bout de papier, Vol. 30, No. 1 (2017), pp. 33–35
Exit Strategy: By 2012, I was wrapping up my posting as the Global Security Reporting Program (GSRP) officer in Havana. It had been a fascinating and life-changing posting; I couldn’t have imagined a better assignment. However, by year two, I was starting to get a career itch that I couldn’t yet put my finger on, but I knew it would likely involve returning to my previous career as a lawyer. I began crafting my exit strategy. As part of this, I enrolled in a distance LLM program in international business law (University of London) that I would complete during my cross-posting as the GSRP officer in Mexico City. (There was so much extra time pre-baby!)
the legal branch of the Steep Learning Curve: In the fall of 2015 I left ling Group International department after a brief stint and joined Major Dri Inc. (MDGII) as the General Counsel and Corporate Secretary. MDGII is the largest New Brunswick-headquartered public company, with operations in over twenty countries (including a strong presence in Latin America). It’s been a hell of a learning curve. Thankfully, I had seven months of handover with my predecessor as he went into retirement (definitely beats the “handover email” from the Foreign Service days). This position has all the elements I was looking for: constant problem-solving, great variety (corporate/ commercial law, employment law, corporate governance, business development, risk analysis, etc.), a high level of responsibility, a strong corporate culture, and an international presence. It’s a fast-paced operating environment, and one where performance and results are at the forefront.
Looking Back at the Department As I take a step back and reflect on my nearly ten years in the department, I realize that I collected some amazing memories along the way. On the professional side, some of my favourite highlights include: being the first GSRP Officer in Havana (a position that offered a unique window into a fascinating country that I grew to love), traveling by helicopter over lawless Guerrero state to remote mining sites in southern Mexico, and appearing before the WTO Appellate Body in Geneva, just to name a few. On the personal side, it’s no doubt the amazing friends and co-workers at HO and post that I met along the way that had the biggest impact. I was always impressed by the remarkable talent that makes up the FS team, and was admittedly in awe at times of the high calibre of my colleagues. It’s with that in mind, and acknowledging that I still care about the future of Canada’s Foreign Service, that I wanted to share a couple of concerns about organization-imposed restraints of which I became aware as I navigated from one position to the next, and which I believe are keeping Canada’s Foreign Service from achieving its full potential.
Empowering employees: At times I found that some of the best officers were markedly under-utilized and not empowered or enabled enough to truly make a meaningful difference. In these instances, FS officers would be entrusted with relatively minimal authority, while at the same time being weighed down by the ever-present duty to consult widely and interact with overly cumbersome internal systems. This dynamic inevitably triggers a feeling akin to driving with the parking brake on, particularly for those who joined the FS ranks after having gained significant work experience elsewhere. In my case, I joined after working as a lawyer in private practice with my own clients and I recall being highly underwhelmed in my first assignment at Pearson in which even relatively innocuous intra-departmental emails had to first be approved by my deputy director. While the reins were gradually loosened over time as I accumulated more experience, after a decade in the department I still didn’t reach the level of responsibility I had as a junior lawyer in the private sector. As I talked with some of those further up the chain, I learned that this concern doesn’t always dissipate at the higher altitudes of the senior ranks. The unfortunate result is that the latent energy on offer by these underwhelmed officers that could have been unleashed at home and abroad is too often stifled by the bureaucracy.
Imagine a department where the hierarchical rigidity is broken down, and young/mid-level officers are given ownership over important files and are charged with managing working committees struck to tackle these files (both at HO and post). Imagine a department that truly seeks to leverage the talents of its officers by prioritizing their individual career development (e.g. with a dedicated career development office, rather than the current “figure it out on your own” approach), and one that uses the intelligence gathered through this process to: i) feed into human resources forecasting 3-5 years out, and ii) help shape the future direction of the department itself.
Fostering intelligent risk-taking: There seemed to be an unwritten career-advancing imperative to play it safe. While there are great examples in the senior ranks that defy this rule, from my humble mid-level officer perspective, I witnessed far too many cases where individuals in senior roles seemed to be rewarded for simply not messing up, rather than for taking risks and showing what they can do (notwithstanding the risk of a few scrapes along the way).
Imagine a department where officers and managers are encouraged to chase down and implement innovative ideas and projects, and where this creative thinking element is prioritized in hiring and promotions.
lf we are serious about reversing the Foreign Service’s perceived decline and restoring it to its coveted spot among the best in the world, there has to be a big shake-up. In my view, if we’re to respond to the concerns raised above, we have to recalibrate the organization’s sights towards offering its people the level of responsibility and freedom to thrive. No doubt, this takes courage and real leadership at the top. My pitch here, however, is focused on much broader shake-up efforts that need to be undertaken, specifically: there desperately needs to be a better framework for more seamless transitions between the public, not-for-profit and private sectors, potentially several times over the course of one’s career.
The benefits of such a dynamic to our organizations and institutions are many, but to name a few at the individual level, this would provide the opportunity to: gain a much deeper understanding of the broader social and economic dynamics and systems at play in today’s world; be exposed to distinct operating environments that have different ways of measuring performance and results; be embedded with a client or partner organization for a time in order to genuinely understand their needs and challenges; and enhance our credibility with stakeholders outside our organizations, having “once been in their shoes”. Perhaps most importantly of all, such opportunities would allow us to vastly enrich our network beyond the normal silos and would give us a boost in becoming truly global (in all senses of the word) citizens. One way to achieve this would be to implement compulsory leave without pay, e.g. up to two years in the first ten years of one’s career, with the potential to subsequently return to the department at a higher level.
Unfortunately, today such movement between sectors is largely the exception, not the rule, i.e. once you’ve picked your camp, you stick to it. Why? In my view, this can be partly blamed on one thing: pensions. If we could extract this from the equation — by having one’s pension (or retirement compensation plan) attached to the individual, and not their job (see lessons from the Australian model) – it would enhance freedom of movement between the public, not-for-profit and private sectors. Couple this with a new departmental mindset that truly values external experience, and I think we’d be off to the races.
Until we get there, I thought I’d conclude by sharing some advice that stuck with me for those considering taking the great leap beyond the public sector. In one of my last outings during my Mexico City posting, I recall discussing my next move over a drink with a former US Ambassador (and lawyer), who remarked: “you’ve got to balance the pain of the bureaucracy with the joy of being able to live in some of the most fascinating places on earth”. Perhaps in the future, such confounding calculations won’t need to be made.
I couldn’t end this piece without noting how much I miss my colleagues in Ottawa and abroad, and sending a shout-out to the absolutely amazing 2006 FS cohort — I know you’ll do great things, both inside and outside the department.
Originally published in bout de papier, Vol. 30, No. 1 (2017), pp. 33–35. Read the rest of this issue →
