bout de papier, Vol. 13, No. 1 (1996) — Spring 1996 // Printemps 1996, pp. 18–20
by Daryl Copeland
Incapable of change. Unable to adapt, unwilling to reform.
Sound like anywhere you work? Despite radical changes in context and content, amplified by the introduction of powerful new technologies, neither the structure of the Canadian foreign service nor the way we work have changed much. New tools, old hands.
The decisions taken following the first round of Program Review and the February 1995 budget provide little indication that DFAIT has progressed beyond the costly incrementalism of past reductions. The collapse of the one significant Departmentally-inspired initiative, FS Restructuring, served mainly to ratchet morale down one more notch by confirming the worst of what many had already suspected.
Perhaps the outcome of Program Review II will produce signs of financial and personnel management. While that would be welcome, in the era of diminishing resources the Department is well past the point where strategic paring alone will suffice. Immense challenges loom. Now is the time to embrace transformation and chart the way forward.
Couriers, Going. Communicators, Clerks … Gone
Over the past few years the surface of diplomacy, and many of the standard operating procedures have been altered, in some cases beyond recognition. The telex culture is, if not quite buried, certifiably dead. The seamless electronic universe which stands in its place is by nature subversive to hierarchy and control. This welcome revolution in communication will change everything. Eventually. But in the meantime, the quality of life in the trenches in worsening.
The withdrawal of support staff, and the downloading of many clerical and secretarial functions onto those at the professional working level has certainly flattened the lower reaches of the organizational structure, but it has also intensified the sense of toiling beneath an inverted pyramid. Although vertical reporting relationships — characterized still by inordinate layering — remain very much in place, horizontal linkages are proliferating. But fasten your swivel chairs: even as we charge into the uncharted reaches of cyberspace, the luxury of time has run out.
In future, the route to official calls is more likely to be potholed, if not mined.
Paradigm Shift, Full Bore…
In addition to the impact of technology and the relentless downward pressure on costs, we have been witness to radical shifts in the international operating environment. Economics and business values have displaced ideological affiliation, political orientation and geostrategic appeal as the animating forces in world affairs. Fragmentation, marginalization, and disintegration have emerged as major historical themes; tribes are rising as states splinter. The blood of ethnic politics is coursing through the gutters of a thousand former neighbourhoods, while a narrow and exclusionary nationalism is ascendent at many of the world’s key crossroads. All of which is to say … delivering that demarche is becoming more difficult.
Simultaneously, a new constellation of issues, ranging from the environment to trade policy, human rights to global finance, has moved into centre stage, and a new set of actors has been cast in lead roles. This suggests that the Department’s statutory mandate to serve as the nation’s main instrument in state-to-state relations has been largely overtaken by events. DFAIT may be the only department empowered to deal with other foreign ministries, but that is a dubious honour in a situation where line departments routinely do business directly with their counterparts abroad, and the big players in the private sector neither want nor need much of what DFAIT has to offer.
To Survive…?
Relevance is the key. The stuff of formal diplomatic discourse has been reduced largely to the programming of official visits and mustering support for candidates seeking office in international organizations — activities which, however important, tall well short of capabilities. Rather than wasting time fighting a rearguard action over dubious turf, an entirely different approach is needed. This will involve cutting losses, refocussing efforts to reinforce strengths rather than emphasizing weaknesses, and redeploying resources according to future, rather than past priorities.
… or Prevail
Three attributes set DFAIT apart from other government departments: a unique network of contacts and overseas representation which makes possible the immediate provision of critical information and integrated analysis; a cadre of employees equipped with the experience and the linguistic, cultural and professional skills required; and the ability to deliver, in policy and programme terms, an excellent product. This combination is the source of the Department’s most powerful comparative advantage. Judiciously managed, these qualities can contribute materially to Canada’s well-being and, not least, to its survival as a successful federation committed to the values of tolerance, compassion and democracy.
The same paradigm shift that has left the erstwhile global village looking more like the South Bronx has opened up vast opportunities and heightened the need for quality advocacy and advice. In this crowded and dangerous world, decision-makers require nuanced assessment, accurate intelligence and timely guidance. In short, it is not in spite of, but because of changes in the international political economy that diplomacy should flourish.
As a dependent trading nation, Canada is vulnerable and exposed to even the slightest changes in the world economy. This country’s need for foreign and trade policy expertise, especially as addressed to the imperative of finding a place for Canada in the upper reaches of the international division of labour, has never been more acute. No matter how well-connected the journalist, how experienced the executive, or how sharp the risk analyst, they lack the perspective necessary to produce considered judgements in support of the national interest.
Maintenance of a flexible, well-tuned diplomatic network deployed in accordance with both current objectives and emerging potential is the sine qua non for informed decision-making. The Foreign Service is out there for the express purpose of engaging the world through the distinctive prism of Canadian policies and interests. That’s the bottom line. And therein lies our collective future.
