Interviews > Pete Romero
​
What prompted you to start the American Diplomat podcast? What did you hope to accomplish with the podcast?
People don’t really know about the Foreign Service and what we do. I realized the stories of the State Department were worth telling and worth telling in an entertaining way so FSOs, aspiring FSOs, as well as the general public could appreciate our stories. As we develop episodes, we emphasize entertainment over information each time to make sure the great stories of diplomacy are fun, appealing, and accessible. Stories are generally a more effective way of communicating and educating—we need to entertain people so they keep listening and engage. If we try to jam down their throat what we think they should know, they tune out—a lesson vital for podcasts and for diplomats who tend to want to explain and educate too much that we can become tedious.
Could you tell us about the importance of taking risks?
When we get so focused on not making mistakes or create a zero-tolerance for mistakes policy, we then make mistakes of omission or inaction. Mistakes of omission or inaction are really damaging to our interests, but because they are harder to quantify or measure, we tend not to focus on them. Many officers choose not to act, stay safe and maintain a low profile, but this is the wrong way to go. Being scared of mistakes may be less risky for the individual, but it also means that we have less impact and inevitably means that the State Department and our country has less influence globally.
It was easier to take diplomatic risks when the United States was the undisputed world leader and we could more easily recover from mistakes. But even now, we need to maximize our influence and both mistakes of commission and omission affect our standing vis-a-vis our competitors. To encourage risk-taking, risk takers should share their approach and their successes more broadly so others see not only what is possible, but how to take risks that advance our interests.
What does taking risk or being creative mean in the State Department?
We are not simply bureaucrats managing a process—we need to be architects trying to build something and make a difference. When I was Assistant Secretary, I would reject briefing papers that had the same tired talking points that would certainly lead to meetings with little or no real impact. If a briefing paper for a particular meeting did not advance our interests or seek to achieve something, I would tell the desk to cancel the meeting or come up with a better approach. Meetings need to have a purpose and not just be done for its own sake.
Once when I met EU representatives in DC to discuss contributions to Plan Colombia, they presented a surprisingly paltry proposed contribution. In a breach of diplomatic protocol, I abruptly ended the meeting and sent them out of the office rather than politely registering our disappointment. This shocked them and had the intended effect. Eventually, the EU did decide to contribute millions more. While this was riskier than following the diplomatic norms, I knew I had my bosses' support for a more assertive response.
How do we encourage and develop creativity and risk taking in the State Department?
We should inculcate the importance and value of risk taking at all levels of our organization. While senior officials can do a lot to drive a creative, impact-focused approach, middle managers and line officers have a lot of responsibility for pushing creativity. Being a desk officer requires courage and creativity as it is difficult to manage the clearance process and come up with new ideas so that every meeting is memorable and makes a difference. Office managers have a lot of responsibility for fostering an atmosphere that pushes for impact rather than seeking the path of least resistance which is often recycling tired, but previously cleared, talking points, or simply accepting functional bureaus' policy projects regardless of their applicability to the meeting, event or overall diplomatic situation.
How should officers learn from their own mistakes?
Mistakes are a key part of how we learn and it’s why experience is so important. In the State department where so many of the norms and rules are unclear or are unwritten, trial and error and the resulting experience are key to developing the intuition necessary to know when to push the limits and when to seek guidance.
It is important that officers handle mistakes properly—the worst thing is to simply ignore your mistake and not learn from it. The second worst thing is to obsess over a mistake and become too cautious. The best thing is, after you make a mistake, park it for a bit, and then revisit and evaluate your mistake later so you explore how you should or could avoid the mistake again.
Should diplomats specialize in one region or functional area?
The broader experience a diplomat has, the better they can look objectively at a new problem, country, or position. It is good to take on jobs outside one’s comfort zone. Foreign Service Officers are more than analysts—after a few months, most officers understand the key policy objectives—so it’s important to keep seeking new opportunities to develop fresh approaches to what are often shared problems. The State Department needs to work to develop better information and experience sharing—perhaps through developing online communities where practitioners can share ideas.
Who was your best mentor or coach and what did they teach you?
Ambassador Pickering was so impressive, I often would ask myself “What would Pickering do?” and that was often a good guide. Pickering had an ability to completely focus on whatever he was doing and never wasted time or attention. At the same time, he was exceptionally patient and could take the long view when developing a policy or approach to “plant a seed” and then give it time to develop. He also said that real leadership meant stepping off stage and letting others “take a bow” whether your staff, NGOs or foreign counterparts. He said that everyone knew what you did so there was no need to seek the limelight.
​
​