A Good Job

Only been in the job for two months and things have already changed. Sounds pretty typical for the Coast Guard. I'm switching accounts from stuff in the Capabilities world to stuff in the Personnel accounts. I think the XO is trying to level out responsibilities for a little more parity between the Reviewers. The current Reviewer for the Personnel accounts has a bunch of other stuff she's responsible for, all of which seems to come due at the same time, so she gets absolutely swamped at certain points in the budget cycle. It'll be a slow-ish relief process as we trade duties, but we've got the time since we're both in the office, just switching desks.

There's a couple of really cool things about taking over the new accounts. I'll learn more about pay, health care, hiring, the civilian work force, reserves, personnel policy in general (think hazing, equal opportunity, harassment, all that), promotions, insourcing, boards, bonuses, housing...than I probably ever wanted to know. I got in to some personnel issues as XO and CO, but this is a *whole* 'nother level. I might actually end up understanding the officer promotion process, which is almost completely opaque to me right now. Zones, year groups, deep selection, passed over, reordering...I know the words, but have no sense of how they get put together to make a workable system.

Also, personnel are involved in *everything!* The service wouldn't exist without its people. Programs are made up of people. Take the people away, and nothing gets done (well, except for CGBI (Coast Guard Business Intelligence)--I think there might be metrics in there that are completely automated.). So if I wanted a job that has the potential to have a major impact on the service, well, I've got it now.

I was talking to the most senior Personnel Reviewer earlier this week. He's getting ready to leave, transferring to Air Station Barbers Point (lucky buggah!!). So I've been trying to pick his brain as much as possible before he leaves. It was actually kind of funny. I went to him about two weeks ago about an issue with civilian employees, and he started going into all these *incredibly* technical budget processes with ease and confidence. I left his cubicle with my head spinning, thinking, omg, not only does he sound like such an expert, it's all so complicated, how the hell does he keep it all straight?! and thank gawd!! he's around with all that knowledge so I don't have to figure it out on my own. Haha...joke's on me...now I've got to learn it.

So anyway, I was talking with him, getting a brain dump about an insourcing issue, which is a good topic for getting into a lot of the technicalities. We broke out the FY13 CJ (Congressional Justification) to look at the FTP (full-time personnel) waterfall (stick with me here) and how technical adjustments correct previous years' vapor creates and go on-budget for mil-civ (military-civilian) conversions which straighten out the funding between PPAs (program, project and activity)...aaauughhghggghhhh!! **STOP!!** My brain hurts! I found myself fervently muttering to myself, "please don't let me ef this up, please don't let me ef this up."

One thing he said stuck out to me though. I don't remember exactly what he was talking about, it might have been the technical adjustment table, but he said it's one thing that no one else cares about. The Budget Coordinators don't really pay attention to it, it's not important to the Reviewers. The Personnel Reviewer is the only one who keeps track of it and makes sure it's correct.

Which made me wonder, if no one cares about it, why is it important to make sure it's right? Nobody pays attention to it, probably nobody even ever looks at it. So why all the freaking hassle and gyrations to make sure it's accurate, especially because it changes damn near daily? I know the colloquial definition of integrity is "doing the right thing even when no one is watching." But what about when no one even cares?

I say in my Philosophy, "...a job worth doing is worth doing to the best of my ability. At the end of my tour, I intend to look back and be able to honestly tell myself that I faced every task and challenge to the best of my ability. This is the only way the sacrifices I have made will have been worthwhile." I think what I meant by doing a good job in that sense was based on how it might impact other people. If I was lazy or slack or just didn't give a shit, someone else had to cover for me, whether it was my XO, my guys, my shipmates on another ship, the shoreside maintenance guys or other support folks...somebody still had to do the job to make sure things continued on smoothly. And pawning off responsibility like that is just *lame.*

Maybe there's some staff member somewhere, either in the Department, the Administration or on the Hill that might look at that table...and throw a fit if it doesn't jive with what we say somewhere else, and make lots of other people's lives miserable trying to figure out what the discrepancies are. Or maybe if it's not right this year, it might not be an issue, but it snowballs and becomes a nightmare in another couple of years for someone else to fix.