Pack up the Pin Stripes…
DEAIT must protect, and if possible enlarge the extent of its presence abroad, even as net resources shrink. The move to more portable forms of representation, utilizing appropriate technology and incorporating, wherever possible, regional economies of scale, should be accelerated. More acute.
Primary Canadian interests will remain engaged in OECD countries. In future, however, fewer and fewer Foreign Service Officers will be spending time plying the fashionable boulevards of tree-lined capitals. The route to official calls is more likely to be potholed, if not mined. More people will have the opportunity to become fleetingly familiar with the likes of Kigali, Dushanbe and Sarajevo. Protective rather than formal attire may become a new standard in diplomatic attire: kevlar vests, not tails.
The pattern of new representation in Eastern Europe and Central Asia may afford a preview of the shape of things to come. With satellite communications stowed in attaché cases and brass plaques hung temporarily on hotel room doors, a diplomatic mission can be installed and removed on a few hours notice. No administrative overheads, no lingering exposure, no sustained liabilities. Needed now is a cadre of specially trained officers developed to service the new network — a diplomatic rapid response corps.
..and Showcase the People The Department’s employees, its most valuable and durable asset, have not always received the attention they deserve. The creation of the Canadian Foreign Service Institute was certainly a step in the right direction. It is not, however, enough. In the cut-throat competition which reigns in the global marketplace, every Foreign Service Officer must have a keen appreciation of the economic content of political relations, and vice versa. The development of a much higher level of geographic, sectoral and linguistic specialization is required, and fast. All new Australian FS recruits must complete a diploma in international affairs, at government expense, as part of their training prior to a first posting. USA officers get six months to two years full time language instruction in advance of assignments.
The truth is this: on a good day in the Pearson Building, the importance of training and professional development is paid lip service. Regular skills upgrading, keyed to coherent career development, is just not a feature of Canadian foreign service life. There is scant evidence of any concerted effort to ensure that the Department’s capabilities mix is kept in tune with present and, especially, future requirements. Moving to a much higher standard of personnel planning is urgent.
The enrichment of Canada-based staff should be complemented by “indigenizing” labour wherever practicable. Though the demise of bloc politics has left the world more volatile, the risks of infiltration and compromise, and most other information and personnel security concerns have been reduced. Large-scale substitution, especially, but by no means exclusively in Europe and the USA, will yield both savings and new representational possibilities by permitting the deployment of Canadians to destinations where they are genuinely needed.
Get the Message…
The Department cannot prosper in isolation. Although most Canadians share a strong sense of their country’s place in the world, polling confirms that public esteem for and identity with DFAIT’s work remains feeble. A profound disconnect between reputation and reality has been exacerbated by the splattering of the Department’s alleged shortcomings all over the national media, usually without comment, let alone defence.
Though the unending vilification and gratuitous attacks have taken a toll, withdrawal is not the answer. The public can be brought on side, and the habitual detractors derailed, but not without the Department and the staff associations working as one to carry the connection between foreign service and national well-being to a higher level of public awareness. Domestic constituency building has become imperative.
Diplomacy is a profession, not a vocation, and clinging to dated notions of exclusivity and splendid isolation serves only to reinforce negative stereotypes of Foreign Service Officers as effete ditherers and pompous snobs. DFAIT has nothing to fear from greater external scrutiny and ventilation; in terms of the calibre of our employees and value for money, we compare favourably against any reasonable standard. Cross-fertilization, a higher public profile, and greater exposure to the domestic scheme of things should be welcomed.
… Out
Implementation of a comprehensive political and communications strategy would see the Department forging a system of strategic alliances with business, the universities, interest groups, other government departments and the unions. The advocacy and negotiating abilities so much in evidence abroad can be put to constructive use at home. Much has already been achieved in terms of establishing consultative linkages with NGOs, and this can be augmented by initiating more and better secondments and exchanges to place DFAIT staff into key positions elsewhere.
Canadians need to know that what goes on in the Pearson Building affects their lives directly. The popular image of dinosaurs tippling cocktails in a Jurassic palace needs to be corrected. It is time for a major reality check, which should take the form of a concerted communications counterattack structured around a few tangible themes. For example: foreign and domestic policy are not solitudes, but two sides of the same coin. Success in exports translates directly into jobs and growth at home. Travel abroad by political leaders builds durable relationships which buttress the expansion of trade and investment. Consular and immigration services are offered with professionalism and integrity for the benefit of all. And the capability to produce independent political and economic analysis is a precondition to national sovereignty.
