I FULLY concur with Tjiurimo Alfredo Hengari when he wrote in his opinion piece that appeared in the Windhoek Observer on September 06, 2013, that President Pohamba’s appointment of the new Ambassadors and High Commissioners is arguably one of the most extensive in the country’s diplomatic personnel abroad since independence and constitutes one of the major shifts the president has signaled, especially when he drew his appointments from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs itself allowing for career mobility. Undoubtedly, diplomats today face a formidable range of new challenges and unprecedented opportunities. They must confront transnational threats such as terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction; balance the need to engage both traditional allies and new partners, and cope with competing challenges such as the need to address climate change and rebuild the global economy.
Nonetheless, they have new tools at their disposal, such as social media technologies, and new means to engage directly with foreign public. Meanwhile, they must operate in a complex and changing environment in which an increasing number of varied actors exercise power and influence, from a wider range of localities, with greater speed and impact than ever before.
Adopting the right policies in this environment is difficult enough; executing them effectively may prove harder still. Nevertheless, I am happy with the work of the Minister of Foreign Affairs and her senior staff who grapple with reforming the ministry in order to align its activities with the country’s foreign policy as stipulated in article 96 of the country’s constitution and its development agenda, while at the same time making the ministry more effective and responsive to events in specific countries and regions.
In this regard, determining how to hire, retain and cultivate the type of employees and leaders for the ministry to be successful, now and in years to come, requires new modes of thinking. Therefore, there is a need for a clear, shared vision; a strong organizational culture; ways of doing business that leverage the size and reach of the ministry, and an institutionalized process that ensures the alignment of the country’s vision and its widely dispersed activities. In addition, nowadays, everyone underscores the importance of having a clear, centrally directed vision to guide the behaviour of its many components. I supposed this is well covered by the country’s white paper on foreign affairs and the constitutional provision guiding our foreign policy.
After such a shared vision, however, there is a need to align vision and action through an overarching strategy. Therefore the ministry should consider ways to coordinate and oversee the implementation of policy at a level between individual embassies and first secretaries who must also lead strategy and policy development. To succeed, teamwork is needed and not this new trend of the head doing everything, including the work of deputies and PAs.
To evaluate progress towards strategic goals, self-reporting by individuals, offices and embassies is useful but not sufficient. The ministry should therefore consider the broader use of assessment teams whose evaluations would feed into state planning, evaluation and promotion processes.
For instance, the ministry could create an Office of the Inspector General (OIG), which could perform much of this function, but its investigative bent should have a slightly different focus and not directly integrated into the planning, evaluation and promotion process. The OIG could also assess the financial reports with the Office of the Auditor General.
Whether the OIG’s assessments can be better integrated into the management process or whether new assessments are necessary is a worthy subject for further inquiry. The membership of such assessment teams is an additional question for review. The inclusion of former ambassadors is worthwhile from an investigative standpoint, because they possess knowledge but have no vested stake in the current set-up of the ministry. But, from a management standpoint, the ministry could also include representatives who report to the current leadership team.
Speaking of former ambassadors, it is also good if the ministry could redeploy some of them including veteran politicians to the African Union headquarters, the United Nations’ agencies and other global organizations, instead of posting novices to some of these critical posts.
On the other hand, nowadays, hiring, cultivating and retaining the right people is essential to success. Therefore organizations invest considerable time and resources in identifying what kinds of leaders they need and how to evaluate their performance. There is also a need for rewarding certain traits and skills that benefit the broader organization.
Different organizations place varying weight on particular traits and skills, particularly for people in leadership roles. Therefore, the ministry should engage in extensive internal discussions about the skills and characteristics necessary to accomplish the objectives laid out in the development plan, if any, to hire, reward and promote people with those traits. It should also evaluate how to create an environment in which people with those skills will feel challenged and valued. This applies to leaders as well as to staff. I must admit, however, that the working environment and the morale of the staff have become positive since the return of the minister to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. In addition, for reasons of both cost and policy effectiveness, the ministry should seriously study reducing the frequency of staff rotations at its embassies. Moving people and their families is extremely expensive financially, and it reduces the ability of embassy staff to capitalize on longer-term relationships built with locals.
Embassy staff invest substantial time in becoming familiar with languages, cultures, key opinion leaders, government regulations, and so on, but the return on this investment is diminished when people move on too quickly or are recalled even based on rumours and personality clashes with junior staff members without their side of the story having been heard. For this reason, many other countries use longer rotations for their diplomatic corps. Embassy staff should still rotate, but lengthening tours of duty to four or five years is a matter worthy of serious attention. Here too, I am glad that the minister confirmed that her ministry will adhere to staff rules when moving the Ambassadors and High Commissioners.
In conclusion, the ministry should focus more attention on proactively building a pipeline of qualified candidates so that when one person leaves, other qualified candidates are ready to step in. Having a pipeline of candidates would also reward talented staff by creating attractive career ladders and opportunities for targeted mentorship. After all, the ministry’s ability to lead our country’s efforts to make and implement our foreign policy will only improve if it invests more diligently in strengthening its own human and institutional potential poised to excel at 21st-century diplomacy. Nonetheless, the question still remains as to why these ambassadors and high commissioners and not others were appointed to those posts.
All in all, I am glad the ministry made such a large-scale re-engineering of our diplomatic corps abroad allowing for career mobility and an inclusive representation.
• Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of my employer and this newspaper, but solely reflect my personal views as a citizen.
By Paul T. Shipale