And then there's the fact that I'm just not sure I could let details that are well within my control and the scope of my responsibility to slide just because of a perceived lack of importance or visibility. It sort of offends my sense of rightness in the world. I prefer to add order and goodness, be a calming effect instead of offering chaos and bedlam. There is most definitely a time and a place for mayhem, shaking up the status quo, rocking the boat, you might say, but I don't think technical budget tables are quite the right forum. For some reason, it feels like being absolutely proficient with the technicalities provides much greater credibility for being able to offer out of the box thinking and creative solutions.

So I've convinced myself yet again that doing a good job for a good job's sake is the way to go.

Command Swagger v. Murphy-style Smack-down

I'm on the fence again about whether I still have anything to say in this forum. A lot of what I want to talk about, I can't for any number of reasons. Sensitive budget information, easily identifiable characteristics of involved individuals, predecisional (I didn't even know what that word *meant* until two months ago!) discussions about specific programs...all are making it kinda tough to tell stories and figure out how it all fits into the bigger, grander picture. 

But what good is a challenge without a little bit of something to overcome? The blogging will continue until morale improves? (snicker)

I am a firm believer in balance. Whether it's work-play, sweet-salty, tree pose or light-dark, both sides of the coin are needed to make a whole piece. The balance that has me stymied right now is the one between self-confidence and humility. My reflex reaction to this spectrum is that I have a lot more experience with humility than self-confidence. Gawd knows, it feels like anytime I get a bit too cocky about something -- my driving skills (cussing another driver for doing something stupid), my professional abilities (thinking I know the whole story), my interpersonal suavity (haha, I actually typed that with a straight face) -- karma, life, Murphy, call it what you will, comes along and smacks some humility back into my little pea brain, usually with, well...humiliating force. So I feel like I'm well-versed in the modesty side of the equation.

But in the last month or so, I've had some conversations with a couple of people who knew me "back in the day." Like, seriously, back in the day...high school and undergrad days. I feel like I was a *mess* then; no sense of who I was, fumbling through each day hoping the next one would get a little easier, second-guessing every word out of my mouth and every gesture, conscious and unconscious. You know, the usual teenage shit. What's funny though is in these conversations both people said they noticed my self-confidence. "One thing that struck me immediately all [those] moons ago in the [Berea College] library - u have a lot more self-confidence 'than other girls.'" (obviously a text conversation) and (thank goodness for FB message archives):

Fellow Farm Worker: "That means you know what you are doing! You always did too back in the day."

Me: "Lynn was a good teacher."
FFW: "I know you to be a hard worker. A plus."

Me: "There is that...but there's also a lot of faking it. At least when it comes to looking like I know what I'm doing."

FFW: "Well, you fooled me."

Me: "Fooled lotsa people, that's what makes me laugh about it."

FFW: "But you always seemed to know what the heck you were doing..."

Really?!? Seriously?! BahahaHAHAahahaa!!

It is reinforced to me nearly every day how much that farm taught me about, hell, damn near everything...self-confidence, customer service, work ethic, follow through, attention to detail, so many of the things that I count as a core skill. Off-topic, but I don't think I say thank you enough to the people there, never mind tell them how grateful I am that I have gotten to re-experience the farm as a growed-up (or at least as close a proximity of a growed-up as I will ever be). It is *so cool* to go back there and see the basics I learned nearly 25 years ago are still taught and still work.

I remember going to PCO (Prospective Commanding Officers) School as a PCO for the first time before I went to Bahrain...so early 2008...and having one of the other students in the class comment on my "command swagger." I think that too had to do with acting like I knew what I was doing. 