… and Up
The elements of a foreign policy community are out there, but are diffuse, unformed. and mute. A coherent, activist community can be sustained only by tapping into the instincts and aspirations of Canadians. Survey data and recent experience have shown convincingly that Canadians are internationally minded, and are quite prepared to engage, but not if relegated to the role of cheerleader in someone else’s game. Peace, development and prosperity are abiding predispositions.
To begin restoring its tattered image, the Department must better mirror and give voice to the country’s ethnic and cultural diversity. Recruiting practices require further reshaping, but they are only the most obvious point of departure. DFAIT must be seen to be sensitive and responsive in everything it does. Openness, innovation and a willingness to embrace issues that resonate publicly must inform action, suffuse thinking, and become the new institutional hallmarks. The inherently conservative bureaucratic culture will have to be stood on its head and shaken — not stirred – which will in turn require vigorous leadership at the highest levels.
Broadening the composition of promotion boards (by bringing in the private sector, NGOs and academics) would help bring a semblance of equity to what many view as a bankrupt proceeding, as would a complete overhaul of the appeal process which is at present so deficient as to be unusable. Vastly enlarging the outreach programme, and building bridges to opinion leaders — journalists, CEOs, MPs, provincial and municipal politicians — are similarly crucial.
The Department’s not inconsiderable cadre of lawyers might consider taking on the project of researching and drafting a Foreign Service Act consistent with the government’s stated objectives for refashioning and simplifying the administration of the public service. The Treasury Board’s agenda is clear, and this may be the only option if there is to be any hope of retaining those elements of our professional lives which are distinctive and worthwhile. In this regard, why not, as a natural follow-on to the Foreign Policy Review, strike a blue ribbon panel to make recommendations on future directions for the Foreign Service? Over a decade has passed since the last major review; it’s time to look again.
More generally, the vast reserves of creative dissent could be harnessed productively through the establishment of formal channels for alternative thinking. We will never be the shiniest but we should strive to be seen as the sharpest tool in the shed Beyond Bureaucratoxis…
To wind up — most of the change that has come to the foreign service in recent years has been imposed in response to technological, budgetary and environmental pressures exerted from outside. We have been trapped in reactive mode, and are still reeling from the consequences. To cite just one measure, the rate of attrition among younger employees is now at an historic high: the Foreign Service has lost, and is continuing to lose some of its best people precisely when it needs them most. Given that it takes even the fastest risers over a decade to reach the bottom rung of the executive ladder, this haemorrhaging is set to continue, especially as (and if) the economy improves.
While there are no quick fixes, departmental management could start by addressing the roots of the pervasive disillusion by tabling for discussion a comprehensive remedial package which would include investing in human resources, reprofiling the overseas network, reducing the administrative burden and developing a constituency by bringing the outside in and turning the inside out.
There can be no substitute for the remaking of the Department’s entire professional establishment. With two levels for Foreign Service Officers and eight for management, it has long been painfully clear that a full blown internal restructuring — not merely a subdivision of existing bands — is necessary to address the vulnerabilities created by the disastrous EX conversion exercise of the early 1980s. This is both desirable and inevitable, and will involve reducing drastically the number of (nominal) managers while simultaneously creating a cadre of specialized experts and according them the recognition and compensation they warrant — a Senior Foreign Service. This can, and must be achieved within existing resource reference levels. Equally critical, to restore some vestige of career mobility, will be the initiation of an aggressive outplacement programme at all levels to remove chronic underperformers, kickstart the promotion process and bring in new blood. The adoption of an upward feedback mechanism — the PAFSO Evaluation Guide (PEG)? — into the management appraisal process could figure centrally in this respect.
… to Better Days
If nothing else, diplomats know how to be helpful. But we can also be useful. The essential political preoccupation in the land, and the only real threat to Canadian security, is the national unity question. Here, too, the Department has a contribution to make — partly by example, as an effective and fully bilingual federal institution, and partly as a source of creative thinking. Defining and developing the Department’s role in the unity file should be an immediate priority. But it is only a beginning. The Foreign Service is brimming with unexplored potential. With minimal effort, for instance, much of the Department’s reporting and analysis could be adapted, repackaged, and pitched aggressively to the marketplace.
In the medium term, more imaginative ways can be found to generate revenue and assist in ameliorating the government’s financial position. It is probably time to start billing at least the larger private sector clients for commercial and export promotion assistance. If these services aren’t worth buying, they may not be worth providing. Above all, no effort can be spared to ensure that everything we do contributes demonstrably to the advance of Canadian interests by producing measurable economic dividends at home.
The future is bearing down on the foreign service like a locomotive. The only alternative to being on the train … is being on the tracks.
Daryl Copeland has had postings in Thailand, Ethiopia, New Zealand and
View the original scanned pages →
Originally published in bout de papier, Vol. 13, No. 1 (1996) — Spring 1996 // Printemps 1996, pp. 18–20. Read the rest of this issue →
