Clearances, Pt 2: Under the Microscope

Going through Security Clearances was the most enigmatic part of the whole process so far.  It's not so much for lack of transparency on the part of DSS, as they provide a lot of information in the FAQs and the Adjudicative Guidelines.  I say enigmatic because there is so much uncertainty about the interview and investigation itself. Many of us in this process are probably borderline OCD and this part of the process falls outside of our locus of control.  ;)

I had filled out the SF-86 prior to my Oral Assessment, as required, using the e-QIP system, and gathered all the recommended documents to bring to the OA.  This took quite a while to complete, and my last ten years have been relatively uneventful!  If you are gearing up for you own OA, do NOT put this off to the last minute, as it could delay your clearances if you pass.  Most of my information was still accurate from my previous OA in 2006, but still took a little while to update and verify.

I had been expecting a call from DSS any day for several weeks after my OA, and had to contact Customer Service a few times until I was notified that my case had been opened, and a target date set.  A few days later, I received a call from the local field agent who was assigned to investigate me.  We arranged a meeting at my office, and he was very interesting to talk to.  The initial interview took less than two hours, as I recall.  I had a list of references for him, and he asked to speak with some other people in my office.  According to the Yahoo Boards, some candidates have had issues with this in the past, but in my case, everyone in the office has known that I've been pursuing this for years, and were each vying for a chance to 'meet with the investigator'.  Of course they were also teasing me that they would 'come up with something bad so they don't take you away'.  :D  I work with a great group of people and will miss them if this all goes through.

He met with several current and former coworkers, and interviewed at least one neighbor.  He also indicated that he would also do a local records checks with the city and county law enforcement agencies in the places I had lived over the past ten years.  One friend from another state (that I had listed as a reference) called me up later to say that he had been interviewed as well.

I have a number of international friends, both Stateside and abroad, and I had quite a stack of informational forms to complete for all of them.  The litmus test, as I understand it, is that a 'close and ongoing relationship' with a Foreign National can be defined as 'are you comfortable with that person coming over and having dinner with little or no advance warning'.  I am not beholden to them in any way, and so they do not pose a security risk in any way, but yes, I am comfortable having them over for dinner.  Several of my friends I had not seen physically in years, but we communicate periodically through Facebook, and so fell under the reporting requirements.  Some of the information required was impossible to obtain (I don't know some current contact information other than email addresses, for example), but the Investigator seemed to shrug it off, stating that more information would be requested if it was deemed necessary.  He did ask, however for the A-numbers of my friends who were now Stateside.  This was a little awkward for me, but after explaining the situation to my friends, they were willing to provide that information.  (Thanks guys!)

Then I entered that case approval purgatory and adjudicatory limbo, but did contact DSS regularly every two weeks or so for an update on the status of my investigation.  Each time I was told that my case was 'still under review.'  The investigator called me back two or three times with clarifying questions, which I was able to easily answer over the phone.  At one point, he requested that additional documentation to be scanned and emailed to him.  No new information, just documentation supporting for what was already contained within the SF-86.

Finally, several weeks after my target date had come and gone, I was told by DSS that I had gone through adjudication and the Final Review Panel.  I was on the Register at last!

How I passed the FSOA (Foreign Service Oral Assessment) - part 3

The final piece of my preparations involved getting mentally tuned into the OA.  My 'new' job had helped me develop my people, negotiation, and case management skills, but I needed to channel these skills and experiences into a format that was practical for the OA.

In the Yahoo! FSOA Group, there is a collection of practice exercises for each section of the OA.  I live in a somewhat remote location and the nearest other FS candidate (that I know of) is several hours away, so becoming involved in one of the Study Groups was impractical.  For the GE portion, I felt confident in my negotiation skills, and decided to focus primarily on presentation and timing.  To do this I downloaded and printed the sample GE Exercises, and using a timer, went through the entire package, one project at a time, working up and giving a presentation for each one.  Doing this repeatedly for multiple projects enabled me to get a good feel for the timeframes involved and to quickly pick out pertinent information.

