Advice for the Inaugural Provost of the Foreign Service Institute
By: Dan Spokojny | Sep 12, 2024
Dr. Cassandra C. Lewis has been appointed the inaugural Provost for the US Department of State’s Foreign Service Institute, according to a September 9 announcement. This position was created by Congress in a law passed in 2023. The law states the new Provost shall:
(A) oversee, review, evaluate, and coordinate the academic curriculum for all courses taught and administered by the Foreign Service Institute; and (B) coordinate the development of an evaluation system to ascertain the utility of the information and skills imparted by each such course, such that, to the extent practicable, performance assessments can be included in the personnel records maintained by the Bureau of Global Talent Management and utilized in Foreign Service Selection Boards.
This is a vital task for US diplomacy. Foreign policy is unique among fields of public policy in that there are no educational requirements necessary to become a leader in the field. There is currently no standard body of tradecraft, professional skills, or standard training regimens from which our officials can draw. The tenuous relationship between scholars of international relations and practitioners is a disconnect unmatched in other fields of public policy, including the military, public health, law, economics, business, education, and more.
A common dictionary definition of a profession is "a paid occupation, especially one that involves prolonged training and a formal qualification." It is not clear that diplomacy meets this standard. This weak professionalization makes our foreign policy less effective, invites inexperienced outsiders into positions of power and influence, and contributes to diplomacy’s marginalization in the national security apparatus.
Congress’s attempt to rectify this situation is commendable, and the law’s emphasis on the need for an academic curriculum and evaluation are important signals. Here is how the new provost can make the most of this opportunity:
The Office of the Provost’s work should begin by developing a concise mission statement to direct its efforts. The Foreign Service Institute does a great many things, but the Provost should consider setting a more concise vision to prioritize her efforts. My suggestion would be something like, “The State Department’s curriculum should prepare diplomats to be the most skilled policymakers on the planet, ones relentlessly focused on policy success.”
The challenge for the Provost will be to upgrade the epistemology of diplomacy – the way our diplomats understand knowledge. The outdated view is that “diplomacy is an art form.” This model encourages a subjective and ad hoc view of foreign policy, which makes it very difficult to evaluate success and failure. This approach is incompatible with the Provost’s responsibility to develop a system to build a more merit-based approach to personnel management.
The Provost’s job will be to develop a deep understanding of what it means to be an expert in foreign policy. Academic literature suggests there are two key ingredients for developing expertise: One must receive feedback on the success or failure of their actions, and one must exercise deliberate practice to improve their strengths and weaknesses. These feedback and practice mechanisms are not only what is required to improve FSI’s curriculum, but are also necessary for the practice of diplomacy itself. Thus, diplomatic training must help create conditions for collective expertise to flourish. Kickstarting this iterative learning process should be a central goal of the Provost’s work.
This feedback and learning process is, in essence, the scientific method. Foreign policy expertise requires a culture of evidence. Science, to be clear, is not about claiming right and wrong. Science is a process, a commitment to studying the effects of our actions in the world, discovering patterns, and updating our collective knowledge accordingly. This appears to be Congress’ intent in its authorizing legislation.
A good early target for the Provost would be to strengthen and improve FSI’s new core curriculum. Today, FSI boasts over 800 different class offerings. This dizzying buffet of options reflects the complexity and multi-faceted nature of modern diplomacy. But it also presents a problem of prioritization. The first iteration of the core curriculum is a step in the right direction. Which classes ought to be considered foundational for the practice of diplomacy? Right now, FSI’s curriculum is almost completely voluntary and too shallow on core skills. Most classes, excluding language training, are only a few days, which is woefully insufficient. The Congressional language authorizing the Provost’s position lays bare the skepticism that today’s training regime for diplomacy is effective.
FSI’s curriculum should prioritize hard skills over specific policy issues. Diplomats must be equipped with a cutting-edge policymaking toolkit that includes approaches for analysis, strategic design, budget and operational planning, and other foundational skills. The modern diplomat must be able to participate in a more evidenced-based decision-making process, not one that simply reifies the gut instincts of its most powerful actors. Diplomats need to be trained in how to think, not spoon-fed pre-cooked beliefs.
Best practices in training suggest that classroom skills should be synced with on-the-job processes. The US military calls this doctrine, “the accepted body of knowledge which is trained.” Yet, whereas the military has doctrine and the intelligence community has tradecraft, the Department of State relies on an ad hoc and idiosyncratic policy formation process. Training skills that will be ignored on the job is a poor use of FSI’s resources. The Provost must therefore help develop the conditions under which a doctrine for diplomacy can be developed to ensure that the most effective diplomatic practices taught in FSI’s classrooms are also deployed in the field, and that training and practice can evolve and grow together.
The practice of diplomacy is ripe for an upgrade, and the new Provost is well-positioned to help lead this transformation. For the sake of the State Department, the strength of US national security, and the people around the world affected by our foreign policy, I hope the new Provost succeeds in her mission.