Now that we've established that I really don't know what I'm doing, and most times it's all an act (which I've written about before), what does all that have to do with my situation now? Well, most all the other Reviewers and Budget Coordinators I've talked to about our job say basically the same thing...none of us know exactly how this job is supposed to go, what we're supposed to be doing or the best way to get it done. In a way that's very comforting, to know I'm not the only one who is just kind of stumbling through each day, hoping I'm getting it right. 

One part of this not-knowing-exactly-what's-going-on feeling that is finally starting to sink in with me is that if I think something needs to be done -- it probably *does* and I should just go ahead and do it before a) someone else tells me to do it or b) it doesn't get done because no one else notices it needs attention. But that's not the only part that's kind of weird. It's also that it's part of my job to be proactive. Shoot, no, that's not right...Is it that I have enough of a sense of things (from experience, smarts, or just common sense?) to recognize when something is going to be an issue? Maybe so, and maybe that's weird because the knowing it needs attention, combined with the autonomy to do what needs to be done without having to ask for permission every time...wow, that's just a different kind of job. And it requires a certain amount of ego-based self-possession and motivation to be that kind of proactive.

Yeah, so that's where the balance comes in. I saw a former CO at HQ a few weeks ago for the first time in a while. He knows what office I'm in and cautioned me to "not get caught up in the mystique of the job." Fantastically excellent advice. Because the self-confidence the job absolutely demands must be tempered with the humility to keep it all in perspective...lest Murphy (likely in the guise of an ADM or CAPT or XO) come along with a powerful smack-down.

Loyalty

My faithful reader, Azulao asked me to ponder loyalty in a comment a few weeks ago. So here I ponder...

I have worked for bosses before that I felt disloyal to for whatever reason. Different leadership styles, different personalities, perspectives, whatever, have made it difficult to work for them. So this is not my first time toeing a line which I would rather draw another way. And certainly, these days, I'm still living it on a daily basis. There is an issue being debated right now that goes to the very core of one of my hard-learned, deeply-rooted institutional beliefs. Do we pay for it or not? Every atom of every molecule of every cell of every muscle and organ and bone in my body screams, yes, we ABSOLUTELY *MUST* pay for it. But the Boss has a different priority. 

Gulp. 

"Aye, aye, sir."

And back I go to the drawing board for a stronger argument to use next time.

I think a lot of loyalty issues, both in my world and in academia, come down to altitude (tee hee...sorry). Or put another way by Chris McGoff in The Primes, "Big Hat-Little Hat." The Big Hat is worn by the Boss, looking at things from a 3,000 foot level (warning: I suck at aviation metaphors, so my apologies if I get the numbers wrong...you should get the point anyway). The Little Hat is worn by the individual projects/programs/departments, looking at things from, if not the flight deck, than at least a low hover (see, better if we include a shipboard reference). Detail versus big picture; scope versus intricacy. Neither one is wrong or right, just different. And both have their necessary place.

Amusingly, I have an anecdote on nearly this very issue from today. I was in a meeting (shocker), trying to lead a couple of programs to the trough of shared responsibility. I think I even got them to drink...after pushing their heads into the water and forcing their lips open, figuratively speaking (seriously though, did we have to go Slide.By.Slide to make a decision?). But as the thirst for resolution to a common problem was slaked, one of the program reps decided to make a snarky remark about being forced to share the trough with yet a third program. Now I always know at least a second or two beforehand, when I'm gonna to say something I'm likely to, if not regret, at least wonder what the hell made me say it out loud. I got that feeling, and then said, "Sir, one team, one fight...we're all on the same side here." There was a moment of awkward silence from the other O4s and O5s in the room, and then the conversation moved on. But *really,* we (collectively, me included) spend too much time hidebound in our own opinions and tiny little worlds. I think there's another entire post on this little concept of being stuck in our comfort zone...but I'll leave it for another time.