For the CM section, I likewise was comfortable with my own case management skills, but needed to concentrate on the timeframes.  Similarly, I downloaded and printed several of the CM Exercises, and worked through each one with a timer.  To establish a baseline, I reviewed previously submitted samples after writing my own memo to compare and contrast with my own, examining the strengths and weaknesses of both.  I also connected with a fellow candidate (who was testing in the same window) and we exchanged and critiqued each others memos.  By comparing my own submission with those submitted by others I was able to easily see the strengths and weaknesses of each memo, including my own.  I reviewed the sample material and thought about how I might have done better.  By doing this I was felt confident in my ability to separate the essential and important nuggets of information from the filler material.

I believe that practicing in this way for the CM and GE gave me the extra edge I needed to pass.  Without it, I might have done alright, but I would have lacked focus.

In preparing for the SI, it is difficult to set a baseline for my own experience, so I spent a fair amount of time contemplating why I wanted to get into the FS.  My initial SOI (Statement of Interest) was stilted and impersonal, and some very good friends gave me some hard advice and I ended up rewriting it from scratch and going in a completely new direction with it.  I hated this, but am glad that they encouraged me to do so.  The final iteration really 'fit' and I was glad that I had put the blood, sweat, and tears into it.

I also spent time going through the 'practice questions' on the FSOA Group board until I had a collections of answers/stories for each question.  The 13-Ds were reviewed and I felt satisfied that I could answer questions on each dimension.

Lastly, I reviewed my notes taken as I worked through The EQ Edge (which I highly recommend each candidate consider doing) and reviewed the job descriptions of the career tracks to establish a point of reference for the hypotheticals.

Although it sounds as though I invested a great deal of time into the preparatory process, it generally was less than an hour a day for 3-4 weeks before my OA--probably 20 to 25 hours overall.  As I mentioned before, I may have done alright without it, but the focus and confidence was critical to my success, and well worth the effort!

How I passed the FSOA (Foreign Service Oral Assessment) - Part 2

I found four books to be extremely useful as I was preparing for the Foreign Service Oral Assessment: the first is touted in the Yahoo Boards as being essential to preparing for the GE portion, the second and third books build on the first, and the fourth and final book was without a doubt the most useful of all to me.  Let's take a quick look at them:

1) Getting to Yes by Fisher is THE book to read, according to the Yahoo Groups, and is useful to individual who would like to develop their negotiating skills and habits.  It's an easy read, but should not be viewed as being 'the key' to passing the GE, as there just isn't enough time to bring the more powerful techniques into play.

2) Getting Past No by Ury is the sister book to Getting to Yes, and goes beyond simply working together to reach an agreement  by focusing on how to negotiate with difficult people or situations.  One example of a difficult person would be the actor in the OA Prep video that used to be shown by the DIRs in the past.  The concepts are important, and helped me to overlook conflict to focus on the problem at hand instead of the people.

3) Beyond Reason: Using Emotions as you Negotiate by Fisher takes both of those books one step further by examining how emotions can be used enhance or detract, and offering advice on cutting through the emotions to bring people to the table.  I found this book to be very interesting and helpful, especially in light of the many discussions in the Yahoo Groups about the effect of group dynamics and personalities during the GE.  Don't wait for the die to be cast; take charge and get the job done the right way!

4) The last one was my favorite, and of greatest benefit to me personally.  The EQ Edge: Emotional Intelligence and Your Success by Stein and Book was recommended several years ago by my good friend, Kejnas, and was almost immediately pooh-poohed in the Yahoo Groups.  I would suspect that some of those members did not take time to look at it more closely.  The book delves into how to identify and strengthen several areas of one's life: the Intrapersonal, Interpersonal, Adaptability, Stress Management, and Mood.  Each of these 'realms' have specific characteristics that parallel and compliment the thirteen dimensions assessed during the OA.  In addition to enabling you to identify them, the book steps you through the process of turning areas which may be underutilized into real strengths.  I stated in a previous post that my career change provided me with the experience to approach the FSOA from a position of strength.  This book added the polish and confidence I needed stand out in each of the three sections of the OA: the GE, CM, and SI.

