TOPICS
TOPICS
Analysis: Internationally oriented executives needed
At virtually every turn, government agencies are finding that their domestic missions have expanded to include important international responsibilities. Yet in many instances, federal agencies are not adequately prepared to handle these new and challenging demands.
The reasons are basic. There is a scarcity of leaders and staff well-versed and experienced in the global environment at many traditionally domestic-oriented agencies, a lack of government training programs and resources devoted to help fill the void, and a tendency not to deal with the issue until problems arise.
Take the Food and Drug Administration. It was created as a national regulatory agency, but because of the explosion of overseas drug manufacturing and the deluge of imported foods from all corners of the world, today its reach must be global.
Unfortunately, FDA has lacked the capacity to keep pace with the changes brought about by globalization -- the need to inspect thousands of foreign plants and products, to keep tainted drugs and foods out of the country, and to navigate many different languages, protocols and regulatory systems.
This dilemma is hardly unique.
The financial meltdown exposed the weaknesses of the nation's securities and banking regulators, reinforcing the need for more stringent government oversight of global markets and international transactions, and making clear that what happens in Europe or Asia directly impacts financial dealings in the United States.
Transportation security, anti-terrorism initiatives, cybersecurity, drug interdiction, offshore tax havens, climate change, energy needs, public health, maritime and aviation policies are just a few of the many other types of issues frequently requiring international collaboration and management by federal agencies.
Despite the increased international responsibilities, federal workers at the traditionally domestic agencies have received little preparation to deal with foreign governments, international organizations, overseas businesses and nonprofit groups. All too often in government, there is a mind-set that domestic and foreign policy are separate and distinct arenas.
The issues are too important to be ignored, with the government's work in the international sector directly affecting our economy, our public health and our national security. It is essential that our civil servants possess the ability to work internationally and to understand the global implications of policies and programs. Yet outside the traditional defense, diplomatic and trade spheres, many agencies lack a human capital strategy that incorporates international concerns and workforce needs.
Training and career development opportunities for international leadership must be given far greater attention than they are today. Such investments are routinely made in the military and the diplomatic corps, but are not even on the radar screen for much of our government.
Senior leaders must understand the international role of their work, communicate it to employees, and support employees in their efforts to fulfill that role. A 2003 RAND Corp. report found the nation is producing too few future government leaders who combine "substantive depth with international experience and outlook," and there is little evidence that much has changed in the past six years.
Leadership development programs must include a broad, global perspective. The Senior Executive Service, the government's career leadership corps, should actively recruit managers from outside the government with international experience and rotate federal executives with skills and knowledge in global affairs among agencies that need such expertise. Federal recruitment also must take better advantage of the ethnic and cultural diversity of the United States, a factor that could help bring cultural sensitivity and foreign language skills to the table.
At the end of the day, the ability of our government to effectively serve the interests of the nation depends heavily on the quality of the workforce and its leaders. And in today's interconnected world, this will require building a new generation of workers and leaders with international experience, a global outlook and the skills to match.
Christopher G. Caine is president and chief executive officer of Mercator XXI LLC and Max Stier is president and CEO of the nonprofit Partnership for Public Service.
COMMENTS
- The USG already has a lot of these resources in place - at the US embassies overseas. USG agencies who start working with foreign governments without checking with the US embassy in that country first often have lots of problems. There are a lot of retired Foreign Service officers available for short term or temporary assignments, who could "consult" with domestic agencies who need immediate help with international issues and who could train domestic agency staff in the process. J M Bensky Posted February 22, 2010 8:49 PM
- Like many of you, I've also got the degrees, experience, & language skills (BA in International Studies, International MBA, very advanced Russian language skills, spent ~ 5 yrs time in the former USSR in, primarily in work environment). I'm also a refugee from the private sector. One of my prior firms had a VERY sophisticated, yet simple annual succession planning process. It gave you the ability to promote the "international" side of your career, and seek mobility. I saw a tiny smidge of succession planning here, which amounted to "Who's got what degree?" and nothing else came of it. We need to be looking at best practices in private industry companies that already have established operations overseas. Heather R Posted February 12, 2010 2:43 PM
- Same here, Leslie, Charles, Andy, Old Finance Person, and Anthony too. The people who are supposed to identify and place us are sadly clueless (or whatever other reason that stops them from actually identifying and placing us). Let's even go farther and recall times when we received a response to an application telling us "we're unqualified"!!!!???? Don't you just feel like barking, "Could it be you who's unqualified to do your job? ... But of course that is not civil. So we just accept the misjudgment and either give up or keep on trying. I won't limit my frustration with HR because sometimes, or in my case, many times, I finally receive that nice notice that I made it to the cert. And then I wait and wait and wait for somebody to appreciate what I offer, and no call for an interview. And then, in the case of Homeland Security, for example, you hear about balls being dropped and people not connecting the dots. And you are so sure you are the kind of employee who would have connected those dots. You just console yourself and sigh, "They don't know what they're missing." Of course, this all sounds self-serving. But reading these posts, truly, what a waste of resource. Frustrated International Oriented Fed Posted February 8, 2010 6:02 PM