But referring back to The Primes, I'll quote Chris's recommendation (pg 145-146 in my 2011 version published by Victory Publishers, NYC, NY):

"1. It's a right-versus-right dilemma, as opposed to right-versus-wrong.
2. The implicit dichotomy of this PRIME can't be eliminated, only managed.
3. People need to be clear about which hat they're wearing when they speak.
4. It's fair to advocate for your LITTLE HAT but not to the detriment of the whole."

I think that there is a major difference between the military, especially the Coast Guard and the academic world. That is, the CG has a well-defined, concrete goal...whichever mission an individual joined to be a part of, search and rescue, law enforcement, national security, environmental protection...all we Coasties have a common goal. One Team, One Fight. 

I'm not sure the same can really be said of academia. What really is the goal of Universities? Is it teaching the students? The research being done? The prestige/reputation of the institution? Pleasing alumni with a popular sports program? Without that baseline commonality, people's interest diverge quickly and divisively into little kingdoms of influence which continually battle over the same resources.

A, I have no idea if I even came close to what you were talking about. I think it comes down to the fact that you have to believe in something to be loyal to it.

A Very Good Day

I had A Very Good Day. It started with this morning's run (well, it actually started with a *looong* overdue conversation last night, but that...that story's just for the conversation's participants right now). I spent the entire drive in debating whether I should do the easy thing, and run on the treadmill, or take a chance, dare do something new and find my way outside to run along the waterfront. It looked like it would be warm enough and light enough to run outside. But I hadn't looked at a map of where to go, just had a general idea of where might offer a good trail. And oddly enough, I was a little intimidated by the idea of how the badge/building security thing worked going out the loading dock door. I decided that was a *lame* excuse for not taking advantage of light and temperate conditions. The guard looked a little annoyed at my uninformed fumblings, but I made my way out with minimal difficulties.

It was still pretty dark when I left the building, with the eastern sky barely shifting to deep purple. It occurred to me somewhere about half-way up 2nd St, that this really wasn't the best neighborhood and it probably wasn't the smartest thing I've ever done to be running in the barely-light by myself. I'll carry my knife next time. The waterfront was deserted, and the fish market quiet. I hung a left under the bridges, and took the path around to the Jefferson Memorial.

I haven't spent nearly enough time out in the history of this city, so I was gleefully delighted to find myself in the midst of three beautiful memorials on the banks of the Tidal Basin this morning. I paused for a moment to appreciate Jefferson, silhouetted against the sky streaked with the early pink and gold of dawn. Then I made my way, backwards through the FDR Memorial, so I saw Eleanor first in the "Fourth Term" section, then FDR in his wheelchair, and the fountain. I loved the weathered patina of this memorial. A little further on was the Martin Luther King, Jr Memorial, which I slowed to walk through because there were signs that said no running. And I wouldn't have wanted to run anyway...I would have missed the inspiring quotes along the marble sides that built to the mountain of despair, from which the stone of hope had separated.

As cheesy as it sounds, I walked out of that space refreshed and, (ugh, really?) rejuvenated.

The whole run was a good reminder that sometimes (lotsa times, I think -- many more than we usually realize), it's better just to dare.

The day in the office passed with a smile on my face. I even think I did a decent job on an analysis of a proposed initiative (though not without significant input from discussions with my sponsor and office-mate (two separate people) and the XO). And there was cake...from a birthday celebration for a couple of the ladies across the hall.

The only minor frustration with the day was leaving...lots of other folks in the office had huge worklists for a meeting planned for tomorrow afternoon. And as much as I wanted to and offered to help, there was really no way for me to usefully contribute. I finally decided the best way I could add to the effort was to get out of everybody's hair and go home...That made more sense when I said it to myself. Now it just sounds like a pathetic excuse to leave.

But, all in all, A Very Good Day.

More Observations

Totally off-topic, but *way* more important than my silly ramblings: My thoughts are with the friends and family of CG-6535's crew, lost early last week in a crash in Mobile Bay, AL. I didn't know any of the four men, but I know people who know them...and any loss in a service as small as ours is deeply felt.