Overall, none of these books will guarantee that you pass the threshold at the OA.  There's no magic bullet except for doing exactly what BEX asks you to do.  What these books can do, however, is help you identify and strengthen potential shortcomings and avoid potential pitfalls.  There are thirteen dimensions.  Perhaps you are great at ten of them.  That's good, and you might do ok at the OA.  But why not examine the remaining three dimensions and take the time to find ways to integrate them into your life as well?  That is what will give you the edge you need at the FSOA, nothing more, nothing less.

I'd be curious to hear other opinions about these books; please comment and leave your reviews, thoughts, or experiences putting them into practice!

How I Passed the FSOA (Foreign Service Oral Assessment), Pt 1

After failing my previous OA in 2006, I spent a significant of time contemplating where I was in relation to where I was going and where I wanted to be.  In this regard, my experience failing the FSOA was critical, as it gave me a much better perspective on what was expected of a Foreign Service Officer, and what was required to pass the Oral Assessment.  Without that baseline, I would had difficulty putting everything into perspective.

My first realization was that I needed more 'people' experience: collaborating, managing, networking, etc.  The job I had at the time was extremely limited in this regard, and the easiest way (for me) to bridge this gap was to investigate a career change.  I had three primary criteria that a potential job offer would have to meet before I would accept it: it would have to be 1) intellectually challenging and/or demanding; 2) enjoyable should the Foreign Service option continue indefinitely; and 3) a logical step toward the FS in terms of requirements and expectations.

In May of 2007, I received and accepted a job offer (it was actually the only application I had submitted) to fill the position of XXXXXXX with XXXXXXXX supervising XXXXXXXXs.  Without going into specifics, I can say that it exceeded my job search requirements.  This position required a significant amount of training and shadowing before I could be given my own caseload, and I made the decision to put the FS on hold in order to focus on maximizing my experience with this new job.  Despite being a good fit with my educational background, the job's learning curve still left me feeling as though basketballs had been repeatedly slamdunked into my skull.

I realize that career transitions are not an option for everyone, but it made sense in my case, and it definitely paid off.  At my most recent FSOA, I could feel a noticeable improvement in my performance that I attributed directly to my experience with this new job.

If you are in a similar situation, but don't have this option, there are lots of other opportunities to develop your skillset without changing jobs: volunteer for a non-profit organization, volunteer for various committees in your community or workplace; get elected to a municipal committee to discuss cultural issues, take a leadership course, etc.  Think through the 13Ds: which ones do you most frequently demonstrate, and which ones do you have to think about?

In my next post, I will discuss some of the books I used to identify my own strengths and challenges, and how I utilized that information in my personal life, my [new] career, and in the FSOA!

How I passed the FSOA (Foreign Service Oral Assessment) - intro

How was I able to bring my FSOA score up one full point from an unimpressive 4.6 in 2006 to a much more acceptable (and competitive) 5.6 in 2010?

I'll tell you, but not in the way you may be thinking (this blog is NDA-safe).  During the intervening years, I methodically prepared for the FSOA and for my career with the State Department.  I'm not quite there yet, but I am making measurable, positive progress! 

My preparations were multi-pronged in focus: physical, personal, and intellectual.  Over the next few posts, I will explain each of these in turn, and how I feel that I benefited.  So stay tuned; the outcome speaks for itself!

FSOA Recap (2010)

I arrived at the testing site about 30 minutes early; there were already about ten or so black suits milling about the lobby. As more continued to arrive, I estimated there to be about 30 or so altogether. Perhaps three-quarters of them were male. Very nice diversity among the tracks, professional backgrounds and experience. Everyone I spoke with knew at least one other language. Very few had taken the OA before; most were there for the very first time.  Astonishingly, I heard a couple of candidates state that they had "decided to read up on what this was all about" only the night before.

It was very different from my last OA in 2006.  At that time, we were just a handful of candidates clustered around a conference room table completing our paperwork.  Now the 'waiting room' was completely filled with candidates quietly scribbling out their information.

The GE was straightforward, five people in the group. No surprises. Some of the presentations were somewhat disjointed and difficult to follow, but we had a minute or two after each one to ask some pointed and relevant questions. When the presentation phase was over, one of the assessors read the instructions and dropped the paper on the desk.  Everyone looked at it curiously, as though he had just given us a hefty bill for dinner. I took it, and placed it with my folder of information.

