly outlasted our subsequent assignments.
On the other side of the coin anyone contemplating a cross stream assignment can anticipate some initial scepticism about “newcomers” and their capacity to adapt and make a relevant contribution. As well, the “newcomer” may be an unknown entity to colleagues and superiors and may therefore have a more pressing need to establish credibility. Finally, on completion of the assignment there may not be an obvious fit or “logical continuance” to the next assignment. This could be a disadvantage if the intent is to use one assignment as a direct stepping stone to another! Lastly, there is need to ensure that appraisals are crafted in such a way that they fully address those activities which the stream considers important.
In a nutshell, the cross stream assignment offers preparation for senior positions and ensures versatility overseas. It provides more varied assignment experience in an environment where officers may seek change in the absence of upward mobility. Nonetheless, timing is key! It is generally recognized that experience in your own stream is most desirable prior to acquiring experience in another stream. Some consider the ideal time for a cross stream assignment to be after a recent promotion, bearing in mind that at least 3-4 full appraisals are required for a promotion. A number of officers are more comfortable with this latter scenario. If there is uncertainty as to how the assignment may be viewed by the stream’s appraisal board then it is better to do this earlier on so that the last 3-4 appraisals can be in the officer’s own stream. Of course, for some managers, thankfully a declining number, there is never a good reason for a cross stream assignment and this should be considered before crossing that “divide”
Those who have locked horns, so to speak, with their assignment officer while seeking approval for a cross stream assignment know how much of an uphill battle this can be. Is this still the case? I spoke with Chris Thornley, Deputy Director (Trade), Personnel Division on the current philosophies/practices concerning cross stream assignments. Chris thought that there were fewer cross stream assignments these days than say, several years ago. This is due in large part to a melding of many jobs which used to be performed almost exclusively by one stream or another. The introduction of the country desk concept for example, has resulted in many officers being able to work on both the political and trade aspects of the bilateral relationship with a given country, without having “to cross the floor”. Likewise, most positions in the General Trade Policy Bureau (E branch) can be filled by personnel from either stream. Chris contends that abroad, the majority of cross stream assignments are made to accommodate “specific personal circumstances” such as an employee couple going to a specific post or health concerns or family responsibility. With the departure of the immigration and development streams from the Department, there are even fewer requests for cross stream assignments and these, in the strict sense would be considered “secondments”. In terms of emerging trends, Chris observed that there seems to be some interest by younger rotational officers in the Consular/Management stream to consider a cross stream assignment to the trade stream but mostly at headquarters. As well, some of the more recent Foreign Service recruits who have advanced degrees in specializations which bear no relation to their initial assignments, may after a couple of assignments seek to broaden their experience by requesting a cross stream assignment in an area more closely related to their original expertise. As far as the current “corporate” thinking is on cross stream assignments and whether the scope should be broadened to include some types of secondments, in Chris’s view the bottom line is that “operational requirements almost always win out”
That said, I think it may still be worthwhile to include the immigration and development streams, at the very least, as part of an informal proactive “cross stream assignment network”, even though they are no longer part of the Department. Their inclusion would provide more “training” options for the Foreign Service practitioner in an era which increasingly requires a multidisciplinary approach to most complex international issues and problems. Within the Department, people may also want to look at functional areas outside of geographic divisions for experiences which may also enrich their careers.
View the original scanned pages →
Originally published in bout de papier, Vol. 15, No. 3 (1998) — Fall 1998 // Automne 1998, pp. 17–20. Read the rest of this issue →