Shiloh Thomas over on Womeninthemilitary.blogspot.com, wrote an excellent piece on what the crash means to us...I'll let you read her words, because she did such an amazing job of summarizing pretty much exactly how I feel about it.

Rest in peace, brothers.

(PS--I've never met Shiloh, or whoever she is behind her pen-name, but I love, love, love!! her posts. Not only is she a great writer, she also has a strong sense of self and thoughtfulness that makes our junior enlisted ranks so much more powerful and effective. And I guess I'm more than a little jealous that she's operational :) I wish her the best success in her career, and just *know* she'll rock at whatever she does.)

I've been in the office for a month now. And I have a few more observations. First, my time horizon has changed. Used to be that I'd plan for the next patrol or the next inport...never more than three months down the line. And on the last couple of ships, never more than a month or two away (well, except for that whole drydock nonsense). Now, I'm staring at Two.And.A.Half.YEARS of the same schedule: alarm goes off at 0500, out the door by 0530, in the gym by 0600, cleaned up and at the desk by 0715. Leaving varies by an hour or two...anywhere from 1730 to 1930 pm so far. Get home, get dinner, fix breakfast and lunch up for the next day, clean the litter box, go to bed. Get up and do it all again the next day.

I tried meeting friends out once or twice during the week...just doesn't work. If I'm not asleep by 2100, the whole 10- to 12-hour workday turns into a complete torture session the next day. So any social life is relegated to the weekends...though thankfully I've got some friends that chat me up on facebook in the evenings so I don't have to live totally alone under my rock.

Two and a half years. The same thing. Day after day. How the *HELL* do people do this for lifetimes?

Don't get me wrong, I'm totally digging the job...just not the sameness of the schedule. Isn't there some opsec lesson to be learned here -- some need to vary your routine so the bad guys aren't able to get a bead on you. And it gives a whole new meaning to "working for the weekend."

Second, there's a whole new vocabulary. The three favorite terms I've noticed so far are:
--wirebrush: it means to dig into a statement made (usually by a program), looking for unstated assumptions, questionable data, faulty logic and lots of the time, just plain lazy analysis. This is what our office does. We wirebrush...everything. Ya know how you count the times a speaker says some catch phrase (I had a soil chemistry professor who used to always say, "in point of fact." Was distractingly annoying)? I'm preeeety sure if I counted how many times "wirebrush" was said in our offices, I'd have more hash marks on the page than I had quarters in the wardroom cuss jar on BOUTWELL.
As used in a sentence: XO to a Reviewer, "We need to wirebrush the numbers supporting that funding request, make sure the parts and people add up."

--good staff work: all that wirebrushing, applied with some sensibility, solid research and insightful recommendations will prompt the phrase, "good staff work." It's pretty much doing our job, but doing it really well.

--pink dot city: what happens in the building after 1601, and about 1400 on Fridays. We've got this cool little communicator system, which we use to IM with other people in our IT system, and each person has a little dot next to their name indicating their status: red means busy, yellow means away, green means available. Pink means logged out. Hence "pink dot city" means that the largest majority of people on any one email are logged out for the day.

Third, just a quick observation about meetings. I haven't been to a single meeting yet with less than a dozen attendants. And the most so far was a meeting I went to this morning...at least two dozen people, including about a half dozen admirals (totaling maybe eight or nine stars).

But this morning's meeting did solve a mystery for me. Late last week, I wore a short-sleeved shirt in the gym for the first time (and yes, I was pretty freaking nervous about it). I was on the treadmill when a distinguished-looking gentleman got on a stationary bike close by. Just by his appearance, I figured he was at least an O6 or GS15, but I didn't recognize him. I kept catching him looking at my arm...not rudely or anything, just kind of interested-ly. I almost asked him if he wanted to take a closer look at it after I got done running, but figured that might be rude on my part. So I just let it go. But he was at today's meeting and I found out who he is. His interest in my tattoo made a lot more sense after that.