We had a very good discussion about the relative merits of the projects, and brainstormed some reasonable possibilities. We all seemed to agree on one project, and tentatively selected it, pending final approval. With two or three minutes remaining, I stated that I believed my project deserved more serious consideration, but in the interest of moving the group toward consensus to meet the deadline, I would offer to remove it from consideration. We were then able to quickly agree on a recommendation.

Case Management came next. Lots of information, as always. I set up the framework for my memo first (as recommended on the boards) and skimmed over the material. After the obligatory "I'm sorry I couldn't meet you..." intro, I dove right into the problem, contrasting alternative solutions. Some of the information was less important, easily overlooked, but potentially useful nonetheless. No surprises here. I felt somewhat pressed for time, and felt I could have done better with an extra ten to fifteen minutes, but I was still pleased with the final result. DON'T GET DISTRACTED; FOLLOW THE INSTRUCTIONS!

The Structured Interview was a mixed bag. During the E&M portion, I would frequently get cut off or interrupted, but I tried to keep up for the most part. There were some areas where I feel I could have articulated better, and once or twice they would repeat the question I was trying to answer. I would spin my answer a bit and continue, despite feeling a bit muddled.

Hypotheticals were fun. After I would answer, they would sometimes sit quietly, as if waiting for more, which was disconcerting at first, but it did give me the opportunity to expand my options. One hypo was unusual, sort-of like "you are a clerk in a retail store. A customer comes in and throws his cup away in YOUR trash can. What do you do?" Very strange, just a "Meh. Nothing, really, unless blah blah blah happens" sort of response.  Or maybe I just completely blew this one.  ;)

The PBI portion was great. Almost all my stories came from work, and I felt I was able to develop a decent connection with the Assessors. They were not as 'stony faced' as they had been at first, and smiled a little more and seemed genuinely curious about "what happened next".

The next two hours of waiting was tortuous, and a couple of other co-candidates and I walked down the block and around the Air & Space museum. The outdoor walk and the company did me good, and helped return me to reality. 

Back at the Annex, we were all herded into the CM room, and waited anxiously for the Russian Roulette smackdown. One candidate had read on the board about a previous group who had applauded candidates as they were called out, in recognition of their effort, and suggested that we do the same. This was a great idea and worked well, seeming to relieve some of the apprehension.

There were about a third of the candidates left when I was called out, and I was taken into the GE room. No one else was in there except myself and three assessors. I saw two fat envelopes on the table, and allowed myself to feel a glimmer of hope, when another candidate was brought in to join us. The assessors were all very chatty and friendly, and answered what questions they could. We went through all the procedural things of passing, and were returned to the waiting room with the other candidates who passed.

There ended up being a total of eight people passing, which was about average. Five males and three females, a slightly better ratio than had begun the day. One individual passed only one of the three sections, but passed overall with a 5.3.  The highest score of the day, I believe, was a 5.8.

The security interview was largely procedural, but interesting. I really enjoyed the agent that met with me and we had a really good conversation while we were reviewing the paperwork. I felt that I was honest to the point of being annoying, but he seemed to appreciate that. He jokingly told me not to go get myself into trouble, because "we've got your fingerprints now". LOL

PASSED: 5.6, passing all three sections.

Whew.

D-Day Arrives

I was scheduled to test on Friday, December 1st, 2006, in Austin.

We left Wednesday afternoon after picking up the kids from school, and ran into a snowstorm in Oklahoma City. Traffic slowed down to 30mph at times, with a steady stream of cars in both ditches and the median, but we made it as far as Gainesville, TX before calling it a night. Thursday morning, we drove the remaining four hours to Austin and checked into our hotel early that afternoon. We stayed at the Residence Inn--about 4 blocks from the test site. After unpacking and relaxing for a bit, we drove around to find the test site, before heading off to eat dinner at a pleasant little Cajun place, where the tables are covered with huge sheets of paper--for drawing entertainment while you wait, then double as plates when the food arrives. The kids thought that was pretty cool. Back at the hotel, we swam for an hours or so before tumbling into bed about 9:30 for a great night's sleep.