Adjustment Mosaic

I'm still in the adjustment period of the new job. At least that's what I'm telling myself. Pretty much everyone I've talked to about being a Program Reviewer has told me that it takes up to a year before you really feel like you know what's going on.

Right.

For someone who doesn't like not knowing what's going on, having the sand shift under her feet with every step, and hates feeling stupid, that sounds like *forever!!*

There have been missteps: kinda embarrassing when the Deputy had to show me how to submit an e-chit for leave authorization (yes, I've already taken my first day of leave...today in fact. I had to be home to receive the shipment of Mom's stuff. And let me say, today has been *ree-*dic*ulously* productive. Got the furniture, cleaned the house, had the plumber come to unstop the tub from draining slowly and fix the toilet so it's not wobbly anymore, *installed the kitchen cabinet hardware!!,* baked pumpkin bread (and mmm, it's good), fixed a piece of furniture that didn't quite make it through the move whole, paid some bills, and (finally) wrote a blog post. I'm thinking one week-day off a month is going to be a necessity from now on.). And I hadn't paid close enough attention to the process for reviewing Qs (informal questions submitted by outside interests), so a response went out that wasn't exactly what was approved, and then because I still didn't understand the process, one went out about three days later than it needed to...after the Deputy sent an email saying that we needed to make sure our Programs submitted their responses in a timely manner in order to meet the deadlines, especially in this critical time of congressional review of our budget. Whoops.

I'm trying to just take it all in. I've had some modest insights so far...and they are randomly offered here as my adjustment mosaic:
--there is no right way to be a Reviewer. There are definitely traits that encourage success, like knowledge (process, political structure, technical...), critical thinking, assertiveness, good time management, written and spoken communication skills, and general nosiness. But how those qualities all mix up and are expressed is not writ in stone. So just because my cell-...I mean, office-mate is gregarious and quick-witted, doesn't mean that I will not be a good Reviewer just because I am definitely *not* either of those things. I must play to my own strengths and not try to be something I'm not.

--What I don't want to be is cynical. Yet what I likely am is naive, somewhat sanctimonious, and idealistic. But I *chose* to go to 821...sure, I had to be accepted there, but I asked for it. Kinda been working my way towards it since my CO put it on my OER back in 2007. The intervening years only made it make more sense in my head that this was where I wanted to be. Is it going to be hard work and long hours (including numerous and stupidly boring meetings)? Of course. And I don't mind, because it's also going to be an opportunity to influence the future of the organization. But I don't want to be cynical about the pathological dedication that a lot of people in the building have to working exactly and only business hours, or that the place turns into a ghost town at 4:01 pm. I don't want to be cynical that, right or wrong, people may blame me personally for the fact that their budget isn't as robust as they would like. I don't want to be cynical about the malaise that seems to infect so many issues at Headquarters so that simple processes turn into absurdly time-consuming slogs through endless backs-and-forths because no one wants to commit to a decision. And I don't want to be cynical that manuals make it through high levels of review but still contain numerous and egregious typos when they hit my desk for review. Sadly, just from my descriptions, it seems like I'm losing the battle. I must not forget why I'm there.

--Weird to have two references to said CO in the same post (didn't really care to work for him, and going through the process of him getting fired pretty much sucked...however I have to acknowledge what I learned from him) and I'm not sure how it really relates to the new job, but he always said, "you don't know what you don't know." For some reason that statement reminds me of Kathryn Schulz's TED talk about being wrong. I keep coming back to this talk, and watching again...*def* recommend it. One of her first points is that being wrong feels just like being right, until you know you're wrong...like Wiley E. Coyote when he runs of the cliff chasing the Roadrunner. He's fine until he realizes he's in mid-air. Then she says, [culturally, we think] "people who get stuff wrong are lazy, irresponsible dimwits...and the way to succeed in life is to never make any mistakes." Followed by, "This attachment to our own rightness keeps us from preventing mistakes when we absolutely need to and causes us to treat each other terribly." Maybe it's just something that I need to keep in mind throughout my discussions (especially the contentious ones) with people. I don't know everything, neither do they, but somehow we've got to come up with the best resolution. And the best way to do that might just be to realize that I'm not always right.

--"Trust but verify." I don't remember where I first heard this phrase, but it has since become a constant theme throughout my career. In this job, however, it's taking on a slightly different flavor. It's more just "Verify!" Or "Question Everything:" where did that data come from? how was it collected? what are its biases? is it complete? who collected it? why was it collected? is there a better source of information? is it an average? what was left out? Maybe that's why I've been thinking about the stuff from that last paragraph lately...I don't always know what to ask...I don't know what I don't know, and I'm having to work through asking *everything* just to figure out what I need to ask.

Huh, I guess that's why I like writing this blog...it helps me to make sense of the white noise in my head, realize connections that I didn't recognize were there.

The First Week

I think I survived the first week. At least I didn't run screaming from the building, or end up hiding under my desk twitching...so I'll call that a good week. It was kinda touch and go there on the first day for a little bit, but then I ate dinner, and realized that the sky really *wasn't* falling down all around me.

My initial impression is that it's gonna be hard to write about the new job here. Lots of pre-decisional and internal messaging discussions that really have no business being broadcast outside the confines of the palace (that's the puzzle palace, aka Headquarters, for you non CG-types). Once a decision has been made by the big guy at the top (which may be, I don't know, the President, the Secretary, or the Commandant, depending on what we're talking about), disagreement is done respectfully in private (not on a silly little blog). And until a decision has been made by the big guy at the top, all the rest is just noise...but it's that noise that I'll be dealing with every day. But, having said that, I think I'll need this forum more than ever to think through and process how I deal with the challenges. The dicey part may be to explain the underlying situation without giving away all the juicy details that would get me in trouble. Hopefully it doesn't turn into an awkward exercise in diplomacy and double-speak.

So this here's my first attempt...

And it kinda just sounds like I'm whining. But I spent some effort refining a briefing sheet (one-page summary, basically, to prep senior leadership for Congressional testimony after the President's budget is released on Monday...not too important, really. Totally just kidding, there...apparently bad humor is how I deal with the political scariness that is my new job.). Routed it through the program. Finally got their concurrence on it (after sending an "updated" version in prep for a face-to-face meeting, but then realizing when I got to the meeting that I had sent an old draft...[head slap]...*great* first impression, Girl!), then ran it back up my chain where what seemed like minor changes were made, but to which the program took exception. It was as close as I came to banging my head against the wall all week.

It was a frustrating roundabout that was a good lesson in what this job is about. The folks I've spoken to about being a Reviewer all seem to agree that we have kind of a split-personality role: first, making sure the programs are in line with overall current policy (which right now, means budget cuts and more budget cuts...which the programs usually don't like) and second, being a staunch advocate for the program, arguing on their behalf to ensure they have the resources they need to meet program requirements. So, regardless of what my own personal feelings may be about a leadership decision, I can only communicate and stand by that down to the program level. The advocacy part comes in, I think (not so sure about this part yet) when putting together communications received by the senior leadership (briefing books, budget recommendations -- in the form of RPs (resource proposals), stuff like that).

Just for the record, I'm not sure if *any* of this is an accurate reflection of my new world of work. It's all still so new to me. I think my biggest accomplishment of the week was to find the easiest, most direct way to get from my car to my cubicle. It reminds me of my first week on BOUTWELL, where getting from my stateroom to the wardroom took me on a different route every time I attempted it. This, though, this isn't like trying to drink from your normal fire hose...it's more like trying to drink from Niagara Falls.