Friday morning, I had a light breakfast before taking a cab over to the test site. I was the second to arrive. At a little before seven, Kelli (who is as awesome as everyone says she is) took us upstairs to the testing area, and we began filling out the additional paperwork. There were twelve of us, six men and six women. Nine from TX, one from OK, one from KS, and one from DC. Most of us were CON, although there was one MGMT, one POL, and one ECON.

The break area was shared with other office in the building--basically there was a coffee machine, a refrigerator, TV, small table and four chairs. No public terminals.

GE: three of the candidates shilled for their projects during the presentation, and one or two even stated right off the bat that they felt their projects weren't worth considering. I think I could have redirected this, but didn't, and I think that hurt everyone. Everyone had time left over for questions, and I had questions for everyone. During the discussion phase, I recommended going around again so everyone could make a brief statement as to why their project should be considered. Most of the group misunderstood this and tried to re-present their project entirely. We were able to quickly narrow the projects. I had serious reservations about certain aspects of mine, and found myself awkwardly countering the person who recommended using mine. Another candidate wanted to examine each aspect of each project to see if it met each and every US objective for that country. I could feel we were getting bogged down, politely interrupted him and moved us on to consensus. Well, it was more like ramrodding them to consensus. Not one of us passed this section (that I am aware). In retrospect, I feel I could have rearranged my presentation to greater effect, as it was fairly complicated to keep track of the up- and downsides of all components. There also was additional material that I failed to reference during the discussion that might have allowed us to make a better decision. It was a minor point in the paperwork, but could have been critical to the decision-making.

Although I was pleased with the outcome, there were definite shortcomings that dragged all of us down. Everyone in my group expressed surprise that I did not pass, but we know what that's worth, right? ;)

The CM: The quantity of material was neither more nor less than I had expected. Other than an initial slowdown on the first instruction, I felt it flowed easily and came together nicely. The math was easy, and the answers seemed fairly straightforward. One comment in one of the emails niggled at me throughout, and only afterward did I come to realize that addressing it should have instead been my primary response--which would have taken my paper in a completely different direction. Of course, it didn't help when the entire city of Austin had not one, but two national emergencies during that time, with sirens screaming in from all directions. I didn't pass this section, either, although I was still pleased at my effort this first time out.

The SI: This was the section I had tried to prepare for the most, yet it was ironically the section for which I was least prepared. Many of the PBQ questions only obliquely touched on the stories I had prepared, and to my downfall, I tried to force them to fit. Many of my best stories could not be used. One of the hypotheticals was fairly tame, which caught me off guard, and I under-answered. The other, in retrospect, had several other options I could have brought into play, but which did not occur to me until afterward.

We were called out by number--and I was the eleventh candidate. Many of the others were waiting in the lobby when I went down--only one had passed; she was already low on the ECON register (5.3), and was trying for CON. She passed with a 5.7.

Overall, I never lost composure--or had need to lose composure. The assessors were amiable and polite--even downright friendly. The pace of the day was actually more relaxed and focused than a "normal" work day, despite all of the emergency responses (another occured during my debriefing). I was pleased with my performance during the GE and CM--not quite so the SI--and was disheartened to score an unimpressive 4.6. I had expected to not pass, but I hadn't expected to score to poorly. In retrospect, however, I see how I could have improved my performance significantly in every area. For the first time, it's still disappointing, but not outrageously bad.

The assessors did hint that they were strongly considering re-implementing two cycles per year, although the 180-day rule would likely remain in effect, and that the website would have more information in January. They encourage me to reflect on the day and to try again. I asked their opinion of the Yahoo Groups, and the said "Officially, no opinion", however, unofficially, they said that many candidates found them quite useful, and that they did monitor them for inconsistencies. Nothing negative there.

Back at the hotel, I felt hollow and empty, and I was glad the rest of the family was there. They dragged me back to my feet and we went to eat Mongolian BBQ. The kids were a pleasant distraction from the disappointment of the day. They wanted to swim again once we got back to the hotel, and that helped work off much of the accumulated stress.

In some ways, I am disappointed to have not passed, but in some ways, it was a small relief, as it gives us a little more time to streamline, to sort through and discard our extra junk.

On toward April!